Search Episodes (What is the Media Center )

Cisco Live UK Day 4, Part 1: Social Media Listening Center

Added 02/03/12
0 Views

Cisco Live UK Day 4, Part 1: Social Media Listening Center

Added 02/03/12
0 Views

Tech Wonders: Her Bad Mother

Added 02/02/12
1 Views

Tech Wonders: Her Bad Mother

Added 02/02/12
4 Views

Hillary Clinton and American politics soon end: UN: Police sei...

Added 01/27/12
0 Views

Hillary Clinton and American politics soon end: UN: Police seize 16 kilograms of cocaine

[LESS INFO] 0 VIEWS | ADDED 12:18:56 01/27/12
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that she will not stay, stating that after two decades, she is ready to step off the high wire of American politics --- Clinton said will stay on until the President nominates someonelse --- She said after 20 year of being it would be probably best to just find out how tired she is ---- stating that she loves the job but has found the constant international travel physically grueling --- Clinton said she plans to work as hard as she can to the last minute , but is now ready to return to her own interests such as reading, writing, and maybe teaching, along with some personal travel ### Last week at the U.N.'s mail intake center, a New York Police Department spokesman said a shipment containing 16 kilograms of cocaine was seized --NYPD's chief spokesman, said the drug was in a white bag, masquerading as a diplomatic pouch that raised suspicions when it was being scanned as it was stamped with what looked like a poor version of the U.N. logo, with no name or address on the shipment sent from Mexico City through Cincinnati --- The Drug Enforcement Administration confirmed the substance inside the shipment intercepted was cocaine --- U.N. undersecretary-general for safety and security Gregory B. Starr said that there is nothing to indicate that this had anything to do with anybody at the United Nations adding that it did not come from a United Nations facilityand in his opinion, it was not intended to go to a United Nations facility ********************************* THIS IS NOT A RECOMMENDATION TO BUY OR SELL ANY SECURITY! Disclaimer: Never invest in any stock featured on our site or emails unless you can afford to lose your entire investment. crwenewswire.com publisher and its affiliates and contractors are not registered investment advisers or broker/dealers.Our disclaimer (Read more at http://www.crwenewswire.com/disclaimer) is to be read and fully understood before using our site, reading our newsletter or joining our email list. Release of Liability: Through use of this website viewing or using, you agree to hold crwenewswire.com report and Crown Equity Holdings Inc. CRWE, its operators, shareholders, employees and/or contractors harmless and to completely release them from any and all liability due to any and all loss (monetary or otherwise), damages (monetary or otherwise) that you may occur. Rule 17B requires disclosure of payment for investor relations. Crown Equity Holdings Inc. (CRWE.OB) is a media-advertisement and newswire company. Crown Equity Holdings Inc. (CRWE.OB), in some cases, provides media advertising and public awareness for both public and private companies, as well as disseminating news. As such, in some cases, when Crown Equity Holdings Inc. (CRWE.OB) advertises for a particular client, Crown Equity Holdings Inc. (CRWE.OB) charges an advertising fee which it must disclose under 17B. The fee may be in cash, in free trading stock or in restricted stock. Crown Equity Holdings Inc. (CRWE.OB), if paid in stock, can and may sell those securities during the advertising period.

