Burying Camelot

post from The American Prospect on 23 February 2012 07:20:15 AM. © The American Prospect

The publication last month of onetime JFK mistress Mimi Alford's Once Upon a Secret: My Affair With President John F. Kennedy and Its Aftermath provoked a variety of reactions. I wonder how many people shared mine, which was, "Bon voyage."

Why? Because I figure Alford's book almost has to be The End. The torch has been passed and then some to a new generation of Americans. Few of its members give much of a damn about presidential peccadilloes half a century old. Barring the discovery of Marilyn Monroe's lost diaries, it's not inconceivable that America is finally done with its Kennedy fetish. As the elderly Tolstoy ?or was it Sophocles??once celebrated the loss of his sex drive, "At last I am freed from a cruel and insane master."

There will, needless to say, be other books?most likely, a whole slew of them next year, the 50th anniversary of that day in Dallas. But that's a dimming industry's last hurrah, no longer reflecting any real public craving. Maybe the counsel for the defense would have planned it differently, but Mimi Alford has become the last witness.

And her book isn't bad. No, not so much for its insights into our 35th president?a man she calls "kind" with a stubbornness that reminds you of Tennessee Williams's "the kindness of strangers"? as for its glimpses of a lost world. Namely, the one where, if you were raised genteelly Republican in the 1950s in Middletown, N.J., you went to Miss Porter's and hoped for marriage to someone who was just like you except for having a penis. It's an ideal Alford lived up to and later regretted, but only after a king-sized Potomac detour.

Her sense of humor won't cost Chelsea Handler much sleep. But she does have a likable acuteness: "He just couldn't resist a girl with a little bit of Social Register in her background," she writes of JFK. Never forget that the Kennedys were hardheaded Irish parvenus who liked thumbing their noses?well, some appendage, anyway?at a WASP high society that had tried to exclude them. If Jacqueline Bouvier had only been Protestant, her husband might have been besotted with her.

Presumably, most of you are up to speed on the, so to speak, bare bones of Alford's story. Awarded a White House summer internship, 19-year-old Mimi?who has less sexual experience than a eunuch's handkerchief?travels to Washington in 1962. Four days into the job, she's invited to join POTUS for his midday swim (his bad back needs the therapy). Then it's up to the family quarters for daiquiris (the First Lady is away). Suddenly, in Jackie's bedroom?just ponder that?a tipsy Mimi is being deflowered by the Leader of the Free World. He seems mildly intrigued to discover he's taking her virginity. The whole setup indicates even to Alford that, but for that detail, all this is SOP.

The surprise may be that it wasn't a one-off. Not only did Mimi spend the rest of the summer of '62 trysting the night away in the East Wing, but the relationship went on?thanks to frequent calls to her Wheaton dorm from "Michael Carter" and summonses to Washington?all through her sophomore year of college. Then it was back to the White House for another summer, although the affair had begun to wind down. Engaged by then?and her fiance, once filled in, must have felt as if only Joseph was his equal in cuckoldry?Alford writes, "I didn't need to finish up with the President. In his sly and graceful way, he was finishing up with me."

But that's well after the book's ugliest episode, in which the President?in his sly, graceful way?orders Mimi to give head to Kennedy factotum Dave Powers as he looks on. ("'Mr. Powers looks a little tense,' he said. 'Would you take care of it?'") In hindsight, Alford is shrewd enough to figure out that she wasn't the only one being "debased," making JFK's later request that she do the same for brother Ted?after Alford was engaged, too?even creepier psychologically. That time, she refused, but did the youngest Kennedy brother need a reminder that it was Jack from whom all blessings flowed? Since Alford doesn't record his reaction to the offer, maybe Teddy was callous enough to think being fellated at the president's request was a swell idea.

Alford attributes these and other instances of repellent Kennedy behavior to JFK's "dark side" coming out, a formula that might be less trite if she'd tried to connect it with other aspects of his personality. She doesn't, though; the odd amyl-nitrate incident aside, he's still a swell guy in her now 69-year-old eyes. Similarly, she writes with undimmed affection about Dave Powers?not only her companion in humiliation, but the president's ever reliable procurer and a man whose "brute practicality" comes out when he briskly phones Mimi to put her in touch with an abortionist soon after she confides to JFK that she may be pregnant. (False alarm, it turns out.) Since presidential staffers are good guides to their boss's character?it's their job to approximate it, after all?the most memorable line in Once Upon a Secret may be this one: "Where the President was involved, I don't believe Dave Powers's first impulse was to distinguish right from wrong."

