Murdoch is Sick for Attacking One-day Old Baby in Headlines

People Should Blast Rupert Murdoch for This 

Just Freedom of the Press - Ha ...

(Attacking a one-day old baby with that is neither free nor press)

I find zero humor in that headline, none whatsoever. “Another Liberal Crybaby” in no way is either funny from a political jab at an adult DEM (who may be liberal) or to any newborn baby.

Freedom of the Press many will say; yes, it is, but it’s also nasty, ugly, lowdown, and distasteful by any standard, let alone by what is stated about the POST: “... widely considered to be the golden standard of journalistic ethics, writing, and sophistication.” I have two words about that: Horse and Shït.

Just reading that headline gives me and I’m sure others, too, more reasons to despise some aspects of the media. This headline reeks right along side most FOX “reporting,” which Murdoch also owns.

For me it’s quite simply another valid reason and example as I said to loathe certain segments of the media. Mr. Murdoch has only two goals that I perceive: (1) to gain as much power and money as possible, and (2) to subvert America for his own good along the way.

Just expressing my freedom of speech, Mr. Murdoch.

CEO Bailout & Salaies Vis-à-Vis Average Worker Under Them

CEO Salaries and Bennies: A Reflection of Greed at Taxpayer Expense

(Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty)

CEO's Surrounded by All That Green
(and it ain't grass either)

What Do Workers Think Their CEO Earns
(ha.... think again)

Major Update on the following topic — segment from MSNBC (Chris Matthews/HARDBALL) (about 7 minutes) (click here).

Original Post:  I was not greatly opposed to the initial TARP and then TARP II or the Bailouts that followed in light of and on top of near total economic meltdown of the country, but I had serious doubts nevertheless. A short review or preface relating to this story is warranted and is taken from my reading and recollection:

Q: How did we get here? Panic arrived via Treasury Secy Hank Paulson and Wall Street to President Bush and then to Congress with these words: “We need a stimulus to stop a NEAR TOTAL MELTDOWN (stated in September 2008).” His proposed bill went from 3 pages to over 400 pages, and from over $700 billion to over $800 billion as the Senate upped their part of the ante based on: 

The failure and collapse of Bear-Stearns; Fannie Mae-Freddie Mac; Lehman Bros; AIG; Merrill Lynch; Washington Mutual; Wachovia, then AUTO bailouts and failures and near failures all over Wall Street, plus closures of over 100 banks. Whew!!!

Where did all that come from? In part, the housing bubble scandal – then foreclosures – aided by CEO salaries – off-shore hideouts for billions, and now: job losses - debt and deficit spending to new records, more and more foreign borrowing (mostly from China). It has stopped somewhat, but job growth remain unstable – slow but not as fast as people need – things are and remain quite volatile, unstable, and uncertain and that has bred the anger and the steps taken (not for them per se, but that one side of the political aisle says IT’S NOT WORKING. A second whew!!!

However, not merely loans backed by Freddie and Fannie caused the problems ... more like those banks and mortgage companies and others who cleverly bundled them, passed them along after they made huge profits – and that kept that chain alive ... or pyramid if you like.

Those in government and those who were supposed to be watching (SEC, oversight committees, et al) forgot to consider or even include a strong anti-greed clause the rules for what was going on – and underneath it all, a lot was going on – an earthquake followed by a huge Tsunami was forming. That is what we face today: all the debris that came down around us is now being washed out to a huge red sea (red as in red ink) and it’s taking a lot of folks with it.

All that was lacking in this mess was people jumping out of Wall Street windows. They had no safety net in 1929 – but, they do today: the American taxpayer, who takes it in the shorts again. 

How is all that related to the story linked above that has this headline:

Report: Treasury approved "excessive" pay at bailed-out firms

From the story, in part, verbatim:

The Treasury Department approved “excessive compensation” for top corporate executives while their companies were still on the hook for the taxpayer-funded bailout, the bailout’s official watchdog SIGTARP said Wednesday, going against the pay limits that the White House had previously set.

Under the bailout legislation that Congress passed during the financial crisis, firms that received taxpayer-funded bailout money were subject to certain limits on executive compensation. In early 2009, the White House took additional steps to restrict executive pay for bailed-out firms, limiting executive pay to $500,000. Treasury went too far in making exceptions to those new rules for top-earning employees at General Motors and Ally Financial, the bailout’s Special Inspector General concluded in a new report. 

President Obama originally announced the executive pay restrictions with great fanfare, vowing to prevent “executives being rewarded for failure.” At the time, the Treasury Department said that compensation in the form of stocks couldn’t be paid out until after the company had repaid the government for the bailout money.  

