Like Wisconsin, Ohio, Indiana, and many other states, Alabama has a big, new Republican legislative majority working hard to undermine unions. The House passed HB 64 yesterday, which would amend Alabama’s 1901 constitution to require secret balloting for workplace unionization. Democrats objected to the bill, challenging sponsor Kurt Wallace on the relevance and necessity of such an amendment. Wallace had few answers to offer, but to his credit he never wavered from insisting the bill was “common sense.” Part Two and notes below the fold: The relevant portion of the ” Handshake with Alabama ” (.PDF): We will fight to ensure that Alabama remains a right-to-work state in order to keep employment costs low and demand legislation that protects the right to a secret ballot in union elections so that no worker may be harassed or intimidated for voting his or her heart and conscience. (Emphasis mine) ‘Keeping employment costs low’ is code for low wages . During a caucus press conference yesterday, House Democrats spoke of the shrinking middle class in Alabama and the need to balance budgets on the backs of large, out-of-state corporations rather than working families. They worried aloud that Alabama was on the verge of becoming a Third World state — attractive to industry only as a source of cheap, unskilled labor and raw materials. They focused on education as the key to forestalling that fate for Alabama. You can follow the Goat Hill Project at YouTube . “Handshake with Alabama” was the Republican marketing slogan in the historic election that swept them to legislative power in November for the first time in 136 years.
Continue reading …WaPo Declares ‘Lots of Drama, Less Substance’ at Yesterday’s Islamic Radicalization Hearings
March 11, 2011 No CommentTwo men testified yesterday before a U.S. House of Representatives panel about how their loved ones were radicalized by Islamist extremists and how local mosque leaders did nothing to help alert U.S. authorities of the potential danger. Yet accounts of their testimony were buried in the Washington Post's front page March 11 story about the Homeland Security Committee's March 10 hearings formally entitled an inquiry into “The Extent of Radicalization in the American Muslim Community and that Community's Response.” Dismissing the radicalization hearings as “Lots of drama, less substance,” Post staffers David Fahrenthold and Michelle Boorstein spent the first five paragraphs devoted to Rep. Keith Ellison's (D-Mich.) emotional testimony. Fahrenthold and Boorstein then admitted there was substance to the hearings, noting in paragraph six how: Abdirizak Bihi, a Somali American from Minnesota, described how a nephew turned radical and left to fight with an Islamic militia in Somalia. He said religious leaders had discouraged him from going to the authorities, warning that “you will have eternal fire and hell” for betraying Islam. But the Post staffers quickly sought to downplay the hearings in the next paragraph. “But, this being Capitol Hill, there also were moments of pure theater and genuine acrimony,” Fahrenthold and Boorstein lamented, before recounting one example of each from a Republican and a Democrat. It wasn't until the 16th paragraph that the Post correspondents looked into
Continue reading …David Frum on Newt Gingrich: ‘Anyone can dump one sick wife. Gingrich dumped two.’
