For the second year in a row there Social Security recipients will not be getting a raise (from the TaxProf Blog ): For the second year in a row, social security recipients will not receive a cost of living increase in 2011 because of an absence of inflation in the consumer price index (calculation
Continue reading …Last night my wife and I had dinner at the Denny’s in Foothill Ranch (I had a coupon).
Continue reading …
Photos: via siryoga Besides shipping pallets, milk and beer crates, glass bottles are another building material that can be cheap, easily collected and reused, like in this house of 5,000 glass bottles built by a woman in Novoshakhtinsk, Russia…. Read the full story on TreeHugger
Continue reading …Bonkers: CNN’s Spitzer Theorizes Obama Intentionally ‘Wants to Lose the House’
October 9, 2010 No CommentWith insightful backwards logic like this, the new CNN show “Parker Spitzer” is certain to be a runaway hit – if just for the comedic value alone. On CNN’s Oct. 8 broadcast of “Parker Spitzer,” disgraced former New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer, the co-host of this program, trotted out a theory that seems so peculiar one might think he was pre-excusing what many feel is the eventual Republican takeover of the U.S. House of Representatives. (h/t Greg Pollowitz ) “Let’s switch gears for a second,” Spitzer said. “Earlier today or a couple days ago, Newt Gingrich said 60 seats would be the Republican pick-up. I’ve got a crazy theory for you. I think the White House wants to lose the House. It needs a foil. It needs an enemy. Agree or disagree? ” And believe it or not, one of Spitzer’s guest panelists agreed, sort of. Steve Kornacki, the news editor for the liberal online media outlet Salon.com, said he thought Spitzer was on to something, but said it would be tougher for the White House to villainize possible Speaker of the House John Boehner and/or Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell the same way Clinton and the Democrats did with former House Speaker Newt Gingrich back in the 1990s. “I think you’re basically right at this point when look at, especially when you start looking at the Senate,” Kornacki said. “If the House goes, then you probably want them all to go because then you can sort of set up the dynamic that Bill Clinton had after the 1994 mid-terms when his party suffered a drubbing. You know, it allowed them to go after Newt Gingrich and the Republican Party. The problem is this. Newt Gingrich made himself such an easy mark for Bill Clinton and for the Democrats back in 1995. He made himself the face of their party, and he was a very unappealing face. You say a lot of things about John Boehner, but I think John Boehner and Mitch McConnell, two in the Senate of that matter, they’re a lot more benign as public figures. So I think the dynamic might have been different where you had that train wreck, where Gingrich and the freshman just went after Clinton and shut the government down. It became do you like Clinton, or do you like Gingrich? And the public likes Clinton more than Gingrich. I’m not sure I see the same thing. Ed Rollins, a GOP strategist and senior political contributor for CNN scoffed at the idea. He explained President Barack Obama’s willingness to negotiate with the congressional Republicans like former President Bill Clinton did with his counterparts is uncertain. “The most difficult thing the president would face if you have one House seat or both Houses against you, the idea that Bill Clinton who could sit down and negotiate with Gingrich and with Trent Lott and make deals is not in the DNA of President Obama,” Rollins said. “And what’s going to happen if they lose the House, the Pelosis of the world who are not going to lose their seats are going to basically say you weren’t progressive enough, we’ve lost our conservative members who are the ones are going to get beat, and you better get more liberal. You go make deals with Republicans, you won’t — they’ll be in this tail more so than anybody else. Chrystia Freeland, global editor-at-large for Reuters, also doubted Spitzer’s suggestion the White House would want this because it would be tough for the Obama administration to play that bipartisan role with an unwilling Republican Party and would backfire on the White House. “And what could even be worse though, I disagree with you, Eliot, about this. I mean, I think whether they want it or not, I think they probably are going to lose control,” Freeland added. “But I think it’s really, really bad for this White House partly because the promise of Obama was I’m going to be the bipartisan guy. So this is going to be if he loses control, this is his big chance to be the bipartisan dealmaker. And I think he’s going to be a heck of a hard time doing that, partly because of what Ed points out and partly because these Republicans are not going to play ball.”
