The damage control effort over at National Public Radio (NPR) is at such a state that they've consulted a piece from Glenn Beck's TheBlaze.com to argue it's the victim of a smear operation. On Sunday morning's “Weekend Edition,” NPR delved into the report. When a sting operation launched by conservative James O'Keefe recorded a top NPR Foundation fundraiser making disparaging comments about Republicans and tea partiers, NPR faced heavy public scrutiny. But a publication created by Glenn Beck, described by an NPR correspondent as a “sort of a conservative 'Huffington Post,'” used the full-cut video of the operation, released after the original edited video, to argue that O'Keefe may have cut the video to cast some comments out of context. ( Click here for the NPR story, which includes audio and transcript of the segment.)
Continue reading …
German chancellor Angela Merkel re-examines move to renew power stations – but US reaffirms support for nuclear power Germany today announced the temporary closure of its two oldest nuclear power stations and suspended plans to extend the life of all of the country’s remaining plants as jitters over nuclear power spread across the world. Switzerland also put on hold plans to build and replace nuclear plants and Austria’s environment minister called for atomic stress tests to make sure Europe’s nuclear facilities are “earthquake-proof”. On Tuesday there will be an emergency meeting of European Union nuclear safety authorities and operators to assess Europe’s preparedness in case of an emergency. After two hydrogen explosions at the Fukushima Daiichi reactor in Japan, the German chancellor Angela Merkel decided to re-examine her controversial decision last year to renew 17 nuclear plants for an average of 12 years. Merkel announced a “three-month moratorium” while each plant was given a thorough safety check.As a result, Germany’s two oldest nuclear power stations will be taken off the grid imminently, as they have already reached the end of their lifespan. They will only be reconnected if they pass strict safety checks, the chancellor said in Berlin. Both plants are situated in states where there are regional elections later this month. One, Biblis A, is in Hesse, western Germany, and the other, Neckarwestheim I, is in the southwestern state of Baden-Württemberg. Merkel’s Christian Democratic Party (CDU) is at risk of losing Baden-Württemberg for the first time since 1953, leading commentators to suggest the decision was partly politically motivated. Most Germans are opposed to nuclear power, and Japan’s problems have raised fears of the technology and strengthened the nuclear lobby and the opposition Green Party. A poll for the news channel N-TV on Monday showed 88% of Germans wanted plants shut sooner rather than later. Merkel said Germany needs to continue using nuclear power while it switches over to renewable power sources to keep energy affordable and to ensure it is not dependent on importing nuclear energy from other countries where safety standards might be lower than those in Germany. However, the events in Japan “teach us that risks that were considered absolutely improbable are in fact not completely improbable,” she added. The Swiss energy minister, Doris Leuthard, said the suspension would affect all “blanket authorisation for nuclear replacement until safety standards have been carefully reviewed and if necessary adapted”. Swiss regulatory authorities had given their stamp of approval to three sites for new nuclear power stations after the plans were submitted in 2008. European energy commissioner Günther Oettinger said safety at older German nuclear power stations must be checked rigorously, and he refused to rule out closures. He told Deutschlandfunk radio that the crisis in Japan had changed the world and brought into question what had been seen as safe and manageable. The government’s decision last year to keep Germany’s nuclear plants running for 12 years beyond their original shutdown date had stirred large-scale protests. On Saturday, anti-nuclear protesters formed a 45km (27 mile) human chain from the city of Stuttgart to an older nuclear power plant that will be kept running longer because of the new policy. Between 50,000 and 60,000 demonstrators took part, according to police and organisers. In the US, Barack Obama reaffirmed his support for nuclear power. At a White House press conference, the head of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), Gregory Jaczko, said the 104 reactors in the US were built to withstand earthquakes and tsunamis. “Right now we believe we have a very strong programme in place,” he said, adding that Japan had requested assistance from the NRC and two experts on boiling water reactors were en route. Jaczko in his remarks gave no details on the magnitude of natural disasters US reactors could withstand. Twenty-three are identical models of the two reactors which exploded in Japan. Twelve are newer versions of that model. He also said any release of radiation would be highly dispersed by the time it travelled across