Further Evidence Sotomayor Is a Racist

Preview for Sunday 070509

Hey folks,

Happy Sunday to you, and welcome to the Big, and I mean Big, Sunday Edition of the OPNTalk Blog this week. I hope you are all well. I am Sunburned. I'm not kidding. Me, Josh {My Son} and my Wife are all Sunburned. I hope you had a great Independence Day. We did.

We went to the "Freedom Fest" in Port St. Lucie Florida, went from there to a local Beach, and then went to a Private Fireworks display. A TWO HOUR LONG Fireworks Display. A GREAT time was hand by all, although we are now all paying for it today. {Smile}

OK. OK. I know. I know. Sarah Palin is out July 25 turning over the reigns to Lieutenant Governor Sean Parnell. EVERYONE is speculating and theorising why. What is she planing to do now. So on. So Forth. I don't know. She has not come right out and said. Until she does? I will refrain from commenting on her decision.

But some things I DO want to talk about? Coming right up today?

Private Non-Profit Organizations Funding The News
Iran's Hope and Change
Florida Crist Can NOT Ask For Diversity
Lori Drew Conviction Tentatively Tossed
Bedwetting, Being Overweight linked to sleep apnea
Swine Flu Update 070509
IWA for Sunday 070509

ALL that in just a few minutes. Did you catch this? Like we really need more proof that Obama's pick for Supreme Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor is a full blown Racist? Here it is. According to the AP - Group Sotomayor belonged to sued over job tests

WASHINGTON – A civil rights group advised by Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor in the 1980s brought several discrimination lawsuits that sought to scrap the results of job tests because too few Hispanics scored well, according to new documents that are fueling GOP criticism of the judge.

The Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund represented Hispanic sanitation workers in New York City who wanted to stop white employees from getting promotions because, they argued, the qualifying exam unfairly disadvantaged minorities. The case unfolded as Sotomayor chaired the organization's board of directors' litigation committee, although there is no evidence that she had any role in the group's decision to participate in the lawsuits, or in formulating or drafting any of their legal arguments.

Still, the case bears strong similarities to a much-discussed case Sotomayor ruled on last year as a federal appeals court judge, which involved the reverse discrimination claims of white firefighters in New Haven, Conn., who sued after the city threw out its promotion test because too few minorities qualified. A panel she joined ruled against the white firefighters in the case, Ricci v. DeStefano. The Supreme Court reversed the decision last Monday.

OK. If the word Racist is to strong a word for you. Let's just say this is another example of her being on the wrong side of the Law more often than not. She has a 65 plus over turn rate. She is just NOT the right person for the job.

Anyway, as you can see, we are fully loaded and ready to go. Going to fill my cup, today's coffee, Eight O Clock,Whole Bean "Hazelnut." www.eightoclock.com. Be right back.
Peter

Sources:
AP - Group Sotomayor belonged to sued over job tests

Private Non-Profit Organizations Funding The News

Why have more Newspapers not gone under?

Hey folks,

So NYTs more layoffs. Readership is down to record levels. Some other Newspapers gone. Some others on their way out. Why are they still around?

I asked this question a while back. Why does anyone read this garbage anymore? Talking about the New York Times. They openly print FALSE information, make stuff up, print top secret information, put our Troops and America's safety at risk. They violate their own Ethics Policy, of which I even printed a year or so ago, on a daily bases. They and others, are NOT reporting the news. They are fabricating it in some cases, and some are still around.

The Rocky Mountain News, has closed its doors. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer, has a Web-only operation. Several major newspapers are in bankruptcy. Some others on their way out? Boston Globe and San Francisco Chronicle. What about The New York Times? Well, we just discovered that they required a major cash infusion from Mexico’s richest businessman. Readership is going away. Even those with a stronger balance sheet are reeling against an advertising recession that saw newspaper revenue decline 17 percent last year and 25-30 percent in the first quarter of 2009.

Now in a normal free market, they lose readership, they go away. But as I just found out, they and many other news outlets are NOT operating in a free market. They are bought and paid for already. Not by their readership, but by PRIVATE organizations that allow them to simply report what they are told to.

The following is a report by David Westphal, Philanthropic Foundations:

Growing Funders of the News. Now it is 12 pages long printed, but I have decided to post the entire report here. You really need to read this to understand why what we are seeing is being allowed to happen. Journalism is dead. Long live the Corporate, State Run Media.

USC ANNENBERG SCHOOL FOR COMMUNICATION
Center on Communication Leadership & Policy
Research Series: July 2009

Philanthropic Foundations:
Growing Funders of the News
by David Westphal
Senior Fellow, Center on Communication Leadership & Policy
and Executive in Residence, Annenberg School for Communication
University of Southern California

Even those who were pessimistic a year ago at prospects for the American news business had to be taken aback by the swiftness of the decline that has occurred since then. A major newspaper, the Rocky Mountain News, has closed its doors. Another newspaper, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, has silenced its presses while maintaining a small, Web-only operation. Several major newspapers are in bankruptcy; others, such as the Boston Globe and San Francisco Chronicle, are threatened with closure. The New York Times required a major cash infusion from Mexico’s richest businessman. Even those with a stronger balance sheet are reeling against an advertising recession that saw newspaper revenue decline 17 percent last year and 25-30 percent in the first quarter of 2009.

It’s not just newspapers that are in trouble. Virtually every news operation of any kind is under stress on multiple fronts: a miserable economy, overleveraged balance sheets and the disruptive effects of the digital revolution. Tens of thousands of journalists have taken buyouts or been laid off. Washington bureaus and statehouse reporting corps have been shut down; foreign bureaus have been reduced to a fraction of their former size. NPR closed down most of its West Coast operation. The speed with which all of this has occurred has been mesmerizing, and it has led some to wonder how society’s essential information needs will be met. “When we had the meeting last year we saw a need,” said USC’s Geoffrey Cowan, one of the conveners. “But now we’re in a state of desperation. The collapse of the traditional economic model has increased both the need for nonprofit journalism, but also the receptivity toward it.”

Even as legacy news organizations struggle for survival, new information sources are springing up – often as one or two-person sites that provide news and information about communities, neighborhoods and topics of interest. In many cases, these sites have established that small-scale, Web-only operations can deliver robust news reports, with technology that provides far better two-way communication than has ever before existed. But for most of them, a sustainable business model has not yet emerged, principally because digital advertising has not proven it can support a news organization that looks anything like the ones Americans have come to know in the last half-century. This is hardly surprising, given the magnitude of the revolution at hand. But it presents the question of what will become of news and information until new models emerge.

Against that backdrop, the worlds of foundations and philanthropy are being looked to in unprecedented ways to serve as a firewall against the disappearance of critical news and information. To some extent the expectations are a mismatch: Even in its weakened state, the newspaper industry alone is a $35 billion-a-year enterprise, no match for a foundation world that also finds itself much diminished by a sliding stock market. But to a surprising degree, foundations are responding on multiple fronts, and there are indications that a much more robust reaction may be in the works. Alberto Ibargüen, who directs journalism’s most important funder, the Knight Foundation, says he’s been talking quietly for the last two years with some of the nation’s biggest foundations, and believes several of them may get into journalism funding in a significant way.

At somewhat smaller levels, the process of greater investment by foundations in journalism is well under way. It can be clearly seen in the world of investigative reporting, a singularly threatened and critical area of watchdog journalism. The Center for Public Integrity is once again thriving after a period of financial uncertainty, and is reporting unsolicited queries from potential funders. The Center for Investigative Reporting recently announced it would establish a California-oriented arm with a staff of about 10 producing state-related investigative reporting – the result of $2.4 million in foundation grants. Other state-oriented investigative sites are emerging, and so are local sites that are taking investigative reporting right to the grassroots.

Foundations are also moving into topical journalism in areas such as health, science and the arts. The Kaiser Family Foundation recently launched its Kaiser Health Service project, aimed at filling a growing void of national health coverage. Similarly, the California HealthCare Foundation is creating, with the University of Southern California Annenberg School of Journalism, a health reporting network focusing principally on California policy issues. In a different model, NGOs are using their existing information-gathering resources to establish journalism arms that convert academic-style reports into consumer-sized news products.

Community news Web sites are also getting into the act, soliciting foundation grants to support hybrid business models that rely on a combination of philanthropy and private-sector revenue. One of the most prominent community Web sites, the Voice of San Diego, has established science and environmental reporting positions, partly through foundation grants. Community foundation grants have already gone to dozens of local news sites, and a new $24 million Knight Foundation program aims to accelerate this trend.

How far this trend will go, or should go, cannot be predicted. Associated Press chief executive Tom Curley says foundations will likely play a small role in the digital revolution because entrepreneuers “are moving too fast to plug gaps.” He’s not alone. Almost to a person, participants in last year’s meeting cautioned that foundations could never play a dominant national role. But until a new business model emerges as a reliable source of news funding, the continuing decline in traditional news reporting is likely to tempt foundations to become part of the solution, if only on a stopgap basis. Said Orville Schell, director of the Asia Society’s Center on U.S.-China Relations: “I think because we are in such alarming times, when the media outlets on which the nation depends for news and information are simply melting away before our eyes like blocks of ice in the sun, it is probably true that more and more foundation and philanthropic money will begin to flow.”

Foundations: Increasingly a news and information player

The conventional wisdom about foundations and other philanthropy is that they simply will not be much of a factor as the news industry goes through the convulsions of the digital revolution. But some revision is in order. A growing number of foundations are getting into the business of supporting news-and-information nonprofits. That trend appears to be accelerating, and there’s some indication that major foundations may get into the act as well.

The Knight Foundation’s Alberto Ibargüen said he has spent the last two years being a “Johnny One Note” with other foundation presidents, arguing behind the scenes that they need to consider journalism as an emergency need in their grant programs. “I think it’s safe to say there’s a growing understanding you can’t run a democracy without a free flow of information,” said Ibargüen. After a series of meetings, with more to come, Ibargüen said he thinks it’s possible some major U.S. foundations will increase their funding of news and information projects, and others might do so for the first time.

A recent study by American University’s J-Lab found that foundations had contributed $128 million to community and investigative reporting nonprofits between 2005 and 2009. As director Jan Schaffer said, “One thing is clear: Philanthropic foundations are increasingly embracing the idea that journalism projects can be a funding fit.”

Norman Pearlstine, chief content officer at Bloomberg, said the notion makes sense to him. “I think there are some people – high net-worth individuals – who might want to acquire a newspaper and go the foundation route rather than operating it as a business,” he said. “I can also imagine community leaders saying, ‘It’s good to have a baseball team in town, but it’s also good to have a newspaper.’ It’s entirely possible this will happen.”

Investigative reporting

In a world without philanthropists and founda–tions, the practice of investigative reporting might not be long for this world. It’s expensive, it’s time-consuming, it has an unreliable payoff – and there’s no obvious free-market way to make sure it gets done in the new-media world. This is a message that seems to be getting through to funders. Somewhat to their surprise, three major investigative reporting nonprofits are on a roll. The Center for Public Integrity, ProPublica and the Center for Investigative Reporting are all seeing growing opportunities for nonprofit investigative work, and they are all hopeful about future funding.

In a scenario few thought possible, cold calls are sometimes coming from the opposite direction – from foundations wondering if they might play a role in financing investigative reporting. “One of the interesting things that’s happening is that the demise of media is occurring so quickly that it does have the attention of funders,” said Bill Buzenberg, who runs the Center for Public Integrity. “New funders have come to us – in part because they see what’s happening. They’re as worried as we are about the watchdog function.”

Investigative reporting held a center seat a year ago at the New York gathering on foundation-funded journalism. Joining Buzenberg were Robert Rosenthal, director of the Center for Investigative Reporting, and Paul Steiger and Richard Tofel of ProPublica. All three nonprofits have stepped up the pace of their work since then. The latest example is Rosenthal’s May unveiling of a California investigative reporting unit that will focus on education and other public policy issues in the nation’s largest state. With grants of $1.2 million each from the James Irvine Foundation and the William and Flora Hewitt Foundation, Rosenthal hopes to hire as many as 10 journalists to staff the new center. Rosenthal, who took over CIR in January 2008, says he also has seen a night-and-day transformation in the interest level of foundations. “One big difference has been that funders previously tended to fund the story,” he said. “Now they’re much more willing to be supportive of the core.” One clear sign of the groups’ success: The Associated Press recently announced it would disseminate the work of four top investigative nonprofits.

ProPublica’s Tofel says investigative reporting is emerging as one of the arenas many people agree must be preserved even as newspapers and other mainstream institutions decline. “I would identify investigative journalism and international reporting as the clearest cases here,” said Tofel. “But serious, analytical metro coverage may also be joining the list – and there could be more to come.”

CIR’s California operation is the latest example of investigating reporting units that are being established on a state or region-wide basis. Two other nonprofits, the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism and the New England Center for Investigative Reporting, are both up and running, and they hold the promise of a much larger collection of state and regional nonprofits focusing on watchdog reporting. In fact, Buzenberg and Rosenthal have already been discussing the possibility of bringing together all the state and regional operations in a network that could offer operational efficiencies and a common Web portal. Many of the investigative nonprofits gathered in New York in late June to talk about those and other issues.

Other new investigative reporting nonprofits are setting up shop. Arianna Huffington launched the Huffington Post Investigative Fund, a $1.75 million startup that will begin its existence looking into the economic crisis. Then there’s SpotUs, David Cohn’s trailblazing initiative to tap the crowd for both story ideas and dollars in the interest of producing investigative work.

Nonprofit investigative reporting sites are also showing up at the local level, with startups in Baltimore and Texas, among other locations. Where this is going is anyone’s guess, but it’s surely a mistake to assume we have seen the last of the new models. As evidence, consider the Goldwater Institute, a conservative think tank, which is advertising for an investigative reporter who will hunt for examples of wasteful government spending.

NGOs

The traditional model of foundation-funded journalism is simple: A foundation sends a check to a non-profit journalistic organization to support reporting and dissemination of the news. But these days it’s hardly the only model. Human Rights Watch is attempting something quite different. It’s leveraging an already robust network of fact-gatherers around the world by adding a small unit that converts its academic-type research into consumer-friendly news reports.

Carroll Bogert, Human Rights Watch’s associate director, said NGOs like Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and others are in good position to use their expertise to become important news resources. But can Human Rights Watch muster the credibility needed to deliver the news even as it acts as advocate for human rights? Absolutely, says Bogert, “I would say that in general, we do much more than journalists do to assure we have the facts right.”

Bogert’s concern is actually a different one – and it’s something that might surprise journalists: Some of the nonprofit’s 75-80 researchers aren’t thrilled with the idea of seeing their work translated, in-house, into journalism. “Journalism to a lot of people means sloppy, it means fast,” said Bogert. “People are worried about whether that would change what we do.”

Not many approach this question from a better position than Bogert, who was a foreign reporter and editor at Newsweek before joining Human Rights Watch. And not many NGOs are better positioned to test their ability to morph into a news-providing role than this one, with staffers monitoring rights violations in 80 countries worldwide.

Bogert has hired a small group of journalists (mostly video and audio editors/producers) to convert the organization’s typically long, dry reports into video clips aimed at news consumers. A recent report documented how Hamas used the recent battle in Gaza as cover for attacking political opponents there.

While video reports such as this, which rely on the group’s in-depth research, are on the rise, Human Rights Watch had envisioned adding the journalism component at a more rapid pace. But the economic collapse has slowed things down. “The world I envisioned, in which NGOs took over more reporting responsibilities, I think it’s still the overall trendline,” said Bogert. “But it’s not going to happen as quickly.”
Thinking big (As in 10 digits)

Alex Jones has led one of the nation’s most prominent nonprofits, the Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy, for the past nine years. Like many, he doesn’t think the fundamental answer to the news media’s precipitous slide will be found in the largess of philanthropists and foundations. “The solution to what’s happening to news media these days is going to be a commercial one,” said Jones.

There are two exceptions, though, and one of them is a big one.

Jones wants one or more of the world’s richest people to establish a $2 billion endowment that would provide permanent funding for PBS’ “NewsHour.” “If Warren Buffett or a group of billionaires wanted to change the world, this is how they could do it,” he said. “It’d be one hour of prime viewing time for every television in the country. It would give the United States the genuinely high-quality TV news operation that it has never had.”

Jones’ other idea: He thinks community foundations and philanthropists should pay visits to their hometown newspapers and talk about how they might finance a city hall reporting position, or a school board reporter.

These are among the recommendations Jones makes in his new book, “Losing the News” (Oxford University Press). Jones said he is addressing the book to the American news consumer who sees traditional journalism receding but “doesn’t understand what’s happening or why.”

In my interview with Jones, I asked whether he was hoping to re-create a BBC-type operation in the United States. “No, no,” he said. “That would be a much bigger proposition. I’m just talking about one hour of terrific television a night. It would be able to attract the top broadcast journalists in the business.” And, Jones said, it would have a spillover effect on cable news, raising the bar for what the public demanded from national TV newscasts.

A $2 billion endowment would yield an annual budget of $100 million, he said, and would create a high-profile venue with sufficient “muzzle velocity” to become the gold standard for TV news. “It seems to me this is a way to make everything better,” he said. “It would bring high-quality news to people who would otherwise have a problem finding high-quality news.”

As for Jones’ other idea, he made it clear he thought philanthropists and foundations ought to invest in reporting positions in newspapers, not in new-media startups where the practice of fund-raising for specific reporting slots has already begun. (Joel Kramer’s MinnPost, for example, is raising money specifically to finance the work of media reporter David Brauer. And Firedoglake is trying to raise $150,000 to pay for the investigative reporting of Marcy Wheeler.)

Why, I asked, would he limit this to legacy media, when digital startups are already making it happen? “News requires not only the ability to come up with the reporting,” he said. “It requires having the right impact. That’s why I think it would be much better to save these institutions, if we can, that already have the power to deliver. And to fight the good fight with their institutional muscle.” Jones said endowing a reporting position would not be that expensive for many foundations and donors, and could result in immediate impact.

Neal Shapiro, president of New York’s Thirteen/WNET, also thinks foundations need to enlarge their thinking about the kind of resources journalism may need to fulfill its news-and-information mission. “I think they can be a (substantially bigger) player and in many ways they may have to be,” said Shapiro. “And yes, I do think public broadcasting is one area where you can produce quality journalism that has a tremendous reach. Foundations can play a bigger role here.”

Voices of skepticism

Although many see promise in the rise of philanthropy and foundation dollars going to the support of journalism, some are less impressed, arguing they’re a drop in the bucket compared to the money that will be generated by the private sector. A few fear that this money may get in the way of the innovation cycle needed to cure journalism’s ills.

Tom Curley, chief executive of the Associated Press, said foundation-funded efforts will be dwarfed by the rise of entrepreneurship. “If content gaps are being created or imagined, journalist entrepreneurs seem to be rising with many varied sources of funding,” he said. “I thought the foundation-funding idea was a naïve response last year and am more convinced of that. AP, for instance, would need $6 billion to endow its core agency operation. Entrepreneurs are moving too fast to plug gaps.”

New-media consultant Merrill Brown says the work that foundations are doing in supporting journalism is “noble and important… But it’s second-level important. It’s more important to get the advertising growing.” To some extent, Brown said, foundation-funded journalism becomes “a distraction for how journalism is going to thrive in the future.”

In looking to foundations, new-media startups are also confronting organizations that are having their own economic issues. Donald Kimelman, managing director of information initiatives for The Pew Charitable Trusts, says foundations, “like everyone else, are feeling the pain of the downturn. So it is tough to make the case for putting resources into a new area of interest, while cuts are being made in established areas of interests.”

In addition, an old truism about philanthropy hasn’t changed, says Peter Osnos, founder of Public Affairs Books. “Philanthropists get tired of funding things and they move on,” he said. “Philanthropy is not really a viable, long-term model… I don’t think the answer is a simple answer of philanthropy picking up the tab.”

The advice of Bill Kling, chief executive of American Public Media, the second-largest producer and distributor of public radio programming, is for foundations to stick with their traditional role of encouraging innovation. “Foundations can stimulate strong existing nonprofit news organizations to move more aggressively into new media. They can create some models of successful regional public media news organizations. And they can fund new experiments in content generation and dissemination. But, by and large the idea of ‘create a new foundation-funded model’ isn’t likely to be sustainable… I have yet to see a viable business model that gets you from start-up to significance in a time frame any foundation could sustain.”

Health funds its own news coverage

On June 1, the Kaiser Family Foundation launched Kaiser Health News, a major startup that could signal a wave of new foundation-supported news enterprises. In the health world, Kaiser will have company. The California HealthCare Foundation recently approved a $3.5 million program, partnering with USC’s Annenberg School of Journalism, that will provide news reporting on California health care policy issues. This model is certain to happen in other fields as well – the arts, science, environment, education – all arenas that have seen a fairly rapid decline in the news resources mustered by mainstream media.

The world of health is leading the way because it has two big advantages: very high consumer interest and, said Matt James, senior vice president of the Kaiser Family Foundation, “there are a lot of health funders.” James said he began to see a decline in the quantity and quality of health reporting in 2003 and 2004, when it also began showing up in the pool of candidates for Kaiser’s fellowship program. “We thought about changing the name to Kaiser Mid-Career Crisis Fellowship program,” he joked. Today, he said, evidence of the cutbacks is “absolutely dramatic. Health reporters don’t have the time, the resources, the travel time to do the good stories they’d like to do.”

So was born, at Kaiser, the idea of funding a health news service that would be at arm’s length from the Kaiser foundation and would partner with news organizations to provide coverage that might not otherwise make its way into the news-and-information sphere. With a staff operating mostly out of Washington, D.C., Kaiser Health News will spend an estimated $2 million this year, $2.3 million in 2010 and eventually $4 million to $5 million a year, with a full-time staff of 12 journalists. Laurie McGinley, a 28-year veteran of the Wall Street Journal, heads Kaiser Health News, which also has its own Web site. Meanwhile, Michael Parks, journalism professor at USC and former Los Angeles Times editor, is assembling an L.A.-based news team that will report primarily on California health policy issues.

This model, in which special-interest foundations establish news organizations that report on funders’ interest areas, traditionally has raised several concerns. For health-news consumers, there’s the question of whether the coverage is somehow shaped by the interests of the funder. For foundations, there’s the loss-of-control issue when a firewall is established between funder and news organization. “This is the first time we’ll be funding health information that we’re not really controlling,” said James.

That these issues have not been prominent in recent months may reflect the starkness of the potential alternative – a vast scaling back, at least in the short term, of health information that consumers need. Said James, “If nonprofits don’t find a way to invest in certain kinds of journalism, we’re not going to see that journalism anymore… I just don’t think there’s a model there anymore.”

Mark Smith, president and CEO of the California HealthCare Foundation, expects to see more such experiments and collaborations in the future. “I think the growing number of … projects stems from both sides: the increasingly desperate straits of traditional journalism, and the desire for foundations to influence events by influencing the media.”

Community news sites

One of the most promising forms of digital news is the community news site – oftentimes just one or two-person operations that chronicle slices of civic life in hometowns and neighborhoods. And one of the most promising hopes for these news models is the prospect that community and civic foundations might be part of their funding base. Like many things in journalism, this is one of those ideas that would have been laughed away even two years ago. But it’s happening with increasing frequency, and some think there’s an opportunity for significant growth. Peter Osnos is one of them. The long-term challenge to community news and information, he said, is to establish the position of news organizations as “indispensable civic assets.”

One reason this idea has promise is that the Knight Foundation is waging a significant effort to persuade community foundations that they need to start bankrolling news and information in their hometowns. In the first year of a five-year program, Knight put up $5 million to fund 21 news sites across the country, while participating foundations contributed $12 million. All told, Knight plans to spend $24 million over the life of the program. “We’re extremely excited about the possibilities here,” said Ibargüen. “Community foundations have billions and billions at their disposal. We think more and more of them are going to find that information has become one of their community’s core needs.”

There are already many examples of community foundations supporting local news sites, with grants big and small. Among the sites: the Gotham Gazette, Voice of San Diego, Twin Cities Daily Planet, MinnPost, Connect SW Alabama, St. Louis Beacon, Chi-Town Daily News, High Country News. Funders go by names like Berks County Community Foundation, the Boston Foundation, the Community Foundation of South Alabama, the Coral Gables Foundation, and so on.

In most cases, these nonprofit sites are receiving revenue from a variety of sources – not just from foundation grants. Many have coalesced around a hybrid model that includes foundation money, NPR-style memberships and advertising sales.

Orville Schell, one of the conveners at the 2008 meeting, said this hybrid style has the best chance of success. “What is needed in the media are forms of support that can be sustaining over the long haul, not just the short haul. This is not philanthropy’s strength.” New media operations that combine some private donations with revenue from the market “make more sense and may be more sturdy and more long-lived,” he said.

Foundations and for-profit news organizations?

One interesting question is whether for-profit news organizations might participate as community foundation recipients. Although tricky, it would not be impossible to set up a framework where foundation money could go to newspapers and broadcast newsrooms to support, for example, specific reporters. Since newspapers have already been beaten to the punch on this by digital journalists, it’s unclear whether they will get in this game. Charlotte Hall, former president of the American Society of News Editors, has already indicated a willingness to consider the idea. “I think one area worthy of more exploration is foundation support for some functions within existing newsrooms,” she says. “They already have an infrastructure, staff and broad audience to have impact.”

Paul Tash, publisher of the St. Petersburg Times, offers one schematic of how that might happen. The Times is in the unusual position of being owned by a nonprofit, the Poynter Institute. Profits from the newspaper (which are taxed just as at any other newspaper) are used by Poynter to support its training and research institute. “Here’s a hypothetical,” said Tash. “What if we gave to Poynter some part of our Web operation, and made that as an R&D project. A journalistic lab. Even gave some support to it from the St. Petersburg Times. Then Poynter might attract some philanthropic support for it. That, perhaps, could be a model.”

Victor Navasky, publisher emeritus of The Nation, contends that it’s in existing news organizations where foundation dollars can best be used. “The best potential lies in one-offs, rather than attempting to launch permanent, new enterprises,” he said, “and supporting existing institutions with track records.”

Photographer Susan Meiselas said the Magnum Photos agency, with which she is affiliated, has set up foundations in New York and London aimed at finding new ways to support documentary photographers. “There are new models to pursue,” she said, “including partnerships between organizations who have distinct roles in news or in-depth reporting which can be complementary.”

CONCLUSION

The uncertainty about philanthropy’s role in the news ecology of the future hasn’t gone away. Journalism needs long-term, reliable, sustainable funding, and foundations and wealthy donors often have something else in mind. Even so, foundation-funded journalism is likely to keep growing. Why? Because the reporting resources of mainstream news organizations are likely to continue receding. Syracuse University journalism professor Vin Crosbie says we may be entering a “Gray Age” of information, in which the news budgets of legacy media shrink much faster than new business models can be created. If so, the foundation-funded news wave may just be beginning.

I have a better solution. Take the lead from those in Media that are GROWING in readership, listenership, and viewership. TELL THE TRUTH. Report the facts and let the American people decide. It really is that simple. The reason the MMD {Mainstream Media Drones} are losing so fast is because the American people are NOT as stupid as they think they are. We are tired of agenda reporting and the MMD telling us what to believe. We want the NEWS. Not agendas passed off as news. We want the FACTS. Not fabrications, opinions, or interpretations. We want truth. Not lies and omissions.

However, as long as the MMD do not have to worry about you, the American consumer, they will continue to go down the road of State Run and agenda driven "reporting."

What is even more sad, is that there will still be some in this country that will continue to believe whatever the MMD tells them, and will continue to give them their hard earned money. Even though, as this report clearly points out, they do not need it. Think about it.
Peter

Sources:
Annenberg School for Communication - CCLP Report Details Growing Philanthropic Support for Journalism

Iran's Hope and Change

Talk about a new day in Iran?

Hey folks,

To this day, after a week and a half delayed condemnation by Obama about the Iranian Elections and protest thereafter, he STILL will not come out and say we will not have anything to do with Iran. He STILL wants to sit and talk with them.

Meanwhile in Iran.

A powerful cleric said Friday that Iran will put British Embassy staffers on trial for fomenting postelection turmoil, a step that would likely increase Iran's isolation and alienate Western nations that have been trying to keep options open with Tehran despite its crackdown on protesters.

Actually it was Ahmad Jannati, the Head of Iran's Guardians Council, who said this at Friday prayers in Tehran.

"In these incidents, their embassy had a presence, some people were arrested. Naturally they will be put on trial, they have made confessions."

The announcement fueled calls in Europe for tougher action against Tehran. Britain is pressing for members of the European Union to pull their ambassadors out of Tehran to protest the staffers' arrests last week.

The standoff is a test of how far Iran's clerical rulers are willing to go to shore up their position at home after the wave of protests — even if they risk wrecking possibilities for dialogue between Tehran and the West, a major policy goal of President Barack Obama that Tehran cautiously welcomed.

THEY DO NOT NOW, NOR WILL THEY EVER, WANT DIALOGUE WITH US! They want us DEAD. All this talk about the hope and change of Iran is idiotic. They are executing people as we speak.

Tehran, Iran, Jul. 03 - Iranian authorities on Thursday hanged six people in the holy city of Qom, central Iran, state media reported.

All six were hanged in a prison, the state-run news agency Fars reported. They were accused of drug trafficking.

Six people were hanged on Wednesday in Tehran's notorious Evin Prison, the state-run news agency ISNA reported, without identifying them. They were accused of murder.

Iranian authorities routinely execute dissidents on bogus charges such as armed robbery and drug trafficking.

Since the 12 June presidential election, millions of people have taken part in anti-government rallies in Tehran and other major cities, protesting the re-appointment of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad following the election which they believe was rigged. Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on 19 June rallied behind Ahmadinejad and demanded protestors stop their action. Demonstrators have since directed their protests at the entirety of the clerical establishment, with chants of “death to Khamenei”.

How does Iran deal with, uh, Free Speech?

Ayatollah Ahmad Khatami, a ranking cleric, on Friday said, "Anyone who takes up arms to fight with the people is worthy of execution."

Those who disturbed the peace and destroyed public property were "at war with God" and should be "mercilessly dealt with", Khatami said in a nationally televised sermon.

Evin Prison was built by the Shah’s regime as a modern security prison to house political dissidents, but it became the Islamic Republic’s most dreaded gulag and the site of thousands of political executions. Ward 209 is exclusively set aside for political prisoners.

Yeah, we should really talk to them. Right? They will change their ways as long as our King Hussein Obama smiles and tells them to. Right? Things are so much better in the world now that "The One," The almighty Obama has risen to power here in our country. {sigh} Great world changing speech. Great speech. However, I do not think they got the message.
Peter

Sources:
AP - Iranian cleric: British Embassy staff to be tried
Iran Focus - Six hanged in central Iran

Florida Crist Can NOT Ask For Diversity

Where is the Circus?

Hey folks,

Here is something you do not see everyday. A Republican Governor demanding diversity, and a State Supreme Court saying Screw You. The National Media ignoring it. I'm not kidding. According to the Sun Sentinel - Crist must fill court opening from original list, Supreme Court rules By Aaron Deslatte

Tallahassee Bureau

4:24 PM EDT, July 2, 2009

TALLAHASSEE - The Florida Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Gov. Charlie Crist must fill a Central Florida appeals court opening from the original list of six nominees and can't reject the names because he wanted a more diverse slate of candidates.

All six are White.

The governor had demanded more racial diversity last December when he rejected a list of six white lawyers to fill a vacancy on the Fifth District Court of Appeal based in Daytona Beach. The vacancy was created by the December retirement of Judge Robert Pleus of Windermere.

Crist's move angered many in the legal community, who fear that allowing governors to reject names submitted by judicial nominating commissions would undermine checks and balances between the two branches of government.

Now I do understand the reason that these "Checks and Balances" are in place. To avoid what we have with Obama and Sotomayor. It is there to prevent a Governor from rejecting whom the Courts feel is the best qualified to put into place a Lackey. But as you can see here, it also creates a situation where the Governor can not over ride what the courts want. In this case, White people.

In March, Pleus asked the Supreme Court to order Crist to name his replacement from the commission's list.

The high court said Thursday the governor must do that -- but did not order it "because we believe the Governor will fully comply with the dictates of this opinion."

Crist said he was "disappointed" by the ruling – but that he'd comply.

"I remain committed to ensuring that the diversity of the people of Florida is represented in our judiciary," he said in a statement. "In respect to the court's decision, I look forward to interviewing and considering the nominees for the Fifth District Court of Appeal."

Pleus' lawyer, former Florida State University President Talbot "Sandy" D'Alemberte, said the governor's goals would be better served by appointing more diverse nominating panels and allowing the judicial screening process to work.

"We never thought that the governor was acting through bad motives; we just didn't think he had the power," D'Alemberte said. "It would undermine the whole system if he were allowed to substitute his judgment for that of the judicial nominating system."

The Florida Constitution says the governor "shall" fill court vacancies within 60 days of receiving up to six nominees from screening panels. This lessens the governor's ability to appoint political allies or cronies.

The Judicial Nominating Commission -- a group of lawyers, most appointed by Crist -- reviewed 26 candidates, including at least three black lawyers, and recommended four men and two women. The 10-member court is currently all white, with one woman member.

So why were the three {Out of 26?} Black Lawyers rejected? Where is the Justice Brothers? Where is the Circus? Where is the cries of Racism? Where is the Mainstream Media doing stories of how the poor Governor, who is seeking Racial Equality, being shut down by the State Supreme Court? Where is the outrage? Oh yeah, Gov. Crist is a Republican. He could not possibly be anything more than a Racist, bigoted, hate filled chauvinistic, Homophobe. Right?

Crist's decision also promoted a group of women lawyers to argue in a separate brief that gender diversity is also important -- and that no woman had been named to the Fifth DCA in 20 years.

Crist had asked the panel to add African Americans -- specifically citing Chief Circuit Judge Belvin Perry of Orange County. The panel refused, saying it didn't have that power. Last month, Crist's lawyer, Jason Gonzalez, said that "questions had been raised" about racial bias in the selection and that the governor hoped to "clear the air" by getting a new slate of names. But Crist's office never produced any proof of racial bias, a point several justices noted in a May hearing.

No proof? 4 WHITE Men. and two WHITE Women. Stories, Lawsuits, and daily news live broadcasts have been done for much less.

The court's unanimous ruling, written by recent Crist appointee Jorge LaBarga, concluded that the governor "is bound by the Florida Constitution to appoint a nominee from the [nominating commission's] certified list ... There is no exception to that mandate."

LaBarga added that "while we applaud the governor's interest in achieving diversity in the judiciary--an interest we believe to be genuine and well-intentioned -- the Constitution does not grant the Governor the discretion to refuse or postpone making an appointment."

{Laughing} Translation? Screw you, pick one that we want. Would it not be nice to see the MMD {Mainstream Media Drones} actually stand up for a REPUBLICAN Governor trying to do the right thing?
Peter

Sources:
Sun Sentinal - Crist must fill court opening from original list, Supreme Court rules

Lori Drew Conviction Tentatively Tossed

Do you think it was right?

Hey folks,

Back on December 09, 2007, I posted this. You Control Access To The Internet My whole point was to point out that it is YOUR responsibility to monitor what your kids are doing Online.

I was talking about 13 year old Megan Meier, who committed suicide after learning that the "Boy" she was talking to was not real. A women named Lori Drew was arrested and charged with Conspiracy and intentionally causing emotional harm while accessing computers without authorization. The Jury found her not guilty of the Felonies and now the Judge has Acquitted Lori Drew of Misdemeanor counts of accessing computers without authorization.

According to AOL News- MySpace Conviction Tentatively Tossed By LINDA DEUTSCH, AP
posted: (July 2)

A federal judge on Thursday tentatively threw out the convictions of a Missouri mother for her role in a MySpace hoax directed at a 13-year-old neighbor girl who ended up committing suicide.

U.S. District Judge George Wu said he was acquitting Lori Drew of misdemeanor counts of accessing computers without authorization but stressed the ruling was tentative until he issues it in writing. He noted the case of a judge who changed his mind after ruling.

Drew was convicted in November, but the judge said that if she is to be found guilty of illegally accessing computers, anyone who has ever violated the social networking site's terms of service would be guilty of a misdemeanor. That would be unconstitutional, he said.

"You could prosecute pretty much anyone who violated terms of service," he said.
Prosecutors had sought the maximum three-year prison sentence and a $300,000 fine, but it had been uncertain going into Thursday's hearing whether Drew would be sentenced.

Wu had given a lengthy review to a defense request for dismissal, delaying sentencing from May to go over testimony from two prosecution witnesses.

Wu said he allowed the case to proceed to trial when Drew was charged with a felony, but she was convicted only of the misdemeanor and that presented constitutional problems.

Drew's attorney Dean Steward said outside court that the U.S. attorney's office in Los Angeles should not have brought the charges in a case that originated in Missouri and was rejected by prosecutors there.

"Shame on the U.S. attorney for bringing this case. The St. Louis prosecutors had it right," Steward said. "The cynic in me says that (U.S. Attorney) Tom O'Brien wanted to make a name for himself or to keep his job."

O'Brien told a press conference that after prosecutors see the written ruling they will consider options, including an appeal to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
"I'm proud of this case," he said. "This is a case that called out for someone to do something. It was a risk. But this office will always take risks on behalf of children."

Steward said the ruling should mark the end of Drew's criminal case.
"It's not the end of the road, it's the end of the chapter on the criminal side, which is pretty clearly the end," he said.

The parents of Megan Meier, the teenager who killed herself, were in court for the ruling. Later, her mother, Tina Meier, said that in spite of the disappointment, she felt that justice was done because "we got the word out."

Tina Meier said she is devoting her life to educating parents and teachers about potential threats to their children lurking in the Internet.

Much attention has been paid to Drew's case, primarily because it was the nation's first cyberbullying trial. The trial was held in Los Angeles because the servers of the social networking site are in the area.

Prosecutors say Drew sought to humiliate Megan by helping create a fictitious teen boy on the social networking site and sending flirtatious messages to the girl in his name. The fake boy then dumped Megan in a message saying the world would be better without her.

