This talk to a a strategic conference is almost a year old but it is still right on point. Senator McCain has a good grasp of the situation but I fear that Senator Obama does not.
THE EMERGING PATTERN OF GEOPOLITICS by Peter W. Rodman
September 2007
The theme of this conference is especially important. Iraq and Afghanistan, important as they are, do not exhaust the strategic landscape. There is a global strategic environment, which presents many challenges in many different regions of the world that bear close attention in their own right. In fact, that global environment forms the context in which we should be thinking about Iraq and Afghanistan. One of the reasons it is so important how well we do in Iraq and Afghanistan is its impact on American credibility—a precious commodity that will affect our success in these other theaters. I have chosen for my topic the phrase “The Emerging Pattern of Geopolitics” because I do see a pattern emerging. For a long time, it was not clear what to call the post-Cold War world. I still do not have a name for it, but we can see already, in my view, two dominantfeatures of the world we are in:
• One is what we call the Global War on Terrorism, but it is really an assault against the West by Islamist extremism, which is a virulent political ideology feeding on centuries of historical and cultural resentments. I would also argue that this ideological challenge is taking on a new geopolitical form, as Iran attempts to make itself the leader of it. Follow the link for the entire article: The Emerging Pattern of Geopolitics.
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
The Thrill is Gone
The following was received by email today:
"The Thrill Is Gone WSJ Editorial July 29, 2008; Page A16
That was a brief fling, even by European romantic standards. One day after his speech before an adulating Berlin crowd last week, Barack Obama said more NATO troops would allow the U.S. to cut its presence in Afghanistan. The "billions of dollars" saved, he told CNN on Friday, could "finance lower taxes for middle-class families."
Ah, not so fast. On Sunday the Secretary General of the opposition German Free Democrats, Dieter Niebel, responded to Mr. Obama by telling the Bild am Sonntag that "Under no circumstances will the German taxpayer pay with more money and more troops for Afghanistan for tax cuts in the U.S."
Erwin Huber, chairman of the center-right Christian Social Union of Bavaria, called Mr. Obama's statement "a disappointment for Europe and Germany." Mr. Huber, who belongs to the sister party of Chancellor Angela Merkel's Christian Democrats, also said that "it is the opposite of solidarity and partnership when one side is to make more sacrifices and the other gains an advantage from it."
Welcome to President Bush's world, Senator Obama. The myth is that Mr. Bush's "unilateralism" has so antagonized America's allies that they will rush to share more of the war burden once the Texan is back in Crawford. But Europeans have long enjoyed the free ride of U.S. military protection while enjoying even more their freedom to criticize how that protection is provided. Mr. Obama's attempt to link European security commitments to American tax cuts was the kind of "unilateral" political faux pas that won't make European defense burden-sharing any more likely."
"The Thrill Is Gone WSJ Editorial July 29, 2008; Page A16
That was a brief fling, even by European romantic standards. One day after his speech before an adulating Berlin crowd last week, Barack Obama said more NATO troops would allow the U.S. to cut its presence in Afghanistan. The "billions of dollars" saved, he told CNN on Friday, could "finance lower taxes for middle-class families."
Ah, not so fast. On Sunday the Secretary General of the opposition German Free Democrats, Dieter Niebel, responded to Mr. Obama by telling the Bild am Sonntag that "Under no circumstances will the German taxpayer pay with more money and more troops for Afghanistan for tax cuts in the U.S."
Erwin Huber, chairman of the center-right Christian Social Union of Bavaria, called Mr. Obama's statement "a disappointment for Europe and Germany." Mr. Huber, who belongs to the sister party of Chancellor Angela Merkel's Christian Democrats, also said that "it is the opposite of solidarity and partnership when one side is to make more sacrifices and the other gains an advantage from it."
Welcome to President Bush's world, Senator Obama. The myth is that Mr. Bush's "unilateralism" has so antagonized America's allies that they will rush to share more of the war burden once the Texan is back in Crawford. But Europeans have long enjoyed the free ride of U.S. military protection while enjoying even more their freedom to criticize how that protection is provided. Mr. Obama's attempt to link European security commitments to American tax cuts was the kind of "unilateral" political faux pas that won't make European defense burden-sharing any more likely."
Monday, July 28, 2008
Nuclear Power Plants for South Carolina
I noticed in Sunday's Aiken Standard that our State Legislature passed a law in 2007 which mandates that all costs of building the two nuclear power plants in South Carolina be paid by the ratepayers (read customers). Neither the company nor the stockholders of the company will be at risk. They will, of course, continue to reap a guaranteed profit from all of their operations regardless of the costs. Wouldn't it be nice if they had to reimburse the customers for excessive costs or all costs if they fail to complete the construction of the power plants! I wonder how the Aiken delegation voted on this law?
I support the construction of nuclear plants as part of the solution to our energy problems; I just think the companies building the sites should bear some of the risk.
I support the construction of nuclear plants as part of the solution to our energy problems; I just think the companies building the sites should bear some of the risk.
Gas tax holiday talk dies; Congress eyes increase instead
Associated Press
WASHINGTON — The political vision of a summer gas tax holiday died a quick death in Congress, losing to a view that federal excise taxes on gasoline and diesel fuel will have to go up if they go anywhere.
Despite calls from the presidential campaign trail for a Memorial Day-to-Labor Day tax freeze, lawmakers quickly concluded — with a prod from the construction industry — that having $9 billion less to spend on highways could create a pre-election specter of thousands of lost jobs.
Now, lawmakers quietly are talking about raising fuel taxes by a dime from the current 18.4 cents a gallon on gasoline and 24.3 cents on diesel fuel.
With gas prices setting records daily, Republican presidential hopeful John McCain and former Democratic candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton called for a 90-day suspension of the federal fuel tax to give drivers a little relief at the pump. The fuel taxes go into the Highway Trust Fund, which is used for road construction and repair and mass transit.