Her story certainly flakes the last bits of gilding from Camelot's private side. Still, beyond the addition of a few sordid details, is anyone truly surprised, let alone shocked? Given how these things usually work, especially where the Kennedys are concerned, it's revealing that no one?s had fainting fits, and few if any attacks have been made on Alford's credibility. Robert Dallek, the most sobersided of JFK biographers?and the one whose brief mention of a nameless White House intern among the president's dalliances eventually led to Alford breaking her silence?has said he doesn't doubt her story. Barbara Walters assailed her on The View for trying to make money off her Kennedy connection, which is pretty funny coming from Walters but not the same thing as calling Alford a liar.

Interestingly, the constellation of people who make it their business to protect the Camelot legacy has largely kept quiet. Just last year, they waxed indignant enough over Joel Surnow's mildly revisionist The Kennedys miniseries?sight unseen, naturally, and indeed before a frame had been shot?to get it booted off the History Channel. But this time around, most of them seem to have said, "Oh, the hell with it. Even we can't pretend it matters anymore." My hunch is that, by and large, that's true of the rest of us as well?and about time, too.

Read The Full Article:
http://prospect.org/article/burying-camelot

Digg this

Thursday Open Thread

post from My Left Wing - Front Page on 23 February 2012 07:00:00 AM. © My Left Wing - Front Page

The power of the ballot we need in sheer defense,
else what shall save us from a second slavery?

W.E.B. DuBois

Born February 23, 1868

Read The Full Article:
http://www.myleftwing.com/diary/27783/thursday-open-thread

Digg this

Making Good Little Corporate Drones

post from They gave us a republic... - Front Page on 23 February 2012 07:00:00 AM. © They gave us a republic... - Front Page

By @KYYellowDog

This is exactly the kind of thing that Kentucky's brain-dead "legislators" will embrace as a cheap way to suck up to the coal industry and stick it to those commie public school teachers at the same time.

And what a coincidence that this anti-democratic propaganda is available just when budget cuts are making public schools desperate for material to make up for the lack of actual, you know, teachers.

Brad Johnson at Think Progress:

Internal documents acquired by ThinkProgress Green reveal that the Heartland Institute, a right-wing think tank funded by the Koch brothers, Microsoft, and other top corporations, is planning to develop a "global warming curriculum" for elementary schoolchildren that presents climate science as "a major scientific controversy." This effort, at a cost of $100,000 a year, will be developed by Dr. David E. Wojick, a coal-industry consultant.
"Principals and teachers are heavily biased toward the alarmist perspective," Heartland's confidential 2012 fundraising document bemoans. The group believes that Wojick's project has "potential for great success," because he has "contacts at virtually all the national organizations involved in producing, certifying, and promoting scientific curricula." The document explains that Wojick will produce "modules" that promote the conspiratorial claim that climate change is "controversial":
Dr. Wojick proposes to begin work on "modules" for grades 10-12 on climate change ("whether humans are changing the climate is a major scientific controversy"), climate models ("models are used to explore various hypotheses about how climate works. Their reliability is controversial"), and air pollution ("whether CO2 is a pollutant is controversial. It is the global food supply and natural emissions are 20 times higher than human emissions").
Wojick would produce modules for Grades 7-9 on environmental impact ("environmental impact is often difficult to determine. For example there is a major controversy over whether or not humans are changing the weather"), for Grade 6 on water resources and weather systems, and so on.

Wojick will receive $5,000 per module, with twenty modules produced a year. Wojick, who manages the Climate Change Debate listserv, is not a climate scientist. His doctorate is in epistomology.
The Heartland Institute also runs the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change, a conspiracy-theorist parody of the Nobel-prize-winning U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Heartland's NIPCC project "pays a team of scientists approximately $300,000 a year to work on a series of editions of Climate Change Reconsidered." Their climate-denial work is funded anonymously.
James M. Taylor, a senior fellow at the Heartland Institute, told ThinkProgress Green in an e-mail why the group is developing its denier curriculum:
We are concerned that schools are teaching climate change issues in a manner that is not consistent with sound science and that is designed to lead students to the erroneous belief that humans are causing a global warming crisis. We hope that our efforts will restore sound science to climate change education and discourage the political propaganda that too often passes as "education".

