Let’s see if anyone else remembers him….
He’s 84 today.
I was a child when he had this big hit song:
Rep. Ryan Tastes The Grapes Of Wrath
All I can think of is Marie Antoinette’s response to being told the peasants had no bread. She allegedly said “Well, let them eat cake.”
This is the guy who wants to destroy Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid while he drinks $700 worth of wine in a restaurant.
These Republicans really do live in a different world. They can’t imagine what life is like for most people. That’s got to be why they do the things they do…
Or, they are just evil….
Your choice….
From TalkingPointsMemo.com:
Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), a leading advocate of shrinking entitlement spending and the architect of the plan to privatize Medicare, spent Wednesday evening sipping $350 wine with two like-minded conservative economists at the swanky Capitol Hill eatery Bistro Bis.
It was the same night reports started trickling out about President Obama pressing Congressional leaders to consider changes to Social Security and Medicare in exchange for GOP support for targeted tax increases.
The pomp and circumstance surrounding the waiter’s presentation, uncorking and decanting of the pricey Pinot Noir caught the attention of another diner who had already recognized Ryan sitting with two other men nearby.
Susan Feinberg, an associate business professor at Rutgers, was at Bistro Bis celebrating her birthday with her husband that night. When she saw the label on the bottle of Jayer-Gilles 2004 Echezeaux Grand Cru Ryan’s table had ordered, she quickly looked it up on the wine list and saw that it sold for an eye-popping $350, the most expensive wine in the house along with one other with the same pricetag.
Feinberg, an economist by training, was even more appalled when the table ordered a second bottle. She quickly did the math and figured out that the $700 in wine the trio consumed over the course of 90 minutes amounted to more than the entire weekly income of a couple making minimum wage.
“We were just stunned,” said Feinberg, who e-mailed TPM about her encounter later the same evening. “I was an economist so I started doing the envelope calculations and quickly figured out that those two bottles of wine was more than two-income working family making minimum wage earned in a week.”
Filed under Health Care, Politics, Uncategorized
In Debt Talks, Obama Offers Social Security Cuts
If he does this, he’s lost me….
If he supports Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security cuts, he might as well be a Republican President. No Democrat should ever support cuts to these programs.
I will have no patience for this type of sell out.
I truly hope this is not true…
This is wrong on so many levels: Factually and Morally.
From the Washington Post:
President Obama is pressing congressional leaders to consider a far-reaching debt-reduction plan that would force Democrats to accept major changes to Social Security and Medicare in exchange for Republican support for fresh tax revenue.
At a meeting with top House and Senate leaders set for Thursday morning, Obama plans to argue that a rare consensus has emerged about the size and scope of the nation’s budget problems and that policymakers should seize the moment to take dramatic action.
As part of his pitch, Obama is proposing significant reductions in Medicare spending and for the first time is offering to tackle the rising cost of Social Security, according to people in both parties with knowledge of the proposal. The move marks a major shift for the White House and could present a direct challenge to Democratic lawmakers who have vowed to protect health and retirement benefits from the assault on government spending.
“Obviously, there will be some Democrats who don’t believe we need to do entitlement reform. But there seems to be some hunger to do something of some significance,” said a Democratic official familiar with the administration’s thinking. “These moments come along at most once a decade. And it would be a real mistake if we let it pass us by.”
Rather than roughly $2 trillion in savings, the White House is now seeking a plan that would slash more than $4 trillion from annual budget deficits over the next decade, stabilize borrowing and defuse the biggest budgetary time bombs that are set to explode as the cost of health care rises and the nation’s population ages.
That would represent a major legislative achievement, but it would also put Obama and GOP leaders at odds with major factions of their own parties. While Democrats would be asked to cut social-safety-net programs, Republicans would be asked to raise taxes, perhaps by letting tax breaks for the nation’s wealthiest households expire on schedule at the end of next year.
The administration argues that lawmakers would also get an important victory to sell to voters in 2012. “The fiscal good has to outweigh the pain,” said a Democratic official familiar with the discussions.
