Showing posts with label Financial Reform. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Financial Reform. Show all posts
Over the weekend, I watched the ESPN 30-For-30 special Straight Outta L.A., a documentary on the Raiders experience in Los Angeles.
The L.A. Raiders, a short-lived marriage between Southern California and Al Davis, came to town at the height of gang activity in the city, as well as the beginnings of a new hip hop culture. In Los Angeles from just 1982-1994, one event stood out more than all others as I watched.
Straight Outta L.A. was narrated by one of L.A.'s gangsta rap founders, Ice Cube, who spoke painfully about the 1992 L.A. Riots. I remember these words he said about the mayor, Tom Bradley.
"I knew he was going to let the city burn." And it did.
Why do I bring this up? Because the images of Los Angeles came flooding to mind when I saw this:
The image is from the New York Times, and depicts Bangkok, the capitol of Thailand, yesterday.
Civil unrest has been brewing in Bangkok since 2006, when former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra was removed from power in a military coup. Some members of the current government are blaming Thaksin for causing the current unrest.
However, unrest would be an understatement of massive proportion. Yesterday, the Thai military stepped up its aggressiveness, leading to a bloody takeover of the protests.
That reporter wrote an incredible piece, saying he heard a bang, like a firecracker, before the general collapsed. He also talked about how the city is built to be a world-class city, with architecture portraying high hopes, yet it is often reduced to times like today.
Or yesterday. When the city burned.
What happens tomorrow? Here is a look from both sides.
Protesters apparently feel let down by their leaders, and it was at that point that they took to the buildings. They are calling for new elections (which they actually got, but rejected), and it is questionable what could actually end this. Thailand is a country with a hugely powerful military, meaning rebellion is very difficult, at least not without the military's help.
A quote from a protester: "We want democracy. True democracy, free democracy. Why is it so hard, why?"
On the other side, the directive should probably make their stance clear. Should protesters become violent at all, they will be shot. And they were yesterday. One protester said that, "if the prime minister wants to govern the country on top of this wreckage, he should go ahead and kill us all." Shortly after the military killed two protesters, wounded several journalists and killed an Italian news photographer.
All the while, the city burned.
--
Speaking of civil unrest, coming off of his blowout win in the Kentucky republican primary, Tea Party candidate Rand Paul is not talking about current policy, but is instead answering questions about his views on the Civil Rights Act. Check out this piece on the Rachel Maddow show. Before you pass it off as Maddow being an MSNBC hack (which she is), remember that Paul announced his candidacy on her show.
Apparently, Dr. Paul has a problem with the federal government telling private businesses whether or not they can discriminate. He is completely supportive of civil rights protections when government funding is involved. He calls it "ending institutional racism."
I just saw this clip this morning, but I've got a couple of thoughts. One, I've never been into a private business that still doesn't have a sign saying, "we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone." That said, there are very few business that don't receive some form of government funding or subsidy.
In addition, Maddow specifically asked him how he could be against discrimination, but not support the CRA. Well, I actually know quite a few women who are against the Equal Protection Act. Why? Because those protections already exist. In the Bill of Rights and the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments of the Constitution. In other words, I don't need to be singled out for protection. I need my government to enforce the foundation of its laws.
Third, per usual, this has been blown up by the left as Paul being a crazy right-wing, racist nut. That may or may not be true. I am all for the Democrat winning in Kentucky. However, this is one of those times that I get sick of two white people arguing from ivory towers about how to treat black people they rarely come in contact with. Let's use a demographic to get elected, but then forget about that demographic until we get elected again. What could change that? Black people voting.
Lastly, Paul makes one really good point. Today, being a racist business owner would be an awful business decision. Is the problem the lack of government regulation, or is it inherent racism within people? Which gets to Paul's original point. Is institutionalized racism the problem, or is it individual racism? I think the former far more than the latter. If children are raised in public school systems that reject discrimination and teach equality, as their public funding would suggest they must, then the solution of the problem happens at age four, not with glorified affirmative action.
Excuse me while I go back to being a Democrat now. And I'll think some more on this topic and get back to you.
Financial reform hit a roadblock yesterday, thanks to our junior senator from Washington, Maria Cantwell. Saw a good headline in reference to the senator's vote against cloture: "Yes We Cantwell." Majority Leader Harry Reid racked up 57 votes for cloture, was screwed by Mass. Senator Scott Brown, and lost Cantwell as well. Both Maine Republicans were 'yes' votes. The day after his loss in the Democratic primary in Pennsylvania, Senator Arlen Specter did not vote.
A big hearing on the Hill today, with nothing to do with anything you've heard about so far. The House Education and Labor Committee will hold a hearing on the effects of concussions on high school athletes. One of the biggest unknowns in athletics are concussions (in medical circles as well), and it cannot be long before a larger safety protocol comes. It could start with this report, from the GAO, showing the most athletes return too soon after suffering the brain trauma.
Finally, I am making this announcement today, knowing that you will forget, and I'll make it again. Over the last week or so, I have been transferring my blog over to a new host, with a new URL. It is pretty much ready, save for a couple of tweaks, though it is not yet what I want it to be. That said, go check it out at www.politicsandpeople.org.
It obviously looks very much like a blog, which is the main thing I am looking into changing. As you've probably noticed, I've moved a lot of my content into the news-y, political (and otherwise) realm, and less about my specific experiences in DC. That said, the people part still stands, because I expand on things, such as the Rand Paul issue from today, or the racism in America piece from last week. I'd like to separate that from the personal stuff. We'll see how that goes.
