Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Thanks to the intrepid Rachel, we finally know the full story of this terrible conspiracy.
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Thanks to the intrepid Rachel, we finally know the full story of this terrible conspiracy.
One of the greatest failings of today’s Conservatives (and many Democrats who have bought into the market is always right philosophy) is the inability to look at the actual facts and reconsider your beliefs. Yet, one Conservative critic of the Public Schools has shown that the real world data is more important than her original assumptions.
Listen to this piece on NPR where Diane Ravitch, the assistant Secretary to Education for Bush I, comes out against No Child Left Behind as a failing program because the underlying assumptions were shown to be wrong and that the way the program works is damaging our children and our schools. One hopes that someone in the White House is listening.
[Note: this is a very human flaw and is one to which everyone is susceptible. The only real defense is to be able to use critical thinking to give appropriate weight to what the data says and having the ability/humility to say I am not fallible and am willing to learn from real world observations.]
Recently I finished an enchanting travel book about Chile and so when I heard about the earthquake this morning, the locations mentioned were vivid in my mind. Called Travels in a Thin Country: A Journey Through Chile by Sara Wheeler, it is great read about Chile, a very long, thin country, no more than 110 miles from east to west at any point along its thousands of miles from Peru to Antarctica.
The book is accompanied by 4 pages of wonderful maps drawn by Neil Hyslop of which this snippet is the section that shows Concepcion south-west of Santiago which is the largest city of Chile and its capital.
Sara planned to travel from north to south, but found she had to start in Santiago as that was the main airport for international travel. But, soon she found her way to the furthest northern frontier town in Chile, Arica, the home of Atacama, the world’s driest desert. There are areas in the desert that have not had any recorded rainfall in 400 years. But the desert, like the high desert of eastern Oregon, has vast mineral salt flats and the mining of borax and other mineral salts provides a harsh, yet lucrative life for those who own the resources.
Arica had its moment of fame in 1868 because of the massive earthquake on the Pacific Coast that caused an enormous tsunami which destroyed much of the town which at that time belonged to Peru. The 1868 quake was smaller than the quake Chile experienced today, yet, the tsunami that resulted was much greater than the one today. In 1868, Hilo was inundated with waves that were 4.5 meters high (greater than 14 feet).
When Sara finally arrived in Concepcion, she found a port city which even in the early nineties had the feel of earlier days.
Concepcion, the country’s third city and capital of the major zone of heavy industry, looked when I left the Ritz the next morning, like a northern French manufacturing town in the 1950s. — p 159
Sara talked about her visit to the island of Robinson Crusoe, an island approximately 400 miles off the coast of the mainland. And just today, Robinson Crusoe was in the news because it was one of the areas hit badly by the tsunami created by the massive earthquake on Saturday.
Sara visited in the early 1990s and found the effects of the Pinochet regime still weighed heavily in the minds of the people. One example:
[Pepe] often came out with prosaic remarks which made the horror of the junta more real than any academic analysis I read. Once, I said that I was anxious to get back to London in time for the election. He had looked blank, and screwed up his eyes.
“Well,” I went on, “Don’t you feel at election time that you wouldn’t want to miss it?”
“For almost all my adutl life there haven’t been any elections.”
Chile is an amazing land, yet one whose recent past of tyranny and governmental terrorism has resulted a society of much poverty with some pockets of enormous wealth and a society that is reluctant to delve too much into the recent horrors. Geographically it extends from the vast desert to the north to the exquisite Patagonia region, through Tierra del Fuego and down onto the Antarctic continent. Reading Sara’s book is one way to start to know the place and to begin an acquaintance with the people who live there.
And in light of today, there is more than enough reason to open your heart and your wallet again to help them recover from this massive earthquake.
On This American Life this week, one of the pieces covered the life of Lucy, a Chimpanzee who was raised by human parents from WNYC’s Radio Lab.
Lucy was only two years old when she was adopted by Dr. Maurice K. Temerlin and his wife Jane so he could conduct a psychological study on how close to human Lucy could become. But Lucy got caught between humans and chimps in a way that she could never overcome. Learning to live without humans after she grew up is an even more interesting story than the one of her years with the Temerlins. It’s a sad, compelling story and one that makes for some fascinating radio.
He thinks Sarah Palin has the “right stuff” to be president. Now that’s delusional. As Josh says, even folks that like Sarah don’t believe she will ever be ready to be president.
