A labor struggle has turned violent in Bangladesh. In protests that have shut down factories in the southern part of the country, three workers have been killed and scores injured as police clashed with demonstrators demanding higher wages. —JCL The BBC: At least three people were killed and dozens more injured when police in Bangladesh clashed with garment factory workers demanding better pay, police have said. Police used batons and tear gas to disperse thousands of protesters in Dhaka and Chittagong. The unrest came a day after demonstrations shut down factories in southern Bangladesh. Read more
Continue reading …Click here to view this media Oh what a lovely bunch we’ve got here. Fox’s weekend carry over from their sister network Fox Business, Cashin’ In hosted a panel segment on the problem we have with long term unemployment. Apparently the problem is not as Susie rightfully noted that we don’t have enough jobs to go around. No… the lazy unemployed bums just don’t want to get off of their couches as long as they’re still collecting those checks. They ask if making the unemployed pay those benefits back later might solve the problem. Yeah, that’ll solve the problem. Let’s squeeze some more nonexistent blood from that turnip. How about a discussion on how to create jobs that doesn’t involve the words “tax cuts” from you cretins? And the apparently soulless Jonathan Hoenig thinks that the government shouldn’t offer unemployment benefits at all, which absolutely stunned Charlie Gasparino who couldn’t believe Hoenig actually thought that. Yeah, let’s just have people starving in the streets immediately after losing their jobs. That’s the ticket. Who needs a safety net? When Julian Epstein attempted to point out as Susie did in her post that due to outsourcing and our rotten economy we’ve got some real structural problems with having enough jobs available to put Americans back to work, he was immediately shouted over by the other guests on the panel and cut off by the host. Heaven forbid we can’t have anyone pointing out the real reasons for our unemployment numbers. I’ve got to wonder how long shows like this that feed off of racial animosity are going to start finding diminishing returns with hating on the poor. This might play well when we’re close to full employment and you want to get some employed white guy to resent the lazy dirty brown person who’s sucking off of the government teet in his view, but when we’ve got unemployment numbers as high as they are now, everyone knows someone out of work. And it’s your family, your friends, your neighbors and not just the scary black person that they want to demonize and dehumanize with their divide and conquer class warfare game. How long can they keep this up before it’s not just liberals who watch hate filled segments like this and see through the game they’re playing and start getting angry at these pundits?
Continue reading …Click here to view this media Phil Donahue joined Eliot Spitzer and Kathleen Parker to discuss his long career as a talk show host, the dangers of media consolidation and his ouster from MSNBC during the run up to the invasion of Iraq for daring to speak out opposing it. You generally don’t find too many conversations like this one on cable news since I’m sure their bosses wouldn’t want to shine a light too brightly on the need to bust these companies up. Every once in a while one slips through like this one though. PARKER: If you think Oprah has the longest running syndicated talk show in history, think again. That particular honor belongs to our next guest. SPITZER: Phil Donahue invented the daytime confessional format, aiming both high brow and low in his 29-year long career. We spoke to him earlier. SPITZER: Thank you for joining us. It’s an honor to have you here. PARKER: I’m thrilled. I watched your show for years and years. I think my entire life. DONAHUE: Well, I thank you. You turned out anyway, didn’t you, watching me? PARKER: Do you sometimes think maybe you created a monster? DONAHUE: Well, I have said they are all my illegitimate children and I love them equally. But it is true that the game has changed, really quite something. In many ways it’s changed from when I went often the off the air which was ’96 with my daytime show. And even the cable, nighttime, your arena, since 2002, when I was on MSNBC, it’s totally different now, totally. PARKER: Is it meaner? Is it coarser? DONAHUE: Sure. First of all, I would never mention Bill O’Reilly on my MSNBC program in 2002. This is only eight years ago. Why would you mention the competition? People might — today, this group — SPITZER: They live off each other. DONAHUE: The shows have fallen back on each other and we are now being entertained by watching them fight with each other. PARKER: But guess what, you don’t see women doing that, do you? DONAHUE: I haven’t thought about that. SPITZER: Oh, sure you do. PARKER: Not