Jack & Jill Politics

EVENING OPEN THREAD IS UP

has anybody seen George lopez's show yet. I haven't but the ad they are running here in Philly is outrageous, "Marc Anthony and Arsenio Hall are on tonight. we need you because we have so much color on tonight."

I haven't seen it yet, but that sounds hilarious

totally ticked off at Chris Matthews and his criticism of President Obama making certain statements to paraphrase about "no faith" would support the mindless killing that happened at Ft. Hood. I haven't listened to Matthews lately, but usually he overly criticizes right after he does a "pro" Obama piece. Is this what happened. All I thought about Matthews piece tonight on the president's comments at Ft. Hood today was that it was nauseating.

I watched the ceremonies and listened to all the speeches and was choked up many times.

that was a w-t-f moment for me too.

The RISE of the RIGHT



"Imagine you had been told five years ago that a huge economic crisis would erupt, prominently featuring irresponsible financiers, and that governments would come to the rescue of firms and families. You would probably have predicted that, politically, the right (the party of bankers) would do badly and the left (the party of bureaucrats) would do well. You would have been wrong. It's not just the Republicans who came out ahead. Last month a conservative coalition swept into power in Germany. In France, Nicolas Sarkozy's party has considerable public support. In Britain, conservatives are poised to win their first national election in 17 years. Even in Denmark and Sweden, where social democrats usually win, the right is in power. In fact, across continental Europe, only one major country, Spain, has a left-wing ruling party.

Why? Part of the answer is that despite the economic turmoil, few people seriously believe the answer is a turn to socialism. But it is also worth looking at the conservative parties that are thriving. Britain's Tory leader, David Cameron, calls himself a "progressive conservative." Sarkozy argues passionately for tight regulation of the financial industry, with pay caps on executive bonuses and more. Angela Merkel staunchly defends the German social market system. In Europe, the right is firmly at the center.

snip

Barack Obama's handling of the financial crisis has mostly been marked by such intelligent centrism. He es-chewed calls from the left to nationalize banks, ignored criticism from scholars that the stimulus was too small, and has largely avoided business bashing. In all these areas, the left wing of his party is dissatisfied.

On health care, however, the story looks different. There are two great health-care crises in America—one in-volving coverage and the other cost. The Obama plan appears likely to tackle the first but not the second. This is bad economics but also bad politics: the crisis of cost affects 85 percent of Americans, while the crisis of coverage affects about 15 percent. Obama's message to the country appears to be "We have a dysfunctional health-care system with out-of-control costs, and let's add 45 million people to it."

Americans see a health-care bill that has been produced by the old Democratic machine rather than the new Democratic technocrats—more Lyndon Johnson than Larry Summers. That might please the party's base but it will dismay independents. Were costs to rocket over the next few years, the Democrats will have squandered a reputation for economic competence that was hard won."

http://www.newsweek.com/id/221611/output/print

I want to hear the case for 'intelligent centrism".

A little evening cool down ya'll. Bill withers: Use Me

they know that their teabagging purist would lose in a rout to the Dem

***Breaking NEWS*****


VICK GETS A BREAK Court RULES he can KEEP $16M

A federal appeals court on Tuesday backed the judge who ruled against the NFL and let quarterback Michael Vick keep more than $16 million in roster bonuses from the Atlanta Falcons.

The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday affirmed Judge David Doty's order saying Vick had already earned the bonuses before his dogfighting conviction, so the money wasn't subject to forfeiture.

Vick served 18 months in prison and is now with the Philadelphia Eagles.

Doty has long handled matters arising from the NFL's collective bargaining agreement. After Doty ruled in the Vick bonus case, the NFL accused him of bias and sought to end his oversight of its contract with the players union.

The appeals court said the contract should remain under Doty's oversight.

NFL spokesman Greg Aiello did not say whether the league planned a further appeal, but he said the 8th Circuit upheld Doty's ruling on Vick's bonuses in large part because it found the contract's forfeiture language ambiguous.

"That is something that we will seek to change at the bargaining table to ensure that bonus payments are paid to players who comply with their contracts and perform on the field," Aiello said.

Vick, a former Atlanta Falcons star, was released from federal custody July 20 after serving 18 months of a 23-month sentence for running a dogfighting ring in Surry County, Va. The Eagles signed Vick to a $1.6 million contract for 2009, with a team option for the second year at $5.2 million, but he has not played much.

I don't wanna see one friggin' word about him donating SHYT to ' animal rights'

You don't have to worry about animal rights. His creditors are at the door. W/ a little luck he might have some cash for himself.

RobM: LOL!! :>) SPEAK TA-RUTH!!:>)

The lack of “good” jobs is a serious problem for all Americans and an especially dire problem for America’s people of color. The current recession has highlighted overall job loss and the need for robust job creation; however, we must also look at the quality of those jobs. The United States has too few good jobs, and the share has been declining over time. A recovery that creates millions of low-wage, no-benefit jobs is not a real recovery at all. This Briefing Paper uses a minimal definition of a “good” job. It defines a good job as one that pays a wage that can support a family and that provides health care and retirement benefits. Using this minimal standard, the paper shows that Hispanics are less than half as likely as whites to have good jobs, and African Americans are about two-thirds as likely. When comparing workers of the same educational level, whites are also more likely to have good jobs than Asian Americans. The large share of college graduates among Asian Americans, however, hides their disadvantage when one
examines the group as a whole. Generally, people of color have less access than whites to quality jobs.