the Pacific to Hawaii or the West Coast. Jaczko’s appearance was the second show of confidence in the nuclear industry since Sunday. The White House said in a statement that Obama continued to see nuclear power as part of America’s energy portfolio. “The president believes that meeting our energy needs means relying on a diverse set of energy sources that includes renewables like wind and solar, natural gas, clean coal and nuclear power. “Information is still coming in about the events unfolding in Japan, but the administration is committed to learning from them and ensuring that nuclear energy is produced safely and responsibly here in the US,” the statement said. Nuclear power Germany Japan Switzerland Austria Energy Europe United States Helen Pidd Suzanne Goldenberg guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
‘Mothership’ and its crew captured by naval patrol in Arabian sea, with suspects facing trial in Mumbai Five dozen pirates living on a hijacked ship serving as a roving pirate base jumped into the Arabian Sea after the Indian navy fired on the vessel, naval authorities said. The navy captured 61 pirates fleeing the battle and the ensuing fire that broke out aboard the hijacked vessel. A pirate in Somalia threatened Indian sailors and the government with attacks in retaliation for the arrests. The Indian navy said a patrol aircraft spotted the pirate mothership on Friday while responding to another vessel reporting an attack. The pirates aborted the hijack attempt and tried to escape on the mothership. When the Indian navy closed in on Sunday night, the pirates fired on them. The hijacked vessel caught fire when Indian vessels returned fire, the navy said. The pirates had hijacked the Mozambique-flagged Vega 5 in December and had used it as a mothership. Indian sailors rescued 13 crew members from the Vega 5 about 700 miles off Kochi in southern India, the statement said. The pirates were carrying about 80 to 90 small arms or rifles and a few heavier weapons, it said. The statement did not describe any casualties among the navy, the fishermen or the pirates. The pirates were being taken to Mumbai to be prosecuted for attacking the Indian ships. Piracy has plagued the shipping industry off east Africa for years, but violence and ransom demands have escalated, with pirates holding around 30 ships and more than 660 hostages as of last month. A self-described pirate in Somalia, who gave his name as Bile Hussein, said the arrests would lead to “trouble” for Indian sailors and ships. “They better release them, considering their people travelling in the waters, or we shall jail their people like that,” he said. “We are first sending a message to the Indian government of releasing our friends in their hands or else they have to be ready for their citizens to be mistreated in the near future.” The Indian navy’s third anti-piracy operation this year followed the capture of 28 Somali pirates last month and 15 in January. Both groups are to be prosecuted in Mumbai. Indian warships have been escorting merchant ships as part of international anti-piracy surveillance in the area since 2008. Piracy at sea India Somalia guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Sacramento state assembly members have introduced a bill that would entitle them to carry concealed weapons Politicians in California say their working lives are now so dangerous that they should be given special dispensation to carry concealed guns to their offices in order to protect themselves. Members of the California state assembly in Sacramento from both main parties have introduced a bill that would put politicians in the same class of workers vulnerable to violence as agents who arrange bail for defendants or jewellery shop owners. The bill would grant California’s representatives to Congress in Washington and its state politicians a “good cause” classification, entitling them to carry hidden guns while in the state on the grounds of self-defence. The legislation , sponsored by two Democrats and one Republican politician in the Californian assembly, specifically refers to January’s mass shooting in Tucson in which six people were killed and 13 injured, including congress member Gabrielle Giffords, who was shot in the head. Lou Correa, a Republican member of the Californian senate, told the Los Angeles Times that, in the wake of Tucson, he was considering keeping a stun gun in his office and said one of his employees had asked for increased protection from potentially violent members of the public. “I’ve had guys physically come up to me ready to punch me out,” Correa said, adding he had received email death threats. The Californian initiative highlights a peculiar trend since the Tucson shooting. Far from inspiring a major change in the US attitude towards personal weapons, which is among the most gun-friendly in the world, it has prompted a rash of legislative moves across the country designed further to loosen gun controls. The Legal Community Against Violence campaign estimates that there are currently 470 gun bills being considered