(If you can put up with listening, here’s Ingraham and Boehner’s discussion) It had to happen. Republicans are turning on each other as this idiotic debt ceiling drama plays out. Earlier today a staffer sent out emails attacking Boehner’s plan and the leadership found out. House GOP leaders spent Wednesday afternoon trying to smooth over deep divisions in their party that erupted into public view after a heated conference meeting in which Republican Study Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (OH) was dressed down for an aide’s attacks on Speaker John Boehner’s (OH) debt-limit proposal. During the morning meeting, Jordan professed not to know about his top staffer’s e-mails to outside conservative groups complaining about Boehner’s proposal and urging the groups to launch coordinated assaults on the plan and its lack of a balanced budget component. Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR), read the text of the e-mail he said that Paul Teller, the RSC’s top staffer, sent to outside activists and upbraided Teller for using information in a closed-door GOP conference meeting against Boehner and GOP leaders. One GOP staffer, however, told TPM the email referenced above was not sent by Paul Teller, despite reports to the contrary. RSC spokesman Brian Straessle apologized in a statement, saying: “This action was clearly inappropriate and was not authorized by the Chairman or any other members of the staff. This has never been — and never will be — the way we do business at the RSC.” And guess who’s backing Boehner’s plan? Afterward, Cantor told the members it was disappointing to see Republicans fighting with each other on TV when he expected to see them fighting with Democrats. Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) spoke out in favor of Boehner’s plan. Cantor will attend a meeting with House GOP freshmen Wednesday afternoon. Discussions are now underway about “staff changes” at the RSC, a powerful group of fiscal conservatives within the conference, but Jordan afterward received strong support from likeminded members. You know Ryan, Cantor and Boehner are slaves to Wall Street so at this point Boehner is in open revolt against the base of his caucus as he told Laura Ingraham that the Tea Party wants chaos to rain down us all to force their balanced budget garbage. thereisnospoon: In case you were wondering about that zombie death cult thing : House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) said today that some members of his own caucus who are refusing to agree to a compromise debt ceiling deal are hoping to unleash “chaos” and thus force the White House and Senate Democrats to make bigger concessions than they’re already offering. As many as 40 House Republicans, especially Tea Party members and freshmen, have demanded nothing short of changing the Constitution to include a balanced budget amendment before they would vote to raise debt ceiling, even though that has zero chance before the U.S. faces potential default on Aug. 2. Speaking on conservative radio host Laura Ingraham’s show this morning, Boehner agreed that failing to raise the limit before the deadline would be devastating, and said the “chaos” plan won’t work when asked by Ingraham what’s motivating the recalcitrant Republicans: BOEHNER: Well, first they want more. And my goodness, I want more too. And secondly, a lot of them believe that if we get past August the second and we have enough chaos, we could force the Senate and the White House to accept a balanced budget amendment. I’m not sure that that — I don’t think that that strategy works. Because I think the closer we get to August the second, frankly, the less leverage we have vis a vis our colleagues in the Senate and the White House. These folks aren’t in the business of doing Wall Street’s bidding. They’re in the business of bringing the system down to create their own new order, no different from a Maoist or Leninist revolutionary on the other side of the aisle. It’s a market fundamentalist cult. They are a sizable and growing minority of the Republican caucus, and the ones who don’t toe their line are terrified their heads will be the next to fall before the Tea Party guillotine. All the grand poobah’s of the GOP are supporting Boehner’s plan now like Bill Kristo l, WSJ, Grover Norquist , Allen West and many others. Meanwhile, Senate Democrats have come out against Boehner’s plan . I do believe Boehner is going to need Democratic votes to pass his bill so we’ll see what happens. And don”st forget R-Mike Lee telling Chris Matthews he forcing default if he doesn’t get his way. Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) told MSNBC’s Chris Matthews Monday that he is giving Congress ten days to pass a constitutional amendment that would make raising taxes nearly impossible. And if he doesn’t get what he wants, he will do everything in his power to force the U.S. to default on its debts.
