Find a show you like and click the 
button. The show will be added to your My Playlist page and updated 24/7 with new videos.
Search Results
0 Views
20:59:14 02/02/12
CBC News Toronto at 5: Thursday, February 2, 2012
[LESS INFO] 0 VIEWS | ADDED 20:59:14 02/02/12
CBC News Toronto at 5: Thursday, February 2, 2012
The power of Twitter is in your hands. And it's not just about small talk and gossip. Practical applications that get you what you want. See how some people are banking on the Twitosphere and taking companies to task with big pay-offs. Plus - New cafeteria menus have got kids moving. Their general direction? Fast food. You can't force-feed healthy eating. See why Toronto schools may have to cook up a new plan. From: CBCtv Views: 446 1 ratings Time: 00:31 More in News & Politics
0 Views
11:05:46 01/19/12
Child Charged with Murder: Indian Teacher has $10B Bank Balance
[LESS INFO] 0 VIEWS | ADDED 11:05:46 01/19/12
Welcome to CRWE Newswire News Update, I'm Christina Collins. A 12-year-old boy died Monday, an hour after he was stabbed by his 10-year-old neighbor in El Cajon, San Diego. The victim slept at the boy's home for two nights before he was attacked at the end of the holiday weekend. It appears the 10-year-old had began taking a new medication just three weeks ago. A detention hearing was scheduled in juvenile court. California requires that children be at least 14 to be charged as adults and State law allows children to be detained until they turn 25 if tried and convicted as juveniles. With a monthly salary of around $700, an Indian high school teacher, was taken back when his bank account showed a balance of almost $10 billion. Parijat Saha, in West Bengal state, said he had checked his State Bank of India account online to confirm reception of a $200 interest payment. Instead the account showed a balance of 496 billion rupees, which is close to $10 billion US dollars. He immediately called a friend working at the bank to advised of what was a major accounting error. The State Bank of India said it was not clear how the amount came to be registered in Saha's account, but are trying to discover what went wrong. Thank you for joining me for and stay with us for all your latest in News for CRWENewswire NewsUpdate, I'm Christina Collins. ********************************* 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.
11 Views
03:24:04 01/19/12
Indie Game Makes Bank and SOPA Goes Down - Press Pause Daily
[LESS INFO] 11 VIEWS | ADDED 03:24:04 01/19/12
An indie developer recoups their entire production cost in four days, and the Stop Online Piracy Act is dead for the moment.
SHOW NOTES:
Story 1:
Here at Press Pause, we are big fans of indie games. So when good things happen to an indie release, we wanna tell you about it.
Toxic Games, makers of the recently released Portal-esque game Q.U.B.E, announced this week that they were able to recoup their full development cost in the game’s first four days on sale.
Toxic was one of the first developers to take part in the Indie Fund, which helps independent game makers fund their games. They ended up investing $90,000 in the development of Q.U.B.E., which was doled out in chunks. The folks at Indie Fund say that their investment was worth it and “that that investment paid off with 12K sold copies since the game launched last week.”
It seems that Toxic is already discussing possibly moving Q.U.B.E. beyond the PC. Lets hope that means an XBLA or PSN release in the near future.
http://www.joystiq.com/2012/01/16/q-u-b-e-moves-12k-copies-in-first-four-days-recouping-full-ind/
http://indie-fund.com/2012/01/q-u-b-e-recoups-investment/
Story 2:
Well it looks like the internet is victorious in it’s battle against the Stop Online Privacy Act, at least for now.
A report has come out that states that the legislation that had been making it’s way through the US House of Representatives has been indefinitely shelved, and will not be coming up for a vote on the floor of the House.
On the official Committee on Oversight and Government Reform site, committee chairman Darell Issa posted a statement stating that SOPA would “not move to the House floor this Congress without a consensus."
While this is a good day for the internet, the fight isn’t over yet.
Let’s not forget that the US Senate has it’s own version of the legislation called the Protect Intellectual Property Act.
Let’s hope the same fate awaits it as well.
http://www.gamespot.com/news/congress-shelves-sopa-6348670
That will do it for your daily dose of Press Pause. You can always find all our episodes over at presspause.mevio.com . You can also check them out over at our Youtube channel: youtube.com/presspausemevio .
0 Views
20:00:02 01/18/12
#J21: Occupy the Corporations
[LESS INFO] 0 VIEWS | ADDED 20:00:02 01/18/12
On Saturday, January 21, activists across the country working with Public Citizen will “Occupy the Corporations” in a series of demonstrations planned throughout the country, designed to expose the fraud that is corporate personhood.
The demonstrations will target corporations like Bank of America and Chevron, calling them out on "the hijacking of our democracy."
In addition to the “Occupy the Corporations” demonstrations, Public Citizen will be hosting rallies in California, Maryland, Massachusetts and Vermont with state law makers and other allied organizations to highlight the push for resolutions in those states legislatures to overturn Citizens United.
“The groundswell of national grassroots activity in support of a constitutional amendment we’re seeing is tremendous,” said Mark Hays, campaign coordinator for Public Citizen’s Democracy is for People Campaign. “With this sort of momentum, we’re ready to write the next chapter of our campaign to ensure that democracy is for people, not corporations.”
For more information about the “Occupy the Corporations” movement, including how you can get involved, click here.
It’s time to take our democracy back.
0 Views
06:45:00 01/07/12
TLDR: Addicts, Gym-Pacts, Windows, and Stephen King
[LESS INFO] 0 VIEWS | ADDED 06:45:00 01/07/12
Free Resources and Tools to Improve Your Blog http://www.lockergnome.com/news/2012/01/06/free-resources-and-tools-to-improve-your-blog/ Get Paid to Exercise with Gym-Pact http://www.lockergnome.com/social/2012/01/06/get-paid-to-exercise-with-gym-pact/ Enhance Any Video Project with Adorage Effects Package 13 http://www.lockergnome.com/media/2012/01/06/adorage-13/ Five Changes That Would Make Windows Better http://www.lockergnome.com/windows/2012/01/06/five-changes-that-would-make-windows-better/ Five Signs You Might Be a Tech Addict http://www.lockergnome.com/social/2012/01/06/five-signs-you-might-be-a-tech-addict/ Five Interesting Alternatives to Traditional Bank Accounts http://www.lockergnome.com/news/2012/01/06/five-interesting-alternatives-to-traditional-bank-accounts/ 11/22/63: The Stephen King Novel for Science Fiction Fans http://www.lockergnome.com/media/2012/01/06/112263-the-stephen-king-novel-for-science-fiction-fans/ Back Link of the Day http://jknproductions1212.wordpress.com/2011/12/29/extra-terrestrial/ Thanks to jknproductions1212 for writing about Matt Ryan's search for extra-terrestrial life. (Efforts still continue for evidence of intelligent terrestrial life, but we take what we can get!) If you'd like to be mentioned as a Back Link of the Day, link to one of our posts on LockerGnome.com from your site and -- this is the important part -- tell us about it! http://www.lockergnome.com/subscribe/ Join us when the countdown ends! https://profiles.google.com/chris.pirillo http://twitter.com/ChrisPirillo http://www.facebook.com/chrispirillo
3 Views
00:00:40 01/06/12
Mitt Romney, a Profile in Cowardice
[LESS INFO] 3 VIEWS | ADDED 00:00:40 01/06/12
For months, likely Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney has made Barack Obama's supposed "failure of leadership" a centerpiece of his campaign. But like his ill-advised comparison of President Obama to Marie Antoinette , Romney's sound bite could well boomerang. After all, when Multiple Choice Mitt isn't comically reversing his stands, he's too afraid to take any at all .
That cowardice starts with his tax returns . While John Kerry and John McCain at least presented a summary of their (and their well-to-do wives') payments to Uncle Sam, the $250 million Mitt has so far refused to do so. Despite his famous demand in the 1994 Senate race that Ted Kennedy release his tax returns to show he has "nothing to hide," Romney 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."
Or as he put it to CNN's Wolf Blitzer last week (at around the 6:40 mark): >
"I don't put out which tooth paste I use either. It's not that I have something to hide."
That's one interpretation. Another is that Mitt Romney is desperate to avoid the horrible political optics his tax returns would inevitably produce. After all, because Romney's continuing millions in annual income from Bain Capital (a company the Los Angeles Times recently explained "often maximized profits in part by firing workers") are taxed at the 15 percent capital gains rate, Mitt already pays a much lower share to Uncle Sam than most middle class families .