Continue reading …
Columnist Charles Krauthammer scoured congressional Democrats on Friday in The Washington Post for failing to pass any appropriations bills or even introduce a bill extending any of the Bush tax cuts. The title was “The Colbert Democrats.” He concluded that: As if this display of unseriousness — no budget, no appropriations bills, no tax bill — were not enough, some genius on a House Judiciary subcommittee invites parodist Stephen Colbert to testify as an expert witness on immigration. He then pulls off a nervy mockery of the whole proceedings — my favorite was his request to have his colonoscopy inserted in the Congressional Record — while the chairwoman sits there clueless. A fitting end for the 111th Congress. But not quite. Colbert will return to the scene of the crime on Oct. 30 as the leader of one of two mock rallies on the Mall. Comedian Jon Stewart leads the other. At a time of near-10 percent unemployment, a difficult and draining war abroad, and widespread disgust with government overreach and incompetence, they will light up the TV screens as the hip face of the new liberalism — just three days before the election. I suspect the electorate will declare itself not amused. All this Colbert activism is welcome, in that it becomes quite clear that Colbert is just as much a sneering liberal as Jon Stewart — this march really makes them like running mates, or mocking mates. They are not just aiming for giggles. Just like liberal reporters, they’re aiming to make the country more liberal (“a better place”). But Krauthammer was not alone in scowling at the Colbert congressional testimony in the Post. Liberal columnist Ruth Marcus took a turn last week: But Colbert’s testimony was not history repeating itself as farce — it was history starting as farce. That’s to be expected when lawmakers appear, at their own risk, on “The Colbert Report.” But there is a difference between lawmakers electing to be a prop in Colbert’s show and letting Colbert turn their show into his prop. And that’s what happened before the House Judiciary Committee’s immigration subcommittee…. Granted, this isn’t the most embarrassing spectacle to unfold before Congress. (I was at the Anita Hill hearings, so I know firsthand.) Nor is it the biggest story around. But it is emblematic of the dumbing down of American political culture — more circuses, less bread. Colbert and Jon Stewart have more than enough material to lampoon politicians without Congress inviting them over for more. As usual, Stewart said it best, during his show Monday night. “Of course Colbert is more embarrassed than the House of Representatives,” he said. “Colbert still has dignity and integrity left to lose.”
Continue reading …Obama’s Approval Plummeting and GOP Surges in Generic Ballot, So CBS Sets Out to Discredit Tea Party
October 8, 2010 No Comment
A new CBS News poll found the public rejecting President Barack Obama and Democrats – so the CBS Evening News focused its story on discrediting the legitimacy of the Tea Party movement. “Tonight, 26 days til the elections,” Katie Couric teased, “a CBS News poll finds support for Republicans growing, but most Americans don’t believe the Tea Party represents them.” Couric proceeded to highlight how “45 percent of likely voters would choose the Republican candidate, 37 percent the Democrat” and Obama’s disapproval on the economy is soaring while “two out of three think he’s been only an average or poor President so far.” Couric then pivoted, however, to how “that would no doubt include members of the Tea Party,” and asked: “But do most Americans agree with the movement’s agenda?” Reporter Dean Reynolds set up a straw man and shot it down: “While they style themselves as insurgents angry at both parties, the CBS News poll says 81 percent intend to vote Republican next month.” He next tried to discredit the movement for its demographics: “Tea Partiers are overwhelmingly white, male, protestant…” Reynolds demanded of a Tea Party supporter: “ Where would we be today were it not for the stimulus or the bailouts of the banks and the auto industry?” The Chicago-based Reynolds stressed how “the poll found that only 30 percent of the country believes the Tea Partiers reflect the views of most Americans, 41 percent of the country does not.” A Chicago resident charged: “They represent a very small sliver of Americans who are upset about paying taxes. There’s always going to be people who don’t want to pay taxes.” Reynolds concluded that “despite all the publicity it’s generated, only 22 percent of Americans view the movement favorably.” Maybe this type of hostile media coverage is part of the reason. In a CBSNews.com “Political Hotshot” posting on the survey findings, Brian Montopoli noted: “Three in four Tea Partiers say media coverage of their movement is too harsh, and only 19 percent say it is fair.” That post, which didn’t match the on-air spin: “ Poll: Tea Partiers Say GOP Represents Their Values .” Downloadable PDF of results . Another on the poll: “ GOP Widens Lead in Generic House Ballot, CBS Poll Finds .” From Thursday morning’s Early Show: “ CBS News Poll Claims ‘Not Good News for Obama or Tea Party ‘” From the Thursday, October 7 CBS Evening News: KATIE COURIC: Good evening, everyone. We begin tonight with the mood of America 26 days before the midterm elections with control of Congress at stake. And in the battle for the House, a new CBS News poll finds that if the election were held today, 45 percent of likely voters would choose the Republican candidate, 37 percent the Democrat. As for President Obama, only 44 percent of Americans approve