The lack of good jobs is a problem for all racial and ethnic groups. From 1979 to 2008, the share of good jobs declined 6.9 percentage points among all races. This is a surprising development when one considers that there has been a 76% increase in productivity over the same period.1 Average Americans are working harder and smarter, but average workers of all racial and ethnic groups have not benefitted in pay and benefits from these improvements. Without the good jobs agenda outlined in this paper, we will likely continue to see reductions in their number.

Without a doubt, the United States could do much better in this area. Many other developed nations pay higher wages than the United States. For example, if one
examines the wages for manufacturing production workers only, workers in Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden all earn more on average than U.S. workers (Mishel, Bernstein, and Shierholz 2009, 377). America also has a comparatively large share of workers making less than two-thirds of the average wage (OECD 2007, 268). If the United States enjoyed a more equitable income distribution, Americans would have more good jobs for millions of Americans, including millions of people of color.

...

In summary:

• America has too few good jobs for people of all races, but the problem is more severe for workers of color.
• The United States needs to develop a “good jobs” agenda at the federal, state, and local levels to dramatically increase the amount of. Ideally, all jobs should be good jobs, but setting an intermediate target of 75% good jobs is an achievable goal over the next 10 years.
• Increasing the number of good jobs will require (1) having policymakers make enlarging the number of good jobs a priority; (2) implementing universal health insurance and universal retirement security; and (3) increasing the unionization rate of American workers.
• Reducing the racial good jobs gap with whites will require programs for ddressing (1) racial discrimination in the labor market; (2) the need for better education and training for people of color; (3) the failure of the U.S. labor market to validate the foreign, non-European college degrees of immigrants; and (4) a dysfunctional criminal justice system.

Getting Good Jobs to People of Color

---

Economic Policy Institute Briefing (PDF)

The US has always been about cheap labor.

The "good jobs" are reserved for the elites.

The scrap menial jobs are reserved for everyone else.

If companies can keep shipping "good jobs" overseas and pay Balki in India $6000 to be a programmer instead of paying Mike in America $60K they will do it.

"Good jobs" ain't coming back. I wouldn't be surprised if full time work goes away and companies just get a series of part time workers to avoid having to pay benefits. I think we all need to get ourselves some hustles going on for 2010.

Sad but true "we all need to get ourselves some hustle on for '10."

" With the Republican National Committee targeting a list of House Democrats in relatively conservative districts whom it will go after for backing health care legislation, the Democratic National Committee is making the opposite case, and says it will use the legislation against 33 Republicans whose districts went for President Obama last fall.

"These are folks in districts that voted for the President, and where insurance reform is not only needed, but also politically popular. By not only voting against the needs of their constituents, but also their desire to reform the perverse health insurance system -- and to do it for purely political purposes -- these Republicans have put a giant target on their back. They made a disastrous choice and they will reap the consequences of that choice," said DNC National Press Secretary Hari Sevugan in an email."

_______

This is the type of action we need to see from the DNC. I think it is very misguided for the DailyKos, FDL and Aravois crowd to be joining in some boycott of the DNC based on DADT and the DOMA.

The DNC is doing what they need to.

For all the media speculation about vulnerable Democratic incumbents being afraid to support fixing a broken system, the DNC has every reason to turn this frame around.

A DNC official said, "If Republicans think this is a political problem for us -- they're sorely mistaken. The American people want reform and Republicans are standing in the way for the sake of partisan politics. That is a political problem for them. We are going to cause havoc for them.

GREAT!!

The D's don't have the stones to do this. Watch what has happened w/ Liberman and Spector. They have spit on the President and the President hasn't done a thing but go out a campaign for Spector.

What WJC says his advice was to the Senate Democratic Caucus today:

"I basically said that I think it's an economic imperative. We're in an economic crisis, we're trying to bring America back, and I have always been concerned that, you know, 16 percent of our people don't have health insurance and 30 percent are without it at any given time during the year.

"But the main thing, since we're focused on the economy, is that we are spending 16.5 percent of our income on health care. The next most expensive country is Switzerland at 11.5. The next most expensive is Canada at 10.5. All of our competitors are between 9 and 10 percent. That means every year, it's like we write a check to all of our economic competitors for $800 or $900 million. And they cover everybody -- we only cover 84 percent, and we don't get better outcomes. We get worse outcomes.

"So the point I tried to make is that this is an economic imperative.... Second thing is that on the policy, there is no perfect bill, because there are always unintended consequences. So there will be amendments to this effort, whatever they pass, next year and the year after and the year after. And there should be. It's a big, complex, organic thing.

"But the worst thing to do is nothing."

http://www.rollcall.com/news/40506-1.html

i agree

Last week, as House Democrats took to the floor with near-unanimous praise for legislation to help the unemployed and stimulate the fragile economy, Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) offered a wildly different message. “This bill,” he said, “represents a textbook example of how not to deal with the economic challenges that our country faces.”

The Texas Democrat wasn’t talking about the extension of unemployment benefits at the heart of the bill, but an amendment providing the nation’s businesses — even the largest corporations — with tens-of-billions of dollars in tax rebates to stem recent losses. That provision, Doggett claimed, is less an economic stimulant than it is “a corporate giveaway” at the expense of taxpayers. It didn’t help the congressman’s mood that the Democrats’ bill allocates more than four times the funding to the business tax than it does to extending unemployment insurance.