March 11, 2011 No CommentThe above video is an interview Newt had with the Brody Files. He’s trying to spin away his disgusting behavior with the women he was married to. He sure hopes there is a forgiving God. And his main excuse for dumping wives who got seriously ill for younger ones is that he was just working to hard for America. Newt Gingrich: There’s no question at times of my life, partially driven by how passionately I felt about this country, that I worked far too hard and things happened in my life that were not appropriate . And what I can tell you is that when I did things that were wrong, I wasn’t trapped in situation ethics, I was doing things that were wrong, and yet, I was doing them. I found that I felt compelled to seek God’s forgiveness. Not God’s understanding, but God’s forgiveness. I do believe in a forgiving God. And I think most people, deep down in their hearts hope there’s a forgiving God. David Frum does not see it the same way after Gingrich tried to whitewash his past by using religion. Remember, he also changed religions as well. David Frum writes: These are all fair and interesting points, but they do not address the reason that Gingrich’s personal life has been – and will be – so politically lethal. It’s not the infidelity. It’s the arrogance, hypocrisy, and – most horrifying to women voters – the cruelty. Anyone can dump one sick wife. Gingrich dumped two. And that second dumped wife is talking to the media. From the Esquire magazine profile of Newt Gingrich published in September 2010: After going to the doctor for a mysterious tingling in her hand, [Marianne Gingrich] was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. Early in May 1999, she went out to Ohio for her mother’s birthday. A day and a half went by and Newt didn’t return her calls, which was strange. They always talked every day, often ten times a day, so she was frantic by the time he called to say he needed to talk to her. “About what?” He wanted to talk in person, he said. “I said, ‘No, we need to talk now.’ “ He went quiet. “There’s somebody else, isn’t there?” She kind of guessed it, of course. Women usually do. But did she know the woman was in her apartment, eating off her plates, sleeping in her bed? She called a minister they both trusted. He came over to the house the next day and worked with them the whole weekend, but Gingrich just kept saying she was a Jaguar and all he wanted was a Chevrolet. “‘I can’t handle a Jaguar right now.’ He said that many times. ‘All I want is a Chevrolet.’ “ He asked her to just tolerate the affair, an offer she refused. He’d just returned from Erie, Pennsylvania, where he’d given a speech full of high sentiments about compassion and family values. The next night, they sat talking out on their back patio in Georgia. She said, “How do you give that speech and do what you’re doing?” “It doesn’t matter what I do,” he answered. “People need to hear what I have to say. There’s no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn’t matter what I live.” Who needs oppo research with quotes like those on the record? Ouch.
Continue reading …Wisconsin Unions Call For Boycott Of Local Bank Over Walker Support, Withdraw Funds
March 11, 2011 No CommentM&I Bank denies making contributions to Gov. Scott Walker with the old “corporations aren’t permitted to make campaign contributions.” (Which isn’t exactly true anymore since Citizens United , but perhaps Wisconsin has its own restrictions. Whatever.) In any event, bank executives and employees are seen as strong backers of Walker, and now that’s made them a target: Madison — Teachers, firefighters and police officers said they would begin a boycott of M&I Bank if the bank does not begin publicly opposing Gov. Scott Walker’s efforts to curtail collective bargaining for public workers. Unions representing those groups said they would start other boycotts of businesses that backed Walker in his campaign. The letter to M&I President Tom Ellis said the boycott would begin March 17 if the bank hasn’t opposed Walker’s efforts by then. “In the event that you cannot support this effort to save collective bargaining, please be advised that the undersigned will publicly and formally boycott the goods and services provided by your company,” the letter says. “However, if you join us, we will do everything in our power to publicly celebrate your partnership in the fight to preserve the right of public employees to be heard at the bargaining table.” So many protesters showed up, they had to close the bank: M&I Bank’s branch on the Capitol Square, at 1 W. Main St., closed Thursday after demonstrators, protesting campaign contributions by bank executives to Gov. Scott Walker, gathered outside the bank and several pulled their money out. Sara Schmitz, a spokeswoman for M&I in Milwaukee, said in an e-mail the bank shut its doors “under the advisement of the Madison Police Department and due to the significant number of protesters surrounding the Capitol.” Madison police said hundreds of people had gathered at the front entrance to the bank. “(The) concern was if the crowd continued to grow, it would be difficult for us to guarantee access and safety for those trying to get in and out of the bank,” police spokesman Joel DeSpain said. He said police did not tell M&I officials to close the bank. Members of several labor unions stopped at M&I twice between 9 and 9:30 a.m., said Joe Conway, Jr., president of Local 311 of the International Association of Fire Fighters. The protest was peaceful, he said. Several protesters went inside and closed their accounts, displaying checks that totaled $192,000 withdrawn, Conway said. Schmitz declined to comment about any withdrawals.