Continue reading …(If you can put up with listening, here’s Ingraham and Boehner’s discussion) It had to happen. Republicans are turning on each other as this idiotic debt ceiling drama plays out. Earlier today a staffer sent out emails attacking Boehner’s plan and the leadership found out. House GOP leaders spent Wednesday afternoon trying to smooth over deep divisions in their party that erupted into public view after a heated conference meeting in which Republican Study Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (OH) was dressed down for an aide’s attacks on Speaker John Boehner’s (OH) debt-limit proposal. During the morning meeting, Jordan professed not to know about his top staffer’s e-mails to outside conservative groups complaining about Boehner’s proposal and urging the groups to launch coordinated assaults on the plan and its lack of a balanced budget component. Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR), read the text of the e-mail he said that Paul Teller, the RSC’s top staffer, sent to outside activists and upbraided Teller for using information in a closed-door GOP conference meeting against Boehner and GOP leaders. One GOP staffer, however, told TPM the email referenced above was not sent by Paul Teller, despite reports to the contrary. RSC spokesman Brian Straessle apologized in a statement, saying: “This action was clearly inappropriate and was not authorized by the Chairman or any other members of the staff. This has never been — and never will be — the way we do business at the RSC.” And guess who’s backing Boehner’s plan? Afterward, Cantor told the members it was disappointing to see Republicans fighting with each other on TV when he expected to see them fighting with Democrats. Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) spoke out in favor of Boehner’s plan. Cantor will attend a meeting with House GOP freshmen Wednesday afternoon. Discussions are now underway about “staff changes” at the RSC, a powerful group of fiscal conservatives within the conference, but Jordan afterward received strong support from likeminded members. You know Ryan, Cantor and Boehner are slaves to Wall Street so at this point Boehner is in open revolt against the base of his caucus as he told Laura Ingraham that the Tea Party wants chaos to rain down us all to force their balanced budget garbage. thereisnospoon: In case you were wondering about that zombie death cult thing : House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) said today that some members of his own caucus who are refusing to agree to a compromise debt ceiling deal are hoping to unleash “chaos” and thus force the White House and Senate Democrats to make bigger concessions than they’re already offering. As many as 40 House Republicans, especially Tea Party members and freshmen, have demanded nothing short of changing the Constitution to include a balanced budget amendment before they would vote to raise debt ceiling, even though that has zero chance before the U.S. faces potential default on Aug. 2. Speaking on conservative radio host Laura Ingraham’s show this morning, Boehner agreed that failing to raise the limit before the deadline would be devastating, and said the “chaos” plan won’t work when asked by Ingraham what’s motivating the recalcitrant Republicans: BOEHNER: Well, first they want more. And my goodness, I want more too. And secondly, a lot of them believe that if we get past August the second and we have enough chaos, we could force the Senate and the White House to accept a balanced budget amendment. I’m not sure that that — I don’t think that that strategy works. Because I think the closer we get to August the second, frankly, the less leverage we have vis a vis our colleagues in the Senate and the White House. These folks aren’t in the business of doing Wall Street’s bidding. They’re in the business of bringing the system down to create their own new order, no different from a Maoist or Leninist revolutionary on the other side of the aisle. It’s a market fundamentalist cult. They are a sizable and growing minority of the Republican caucus, and the ones who don’t toe their line are terrified their heads will be the next to fall before the Tea Party guillotine. All the grand poobah’s of the GOP are supporting Boehner’s plan now like Bill Kristo l, WSJ, Grover Norquist , Allen West and many others. Meanwhile, Senate Democrats have come out against Boehner’s plan . I do believe Boehner is going to need Democratic votes to pass his bill so we’ll see what happens. And don”st forget R-Mike Lee telling Chris Matthews he forcing default if he doesn’t get his way. Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) told MSNBC’s Chris Matthews Monday that he is giving Congress ten days to pass a constitutional amendment that would make raising taxes nearly impossible. And if he doesn’t get what he wants, he will do everything in his power to force the U.S. to default on its debts.