of the job he’s doing overall [45% disapprove]. And only 38 percent like the way he’s handling the economy [50% disapprove] – the lowest number since he took office. When he took office in January of last year, two out of three Americans expected him to be a good or very good President [68%]. But that’s turned around. Two out of three think he’s been only an average or poor President so far [66%]. That would no doubt include members of the Tea Party, but do most Americans agree with the movement’s agenda? Here’s national correspondent Dean Reynolds. DEAN REYNOLDS: There are no more passionate foes of the Obama agenda than the Tea Partiers. MAN AT RALLY: We have stronger principles and we have stronger values. REYNOLDS: But while they style themselves as insurgents angry at both parties, the CBS News poll says 81 percent intend to vote Republican next month, including poll participant Mark Evans. MARK EVANS: I think there’s a lot of anger out there as to what’s been going on the last couple of years. And I think that the Tea Party is representing a lot of that. REYNOLDS: Tea Partiers are overwhelmingly white [93%], male [58%], protestant [64%] and fired up [74%]. Steve Steblick is an unemployed Tea Party advocate and a Democrat’s nightmare. STEVE STEBLICK (sp?): They’re running up deficits and spending money that we don’t have, spending our children’s and their children’s money, and people are reacting to that. REYNOLDS, TO STEBLICK: Where would we be today were it not for the stimulus or the bailouts of the banks and the auto industry? STEBLICK: We might have been better off. REYNOLDS: Large majorities of Tea Partiers agree that the bailouts were bad [63%] and they argue for a smaller government. But how many Americans agree with the Tea Party overall is a valid question. The poll found that only 30 percent of the country believes the Tea Partiers reflect the views of most Americans, 41 percent of the country does not. TOM SARIKAS, CHICAGO RESIDENT: They represent a very small sliver of Americans who are upset about paying taxes. There’s always going to be people who don’t want to pay taxes. REYNOLDS: And while almost seven out of ten Tea Partiers believe they are part of a long-term political movement [69%], only 26 percent of all Americans buy that. ELIZABETH OLIN, LOS ANGELES RESIDENT: I think the Tea Party has no political place. No, no way, absolutely not. REYNOLDS: Now, according to our poll, the Tea Party movement is not well understood in the country, and despite all the publicity it’s generated, only 22 percent of Americans view the movement favorably. Katie. COURIC: All right, Dean Reynolds in Chicago tonight. Thank you, Dean.
Continue reading …Larry Kudlow thinks the economy has less to do with the stock market surge than polls showing that Republicans are about to make huge gains in Washington and state governments: Could it have been the new Gallup poll that drove stocks up almost 200 points on Tuesday? That blockbuster survey, regarded by many as the blue-chip gold standard for election forecasting, pointed to an unprecedented Republican landslide tsunami in the generic congressional race. That blowout could include a GOP House gain of 65 to 70 seats, and a bare-majority 10-seat pickup in the Senate. Released Monday night, the Gallup numbers demolished the new narrative of the elite mainstream media in Washington, and their prediction that somehow the Democrats are mounting a serious comeback based on frantic Obama campaigning and a slew of multimillion-dollar negative campaign ads. Kudlow goes on to explain some of the economic factors that might have played into the stock numbers, but the pretty much dismisses their impact: What I do think, however, is that highly profitable companies would love to get Washington out of their hair. Anything that even slows down the federal tax-and-regulatory pawing of American firms could conceivably prompt businesses to unleash their massive cash hoard into something that more closely resembles a normal capital-goods-investment
Continue reading …‘Managed access’ trial screens prison phone calls without jamming the airwaves
October 5, 2010 No Comment
Yeah, we’ve been to this rodeo before… kind of . If you’ll recall, prisons have had one heck of a time getting the Feds to sign off on a new law that would allow cellphone jamming equipment to be installed on their premises, and due to a 1934 law that allows only federal agencies to jam public airways, they’ve had little choice but to sit and wait . A bill is resting in the House right now that would allow pilot jamming programs to commence, but given that it’s unlikely to go anywhere anytime soon, South Carolina’s prison director (Jon Ozmint) is eying something else. In fact, he’s already trying something else. A “managed access” trial has begun in the Palmetto State (as well as Mississippi), which routes mobile calls originating in the prison to a third-party provider that check’s each number to see if it’s on a whitelist; if it doesn’t make the cut, the call is blocked. Jon’s still pushing for jamming , but it looks as if this second-rate system may just be good enough to convince most criminals to stop trying to reach the outside world. Or at least add yet another level of frustration to their lives. [Image courtesy of Wired ] ‘Managed access’ trial screens prison phone calls without jamming the airwaves originally appeared on Engadget on Mon, 04 Oct 2010 20:57:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds . Permalink
Continue reading …
White House Economic Adviser Christina Romer discusses “ridiculous” bank bonuses.
Continue reading …