"Facebook is a complex ecosystem of individuals, creators, brands and advertisers, but I don't think it serves any of these groups particularly well because its top priority is to make money. Now, I don't think making money is a bad thing, in fact I hope to make some myself. The problem is the only way Facebook has found to make money is by treating all entities on the site as advertisers and charging them to share their content".
"As long as the special interests pay to elect the pols, we will have government of the special interests, by the special interests, and for the special interests". - Molly Ivins
Sunday, January 19, 2014
Friday, January 17, 2014
Wednesday, January 15, 2014
It was the year America stood up... and split apart: 1964 | American Experience | PBS
1964 was the year the Beatles came to America, Cassius Clay became Muhammad Ali, and three civil rights workers were murdered in Mississippi. It was the year when Berkeley students rose up in protest, African Americans fought back against injustice in Harlem, and Barry Goldwater’s conservative revolution took over the Republican Party. In myriad ways, 1964 was the year when Americans faced choices: between the liberalism of Lyndon Johnson or Barry Goldwater’s grassroots conservatism, between support or opposition to the civil rights movement, between an embrace of the emerging counterculture or a defense of traditional values.
Saturday, January 04, 2014
Rachel Maddow scorches Koch brothers on ‘correction’ demand
Rachel Maddow: "[W]e occasionally find people who have been mentioned in our coverage who are absolutely outraged that they have been mentioned in our coverage".
Saturday, December 28, 2013
Thomas Cahill on the People’s Pope | Bill Moyers
December 27, 2013
In just a few months, Pope Francis has proven to be one of the most outspoken pontiffs in recent history, especially when it comes to poverty and income inequality. In a message to be sent to world leaders marking the Roman Catholic Church’s World Day of Peace on January 1, he criticized the “widening gap between those who have more and those who must be content with the crumbs.”
Thomas Cahill on the People's Pope from BillMoyers.com on Vimeo.
In just a few months, Pope Francis has proven to be one of the most outspoken pontiffs in recent history, especially when it comes to poverty and income inequality. In a message to be sent to world leaders marking the Roman Catholic Church’s World Day of Peace on January 1, he criticized the “widening gap between those who have more and those who must be content with the crumbs.”
Thomas Cahill on the People's Pope from BillMoyers.com on Vimeo.
Sunday, December 15, 2013
The Pathology of the Rich - Chris Hedges
On Reality Asserts Itself with Paul Jay, Chris Hedges discusses the psychology of the super rich; their sense of entitlement, the dehumanization of workers, and mistaken belief that their wealth will insulate them from the coming storms.
Thursday, December 12, 2013
David Simon: Some people are more equal than others
There are two Americas. In one, bankers get golden parachutes, insider traders return to society as well-paid consultants, and influence is for sale. In the other, opportunity is scarce and forgiveness scarcer, jail awaits those caught possessing recreational drugs, and cries for help are ignored. Society preaches forgiveness for the rich and retribution for the poor. Entrenched inequality and its companion, poverty, are the dark side of the American dream for a citizenry united by name, but not by rules.
Wednesday, December 11, 2013
Sunday, December 08, 2013
Paul Krugman: Obama Gets Real
Paul Krugman | New York Times
5 Dec 2013
excerpt:
Much of our political and pundit class remains devoted to the notion that rising inequality, to the extent that it’s an issue at all, is all about workers lacking the right skills and education. But the president now seems to accept progressive arguments that education is at best one of a number of concerns, that America’s growing class inequality largely reflects political choices, like the failure to raise the minimum wage along with inflation and productivity.
5 Dec 2013
excerpt:
Much of our political and pundit class remains devoted to the notion that rising inequality, to the extent that it’s an issue at all, is all about workers lacking the right skills and education. But the president now seems to accept progressive arguments that education is at best one of a number of concerns, that America’s growing class inequality largely reflects political choices, like the failure to raise the minimum wage along with inflation and productivity.
And because the president was willing to assign much of the blame for
rising inequality to bad policy, he was also more forthcoming than in
the past about ways to change the nation’s trajectory, including a rise
in the minimum wage, restoring labor’s bargaining power, and
strengthening, not weakening, the safety net.