Right-wing ideologues, fueled by the fossil fuel industry, have been increasing their efforts to pollute science education in elementary schools. These attempts to hijack children's education piggyback on the religious right's war on biology education and the science of evolution. The National Center for Science Education, which has long led the defense of evolution education in elementary schools, has begun a new program to fight global warming denial in textbooks and classrooms.

Zandar knows what's really going on:

And these modules would start in Kindergarten. The plan of course is to continually call in to question the science behind climate change and call it "critical thinking", the same way cigarettes causing cancer isn't "settled science" and the way evolution is just a "theory". What do you expect from an outfit that calls anyone who believes in climate change to be "an alarmist", as if it's a mental disease.
Meanwhile, this is why Republicans are doing everything they can to take over local school boards and county commissions and city councils, in state assemblies and legislatures and Governor's mansions. 2010 was a crushing defeat for Dems in local and state elections, one bad enough that it will take at least a decade just for the Democratic party to come up for air at the state level.
The best way to prove your argument that government can't work is to destroy it from within.

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TheyGaveUsARepublic-FrontPage/~3/VQRcrPy128Q/makin
g-good-little-corporate-drones

Digg this

Where Was the Outrage at Texas' Sonogram Law

post from The American Prospect on 23 February 2012 06:37:13 AM. © The American Prospect

Pro-choice advocates around the country cheered Wednesday, as Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell withdrew support for a pre-abortion sonogram bill. The bill had risen to national attention, even earning a spot on The Daily Show. Critics focused on a particularly disturbing detail of the measure?most women having abortions have them early in the pregnancy, too early for the usual "jelly on the belly" ultrasound. So the bill mandated transvaginal sonograms, in which a probe would be stuck inside a woman's vagina and she would be offered a chance to see the fetus before she could terminate the pregnancy. "During the entire wand-forcibly-inserted-in-your-most-private-area experience, you still have complete and total control over which way your head is turned," The Daily Show's Jon Stewart told his guests. The focus from national media, social media, and bloggers all likely helped to force McDonnell into changing his position.

At the same time many protested the Virginia effort, Texas this month began implementing its version of the sonogram bill. In the Lone Star State, transvaginal sonograms are already a reality. (For a comparison of the bills, see my write-up here.) In examining the pro-choice victory, it's worth noting that around this time last year, the very similar bill sped through the Texas Legislature, and the chorus of liberal voices around the country?so loud this week?were a whole lot quieter.

Of course activists and those focused on pro-choice issues paid attention to the Lone Star measure and sounded warning bells. But why didn't the Texas fight, either when the bill was passed last year or implemented this month, receive the level of national attention that Virginia did over the past couple weeks?

Texas Democrats, after all, did their best to put up a fight and make a good show for the media covering the legislative debate. One delegate stood armed with a vaginal probe, trying to detail just how invasive the procedure would be. Despite being outnumbered two-to-one in the Texas House, Democrats threw a slew of points of order at the measure until one finally delayed the bill. When everyone returned to restart the debate, Democrats came up with amendment after amendment, including an attention-getter that allowed an unmarried woman who decided against an abortion to get a court order requiring the man who get her pregnant to undergo a vasectomy (assuming he had fathered at least two other children out of wedlock with different women.) On its second time around, the Texas House debated the measure for seven hours. It ultimately passed and eventually then was signed by Governor Rick Perry in a big ceremony. Perry had given the bill priority status during the session by naming it an emergency item.

Despite their efforts, state Democrats hardly got much national attention. When I searched for "Texas sonograms" while the Texas Legislature was in session last year, the publications database Lexis Nexis returned more than 400 articles. But almost all of them were from state newspapers or the Associated Press. Hardly a scientific study, but illustrative nonetheless. And let's not forget, the Texas governor who pushed the measure spent months running for president. His track record on transvaginal sonograms barely came up.

