Journalist Jeff Greenfield responded to the ongoing battle from the media this week, when reporting, that the FOX NEW’S DEPARTMENT is being accused of being the research and communication’s arm of the Republican Party. He also says that “. . . Fox’s bottom-line has increased 13% since Obama came into office. So perhaps they are crying all the way to the bank”.
Obama accuses Fox News as appearing “to be more like a talk show format and not a news format”.
There is no question that the Rupert Murdoch owned conglomeration’s opinions predominately favor the far Right Republican agenda. So when the White House decides not to give more fuel to Fox’s perceived negativity and refuses to be on their programs, is this an exercise of free speech? On the other hand, is it an exercise in futility? The points of views coming from the White House will be interpreted as the voice of the Obama Administration no matter what the administration representative says when they appear on FOX. Being fair however, MSNBC has been called the most left in their presentation of Obama’s opinions. So to whom do we listen for the “true news story”? Nevertheless, who would that be?
Where do we find a news source that is truly balanced? Personally, I find I have to listen to them all and weigh what seems “logical”, but I was taught in journalism school and at the LA TIMES that politics are highly hinged in “manipulating emotions and the illusion”.
This morning I watched with pride as Sonia Sotomayor was sworn in as the first Hispanic and the third woman Supreme Court Justice in the United States. She now joins a select group of extraordinary women, along with Justice Ruth Bader and the now retired, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor in the highest Court of the land, making decisions that have an effect in the rights of everyone in this country.
In this excellent op-ed piece, super-economist Christina Romer (one of President Obama's most trusted advisors) makes an impassionate plea for health care reform. She expalins the different options that could lead to the President's goal of universal health care, and helps the reader get a really goodunderstanding of what is really at stake. Too often, we hear that universal health care would be too costly and force the economy to suffer. That is a far right Republican talking point which has been discredited several times over, but which still survives and lives on because of the ignorance of many. This piece by Prof. Romer dispels all misunderstandings and makes the choice clear: health care reform would strengthen America's economy for the future, not hurt it...
First US Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women's Issues Confirmed
Melanne Verveer was confirmed by the Senate Friday as the United State's first Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women's Issues. Several other nominees for state department positions were also confirmed Friday. According to a White House press release, "The President's decision to nominate an Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women's Issues is unprecedented and reflects the elevated importance of global women's issues to the President and his entire Administration." Verveer formerly served in the Clinton Administration as Assistant to the President and as Hillary Clinton's Chief of Staff and Chief Assistant in international activities. She was also involved in establishing the President's Interagency Council on Women during the Clinton Administration. Verveer is the Co-Founder, Chair, and Co-CEO of Vital Voices Global Partnership, a nonprofit that invests in development of women leaders globally. She has also served as Executive Vice President of People for the American Way and in a number of other legislative and international policy roles.
Media Resources: White House Press Release 3/6/09; US Senate Confirmations 4/3/09
Feminist.org: Your daily source for the feminist perspective on national and global events. If you liked this story, consider making a tax-deductible donation to the Feminist Majority Foundation! Your contribution helps support the Feminist Daily News Wire.
Subscribe to the Feminist Daily News Wire
Uganda’s Lord’s Resistance Army: A “Good Story” for Some, a Continuing Nightmare For Many
Hellen Abak
Yesterday the Enough Project sent out an email reminding people to watch the popular crime show “Law and Order: Special Victims Unit.” The episode, titled “Hell” which will be broadcast on U.S. television Tuesday, March 31st, will focus on the fictionalized story of “Elijah” a former child soldier traumatized by the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA).
Seemingly, Enough analyst John Prendergast and SVU’s producers are doing a good deed in working together to highlight the plight of child soldiers and the little-known Northern Ugandan war. However, the consistent “Hollywood-ization” of the issue of child soldiers and the over-simplification of the long running war between the Ugandan government and the LRA has almost completely drowned out the voices of leaders and survivors from Northern Uganda, and assumed a half-true narrative, at its best.
I am proud of our Obama's announcement today.
It is wonderful to see a smart, strong young man stepping up to the plate and doing what needs to be done. It is wonderful to see one of my "Change This!" Wish List items getting attended to. (see earlier blog "Change This!")
We have a lot of housecleaning to do - at least it's springtime and time for it anyway. I can't wait to watch this Failed Lead Executive Extirpation Program (FLEE, for short ;) become common practice as we go about our economic recovery. I look forward to courageous, honest and deserving players taking the place of a too-long-entrenched uncaring régime - good thing you have a lot of résumes to choose from.
My prayers are with you folks and, for what it's worth, I'm around for ya.
All My Relations, Gramma Willi
P.S. Bringing the Indian Tribes into the UN is a sheer stroke of genius. Mad props to everyone who is behind it! Suggestion - put some of those savvy Native Elders at the helm of some of these organizations.
The Obama-Biden administration has the power to make sure that everyone has good, clean food. Change This stewardship agreement!