really? SPITZER: I’m not going to name names. I don’t think there is a gender divide here. Some of the more vitriolic names right now may not be women, but I don’t think there’s a gender division. PARKER: I think some woman are vitriolic in their approach to interviewing and commenting. But I don’t think they go after each other. DONAHUE: You might want to watch “The View.” PARKER: Yeah. DONAHUE: Well that’s true, that is not a night time show. I don’t know if that makes a difference, but certainly they push back. SPITZER: I want to go back to Newt Minnow who way back in the 60s, I think it was, referred to TV as a vast wasteland. Are we doing better? Are the talk shows even though they’re edgy and they’re loud and the decibel level may be too high, do they contribute to our politics in a way or a bad way, do you think? DONAHUE: Well, as you know, I’m a brilliant man. SPITZER: We do know, that’s why I’m asking you this hard question. DONAHUE: Here’s the thing I’m having trouble with. You know, I — in — my first job was in a radio station, and I was the news director. I had never been a reporter. I was the news director, by the way, because I was the only man in the news department. It was a small radio station. And I covered the news, and I could stop the mayor. I was like — I looked 12 years old, and I couldn’t get over the power of this thing. And then I’m a slow learner. The First Amendment ensures that if anybody can be a reporter, even me, I took no test, I didn’t pee in a bottle, I just said I’m a reporter, and I was, that’s what you want, because you get a lot of people reporting then. And then somewhere in the middle of this large crowd will be found the truth. Today, that middle is occupied by five companies. So you don’t get to push back. There is — I have 900 channels on my TV, but 700 of them are selling the Botox machine. That is not good diversity. SPITZER: But right. But here’s where the new media, the technology maybe our saving grace. There has been this diffusion, this explosion in terms of the number of channels and the YouTubes and social media so everybody is a journalist, because everybody can talk to everybody. And you’re right. There is this enormous and dangerous concentration, but out of that voices will emerge, can we not hope, sort of — DONAHUE: You would hope. But let’s remember this, governor — every major metropolitan newspaper in this country supported the invasion of Iraq. SPITZER: Right. DONAHUE: I mean, think about that. This is the land of the first amendment. Cacophony of voices, arguing, growing — SPITZER: Let me raise something then that — DONAHUE: But this is corporate media. This is what you get. SPITZER: I want to raise something then that we weren’t going to raise, which is that you were pushed off the air because you opposed it. DONAHUE: I opposed the war. SPITZER: And is that one of the reasons they pushed you off? DONAHUE: Read the memo published by the “New York Times,” “Donahue’s anti-war voice is not going to work against the flag waving on the other station.” Donahue and any anti-war voice in 2002, remember, they’re all doing what I did now. The whole channel is now. You could not criticize this war four months before the invasion. It was not good for business. You had — General electric had no interest in featuring an old talk show host who was against the president’s war. It was — it was unpopular. You weren’t American. This is what you get with corporate media. It’s going to happen again. PARKER: Well, and, you know, when the Congress voted for it, too. But everyone did think there was something going on. It’s not like they were just maliciously going after another country. People were afraid, don’t you think? After 9/11 — DONAHUE: Are we so insecure? PARKER: Yes. DONAHUE: That when — PARKER: After we were attacked the way we were attacked, I think there was a low, low tolerance for any kind of risk. I’m not making a justification for war. I’m just saying what — DONAHUE: Are you making a justification for this war? PARKER: The mindset of the country at the time was such that — I mean, I wish you had been on the air doing your old show. DONAHUE: I do, too. But I didn’t make it to the invasion. I was gone three months — the invasion was March of ’03 and I was gone like in January. And the president — the president scared the hell out of the nation. PARKER: The nation was already scared. DONAHUE: He’s under your bed, he’s outside your window, he’s got mass destruction weapons. You could feel the heartbeat of the nation accelerate. It was a bloodlust — SPITZER: You are so right in what you’re saying is so important about the lack of tolerance for dissenting voices and your voice not going to be silenced. DONAHUE: Oh, thank you. SPITZER: It won’t be. I don’t care who does what. It won’t be silenced. PARKER: Phil Donahue, thank you for being with us. DONAHUE: Thank you both. PARKER: We’ll be back.