49ers Gold Mine - Ep.24

Added 01/27/12
0 Views

Honey Badger Video Creator May Get His Own TV Show

Added 01/18/12
0 Views

Obama's 'In-Sourcing' Initiative Designed to Counter Outsourcing

Added 01/15/12
0 Views

Obama's 'In-Sourcing' Initiative Designed to Counter Outsourcing

[LESS INFO] 0 VIEWS | ADDED 01:00:53 01/15/12
On Wednesday, President Barack Obama announced a new initiative to combat outsourcing. The so-called 'in-sourcing' initiative would push a series of policies that would create jobs in the United States, including inviting more foreign companies to invest in U.S. jobs. Some of the suggested policies include tax breaks for companies that create jobs in the U.S. and tax disincentives for companies that continue to engage in outsourcing. > The White House announcement was made in conjunction with an in-sourcing forum that brought 14 large and small U.S. companies to meet with President Obama and discuss what kinds of policies might work to encourage the generation of jobs here instead of abroad. The 14 were Ford, DuPont, Otis Elevator, Intel, Siemens, ThyssenKrupp, Rolls Royce, Master Lock, Lincolnton Furniture, GalaxE Solutions, AGS, KEEN, Chesapeake Bay Candle and NOVO 1. Some of the companies involved in the forum called for deregulation and lower corporate tax rates. Another tactic, used successfully by GM, is to increase productivity by increasing the use of automation and paying workers less. Rep. Tim Bishop is calling on the president to focus on call centers : > In a letter, Bishop urged the President to consider the "U.S. Call Center and Consumer Protection Act," the bipartisan bill he sponsored to bar corporations that outsource U.S. call center jobs from receiving federal grants and loans, as a framework for Executive action to encourage the retention and growth of call center jobs in America. Highlighting the fact that U.S-based call centers account for approximately three percent of jobs in the American workforce, Bishop wrote: "I hope your Administration will seriously consider the remedy my colleagues and I are confident will reduce the incidence of outsourcing by creating new incentives to insource call center jobs and provide a measure of stability and longevity to a sector of America’s workforce that needs our help as our economy continues to recover." Bishop's "U.S. Call Center and Consumer Protection Act," which is co-sponsored by Reps. Dave McKinley (R, WVA-1), Mike Michaud (D, ME-1), Mike Grimm (R, NY-13) and Gene Green (D, TX-29), would require the U.S. Department of Labor to track firms that move call center jobs overseas; the firms would then be ineligible for any direct or indirect federal loans or loan guarantees for five years. The provision is partially a response to the practice of companies taking millions in incentives from local taxpayers to open call centers in the U.S., only to off-shore their operations a short time later and leave local communities devastated and still paying the bill. Bishop's bill also requires overseas call center employees to disclose their location to US consumers and gives customers the right to be transferred to a US-based call center upon request. The legislation has the full support of the 700,000-member Communications Workers of America. The Communications Workers of America have already come out in favor of this bill. India and the Philippines , the recipients of many of the outsourced call center jobs, are lobbying against the bill.

James O'Keefe's Voting Stunt Has State, Feds Investigating

Added 01/13/12
1 Views

James O'Keefe's Voting Stunt Has State, Feds Investigating

[LESS INFO] 1 VIEWS | ADDED 03:00:03 01/13/12
Let's get this out of the way: James O'Keefe, the wannabe gotcha journalist who can't hide his punk stupidity , is a big, fat liar . If he directs his hidden camera at you, you can be sure that what turns up will be wildly edited and quickly discredited . O'Keefe loves to go after liberal stalwarts: ACORN, NPR, voting and democracy. You know, basically things that aren't at all threats to anything other than the mindset that we're a center-right nation. In his latest stunt, he tried to "prove" that voting fraud was rampant, with dead people actually voting in the New Hampshire primary. Except.... > With his last set of videos largely seen as meaningless and pathetic , his fundraising in shambles , and his allies leaving him in disgust , O'Keefe clearly hopes to press this non-issue to revive his standing in the conservative movement. As always , the Daily Caller is happy to help out, already trumpeting the "bombshell video" that they received "exclusively" from O'Keefe. In the service of this aim, O'Keefe and associate Spencer Meads visited a number of polling locations during the January 10 New Hampshire primaries armed with hidden cameras. At each polling location, the videographer in question would approach a poll worker who was checking in voters and ask the poll worker if a recently deceased voter's name is on the rolls. When the poll worker, assuming that the right-wing operative is presenting themselves as that person, attempts to give them a ballot, the videographer says that they don't have their ID and leaves.[..] But O'Keefe's claim [of rampant fraud] aside, there is simply no evidence that such fraud occurs more often then, say, community organizations are asked to help set up child sex rings. In a 2007 report , the Brennan Center for Justice reported that there are a "handful" of cases when votes have actually cast in the names of the deceased, compared to thousands of such allegations that ultimately proved fruitless . Again, this whole conservative bugaboo demanding Voter ID to prevent voter fraud is a solution to a non-existent problem, and one that has been shown to actually prevent legitimate voting from taking place . But convicted parolee O'Keefe may have reached too far: > [E]lection law experts tell TPM that O’Keefe’s allies could face criminal charges on both the federal and state level for procuring ballots under false names, and that his undercover sting doesn’t demonstrate a need for voter ID laws at all. Federal law bans not only the casting of, but the “procurement” of ballots “that are known by the person to be materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent under the laws of the State in which the election is held.” Hamline University law professor David Schultz told TPM that there’s “no doubt” that O’Keefe’s investigators violated the law. “In either case, if they were intentionally going in and trying to fraudulently obtain a ballot, they violated the law,” Schultz said. “So right off the bat, what they did violated the law.” The NH Attorney General's office and the US Attorneys' office in NH have both issued statements that they are launching investigations. Unfortunately, it looks at first blush that the NH AG's office is focusing more on O'Keefe's allegation of the ease of voter fraud than the fraud that O'Keefe himself is committing. And if that is the case, there needs to be pushback immediately. O'Keefe deserves no such legitimization of his work with his history. Luckily, there are some in NH that see that clearly : > Officials in Nashua and Manchester said the filmmaker should be arrested. “They should be arrested and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. When I was in the Senate, I always heard, ‘This never happens.' This is proof this happens,” said Manchester Mayor Ted Gatsas. “People who pull stunts like this should be prosecuted,” Nashua City Clerk Paul Bergeron said. Actually, it doesn't happen, Mayor Gatsas. The video shows no votes cast. But it sure shows O'Keefe and his helpers trying to interfere with the voting process, which is a Class D Felony. Not exactly something someone on parole would want to be charged with, is it? > Actually, the would-be voter gets his hands on ballots only nine times in the 10-minute, seven-second Project Veritas video. In one, the clerk directly asks the person if he is the man listed on the checklist. At that point, the person said he was just checking to see if the checklist designates the voter as deceased. In another, the dead person is not on the checklist, and the clerk encourages the person to register to vote. Another time, the would-be voter left after poll workers started asking question about the name he gave, Manchester City Clerk Matt Normand said. “It just so happens the ward moderator recognized the name as not being that person,” Normand said. The moderator, Gloria Pilotte, asked to speak to the undercover voter to see if there was some mistake. He left before they had a chance to speak. “He never got a ballot,” Normand said. That instance is not on the video.

Alison J. Head on Modeling the Information-Seeking Process of ...