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocumentDetail&o=090000648084de39
"Technology/stewardship agreements required for the purchase of genetically modified seed explicitly prohibit research. These agreements inhibit public scientists from pursuing their mandated role on behalf of the public good unless the research is approved by industry. As a result of restricted access, no truly independent research can be legally conducted on many critical questions regarding the technology, its performance, its management implications, IRM, and its interactions with insect biology. Consequently, data flowing to an EPA Scientific Advisory Panel from the public sector is unduly limited."
also see
"Rising Rhetoric on Genetically Modified Crops"in PR Watch, Volume 10, No. 1, 1st Quarter 2003.
"Their level of desperation appears to be increasing," says Michael Hansen, a scientist with Consumers Union in the US, who monitors the activities of the biotech industry as it lobbies for acceptance of genetically modified (GM) foods. Hansen has watched with increasing alarm as the pro-GM lobby escalates its vitriolic attacks on critics.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Rising_Rhetoric_on_Genetically_Modified_Crops
Do More on the Deficit
Pub Date: Feb 27, 2009
In his address to Congress, President Obama pledged to cut the annual budget deficit in half by the end of his term. The problem is, this goal would keep deficit levels higher than the record deficits we have seen over the last eight years.
The bottom line is we have to do better. The largest budget deficit during the Bush presidency was $454 billion in 2008. At the time, that was a record. Everyone knows that record will be smashed to bits with the deficit estimated (pdf) to exceed $1.7 trillion in 2009. Right on the heels of that is a predicted deficit of $1.2 trillion in 2010.
We understand the argument that the country is in a deep recession, committing unprecedented funds to a bailout of the financial system and to stimulate the economy, so there is a need to carry large deficits in the short term. But, the budget the Administration released predicts the economic recovery starting in 2010, thus deficit reductions should and can be more aggressive before the end of the Presidential term in 2013.
Let’s be clear—the recent go-go spending years put the country in a deep fiscal hole. During President Bush’s two terms the debt nearly doubled, from $5.6 trillion to $10.6 trillion. The idea that there are no problems with running large budget deficits in an economic boom is intellectually bankrupt. We should have been saving for lean times in recent years, but we didn’t.
Unfortunately, the proposed budget doesn’t go far enough in reversing the bad habits of recent years. It’s not just that halving the budget deficit by 2012 is an underwhelming goal, it’s that the Administration is betting on significant deficit spending as the right economic strategy even after they predict strong economic growth after 2009. The predicted annual deficits through 2019 all exceed half a trillion dollars, piling nearly $7 trillion on top of the debt over the next ten years.
Budget documents are largely political statements, and even the most honest budgets will be imprecise, based at least in part on policy wish lists. The good news is that the Administration’s proposed budget does away with some budgetary gimmicks. There is a return to 10 year budget predictions (rather than only five years) and the costs of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are finally being included. We welcome these changes to add more clarity to the budget.
But there are still a lot of smoke and mirrors. Like budgets of past administrations, the underlying projections rely on unspecified and unsubstantiated savings from eliminating waste, and counts on future receipts from uncertain programs like a controversial cap and trade proposal to deal with climate change.
When the budget was released, Office of Management and Budget Director Peter Orszag argued that Medicare and health care were ticking time bombs that the country had to deal with or else they would break the budget. We don’t disagree. But budgets are about priorities and we have to fiscally walk and chew gum at the same time – make the tough spending and revenue decisions to deal with the deficit and Medicare at the same time. Otherwise, we are crippling the country’s economic future.
Politics & economics - It’s a hard truth for Americans to face that neither team in Washington is going to guard what we love the most. That is something we are going to have to face. Liberty is for the citizens to guard themselves.
The theme of my book, The Left, the Right, and the State, is that both sides of the political aisle represent a grave threat to liberty — though each of a different sort. It is like two people tugging at a turkey’s wishbone: the turkey is liberty, and you are the bone.
The Establishment's Thanksgiving
by Robert Parry @ smirkingchimp.com
Surprisingly this Thanksgiving, the Washington Establishment had a lot to give thanks for. And its chief mouthpiece – the Washington Post’s neoconservative editorial page – was glowing over its good fortune in the three-plus weeks since Barack Obama's election.
On Friday, the Post’s lead editorial thanked President-elect Obama for settling on insider favorites for key jobs, especially officials with long records of promoting the neocon foreign policy agenda.
In Post speak, Obama “has so far placed an admirable emphasis on proven competence over personal loyalty or political purity.”
In the frame of the Washington Establishment, “proven competence” means you were a strong supporter of George W. Bush’s invasion of Iraq and see any failure there as a matter of Donald Rumsfeld’s tactical mistakes, not fundamental misjudgments. You also must show a manly regard for the brilliant “surge” strategy.......