Continue reading …Sally Quinn reads Bill O’Reilly some of Anders Breivik’s Christian writings… and he still denies Norway shooter is ‘Christian’
July 27, 2011 No CommentBill O’Reilly has been blaming media bias for portraying the mass murderer from Norway, Anders Breivik a Christian. David wrote a great piece yesterday on it with ample justification for the man actually being a Christian. And let’s face it: It’s not the first time an extreme right wing Christian zealot took matters into their own hands. Anyway, truth is fiction and facts are inconveniences for O’Reilly on this story, which is awfully strange. He continued his denials of said facts and even brought on Queen of the Village, Sally Quinn, to defend his assertions. She pretty much trounced him. If the tragedy wasn’t so terrible I would say that BIllO’s claims are absurdly hysterical for their blatant disregard for the facts. After Quinn reads quotes from Anders Breivik’s own writings in which he proclaims he’s a Christian, Bill O’s only real defense was to constantly yell that “Mussolini” was not a Christian too. Huh? A C&L reader sent over an archived picture of Breivik’s Facebook page in which he clearly labels himself as a Christian and a Conservative. Some on the right will never admit the truth on this subject and it looks like Bill O’Reilly is championing their cause. enlarge Salon’s Alex Parene has even more details : Breivik chose to be baptized at age 15. He self-identified as “Christian” on his Facebook page. He thought “Christianity should recombine under the banner of a reconstituted and traditionalist Catholic Church” or, later, under a new (traditionalist) European Church. Breivik is not an American-style evangelical Christian. He is not a “fundamentalist” in that sense. Though he does identify with American cultural Christian conservatives. And he considers himself to be fighting in the name of “our Christian cultural heritage.” He supports a reconstituted Knights Templar devoted to winning a war against Islam in the name of Christianity. All of this says “Christian terrorist.” His goals — the restoration of a pure Christian world in its “traditional” home — were analogous to the stated of goals of al-Qaida. Does he go to church? Does he believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ? Is he a biblical literalist? I have no idea. There’s plenty about him that would lead a devout Christian to consider Breivik “not a ‘real’ Christian.” Here’s the thing about that: The same is true of all self-proclaimed Muslims who commit acts of terrorism. Terry Krepel at Media Matters has more.
Continue reading …
The attacks in Oslo and Utøya have changed Norway for ever and it will never again be the innocent, trusting place it once was, says novelist Jo Nesbø A few days ago, before Utøya and the government building, a friend and I were talking about how two things always go hand in hand: the joy of being alive and the sorrow that things change. That even the brightest future can never entirely make up for the fact that no roads lead back to what went before. To the innocence of childhood. To the first time you fell in love. To the scents of July, the blades of grass tickling your sweaty back as you leap from a boulder and in the next second are enveloped by the ice-cold meltwater of a Norwegian fjord, with your nose and throat filled with the taste of salt and glaciers. No road back to when you were 17 and, with 10 francs in your pocket, stood by the harbour in Cannes and watched two grown men wearing idiotic white uniforms row a woman ashore from a yacht with her poodle and credit cards, and you realised that the egalitarian society you came from was the exception and not the rule. Or you stood, wide-eyed, in front of another country’s national assembly, which was surrounded by guards carrying automatic weapons – a sight that made you shake your head with a mixture of resignation and self-satisfaction, thinking: “We don’t need that sort of thing where I come from.” Because I came from a country where fear of others had not found a foothold. A country you could leave for three months, travelling through two coups d’état , a catastrophic famine, a school massacre, two assassinations, a tsunami, and come home to read the newspapers and discover that the only thing new was the crossword puzzle. A country where everyone’s material needs were provided for when oil was discovered in the 70s, and where the political path was established right after the second world war. The consensus was overwhelming, the debates focused primarily on the best means for achieving the goals that had been agreed upon by everyone from the rightwing to the left. It was a country that thought it was best served by keeping to itself and chose to remain outside the EU, which most small countries would give their right arm to be admitted to. Ideological debates arose only when the reality of the rest of the world began to encroach, when a