{"id":23,"date":"2009-09-15T04:10:00","date_gmt":"2009-09-15T12:10:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/?p=23"},"modified":"2009-09-15T04:10:00","modified_gmt":"2009-09-15T12:10:00","slug":"in-the-news-%e2%80%93-9152009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/2009\/09\/15\/in-the-news-%e2%80%93-9152009\/","title":{"rendered":"In the News \u2013 9\/15\/2009"},"content":{"rendered":"

Today I\u2019m only going to post one article.  There are half a dozen stories that caught my attention, but no single issue inspired a major post today.<\/p>\n

On a personal note, I visited my doctor yesterday.  On the plus side, I am still breathing, I have a pulse, and I got a flu shot.  On the minus side, for my twenty minute appointment, I traveled ninety minutes each way, waited over an hour when I got there, and spent over $100.  :-(   I won my games in both fantasy football leagues I joined, and much to my surprise, I had the best scores in both leagues.  Wooo! Hooo!  TomCat sticks out his chest and struts as if he were macho<\/em>. \ud83d\ude09<\/p>\n

Joe Wilson lied about more than coverage for illegal immigrants.<\/p>\n

\n

\"JoeWilsonLied\"<\/a> Rep. Joe ("You Lie!") Wilson’s now-legendary exclamation during President Obama’s speech to Congress last week was itself essentially untrue, as we’ve documented. <\/font><\/p>\n

But in trying to deflect charges of xenophobia in the wake of the outburst, it looks like the South Carolina congressman again played fast and loose with the facts.<\/font><\/p>\n

At a Thursday press conference, Wilson was at pains to present himself as a friend of immigrants, <\/font>declaring<\/font><\/a>:<\/font><\/p>\n

\u201cWe need to be discussing issues specifically to help the American people. And that would not include illegal aliens, these are people– I’m for immigration, legal immigration, I’ve been an immigration attorney<\/strong>. But people who have come to our country and violated laws, we should not be providing full health care services.\u201d<\/font><\/p>\n

We weren’t aware that Wilson had been an immigration attorney. So TPMmuckraker went looking for information about his work in the field. And we came up dry.<\/font><\/p>\n

According to the bio on Wilson’s website — or what’s left of the site, after it crashed last week amid the flurry of attention he received — he’s a real estate attorney by trade, who helped found the West Columbia law firm Kirkland, Wilson, Moore, Taylor & Thomas, before entering Congress in 2001. He also has served as a Staff Judge Advocate with the South Carolina Army National Guard.<\/font><\/p>\n

One lawyer from Wilson’s home county of Lexington — who said he has known Wilson personally since 1985 and described himself as very familiar with Wilson’s law practice — declared flatly to TPMmuckraker: "Joe has never been anything but a real-estate attorney<\/strong>."… [emphasis added<\/em>]<\/font><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Inserted from <TPM Muckraker<\/a>><\/p>\n

OOPS!!  Poor Joe.  Gone are the days that congress people can lie like a Republican and not get caught.  Joe is a perfect example of GOP credibility.<\/p>\n

While we\u2019re on the subject of lying fools, here\u2019s a progress report on the campaign to boycott Beck\u2019s advertisers.<\/p>\n

\n

\"BeckCrying\"<\/a> Today, Color of Change announced that since it launched a boycott of Glenn Beck\u2019s Fox News show a month ago, the controversial host has lost<\/font> half of his estimated advertising revenue<\/a>:<\/p>\n

According to the data collected, the amount of money spent by national advertisers on Beck\u2019s program per week was at its highest at approximately $1,060,000, for the week ending August 2, 2009. ColorOfChange.org launched their campaign at the end of that week and since then, 62 advertisers have distanced themselves from Beck. Data collected for the week ending September 6, 2009 shows Beck\u2019s estimated ad revenue at $492,000, equal to a loss of $568,000<\/strong>.<\/font><\/p>\n

\u201cFox News Channel has consistently claimed they haven\u2019t lost revenue as advertisers abandon Glenn Beck, but the numbers prove otherwise,\u201d said Color of Change Executive Director James Rucker… [emphasis original<\/em>]<\/font><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Inserted from <Think Progress<\/a>><\/p>\n