around the US, of which 273 would make it easier for people to buy and carry weapons. Even in Arizona itself, where the Giffords shooting took place, there are 16 bills now pending, most of which favour the gun owner rather than the potential victims of gun outrages. One potentially significant shift in the other direction is that President Barack Obama appears to be moving towards tightening gun controls by making background checks on purchasers more stringent. In an article in the Arizona Daily Star, Obama said 2,000 Americans had been killed by guns since the Tucson massacre on 8 January. Every year, about 100,000 people are killed or injured as a result of gun violence in the US. “We have a responsibility to do everything we can to put a stop to it,” Obama wrote, highlighting the fact that Jared Loughner, who is charged with the Tucson shooting, was able to buy a gun, despite having been deemed by the US army to be unfit for service and by his college to be too unstable to study there. Obama went on to propose that the background check before gun sales should be made more rigorous and speedy. “None of us should be willing to remain passive in the face or violence or resigned to watching helplessly as another rampage unfolds on television.” US gun control California Gabrielle Giffords United States Ed Pilkington guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Appeal to be made as G8 foreign ministers consider whether to back French and British calls for a no-fly zone over Libya Libya’s revolutionary leadership is pressing western powers to assassinate Muammar Gaddafi and launch military strikes against his forces to protect rebel-held cities from the threat of bloody assault. Mustafa Gheriani, spokesman for the revolutionary national council in its stronghold of Benghazi, said the appeal was to be made by a delegation meeting the French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, and the US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, in Paris on Monday, as G8 foreign ministers gathered there to consider whether to back French and British calls for a no-fly zone over Libya. “We are telling the west we want a no-fly zone, we want tactical strikes against those tanks and rockets that are being used against us and we want a strike against Gaddafi’s compound,” said Gheriani. “This is the message from our delegation in Europe.” Asked if that meant that the revolutionary council wanted the west to assassinate Gaddafi, Gheriani replied: “Why not? If he dies, nobody will shed a tear.” But with diplomatic wrangling focused on the issue of the no-fly zone, there appeared to be little immediate prospect of a foreign military assault on Gaddafi’s forces, let alone an air strike against the Libyan dictator. The Libyan revolutionary leadership made the appeal as Gaddafi’s airforce bombed Ajdarbia, a town of 135,000 people that is the last major obstacle for his forces before Benghazi, the seat of the revolutionary council. Those attacks strengthened the hand of France and Britain in pressing for intervention. Paris said it wants to see a no-fly zone “as fast as possible”. The move is backed by the Arab League, which may ease the way to agreement at the UN security council. France and Britain are also expected to push the move at a Nato meeting on Tuesday. But the rebels’ appeal is also a recognition that while a no-fly zone would provide a boost to them, their military defeats of recent days have largely been under an onslaught of rockets and shells, and air strikes have been relatively peripheral. A no-fly zone alone may not be enough to prevent the continued advance of Gaddafi’s forces toward Benghazi, the revolutionaries’ de facto capital. So far no western nation has explicitly supported attacks on Gaddafi’s forces separate from enforcing a no-fly zone. The issue is complicated by overwhelming opposition even among the insurgents to foreign forces becoming involved on the ground, in large part because of strong views about the consequences of the invasion of Iraq. The talks are being closely watched in Benghazi and other areas under the control of the revolutionaries where Libyans are increasingly concerned at the direction of the conflict and the west’s failure, so far at least, to follow through on calls for Gaddafi to go with action in support of the rebellion. A large French flag hangs on the front of the courthouse used as the revolutionary council’s headquarters after Paris recognised the rebel leadership, and the tricolour is often seen on the streets of Benghazi. But Libyans are also increasingly vocal in their criticism of Washington in particular for what is seen as a failure to back up rhetoric against the regime. However, Gheriani said that if the west failed to offer practical help to the revolutionaries to free themselves from Gaddafi’s rule it risked frustrated Libyans turning to religious extremists. “The west is missing the point. The revolution was started because people were feeling despair from poverty, from oppression. Their last hope was freedom. If the west takes too