Texas is fairly predictable, and the passage of the sonogram bill felt, from the outset, somewhat inevitable. But that shouldn't account for a lack of outrage. The assumption, it sometimes feels, is that Texas is the conservative bastion where everyone wants these laws. However, in a state of more than 25 million, many voices are going unrepresented?and those are the folks most affected by these changes. In 2010, only 38 percent of registered voters came to the polls?and only 27 percent of the voting age population. Even in 2008, a presidential election year, only 45.5 percent of Texas' voting age population turned out. Texas is among the lowest turnout states in the country. My friend and former colleague Forrest Wilder looked at "income bias" across counties in Texas. His results were striking if unsurprising:

On the other extreme are pockets of severe disengagement. Border communities and poor, minority neighborhoods in big cities have especially low registration and turnout rates. Six of the seven precincts in Presidio County?one of the poorest counties in the nation?had fewer than half of the registered voters come to the polls in 2008. One barely topped 23 percent. Even in Travis County, which frequently posts the highest urban turnout in the state, there is a stark contrast. The more affluent sectors of Austin largely vote, and the historically black and brown East Side largely don?t.

Huge swaths of the population in Texas are alienated from the political process?and often those populations have important needs. Almost 17 percent of Texans live below the poverty line. The sonogram bill is just one example of a measure that will disproportionately impact the poor, since, after all, wealthy folk can always travel out of state to get an abortion. There's also the stringent voter ID law currently tied up in courts. There are the funding cuts to programs disproportionately affecting low income residents (no more state-funded all day pre-K in Texas). While state lawmakers were requiring women get sonograms for abortion, they also cut funds for low-income women's healthcare by 66 percent. There are of course a ton of reasons why Virginia's sonogram bill blew up and Texas' did not. But it's hard not to think that for many, Texas winds up getting written off as a state where extreme stuff just happens without much recourse. The trouble is, it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. Extreme stuff happens because so many are disengaged from the process, and they're disengaged from the process because there's little sense that anything can change. In the case of the sonogram bill, it's unlikely national outrage would have much of an impact on the fate of the bill. (Rick Perry is hardly known for backing down on hot-button issues.) However, national attention can help give voice to those looking to register frustration?a step that might lead to voting or political involvement. In the meantime, all those concerned about what might happen to women in Virginia if the sonogram bill had gone through don't have to wonder about the impact. They can always come to Texas, where it's law.

Read The Full Article:
http://prospect.org/article/where-was-outrage-texas-sonogram-law

Digg this

Where Was the Outrage Over Texas's Sonogram Law

post from The American Prospect on 23 February 2012 06:37:13 AM. © The American Prospect

Pro-choice advocates around the country cheered Wednesday, as Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell withdrew support for a pre-abortion sonogram bill. The bill had risen to national attention, even earning a spot on The Daily Show. Critics focused on a particularly disturbing detail of the measure?most women having abortions have them early in the pregnancy, too early for the usual "jelly on the belly" ultrasound. So the bill mandated transvaginal sonograms, in which a probe would be stuck inside a woman's vagina and she would be offered a chance to see the fetus before she could terminate the pregnancy. "During the entire wand-forcibly-inserted-in-your-most-private-area experience, you still have complete and total control over which way your head is turned," The Daily Show's Jon Stewart told his guests. The focus from national media, social media, and bloggers all likely helped to force McDonnell into changing his position.

At the same time many protested the Virginia effort, Texas this month began implementing its version of the sonogram bill. In the Lone Star State, transvaginal sonograms are already a reality. (For a comparison of the bills, see my write-up here.) In examining the pro-choice victory, it's worth noting that around this time last year, the very similar bill sped through the Texas Legislature, and the chorus of liberal voices around the country?so loud this week?were a whole lot quieter.

Of course activists and those focused on pro-choice issues paid attention to the Lone Star measure and sounded warning bells. But why didn't the Texas fight, either when the bill was passed last year or implemented this month, receive the level of national attention that Virginia did over the past couple weeks?

Texas Democrats, after all, did their best to put up a fight and make a good show for the media covering the legislative debate. One delegate stood armed with a vaginal probe, trying to detail just how invasive the procedure would be. Despite being outnumbered two-to-one in the Texas House, Democrats threw a slew of points of order at the measure until one finally delayed the bill. When everyone returned to restart the debate, Democrats came up with amendment after amendment, including an attention-getter that allowed an unmarried woman who decided against an abortion to get a court order requiring the man who get her pregnant to undergo a vasectomy (assuming he had fathered at least two other children out of wedlock with different women.) On its second time around, the Texas House debated the measure for seven hours. It ultimately passed and eventually then was signed by Governor Rick Perry in a big ceremony. Perry had given the bill priority status during the session by naming it an emergency item.