Added 01/10/12
4 Views

There's No Mystery About Romney's Taxes and Tax Plan

Added 12/29/11
4 Views

There's No Mystery About Romney's Taxes and Tax Plan

[LESS INFO] 4 VIEWS | ADDED 21:00:06 12/29/11
Why is Mitt Romney alone among the Republican presidential candidates in refusing to release his tax returns ? And why is the former Massachusetts Governor also the only major GOP contender not calling for the complete elimination of the capital gains tax ? As it turns out, the answer - horrible political optics - is the same to both questions. Because Romney's continuing millions in annual income from Bain Capital are taxed at the 15 percent capital gains rate, Mitt already pays a much lower share to Uncle Sam than most middle class families . And if he called for changing the capital gains rate to zero, Mitt Romney would have to explain to voters why the $250 million man should pay virtually no tax bill at all . Despite his famous demand in the 1994 Senate race that Ted Kennedy release his tax returns to show he has "nothing to hide," Romney last week reiterated his own paperwork would not be forthcoming. "We don't have any current plans to release tax returns, but never say never," Romney said, adding: > "I can tell you we follow the tax laws, and if there's an opportunity to save taxes, we like anybody else in this country will follow that opportunity." Truer words were never spoken. In October, Citizens for Tax Justice estimated that the Romneys paid only 14 percent of their income in taxes . (It's no wonder Mitt opposes the " Buffett Rule .") As Time reported: > Just how much Romney pays in taxes is, for the moment, a private matter. But his income is public knowledge. In August, Romney disclosed that in 2010 he and his wife made between $1.1 million and $2.8 million in royalties, salary, speaking fees and interest, most of which was likely taxed at a marginal rate of 35%, after accounting for deductions. The Romneys made an additional $5.5 million to $37.3 million from dividends and capital gains, which is generally taxed at a much lower rate of 15%. Two weeks ago, the New York Times shed light on that "$5.5 million to $37.3 million from dividends and capital gains" that represents most of Romney's income. Though Mitt left Bain Capital in 1999, 13 years later his windfall continues uninterrupted: > In what would be the final deal of his private equity career, he negotiated a retirement agreement with his former partners that has paid him a share of Bain's profits ever since, bringing the Romney family millions of dollars in income each year and bolstering the fortune that has helped finance Mr. Romney's political aspirations... > In the process, Bain continued to buy and restructure companies, potentially leaving Mr. Romney exposed to further criticism that he has grown wealthier over the last decade partly as a result of layoffs. Moreover, much of his income from the arrangement has probably qualified for a lower tax rate than ordinary income under a tax provision favorable to hedge fund and private equity managers, which has become a point of contention in the battle over economic inequality. And that creates what Steve Benen aptly called "Romney's 'carried interest' problem." > In case anyone needs a refresher, there's a tax loophole on "carried interest" -- sometimes called "the carry" -- that taxes private equity and venture capital income at a lower, 15% rate, as compared to 35% on ordinary income. Hedge-fund managers and the Wall Street have fought tooth and nail to protect this loophole -- even after the Obama White House tried to eliminate it -- and so far, they've been successful. Which is why Mitt Romney has thus far refused to join his fellow GOP White House hopefuls in proposing the elimination of the 15 percent capital gains tax. Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry and Herman Cain all called for zeroing out the capital gains levy, which is one reason why their tax plans represent such a huge windfall for the wealthy . (Their support for a flat-tax is another.) The Washington Post explained why for the rich that would be "better than any Christmas gift": > While it's true that many middle-class Americans own stocks or bonds, they tend to stash them in tax-sheltered retirement accounts, where the capital gains rate does not apply. By contrast, the richest Americans reap huge benefits. Over the past 20 years, more than 80 percent of the capital gains income realized in the United States has gone to 5 percent of the people; about half of all the capital gains have gone to the wealthiest 0.1 percent. For his part, Romney has proposed reducing the capital gains tax rate only for the first $200,000 in income. But as ThinkProgress pointed out, Romney's claim that "The people in the middle...I focused my tax cut right there" is preposterous: > Romney may think he focused his tax cut on the middle-class, but according to a ThinkProgress analysis of Tax Policy Center data*, nearly three-fourths of households that make $200,000 or less annually would get literally nothing from Romney's tax cut, due to the simple fact that most of those households have no capital gains income. But while Mitt Romney didn't want to create the appearance of slashing most of his own tax bill, that doesn't mean his proposals wouldn't produce a massive payday for his own and other rich families while piling up yet more debt. Romney's 59-point economic plan calls for extending the Bush tax cuts, ending the estate tax and reducing corporate taxes. The result, as ThinkProgress explained: > Romney's tax plan includes a $6.6 TRILLION giveaway to corporations and the wealthiest Americans. Meanwhile, Romney's Medicaid cuts are even more draconian than the ones in Paul Ryan plan. Both of their plans end also end Medicare, naturally. Still, in an interview last weekend the reliably Republican Wall Street Journal wondered why Romney had been so "timid" compared to his rivals. In a rare moment of candor, Mitt revealed that his real preferences would make for very bad politics: > What about his reform principles? Mr. Romney talks only in general terms. "Moving to a consumption-based system is something which is very attractive to me philosophically, but I've not been able to sufficiently model it out to jump on board a consumption-based tax. A flat tax, a true flat tax is also attractive to me. What I like--I mean, I like the simplification of a flat tax. I also like removing the distortion in our tax code for certain classes of investment. And the advantage of a flat tax is getting rid of some of those distortions"... > Amid such generalities, it's hard not to conclude that the candidate is trying to avoid offering any details that might become a political target. And he all but admits as much. "I happen to also recognize," he says, "that if you go out with a tax proposal which conforms to your philosophy but it hasn't been thoroughly analyzed, vetted, put through models and calculated in detail, that you're gonna get hit by the demagogues in the general election." "The president," Romney complained, "will characterize anyone running for office, and me in particular, as just in there to lower taxes for rich people, and that is not my intent." Perhaps, but that's the inevitable impact. As John McCain learned in 2008 , refusing the release the details of his beer heiress wife Cindy's fortune while calling for tax policies delivering his family lottery-sized winning courtesy of the U.S. Treasury is not going to endear you to working Americans. (In Mitt Romney's case, revealing the 10 percent tithe he dutifully pays to his Mormon church probably won't endear him to the GOP's evangelical primary voters, either.) All of which explains why Mitt Romney won't release his tax returns or call for abolishing the capital gains tax, the love which dares not speak its name. Besides, Mitt Romney wants Americans to believe he's just part of the "80 to 90 percent of us" who are middle class. And, no doubt, Mitt's willing to bet you $10,000 to prove it. (This piece also appears at Perrspectives .)