… by Walter Brasch
Air America, the liberal radio network, went down in flames, Jan. 21, when it filed for bankruptcy. It wasn’t because of air-to-air combat with conservative talk shows and bloggers. It wasn’t because of the Recession, although reduced advertising revenue, a reality of all media, also affected Air America. It wasn’t even demographics, even though older, marginalized conservatives tend to listen to radio more than do younger liberal professionals. And media history was only part of the problem.
By the 1960s, liberals had become masters at developing and using not only mainstream media but also an emerging alternative media to advance a social agenda. But then they choked, sputtered, and fell into disarray.
During the past two decades, conservatives slowly, almost methodically, established a talk show base that ignited its own movement.
By 2000, with liberals more focused upon the print media and the emerging social media, and having neglected the advantages of a re-energized AM bandwidth that was more adaptable to talk than to music, the personality-drenched conservative talk radio medium filled the vacuum. The talk shows targeted the same kind of audience that the liberal ’60s alternative media had targetedthe socially and politically marginalized who distrusted Big Government and believed in individual liberties. Any emerging liberal network would be seen as merely an annoyance, rather than competition. The conservatives, embraced by Fox News and talk radio, solidified their hold upon the listeners by playing to irrational fears of their basethat the media were controlled by liberals, and that government was out to get them.
Air America had begun as a fresh challenge to the conservative talk show movement. It had a decent mix of comedy, rant, and music. Eventually, it would syndicate shows to about 100 affiliates. Air America had come into a market saturated by right-wing talk radioand then committed suicide by incompetence. Its death was celebrated by a vitriolic rightwing mix of radio commentators and listeners.
Even facing the Recession, diminished advertising revenue, a target population that had almost abandoned radio except for niche music stations and NPR, and the dominance of conservative talk radio, the six-year-old network could have survived . . .
IF it had better investment funding . . .
IF it didn’t spend a disproportionate share of its small investment on lavish studios in a high-rent Manhattan commercial building . . .
IF it didn’t have so many management changes, and so much ineptness among senior managers. . . .
IF it could have hired more on-air personalities and off-mike producers who had significant radio experience. Even the most talented (among them Al Franken, Sam Seder, and Rachel Maddow) had minimal radio experience. In contrast, almost all of Rush Limbaugh’s career was in radio before he became the man most loathed by liberals.
Air America might have survived if it tried to evolve slowly, as had conservative talk radio, and not try to match it in salaries and personalities the first year.
It might have survived if its primary message wasn’t to attack the conservative infotainment hosts but to develop its own entertainment and issues, and to deliver a focused message. By the demise of Air America, conservative talk radio not only had a larger fan base but better websites and outreach.
But, most of all, Air America might have survived if it wasn’t so arrogant. Its hosts and producers ignored phone calls and e-mails from liberals and moderates who were not on its radar as “important.” And, it and many of its affiliates also ignored calls from many reporters who were trying to do stories about the network and its personalities. If the producers arrogantly didn’t think something mattered, then it didn’t.
In the end, Air America didn’t do for the liberal movement what the rest of talk radio did for its conservative movementit didn’t respect its listeners enough to allow them their own voice.
[Dr. Brasch is an award-winning reporter and editor, media analyst, and author of 17 books. His latest are Sinking the Ship of State: The Presidency of George W. Bush; ‘Unacceptable’: The Federal Response to Hurricane Katrina; and America’s Unpatriotic Acts. All are available at Amazon.cm, and other bookstores. You may contact Dr. Brasch at [email protected], or through his website, www.walterbrasch.com]
Paul Waldman writes that Senator Richard Shelby has put a hold on every single Obama appointee up for a vote in the Senate until the Democrats fork over some extra defense funds for his state – a disgusting display of blackmail that absolutely should not be tolerated. Along with the filibuster, there must be costs for such blatantly obstructive actions.
As for the filibuster, the reason Senators don’t have to talk on and on and on and on when they filibuster is because there was an agreement that a filibuster should not have to halt all Senate business. When the ability of the Senate to do any business for the people is stopped because of the misuse of the filibuster, then Senators must once again be made to get up and talk until they and their allies are talked out (*) if only to make it extremely visible to the Public who is responsible for the deadlock in the Senate. If they want to filibuster, then make them talk.
(*) Doing so they can spend their energy trying to convince their colleagues to vote with them with their public oratory or they can rally the country to their side. Somehow visibility on who is responsible for the stalemate must be brought back if there is any hope to bringing balance to our form of government.
