Here’s one form of big government that even some Republicans on Capitol Hill can apparently embrace : On Tuesday, the Senate passed a bill designed to crack down on food regulation practices in the U.S. after recent batches of tainted foodstuffs were unleashed on the general public.
Continue reading …enlarge Credit: planetgreen.discovery.com Net Neutrality Rules! But for how long? Media Decoder: Level 3 Communications, a central partner in the Netflix online movie service, accused Comcast on Monday of charging a new fee that puts Internet video companies at a competitive disadvantage. Level 3, which helps to deliver Netflix’s streaming movies, said Comcast had effectively erected a tollbooth that “threatens the open Internet,” and indicated that it would seek government intervention. Comcast quickly denied that the clash had anything to do with network neutrality, instead calling it “a simple commercial dispute.” The dispute highlighted the growing importance of Internet video delivery — an area that some people say needs to be monitored more closely by regulators. Net neutrality, which posits that Internet traffic should be free of any interference from network operators like Comcast, is thought to be on the December agenda of the Federal Communications Commission. “With this action, Comcast demonstrates the risk of a ‘closed’ Internet, where a retail broadband Internet access provider decides whether and how their subscribers interact with content,” Thomas C. Stortz, the chief legal officer for Level 3, said in a statement Monday. Those issues cut to the heart of Comcast’s imminent acquisition of NBC Universal, which is in the final stages of review by the F.C.C. and the Justice Department. The F.C.C. is considering attaching a condition to the merger that would aim to keep Comcast’s Internet network open to competitors, according to public filings this month.In theory, without government action, Comcast could speed up streams of NBC programs and slow down streams of its rivals’ programs. “This may be one of those teaching moments for consumers to understand what’s at stake,” said Michael McGuire, a media analyst for Gartner… read on This is a preview of what’s in store for America if Big Business has its way with the Internet. Netflix is hugely successful and popular; heck, I’m a big fan of Insta-watch myself. Does anybody really believe the free market Gods of Capitalism will suddenly not worry about the Almighty bottom line when they get the chance to make more profits? Netflix is becoming a direct competitor with Comcast and other content providers and it’s only a matter of time before companies begin to make it harder for them to do business if they feel it will take cash out of their pockets. UPDATE: The fight is gearing up on the mobile web side too : AT&T Gains FCC’s Ear as Regulators Near Decision on Net Neutrality Rules AT&T Inc. has spoken more frequently than any other company with U.S. officials as they near a decision on rules that may restrict how carriers offer mobile Internet service, according to regulatory filings. Jim Cicconi , a Republican who is AT&T’s top Washington executive, talked at least six times about the net-neutrality rules from Nov. 4 to Nov. 26 with Edward Lazarus , chief of staff at the Democrat-led Federal Communications Commission, according to disclosure filings with the agency… read on
Continue reading …WikiLeaks honcho Julian Assange probably didn’t reckon that he could royally tick off so many key players from various global power centers with his site’s revelatory antics and emerge unscathed, and by Tuesday, it was clear that repercussions were coming his way from multiple directions. Take Interpol, for example.
Continue reading …In no uncertain terms, Rush Limbaugh (link will become unavailable in seven days) ripped into an Associated Press report today on the alleged perils of allowing unemployment benefits to expire for what the Labor Department says is nearly 2 million unemployed: I have not had one class in economics since high school in the 1960s — not one — and I understand more about this through my own self-education than these wizards at the AP. And I'm still convinced they just repeated it. They just printed a fax from Pelosi's office or whatever. … After 23 years and we still get trash like this in our major, #1 wire service. I guarantee you whoever wrote this story is an absolute, abject ignoramus. I don't know about you, folks, but I don't like being surrounded by stupidity. The chief ignoramus in question whose name Rush didn't have is the misnamed AP Economics Writer Paul Wiseman, with the ignorant assistance of Christopher Rugaber. Behold their ignorance: read more
Continue reading …Defense Secretary Robert Gates sent a strong and clear message to Congress on Tuesday: Get rid of the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy on gays and lesbians among their ranks, and do it pronto. The reason for his sense of urgency, however, didn’t have so much to do with social justice as it did with avoiding more interventions from the courts on the issue.
Continue reading …Click here to view this media You know that Republican obsession with “American exceptionalism”? It’s becoming pretty obvious, in all the right-wing wailing and teeth-gnashing over the WikiLeaks releases, that for most of these dangerous fools, this translates into a belief that the USA runs the world, and therefore can willy-nilly shove ourselves by force — militarily or otherwise — onto other countries without their permission or cooperation. After all, the leading prospect for the Republican presidential nomination just announced that she thinks we should just go hunt down (and presumably kill) WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. Glenn Beck thought we should try him for treason — which is kind of hard to do with a non-citizen. Then there was WaPo columnist Marc Thiessen last night on Sean Hannity’s Fox News show: THIESSEN: There are plenty of tools at our disposal. … But failing that, we can act unilaterally. We can go and get him without another country’s permission. We did it with General Noriega — there’s authority within the Office of Legal Counsel and that we can go and take anybody anywhere in the world. As Alec Seitz-Wald at ThinkProgress observes, this would pretty much mean invading one of the countries where Asange lives part-time, most likely Sweden or Iceland or Australia. It’s worth noting that going and getting Gen. Manuel Noriega, the former narco-dictator of Panama, as Thiessen suggested, involved a full-scale invasion of the country with 25,000 American troops. Former President George H.W. Bush “broke both international law and [U.S.] government policies” in ordering the invasion in 1989, which resulted in the loss of 23 American servicemembers and the wounding of another 325, the death of hundreds of Panamanians, and major lasting damage to Panama’s economy and capital city. Yeah, that’s American exceptionalism at work.
Continue reading …From his perch at the liberal magazine The New Yorker on Tuesday, CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin recycled his lament that the Bush-Gore 2000 chad fight should have lasted several more months. (Toobin's 2001 book Too Close to Call also carried Al Gore's water.) Toobin fights against the popular notion that liberals should get over 2000, for it revealed conservative judicial activism, most appalling to Toobin when “equal protection” is applied to white males, as if they're entitled to it. But Toobin simply gets it wrong in finding media recounts were not conclusive: Bush v. Gore would resonate, in any case, because the Court prevented Florida from determining, as best it could, whether Gore or Bush really won. (Recounts of the ballots by media organizations produced ambiguous results; they suggest that Gore would have won a full statewide recount and Bush would have won the limited recount initially sought by the Gore forces.) Wrong. As Brent Baker reminded readers in 2008 , both media recounts, including a statewide recount of undervotes, concluded the Court did not decide the election: read more
Continue reading …Click here to view this media I’m sure most people who read this blog have missed this, but Fox News’ Brit Hume has been doing a six-part series “documenting” the history of the conservative movement in America. The segments featured here include the tale of the first Laffer Curve being drawn on an expensive dinner napkin, Phyllis Schlafly’s effort to help conservatives get elected by taking woman’s movement backwards and how Ronnie Ray-gun inspired Rush Limbaugh as one of our first right-wing hate talkers. The segments featured here are from Part 3, but if you’re a real glutton for punishment you can go watch the rest on Fox’s web site . The series illustrates one thing pretty clearly and that is there isn’t an ounce of difference between the conservatives featured in their “documentary” and these supposed “Tea Partiers” of today. They’re all just the far right wing of the Republican Party. Click here to view this media
Continue reading …Click here to view this media [H/t David] The Pentagon just released its report on its misbegotten “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” policy, and both Defense Secretary Bob Gates and the Joint Chiefs’ Admiral Mullen believe it’s time that Congress send the legislation through repealing it: The study found that 70 percent of troops surveyed believed that repealing the law would have mixed, positive or no effect, while 30 percent predicted negative consequences. Opposition was strongest among combat troops, with at least 40 percent saying it was a bad idea. That number climbs to 58 percent among Marines serving in combat roles. The study also draws a strong correlation between troops who have worked with a gay service member and those who support repeal. According to the assessment, 92 percent of troops who have served with someone they believed to be gay thought that their unit’s ability to work together was either very good, good, or neither good nor poor. One person familiar with the report said it will show that military commanders believe gay and lesbian troops have a strong desire to fit in and feel accepted by their units. The report will also show that gay service members currently serving in the military have expressed a patriotic desire to serve, and want to be subject to the same rules as other service members. The survey is based on responses by some 115,000 troops and 44,200 military spouses to more than a half million questionnaires distributed last summer by an independent polling firm. Greg Sargent has more: Okay, I’ve got some more detail for you on the findings in that forthcoming Pentagon report on the impact repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t tell will have on the military. The upshot: It will leave GOP moderates with no reasons left to oppose repeal. One of the key findings in the report is that a whopping 74 percent of spouses of military service-members say repeal of DADT would have no impact on their view of whether their husbands or wives should continue to serve. This number comes by way of a Congressional staffer who attended a private briefing that the report’s authors, Defense Department officials Jeh Johnson and Carter Ham, gave to Senate Armed Services Committee staffers this morning. This finding is important, because it undercuts a key argument made by repeal opponents: That having service-members mingle with gay colleagues could worry their families. Also: The report will also undercut another key argument being made by repeal opponents: That opposition remains strong in the Marines. According to the source, while the report does find that concern runs high among Marines, it also finds that 84 percent of Marine combat corps combat arms units who said they thought they’d worked with homosexual service-members in the past found the experience either very good, good, or neutral. Ed O’Keefe writes: Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates , who requested the report, echoed their sentiments: “This can be done, and should be done, without posing a serious risk to military readiness.” “Now that we have completed this review, I strongly urge the Senate to pass this legislation and send it to the president for signature before the end of this year,” Gates said. “I believe this is a matter of some urgency because, as we have seen this past year, the federal courts are increasingly becoming involved in this issue.” The right will dig up any little tidbit they can to try and undermine the repeal of DADT so I always felt that this report was a delaying tactic to undermine its chances. Steve Benen thinks that Republicans have lost the information battle, but to these Republicans, truth and facts do not matter. As for the larger legislative context, remember, Senate Republicans recently refused to even allow a debate on funding U.S. troops because they wanted to wait for this report. They took a gamble, of sorts — maybe the survey results would show servicemen and women agreeing with the GOP’s anti-gay animus, thus giving the party a boost fighting pro-repeal Democrats. The gamble failed. We now know a majority of U.S. troops, a majority of U.S. civilians, a majority of the House, a majority of the Senate, the Commander in Chief, the Secretary of Defense, and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs are all ready to see DADT repeal move forward. If John McCain and other anti-gay senators hoped to gain some leverage, those hopes were in vain. They’ve run out of excuses. It’s time for the Senate to do the right and decent thing. Remember, Democrats only need two Republicans — literally, just two — to break ranks. These GOP senators, if they exist, don’t even have to vote for the spending bill that includes the DADT provision; they just need to let the Senate vote up or own. If this report doesn’t lead two Republicans to drop the nonsense, nothing will. Barbara Morrill writes: McCain, who has apparently decided to make his lasting legacy be that of the last man standing against the civil rights issue of the twenty-first century, will presumably continue to argue that violating Americans’ 14th Amendment rights isn’t a problem. But the bottom line here is, the findings in this report removes any excuse for opposing the repeal by moderate Republican Senators who have said their vote on the issue would be based on its findings. But bear in mind that this is just a recommendation on gradually implementing the repeal. It’s a victory, but the war isn’t won. Senate Majority Leader Reid (D-NV) has promised a vote on the repeal before the end of the year.
Continue reading …enlarge ‘Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?’ Here’s what I suggest for anyone who’s losing their unemployment payments this week: Grab a blanket and a pillow, and head on over to your local congressperson’s office — or, if you live in a big city, go to your senator’s office. Tell them you can’t afford to turn on the heat, and you’re going to camp out in their waiting room until the congressman or senator has time to talk to you. And since you don’t have money for food, either, I suggest you loudly solicit the staff and incoming visitors for cash. Because I am so goddamned sick of these bastards and the protected little bubbles in which they live. It’s time we did what we could to remind them of the consequences of everything they’ve done — or failed to do : WASHINGTON — Food banks across the country are watching for the end of federally-funded extended unemployment insurance. “We are bracing for it,” said Vicki Escarra, CEO of Feeding America, the nation’s largest domestic hunger-relief charity, in an interview with HuffPost. Escarra said that Feeding America’s 200 member food banks across the country feed nearly six million people every week. “I can assure you, if these unemployment insurance benefits are not reinstated we’ll see these numbers go way up,” Escarra said. Two federal programs — Emergency Unemployment Compensation and Extended Benefits, which together provide up to 73 weeks of jobless aid on top of 26 weeks of state aid — are set to begin to expire this week because Congress has not reauthorized them. According to the Labor Department, two million long-term unemployed will be dropped from the programs by the end of December if Congress does not act. Congress allowed benefits to lapse twice for a brief time earlier this year, and once for a long time, when 2.5 million had their benefits interrupted for nearly two months over the summer. The path forward for reauthorizing the benefits is unclear, but Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said Sunday that he wants the benefits preserved as part of a deal to reauthorize the also-expiring Bush-era tax cuts. The Congressional Budget Office recently reported that extended unemployment benefits prevented record poverty in 2009 and were used mostly by middle-class Americans. Households with total income more than twice the poverty threshold received 70 percent of the $120 billion the federal government spent on unemployment benefits last year. Part of the reason is that the benefits themselves push families into higher-income groups. A study released by Feeding America this year found that of the 37 million people served by its member food banks, 70 percent came from households with incomes below the poverty line. The study found that 5.7 million people received emergency food assistance in 2009, a 27 percent increase from 2006.
Continue reading …