long – where people say it’s too little, too late – then people become a target for extremists who say the west doesn’t care about them,” he said. “Most people in this country are moderates and extremists have not been able to penetrate them. But if they get to the point of disillusionment with the west there will be no going back.” Although the revolutionary leadership is reluctant to concede that it is enduring significant military setbacks, Gaddafi’s forces have driven them from two small towns and back about 150 miles to the edge of Ajdarbia. On Sunday the rebel army fled in the face of a barrage of rockets and shells as Tripoli’s army took Brega, a day after seizing the strategic oil centre of Ras Lanuf, 90 miles away. The rebels’ military leader, Abdel Fattah Younis, Gaddafi’s former interior minister, has promised a vigorous defence of Ajdarbia to block the government’s advance on Benghazi, 90 miles along the coastal road. Younis has said he believes Gadaffi’s supply lines are overstretched and his forces demoralised. He also said that street fighting in a town will be a more even contest than facing rocket barrages in largely open desert. But the defences on display on Monday, which included a handful of tanks and armoured vehicles and small artillery guns, did not look strong. The revolutionaries claimed to be back in Brega, but provided no evidence and prevented reporters from travelling towards the town. On Monday Gaddafi’s forces also attacked Zuwara, a town of 40,000 people about 60 miles west of Tripoli and near the Tunisian border. Residents described shelling of their neighbourhoods and said armoured vehicles were in the heart of the town. “I can see the tanks from where I am now and they are around 500 metres from the centre of Zuwara,” Tarek Abdullah told Reuters by telephone. “There are still clashes but I think soon the whole town will fall into their hands.” But the pressure appeared to be off the only major city in the west still held by the rebels, Misrata, 130 miles east of the capital. Tripoli’s assault apparently stalled amid claims of a mutiny within the ranks of the besieging government forces. Libya Muammar Gaddafi Middle East Protest Chris McGreal guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Decision will infuriate Tory rightwingers unhappy at what they believe is Strasbourg judges’ interference in UK rights Conservative hopes of pulling out of the European convention on human rights in response to its perceived interference in issues such as UK prisoners’ votes have been dashed by Liberal Democrat objections. Nick Clegg has won a battle to prevent the inclusion of total withdrawal from the convention in the terms of reference of an expected seven-strong commission of inquiry in UK human rights law. The decision will infuriate Tory rightwingers angered at the way in which they believe the Strasbourg judges have interfered with UK rights. Some Tory backbenchers have argued that withdrawal is not as complex as some human rights lawyers claim. The commission, due to be announced shortly, will discuss reform of the court’s procedures, and the possibility of a British bill of rights acting as a supplement, but not as a replacement for the European convention. It would also look at a bill’s relationship with the Human Rights Act that incorporates the European convention into British law. It has also been agreed that the commission will also report to Kenneth Clarke, the justice secretary, and to Clegg, who is the man charged with responsibility for constitutional affairs. The two men are probably the politicians in cabinet most sympathetic to the convention’s aims, even if both are open to reform. The decision effectively leaves prime minister David Cameron with the option of preparing his own party’s proposals for the 2015 general election manifesto. Clegg won his battle largely because the coalition agreement, negotiated in haste in the immediate aftermath of the general election, makes it clear that the coalition should not seek to withdraw from the convention. It states: “We will establish a commission to investigate the creation of a British Bill of Rights that incorporates and builds on all our obligations under the European convention on human rights, ensures that these rights continue to be enshrined in British law, and protects and extends British liberties.” The passage was negotiated between Cameron and Clegg right at the end of the coalition talks by the time Cameron was actually installed in Downing Street. This angered some Tories who feel the prime minister needlessly sold the pass on the issue when he was already in a strong negotiating position. But a year ago Tory backbench distaste for the convention’s interference had not reached its current intensity, largely due to the court’s decisions to require Britain to give prisoners the vote, a decision that Cameron said made him feel sick. Britain is appealing against the decision in the wake of the large Commons vote against the proposal. There are senior Liberal Democrat lawyers such as Lord Carlile who are critical