Continue reading …
If banks and credit card companies are willing to lend you money, does that mean you're not broke? According to Nobel laureate Paul Krugman, America is doing just fine financially because we're having no problem borrowing money : [T]he nation is not, in fact, “broke.” The federal government is having no trouble raising money, and the price of that money — the interest rate on federal borrowing — is very low by historical standards. So there’s no need to scramble to slash spending now now now; we can and should be willing to spend now if it will produce savings in the long run. You got that? It warrants repeating, because the inanity on display is almost staggering: 'The federal government is having no trouble raising money…So there’s no need to scramble to slash spending now.” I guess in Krugman's view, governments shouldn't worry about their deficits until they have problems borrowing. Should corporations and individuals manage their finances the same way? Isn't that in fact a large cause of the financial crisis that rocked our nation in 2008? To put a finer note on the absurdity, a few paragraphs earlier, Krugman said, “[T]here are still moments when I find myself saying, 'They can’t really be that stupid.'” This is how a feel virtually every time I read one of Krugman's columns or see him on television. But there was more: [W]hile the government does have a long-run fiscal problem, that problem is overwhelmingly driven by rising health care costs. The Congressional Budget Office expects Social Security outlays as a percentage of G.D.P. to rise 30 percent over the next quarter-century, as the population ages, but it expects a near doubling of the share of G.D.P. spent on Medicare and Medicaid. So if you’re serious about deficits, you shouldn’t be pinching pennies now; you should be looking for ways to rein in health spending over the long term. Think of it this way: Congress could, with a stroke of a pen, cut Social Security benefits in half. But it couldn’t do the same with health spending: Medicare can’t suddenly start paying to replace only half a heart valve or mandate that bypass operations stop halfway through. Readers are once again reminded that this man has a Nobel prize in economics and is widely-revered by liberals from coast to coast. To begin with, reining in Medicare costs in the future will indeed require decisions to be made concerning what the program will and won't cover. Most experts agree the program can't go on forever without making such tough choices. Krugman himself made this very point on ABC's “This Week” last November: If they were going to do reality therapy, they should have said, OK, look, Medicare is going to have to decide what it's going to pay for. And at least for starters, it's going to have to decide which medical procedures are not effective at all and should not be paid for at all. So, four months ago before the new Republican House was sworn in looking to cut spending, Krugman was all for Medicare reducing costs by making decisions concerning what procedures it will and won't cover. But on Friday, as Republicans are pushing for very modest fiscal belt tightening, Krugman claimed Congress can't cut Medicare spending. They can’t really be that stupid. What shills like Krugman intentionally hide from Americans is what's called unfunded liabilities. These are the combined financial obligations of Social Security and Medicare in the future. As the National Center for Policy Analysis reported in June 2009: The 2009 Social Security and Medicare Trustees Reports show the combined unfunded liability of these two programs has reached nearly $107 trillion in today's dollars!
Continue reading …Pray for Japan: 8.9 earthquake hits Tokyo, massive tsunamis slam northeast coast
March 11, 2011 No Comment
Click here to view this media Good God : Japan was struck by a magnitude 8.9 earthquake off its northeastern coast Friday, unleashing a 13-foot tsunami that washed away cars and tore away buildings along the coast near the epicenter. TV footage showed massive damage from the tsunami, with dozens of cars, boats and even buildings being carried along by the water. A large ship swept away by the tsunami rammed directly into a breakwater in Kesennuma city in Miyagi prefecture, according to footage on public broadcaster NHK. A tsunami warning was also issued for Hawaii and the coasts of Oregon, California, Washington and parts of Alaska. “A tsunami has been generated that could cause damage along the coastlines of all islands in the state of Hawaii,” the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center’s bulletin said. “Urgent action should be taken to protect lives and property.” The first tsunami wave was expected to hit Hawaii at 2:59 a.m. local time (7:59 a.m. ET), officials said. Black smoke was also pouring out of an industrial area in Yokohama’s Isogo area. TV footage showed boats, cars and trucks floating in water after a small tsunami hit the town of Kamaichi in northern Japan. An overpass appeared to have collapsed into the water. The footage coming in of the tsunamis sweeping inland are frightening and disturbing — though, judging from the lack of human activity, it appears their warning system may have worked well. Likewise judging (guessing?) from reports from Tokyo, it appears their building safety standards made a big difference in minimizing casualties. We’ll see if that remains the case as more details arrive. More on the warnings for the USA’s West Coast and Hawaii: The warning was issued Thursday at 9:31 local time. Sirens were sounded about 30 minutes later in Honolulu alerting people in coastal areas to evacuate, and the first waves were expected to arrive at 2:55 a.m. local time (7:55 a.m. ET) Friday. About 70 percent of Hawaii’s population resides in Honolulu, and as many as 100,000 tourists are in the city on any given day. “A tsunami has been generated that could cause damage along the coastlines of all islands in the state of Hawaii,” the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center’s bulletin said. “Urgent action should be taken to protect lives and property.” Victor Sardina, a geophysisist for the center, told the Honolulu Star-Adviser that 12- to 14-foot waves could hit the town of Hilo on the island of Hawaii and the town of Haleiwa on Oahu. Residents in Oahu were lining up to get gas, the Star-Adviser reported. A tsunami watch was issued for California, Oregon, Washington, British Columbia and Alaska from the California-Mexico border to Chignik Bay, Alaska.