She hanged herself a short time later in October 2006 in the St. Louis suburb of Dardenne Prairie, Mo.

Drew was not directly charged with causing Megan's death. Instead, prosecutors indicted her under the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, which in the past has been used in hacking and trademark theft cases.

Wu acknowledged in May he was concerned that sending Drew to prison for violating a Web site's service terms might set a dangerous precedent. Wu at the time noted that millions of people either don't read service terms, as happened in Drew's case.

During the trial, prosecutors argued that Drew violated MySpace service rules by setting up the phony profile for a boy named "Josh Evans" with the help of her then-13-year-old daughter Sarah and business assistant Ashley Grills. They posted a photo of a bare-chested boy with tousled brown hair.

"Josh" then told Megan she was "sexi" and assured her, "i love you so much."
Prosecutors believe Drew and her daughter, who was friends with Megan, created the profile to find out if Megan was spreading rumors about Sarah. Grills testified she received a message from Megan in mid-2006, calling Drew's daughter a lesbian.

Grills, who testified under a promise of immunity, allegedly sent the final, insulting message to Megan before she killed herself. Prosecutors said Megan sent a response saying, "'You are the kind of boy a girl would kill herself over.'"

Jurors decided Drew was not guilty of the more serious felonies of intentionally causing emotional harm while accessing computers without authorization. The jury could not reach a unanimous verdict on a felony conspiracy charge.

I still retain my original question.

"OK, question. Did Tina Meier, Megan's Mother, know ANYTHING about what her daughter was doing? Did she know where her daughter was visiting online? Did she KNOW that this was happening? If not, WHY?"

I'm glad that Tina Meier said she is devoting her life to educating parents and teachers about potential threats to their children lurking in the Internet. I hope some good DOES come out of this horrible tragedy. I'm glad that the Judge did the right thing here. I HOPE you folks out there with kids, will let this be a lesson learned that YOU are responsible for what your kids are doing. Not just Online, but at all times.
Peter

Sources:
AOL News- MySpace Conviction Tentatively Tossed

Bedwetting, Being Overweight linked to sleep apnea

Health and Science for 070509

Hey folks,

You know, it's kind of like when you buy a new car. All of a sudden you see them EVERYWHERE. I will admit that I had no idea about Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA), until I was diagnosed with it. Now, I find that it is FAR more common than I knew, and that it is far more dangerous than I ever thought.

I keep learning more and more about it and I found this interesting. According to Health.am - Bedwetting, being overweight linked to sleep apnea

Children who are overweight and wet the bed at night may have obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), researchers report.

Both being overweight and wetting the bed are associated with the nighttime breathing disorder, they found. However, overweight and bedwetting are not associated with each other.

OK I have to admit something else. The whole overweight thing REALLY bothers me. I really have no idea why. But it does. Now I weighed in at 224 my last weight check. But I would not consider myself as all that over weight due to the fact Muscle weighs more than fat and I have far more muscle than I do fat. Now yeah, I have gotten a little soft in the middle having stayed away from the gym for three years. But I'm back and working at it.

For those of you who watch Pro Wrestling, you know who I'm going to talk about. For those of you who do not, you will just have to trust me on this. Batista. Batista is 300 pounds, without an OUNCE of fat on him. Now by standard charts, he would be considered Obese. But he is not. So the whole, "OH, you have OSA, you better loose some weight," to me, well, is too generic. Anyway, back to the article.

In a “case-control” study, Dr. Joseph G. Barone, of Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, New Jersey, and colleagues performed overnight sleep studies in 149 children between the ages of 5 and 15 with OSA, and 139 matched control children.

They combined that data with information from medical records, including age, gender, height, weight, frequency of bedwetting, history of snoring, diabetes, nasal allergies, and/or enlarged tonsils.

According to Barone and colleagues, there was a significant association between both bedwetting and overweight and OSA.

Bedwetting raised the likelihood of OSA more than fivefold and being overweight raised the likelihood of OSA more than fourfold. However, their associations are independent of each other, the researchers note.

Barone’s team suggests that doctors consider OSA in overweight children who wet the bed, especially when they display other symptoms of OSA or fail to respond to standard bedwetting treatment programs.

SOURCE: Pediatrics, July 2009.

So what this is saying is that if your kid wets the bed, they are MORE likely to have OSA than ones that are overweight? WHY? I'm honestly asking here. What is the connection between wetting the bed and OSA? The weight thing, although I feel strongly can be overused, I can also understand. More weight makes is easier for your airways to be cut off. But bedwetting? That was a new one for me, and now something else I will have to look into.

But folks, I want you to take this seriously. This is a SERIOUS condition. In sever cases, Strokes, heart failure, death, can occur. So if you, or any of your loved ones show ANY of these signs, PLEASE get them checked out and get them the help they need.
Peter

Sources:
Health.am - Bedwetting, being overweight linked to sleep apnea

Swine Flu Update 070509

UPDATE: Swine Flu still alive.

Hey folks,

Yes, the H1N1, AKA Swine Flu, is still alive and well. So to speak. Of course, I am still watching it. According to the Chicago Tribune - Actor Rupert Grint, Ron Weasley in 'Harry Potter' films, recovering from swine flu

LONDON (AP) — The agent for "Harry Potter" star Rupert Grint says the actor is recovering from a mild case of swine flu.

Grint plays the boy wizard's best friend Ron Weasley in the hit film franchise.

Christian Hodell of Hamilton Hodell management said Saturday that Grint took a few days away from the set of the latest film, but has now been able to return to work.

Here is your US CDC Update:

Alabama 330 cases 0 deaths
Alaska 60 cases 0 deaths
Arkansas 42 cases 0 deaths
Arizona 761 cases 10 deaths
California 1985 cases 21 deaths
Colorado 136 cases 0 deaths
Connecticut 1247 cases 6 deaths
Delaware 316 cases 0 deaths
Florida 1302 cases 5 death
Georgia 118 cases 0 deaths
Hawaii 616 cases 0 deaths
Idaho 92 cases 0 deaths
Illinois 3166 cases 13 deaths
Indiana 267 cases 0 deaths
Iowa 92 cases 0 deaths
Kansas 117 cases 0 deaths
Kentucky 130 cases 0 deaths
Louisiana 183 cases 0 deaths
Maine 82 cases 0 deaths
Maryland 591 cases 1 death
Massachusetts 1308 cases 3 deaths
Michigan 484 cases 7 deaths
Minnesota 576 1 death
Mississippi 161 cases 0 deaths
Missouri 65 cases 1 death
Montana 67 cases 0 deaths
Nebraska 111 cases 0 deaths
Nevada 301 cases 0 deaths
New Hampshire 224 cases 0 deaths
New Jersey 1159 cases 9 deaths
New Mexico 232 cases 0 deaths
New York 2499 cases 44 deaths
North Carolina 255 cases 2 deaths
North Dakota 57 cases 0 deaths
Ohio 120 cases 1 death
Oklahoma 128 cases 1 death
Oregon 366 cases 4
Pennsylvania 1748 cases 4 deaths
Rhode Island 158 cases 1 death
South Carolina 160 cases 0 deaths
South Dakota 29 cases 0 deaths
Tennessee 174 cases 0 deaths
Texas 3991 cases 17 deaths
Utah 920 cases 10 deaths
Vermont 49 cases 0 deaths
Virginia 191 cases 1 death
Washington 588 cases 4 deaths
Washington, D.C. 33 cases 0 deaths
West Virginia 154 cases 0 deaths
Wisconsin 5861 cases 4 death
Wyoming 81 cases 0 deaths
Territories
Puerto Rico 18 cases 0 deaths
Virgin Islands 1 case 0 deaths
TOTAL (53)* 33,902 cases 170 deaths

Be careful out there folks. Take the precautions you need to take and if you feel you may have the symptoms, get checked out.
Peter

IWA for Sunday 070509

I know some of you will hate this.

Hey folks,

I WAS seriously considering giving the Idiots the Week off due to Independence Day. I seriously considered not looking for one to award this week, in the spirit of unity and oneness. In the spirit of being TRUE Americans.

Then I saw this. Obama is going on yet another World Apology Tour and is going to sit down with President Dmitry Medvedev of Russia and talk about reducing our {theirs and our} nuclear weapons.

He will also meet with the Pope. Reason? Who knows. Then he will meet with other world Leaders to discuss Climate Change. {Sigh} He will wrap things up in Africa.

Meanwhile in the real world.

Vladimir Putin now Prime Minister of Russia is still attempting to bring back the good old USSR. Iran is continuing their Nuclear Quest. North Korea just fired another, up to about 7 or 8, rockets, showing their skills are improving. Uh, they HAVE nuclear Weapons. There was just a military coup in Honduras. Islamofascists are still trying to kill us. Let's not forget, our Economy sucks and he wants to put us in more dept.

"I think that there have been times over the last several years where U.S.-Russian relations were not as strong as they should be," Obama told state-owned Russia TV. "What I have said coming in is I want to press the restart button on relations between the United states and Russia."

Yeah, he told this to the State Run American Media also. Then they even misspelled RESET, or restart, whatever, in Russian. Could not even take the time to LEARN how to spell it?

Anyway, what does he hope to actually ACCOMPLISH this trip? Will he be visiting Israel? Nope. What about Britain knowing that they have citizens going on trial in Iran? Nope. What does he have to say about that? Not much.

No folks, this will end up being another Obama Apology Tour. Nothing more, nothing less. He will come across as EXACTLY what he is. Inexperienced, ignorant, and easily excused. He will NOT improve relations with those that want us dead. He will not change anyone's minds. He will FAIL completely while more important matters at hand will continue to be ignored.