Romney's pusillanimity extends to his own tax proposals as well. Unlike virtually all of his GOP rivals , Romney has held back on endorsing either a flat-tax or the complete elimination of the capital gains tax. As he seemed to suggest to the Wall Street Journal , discretion is the better part of valor when it comes to telling voters about the massive windfall the Romneys would reap under the tax policies that dare not speak their name: >
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."
Mitt Romney's fear of getting hit was also on display during the debt ceiling debate this summer. As the GOP's brinksmanship over defaulting on the U.S. debt reached its climax in late July, Romney turned his tail and fled. As MSNBC reported at the time: >
NBC's Garrett Haake reported that Mitt Romney told reporters in Ohio yesterday that he would not comment on the debt negotiations in Washington. And so far, he has refused to either endorse Boehner's legislation (as Huntsman has done) or oppose it (as Pawlenty and Bachman have done). Our question: How does someone who wants to be the leader of the Republican Party not have a position on one of the biggest issues facing Washington, especially after the dueling primetime speeches by Obama and Boehner? It's actually quite surprising; this isn't just another Washington fight. Is the lack of a position proof of how fragile Team Romney believes its front-runner status is right now?
(Ultimately, Romney used Facebook to announce his support of the Boehner bill, but only after it passed the GOP House .)
As it turns out, Ohio was the scene of another of Mitt Romney's moments in cowardice.
After visiting a Republican phone bank calling voters about the state's controversial Issue 2 curbing public unions , Romney amazingly refused to take a position: >
"I'm not saying anything one way or the other about the two ballot issues."
Embarrassed by his obvious lack of backbone, Romney endorsed the measure the next day. Ohio voters, who handily defeated the Republican measure, won't soon forget Romney said goodbye to his spine in Columbus.
Romney's vertebra similarly went missing on immigration and abortion , two issues near and dear to the Republican primary voter's heart. As Steve Benen recounted, Mitt's campaign simply would not answer Joe Klein question about what President Romney would do about the 12 million illegal immigrants already in the country: >
The evasion wasn't exactly graceful. Klein asked what Romney would do with the undocumented immigrants who are already here, and Fehrnstrom replied, "He would not grant them amnesty." Right, Klein said, but instead of amnesty, what would Romney do with these people? "He would not grant them amnesty," Fehrnstrom answered. Got it, Klein said, but what, specifically, would Romney do? "I just told you, he's not going to grant them amnesty," the campaign spokesperson said. When Klein then explained that this isn't actually an answer, Fehrnstrom, once again, said, "He would not grant them amnesty."
The Romney camp built a similar stonewall after their man seemingly came out in support of the soon-to-be defeated "personhood" initiative in Mississippi . But the day after the ballot measure went down to crushing defeat, Team Romney insisted "he's being falsely characterized as supporting a proposed amendment to define a fertilized egg as a 'person.'"
On matters small and large, duck and cover is Mitt Romney's posture. Afraid to admit that he has obviously been running for President without interruption since his failed campaign four years ago, Romney's wife claimed his 2012 run was all her idea. As Ann Romney told Wolf Blitzer last week (starting around the 2:30 mark in the video above): >
BLITZER: Is it true that you had to talk to Mitt into running again? >
ANN ROMNEY. ROMNEY: It is true...after the last campaign, it was kind of ironic that I was the one that said I'd never do this again, and now, this time around, I'm saying, you know what, Mitt, you've got to do this again.
But in Mitt's telling, his latest White House bid is all due to Barack Obama. As he told the Wall Street Journal just days ago, Mitt was content to hang out in his $12 million, soon-to-be doubled-in-size California beach side home : >
The Republican presidential candidate says he never intended to run for office again after 2008--"I went back and bought a home which was far too expensive and grandiose for the purposes of another campaign," he jokes. He was drawn back into public life amid Mr. Obama's bid to "fundamentally transform" the country, to use the president's own words, into "an entitlement society," to use Mr. Romney's.
Given his Boston area townhouse and lakeside mansion with man-made beach in New Hampshire, a third palatial retreat would have seemed excessive for a candidate Romney. After all, Mitt Romney's running for office as a " man of the people "; he can't have mansions, for Pete's sake .
"If it seems like this keeps coming up with the former governor," Benen concluded, "it's not your imagination." >
Romney refused to take a stand on Paul Ryan's budget. Romney refused to take a stand when asked about voters booing a U.S. soldier serving in Iraq during a Republican debate. Romney refused to take a stand when Rick Perry dabbled in Birtherism. Romney initially refused to take a stand on Ohio's campaign to undermine collective-bargaining rights, and then sheepishly backpedaled when the right complained. >
There's going to come a point next year when the Obama campaign is likely to say, "Mitt Romney lacks the courage and the character to be a leader." And the criticism will sting because it's based in fact.
And so it goes for the man George Will rightly described as a "recidivist reviser of his principles." On the issues where he doesn't change his mind, Mitt Romney - the man who would be leader of the Free World - lacks "the courage of his absence of convictions."
(This piece also appears at Perrspectives. )
0 Views
00:00:40 01/06/12
Mitt Romney, a Profile in Cowardice
[LESS INFO] 0 VIEWS | ADDED 00:00:40 01/06/12
For months, likely Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney has made Barack Obama's supposed "failure of leadership" a centerpiece of his campaign. But like his ill-advised comparison of President Obama to Marie Antoinette , Romney's sound bite could well boomerang. After all, when Multiple Choice Mitt isn't comically reversing his stands, he's too afraid to take any at all .
That cowardice starts with his tax returns . While John Kerry and John McCain at least presented a summary of their (and their well-to-do wives') payments to Uncle Sam, the $250 million Mitt has so far refused to do so. Despite his famous demand in the 1994 Senate race that Ted Kennedy release his tax returns to show he has "nothing to hide," Romney 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."
Or as he put it to CNN's Wolf Blitzer last week (at around the 6:40 mark): >
"I don't put out which tooth paste I use either. It's not that I have something to hide."
That's one interpretation. Another is that Mitt Romney is desperate to avoid the horrible political optics his tax returns would inevitably produce. After all, because Romney's continuing millions in annual income from Bain Capital (a company the Los Angeles Times recently explained "often maximized profits in part by firing workers") are taxed at the 15 percent capital gains rate, Mitt already pays a much lower share to Uncle Sam than most middle class families .
Romney's pusillanimity extends to his own tax proposals as well. Unlike virtually all of his GOP rivals , Romney has held back on endorsing either a flat-tax or the complete elimination of the capital gains tax. As he seemed to suggest to the Wall Street Journal , discretion is the better part of valor when it comes to telling voters about the massive windfall the Romneys would reap under the tax policies that dare not speak their name: >
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."
Mitt Romney's fear of getting hit was also on display during the debt ceiling debate this summer. As the GOP's brinksmanship over defaulting on the U.S. debt reached its climax in late July, Romney turned his tail and fled. As MSNBC reported at the time: >
NBC's Garrett Haake reported that Mitt Romney told reporters in Ohio yesterday that he would not comment on the debt negotiations in Washington. And so far, he has refused to either endorse Boehner's legislation (as Huntsman has done) or oppose it (as Pawlenty and Bachman have done). Our question: How does someone who wants to be the leader of the Republican Party not have a position on one of the biggest issues facing Washington, especially after the dueling primetime speeches by Obama and Boehner? It's actually quite surprising; this isn't just another Washington fight. Is the lack of a position proof of how fragile Team Romney believes its front-runner status is right now?
(Ultimately, Romney used Facebook to announce his support of the Boehner bill, but only after it passed the GOP House .)
As it turns out, Ohio was the scene of another of Mitt Romney's moments in cowardice.
After visiting a Republican phone bank calling voters about the state's controversial Issue 2 curbing public unions , Romney amazingly refused to take a position: >
"I'm not saying anything one way or the other about the two ballot issues."
Embarrassed by his obvious lack of backbone, Romney endorsed the measure the next day. Ohio voters, who handily defeated the Republican measure, won't soon forget Romney said goodbye to his spine in Columbus.
Romney's vertebra similarly went missing on immigration and abortion , two issues near and dear to the Republican primary voter's heart. As Steve Benen recounted, Mitt's campaign simply would not answer Joe Klein question about what President Romney would do about the 12 million illegal immigrants already in the country: >
The evasion wasn't exactly graceful. Klein asked what Romney would do with the undocumented immigrants who are already here, and Fehrnstrom replied, "He would not grant them amnesty." Right, Klein said, but instead of amnesty, what would Romney do with these people? "He would not grant them amnesty," Fehrnstrom answered. Got it, Klein said, but what, specifically, would Romney do? "I just told you, he's not going to grant them amnesty," the campaign spokesperson said. When Klein then explained that this isn't actually an answer, Fehrnstrom, once again, said, "He would not grant them amnesty."
