Ike's Call for Sanity

Jon Stewart and President Eisenhower make an odd couple, but they have a similar message for today's politicians.

As the Daily Show host does an enraged rant about Congressional hypocrisy in caring more about tax cuts for the rich than the health of 9/11 responders, Ike's voice comes from the past, warning about falling "into bitter, unreconcilable factions which in other nations have paralyzed the democratic process."

Fifty years after his farewell address, newly discovered papers reveal that, in addition to a legendary warning about growing power of the "military-industrial complex," Eisenhower considered an admonition against Congressional paralysis by political divisions, followed by the lesson he learned from leading a divided government:

"Despite our differences, we worked together, and the business of the nation went forward, and the fact that it did so is in large measure a credit to the wisdom, forbearance, and sense of duty displayed by the Congress."

John Boehner and Mitch McConnell may want to consider such advice from the Republican president who brought egomaniacal commanders together for a World War II victory and, as President, left office respected by Americans across the political spectrum.

Half a century ago, it was possible for a lifelong Democrat to fall in love with Eisenhower for his palpable decency, honor and adherence to true American values.

If he were still with us, Ike would get a rousing reception from Jon Stewart's audience as he offered a bit of advice to the Tea Party, "Here in America we are descended in blood and in spirit from revolutionists and rebels--men and women who dare to dissent from accepted doctrine. As their heirs, may we never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion."

In his lifetime, Eisenhower was wooed by both Republicans and Democrats to run as their candidate for the White House. Would he be today?



Read The Full Article:
http://ajliebling.blogspot.com/2010/12/ikes-call-for-sanity.html

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

Deficit Fraud Romney: Jobless Benefits Are Too
Expensive, But The Bush Tax Cuts Increase Revenue

Yesterday, the Senate approved the tax deal that President Obama negotiated with Congressional Republicans by an 83-15 vote. The legislation now moves to the House, where Democrats are saying that they might tinker with the estate tax cut that Republicans are insisting upon.

But it isn’t only on the left that opposition to the deal exists. A few House Republicans have disparaged the deal for including too few tax cuts and too much help for the jobless. In a USA Today op-ed today, former Gov. Mitt Romney (R-MA) — who is consistently mentioned amongst GOP 2012 hopefuls — came to the same conclusion, saying that a two-year extension of all of the Bush tax cuts is too short, while a one-year extension of unemployment benefits is too expensive:

One thing is certain: While we cannot rebuild our flawed system [unemployment insurance system] overnight, we are surely not required to borrow the funds to pay for it. In spending $56.5 billion to extend benefits, the deal is sacrificing the bedrock Republican principle that new expenditures be paid for with offsetting budget cuts.

Romney also criticizes the deal’s payroll tax reduction for adding to the deficit. But then, in order to get around the fact that he favors permanent extension of the entire Bush tax cut package (at a cost of $4 trillion over the next decade), Romney asserts that such an extension will actually increase revenues:

In many cases, lowering taxes can actually increase government revenues. If new businesses, new investments and new hiring are spurred by the prospects of better after-tax returns, the taxes paid by these new or growing businesses and employees can more than make up for the lower rates of taxation.

As The Wonk Room explained, when it comes to the Bush tax cuts, revenue surely did not increase. Romney is simply twisting himself in circles to justify his opposition to the tax deal on fiscal responsibility grounds, while simultaneously advocating for a full extension of the Bush tax cuts, no matter their effect on the deficit.

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

War, xenophobia and other downsides to group
selection (evolutionary logic pt.2)

"the good, the bad, the beautiful and the ugly"If anyone managed to come away from Part I: Humans:[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/OpenLeft-FrontPage/~3/xeBJ2ueXObc/war-xenophobia-a
nd-other-downsides-to-group-selection-evolutionary-logic-of-collective-act

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

Now he tells us: Hannity calls Bush tax cuts
"madness"

On his Fox News show last night, Hannity did something unusual. The usually reliable neglected to propose any way to pay for the hugely expensive cuts, and letting them expire after nine years mitigated the enormous price-tag that accompanied these cuts (because price estimates are calculated over a 10-year period).

Therefore, it was Bush and the Republicans who created the "madness." Someone should probably tell Hannity he agrees with Obama about the Bush tax cuts. But do it gently--you wouldn't want him to faint.

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

Obama should try a little populism

People are pissed.

More than 70 percent of Americans say big bonuses should be banned this year at Wall Street firms that took taxpayer bailouts, a Bloomberg National Poll shows.