However, it was up to Treasury to enforce the rules, and TARP’s watchdog says that officials were too lenient in making exceptions to the rules at GM and Ally. 

So, here we are today: Allowing or at least accepting the fact that CEO's who caused this mess to once again get back on the proverbial gravy train, or it seems to buy and hold the majority of stock in that train.  

A lot of folks worried about this – now those fears are right in our face. I am sure more will come out on this. Stay tuned.

More Nasty FOX Hørsëshït Designed to Subvert America

Fox News "Outnumbered" Show host Harris Faulkner

I'll keep this simple ... FOX needs to get this sickness off the public airwaves. 

Roger Ailes and Rupert Murdoch

(Possibly the worst two men in the country)

My question is just as simple: Is there any lower depth that FOX won't stoop to bash, insult, or blast Mr. Obama while trying to keep the Benghazi mess alive to benefit GOP for political points and not much else?  

The latest from this story (video included): 

“What does Omar Gonzalez, the 42-year-old former Army specialist who jumped the White House fence and made it inside with a small pocket knife in his pants last week, have to do with Benghazi?  FOX News “Outnumbered" show host Harris Faulkner will tell you.”  

This latest is pretty disgusting .... therefore, I propose a massive campaign to write letters, send faxes, emails, or telephone calls to Mr. Murdoch and Mr. Ailes and to tell them point blank:

  “Stop trying to subvert America.”

Where Are the Great Leaders Today Like Those in the Past

Teddy to LBJ

These were great American leaders with visions about the future and good for the country, and they all had mostly good results:

•  Teddy gave us a “Square Deal.”

•  FDR offered a “New Deal.”

•  Truman had a “Fair Deal.”

•  JFK saw a “New Frontier.”

•  LBJ worked for a “Great Society.”

The GOP changed course dramatically under House Speaker Gingrich, et al during the Clinton era with their harsh resistance, rhetoric, and tone while offering “No Deal.”

The present day GOP is petty, callous, cruel, and sustains a hard-line partisan stance with a “Raw Deal.”

We never heard about government shutdowns, stopping progress, secession of states from the Union, and going to war so easily as we see and hear today. The anxious beat of drums about going to war again in the Middle East is very disturbing.

This letter, written by a Retired Navy Officer, is a must read.

Now today, we also see and hear more raw politics backed by massive amounts of money from a handful of millionaires and billionaires trying to buy and own the country. The GOP projections for our future is based their desire to win anyway possible and control the entire Congress and then the White House starting with the November midterm elections and then after the 2016 presidential race. 

Their motto if that were to happen and based on recent activities by the Grand Old Party would be: 

“Our Deal or No Deal”

Jindal Louisiana Weasel — The Worst in the Bayou State

Rebuttal to Obama's SOTU Speech in 2009

The headlines

Gov. Jindal Sues Obama Over Common Core State Standards

Gov. Piyush “Bobby” (only his reel name) Jindal (R-LA) is suing President Obama over Common Core Education Standards — standards he was for until now, and now well… that appears to be political gain and not much else – certainly not on rational or sound principle.

A few specifics from the story: 

“Although the federal government had no official role in developing the standards, the Obama administration has supported them, giving $360 million to groups of states that are writing new Common Core tests.

“Obama’s education department also used Race to the Top, its $4.3 billion competitive grant program, as an inducement, saying that states adopting “college- and career-ready” standards had a better chance of winning federal dollars under the program. Most states understood that phrase to mean Common Core.

“When Louisiana applied multiple times for a grant under Obama’s Race to the Top program, Jindal never mentioned overreach, illegality or coercion. His state superintendent of education at the time wrote to the U.S. Department of Education saying in part: … we proudly submit this application to Race to the Top because Louisiana’s children can’t wait.

“Louisiana won on the third try in 2011, when it received a $17.4 million grant. The state also sought and received a waiver from No Child Left Behind after meeting the Obama administration’s requirements.”

Jindal’s argument falls flat on its face just like often does as he competes to overshadow the President (while he seeks the fame to launch him to the presidency).

Jindal is such a flaming a-hole. I hate to be so graphic, but he is … he is a typical GOPer seeking another way to insult and bash Mr. Obama anyway possible. As for me, I’m sick and tired of it, and on this topic that is underscored.