Mitt Romney's Big Promises - and Bigger Lies

Added 12/29/11
6 Views

Mitt Romney's Big Promises - and Bigger Lies

[LESS INFO] 6 VIEWS | ADDED 16:00:56 12/29/11
Click here to view this media In the election of 1928, the Republican Party of Herbert Hoover promised voters "a chicken in every pot and a car in every backyard." (We all know how that turned out.) Now, Mitt Romney is pledging that "If I'm President" every college graduate will be guaranteed a job, Iran will have no nuclear weapons and the United States will dominate the 21st century. And when Romney isn't making fantastic promises about what he'll do when he gets to the White House, he's slandering the current occupant , Barack Obama. "I Won't Let Iran Get Nukes" Governor Romney's guarantees start with Iran and its nuclear program . In a November 10, 2011 op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, Romney pledged, " I won't let Iran get nukes ." Or as he put it 10 days earlier during a GOP national security debate : > "If we re-elect Barack Obama, Iran will have a nuclear weapon. If you elect me as president, Iran will not have a nuclear weapon." As to how he'll ensure that outcome, Romney explained that "If you want peace, prepare for war." And despite occasionally acknowledging the complexity of a strike against Iran and even the questionable possibility of success, Romney told the Wall Street Journal this weekend how he would get it done: > So what would he do about it? "I do not have a top secret security clearance at this stage to be able to define precisely what kinds of actions we could take." But he adds that "the range includes something of a blockade nature, to something of a surgical strike nature, to something of a decapitate the regime nature, to eliminate the military threat of Iran altogether." No U.S. Decline in Romney's "American Century" Romney's promise to "eliminate the military threat of Iran altogether" is just part of his larger assurance that the 21st century will be another " American Century ." Pretending that the rise of India, China and Brazil doesn't inevitably entail the relative loss of U.S. power and influence, Romney announced in his October address at The Citadel : > "This century must be an American Century. In an American Century, America has the strongest economy and the strongest military in the world. In an American Century, America leads the free world and the free world leads the entire world...As President of the United States, I will devote myself to an American Century. And I will never, ever apologize for America." Not content to rest there, Romney accused President Obama of "waving the white flag of surrender": > "An eloquently justified surrender of world leadership is still surrender. > I will not surrender America's role in the world. This is very simple: If you do not want America to be the strongest nation on Earth, I am not your President. > You have that President today." Two months later, Mitt Romney repackaged his promise and his slander at the December 15 Republican debate in Sioux City, Iowa: > "Our president thinks America is in decline. It is if he's president. It's not if I'm president. This is going to be an American century." As for Romney's charge that President Obama "went around the world and apologized for America," the Washington Post Fact Checker deemed it a Four-Pinocchio lie . A Job for Every College Graduate At an event in New Hampshire last week, Governor Romney's pandering went from the sublime to the ridiculous. There, Mitt pledged President Romney would deliver full-employment for all American college graduates: > "What I can promise you is this -- when you get out of college, if I'm president you'll have a job. If President Obama is reelected, you will not be able to get a job. That's the reason I will hopefully get young people who are in college is to say, You know what, I understand what it takes to get jobs in America." As the record shows , not so much. After all, as the Los Angeles Times recently documented, Romney's "Bain Capital often maximized profits in part by firing workers." That's why FactCheck.org , the Washington Post Fact Checker and Fortune all refused to vouch for Romney's claim that "In those hundreds of businesses we invested in, tens of thousands of jobs net-net were created." Obama "Has Not Created Any New Jobs" If Mitt Romney can't prove his boasts about his own job creation record, neither can he justify his blatant lie about President Obama's : > "25 million people are out of work because of Barack Obama. And so I'll compare my experience in the private sector where, net-net, we created over 100,000 jobs." > "I'll compare that record with his record, where he has not created any new jobs." Sadly for Mitt Romney, the Bush recession began in December 2007. As ThinkProgress rightly noted, "The private sector has added 2.3 million new jobs since March 2010, and it took the Obama economy one year to create more jobs than the economy under President Bush did in eight." As The Economist explained earlier, the recession was not at its deepest just as Barack Obama was entering office, but far worse than official statistics revealed at the time. Romney might also want to check with former McCain economic adviser Mark Zandi as well as the non-partisan CBO , who concluded that the Obama stimulus program "added up to 0.9 million jobs in 2009, 3.3 million jobs in 2010 and 2.6 million jobs in 2011." Obama's Debt Exceeds All Previous Presidents Combined Mitt Romney didn't just lie about Barack Obama's jobs record. At the Sioux City debate, he got President Obama's contribution to the federal debt all wrong as well: > "We all understand that the spending crisis is extraordinary, with $15 trillion now in debt, with a president that's racked up as much debt as almost all of the other presidents