The Romney camp built a similar stonewall after their man seemingly came out in support of the soon-to-be defeated "personhood" initiative in Mississippi . But the day after the ballot measure went down to crushing defeat, Team Romney insisted "he's being falsely characterized as supporting a proposed amendment to define a fertilized egg as a 'person.'"
On matters small and large, duck and cover is Mitt Romney's posture. Afraid to admit that he has obviously been running for President without interruption since his failed campaign four years ago, Romney's wife claimed his 2012 run was all her idea. As Ann Romney told Wolf Blitzer last week (starting around the 2:30 mark in the video above): >
BLITZER: Is it true that you had to talk to Mitt into running again? >
ANN ROMNEY. ROMNEY: It is true...after the last campaign, it was kind of ironic that I was the one that said I'd never do this again, and now, this time around, I'm saying, you know what, Mitt, you've got to do this again.
But in Mitt's telling, his latest White House bid is all due to Barack Obama. As he told the Wall Street Journal just days ago, Mitt was content to hang out in his $12 million, soon-to-be doubled-in-size California beach side home : >
The Republican presidential candidate says he never intended to run for office again after 2008--"I went back and bought a home which was far too expensive and grandiose for the purposes of another campaign," he jokes. He was drawn back into public life amid Mr. Obama's bid to "fundamentally transform" the country, to use the president's own words, into "an entitlement society," to use Mr. Romney's.
Given his Boston area townhouse and lakeside mansion with man-made beach in New Hampshire, a third palatial retreat would have seemed excessive for a candidate Romney. After all, Mitt Romney's running for office as a " man of the people "; he can't have mansions, for Pete's sake .
"If it seems like this keeps coming up with the former governor," Benen concluded, "it's not your imagination." >
Romney refused to take a stand on Paul Ryan's budget. Romney refused to take a stand when asked about voters booing a U.S. soldier serving in Iraq during a Republican debate. Romney refused to take a stand when Rick Perry dabbled in Birtherism. Romney initially refused to take a stand on Ohio's campaign to undermine collective-bargaining rights, and then sheepishly backpedaled when the right complained. >
There's going to come a point next year when the Obama campaign is likely to say, "Mitt Romney lacks the courage and the character to be a leader." And the criticism will sting because it's based in fact.
And so it goes for the man George Will rightly described as a "recidivist reviser of his principles." On the issues where he doesn't change his mind, Mitt Romney - the man who would be leader of the Free World - lacks "the courage of his absence of convictions."
(This piece also appears at Perrspectives. )
0 Views
00:00:35 01/05/12
Occupy Wall Street Media Team Evicted From Rented Studio, 6 Arrested
[LESS INFO] 0 VIEWS | ADDED 00:00:35 01/05/12
If you had any remaining doubt that we're now living in a police state here in the U.S., what happened early this morning at the Occupy Wall Street Livestream office should make it painfully clear.
Ever since September 17th, 2011 and Zuccotti Park, Global Revolution Media has been a large supplier of the media coverage has been covering the Occupy Wall Street movement both here in the U.S. and internationally, providing followers of the movement with raw video footage and keeping their viewers informed.
Monitoring livestreams coming across the internet, the media team picks the best ones for rebroadcast. This small team of dedicated media broadcasters serving the Occupy movement makes finding information quick and easy, making following a plethora of events and breaking occupy news possible for followers. The Global Revolution media team operated out of a leased studio office at 13 Thames Street in Brooklyn, but continuing to do so is in doubt at this time, and the future of the operation in jeopardy.
Via Liberating Flames : >
Earlier this morning, Global Revolution Studios was ordered to vacate from their building by the NYPD in conjunction with the building department. It took three separate departments visiting 13 Thames to finally come up with a reason to remove the Global Revolution team with a posted notice despite having all applicable paperwork for the department of buildings in order. The reason given to me by the Global Revolution team is “A made up sprinkler condition.” Supporting this allegation of falsified conditions is that the very same building passed the same inspection standards back in 2011 in the month of November with no comments or concerns as to the buildings integrity or its sprinkler system.
It’s also odd how the first floor and cellar is imminently perilous to human life, and the floors directly above are perfectly fine. Even the person living illegally in the basement is perfectly fine where he is, meaning it’s specifically the area that Global Rev occupies and nothing else. One could accurately allege that this was a direct attack against one of the major voices of the movement and considering Global Revolutions direct affiliation with the Occupy movement; has made it an obvious target for this attack on free speech. The overreaching plan of these actions has been to suppress the ability of Occupy to communicate and to share the movements’ collective stories as they unfurl. By being a nexus of streams and information, authorities are attempting to do a top-down decapitation of the movements’ media coverage by once again isolating the information to the general public.
Six key members of the team were arrested at the Thames Street location, "charged with Trespass, Obstructing Governmental Administration and Resisting Arrest. They are likely to remain in jail overnight," according to Global Revolution's TV blog .
“We can do all of this from laptops”—Vlad Teichberg, GlobalRevolution.TV, after the #OccupyWallStreet and international live news protest channel was evicted from its NYC base .
Thames Street isn't the first home occupied by Global Revolution, and doubtful it would be it's last. In the beginning, activist Vlad Teichberg of Global Revolutiona worked in a small, dark, second-floor room in a clapped-out building on Lafayette at Bleecker. (His neighbors include the War Resisters League, the Socialist Party USA, and the Libertarian Book Club.) This is the original home office of globalrevolution.tv, which channels vérité video from occupations around the world through hosting sites such as Livestream.com .
Via NYMag : >
Teichberg is a 39-year-old Russian immigrant with stooped shoulders and a mop of brown hair who grew up in Rego Park and is so jacked in to the electronic grid that he comes across like a character out of Neuromancer. But what makes him so interesting is that you could just as easily imagine him making a cameo in The Big Short. A math prodigy who was a Westinghouse Science Talent Search finalist before matriculating at Princeton, he left college (temporarily) after his sophomore year and went to work for Bankers Trust, the first in a string of Wall Street gigs at firms including Deutsche Bank, Swiss Reinsurance Corp., and HSBC. And what did he do in those places? He created, modeled, and traded derivatives, including some of the first synthetic CDOs. As he told the London Times, he was “one of the people [who] built that bomb that blew up the whole economy.”
Teichberg’s time in the Wall Street armament factory gave him a close-up view of everything wrong with the place: the culture of greed, the insane levels of risk, the corruption of the credit-rating agencies. “By 2001, it was obvious to me it was going to blow up,” he says, “and I wanted to be nowhere near it.” But he didn’t leave. Instead, hopping from job to job, he tried to put brakes on the process, devising new ways to value risk more accurately, only to be rebuffed by his bosses. At the same time he starting taking the money he was making on Wall Street and funding ways to undermine it.
More via SuperChief : >
A resident has confirmed 5 arrested, one of whom is Vlad Teichberg operator of the livestream. He also claims that police damaged camera equipment upon entering the building Tuesday afternoon.
...
Residents are reporting to Superchief that they suspect the order to vacate is a targeted attack – likely towards a Global Rev organizer Vlad Teichberg, and his 4-month pregnant wife. They report that they were able to remove an 800 pound server containing their video archives and their important documents last night.
Police did not specifically issue an order to vacate last night. Rather, they are enforcing a year-old order to vacate – which may or may not be selectively enforced now based on the Occupy presence in the space.
Those arrested were first taken to Central Booking on Centre Street, and are now at the 90th Precinct in Brooklyn at at Union St and Montrose Avenue.
Will update as more information becomes available...
Update 1 : Video footage of the police arrests show that no one from Global Revolution was "resisting arrest" as claimed. Arrests begin around 4 minutes into the video, and continue until the end when with no reason given NYPD arrest 2 people who were down the street observing on the sidewalk, view here .
Update 2: See the post here .
1 Views
00:00:35 01/05/12
Occupy Wall Street Media Team Evicted From Rented Studio, 6 Arrested
[LESS INFO] 1 VIEWS | ADDED 00:00:35 01/05/12
If you had any remaining doubt that we're now living in a police state here in the U.S., what happened early this morning at the Occupy Wall Street Livestream office should make it painfully clear.
Ever since September 17th, 2011 and Zuccotti Park, Global Revolution Media has been a large supplier of the media coverage has been covering the Occupy Wall Street movement both here in the U.S. and internationally, providing followers of the movement with raw video footage and keeping their viewers informed.
Monitoring livestreams coming across the internet, the media team picks the best ones for rebroadcast. This small team of dedicated media broadcasters serving the Occupy movement makes finding information quick and easy, making following a plethora of events and breaking occupy news possible for followers. The Global Revolution media team operated out of a leased studio office at 13 Thames Street in Brooklyn, but continuing to do so is in doubt at this time, and the future of the operation in jeopardy.
