Today's edition of quick hits:
* The U.N. mission in Syria is very much in doubt after Russia and China, once again, vetoed a resolution that threatened Syrian authorities with sanctions if they did not stop using heavy weapons against an uprising and withdraw troops from towns and cities. The Security Council vote was 11 to 2.
* Meanwhile, violence that had been limited to isolated areas is becoming more common in Damascus.
* A majority with 56 votes wasn't enough: "Senate Republicans on Thursday blocked the No.1 item on the president's congressional 'to-do-list,' refusing to allow a vote on a bill that would give tax breaks for companies that 'insource' jobs to the U.S. from overseas while eliminating tax deductions for companies that move jobs abroad."
* U.S. official confirmed Israel's assertions that "the suicide bomber who killed five Israelis in an attack ... on Wednesday was a member of a Hezbollah cell operating in Bulgaria."
* Eurozone: "Amid much griping, the German Parliament voted Thursday in favor of a plan to rescue Spanish banks."
* Michele Bachmann is not above literally running away from legitimate reporters' questions.
* If George Zimmerman had it to do over again, he wouldn't have done anything differently.
* Congratulations to Glenn Greenwald as he makes the transition from Salon to The Guardian.
* And a conservative blogger thought he/she had found clear evidence of outrageous media bias when he/she saw a picture of Cleveland Plain-Dealer columnist Connie Schultz hugging Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio). What the blogger failed to realize (or check): Schultz and Brown are married.
Anything to add? Consider this an open thread.
Leave a Comment:
As some might recall, When Tom Daschle was speaker his wife was a lobbyist for Boeing. IOKIYAD.
Not mentioned is the gross distortion of the initial jobless claims. The reported number was 386,000 "seasonally adjusted". The actual number was 452,960.
I believe "seasonally adjusted" is officialese for "fictional".
http://www.ows.doleta.gov/press/2012/071912.asp
And of course "belief" is ..
Shooter, you need to take your complaints about jobless claims over to a GOP-themed website. Republicans have done nothing but vote again and again against job-creation legislation. They did it again today. And with regard to the GOP's pathetic JOBS bill that they submitted and passed, a Moody's economist projected it would likely actually cause another recession, and that Pres. Obama's American Jobs Act would likely create 1.9 million jobs. Guess which one Republicans voted for, and which one they ALL voted against. (Washington Post - "Economist: Senate GOP jobs plan wouldn't help economy in short term, and could even hurt").
@Shooter
Just wondering how this is relevant now?
"Seasonally adjusted":
Lots of data sets that have historically predictable fluctuation are available either not adjusted or adjusted for these fluctuations. (NSA or SA)
There is nothing "fictional" about it.
When the data is graphed over time the "SA" data is smoother and it is easier to see overall trends. The "NSA" looks all jaggedy - kind of like seismograph during an earthquake.
Sometimes - as is the case this week - the SA number is lower than the NSA number. But it goes the other way too. (like right before Christmas, when temporary jobs in sales open up)
Go ahead and look at the NSA numbers if you want. I and most people think that the SA numbers give more useful information.
Typical! For the people?
Petition/Libor Scandal tell White House to investigation by US Justice Dept.
http://www.change.org/petitions/white-house-demand-an-investigation-by-the-us-justice-department-on-the-libor-scandal?utm_campaign=autopublish&utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=share_petition
Petition/Tell Congress to pass farm bill
http://action.heidifornorthdakota.com/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=577
As the country will suffer its worst drought and crops a going to fail! Family farmers the life blood of their income is under attack! The teapublicans see this as a chance to force family farmers to fold and sell their farmland so the corporate rich can do what the vultures do best. We as a country are under attack from the people that have sworn to work in the peoples best interest. Not so much!
PS if corporations have control of the food and feed they will have another monopoly just like they do on oil/gas. Greedy rotten bastards!
Ahhh but-the Russians used to say that control of food was power and took over the farms that worked well didn't it.
I dearly love MSNBC and of course Rachel but, at times, reality is so depressing I am tempted to tune to FOX for a good laugh.