It is not clear whether that argument can prevail on Capitol Hill. Thursday’s meeting at the White House — an attempt by Obama to break the impasse that halted debt-reduction talks two weeks ago — will provide a critical opportunity for leaders in both parties to say how far they’re willing to go to restrain government borrowing as the clock ticks toward an Aug. 2 deadline for raising the debt ceiling.
Obama has already spoken to House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) about the possibility of building support for a more ambitious debt-reduction plan, according to people with knowledge of those talks, who, like others quoted in this article, spoke on the condition of anonymity to shed light on private negotiations. The two discussed various options for overhauling the tax code and cutting entitlement spending, but they reached no agreement.
via In debt talks, Obama offers Social Security cuts – The Washington Post.
The Media’s Casey Anthony Shame
Another good article, in addition to my earlier post, about the Media manipulation of this sad little story…
From Howard Kurtz via The Daily Beast:
What television news was guilty of was massive overkill. There was absolutely no reason for the TV business to turn the death of 2-year-old Caylee into a national soap opera—that is, short of milking the story for ratings. (Newspapers and magazines have largely stayed off this bandwagon.)
Sadly, many children are killed by parents in the United States each year, and most barely merit a short story in the local paper. If they’re African-American, they are barely on the radar. Casey Anthony is white, middle-class and attractive—the trifecta for producers and bookers.
Such trials are the spawn of O.J., whose murder case dominated the media in the mid-1990s. But Simpson was a world-famous athlete. Chandra Levy at least worked for a member of Congress. Since then, television news has tried to fill the void by taking unknown victims and defendants—Laci Peterson, Natalee Holloway—and turning them into cause celebres so that viewers would develop a rooting interest in the players and the subplots.
I find it sickening, which is why I’ve largely avoided writing or talking about the Anthony case until now. Like many of those who even casually followed the story, I thought she was probably guilty. But I never understood why I should care about this murder above so many others. Let’s be honest with ourselves: this is the exploitation of tragedy until it becomes entertainment. And that’s why the situation is even worse than the indictment by Anthony’s lawyer would suggest.
July 05, 2011 07:05pm
Filed under Media
Bill Clinton: GOP Voting Crackdown Worst Since Jim Crow
Another thing people should be paying attention to instead of the Casey Anthony Verdict…
From TalkingPointsMemo.com:
Former President Bill Clinton weighed in on Republican efforts in several states to pass new restrictions on voting, comparing the measures to the Jim Crow laws of the past.
“There has never been in my lifetime, since we got rid of the poll tax and all the Jim Crow burdens on voting, the determined effort to limit the franchise that we see today,” Clinton said in a speech at a Campus Progress conference in Washington.
He specifically called out Florida Governor Rick Scott (R) for trying to reverse past precedent and prevent convicted felons from voting even after they’ve completed their sentence.
“Why should we disenfranchise people forever once they’ve paid their price?” Clinton said. “Because most of them in Florida were African Americans and Hispanics who tended to vote for Democrats. That’s why.”
Clinton is hardly the first Democrat to raise the alarm over a wave of Republican-proposed laws purportedly aimed at combating voter fraud. The Democratic Governor Association is raising money for a new voter protection project to counter the proposals, which they say violate minority voters’ civil rights.
Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz recently made similar comparisons to Jim Crow over the Florida policy as well as new voter ID laws in other states that civil rights activists have likened to a poll tax.
“You have the Republicans, who want to literally drag us all the way back to Jim Crow laws and literally — and very transparently — block access to the polls to voters who are more likely to vote for Democratic candidates than Republican candidates,” she said. The Florida Congresswoman later walked back her remarks, saying the JIm Crow reference was the “wrong analogy.”
via Bill Clinton: GOP Voting Crackdown Worst Since Jim Crow | TPMDC.