of the delays in the court, and the quality of some of its judges. Among those expected to sit on the committee are the Liberal Democrat Lord Lester, the Labour peer Baroness Kennedy and the eurosceptic barrister Martin Howe. Clarke has said he favours reform of the court, set up by the Council of Europe after the second world war. But there is disagreement on how easy it will be to negotiate its reforms. Lord Woolf, Britain’s most senior judge between 2000 and 2005 said: “We have got a stark option: either we accept the European convention, or we don’t accept it and decide to leave the Council of Europe. “It’s very difficult to do what Mr Clarke indicated he would like to do when he’s chairman of the relative body, because there are 47 signatories in Europe which are signatories to the European convention as well as ourselves”. Human rights Human Rights Act Council of Europe Nick Clegg David Cameron Conservatives Liberal Democrats Kenneth Clarke Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Move which sees soldiers called in to protect strategic sites likely to inflame tensions between rulers and Shia majority Saudi Arabian troops have crossed into Bahrain after the tiny Gulf state’s rulers asked for help from neighbouring Sunni Arab states to quell a two-month uprising that threatens their 200-year-old political dynasty. Riyadh said it had responded to a “security threat” by deploying its military in the streets of its tiny near-neighbour. The Saudi troops have been asked to protect strategic sites, such as bridges and government buildings. Bahrain’s rulers said the Saudi forces had crossed the 16-mile causeway linking Saudi Arabia with the Arab world’s smallest state as part of a contingent of troops from the Gulf Co-operation Council. Saudi authorities did not give details on the size of the force, which some reports estimate to be about 1,000-strong. The move is likely to inflame tensions between the regime and Bahrain’s Shia majority, which has laid siege to central Manama since mid-February and has, in recent days, marched on key government buildings and palaces. As news of the Saudi intervention spread throughout Manama, the landmark Pearl roundabout in the centre of the capital – which has become a focal point for the protests – and a nearby overpass saw tens of thousands of demonstrators, many of whom were bracing for fresh confrontations with troops. More worrying for many observers than the spectre of new clashes is an escalation in the standoff between the Gulf states and Iran, which has strongly backed Bahrain’s Shia majority and has long been at odds with its Gulf neighbours, especially Saudi Arabia. Iran’s foreign minister, Ali Akbar, reacted immediately to the deployment, urging Bahrain’s leaders to use discipline and wisdom in defusing the steadily deteriorating security situation. Meanwhile, Bahrain’s main opposition bloc, the al-Wefaq party, described the Saudi-led intervention as a ‘declaration of war’. An opposition alliance urged United Nations intervention. “We consider the entry of any soldier or military machinery into the Kingdom of Bahrain’s air, sea or land territories a blatant occupation,” al-Wefaq said. “This real threat about the entry of Saudi and other Gulf forces into Bahrain to confront the defenceless Bahraini people puts the Bahraini people in real danger, and threatens them with an undeclared war by armed troops.” The White House said it did not consider the entry into Bahrain of Saudi Arabian security forces an invasion. “This is not an invasion of a country,” White House spokesman Jay Carney said. “We urge the government of Bahrain, as we have repeatedly, as well as other GCC countries [Oman, Qatar, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates], to exercise restraint,” Carney added. The past month has seen diplomatic relations between Washington and Bahrain’s rulers sorely tested. US officials had initially backed the demonstrators’ demands for widespread political reforms and the instalment of a constitutional monarchy, which stripped power from the regime. Their support was partly based on a shift in US Middle East policy to favouring democracy over stability, rather than the other way around — which had been stated US policy for more than 60 years. However, frenetic shuttle diplomacy between Manama and Washington, as well as urgent appeals from the Gulf states, including Saudi Arabia, has since led the US to retreat to the sidelines in the dispute. Bahraini officials earlier this month told their US counterparts that the protests could gain unstoppable momentum if they continued to be sanctioned by the US, a development that would imperil US interests. The US has long viewed Bahrain as one of its most important strategic allies in the Middle East. It bases its Fifth Fleet near Manama, and sees the kingdom as a buffer amid tensions between the US and Iran. Bahrain’s crown prince, Sheikh Salman al-Khalifa, late last month announced a dialogue with opposition parties aimed at giving the disenchanted Shia majority a greater role in the affairs of