Welcome! "What's Happenin'?" is a casual community diary (a daily series, 8:30 AM Eastern on weekdays, 10 AM on weekends and holidays) where we hang out and talk about the goings on here and everywhere.
We welcome links to your writings here on dkos or elsewhere, posts of pictures, music, news, etc.
Just about anything goes, but attacks and pie fights are not welcome here. This is a community diary and a friendly, peaceful, supportive place for people to interact.
Everyone who wants to join in peaceful interaction is very welcome here.
|
Good Morning!
A hill in Chadds Ford, PA across the street from Kuerner Farm, a frequent setting for Andrew Wyeth paintings (Photo by joanneleon. October, 2012)
"Democracy as we know it will be lost if we continue to allow government to become one bought by the highest bidder, for the highest bidder. Candidates will simply become bit players and pawns in a campaign managed and manipulated by paid consultants and hired guns."
- Sen. Wendell Ford. (Wash. Post, 3/11/97, at A4)
Bruce Springsteen-American Land |
Drop in
any time
day or night
to say hello.
|
News and Opinion
I feel sorry for the people in the swing states.
2012 ad blitz: big money, smaller audience
WASHINGTON — One million ads. More than $1 billion. Ten battleground states.
Those eye-popping figures tell the story of the 2012 presidential campaign TV ad blitz – never before has so much money been spent on so many commercials aimed at so few voters.
Television ads were the primary communications tool for the campaigns of President Barack Obama and his Republican challenger Mitt Romney, despite the gradual but persistent shift of viewers from television to the Internet.
[...]
"The decline of television advertising hasn't happened, and it's not going away anytime soon," said Erika Franklin Fowler, director of the Wesleyan University Media Project which tracks campaign advertising. "TV is where you look for the persuadable voter, and the Internet is what you use to mobilize your base."
The two presidential campaigns, the political parties and their allied independent groups aired 1,015,615 ads between June 1 and Oct. 29, the Wesleyan project found – almost 40 percent more than the number of ads that ran in the same period in 2008, when Obama defeated Republican John McCain for the presidency.
A campaign awash in cash
WHEN IT COMES to the corrosive influence of money in politics, the 2012 campaign has presented a trifecta of troubling developments. They are, in ascending order of worry: the complete collapse of the presidential public financing system set up in the wake of Watergate; the explosion of the super PAC political committees, which are allowed to take unlimited checks to finance independent expenditures for or against particular candidates; and the proliferation of “dark money,” or spending by nonprofit organizations and trade groups that, unlike super PACs, are excused from having to reveal their donors. The end result is a system awash in cash and dangerously ripe for corruption.
Every presidential cycle ends up costing more than the last, but 2012 marked the first presidential election since Watergate to be underwritten entirely by private money. This development left the candidates spending even more time than usual scrambling for dollars and beholden to the bundlers who rake in hundreds of thousands, if not millions, in donations. Along with their allied parties, each candidate raised more than $1 billion. President Obama, who helped break the system and then ignored his pledge to try to fix it, at least discloses the identity of his bundlers. Mitt Romney, unlike his two Republican predecessors, has refused even that minimal transparency.
The most dramatic development of the 2012 campaign has been the explosion of super PACs and the emergence of candidate-specific super PACs as a major force in the presidential campaign and, in some cases, congressional races. [...] Even more troubling was the surge in 2012 of “dark money” spending by outside groups — supposed nonprofit “social welfare organizations” and trade associations — that take advantage of permissive interpretations by the Federal Election Commission and Internal Revenue Service to avoid disclosing donors. The Center for Responsive Politics reports close to $300 million in such secret money.
Fundraiser in chief
http://www.baltimoresun.com/...
System meant to reform campaign finance ironically turned candidates into non-stop money grubbers
President Obama's 220 fundraisers for the Obama Victory Fund, a joint committee benefiting both the Obama-Biden reelection campaign and the Democratic National Committee, exceed the combined total of 208 fundraisers headlined by his five immediate predecessors for their reelection campaigns and national committees in their third and fourth years in office: 86 by George W. Bush; 70 by Bill Clinton; 24 by George H.W. Bush; three by Ronald Reagan; and 25 by Jimmy Carter. This rise in the time devoted to fundraising is a multi-president story. Mr. Clinton far outpaced George H.W. Bush's reelection fundraising, George W. Bush broke Mr. Clinton's records, and now Mr. Obama has eclipsed Mr. Bush's efforts. Why?
How to Win the Election (Without Super PACs)
But as often, the apparent familiarity of the world of the ancient text is largely a matter of translation. For decades, if not centuries, Quintus Cicero’s advice has been adjusted in English versions to match our own political systems and processes. Freeman’s translation is no different. Even the idea that the politician should give people hope, a cliché of modern media politics, looks different in the original Latin from the modern English. Freeman’s version has: “The most important part of your campaign is to bring hope to people and a feeling of goodwill toward you.” It is, for us, an instantly recognizable thought. But what the original Latin actually says is this: “In seeking election you must take care that the state has a good hope of you, and a good opinion of you”—which is quite different from (indeed the reverse of) the modern idea of bringing hope to the people.
