Howard Dean is first.

Another KBR rape case.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080421/ho...

Big Sky slugfest.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/05/opinio...

I love Gov. Schweitzer. Whatta guy!

Howard is a guest on Face the Nation tomorrow.

Shieffer better be nice, or I'll have to send Howard another check.

The most recent findings on income inequality come from the New York Times' analysis of a November, 2006, Internal Revenue Service report on income in 2004. Although overall income has grown by 27% since 1979, 33% of the gains went to the top 1%. Meanwhile, the bottom 60% were making less: about 95 cents for each dollar they made in 1979. The next 20% - those between the 60th and 80th rungs of the income ladder -- made $1.02 for each dollar they earned in 1979. Furthermore, the Times author concludes that only the top 5% made significant gains ($1.53 for each 1979 dollar). Most amazing of all, the top 0.1% -- that's one-tenth of one percent -- had more combined pre-tax income than the poorest 120 million people (Johnston, 2006).

A key factor behind the high concentration of income, and the likely reason that the concentration has been increasing, can be seen by examining the distribution of what is called "capital income": income from capital gains, dividends, interest, and rents. In 2003, just 1% of all households -- those with after-tax incomes averaging $701,500 -- received 57.5% of all capital income, up from 40% in the early 1990s. On the other hand, the bottom 80% received only 12.6% of capital income, down by nearly half since 1983, when the bottom 80% received 23.5%. Figure 5 and Table 7 provide the details.

26.  former
Sun, 04/06/08

The government should represent the people, all the people, not just the business/corporate people.

The dream world..., lol
-----------------------------
24. puddle
Sat, 04/05/08

Reply to this
After we've "deregulated" air, water, earth, food,
==================================

good one, puddle.  Never thought of air, food and water being "deregulated"  toxic and polluted, yes.  I guess its the same thing.

There is a such thing as a bad regulation, but living in a world with bad regulations that need to be addressed is light-years better than a world that throws out the rule book.

That is living in the bizarro world, like Oscar the Grouch on Sesame Street, who loves being irritable and unkind to others, who gets embarrassed when people catch him saying something nice.

The neocons sold "global free trade" as a way to make the Chinese embrace our Western ideals.  What happened was the we embraced their lack of industrial responsibility, toxic disregard for life, and disregard for common human civil rights, and humane work conditions.   and the commies have their people under their tyranny and iron hand, as much as they did 20 years ago.

http://blogforamerica.com/view/24771#comment-1185862

back pages

Dean is also on This Week, on ABC.

 Also a FL congresswoman reinvents the primary rules in an interview.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/1969

yeeee-hawwwww!  there will be more war, my friends...  I love Greenwald's stuff!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nqtL-P8kzo

Danny, just wanted to say once again how much I appreciate your thoughtful thread topics and your attention to the blog.  it's the only shred of hope that I've had that hdqtrs may indeed (eventually) fix the dam thing!  please, make it soon!

Good morning, everybody

I've signed up with Lakoff's Rockridge nation and left this post abut NATO:

NATO is about many things

collapse Posted by hannah at Sunday, April 6, 2008 02:46 AM



1) The expansion is seen as a good thing by members who don't want to be perceived as useless by the US, as the EU was not so long ago. Also, it's probable that a military back-up for the Eurabia that France and Germany are plotting will come in handy.

2) The US has been keen to redeploy it's military assets from Germany and GB, in part because they're not needed and because keeping the families of troops in Europe is becoming increasingly expensive as the dollar falls. moving the bases further east was envisioned in the BRAC process.

3) The missile builders will be happy to upgrade systems and the people who are still counting on a satellite-based missile defense which will never work, will be mollified.

4) KBR and Halliburton will be happy to outfit new bases, built with cheap former East Block labor, ala Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo, which was set up under the aegis of the Bosnia conflict but serves almost entirely as a surveillance outpost to "protect" the oil pipeline and gather data for the wars of the future which, as Rumsfeld said, will be fought in cyberspace--i.e. we won't be sending planes and tanks and boots on the ground, but rather "take out" the enemy's command and control and information and communication and financial systems with electromagnetic pulses, etc. That's why the Air Force is busy trying to set up its Cyber Command to extend its domination of air, land, sea and outer space into cyber space and the N.S.A. has been mapping the global communications systems. Can't take out nodes unless you know which ones so you won't disrupt your own.