Anyway, check out the new space, tell me what you think. And I will have a more personal piece on my visit to the White House yesterday, sometime this week.
[More]
The L.A. Raiders, a short-lived marriage between Southern California and Al Davis, came to town at the height of gang activity in the city, as well as the beginnings of a new hip hop culture. In Los Angeles from just 1982-1994, one event stood out more than all others as I watched.
Straight Outta L.A. was narrated by one of L.A.'s gangsta rap founders, Ice Cube, who spoke painfully about the 1992 L.A. Riots. I remember these words he said about the mayor, Tom Bradley.
"I knew he was going to let the city burn." And it did.
Why do I bring this up? Because the images of Los Angeles came flooding to mind when I saw this:
Civil unrest has been brewing in Bangkok since 2006, when former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra was removed from power in a military coup. Some members of the current government are blaming Thaksin for causing the current unrest.
However, unrest would be an understatement of massive proportion. Yesterday, the Thai military stepped up its aggressiveness, leading to a bloody takeover of the protests.
Arsonists in Bangkok set fire to almost 30 buildings, the government said, including the country's stock exchange, a massive shopping mall, two banks, a movie theater and a television station. Two city halls were set on fire in the provincial capitals when thousands of protesters reacted to news of the Bangkok crackdown.Somehow, only 12 people were killed and about 60 injured, far less than expected. That is because, do to the increased pressure from the powerful Thai military, many of the protest's leaders turned themselves in yesterday. This is the same protest that saw a renegade general shot in the head while giving an interview with a western reporter last week.
That reporter wrote an incredible piece, saying he heard a bang, like a firecracker, before the general collapsed. He also talked about how the city is built to be a world-class city, with architecture portraying high hopes, yet it is often reduced to times like today.
Or yesterday. When the city burned.
What happens tomorrow? Here is a look from both sides.
Protesters apparently feel let down by their leaders, and it was at that point that they took to the buildings. They are calling for new elections (which they actually got, but rejected), and it is questionable what could actually end this. Thailand is a country with a hugely powerful military, meaning rebellion is very difficult, at least not without the military's help.
A quote from a protester: "We want democracy. True democracy, free democracy. Why is it so hard, why?"
On the other side, the directive should probably make their stance clear. Should protesters become violent at all, they will be shot. And they were yesterday. One protester said that, "if the prime minister wants to govern the country on top of this wreckage, he should go ahead and kill us all." Shortly after the military killed two protesters, wounded several journalists and killed an Italian news photographer.
All the while, the city burned.
--
Speaking of civil unrest, coming off of his blowout win in the Kentucky republican primary, Tea Party candidate Rand Paul is not talking about current policy, but is instead answering questions about his views on the Civil Rights Act. Check out this piece on the Rachel Maddow show. Before you pass it off as Maddow being an MSNBC hack (which she is), remember that Paul announced his candidacy on her show.
Apparently, Dr. Paul has a problem with the federal government telling private businesses whether or not they can discriminate. He is completely supportive of civil rights protections when government funding is involved. He calls it "ending institutional racism."
I just saw this clip this morning, but I've got a couple of thoughts. One, I've never been into a private business that still doesn't have a sign saying, "we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone." That said, there are very few business that don't receive some form of government funding or subsidy.
In addition, Maddow specifically asked him how he could be against discrimination, but not support the CRA. Well, I actually know quite a few women who are against the Equal Protection Act. Why? Because those protections already exist. In the Bill of Rights and the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments of the Constitution. In other words, I don't need to be singled out for protection. I need my government to enforce the foundation of its laws.
Third, per usual, this has been blown up by the left as Paul being a crazy right-wing, racist nut. That may or may not be true. I am all for the Democrat winning in Kentucky. However, this is one of those times that I get sick of two white people arguing from ivory towers about how to treat black people they rarely come in contact with. Let's use a demographic to get elected, but then forget about that demographic until we get elected again. What could change that? Black people voting.
Lastly, Paul makes one really good point. Today, being a racist business owner would be an awful business decision. Is the problem the lack of government regulation, or is it inherent racism within people? Which gets to Paul's original point. Is institutionalized racism the problem, or is it individual racism? I think the former far more than the latter. If children are raised in public school systems that reject discrimination and teach equality, as their public funding would suggest they must, then the solution of the problem happens at age four, not with glorified affirmative action.
Excuse me while I go back to being a Democrat now. And I'll think some more on this topic and get back to you.
Financial reform hit a roadblock yesterday, thanks to our junior senator from Washington, Maria Cantwell. Saw a good headline in reference to the senator's vote against cloture: "Yes We Cantwell." Majority Leader Harry Reid racked up 57 votes for cloture, was screwed by Mass. Senator Scott Brown, and lost Cantwell as well. Both Maine Republicans were 'yes' votes. The day after his loss in the Democratic primary in Pennsylvania, Senator Arlen Specter did not vote.
A big hearing on the Hill today, with nothing to do with anything you've heard about so far. The House Education and Labor Committee will hold a hearing on the effects of concussions on high school athletes. One of the biggest unknowns in athletics are concussions (in medical circles as well), and it cannot be long before a larger safety protocol comes. It could start with this report, from the GAO, showing the most athletes return too soon after suffering the brain trauma.
Finally, I am making this announcement today, knowing that you will forget, and I'll make it again. Over the last week or so, I have been transferring my blog over to a new host, with a new URL. It is pretty much ready, save for a couple of tweaks, though it is not yet what I want it to be. That said, go check it out at www.politicsandpeople.org.