Outside Spending
Obama, Romney in even race two days before election: Reuters/Ipsos poll
(Reuters) - The race for the White House remained in essentially a dead heat ahead of Tuesday's election but U.S. President Barack Obama holds a slim edge over Republican candidate Mitt Romney in the key state of Ohio, according to a Reuters/Ipsos daily tracking poll released on Sunday.
Nationally, of 3,805 polled likely voters, 48 percent said they would vote for Democrat Obama, while 47 percent sided with Romney, a former Massachusetts governor, the poll showed.
The results were similarly close in several swing states seen as determining the winner - Virginia, Colorado and Florida.
But in Ohio - perhaps the single most crucial swing state and where 18 electoral votes are at stake - Obama had 48 percent compared to Romney's 44 percent. On Saturday, Obama was ahead in Ohio by a point in the same poll.
[...]
All of the Reuters/Ipsos poll results on Sunday fall within the polls' credibility intervals, a tool used to account for statistical variation in Internet-based polling.
This is how it looks for disclosed contributions. Wall Street is bent out of shape about weak, mostly not implemented yet, legislation like Dodd-Frank. Imagine how bent out of shape they'd be about some measures that really held them accountable. They've already gotten off nearly scot free. It's amazing that they haven't been more generous to an administration that has been so generous to them (unless they have but just not in places where contributions would be disclosed).
Wall Street donors opening their checkbooks for Mitt Romney
The financial industry's support for the Republican nominee marks a sharp reversal from four years ago, when the industry supported Barack Obama over John McCain.
The financial sector has bet big on Romney. The industry — including insurance and real estate — has so far sent $52.4 million in campaign donations to Romney, according to data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics. That's almost 19% more spent on ousting Obama than the $44.2 million the financial sector spent on putting him into the White House in 2008.
[...]
This election, only $6 million, or 23%, of Wall Street's cash to the two main presidential campaigns has gone to Obama, versus $19.7 million to Romney, as of Oct. 17, the CRP data show.
[...]
Notable in support for Romney is Goldman Sachs Group Inc., the powerful investment bank. Goldman Sachs donated more than $1 million to Obama when he first ran for president in 2008, while giving only $240,295 to McCain, according to the CRP data. The data reflect contributions by employees, immediate family and political action committees, not the organizations.
This time, Goldman ranks as Romney's No. 1 contributor, giving him $994,139, according to CRP data. Four other top Romney contributors include Wall Street powerhouses: Bank of America Corp., Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Credit Suisse.
Obama has taken in only $184,925 from Goldman this election. Four years ago Goldman was the president's second-biggest contributor, but its ranking has sunk to 53rd. (Goldman's PAC did not donate to either campaign this election, according to the CRP.)
Silicon Valley unsure over support for Obama,Romney
Microsoft and Google trail only the University of California at the top of a list of Obama contributors disclosed by the Center for Responsive Politics.
However, the drive to grow and profit in Silicon Valley makes Romney an attractive candidate for some executives and venture capitalists.
[...]
The top five contributors for Romney were listed as financial institutions Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan Chase and Credit Suisse Group.
[...]
Major corporations direct contributions to campaigns or political action committees, but typically try to stay in the good graces of rival parties by having "bundlers" who work with campaigns seeking donations from employees.
Microsoft, for example, has bundlers working with Republicans and Democrats and, as a corporation, has donated to both sides.
Wired's Maplight Tracker
Romney
Top Ten Contributors from Jan 1, 2011 - Oct 28, 2012More info
Goldman Sachs $785,990
U.S. Government $742,880
Bank of America $696,598
JPMorgan Chase $635,689
Morgan Stanley $622,866
Credit Suisse $517,075
Deloitte $409,851
Kirkland & Ellis $393,947
Wells Fargo $390,996
Barclays $388,800
Obama
Top Ten Contributors from Jan 1, 2011 - Oct 28, 2012More info
U.S. Government $2,095,270
University of California $799,533
Google $508,864
Microsoft $501,101
Harvard University $433,380
Kaiser Permanente $391,746
Deloitte $351,537
DLA Piper $348,247
Stanford University $305,199
Sidley Austin $293,743
Goldman Sachs Building Is Bright, but Occupy Shines
Dear Lloyd Blankfein, Chief Executive Officer of Goldman Sachs: The global headquarters of your firm is situated in Battery Park City. The well-to-do community built on landfill west of the World Trade Center, connects, I am told, to a different grid from the rest of lower Manhattan. Still, 200 Water Street seems to have kept every light on every floor illuminated since Sunday. Are you trying to send a message to the rest of us about your power? From our very dark, increasingly quiet and cold apartments we see you through our windows and we get it.