And there was this: “When it comes to our budget, we should not be stuck
in a stale debate from two years ago or three years ago. A
relentlessly growing deficit of opportunity is a bigger threat to our
future than our rapidly shrinking fiscal deficit.” Finally! Our
political class has spent years obsessed with a fake problem — worrying
about debt and deficits that never posed any threat to the nation’s
future — while showing no interest in unemployment and stagnating wages.
Mr. Obama, I’m sorry to say, bought into that diversion. Now, however,
he’s moving on.
READ IT ALL:
READ IT ALL:
Friday, November 29, 2013
Digging In
How eating cornbread and beans taught me who I was -- and who we are as Texans.
PATRICIA SHARPE | Texas Monthly
December 2013
December 2013
My mother was not nostalgic about many things in life,
but when it came to cornbread and beans, she was a sentimental fool. She
and my father had been teenagers during the Great Depression, and the
memory of those hard times was still raw when they married, in 1942.
“Many a day, cornbread and beans was all we had to eat,” one of them was
likely to say. Neither of them had ever gone to bed hungry, but they
came close.
Since Mother firmly believed that those who do not remember the past are doomed to repeat it, she made sure her three well-fed children had an inkling of what the previous generation had endured. At least a couple of times a year, a big pot of pinto beans seasoned with salt pork would appear on the stove, slowly simmering down almost to mush, along with a pan of yellow cornbread, fragrant and steaming. We would gather around our fifties-era Formica dinette table and fill our cereal bowls and plates. I’m afraid that my two younger brothers and I rolled our eyes, although never so that Mother or Daddy could see us. Still, something must have sunk in, because I often find myself calling up remembrances of meals past as a way of understanding, if only a little, where I came from. Food is about many things—nourishment, pleasure, and culture among them—but it’s also about recognizing who you are, and why.
READ IT ALL:
Saturday, November 16, 2013
Clinton vs. Warren?
Hendrik Hertzberg | newyorker.com
15 Nov 2013
Warren was a Republican well into her forties (she’s sixty-four, just three years Hillary’s junior)—but, as the saying goes, that could be a feature, not a bug. It makes for a potentially useful party-line-blurring “narrative.” Reagan, too, switched affiliations in midlife. He knew how to talk the other side’s talk, and even as he won the hearts of the far reaches of his adopted party he remained politically bilingual. Warren may turn out to have a similar talent. After all, there are Republicans who are suspicious of the banks, just as there were Democrats who fretted about welfare.
[snip]
When Warren is on her game, she’s almost as good as Hillary’s husband (or Nancy’s) at ’splaining stuff in plain language, above all when she’s talking about her signature issue, financial reform—which, as it happens, is Clinton’s biggest ideological vulnerability with the Democratic-primary electorate.
[snip]
Should Hillary Clinton end up heading the Democratic ticket in 2016, she would be the most qualified, most fully prepared, most thoroughly tested non-incumbent major-party nominee for President since Henry Clay. She has spent more than twenty years in the crucible. She didn’t while away her eight White House years walled up in the East Wing convent, First Ladylike. She was a full participant in every important political and policy deliberation and in every crisis, foreign and (in both senses) domestic. She was a successful senator, popular with voters and colleagues alike. While her tenure as Secretary of State yielded no spectacular diplomatic coups, she did the job competently and creatively. Her partnership with President Obama was a political masterstroke for them both. She is as Presidential as they come, and, as Scheiber writes, she sounds increasingly “candidential.” (A nice neologism, that.)
To the extent that Hillary has a problem, though, it may not be only the liberal and populist unease with the Clintons’ history of chumminess with Wall Street—and their role in creating the deregulatory regime that was an indispensable precondition for the 2008 financial crisis and the economic ruin that it has wrought.
READ IT ALL:
15 Nov 2013
Warren was a Republican well into her forties (she’s sixty-four, just three years Hillary’s junior)—but, as the saying goes, that could be a feature, not a bug. It makes for a potentially useful party-line-blurring “narrative.” Reagan, too, switched affiliations in midlife. He knew how to talk the other side’s talk, and even as he won the hearts of the far reaches of his adopted party he remained politically bilingual. Warren may turn out to have a similar talent. After all, there are Republicans who are suspicious of the banks, just as there were Democrats who fretted about welfare.