It obviously looks very much like a blog, which is the main thing I am looking into changing. As you've probably noticed, I've moved a lot of my content into the news-y, political (and otherwise) realm, and less about my specific experiences in DC. That said, the people part still stands, because I expand on things, such as the Rand Paul issue from today, or the racism in America piece from last week. I'd like to separate that from the personal stuff. We'll see how that goes.
Anyway, check out the new space, tell me what you think. And I will have a more personal piece on my visit to the White House yesterday, sometime this week.
Where were you yesterday at 2:30 pm? I think I was in my office. What I certainly was not doing was watching the stock market. Thank goodness.
Partly due to a trader error, the stock market went into a free fall yesterday, then climbed right back out of the hole, all in the space of about 30 minutes. The Dow dropped about 1,000 points, while one $40 stock was trading at one penny.
While investors and regulators try to figure out what happened, some assurances can be made about the strength of the current market, though the safeguards could not prevent the loss of billions of dollars yesterday.
Remember that after the market crash, the Dow would lose some 89 percent of its value by 1932.
Obviously, 1929 was a long time ago, so let's take a look at 1987, when Black Monday happened. On that day, the Dow dropped 508 points, or 22.6 percent. That would trigger a halt in trading now. At that point it was the greatest single day loss the Dow had ever taken. Over the week, the Dow lost 760 points, or more than 30 percent.
In comparison to all of these, in one week in 2008, the Dow dropped more than 1,800 points, but only 18 percent. The Dow finished off 347 points yesterday.
It now sits at 10,520.32. You probably don't know what that means, which is fine. Just look at it through the progression. While I just told a story of three pretty bad times in American history, what you cannot ignore is how much larger the numbers got each time. Our economy has grown exponentially, which allows for these "corrections" to occur. That said, billions were still lost yesterday.
--
Obviously the other big news yesterday comes to us from across the Atlantic, England, where economic struggle came to a head amidst a huge election. As the front pages were covered with pictures of Greek rioting, a three-party race was in a sprint to the finish.
As polls closed last night and results came in, it became very clear that sitting Prime Minister Gordon Brown has a challenge ahead of him: dealing with a hung parliament.
Liberal Democrats (which have got to be like college student liberal) are projected to win 61 seats, with the Labour party around 255. What this means is that, despite huge momentum, the conservative party will not claim an absolute majority. This could get messy. But it will be fun to watch.
What won't be so fun is figuring out how this new government is going to dig England out of financial straights. They will first have to rebuild the government, closely followed by a plan that will take this country from the brink.
Oh, and that stock market thing? Not helping England. The Asian markets took an overnight plunge and the European markets appear to be doing the same. Scared yet? This is one of those things that the average person just doesn't understand really at all. I provided a mini horror story, I know, but in reality, it would take more than this for real damage to be done. This should just underscore how volatile the whole thing can be.
Here is a comparison of Greece to California, with a guess that the country will leave the euro.
And just as I finished typing that an update flashed across my screen that unemployment is up to 9.9 percent, but the US economy created 290,000 jobs in April. How does that work? Well first, the economy needs to gain something like 135,000 jobs every month just to keep up with new job seekers (estimating that many people join the workforce every month). So yes, that 290,000 is a good number, even if the net is only about 155,000. However, as the economy begins to pick back up and people report having new jobs, more of those who had been unemployed and not looking for new jobs restart their search, adding to the number of those considered "unemployed." Hence the jump. Frankly, if you really want to know the unemployment number in this country, it is closer to the 20 percent range. For minorities it is far higher.
--
Since that open was so fiscal and peachy, how about some funny:
"What are we gonna do in this country when we get attacked by someone who is not one of the Home Alone burglars."
Jon Stewart breaks down pretty much every major story in the news, as only he can do - with a fishing pole and a bottle of Coke. Yeah, watch it. His underlying point, that it seems like the world is falling apart, is shared by many.
--
Other news:
- Back in the financial markets, the Senate rejected an amendment yesterday that would have forced the breakup of several of the nation's largest banks. It was an attempt to end "too big to fail." It was voted down 61-33, with three Republican votes, meaning more than 30 Democrats voted against it. Even they think that might be government overreaching. Or they just get significant contributions from Bank of America.
The overall financial overhaul is expected to pass, however, giving Democrats another victory, after a deal was forged on an audit of the Fed. My conservative friends can argue all the want, but when this happens, check out the list of accomplishments of this one Congress:
- Finally, in a shocking development (a Cornell study actually), waitresses with big boobs get better tips. Excuse me, I need to make sure this guy doesn't get any federal funding for his studies.
[More]
Partly due to a trader error, the stock market went into a free fall yesterday, then climbed right back out of the hole, all in the space of about 30 minutes. The Dow dropped about 1,000 points, while one $40 stock was trading at one penny.
While investors and regulators try to figure out what happened, some assurances can be made about the strength of the current market, though the safeguards could not prevent the loss of billions of dollars yesterday.
Some circuit breakers do exist, a legacy of the reforms made following the 1987 stock market crash, but they only kick in after a huge drop — and only at certain hours. Before 2 p.m., a 10 percent drop in the Dow causes New York Stock Exchange to halt trading for one hour. Between 2 p.m. and 2:30 p.m., the pause shrinks to a half-hour and after 2:30, there is no halt in trading.These are all obviously in place to prevent a full crash. The thing I always find interesting to look at is how a drop like this compares to, say, the stock market crashing. Over two days in 1929, the Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 23 percent, but the raw number was less than 100 points. Yesterday the market was off about eight percent at the worst, and it was about 1000 points.
