THE NEWSLETTER
Today's Note from a Madman
Wednesday, December 28, 2005
Media Madman Quotes in the Lead
Fox News asked "Is Hollywood snubbing our troops?
I'd like to ask the same question of President Bush.
-Noah Greenberg
"With 95 percent of a preliminary tally from the
Dec. 15 vote now completed, Chalabi remained almost 8,000 votes short of the
40,000 minimum needed for him or his bloc to win a single seat in the 275-seat
National Assembly, according to election officials. Without a seat in the
assembly, Chalabi would presumably be unable to obtain a post in the resulting
government [...]
"Chalabi's supporters here had hoped he would do well among exile voters who
were allowed to cast ballots overseas. But results announced Monday showed he
received just 0.89 percent of the "special vote,'' from Iraqi citizens in
foreign countries, hospitals, the army and prisons."
-Ellen Knickmeyer and Naseer Nouri of The Washington Post
report:
At least the Iraqi people can recognize a scoundrel. Unfortunately,
our President couldn't do the same or just didn't care.
The Two Americas
George W. Bush and his
legal advisers believe they can keep
anyone they want in custody, for any amount of time, and for any reason they see
fit by claiming that his "executive powers"
gives him the "Right" to do so.
(Another poor use of the word "Right")
I recognize the necessity of detaining captured "suspects" for questioning, but
I have a couple of, shall we say, "reservations".
First, I want to know the constitutional justification that allows
President Bush the "Right" to
put American citizens
in prison without due process? Whereas I am no fan of
Jose Padilla, who has been incarcerated for
three-and-a-half years now, the question remains who
else, and for what other reasons would GW put
American citizens in jail?
Next, I'm going to compare the American
Taliban, John Walker Lindh, who was captured and questioned as an
armed enemy combatant fighting against the US
in Afghanistan.
Lindh received a stiff 20 year prison term
for his crime. We know this for a fact: Lindh raised
arms against his own country and fellow citizens. He deserved
more than the 20 years he received. We also know that his
US interrogator,
CIA agent Mike Spann, was killed not long after his questioning
of Lindh during a prisoner uprising.
Whenever we saw pictures of Lindh ,
we also saw his parents pleading for his life and a light sentences. We saw all
of the pictures of an all-American
childhood. Sometimes there was a basketball court in the background and
sometimes there was a picture of of him in his Prom suit. We saw the child
Lindh and the teenage
Lindh . He got away easy with 20 years.
What you can say is that, at the very least, John
Walker Lindh, the American
Taliban was given his due process and knew his fate in a timely
fashion. In my estimation, he deserved the ultimate penalty. If ever there was a
case for someone to be given the death penalty, it was his case, whether he was
a "confused kid" or not.
On the other hand, we have Jose Padilla.
Every picture we see of him is that mug-shot of a scowled face in an orange
prison jump-suit. In the end, Mr. Padilla
might also deserve the death penalty, but he also deserves due process of the
law.
There is a difference in the way that John Walker
Lindh was treated and the way Jose
Padilla is being treated. Both are
American citizens. One is white while the other is Hispanic. The
question you have to ask yourself is this: Is race
the determining factor in the treatments of similar enemy
combatants who, similarly are also American citizens?
Is it race that decides their ultimate fate?
What is going to happen when there is a president who doesn't like me? Will I be
thrown into a prison for things reasons undetermined? Will you? I don't want to
be the guy who is accused of being too easy on
criminals or too soft on terrorism,
so I am going to take President Bush's
word for it and assume that Padilla
had something to do with the 9/11 hijacking and
terrorism here in the US. But
he is an American citizen. Try him...
convict him... throw him into jail or give him the death penalty... use his
knowledge to capture other terrorists. Do something.
It makes me feel uneasy to know that any one citizen's rights are taken away
because the president says it's "okay" and within his "power" to do so.
I don't want anyone taking away my rights. Period. And if they do, I want
to be able to defend myself.
-Noah Greenberg
I have brought up the death penalty in the above editorial. As I have said
before, I am for the death penalty WHEN, and ONLY WHEN I can be assured that it
will be applied fairly to the deserving convicted felon of special
circumstances. But that is just not the case.
Similarly to how the death penalty is applied, we can look at
how FEMA and President Bush responded to Hurricane Katrina.
It is more than obvious that race plays a part in
decisions made by this administration. Just look at the response of the
very same people after the hurricanes of 2004 hit Florida
and a more affluent citizenry.