And now to cousin Chloe. She reports from Wiliamsburg:
Thursday, Nov 1. 12.35 am
[...]
On the volunteer side, there were a half-dozen occupy trained organizers on-site doing kitchen, social networking and media outreach, community outreach (biking around to any local organization or establishment that might have resources or information) and organizational infrastructure. Today I saw Occupy alive, providing much-needed support and coordination of efforts to help the slightly overwhelmed RHI staff serve the population. An incredible woman in a bright pink sweater stepped up to coordinate all the kitchen work—her name is Lisa, but I call her Pink Wonder Woman. A student named Zoltan biked around to all the local community service providers and attempted to figure out who else can come online to help distribute supplies and food. About fifteen to twenty-five other volunteers were on site—maybe Occupy or not, I’m not sure—who chopped and prepared food and processed intake and distribution. People arrived throughout the day to deliver supplies of all kinds, all of which were needed. Paper towels, batteries, flashlights, toilet paper, paper plates, non-perishable ready to eat foods, water (tons of water)—all gratefully received and redistributed.
[...]
At 6 pm, RHI opened its roll-up side door to a line of hundreds of people who had been patiently waiting for food. Each person received a plate of hot food, a small bag of supplies (water, canned goods, candles), some candy if they wanted it, baby food if necessary, and paper towels and toilet paper if they needed it. People were very grateful for our help and the mood was good. They covered their food with tin foil and carried it away back to dark buildings, where other children and grandmothers and sick people waited for help.
Shock Doctrine, American-Style: Hurricane Sandy Devastation Used to Push for Sale of Public Infrastructure to Investors
One of the themes of Naomi Klein’s book The Shock Doctrine was that disasters, such as the explosion of government budget deficits as a result of the financial crisis, help powerful parties push through programs that would have been hard to sell in ordinary circumstances. An even more cynical version is starting. The wreckage from Hurricane Sandy hasn’t even been cleared, yet financial entrepreneurs are looking to profit from it. From Philly.com:
Rebuilding the shattered Shore and the swamped New York tunnels, along with badly needed updates to the Northeast’s exhausted roads and rails, will be an opportunity to implement streamlined construction laws backed by Republicans and pro-business Democrats in Congress and the states, says Frank Rapoport, Berwyn-based partner at New York law firm McKenna Long & Aldridge L.L.P., and counselor to contractors who support “public-private partnerships” (P3).
That’s a label for a group of strategies that replace lengthy government-led construction with private contractors and financiers, financed by “sharing” user fees – like road tolls – once the project is built, instead of borrowing money and charging taxpayers….
P3 funding – which Corbett’s predecessor, Democrat Ed Rendell, also supported and has continued to champion in his part-time retirement gig as an investment banker for Greenhill & Co. – is coming along “just in time” to aid in Sandy reconstruction, Rapoport says. Virginia is pushing a high-profile, privately run, toll-funded expansion of I-495 that P3 backers call a model. Pennsylvania “is following Virginia and Texas” in pushing privately run public projects, he added. Cash-strapped Puerto Rico is using P3 projects “for everything from bridges to schools.
Marines push into NYC to help with Sandy relief
NEW YORK — Marines arrived Sunday in New York City’s Staten Island borough, a community devastated by last week’s superstorm, to assist local authorities with ongoing cleanup efforts and deliver food to those displaced by the destruction.
[ ... ]
Numbering about 20, many in this group of Marines are assigned to Combat Logistics Battalion 26, part of the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit, out of Camp Lejeune, N.C. Currently, about 300 personnel from the MEU are based aboard the amphibious assault ship Wasp, anchored about five miles off New York’s Brooklyn borough. Joining the logistics Marines are personnel from Marine Heavy Helicopter Squadron 366, out of Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point, N.C.
[ ... ]
The 26th MEU, commanded by Col. Matthew G. St. Clair, suspended its pre-deployment training Thursday upon receiving orders to head for the Northeast. Its personnel are capable of providing medical, engineering and logistics support along with airlift. The MEU operates CH-53 Super Stallion and UH-1N Huey helicopters as well as MV-22 Osprey tiltrotors, which can take off and land like helicopters and fly like airplanes.
Additional personnel could come ashore Monday, Marine officials said.
Fed Budgetary Experts Demolish CBO Health Cost Model, the Lynchpin of Budget Hysteria
The argument made by the opponents of the plans to cut Social Security and Medicare generally take this form: concerns about Social Security are greatly exaggerated. They are based on long-term forecasts, which are notoriously inaccurate in outlying years. The most commonly cited, by the Trustees of the Social Security system, projects the exahustion of the famous trust fund in 2033. As several analysts have observed, if Social Security really has a problem, we’ll know it in plenty of time; there’s no need to do anything immediately.