If there is a 20 percent drop, trading stops for two hours before 1 p.m. and by one hour between 1 and 2 p.m. After 2 p.m., the market closes.
Remember that after the market crash, the Dow would lose some 89 percent of its value by 1932.
Obviously, 1929 was a long time ago, so let's take a look at 1987, when Black Monday happened. On that day, the Dow dropped 508 points, or 22.6 percent. That would trigger a halt in trading now. At that point it was the greatest single day loss the Dow had ever taken. Over the week, the Dow lost 760 points, or more than 30 percent.
In comparison to all of these, in one week in 2008, the Dow dropped more than 1,800 points, but only 18 percent. The Dow finished off 347 points yesterday.
It now sits at 10,520.32. You probably don't know what that means, which is fine. Just look at it through the progression. While I just told a story of three pretty bad times in American history, what you cannot ignore is how much larger the numbers got each time. Our economy has grown exponentially, which allows for these "corrections" to occur. That said, billions were still lost yesterday.
--
Obviously the other big news yesterday comes to us from across the Atlantic, England, where economic struggle came to a head amidst a huge election. As the front pages were covered with pictures of Greek rioting, a three-party race was in a sprint to the finish.
As polls closed last night and results came in, it became very clear that sitting Prime Minister Gordon Brown has a challenge ahead of him: dealing with a hung parliament.
Liberal Democrats (which have got to be like college student liberal) are projected to win 61 seats, with the Labour party around 255. What this means is that, despite huge momentum, the conservative party will not claim an absolute majority. This could get messy. But it will be fun to watch.
What won't be so fun is figuring out how this new government is going to dig England out of financial straights. They will first have to rebuild the government, closely followed by a plan that will take this country from the brink.
Oh, and that stock market thing? Not helping England. The Asian markets took an overnight plunge and the European markets appear to be doing the same. Scared yet? This is one of those things that the average person just doesn't understand really at all. I provided a mini horror story, I know, but in reality, it would take more than this for real damage to be done. This should just underscore how volatile the whole thing can be.
Here is a comparison of Greece to California, with a guess that the country will leave the euro.
And just as I finished typing that an update flashed across my screen that unemployment is up to 9.9 percent, but the US economy created 290,000 jobs in April. How does that work? Well first, the economy needs to gain something like 135,000 jobs every month just to keep up with new job seekers (estimating that many people join the workforce every month). So yes, that 290,000 is a good number, even if the net is only about 155,000. However, as the economy begins to pick back up and people report having new jobs, more of those who had been unemployed and not looking for new jobs restart their search, adding to the number of those considered "unemployed." Hence the jump. Frankly, if you really want to know the unemployment number in this country, it is closer to the 20 percent range. For minorities it is far higher.
--
Since that open was so fiscal and peachy, how about some funny:
"What are we gonna do in this country when we get attacked by someone who is not one of the Home Alone burglars."
Jon Stewart breaks down pretty much every major story in the news, as only he can do - with a fishing pole and a bottle of Coke. Yeah, watch it. His underlying point, that it seems like the world is falling apart, is shared by many.
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Family Research Council's European Gaycation | ||||
| ||||
--
Other news:
- Back in the financial markets, the Senate rejected an amendment yesterday that would have forced the breakup of several of the nation's largest banks. It was an attempt to end "too big to fail." It was voted down 61-33, with three Republican votes, meaning more than 30 Democrats voted against it. Even they think that might be government overreaching. Or they just get significant contributions from Bank of America.
The overall financial overhaul is expected to pass, however, giving Democrats another victory, after a deal was forged on an audit of the Fed. My conservative friends can argue all the want, but when this happens, check out the list of accomplishments of this one Congress:
- Major stimulus package still creating jobs and investing in things like clean energy. Even the GOP's own Eric Cantor admitted projects like high-speed rail will create tons of jobs.
- A Supreme Court justice.
- Something important happened last month, hold on, forgetting, oh: Health care passed after decades of debate (or did it just feel like that?).
- Financial reform.
- There will be another Supreme Court justice.
- The House passed a clean energy and climate bill and the Senate still has time.
- Could ratify the new START treaty.
- Cash for Clunkers.
- Harry Reid may have grown a pair, which would be the biggest accomplishment of all, considering he is about to lose his job.
- Finally, in a shocking development (a Cornell study actually), waitresses with big boobs get better tips. Excuse me, I need to make sure this guy doesn't get any federal funding for his studies.
And maybe throwing all of Wall Street into it. Okay, so maybe that is an exaggeration, but two big stories today, one much bigger than the other (despite the fact that it ought to be the reverse), one involving fire, one involving being under fire.
Republicans caved yesterday, finally allowing a cloture vote on financial reform to pass. It actually was just a unanimous consent motion instead of a vote this time, with no objection. No one is really saying they got much, other than an open debate and the ability to offer amendments. Now, that could be quite a bit if the number of amendments allowed is unlimited, but it seems that even the GOP realizes it would look bad to be on the wrong side of financial reform.
As one observer said, it is hard to justify participating in a hearing lambasting Goldman Sachs executives actions on Wall Street, then going next door and voting against financial reform.
One thing we tend to forget, with all of this focus on the Senate, is that the House has already passed financial reform. Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (a job title I held in my congressional simulation class) has said that a conference is expected once the Senate completes its work.