Via Liberating Flames : >
Earlier this morning, Global Revolution Studios was ordered to vacate from their building by the NYPD in conjunction with the building department. It took three separate departments visiting 13 Thames to finally come up with a reason to remove the Global Revolution team with a posted notice despite having all applicable paperwork for the department of buildings in order. The reason given to me by the Global Revolution team is “A made up sprinkler condition.” Supporting this allegation of falsified conditions is that the very same building passed the same inspection standards back in 2011 in the month of November with no comments or concerns as to the buildings integrity or its sprinkler system.
It’s also odd how the first floor and cellar is imminently perilous to human life, and the floors directly above are perfectly fine. Even the person living illegally in the basement is perfectly fine where he is, meaning it’s specifically the area that Global Rev occupies and nothing else. One could accurately allege that this was a direct attack against one of the major voices of the movement and considering Global Revolutions direct affiliation with the Occupy movement; has made it an obvious target for this attack on free speech. The overreaching plan of these actions has been to suppress the ability of Occupy to communicate and to share the movements’ collective stories as they unfurl. By being a nexus of streams and information, authorities are attempting to do a top-down decapitation of the movements’ media coverage by once again isolating the information to the general public.
Six key members of the team were arrested at the Thames Street location, "charged with Trespass, Obstructing Governmental Administration and Resisting Arrest. They are likely to remain in jail overnight," according to Global Revolution's TV blog .
“We can do all of this from laptops”—Vlad Teichberg, GlobalRevolution.TV, after the #OccupyWallStreet and international live news protest channel was evicted from its NYC base .
Thames Street isn't the first home occupied by Global Revolution, and doubtful it would be it's last. In the beginning, activist Vlad Teichberg of Global Revolutiona worked in a small, dark, second-floor room in a clapped-out building on Lafayette at Bleecker. (His neighbors include the War Resisters League, the Socialist Party USA, and the Libertarian Book Club.) This is the original home office of globalrevolution.tv, which channels vérité video from occupations around the world through hosting sites such as Livestream.com .
Via NYMag : >
Teichberg is a 39-year-old Russian immigrant with stooped shoulders and a mop of brown hair who grew up in Rego Park and is so jacked in to the electronic grid that he comes across like a character out of Neuromancer. But what makes him so interesting is that you could just as easily imagine him making a cameo in The Big Short. A math prodigy who was a Westinghouse Science Talent Search finalist before matriculating at Princeton, he left college (temporarily) after his sophomore year and went to work for Bankers Trust, the first in a string of Wall Street gigs at firms including Deutsche Bank, Swiss Reinsurance Corp., and HSBC. And what did he do in those places? He created, modeled, and traded derivatives, including some of the first synthetic CDOs. As he told the London Times, he was “one of the people [who] built that bomb that blew up the whole economy.”
Teichberg’s time in the Wall Street armament factory gave him a close-up view of everything wrong with the place: the culture of greed, the insane levels of risk, the corruption of the credit-rating agencies. “By 2001, it was obvious to me it was going to blow up,” he says, “and I wanted to be nowhere near it.” But he didn’t leave. Instead, hopping from job to job, he tried to put brakes on the process, devising new ways to value risk more accurately, only to be rebuffed by his bosses. At the same time he starting taking the money he was making on Wall Street and funding ways to undermine it.
More via SuperChief : >
A resident has confirmed 5 arrested, one of whom is Vlad Teichberg operator of the livestream. He also claims that police damaged camera equipment upon entering the building Tuesday afternoon.
...
Residents are reporting to Superchief that they suspect the order to vacate is a targeted attack – likely towards a Global Rev organizer Vlad Teichberg, and his 4-month pregnant wife. They report that they were able to remove an 800 pound server containing their video archives and their important documents last night.
Police did not specifically issue an order to vacate last night. Rather, they are enforcing a year-old order to vacate – which may or may not be selectively enforced now based on the Occupy presence in the space.
Those arrested were first taken to Central Booking on Centre Street, and are now at the 90th Precinct in Brooklyn at at Union St and Montrose Avenue.
Will update as more information becomes available...
Update 1 : Video footage of the police arrests show that no one from Global Revolution was "resisting arrest" as claimed. Arrests begin around 4 minutes into the video, and continue until the end when with no reason given NYPD arrest 2 people who were down the street observing on the sidewalk, view here .
Update 2: See the post here .
0 Views
00:00:42 01/03/12
Last-Place Bachmann: 'I Intend To Be America's Iron Lady'
[LESS INFO] 0 VIEWS | ADDED 00:00:42 01/03/12
video platform video management video solutions video player
Michelle Bachmann's appearance yesterday on This Week with Jake Tapper was one of her more cringe-inducing performances. Not because she isn't someone incapable of delivering lines and staying on message, but because the content of her message is so obviously boilerplate campaignspeak from someone who's so clearly sliding too far down, too fast to win. Instead, she's promising a "miracle:" >
TAPPER: My next guest sounds just as confident, but her path forward is a lot more murky. Congresswoman Michele Bachmann joins me from Des Moines.
Congresswoman, thanks for joining us, and happy new year.
BACHMANN: Happy new year to you. Great to be on with you this morning, Jake.
TAPPER: So the last time you and I spoke, you had just won the Iowa straw poll. The Des Moines Register poll had you tied for first place with Mitt Romney with 22 percent of the vote. Now that same poll has you with 7 percent of the vote. What happened to your campaign?
BACHMANN: Well, we've had a very good campaign. And I think what's happened is, a lot of candidates have come in, and Iowa voters and national voters have taken a look at all of the other candidates. But we have done I think what no other candidate has done, and that is, after the last debate, we've gone across all of Iowa, all 99 counties, and we've actually done heavy, heavy retail politics where we've gone into cafes and into living rooms of Iowans, and we've made a very strong connection with a lot of people.
And if you look at the polls, it's upwards of 40 percent to 50 percent of Iowans haven't made their decision yet. And I think the polls, what they're reflecting will be very different from what we're seeing on Tuesday night, because people make their decision, quite honestly, in the caucus room. Iowa is very different. People gather in living rooms. They gather in elementary schools and churches, and they make their decision on the spot with their neighbors. And we have done, like I said, what no other candidate has done the last two weeks. We've put over -- almost 7,000 miles on our bus, and we've literally gone from town to town to town meeting with people directly. And we saw thousands of people switch their vote just in the last couple of weeks, so we think there's going to be a very profound shift that people see on Tuesday night.
TAPPER: Well, one of the -- one of the dilemmas that you've had is that a lot of the voters that you are competing for, conservative voters, Christian evangelicals in some cases, are also being wooed by Rick Santorum and Rick Perry. And Santorum has momentum right now. He is at third place in the Des Moines Register poll. And if you look at the last two days, he's in second place. He has strong social conservative credentials. He's fluent in foreign affairs. He won statewide twice in a key swing state, Pennsylvania. So why should voters go for you and not him?
BACHMANN: Well, because I'm the strongest core conservative in this race. There is no comparison with all of the other candidates and my credentials. No other candidate has current national security experience in the race. I sit on the House Intelligence Committee. I am daily involved with the issue of national security. No other candidate is.
And as what we -- what we are seeing happening with Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon, that will be a formidable issue immediately with the next commander-in-chief. I'm ready. No other candidate is currently ready in that issue.
Gee, Michelle, I know it makes me feel better that you'll lie about Iran "obtaining" a nuke. It shows you'll say anything at all to win - always a great quality in a president. >
Also, I'm the only federal tax litigation attorney in this race. When it comes to dealing with the number-one issue that's on voters' minds, which is out-of-control spending, I have that credential in spades over any other candidate, because no other candidate was leading on this issue in the halls of Congress or in Washington or nationally. I'm the one that called for saying "no" to letting Barack Obama increase the national credit card limit.
Psst, Michelle honey? Try not to say things like that around sane people. It doesn't help. >
And when it comes to social issues, there's no one who can -- who can compare with my record. I'm a mother of five, a foster mother to 23 children that we've raised, and also I have an unassailable record on life, on marriage, on religious liberty. So when it comes to values and issues, there is no one who comes close to where I am on those issues.
But I think even more so, I'm the one that's been proven and tested in the fires of Washington, and that's why I think you saw people vote for me in the Iowa straw poll, but also it's what we have done on the ground. No other candidate has done more retail campaigning on the ground.
TAPPER: But...
BACHMANN: And I think we'll bear the fruit of that on Tuesday night.
TAPPER: But with all due respect, Congresswoman, this is the same pitch you've been making all summer and all fall and -- and up until today, and you're in last place, according to the polls. And -- and somebody that has similar credentials to you and a similar appeal to you, Rick Santorum, is showing huge momentum. Why you over him?
BACHMANN: Well, again, I think the polls take a few days to catch up. And -- and we have made that incredible deposit of going in every single county. We've drawn 300 people at a stop, 250 people at a stop, and I think a lot of that isn't yet reflected in the polls. And the main thing will be on Tuesday night.
We're looking forward. We're not looking in the rear-view mirror. And what we're seeing going forward, especially with the tremendous outpouring of young people that are coming out to work on our phone banks and to go lit dropping and door-to-door is nothing short of amazing. We're -- we're number-one in the category of enthusiasm. If you look at all of the candidates, which candidate has the most enthusiasm among their supporters, I'm that candidate. I'm number-one with the 18- to 29-year-old voters, which are highly motivated, and they're doing all of the work.
So I think that if you look at my past races, and polling data showed me actually losing and 8 points behind in previous races that I've had when I've run for Congress, and yet I -- I win by 8 and 13 points. So polls don't -- are -- sometimes belie the truth on the ground, and that's what we see. This isn't just about polling. This is about what we're seeing in reality, and I think Tuesday night people are going to see a miracle.
TAPPER: In the last week, your campaign has gotten involved in a big kerfuffle about one of your top supporters, your chairman in Iowa defecting and going to the Ron Paul campaign. I don't want to get into the weeds on that debate. There was a back-and-forth about whether or not he was paid off. He denied that you accused him of doing that. But this is not the first time you've made a charge like this. You've also said this about other supporters with Newt Gingrich in Georgia, with Rick Santorum.
Don't you risk -- making these charges, doesn't that risk voters seeing you as making a final gasp of desperation?
BACHMANN: Oh, for Heaven's sake. Of course not. What this shows is the tremendous momentum that we have out of the last debate. From person after person, they said that I won the last debate in Sioux City, Iowa. And the reason why is because, when Ron Paul made his very dangerous statements, which is he was just fine with Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon, or with Newt Gingrich taking $1.6 million from Freddie Mac and he was unable to defend that, I -- I took it to them.
And what people saw during the last debate is that I have the ability, of all of the candidates on the stage, I have the best ability to take it to Barack Obama in the debate and hold him accountable. We had tremendous momentum coming out of the last debate, and we saw it in county after county in our 99-county tour, where people were just appalled by Ron Paul's position. They thought it was dangerous.
That's why we saw literally thousands of people switching their decision on the spot, and that's what you saw, was this crush of momentum. And so we saw some different actions coming out of the Ron Paul campaign. And I think that people will be very surprised at the results on Tuesday night, because I think people will see a lot of defections away from Ron Paul because they see -- especially with the aggressive nature of the actions on the part of Iran in the Straits of Hormuz, people are seeing how important it is that we have a commander-in-chief who is conversant, prepared, knowledgeable, and has good judgment on foreign affairs. And of all of the candidates in the race, I'm best suited for that -- that portion of being commander-in- chief.
TAPPER: Congresswoman, we only have a little bit of time left, so last question. In the interests of candor and being based in reality, positing that you feel that you're going to have a very good night on Tuesday and that all the polls are wrong and you're going to do well, but assuming that the polls are right, isn't that, practically speaking, the end of your campaign if you come in last on Tuesday?
BACHMANN: Well, we've bought tickets to head off to South Carolina. And we are looking forward to the debates. January is a very full month. We're here for the -- for the long -- for the long race. This is a 50-state race. And we intend to participate not only in New Hampshire, South Carolina, Florida, but to go all the way, because I intend to be the Republican nominee and defeat Barack Obama in 2012, because America needs a candidate that will be in the legacy of a Ronald Reagan and of a Margaret Thatcher. That's what I intend to do, is to be America's iron lady.
TAPPER: All right. Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, good luck on Tuesday. And hope you have a wonderful 2012.
BACHMANN: Thank you. Same to you and your listeners.
0 Views
00:00:42 01/03/12
Last-Place Bachmann: 'I Intend To Be America's Iron Lady'
[LESS INFO] 0 VIEWS | ADDED 00:00:42 01/03/12
video platform video management video solutions video player
Michelle Bachmann's appearance yesterday on This Week with Jake Tapper was one of her more cringe-inducing performances. Not because she isn't someone incapable of delivering lines and staying on message, but because the content of her message is so obviously boilerplate campaignspeak from someone who's so clearly sliding too far down, too fast to win. Instead, she's promising a "miracle:" >
TAPPER: My next guest sounds just as confident, but her path forward is a lot more murky. Congresswoman Michele Bachmann joins me from Des Moines.
Congresswoman, thanks for joining us, and happy new year.
BACHMANN: Happy new year to you. Great to be on with you this morning, Jake.
TAPPER: So the last time you and I spoke, you had just won the Iowa straw poll. The Des Moines Register poll had you tied for first place with Mitt Romney with 22 percent of the vote. Now that same poll has you with 7 percent of the vote. What happened to your campaign?
BACHMANN: Well, we've had a very good campaign. And I think what's happened is, a lot of candidates have come in, and Iowa voters and national voters have taken a look at all of the other candidates. But we have done I think what no other candidate has done, and that is, after the last debate, we've gone across all of Iowa, all 99 counties, and we've actually done heavy, heavy retail politics where we've gone into cafes and into living rooms of Iowans, and we've made a very strong connection with a lot of people.
And if you look at the polls, it's upwards of 40 percent to 50 percent of Iowans haven't made their decision yet. And I think the polls, what they're reflecting will be very different from what we're seeing on Tuesday night, because people make their decision, quite honestly, in the caucus room. Iowa is very different. People gather in living rooms. They gather in elementary schools and churches, and they make their decision on the spot with their neighbors. And we have done, like I said, what no other candidate has done the last two weeks. We've put over -- almost 7,000 miles on our bus, and we've literally gone from town to town to town meeting with people directly. And we saw thousands of people switch their vote just in the last couple of weeks, so we think there's going to be a very profound shift that people see on Tuesday night.
TAPPER: Well, one of the -- one of the dilemmas that you've had is that a lot of the voters that you are competing for, conservative voters, Christian evangelicals in some cases, are also being wooed by Rick Santorum and Rick Perry. And Santorum has momentum right now. He is at third place in the Des Moines Register poll. And if you look at the last two days, he's in second place. He has strong social conservative credentials. He's fluent in foreign affairs. He won statewide twice in a key swing state, Pennsylvania. So why should voters go for you and not him?
BACHMANN: Well, because I'm the strongest core conservative in this race. There is no comparison with all of the other candidates and my credentials. No other candidate has current national security experience in the race. I sit on the House Intelligence Committee. I am daily involved with the issue of national security. No other candidate is.
And as what we -- what we are seeing happening with Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon, that will be a formidable issue immediately with the next commander-in-chief. I'm ready. No other candidate is currently ready in that issue.
Gee, Michelle, I know it makes me feel better that you'll lie about Iran "obtaining" a nuke. It shows you'll say anything at all to win - always a great quality in a president. >
Also, I'm the only federal tax litigation attorney in this race. When it comes to dealing with the number-one issue that's on voters' minds, which is out-of-control spending, I have that credential in spades over any other candidate, because no other candidate was leading on this issue in the halls of Congress or in Washington or nationally. I'm the one that called for saying "no" to letting Barack Obama increase the national credit card limit.
Psst, Michelle honey? Try not to say things like that around sane people. It doesn't help. >
And when it comes to social issues, there's no one who can -- who can compare with my record. I'm a mother of five, a foster mother to 23 children that we've raised, and also I have an unassailable record on life, on marriage, on religious liberty. So when it comes to values and issues, there is no one who comes close to where I am on those issues.
But I think even more so, I'm the one that's been proven and tested in the fires of Washington, and that's why I think you saw people vote for me in the Iowa straw poll, but also it's what we have done on the ground. No other candidate has done more retail campaigning on the ground.
TAPPER: But...
BACHMANN: And I think we'll bear the fruit of that on Tuesday night.
TAPPER: But with all due respect, Congresswoman, this is the same pitch you've been making all summer and all fall and -- and up until today, and you're in last place, according to the polls. And -- and somebody that has similar credentials to you and a similar appeal to you, Rick Santorum, is showing huge momentum. Why you over him?
BACHMANN: Well, again, I think the polls take a few days to catch up. And -- and we have made that incredible deposit of going in every single county. We've drawn 300 people at a stop, 250 people at a stop, and I think a lot of that isn't yet reflected in the polls. And the main thing will be on Tuesday night.
We're looking forward. We're not looking in the rear-view mirror. And what we're seeing going forward, especially with the tremendous outpouring of young people that are coming out to work on our phone banks and to go lit dropping and door-to-door is nothing short of amazing. We're -- we're number-one in the category of enthusiasm. If you look at all of the candidates, which candidate has the most enthusiasm among their supporters, I'm that candidate. I'm number-one with the 18- to 29-year-old voters, which are highly motivated, and they're doing all of the work.
So I think that if you look at my past races, and polling data showed me actually losing and 8 points behind in previous races that I've had when I've run for Congress, and yet I -- I win by 8 and 13 points. So polls don't -- are -- sometimes belie the truth on the ground, and that's what we see. This isn't just about polling. This is about what we're seeing in reality, and I think Tuesday night people are going to see a miracle.
TAPPER: In the last week, your campaign has gotten involved in a big kerfuffle about one of your top supporters, your chairman in Iowa defecting and going to the Ron Paul campaign. I don't want to get into the weeds on that debate. There was a back-and-forth about whether or not he was paid off. He denied that you accused him of doing that. But this is not the first time you've made a charge like this. You've also said this about other supporters with Newt Gingrich in Georgia, with Rick Santorum.
Don't you risk -- making these charges, doesn't that risk voters seeing you as making a final gasp of desperation?
BACHMANN: Oh, for Heaven's sake. Of course not. What this shows is the tremendous momentum that we have out of the last debate. From person after person, they said that I won the last debate in Sioux City, Iowa. And the reason why is because, when Ron Paul made his very dangerous statements, which is he was just fine with Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon, or with Newt Gingrich taking $1.6 million from Freddie Mac and he was unable to defend that, I -- I took it to them.
And what people saw during the last debate is that I have the ability, of all of the candidates on the stage, I have the best ability to take it to Barack Obama in the debate and hold him accountable. We had tremendous momentum coming out of the last debate, and we saw it in county after county in our 99-county tour, where people were just appalled by Ron Paul's position. They thought it was dangerous.
That's why we saw literally thousands of people switching their decision on the spot, and that's what you saw, was this crush of momentum. And so we saw some different actions coming out of the Ron Paul campaign. And I think that people will be very surprised at the results on Tuesday night, because I think people will see a lot of defections away from Ron Paul because they see -- especially with the aggressive nature of the actions on the part of Iran in the Straits of Hormuz, people are seeing how important it is that we have a commander-in-chief who is conversant, prepared, knowledgeable, and has good judgment on foreign affairs. And of all of the candidates in the race, I'm best suited for that -- that portion of being commander-in- chief.
TAPPER: Congresswoman, we only have a little bit of time left, so last question. In the interests of candor and being based in reality, positing that you feel that you're going to have a very good night on Tuesday and that all the polls are wrong and you're going to do well, but assuming that the polls are right, isn't that, practically speaking, the end of your campaign if you come in last on Tuesday?
BACHMANN: Well, we've bought tickets to head off to South Carolina. And we are looking forward to the debates. January is a very full month. We're here for the -- for the long -- for the long race. This is a 50-state race. And we intend to participate not only in New Hampshire, South Carolina, Florida, but to go all the way, because I intend to be the Republican nominee and defeat Barack Obama in 2012, because America needs a candidate that will be in the legacy of a Ronald Reagan and of a Margaret Thatcher. That's what I intend to do, is to be America's iron lady.
TAPPER: All right. Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, good luck on Tuesday. And hope you have a wonderful 2012.
BACHMANN: Thank you. Same to you and your listeners.
5 Views
19:00:30 12/28/11
Notable Death of the Year: RIP Austerity Economics, 1921-2011
[LESS INFO] 5 VIEWS | ADDED 19:00:30 12/28/11
"Smokestack Lightnin'," with Hubert Sumlin backing Howlin' Wolf in 1964
This is the time of year when we're reminded of all the famous people who died over the last twelve months, a list which includes two of my favorite guitar players ( Hubert Sumlin and Cornell Dupree ). But there were also some notable non-human deaths in 2011, especially in the world of economic policy.
One of those deaths should have completely altered the political debate in Washington. The name of the deceased was "Austerity Economics," and it was first glimpsed in a 1921 paper by conservative economist Frank Wright. Austerity died of natural causes brought on by prolonged exposure to reality.
But the debate in Washington didn't change nearly enough after its passing. In the nation's capital, dead things still rule the night.
Why Austerity?
"Austerity economics" backers claim that today's economic woes can only be fixed by dramatic reductions in government spending, which will lead to increased private-sector confidence and therefore to greater investment and growth.
But it's never worked. And if investors have lost confidence in the U.S. government's fiscal stability, they're sure not acting that way. There hasn't been this much demand for Treasury bonds since the government began tracking it twenty years ago, and they haven't performed as well since the go-go 1990s.
It's easy to understand austerity's attraction for power elites inside and outside of government. The people who suffer from austerity budgets aren't the kinds of people they know personally, since they're typically public employees like teachers, police, firefighters and the administrators of social programs; people who need government assistance, like the poor; and middle-class people with the temerity to either grow old or become disabled.
Austerity's attraction became even greater in the U.S. because once it became conventional wisdom that tax increases on the wealthy was "politically infeasible." That made it a program whose sole purpose was to cut government spending, lowering the pressure to increase taxes on the wealthy from today's historically low levels.
For a one-percenter, what's not to love?
Austerity Comes of Age
The idea's been around in one form or another since that 1921 paper, and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) had been imposing it on Third World nations for decades.
But 2009 was the year that austerity really came of age. That was the year that a wealthy stockbroker's son named David Cameron began campaigning for Prime Minister of Great Britain on an explicitly pro-austerity platform.
It was also the year that Cameron helped to form a group named European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) dedicated to electing like-minded politicians across Europe and helping them collaborate on ways to slash government spending. It was also the year that right-leaning Angela Merkel won reelection as the Chancellor of Germany with a stronger mandate than she'd been given in her first term.
With Nicolas Sarkozy as President of France, Great Britain was the only major European power not yet in the hands of the corporate-backed austerity crowd.
The Global Sado-Erotic Thrill Machine
That changed with Cameron's election as Prime Minister in May 2010, an event that threw pro-austerity Americans into throes of near-erotic ecstasy. And if that sounds like hyperbole, consider conservative Anne Appelbaum's reaction to Cameron's budget in September of 2010: >
Vicious cuts." "Savage cuts." "Swingeing (sic) cuts." The language that the British use to describe their new government's spending-reduction policy is apocalyptic in the extreme. The ministers in charge of the country's finances are known as "axe-wielders" who will be "hacking" away at the budget. Articles about the nation's finances are filled with talk of blood, knives, and amputation.
And the British love it.
What can I say? There are people who collect serial-killer memorabilia, too. But Appelbaum wasn't just speaking for herself. It became unacceptable for any politician in Washington, Democrat or Republican, to advocate anything other than an austerity budget for the United States.
And it was more than an economic strategy to its backers. Austerity became a way to demonize those who had suffered most from the banking abuses and self-indulgences of the wealthy, a totemic "blame the victim" response that turned the political debate into a grotesque inversion of morality. Again, Appelbaum: >
"Not only is austerity being touted as the solution to Britain's economic woes; it is also being described as the answer to the country's moral failings."
Bad Metaphors vs. Good Economists
The Democratic President of the United States, Barack Obama, jumped onto the bandwagon with both feet by repeatedly lecturing Americans on the need for government to stop "spending beyond its means." Obama recycled the popular conservative metaphor of a family that has to sit around the kitchen table and decide how much money it has to spend.
That's one of the worst metaphors in modern politics. Does a family establish its own currency -- especially one that has the unique position of the dollar? Can a family borrow money at rates so low they're effectively less than zero? Would a family let Grandma go hungry because Junior bought too many Porsches out of the family kitty and then gambled it away on lousy mortgage investments?
The world's top economists, those who had successfully predicted the crisis of 2008, tried telling the rest of the world what was wrong with the idea: Joblessness and consumer fears were killing any chance of real recovery. More short-term spending was needed to get the economy moving again. Austerity would make things worse, not better.
But nobody listened. Austerity's S%M-like attraction had the world's elites in its grip.
Death of a Delusion
And then something else came into the picture: Reality.
Cameron's austerity budget had a shattering effect on the already-struggling British economy. His government's financial stability was downgraded five times during his first year in power and retail sales had fallen 2.5 percent. Household income was projected to fall an additional 2 percent if his austerity plans were carried forward. Britain's modest employment gains were reversed, youth unemployment reached record levels, and income inequality was the worst it had been in more than half a century.
Anne Appelbaum's erotic dreams had become Great Britain's nightmare.
As Europe's ruling austerity class pushed forward with their plans, even the IMF tried to dissuade them. It was clear to anyone who wasn't blinded by ideology or political cynicism that austerity economics was a failed program. Even in countries like Greece, where government was far graver than elsewhere, the austerity programs imposed from outside threatened to destabilize society while other reasonable measures like improved tax collection were still not taken seriously enough.
And now the entire Eurozone hangs in the balance. Bankers became wealthy by treating governments as if they were mortgages, lending recklessly and pocketing their fees without considering the long-term reliability of their loans. European leaders insisted for months they were take the kind of sensible steps that should've been taken in the United States by requiring bankers to accept at least part of the losses for the bad loans they had issed.
That plan was quietly dropped last month. "Austerity economics" never calls for austerity from those who have gotten rich by being irresponsible, only from those who didn't benefit from it at all.
The Afterlife
President Obama has dropped his austerity rhetoric, at least for the time being, but the Republicans have not. Listening to Mitt Romney discuss economics is like having a doctor wave a dead chicken over your head and saying he's decided to cast a spell on you rather than operate on that thing they found in your X-rays.
Aside from the bill introduced this month by the House Progressive Caucus to almost no media attention, there's no comprehensive plan for dropping this country's ineffective austerity strategy and replacing it with an agenda that works.
Rational solutions to our economic problems are being ignored. There won't be a real debate about alternatives to austerity until an entire political party, not just part of it, adopts this kind of program. Until then there will be chaos. And where there is chaos, austerity's powerful advocates can step in and take charge.
Austerity economics died in 2011 and is survived by the British, German, and French governments as well as the GOP and large portions of the Democratic Party. Instead of sending flowers, the family has asked the public to abandon all hopes of future economic growth.
1 Views
19:00:30 12/28/11
Notable Death of the Year: RIP Austerity Economics, 1921-2011
[LESS INFO] 1 VIEWS | ADDED 19:00:30 12/28/11
"Smokestack Lightnin'," with Hubert Sumlin backing Howlin' Wolf in 1964
This is the time of year when we're reminded of all the famous people who died over the last twelve months, a list which includes two of my favorite guitar players ( Hubert Sumlin and Cornell Dupree ). But there were also some notable non-human deaths in 2011, especially in the world of economic policy.
One of those deaths should have completely altered the political debate in Washington. The name of the deceased was "Austerity Economics," and it was first glimpsed in a 1921 paper by conservative economist Frank Wright. Austerity died of natural causes brought on by prolonged exposure to reality.
But the debate in Washington didn't change nearly enough after its passing. In the nation's capital, dead things still rule the night.
Why Austerity?
"Austerity economics" backers claim that today's economic woes can only be fixed by dramatic reductions in government spending, which will lead to increased private-sector confidence and therefore to greater investment and growth.
But it's never worked. And if investors have lost confidence in the U.S. government's fiscal stability, they're sure not acting that way. There hasn't been this much demand for Treasury bonds since the government began tracking it twenty years ago, and they haven't performed as well since the go-go 1990s.
It's easy to understand austerity's attraction for power elites inside and outside of government. The people who suffer from austerity budgets aren't the kinds of people they know personally, since they're typically public employees like teachers, police, firefighters and the administrators of social programs; people who need government assistance, like the poor; and middle-class people with the temerity to either grow old or become disabled.
Austerity's attraction became even greater in the U.S. because once it became conventional wisdom that tax increases on the wealthy was "politically infeasible." That made it a program whose sole purpose was to cut government spending, lowering the pressure to increase taxes on the wealthy from today's historically low levels.
For a one-percenter, what's not to love?
Austerity Comes of Age
The idea's been around in one form or another since that 1921 paper, and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) had been imposing it on Third World nations for decades.
But 2009 was the year that austerity really came of age. That was the year that a wealthy stockbroker's son named David Cameron began campaigning for Prime Minister of Great Britain on an explicitly pro-austerity platform.
It was also the year that Cameron helped to form a group named European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) dedicated to electing like-minded politicians across Europe and helping them collaborate on ways to slash government spending. It was also the year that right-leaning Angela Merkel won reelection as the Chancellor of Germany with a stronger mandate than she'd been given in her first term.
With Nicolas Sarkozy as President of France, Great Britain was the only major European power not yet in the hands of the corporate-backed austerity crowd.
The Global Sado-Erotic Thrill Machine
That changed with Cameron's election as Prime Minister in May 2010, an event that threw pro-austerity Americans into throes of near-erotic ecstasy. And if that sounds like hyperbole, consider conservative Anne Appelbaum's reaction to Cameron's budget in September of 2010: >
Vicious cuts." "Savage cuts." "Swingeing (sic) cuts." The language that the British use to describe their new government's spending-reduction policy is apocalyptic in the extreme. The ministers in charge of the country's finances are known as "axe-wielders" who will be "hacking" away at the budget. Articles about the nation's finances are filled with talk of blood, knives, and amputation.
And the British love it.
What can I say? There are people who collect serial-killer memorabilia, too. But Appelbaum wasn't just speaking for herself. It became unacceptable for any politician in Washington, Democrat or Republican, to advocate anything other than an austerity budget for the United States.
And it was more than an economic strategy to its backers. Austerity became a way to demonize those who had suffered most from the banking abuses and self-indulgences of the wealthy, a totemic "blame the victim" response that turned the political debate into a grotesque inversion of morality. Again, Appelbaum: >
"Not only is austerity being touted as the solution to Britain's economic woes; it is also being described as the answer to the country's moral failings."
Bad Metaphors vs. Good Economists
The Democratic President of the United States, Barack Obama, jumped onto the bandwagon with both feet by repeatedly lecturing Americans on the need for government to stop "spending beyond its means." Obama recycled the popular conservative metaphor of a family that has to sit around the kitchen table and decide how much money it has to spend.
That's one of the worst metaphors in modern politics. Does a family establish its own currency -- especially one that has the unique position of the dollar? Can a family borrow money at rates so low they're effectively less than zero? Would a family let Grandma go hungry because Junior bought too many Porsches out of the family kitty and then gambled it away on lousy mortgage investments?
The world's top economists, those who had successfully predicted the crisis of 2008, tried telling the rest of the world what was wrong with the idea: Joblessness and consumer fears were killing any chance of real recovery. More short-term spending was needed to get the economy moving again. Austerity would make things worse, not better.
But nobody listened. Austerity's S%M-like attraction had the world's elites in its grip.
Death of a Delusion
And then something else came into the picture: Reality.
Cameron's austerity budget had a shattering effect on the already-struggling British economy. His government's financial stability was downgraded five times during his first year in power and retail sales had fallen 2.5 percent. Household income was projected to fall an additional 2 percent if his austerity plans were carried forward. Britain's modest employment gains were reversed, youth unemployment reached record levels, and income inequality was the worst it had been in more than half a century.
Anne Appelbaum's erotic dreams had become Great Britain's nightmare.
As Europe's ruling austerity class pushed forward with their plans, even the IMF tried to dissuade them. It was clear to anyone who wasn't blinded by ideology or political cynicism that austerity economics was a failed program. Even in countries like Greece, where government was far graver than elsewhere, the austerity programs imposed from outside threatened to destabilize society while other reasonable measures like improved tax collection were still not taken seriously enough.
And now the entire Eurozone hangs in the balance. Bankers became wealthy by treating governments as if they were mortgages, lending recklessly and pocketing their fees without considering the long-term reliability of their loans. European leaders insisted for months they were take the kind of sensible steps that should've been taken in the United States by requiring bankers to accept at least part of the losses for the bad loans they had issed.
That plan was quietly dropped last month. "Austerity economics" never calls for austerity from those who have gotten rich by being irresponsible, only from those who didn't benefit from it at all.
The Afterlife
President Obama has dropped his austerity rhetoric, at least for the time being, but the Republicans have not. Listening to Mitt Romney discuss economics is like having a doctor wave a dead chicken over your head and saying he's decided to cast a spell on you rather than operate on that thing they found in your X-rays.
Aside from the bill introduced this month by the House Progressive Caucus to almost no media attention, there's no comprehensive plan for dropping this country's ineffective austerity strategy and replacing it with an agenda that works.
Rational solutions to our economic problems are being ignored. There won't be a real debate about alternatives to austerity until an entire political party, not just part of it, adopts this kind of program. Until then there will be chaos. And where there is chaos, austerity's powerful advocates can step in and take charge.