An additional one in six favors slapping a 50 percent tax on bonuses exceeding $400,000. Just 7 percent of U.S. adults say bonuses are an appropriate incentive reflecting Wall Street’s return to financial health.

Boy, now THERE'S an issue Democrats could own, if they weren't so beholden to Wall Street themselves. In fact, Democrats are so captured by nefarious Wall Street interests, that Obama himself will be groveling at their feet in a couple of days.

President Barack Obama will sit down with top chief executives on Wednesday for a full-day summit, in his first major meeting with big business since admitting he painted corporate America as “the bad guy” too often during his first two years in office [...]

Business groups have had reason to be cheerful since Mr Obama’s “shellacking” in the November 2 congressional elections, which handed Republicans control of the House of Representatives and reduced the size of the Democrats’ Senate majority.

As I've written several times already, only Obama would apologize to those assholes for helping create their best business climate since forever. There's this:

Investors around the world say President Barack Obama is bad for the bottom line, even though U.S. corporations are on track for the biggest earnings growth in 22 years and the stock market is headed for its best back-to- back annual gains since 2004.

And this:

American businesses earned profits at an annual rate of $1.66 trillion in the third quarter, according to a Commerce Department report released Tuesday. That is the highest figure recorded since the government began keeping track over 60 years ago, at least in nominal or non-inflation-adjusted terms.

Corporate profits have been going gangbusters for a while. Since their cyclical low in the fourth quarter of 2008, profits have grown for seven consecutive quarters, at some of the fastest rates in history.

The captains of industry, fresh off looting America, are hurt that anyone might have said mean things about them! And while Obama should be leading the pitchfork and torch brigades, he's groveling at their feet instead.

It should be the other way around. Corporate America should be praising Obama to the high heavens and kissing his feet for protecting them from the mob, bailing their asses out, and refusing to get serious about reforming, taxing, and regulating Wall Street and other such industries.

Yet like his lame apologies to the GOP for not reaching out enough, Obama is now trying to "mend fences" with the people who have destroyed America, and will soon gear up to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to defeat him and other Democrats in 2012. Instead of rallying populist sentiment, he's doing everything he can to jump in bed with these hated corporatists. And the end result? It'll be more of this (from the 2010 exit polls):

There's no reason Democrats should be losing the populist anti-Wall Street vote. None. Yet at this rate we won't be turning around those numbers anytime soon.

This would be a better use of his time:

So how about holding a summit with the unemployed, and taking their suggestions? This might "ease strained relations" between the unemployed and the country's leaders and their policies.

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

Julian Assange Released on Bail

After a week in the prison cell which once held Oscar Wilde, Julian Assange has been released in Britain on $310,000 bail, as the case over his extradition to Sweden on sex-related charges continues.[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/firedoglake/fdl/~3/uvV0mRBWNHA/

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

WikiLeaks Founder Assange Granted Bail By British
Court

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, arrested in Britain on Swedish allegations of sex crimes, was freed on bail by a British court today, an article by Reuters says this morning.

Senior District Judge Howard Riddle, who last week said that Swedish authorities would need to show some convincing evidence if they wanted to oppose bail for the 39-year-old Australian when he appears in court to oppose extradition to Sweden, today granted Assange bail with conditions until another hearing on January 11.

Mr Assange had been refused bail Wednesday December 08, 2010 and sent to Wandsworth prison when he appeared before Judge Riddle to answer a Swedish extradition application.

The Brisbane Times reports that "Mr Assange, 39, won his temporary freedom after his lawyer, Geoffrey Robertson, gave Judge Howard Riddle a temporary address where the WikiLeaks founder would stay and agreed to post a guarantee of £200,000 ($US315,280)."

...Mr Assange had not been given any of his mail, including legal letters, since he was jailed.

He was on 23½-hours-a-day ''lock-down'' at Wandsworth. He was kept under surveillance on infrared video.

Ahead of his court appearance, Mr Assange blasted Visa, MasterCard and PayPal for blocking donations to his website.

In a defiant statement from behind bars, he claimed the firms were "instruments of US foreign policy" but vowed their actions would not stop the whistle-blowing website from continuing to publish thousands of confidential US diplomatic cables.

Last week, in the wake of Visa, MasterCard and PayPal shutting down donations processing for WikiLeaks, the organizations credit card processor DataCell ehf of Iceland announced its intention to sue Visa and Mastercard, with DataCell CEO Andreas Fink stating that the company "has decided to take up immediate legal actions to make donations possible again," and that "The suspension of payments towards Wikileaks is a violation of the agreements with their customers."

