Archive for the ‘Politics – The Wrong Way’ Category

Agency Blocked Hurricane Report

Saturday, September 30th, 2006

By RANDOLPH E. SCHMID

The Associated Press
Wednesday, September 27, 2006; 8:34 PM

WASHINGTON — A government agency blocked release of a report that suggests global warming is contributing to the frequency and strength of hurricanes, the journal Nature reported Tuesday.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration disputed the Nature article, saying there was not a report but a two-page fact sheet about the topic. The information was to be included in a press kit to be distributed in May as the annual hurricane season approached but wasn’t ready.

“The document wasn’t done in time for the rollout,” NOAA spokesman Jordan St. John said in responding to the Nature article. “The White House never saw it, so they didn’t block it.”

The possibility that warming conditions may cause storms to become stronger has generated debate among climate and weather experts, particularly in the wake of the Hurricane Katrina disaster.

In the new case, Nature said weather experts at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration _ part of the Commerce Department _ in February set up a seven-member panel to prepare a consensus report on the views of agency scientists about global warming and hurricanes.

According to Nature, a draft of the statement said that warming may be having an effect.

In May, when the report was expected to be released, panel chair Ants Leetmaa received an e-mail from a Commerce official saying the report needed to be made less technical and was not to be released, Nature reported.

More…

CNN Fact Checks Inhofe’s Diatribe Against Global Warming Science

Thursday, September 28th, 2006

– This fellow, Senator Jim Inhofe, a Republican from Oklahoma, is Chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on the Environment.  If that’s not scary, nothing is.  He apparently disbelieves in Global Warming though one has to wonder if the $850,000 he took in as campaign donations from the oil and gas industry had anything to do with it.  The U.S. has lagged very badly on coming up to speed with the rest of the world and this man is one of the major roadblocks.  How can I say this politely?  He’s an idiot and we’re all going to pay for his stupidity.   Read this one – it’s chilling!

——————————-

On Monday, Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK) took to the Senate floor and launched into a 45-minute diatribe on global warming science. Repeating his claim that global warming is a hoax, Inhofe said, “The American people know when they are being used and when they are being duped by the hysterical left.“

In particular, he attacked the news media. According to Inhofe,  during the past year, “The American people have been served up an unprecedented parade of environmental alarmism by the media and entertainment industry.”

This morning, CNN hit back with a segment documenting that virtually everything Inhofe said was flatly contradicted by the facts.

More…

Hired guns aim to confuse

Thursday, September 21st, 2006

Written by David Suzuki – July 21st, 2006

Al Gore once told me that to get politicians to listen, you have to engage the people first. The former vice president is attempting to do just that this summer with his critically acclaimed global warming documentary “An Inconvenient Truth.” But he’s up against some pretty powerful opponents.His movie, by most standards, is pretty good. Rotten Tomatoes, a website that compiles movie reviews from newspapers, television and the internet, shows that 92 per cent of critics liked it. A story by the Associated Press on experts who critiqued the science behind the movie found that they too gave it a thumbs up for accuracy. Personally, I thought it was brilliant.But shortly after the Associated Press article came out, other articles started popping up that said Mr. Gore’s science was shoddy. People claiming to be experts wrote opinion pieces in newspapers decrying the film, Mr. Gore, and the “theory” of global warming in general. Contrarians, it seemed, were coming out of the woodwork. What happened?

What happened was a well-funded campaign to discredit the film and carpet bomb North Americans with confusing and contradictory information about the science of global warming. It appears to be having an effect too. Recent polls I’ve seen indicate that while the public is very concerned about climate change, they are still confused about the science.

Those who read science journals probably find this public confusion, well, confusing. While there is plenty of discussion in scientific circles about what precisely a changing climate will mean to people in various parts of the world, there is no debate about the cause of global warming (human activities, mostly burning oil, coal and gas), or about the fact that it is already having an effect and that those effects will become more and more pronounced in coming years.

Yet, there they are in the editorial and opinion pages, supposed experts writing about the grand global warming conspiracy perpetuated by Europeans. Or socialists. Or European socialists. Those in the know can laugh off such nonsense. But the problem is, most people aren’t in the know. Average citizens are busy people and they are not experts in climate science, so naturally they tend to defer to people who appear to know what they’re talking about.