Clinton suggested making up for the loss by imposing a windfall profit tax on oil companies, an idea that Republicans rejected. McCain said the money could come out of the general Treasury fund, in effect adding to the federal deficit, and still is getting mileage from the idea.
"Some economists don't think much of my gas tax holiday," he said in a speech this month. "But the American people like it, and so do small business owners."
Barack Obama, the likely Democratic nominee, opposed the idea from the beginning and the White House gave it a cold shoulder. Depriving the 52-year-old Highway Trust Fund of $9 billion at a time when it is heading into the red doomed the notion of a gas tax holiday in Congress.
The chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Rep. James Oberstar, and the chairman of the highway subcommittee, Rep. Peter DeFazio, presented fellow lawmakers with a list of how many jobs and how much money each state would lose. It ranged from $30 million and 1,000 jobs in Vermont to $664 million and 23,000 jobs in California.
"Because the trust fund is already looking at a looming shortfall, it would have moved project cancellations into the construction season," DeFazio, D-Ore., said in an interview. He said it was "highly unlikely" that oil companies would have passed savings along to consumers.
Just three years ago, that trust fund enjoyed a surplus of $10 billion. Even without a tax freeze, the fund is projected to finish 2009 with a deficit of $3 billion. That could grow as Americans drive less and buy less gas because of higher pump prices.
The consequence is that only about $27 billion in federal money will be available next year to states and local governments for new infrastructure investment even though the current highway act calls for spending $41 billion a year. For many, the solution is to raise rather than suspend or cut federal fuel taxes, which haven't changed since 1993.
The Transportation Construction Coalition, a group of industry companies and unions, said that if Congress does not do something about the shortfall, states will lose about one-third of their road and bridge money in the budget year starting Oct. 1. That would put 485,000 more jobs at risk.
That message carried the day this summer. But now Congress has the bigger task of dealing with the short-term deficit crisis in the fund and coming up with a new spending plan, including revisiting the gas tax issue, when the current six-year, $286 billion highway-transit act expires in September 2009.
Senate Democrats in May tried to add $5 billion to an aviation overhaul bill to replenish the highway trust fund next year; Republicans objected. Democrats tried again in June, but this time for $8 billion; Republicans objected to that, too.
Congress should first reduce spending on pet projects, known as earmarks, argued Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C. "I'm not going to let the Senate spend all this money when nobody is looking, especially when we refuse to stop wasting billions of taxpayer dollars on earmarks."
Oberstar, D-Minn., said his committee is working on the next long-term highway bill. He estimated it will take between $450 billion and $500 billion over six years to address safety and congestion issues with highways, bridges and transit systems.
"We'll put all things on the table," Oberstar said, but the gas tax "is the cornerstone. Nothing else will work without the underpinning of the higher user fee gas tax."
At the very least, the gas tax should be indexed to construction cost inflation, DeFazio said.
The nonpartisan National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission concluded in a report this year that the U.S. needs to spend $225 billion annually over the next 50 years to create a highway and transit system capable of sustaining strong economic growth. Current spending, at federal, state and local levels, is about $90 billion a year.
Among other revenue-raising possibilities, the commission recommended gradually increasing the current federal fuel taxes to 40 cents a gallon.
The American Road & Transportation Builders Association is calling for a 10-cent-a-gallon raise and indexing the tax to inflation. With construction costs soaring because of competition for building materials from China and other developing nations, the tax rate would have to be about 29 cents a gallon to achieve the same purchasing power as the 18.4-cent rate imposed in 1993, the association says.
Including state and local levies, people in the U.S. pay about 47 cents on average in taxes for a gallon of gasoline. Fuel in many European countries costs $8 to $9 a gallon, with half or more of that going to taxes.
Other ideas that will be on the table when lawmakers write a bill next year include more toll roads and public-private partnerships, congestion pricing and user fees where drivers pay a tax based on how many miles they drive.
Democrat Senate Passed 94% of Bills without Debate or Roll Call Vote
Democrat Senate Passed 94% of Bills without Debate or Roll Call Vote
Monday, July 28, 2008
By Josiah Ryan, Staff Writer
Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.)
Jim DeMint (R-S.C.)
Monday, July 28, 2008
By Josiah Ryan, Staff Writer
Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.)
On the Spot (CNSNews.com) - Sens. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) dismissed Democratic claims of obstructionism and expressed outrage last week over a government report that shows the majority of bills that have passed in the Democrat-controlled Senate of the 110th Congress have done so without any debate or even a vote.
“The U.S. Senate has a nine percent approval rating, because the American people believe that much of our work is done in secret with no debate, no transparency and no accountability,” Coburn told reporters at press conference Wednesday at the Capitol.
“This report shows that the reality is worse than the public’s fears. Instead of encouraging open debate, I’m disappointed that Majority Leader Reid often chooses secrecy or demagoguery,” he added.
Coburn was referring to a non-partisan study released on June 10 by the government’s Congressional Research Service (CRS), which indicates that 855 of the 911 bills passed by the Senate of the 110th Congress have been streamlined by Democratic Party leadership with a procedural tactic known as Unanimous Consent (UC), which requires no debate or even a vote.
With the Senate’s traditional August recess about to start, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has repeatedly accused Republicans, however, and especially Coburn and DeMint, of blocking UC on legislation that he says is critical to the well-being of many Americans.
“The U.S. Senate has a nine percent approval rating, because the American people believe that much of our work is done in secret with no debate, no transparency and no accountability,” Coburn told reporters at press conference Wednesday at the Capitol.
“This report shows that the reality is worse than the public’s fears. Instead of encouraging open debate, I’m disappointed that Majority Leader Reid often chooses secrecy or demagoguery,” he added.