Despite their efforts, state Democrats hardly got much national attention. When I searched for "Texas sonograms" while the Texas Legislature was in session last year, the publications database Lexis Nexis returned more than 400 articles. But almost all of them were from state newspapers or the Associated Press. Hardly a scientific study, but illustrative nonetheless. And let's not forget, the Texas governor who pushed the measure spent months running for president. His track record on transvaginal sonograms barely came up.

Texas is fairly predictable, and the passage of the sonogram bill felt, from the outset, somewhat inevitable. But that shouldn't account for a lack of outrage. The assumption, it sometimes feels, is that Texas is the conservative bastion where everyone wants these laws. However, in a state of more than 25 million, many voices are going unrepresented?and those are the folks most affected by these changes. In 2010, only 38 percent of registered voters came to the polls?and only 27 percent of the voting age population. Even in 2008, a presidential election year, only 45.5 percent of Texas' voting age population turned out. Texas is among the lowest turnout states in the country. My friend and former colleague Forrest Wilder looked at "income bias" across counties in Texas. His results were striking if unsurprising:

On the other extreme are pockets of severe disengagement. Border communities and poor, minority neighborhoods in big cities have especially low registration and turnout rates. Six of the seven precincts in Presidio County?one of the poorest counties in the nation?had fewer than half of the registered voters come to the polls in 2008. One barely topped 23 percent. Even in Travis County, which frequently posts the highest urban turnout in the state, there is a stark contrast. The more affluent sectors of Austin largely vote, and the historically black and brown East Side largely don?t.

Huge swaths of the population in Texas are alienated from the political process?and often those populations have important needs. Almost 17 percent of Texans live below the poverty line. The sonogram bill is just one example of a measure that will disproportionately impact the poor, since, after all, wealthy folk can always travel out of state to get an abortion. There's also the stringent voter ID law currently tied up in courts. There are the funding cuts to programs disproportionately affecting low income residents (no more state-funded all day pre-K in Texas). While state lawmakers were requiring women get sonograms for abortion, they also cut funds for low-income women's healthcare by 66 percent. There are of course a ton of reasons why Virginia's sonogram bill blew up and Texas' did not. But it's hard not to think that for many, Texas winds up getting written off as a state where extreme stuff just happens without much recourse. The trouble is, it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. Extreme stuff happens because so many are disengaged from the process, and they're disengaged from the process because there's little sense that anything can change. In the case of the sonogram bill, it's unlikely national outrage would have much of an impact on the fate of the bill. (Rick Perry is hardly known for backing down on hot-button issues.) However, national attention can help give voice to those looking to register frustration?a step that might lead to voting or political involvement. In the meantime, all those concerned about what might happen to women in Virginia if the sonogram bill had gone through don't have to wonder about the impact. They can always come to Texas, where it's law.

Read The Full Article:
http://prospect.org/article/where-was-outrage-over-texass-sonogram-law

Digg this

What if your government told you to leave to find
a job

post from DemConWatch on 23 February 2012 05:54:54 AM. © DemConWatch

Pretend for a moment you live in a country where the unemployment rate is 14%, hasn't fallen below 10% for several years, and shows no signs of improving. Because of the structure of the economy, things are especially hard for the young, and for teachers. Imagine now that your government tells you that your only real chance of having a future is if you leave the country and travel to another continent for the possibility of work.

Welcome to Portugal.

"Recent graduates should lead a new type of emigration, different from the 1960s, when Europe was the destination," Minister for Parliamentary Affairs Miguel Relvas said recently. "In the past 20 years, Portugal has invested in a generation of people, and now we can't give them what they need: employment." [...]
What seemed at first to be a public relations gaffe soon received the governmental seal of approval when Conservative Prime Minister Pedro Passos Coelho advised unemployed teachers to search for jobs in Brazil and Angola. Source.

Some of the "blame" here falls at the feet of the austerity measures required by the IMF, the EU and the Central Bank as conditions for a bailout. In another year, it will be equally bad in Greece.

Here in the United States, most people (or their ancestors) came here for economic opportunity, to escape religious persecution, or just plain for a better life for them and their children. Still, it seems somehow disquieting that a government is saying, effectually, that their economy is in ruins and it's time to go. This isn't a migration due to natural events, like a dust bowl, a potato famine (yes, I know, political overtones), or something similar. This is a government watching over a country where the economy is contracting, and having young people and teachers leaving will only serve to hasten that decline. Here's what gets me:

Portugal has always had large-scale emigration – around three million live abroad and ten million at home – but in the past it was the working class and villagers who left for a better life, not the skilled and well-educated.
Lack of competitiveness is at the heart of Portugal's economic problems, bemoaned by everybody from heads of industry to café owners. Unlike Greece, the nation's finances have been fairly well run. Unlike the Irish, the Portuguese are not in a mess because of the bursting of an unsustainable boom. Source.

The are both similarities and differences between the problems in Europe and here at home. Trying to have a single currency while maintaining different governments was always dicey. It may well be that Greece is the first to leave the euro behind. And if Portugal's problems cross the border into Spain, the whole EU could dissolve economically.

Here in the US, our currency is not interdependent, and it is "the" currency that people worldwide set things to. But we, too, are plagued with a lack of opportunity at all levels of the 99%. Our kids, too, coming out of college and grad school don't have the opportunities available even 5 years ago. Will our government be telling them, too, to go to South America and Africa for opportunities they cannot find here? Perhaps to Asia? A lot of the emigrating Portuguese are moving to previous Portuguese colonies. We have no colonies. Protectorates, sure, but I don't see a mass of people moving to the Northern Marianas. Or American Samoa.

To me, this is a loud siren that we should heed. While the entire Republican party is getting the fiddles ready, we should be talking about spending money to make money. Obama's proposed budget is a good start: punish those corporations who offshore jobs, give breaks to manufacturers, improve the infrastructure, invest in education. What do you think?

Read The Full Article:
http://www.DemocraticConventionWatch.com/diary/5161/what-if-your-government-told-
you-to-leave-to-find-a-job

Digg this

Ratings agency forecasts default in Greece

The track record of the ratings agencies has been poor, but they are right on this call. It is obvious that a Greek default is ?highly likely in the near term? as Fitch says.

?In Fitch's opinion, the exchange, if completed, would constitute a 'distressed debt exchange' (DDE) in line with its criteria and consequently yesterday's announcements set in motion the agency's process for reviewing Greece's issuer and debt securities ratings,? Fitch said in a statement.

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Americablog/~3/cIssG0OkpLQ/ratings-agency-forecast
s-default-in.html

Digg this

Oh blessed right-winger that isnt so very
right-wing

There?s nothing our beltway ?reasonable men and women? love more than a conservative a-hole they can praise because he (it?s almost always a he) isn?t an EXTREEEEEEEEEEME conservative a-hole.[...]

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

Digg this

FX Takes a Moment to Consolidate

Source: Advanced Currency Markets | G10 Advancers and Decliners vs USD CHF 0.25 EUR 0.23 JPY 0.22 GBP 0.14 In the Asian session, regional equities were mixed but the weak sentiment did not spillover into FX. Looking at the Asian bourses, the Nikkei is up 0.44% on the day, the Hang Seng down 0.72%, and the Shanghai Composite up 0.25%, painting a confusing picture for things to come. EURUSD was able to drift up to 1.3281 from 1.3230, shrugging off yesterdays weaker Eurozone PMIs, but on marginal volume….

EUR Remains under Pressure as Greece Concerns
Persist

Source: ForexYard EUR Remains under Pressure as Greece Concerns Persist

The euro remained under pressure against the US dollar throughout yesterday's trading session, as investors remained cautious regarding Greece's financial situation. The EUR/USD spent much of the day range trading around the 1.3225 level after failing to break above key resistance lines the day before. Today, traders will want to pay attention to the weekly US Unemployment Claims figure. A better than expected result may result in the euro falling further against the greenback.

Economic News USD – US Unemployment Claims May Generate Volatility Today

The US dollar saw gains virtually across the board yesterday, as the combination of a number of international factors resulted in investors reverting . . . → Read More: EUR Remains under Pressure as Greece Concerns Persist

Read The Full Article:
http://jutiagroup.com/20120223-eur-remains-under-pressure-as-greece-concerns-pers
ist/

Digg this