state. The talks, however, appear to have stalled, with opposition groups at odds over key demands. Some opposition members are insisting on the overthrowing of the monarchy, while al-Wefaq has limited its calls to making Bahrain more accountable by law. Shias account for around 70% of Bahrain’s population, but are not allowed to serve in large parts of the country’s establishment, like the military and the police. The regime has long-believed that its Shia population is susceptible to Iranian influence. Bahrain’s security forces are comprised almost exclusively of Sunni Arabs, many of whom have been invited from neighbouring Sunni states and given Bahraini citizenship. A common refrain among the country’s Shia groups is that the security forces safeguard the regime, but not the people. As central Manama once again seethed, troops and riot police were nowhere to be seen. Clashes in February left seven demonstrators dead. Dozens more were wounded, mainly with tear gas and rubber bullets, although live rounds were fired by troops after demonstrators were ousted from Pearl roundabout during a pre-dawn assault on 16 February. The crown prince ordered that troops surrender the roundabout three days later as part of the regime’s calls for calm. Bahrain Saudi Arabia Protest US foreign policy Middle East Iran Obama administration United States Martin Chulov guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Maybe if we get them to wear tea bags on their heads and show up in their Medicare funded Scooters the media will start to pay attention to them — or not. Wisconsin protests larger than any Tea Party rally : Police estimated that more than 100,000 people flooded the streets around the Wisconsin Capitol in Madison Saturday, making the turnout larger than any of the fledgling Tea Party’s rallies. The largest turnout for a Tea Party rally is the estimated crowd of 60,000 to 70,000 people who marked in Washington, D.C. during the group’s September 12, 2009 demonstration. The 2009 Tea Party rally’s crowd size is also notable for the controversy that surrounded it. ABC News published a piece claiming conservative activists had told them that 1 million to 1.5 million people turned out at the rally, when the corrected number was only a fraction of that size. According to ThinkProgress , the protests in Wisconsin have inspired demonstrations in seven other states, with some protesters even wearing “Cheesehead” hats as a nod to their Madison counterparts. Wisconsin Democrats have also vowed to make virtually every upcoming election a referendum on Gov. Walker’s anti-union administration, which they say has made Wisconsin akin to “a dictatorship.” More there so go read the rest. And as they noted at Raw Story, the above video is from ” YouTube user stumptownfilms put together a time-lapse video from footage of one day of protests in Madison last week that shows the impressive crowd sizes.” And as Steve Benen noted, It’s Not Jut Madison : The efforts of progressive activists in Wisconsin have generated considerable attention, and with good reason. But here’s hoping the activism won’t be limited to Madison. For example, you may not have heard about this gathering in Austin, Texas. Thousands of parents, teachers and other education advocates poured onto the Capitol grounds Saturday to rally against proposed state budget cuts that school districts say could force layoffs of thousands of teachers and other public education employees. Demonstrators sprawled across the statehouse grounds, carrying signs scrawled with “Save Our Schools” and “Fund the Future.” Others carried umbrellas to underscore their desire that lawmakers tap into the state’s rainy day fund to help balance the budget. “We hope that being here will make a difference,” said Nicollette Anthony, a 17-year-old from San Antonio. “But even if it doesn’t, they’ll know we tried.” Estimates of the crowd size vary, but I’ve seen some put the number at 12,000 people. (Organizers brought 11,000 stickers to hand out to those on hand, and ran out while folks were still showing up.) It’s a shame events like this don’t get more attention. A year ago at this time, a former half-term governor attended a Tea Party rally in Nevada, drew a crowd of 8,000 , and garnered national media attention, including live television coverage. But 12,000 people take a stand against deep education cuts, and it’s largely an afterthought outside the local media. Read on…
Continue reading …Anonymous Releases Part 1 of Bank of America Emails, Ex-Employee Says He Can Prove Mortgage Fraud
March 14, 2011 No Comment