Congratulations Mr. President. You ARE the Idiot of the Week. What you really need is a moment of clarity. A moment that you wake up and realize you are NOT your hype. You are NOT "The One." "The Messiah. "The bringer of peace to the world." "God." No Sir. You are an inexperienced little child attempting to PLAY President. You are FAILING Sir. You need to recognize this fact and actually DO something to protect this country and it's citizens. My biggest fear Mr. President is that the moment of clarity I speak of, will either never come, or it will come at the price of thousands of dead Americans.

However, in the Spirit of unity, let me help you prepare for your trip. Repeat after me. "I'm sorry. I'm so sorry."
Peter

Sources:
AP - Obama's trip: A mission to reshape US image

Happy Independence Day!

Happy Independence Day!

Let us NEVER forget, In the United States, Independence Day, commonly known as the Fourth of July, commemorating the adoption of the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776. This is the day we declared Independence from the Kingdom of Great Britain.

John Adams Wrote:

"The second day of July, 1776, will be the most memorable epoch in the history of America. I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated by succeeding generations as the great anniversary festival. It ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance, by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations, from one end of this continent to the other, from this time forward forever more."

We have chosen July 4th, the date shown on the Declaration of Independence. We then and now, for now, have the Freedom OF Religion. The Freedom of Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We should celebrate this day like no other as a Nation and we shalt never forget all those that have paid the ultimate price for that freedom. We ought not forget that we HAVE this freedom. We ought not EVER, willing allow these freedoms to be taken away. Not just from those outside, but from within also.

Have a Happy and SAFE Independence Day!
Peter

California IOUs To Go Nationwide?

From the Emails for Friday 070309

Hey folks,

Yes, this one is actually the Friday Edition. Happy Friday. You know, one of these weeks I might just do the entire week from the Emails. You folks out there find some great stuff. Today is no different.

Yes, I did see this. This is just completely unbelievable. Well, not unbelievable, but what I do not get is WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE? How can these Morons get away with this. Oh, TS pointed this out to me, by the way. The article is from CNN Money - Cash-poor California turns to IOUs

I will be commenting on this one. Here it is.

The Golden State is running short on cash so it is issuing IOUs to some contractors, agencies and taxpayers. By Tami Luhby, CNNMoney.com senior writer Last Updated: July 2, 2009: 6:07 PM ET

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Here come the California IOUs.

Unable to meet its bills for the second time this year, the state started printing IOUs on Thursday. Some 28,750 IOUs worth $53.3 million will be issued initially, mainly for personal income tax refunds.

That's right folks. If you live in California, you work hard all year, and you are counting on your refund? Sorry. Your IOU is on it's way.

The IOUs helps the state controller stave off a deficit of nearly $3 billion for July. The state plans to send the IOUs to certain county agencies, small businesses and taxpayers owed billions of dollars.

The state's fiscal condition is disastrous. Officials passed a budget in February, but declining tax revenues have opened up a $26 billion deficit.

So why? Out of control spending and Liberal Loon policies. Some of which Obama and crew what to take Nationwide.

Lawmakers and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger are locking horns over how to bridge the gap: The governor wants to use deep spending cuts and borrowing, and Senate Democrats are pushing tax increases and less-severe cuts.

Of course. That is the Left's main plan for ANYTHING. More taxes. They could not possibly spend LESS or cut idiotic policies. No. YOU better pay MORE.

Schwarzenegger on Wednesday declared a fiscal emergency, giving the legislature 45 days to address the crisis. He also ordered state workers to take a third furlough day every month.

On Thursday, however, it appeared progress had been made and a deal may be struck within days.

"It's time that we get this done. It's time that we move to a close quickly. It's going to take compromise," said Senate President pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, adding that a tax package proposed earlier by the Democrats is off the table.

The damage, however, is already being done. The IOUs will cost the state millions in interest and could hurt its bond rating. And California residents and businesses won't get paid on time.

But you know who will? More on that in a second.

"Unfortunately, the state's inability to balance its checkbook will now mean short-changing taxpayers, local governments and small businesses," state Controller John Chiang said last week.

It gets worse folks. Who needs small business anyway? They have NEVER been important to the Left. EVER. Even though Obama just said, "Big businesses were once small businesses." Not if they are KILLED before they get there Mr. President.

The IOUs can be redeemed at face value, plus 3.75% interest, by Oct. 2 or earlier if a budget deal is signed and the state has enough cash to cover them. Some banks and at least 25 credit unions have agreed to accept the IOUs. Bank of America, Chase, Citi and Wells Fargo have said they would accept the paper through July 10.

The last time the state had to issue IOUs was amid another budget crisis 17 years ago. It had to delay $2.8 billion in payments for five weeks starting in February after the governor and legislators failed to address a $42 billion deficit at that time. The two sides came to an agreement and Schwarzenegger signed it into law on Feb. 20.

Voters delivered a crushing blow to the state finances in May, when they rejected five ballot proposals that would have eased the budget strain.

Yeah, they said NO NEW TAXES, and NO MORE GOVERNMENT. So what is the reasonable alternatives? CUT WASTE and REDUCE spending. But they won't do THAT.

Things will only get worse if state officials don't come to an agreement soon. The cash shortfall widens to $6.5 billion in September. After then, even IOUs won't be enough, said Hallye Jordan, spokeswoman for the controller. The gap will hit $16.7 billion by October.

Who is affected

To save money for education and debt payments, Chiang plans to withhold $424 million that would go for state operations, primarily to vendors, as well as another $141 million in payments to small businesses.

Nearly $200 million in personal income and corporate tax payments would be delayed. Regional centers that provide services to those with developmental disabilities would get IOUs instead of $363 million, while the CalWorks welfare program wouldn't get $495 million right away.

The IOUs can have devastating effects on residents and companies, particularly small businesses.

Gloria Freeman runs Staff USA, which supplies medical staff for state prisons and other facilities. State contracts represent 80% of her business.

"I have already laid off 5 employees in preparation for IOUs," Freeman said in a statement Wednesday.

Now I was waiting to see if they said who was NOT effected. They didn't. So allow me. To recap:

People who get California IOUs?

Grants to aged, blind or disabled persons.
People needing temporary assistance for basic family needs.
People in drug prevention, treatment, and recovery services.
Persons with developmental disabilities.
People in mental health treatment.
Small Business Vendors.

People NOT effected and whom California pays in cash, and on time?

Legislators, legislative employees, and appointees.
University of California.
Public Employees’ Retirement System.
Judges.
Department of Corrections.
Health Care Services payments to Institutional Providers.

That's right folks, Grants to aged, blind or disabled persons, sorry tough luck. People needing temporary assistance for basic family needs? BASIC NEEDS? Screw ya. People in drug prevention, treatment, and recovery services. Keep doing your drugs. After all, you won't care about the economy while high. Besides, once we find a way to tax that, we'll need all the addicts we can get. Persons with developmental disabilities and people in Mental Health Treatment. Well, they do not know how bad off they are anyway. They are just a burden. They can wait. Small Business? Screw ya. You are to small for us to control anyway. Tough luck.

Legislators? Hell no. We are not giving ourselves IOUs. Are you nuts? We need to get paid. We are smarter than you and we are in charge of this, so you will continue to give US your money. You know, so we can spend it. University of California? Of course. We need our Indoctrination Centers to be funded with your money. We are not getting any younger. We need to raise the next crop of Socialist. Public Employees’ Retirement System? Of course. We are talking about OUR money you know. We also have to take care of our Lackeys. Judges and Department of Corrections? Of course. We need to pay those that lock up those that do not agree with us. Uh, we mean, we have to protect the public. Health Care Services payments to Institutional Providers? Of course. We have to take care of the Illegal Aliens.

After all, this is ALL YOUR FAULT ANYWAY. You are to stupid to do the right thing. Didn't you listen to Colon Powell? You WANT bigger Government and higher taxes. Didn't you listen to VP Biden? It's time to be patriotic and pay more taxes. Didn't you listen to Obama? Taxes and high Energy costs are GOOD. No. No, you stupid idiots. You DARED to block us from Dictating to you what is best for you. You really do not expect us to take pay cuts or cut our spending on pet projects did you? Here is your IOU. Trust us, were good for it.

Yes my friends in California. It is all your fault. Not the asinine out of control Liberal spending on FAILED policies. YOU. You voted to STOP the madness. So this is pay back to you. Imagine this on the National Level. 2010 is just around the corner. Get ready folks. You CAN slow the madness down.
Peter

Sources:
CNN Money - Cash-poor California turns to IOUs
Reuters Blog - Felix Salmon

Watch lists, guns and government

From the Emails 070209

Hey folks,

Happy Thursday. Here is yet another From the Emails. This is something you will NOT read about in the MMD. No. That would go against Obama and the Loons that want to BAN all Guns.

The following was sent in by DH. It's by Bob Barr, former Senator and Libertarian Presidential Candidate.

Watch lists, guns and government by Bob Barr
As published in The Atlanta Journal Constitution
Monday, June 29, 2009 at 9:00 AM

The secret government "Terrorist Watch List," reportedly already swelled to more than 1.1 million names, will have an addendum, if gun control advocates in Congress have their way. This new addendum — also to be cloaked in secrecy — would empower the U.S. Attorney General to deny a person the ability to exercise their Second Amendment rights to purchase a firearm.

While it is not surprising that some members of Congress are again using fear of terrorism to implement a gun-control agenda, the openly unconstitutional legislative language proponents are employing is troubling.

Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) is leading the effort in the Senate, while another well-known gun control advocate — Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) — is directing the House initiative. They have introduced identical bills — the "Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009." This proposal would give the attorney general the power to unilaterally and in secret develop a watch list of persons believed to be unworthy of possessing a firearm or any explosive.