--
To the lead story, which has actually gotten worse in the moments I have been writing this. Over the weekend, experts found two different leaks on the sea floor, related to the sunken oil rig from last week. It was estimated at the time that about 42,000 gallons of oil were spilling into the Gulf of Mexico every day. The good news was, due to the bends in the pipe caused by the sinking (imagine bending a hose too far), the leak was not as flowing as it could've been. The bad new is that workers have been unable to shut of the valve, meaning they are working on other ways to stop the leak.
Excuse me while I seemingly vent for a moment. I have taken quite a bit of time in the last few days learning about this. We are talking about BP (British Petroleum), which fought tighter federal safety regulations tooth and nail in the last few years. The rig in question was fairly new, about the size of a football field and state of the art. It was one-of-a-kind, drilling deeper than we've ever drilled before. While the clear point of the first part of the paragraph was to understate how something like this should never happen, the last sentence should illustrate just how ill-prepared we are to deal with it.
Just how ill-prepared are we? We (or BP - it's hard to tell really) can't even figure out how big the leak is yet. Late yesterday a third leak was discovered, with the Coast Guard estimating that five times the amount of oil is spilling into the ocean than previously thought. While yesterday it was an estimated 42,000 gallons each day, that number is now around 210,000 gallons. Put in simpler numbers, in just 52 days this would be larger than Exxon Valdez. Think that isn't possible? It is. With today's measures, 52 days would seem like forever, but workers have tried just about ever short term solution they can think of, which was one thing: shut off the valve. They've failed.
Initially yesterday, the plan was to burn off some of the oil, literally setting the surface on fire, but bad weather prevented that. They will try again today. It can't all be done this way, but from their experience, a significant amount can. However, one member of the Coast Guard had a telling statement: "this isn't something we do every day." No, it isn't. Stay tuned, as this will only get worse before it gets better.
--
And speaking of getting worse before getting better, how about Arizona. Oh, Arizona. Couple things. It appears that the DOJ - that's Department of Justice people - will be suing the state of Arizona, I suppose for privacy infringement. Not really sure. But still a positive development.
Last night I actually watched some evening news shows, which, if you can take even every breath with a grain of salt, can be entertaining to say the least. My favorite had to be Frank Luntz on Hannity. I learned about Luntz way back in high school. He is an expert Republican pollster and damn good at it. He creates messaging based on focus groups and polling, something everyone does now. But last night, to listen to him say, "most Americans are against financial reform," absolutely blew me away. Not only was he blatantly lying without even changing his expression, but he knew just how dishonest he was being probably more than anyone else. It was unreal. And of course it was on Fox (yes all of my conservative friends, I also watched Maddow and, ugh, parts of Olbermann last night. Fox is more entertaining though.)
Anyway, back to immigration. Hannity also had a debate on immigration. I have never seen Michelle Malkin so angry. Thought she might punch her opponent through the television screen. Here is something everyone needs to recognize about illegal immigration: it isn't illegal. The bill in Arizona made it illegal, in Arizona. Everywhere else in the country, illegal immigration is a civil offense. We don't throw you in jail, we send you home. That's it. Which is why I found it so interesting that Hannity and Malkin were screaming about following the letter of the law, since it is two-fold against them. One, it isn't illegal. Two, the biggest fears when profiling someone is that police ignore the law of needing another reason to stop someone (criminal activity) and just do it anyway. I don't want to get into the economic argument, even though there is one. I understand where Arizona is coming from. Watch as I represent both sides at the same time.
A few years ago I watched a movie called the Thin Blue Line. I remember it very well because we were watching in a class at UW during the same week that Virginia Tech happened. It was about a black man being profiled in Dallas for a murder he never admitted to committing. If I recall correctly, there was proof he didn't do it, but he was convicted anyway. People look at that as profiling. Sure, profiling was involved, but so was a racist jury. The problems go much deeper than saying, "he's black, let me pull him over."
Not too long after that I had a lengthy conversation with a black police officer in Seattle. His words to me: profiling helps me do my job. Surprisingly, I wasn't surprised. He's right. We make this big deal out of profiling, just like we do out of mandatory minimums, but ignore that in the majority of cases, the people actually committed crimes. This isn't the 1960's. If you have drugs in your car and you're mad that a cop made up a phony reason to pull you over, that doesn't change the fact that you have drugs in your car. You're worried about the wrong thing. I do believe that profiling probably does help police work. Does that make it right? No. But what neighborhood would you feel safer walking through, the poorer black neighborhood or the richer white one? Let's not act like police are the only profilers out there. Stereotypes exist for a reason.
Now, with that said, there is this thing about a right to privacy and profiling that is great about the Republican party. They are all for forfeiting some privacy in the name of security, unless it is there own. And they are all for profiling, which makes sense, because they are vastly white. No money trail is necessary. Just look at their faces.
It is unclear what is going to happen with this immigration law, except that it doesn't appear congress will take it up soon. The ball might be squarely in the DOJ's court right now and that is fine. Gives me more time to do more learning about immigration law. What I know right now is what I've previously mentioned, and that it is a lot like gun law: fairly strict, but grossly under-enforced. Also, as was pointed out last night, drug smugglers aren't walking across borders. As long as Americans have a drug problem, smugglers will find a way to get it to us. And that is where the crime comes from.
However, above all of this, if you really want to curb illegal immigration, I've got three words: punish the companies. But that will never happen, because that would be against free market policies, right Republicans? Make up your minds. Oh one more note: Malkin yesterday said that border security is no safer than it was on September 11, 2001 and that is the fault of Democrats. Ummm....