[snip]
When Warren is on her game, she’s almost as good as Hillary’s husband (or Nancy’s) at ’splaining stuff in plain language, above all when she’s talking about her signature issue, financial reform—which, as it happens, is Clinton’s biggest ideological vulnerability with the Democratic-primary electorate.
[snip]
Should Hillary Clinton end up heading the Democratic ticket in 2016, she would be the most qualified, most fully prepared, most thoroughly tested non-incumbent major-party nominee for President since Henry Clay. She has spent more than twenty years in the crucible. She didn’t while away her eight White House years walled up in the East Wing convent, First Ladylike. She was a full participant in every important political and policy deliberation and in every crisis, foreign and (in both senses) domestic. She was a successful senator, popular with voters and colleagues alike. While her tenure as Secretary of State yielded no spectacular diplomatic coups, she did the job competently and creatively. Her partnership with President Obama was a political masterstroke for them both. She is as Presidential as they come, and, as Scheiber writes, she sounds increasingly “candidential.” (A nice neologism, that.)
To the extent that Hillary has a problem, though, it may not be only the liberal and populist unease with the Clintons’ history of chumminess with Wall Street—and their role in creating the deregulatory regime that was an indispensable precondition for the 2008 financial crisis and the economic ruin that it has wrought.
READ IT ALL:
Thursday, November 14, 2013
Audience laughs at Ted Cruz for claiming he 'didn't want a shutdown'
14 Nov 2013 - Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) faced howls of laughter from an audience in
Washington, D.C. on Thursday when he claimed that he "didn't want a
shutdown" over President Barack Obama's health care reform law.
At The Atlantic's Washington Ideas Forum, Fox News host Chris Wallace pointed out to the Texas Republican that many of his colleagues thought he hurt the party by forcing the government shutdown instead of letting Obamacare fail on its own.
"That ignores who I think was responsible for the shutdown," Cruz replied. "I didn't want a shutdown. Throughout the whole thing, I said we shouldn't have a shutdown."
That remark elicited laughter from the forum audience.
SOURCE
At The Atlantic's Washington Ideas Forum, Fox News host Chris Wallace pointed out to the Texas Republican that many of his colleagues thought he hurt the party by forcing the government shutdown instead of letting Obamacare fail on its own.
"That ignores who I think was responsible for the shutdown," Cruz replied. "I didn't want a shutdown. Throughout the whole thing, I said we shouldn't have a shutdown."
That remark elicited laughter from the forum audience.
SOURCE
Saturday, November 09, 2013
How Big Money and Big Media undermine democracy
8 Nov 2013 | BillMoyers.com
“Democracy
means rule of the people: one person, one vote. Dollarocracy means the
rule of the dollars: one dollar, one vote. Those with lots of dollars
have lots of power. Those with no dollars have no power,” Robert
McChesney tells Bill.
SOURCE:
Sunday, November 03, 2013
Saturday, November 02, 2013
Trans-Pacific Partnership is the answer to the question: How can we make the rich richer?
Dean Baker, Truthout | 28 Oct 2013
The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) stands at the top of the Obama administration’s trade agenda. The argument from its supporters is that this agreement is part of the never-ending quest for freer trade. The evidence from what we know of this (still secret) pact is that the TPP has little to do with free trade. It can more accurately be described as a pact designed to increase the wealth and power of crony capitalists.
[snip]
The TPP is about crafting rules that will favor big business at the expense of the rest of the population in both the United States and in other countries. For example, we can expect to see limits on the ability of national and sub-national governments to impose environmental restrictions, such as requirements that companies engaging in fracking disclose the list of chemicals they use. There may also be limits on the extent to which governments can restrict the sale of genetically modified foods, with rules on labeling. And, the TPP may prevent governments from imposing restraints on financial firms that would prevent the sort of abuses that we saw during the run-up of the housing bubble.
READ IT ALL:
The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) stands at the top of the Obama administration’s trade agenda. The argument from its supporters is that this agreement is part of the never-ending quest for freer trade. The evidence from what we know of this (still secret) pact is that the TPP has little to do with free trade. It can more accurately be described as a pact designed to increase the wealth and power of crony capitalists.