This new "dangerous terrorist" watch list would include names based not on hard evidence of criminal activity, but on nothing more than the subjective conclusion by the attorney general that a person is "appropriately suspected" (whatever that means) of engaging in some manner of assisting or preparing for acts of domestic or international terrorism. The American people would never be privy to what criteria might be employed by the attorney general to determine whether someone is an "appropriate suspect," and they would have no way of knowing why they might be denied the ability to purchase a firearm.

If a person were to be refused "permission" to purchase a firearm or explosive, and if they subsequently filed a lawsuit in federal court to find out why, the government still could keep such information secret. In other words, the attorney general could deny a U.S. citizen the ability to own a firearm, and never have to give the reason.

For legislators like Lautenberg and King, who apparently have absolute faith in unelected government officials to make the right decisions for the right reasons at the right times (and never be required to explain those decisions), one has only to consider the checkered history of post-9/11 "terrorist" watch lists to see the folly of such perspective. Stories abound of persons denied the ability to board a commercial aircraft, or greatly delayed in being allowed on board, for no reason other than their name erroneously appeared on some "watch list." Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), and Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), have been among this not-so-elite group.

A report earlier this year by the FBI's inspector general chronicled extensive internal problems with the terrorist watch list maintained by that agency. The IG found numerous examples of inaccuracies, incomplete entries, out-of-date information and inclusion of information "unrelated to terrorism." While the inconvenience of not being able to board an airliner for a business trip or a vacation can be a real headache, being refused the ability to purchase a firearm to protect one's life clearly raises the stakes.

The government already has remedies already at its disposal to keep firearms out of the hands of known or suspected terrorists. Under existing federal law, there are numerous categories of persons prohibited from purchasing or possessing firearms; including persons in violation of immigration laws, convicted felons, illicit drug users and others. And if a person truly is a known or suspected terrorist, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives — as the federal law enforcement agency primarily responsible for enforcing the nation's gun laws — certainly should be made aware of that information. We don't need a secret, anti-Second Amendment watch list to implement effective law enforcement in America.

LINK: The Bar Code

Remember the asinine "Right Wing Extremist Report? If you are not Pro-Death {Pro-Life} you may now be deemed a terrorist and with this new Law, be banned from owning a firearm. But could there be more to this?

I have started hearing some rumblings of people so fed up with our OUT OF CONTROL Government and their CLEAR quest for Tyranny, that they are starting to wonder if the only thing left is a NEW Civil War. I do not think we are there yet. But some are starting to wonder. Now the Obama Administration is talking about THIS? Dis-arm the populace so that this can not happen? I don't know. Kind of makes sense. However, this IS in a direct violation of the Constitution. But then again, Obama couldn't care less about the Constitution. He in as much said so.

Now I do not personally like Guns. I really don't. Guns do not scare me. Idiots with guns scare me. I really think that if you are to buy one, you should be required to be FULLY trained on safety and use. But I believe in the Constitution and the WISDOM of our Founding Fathers. I put more faith in them than I do in the crop of Idiots we have now attempting to rip the very foundation of this country out from right under of our feet.
Peter

Note: "From The Emails" is a weekly segment in the Friday edition of the OPNtalk Blog. If you care to send in News Articles, Comments, Stories, or anything else you may wish to share, please feel free to send it to opntalk@aim.com As always, you never know what you are going to see here.

Government Sanity

We need sanity brought back to Government.

Hey folks,

I'm serious. We are dying as a Country, our Rights are being striped away, and some in the ignorant populace are standing and applauding what they would normally be standing up against. We need a REHAUL of Government. We need the voices of the SANE heard. We need REAL hope and change. But it is ALL up to you.

Let's see what the Looney Left is up to today.

God be with those in Minnesota. A horrible Comedian, failed talk show host, and one that suffers from EAD {Explosive Anger Disorder} is now a Senator representing you. Yes folks, this guy is insane. It only took him and ACORN, and the LOONS in control of the Election 8 months to rig the win. According to the AP - Franken wins Minn. Senate race; Coleman concedes By BRIAN BAKST, Associated Press Writer Brian Bakst, Associated Press Writer – Tue Jun 30, 7:45 pm ET

ST. PAUL, Minn. – Al Franken ascended Tuesday from the ranks of former "Saturday Night Live" comedians to an even more exclusive club, outlasting Republican Norm Coleman in an eight-month recount and courtroom saga to win a seat in the U.S. Senate.

Franken's victory gives Democrats control of 60 seats in the Senate — the critical number needed to overcome Republican filibusters. When Franken is seated, which could come as early as next week, his party will have a majority not reached on either side of the aisle in some three decades.

"When you win an election this close, you know not one bit of effort went to waste," Franken said. "The way I see it, I'm not going to Washington to be the 60th Democratic senator, I'm going to Washington to be the second senator from Minnesota."

Yes AL, "you know not one bit of effort went to waste." ACORN did a wonderful job. Any SANE person can clearly see that YOU stole this. It went like this. Original Vote, Coleman won. Recount, Coleman wins. Recount, Al closer, but Norm wins. It was like "Coleman wins by 1000, no, 500, no 250, no, WAIT! Al wins by 315, OK THAT'S IT. Al wins." {Sigh}

Then this. You want to see what lies ahead for America under Obama Rule? According to the Mercury News - Calif. Senate fails to break budget deadlock By JUDY LIN Associated Press Writer Posted: 06/30/2009 11:50:13 PM PDT Updated: 07/01/2009 12:46:12 AM PDT

SACRAMENTO—The California Senate shut down at midnight Tuesday after failing to approve a stopgap plan to stave off the need for IOUs and ease the state's $24.3 billion budget deficit.

It is all the Liberal Lunatic Policies that has brought California to the place it is now. They can not afford to operate the way they have been any longer without drastic cuts, that the Libs REFUSE to cut. So you have what you have. A State, and if America adopts all this Lunacy, a country, BANKRUPT and shut down.

Then this. You LIKE the concept of Universal Healthcare? You like the concept of the Government deciding what is best for you? Obama as your new Doctor? They have not gotten there yet, but they are trying. Get this. This is from Bloomberg.com - Painkiller Limits Urged by FDA After Education Efforts Failed By Catherine Larkin

July 1 (Bloomberg) -- Tylenol, a 50-year-old staple of household medicine cabinets, and Vicodin, the most prescribed drug in the U.S., may face new restrictions because of the risk of liver damage tied to the ingredient acetaminophen.

Yep!

Outside advisers to the Food and Drug Administration voted yesterday in favor of a ban on Vicodin, Percocet and other prescription medicines that combine acetaminophen with a narcotic. The panel also urged that Johnson & Johnson’s Tylenol be given in lower doses than now recommended and the extra- strength version be sold by prescription only.

Why?

Acetaminophen, an aspirin alternative used to reduce pain and fever, has been a leading cause of liver injury for more than a decade. The FDA proposed tough strategies to limit overdoses after education efforts failed, a sign that it is “taking a harder look at safety” under President Barack Obama than in previous administrations, said Les Funtleyder, a health- care analyst at Miller Tabak & Co., in New York.

“This is not a problem that arose overnight,” said Sandra Kweder, deputy director of the FDA’s Office of New Drugs, after yesterday’s meeting in Adelphi, Maryland. “There is probably not one thing that will reduce the trend of acetaminophen- related liver toxicity. We had taken some actions. They alone aren’t likely to be enough.”

OK. So because some people MISUSE the product that has help MILLIONS over the years, is now being talked about being done away with and made impotent. Because the Libs think you are to stupid to use the product correctly. Not to mention it will give Government more say in more Private Industries.

Acetaminophen overdose was linked to 458 deaths, 26,000 hospitalizations and 56,000 emergency-room visits annually from 1990 to 2001, according to the working group’s report. The drug is a leading cause of acute liver failure in the U.S.

WAIT! 1990 to 2001? What about LAST year? Any UPDATED NUMBERS? How many of them were due to those MISUSING the product? How many were Suicides?

Vicodin, sold by Abbott Laboratories, and its generic equivalents are the most popular drug in the U.S., with about 125 million prescriptions dispensed last year, according to IMS Health Inc., a data research company in Norwalk, Connecticut.

“You have to balance patient safety and treatment options,” said DeAnna DuBose, a spokeswoman for Abbott, in a telephone interview after the panel’s decision. “This particular combination has been around for 30 years. It has a long history of doctors prescribing it and feeling comfortable with it.”

Prescription combination drugs account for half of acetaminophen overdoses because patients intentionally take too much or don’t realize they shouldn’t take over-the-counter Tylenol at the same time, the FDA’s advisers said. Liver damage caused by acetaminophen has reduced the number of organs available for transplant, said panel member Robert Levine.

‘Best’ Prevention

Banning prescription combinations would offer “the best advantage that I’ve seen in preventing” liver injury, said Levine, a gastroenterology professor at the State University of New York Upstate Medical University in Syracuse.

Endo Pharmaceuticals Holdings Inc., which makes Percocet, looks forward to working with the FDA, Kevin Wiggins, a company spokesman.

“We introduced a lower-dose tablet, primarily to give physicians a choice for managing the drug with their patients,” Wiggins said yesterday in a telephone interview. “This has been looked at for a long time.”

Even if the FDA doesn’t ban Vicodin or Percocet, adding tougher warnings about liver risks or reducing the amount of acetaminophen they contain may shift demand to a competing painkiller developed by Bristol, Tennessee-based King Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Acura Pharmaceuticals Inc., based in Palatine, Illinois. The companies are waiting for FDA approval of Acurox, a short-acting oxycodone pill designed to deter abuse by causing unpleasant side effects if too much is taken.

So force people to move away from what WORKS, to a cheaper and less effective alternative? Does anyone else wonder if any of these morons have interest in Acura Pharmaceuticals Inc.?

Your Government at work. The Liberals, in their mind, the smartest people in the room, know that you are to stupid to know what is best for you. So to "Save on Healthcare Costs" they want to do away with something that has been around for decades to help people who may not be able to take Aspirin. My Wife is one of them. My Niece is another.

2010 is your opportunity folks. YOU have the power to bring Sanity back to Government. YOU have the power to FIRE some of these from the Looney Left and at least slow this insanity down a bit. They are out of control and they are taking us down a road we should never go.
Peter

Sources:
AP - Franken wins Minn. Senate race; Coleman concedes
Mercury News - Calif. Senate fails to break budget deadlock
Bloomberg.com - Painkiller Limits Urged by FDA After Education Efforts Failed

Supreme Court Overrules Sotomayor

Special Tuesday From the Emails.

Hey folks,

Happy Tuesday to you. You know, I've said this before. I could do the whole blog just from the Emails. I really could. Right now I have 28 to go through and 5 I would love to use right now. I chose this one because it is another clear example of Obama's Nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor using race in making official decisions and just another case that has be overturned. Something like a 65 percent turn over rate is what Judge Sotomayor's record shows.

Now I'm not going into the whole thing again. We have covered Sotomayor pretty intensely. She is a Racist. She is WRONG on the Law. She THINKS Judges Legislate from the bench. She is a radical.

Now the Supreme Court has stepped in and over turned yet another decision. IG sent this to me, and included this note:

About time.

Reverse discrimination has been been going on way to long.

The Affective Action law started reverse discrimination and it's way past time to end it.

You shouldn't get a job because of your color but because your qualified to do the job.

I could not agree more. As I keep saying, if we are going to have TRUE equality in this country, we have to start treating EVERYONE equally. This is from CNN.

CNN - High court backs firefighters in reverse discrimination suit

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. Supreme Court sided Monday with white firefighters in a workplace discrimination lawsuit, a divisive case over the role race should play in job advancement.

In the split 5-4 vote, a majority of the justices ruled that the city of New Haven, Connecticut, improperly threw out the results of promotional exams that officials said left too few minorities qualified.

One Latino and no African-American firefighters qualified for promotion based on the exam; the city subsequently decided not to certify the results and issued no promotions.

A group of 20 mostly white firefighters sued, claiming reverse discrimination.

No. It was not "reverse discrimination." It WAS discrimination PERIOD.

High court nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor heard the case on her federal appeals court last year and sided with the city.

The Supreme Court was being asked to decide whether there was a continued need for special treatment for minorities, or whether enough progress has been made to make existing laws obsolete, especially in a political atmosphere in which an African-American occupies the White House.

At issue was whether the city intentionally discriminated -- in violation of both federal law and the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause.

In a dissent read from the bench, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg questioned the fairness of the test, which was 60 percent written and 40 percent oral.

"Relying so heavily on pencil-and-paper exams to select firefighters is a dubious practice," Ginsburg said, calling the majority ruling "troubling."

"Congress endeavored to promote equal opportunity in fact, and not simply in form. The damage today's decision does to that objective is untold," she said.

So OK. I have a question for her Honor Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Did she NOT just say that Minorities are to stupid to take a test using pencil-and-paper exams? Sure does sound like she just did. Then notice how she COMPLETELY disregarded the Constitutional question and said Congress. Sorry, the Constitution wins out over Congress. I hope this decision will not only damage the stupidity of LEGAL Discrimination, but lead to ENDING it altogether.

Key plaintiff Frank Ricci and others took promotional exams in 2003 for lieutenant and captain positions that had become available in New Haven.

When the results came back, city attorneys expressed concern about the results, and the New Haven corporation counsel -- after several public hearings -- refused to certify the test, and no promotions were given.

The city said that under a federal civil rights law known as Title VII, employers must ban actions such as promotion tests that would have a "disparate impact" on a protected class, such as a specified race or gender.

Which is completely idiotic.

The Obama administration took a nuanced position on the appeal. A Justice Department lawyer told the high court that while the federal government supported the city's discretion to nullify the test results, it also believed the lawsuit should be allowed to proceed on a limited basis.

Kennedy argued that "the process was open [and] fair" and that the city officials "were careful to ensure broad racial participation in the design of the test itself and its administration."

He added that "race-based action like the city's in this case is impermissible under Title VII unless the employer can demonstrate a strong basis in evidence that, had it not taken the action, it would have been liable" under the law dealing with "disparate impact."

Kennedy said the city had not met that threshold.

The case has received added attention because Sotomayor was on the appellate court that dismissed the appeal.

Sotomayor was part of a three-judge panel that ruled in February 2008 to uphold a lower court decision supporting New Haven's move to throw out the results.

In June 2008, Sotomayor was part of a 7-6 majority that denied a rehearing of the case by the full court.

Legal analysts said they expect Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee will want to ask about her role in that case as well as her comments about ethnicity and the bench.

They BETTER. Someone needs to stand up and say enough is enough. Not just with Sotomayor's Nomination, but with ALL the lunacies of the Left in charge. I agree IG. It is ABOUT TIME.
Peter

Sources:
CNN - High court backs firefighters in reverse discrimination suit

Obama Excuses Others From "Global Warming" Due to Bad Economy

From the Energy Front 062909

Hey folks,

Yeah, Obama excuses foreign Countries from worrying about penalties for not cutting emissions, but YOU. You stupid American, you WILL pay big time. His reason? The Economy. I'm not kidding. According to Reuters - Obama opposes energy bill trade penalties: reports

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Barack Obama on Sunday called a House-passed climate change bill "an extraordinary first step," but spoke out against a provision that would impose trade penalties on countries that fail to cut greenhouse gas emissions.

"At a time when the economy worldwide is still deep in recession and we've seen a significant drop in global trade, I think we have to be very careful about sending any protectionist signals," Obama said in an Oval Office interview reported by The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post.

So he just excused others from doing their part to help save the planet, based on a bad economy. But YOU? The single Mom working two jobs? The young family just starting off. The Retired folks on a set income? SCREW YOU! You WILL pay higher energy costs. You WILL watch this "Kill The American Economy Bill," increase unemployment, and put unfair and completely unnecessary burdens on ALL Americans. To save the planet of course.

You know folks, I have said this before. Let's talk about an asteroid coming to collide with Earth. Some Scientist somewhere finds it. Sees it's path will strike California. The size of it, is thought to be a World Ending event.

America and all others would come together and come up with some kind of plan. Either attempt to reflect it, changing it's course, or a contingency plan to save the Human race by saving some.

NOTHING ELSE WOULD MATTER! The Economy, Trade Relations, employment, NOTHING. The "Talks" would not be put off. There would be no fanfare. It is a crises that would have to be dealt with. What good would a good economy be if we are all dead?

Now we have "Global Warming," I mean, "Man-made Climate Change" that the Chicken Little Crowd wants you to believe is a World Ending event. But we have to talk about it. We have to regulate some, but not all. We have to make people "Feel Good" about doing their part. We have to have talks to discuss what we will talk about in future talks. {Sigh}

Why? Because there is NO THREAT. Those pushing this, KNOW there is no threat. So Obama is not concerned about China, who pollutes more than any other country on the face of the planet. But YOU? You better follow the agenda. You do not have a choice.

Poor and Middle Class Americans: "But Mr. President, I can't afford higher Energy Costs. With the Economy being as bad as it is. I am going to lose my job with this Cap and Trade bill. I'm hurting here Mr. President."

Obama: "I understand. I feel for you. But you have to do your part. We know what is best for you. We have to save the planet. You have to pay these costs to force companies to seek out cleaner solutions. Besides. You will have new, and better jobs in the Green Field, in ten to twenty years when someone comes up with an alternative."

Still to my utter amazement, a slight majority of Americans: "Oh? OK. I'm sorry for questioning you on this Mr. President. I was listening to those evil, Fear Mongering Republicans that are nothing but Racists. Thank you Mr. President. Thank you for setting me straight. You are right. I'm too stupid to know what is best for me. Of course I will do my part. Thank you, thank you. Long Live Obama."

The Democratic-controlled House on Friday passed the climate change bill that would require large U.S. companies, including utilities and manufacturers to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other gases associated with global warming by 17 percent by 2020 and 83 percent by 2050, from 2005 levels.

This is complete BS folks. Impartial Experts have proven that at the MOST, it MAY alter the Global Temps by half a degree in like 20 to 50 years. MAYBE. It will not do ANYTHING to help the environment.

But it will do A LOT to burden and already hurting US Economy. It will also effect the Global Economy. Why? Less and less Americans will have any MONEY. They will cut there energy use to bare minimums, cut travel to foreign destinations, cut their spending here at home. Kind of hard to go on vacation if Gas is over $4.00 a gallon, energy costs for your home doubles, Air fare doubles, food cost skyrocket do to shipping and transport costs.

Let's see. Trip, or paying the Electric Bill? Go to Wal-Mart and buy that new outfit, buy gas to go to work? Go out to dinner, or stay home? You get the point. We already know what happens when gas is at $4.00 a gallon. Yet, some of the same people that were up in arms over it at the time, are now PRAISING Obama's agenda that will do that and more.

So what is Obama's answer to those concerned with this? Light Bulbs. I'm not kidding.

An aide said Obama plans to announce new energy-saving standards for light bulbs this week to keep the focus on energy issues, the newspaper said.

So Obama's answer to those concerned Americans about $4.00 a gallon gas, skyrocketing Energy Costs, and over a million new Job Losses? Light Bulbs. Oh, and do not forget to inflate your tires and for those of you up north, uh, wear a Sweater.

Of course, you could always more to China, then you will not have to worry about any of this. The Economy is bad after all don't you know?
Peter

Sources:
Reuters - Obama opposes energy bill trade penalties: reports