Note also, I believe the Democrats could have found some very eloquent voices on why they were blocking the terrible Bush judicial nominees if they had been required to talk. The Republicans should be required to be explicit about their objections in a very public way. Just as Martin Luther King, Jr. preached civil disobedience it was only because he was willing to pay the price for his actions by going to jail that his actions got moral authority. These guys who are playing with blackmail don’t expect to have to pay anything for their acts. Like all bullies and cheats they believe they are above the laws and rules of honorable behavior. Make them talk.
In 2006, Colorado Springs was named one of the 10 most liveable cities by Money Magazine. In 2010 as they turn the lights off in the city, those days of glory seem so far away. Perhaps the prayer shield will hold off the problems of closed parks, dimmed streets and bored teens. Or perhaps volunteers will show that you don’t need government to provide shared services.
It’s broken. Our government, that is.
Paul Krugman thinks it comes from the dysfunctional political culture.
James Fallows points to the broken political system and the consequences for having essentially a gangrenous government that is sucking the life blood out of our country. But he notes that the dream of less government which the conservatives proclaim devolves into a Mad Max world where nothing works (including the private sector) and that is to be avoided.
Nevertheless we are at a terrible crossroads as it becomes evident that we no longer can solve our problems through our government.
A major reason our government is so bad today is the Senate and it’s requirement to have 60 votes to do anything. One thing that makes the Senate so bad is the complete misallocation of power to the empty spaces in our country. The fact is that a Senator from a small state has significantly more power than our founders would have imagined. And then we have the entrenched interests that can buy themselves whatever they want. Which the Supreme Court made even worse last week.
Recognizing that our country and the form of government bequeathed to us has been so badly broken has been a source of profound sadness for me.
Dear Obama Administration,
I hear you are planning to have a discretionary spending freeze to help rein in the federal deficit.
I have suggestion.
Perhaps you can threaten to shutdown things like the national parks. After all, it worked when Newt Gingrich was running the Congress. But then again perhaps you might want to consider who will get the blame this time?
After all, you all (the Democrats) have all the power with your overwhelming, albeit not filibuster-proof majorities. There isn’t a Gingrich holding a gun to your heads (just that damn Wall Street waiting to grab whatever they can). You all are making the decisions of what to cut.
Yours,
-Mary
Do you like math puzzles? Are you a sudoku aficionado? Well, here’s a new site for you. Announcing the launch of NumberFest’s Puzzle Books. It’s got some great puzzles.
This morning a news bulletin talked about the massive rain fall in Southern California and mentioned that the debris basins were full. You might wonder, what the heck are debris basins? They are the football field-sized man-made holes at the base of the San Gabriel mountains which were dug to catch the massive boulders and debris that are sloughed off the mountains during torrential rains. I wrote about this here when I recommended John McPhee’s book which has a vivid description of the phenomena LA is experiencing now. Fortunately it appears that this year, LA has been spared the worst of it.
Cannon said the mountains ended up getting less rain than forecasters had predicted, and that helped tremendously. The most powerful cells from the storms veered away from the Station fire burn area, she said.
…But Spencer and Schmidt cautioned that the preparations won’t be enough if heavier rains soak the mountains.
“We want to prevent a sense of complacency,” Schmidt said Friday. “It’s not like crying wolf. It wasn’t worse, because the rainfall intensity and its duration was not as high as forecasted. If we had gotten what was forecasted, it would have been a lot worse.”
From October 2003:
—
Listening to the news this morning about the incredible wildfires in Southern California reminded me of my very favorite John McPhee book: In Control Of Nature . In this book, McPhee talks about three natural disasters: volcanic eruptions, floods and landslides, and how modern day humans have tried to constrain their impact. The section on landslides is an excellent primer on the reasons the fires in Southern California are so bad and how the consequences of the fires can mean massive mudslides.
The landscape in Southern California has been created to be one of the most flamable in the world and the ecosystem is shaped by earthquakes, wind, fire and water. The worst of the fire season in California is always in October and in Southern California are conjoined with the Santa Ana winds (hot and dry) that help the fires move and grow. The latest studies show that urban growth is now exacerbating the fire danger.
McPhee’s story shows how the fires in autumn can be combined with torrential rains in the winter (the 100 year rains) to create huge mudslides, enough so that in the foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains are found huge football field sized man-made holes designed to catch the boulders that are sloughed off the mountains. The interaction between the vegetation, the fires, the soil and the rain is quite fascinating. And how although men are constantly attempting to tame nature, this is not always something we do well or wisely. This is one book that I definitely recommend.
Rachel patiently points out why the Republican charges of racism are so wrong.
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Her guest, Tricia Rose, pointed out that this could only come because people have so little real understanding about the real consequences of structural discrimination. And even more, it points to a problem in recognizing reality.
So how many conservatives get things wrong because they have little empathy for others and thus are out of touch with reality? Paul Krugman noted today that Roger Ailes might not be simply politically opportunistic, but also illogically paranoid. And Digby caught Sally Quinn believing that she too is the target of a vast terrorist conspiracy.
Perhaps this explains the reason Scott Lively1 wrote an entire book that says homosexuals were responsible for the Nazi totalitarianism. Lively too turns day into night, because he accuses the victims of Hitler of being the perpetrators even though there is overwhelming evidence that homosexuals were explicitly targeted for death by Hitler’s regime.
It is so nice to believe the injustice and persecution of some out group is justified when one feels threatened by them for some imaginary reason.
(1) Scott Lively is an evangelical who thinks homosexuality is the root of all evil and helped convince the Ugandans that they needed to deal with the danger which led to the proposed law to put homosexuals to death.
Recently the Atlantic published an article by Hanna Rosin about the role the prosperity gospel had in creating the financial crisis. In the piece she wrote that evangelical churches serving Latino and other minority communities have based their theology on the prosperity gospel.
Among Latinos the prosperity gospel has been spreading rapidly. In a recent Pew survey, 73 percent of all religious Latinos in the United States agreed with the statement: God will grant financial success to all believers who have enough faith. For a generation of poor and striving Latino immigrants, the gospel seems to offer a road map to affluence and modern living. Garays church is comprised mostly of first-generation immigrants. More than others Ive visited, it echoes back a highly distilled, unself-conscious version of the current thinking on what it means to live the American dream.
Rosin shows that this underlying belief tied directly to the number of subprime loans that were made to communities under the Bush policy that tied the Ownership Society to the Faith-based Initiatives.
One theme emerging in these suits is how banks teamed up with pastors to win over new customers for subprime loans.
…The idea of reaching out to churches took off quickly, Jacobson recalls. The branch managers figured pastors had a lot of influence with their parishioners and could give the loan officers credibility and new customers. Jacobson remembers a conference call where sales managers discussed the new strategy. The plan was to send officers to guest-speak at church-sponsored wealth-building seminars like the ones Bowler attended, and dazzle the participants with the possibility of a new house. They would tell pastors that for every person who took out a mortgage, $350 would be donated to the church, or to a charity of the parishioners choice. They wouldnt say, Hey, Mr. Minister. We want to give your people a bunch of subprime loans, Jacobson told me. They would say, Your congregants will be homeowners! They will be able to live the American dream!
Rosin points to the role the Christian Right has in creating the financial crisis, but she missed tying it directly to the philosophy and financial backing that underpinned the Bush faith-based policies.
Max Blumenthal reports in his book, Republican Gomorrah, that the intellectual underpinnings for this initiative came from the Religious Right through the writings of Marvin Olasky who came up with the Bush theme of “compassionate conservatism.” Olasky was funded by Howard F. Ahmanson, Jr., the financier for most of the conservative, stealth religious campaigns in the 1990s and during the Bush years.
In 1992, Olasky wrote The Tragedy of American Compassion, an argument for transferring government social welfare programs to the church, which he claimed was the traditional and most effective approach until the New Deal – the very policy Rushdoony and his acolytes had long advocated. In this work, Olasky cited his “conservative Christian” friend Howard Ahmanson as proof that faith can cure poverty, describing how Ahmanson “found that poverty around the world is a spiritual as well as a material problem – most poor people don’t have faith that they and their situations can change.”
How many of those newly minted foreclosed upon who believed that it was their faith that allowed them to buy a home are aware that they were being staked out to fleece in the world’s latest con-game?
What is clear is the prosperity gospel was made for the Bush years because what it delivered was remarkable prosperity for the select few.
I recently read the book, Plum Wine, by Angela Davis-Gardner, which was a beautiful exposition on two people, one American and one Japanese, coming to terms with themselves against the canvas of the aftermath of Hiroshima as the Vietnam War was ramping up. One question asked was how western and eastern religions saw the essential nature of humankind. One young Japanese student explained how the west explained the human condition by the concept of original sin whereas in the east, humans did not start out in the state of sin.
Though I do not have personal memory of bombing my family and city and fellow people are affected in most horrible way to befall humans and other creatures since beginning of time on our planet. Yes, Japan to her shame was aggressor in war both in China and America and this ending was brought upon us for this reason. But I think worst thing is use of split atom, human discovery of nature’s secret, to destroy. Perhaps Japan would have dropped same type of bomb on Washington if possible. You asked me, what is Japanese idea of sin. For Japanese there is no original sin. In Buddhism, belief is that human in original state is pure and our effort should be to return to pure nature. Wrongdoings are committed through ignorance and lack of compassion. We are all brothers, ne? There is the saying, that dog could be your mother. This suffering woman could be yourself.
However there is some interesting point in your Adam and Eve myth of human curiosity which I have been thinking of. Maybe we can say that split of atom caused by human curiosity is the original sin of mankind. Other things may be done or learned from same curiosity for good or bad reason. But Adam is like atom, do you agree? The tragic result of split atom will affect all people from now until end of time.
So, what is the basis of sin? It seems to me to that the Buddhist explanation of ignorance and a lack of empathy and compassion and also a lack of awe for the world in which we live are the roots that best explain sin. Curiosity in itself is not bad, it is when the actions that arise from curiosity are made without regards to others that it becomes dangerous.
Paul Krugman provides some perspective on the plight of those who saw Obama as a stronger progressive than he has thus far proven to be. Money quote:
But back to Obama: the important thing to bear in mind is that this isnt about him; and, equally important, it isnt about you. If youve fallen out of love with a politician, well, so what? You should just keep working for the things you believe in.
It’s a timely message for many of us.
Climate change and what to do about it has been a contentious topic for some time now. Although Al Gores film, An Inconvenient Truth, did a terrific job of telling the story about the threat of global warming, too many people dont believe they can or should do anything about it.
A recent controversy comes from Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubners new book, Superfreakonomics, where they posit that we should stop bothering with weaning ourselves off a fossil fuel economy. They quote Nathan Myhrvold, former CTO of Microsoft, as saying: coal is so cheap that trying to generate electricity without it would be economic suicide, especially for developing countries. And, They [the environmentalists] want to divert a huge amount of economic value toward immediate and precipitous anti-carbon initiatives, without thinking things through. This will have a huge drag on the world economy.
But Myhrvold and others who believe we must use coal plants to produce energy are looking at the problem the wrong way. They see the problem as a supply-side problem: because the planet has more people, we need to find more energy to keep up with demand which means we need to build more power plants and drill more oil.
Yet today, experts driving energy planning understand the problem is a demand-side problem: the reason we need so much energy is because we waste so much. This insight comes from recognizing that we arent looking for energy as an end-product, but for the services we get from it: warm water for our showers, light for our homes, the ability to get to where we need to go.
Even better, by getting more out of the energy we use, we have more to invest elsewhere. Art Rosenfeld, winner of the Enrico Fermi award for his innovation and leadership regarding energy efficiency in California, says that through energy efficiency programs put in place in California between 1976 and 2004, California families saved over $1000 per year by not having to build new power plants.
Amory Lovins, founder of Rocky Mountain Institute, has been preaching the benefits of energy efficiency for decades and he says that if the United States used energy as efficiently as the top ten states did 4 years ago, we would eliminate our need for 62.5% of the coal powered energy produced today.
A big fallacy around energy conservation is that it has to be hard, expensive and, as former Vice President Dick Cheney said, dependent on someones personal commitment to using less energy. But realistically, using energy efficiently comes from regulation-driven product designs that deliver more for less. In the 1970s, California set rigorous energy usage targets for refrigerators and the result is that since 1975, refrigerators are 75% more energy efficient than they used to be.
The biggest impediment to a more energy-efficient economy is the lack of a smart regulatory environment that creates the right market incentives to engage manufacturers and utilities in helping their customers save energy. After all, for an energy utility following the traditional profit model of charging their customers for the amount of energy they use, selling less hurts their bottom line.
When a state doesnt get the incentives right, utilities and their customers can find themselves working against each other. In October Ohios FirstEnergy sent CFLs (Compact Fluorescent Lightbulbs) to their customers, and then charged them significantly more than the market price for the bulbs. FirstEnergys reason for charging more for the energy efficient lightbulbs was that they had to recoup what they would lose when their customers used less electricity. Other states which have had more success, have put in place regulations that decouple the profits from the amount of energy delivered, and divide the savings between the utility and its customers.
Bottom line: we know how to make our American economy more energy efficient. And for the developing world this works better in providing enough energy for their needs than building more coal power plants.
Of all the excuses for not strongly pursuing energy efficiency and alternative renewable energy resources, concerns about bankrupting our economy and condemning the poor to an energy-starved future by not exploiting coal has to be one of the dumbest.
[I wrote this originally for the Commonweal Institute Progressive OPED program.]