That way lies madness! :-)
I'm still obsessing about the right wing lie that "we're broke", which is a foundation stone in their effort to con more money out of the middle class. The question is, who's "we"? The country isn't broke, it's the richest in the world. Yes "we" the middle class are broke thanks to 30 years of Reaganomics. But you Mitt aren't, and your money should be taxed and invested in America. More here: http://therepublicon.blogspot.com/2012/07/were-broke-what-you-mean-we-mitt.html
You guys should do a meme/image dubbing contest every once in a while.
Here's my entry (featuring, Boehner):
https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/532496_10150961530881794_353732680_n.jpg
Can MSNBC please tighten up it's use of terms describing job offshoring? The terminology is confused, and hosts come off sounding ill informed about simple business terms.
Usually the word outsourcing is used as a synonym of offshoring. Yet the sets have nothing to do with each other- saying one does not imply the other. For example, Case 1: IBM got rid of many of the jobs that IBM used to perform in the US- the work is now performed outside the US by IBM. These are foreign workers on the IBM payroll, so it is not outsourcing- it is offshoring. Case 2: A small business may figure out that the outfit on the other side of town fixes radiators cheaper than he can because they have an expensive radiator repair piece of equipment. So he outsources those jobs to the other outfit and he makes more money than he did if he fixed radiators himself. Nothing nefarious about that outsourcing- it's just sensible.
Reid eyes Senate reform
By Steve Benen
-
Tue Jul 17, 2012 4:30 PM EDT
A couple of months ago, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), a traditionalist who's resisted changes to the way the chamber operates, raised some eyebrows when he voiced support for systemic institutional changes. In early June, he was even more forceful on the subject, saying he was "wrong" to resist reforms last year.
________________________________
A 56-vote majority wasn't enough: "Senate Republicans on Thursday blocked the No.1 item on the president's congressional 'to-do-list,' refusing to allow a vote on a bill that would give tax breaks for companies that "insource" jobs to the U.S. from overseas while eliminating tax deductions for companies that move jobs abroad."
Go to hell Harry.
Wise up. Reid just can't snap his fingers and make it happen. Changing Senate rules is also subject to the filibuster, unless done at the start of a new Congress, and that isn't going to happen until January. Way to make an ass of yourself.
MM- Actually, you are incorrect. Reid has the power to change the Senate rules by majority vote at any time.
For a large number of citations documenting this, see the Wikipedia article on the legislative tactic dubbed "the nuclear option".
Reid has what he calls a gentlemen's agreement with McConnell not to use the nuclear option. He is a man of his word and we can simply make Patty Murray leader and she can invoke it. No need to do this until we really need it like a SCOTUS confirmation or a majority in the House with a measure that cannot be pushed through under reconciliation rules as was done with Affordable Care Act.
Sorry, that's incorrect, for complicated reasons. In this instance, Wikipedia is not your friend. The kind of warning that's on the top of the article you link to is there for a reason.
You seem to be forgetting all the noise about filibuster reform that led up to the start of the current Congress, and all the reasons advanced for why the reformers were pinning their hopes on the beginning of the session. You should review news articles and blog postings from that period. I know you can use Google, but here's some Ezra Klein to get you started.
Per Mr. Klein:
"Because stopping the Senate from considering its own rules would be unconstitutional, the chair can rule against the filibuster, and the Senate could then move to change its rules on a majority vote."
"One caveat: Many people, including Udall himself, believe this has to happen at the beginning of a new Congress. If it doesn't happen at the beginning of a new Congress, then Congress is considered to have acquiesced to the previous Congress's rules, and a filibuster against further rule changes wouldn't interrupt the constitutional right to determine the rules."
Could this have been done last January? Or the January before?
I am pretty sure this must be done in the new Congress. Logically, changing the rules in the middle of the "game" would be like children making rules as they go. Imaginative, but really not fair. The rules are made, agreed and honored from the onset.
MM- I have studied the subject by examining not just pundits like Klein and Hayes, but original documents. I stand by my statement. Further, to your criticism that I accepted Wikipedia as an authority, please carefully reread what I wrote.
Wikipedia is a great source of citations, but is honest about itself- see for example its article: WP:Sucks
You may stand by your statement, but I've always found that an absurd thing to say, as if being convinced in oneself is somehow necessarily impressive to another person. And the remark about 'original documents' is so David Barton.
In any case, 'original documents' or not, it is still important to grapple with what actually happened in the runup to the start of the current Congress. To focus on 'pundits' and neglect to consider the actions and reasoning of proponents of reform such as Udall, a man with actual Senate experience, is to miss the point. And the point is, leaving aside Bartonesque statements about 'original documents' and standing next to yourself, reforming the filibuster in real life is a tricky and difficult thing. If it were as easy as you think is it, then it should have been accomplished by now. Your understanding of the matter fails the test of reality, which is a pity because otherwise we'd have a functional Senate.
Looks like the DNC got itself wrapped around the axle AGAIN today!! It appears they are pulling the "dancing horse" ad which is ABSOLUTELY STUPID!!
It appears that Pawlenty is "upset" because Ann Romney uses that horse as a "hobby" to help her with her MS. And he goes further to say:
Now remember, this is the SAME HORSE that Romney took a $77,000 deduction off his income taxes for.
This is the SAME Pawlenty who tried to cut physical therapy for the poor citizens of Minnesota. So Pawlenty thinks it OK for Romney to take a $77,000 deduction for Ann Romney's hobby horse (you know, it helps her with her MS) but it is NOT OK for poorer citizens of Minnesota who also may have MS to get physical therapy to help with THEIR MS???
Nonsense like this makes me wonder who the DNC is actually working for!!
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/07/pawlenty-to-obama-leave-ann-romneys-dancing-horse-alone/
http://www.minnesotamedicine.com/PastIssues/PastIssues2009/March2009/MMANewsMarch2009.aspx
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/06/18/1100947/-Romney-Took-77-000-Tax-Deduction-For-His-Dancing-Horse
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/07/dnc-regrets-offending-ann-romney-no-more-horse-ads/
The Senate filibuster is going to destroy this nation. This is an insane way to conduct business...by design.
the linked article on the "56 votes" line tells the tale. The Chamber of Commerce is not about american jobs, they are about corporate profits. Senate Republicans are not about american jobs or economy, they are about corporate profits.
Congratulations libertarians, how's that "free market" working for you?
Is the Fisker Romney mess because he is an oil industry shill?
Man, there are a lot of smart people here...
Cabdriver Confession: I've just discovered I'm more comfortable gobsmacking the trolls because their stupidity is so obvious...
Competition here is tough...
Wake me when you want some in-depth history on Mitt's religion, okay? Alright, it's Harry's religion, too, but he's a convert, and there's often a big difference... Reid didn't get all those doors slammed in his face in France, something that would give a lot of people a mean streak...
Carry on...
Hey Cabbie! Quick Mormon question - as I understand it, the Mormon Church's position on gambling is that it is a moral evil (and statistically stupid). How does a Mormon rationalize accepting millions from Sheldon Adelson? Why have I heard no protest from the Mormon Church?
Wouldn't that be like the Obama campaign accepting money from Rupert Murdoch ?
Excellent question. After the mob "exited" Las Vegas--in the days of Howard Hughes--the only banks that were financing new enterprises there were LDS-owned. They had the field to themselves, and it was particularly profitable.
You'll have to do your own research on that one, but a lot of Mormons do work in casinos. They honestly don't drink, and they don't gamble (neither do I, for that matter, and I"m a good enough card counter to beat a blackjack deck, but I know I can't beat the "early reshuffle"). Mormons are opposed to vice and sin, but they're not opposed to making money off of them.
Here on Planet Utah, you can only buy beer (not even wine coolers) in the grocery stores; everything else is sold in state package stores (with a high markup). And in the bars (at least they did away with "private clubs" that charged a token fee for a temporary membership), anyone who looks under 30 has to produce an ID that is recorded with a bar code reader. Finally, in restaurants with liquor licenses, there's a requirement that there be an "opaque barrier" so that patrons cannot see their drinks being prepared. I think the idea is to avoid "corrupting" innocent children. The nickname for that structure is "The Zion Curtain."