Why Do the Police Have Tanks? The Strange and Dangerous Militarization of the US Police Force
This is the type of thing people ought to be focusing on instead of the Casey Anthony case…
Very disturbing article from AlterNet.com:
Just after midnight on May 16, 2010, a SWAT team threw a flash-bang grenade through the window of a 25-year-old man while his 7-year-old daughter slept on the couch as her grandmother watched television. The grenade landed so close to the child that it burned her blanket. The SWAT team leader then burst into the house and fired a single shot which struck the child in the throat, killing her. The police were there to apprehend a man suspected of murdering a teenage boy days earlier. The man they were after lived in the unit above the girl’s family.
The shooting death of Aiyana Mo’Nay Stanley-Jones sounds like it happened in a war zone. But the tragic SWAT team raid took place in Detroit.
Shockingly, paramilitary raids that mirror the tactics of US soldiers in combat are not uncommon in America. According to an investigation carried out by the Huffington Post’s Radley Balko, America has seen a disturbing militarization of its civilian law enforcement over the last 30 years, along with a dramatic and unsettling rise in the use of paramilitary police units for routine police work. In fact, the most common use of SWAT teams today is to serve narcotics warrants, usually with forced, unannounced entry into the home.
Some 40,000 of these raids take place every year, and are needlessly subjecting nonviolent drug offenders, bystanders and wrongly targeted civilians to the terror of having their homes invaded while they’re sleeping, usually by teams of heavily armed paramilitary units dressed not as police officers but as soldiers. And as demonstrated by the case of Aiyana Mo’nay Stanley-Jones, these raids have resulted in dozens of needless deaths and injuries.
Filed under Law Enforcement
The Casey Anthony Verdict
James Wolcott, at the “Vanity Fair” website pretty much sums up my thoughts on this….
Great article about the collective nervous breakdown and media hysteria this case seems to be generating…
Don’t get me wrong, the murder of any child is tragic. It’s the media firestorm and manipulation I find, frankly, disgusting.
I really haven’t paid much attention to this….mainly because I came across Nancy Grace’s coverage on TV in a hotel room when I was traveling. During the 5 minutes or so I could tolerate watching her false anger and over-acting, I decided I just didn’t care to know about anything she was trying so hard to exploit for her own ratings.
It’s a tough title to win and the competition is intense, but Nancy Grace has to hold the title as the World’s Most Annoying Uptight White Woman. And when she covers these things, she still manages to somehow make it all about her….
Anyway…
People need to remember a few things:
- In the American Judicial System, you are presumed innocent until proven guilty. No matter what Nancy Grace thinks.
- “Not Guilty” does not mean innocent.
- “Not Guilty” means reasonable doubt exists
- Reasonable doubt means the prosecution didn’t prove the case beyond the reasonable possibility that the accused is innocent.
- Unlike some countries, the U.S. Justice system errs on the side of caution. The Founders believed it was better to let a guilty person go free than make it easy to convict the innocent. They were wise men.
But then “reasonable” is not a word anyone could apply to any aspect of this tragic mess….
I’ll let James Wolcott take it from here….
I don’t claim powers of clairvoyance or psychic reading, but the other day I was channel-hopping and paused at one of the cable channels doing a live feed from the Casey Anthony trial. I hadn’t followed the case, had only a dim awareness of the apparently endless discussion of duct tape, stench from the car, and Casey Anthony’s visit to a tattoo place that had taken place within the endless cable palaver during the trial coverage, but after a few minutes of watching I vaguely thought, I dunno, I could see her getting off.
So when the not-guilty verdicts came down within the last hour on the charges of murder and manslaughter (she was found guilty on the charges of lying to investigators), I seemed to be one of the few whose world didn’t flip sideways–I wasn’t that surprised and if anything pleased that the jury made up its own collective mind in defiance of the lynch-mob clamor on the cable channels.