Indeed, although the jobless benefits are the centerpiece of the Democrats’ bill, they represent a mere $2.4 billion of the spending, according to the Congressional Budget Office — or just 10 percent of the $24 billion proposal. Nearly half of the money — $10.4 billion — will go toward the so-called loss carry-back extension, which will allow businesses, both large and small, to apply any losses suffered in 2008 and 2009 to income made in the previous five years, three years longer than current law allows. The result will be tax refunds topping $33 billion next year, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation.

Supporters of the two tax breaks — including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.), the bill sponsors — argue that they’ll help prop up businesses in the midst of the worst unemployment crisis in 26 years.

Yet an analysis of a similar bill by Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Economy.com, indicates that, in terms of bang-for-the-buck, the lopsided allocations in the stimulus bill are dubious. Indeed, for every dollar spent on the business tax rebate, just 21 cents are returned to the larger economy, according to Zandi. By contrast, the homebuyer tax credit returns 90 cents on the dollar, he found, while the unemployment extension returns $1.61.

“This bill,” Doggett said, “now directs the Treasury to essentially write a check directly to corporations for more than $10 billion — checks to corporations that have committed fraud, checks to corporations that have no ability to create jobs because they have no employees and exist solely on paper as a fiction. It rewards some of the very corporate losers who have brought us to the brink of economic ruin.”

Employment Bill Called ‘Corporate Giveaway’: Bill Allocates Five Times More for Corporate Tax Perks Than Unemployment Insurance Benefits

Rep Lloyd Doggett is glad he lives in Texas so he can carry a six shooter. someone is coming after him for talking truth.

A look back at the House health bill fight
by David Waldman
Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 09:32:03 AM PST

So the health insurance reform bill is through the House on its first pass. There's a weakened version of the public option in there. That's good. And there's the Stupak amendment in there. That's bad.

The inclusion of the Stupak amendment has a couple of great backstories about activism and organizing, if you look for them.

First, of course, there's the story of the vast, lavishly-funded national network of professional abortion rights advocacy groups who somehow found themselves blindsided and rolled by a situation that was 100% predictable (not to mention 35 years in the making), and will now have to either threaten to kill the entire bill if the Senate is unable to resist the temptation to pass the same language, or release 40+ super-progressive women legislators and allies to vote for a health insurance reform bill that for all practical purposes nearly eliminates access to abortion that isn't paid for up front and in cash. Ordinarily, that'd be ludicrous, except for the fact that those super-progressive legislators just voted for exactly that, though surely they'd explain that they just did it "to move the process forward."

Second, there's the story of the voices in the wilderness, the single payer advocates, who settled for the promise of a floor vote on the Weiner amendment, only to see that amendment withdrawn in a deal to avoid... the Stupak amendment, only to see that amendment not withdrawn and ultimately given a floor vote and be adopted.

The public option -- to the extent it was saved (and that's yet to be determined) -- was saved by taking a sober look at the legislative playing field, identifying where the cracks in the dam would appear, and building the best bulwark against it that an ad hoc network of advocates could build, working it, grooming it, and maintaining it. Vote pledges were sought early on, lined up and reinforced in advance of the committee markups, with a special emphasis on seeing those pledges through all the way through conference.

Abortion rights advocates, on the other hand, had an existing network of professional lobbyists and policy analysts, plus a multi-million dollar funding base, not to mention nearly 35 years of lead time in terms of knowing that any health care bill would include a serious abortion threat (counted from the earliest days of the Hyde amendment on), and yet their efforts seemed next to invisible, and they now look to be in position not only to possibly lose, but to put their biggest supporters in Congress in danger of voting the wrong way on their signature issue.

Even if you don't buy the idea of starting the clock on threats to abortion rights in the health care bill with the advent of the Hyde amendment, Bart Stupak was open about his demands on the bill from early on, committing them to a letter to the Speaker as early as June.

But the professional advocates appear to have been caught largely by surprise by Stupak's maneuvering. Reacting much too late in the game, they were forced to rely on "urgent" emails to their lists of supporters to drive calls to Congress on the day of the floor vote. That's a game that's perhaps slightly more effective for amendments than for entire bills, but it's almost always way, way, way too late in the process to make a big impact. (In truth, urgent "call your Representatives!" emails sent on the day of a vote are usually designed to keep you "involved" as a donor, not effective as an activist. But that's another story.)

As I said, the anti-choice threat to federal health care legislation is going on 35 years old. It's a known threat, and just as much is known about the efficacy of different approaches to activism and lobbying on those threats. When, in those 35 years, has a bunch of phone calls stemmed the steady tide of erosion of reproductive rights?

So the effort of the professionals now turns to praying for a conference miracle. That's always possible, but now it's the play that was once floated for the public option, only in reverse.

That is, it was once speculated that the Senate would exclude the public option in order to get a bill to conference, but that there could be a super secret plan to accede to the House position on it in conference, and that way make conservative Dems in the Senate vote on it (and cloture) only once, but in so doing it would appear right up until the last minute as if the public option were being abandoned, and there would in fact be no second chance to revive it if something went wrong with the super secret plan.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/11/9/802608/...

Just unbelievable how amateur hour the D's are.

Shooting at mall in Portland, what the hell is going on??? Why do people seem to believe that shooting people is the way to solve their problems.

People's anger has been stirred up for almost 2 years now. People have been told by the Ferraros and Hannitys and OReillys and Dobbs and Becks and Fox Noises that "that guy over there took your spot, that guy over there is coming to take your shit, those people over there are going to suck you dry, those people over there don't belong here, these people right here aren't real Americans" and on and on. That anger has built up and must be released and all these shootings are the release of that nasty energy.

the thing why don't they just off themselves? if you're that miserable - take YOURSELF out. why you think you should take others out...hell no.

hat tip -Icebergslim

Damn, burglaries down due to the recession

This is a WTF read, seriously...

Ever since he was laid off in March, Frank Beil has been on the lookout.

He keeps an eye out for cars moving slowly down the street or strangers walking along the sidewalk of his suburban Chicago neighborhood. He wonders about the times he answers the phone and the caller hangs up.

"You don't know if that might be people staking you out, finding out if you're home or not," said the 71-year-old hospital chaplain from Glenview.

Beil is watching for burglars, and police nationwide credit him and those like him for one of the few bright spots of the recession: The number of home burglaries is falling in some cities and towns.

"With a lot more unemployed people, a lot more people are staying home, and they see more in their neighborhood," said Sgt. Thomas Lasater, who supervises the burglary unit of the police department in St. Louis County, Mo., where authorities recorded a whopping 35 percent drop in burglaries during the first six months of 2009.

The trend is showing up in communities big and small. read more here...


Never would I have ever thought recession taking thieves out of business...

http://thisweekwithbarackobama.blogspot.com/200...

Dont ask me how I know but the bootlegging business is way down too! LOL

i know too.....but, i won't admit how either...lol

The American Medical Association (AMA) voted today to reverse its long-held position that marijuana be retained as a Schedule I substance with no medical value. The AMA adopted a report drafted by the AMA Council on Science and Public Health (CSAPH) entitled, "Use of Cannabis for Medicinal Purposes," which affirmed the therapeutic benefits of marijuana and called for further research. The CSAPH report concluded that, "short term controlled trials indicate that smoked cannabis reduces neuropathic pain, improves appetite and caloric intake especially in patients with reduced muscle mass, and may relieve spasticity and pain in patients with multiple sclerosis." Furthermore, the report urges that "the Schedule I status of marijuana be reviewed with the goal of facilitating clinical research and development of cannabinoid-based medicines, and alternate delivery methods."

The change of position by the largest physician-based group in the country was precipitated in part by a resolution adopted in June of 2008 by the Medical Student Section (MSS) of the AMA in support of the reclassification of marijuana's status as a Schedule I substance. In the past year, the AMA has considered three resolutions dealing with medical marijuana, which also helped to influence the report and its recommendations. The AMA vote on the report took place in Houston, Texas during the organization's annual Interim Meeting of the House of Delegates. The last AMA position, adopted 8 years ago, called for maintaining marijuana as a Schedule I substance, with no medical value.

AMA Ends 72-Year Policy, Says Marijuana has Medical Benefits

---

Line up to get them scripts!!

Another one of those "lagging indicators"...

Have any thoughts on latest EPI report? Getting Good Jobs to People of Color

I suppose that's one of those "historic lagging indicators"...LOL!

decriminalize it and tax it.

If you think the gardening movement is a response to hard times what makes you think everyone will not have their own herb garden? How are you going to tax that?

Not the Worst GOP Scandal Ever

by Steven D
Tue Nov 10th, 2009 at 07:57:45 AM EST
This story about prominent Idaho political figure and Republican National Committee member Blake Hall and his conviction for stalking his former girlfriend is pretty disturbing, nonetheless, especially from the "ewww!" factor alone:

Blake Hall, a leading figure in Idaho and national politics for 25 years, was fired Monday as a deputy prosecuting attorney in eastern Idaho and has resigned from the Republican National Committee. [...]

Idaho Falls police reported that witnesses said Hall disposed of used condoms on the lawn of the woman's house. Nineteen condoms were turned over to police, collected on 10 different dates, according to a police report. Both Hall and his lawyer acknowledged the condoms belonged to him, according to a police report. [...]

"I was so tired of being victimized," the woman said. "It is unimaginable that a 56-year-old would be so deviant."

Well, at least he didn't try to choke her to death. And it's clear from his behavior he hasn't been seduced by the Gay Side, so far as we know. In Republican Political circles I guess that makes him a stand up guy. Which is why, even though he has to serve a six month 15 day jail term, resign from the RNC, and was fired from one of the government jobs he held, he still gets to keep his second government job as a civil attorney for Fremont County, Idaho:

But Hall, 56, will keep his $31,000-a-year job as the civil attorney in nearby Fremont County, according to Prosecutor Joette Lookabaugh, a Republican who hired Hall in January.

Lookabaugh said she told Hall he would keep his job "unless or until his ability to do an outstanding job for Fremont County citizens is compromised." [...]

"I understand that political figures are held to a higher standard," she said. "What is disturbing is the fact that often people who have devoted their lives to public service are not given the same benefits, or are treated more harshly, than the public at large. There seems to be a certain amount of political glee in striking down the well-known for any real or perceived foible."

This behavior by Mr. Hall was only a "real or perceived foible? I guess a conviction and jail time for stalking a married woman who repeatedly asked him to stop harassing her and leaving used condoms on her lawn is only a "foible" if you're a Republican. As opposed to a blow job given to a Democratic president which was, after all, an impeachable offense committed by a man who nearly destroyed this great nation of ours, and was, without a doubt, the worst, most immoral thing ever done by a White Male President.*

Still, he's not really that bad of a guy. By all accounts (i.e., his attorney's statement), he took his punishment like a real man, with grace and dignity, but most of all with great strength:

David Leroy, a former Idaho attorney general, is Hall's attorney.

"In my opinion, he accepted this severe penalty with extreme grace," Leroy said Monday. "He was calm and strong."

I think this qualifies him to run for Vice president, don't you? Clearly, he'd make a great running mate for Sarah Palin in 2012. I mean, he's a bit of a rogue, too, and he comes from Real America, which would make their ticket a match made in Republican Heaven. What more could she ask for?

http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2009/11/10/7...

-----------------

USED CONDOMS?

I shudder at the thought...disgusting.

Nowak Pleads Guilty in Love Triangle Case
By MIKE SCHNEIDER
,
ORLANDO, Fla. (Nov. 10) - A former astronaut charged with confronting a romantic rival in an airport parking lot after driving 1,000 miles from Houston to Orlando pleaded guilty Tuesday and was sentenced to one year of probation.
Lisa Nowak, a Navy captain, pleaded guilty to felony burglary and misdemeanor battery. She originally had been charged with two felonies — attempted kidnapping and burglary — along with misdemeanor battery.

Nowak confronted her romantic rival, Colleen Shipman, in the parking lot of Orlando International Airport in February 2007 after driving from Houston. Shipman had begun dating Nowak's love interest, former space shuttle pilot Bill Oefelein.
Wearing a wig and trenchcoat, Nowak followed Shipman to the parking lot and tried to get into her car, then attacked her with pepper spray. Shipman was able to drive away.
Police arrested Nowak a short time later in the parking lot near a trash can where she was seen getting rid of a bag. In Nowak's bag police found a steel mallet, a knife, a BB pistol, rubber tubing and several large garbage bags.
"Almost three years later, I'm still reeling from her vicious attack," Shipman told the judge after Nowak's plea, holding back tears. "I know in my heart when Lisa Nowak attacked me, she was going to kill me.
"I believe I escaped a horrible death that night," Shipman said.
An appeals court ruled last year that diapers, latex gloves and other items found in Nowak's car could be used as evidence in a trial that had been scheduled for next month, but her six-hour police interview after her arrest could not. The court said investigators took advantage of the former astronaut, who had not slept for more than 24 hours, coercing her into giving information.
Nowak, 46, is a married mother of three. She flew on the space shuttle in 2006, but was dismissed from the astronaut corps after her arrest and has since been on active duty at a Navy base in Corpus Christi, Texas. Oefelein, 44, also was forced out of NASA and now lives in Alaska with Shipman.

http://news.aol.com/article/plea-deal-offered-t...

Black Kos, Tuesday's Chile
by Black Kos [Unsubscribe]
Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 12:00:07 PM PST


Commentary, Deoliver47, Black Kos Editor

Denial is not a river in Egypt and AIDS is a problem we can’t sleep on.

We have got to stop denying we have a problem – with HIV/AIDS. AIDS is not a gay disease. AIDS is not a straight disease. AIDS is just a disease that is killing more black people in this country than folks want to think about – yet we still have folks that don’t want to talk about sex and multiple sex partners, don’t want to talk about homosexuality, don’t want to talk about intravenous drug use.

* Black Kos's diary :: ::
*

Our government has, up until recently mostly ignored AIDS in black and latino communities. World AIDS conferences aren’t held here; we’ve been boycotted because of the stupid travel ban restricting anyone who is HIV poz or who has an AIDS diagnosis from entering the US. Thankfully President Obama has lifted the ban, and the CDC has just recently funded The Black AIDS Institutes new initiative:

Black AIDS Institute Receives Long-Term Funding from CDC for African American HIV University (AAHU)

Founded in May of 1999, the Black AIDS Institute is the only national HIV/AIDS think tank focused exclusively on Black people. The Institute's Mission is to stop the AIDS pandemic in Black communities by engaging and mobilizing Black institutions and individuals in efforts to confront HIV. The Institute interprets public and private sector HIV policies, conducts trainings, offers technical assistance, disseminates information and provides advocacy from a uniquely and unapologetically Black point of view.

One? Only one? We need more than one major think tank to deal with this.
Let's look at the facts from the CDC

The HIV/AIDS epidemic in African American communities is a continuing public health crisis for the United States. At the end of 2006 there were an estimated 1.1 million people living with HIV infection, of which almost half (46%) were black/African American [1]. While blacks represent approximately 12 percent of the U.S. population, they continue to account for a higher proportion of cases at all stages of HIV/AIDS—from infection with HIV to death with AIDS—compared with members of other races and ethnicities.

So how, and why is this happening and what are we going to do about it?

I have been working in the AIDS community, as an activist, since GRID.
I went back to school to become a medical anthropologist because my neighbors, friends, relatives and lovers were dying and I wanted some answers. I protested in front of Harlem churches whose pastors shut their doors, put their hands over their eyes, closed their ears, and refused to listen.

They were in De-nial.

I did guerrilla needle exchange.

It was illegal. The city government was in De-Nial.

I joined ACT-UP, as a part of the women's caucus, because the medical establishment was in De-nial. I am grateful to have met Maxine Wolfe. Women weren't included in clinical trials, because straight women didn't have AIDS. Lesbians weren't at risk.

Yeah, right.

But those of us who were not in denial, took to the streets and made demands. We also began to educate folks, sometimes door-to-door.
But the efforts made in black and other communities of color were underfunded and overlooked.

SILENCE = DEATH.

And so we continued to die. Oh, there were successes, and high profile efforts to raise AIDS awareness, and there is now treatment available. But the infection rates in our community continue to skyrocket.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/11/10/801572...

Ex-Gates Foundation exec named foreign aid chief
By MATTHEW LEE, Associated Press Writer Matthew Lee, Associated Press Writer – 7 mins ago

SINGAPORE – The Obama administration will nominate a young former executive with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to run America's top foreign assistance program, ending months of speculation and complaints about who would take the vacant post, U.S. officials said Tuesday.

President Barack Obama has chosen Rajiv Shah, a medical doctor and currently a senior official at the Department of Agriculture dealing with food security, to run the U.S. Agency for International Development, the officials said.

The officials — some traveling with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and others at the White House — spoke on condition of anonymity pending notification to Congress and a formal public announcement of the choice.

Shah's selection, which must still be confirmed by the Senate, would end a 10-month leadership vacuum at USAID, which has been operating with an acting director since Obama took office despite his campaign pledges to have the agency play a greater role in foreign policy.

Obama and Clinton have said USAID is crucial to deploying their preferred "smart power" foreign policy strategy, which envisions more equal roles for diplomacy and development alongside defense. They plan to double the amount of foreign aid.

The agency will play a key role in the administration's efforts in Afghanistan and Pakistan, where officials believe the civilian component must be strengthened.

But the top job at the agency has remained vacant until now, with several prime candidates withdrawing from consideration amid a White House vetting process that Clinton denounced in July as "ridiculous," "a nightmare," and "frustrating beyond words."

Shah, 36, whose family immigrated to the U.S. from India, is now the Under Secretary for Research, Education and Economics and Chief Scientist at the Agriculture Department where he manages a budget of more than $2.6 billion and more than 10,000 staff around the world.

Before that, he had several positions at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, including managing its $1.5 billion contribution to a global vaccination fund and helping launch the foundation's Global Development program where he oversaw a $1.3 billion investment portfolio.

The lingering USAID vacancy, particularly after several leading candidates pulled out, had upset development experts and Congress. Some lawmakers had suggested that Obama choose someone who had already gone through the vetting process.

Shah fits that bill and has important political credentials, having worked with or for several leading Democratic politicians.

If confirmed, Shah will take over a weakened agency that has seen its staff cut and some functions folded into the State Department. Many in the development community worry that State plans to keep control of the aid agency's budget, with the new administrator answering to a deputy secretary of state.

Given that speculation, and the delay in appointing an administrator, David Beckmann, co-chair of the Modernizing Foreign Assistance Network, said the administration needs to move quickly in defining Shah's responsibilities.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091110/ap_on_re_as...

Why Wasn't Hasan Discharged?
Posted by Joe Klein Tuesday, November 10, 2009 at 12:09 pm




It is becoming increasingly apparent that Nidal Hasan was not only unhinged, but also an entirely inappropriate character to counsel U.S. soldiers on war-related stress and injuries. The wingers are exaggerating much of this--the fact that he attended the same mosque as two of the 9/11 hijackers is guilt by association, at best; the fact that he communicated with an Al Qaeda leader is more troubling, but the emails were monitored and judged to be non-threatening.

What is very troubling is that his colleagues at Walter Reed seem to have had grave doubts about the guy (it'll be interesting to see the evaluations he received from superiors)--and yet he was allowed to continue to counsel American troops, troops who were in an extremely delicate psychological state. That seems beyond careless. And the question has to be asked: Was this a matter of political correctness? Was the Army reluctant to discharge a Muslim in a sensitive position because it might be portrayed as an act of bigotry or censorship--that he was fired for his views?

Well, in some jobs, your views matter. In this case, Hasan's apparent belief that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were an anti-Muslim crusade, had to influence to way he interacted with his patients. No doubt, those views were influenced, and perhaps exacerbated, by his experiences treating the tormented troops in his care...and, perhaps, in some cases, they made Hasan a more compassionate therapist. But they were wrong and extreme--the war in Iraq was a disgrace for any number of reasons, but it was not an anti-Muslim jihad--and they were inappropriate for a person in Hasan's position. He should have been discharged.

By the way, it is possible to believe that Hasan should have been discharged...and to also believe that his act of insanity was not an act of terrorism. Most terrorists kill strangers; Hasan killed people he knew and worked with, fellow therapists, in fact. His disgraceful act has far more in common with Columbine than it does with 9/11.

In any case, I don't understand where calling the act "terrorism" gets us. If it was terrorism, rather than sheer insanity, what are the policy implications? That devout Muslims should be regarded as inherently suspicious characters? That Muslims should not be allowed to serve in the military or in sensitive government agencies? That we should be more vigilant at home and more aggressive fighting the War on Terror overseas? (Add: There is a real danger, as we saw during the Bush Administration, of overreacting to a serious, heinous but non-existential threat.)

I'd draw a far more narrow lesson: that even though the Army has made dramatic improvements in its treatment of our psychologically wounded warriors, the vast increase in the need for therapists has allowed standards to slip. It is important that the military use this massacre as an impetus to pay much closer attention to the therapists entrusted with the care of our troops.


Read more: http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/11/10/why-...

Is Joe Klein that dense?

If we call it "terrorism," like the neo-cons want us to, then they get to hang a terrorist attack on American soil around this president's neck. And they'll yank on it and yank on it and yank on it and yank and yank and yank....

I do not believe his actions were those of insanity. That is a real curve ball that is not consistent with the facts. This man did what he did because of his religious beliefs.

He gave an entire presentation on those beliefs as his final topic at WalterReed. The things he said in that slide presentation clearly indicated that his religious views made him a conscientious objector.

One slide even said...we love death more than you love life!

Hasan went to great lengths to share his religious background and cited numerous passages from the Koran that allowed anyone listening to understand, his mental conflicts. Hasan, explained how many muslims there were globally, which countries had the most muslims and broke down by ethnicity the percent of muslims in the US Army. I suspect one of the driving factors that his treatise was not acted on is because:

. The largest group of Muslims in the US Army are African American.

Check out his presentation at this link:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ga...


Hasan, should have been relieved of his role as psychiatrist and made to serve in a different role militarily since the US taxpayers paid for both his UG and Medical School education.

Also to add complexity to the issue and rebut that this was a question of sanity. Despite Hasan going to the mosque daily and refusing to take pics with females...he also visited a strip club less than a 0.25 miles from the mosques, where the owner said he would spend 6-7 hours and pay for lap dances in private rooms.

Soo, this man was not insane, he was a religious hypocrite who decided it was OK to kill innocent people cause he lacked the courage to serve in themilitary.

In short, if AA muslims can serve and make up the highest percent of muslims in the Army....Hasan wasn't crazy...he was simply a MOFO COward!!

while I'm not inclined to believe the man was insane, am I wrong to believe that he set off enough neon bells that he should have been on someone's radar?

if true that the man asked to be let out of the Army, and was willing to PAY BACK THE COSTS OF HIS MEDICAL SCHOOL TUITION ...

that means to me..HE WANTED OUT and should be taken seriously. ..the question is, why wasn't he?

O I completely agree...it was grossly negligent that he was NOt on the Army's radar. That presentation was OVER the TOP!! I do not understand why that was not the biggest ass red flag EVER...you are suppose to do it on a MEDICAL topic and he chose a RELIGIOUS topic and made it a defiant rebellious statement against the very wars his allegiance as an AMERICAN serving in the US ARMY he was obligated to uphold.

I think something really, really, really smells in Denmark when this man was just promoted to Major in May and when he was not being monitored nor counseled.

Something stinks...I wonder if he was allowed to continue because he WAS being monitored and they wanted to see where HIS contacts would lead to?

They erred big time in waiting tooo long. They had to know he purchased those guns..if not...something is foul...and the stench is growing daily with the more information that comes out.

Too many coincidences also in his story in terms of Awlaki..the iman that just so happened to belong to the mosque where Hasan buried his mom, the fact that Awlaki was an iman for 2 of the 8/11 hijackers, the fact that Awlakii is KNOWN to relate exceptionally well to American Muslims when it comes to jihad..they say he is American, funny and persusasive...in short he would 'get' Hasan and other Arabic/somalian Muslims who grew up as Americans. Supposedly Awlaki is in Yemen now, but there are too many coincidences in the bkgrd of Hasan...for this all to have been an 'isolated lunatic' who just so happens to be Muslim. Awlaki also has been said to have links to the young Somalians in MN that are turning jihadists.

"the question is, why wasn't he?"

Was he suppose to be a decoy for the CIA to follow to find his other 'terrorisism' network contacts. How could they let him go as a religious objector when the majority of Muslims serving in the US Army are AA? Would they need to allow all of them out as well.

Imagine the controversy that would cause..if you are Muslim and of Arabic descent, despite being an American citizen born and raised here,,,,you can be relieved of your obligation on the basis of conscientious objector BUT if you are Muslim and of AfricanAmerican descendant...you have to fulfill your military obligation...cause it is just too many of y'all AA for the US ARMY to be able to let all y'all go....besides the government set the precedent when they never allowed ALI not to serve..the US government threw him in jail for his religious beliefs.

So, there is precedent here in terms of conscientious objectors of the Muslim faith.

if this is the case, then they should admit it, and deal with the fallout. right now, we're slowly coming to two baskets-
1. this is a setup
2. this is gross incompetence.

neither one is comforting. to admit that he WAS on someone's radar, and that they screwed up because they wanted to see ' if he led anywhere', in an odd way, could be more comforting, because at least I'd be assured that all of these new 'monitoring' methods since 9-11, have a practical purpose. he wasn't presenting this to folks picked off the street - his presentation was to a room full of PROFESSIONALS.

Well, what's been the theme floating around Obama:

1) He's too weak to keep us safe on US Soil.

2) He's "dithering" on whether or not to send troops to Afghanistan to keep us safe.

Then you have a series of leaks saying "Obama's going to send X amount of troops to Afghanistan" and the WH denies it.

Now you have this froot loop shooting up Fort Hood, who was supposed to be under surveillance and the wingnuts are screaming that this was on Obama's watch blah blah he didn't keep us safe blah blah it's his fault yada yada.

So I expect in the next week one of the Darth Cheneys to pop up on TV screaming that Obama didn't keep us safe and suggesting he needs to be removed.

This screams "set up" from the inside.

The problem is that no one is willing to admit that non Christian Religion plays a role in psychological and pyschiatric treatment. We see it all the time w/ right wing Christians in the throws of ecastasy. Few are willing to admit the connection but a Muslim....

If nonChristian religion is a significant factor then why are we not seeing far more AfricanAmerican Muslims having such problems? AA make up the largest group of non-Christian religion in the army...are we hearing about an increase in their psychological treatment based on their non=Christian views? If not why not.

here I go being politically incorrect...
they were Black longer than they've been Muslim

I am not saying religion is a signifcant factor but it needs to be taken into account w/ treatment. Cultural factors such as a belief in freedom of religion may account for the lack of problems w/ AA Muslims manifesting itself the way it did in the Major. AA soldiers didn't come to Islam for extremist reasons nor did they grow up w/ it the way a fundamentalist does in either religion.
This does not mean AA Muslim soldiers don't suffer from PTSD.

Genius. Not.

I agree Hasan was not a genius either.

here comes the faux outrage
Obama is into trading jews tonight on Hannity

peak oil?
Key oil figures were distorted by US pressure, says whistleblower
Terry Macalister

The world is much closer to running out of oil than official estimates admit, according to a whistleblower at the International Energy Agency who claims it has been deliberately underplaying a looming shortage for fear of triggering panic buying.

The senior official claims the US has played an influential role in encouraging the watchdog to underplay the rate of decline from existing oil fields while overplaying the chances of finding new reserves.

The allegations raise serious questions about the accuracy of the organisation's latest World Energy Outlook on oil demand and supply to be published tomorrow – which is used by the British and many other governments to help guide their wider energy and climate change policies.
'There's suspicion the IEA has been influenced by the US' Link to this audio

In particular they question the prediction in the last World Economic Outlook, believed to be repeated again this year, that oil production can be raised from its current level of 83m barrels a day to 105m barrels. External critics have frequently argued that this cannot be substantiated by firm evidence and say the world has already passed its peak in oil production.

Now the "peak oil" theory is gaining support at the heart of the global energy establishment. "The IEA in 2005 was predicting oil supplies could rise as high as 120m barrels a day by 2030 although it was forced to reduce this gradually to 116m and then 105m last year," said the IEA source, who was unwilling to be identified for fear of reprisals inside the industry. "The 120m figure always was nonsense but even today's number is much higher than can be justified and the IEA knows this.

"Many inside the organisation believe that maintaining oil supplies at even 90m to 95m barrels a day would be impossible but there are fears that panic could spread on the financial markets if the figures were brought down further. And the Americans fear the end of oil supremacy because it would threaten their power over access to oil resources," he added.

A second senior IEA source, who has now left but was also unwilling to give his name, said a key rule at the organisation was that it was "imperative not to anger the Americans" but the fact was that there was not as much oil in the world as had been admitted. "We have [already] entered the 'peak oil' zone. I think that the situation is really bad," he added.

The IEA acknowledges the importance of its own figures, boasting on its website: "The IEA governments and industry from all across the globe have come to rely on the World Energy Outlook to provide a consistent basis on which they can formulate policies and design business plans."

The British government, among others, always uses the IEA statistics rather than any of its own to argue that there is little threat to long-term oil supplies.

The IEA said tonight that peak oil critics had often wrongly questioned the accuracy of its figures. A spokesman said it was unable to comment ahead of the 2009 report being released tomorrow.

John Hemming, the MP who chairs the all-party parliamentary group on peak oil and gas, said the revelations confirmed his suspicions that the IEA underplayed how quickly the world was running out and this had profound implications for British government energy policy.

He said he had also been contacted by some IEA officials unhappy with its lack of independent scepticism over predictions. "Reliance on IEA reports has been used to justify claims that oil and gas supplies will not peak before 2030. It is clear now that this will not be the case and the IEA figures cannot be relied on," said Hemming.

"This all gives an importance to the Copenhagen [climate change] talks and an urgent need for the UK to move faster towards a more sustainable [lower carbon] economy if it is to avoid severe economic dislocation," he added.

The IEA was established in 1974 after the oil crisis in an attempt to try to safeguard energy supplies to the west. The World Energy Outlook is produced annually under the control of the IEA's chief economist, Fatih Birol, who has defended the projections from earlier outside attack. Peak oil critics have often questioned the IEA figures.

But now IEA sources who have contacted the Guardian say that Birol has increasingly been facing questions about the figures inside the organisation.

Matt Simmons, a respected oil industry expert, has long questioned the decline rates and oil statistics provided by Saudi Arabia on its own fields. He has raised questions about whether peak oil is much closer than many have accepted.

A report by the UK Energy Research Centre (UKERC) last month said worldwide production of conventionally extracted oil could "peak" and go into terminal decline before 2020 – but that the government was not facing up to the risk. Steve Sorrell, chief author of the report, said forecasts suggesting oil production will not peak before 2030 were "at best optimistic and at worst implausible".

But as far back as 2004 there have been people making similar warnings. Colin Campbell, a former executive with Total of France told a conference: "If the real [oil reserve] figures were to come out there would be panic on the stock markets … in the end that would suit no one."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/...

I'm watching the Ft. Hood memorial right now...