Continue reading …A New York Times “Learning Network” graphic informs us that under the proposed Obama-GOP tax and spending compromise, “rates will not change for at least two years for anyone.” Wow. Somebody at the Learning Network needs to tell the Old Gray Lady's beat reporters, editorial board, and opinion columnists. Just today, reporter Helene Cooper, in noting
Continue reading …So corporations sense vulnerability and they’re going to ask for the moon — basically, they want to run untaxed, unregulated businesses with few (if any) legal obligations to the people who still work for them. Oh, and they want “austerity” for the working classes. (Don’t worry, Obama will fight hard to protect us!) There, that’s settled! Now perhaps the president can convene a one-day summit of the unemployed and the working poor to ask them what they think, for a change: WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama will convene a one-day summit of corporate chief executives Wednesday as part of a renewed White House effort to build support among business leaders for his economic agenda. Executives from Google, Cisco Systems, Inc., Facebook Inc., International Business Machines Corp., American Express Co., The Dow Chemical Co. and Pepsico Inc. have been invited to the Wednesday meeting at Blair House, adjacent to the White House, to discuss trade, tax, regulatory issues and the deficit. The administration wants to persuade U.S. companies to unleash some of the $1.93 trillion in cash and other liquid assets they’re hoarding in their treasuries. Cash as a share of total assets is at the highest level it’s been in a half-century, the Federal Reserve said last week. Mr. Obama wants the nation’s biggest companies to invest that money in expansion and new hires in the U.S. Ideas for overhauling the tax code and cutting the deficit will be a substantial part of the Wednesday discussion, Presidential adviser Valerie Jarrett said, as would ideas for “a balanced approach to regulations—to promote economic growth and give business regulatory certainty and predictability while providing safety for the American people,” she said. Last summer, former White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel pushed for a review of rules affecting business hiring, but ran into stiff resistance from some members of the president’s political team. “Regulations have been a fault-line with business, so compromise on them would be a very welcome change,” said Johanna Schneider, executive director of the Business Roundtable, composed of chief executives from the nation’s biggest multinationals. Mr. Obama has met with chief executives since the start of his administration, but some who attended those meetings have complained that he didn’t take their views into account in policies that resulted. Corporate leaders have expressed dismay at Mr. Obama’s sometimes sharp criticism of multi-national corporations, and his administration’s regulatory and tax policies, such as a proposal to raise taxes on income corporations earn overseas. Business executives say they sense a difference in the approach taken by Mr. Obama since Democrats got trounced in the November congressional elections. Recent administration compromises on trade and taxes have encouraged business leaders.
Continue reading …How can you cover a story about Uncle Sam's November Monthly Treasury Statement and the proposed Obama-GOP compromise on taxes and unemployment benefits without using the words “spending,” “receipts,” any form of “collect,” or “unemployment”? It's a neat trick, but the Associated Press's Martin Crutsinger pulled it off in his Friday afternoon dispatch shortly after the government report's release. Instead of communicating apparently boring facts, Crutsinger concentrated his fire on the “tax-cut agreement” with a supposed “cost (of) $855 billion over two years” worked out by President Obama and Congressional Republicans. In doing so, he “somehow” failed to mention that the proposal includes a 13-month extension of unemployment benefits. Based on a comparison
Continue reading …enlarge Credit: The Professional Left Time for your weekly podcast with The Professional Left, our own Driftglass and Bluegal who aren’t any happier about President Obama’s deal with the Republicans (not to mention his hippie punching) this week than I am. You can listen to the archives or make a donation if you’d like to help keep the podcasts going at http://professionalleft.blogspot.com/ .
Continue reading …enlarge Nixon 1970 – a ceasefire . . at least with the press. Click here to view this media President Nixon delivered one of his rare press conferences during Prime Time on December 10, 1970. As press conferences went, there were no startling revelations and it all went pretty much to plan, including two announcements: Pres. Nixon: “I will announce tonight however, two I think important additions to the Administration. The first, Mister Rumsfeld is coming into the White House as a Counselor to the President on a full time basis and Mister Frank Carlucci will take over as the Director of OEO. He is his deputy and has done an outstanding job in that particular position and I believe in promoting a man who has done such a job to the top spot. Mister George Bush, the Congressman who was defeated in his bid for the United States Senate, I talked to yesterday and I’m very happy to report that he has agreed to take a top position in the Administration. That will be announced tomorrow at Mister Ziegler’s eleven o’clock conference. Mister Bush will be there.” Funny how those two names keep popping up. The gifts that just keep on giving.
Continue reading …As NewsBusters previously reported , the three broadcast networks completely ignored the revelation that an unknown Democrat said “F–k the President” during a heated meeting of the House Democratic caucus Thursday. A further examination has identified that despite corroboration by other sources, practically no American media outlets reported the news: read more
Continue reading …