Watch live streaming video from nysenate at livestream.com
Continue reading …Watch live streaming video from nysenate at livestream.com
Continue reading …Watch live streaming video from nysenate at livestream.com
Continue reading …Watch live streaming video from nysenate at livestream.com
Continue reading …Smart move, an unequivocable win for the administration , for the economy and for consumers. Now let’s see this kind of aggressive solution to the food speculators, and more of us will breathe easier: Thursday’s surprise release of 60 million barrels of crude reserves is not about keeping oil consumers well supplied. It’s about chasing oil speculators out of the market. And it seems to be working. “This is the straw that breaks the camel’s back — this is the tipping point,” said Fadel Gheit, oil analyst for Oppenheimer, a leading investment bank. “The speculators will have to change their positions. Instead of betting on higher prices they have to bet on lower prices.” In a coordinated move, U.S. and European energy officials announced they would release 60 million barrels of oil from strategic stockpiles over the next month after OPEC failed this month to agree on an increase in production. Those extra OPEC barrels were supposed to replace crude output lost when civil war in Libya shut down production. “This supply disruption has been underway for some time and its effect has become more pronounced as it has continued,” said the International Energy Agency in a statement. It said expectations were that Libyan production would remain off the market for the rest of 2011. “Greater tightness in the oil market threatens to undermine the fragile global economic recovery,” it said. But independent analysts said the move was aimed more at bursting the speculative bubble rather than substantially improving market supply . Lowering oil prices further would help boost the weak U.S. economy at a time when both the Fed’s monetary stimulus and the government’s spending stimulus are winding down. Based on the market’s immediate response, the plan seems to be working. News of the oil release sent gasoline tumbling 14 cents a gallon in the futures markets. That’s the equivalent of about $56 million a day in savings at the gas pump — or about $20 billion a year, according to Peter Beutel, and oil analyst a Cameron Hanover. In New York trading crude oil was down $4.01 to $91.40 a barrel, more than 20 percent below peak levels of $114 hit in early May.
Continue reading …Smart move, an unequivocable win for the administration , for the economy and for consumers. Now let’s see this kind of aggressive solution to the food speculators, and more of us will breathe easier: Thursday’s surprise release of 60 million barrels of crude reserves is not about keeping oil consumers well supplied. It’s about chasing oil speculators out of the market. And it seems to be working. “This is the straw that breaks the camel’s back — this is the tipping point,” said Fadel Gheit, oil analyst for Oppenheimer, a leading investment bank. “The speculators will have to change their positions. Instead of betting on higher prices they have to bet on lower prices.” In a coordinated move, U.S. and European energy officials announced they would release 60 million barrels of oil from strategic stockpiles over the next month after OPEC failed this month to agree on an increase in production. Those extra OPEC barrels were supposed to replace crude output lost when civil war in Libya shut down production. “This supply disruption has been underway for some time and its effect has become more pronounced as it has continued,” said the International Energy Agency in a statement. It said expectations were that Libyan production would remain off the market for the rest of 2011. “Greater tightness in the oil market threatens to undermine the fragile global economic recovery,” it said. But independent analysts said the move was aimed more at bursting the speculative bubble rather than substantially improving market supply . Lowering oil prices further would help boost the weak U.S. economy at a time when both the Fed’s monetary stimulus and the government’s spending stimulus are winding down. Based on the market’s immediate response, the plan seems to be working. News of the oil release sent gasoline tumbling 14 cents a gallon in the futures markets. That’s the equivalent of about $56 million a day in savings at the gas pump — or about $20 billion a year, according to Peter Beutel, and oil analyst a Cameron Hanover. In New York trading crude oil was down $4.01 to $91.40 a barrel, more than 20 percent below peak levels of $114 hit in early May.
Continue reading …In a primarily symbolic vote, Republican-led House rejects resolution authorising Libya mission – but fails in bid to cut funds The Republican-controlled House of Representatives delivered a rare rebuke to Barack Obama over his involvement in the Libyan war on Friday by rejecting a resolution to authorise the US mission. It is an embarrassment for the president to have a vote go against him in time of conflict and reflects the disenchantment in the US over yet another war. The vote is primarily symbolic but members of Congress sympathetic to Obama and the US role in Libya said the danger was that it could leave the Libyan leader, Muammar Gaddafi, with the impression that support for the war is collapsing. The House voted 295 to 123 against the resolution to authorise the war. About 70 of the president’s Democratic party joined the Republicans to vote it down. The vote was held to highlight a constitutional debate between the White House and Congress over presidents engaging in wars without congressional approval. It is the first time since during the Bosnian conflict in 1999 that either the House or the Senate has voted against a military operation. The Democratic-controlled Senate is unlikely to mirror the House vote. The House ignored pleas by the secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, on Thursday against voting it down. Obama argues that he does not need congressional authorisation because the Libya mission is not a full-blown conflict. House speaker John Boehner said: “I support the removal of the Libyan regime. I support the president’s authority as commander-in-chief, but when the president chooses to challenge the powers of the Congress, I, as speaker of the House, will defend the constitutional authority of the legislature.” Republican congressman Tom Rooney, who sits on the armed services committee, said: “The last thing that we want as Americans is for some president, whether it’s this president or some future president, to be able to pick fights around the world without any debate from another branch of government.” Rooney had sponsored a separate bill aiming to cut off funds to the Libya campaign, which would have barred drone attacks and air strikes but allowed the US to continue actions in intelligence gathering, refuelling and reconnaissance. The effort to cut off money was defeated by 238 votes to 180. Republican leaders had backed the measure, but did not pressure other Republicans in the House to support it. In a separate development, the Guardian has learned that Nato forces are confident they are successfully tracking Gaddafi as he moves from hideout to hideout in Tripoli. The coalition is abiding by the UN mandate, which does not permit the military to target the Libyan leader directly, and commanders are hoping he will be removed by a revolt from within his circle of closest associates. There is also a privately held wish in London that Gaddafi might be caught up in a legitimate bombing raid on a command and control cell as he flits from one safe haven to another. A senior British source, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said Gaddafi’s movements were being monitored closely, and that the military had been able to track him “racing from one place to another” over recent weeks. Nato has an array of surveillance equipment at its disposal: as well as a Nimrod plane and drones, HMS Liverpool, which is stationed off the Libyan coast, has listening systems which should enable the military to keep watch on the Libyan leader and his entourage. US foreign policy United States Republicans US politics Barack Obama Libya Middle East Africa Ewen MacAskill Nick Hopkins guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Click here to view this media Here’s some bipartisanship I could get behind — taking a step in the right direction to end our ridiculous “war on drugs” which is filling our prisons up with non-violent drug offenders. Marijuana Bill In Congress: Barney Frank, Ron Paul Legislation Would End Federal Ban On Pot : Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) will introduce legislation on Thursday to end the federal ban on marijuana and let the states decide whether to legalize it. “The legislation would limit the federal government’s role in marijuana enforcement to cross-border or inter-state smuggling, allowing people to legally grow, use or sell marijuana in states where it is legal,” according to the Marijuana Policy Project, which advocates for pot legalization. “The legislation is the first bill ever introduced in Congress to end federal marijuana prohibition.” More than a dozen states allow the sale of medical marijuana, but the practice is not legal under federal law, leading to confusion and clashes between local and federal authorities. Read on…
Continue reading …Pulitzer Prize-winning Washington Post columnist Colby King on Friday disgracefully called Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann “Barbie with fangs.” His fellow “Inside Washington” panelist Charles Krauthammer – obviously annoyed by this sexist display – replied, “It’s good to see how civil and non-ad hominem we are here in the Huntsman spirit” (video follows with transcript and commentary): COLBY KING, WASHINGTON POST: Well, what he’s, [Jon Huntsman] can’t out anti-Obama with the other Republican field. They have that. He’s got Gingrich there, he’s got Michele Bachmann, they’re going to do the number on Obama. So he has to distinguish himself. But, when you get right down to it, he, and, and, and, and Mitt Romney are the, are the two Ken dolls in the, in the, in the Republican race. You got Michele Bachmann who is Barbie with fangs. [Laughter] I mean, it’s, the, the, the field itself is just sort of a, like a caricature. There’s no substance. CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: It’s good to see how civil and non-ad hominem we are here in the Huntsman spirit as I understand it. KING: I love them all. How thoroughly disgraceful. King should be ashamed of himself and be asked to immediately apologize for making such a statement about a sitting member of Congress. When is this sexist bashing of conservative female political officials by America's press going to stop?
Continue reading …enlarge The surest way of causing mass pouting in the Washington Post’s editorial room is by threatening to take away their shiny war toy. Yes, the same people who scold Americans every day for being unwilling to sacrifice our Social Security and Medicare are now demanding that we gladly sacrifice military lives in three separate conflicts for an indeterminate amount of time. Me personally, I wish the Afghan withdrawal was occurring more quickly. I mean, the main reasons we supposedly went into that country in the first place — to oust the Taliban, disrupt al-Qaeda and to capture or kill Osama bin Laden — have all been accomplished. No amount of blood or treasure is going to transform Afghanistan into a happysmileysuperfuntime place, so what the hell else are we supposed to do there? But still! I’ll take whatever positive developments I can get in these dark times. Except the dirtbag vultures at the WaPo op-ed board want to take this small sliver of good news away from us. Let’s start with the truly sociopathic Charles Lane : In September 1864, Union General William Tecumseh Sherman ordered the civilians of Confederate Atlanta to evacuate so that his army could burn the city. Atlanta’s mayor pleaded for mercy; Sherman refused. “We must have peace, not only at Atlanta, but in all America,” Sherman explained. “To secure this, we must stop the war that now desolates our once happy and favored country.” In Sherman’s view, sparing Atlanta, with all its resources, might indeed be humane in the short run — but would enable the rebels to prolong the war. And that was clearly the greater evil. Atlanta must burn. “War is cruelty,” the general memorably lamented, “and you cannot refine it.” President Obama’s policy on Afghanistan — up to and including last night’s beginning-of-the-end speech — could use a dose of Sherman’s tragic wisdom. Right off the bat we’ve got someone who recommends basing foreign policy on the actions of a general most famous for burning entire cities to the ground. I mean, look, I’ve known guys who think like this in the past. They were the kids who loved torturing frogs and who loved throwing firecrackers into birds’ nests. Most of them, however, wound up in jail. A lucky few of them wound up writing op-eds for the Washington Post. Next up on our “Give War Another Twelve Chances” tour of duty is Richard Cohen . Cohen isn’t against drawing down troops in the region per se, but he is saddened by the fact that the withdrawal means that foreigners will no longer respect America’s formerly-invincible freedom schlong: The American Century just ended. This was the phrase coined by Henry Luce, which so aptly described America as the modern-day colossus, more powerful than any nation had ever been. Wednesday night, President Obama said that power had reached its limit. He was bringing 10,000 troops home from Afghanistan. The war was not finished, but we are. “America, it is time to focus on nation building at home,” the president said. There it was, the theme of the speech. We had done what we could in Afghanistan, and there was, of course, more to do. But the purse was empty and the nation was tired — this is me, not Obama, talking, but he said much the same thing. “We must be as pragmatic as we are passionate; as strategic as we are resolute,” Obama said. In other words, we are going to pick our fights more carefully, and when we do, we can use the new weaponry of drones and the units of SEALs and such. No need for massive armies anymore. From the president’s mouth to God’s ear, I would add. I have heard this speech before. I heard echoes of Richard Nixon explaining “Vietnamization.” Gonna turn the war over to our stolid allies. We put them on their feet. We trained them. We supplied them. We schooled them at our elite military academies. They looked splendid in their uniforms. But when the U.S. pulled out, South Vietnam collapsed. It will happen again in Afghanistan. You know, look, dude. We have to listen to you and your buddies wail and moan all year long about America’s dire fiscal situation. You demand that politicians make “brave” cuts to spending programs that will hurt the poor, the elderly and the disabled. But you also insist that we fight three wars at maximum power at the same time. You guys can either have your Balanced Budget Pony or you can have your Freedom Bombs. But you can’t have both unless you figure out a way to make the poor, elderly and disabled into explosives that can be launched at our enemies (not that I should be giving you fellas any ideas or nothing). Next up, we have the crazed neocon Jennifer Rubin : Obama’s recounting of the past 10 years in the war against Islamic terror (not that he calls it that) is all negative — losses, casualties, domestic programs we have foregone. That should not be minimized. But should we risk all that we have gained for a re-election campaign? He choose not to point out the accomplishments of the decade: We have eliminated Saddam Hussein, liberated tens of millions of Muslims, made huge progress in Afghanistan. Oh, no, nevermind. The prospect that Afghanistan will come undone as Obama scrambles to keep his “promise” to bring home troops is not one that keeps him up nights, it would seem. There comes a point when you have to ask neocons, ” JESUS CHRIST, HOW MUCH WAR WILL IT TAKE TO MAKE YOU GUYS HAPPY??!!?!!!? ” We’ve been in Afghanistan for almost ten years now. Ten years! We’ve been in Iraq for more than eight. And Obama’s grand new illegal adventure in Libya, it seems, is just getting heated up. We’ve been in a state of constant, perpetual war with some Hitler or another for as long as I can remember. Hundreds of thousands of people have died because of these wars. They have not magically transformed the Middle East into Freedom Land. Don’t you think that maybe, just maybe, with our country facing multiple domestic challenges we might try to fight a wee bit fewer wars in the future? OK, so we’ve also got Jackson Diehl , Marc Thiessen , Robert Kagan and many other sad human beings whose lives are so empty that they can’t feel joy unless America is at war with multiple countries at the same time. As I said before, I’m not at all surprised that such people exist but I am a little surprised that they’re all employed by a formerly-prestigious news organization when they should really be hermetic shut-ins who drive cabs at night and then come home to play Call of Duty all day.
Continue reading …