Frankly, I don\u2019t think anything we can do will take Beck off the air.  The First Amendment guarantees freedom of the press to anyone fortunate enough to own a press, or its modern equivalent.  Rupert Murdoch is fortunate enough to own lots of them, so it\u2019s his right to keep attack dog on the air.  But if that must be so, let it be Murdoch money that supports Beck, not money from American consumers.<\/p>\n

On the healthcare front, there\u2019s some encouraging news for a change.<\/p>\n

\n

\"Harkin\"<\/a> Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin predicts Congress will approve a health care reform bill this fall that includes a public option, saying a "silent majority" of Americans favor such an overhaul.<\/font><\/p>\n

Speaking with reporters Sunday at a Democratic fundraiser, Harkin promised passage of "a bill before we go home for Christmas." He says the measure will include a government insurance option.<\/font><\/p>\n

Harkin’s views have grown in importance since he was named chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee after the death of Sen. Ted Kennedy.<\/font><\/p>\n

Harkin says there is little political risk in backing health care reform and that the real danger is opposing changes…<\/font><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Inserted from <Common Dreams<\/a>><\/p>\n

The buzz I\u2019m hearing is after the Baucus proposal is announced tomorrow, and once it is marked-up before the full finance committee next Tuesday, the Democrats who constitute a majority of that committee, who have been excluded from the negotiations so far, as though elections did not matter, will be proposing amendments sufficient to clean it up.  I also understand that snake-in-the Grassley and his goose-stepping cohorts will reject even the unacceptably watered-down Baucus version.  The bottom line is this: Democrats will have to proceed without Republicans, unless they are willing to concede to a continuation of the status quo.  Since that is true, they should proceed with what Obama promised, not a measure weakened by the Repuglican Reich, whish they refuse to support anyway<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

On the human rights front, the Bush\/GOP practice of opposing UN efforts to combat abuses is now over.<\/p>\n

\n

\"un_logo\"<\/a> U.S. attended its first formal meeting of the U.N. Human Rights Council as a member Monday, saying it will try to promote dialogue at a body it once avoided and heavily criticized.<\/font><\/p>\n

The U.S. was elected in June to the 47-nation council, which was criticized by the Bush administration for primarily denouncing Israel while ignoring abuses elsewhere. Washington left its observer seat on the council vacant during the last six months of President George W. Bush’s second term.<\/font><\/p>\n

"We will strive for discussions that are thoughtful, focused and open to all viewpoints and perspectives," U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Esther Brimmer told the council.<\/font><\/p>\n

The decision in May to seek a seat on the Geneva-based body after three years of staying on the sidelines was a major shift in U.S. policy in line with President Barack Obama’s stated aim to closer cooperate with the United Nations…<\/font><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Inserted from <AP\/Google<\/a>><\/p>\n

This is a positive development.  It\u2019s time for the US to speak out against Israeli human rights abuses.  Plus, if the Council has ignored abuses elsewhere, we can bring them into focus.<\/p>\n

Probably the last place one would expect a discussion of the recent Acorn scandal is on a left-of-center blog.  But I think the issue needs to be aired, and I\u2019ve never been one to avoid hard topics.<\/p>\n

\n

\"ACORN\"<\/a> The Senate voted Monday to block the Housing and Urban Development Department from giving grants to ACORN, a community organization under fire in several voter-registration fraud cases.<\/font><\/p>\n

The 83-7 vote would deny housing and community grant funding to ACORN, which stands for the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now.<\/font><\/p>\n

The action came as the group is suffering from bad publicity after a duo of conservative activists posing as a prostitute and her pimp released hidden-camera videos in which ACORN employees in Baltimore gave advice on house-buying and how to account on tax forms for the woman’s income. Two other videos, aired frequently on media outlets such as the Fox News Channel, depict similar situations in ACORN offices in Brooklyn and Washington, D.C.<\/font><\/p>\n

The Senate’s move would mean that ACORN would not be able to win HUD grants for programs such as counseling low-income people on how to get mortgages and for fair housing education and outreach.<\/font><\/p>\n

Sen. Mike Johanns, R-Neb., said that ACORN has received $53 million in taxpayer funds since 1994 and that the group was eligible for a wider set of funding in the pending legislation, which funds housing and transportation programs.<\/font><\/p>\n

Just last week, the Census Bureau severed its ties with ACORN, saying it does not want the group’s help in outreach efforts on the decennial count…<\/font><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Inserted from <AP\/Google<\/a>><\/p>\n

OK, I\u2019ve seen the videos and there is no question in my mind that more than one Acorn employees did advise Faux Noise plants, posing as prostitutes and pimps, on how to break the law.  I cannot endorse their behavior, and neither did Acorn.  Those employees have been fired.  To my knowledge, there is no evidence that this behavior represents Acorn\u2019s policy.<\/p>\n

In my opinion, the vote by the Senate and the Census Bureau removing Acorn from outreach are overreactions.  Where is the balance here.  Didn\u2019t they consider all the good Acorn has done for the poor?  And where is the fairness?  Consider Bonner and Associates, who sent forged letters to Representatives.  Did not they break the law?  Is not Congress encouraging them to break the law by continuing to accept campaign cash they raise on behalf of Big Coal?  On the subject of prostitution, consider David Vitter, who could not have encouraged a prostitute to break the law more than he did.  He bought her services.  Has the Senate kicked him out?<\/p>\n

My big concern is that it will be a long time before anyone else is organized sufficiently to continue the many services Acorn has provided to those who need them most.  That\u2019s why the GOP objects to Acorn.  They hate it when the government finances services to help the poor.  Every penny spent on the poor, is a penny the GOP can\u2019t spend on a millionaire<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

The following Senators had the courage to vote against the tide:<\/p>\n

Roland Burris, Bob Casey, Dick Durbin, Kirsten Gillibrand, Patrick Leahy, Sheldon Whitehouse, Bernard Sanders<\/strong><\/p>\n

Finally, there\u2019s some good news on the financial regulation front.<\/p>\n

\n

\"Judge-rejects-settlement\"<\/a> As President Obama traveled to Wall Street on Monday and chided bankers for their recklessness, across town a federal judge issued a far sharper rebuke, not just for some of the financiers but for their regulators in Washington as well.<\/font><\/p>\n

Giving voice to the anger and frustration of many ordinary Americans, Judge Jed S. Rakoff issued a scathing ruling on one of the watershed moments of the financial crisis: the star-crossed takeover of Merrill Lynch by the now-struggling Bank of America.<\/font><\/p>\n

Judge Rakoff refused to approve a $33 million deal that would have settled a lawsuit filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission against the Bank of America. The lawsuit alleged that the bank failed to adequately disclose the bonuses that were paid by Merrill before the merger, which was completed in January at regulators\u2019 behest as Merrill foundered. <\/font><\/p>\n

He accused the S.E.C. of failing in its role as Wall Street\u2019s top cop by going too easy on one of the biggest banks it regulates. And he accused executives of the Bank of America of failing to take responsibility for actions that blindsided its shareholders and the taxpayers who bailed out the bank at the height of the crisis. <\/font><\/p>\n

The sharply worded ruling, which invoked justice and morality, seemed to speak not only to the controversial deal, but also to the anger across the nation over the excesses that led to the financial crisis, and the lax regulation in Washington that permitted those excesses to flourish. <\/font><\/p>\n

Implicit in the judge\u2019s remarks were broader questions on the anniversary of one of the most tumultuous weeks in Wall Street\u2019s history: What do the giants of finance owe their shareholders and the investing public? And who will adequately oversee these behemoths?…<\/font><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Inserted from <NY Times<\/a>><\/p>\n

Now that\u2019s my kind of judge!!  Perhaps there is hope that the judicial branch of our government might force more action from Congress!  If you missed Countdown last night, Keith was off, but they had an interesting discussion about financial regulation, and I\u2019ll leave you with a video of that.<\/p>\n