Today's edition of quick hits:
* If Kofi Annan has a plan for Syrian peace, it's unclear what it might be.
* George Will and James Inhofe are unimpressed: "[T]he first six months of 2012 accounted for the warmest January-through-June period on record for the contiguous U.S., the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration announced Monday."
* Hard to imagine this a year ago: "Defying expectations and, in some places, bullets, Libyans across most of the country voted Saturday in the first election after more than four decades of isolation and totalitarianism under Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi."
* Heartbreaking: Outcry over the public execution of an Afghan woman accused of adultery by alleged Taliban assailants reverberated across the Web on Monday, with government officials and netizens taking to social media to express their disgust.
* Plans for high-speed rail, unexpectedly, are advancing in California.
* Real damage: "The earthquake-damaged Washington Monument could remain closed into 2014, the National Park Service said, and its repairs will require the exterior and part of the interior of the 555-foot structure to be shrouded in scaffolding."
* An interesting investigation into MEK's lobbying operation.
* NPR really does have a responsibility to learn who Joe Olivo is and tell listeners about his larger role.
* Oh my, John Solomon.
* There's a CNN poll making the rounds showing a majority of Americans endorsing the contempt vote against Attorney General Eric Holder, but I'd encourage folks to keep one detail in mind: most Americans have no idea who Eric Holder is.
Anything to add? Consider this an open thread.
Leave a Comment:
What's happened to the judgment of news agencies, specifically Politico? Just because a poll is done, is it reported by major affiliates who cite Politico usually? Are there some polls that never get publicized beyond their locale? Why would Politico report such a poll? How did it tie in with any other story it was reporting or investigating? at the time? What was newsworthy about this poll? Just the finding? Who paid for it? How many people it questioned? The political, racial, gender, etc. of the respondents? Was it reported in isolation? Other than attempting to discredit this administration, I wonder what the answers to these questions might be? Does anyone know? While we're considering this, why is Politico and its reporters used as a source so much on MSNBC? Clearly, they have a more conservative bias, but is there some ownership relationship that should be listed on screen (or in writing) when referencing one of their stories?
On a subject that the MaddowBlog would never voluntarily bring up, Bradlee Dean has been ordered to pay the legal expenses of Rachel and the other defendants in his loony-tune SLAPP.
Bradlee Dean Info (not a fan site)
Citypages
HuffPo
TPM
I think it's safe to say that Dean's lawsuit isn't quite going the way he would like. I'm absolutely convulsing with crying. Or is it laughter?
I just read another poll that said most Americans believe the contempt citation was political in character. In the CNN poll, " A bigger majority, 61 percent, said that the vote’s purpose was to “gain political advantage,” while only 34 percent the vote represented “real ethical concerns.” (courtesy of TPM)
Before you make the mistake of thinking that the news about California proceeding with a high-speed rail plan is good news, be sure to read this article in today's LA Times:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-rail-advice-20120709,0,4539140.story
As is usual, the geniuses in Sacramento, led by Governor Moron The Moonbeam, can't find their posterior with both hands on a clear day with a 2-hour advance notice, and are busy setting up the railroad to the future (it's going to run from Manteca to Bakersfield - I'm sure all 20 people who will use it when completed will thank the rest of us for our largesse). What? Hire people who actually know how to run this kind of system to work with us to do it? What are you, some sort of subversive?
Considering that our current weather is more a result of pollution from fifty years ago and that ocean currents take a hundred years to complete a cycle from bottom to top I am unimpressed by George Will's moronic attitude. I say again-the sixties and seventies were the time to correct this. Those who warned us were called tree huggers or worse so I hope in the end they get to say I told you so.
Folks, I asked this about the quake damage on the WaPo site, but given the pathetic series of posts ahead of it, I'm wondering if anyone sane would find it. But then, I read through to the end.... Anyway, there are way more eddy-kated folks on MaddowBlog, so I'll ask it here:
May I ask a serious question? A 5.8-6.0 really isn't much. My 40-year old, wood-frame house is roughly 1/2 the distance from the epicenter that the Monument is, and I had exactly one picture frame on one upstairs wall go <10degrees askew. No cracked drywall or plaster, no dust, nothing fell. Is the amount of fill in the Tidal Basin area at all responsible for the disproportionate amount of damage there, or is the Monument built less well than my middle-aged house? Or is it something else entirely? Helpful, non-political answers only, please.
I'm no expert.
Wood frame houses are the most earthquake resistant. Brick and mortar are the least resistant.
I'm not sure about the Washington Monmument, but I'm sure it it not made of wood.
I just wanted to comment on the Romney fundraiser segment. It was so intense it almost made me feel sorry for the clueless entitled human polo pony..for about 20 seconds...then I remembered all the people who I have met who really thought and talked like the satirical imagery said Romney's people did
I smiled at the "they just don't get it" quote -- that woman's attitude was so very Marie Antoinette-ish. I can just envision such a woman brushing an imaginary speck of dirt from her spotless white silk dress, sneering through her large, glamorous sunglasses under a lovely wide-brimmed hat, looking cool and unapproachable walking to her gathering with the other elitists. And later, of course, trashing the commoners with her cronies as she smugly sips champagne and nibbles hors d'oeuvres...
The Repubs are saying that the penalty in the ACA is a tax. They say the SC ruled that it is a tax.
No, the SC did not rule it is a tax. One justice ruled that it is a tax. Four other justices ruled that it is OK under the Commerce Clause. If one of them had ruled that it was OK under the Post Office Clause, would anyone now be saying that it is a Post Office? One justice of the 9 does not constitute a ruling by the SC.
BTW 4 SC justices ruled that it is NOT a tax. The 4 conservative justices ruled that it is not OK, that means they ruled that it is not OK under the taxing power clause so it is not a tax according to 4 justices.