Trio on FOX and Fiends: Worst Weasels in the Morning

Their latest — it is truly amazing how this crew, on air or off air, manages to keep tying crap together that is totally unrelated to anything and all for political gain. So, I wonder: is what they say on the air what the top brass at FOX instruct them to say on the air? That is to "... tie crap together for whatever effect or affect we can achieve for the sake of the GOP in order to bash the Obama team and make the GOP look good in every broadcast all the time." (Or something as cynical as that - just my hunch). (Title of this post is not a typo, either - my view).

Elisabeth Hasselbeck Manages to Connect NFL Domestic Violence Scandal to Benghazi

FOX and a few in Congress (led by Rep. Issa the GOP's lead witch hunter) seem obsessed about or possessed by the demons from Benghazi. The record is clear on that. This makes that even clearer -- read it and judge for yourself click for a good run down.

And for goodness sake, turn FOX off ... helps keep your sanity.

WTF (What the FOX) Moment: Clear Goal Undermine America

To me this is more than a FOX “wardrobe malfunction” or some Tekkie glitch ... it is intended to further insult, defame, and belittle the Obama TEAM ... check the link – decide for yourself.

FOX should be ashamed, but they clearly are not – they love their tactics – “fair and balanced” my aching ass – how about “unfair and unbalanced?”

... I stick by my contention that the FOX goal is to undermine America one broadcast at a time to try and get the kind of country they want on their terms: A Fox Nation (no pun intended).

How are they doing that? Watch any broadcast to see (24/7).  Anyway, for today ... 

                                       

Quick: Flush FOX as Needed — It's a Long Way to the Cesspool

Not Hard to Dispute This

I have worked on this for some time ... see what you think:

Historically in U.S. law, (1) “the bad tendency principle” was a test used that permitted restriction of freedom of speech by government if it is believed that a form of speech has a sole tendency to incite or cause illegal activity.  

It was formulated in Patterson v. Colorado in 1907. However, it was seemingly overturned with the (2) “clear and present danger principle” used in the landmark case Schenck v. United States in 1919, as introduced and stated by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr..

Then eight months after that in Abrams v. United States in 1919, the Court again used the bad tendency test to uphold the conviction of a Russian immigrant who published and distributed leaflets calling for a general strike and otherwise advocated revolutionary, anarchist, and socialist views. Holmes dissented in Abrams explaining how the clear and present danger test should be employed to overturn Abrams' conviction.

The arrival of the bad tendency test resulted in a string of politically incorrect rulings such as Whitney v. California in 1927, where a woman was convicted simply because of her association with the Communist Party. The court ruled unanimously that although she had not committed any crimes, her relationship with the Communists represented a bad tendency and thus was unprotected. The “bad tendency” test was finally overturned in Brandenburg v. Ohio in 1969, and was replaced by the (3) “imminent lawless action” test or standard.

Imminent lawless action is the current standard used by the USSC that was established by them in the Brandenburg v. Ohio case in 1969. It defines the limits of freedom of speech.

Brandenburg clarified what constituted a clear and present danger(the standard established by Schenck but then overruled in Whitney, which had held that speech that merely advocated violence could be made illegal.

Under the imminent lawless action test, speech is not protected by the First Amendment if the speaker intends to incite a violation of the law that is both imminent and likely. While the precise meaning of “imminent” may be ambiguous in some cases, the court provided later clarification in Hess v. Indiana in 1973.

Somewhere in all this lies the solution to the FOX problem as I see it. FOX has for a very long time in all their broadcasts work against the country - i.e., they undermine the basic fabric of country. I’m not a lawyer, but boy, it makes perfect sense to me that FOX with those apparent goals are in most cases truly “designed and laced with (1) bad tendencies that pose a (2) clear and present danger that is (3) imminent.” 

There I combined all three into one… How’s that? (smile).

Weasels Rally With Dark Dick Cheney as War Drums Thunder

He's baaaaaaaaaaaaack ... duck! What duck????

Just as war chants erupt in DC, guess who pops back up like a whack-a-mole?  Yep – old DARK DICK himself.

With war in Iraq (and other places perhaps) suddenly back in style, Richard Bruce Cheney met with House Republicans to basically bash President Obama and his foreign policy and to stump for more defense spending, just as the President prepares his statement to public (Wed night, Sep 10, 2014 - which ironically is one day short of the 13th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks in NYC, on the Pentagon, and the ill-aimed flight that crashed in Shanksville, PA (when passengers overtook the hijackers and saved perhaps the White House as their 4th target). 

Cheney’s visit marked a sort of coming out party for Republican hawks, who polls show are rapidly gaining support among GOP voters after years in which the non-interventionists, led by Cheney’s nemesis, Rand Paul, had the momentum.