--
Notes:
- Two coal miners are missing after a wall collapsed in Kentucky. This is not a Massey mine and it is a developing story.
- I refuse to link it, but I should mention that Tiger Woods is playing again today. No word on whether anyone else is involved. Real question though: should there be a fantasy league, just like a sports one, that takes bets on who is "meeting" Tiger at each tournament? Too soon?
- The Washington Capitols pulled a major choke job in game seven of their first round series last night, losing to Montreal. As Bill Simmons said, it is quite possible that Washington has surpassed Seattle as the nation's most depressed sports town. Also as Simmons said, at least the Emerald City has Pete Carroll for comedic value.
- Finally, in a surprising development, a formula created to identify the most despised team in baseball came up, not with the New York Yankees, but the Cleveland Indians. As they said on SportsCenter, "wait, what?"
- A late addition: a New York subway train was stopped, and all passengers fine, after an operator died in the cab yesterday during rush hour. The "Dead Man Feature" (its real name) was employed, the first time anyone can recall it being used, to stop the train. It is a lever that motormen hold throughout the day, that when released will stop the train. It is designed to prevent runaway trains. Sadly, it was proven yesterday that it works.
[More]
Republicans caved yesterday, finally allowing a cloture vote on financial reform to pass. It actually was just a unanimous consent motion instead of a vote this time, with no objection. No one is really saying they got much, other than an open debate and the ability to offer amendments. Now, that could be quite a bit if the number of amendments allowed is unlimited, but it seems that even the GOP realizes it would look bad to be on the wrong side of financial reform.
As one observer said, it is hard to justify participating in a hearing lambasting Goldman Sachs executives actions on Wall Street, then going next door and voting against financial reform.
One thing we tend to forget, with all of this focus on the Senate, is that the House has already passed financial reform. Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (a job title I held in my congressional simulation class) has said that a conference is expected once the Senate completes its work.
--
To the lead story, which has actually gotten worse in the moments I have been writing this. Over the weekend, experts found two different leaks on the sea floor, related to the sunken oil rig from last week. It was estimated at the time that about 42,000 gallons of oil were spilling into the Gulf of Mexico every day. The good news was, due to the bends in the pipe caused by the sinking (imagine bending a hose too far), the leak was not as flowing as it could've been. The bad new is that workers have been unable to shut of the valve, meaning they are working on other ways to stop the leak.
Excuse me while I seemingly vent for a moment. I have taken quite a bit of time in the last few days learning about this. We are talking about BP (British Petroleum), which fought tighter federal safety regulations tooth and nail in the last few years. The rig in question was fairly new, about the size of a football field and state of the art. It was one-of-a-kind, drilling deeper than we've ever drilled before. While the clear point of the first part of the paragraph was to understate how something like this should never happen, the last sentence should illustrate just how ill-prepared we are to deal with it.
Just how ill-prepared are we? We (or BP - it's hard to tell really) can't even figure out how big the leak is yet. Late yesterday a third leak was discovered, with the Coast Guard estimating that five times the amount of oil is spilling into the ocean than previously thought. While yesterday it was an estimated 42,000 gallons each day, that number is now around 210,000 gallons. Put in simpler numbers, in just 52 days this would be larger than Exxon Valdez. Think that isn't possible? It is. With today's measures, 52 days would seem like forever, but workers have tried just about ever short term solution they can think of, which was one thing: shut off the valve. They've failed.
Initially yesterday, the plan was to burn off some of the oil, literally setting the surface on fire, but bad weather prevented that. They will try again today. It can't all be done this way, but from their experience, a significant amount can. However, one member of the Coast Guard had a telling statement: "this isn't something we do every day." No, it isn't. Stay tuned, as this will only get worse before it gets better.
--
And speaking of getting worse before getting better, how about Arizona. Oh, Arizona. Couple things. It appears that the DOJ - that's Department of Justice people - will be suing the state of Arizona, I suppose for privacy infringement. Not really sure. But still a positive development.
Last night I actually watched some evening news shows, which, if you can take even every breath with a grain of salt, can be entertaining to say the least. My favorite had to be Frank Luntz on Hannity. I learned about Luntz way back in high school. He is an expert Republican pollster and damn good at it. He creates messaging based on focus groups and polling, something everyone does now. But last night, to listen to him say, "most Americans are against financial reform," absolutely blew me away. Not only was he blatantly lying without even changing his expression, but he knew just how dishonest he was being probably more than anyone else. It was unreal. And of course it was on Fox (yes all of my conservative friends, I also watched Maddow and, ugh, parts of Olbermann last night. Fox is more entertaining though.)
Anyway, back to immigration. Hannity also had a debate on immigration. I have never seen Michelle Malkin so angry. Thought she might punch her opponent through the television screen. Here is something everyone needs to recognize about illegal immigration: it isn't illegal. The bill in Arizona made it illegal, in Arizona. Everywhere else in the country, illegal immigration is a civil offense. We don't throw you in jail, we send you home. That's it. Which is why I found it so interesting that Hannity and Malkin were screaming about following the letter of the law, since it is two-fold against them. One, it isn't illegal. Two, the biggest fears when profiling someone is that police ignore the law of needing another reason to stop someone (criminal activity) and just do it anyway. I don't want to get into the economic argument, even though there is one. I understand where Arizona is coming from. Watch as I represent both sides at the same time.