Coincidences do happen, but after awhile, they cease
becoming "coincidences". -NG
Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI)
Robert Kennedy, Jr. has spoken frequently about replacing GDP with a new
measurement of success called the Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI). The authors
of GPI - Clifford Cobb, Ted Halstead, Jonathan Rowe - have defined it as
follows:
"The GPI takes into account more than twenty aspects of our economic lives that
the GDP ignores. It includes estimates of the economic contribution of numerous
social and environmental factors which the GDP dismisses with an implicit and
arbitrary value of zero. It also differentiates between economic transactions
that add to well-being and those which diminish it.
The GPI then integrates these factors into a composite measure so that the
benefits of economic activity can be weighed against the costs."
"The GPI is intended to provide citizens and policy-makers with a more accurate
barometer of the overall health of the economy, and of how our national
condition is changing over time."
"While per capita GDP has more than doubled from 1950 to present, the GPI shows
a very different picture. It increased during the 1950s and 1960s, but has
declined by roughly 45% since 1970. Further, the rate of decline in per capita
GPI has increased from an average of 1% in the 1970s to 2% in the 1980s to 6% so
far in the 1990s. This wide and growing divergence between the GDP and GPI is a
warning that the economy is stuck on a path that imposes large -- and as yet
unreckoned -- costs onto the present and the future."
"Specifically, the GPI reveals that much of what economists now consider
economic growth, as measured by GDP, is really one of three things: 1) fixing
blunders and social decay from the past; 2) borrowing resources from the future;
or 3) shifting functions from the community and household realm to that of the
monetized economy. The GPI strongly suggests that the costs of the nation's
current economic trajectory have begun to outweigh the benefits, leading to
growth that is actually uneconomic."
"If the mood of the public is any barometer at all, then it would seem that the
GPI comes much closer than the GDP to the economy that Americans actually
experience in their daily lives. It begins to explain why people feel
increasingly gloomy despite official claims of economic progress and growth."
"The GPI starts with the same personal consumption data the GDP is based on, but
then makes some crucial distinctions. It adjusts for certain factors (such as
income distribution), adds certain others (such as the value of household work
and volunteer work), and subtracts yet others (such as the costs of crime and
pollution). Because the GDP and the GPI are both measured in monetary terms,
they can be compared on the same scale."
-Robert Scardapane
What's Wrong With The Economy?
The fine folks at the Economic Policy Institute,
www.epi.org, outlined
the failures of the Bush economy:
1. Profits are up, but the wages and the incomes of
average Americans are
down.
2. More and more people are deeper and deeper in debt.
3. Job creation has not kept up with population growth, and the employment rate
has fallen sharply.
4. Poverty is on the rise.
5. Rising health care costs are eroding families' already declining income.
Is The Economy Slowing?
On December 27, the Treasury market closed as follows:
2 year Treasury bond yield - 4.34%
10 year Treasury bond yield - 4.34%
30 year Treasury bond yield - 4.50%
2 year Treasury notes actually yield more than 5 year treasury notes. The 2 year
note briefly yielded more than the 10 yield note but closed equal. This
condition is commonly known as an inversion of the yield curve.
Some think this is the result of excess liquidity that props up longer-term
Treasury prices. Others think this is a sign of an economic slowdown. In
general, all recessions are accompanied by an inverted yield curve. However, the
yield curve has sometimes inverted without a recession.
There is reason to be concerned as other indicators are slowing. Across the
nation housing prices have fallen and inventory is increasing. There was a
recessionary reading by the Richmond Federal Reserve index, manufacturing
activity, for the last month but it's not a trend (yet that is).
-Robert Scardapane
On that same note, today I saw a report that showed the Las Vegas are
housing market rose 11 percent this past year. In 2004, it rose 54 percent. For
those of you who don't know, Las Vegas was, and is the single hottest housing
market in the nation.
S-s-s-s-s-s. The sound of air escaping from a balloon.
-NG
More on the Fading Economy
The treasury yield curve is currently as flat as a pancake. In general, treasury
yields should be significantly higher for longer term notes. But, the difference
between the 2 year and the 10 year treasury note is very small - a couple of
basis points (one basis point = 1/100 of a percent). In some locations along the
yield curve, it is now inverted. Namely, the 2 year treasury notes yields more
than a 5 year note.