Continue reading …Time Covers Mike Tyson’s Islam, Not Radical Islamist’s Shooting of U.S. Troops
March 11, 2011 No Comment
Time's March 14 edition (the one that went to press on March 4 or 5) contained no mention of the two U.S. airmen gunned down in Germany by a radical Islamist. It did include a paragraph on the shooting of Pakistani Christian cabinet minister Shahbaz Bhatti, titled “Christian Politician's Murder A Sign of a Growing Assault on Liberals.” The shooting in Islamabad happened on Wednesday. So did the shooting in Frankfurt. It would be hard for Time, now publishing on Fridays,
Continue reading …Reporting on All-Time One Month Deficit, AP’s Crutsinger Blames Lower Taxes, Not Spending
March 10, 2011 No Comment
This afternoon's report by the Associated Press's Martin Crutsinger on the government's February Monthly Treasury Statement , which shows the highest single-month deficit in U.S. history, has more spin in it than the complete library of this group's songs . A complete rundown would take more space than readers could stand, so let's just concentrate on two paragraphs. Here's the first: The widening deficit reflects the impact of the tax-cut package President Barack Obama and congressional Republicans brokered in December. Well yes, but it reflects higher spending to a greater degree. Consider the results of the past two months, the only two affected by the “tax-cut package,” compared to January and February of last year: Despite the “tax-cut package,” which kept income tax rates the same, receipts are up by $25 billion. They might be higher by about $22 billion but for the 2-point reduction in employee Social Security taxes this year. But since receipts are up anyway, how can one claim that they are “widening the deficit”? But spending is up by more $33 billion, which, for Marty Crutsinger's information, is more than the roughly $22 billion in foregone receipts. If anything, spending should be going down, because the “stimulus” spending of the past two years, which stimulated nothing , is supposed to be almost over. The bigger problem than the “tax-cut package” is that Nancy Pelosi's and Harry Reid's last Congress left spending on auto-pilot when they failed to pass a budget. February's total spending of $333 billion was also an all-time single-month record, something Crutsinger “somehow” forgot to tell his readers. Speaking of the “stimulus,” that brings us to Crutsinger's second putrid paragraph: It's unusual for an economy to be running record-high deficits this far into a recovery. The recession that began in December 2007 ended in June 2009. The problem is that the financial crisis and the recession that followed fueled explosive deficit growth. (Aside: The recession as normal people define it began in July 2008 and ended in June 2009. No amount of propagandizing by the National Bureau of Economic Research will ever change that.) What's “unusual” is that instead of doing what works, i.e., cutting taxes and lightening up on oppressive regulation, the administration did the opposite, spending like mad and intervening in the economy on an unprecedented scale, thereby introducing massive uncertainty into the economy when it could least afford it. Crutsinger acts as if the government and the administration had no choice, and as if “stimulus” and explosive deficit growth (try over $4 trillion in three years by the time we get to the end of the current fiscal year) was the only available solution. It wasn't. Beyond that, the ridiculous growth in spending in many areas of the government has nothing to do with either the “financial crisis” or the recession. Some specific examples through five months of the fiscal year compared to last year's first five months (increases are calculated on actual and not rounded numbers): Dept. of Energy — $14.0 billion vs. $11.1 billion, a 26% increase EPA — $5.0 billion vs. $3.6 billion, a 37% increase Dept. of Agriculture — $63.3 billion vs. $59.0 billion, a 7% increase (with the unemployment rate declining, shouldn't Food Stamp spending be stabilizing or going down?) HHS — $358 billion vs. $342 billion, a 4.7% increase (how much of this is illegal Obamacare implementation spending?) One more mini-example: Crutsinger joins the “keep spending like mad or economic growth will stall” chorus when he writes that “Even if Republicans achieved their target for spending cuts this year, the 2011 deficit would still be on track to hit a record.” So I guess they're supposed to decide that controlling spending isn't worth the bother. Zheesh. Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com .