A few years ago I watched a movie called the Thin Blue Line. I remember it very well because we were watching in a class at UW during the same week that Virginia Tech happened. It was about a black man being profiled in Dallas for a murder he never admitted to committing. If I recall correctly, there was proof he didn't do it, but he was convicted anyway. People look at that as profiling. Sure, profiling was involved, but so was a racist jury. The problems go much deeper than saying, "he's black, let me pull him over."
Not too long after that I had a lengthy conversation with a black police officer in Seattle. His words to me: profiling helps me do my job. Surprisingly, I wasn't surprised. He's right. We make this big deal out of profiling, just like we do out of mandatory minimums, but ignore that in the majority of cases, the people actually committed crimes. This isn't the 1960's. If you have drugs in your car and you're mad that a cop made up a phony reason to pull you over, that doesn't change the fact that you have drugs in your car. You're worried about the wrong thing. I do believe that profiling probably does help police work. Does that make it right? No. But what neighborhood would you feel safer walking through, the poorer black neighborhood or the richer white one? Let's not act like police are the only profilers out there. Stereotypes exist for a reason.
Now, with that said, there is this thing about a right to privacy and profiling that is great about the Republican party. They are all for forfeiting some privacy in the name of security, unless it is there own. And they are all for profiling, which makes sense, because they are vastly white. No money trail is necessary. Just look at their faces.
It is unclear what is going to happen with this immigration law, except that it doesn't appear congress will take it up soon. The ball might be squarely in the DOJ's court right now and that is fine. Gives me more time to do more learning about immigration law. What I know right now is what I've previously mentioned, and that it is a lot like gun law: fairly strict, but grossly under-enforced. Also, as was pointed out last night, drug smugglers aren't walking across borders. As long as Americans have a drug problem, smugglers will find a way to get it to us. And that is where the crime comes from.
However, above all of this, if you really want to curb illegal immigration, I've got three words: punish the companies. But that will never happen, because that would be against free market policies, right Republicans? Make up your minds. Oh one more note: Malkin yesterday said that border security is no safer than it was on September 11, 2001 and that is the fault of Democrats. Ummm....
--
Notes:
- Two coal miners are missing after a wall collapsed in Kentucky. This is not a Massey mine and it is a developing story.
- I refuse to link it, but I should mention that Tiger Woods is playing again today. No word on whether anyone else is involved. Real question though: should there be a fantasy league, just like a sports one, that takes bets on who is "meeting" Tiger at each tournament? Too soon?
- The Washington Capitols pulled a major choke job in game seven of their first round series last night, losing to Montreal. As Bill Simmons said, it is quite possible that Washington has surpassed Seattle as the nation's most depressed sports town. Also as Simmons said, at least the Emerald City has Pete Carroll for comedic value.
- Finally, in a surprising development, a formula created to identify the most despised team in baseball came up, not with the New York Yankees, but the Cleveland Indians. As they said on SportsCenter, "wait, what?"
- A late addition: a New York subway train was stopped, and all passengers fine, after an operator died in the cab yesterday during rush hour. The "Dead Man Feature" (its real name) was employed, the first time anyone can recall it being used, to stop the train. It is a lever that motormen hold throughout the day, that when released will stop the train. It is designed to prevent runaway trains. Sadly, it was proven yesterday that it works.
Welcome to Wednesday, the middle of the week, and the day Fox News, the most watched channel on television, references the "lame-stream news" for the 38,478,593,729,384,572 time. One second, need to insert commas into that number. That's more than the national debt, right? Maybe we should just tax Fox a dollar every time they, the most watch channel on television, use that line.
Or maybe we could remind them that Fox is indeed, THE MOST WATCHED CHANNEL ON TELEVISION! Personally, I favor Conan. Thankfully he is no longer on NBC. Damn liberals.
Alright, got that off my chest. Except one more thing: It worries me that this is the first time I've sided with this man, but Pat Buchanan absolutely wiped the floor with the entire MSNBC Morning Joe set this morning on immigration. It was embarrassing. The guy has ideas and knows what he's talking about. Most of his ideas are wildly ridiculous and he is the worst communicator of all time. But he knows what he's talking about.
Moving on.
In case you didn't see my rambling, overly cheery or praising post last night, some pretty cool/sad news (depending on who are) out of UW yesterday, that President Mark Emmert, head of the university since 2004, has accepted the position of Chief Executive of the NCAA. Much congratulations to Mark, who I personally think left UW in a much better place than he got it, despite the economic situation. This decision is a good one for the NCAA. If there is one department at UW he really left far better than he got it, it is one of the nation's premiere athletic departments.
During his tenure national championships became commonplace. The defending national champion Washington softball team sits atop the rankings still, a position they have held this entire season. In 2008-09 alone the program won two national titles and finished 11th in the Director's Cup standings. During my time at UW I witnessed three national championships, a Sweet 16, the best rowing program in the country and so on. All of that while maintaining some of the highest graduation rates in the country.
So congratulations to Mark, who leaves UW for a major position, but not without having made the school better during his time. In addition to the previously mentioned accomplishments, I would be remiss by not mentioning these: the $2.8 billion fundraising campaign that concluded in 2008, and the nation's top-ranked primary care medical school and top-ranked nursing school.
--
Washington is a little crazy right now. Yesterday there was a marathon hearing in the Senate, where a panel of Goldman-Sachs executives were drilled by members of Congress. At one point, in quoting an email, Senator Carl Levin used the word "shitty" about 50 times, guaranteeing that Fox would cover nothing else about the hearing. But seriously, there was hostility from the Senate panel, something we don't often see.