nation, which up until the 70s had consisted largely of people of the same ethnic and cultural background, had to decide whether their new citizens should be allowed to wear the hijab and build mosques, and when Norwegian soldiers were sent to Afghanistan and Libya. But the Norwegian self-image before 22 July 2011 was that of a virgin – nature untouched by human hands, a nation unsullied by the ills of society. An exaggeration, of course. A glance at police records is all it takes. And yet. In June I was cycling with the Norwegian prime minister, Jens Stoltenberg, and a mutual friend through the streets of Oslo, setting out for a hike on a forested mountain slope within the city limits of this big yet little city. Two bodyguards followed a few metres behind us, also on bicycles. As we stopped at an intersection for a red light, a car drove up beside the prime minister with the window rolled down. The driver called out his name. “Jens!” The fact that the Norwegian people usually speak of the nation’s top leader and even address him directly by his first name is in the tradition of the egalitarian spirit, and it has long since ceased to surprise me. “There’s a little boy here who thinks it would be cool to say hello to you,” said the man. Stoltenberg smiled and shook hands with the little boy sitting in the passenger seat. “Hi, I’m Jens.” The prime minister wearing his bike helmet. The boy wearing his seatbelt. Both of them stopped for a red light. The bodyguards waited a discreet distance behind us. Smiling. It’s an image of safety and mutual trust. Of the ordinary, idyllic Norwegian society that we all took for granted. Of what we considered normal. How could anything go wrong? We had bike helmets and seatbelts, and we were obeying the traffic rules. Of course something could go wrong. Something can always go wrong. In February the Nordic World Ski Championships were held in Oslo. The Norwegian participants performed well, and every evening more than 100,000 enthusiastic Norwegians gathered for the medal ceremonies in downtown Oslo, jubilantly celebrating. On 25 July, 150,000 of Oslo’s 600,000 citizens gathered in grief. The contrasts were striking. As were the similarities. Both events revealed the unexpected force of emotion in a nation where restraint is a national virtue and “keeping a cool head” is a standard expression, but “keeping a warm heart” is not. Even for those of us who have an automatic aversion to national self-glorification, flags, grandiose words, and expressions of joy or sorrow in large crowds of people, it makes an indelible impression when people demonstrate that they do in fact mean something – these ideas and values of the society we have inherited and more or less take for granted. It’s true that they are symbolic actions, which don’t cost the individual much, but the actions do say something. They say that we refuse to let anyone take away our sense of security and trust. That we refuse to lose this battle against fear. We have the will. And yet there is no road back to the way it was before. Yesterday I heard a man shouting in fury on a train. Before 22 July, my natural response would have been to turn around, maybe even move a little closer. This could be an interesting disagreement that might entice me to take one side or the other, after an objective assessment of the arguments. But now my automatic reaction was to look at my daughter to see whether she was safe and to look for a possible escape route for her. I hope there is reason to believe that this new response will be tempered over time. But I already know that it will never – never – disappear entirely. That date will occur every year, 22 July, and for Norwegians who are alive today, it will be a reminder for the rest of our lives that nothing can be taken for granted, in spite of the bike helmets and seatbelts. After the bomb went off – an explosion that was felt where I live in Oslo – and reports of the shootings on the island of Utøya began to come in, I asked my daughter whether she was scared. She replied by quoting something I had once said to her: “Yes, but if you’re not scared, you can’t be brave.” So if there is no road back to how things used to be, to the total, unconscious and naive fearlessness of what was untouched, there is a road forward. To be brave. To keep on as before. To turn the other cheek as we ask: “Was that all you’ve got?” To refuse to allow fear to set limits to the way we continue to build our society. • Jo Nesbø is the author of the novel The Snowman. This article was translated from the Norwegian by Tiina Nunnally. © 2011 The
Continue reading …Syrian protesters ‘forcibly disappeared’ at rate of one every hour, say activists
July 27, 2011 No Comment