ENTIRE ARTICLE - http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/18951
Oh yeah... Remembering the War and Other National and Global Crises
by Dave Lindorff @ thesmirkingchimp.com
The ongoing and deepening global economic crisis, to which Barack Obama owes his presidential election victory, is no small thing, to be sure. It also presents us on the left with a lot of openings to press for progressive change.
We saw how the Republican attempt to derail Obama by labeling him a "socialist" actually backfired--especially when people were reminded that a fundamental premise of socialism is "income redistribution," in which some of the wealth of the rich is taken away through taxation, and transferred through federal programs to those who are less wealthy. Joe the Plumber was outraged, but when most Americans who were having trouble paying for gas or making their next mortgage payment, or who were worried that their jobs might be about to vanish, thought about that for longer than a sound-bite, it turns out that, not surprisingly, they decided socialism and redistribution didn't sound like a bad or scary idea at all....,..
ENTIRE ARTICLE - http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/18821
What is Extensive Vetting for Potential Obama Appointees?
Michigan has approved the smoking of marijuana for medical reasons. Can smoking marijuana threatened your hopes of landing a top presidential appointment? An army of lawyers from Michigan is faithfully volunteering on President-Elect Barack Obama’s Transition Team to vet his potential picks.
The assembly of President Elect Barack Obama’s administration is an explicit, exemplary and prodigious investigation. This process is beyond previous prerequisites of a government job. It’s above the acquisition of obtaining your actual precise hair count, yes, numbers of hair strands you may have. Tidous process?
These lawyers are utilizing a new level of scrutiny of any task on his transition team. They are vetting his potential picks with unprecedented scrutiny of their personal, financial and professional backgrounds.
Embarrassing e-mails, text messages, diary entries, my space web pages and Facebook profiles? Gifts worth more than $50, other than those from relatives and long-standing friends? Family members though third generations. Validate it. What did your great grand parents do for a living? Do you have any second cousins with connections to Fannie Mae, Freddie Mack, AIG or any other company receiving a federal bailout?
Obama is conducting the vetting process much the way he managed his campaign: methodically, thoroughly and on a prodigious scale. He did not wait until he won the election to vet his favored picks. Soon after he clinched the Democratic nomination, lawyers quietly prepared dossiers of about 150 contenders for senior positions -- often without the candidates themselves knowing. Obama is discipline to reading and studying with a semblance more towards Lincoln’s political strategies and thought processes and other a select few others.A Senior Obama Transition Adviser stated, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
By Nina Calahan-James Email: Nina@BarackObama4change.us
I know that I am just a citizen, but this would be an excellent time for Senator Obama to begin dropping some hints to whom he would have in his cabinet as President while he is now on the offensive.
It is important that his cabinet is very diverse in political terms, gender, race, etc.. Show the American People what your cabinet would look like.
Who do you think should be in his cabinet?
Here's a link to an interview with John Bolton. It would do Obama's campaign well to work this to their advantage and pay close attention to this article. What do you think about Bush paving the way to an Obama administration? This commentary by a Republican is interesting. Bolton appearing to concede that Obama will win the White House? Check it out.
Media pundits have stated that HRC does not want to return to the Senate, where a leadership position for her is unlikely. Interview buddy, and former "newsman," George Stephanopolous has written that she is now interested in being Barack's VP. In an earlier blog I explain why that would be a nightmare ticket for Barack and why he should, "just say NO." Is there anywhere HRC might fit in an Obama administration?
My first choice would be no. My second choice would be Ambassador to the Sudan or Congo. My third choice would be Secretary of Labor of Health and Human Services. I think she could be an excellent champion of the labor movement, a livable minimum wage, pension reform, and unions - all of which have long suffered from inadequate attention. This lack of focus has dramatically unbalanced the management-labor playing field and is largely responsible for the declining real minimum wage and the increasing income disparity in the U.S.
Health and Human Services would allow her to work on the only issue where she really has experience - health care. We badly need affrdable health care that covers all U.S. workers. Perhaps HRC can learn from the mistakes she made in her husband's administration and deliver on a proposal which has bipartisian support. Were I President Obama, I would give her a short leash in this area, lest her strident and uncompromising nature cause the status quo to remain and the need continue unfullfilled.
Listen to Obama's chief strategist: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=17416007&ft=1&f=1102 Take a look at the inspirational first comment.
_________________________________________________________________________
Thank you,
Lisa Beyer
Precinct Deputy Captain in Las Vegas Precinct 6475
Why I Support Barack Obama for PresidentMYBO ProfileMYBO BlogMySpaceMySpace BlogFacebookLinkedIn ProfileSouthern Nevada for Obama TestimonialSouthern Nevada for Obama - A Grassroots Campaign Effort
Did you know...
On January 19, 2008, Nevada will be the 2nd state in the nation to caucus for a presidential nominee!
Democrats will meet at their designated sites at 11:00 a.m. on Saturday, January 19, 2008NV Democratic Caucus FAQsClark County, NV Residents: Find Your Precinct Here