5) The people who have a thing about "re-emerging Russia" and "a rising China" are no doubt enthusiastic about the chain of bases being planned in addition to those already functional in Kosovo and Romania. Poland and the Czech Republican are causing Putin to raise objections about radar and missile installations which aren't planned to be built for several years. What I suspect is that the mention of these facilities is designed to distract attention from what's already been built on the mega bases in Iraq where the facilities from western Europe were slated to be re-deployed in the first place--a project that was in the works long before Bush Two gave the green light for the invasion. (I have no doubt Russia and China know what's going on and, if the Iraqis ever agreed to let the bases do their surveillance and "stabilizing" of the region without interruption, would have to take more direct action against these installations on Asia's back door. Russia has not put its strategic bombers on patrol to counter bases that haven't yet been built).

6) Turkey has long proved an unreliable partner in the task of keeping the Eastern hemisphere contained even though, you'll recall, it was the installation of US missiles in Turkey that set off the Cuban Missile Crisis for JFK. A long relationship but not necessarily reliable.

7) The bases in Iraq are part of the long-term plan of redeployment not just from western Europe but from Korea and Japan and Diego Garcia, which has to be vacated soon. The Central Command will be in charge of Southwest Asia and North Africa and NATO will provide coverage for the northwest. Those who speak of US hegemony are merely responding to the plans laid out in the Quadrennial Defense Review and the Pentagon budgets, most of the Air Force portion of which is never discussed in toto, though quite a bit can be gathered from the purchases as they are announced.

8) From the speeches he's been giving, it's clear that McCain is still committed to this alternative to the bases on the eastern side of the Indian Ocean basin that were abandoned in Vietnam and which neither Vietnam or the other members of SEATO are willing to reconsider. If Republicans were better businessmen, they'd know not to throw good money after bad. The Pentagon seems ready to take the air assets out. At least that's what General Mullen said in a speech not long ago. (It would make sense for the Pentagon to take another look at Somalia if more bases are really needed in the region. It's not likely that the Iraqis will ever "cry uncle" no matter how long they are bombed back into the stone age.)

McCain probably thinks that if the US had been honest about the plan for long term bases and that we had no interest in the subjugation of the Iraqi people, the plan could have been pulled off. It was what Kerry seemed to think when he said "wrong war, wrong time, wrong place" but wasn't willing to admit that he'd been supportive of all the planning for fourteen bases and the pressure on Saddam which was supposed to make him "cry uncle." Four million dead and/or displaced later it's, IMHO, too late.

Besides, the vision of electronic warfare in the future is, again IMHO, a gross mistake. Electronics are too fickle. Atmospheric conditions cause them to be erratic. They can't even count our votes right.



 

There never were rules about what to do with waste.  Initially, industrialization actually made use of stuff that had formerly been discarded.  But, as more things became useful through the processes of material transformation, we produced ever more and more lethal wastes which we disposed of in such small particles that they weren't noticed right away.  It wasn't until air and water became obvious (able to be seen) health hazards that we started to try to reduce pollution.  Remember that the first decades it was a matter of "pollution Control" not elimination and certainly not clean up.

The oponents of environmental protection are people who don't want to clean up after themselves.  You know, it used to be that "cleanliness was next to godliness."  Pollution needs to be made a moral issue. 

BTW, the Yale professors' suggestions do not cover the water front.  For one thing, they don't take into account that there is no war in Iraq.  Helping our puppet government deal with insurgents is not very different from what we are doing in Colombia, for example.  Also, from what I know, we have status of forces agreements for the 750 bases we have on foreign soil and they're not each approved by Congress--should be, but aren't.  I think the reason the administration isn't keen to talk about a formal status of forces agreement is because the Congress might decide to take an interest in ALL of them and do a more comprehensive review of our international commitments.