Coburn was referring to a non-partisan study released on June 10 by the government’s Congressional Research Service (CRS), which indicates that 855 of the 911 bills passed by the Senate of the 110th Congress have been streamlined by Democratic Party leadership with a procedural tactic known as Unanimous Consent (UC), which requires no debate or even a vote.
With the Senate’s traditional August recess about to start, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has repeatedly accused Republicans, however, and especially Coburn and DeMint, of blocking UC on legislation that he says is critical to the well-being of many Americans.
Jim DeMint (R-S.C.)
Coburn and DeMint have a reputation for reading and objecting to bills that would have otherwise passed without debate or objection, Bryan Darling, director of Senate relations for the conservative Heritage Foundation, told CNSNews.com.
Reid has also objected to a procedural tactic know as filibuster, which Republicans have used to block legislation they oppose.
“I had out here earlier today our Velcro chart, 79 [Republican] filibusters,” said Reid on June 25. “Is it any wonder that the House seats that came up during the off-year went Democratic? Is it any wonder that the State of Mississippi sent us a Democratic House Member? ... It is no wonder because they see what is going on over here.”
Reid was referring to a flip chart that the Democrats use to tally the number of GOP filibusters. As of Friday, July 25, there were 85 Republican filibusters, according to Reid’s press office.
On Thursday, Reid introduced the Advance America's Priorities Act, which is nicknamed the “Coburn Omnibus” because it patches together 40 bills, many of which Coburn has already stopped from passing through the Senate by Unanimous Consent.
Reid’s press secretary, Jim Manley, told The Hill on June 27 that the omnibus is a reaction to Coburn’s obstruction.
"Look what happened last time we did this: Sen. Coburn held up action on dozens of bills for narrow, personal reasons, demanding debate and four amendments,” said Manley.
“These bills were held up for months. The Senate had to waste precious time to allow him to offer a few amendments. That is not debate and amendment. It is abuse, obstruction and delay," he said.
"Things have gotten so bad that Republican senators have approached Reid to ask that their bills be included in the package," Manley added.
But Coburn said on Wednesday that forcing costly bills before Congress right before a recess is typical of the Democratic leadership’s approach to legislating.
“They [Democrats] have tried to ram them [bills] through right before recess to pressure us to give up,” said Coburn. “But senators shouldn’t fear debate on these important bills.
“It’s in the best traditions of our republic to demand the Senate actually do its job and have a public debate on bills that expand government and increase the burden on taxpayers. Senator Reid can complain all he wants, but Republicans represent millions of Americans whose voices are being silenced by Democrat strong-arm tactics,” he added.
Reid has also objected to a procedural tactic know as filibuster, which Republicans have used to block legislation they oppose.
“I had out here earlier today our Velcro chart, 79 [Republican] filibusters,” said Reid on June 25. “Is it any wonder that the House seats that came up during the off-year went Democratic? Is it any wonder that the State of Mississippi sent us a Democratic House Member? ... It is no wonder because they see what is going on over here.”
Reid was referring to a flip chart that the Democrats use to tally the number of GOP filibusters. As of Friday, July 25, there were 85 Republican filibusters, according to Reid’s press office.
On Thursday, Reid introduced the Advance America's Priorities Act, which is nicknamed the “Coburn Omnibus” because it patches together 40 bills, many of which Coburn has already stopped from passing through the Senate by Unanimous Consent.
Reid’s press secretary, Jim Manley, told The Hill on June 27 that the omnibus is a reaction to Coburn’s obstruction.
"Look what happened last time we did this: Sen. Coburn held up action on dozens of bills for narrow, personal reasons, demanding debate and four amendments,” said Manley.
“These bills were held up for months. The Senate had to waste precious time to allow him to offer a few amendments. That is not debate and amendment. It is abuse, obstruction and delay," he said.
"Things have gotten so bad that Republican senators have approached Reid to ask that their bills be included in the package," Manley added.
But Coburn said on Wednesday that forcing costly bills before Congress right before a recess is typical of the Democratic leadership’s approach to legislating.
“They [Democrats] have tried to ram them [bills] through right before recess to pressure us to give up,” said Coburn. “But senators shouldn’t fear debate on these important bills.
“It’s in the best traditions of our republic to demand the Senate actually do its job and have a public debate on bills that expand government and increase the burden on taxpayers. Senator Reid can complain all he wants, but Republicans represent millions of Americans whose voices are being silenced by Democrat strong-arm tactics,” he added.
Sunday, July 27, 2008
MISSING FROM BERLIN SPEECH
The following is the first paragraph of an excellent column published today in the Boston Globe. A link to the entire piece appears below:
Missing from that Berlin speech
EmailPrintSingle Page Text size – + By Jeff Jacoby
July 27, 2008
BARACK OBAMA had ample reason to recall the Berlin Airlift of 1948 during his dramatic speech in the German capital last week. The airlift was an early and critical success for the West in the Cold War, with clear relevance to our own time, the war in Iraq, and the free world's conflict with radical Islam. But having reached back 60 years to that pivotal hour of American leadership, Obama proceeded to draw from it exactly the wrong lessons.
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/07/27/missing_from_that_berlin_speech/
Missing from that Berlin speech
EmailPrintSingle Page Text size – + By Jeff Jacoby
July 27, 2008
BARACK OBAMA had ample reason to recall the Berlin Airlift of 1948 during his dramatic speech in the German capital last week. The airlift was an early and critical success for the West in the Cold War, with clear relevance to our own time, the war in Iraq, and the free world's conflict with radical Islam. But having reached back 60 years to that pivotal hour of American leadership, Obama proceeded to draw from it exactly the wrong lessons.
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/07/27/missing_from_that_berlin_speech/
STRONG LEADERSHIP NEEDED TODAY
The following letter by Jet Beckum was published in the Aiken Standard a few days ago. Jet is a frequent contributor of letters to the Aiken Standard and often appears at City Council meetings to comment on matters under consideration.
“With the election of Lincoln in 1860 the Southern states decided it was time to break away from the union and start a new nation. Of course. we know the story and its consequences. Lincoln's position was to preserve the union at all costs ‑ a huge cost of 650.000 Americans.
More important the war's devastation to the South would be felt over a hundred years and many think it has not completely recovered today. History has judged Lincoln as one of our greatest presidents.
Lincoln had very, little support from Congress for the war. Most Democrats wanted a compromise, and military leaders had little desire to fight their own countrymen. The press in many Northern cities was totally against the war and said so with such ferocity that Lincoln shut down their dissent by closing the newspapers. Lincoln was no Rock Star. It is said that Lincoln prayed on his knees every night for God to help him through each day.
I think the point of this letter is many things change but many things remain the same. Hopefully, we have in the future, men that will have the character to lead this nation because if history is any indication it will be a lonely and unappreciative job. The press, politicians and people in general revel in Monday morning quarterbacking. Leadership is not afforded this luxury.”
”
“With the election of Lincoln in 1860 the Southern states decided it was time to break away from the union and start a new nation. Of course. we know the story and its consequences. Lincoln's position was to preserve the union at all costs ‑ a huge cost of 650.000 Americans.
More important the war's devastation to the South would be felt over a hundred years and many think it has not completely recovered today. History has judged Lincoln as one of our greatest presidents.
Lincoln had very, little support from Congress for the war. Most Democrats wanted a compromise, and military leaders had little desire to fight their own countrymen. The press in many Northern cities was totally against the war and said so with such ferocity that Lincoln shut down their dissent by closing the newspapers. Lincoln was no Rock Star. It is said that Lincoln prayed on his knees every night for God to help him through each day.
I think the point of this letter is many things change but many things remain the same. Hopefully, we have in the future, men that will have the character to lead this nation because if history is any indication it will be a lonely and unappreciative job. The press, politicians and people in general revel in Monday morning quarterbacking. Leadership is not afforded this luxury.”
”
Friday, July 25, 2008
AN ENLIGHTENED VIEW
“He ventured forth to bring light to the world"
"The anointed one's pilgrimage to the Holy Land is a miracle in action - and a blessing to all his faithful followers”---------
The above quote is the lead on a story by Gerard Baker about Obama’s grand tour that appears on the Times Online website today. It is very clever and well worth the read. Times Online
"The anointed one's pilgrimage to the Holy Land is a miracle in action - and a blessing to all his faithful followers”---------
The above quote is the lead on a story by Gerard Baker about Obama’s grand tour that appears on the Times Online website today. It is very clever and well worth the read. Times Online
Thursday, July 24, 2008
HOW TO DRAW A CROWD
The following email was received from a good friend today and I think it helps explain some of the the young crowds coming to see Candidate Obama.
"Remember back in May when media gushed and fawned over a huge crowd in Portland, Oregon -- supposedly gathered to hear the words of Democrat presidential candidate Barack Obama -- but chose not to report the free concert given before his speech?
Well, it has been learned that before the presumptive Democrat nominee spoke to a crowd in Berlin Thursday, two popular German acts -- reggae artist Patrice and rock band Reamonn -- entertained the gathering audience.
Will media report this tonight, or just gush and fawn over the huge crowd again?
While you ponder, here's what was reported by Spiegel Online moments ago (h/t Hot Air and Gateway):
++ Pop Concert for Obama Fans ++
6:33 p.m.: The tens of thousands of Obama fans are being entertained as they await the senator. The reggae musician Patrice kicked things off, followed by the rock band Reamonn.
I'm sure this will be part of ALL media reports concerning this speech...not!"
"Remember back in May when media gushed and fawned over a huge crowd in Portland, Oregon -- supposedly gathered to hear the words of Democrat presidential candidate Barack Obama -- but chose not to report the free concert given before his speech?
Well, it has been learned that before the presumptive Democrat nominee spoke to a crowd in Berlin Thursday, two popular German acts -- reggae artist Patrice and rock band Reamonn -- entertained the gathering audience.
Will media report this tonight, or just gush and fawn over the huge crowd again?
While you ponder, here's what was reported by Spiegel Online moments ago (h/t Hot Air and Gateway):
++ Pop Concert for Obama Fans ++
6:33 p.m.: The tens of thousands of Obama fans are being entertained as they await the senator. The reggae musician Patrice kicked things off, followed by the rock band Reamonn.
I'm sure this will be part of ALL media reports concerning this speech...not!"
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
GVW INCORPORATION
The GVW referendum is tentatively scheduled for August 26th and citizens residing within the proposed borders which encompass more than 23 square miles must be registered to vote no later than July 25th in order to make their voices heard. Reportedly there have been several hundred new registrations since the petition to incorporate was submitted last November. The total number of citizens eligible to vote may reach 4400. If the turnout is less than 50% it seems likely that the organizers will prevail since they had almost 900 valid signatures on their petition and would need just a few hundred more to win.
"PROGRESSIVES" AND THE MEDIA
On July 21 the Aiken Standard published a wailing opinion column written by David Sirota. The column is entitled “When is Moving Away from the Center called ‘Centrism’?” Let us hope that the Aiken Standard has not decided to make him a regular. The following appears on his website. Check out the various links contained in his piece and be aware.
“Latest Column: This Summer's Trilogy of Truth
By David Sirota, 6/27/08
The future of the media is cloudy. In this brave new world of YouTube, Facebook and 400 cable channels, book publishers are fretting about obsolescence. But books have survived radio and television for the same reason they will survive the Internet. Human life is simply too complex to be represented by a news spot or a blog post � and three new tomes demonstrate how books will always be the necessary instruments for deeper analysis. They are a trilogy of truth in this era of misinformation.
Read the rest of Sirota's newest nationally syndicated column here...
CONTACT YOUR LOCAL EDITOR: If you would like to see Sirota's weekly column in your local newspaper, just go here to find the contact info for your local newspaper editor and send them a message with the request (remember - be polite and respectful!).
Who Is David Sirota?
David Sirota is a political journalist, New York Times bestselling author and nationally syndicated newspaper columnist living in Denver. His daily blog can be found at Credo action (his old blog was at this site, but moved). He is a senior fellow at the Campaign for America's Future and a board member of the Progressive States Network - both 501(c)3 nonpartisan research organizations. He writes a weekly, nationally syndicated column for Creators Syndicate which was launched in the Fall of 2007 and which now appears in newspapers with a combined daily circulation of more than 1.6 million readers. Newspapers running Sirota's column include, among others, The Denver Post, The San Francisco Chronicle, The Seattle Times, The Idaho Statesman, The Everett Herald, The Idaho Falls Post Register and The Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star and The Ocala Star-Banner. Sirota also contributes regularly to the Denver Post's website, is a senior editor at In These Times magazine. Sirota's two books, Hostile Takeover and The Uprising, were both New York Times bestsellers. He has been profiled in Newsweek and the Rocky Mountain News and is widely known for his reporting on political corruption, globalization and working-class economic issues often ignored by both of America's political parties. The New York Times has called him a "populist rabble-rouser" with a "take-no-prisoners mind-set," while the Philadelphia Daily News labeled him "a progressive powerhouse." The American Prospect said Sirota is "the kind of pundit you'd like to have on your side in a knife fight and wouldn't want to cross in a dark alley." Syndicated columnist Molly Ivins said, "Sirota is a new-generation populist who instinctively understands that the only real questions are 'Who's getting screwed?' and 'Who's doing the screwing?'"
BIOGRAPHY: See Sirota's full biography here.
ARTICLES: See all of Sirota's writings in the lefthand column of this website.
MEDIA APPEARANCES: See Sirota's recent newspaper appearances here and television appearances here.
“Latest Column: This Summer's Trilogy of Truth
By David Sirota, 6/27/08
The future of the media is cloudy. In this brave new world of YouTube, Facebook and 400 cable channels, book publishers are fretting about obsolescence. But books have survived radio and television for the same reason they will survive the Internet. Human life is simply too complex to be represented by a news spot or a blog post � and three new tomes demonstrate how books will always be the necessary instruments for deeper analysis. They are a trilogy of truth in this era of misinformation.
Read the rest of Sirota's newest nationally syndicated column here...
CONTACT YOUR LOCAL EDITOR: If you would like to see Sirota's weekly column in your local newspaper, just go here to find the contact info for your local newspaper editor and send them a message with the request (remember - be polite and respectful!).
Who Is David Sirota?
David Sirota is a political journalist, New York Times bestselling author and nationally syndicated newspaper columnist living in Denver. His daily blog can be found at Credo action (his old blog was at this site, but moved). He is a senior fellow at the Campaign for America's Future and a board member of the Progressive States Network - both 501(c)3 nonpartisan research organizations. He writes a weekly, nationally syndicated column for Creators Syndicate which was launched in the Fall of 2007 and which now appears in newspapers with a combined daily circulation of more than 1.6 million readers. Newspapers running Sirota's column include, among others, The Denver Post, The San Francisco Chronicle, The Seattle Times, The Idaho Statesman, The Everett Herald, The Idaho Falls Post Register and The Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star and The Ocala Star-Banner. Sirota also contributes regularly to the Denver Post's website, is a senior editor at In These Times magazine. Sirota's two books, Hostile Takeover and The Uprising, were both New York Times bestsellers. He has been profiled in Newsweek and the Rocky Mountain News and is widely known for his reporting on political corruption, globalization and working-class economic issues often ignored by both of America's political parties. The New York Times has called him a "populist rabble-rouser" with a "take-no-prisoners mind-set," while the Philadelphia Daily News labeled him "a progressive powerhouse." The American Prospect said Sirota is "the kind of pundit you'd like to have on your side in a knife fight and wouldn't want to cross in a dark alley." Syndicated columnist Molly Ivins said, "Sirota is a new-generation populist who instinctively understands that the only real questions are 'Who's getting screwed?' and 'Who's doing the screwing?'"
BIOGRAPHY: See Sirota's full biography here.
ARTICLES: See all of Sirota's writings in the lefthand column of this website.
MEDIA APPEARANCES: See Sirota's recent newspaper appearances here and television appearances here.
Monday, July 21, 2008
ALL THE NEWS FIT TO PRINT-NOT REALLY!
Thanks to FOXNews.com for posting the following article. Click on the title to read the entire piece.
The McCain Op-Ed The New York Times Wouldn’t Publish
by FOXNews.com
Monday, July 21, 2008
By Sen. John McCain
In January 2007, when General David Petraeus took command in Iraq, he called the situation “hard” but not “hopeless.” Today, 18 months later, violence has fallen by up to 80 percent to the lowest levels in four years, and Sunni and Shiite terrorists are reeling from a string of defeats. The situation now is full of hope, but considerable hard work remains to consolidate our fragile gains.
The McCain Op-Ed The New York Times Wouldn’t Publish
by FOXNews.com
Monday, July 21, 2008
By Sen. John McCain
In January 2007, when General David Petraeus took command in Iraq, he called the situation “hard” but not “hopeless.” Today, 18 months later, violence has fallen by up to 80 percent to the lowest levels in four years, and Sunni and Shiite terrorists are reeling from a string of defeats. The situation now is full of hope, but considerable hard work remains to consolidate our fragile gains.
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS – There was not enough time to make any progress on aligning Board and Commission appointments with the Council member’s term of office. We needed more than the allowed thirty minutes to thoroughly discuss the issue. Some of the comments made by Council members suggest that consensus on this issue may be difficult to achieve. I remain optimistic that an agreement is possible. We will re-visit this issue probably in September. Keep in mind that the primary purpose of this change is to ensure that newly elected City Council members are able to make their appointments on the January 1st date after their election.
SMOKING ORDINANCE – In a very difficult and emotional discussion, City Council passed the Smoking Ordinance. Voting in favor of the Ordinance was Mayor Fred Cavanaugh, Councilwoman Beverly Clyburn, Councilwoman Lessie Price, and me. Voting not to impose a smoking ban were Councilman Dick Smith, Councilwoman Jane Vaughters, and Councilman Don Wells. We appreciate the support and advice from constituents on both sides of the issue.
NEW WALGREENS - The new Walgreens project was approved by a five to two vote. Both Dick Smith and I had serious traffic concerns which we hope will be resolved before the new facility is completed. Specifically, as approved, it will be possible to make a left turn from Richland Ave into the new Walgreens and a left turn onto Richland when leaving Walgreen's. Dick and I feel that these turns are dangerous and should not be allowed so near a major intersection in the City (University Ave/Richland Ave).
SMOKING ORDINANCE – In a very difficult and emotional discussion, City Council passed the Smoking Ordinance. Voting in favor of the Ordinance was Mayor Fred Cavanaugh, Councilwoman Beverly Clyburn, Councilwoman Lessie Price, and me. Voting not to impose a smoking ban were Councilman Dick Smith, Councilwoman Jane Vaughters, and Councilman Don Wells. We appreciate the support and advice from constituents on both sides of the issue.
NEW WALGREENS - The new Walgreens project was approved by a five to two vote. Both Dick Smith and I had serious traffic concerns which we hope will be resolved before the new facility is completed. Specifically, as approved, it will be possible to make a left turn from Richland Ave into the new Walgreens and a left turn onto Richland when leaving Walgreen's. Dick and I feel that these turns are dangerous and should not be allowed so near a major intersection in the City (University Ave/Richland Ave).
PRESIDENT BUSH AND ENERGY
On Tuesday, President Bush held his second news conference in two weeks – and it was interesting. First, he is clearly frustrated with our current do-nothing obstructionist congress, and he is finally standing up and challenging them. Second, he demonstrated command of facts and clear thinking on the many complex challenges our country is facing.
Many press questions focused on energy and the same old saws – are the oil companies really drilling where they already have leases; can’t we solve the problem by conserving; why shouldn’t we focus on “alternative energy;” drilling more won’t solve the problem immediately and therefore it is not worth doing; etc.
For many years, I worked developing data processing systems. Again and again some senior company official would ask how long it would take to develop some new system. Whatever the answer, it was usually "too long." Six months later the same official would ask the same question, and again after another six months. The fact that it will take “too long” was always a reason not to start. The real problem was they wanted easy answers and never had the commitment or courage to see a tough project through. As President Bush pointed out, his administration wanted to begin expanding energy drilling and production seven years ago. Had that happened, we would be in a completely different place now. Whatever happened to our country that could "put a man on the moon by the end of the decade" (JFK 1960) and to leaders who could stand up to such a challenge?
One of the most promising and least understood sources of alternative energy is nuclear. Imprimis, a publication of Hillsdale College recently published an excellent article on all energy alternatives, with a clear explanation of nuclear including the issue of nuclear waste. Below is a link to the article:
http://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2008&month=02
If you have not heard of/do not subscribe to Imprimis, you might want to. You can request the hard copy be mailed to you - and it's free! The articles are always informative and well-done.
Many press questions focused on energy and the same old saws – are the oil companies really drilling where they already have leases; can’t we solve the problem by conserving; why shouldn’t we focus on “alternative energy;” drilling more won’t solve the problem immediately and therefore it is not worth doing; etc.
For many years, I worked developing data processing systems. Again and again some senior company official would ask how long it would take to develop some new system. Whatever the answer, it was usually "too long." Six months later the same official would ask the same question, and again after another six months. The fact that it will take “too long” was always a reason not to start. The real problem was they wanted easy answers and never had the commitment or courage to see a tough project through. As President Bush pointed out, his administration wanted to begin expanding energy drilling and production seven years ago. Had that happened, we would be in a completely different place now. Whatever happened to our country that could "put a man on the moon by the end of the decade" (JFK 1960) and to leaders who could stand up to such a challenge?
One of the most promising and least understood sources of alternative energy is nuclear. Imprimis, a publication of Hillsdale College recently published an excellent article on all energy alternatives, with a clear explanation of nuclear including the issue of nuclear waste. Below is a link to the article:
http://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2008&month=02
If you have not heard of/do not subscribe to Imprimis, you might want to. You can request the hard copy be mailed to you - and it's free! The articles are always informative and well-done.
Monday, July 14, 2008
AIKEN CITY COUNCIL MEETING
From Dick Dewar
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS – Tonight at 6:30 PM we will have a work session to discuss revamping all boards, commissions, and committee appointments to coincide with City Council elections. At the present time and due to the fact that I was elected last November, I am the only member of the City Council immediately affected with the current system. Of ten or eleven appointments each Councilmember has (some have an appointment to the Aiken Housing Authority; I do not), I have only made five appointments. Two of those appointments were due to resignations.
However, the primary purpose of this change is to ensure that newly elected City Council members are able to make their appointments on the January 1st date after their election. We will also consider whether appointments should be for two or four years or a combination. State Law, for example, requires that the Design Review Board be for a term of between three and five years.
SMOKING ORDINANCE - Tonight we consider the Smoking Ordinance for the second (and probably last) reading. I expect requests to exempt bars and special club facilities at which smoking is permitted. There has been a major effort on the part of many to develop a consistent ordinance between North Augusta, the County of Aiken, and the City of Aiken. While we have not met as a group, we have exchanged information and I hope, through that process, to be as consistent as possible with a smoking ordinance. I know there are some of you who feel that we are infringing on a person’s right to smoke and others who feel that smoking is harmful to the workplace and should be controlled or prohibited. Tonight may be your last chance to voice your concerns and I hope you take the time to do so.
NEW WALGREENS – First, there is no limit on the number of drugstores/pharmacies that are permitted in the City of Aiken. That said, Walgreens is seeking to build a second store near the corner of Richland Ave and University Parkway. The major concerns at this second reading are traffic and storm water detention. The developer wants to gain access to the store from Pepper Hill Way which borders the property, a “right-in/right-out entrance/exit on Richland Ave, and a new curb cut which would replace an existing curb cut near the Buffet Restaurant on University Ave. The entrance on Richland would only allow access by a right turn into the site and exit by a right turn onto Richland Ave. I still have some concerns about the widening of Pepper Hill Way and the granting of waivers to our Access Management Ordinance passed last November. The remaining issue is that of storm water drainage which we were not able to discuss in sufficient detail at the first reading.
RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITIES IN A NEIGHBORHOOD – We discussed this issue at the last Council meeting and have determined that the process of developing a Residential Care Facility in the City must begin with the Department of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC). If that is done, we can consider if the applicant complies with City zoning requirements.
CITY HALL SPACE – At our last meeting, we approved the purchase of land immediately adjacent to City Hall. The cost is $930,851.06 which would be payable in four installments. While the size of the lot is small (0.2117 acres), it will permit the addition of the needed space to accommodate future needs. It may be several years before building commences, but the purchase will ensure that City Hall remains in downtown Aiken.
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS – Tonight at 6:30 PM we will have a work session to discuss revamping all boards, commissions, and committee appointments to coincide with City Council elections. At the present time and due to the fact that I was elected last November, I am the only member of the City Council immediately affected with the current system. Of ten or eleven appointments each Councilmember has (some have an appointment to the Aiken Housing Authority; I do not), I have only made five appointments. Two of those appointments were due to resignations.
However, the primary purpose of this change is to ensure that newly elected City Council members are able to make their appointments on the January 1st date after their election. We will also consider whether appointments should be for two or four years or a combination. State Law, for example, requires that the Design Review Board be for a term of between three and five years.
SMOKING ORDINANCE - Tonight we consider the Smoking Ordinance for the second (and probably last) reading. I expect requests to exempt bars and special club facilities at which smoking is permitted. There has been a major effort on the part of many to develop a consistent ordinance between North Augusta, the County of Aiken, and the City of Aiken. While we have not met as a group, we have exchanged information and I hope, through that process, to be as consistent as possible with a smoking ordinance. I know there are some of you who feel that we are infringing on a person’s right to smoke and others who feel that smoking is harmful to the workplace and should be controlled or prohibited. Tonight may be your last chance to voice your concerns and I hope you take the time to do so.
NEW WALGREENS – First, there is no limit on the number of drugstores/pharmacies that are permitted in the City of Aiken. That said, Walgreens is seeking to build a second store near the corner of Richland Ave and University Parkway. The major concerns at this second reading are traffic and storm water detention. The developer wants to gain access to the store from Pepper Hill Way which borders the property, a “right-in/right-out entrance/exit on Richland Ave, and a new curb cut which would replace an existing curb cut near the Buffet Restaurant on University Ave. The entrance on Richland would only allow access by a right turn into the site and exit by a right turn onto Richland Ave. I still have some concerns about the widening of Pepper Hill Way and the granting of waivers to our Access Management Ordinance passed last November. The remaining issue is that of storm water drainage which we were not able to discuss in sufficient detail at the first reading.
RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITIES IN A NEIGHBORHOOD – We discussed this issue at the last Council meeting and have determined that the process of developing a Residential Care Facility in the City must begin with the Department of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC). If that is done, we can consider if the applicant complies with City zoning requirements.
CITY HALL SPACE – At our last meeting, we approved the purchase of land immediately adjacent to City Hall. The cost is $930,851.06 which would be payable in four installments. While the size of the lot is small (0.2117 acres), it will permit the addition of the needed space to accommodate future needs. It may be several years before building commences, but the purchase will ensure that City Hall remains in downtown Aiken.
Sunday, July 13, 2008
WOUNDED WARRIORS NEED HELP
FROM THE AUGUSTA CHRONICLE
Fighting For War's Wounded
Augusta lacks advocates to help veterans with benefits
By Johnny Edwards Staff Writer
Sunday, July 13, 2008
storyTools();
The passing of time has only made the pain worse, says Iraq war veteran Daniel Smith.
Iraq war veteran Daniel Smith, of Graniteville, said he found it hard not only to ask for help when he returned home, but to find it. The Wounded Warrior program aims to help veterans get benefits. For full story follow this link:http://chronicle.augusta.com/stories/071308/met_465535.shtml
Fighting For War's Wounded
Augusta lacks advocates to help veterans with benefits
By Johnny Edwards Staff Writer
Sunday, July 13, 2008
storyTools();
The passing of time has only made the pain worse, says Iraq war veteran Daniel Smith.
Iraq war veteran Daniel Smith, of Graniteville, said he found it hard not only to ask for help when he returned home, but to find it. The Wounded Warrior program aims to help veterans get benefits. For full story follow this link:http://chronicle.augusta.com/stories/071308/met_465535.shtml
Thursday, July 10, 2008
AUGUSTA CHRONICLE EDITORIAL ON "FAIRNESS DOCTRINE'
JULY 7, 2008
If you don't subscribe to the Augusta Chronicle the following editorial published today might make you consider doing so. The editorial also appears on THE AUGUSTA CHRONICLE website as a blog and the 124 COMMENTS are, with a few exceptions, well worth reading. The so-called fairness doctrine is scary we must oppose it with all our might. We do not need thought police!
Arrest the speech police
Return to the Fairness Doctrine has chilling implications
Augusta Chronicle Editorial Staff
Monday, July 07, 2008
125 comments
Today's quiz: Can you name the country whose new leaders want the government to impose strict government controls on broadcast speech?
Nope. Not Venezuela. Not Cuba. Not even Putin's Russia.
It's the country formerly known as the United States of America.
Some Democrats, who now control Congress and are pining for the White House, want to bring back the Orwellian "Fairness Doctrine," in which the federal government monitors all broadcast speech in the name of "fairness" and decides if stations need to have more opposing viewpoints heard.
Shouldn't the free market decide that?
And has the free market ever done a better job of it?
The Fairness Doctrine was in force from 1949 until 1987, when it was deemed outdated due to the proliferation of consumer choices and, yes, different viewpoints.
The problem is, most of the viewpoints that have flourished since then have been conservative ones. With the explosion of talk radio, the Internet and cable news, conservative views have seen expression as never before -- certainly more so than when three liberal network news operations and the New York Times set the nation's news and analysis tempo.
So, some liberals want the government to step in and demand that successful conservative broadcasts are counterbalanced by an equal amount of liberal views -- because they can't achieve that balance competing on a level playing field.
Again, why not let listeners decide that? Isn't that what they do in a free country?
It is more than a little frightening that such figures as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi support the reimposition of government manipulation of the airwaves under the Fairness Doctrine. She admitted her support in a recent interview. And she refuses to allow a floor vote on a bill prohibiting the doctrine from coming back.
Democratic nominee-to-be Barack Obama has said he "doesn't support" the Fairness Doctrine. But that's different from opposing it. It's possible the tepid "doesn't support it" could change or simply yield under pressure from his Democratic colleagues. And, as columnist and Phoenix radio talk show host Austin Hill notes, Obama once was a huge proponent of spending limits under public financing of presidential campaigns -- until he found he could raise a lot of money and spend it with no limits.
Might he also change his position on the Fairness Doctrine?
Back in broadcasting's infancy, an argument could be made that the limited number of broadcast outlets required some government watchdogging. Now, however, a return to the Fairness Doctrine would be an attempt not to allow more speech, but to rein it in.
That should scare all of us, regardless of our political views.
From the Monday, July 07, 2008 edition of the Augusta Chronicle showYahooAds();
advertisement
If you don't subscribe to the Augusta Chronicle the following editorial published today might make you consider doing so. The editorial also appears on THE AUGUSTA CHRONICLE website as a blog and the 124 COMMENTS are, with a few exceptions, well worth reading. The so-called fairness doctrine is scary we must oppose it with all our might. We do not need thought police!
Arrest the speech police
Return to the Fairness Doctrine has chilling implications
Augusta Chronicle Editorial Staff
Monday, July 07, 2008
125 comments
Today's quiz: Can you name the country whose new leaders want the government to impose strict government controls on broadcast speech?
Nope. Not Venezuela. Not Cuba. Not even Putin's Russia.
It's the country formerly known as the United States of America.
Some Democrats, who now control Congress and are pining for the White House, want to bring back the Orwellian "Fairness Doctrine," in which the federal government monitors all broadcast speech in the name of "fairness" and decides if stations need to have more opposing viewpoints heard.
Shouldn't the free market decide that?
And has the free market ever done a better job of it?
The Fairness Doctrine was in force from 1949 until 1987, when it was deemed outdated due to the proliferation of consumer choices and, yes, different viewpoints.
The problem is, most of the viewpoints that have flourished since then have been conservative ones. With the explosion of talk radio, the Internet and cable news, conservative views have seen expression as never before -- certainly more so than when three liberal network news operations and the New York Times set the nation's news and analysis tempo.
So, some liberals want the government to step in and demand that successful conservative broadcasts are counterbalanced by an equal amount of liberal views -- because they can't achieve that balance competing on a level playing field.
Again, why not let listeners decide that? Isn't that what they do in a free country?
It is more than a little frightening that such figures as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi support the reimposition of government manipulation of the airwaves under the Fairness Doctrine. She admitted her support in a recent interview. And she refuses to allow a floor vote on a bill prohibiting the doctrine from coming back.
Democratic nominee-to-be Barack Obama has said he "doesn't support" the Fairness Doctrine. But that's different from opposing it. It's possible the tepid "doesn't support it" could change or simply yield under pressure from his Democratic colleagues. And, as columnist and Phoenix radio talk show host Austin Hill notes, Obama once was a huge proponent of spending limits under public financing of presidential campaigns -- until he found he could raise a lot of money and spend it with no limits.
Might he also change his position on the Fairness Doctrine?
Back in broadcasting's infancy, an argument could be made that the limited number of broadcast outlets required some government watchdogging. Now, however, a return to the Fairness Doctrine would be an attempt not to allow more speech, but to rein it in.
That should scare all of us, regardless of our political views.
From the Monday, July 07, 2008 edition of the Augusta Chronicle showYahooAds();
advertisement
AIKEN STANDARD STRIKES AGAIN
JULY 8, 2008
AIKEN STANDARD STRIKES AGAIN- While explaining his veto of the DNA bill Governor Sanford made the following points:
“There were some other good provisions in the bill that I would like to see passed at some point. I favor prisoners having the right to DNA testing to prove their innocence. There was also a condition that would have allowed family members of missing persons to have their DNA tested against unidentified remains.”
In light of his comments and the main concern of the web author I cannot understand why the Aiken Standard felt the following web posting should be on the front page of its paper today unless it suited their own "political" concerns.
AIKEN STANDARD STRIKES AGAIN- While explaining his veto of the DNA bill Governor Sanford made the following points:
“There were some other good provisions in the bill that I would like to see passed at some point. I favor prisoners having the right to DNA testing to prove their innocence. There was also a condition that would have allowed family members of missing persons to have their DNA tested against unidentified remains.”
In light of his comments and the main concern of the web author I cannot understand why the Aiken Standard felt the following web posting should be on the front page of its paper today unless it suited their own "political" concerns.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)