You might be saying - hey Bob, that's
interesting but how does it impact me? A classic indicator of a
recession is an inverted yield curve. Thus far, the
Federal Reserve denies that a significant slow down is in the
cards. They attribute the flat yield curve to cash
flow between nations and excess liquidity around the
world. Yet,
just today the Richmond Fed index fell from 9 in November to -2 in December
missing a forecast of a rise to 10. Any level below 0 indicates a contraction.
So, we shall see what we shall see. Look out for
Republicans screaming for even more tax cuts. As insane as that
sounds, Republicans will make the
argument that more tax cuts are needed to avoid a recession. Of course, they
fail to say that for most Americans
the economy has been in recession throughout the Bush regime. Oh
yeah, look for them to blame Bill Clinton
somehow, someway.
-Robert Scardapane
THE LAVENDER TUBE: THE YEAR IN REVIEW
by Victoria A. Brownworth
copyright c 2005 San Francisco Bay Area Reporter
Dickens had it right: 2005 was definitely the best *and* worst of times on
the tube, and the top TV event of the year, still playing out after four months,
proves it.
*Katrina*
Not since 9/11 has there been such a catastrophe in America and not since 9/11
have the TV networks from the big three to Univision been able to marshal their
forces and produce such stirring, gripping and unbelievable stories and images
to move a nation–if not a government.
When one looks at the current unraveling of the Bush Administration, it is the
televised images of sheer horror and devastation from Katrina–and the Bush
Administration's failures to alleviate the suffering of thousands of
*Americans*or even seem to care–that began that unraveling.
ABC's anchor, Peter Jennings, died of lung cancer in 2005. We remember writing
about 9/11 and how Jennings presented some of the best round-the-clock reporting
of that terrible event of anyone on TV. So it was with Katrina: Jennings' legacy
was carried forward with the incredible efforts of the ABC news team. It was
*Nightline's*Ted Koppel who single-handedly brought down execrable FEMA director
Michael Brown with the damning statement: "Man, don't you people watch
television?!"
It was John Donvan and Chris Bury, veteran *Nightline* reporters who, their
pale, red-headed visages sunburned to blistering, gave the truest picture of the
unfolding horror. It was Bury who "found" the Convention Center with its
staggering thousands who had gone without water or food (and of course,
sanitation) for more than three days. Bury took his cameraman through–a man who
wept at seeing a dead infant on the tour–and said quite simply, "If this isn't
hell, I don't know what is."
And it was Koppel who raised this response from Brown about the CC: "No one told
them to go there."
Except *they*–the suffering poor of New Orleans, had indeed been told to go
there, by the Mayor, the Governor and others.
ABC's Bob Woodruff, made co-anchor with Elizabeth Vargas, just weeks ago, owes
that position in no small way to his reportage during Katrina. Woodruff has
always been a reporter on the front lines: We've watched him report from various
war zones over the years and he was ABC's first man-on-the-ground after the
December 26th tsunami in the Indonesian Basin, which certainly prepared him for
what he found on the Gulf Coast. And he was definitely up to the job.
ABC gets a second *best* for their gal Oprah, who led her own team of
celebrities with cash to salvage lives. Oprah grew up in rural Mississippi and
visited her hometown devastated by Katrina. She enlisted sacks full of celebrity
cash and did what FEMA and the Bush team seemed incapable of: helped people on
the ground. Her friend, actor Matthew McConnaghy single-handedly airlifted a
bunch of doctors and some 30-odd dogs out of harm's way.
As is so often the case, Oprah with her celebrity power was able to do more than
those in *real* power. Maybe that because she just *wants* to help? Oprah also
donated $10 million of her own money to the victims whom she later went to visit
in shelters. She shot several shows from the Astrodome.
If ABC (with an honorable mention to NBC and the team led by anchor Brian
Williams whose outrage matched Koppel's) got best TV news reporting of 2005, it
should be no surprise that FOX got worst.
Set aside their second *worst* of the year, the ridiculous *war on Christmas*
news-story-that-wasn't that their star "fair-and-balanced" go-to-guy Bill
O'Reilly has been flogging in recent weeks. Their reportage of Katrina was
fraught with an undercurrent of classism and racism that was unmistakable–you
could *smell* it through the small screen. They just don't *like* poor people.
Especially if they aren't white.
They get our *worst* rating–for so many reasons.