enlarge Ex-employee: ‘Tells me Boa is knowingly hiding Foreclosure information from Feds…’ It’s here. The first Anonymous leak from an ex-Bank of America employee has been released, so have at it. Here’s a sample: How is Balboa able to charge such inflated premiums and get away with it? It’s all very simple. First, when you call in to customer service, for say, GMAC, you’re not actually speaking to a GMAC employee. You’re actually speaking to a Bank of America associate working for Balboa Insurance who is required by their business to business contract with GMAC to state that they are, in fact, an employee of GMAC. The reasoning is that if you do not realize you’re speaking to a Bank of America/Balboa Insurance employee, you have no reason to question the validity of the information you are receiving from them. If you call your insurance agent and ask them for the lienholder information for your GMAC/Wells Fargo/etc lien (home or auto) you will be provided with their name, but the mailing address will be a PO Box at one of Balboa’s 3 main tracking locations (Moon Township/Coreaopolis, PA, Dallas/Ft Worth, TX, or Phoenix/Chandler, AZ) Anonymous also released this video (warning: turn down the volume), and has called for multiple days of national civil disobedience to shut down the Fed, March 28th and on:
Continue reading …
Jay Kernis, senior producer of CNN's In the Arena program, promoted liberal writer David Sirota's thesis that ” the mythology of the 1980s still defines our thinking on everything from militarism, to greed, to race relations .” Sirota bashed 80s cultural touchstones such as The A Team and Ghostbusters for being ” hideously militaristic ” and the ” ugliness of [their] anti-government message .” Kernis interviewed the Huffington Post contributor about his new book, “Back to Our Future: How the 1980s Explain the World We Live in Now—Our Culture, Our Politics, Our Everything” in an item on his program's blog on CNN.com on Monday . The producer first asked about the writer's hypothesis that “the political and cultural references from the 1980s have not only become cool again, but may be a way to explain our present-day issues and conflicts, and even influencing our thinking today.” Sirota, who once attacked Glenn Beck as a ” right wing political terrorist ” and labeled opponents of President Obama ” a bunch of psychopaths ,” cited an apparent connection with the current Tea Party movement: Consider, for instance, the Tea Party – a revival of what the New York Times called “modern Boston Tea Party” revolts against taxes on the eve of the 1980s. Notably, today's iteration of this uprising regularly laces its rhetoric with revivalist paeans to the Eisenhower Era. Summarizing the sentiment, one Tea Partier said: “Things we had in the fifties were better.” This rhetoric has resonated because for many, it no longer stirs memories of the actual 1950s of Jim Crow laws, gender inequality and religious bigotry . Instead, it evokes the sanitized idea of “The Fifties” that was originally created in the 1980s through movies like Back to the Future, Stand By Me and Hoosiers, television shows like Happy Days and Laverne & Shirley , and rockabilly greaser bands like the Stray Cats. Same thing for the Tea Party's use of red-baiting language that suggests the individual is more important than the common good. Though the Cold War ended years ago and though Ayn Rand is long dead, the bromides elicit Red Dawn fears and Michael Jordan dreams from a generation that grew up being taught to see ourselves as both Soviet-oppressed Wolverines and the next superstars singularly soaring to MVP awards – as long as we will ourselves to just do it. One glaring weakness in his cultural examples is the fact that Happy Days and Laverne & Shirley are not 80s programs. They began in the mid-1970s and were past their prime when they ended their runs in the early 80s (the famous phrase “jump the shark” comes from a later-season Happy Days episode). Also, Sirota would have us believe that Tea Partiers regularly harken back to 50s (which, of course, he cast in the worst light possible) based on an extrapolation from his one anecdote. If the point was to demonize the 50s, then why hasn't he gone after the popular AMC program Mad Men? The Huffington Post writer then held up Michael J. Fox and his characters in Back to the Future and Family Ties as influences: “Those two characters perfectly represent exactly how the 1980s was revising and reimagining contemporary American history on ideological lines. Think about it: Marty McFly was a suburban teen fleeing the cartoonized dangers of modern life…into an idyllic Fifties of unity and safety . Alex P. Keaton, by contrast, spends his life lambasting his parents Sixties idealism .” However, as the MRC's recent report “Rewriting Reagan” pointed out, Family Ties actually worked in anti-Reagan jokes into the dialogue. In the process of singling out Fox, Sirota returned to his 50s talking point: This “Back to the Future”-versus-”Family Ties” war between the 1980s version of “The Fifties” (supposedly 100% unified, universally happy, optimistic, safe, etc.) and the 1980s version of “The Sixties” (supposedly 100% violent, chaotic, overly idealistic, etc.) defines our politics today. We are, for instance, supposed to forget that America in the actual 1950s was basically an apartheid state, and also had a 90% top tax bracket . Likewise, we are supposed to forget that the 1960s saw great progress on civil rights and that liberals in the 1960s ultimately helped end the Vietnam War .
Continue reading …