Visa should "just simply do their business where they are good at ? transferring money," Fink wrote.

Neither of the credit card companies have commented on the pending lawsuit.

Xipwire, Inc. of Philadelphia announced on Tuesday December 07 that it would act as an intermediary for WikiLeaks after the world's largest credit card providers halted all electronic donations to the non-profit media outlet. Xipline accepts Visa, MasterCard, Discover, and bank debit cards, and has since stated in their website that "We have officially been contacted by WikiLeaks and will be forwarding all donations to them directly".

Stephen Webster writing at RawStory also notes this morning that "Though granted bail, Assange may not actually be freed on Tuesday, as it was already late afternoon when the ruling came down and prosecutors had time to appeal the decision. One of his supporters, Sarah Saunders, offered the court £150,000 -- or "pretty much all I'm worth," according to a reporter on the scene -- to ensure Assange did not flee. --- Bail was set at 200,000 pounds. Once the decision was announced, the courtroom erupted with cheers, according to The Guardian. The court required that Assange surrender his passport, submit to a curfew and wear a tracking device."

Earlier this morning filmmaker Michael Moore had issued an announcement stating that "Yesterday, in the Westminster Magistrates Court in London, the lawyers for WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange presented to the judge a document from me stating that I have put up $20,000 of my own money to help bail Mr. Assange out of jail. Furthermore, I am publicly offering the assistance of my website, my servers, my domain names and anything else I can do to keep WikiLeaks alive and thriving as it continues its work to expose the crimes that were concocted in secret and carried out in our name and with our tax dollars."

The UK Independent reported this morning ahead of Mr. Assange's bail hearing that:

Whitehall is preparing for a crippling attack on government websites as evidence mounts that the backlash against the arrest of the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is rapidly growing into a mass movement that aims to cause widespread disruption on the internet.

Extra security measures have been added to a host of government web services, in particular those used to claim benefits or provide tax information, after Sir Peter Ricketts, the national security adviser, warned permanent secretaries across all departments that "hacktivists" who last week targeted the sites of companies such as MasterCard and PayPal could switch their focus to Britain.

Downing Street officials confirmed they are preparing for a court appearance today by Mr Assange, who remains in custody following his arrest on sex allegations at the request of the Swedish authorities, to be used by hackers as an excuse to switch their focus to key cyber infrastructure such as the website of HM Revenue and Customs. Members of the online collective Anonymous have already signalled their willingness to attack UK targets if Mr Assange ? who denies the claims and whose lawyers will today apply for bail ? is extradited to Sweden.

WikiLeaks has said that it is in no way connected to "Anonymous," but added that they neither approve nor disapprove of their actions.

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

WikiLeaks Founder Assange Freed On Bail By
British Court

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, arrested in Britain on Swedish allegations of sex crimes, was freed on bail by a British court today, an article by Reuters says this morning.

Senior District Judge Howard Riddle, who last week said that Swedish authorities would need to show some convincing evidence if they wanted to oppose bail for the 39-year-old Australian when he appears in court to oppose extradition to Sweden, today granted Assange bail with conditions until another hearing on January 11.

Mr Assange had been refused bail Wednesday December 08, 2010 and sent to Wandsworth prison when he appeared before Judge Riddle to answer a Swedish extradition application.

The Brisbane Times reports that "Mr Assange, 39, won his temporary freedom after his lawyer, Geoffrey Robertson, gave Judge Howard Riddle a temporary address where the WikiLeaks founder would stay and agreed to post a guarantee of £200,000 ($US315,280)."

...Mr Assange had not been given any of his mail, including legal letters, since he was jailed.

He was on 23½-hours-a-day ''lock-down'' at Wandsworth. He was kept under surveillance on infrared video.

Ahead of his court appearance, Mr Assange blasted Visa, MasterCard and PayPal for blocking donations to his website.

In a defiant statement from behind bars, he claimed the firms were "instruments of US foreign policy" but vowed their actions would not stop the whistle-blowing website from continuing to publish thousands of confidential US diplomatic cables.

Stephen Webster writing at RawStory also notes this morning that "Though granted bail, Assange may not actually be freed on Tuesday, as it was already late afternoon when the ruling came down and prosecutors had time to appeal the decision. One of his supporters, Sarah Saunders, offered the court £150,000 -- or "pretty much all I'm worth," according to a reporter on the scene -- to ensure Assange did not flee. --- Bail was set at 200,000 pounds. Once the decision was announced, the courtroom erupted with cheers, according to The Guardian. The court required that Assange surrender his passport, submit to a curfew and wear a tracking device."

Earlier this morning filmmaker Michael Moore had issued an announcement stating that "Yesterday, in the Westminster Magistrates Court in London, the lawyers for WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange presented to the judge a document from me stating that I have put up $20,000 of my own money to help bail Mr. Assange out of jail. Furthermore, I am publicly offering the assistance of my website, my servers, my domain names and anything else I can do to keep WikiLeaks alive and thriving as it continues its work to expose the crimes that were concocted in secret and carried out in our name and with our tax dollars."

The UK Independent reported this morning ahead of Mr. Assange's bail hearing that:

Whitehall is preparing for a crippling attack on government websites as evidence mounts that the backlash against the arrest of the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is rapidly growing into a mass movement that aims to cause widespread disruption on the internet.

Extra security measures have been added to a host of government web services, in particular those used to claim benefits or provide tax information, after Sir Peter Ricketts, the national security adviser, warned permanent secretaries across all departments that "hacktivists" who last week targeted the sites of companies such as MasterCard and PayPal could switch their focus to Britain.

Downing Street officials confirmed they are preparing for a court appearance today by Mr Assange, who remains in custody following his arrest on sex allegations at the request of the Swedish authorities, to be used by hackers as an excuse to switch their focus to key cyber infrastructure such as the website of HM Revenue and Customs. Members of the online collective Anonymous have already signalled their willingness to attack UK targets if Mr Assange ? who denies the claims and whose lawyers will today apply for bail ? is extradited to Sweden.

WikiLeaks has said that it is in no way connected to "Anonymous," but added that they neither approve nor disapprove of their actions.

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

Updated: WikiLeaks Founder Assange Granted Bail
By British Court

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, arrested in Britain on Swedish allegations of sex crimes, was conditionally granted bail by a British court today, an article by Reuters says this morning. The article notes that "Judge Howard Riddle, who had earlier granted Assange bail under stringent conditions, said Assange must remain in custody until the appeal is heard within 48 hours."

Riddle, who last week said that Swedish authorities would need to show some convincing evidence if they wanted to oppose bail for the 39-year-old Australian when he appears in court to oppose extradition to Sweden, today granted Assange bail with conditions until another hearing on January 11.

Mr Assange had been refused bail Wednesday December 08, 2010 and sent to Wandsworth prison when he appeared before Judge Riddle to answer a Swedish extradition application.

The Brisbane Times reports that "Mr Assange, 39, won his temporary freedom after his lawyer, Geoffrey Robertson, gave Judge Howard Riddle a temporary address where the WikiLeaks founder would stay and agreed to post a guarantee of £200,000 ($US315,280)."

...Mr Assange had not been given any of his mail, including legal letters, since he was jailed.

He was on 23½-hours-a-day ''lock-down'' at Wandsworth. He was kept under surveillance on infrared video.

Ahead of his court appearance, Mr Assange blasted Visa, MasterCard and PayPal for blocking donations to his website.

In a defiant statement from behind bars, he claimed the firms were "instruments of US foreign policy" but vowed their actions would not stop the whistle-blowing website from continuing to publish thousands of confidential US diplomatic cables.

Last week, in the wake of Visa, MasterCard and PayPal shutting down donations processing for WikiLeaks, the organizations credit card processor DataCell ehf of Iceland announced its intention to sue Visa and Mastercard, with DataCell CEO Andreas Fink stating that the company "has decided to take up immediate legal actions to make donations possible again," and that "The suspension of payments towards Wikileaks is a violation of the agreements with their customers."

Visa should "just simply do their business where they are good at ? transferring money," Fink wrote.

Neither of the credit card companies have commented on the pending lawsuit.

Xipwire, Inc. of Philadelphia announced on Tuesday December 07 that it would act as an intermediary for WikiLeaks after the world's largest credit card providers halted all electronic donations to the non-profit media outlet. Xipline accepts Visa, MasterCard, Discover, and bank debit cards, and has since stated in their website that "We have officially been contacted by WikiLeaks and will be forwarding all donations to them directly".