Austerity economics died in 2011 and is survived by the British, German, and French governments as well as the GOP and large portions of the Democratic Party. Instead of sending flowers, the family has asked the public to abandon all hopes of future economic growth.
0 Views
19:41:00 12/22/11
Prince William & Kate To Have a Baby & More 2012 Predictions
[LESS INFO] 0 VIEWS | ADDED 19:41:00 12/22/11
Prince William & Kate To Have a Baby & More 2012 Predictions
Prince William & Kate to have a baby, Robert Pattinson & Kristen Stewart to tie the knot and more predictions for celebs in 2012! 2011 HAS COME AND GONE, SO NOW THAT WE'RE ON TO A NEW YEAR, IT'S TIME TO PEER INTO THE CELEBTV CRYSTAL BALL FOR A SEGMENT WE'RE CALLING "WILDLY SPECULATIVE PREDICTIONS FOR 2012." 2011 WAS ALL ABOUT THE ROYAL WEDDING, AND WE THINK THIS IS THE YEAR OF THE ROYAL HEIR. WE'RE BETTING THE DUKE AND DUCHESS WILL BE ON THEIR WAY TO BEING "DADDY WILLS" AND "MUMMY KATE" BY THE TIME THE YEAR IS OUT. AND SPEAKING OF NOBILITY, WOULD YOU TWO JUST HOOK IT UP ALREADY! HE'S A SEXY GINGER ... AND SHE'S JUST PLAIN HOT. WE'RE TOTALLY BANKING ON A HARRY-PIPPA RELATIONSHIP -- MOSTLY BECAUSE WE'RE DYING FOR ANOTHER ROYAL WEDDING. THEIR VAMPIRIC LOVE WAS CENTER STAGE IN "BREAKING DAWN", AND WE THINK IT WOULDN'T SUCK IF K-STEW AND R-PATTZ MADE IT OFFICIAL AND WALKED DOWN THE AISLE IN REAL LIFE IN 2012. "DANCING WITH THE STARS" WILL BE BACK WITH AN ALL-NEW CAST AND WE'VE GOT A "MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE" FOR THE PRODUCERS -- GET TOM CRUISE TO SHOW OFF HIS MOVES. THERE WOULDN'T BE ANYTHING RISKY ABOUT THAT BUSINESS. WE CAN GUARANTEE THE KARDASHIANS WILL BE IN THE NEWS -- BUT WE'RE NOT EVEN GOING TO RISK TAKING A GUESS WHAT THE STORY WILL BE. NOT AFTER THAT WHOLE 72-DAY ROLLERCOASTER KIM AND KRIS TOOK US ON LAST YEAR. OK FINE, THREE WORDS: KHLOE. LAMAR. BABY. AND SOMETHING TELLS US SHE'LL BE SPORTING ONE HUMONGOUS BUMP. AS THEY SAY, EVERYTHING'S BIGGER IN TEXAS -JUST ASK JESSICA ... From: CelebTV Views: 3980 16 ratings Time: 01:33 More in Entertainment
0 Views
19:41:00 12/22/11
Prince William & Kate To Have a Baby & More 2012 Predictions
[LESS INFO] 0 VIEWS | ADDED 19:41:00 12/22/11
Prince William & Kate To Have a Baby & More 2012 Predictions
Prince William & Kate to have a baby, Robert Pattinson & Kristen Stewart to tie the knot and more predictions for celebs in 2012! 2011 HAS COME AND GONE, SO NOW THAT WE'RE ON TO A NEW YEAR, IT'S TIME TO PEER INTO THE CELEBTV CRYSTAL BALL FOR A SEGMENT WE'RE CALLING "WILDLY SPECULATIVE PREDICTIONS FOR 2012." 2011 WAS ALL ABOUT THE ROYAL WEDDING, AND WE THINK THIS IS THE YEAR OF THE ROYAL HEIR. WE'RE BETTING THE DUKE AND DUCHESS WILL BE ON THEIR WAY TO BEING "DADDY WILLS" AND "MUMMY KATE" BY THE TIME THE YEAR IS OUT. AND SPEAKING OF NOBILITY, WOULD YOU TWO JUST HOOK IT UP ALREADY! HE'S A SEXY GINGER ... AND SHE'S JUST PLAIN HOT. WE'RE TOTALLY BANKING ON A HARRY-PIPPA RELATIONSHIP -- MOSTLY BECAUSE WE'RE DYING FOR ANOTHER ROYAL WEDDING. THEIR VAMPIRIC LOVE WAS CENTER STAGE IN "BREAKING DAWN", AND WE THINK IT WOULDN'T SUCK IF K-STEW AND R-PATTZ MADE IT OFFICIAL AND WALKED DOWN THE AISLE IN REAL LIFE IN 2012. "DANCING WITH THE STARS" WILL BE BACK WITH AN ALL-NEW CAST AND WE'VE GOT A "MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE" FOR THE PRODUCERS -- GET TOM CRUISE TO SHOW OFF HIS MOVES. THERE WOULDN'T BE ANYTHING RISKY ABOUT THAT BUSINESS. WE CAN GUARANTEE THE KARDASHIANS WILL BE IN THE NEWS -- BUT WE'RE NOT EVEN GOING TO RISK TAKING A GUESS WHAT THE STORY WILL BE. NOT AFTER THAT WHOLE 72-DAY ROLLERCOASTER KIM AND KRIS TOOK US ON LAST YEAR. OK FINE, THREE WORDS: KHLOE. LAMAR. BABY. AND SOMETHING TELLS US SHE'LL BE SPORTING ONE HUMONGOUS BUMP. AS THEY SAY, EVERYTHING'S BIGGER IN TEXAS -JUST ASK JESSICA ... From: CelebTV Views: 3980 16 ratings Time: 01:33 More in Entertainment
13 Views
02:00:38 12/20/11
60 Minutes: Another Good Reason to Occupy Foreclosed Homes?
[LESS INFO] 13 VIEWS | ADDED 02:00:38 12/20/11
[Note: If you have any trouble viewing this video, try it on the 60 Minutes homepage here .]
Yet another good reason to occupy homes: Foreclosure thieves have gone high tech. They know when evictions are occurring because they're posted online. And they will follow the sheriff. They're usually there that afternoon or that evening.
Across America, recession-fueled foreclosures and plummeting home values have left countless properties abandoned and vulnerable to looting. As Scott Pelley reports in the above video, the problem has gotten so bad in Cleveland, Ohio, that county officials have demolished more than 1,000 homes this year - and plan to demolish 20,000 more - rather than let the blight spread and render nearby homes worthless.
Jim Rokakis, a former county treasurer, explains why to 60 Minutes : >
Jim Rokakis: We're looking at a neighborhood that has almost as many vacant houses awaiting demolition as there are houses with people living in them. We have one here. One here. One here. One there.
Rokakis is leading the effort to tear down thousands of abandoned homes because they're rotting their neighborhoods from the inside out. It often starts, he told us, when a vacant house becomes an open house to thieves.
Scott Pelley: It's a nice house from the roof to about here. And then down here it's been ripped to pieces. What's goin' on?
Rokakis: Well this is typical because this is as high as they could reach without using ladders. They ripped off the aluminum siding, which you'll see on most of these houses. The aluminum and the vinyl siding comes off. It's getting' about a buck a pound.
Pelley: Essentially foreclosure scavengers have been through here?
Rokakis: The thieves have gone high tech. They know when evictions are occurring 'cause they're posted online. And they will follow the sheriff. They're usually there that afternoon or that evening.
CBS reports that 11 million homeowners are said to be "underwater," or owing more than their house is worth. It's believed that even more neighborhoods would fall into ruin if it weren't for the people who refuse to walk away from their homes, even it might be best for them financially.
Pelley speaks with Linda Bizzelle of Cleveland, who has refused to give up on her home: >
Her house is worth 50,000, she owes a hundred. A financial planner might tell her to put something away for retirement rather than pay a mortgage that will never recover. Especially, since she lost her job in nursing last April.
Pelley: What have you been cutting back on?
Bizzelle: Sometimes food. I would go to the food bank in order to make up the difference, so that I wouldn't be completely hungry. Sometimes I wouldn't get my medications renewed and I would have difficulty with that because I really need my medications. I take medication for high blood pressure. And my doctor could always tell when I didn't take 'em and I said, "Oh no, you can't do that. No No."
Pelley: You're living on unemployment right now?
Bizzelle: Yes.
Pelley: What about the next mortgage payment?
Bizzelle: I'm gonna pray. That's the best I can do. I'm gonna pray that I find a job.
More homeowners like Linda Bizelle in the program, and you can view the entire transcript online here.