Continue reading …Reporting on All-Time One Month Deficit, AP’s Crutsinger Blames Lower Taxes, Not Spending
March 10, 2011 No CommentThis afternoon's report by the Associated Press's Martin Crutsinger on the government's February Monthly Treasury Statement , which shows the highest single-month deficit in U.S. history, has more spin in it than the complete library of this group's songs . A complete rundown would take more space than readers could stand, so let's just concentrate on two paragraphs. Here's the first: The widening deficit reflects the impact of the tax-cut package President Barack Obama and congressional Republicans brokered in December. Well yes, but it reflects higher spending to a greater degree. Consider the results of the past two months, the only two affected by the “tax-cut package,” compared to January and February of last year: Despite the “tax-cut package,” which kept income tax rates the same, receipts are up by $25 billion. They might be higher by about $22 billion but for the 2-point reduction in employee Social Security taxes this year. But since receipts are up anyway, how can one claim that they are “widening the deficit”? But spending is up by more $33 billion, which, for Marty Crutsinger's information, is more than the roughly $22 billion in foregone receipts. If anything, spending should be going down, because the “stimulus” spending of the past two years, which stimulated nothing , is supposed to be almost over. The bigger problem than the “tax-cut package” is that Nancy Pelosi's and Harry Reid's last Congress left spending on auto-pilot when they failed to pass a budget. February's total spending of $333 billion was also an all-time single-month record, something Crutsinger “somehow” forgot to tell his readers. Speaking of the “stimulus,” that brings us to Crutsinger's second putrid paragraph: It's unusual for an economy to be running record-high deficits this far into a recovery. The recession that began in December 2007 ended in June 2009. The problem is that the financial crisis and the recession that followed fueled explosive deficit growth. (Aside: The recession as normal people define it began in July 2008 and ended in June 2009. No amount of propagandizing by the National Bureau of Economic Research will ever change that.) What's “unusual” is that instead of doing what works, i.e., cutting taxes and lightening up on oppressive regulation, the administration did the opposite, spending like mad and intervening in the economy on an unprecedented scale, thereby introducing massive uncertainty into the economy when it could least afford it. Crutsinger acts as if the government and the administration had no choice, and as if “stimulus” and explosive deficit growth (try over $4 trillion in three years by the time we get to the end of the current fiscal year) was the only available solution. It wasn't. Beyond that, the ridiculous growth in spending in many areas of the government has nothing to do with either the “financial crisis” or the recession. Some specific examples through five months of the fiscal year compared to last year's first five months (increases are calculated on actual and not rounded numbers): Dept. of Energy — $14.0 billion vs. $11.1 billion, a 26% increase EPA — $5.0 billion vs. $3.6 billion, a 37% increase Dept. of Agriculture — $63.3 billion vs. $59.0 billion, a 7% increase (with the unemployment rate declining, shouldn't Food Stamp spending be stabilizing or going down?) HHS — $358 billion vs. $342 billion, a 4.7% increase (how much of this is illegal Obamacare implementation spending?) One more mini-example: Crutsinger joins the “keep spending like mad or economic growth will stall” chorus when he writes that “Even if Republicans achieved their target for spending cuts this year, the 2011 deficit would still be on track to hit a record.” So I guess they're supposed to decide that controlling spending isn't worth the bother. Zheesh. Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com .
Continue reading …