Stephen Webster writing at RawStory also notes this morning that "Though granted bail, Assange may not actually be freed on Tuesday, as it was already late afternoon when the ruling came down and prosecutors had time to appeal the decision. One of his supporters, Sarah Saunders, offered the court £150,000 -- or "pretty much all I'm worth," according to a reporter on the scene -- to ensure Assange did not flee. --- Bail was set at 200,000 pounds. Once the decision was announced, the courtroom erupted with cheers, according to The Guardian. The court required that Assange surrender his passport, submit to a curfew and wear a tracking device."

Earlier this morning filmmaker Michael Moore had issued an announcement stating that "Yesterday, in the Westminster Magistrates Court in London, the lawyers for WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange presented to the judge a document from me stating that I have put up $20,000 of my own money to help bail Mr. Assange out of jail. Furthermore, I am publicly offering the assistance of my website, my servers, my domain names and anything else I can do to keep WikiLeaks alive and thriving as it continues its work to expose the crimes that were concocted in secret and carried out in our name and with our tax dollars."

The UK Independent reported this morning ahead of Mr. Assange's bail hearing that:

Whitehall is preparing for a crippling attack on government websites as evidence mounts that the backlash against the arrest of the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is rapidly growing into a mass movement that aims to cause widespread disruption on the internet.

Extra security measures have been added to a host of government web services, in particular those used to claim benefits or provide tax information, after Sir Peter Ricketts, the national security adviser, warned permanent secretaries across all departments that "hacktivists" who last week targeted the sites of companies such as MasterCard and PayPal could switch their focus to Britain.

Downing Street officials confirmed they are preparing for a court appearance today by Mr Assange, who remains in custody following his arrest on sex allegations at the request of the Swedish authorities, to be used by hackers as an excuse to switch their focus to key cyber infrastructure such as the website of HM Revenue and Customs. Members of the online collective Anonymous have already signalled their willingness to attack UK targets if Mr Assange ? who denies the claims and whose lawyers will today apply for bail ? is extradited to Sweden.

WikiLeaks has said that it is in no way connected to "Anonymous," but added that they neither approve nor disapprove of their actions.

UPDATES - 2:00PM PST:

From David Edwards and Stephen Webster at RawStory:

Update: Swedish authorities will appeal decision

Swedish prosecutors will appeal a British decision to grant WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange bail, according to updates from sources outside the courtroom.

"This is really turning in to a show trial," his attorney told reporters. "We will be in court in the next 48 hours, they haven't given us the courtesy to say when. It is an unfortunate state of affairs, but given their history of persecuting of Mr Assange, it is perhaps not surprising."

Assange will remain in custody until there's a ruling on the appeal.

From RT:

The WikiLeaks founder has been granted bail by a British court - but with strict conditions. Assange will stay in jail until another hearing in the next two days, as Swedish prosecutors are appealing the bail decision. Stockholm wants to extradite Assange to answer questions over sexual assault allegations, which he denies. The WikiLeaks site is still operating and continues to publish confidential American diplomatic cables.

video details and more

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

New Category Lets YouTube Users Report Vids That
'Promote Terrorism'

YouTube has quietly added a new category viewers can use to flag inappropriate videos: "promotes terrorism."

The new category, which went live in early November, is a subcategory of the "Violent or Repulsive Content" category users can choose when they report material on the site. The addition occurred shortly after lawmakers in the U.S. and Britain pressured the site to do something about terror-related content.

Last month, as The New York Times reported, the site removed hundreds of videos featuring American cleric Anwar Awlaki, who is connected to Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, after taking heat from Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) and British officials. But many videos of Awlaki remain easily accessible on the site. The new category will let users help the site keep track of terror-related videos amid the 24 hours worth of video uploaded every minute.

Users flag thousands of videos on YouTube every day, and humans review those reports 24 hours a day. Not all flagged videos are taken down, however, and those that are found to be newsworthy or contain religious speech will not be removed.

A Youtube spokesperson told TPM: "To make it easier for our users to identify content that incites violence, last month we added a flag labeled "promotes terrorism" to the flagging menu. We review flagged videos around the clock, and if we find that they violate our policies, we take them down."

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) called the new protocols a "good first step toward scrubbing mainstream Internet sites of terrorist propaganda," according to the Los Angeles Times. Still, he added, "it shouldn't take a letter from Congress -- or in the worst possible case, a successful terrorist attack -- for YouTube to do the right thing." But George Washington University Law Professor Jeffrey Rosen called the move "potentially troubling." Rosen argued that the phrase "promotes terrorism" is more subjective than YouTube's other flagging categories.

[Ed note: This article was edited after publication]

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!