[snip]
The TPP is about crafting rules that will favor big business at the expense of the rest of the population in both the United States and in other countries. For example, we can expect to see limits on the ability of national and sub-national governments to impose environmental restrictions, such as requirements that companies engaging in fracking disclose the list of chemicals they use. There may also be limits on the extent to which governments can restrict the sale of genetically modified foods, with rules on labeling. And, the TPP may prevent governments from imposing restraints on financial firms that would prevent the sort of abuses that we saw during the run-up of the housing bubble.
READ IT ALL:
Friday, November 01, 2013
Jon Stewart to The Media for using him to attack Obamacare: 'Go F*ck Yourselves!'
31 Oct 2013 | Wit Happens
The media uses Jon's lampooning of the Affordable Care Act as evidence of its impotence. (05:51)
The media uses Jon's lampooning of the Affordable Care Act as evidence of its impotence. (05:51)
Thursday, October 24, 2013
Russell Brand's revolutionary interview
Actor-slash-comedian-slash-Messiah Russell Brand, in his capacity as guest editor of the New Statesman's just-published revolution-themed issue, was invited to explain to Jeremy Paxman why anyone should listen to a man who has never voted in his life.
"I don't
get my authority from this preexisting paradigm which is quite narrow
and only serves a few people," Russell responded. "I look elsewhere for
alternatives that might be of service to humanity."SOURCE:
Oasis in a Food Desert | Bill Moyers
An Oasis in a Food Desert
24 Oct 2013 | BillMoyers.com
Since
opening last month, America’s first nonprofit grocery store is bringing
fresh and affordable fruits, vegetables, meat and dairy to Chester,
Pa., a community that has struggled to find healthy food options since
the city’s last supermarket closed in 2001.Chester, home to 35,000 people, has been designated a food desert, a low-income area lacking easy access to healthy food, by the US government. For the residents of Chester the Fare & Square grocery store — seven years in the making — is a welcome relief: “It’s a beautiful supermarket,” said employee Geraldine Carter.
The store is the brainchild of Bill Clark, the executive director of Philabundance, a nonprofit hunger relief organization. Chester has a 36 percent poverty rate and unemployment is 13 percent. Clark said at one time Chester had five grocery stores, but they all closed when the city fell on hard times after manufacturing virtually disappeared.
READ THE REST:
Monday, October 21, 2013
Park Avenue: money, power and the American dream - Why Poverty?
740 Park Ave, New York City, is home to some of the wealthiest Americans. Across the Harlem River, 10 minutes to the north, is the other Park Avenue in South Bronx, where more than half the population needs food stamps and children are 20 times more likely to be killed. In the last 30 years, inequality has rocketed in the US -- the American Dream only applies to those with money to lobby politicians for friendly bills on Capitol Hill.
How much inequality is too much? To find out more and get teaching resources linked to the film, go to www.whypoverty.net
How much inequality is too much? To find out more and get teaching resources linked to the film, go to www.whypoverty.net
Sunday, October 20, 2013
Krystal Ball tells the truth on Obamacare
25 Sept 2013 | MSNBC.com
Krystal Ball stated the truth that Conservatives’ alternative to Hillarycare’s liberal healthcare proposal was one by Wharton Business School professor Marl V. Pauly. That proposal was subsequently adopted by Conservative/Republican Think Tank Heritage Foundation. His proposal required individuals to purchase private insurance called an individual mandate. It was within a bill cosponsored by 22 GOP Senators. It is the same bill that was adopted by Mitt Romney (Romneycare) and it was adopted by President Obama who went against his initial support of Single Payer in order to appease Republicans.
Krystal Ball stated the truth that Conservatives’ alternative to Hillarycare’s liberal healthcare proposal was one by Wharton Business School professor Marl V. Pauly. That proposal was subsequently adopted by Conservative/Republican Think Tank Heritage Foundation. His proposal required individuals to purchase private insurance called an individual mandate. It was within a bill cosponsored by 22 GOP Senators. It is the same bill that was adopted by Mitt Romney (Romneycare) and it was adopted by President Obama who went against his initial support of Single Payer in order to appease Republicans.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