NBC gets our *best* for ongoing coverage of Katrina. Williams has gone back
repeatedly, including just last week, to report on what has (little) and what
has not (lots) been done to put the Gulf Coast back together.
But the single *worst* TV moment in the Katrina tragedy was George Bush's creepy
live report from in front of St. Louis Cathedral in Jackson Square in the French
Quarter.
Commandeering all the electricity in the blacked-out city, the President, with
rolled-up sleeves, gave a speech of unparalleled bizarreness about how New
Orleans would be rebuilt, blah, blah, blah. As Williams later noted on his blog,
the flood of lights went out after Bush left and the city returned to darkness.
A metaphor if ever there was one.
ABC also gets our *best* for Terry Moran's unparalleled grilling of the Bush
team on the issue of torture. Just last week Moran, one of the three reporters
to take over for Koppel at *Nightline,* nearly caused the heartless Dick Cheney
to have another attack as he queried him. Moran, longtime senior White House
correspondent for ABC, was on assignment with Cheney during the VP's surprise
trip to Iraq. Moran put the case for torture in terms every American could
understand: "Mr. Vice President, you have daughters, I have daughters–is this
the world we want for our kids, where the Vice President of the United States
can't say torture is wrong?"
Moran gets our best of the year for real reporting of political events. He give
us hope that reporters *can* remember that their job isn't to take what this or
any Administration says at face value (Judith Miller, are you listening? FOX,
are you listening), but to ask questions–hard questions–like when Koppel grilled
Brown.
We'd also like to land a second echelon best on CNN's Anderson Cooper (whom, we
might add, started out on ABC's *World News Now,* which is where we first fell
in love with him) for his expert reporting during Katrina and of Iraq.
Speaking of Iraq, which so few do, that gets our *worst* of the year award. How
the slaughter of 2,200 American soldiers and–according to the President two
weeks ago in Philadelphia–30,000 Iraqis could be the non-news story of the year
escapes us, but it was. We're all for democracy and purple fingers, but the
voting wasn't the story. The dying and mutilating was. Perhaps in 2006, with
elections in the wings, these stellar news teams can get back to that story
in-depth. After all, it *is* a war.
Of course TV is only part news–the rest is (supposed to be) entertainment. We
have a lot of bests this year in that category.
Our favorite, must-see show on TV: Craig Ferguson's *Late Late Show* following
Letterman on CBS. Ferguson is smart, edgy, cute as hell, has the great Scottish
accent and is a one-man show. His opening monologues have made him a cult
favorite among smart, left-leaning insomniacs. His little Pythonesque skits are
hilarious and his guest round up is superb: celebrities and writers, the best
comedians we've ever seen and edgy new music as well as big names we know. If
you can't stay up that late, tape him. We guarantee instant addiction. He's like
Bill Maher without the cynicism. (You can also catch him next week hosting the
*People's Choice Awards* on CBS.)
Our favorite new bit of Ferguson's is "Is the President drinking again?" For
several weeks now, Ferguson has been taking clips of Bush's news conferences and
slowing the speed infinitesimally. Bush sounds like a drunk boy at the frat
house trying to impress a girl with his knowledge of politics–and failing
miserably. These spots are hilarious–oh, except he really *is* President.
Other late-night bests include *Jimmy Kimmel's* monologues, his Friday-night
skewering of the FCC and his wonderful excising of clips from televangelist TV
which never fail to stun.
In the comedy line-up, we also give a best to Tina Fey for a much-improved
*Saturday Night Live* and to her and Amy Poehler for their fantastic version of
*SNL's* news update.
You don't have to stay up late to catch the best new drama series on TV,
however. ABC's *Invasion* might have had a bad-timing entrance, given its oddly
prescient storyline of a devastating hurricane and the aftermath in which
government abandons the needy and there is no water or electricity for months.
But the show is wonderfully cast, superbly written and acted, has all the
government-conspiracy angles down pat and is incredibly entertaining with its
*X-Files-ish* story. It follows last season's best, *Lost,* still a super show,
on Wednesdays on ABC. Don't miss it.
Our best couple of the year should have been Bianca and Lena on ABC's *All My
Children, * but both left the show. Bianca has recently returned, sans
girlfriend, but with baby in tow. It remains to be seen what will happen with
her–she's currently one of those solo lesbians that we have seen all-too-often
on the tube.