Unfortunately, masquerading as an expert in the media is pretty easy. All you need are a few letters after your name and a controversial story to tell. That makes news. And there’s no shortage of public relations people willing to spin a good tale – usually for a tidy profit. Companies pay big bucks to have these spin doctors work their magic and make sure the industry line gets heard.

But even some of public relations’ best-known spin doctors are disgusted by what’s going on right now over global warming. Jim Hoggan is one. He’s a personal friend who happens to be president of one of western Canada’s largest public relations firms, James Hoggan and Associates. And he’s so appalled at what he says is deliberate manipulation of public opinion about this issue that he’s started a website called desmogblog.com to debunk the global warming skeptics.

Jim writes in his blog: “There is a line between public relations and propaganda – or there should be. And there is a difference between using your skills, in good faith, to help rescue a battered reputation and using them to twist the truth – to sow confusion and doubt on an issue that is critical to human survival. And it is infuriating – as a public relations professional – to watch my colleagues use their skills, their training and their considerable intellect to poison the international debate on climate change.”

Well said, Jim. His blog makes fascinating reading. It names names and follows the money trail – often leading back to big U.S. conservative organizations and fossil fuel giants. Jim’s making it his mission to expose the liars and the frauds and he’s doing a pretty good job.

Al Gore was right, the people do have to be engaged before politicians will listen. But engaging the people sometimes requires clearing the air first.

Original article…

Dobbs: Voting machines put U.S. democracy at risk

Wednesday, September 20th, 2006

NEW YORK (CNN) — Democrats and Republicans are desperately trying to nationalize the midterm elections, now only 48 days away.

Democrats are seeking to focus voter attention on President Bush’s conduct of the war in Iraq, while Republicans are trying to convince voters that the president and all Republicans should be given credit for the conduct of the war on terror, and the fact that there has not been a terrorist attack on U.S. soil since September 11, 2001.

And voters will also choose which party to support on a host of other issues, local and national: illegal immigration, border security, the state of the economy, the escalating cost of health care, failing public schools, record budget and trade deficits, and the declining standard of living for the middle class.

Voters will be deciding whether the promise of challengers or the performance of incumbents merits their votes. The most recent polls reveal a national public mood that is now more supportive of a still unpopular president and about evenly divided over their preferences for, or tolerance of, congressional Republicans and Democrats. In other words, less than seven weeks before we go to the polls, there is every indication that the partisan quest for power on Capitol Hill will be close.

But there is additional uncertainty about the outcome of our elections that is intolerable and inexcusable, and which could make the contested 2000 presidential election look orderly by comparison. As of right now, there is little assurance your vote will count. As we’ve been reporting almost nightly on my broadcast for more than a year, electronic voting machines are placing our democracy at risk.

More…

Today’s Fiscal Policy Remains Unsustainable

Friday, September 15th, 2006

This is from the United States Government Accountability Office and it is entitled:Â The Nation’s Long-Term Fiscal Outlook September 2006 Update

GAO’s current long-term simulations continue to show ever-larger deficits resulting in a federal debt burden that ultimately spirals out of control. The timing of deficits and the resulting debt build up varies depending on the assumptions used, but under either optimistic (“Baseline extended”) or more realistic assumptions, current fiscal policy is unsustainable.

Simulations are not forecasts or predictions. They are designed to ask the question “what if?” GAO’s “what ifs” are that discretionary spending may grow faster or slower, and tax cuts may be renewed or allowed to expire – but in both cases, the Nation’s long-term fiscal future is “at risk.” Under any reasonable set of expectations about future spending and revenues, the risks posed to the Nation’s future financial condition are too high to be acceptable.

By definition, what is unsustainable will not be sustained. The question is how our current imprudent and unsustainable path will end. At some point, action will be taken to change the Nation’s fiscal course. The sooner appropriate actions are taken, the sooner the miracle of compounding will begin to work for the federal budget rather than against it. Conversely, the longer action to deal with the Nation’s long-term fiscal outlook is delayed, the greater the risk that the eventual changes will be disruptive and destabilizing. Acting sooner rather than later will give us more time to phase in gradual changes, while providing more time for those likely to be most affected to make compensatory changes.