Somebody's left a new link at Hannah with pictures of Kosovo.  The verbiage is in whatever they speak in Macedonia.

in case you know Macedonian

http://edo-makedonia.pblogs.gr/2008/04/apo-to-diasthma-fainetai-1-to-siniko-teihos-kai-2.html 

The best argument for ethanol is a look at the maps of our military bases in relationship to oil piplines and our "defense" budget.

Some info on the Port of Bar, Albania:

 Monica wrote, "in case you know Macedonian"

while refering to her link :  

  So, I went to AltaVista - babel Fish Translation and tried Greek

http://babelfish.altavista.com/tr

Somebodies support that only two are, the human fabrications that are distinguished by the Interval: the Sjnjko' Wall and the Camp Bondsteel.

Yes, it's commonly noted when making reference to Camp Bondsteel that there are two man-made structures that are easily recognizable from space--the Great Wall of China and Camp Bonsteel, the latter probably because it's such an anomaly in the midst of the mountainous teraine. 

TTFN

9:51 AM EDT

Brand Obama :

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/04/04/arts/design7.php

Brand Obama, a winner in the image war

NEW YORK: It doesn't matter where you stand politically, or what you think of them personally. Whether you prefer Barack Obama's policies to Hillary Clinton's. What you think of her electioneering tactics, or his pastor. Or if you'd dump them both for John McCain. When it comes to choosing the best-designed U.S. presidential candidate, there's only one contender - Obama.

Every element of his visual identity has been masterfully conceived and executed to depict Obama as perfect presidential material. "It really is a treat to see graphic design applied so well," said the typography designer, Jonathan Hoefler. "Visually he is on message at every turn. I can't think of many corporations that use design so intelligently."

How has Obama done it? Managing a visual identity is a formidable challenge for any organization, but especially so for one that is as big as his and deploys so many volunteers in a fiercely competitive, constantly changing arena. No wonder most politicians play safe when it comes to design.

Take Obama's rivals. Their visual identities are in the conservative style that would-be presidents have used for decades. Hillary is playing super-safe with a "Hillary for president" logo in red, white and blue (obviously) and one of those old-fashioned serif typefaces with squiggles at the ends of the letters that signify gravitas and tradition. (What is she suggesting?) The only noteworthy aspect of McCain's identity is his choice of black, white and yellow rather than red, white and blue with a military-style star (lest voters forget his bravery during the Vietnam War). The effect is powerful, imposing and unapologetically macho; at least it would be if it didn't also look like an uptight version of the logo of McCain, the Canadian frozen French fries manufacturer.

...

10:11 AM EDT

Clinton ahead of Obama now by only 27 superdelgates:

http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/01/superdelegate-list.html

2008 Democratic Comvention Watch

...

4-5-08 - Removed DNC Helen Langan (UT) from Clinton and put her on the uncommitted list.
Added Missouri add-on Susan Montee (MO)# , Delaware add-on Rob Carver (DE)# , Yvette Alexander(DC)# for Obama.
Added Harry Thomas Jr.(DC)# for Clinton.

Stay tuned... we'll update this list as we find out more.

...

I've downloaded the Yoo memorandum.  It's a pdf and rather large, but makes clear right up front where the problem lies.  He's conflated the "responsibilities" with the "powers."  In other words, because the President is responsible for protecting the nation, he can claim all powers that he might need, whether or not they've been authorized. 

It's really the same logic that supports their interpretation of the election/selection process.  Once done, there's nothing left for the public or their representative to do.  It's a one-shot deal.   

Drive by -- On Chris Matthews Sunday show on 'Scoops and Predictions' someone finally mentioned the torture memo recently released -- it was Andrew Sullivan and he said and I quote from memory - that as a result -- Rumsfeld, Addington, and Yoo should not leave the USA any time soon -- that they would be indicted for war crimes.

US CENTRAL COMMAND FACILITIES

CENTCOM’s strategic basing plan is being developed in conjunction with other combatant commands, the Office of the Secretary of Defense, and the Joint Staff to ensure that it complements the basing strategies of adjoining combatant commands and supports the overall Global Basing Strategy. CENTCOM’s basing strategy will complement the overall Global Basing Strategy by positioning key capabilities throughout the CENTCOM Area of Responsibility (AOR) to enable a rapid and flexible response for the execution of major combat operations in support of the Global War on Terror.