Since the Bianca and Lena coupling didn't pan out, we've had to look elsewhere
for a *best* and there's no question: Best couple, James Spader and William
Shatner on ABC's *Boston Legal* as Alan Shore and Denny Crane. (ABC also gets
our vote for most improved network–we remember when the only good show they had
was *NYPD Blue.*)
Spader and Shatner play acerbic lawyers and are mesmerizingly good in their
roles as two friends with infinite problems relating to others. The past few
weeks they have been sleeping together in an innuendo-filled story line that has
more to do with Shore's night terrors than anything gay, but it has given David
Kelley, the show's creator, ample room to address gay issues. Nicely done. If
you haven't caught the show or the fabulous coupling of Spader and Shatner, do
so. Totally apart from the excellent political subtext of the show, these two
are the best actors on prime time.
Of course there were many worsts, as there always are on TV, among them ABC's
*Commander in Chief, *a terrible, terrible program setting the stage to keep a
woman from becoming President in the U.S. by showing just how silly girls in
power can be. The episode of *ER* shown on World AIDS Day in which a Mother with
AIDS refused to have her HIV+ child treated because AIDS, she said, is just a
government conspiracy. Her Deusenberg theories on AIDS were *so* unworthy of a
show consistently dedicated over the past decade to AIDS awareness and edgy
presentation of the disease. Everything on FOX news. Everything on televangelist
TV (although it's worth watching occasionally to see what they think of us).
TV in 2005 was best exemplified by Peter Jennings and Ted Koppel. Jennings died
in August and Koppel retired in November, but both brought a standard to TV that
it rarely achieves. On their own they made 2005 a best in reporting. And their
legacy–training reporters like Terry Moran in their scrupulous image–bodes well
for the future of TV news.
It was a hellish year, but TV brought it to us in living color so we couldn't
look away. For that alone, TV once again gets our best of the year award. Stay
tuned.
Iraqis Should Vote On Withdrawal
Irony defined. On the same day the United States House of Representatives
debates a bill to have the House of Representatives decided the length of the US
occupation of Iraq, Congressman Dennis J. Kucinich (D-OH) and Congressman Ron
Paul (R-TX) introduced bipartisan legislation calling on the United States to
support a vote in the Iraqi Parliament on the future of the US occupation of the
country.
Kucinich issued the following statement today on his legislation:
"The new permanent elected body in Iraq, not the US House of Representatives,
should vote on the length of the US occupation. It is their country. What Iraq
needs and what Iraq wants in terms of continued US military occupation should be
determined by the Iraqis, not the US occupying force or politicians in
Washington.
"Over and over this Administration has compared Iraq's progress towards
democracy with our nation's struggle over 200 years ago. Using the
Administration's own analogy, it is time to allow Iraq the chance to write its
own Declaration of Independence.
"Iraq has passed a Constitution, and has held elections to have a permanent
elected body. Iraq, by all measurable means, is a sovereign nation. As such, it
should be able to debate and vote on the most important issue facing their
nation-the US occupation. The Administration has repeatedly stated that if the
Iraqis ask us to leave, we will leave. Poll after poll in Iraq indicate that the
Iraqi people overwhelming oppose the US occupation.
"It is now time for this Administration to live up to its word, and allow Iraqis
to make the most important and basic decision about the future of their country.
The Iraqi people cannot fully be free until decisions about their future are
made in Baghdad and not Washington."
The Kucinich/Paul resolution will make it the sense of Congress, "that the new
permanent Council of Representatives should debate and vote on whether or not a
continued U.S. military presence in Iraq is desired by the government of Iraq;
and that such a debate and vote should be conducted in an open and transparent
manner, and occur as soon as practicable."
-Forwarded by Robert Scardapane
In response to "Maybe if enough of us got together, we can have the
parties changed from the inside. Go to your congressional and senatorial
debates. Question the candidates about their stand on campaign finance reform.
Ask them if elected, will they work to eliminate lobbyists, "
David W. writes:
Is the press getting "it?" Suddenly, the whore press sounds like
bartcop.com
Excerpt:
Austin American Statesman:
Americans can't settle for
Bush's "Trust me" defense of spy program
The Asheville Citizen-Times (North Carolina):
Bush's domestic spying a flagrant abuse of power.
The Arizona Republic:
Warrantless eavesdropping a chilling specter
Send your comments to: NationalView@aol.com or comments@nationalview.org
-Noah Greenberg