combined." Of course, we don't all understand that, because it's not true . After Ronald Reagan tripled the gross national debt and George W. Bush doubled it again, Uncle Sam's red ink totaled almost $11 trillion when Barack Obama took the oath of office. Obama is "Taking over 100 Percent" of Health Care In his desperate quest to win over conservative Republican primary voters, Mitt Romney has turned his back on his signature achievement which he once boasted was a health care model for the nation. And to do it, Romney has been lying for months by telling voters "Obamacare is about taking over 100 percent of the people's insurance in this country." In a September 15, 2011 interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer , Romney made the same charge: > "The Massachusetts plan was crafted for Massachusetts, for the needs of 8 percent of our population that didn't have insurance, not for the 92 percent that did. Obamacare is a plan that takes over 100 percent of the people in the country and their health care, and that's one of the reasons why people don't want it." Sadly for Mitt Romney, repetition of a lie doesn't make it any more true. The Affordable Care Act passed by Congress and signed by President Obama in the spring of 2010 targets the 17 percent of people (over 50 million people) who are uninsured . As Politifact explained in deeming Romney's fraud another "Pants on Fire" lie: > According to the Census Bureau, the percentage of Americans without health insurance nationally was slightly under 17 percent in 2009, the year Obama began pushing for the bill. According to a Congressional Budget Office estimate, the number was about the same in 2010, when the measure was signed into law. Other estimates have pegged the national number at about 15 percent. As Henry Aaron, a senior fellow with the centrist-to-liberal Brookings Institution right noted, comparing 8 percent to 17 percent "would have been apples to apples" when it comes to the impact of the individual mandate at the center of both the Massachusetts and national plans. Sadly, Politifact concluded, Romney was guilty of "a felony case of comparing apples and oranges." Romney "Will Reverse President Obama's Massive Defense Cuts" During that same "American Century" speech in October, Governor Romney pledged: > "I will reverse President Obama's massive defense cuts. Time and again, we have seen that attempts to balance the budget by weakening our military only lead to a far higher price, not only in treasure, but in blood." Sadly for Romney, as Steve Benen pointed out, defense spending has not only gone up every year of the Obama presidency . It is higher than it ever was when George W. Bush sat in the Oval Office. Of course, Romney's confusion over matters of war and peace are hardly new. In an April op-ed for the Manchester Union Leader, Mitt forgot about the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan as he denounced President Obama for "one of the biggest peacetime spending binges in American history." Obama's "Equal Outcomes" and "Entitlement Society" Last week, the Romney campaign rolled out what may well become the meta-theme and meta-lie for the 2012 general election race. After President Obama declared in his Osawatomie, Kansas address that Republican trickle down economics "never worked," Romney struck back. Just not with the truth: > "Just a couple of weeks ago in Kansas, President Obama lectured us about Teddy Roosevelt's philosophy of government. But he failed to mention the important difference between Teddy Roosevelt and Barack Obama. Roosevelt believed that government should level the playing field to create equal opportunities. President Obama believes that government should create equal outcomes. > "In an entitlement society, everyone receives the same or similar rewards, regardless of education, effort, and willingness to take risk. That which is earned by some is redistributed to the others. And the only people who truly enjoy any real rewards are those who do the redistributing -- the government. > "The truth is that everyone may get the same rewards, but virtually everyone will be worse off." By raising the mythical red menace of communism and falsely attributing it to Barack Obama, Romney in the words of Paul Krugman had introduced " The Big Lie " into his " Post-Truth Campaign ." While Andrew Sullivan announced "Mitt Romney is a big, fat liar," Steve Benen lamented that "Romney, allegedly the responsible one in the Republican field, has been reduced to lying uncontrollably." And while Greg Sargent in the past had expressed amazement at "Mitt Romney's casual, effortless falsehoods," New York Magazine's Jonathan Chait explained that Romney's red scare rose to a whole new level of duplicity: > "This isn't just a casual line. In eight sentences, Romney asserts over and over again that Obama wants to create "equal outcomes" and give everybody the "same rewards." This is nuts, Glenn Beck-level insane. Restoring Clinton-era taxes is not a plan to equalize outcomes, or even close. It's not even a plan to stop rising inequality. Obama's America will continue to be the most unequal society in the advanced world -- only slightly less so. The alternative proposals accelerate inequality even further." Of course, as the proliferating profiles from the Wall Street Journal , the New York Times , the Washington Post and others show, Mitt Romney is no stranger to inequality. Legendarily cheap and analytical , as a Harvard Business School student Romney gave a presentation to his classmates that "proved the value of family time based not on emotion but on yield." Two Romney quotes - " I love business " and " I love data " - seem to sum up the man. As for loving the truth, that for Mitt Romney is apparently another matter altogether. (This piece also appears at Perrspectives .)