By contrast, conventional wisdom is that Medicare does have a long term cost predicament, but the problem is not demographic, but that of the steep rise of health care costs in general.
[ ... ]
The CBO’s performance on this front looks like malpractice. The Fed economists note telling irregularities, such as the substitution of scenarios, as opposed to the use of confidence band analysis, as the CBO employed in its Social Security forecasts. And this would not the first time that CBO has apparently allowed political considerations to interfere with its pretense of objectivity. First we have the case of CBO analyst Lan Pham, who was fired for attempting to incorporate the impact of foreclosures and chain of title issues on home price and property tax forecasts. Second, we have the instance of Tom Ferguson and Rob Johnson of alerting the CBO to a significant omission in their deficit analysis, that of failing to include financial assets in their debt-to-GDP ratio calculation. CBO staffers have not disputed the accuracy of the Ferguson/Johnson research but nevertheless will not change their projections. Now we have what is demonstrably an overly aggressive set of assumptions driving health policy debate, with two Federal Reserve analysts sufficiently taken aback by the model as to publish a serious takedown of it.
The CBO’s independence is, like its output, treated as above question. It’s time to subject both to harsh scrutiny.
This Is Not a Revolution
When goals converge, motivations differ. The US cooperated with Gulf Arab monarchies and sheikhdoms in deposing Qaddafi yesterday and in opposing Assad today. It says it must be on the right side of history. Yet those regimes do not respect at home the rights they piously pursue abroad. Their purpose is neither democracy nor open societies. They are engaged in a struggle for regional domination. What, other than treasure, can proponents of a self-styled democratic uprising find in countries whose own system of governance is anathema to the democratic project they allegedly promote?
The new system of alliances hinges on too many false assumptions and masks too many deep incongruities. It is not healthy because it cannot be real. Something is wrong. Something is unnatural. It cannot end well.
[...]
Not unlike the rulers they helped depose, Islamists placate the West. Not unlike those they replaced, who used the Islamists as scarecrows to keep the West by their side, the Muslim Brotherhood waves the specter of what might come next should it fail now: the Salafis who, for their part and not unlike the Brothers of yore, are torn between fealty to their traditions and the taste of power.
It’s a game of musical chairs. In Egypt, Salafis play the part once played by the Muslim Brotherhood; the Brotherhood plays the part once played by the Mubarak regime. In Palestine, Islamic Jihad is the new Hamas, firing rockets to embarrass Gaza’s rulers; Hamas, the new Fatah, claiming to be a resistance movement while clamping down on those who dare resist; Fatah, a version of the old Arab autocracies it once lambasted. How far off is the day when Salafis present themselves to the world as the preferable alternative to jihadists?
[...]
The battle in Syria also is a battle for Iraq. Sunni Arab states have not accepted the loss of Baghdad to Shiites and, in their eyes, to Safavid Iranians. A Sunni takeover in Syria will revive their colleagues’ fortunes in Iraq. Militant Iraqi Sunnis are emboldened and al-Qaeda is revitalized. A war for Iraq’s reconquest will be joined by its neighbors. The region cares about Syria. It obsesses about Iraq.
[...]
What the US sought to obtain over decades through meddling and imposition, it might now obtain via acquiescence: Arab regimes that will not challenge Western interests. Little wonder that many in the region are persuaded that America was complicit in the Islamists’ rise, a quiet partner in what has been happening.
[...]
Was the last century an aberrant deviation from the Arab world’s inherent Islamic trajectory? Is today’s Islamist rebirth a fleeting, anomalous throwback to a long-outmoded past? Which is the detour, which is the natural path?
Rival Libya militias battle on streets of Tripoli
(Reuters) - Rival Libyan militias fired guns and rocket-propelled grenades at each other in Tripoli on Sunday and set fire to a former intelligence building in one of the worst breakdowns in security in the capital since Muammar Gaddafi's fall.
At least five people were wounded and a stray bullet entered a hospital in the heart of the city, where residents rushed to arm themselves, saying calls to police had gone unheeded. After more than 12 hours, the army moved in.
[...]
By early afternoon, a building belonging to the Supreme Security Committee (SSC), a body set up last year to try to regulate armed groups, was in flames and being looted by members of a rival militia faction, witnesses said. A sports shop that helps fund one of the militia groups was also looted.
Blog Posts and Tweets of Interest
People Have The Power - Roll Hall of Fame 2007
Remember when progressive debate was about our values and not about a "progressive" candidate? Remember when progressive websites championed progressive values and didn't tell progressives to shut up about values so that "progressive" candidates can get elected?
Come to where the debate is not constrained by oaths of fealty to persons or parties.
Come to where the pie is served in a variety of flavors.
"The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum." ~ Noam Chomsky
|