What Drives Our Nation’s Bleak Long-Term Fiscal Outlook?

The long-term fiscal outlook results from a large and persistent gap between expected revenues and expected spending.

The spending that drives the outlook is primarily spending on the large federal entitlement programs (i.e., Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid). The retirement of the baby boom generation is one key element of this. In 2008 the first boomers will be eligible to draw “early retirement” Social Security benefits, and in 2011 the first boomers will become eligible for Medicare. Over the following 2 decades America’s population will age dramatically, and fewer workers will be asked to support ever larger costs for retirees.

Although Social Security is a major part of the fiscal challenge, contrary to popular perception, it is far from our biggest challenge. Spending on the major federal health programs (i.e., Medicare and Medicaid) represents a much larger and faster growing problem. Over the past several decades, health care spending on average has grown much faster than the economy, absorbing increasing shares of the Nation’s resources, and this rapid growth is projected to continue. For this reason and others, rising health care costs pose a fiscal challenge not just to the federal budget but to American business and our society as a whole.

More…

Amazing Suddenly Huge Stories

Friday, September 15th, 2006

by Thom Hartmann

I was on the air doing my radio program two weeks ago when the story came down the wire that the killer of JonBenét Ramsey had been captured in Thailand just hours earlier. I opened the microphone and said words to the effect of, “Today there must be something really awful going down for the Republicans. Maybe Rove really will be indicted. Maybe Cheney. Maybe some terrible revelation about Bush. And if there isn’t, today will be the day they’ll toss out the unsavory stories – like gutting an environmental law or wiping out pension plans – that they don’t want covered.”

Apparently it was worse than I’d imagined.

That same morning – just hours after the JonBenét information hit the press and just after I got off the air – it was revealed that US District Court Judge Anna Diggs Taylor had ruled that George W. Bush and now-CIA Director Michael Hayden had committed multiple High Crimes, Misdemeanors, and felonies, both criminal and constitutional. If her ruling stands, Bush and Hayden could go to prison.

As Judge Taylor said in her “ACLU v. NSA” decision (available here): “In this case, the President has acted, undisputedly, as FISA [the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act] forbids.”

When somebody acts “as FISA forbids,” the law is pretty clear about the penalties. As you can read here, when somebody – anybody – breaks the FISA law, they are subject to “a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than five years, or both.”

Further, in the case of a president or NSA director, the law specifies that federal agents and courts have the authority to arrest and prosecute: “There is Federal jurisdiction over an offense under this section if the person committing the offense was an officer or employee of the United States at the time the offense was committed.”

Judge Taylor went on to point out that Bush had not only broken the law, but that he had also violated the Constitution – which many legal scholars would suggest is clearly an impeachable offense. In Judge Taylor’s words:

“The President of the United States, a creature of the same Constitution which gave us these Amendments [the Bill of Rights], has undisputedly violated the Fourth in failing to procure judicial orders as required by FISA, and accordingly has violated the First Amendment Rights of these Plaintiffs as well.”

But the media didn’t notice. They were too busy with the story of the child-killer who had finally, after a decade, been found and captured. As the Think Progress blog noted:

Yesterday, a federal judge in Michigan issued “a sweeping rebuke of the once-secret domestic-surveillance effort the White House authorized following the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.” The ruling was “a significant blow to Bush’s attempts to expand presidential powers,” but you wouldn’t know that by watching last evening’s network newscasts.

Think Progress went on to chronicle how much time the three big networks had devoted to the two stories that first night:

NBC – 7 minutes 39 seconds on the Ramsey story, only 27 seconds on the NSA

CBS – 3 minutes 23 seconds on the Ramsey story, only 25 seconds on the NSA

ABC – 4 minutes 3 seconds on the Ramsey story, only 2 minutes on the NSA

Within a few days, the story of the President being found guilty of both imprisonable felonies and impeachable violations of the Constitution had vanished from the mainstream media altogether.