Host nation support is key to CENTCOM’s basing strategy. As such, site selection is made considering the improvement of host nation capabilities while avoiding the incitement of anti-American sentiment CENTCOM’s strategic plan for basing calls for Forward Operating Sites (FOS), Cooperative Security Locations (CSL) and the contingency use of ports and airfields throughout the AOR. These infrastructure sites have been identified to assure U.S. access to enable the projection and sustainment of forces within the AOR.

Logistics Civil Augmentation Program (LOGCAP) uses a team approach to provide services for which the Army no longer has organic resources. Contractors are brought in to augment troops during wartime to provide food, laundry, shower, latrine and power generation services, including the set-up and maintenance of base camps in places like Djibouti, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Jordan and more recently in Kuwait, UAE and Iraq. With contractors providing these basic services, the Army can concentrate on what it does best.

Howard Dean is doing great on the pol shows this a.m. He's working hard to dispell the notion that the nominee will lose the support of the losing sides supporters.

Check out the second part of CBS's show, it's about Iraq now. Their reporter in Baghdad, Lara Logan, sees that the support by US forces of the attacks on al Sadr's supporters has a backlash. Now the fight in Baghdad is for areas that can be used to stage attacks on American forces.
Yep that's right, Gen. BetrayUs has taken sides in this frey ironicly on the side of those most closely associated with Iran on one side and Saudi Arabia on the other. This pits us against the folks who most want Iraq to be the determinant of it's own future, the nationalistic Shia. (Actually al Sadr is not for the breakup into a federalist system based on religious/ethnic divisions. So much for the Biden plan.)

Gawwwwd i hate being correct all the time...

Howard did great on This Week and Face the Nation. I think he likes Bob Scheiffer. Did anyone else notice how the roundtable on This Week seemed to be pimping Condi for Veep? I find the prospect terrifying. Most of the USA think she's a wonderful role model. I fear that McCain-Condi could win b/c Americans are so retarded - actually just news deprived. Buenos Aires is looking better and better - I better buy the Rosetta Stone on Spanish -- can't decide btw Spanish, German, Italian, French - but it's running in that order.

mary vb thanks for the great article on Schweitzer - I swear the guy will 'sell' in the redneck area of the South which is most of it (I include myself Deaniac). Actually down here we used to call ourselves Crackers and now mostly we call ourselves rednecks instead - proudly of course.

And I don't know how y'all have been sleeping waiting for the answer to the WUFT FM classical music trivia question. Who was the first American to conduct at Beyreuth? Loren Maazel (sp).

In her own words - Hillary: Michigan won't count for anything.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/4...

It's painfully obvious who actually controls Iraq, and it's al Sadr.

And yes, Macedonians speak Greek, as they were part of the Greek empire of old.

Howard's not on until 11:30 here, I'm waiting eagerly.

-- volney

22.

Monica Smith
Sun, 04/06/08


I've downloaded the Yoo memorandum.... He's conflated the "responsibilities" with the "powers." In other words, because the President is responsible for protecting the nation, he can claim all powers that he might need, whether or not they've been authorized.

It's really the same logic that supports their interpretation of the election/selection process. Once done, there's nothing left for the public or their representative to do. It's a one-shot deal.
---------------------

Good, one more example, Monica about “representation” inheriting failings..., lol.

That very idea bears naturally and logically along another idea, the idea of “concentration” of power, - very luring invitation for abuses.

In fact, I think, representation is even less prone against such abuses than, say, kingdom, since king’s family bears generational long, moral responsibilities while representatives’ responsibilities last just years.

new thread

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/04/0...

CBS will run an interview this evening with Douglas Feith. He is a good candidate for the war tribunals in the Hague, he, Yoo and Cheney need those life sentences - i'd recommend that they serve it in Abu Ghraib.

http://www.antiwar.com/news/?articleid=2...