How was his visit, you wonder? “It was a great message – and something we needed to hear and hopefully it sticks with a lot of my colleagues who kind of had this creep towards isolationism,” said Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL). “Hopefully this is an awakening that we have to be very strong and very serious.”

Rep. John Fleming (R-LA) told The Daily Beast that Cheney accused Obama of “facilitating the Muslim Brotherhood,” the Islamic movement that won elections in Egypt only to be deposed by the military.

CNN reports that Cheney dinged Mr. Obama for not demanding the U.S. leave a residual force behind while negotiating a withdrawal with the Iraqi government (this is laughable since Bush-Cheney made that deal with Iraq – basically no SOFA agreement for U.S. Forces to be left behind – thus Mr. Obama followed their timeline).  

In a word: Mr. Cheney is one sick old bastard whose time has long passed, so please go back to WY and just STFU. Please, for the sake of our national sanity, just get out of our collective face.

Greed vs. Country; Money vs. Freedom; Profits vs. Patriotism

Don't Let the Door Hit You in the Ass on the Way Out ...

Bye, Bye American Pie

(Hello More Profits and Less Taxes)

Okay, Old Slogan - Still Applicable 

(Just call me old-fashioned)

I'll make short and to the point: More and more Americans (either by birth or naturalization) are giving up their citizenship for one basic reason it seems (re: this article and this one): Various reasons: hate American taxes and the IRS making them pay their fair share, or just want to return to their native land, whatever.

... FYI: That number of Americans giving up their citizenship surged to 3,000 in 2013, which is three times more than the previous year (refer to chart), and lists of names are here and here.

I say “boo freaking hoo” and further: Good riddance to bad rubbish ... if your money means more than your freedom under Old Glory, then bye-bye.

In Office, Seeking Office, Moneyed Backers: Symbiosis Amok

Moneyed Backers and Oh, Yeah, these 5 (to 4) Supporters

(The Losers: The Public)

Two historical cases and yes, by the same 5-4:

The first case was Citizens United v. the FEC, which opened the flood gates for big money to flow:

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, (2010) is a U.S. constitutional law case dealing with the regulation of campaign spending by corporations. The United States Supreme Court held that the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent political expenditures by corporations. The principles articulated by the Supreme Court in the case have also been extended to labor unions and other associations.

The second case was McCutheon v. the FEC, which in essence, tore down the gate and threw away the parts:  

McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, (2014) was a second landmark campaign finance case before the United States Supreme Court challenging Section 441 of the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA), which imposed a biennial aggregate limit on individual contributions to national party and federal candidate committees.

And here we are today. The proof as they say is in the pudding or in this case, in the fattest wallets and biggest checkbooks ever known to mankind. A great report by Open Secrets.org here with this headline: 

Cracking the Contribution Cap: One in a Million Americans

And here we are today – the proof as they say is in the pudding or in this case, in the fattest wallet and biggest checkbooks ever…

Thrust of this fine article: Of the 318 million people in the U.S., a whopping 310 donors have given more than the total $123,200 they were allowed to contribute to candidates, parties and PACs before the McCutcheon ruling, a new analysis by the Center for Responsive Politics shows. This gilded group of donors favors Republicans over Democrats by a two-to-one margin.

Continue at this link.

My footnotes for what it's worth:

Here is the database of those 300 donors who have been running wild ... and in the name of representative democracy, of course. If you honestly believe and support that, then may I offer you a bride in Brooklyn, and real cheap, too.

Here under column E ... we can see the amount the 300 gave post-McCutcheon. Also, did you know that very few Americans make political contributions at all, and less than 0.03 percent is the number of those who actually can an do give more than the allowed $2,600: the maximum an individual can give to a single candidate for each election.

Now, do you still believe that money is still speech, if so, I guess those like Sheldon Adelson, who gave $92 million in 2012 and a handful of others like him, have not only the fattest wallets but the biggest dictionaries to boot.

Thanks for stopping by.

Memo to Far Right Who Blast Mainstream Media All the Time

I am still waiting for some on the right to apologize for their message that we hear 24/7 when they refer to the mainstream media as “lame stream” while they hawk themselves above all real honest-to-goodness media and news sources. People like Limbaugh, Hannity, O’Reilly, Savage, Levin, Coulter, Ingraham, and host of other yappers and screechers we see and hear daily from the FOX hole. 

Their silence is deafening. The main steam media is precisely who real journalist like James Foley and Steven Stoloff worked for.