It can’t be said that the know-nothing know-it-alls on Fox News and Nancy Grace’s Sweeney Todd cooking school accepted the jury’s verdict with modesty and maturity. After expressing shock and taking turns to tell us how “stunned” they were, they accused the jury of suffering from Stockholm Syndrome (staring at Casey Anthony’s face somehow melting their reason and resolve), appearing to resent that fact that the defendant might be freed soon (since she might be granted time-served on the lesser charges, having already served years behind bars), and acting peevish that they didn’t get their way, having already convicted Casey Anthony on the airwaves for years now and treating the trial as an audiovisual demonstration of what to them was self-evident.
“Appearing to resent” and “peevish” are too mild, actually–many of the instant commentators on cable were visibly, audibly angry at the AUDACITY these acquittals. (Once exception: Judge Andrew Napolitano on Fox News, who was calm and sensible.)
It may have annoyed Nancy Grace (everything annoys Nancy Grace), but defense attorney Casey Anthony slamdunked it afterwards when he told the press that this verdict was a rebuke to the demonization of his client and the ugly, unprofessional spectacle of lawyers going on TV to talk about a case about which they clearly didn’t know as much as they thought they did.
What little I saw of the coverage was disgusting and sob-sister, this endless fetishizing of “little Caylee,” as if these well-dressed, high-paid lawyers and media mouths had adopted her as their own little angel, and minutes after the verdict came down there was Judge Jeanine Pirro wailing, Where is the justice for this little girl? (“Justice for Caylee” was the sidebar subhead on Grace’s Headline News coverage, as if it were a personal crusade.)
Look, I don’t know if Casey Anthony is guilty or not, but neither does Nancy Grace or any of the performing seals brought in as expert commentators to bark and clap their fins, and maybe if they acknowledged they lack of godly omniscience they might be a little less “shocked” and “stunned” the next time around.
Barring exorcism, I don’t expect Nancy Grace to change, she being the only person whose nose seems tilted into a permanent sneer.
Postscript: Thanks, Florida, FOR WASTING OUR TIME YET AGAIN.
via The Casey Anthony Verdict | James Wolcott’s Blog | Vanity Fair.
Filed under Entertainment, Media, Television, Uncategorized
Justin Bieber’s Vanity Fair Lowest Selling Issue in 12 Years
Duh…
As some of you may recall, I questioned this when I got my copy of “Vanity Fair” in the mail. Justin Bieber is not exactly the type of celebrity that appeals to the “Vanity Fair” audience.
He’s more like “Tiger Beat”. But apparently even his “Teen Vogue ” cover also tanked…
I guess the ‘tweens and teens are more digital. Another “Duh…”
I only took one Marketing course in College, but even I remember the concept of “target marketing”. Justin Bieber just doesn’t appeal to “Vanity Fair’s” target market – or to most educated, discriminating upscale music buyers and listeners.
Massive marketing failure….
Justin Bieber may have more than 10 million Twitter followers, and a hit with his documentary Never Say Never — but that doesn’t translate into newsstand sales for the magazine covers he graces.
The February Vanity Fair that featured the 17-year-old covered in lipstick kisses is on track to become the worst selling issue in 12 years, Women’s Wear Daily reports. It may also become one of the three worst sellers for the magazine since Graydon Carter was named editor in chief in 1992.
“Who knew 12-year-olds didn’t buy magazines?” said a Vanity Fair spokeswoman.
It’s sold 246,000 copies, according to Audit Bureau of Circulation’s’ Rapid Report — which is not yet audited, so numbers could change slightly.
AND
Bieber didn’t only lower numbers for Vanity Fair. His October 2010 Teen Vogue cover sold 121,054 copies, which is about 12 percent below the magazine’s 2010 average, WWD points out.
People’s April 2010 Bieber cover sold 961,762 copies, which was down 25 percent from its annual sales in 2010, and became the third worst seller of the weekly that year.
via Justin Bieber’s Vanity Fair Lowest Selling Issue in 12 Years – The Hollywood Reporter.
Filed under Entertainment, Music, Uncategorized
Lost in the 21st Century 