Defrag - Unplayable Media Center files, Missing RAM, Closing C...

Added 11/30/11
25 Views

Defrag - Unplayable Media Center files, Missing RAM, Closing C...

Added 11/30/11
13 Views

Right-Wing Furious Over Obama's 'Godless' Thanksgiving Address

Added 11/29/11
0 Views

Right-Wing Furious Over Obama's 'Godless' Thanksgiving Address

[LESS INFO] 0 VIEWS | ADDED 20:00:43 11/29/11
Remember when President Bush forgot to thank God in his 2008 Thanksgiving address? Neither do the conservatives now apoplectic that Barack Obama's 2011 remarks contained no reference to the Almighty. Nevertheless, the usual suspects on the right are frothing at the mouth over the perceived slight from the man many still pretend is a secret Muslim . As Americans were still eating their turkey on Thursday, the Los Angeles Times served as the dutiful stenographer for the Twitter vitriol: > But Thursday morning, Republicans and others tweeted their discontent with the reported omission of God from Obama's address. > Comments included "So sad!" and "God help us!" Republicans Abroad retweeted the Fox News headline: "Obama Leaves God Out of Thanksgiving Address." > "To give thanks for luck is to deny God much less omit!" tweeted "PastorJeffBrown," whose Twitter account lists him as a rural Oklahoma husband, father and Baptist pastor. Apparently, Obama's passing references to "blessings" and "faith" were not sufficient in his expression of gratitude to American service men and women, among others: > As Americans, each of us has our own list of things and people to be thankful for. But there are some blessings we all share. > We're especially grateful for the men and women who defend our country overseas. To all the service members eating Thanksgiving dinner far from your families: the American people are thinking of you today. And when you come home, we intend to make sure that we serve you as well as you're serving America. > We're also grateful for the Americans who are taking time out of their holiday to serve in soup kitchens and shelters, making sure their neighbors have a hot meal and a place to stay. This sense of mutual responsibility - the idea that I am my brother's keeper; that I am my sister's keeper - has always been a part of what makes our country special. And it's one of the reasons the Thanksgiving tradition has endured. Of course, if this language sounds familiar, it should. With one mention of the "a land where they could worship the Almighty without persecution," George W. Bush said pretty much the same thing for Thanksgiving, 2008: > During this holiday season, we give thanks for those who defend our freedom. America's men and women in uniform deserve our highest respect -- and so do the families who love and support them. Lately, I have been asked what I will miss about the presidency. And my answer is that I will miss being the Commander-in-Chief of these brave warriors. In this special time of year, when many of them are serving in distant lands, they are in the thoughts and prayers of all Americans. > During this holiday season, we give thanks for the kindness of citizens throughout our Nation. It is a testament to the goodness of our people that on Thanksgiving, millions of Americans reach out to those who have little. The true spirit of the holidays can be seen in the generous volunteers who bring comfort to the poor and the sick and the elderly. These men and women are selfless members of our Nation's armies of compassion -- and they make our country a better place, one heart and one soul at a time. Following Bush's departure, God returned to a place of prominence in Barack Obama's 2009 and 2010 Thanksgiving addresses . Two years ago, President Obama encouraged " all the people of the United States to come together, whether in our homes, places of worship, community centers, or any place where family, friends and neighbors may gather" to, among other things: > [R]ecall President George Washington, who proclaimed our first national day of public thanksgiving to be observed "by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God," and President Abraham Lincoln, who established our annual Thanksgiving Day to help mend a fractured Nation in the midst of civil war. A year ago, President Obama again offered thanks to Him: > Today, like millions of other families across America, Michelle, Malia, Sasha and I will sit down to share a Thanksgiving filled with family and friends - and a few helpings of food and football, too. And just as folks have done in every Thanksgiving since the first, we'll spend some time taking stock of what we're thankful for: the God-given bounty of America, and the blessings of one another. But never missing an opportunity to portray Obama as "the other," Fox News rang the alarm , declaring, "Obama Leaves God Out of Thanksgiving Address." His calls for community and unity, and to "give thanks for that most American of blessings, the chance to determine our own destiny," was more than the conservative caricaturists could handle from the supposed "militant atheist" in the White House.