This isn’t the first time bad news for Republicans has been coincidentally eclipsed by Suddenly Huge Stories.

Keith Olbermann first compiled, almost a year ago on his “Countdown” program on MSNBC, a list of ten “coincidences” wherein bad news for the Bush administration (or, during the election, good news for John Kerry) was immediately followed by terror alerts that grabbed the headlines and diverted the attention, Teflon-like, away from Republicans and into a media frenzy.

Olbermann’s list is now up to 13 of these odd “coincidences.” An administration that would out a CIA agent and bring down an entire counterterrorism operation just to punish a former ambassador who dared to speak out about administration lies may well be easily capable of cooking up news-grabbing “coincidences.”

And apparently there’s some fire to go with that smoke. As USA Today reported (“Ridge Reveals Clashes On Alerts” by Mimi Hall, 10 May 2005):

“The Bush administration periodically put the USA on high alert for terrorist attacks even though then-Homeland Security chief Tom Ridge argued there was only flimsy evidence to justify raising the threat level, Ridge now says. …

“‘More often than not we were the least inclined to raise it,’ Ridge told reporters. ‘Sometimes we disagreed with the intelligence assessment. Sometimes we thought even if the intelligence was good, you don’t necessarily put the country on (alert). … There were times when some people were really aggressive about raising it, and we said, “For that?”‘”

By coincidence, when Boulder District Attorney Mary Lacy made her first announcement, transcribed by the Rocky Mountain News, she mentioned her work with Bush’s Department of Homeland Security several times, naming agents of that department, and pointing out that her own investigator, Mark Spray, had been sent off to Thailand a week earlier “with little more than four hours notice.”

It probably took Judge Anna Diggs Taylor around a week to wrap up the wording of her decision, and if the NSA were spying on her without a warrant, the timing of sending off a Boulder agent just in time to generate a sensational headline a week later would be no problem.

In a way, it would be nothing new: Republican operatives working out of Utah Republican Senator Orrin Hatch’s office successfully hacked into the computers of and spied on several prominent Democrats, most notably Massachusetts Democratic Senator Ted Kennedy, for over a year from the Spring of 2002 through April of 2003. As The Boston Globe noted on January 22, 2004, the memos were then leaked at useful moments to The Washington Times, Bob Novak, and others:

“Republican staff members of the US Senate Judiciary Committee infiltrated opposition computer files for a year, monitoring secret strategy memos and periodically passing on copies to the media, Senate officials told The Globe.

From the spring of 2002 until at least April 2003, members of the GOP committee staff exploited a computer glitch that allowed them to access restricted Democratic communications without a password. Trolling through hundreds of memos, they were able to read talking points and accounts of private meetings discussing which judicial nominees Democrats would fight — and with what tactics.

“The office of Senate Sergeant-at-Arms William Pickle has already launched an investigation into how excerpts from 15 Democratic memos showed up in the pages of the conservative-leaning newspapers and were posted to a website last November.

“With the help of forensic computer experts from General Dynamics and the US Secret Service, his office has interviewed about 120 people to date and seized more than half a dozen computers — including four Judiciary servers, one server from the office of Senate majority leader Bill Frist of Tennessee, and several desktop hard drives.

“But the scope of both the intrusions and the likely disclosures is now known to have been far more extensive than the November incident, staffers and others familiar with the investigation say.

“The revelation comes as the battle of judicial nominees is reaching a new level of intensity. Last week, President Bush used his recess power to appoint Judge Charles Pickering to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, bypassing a Democratic filibuster that blocked a vote on his nomination for a year because of concerns over his civil rights record.”

Investigations into the “computer glitch” have been blocked by Senate Republicans for three years now, and the data was used to successfully torpedo several of Kennedy’s and other Democrats’ efforts against Bush’s federal judicial appointments of right-wing extremists.

So we have Republicans who have admitted spying illegally. Who brag about it. And who have evidently – according to Tom Ridge – played the media like a violin for years. Could it be that the Karr/Ramsey case is another Soviet-style manipulation of the media?

Or is that too paranoid to contemplate?

Tragically, there are virtually no investigative reporters left in America, and the few who are still working find incredible roadblocks – and over the past year the threat of imprisonment – when looking into the workings of the Bush administration’s intelligence services.

So, at the worst for Republicans who trot out “news” and “terror alerts” to misdirect our attention, this will probably just be chalked up as Coincidence Number 14 on Keith Olbermann’s list.

Thom Hartmann is a Project Censored Award-winning best-selling author, and host of a nationally syndicated daily progressive talk show carried on the Air America Radio network and Sirius. www.thomhartmann.com His most recent book, just released, is “Screwed: The Undeclared War on the Middle Class and What We Can Do About It.” Other books include: “The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight,” “Unequal Protection,” “We The People,” and “What Would Jefferson Do?

Original Story:

Research credit: Michael M

E-Voting Machine an Easy Hack

Friday, September 15th, 2006

Associated Press 14:00 PM Sep, 14, 2006

A Princeton University computer science professor has added new fuel to claims that electronic voting machines used across much of the country are vulnerable to hacking that could alter vote totals or disable machines.

In a paper posted on the university’s website, Edward Felten and two graduate students described how they had tested a Diebold AccuVote-TS machine they obtained, found ways to quickly upload malicious programs and even developed a computer virus able to spread such programs between machines.

The marketing director for the machine’s maker — Diebold Election Systems of Allen, Texas — blasted the report, saying Felten ignored newer software and security measures that prevent such hacking.

“I’m concerned by the fact we weren’t contacted to educate these people on where our current technology stands,” Mark Radke said. He also questioned why Felten hadn’t submitted his paper for peer review, as is commonly done before publishing scientific research.

Felten said he and his colleagues felt it necessary to publish the paper as quickly as possible because of the possible implications for the November midterm elections.

More…

The Mess in Montgomery

Wednesday, September 13th, 2006

Those responsible for the failure to prepare polling stations must be held accountable.

UNTOLD NUMBERS of people were turned away from polling places yesterday in Montgomery County. The official responsible for their disenfranchisement called it “a clerical error.” We call it gross incompetence that strikes at the very heart of our government. More than apologies are in order.

Election officials in Maryland’s largest and richest jurisdiction, one that prides itself on a reputation for good service, forgot to deliver the computer cards that operate the voting machines. Confusion reigned. Some people were told they couldn’t vote and should come back later. Others were given paper provisional ballots, but many precincts ran out of the forms. Communication was abysmal. Many voters who could not make a return trip were frustrated — as were candidates who feared that the debacle could well make the difference in a close race. With important local, state and federal offices at stake, some were questioning the legitimacy of the election even before the polls closed.

The county Board of Elections has one essential job — to ensure fair elections — and yesterday that job wasn’t done. The system needs to be held to account. Board President Nancy H. Dacek has promised an investigation, but her standing has been so damaged that she must consider whether her continuance in office serves the public good. Election Director Margaret Jurgensen is paid $113,033 a year to run day-to-day operations; part of that must be telling the public exactly who and what went wrong and what the consequences and remedies are.

More…

China unveils curbs on foreign news distribution

Wednesday, September 13th, 2006

BEIJING (Reuters) – China announced rules on Sunday requiring foreign media to seek approval from its state news agency to distribute news, pictures and graphics domestically, and warned against reports that “endanger national security.”

The rules, released by Xinhua and with immediate effect, also empowered the news agency to censor news distributed in China by foreign media and delete contents deemed forbidden.

Xinhua did not identify any foreign news agency.

The rules said foreign news, pictures and graphics can be sold in China only through agents approved by Xinhua.

More…

News photos doctored – beware

Wednesday, August 9th, 2006

News photos coming out of the Israeli / Hezbollah conflict have been revealed by sharp-eyes bloggers to be digital fakes.   And, worst of all, it seems likely that US news editors are either complicit or utterly incompetent.

—————————

The recent discovery that the Reuters news agency released a digitally manipulated photograph as an authentic image of the bombing in Beirut has drawn attention to the important topic of bias in the media. But lost in the frenzy over one particular image is an even more devastating fact: that over the last week Reuters has been caught red-handed in an astonishing variety of journalistic frauds in the photo coverage of the war in Lebanon.

More…