Regime accused of holding 2,918 people in secret, while thousands of others are forced to flee A sweep by government forces has seized one person every hour during the five-month Syrian uprising and detained them in secret, leaving their families no way to locate them, says a human rights group. The group, Avaaz , claims 2,918 people have been “forcibly disappeared” since anti-government demonstrations began in Syria on 15 March. Most are accused of being involved in the rebellion that continues to undermine a regime long renowned as the Middle East’s most formidable police state. An additional 12,617 people also remain in detention; however their incarceration has been declared to family members. Tens of thousands more people have fled from towns and villages in northern Syria in the face of intensive military assaults that Damascus claims are ridding the area of criminals and collaborators. The scale of the detentions in Syria has been compiled by a network of activists and researchers who have provided information to Avaaz. The group has gathered photos of many of the disappeared and is launching an awareness campaign today. “Hour by hour, peaceful protesters are plucked from crowds by Syria’s infamously brutal security forces, never to be seen again,” said Avaaz’s executive director, Ricken Patel. “President Assad’s attempt to terrorise Syrians into submission isn’t working, but they urgently need the international community to demand the release of the disappeared and a transition to democracy.” One young Syrian professional spoke to the Guardian about the disappearance of her father, who vanished from a Damascus suburb on 2 July. “My father used to talk a lot,” she said, declining to reveal her name. “He talked against the government in a political way. We used to tell him to stay quiet but he wouldn’t listen. “They came to a neighbour’s fast food shop and they took him. We haven’t heard anything from him since. They don’t even acknowledge that they have him.” She said security officials had come looking for her at her university, in what she suspects was an attempt to place further pressure on her family. “It is unimaginable not knowing what has happened,” she said. “The fear is worse than the intimidation. That is their weapon.” A second man, Udai al-Sayed, who worked in a media production company in Idlib before fleeing to Turkey, said his brother, Moustafa, was taken on 12 June. “The accusation against him was that he had more than one Syrian mobile number registered in his name,” Sayed said. “It has been impossible to find out anything about him, although we heard a rumour that he escaped prison but his hands and feet may have been broken.” The brothers had regularly turned out for protests in Syria’s rebellious north, where the military has had an especially strong presence over the past three months. Officials in Damascus claim the country’s military is combating a Sunni Islamist uprising bent on stirring sectarian war in Syria. “I participated in all the protests before I left,” said Sayed. “And I saw all components of Syrian society, Christians, Muslims, Kurds uniting as one to demand their rights. The government and the army is sectarian, not us. “They are killing and detaining in a very cruel way. People have kneeled to Assad for 42 years. They need to understand that Syria is not a farm that belongs to Assad and his family. It is a free Arab country and the people will take their rights.” Avaaz’s research, together with separate reports and videos coming out of Syria show its citizens are paying a particularly high price for their dissent. At least 1,600 demonstrators have been killed since the uprising began. The government claims that more than 300 members of the security forces have also been killed. The government is actively working to prevent outside scrutiny of the uprising, limiting the number of foreign reporters allowed into the country and strictly supervising those that are. However, visitors who have got in bear witness to a country under full military occupation, with all military units actively deployed throughout the country. Military intelligence agencies are playing a lead role in the secret detentions, according to multiple sources inside Syria and in Turkey, which continues to provide refuge to many who have fled. The sweeps are thought to have intensified over the past week in the lead-up to the Muslim Holy Month of Ramadan, which begins next week. Syria Arab and Middle East unrest Middle East Martin Chulov guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media Yes, I’m once again watching the most soul-sucking channel on earth. Fox News. Take note of this brief segment with Megyn Kelly clone Martha McCallum where they breathlessly report a Tea Party revolt to strip John Boehner of his speakership. See that “rally”? The one with the spiffy signs and stuff? Here’s a photo taken in real time: enlarge Credit: Dave Weigel Yeah. And Fox has it as some major revolt. MoveOn.org, on the other hand, had turnouts at congressional offices all over the country yesterday, and is planning a rally on the Capitol steps Thursday at noon. Will it be covered by any media at all?
Continue reading …
• Education Committee report states that the Ebacc does not improve the prospects of low-income pupils • Schools minister Nick Gibb stands by coalition plan despite calls to rethink One of the coalition’s flagship education reforms, the English Baccalaureate, has major flaws and there is no evidence that it improves the prospects of disadvantaged pupils, a powerful cross-party committee of MPs has warned. The English Baccalaureate, or Ebacc, which was introduced into league tables in January, measures the percentage of pupils who have obtained GCSE passes in traditional academic subjects. To achieve the Ebacc, a pupil must score an A* to C grade in English, maths, at least two sciences, history or geography and a modern or classical language. Ministers decided on the measurement partly out of concern that schools in low-income neighbourhoods were not encouraging their pupils to take traditional subjects, thus preventing them from obtaining places at top universities. In May, schools minister Nick Gibb told MPs that the Ebacc was a “key component” in the “overall objective of closing the attainment gap between wealthier and poorer children”. But an Education Committee inquiry into the Ebacc found no evidence that the flagship reform will improve the life chances of low-income pupils. The inquiry – which gathered evidence from more than 360 teachers, academics and educationalists – calls on ministers to rethink the Ebacc programme. “The committee fully supports the government’s stated intention to improve the attainment of the poorest young people,” the MPs argue. “However, the evidence is unclear as to whether entering more disadvantaged students for Ebacc subjects would necessarily make a significant contribution to this aim.” Japan and Singapore, whose education systems are lauded, have models that are similar to the Ebacc. But so does Germany, and its education system performs below the OECD average on some indicators, the MPs stated. The report adds: “The evidence which we received does not suggest a link … between the prescribed study of certain academic subjects and improved attainment and prospects for poorer students.” The commitee calls for ministers to state how they will monitor the performance of children who receive free school meals in relation to the Ebacc. The MPs warn that the reform could lead to teachers devoting more time to pupils who are most likely to achieve the Ebacc, which will “have a negative impact on the most vulnerable or disadvantaged young people”.The MPs said the importance of school league tables is such that headteachers are likely to direct teachers to focus their attention on so-called borderline pupils, who may narrowly miss out on the Ebacc, rather than on brighter pupils or those struggling at the bottom. The government should focus on each pupil’s progress rather than whether they pass the Ebacc, the report argues. Conservative MP Graham Stuart, the committee’s chair, said the Ebacc had generated a “mainly negative response” from teachers and academics. The report warns that the suggested subjects for study in order to obtain the Ebacc are “fairly narrow” and likely to deter pupils from taking art, music and other excluded subjects.”Academic subjects are not the only path to a successful future, and all young people, regardless of background, must continue to have opportunities to study the subjects in which they are likely to be most successful, and which pupils, parents and schools think will serve them best,” Stuart said. He went on to state that: “Our inquiry has uncovered significant issues with the Ebacc’s current composition, and there are certain subjects and qualifications where we are not clear on the rationale behind their exclusion. A focus on a fairly narrow range of subjects, demanding considerable curriculum time, is likely to have negative consequences on the uptake of other subjects.”The MPs argue that ministers were too hasty to introduce the Ebacc, and teachers were outraged when ministers told schools that January league tables for last summer’s exam results would include the measurement. Their pupils had taken their exams before the Ebacc introduction had been announced. Gibb said all children had the right to a broad and balanced education that included English, maths, science, a language and a humanity. “These academic subjects reflect the knowledge and skills young people need to progress to further study or rewarding employment,” he said. “It cannot be right that children from the poorest backgrounds are significantly less likely to have the opportunity to take GCSEs in these subjects than children from more advantaged areas. Closing the attainment gap between children from wealthier and poorer backgrounds is a key objective of the government and the Ebacc measure plays an important part in helping to deliver that objective.”According to the latest league tables, just over 4% of pupils on free school meals – a key indicator of poverty – achieved the Ebacc, compared with 17% of pupils who were not. Schools Secondary schools Vocational education Education policy Jessica Shepherd guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …[ Melissa Harris-Perry explains in great detail the origins of the full faith and credit of the U.S. government and why the U.S. debt should not be questioned (14th amendment) while recapping the debt ceiling debate] Any rational person who follows politics understands that the debt-ceiling debate is a manufactured crisis, concocted by an insane Republican Party that is willing to wreck the American economy with the sole purpose of harming an Obama presidency and winning the White House in 2012. It has been enabled by a frightened Beltway media Village that refuses to give us honest analysis and historical context to go along with the debt ceiling process. President Obama sounded more like a Republican than a Democrat when he gave his presser the other night, once again making his case for a Grand Bargain, which he has admitted is a slap to Democratic principles. Is he playing a chess game with the GOP, hoping America will see the Tea Party for the radical right wing cult they are, to win the debate? That’s for you to decide , but this is a precarious strategy nonetheless, since it’s destined to be a huge setback for Keynesian economics and Progressive ideals, as Greg Sargent outlines in his piece. Even so, the media should be able to explain to the American people that the problem isn’t between both parties, but only one: the Republican party. Why do the media refuse to cover this story honestly? Paul Krugman has a few thoughts on the matter: Watching our system deal with the debt ceiling crisis — a wholly self-inflicted crisis, which may nonetheless have disastrous consequences — it’s increasingly obvious that what we’re looking at is the destructive influence of a cult that has really poisoned our political system. And no, I don’t mean the fanaticism of the right. Well, OK, that too. But my feeling about those people is that they are what they are; you might as well denounce wolves for being carnivores. Crazy is what they do and what they are. No, the cult that I see as reflecting a true moral failure is the cult of balance, of centrism. Think about what’s happening right now. We have a crisis in which the right is making insane demands, while the president and Democrats in Congress are bending over backward to be accommodating — offering plans that are all spending cuts and no taxes, plans that are far to the right of public opinion. So what do most news reports say? They portray it as a situation in which both sides are equally partisan, equally intransigent — because news reports always do that. And we have influential pundits calling out for a new centrist party, a new centrist president, to get us away from the evils of partisanship . “Washington is broken” is the refrain we hear constantly from the Beltway media, a long-held talking point pushed by conservatives in the MSM. When one branch controlled by Republicans does break down, then the government does stop working. The debt-ceiling debate is exposing the GOP as truly being broken because House Speaker Boehner can’t even get his own members to back his own “spending cuts” plan, even after President Obama has offered up the store in negotiations. But this story also strikes at the heart of the Villagers as much as the GOP. What all this means is that there is no penalty for extremism; no way for most voters, who get their information on the fly rather than doing careful study of the issues, to understand what’s really going on. You have to ask, what would it take for these news organizations and pundits to actually break with the convention that both sides are equally at fault? This is the clearest, starkest situation one can imagine short of civil war. If this won’t do it, nothing will. And yes, I think this is a moral issue. The “both sides are at fault” people have to know better; if they refuse to say it, it’s out of some combination of fear and ego, of being unwilling to sacrifice their treasured pose of being above the fray. It’s a terrible thing to watch, and our nation will pay the price. Our nation has been paying the price of their news cowardice for decades (Clinton’s impeachment, Al Gore’s loss, and the Iraq War, to name a few) and now as this usually unremarkable procedural vote called the debt ceiling winds down and which has never been subjected to this type of political grand-standing closes in, our credit rating may fall and throw the US into a much deeper economic hole than we already are in—the beltway media stands by refusing to report what is actually going on. As Krugman says, this is a moral one facing journalism as a whole, but it’s the American population that suffers.
Continue reading …
British prop artist Andrew Ainsworth free to sell replica helmets, court rules, but now open to US copyright claims Star Wars may have been a cinematic blockbuster, but its costumes were never high art – a view now confirmed by the supreme court, which has ruled that an imperial stormtrooper’s helmet from the movie is not a piece of “sculpture”. The decision opens the way for Andrew Ainsworth, an English prop designer, to carry on selling outfits for up to £1,800 each to customers in Britain but it exposes him – and other UK manufacturers – for the first time to claims of infringement of foreign copyrights in British courts. Not being a work of art means that any enforceable UK design right in the helmets expired after 15 years. Ainsworth, who helped make outfits for the first movie in 1977, welcomed the ruling that the headgear was not a sculpture and that he could therefore carry on selling them to domestic customers. He said: “I am delighted to have won the right to continue to make these replicas from the original tools and moulds. I am proud to report that in the English legal system David can prevail against Goliath if his cause is right. If there is a force, then it has been with me these past five years.” Lucasfilm, the American producers, have been trying to prevent him selling replica helmets from his studio in Twickenham, south-west London. A California court has already ruled in favour of the director, George Lucas, who was awarded £10m in damages. In its judgment, the supreme court wrestled with movie history. “The Star Wars films are set in an imaginary science fiction world,” the judgment noted. The supreme court judges concluded: “It was the Star Wars film that was the work of art that Mr Lucas and his companies created. The helmet was utilitarian in the sense that it was an element in the process of production of the film.” The ruling that infringements of foreign copyrights can be pursued through British courts, may, however, eventually prove far more significant for future commercial and intellectual property rights cases. It will have little personal affect on Ainsworth since relatively few helmets had been sold to US customers. His lawyer, Seamus Andrew, acknowledged that there “will now have to be an assessment of the damages arising from this” but did not anticipate they would be very much. In its judgment, the supreme court said there was “no reason for the English courts refusing to take jurisdiction over an English defendant in a claim for breach of foreign copyright”. The implications of this decision are likely to be felt in the film and TV industries and far beyond, according to Danielle Amor, a copyright lawyer at the firm Hogan Lovells. “As a result of this judgment, the UK may well be a more tempting place to take legal action,” she said. “It will now be possible to sue in the UK for infringement of copyright and other unregistered rights which occurred in a number of different countries provided the defendant is resident in the UK. “The more interesting part of the decision is the acceptance of jurisdiction over foreign copyright infringement claims. “This is a welcome clarification of the extent of the court’s jurisdiction and the reasoning could well be applied to other claims relating to foreign unregistered intellectual property rights.” Lucasfilm welcomed the supreme court decision that Ainsworth’s replicas infringed the company’s US copyrights and that those rights are enforceable in the UK with respect to activities outside of the UK. “This is the first time the supreme court has ruled on an issue of great commercial and legal importance, namely the jurisdiction of the courts in the UK over infringements taking place abroad,” a company statement said. “The judgment is an important step in modernising UK law and bringing it into line with the EU. “Lucasfilm remains committed to aggressively protecting its intellectual property rights relating to Star Wars in the UK and around the globe through any and all means available to it, including copyright, trademark, design patents and other protections afforded by law.” Star Wars George Lucas Science fiction and fantasy United States Design Intellectual property Owen Bowcott guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media Former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin told the Fox Business Network Tuesday that President Barack Obama doesn’t understand the American way of doing business because of his “background.” “The President is not capable of giving the right message to deal with the problem we are facing with the bankruptcy that’s facing America if we don’t start living within our means,” she said. “The right message is that growing more debt won’t get us out of debt, and raising taxes in a time of economic woes in a bad economy is a bad idea.” “A lot of this has to do with his background, him having not been a part of the private sector and running a business or having to rely on making profit. That seems to be foreign to our President. His background and those he’s appointing don’t understand what America was built upon. His ideas are the antithesis of those things that created the prosperity in America.”
Continue reading …