At the same time the Senate continued work on a financial reform bill, sort of. For the second straight day the cloture vote failed. Again, the voted against voting. You have to love the U.S. Senate. Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE), famous for the infamous "Cornhusker Kickback" from the health care debate, is taking hits from both sides right now, despite voting against cloture. Even Republicans are calling him out for his apparent heeding of Warren Buffett, who is based in Omaha. Hey, he is a constituent, right?
Oh but there's more. Apparently Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid rejected a proposal that would have fast-tracked immigration reform through the committee process, in an effort to get an energy bill to the floor. It looks like Reid would rather see a bill go through the normal committee process, which one would think will take even longer. The proposal estimated that immigration would come up in November. I honestly could not tell you what Reid's plan is right know, which puts me in the majority of people.
--
One of the bigger stories from yesterday took place in a different capitol, in the state of Oklahoma. That is where lawmakers overwhelming overrode the governor's veto to pass new abortion policy into law. Two measures were passed, both aimed at seriously restricting abortion.
One forces women to undergo an ultrasound, while listening to a detailed description of the fetus - arms, legs, head, etc - before getting an abortion. No exceptions are made for rape or incest victims. The second prevents women who have a disabled baby from suing a doctor for withholding information about birth defects while the child was in the womb.
For his part, the governor of Oklahoma, Brad Henry, not only vetoed the bills, but spoke out strongly against them.
--
- Electoral politics, as always, are in play right now. Here is how the Washington Post sees things. At this point it appears they see Senator Patty Murray as safe. We'll see what happens with Dino Rossi.
Finally, check this video out. Heard it went viral yesterday:
[More]
Or maybe we could remind them that Fox is indeed, THE MOST WATCHED CHANNEL ON TELEVISION! Personally, I favor Conan. Thankfully he is no longer on NBC. Damn liberals.
Alright, got that off my chest. Except one more thing: It worries me that this is the first time I've sided with this man, but Pat Buchanan absolutely wiped the floor with the entire MSNBC Morning Joe set this morning on immigration. It was embarrassing. The guy has ideas and knows what he's talking about. Most of his ideas are wildly ridiculous and he is the worst communicator of all time. But he knows what he's talking about.
Moving on.
In case you didn't see my rambling, overly cheery or praising post last night, some pretty cool/sad news (depending on who are) out of UW yesterday, that President Mark Emmert, head of the university since 2004, has accepted the position of Chief Executive of the NCAA. Much congratulations to Mark, who I personally think left UW in a much better place than he got it, despite the economic situation. This decision is a good one for the NCAA. If there is one department at UW he really left far better than he got it, it is one of the nation's premiere athletic departments.
During his tenure national championships became commonplace. The defending national champion Washington softball team sits atop the rankings still, a position they have held this entire season. In 2008-09 alone the program won two national titles and finished 11th in the Director's Cup standings. During my time at UW I witnessed three national championships, a Sweet 16, the best rowing program in the country and so on. All of that while maintaining some of the highest graduation rates in the country.
So congratulations to Mark, who leaves UW for a major position, but not without having made the school better during his time. In addition to the previously mentioned accomplishments, I would be remiss by not mentioning these: the $2.8 billion fundraising campaign that concluded in 2008, and the nation's top-ranked primary care medical school and top-ranked nursing school.
--
Washington is a little crazy right now. Yesterday there was a marathon hearing in the Senate, where a panel of Goldman-Sachs executives were drilled by members of Congress. At one point, in quoting an email, Senator Carl Levin used the word "shitty" about 50 times, guaranteeing that Fox would cover nothing else about the hearing. But seriously, there was hostility from the Senate panel, something we don't often see.
At the same time the Senate continued work on a financial reform bill, sort of. For the second straight day the cloture vote failed. Again, the voted against voting. You have to love the U.S. Senate. Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE), famous for the infamous "Cornhusker Kickback" from the health care debate, is taking hits from both sides right now, despite voting against cloture. Even Republicans are calling him out for his apparent heeding of Warren Buffett, who is based in Omaha. Hey, he is a constituent, right?
Oh but there's more. Apparently Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid rejected a proposal that would have fast-tracked immigration reform through the committee process, in an effort to get an energy bill to the floor. It looks like Reid would rather see a bill go through the normal committee process, which one would think will take even longer. The proposal estimated that immigration would come up in November. I honestly could not tell you what Reid's plan is right know, which puts me in the majority of people.
--
One of the bigger stories from yesterday took place in a different capitol, in the state of Oklahoma. That is where lawmakers overwhelming overrode the governor's veto to pass new abortion policy into law. Two measures were passed, both aimed at seriously restricting abortion.
One forces women to undergo an ultrasound, while listening to a detailed description of the fetus - arms, legs, head, etc - before getting an abortion. No exceptions are made for rape or incest victims. The second prevents women who have a disabled baby from suing a doctor for withholding information about birth defects while the child was in the womb.
For his part, the governor of Oklahoma, Brad Henry, not only vetoed the bills, but spoke out strongly against them.
It is unconscionable to grant a physician legal protection to mislead or misinform pregnant women in an effort to impose his or her personal beliefs on a patient.Unconscionable is probably the right word. Unless you're an Oklahoma congressman.
--
- Electoral politics, as always, are in play right now. Here is how the Washington Post sees things. At this point it appears they see Senator Patty Murray as safe. We'll see what happens with Dino Rossi.
Finally, check this video out. Heard it went viral yesterday: