PM backs higher standards, greater independence for schools and ‘confronting educational failure head-on’ as he opens one of the first free schools today David Cameron will identify discipline, “freedom for schools” and “high expectations” as the key factors that make for a good education system as he opens one of the first “free” schools today. “We want to create an education system based on real excellence, with a complete intolerance of failure,” the prime minister will say in a speech being seen by some as backing a return to elitism in schools. While there is no direct mention of the recent riots in extracts of the speech released in advance, he will say: “We’ve got to be ambitious too, if we want to mend our broken society. “Because education doesn’t just give people the tools to make a good living – it gives them the character to live a good life, to be good citizens. So for the future of our economy, and our society, we need a first-class education for every child.” Speaking at the opening of one of the first new “free” schools – set up by parents, teachers, faith groups, charities and others outside of local authority control – he will say that the country had been “bogged down in a great debate” for too long about how to provide that first-class education. “Standards or structures? Learning by rote or by play? Elitism or all winning prizes? These debates are over – because it’s clear what works,” he will add. “Discipline works. Rigour works. Freedom for schools works. Having high expectations works. Now we’ve got to get on with it – and we don’t have any time to lose. So there are three bold things we’re doing. One: ramping up standards, bringing back the values of a good education. “Two: changing the structure of education, allowing new providers in to start schools, and giving schools greater independence. And three: confronting educational failure head-on.” Amid backbench Tory concerns over Liberal Democrat influence, the prime minister will also claim that both coalition parties share a “passion” for free schools. The deputy prime minister and Liberal Democrat leader, Nick Clegg, said on Monday that the new free schools must be open to all children and not just a “privileged few”. He added that they would be acceptable only if they reduce social segregation rather than entrenching inequalities of opportunity and called on the education secretary, Michael Gove, to ensure that the second wave of the schools, to be announced within the next few weeks, are in poorer neighbourhoods or areas with a shortage of school places. Free schools David Cameron Schools Ben Quinn guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
A major power outage knocked out electricity to up to 5 million people in California, Arizona and Mexico, bringing San Diego and Tijuana to a standstill A major power outage knocked out electricity to up to 5 million people in California, Arizona and Mexico on Thursday, bringing San Diego and Tijuana to a standstill and leaving people sweltering in the late-summer heat in the surrounding desert. Two nuclear reactors were offline after losing electricity, but officials said there was no danger to the public or workers. San Diego bore the brunt of the blackout that started shortly before 4pm, most of the eighth-largest US city was darkened. All outgoing flights from San Diego’s Lindbergh Field were grounded and police stations were using generators to accept emergency calls across the area. Parts of Orange County regained power on Thursday evening, but officials said most people would remain in the dark through the night. The outage was likely caused by an employee removing a piece of monitoring equipment that was causing problems at a power substation in southwest Arizona, officials said. The power loss should have been limited to the Yuma, Arizona, area. The power company, Arizona Public Service, was investigating why the outage wasn’t contained. “This was not a deliberate act. The employee was just switching out a piece of equipment that was problematic,” said Dan Froetscher, a vice president at APS. Homes and businesses were darkened from southern parts of Orange County to San Diego to Yuma. It also affected cities south of the border across much of the state of northern Baja. Border officials said crossings into California are open. “It feels like you’re in an oven and you can’t escape,” said Rosa Maria Gonzales, a spokeswoman with the Imperial Irrigation District in California’s sizzling eastern desert. She said it was about 115 degrees when the power went out for about 150,000 of its customers. In Tijuana, people wandered out of their hot homes into the street to cool off while restaurants scrambled for ice to save perishable food. In San Diego, the trolley system that shuttles thousands of commuters every day was shut down and freeways were clogged at rush hour. Trains were stopped in Los Angeles, an Amtrak spokesman said, because there was no power to run the lights, gates, bells and traffic control signals. Police directed traffic at intersections where signals stopped working. When a transmitter line between Arizona and California was disrupted, it cut the flow of imported power into the most southern portion of California, power officials said. The extreme heat in some areas also may have caused some problems with the lines, said Mike Niggli, chief operating officer of San Diego Gas & Electric Co. “Essentially we have two connections from the rest of the world: One of from the north and one is to the east. Both connections are severed,” Niggli said. Niggli said relief was on its way, slowly. He said his 1.4 million customers may be without power until Friday. Two reactors at the San Onofre nuclear power plant went offline at 3:38 p.m. as they are programmed to do when there is a disturbance in the power grid, said Charles Coleman, a spokesman from Southern California Edison. He said there was no danger to the public or to workers there. The outage came more than eight years after a more severe black out in 2003 darkened a large swath of the Northeast and Midwest. More than 50 million people were affected in that outage. In 2001, California’s failed experiment with energy deregulation was widely blamed for six days of rolling blackouts that cut power to more than 3 million customers and shut down refrigerators, ATMs and traffic signals. In Arizona, about half of Yuma County had power again Thursday evening after losing it earlier. Yuma County has about 200,000 residents and a little under half live in the city of Yuma. “It’s 113 degrees right now outside,” said Yuma city spokesman Greg Hyland, who was sitting in the dark, answering calls. United States California Arizona Mexico guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
FBI says it has received ‘specific but unconfirmed’ intelligence on a possible attack. Mayor Michael Bloomberg has emphasised that the intelligence is uncorroborated New York is to be put into a state of heightened alert over the 9/11 anniversary weekend, with extra bomb sweeps, dog patrols, surveillance of tunnels and bridges and even vehicle check points, following what is being described as “credible but unconfirmed” information that a terrorist attack is being planned on the city or on Washington. Only sketchy details have been given of the nature of the threat and Michael Bloomberg, New York’s mayor, emphasised in a late-night press conference held at city hall that the intelligence of the threat was uncorroborated. But with the world’s eyes on New York ahead of the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, nobody is taking any chances. “We know the terrorists regard the anniversary as an opportunity to strike again. We do live in a world where we must take these threats seriously,” Bloomberg said. Warnings of a plot to launch a vehicle bomb attack on New York or Washington, believed to be in the form of a single piece of intelligence, were first received on Wednesday night. President Obama and key intelligence personnel were briefed from Thursday morning. ABC news said intelligence agencies received information that three people had entered the US with the intention of launching a “vehicle-borne” attack on the anniversary of September 11. In a report on its website, ABC said officials believed the suspected attackers began their journey in Afghanistan, and may have passed through Iran. Janice Fedarcyk, assistant director of the FBI in New York, said that intelligence obtained during the raid that killed Osama Bin Laden at Abbottabad in Pakistan in May had shown that al-Qaida had an interest in important dates and anniversaries such as 9/11. She said she expected more intelligence to come in over the next few days but stressed that “sometimes this reporting is credible and warrants intense focus, other times it lacks credibility and is highly unlikely to relate to real plots that are under way.” Despite the lack of certainty on the nature or the seriousness of the latest threat, New Yorkers are likely to notice a dramatic beefing up of security at least until Monday. Ray Kelly, the city’s police chief, said he has ordered increased bag checks on the subway, a 30% increase in police patrols and rapid response teams, added deployment of officers specialising in detecting nuclear radiation and extra sweeps at religious and government buildings. There will also be exercises involving several security agencies at Grand Central, Penn station and Times Square on Friday. The city is well used to the inconveniences and stresses that frequent scares of this sort have brought over the past 10 years. Bloomberg said that the NYPD was also well prepared, having helped to thwart at least 12 possible terror attacks since 9/11. He urged people to be vigilant but defiant. “The best thing we can do to fight terror is to refuse to be intimidated by it. For the past 10 years we have not allowed terrorists to intimidate us, we have lived our lives without fear and we will continue to do so.” The homeland security secretary, Janet Napolitano, told reporters last Thursday there was “a lot of chatter” around the anniversary of the attacks but there was no information about a specific threat. Security measures around the US, including in New York and Washington, have been enhanced in the weeks leading to the anniversary on Sunday. United States New York Global terrorism Washington DC September 11 2001 Ed Pilkington guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …New MRC Special Report on Ten Years of Terror Coverage: ‘Red, White, and Partisan’
September 8, 2011 No CommentThe premeditated murder of thousands of Americans on September 11, 2001 unified the United States, in grief over the attacks and in resolve to never let it happen again. Just as Members of Congress stood together as one on the Capitol steps to sing “God Bless America,” the American major media united with the people in their collective shock and outrage.
Continue reading …We talk about the Villagers a lot on C&L , and you’ll hear the term used in many progressive blogs as well. Tom Friedman is a high ranking beltway Villager and Rick Santelli is a free market CNBC/wingnut Villager. Remember, he did his rebel yell that helped kick off the tea party by blaming homeowners for the mortgage crisis instead of his Wall street pals who actually created it. However, Santelli told us that the economy was healthy right before the meltdown. Anyway, this is what you get when you put two Villagers together on one screen. The debate was about Social Security. Rick Perry, the new tea party favorite calls it a Ponzi scheme. Obviously Santelli wants to privatize it so he and his CEO pals can make tons of cash off of the backs of the middle class again and put their retirements at risk. They’ll attack it from any angle, even if it’s an insane one. I hadn’t heard that Social Security is like a chain letter before, have you? Texas Gov. Rick Perry stuck to his claim during last night’s presidential debate that Social Security is “a Ponzi scheme.” The media are getting a lot of mileage out of that sound bite, and the Ponzi-scheme debate is very much alive this morning. On Thursday’s “Squawk Box” on CNBC, CME Group floor reporter Rick Santelli, known to some as the father of the tea party movement, challenged New York Times columnist and Rick Perry critic Thomas Friedman on that claim. “I’d just like to know — you know, I was watching that debate last night, although it really wasn’t a debate,” Santelli said. “It was like a weird press conference. But I would like to know — does Mr. Friedman think Social Security is a Ponzi scheme?” That led to a heated back-and-forth between Friedman and Santelli: FRIEDMAN: No, I don’t think it’s a Ponzi scheme. SANTELLI: Earlier in the show you said that we’re putting a burden on our kids that’s unsustainable . What’s the definition of a Ponzi scheme? FRIEDMAN: It’s a program that made promises that it cannot keep in full and it needs to be fixed and reformed. SANTELLI: Isn’t that exactly what a Ponzi pyramid is? FRIEDMAN: I don’t think it is a Ponzi scheme as a criminal endeavor. SANTELLI: No, no — forget the criminal side. You need more people to perpetuate a myth because if the people stop the myth is known to all. That’s my definition of a Ponzi scheme. Let’s call at it chain letter, a pyramid scheme. Isn’t that by definition what Social Security is? Take the legalities and fraud out. STEVE LIESMAN: Why is it a Ponzi scheme, Rick? FRIEDMAN: It is pay as we go. Ronald Reagan fixed it. Why can’t we fix it? SANTELLI: What does Ronald Reagan have to do with my question? FRIEDMAN: What does your question have to do with reality? MICHELLE CARUSO CABRERA: We brought it up. SANTELLI: You can’t decide that more people is the only thing made Social Security work. We have a real issue because many people in government seem to like to read your work. FRIEDMAN: What makes Social Security work is fixing Social Security in terms of the population demands. SANTELLI: I didn’t ask if we should fix it or not. I asked if it’s a pyramid scheme. FRIEDMAN: Your question is idiotic. That’s what you asked. SANTELLI: You’re idiotic. I’m done. I feel good. FRIEDMAN: So do I. Santelli is a Wall Street gasbag who won’t ever need Social Security to live on when he retires and he’s upset because Tom gets a lot of attention from his beltway pals. Screaming about bailouts is one thing, but calling the longest running social program a pyramid scheme or a chain letter won’t set off waves of protests from the tea party since many of them receive it. Friedman at least understands that it’s not a Ponzi scheme. However, Friedman also believes that the middle class and poor need to start sharing the sacrifice even more. CEPR: On the first question, I suppose that Friedman and Mahbubani want to see taxes increased or benefits like Social Security and Medicare cut. Both of these steps would mean real sacrifices for low and middle class people, but how exactly do they help the recovery? Remember our problem is too little demand. So we make people sacrifice by paying higher taxes. How does this increase demand? Or we cut their Social Security benefits or make them pay more for their Medicare. Again, this would imply real sacrifice, but how does this spur the economy? Are there businesses out there who are saying that they will not hire or invest today because Social Security and Medicare are too generous? Will these businesses decide to hire more workers and expand their business if the government cut these benefits? In more normal times, there was at least a plausible argument that this could be the case. The story would go that reducing the deficit would lower interest rates, thereby encouraging businesses to invest. (Actually most research shows that investment is not very responsive to interest rates.) However, with interest rates already at post-Depression lows, it is difficult to envision them going much lower, nor that there would be much additional investment even if they did. In other words, Friedman and Mahbubani seem to be calling for pointless sacrifice. The second part of the story is who they want to sacrifice. The top 10 percent of income distribution received the vast majority of the gains from economic growth over the last three decades. A grossly disproportionate share went to the top 1.0 pecent and the top 0.1 percent. It might be reasonable to expect that the big gainers over this period would be the ones who should be doing the sacrificing. But not in Thomas Friedman’s world. In his world, sacrifice must be shared equally. Those who are incredibly rich and those who are barely getting are both called upon to make sacrifices for the greater good. That’s Thomas Friedman justice. Friedman happens to be a very wealthy man. (h/t Atrios )
Continue reading …Not much more needs be said. Except maybe “Ponzi Scheme”.
Continue reading …
It's official — I'm an Ed Schultz fan. OK, well, “fan” isn't exactly the right word. Let's just say I'd be crushed if MSNBC canceled “The Ed Show.” After all, nowhere else on cable does not find such a consistent stream of idiocy that never fails to amuse. Not even from Schultz's colleague Al Sharpton, though the man is certainly a contender. (video after page break) Here's Schultz on “The Ed Show” Tuesday night, lamely comparing Teamsters president James Hoffa's vulgar thuggish threat aimed at the tea party with — ready? — the GOP labeling three of its aspiring leaders “the Young Guns” — SCHULTZ: Now, let's just turn the tables for a moment. If you don't believe (House Majority Leader Eric) Cantor and (GOP congressman Paul) Ryan use violent rhetoric themselves, let's go back to the commercial they cranked out just last year. REPUBLICAN AD: There is a better way and a new team is ready to bring America back — Eric Cantor, Kevin McCarthy, Paul Ryan — joined by common-sense conservative candidates from across the country. Together, they are ready to make history. Together, they are the Young Guns. SCHULTZ (initially echoing ad): They are the Young Guns. What do you do with a gun? Just kinda hang onto it or do you use it?! I mean, c'mon folks. We all know that James Hoffa was talking about middle classers fighting back and going after the ballot box to get rid of the very people that have attacked labor that were in that commercial. Now where was the outrage when that commercial came out? They're the Young Guns. Ever heard of a congressional member being labeled a young gun? Where was the outrage when this commercial came out, Schultz belatedly demands. Indeed, where was your outrage when it came out, Ed? There was none, not that I recall, nor was anyone else outraged — since there was nothing to be outraged about. It's worth noting this feigned indignation is coming from a liberal who often boasts that he is an unapologetic gun owner and hunter. No matter — Schultz is incapable of distinguishing between the valid uses of a gun and those that aren't. “What do you do with a gun,” Schultz asks. “Just kinda hang onto it or do you use it?!” Depends. If you are a police officer, you might work your entire career, especially in a small town, and never once fire your gun in the line of duty. If you are a woman being stalked by an enraged ex-boyfriend, you might “just kinda hang onto it” and that makes all the difference. Or the person wielding the gun could be homicidal and intent on murder. You do see the differences here, Ed, right? If this is too complicated I can type slower. As for James Hoffa, those of us over a certain age hear his name and think instead of his father — the Teamsters leader who was, uh, taken out in the summer of '75 and hasn't been heard from since. The younger Hoffa may think it no big deal to engage in vitriolic rhetoric that can be easily interpreted as threatening, then wonder what the fuss it about during the uproar that follows. You think there might be a reaction if Hoffa suggested Teamsters take tea partiers “for a ride” to the polls?
Continue reading …
Three people have entered US intending to launch attack on New York or Washington on anniversary of 9/11, according to reports US officials have received “credible but unconfirmed” intelligence that a terrorist attack is being planned for New York or Washington on the anniversary of 9/11. Associated Press reported a counter-terrorism official as saying the intelligence had been under investigation since it was received late on Wednesday night. ABC news said intelligence agencies received information that three people had entered the US with the intention of launching a “vehicle-borne” attack on the anniversary of September 11. The mayor of New York, Michael Bloomberg, announced a press conference for 9.30pm ET (2.30am BST) with the city’s police commissioner, Ray Kelly, and a senior FBI official. In a report on its website, ABC said officials believed the suspected attackers began their journey in Afghanistan, and may have passed through Iran. AP said officials would not say specifically what is being targeted in New York or Washington, nor the timing of a potential attack. A government official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the terror alert had not been raised because of the threat. AP said that, according to its source, the threat came in a single piece of information. A White House official said President Barack Obama was briefed on Thursday morning. Matt Chandler, a spokesman for the homeland security department, said in a statement: “As we know from the intelligence gathered from the Osama bin Laden raid, al-Qaida has shown an interest in important dates and anniversaries, such as 9/11. In this instance, it’s accurate that there is specific, credible but unconfirmed threat information. “As we always do before important dates like the anniversary of 9/11, we will undoubtedly get more reporting in the coming days. “Sometimes this reporting is credible and warrants intense focus, other times it lacks credibility and is highly unlikely to be reflective of real plots under way. Regardless, we take all threat reporting seriously, and we have taken, and will continue to take all steps necessary to mitigate any threats that arise. ‘We continue to ask the American people to remain vigilant as we head into the weekend.” The homeland security secretary, Janet Napolitano, told reporters last Thursday there was “a lot of chatter” around the anniversary of the attacks but there was no information about a specific threat. Security measures around the US, including in New York and Washington, have been enhanced in the weeks leading to the anniversary on Sunday. Global terrorism United States New York Washington DC CIA September 11 2001 guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
President uses televised address to urge Republicans to end ‘political circus’ and approve American Jobs Act to bring down unemployment Barack Obama used a televised address to the nation to unveil a $447bn package aimed at bringing down the country’s high jobless total, the issue that could determine whether he wins re-election next year. In a rare joint session of Congress on Thursday night, the president challenged the Republicans to end the “political circus” in Washington by approving legislation he is to send them next week, the American Jobs Act. But the Republicans, even before Obama spoke, signalled opposition to a package they dispute will produce significant numbers of new jobs and dismissed it as an election gimmick. Washington could be facing its third major Congress-White House standoff this year. All the pomp and ceremony attached to such events could not disguise the extent of the polarisation in Washington. Many Republican members of Congress boycotted Obama’s speech, a rare snub for a sitting president. Those members defied the Republican House Speaker, John Boehner, who earlier in the day, even though he is himself one of Obama’s fiercest opponents, urged them to show respect for the office by attending. Democrats stood frequently to applaud what was a strongly partisan speech while, for the most part, Republicans sat in grim silence. The American Jobs Act includes $140bn for building roads, bridges and other major infrastructure projects that would put hundreds of thousands into work; $70bn in tax breaks for small businesses; tax credits for companies taking on military veterans; tax and training for the long-term jobless, and aid to states so that they do not have to lay off 280,000 teachers, as well as other workers. Infrastructure projects include repairing and modernising 35,000 schools. The biggest expenditure, $175bn, is to put more money into the pockets of workers and their families through a 50% cut in payroll tax. Obama said he will announce later what cuts will need to be made to pay for this. He hinted this would include tax cuts for millionaires, moves that Republicans will reject outright. The president said Congress had to choose between millionaires and teachers: he knew what Americans wanted. “This isn’t political grandstanding. This isn’t class warfare. This is simple math,” he said. Republicans, committed to deep cuts in federal spending, are almost certain to vote down proposals that will cost $447bn. In his speech, Obama called on them to work for a compromise rather than paralyse Washington as they did over debt before the summer. “The question is whether, in the face of an ongoing national crisis, we can stop the political circus and actually do something to help the economy,” he said. He added: “Ultimately, our recovery will be driven not by Washington, but by our businesses and our workers. But we can help. We can make a difference. There are steps we can take right now to improve people’s lives.” Obama’s approval ratings, according to a Gallup poll this week, stand at a career low of only 42%, mainly because of his handling of the economy, and if he cannot reverse the unemployment figures he faces a tough re-election battle. If Republicans in Congress block his plans, Obama has a Plan B, proposing to go out on the campaign trail blaming them for obstructionism. Fourteen million people in the US are officially unemployed, though the real figure is estimated at being possibly double that. Republicans say Obama’s last stimulus package in 2009, which cost $789bn, failed to create new jobs. Unemployment under Obama has risen from 7.8% at the start of his presidency to 9.1%. Obama counters that without his stimulus package unemployment would be even higher. He told Congress that the purpose of the American Jobs Act was to put more people in work and more money in the pockets of those who are working. “It will create more jobs for construction workers, more jobs for teachers, more jobs for veterans, and more jobs for the long-term unemployed, ” Obama said. “It will provide a tax break for companies who hire new workers, and it will cut payroll taxes in half for every working American and every small business. It will provide a jolt to an economy that has stalled, and give companies confidence that if they invest and hire, there will be customers for their products and services. You should pass this jobs plan right away.” Republican members of Congress said on Thursday morning that, based on leaks to the media, there was nothing new in the speech, which would be just a rehash of proposals Obama has put forward since his days on the campaign trail in 2008. The Republican leader in the Senate, Mitch McConnell, dismissed Obama’s jobs plans as retreads. “What is surprising is the president’s apparent determination to apply the same government-driven policies that have already been tried and failed,” he said in a speech to the Senate. He added: “This isn’t a jobs plan. It’s a re-election plan.” House Republicans, reluctant to be cast as the villains, were in public unwilling to dismiss Obama’s plans out of hand and said they were willing to consider the proposals. Boehner, in a statement issued after Obama completed his speech, sounded conciliatory, recognising the anger among voters over party bickering. “The proposals the president outlined tonight merit consideration. We hope he gives serious consideration to our ideas as well,” he said. “It’s my hope that we can work together to end the uncertainty facing families and small businesses, and create a better environment for long-term economic growth and private-sector job creation.” But behind the scenes, House Republicans, who voted against Obama’s first stimulus package, see little reason to vote for a second. Barack Obama US economy United States Obama administration US Congress US politics Republicans Ewen MacAskill guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
The film battling to be this year’s Social Network is more melodramatic than one might expect from Aaron Sorkin So here’s the film batting to be this year’s The Social Network. It’s got the whole package: a plot that revolves round a revolutionary bit of computer kit, loads of scenes in which men argue in boardrooms, and a script spritzed with zingers by Aaron Sorkin. But the software in Moneyball – sabermetrics, or the use of data analysis to place a fiscal value on baseball attributes – is a tougher sell than the insta-sexy Facebook, and its potential impact on the world feels a lot less teutonic. Those who enter the cinema unstirred by either the sport or by the joys of stats are unlikely to come out converts. Brad Pitt plays Billy Beane, a star player gone to seed and now managing an ailing team in Oakland. He doesn’t have cash to blow on pricey players so needs to get creative. Enter an economics whiz (Jonah Hill), who briefs him on the hidden bargains to be snapped up for a song – think Bargain Hunt meets Wisden. Such unorthodox tactics incur the anger of Billy’s traditionalist colleagues, most notably Philip Seymour Hoffman’s head coach – a performance of mostly unleavened grumpiness, this, just as Robin Wright (as Billy’s estranged wife) is simply supportive, and Kerris Dorsey as his 12-year-old daughter purely precocious. Pitt, meanwhile, comes across as a bit of a knackered lunk, too vanilla for his struggles to grip in the same way as, say, those of Michael Sheen’s Brian Clough in The Damned United – a film with a similar real-life sporting triumph template. The exception is Hill, who delivers a surprisingly affecting performance, shy but not simpering, with a refreshing lack of character arc. It’s the sort of turn too rare on screen: unshowy and naturalistic. Overall though, Moneyball is more melodramatic than one might expect from the pen of Sorkin (who massaged an earlier draft by Steven Zaillian), gooier in the middle and coshing the audience with its emotional wallops. While The Social Network scaled up the computer programme at its centre to say wider things about humanity (that electronic connectivity may not ultimately alleviate loneliness), Moneyball fails to deliver any thesis on whether or not people can be condensed to data. It’s a topic you’d imagine might have tickled the scriptwriter – but compared to Sorkin’s earlier efforts, this has all the subtle touch of a baseball mitt. Rating: 2/5 Toronto film festival 2011 Drama Brad Pitt Aaron Sorkin Philip Seymour Hoffman US sport Toronto film festival Festivals Catherine Shoard guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …