Happy New Year

Well, we made it another year.

Happy New Year. See you in 2008!

Unpaid Credit Cards- An Ominous Sign

This issue, in my opinion, will be a huge story in the upcoming year.

Americans are falling behind on their credit card payments at an alarming rate, sending delinquencies and defaults surging by double-digit percentages in the last year and prompting warnings of worse to come.

An Associated Press analysis of financial data from the country's largest card issuers also found that the greatest rise was among accounts more than 90 days in arrears.

Experts say these signs of the deterioration of finances of many households are partly a byproduct of the subprime mortgage crisis and could spell more trouble ahead for an already sputtering economy.

"Debt eventually leaks into other areas, whether it starts with the mortgage and goes to the credit card or vice versa," said Cliff Tan, a visiting scholar at Stanford University and an expert on credit risk. "We're starting to see leaks now."

The value of credit card accounts at least 30 days late jumped 26 percent to $17.3 billion in October from a year earlier at 17 large credit card trusts examined by the AP. That represented more than 4 percent of the total outstanding principal balances owed to the trusts on credit cards that were issued by banks such as Bank of America and Capital One and for retailers like Home Depot and Wal-Mart.

At the same time, defaults — when lenders essentially give up hope of ever being repaid and write off the debt — rose 18 percent to almost $961 million in October, according to filings made by the trusts with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Wall Street Looks Ahead to 2008

It appears that Wall Street is nervous about the upcoming year.

As 2007 comes to a close, Wall Street is almost as jittery as it was over the summer, when worries about the housing slump and banks' losing bets on mortgages first came to a head.

Investors know more now about how much exposure financial institutions have to bad loans — quite a lot — but they remain uncertain about how the credit crisis of 2007 will hurt the economy in 2008. Market participants will be paying close attention to this week's economic data, particularly the monthly report on employment, seen as the most important factor in preventing housing woes from crippling consumers.

Last week, the Dow Jones industrial average ended 0.63 percent lower, the Standard & Poor's 500 index finished down 0.40 percent, and the Nasdaq composite index fell 0.65 percent.

The three major indexes will finish the year with gains, barring any extraordinary drops Monday, but problems with credit, housing and the financial sector are likely to keep Wall Street nervous at least early on in 2008.

It's been a dismal fourth quarter for the stock market, and the "Santa Claus rally" Wall Street often launches at the end of every year failed to gain steam. The Dow has fallen 3.8 percent since the end of September, when many investors were driving the blue-chip index toward record heights and betting that the worst of the credit crunch was over.

Dollar Ends Year Weaker

The Wall Street Journal reports this morning that the dollar ended the year lower against other major currencies.

The dollar is lower early Monday in New York, a fitting path for the greenback on the final day of trading of 2007, a year that saw the dollar fall against virtually all its rivals.

Poor U.S. housing data last week and generally weaker global stock markets overnight have pushed the dollar to a two-week low of 111.73 yen against the yen early Monday as investors become averse to risk.

The dollar is also lower against sterling and a bit weaker versus the euro as it continues a weakening trend that began last week on persistent worries of a U.S. recession.

"It appears that disappointing U.S. economic data have caused the weakening trajectory (in the dollar) to reassert itself," said Stephen Malyon, currency strategist at Scotia Capital in Toronto.

Trading volume has been thin Monday with many global stock markets closed or open for only a half-day ahead of the New Year holiday Tuesday.

Benazir Bhutto on David Frost

An chilling interview that took place right after the first assassination attempt on her life. Here she talks about those who would like to see her dead. Play close attention to what she has to say.

The Assasination of Benazir Bhutto

The horrific tragedy that occurred in Pakistan this week is likely to have immense implications in that country and beyond in the near future. Here is a great article that I came across this morning that offers a good perspective of the situation in Pakistan today.

Even those of us sharply critical of Benazir Bhutto's behaviour and policies - both while she was in office and more recently - are stunned and angered by her death. Indignation and fear stalk the country once again.

An odd coexistence of military despotism and anarchy created the conditions leading to her assassination in Rawalpindi yesterday. In the past, military rule was designed to preserve order - and did so for a few years. No longer. Today it creates disorder and promotes lawlessness. How else can one explain the sacking of the chief justice and eight other judges of the country's supreme court for attempting to hold the government's intelligence agencies and the police accountable to courts of law? Their replacements lack the backbone to do anything, let alone conduct a proper inquest into the misdeeds of the agencies to uncover the truth behind the carefully organised killing of a major political leader.

How can Pakistan today be anything but a conflagration of despair? It is assumed that the killers were jihadi fanatics. This may well be true, but were they acting on their own?

Benazir, according to those close to her, had been tempted to boycott the fake elections, but she lacked the political courage to defy Washington. She had plenty of physical courage, and refused to be cowed by threats from local opponents. She had been addressing an election rally in Liaquat Bagh. This is a popular space named after the country's first prime minister, Liaquat Ali Khan, who was killed by an assassin in 1953. The killer, Said Akbar, was immediately shot dead on the orders of a police officer involved in the plot. Not far from here, there once stood a colonial structure where nationalists were imprisoned. This was Rawalpindi jail. It was here that Benazir's father, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, was hanged in April 1979. The military tyrant responsible for his judicial murder made sure the site of the tragedy was destroyed as well.

Zulfikar Ali Bhutto's death poisoned relations between his Pakistan People's party and the army. Party activists, particularly in the province of Sind, were brutally tortured, humiliated and, sometimes, disappeared or killed.

Pakistan's turbulent history, a result of continuous military rule and unpopular global alliances, confronts the ruling elite now with serious choices. They appear to have no positive aims. The overwhelming majority of the country disapproves of the government's foreign policy. They are angered by its lack of a serious domestic policy except for further enriching a callous and greedy elite that includes a swollen, parasitic military. Now they watch helplessly as politicians are shot dead in front of them.

Benazir had survived the bomb blast yesterday but was felled by bullets fired at her car. The assassins, mindful of their failure in Karachi a month ago, had taken out a double insurance this time. They wanted her dead. It is impossible for even a rigged election to take place now. It will have to be postponed, and the military high command is no doubt contemplating another dose of army rule if the situation gets worse, which could easily happen.

What has happened is a multi-layered tragedy. It's a tragedy for a country on a road to more disasters. Torrents and foaming cataracts lie ahead. And it is a personal tragedy. The house of Bhutto has lost another member. Father, two sons and now a daughter have all died unnatural deaths.

I first met Benazir at her father's house in Karachi when she was a fun-loving teenager, and later at Oxford. She was not a natural politician and had always wanted to be a diplomat, but history and personal tragedy pushed in the other direction. Her father's death transformed her. She had become a new person, determined to take on the military dictator of that time. She had moved to a tiny flat in London, where we would endlessly discuss the future of the country. She would agree that land reforms, mass education programmes, a health service and an independent foreign policy were positive constructive aims and crucial if the country was to be saved from the vultures in and out of uniform. Her constituency was the poor, and she was proud of the fact.

She changed again after becoming prime minister. In the early days, we would argue and in response to my numerous complaints - all she would say was that the world had changed. She couldn't be on the "wrong side" of history. And so, like many others, she made her peace with Washington. It was this that finally led to the deal with Musharraf and her return home after more than a decade in exile. On a number of occasions she told me that she did not fear death. It was one of the dangers of playing politics in Pakistan.

It is difficult to imagine any good coming out of this tragedy, but there is one possibility. Pakistan desperately needs a political party that can speak for the social needs of a bulk of the people. The People's party founded by Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was built by the activists of the only popular mass movement the country has known: students, peasants and workers who fought for three months in 1968-69 to topple the country's first military dictator. They saw it as their party, and that feeling persists in some parts of the country to this day, despite everything.

Benazir's horrific death should give her colleagues pause for reflection. To be dependent on a person or a family may be necessary at certain times, but it is a structural weakness, not a strength for a political organisation. The People's party needs to be refounded as a modern and democratic organisation, open to honest debate and discussion, defending social and human rights, uniting the many disparate groups and individuals in Pakistan desperate for any halfway decent alternative, and coming forward with concrete proposals to stabilise occupied and war-torn Afghanistan. This can and should be done. The Bhutto family should not be asked for any more sacrifices.

Happy Holidays

The Obama Girls to Bush- You're So Lame

A special holiday messsage from Barely Political. Enjoy...

Bonuses on Wall Street Surge

Bad year on Wall Street? Not for bonuses!

This might have been one of Wall Street's most dismal years in a decade, but that hasn't stopped bonus checks from rising an average of 14 percent.

Four of the biggest U.S. investment banks — Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Morgan Stanley, Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. and Bear Stearns Cos. — will pay out about $49.6 billion in compensation this year. Of that, bonuses are traditionally estimated to represent 60 percent, or almost $30 billion.

But that might not sit well with investors who held on to investment bank stocks this year — and watched them plunge by up to 45 percent. Investment houses have been slammed by the credit crisis, and top executives this past week said they've yet to see a bottom.

Further, some of those executives have even agreed to forgo their bonuses this year to reflect the poor performance. Morgan Stanley CEO John Mack and Bear Stearns CEO Jimmy Cayne won't be collecting their payouts.

Mack received no cash bonus a year ago but received stock and options worth an estimated $40.2 million, well above his $800,000 base pay. Cayne received a bonus of $33.6 million in 2006 and base pay of $250,000.

Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein reportedly is in line for a bonus of up to $70 million this year, as the nation's largest investment bank has largely navigated past any mortgage-related losses. Lehman Brothers' CEO Richard Fuld was granted a $35 million stock bonus for 2007, up 4 percent from last year.

There had been some predictions the increase in bonuses would have been significantly higher. However, layoffs and top managers giving up their bonuses have curtailed that.

Meanwhile we peons are told to pull ourselves up by the bootstraps and learn how to live within our means. Bonuses? Please! Maybe a McDonald's gift certificate book if we are lucky.

Black Site Survivor Relates Horrific Tale

A sad look at our new centers of 'freedom and liberty'.

"Black Site" Survivor Relates Horrific Tale
Enforced disappearance and torture at several CIA "black sites"

NEW YORK, Dec 19 (IPS) - As human right lawyers sought to block U.S government efforts to stop a lawsuit against a Boeing subsidiary accused of flying detainees to "black sites" where they were tortured, a legal advocacy group published the first testimony of a victim of the Central Intelligence Agency's "enhanced interrogation" programme.

In the first-ever report of its kind, the Centre for Human Rights and Global Justice (CHRGJ) at New York University School of Law released a firsthand account of a survivor of enforced disappearance and torture at several CIA "black sites". The 63-page report, "Surviving the Darkness: Testimony from the U.S. 'Black Sites'", is an in-depth account of a former CIA detainee's experience in his own words.

The bone-chilling narrative tells the story of Mohamed Farag Ahmad Bashmilah, a Yemeni national who spent more than a year and a half in the CIA's secret detention programme. He was never charged with a terrorism-related crime.

The CHRGJ charges that Bashmilah was "illegally detained by the Jordanian intelligence service in October 2003, tortured into signing a false confession, and then handed over to an American rendition team."

The group says he spent the next 18 months in the U.S. secret detention network -- in sites believed to be in Afghanistan and possibly Eastern Europe. In May 2005, he was transferred to the custody of the Yemen government, which held him in proxy detention at the behest of the U.S. until he was put on trial and finally released in March 2006.

Bashmilah's story was made public as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed legal papers opposing the CIA's attempt to throw out a lawsuit against Boeing subsidiary Jeppesen Dataplan, Inc. for its participation in the CIA's "extraordinary rendition" programme.

The ACLU charged that the U.S. government is improperly invoking the "state secrets" privilege to avoid judicial scrutiny of this unlawful policy.

Steven Watt, an attorney with the ACLU's Human Rights Programme, told IPS, "Five men have been brutally abused with the help of a U.S. corporation, and they are entitled to their day in court."

"Jeppesen must not be given a free pass for its profitable participation in a torture programme," he said. "And the government should not be allowed to use the national security defence as a way to cover up its mistakes or, worse, its egregious abuses of human rights."

The ACLU filing comes in a lawsuit brought on behalf of five victims of the rendition programme who were kidnapped and secretly transferred by the CIA to U.S.-run overseas prisons or foreign intelligence agencies where they were interrogated and tortured.

According to the lawsuit, Jeppesen knowingly provided flight planning and essential logistical support to aircraft and crew used by the CIA for the clandestine rendition flights.

After the lawsuit was filed, the U.S. government intervened to seek its dismissal, contending that further litigation of the case would be harmful to national security. But the ACLU contends that the information needed to pursue this lawsuit, including details about the rendition programme, is already in the public domain.

It adds, "Jeppesen's involvement in the programme is also a matter of public record. It has been confirmed by extensive documentary evidence and eyewitness testimony, including the sworn declaration of a former senior Jeppesen employee, which was submitted in support of the ACLU filing."

In recent years, the government has asserted the once-rare "state secrets" claim with increasing regularity in an attempt to throw out lawsuits and justify withholding information from the public not only about the rendition programme, but also about illegal wiretapping, torture, and other breaches of U.S. and international law.

It has been 50 years since the United States Supreme Court last reviewed the use of the "state secrets" privilege. The Supreme Court recently refused to review the "state secrets" privilege in a lawsuit brought by Khaled El-Masri, a German citizen also represented by the ACLU, who was kidnapped and rendered to detention, interrogation, and torture in a CIA "black site" prison in Afghanistan.

Meanwhile, more than 250 people once held in Iraqi prisons, including Abu Ghraib, have filed suit against a U.S. military contractor for alleged torture of detainees. The Centre for Constitutional Rights filed the lawsuit seeking millions of dollars in compensatory and punitive damages against CACI International Inc. of Arlington, Virginia.

The complaint alleges that CACI interrogators who were sent to Iraqi prisons directed and engaged in torture between 2003 and 2004. The lawsuit charges that the detainees were repeatedly beaten, sodomised, threatened with rape, kept naked in their cells, subjected to electric shock and attacked by unmuzzled dogs, among other humiliations.

The court action also names two CACI employees -- Stephen Stefanowski, known as "Big Steve", and Daniel Johnson, known as "DJ" -- accusing them of participating in the abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib. The suit alleges that the two CACI contractors directed Corporal Charles Graner and Sergeant Ivan Frederick. Graner was sentenced to 10 years in prison for this role in the Abu Ghraib scandal; Frederick is serving an eight-year jail term.

"These corporate guys worked in a conspiracy with those military guys to torture people," said Susan Burke, the lead attorney in the case.

"And now the military have been held accountable, but the company guys and the company have not been," she said.

The legal status of U.S. private contractors in Iraq and elsewhere abroad remains cloudy. The Iraqi government says they should be subject to Iraqi law, a position rejected by the U.S. It remains unclear whether they are subject to U.S. law. No U.S. court has yet decided a relevant case, though lawsuits have been brought against a number of contractors, including Blackwater, whose employees are accused of killing 17 unarmed Iraqi civilians in a shooting incident in September.

In the CACI case, to the surprise of some legal observers, the government did not intervene on behalf of the contractors and the court ruled that the litigation could go forward.

In a related development, the New York Times reported Wednesday that Pakistan's military and intelligence agencies, "apparently trying to avoid acknowledging an elaborate secret detention system, have quietly set free nearly 100 men suspected of links to terrorism, few of whom were charged."

Human rights groups in Pakistan say those released are some of the nearly 500 Pakistanis presumed to have disappeared into the hands of the Pakistani intelligence agencies cooperating with Washington's fight against terrorism since 2001.

The Times reported that no official reason has been given for the releases. But it quoted Pakistani sources as saying that as pressure has mounted to bring the cases into the courts, "the government has decided to jettison some suspects and spare itself the embarrassment of having to reveal that people have been held on flimsy evidence in the secret system."

Among those pressing to bring the cases into court was the chief justice of Pakistan's Supreme Court, Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry. He was dismissed by President Pervez Musharraf and remains in detention, although Musharraf last Saturday lifted the state of emergency he imposed in November.

The Times reported that the prisoner releases were "particularly galling to lawyers" because Musharraf had accused the courts of being soft on terrorists, and had used that claim as one justification for imposing emergency rule.

Listen to this Democracy Now clip that aired this week. It's chilling tale by a man who had the misfortune of being picked up and detained by the CIA.

Iowa Caucuses Movie Trailer- John Edwards

A great and inspiring ad.

The Coming Gulf Cooperation Council

The six-member Gulf Cooperation Council announced their new plans yesterday to form a common market and currency. This is the latest in the worldwide trend to set up global 'economic blocs' with a single currency. Soon, the role of the nation will be not as a sovereign state but simply as a part of a greater economic union.

Gulf Cooperation Council to Launch Common Market in January 2008

by Abu Zainab

Leaders of the six-member Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) yesterday announced their plan to launch a common market in January 2008 and a currency union by 2010 in addition to maintaining their currencies’ peg to the US dollar.

“The Gulf Common Market aims to create one market ... raising production efficiency and optimum usage of available resources and improving the GCC’s negotiating position among international economic forums,” said a final communiqué at the end of the two-day summit.

GCC Secretary-General Abdul Rahman Al-Attiyah called the decision to create the common market “a historic declaration.” He told reporters, “We want to have equal opportunities for all GCC citizens.” These include the right to work in all government and private institutions in the GCC, buy and sell real estate and make other investments, move freely between the countries, and receive education and health benefits, the communiqué said.

Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Abdullah led the Saudi delegation to the summit. The king’s presence made the annual gathering a success. Abdullah returned to Riyadh later in the afternoon after a meeting with Qatari Emir Sheikh Hamad ibn Khalifa Al-Thani.

The highlight of the two-day gathering was the presence of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the first Iranian president to attend a GCC summit. He offered his GCC neighbors a regional security pact and a 12-point cooperation plan, including free trade and joint investments in oil and gas.

Qatari Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Sheikh Hamad ibn Jassem Al-Thani welcomed Ahmedinejad’s proposals and hoped that they would open a new era in GCC-Iran relations.

“We have to collaborate with all our neighbors and not be dragged into (following) foreign strategies. Iran also serves its interests by taking the hand of those countries that extend a friendly hand to it,” the premier said. “If we are pulled apart by foreign strategies, it will be dangerous,” Hamad said, adding that Qatar had no contact with the International Atomic Energy Agency over Iran’s nuclear-enrichment program.

In the summit’s opening session Ahmadinejad stressed that the common heritage of Arabs and Persians made their partnership and friendship “inseparable.” He also warned against foreign intervention, a reference to the growing US presence in the region.

The leaders of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Oman, Kuwait and the UAE reiterated the GCC position of demanding a “peaceful solution” to Iran’s nuclear crisis, while it exhorted Tehran to “pursue dialogue with the international community.”

At the news conference, Sheikh Hamad was asked whether the findings of a US intelligence report meant the crisis over Iran’s nuclear work was over. “We don’t have information apart from what we have from the (International) Atomic Energy Agency and our brothers in Iran that this program is peaceful and we hope the program is peaceful,” he said.

The communique said GCC leaders were waiting for “positive steps” to follow a recent Middle East peace conference in the United States aimed at jumpstarting Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.

Qatari Emir Sheikh Hamad opened the two-day gathering urging dialogue among the Gulf states and said the United Nations was the place to resolve regional disputes. “While we realize that the crises in the region have their reasons and backgrounds, and many of them are clear to us, we hope that all those who are concerned with regional and international issues reconsider their positions before it is too late,” said the emir.

Attiyah said the summit leaders decided to stick to a 2010 date to launch their single currency. “The leaders have decided to continue to work toward achieving the monetary union... and confirmed keeping the date of 2010,” he told reporters.

The decision was effectively made ahead of the summit, when GCC foreign and finance ministers decided to stick to the date despite worries over high inflation. Leaders also decided to keep pegging their currencies to the sliding dollar, and not follow Kuwait’s move in linking its dinar to a basket of currencies.

“Right now, the policy is to stick to the dollar ... The GCC is concerned about the (weakening) dollar. No decision on the currency for the moment,” Sheikh Hamad said. The premier admitted that any talks on how to cope with the dollar’s decline would have been held in secret. “If they discussed something, we will not tell you...There is a market and you can’t scare the market,” he told reporters.

Kuwait broke ranks with the bloc by dropping its dollar peg in May, and Hamad noted that other countries could do the same.

“These are sovereign countries and can do as they wish,” he said.

Gulf currencies weakened against the dollar as expectations of a near-term change in exchange rate policy waned. The Saudi riyal hit a two-week low.

Gulf policymakers will meet again to try to agree on a common position regarding currencies, Bahrain’s foreign minister said. Asked whether there would be a change in currency regimes, Sheikh Khaled ibn Ahmed Al-Khalifa said: “We don’t have a decision yet; we are going to meet over it.”

Some analysts said a coordinated revaluation against the dollar by Gulf states, rather than more moves to currency basket pegs, could be the most likely compromise for the bloc.

The need to maintain dollar pegs has forced Gulf countries to cut interest rates in tandem with the Federal Reserve even though their economies are booming and inflation spiraling.

Kuwait said yesterday that annual inflation was 6.2 percent in September, the highest on record. Analysts said the rate would have been even higher had Kuwait not revalued its dinar.

The weakness of regional currencies is also stirring discontent among migrant workers who make up the bulk of the labor force in the GCC countries. After South Asian construction workers rioted in Dubai over savings lost due to the dollar’s slide, UAE Central Bank Gov. Sultan Nasser Al-Suweidi said he was under growing social and economic pressure to drop the peg.

Since then, many analysts have suspected that the UAE would eventually change currency policy, with or without a consensus among other Gulf countries. Saudi Arabia, however, has strongly resisted pressure to drop the dollar peg.

“There is no change in the policy of the kingdom. And I think that applies to other Gulf states as well,” Saudi Finance Minister Ibrahim Al-Assaf told Al-Arabiya channel, warning markets against betting on a change in exchange rate regimes.

“Rumors sometimes provoke those hungry for speculation but as was the case in the past, those who indulge in speculation always lose,” the minister observed.

Lieberman endorses McCain

This is really no surprise.

The Democratic vice presidential nominee in 2000 endorsed Republican John McCain for president on Monday, scandalizing Democrats in Washington and giving the GOP hopeful a much-needed boost in New Hampshire where independents outnumber Republicans and Democrats.

Sen. Joseph Lieberman, an independent who caucuses with the Democrats, said he chose his longtime Senate colleague because he has the best shot of breaking partisan gridlock in Washington. Both men also are strong and vocal supporters of the war in Iraq.

"On all the issues, you're never going to do anything about them unless you have a leader who can break through the partisan gridlock," said Lieberman, who was Al Gore's running mate seven years ago. "The status quo in Washington is not working."

The status quo? This coming from Joe Lieberman who has been in the Senate since 1988. John McCain has been in the Senate since 1986. It is almost laughable for anyone that has practically taken root in a Senate chair to mention status quo.

Partisan gridlock? This has become the slogan of Joe Lieberman. Any discussion about issues in Washington are somehow 'partisan' in his view, and should be avoided. I don't suppose his weekly jaunts over to Fox News to do his weekly Democratic bash session is in any way 'partisan'?

The Other War- Afghanistan

In the infamous 'War on Terror', Afghanistan is almost a sad footnote. Troop levels were never adequate, poor planning and coordination, soaring drug production and the incompetence of Karzai and the government in Kabul have all contributed to a sense that this war could be lost. The New York Times has a good editorial this morning which looks at this issue.

One of the biggest problems is that when NATO took command in Afghanistan, many members expected that most of the fighting would be over and their troops would focus on development and stabilization. Instead, they are increasingly taking casualties, and European leaders have still failed to tell their citizens why Afghanistan matters — and why a major effort must be made to deny the Taliban and Al Qaeda a safe haven.

We understand Mr. Gates’s frustration. He might do better with the Europeans if he told another truth: Before NATO got involved, Washington never had enough troops in Afghanistan, nor did it have a coherent strategy for stabilizing and developing the country. Its decision to invade Iraq ended up shortchanging the effort even more. Too few ground troops, meanwhile, meant too much reliance on airstrikes, leading to too many civilian casualties, which fanned popular anger and resistance.

By the end of last week, Mr. Gates and European officials agreed that instead of trading blame they would begin a much needed top-to-bottom review of their strategy. Better late than never. The review must look at everything: politics, development, counternarcotics and security. It must find ways to improve coordination between NATO, Washington and Kabul. It must acknowledge that European and American troops will most likely have to remain there for many years. And it must be done quickly, before Afghanistan unravels even more.

Before urging that the military go forth on new and more exciting adventures (i.e. Iran), it would be wise to step back and see the results of our recent actions in this fight against 'terrorism'.

Chuck Schumer- Give Mukasey a Chance!

A sad look back at the Mukasey hearings. This is followed by an excellent analysis of the torture issue with Amy Goodman of Democracy Now! and Naomi Klein.

Justice Dept. Freezes Congress Out of CIA Tape Inquiry

It is nice to see that we exchanged one incompetent Attorney General for another. This is the latest saga in 'As the Justice Department Turns'.

The Justice Department asked the House Intelligence Committee on Friday to postpone its investigation into the destruction of videotapes by the Central Intelligence Agency in 2005, saying the Congressional inquiry presented “significant risks” to its own preliminary investigation into the matter.

The department is taking an even harder line with other Congressional committees looking into the matter, and is refusing to provide information about any role it might have played in the destruction of the videotapes. The recordings covered hundreds of hours of interrogations of two operatives of Al Qaeda.

The Justice Department and the C.I.A.’s inspector general have begun a preliminary inquiry into the destruction of the tapes, and Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey said the department would not comply with Congressional requests for information now because of “our interest in avoiding any perception that our law enforcement decisions are subject to political influence.”

Over all, the position taken by Mr. Mukasey, who took office last month, represented what Justice Department officials described as an effort to caution Congress against meddling in the tapes case and other politically explosive criminal cases.

I am beginning to seriously wonder if we can ever put back the pieces of our broken down and corrupt government. Congress has become irrelevant, the executive branch is totally out of control and the judiciary is stacked with political lackeys. All of us, whether Democrat or Republican, better wake up and demand accountability from our 'leaders' or one day wake up to the cold fact that we have even lost that right.

As a side- many thanks to Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer for their enthusiastic support of Mukasey during his confirmation hearings!

Bush Demands Freedom to Torture

After declaring a million times that "We don't torture", why would Bush veto a House bill that requires that intelligence services follow the Army Field Manual when dealing with detainees?

President Bush's repeated insistence that "we don't torture" appeared even more transparently bogus yesterday as the White House threatened to veto a House bill that would explicitly ban a variety of abhorrent practices.

The bill would require U.S. intelligence agencies to follow interrogation rules adopted by the armed forces last year.

What does that mean? As Pamela Hess writes for the Associated Press, those rules explicitly prohibit "forcing detainees to be naked, perform sexual acts, or pose in a sexual manner; placing hoods or sacks over detainees' heads or duct tape over their eyes; beating, shocking, or burning detainees; threatening them with military dogs; exposing them to extreme heat or cold; conducting mock executions; depriving them of food, water, or medical care; and waterboarding."

Administration officials have consistently refused to confirm or deny whether any of those methods have been sanctioned by the White House and are in use. But really all you need to know is this: According to yesterday's formal statement of administration policy, limiting intelligence agencies to the army rules "would prevent the United States from conducting lawful interrogations of senior al Qaeda terrorists to obtain intelligence needed to protect Americans from attack."

I have heard people trying to defend this abhorrent practice, but the fact is torture is wrong and torture is illegal. I remember wondering how things in 1930's Germany were allowed to happen, but sadly I think I understand all too well now.

FCC Proposes Greater Media Consolidation

Watch this and then read the article. This must be stopped.

More Media Disinformation? FCC Proposes Greater Media Consolidation

by Stephen Lendman

On October 17, FCC chairman Kevin Martin proposed lifting the 1975 media cross-ownership rule that forbids a company from owning a newspaper and television or radio station in the same city even though giant conglomerates like Rupert Murdock's News Corp. and the (Chicago) Tribune Company already do. On November 13, he expanded on his earlier plan claiming changes will only allow cross ownership "in the largest markets where there exists competition and numerous voices."

That's not how Free Press.net's policy director, Ben Scott, sees it in his statement on the same day saying: "Chairman Martin's lofty rhetoric talks about saving American newspapers and ensuring a diversity of voices. But the devil is in the details. His new rules appear to be corporate welfare for the (media giants) in the biggest cities (and) most worrying....the proposed rules appear to contain a giant loophole that could open the back door to runaway media consolidation in nearly every market (in) another massive giveaway to Big Media."

If the ban is ended, that's what will happen, and the trend author and journalist Ben Bagdikian documented since 1983 will continue unimpeded. He did it in six editions of his landmark book, "The Media Monopoly," plus his newest 2004 update titled, "The New Media Monopoly."

Since 1983, the number of corporations owning most newspapers, magazines, book publishers, recorded music, movie studios, television and radio stations have shrunk from 50 to five "global-dimension firms, operating with many of the characteristics of a cartel" - Time-Warner, Disney, News Corp., Viacom and Bertelsmann AG based in Germany. Also large and dominant are companies like cable giant Comcast and corporate behemoth GE with its NBC television and radio operations.

When The Telecommunications Act of 1996 passed, its supporters claimed it would increase competition, lower prices, improve service, and according to Vice-President Al Gore be an "early Christmas present for the consumer." Point of fact - it wasn't passed for the consumer or to discipline the market. It had many anti-consumer provisions in it that included giving media and telecom giants the right to consolidate further through mergers and acquisitions.

Limits on TV station ownership were raised to let broadcast giants own twice as many local stations as before. For radio, it was even sweeter with all national limits on station ownership removed, and on the local level one company henceforth could own up to eight stations in a major market. In smaller ones, two companies could own them all. The bill also consigned new digital television broadcast spectrum space to current TV station owners only and let cable companies increase their local monopoly positions. The clear winners from this bill were the media and telecom giants. As always, consumers lost out, and FCC chairman Martin wants to make it worse by his October 17 proposal to end the cross-ownership ban.

Further consolidation means less diversity when there's already precious little. That's anathema to a healthy democracy that depends on the free marketplace of ideas that's greatly eroded since the 1980s. In 2003, the Michael Powell-run FCC tried to weaken it further through a number of proposed changes Congress blocked in the wake of strong public opposition to them. That even aroused former CNN owner Ted Turner to say a further rule relaxation would "stifle debate (and) inhibit new ideas." The Media Access Project (MAP) also won a Third Circuit Court June, 2004 decision in the Prometheus Radio Project v. FCC case that ruled for diversity and democracy over greater media consolidation and ordered the FCC to reconsider its ill-advised ownership rules changes Powell's FCC proposed that included:

-- ending the cross-ownership ban under consideration now that prohibits a company from owning a newspaper and TV or radio station in the same city;

-- eliminating the previous ban on radio/TV cross-ownership and replacing both types with a single set of cross-media limits;

-- a concocted "diversity index" to determine cross-media limits. It was based on assigning varying weights to the various media to determine if markets retained enough diversity. It would only consider ownership limits if by its formula there wasn't enough. It was pure deception because in major markets like New York the FCC gave equal or greater weighting to a community college radio station than the New York Times and local ABC affiliates;

-- cross-ownership limits only in smaller markets. In ones with eight or more TV stations, proposed rules changes would have no cross-ownership newspaper, TV and radio station restrictions;

-- a company would be able to own two TV and six radio stations in the same market if at least 20 "independently owned media voices" remained after a merger. If only 10 remained, ownership would be limited to two TV and four radio stations;

-- redefining National Market Share to mean the total number of households company TV stations reach and raising the allowable ownership ceiling from 35% to 45%. A 39% compromise was reached to allow News Corp. and Viacom to keep all their stations that already exceeded the allowable limit.

In spite of mass public opposition today, FCC Chairman Martin wants to end limits on media ownership in a plan to take effect in weeks or sooner if not stopped. He's been allowing public comments on the proposal since mid-November with a Republican three to two majority FCC vote planned for December 18. His move is the latest effort to end 1940s restrictions the New York Times said (in February, 2002) were "rooted in the fears of the European experience at the time that the television industry in the United States could come to be dominated by a few powerful interests." Ownership limits were gradually eased thereafter, and mergers and acquisitions followed.

By the mid-1980s, no network was allowed to control local media that reached over a fourth of the nation's households, nor could it own more than 12 stations. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 raised the limit to 35% that made possible almost 200 TV station mergers and acquisitions that followed.

It was no different for the three giant radio broadcasters. They were able to acquire the great majority of the 2000 stations bought between 1996 and 2000, after which Clear Channel Communications bought AMFM Radio to become the nation's largest radio broadcaster with over 900 stations (plus its 19 TV stations) that combined with its international holdings makes it the largest one in the world.

Regulatory easing had a devastating effect on local diversity according to Free Press.net Research Director S. Derek Turner. In testimony before the Senate Commerce Committee on October 23 he said: "Congress must send a message to the FCC to stop its rush toward more consolidation. Ownership rules exist for a reason: to increase diversity and localism, which in turn produces more diverse speech, more choice for listeners, and more owners who are responsive to their local communities."

Free Press, the Consumer Federation of America and Consumers Union voiced their opposition to proposed changes by filing thousands of pages of comments October 22 against the FCC plan. Their research shows ownership limits enhance local news quantity and quality. It refutes FCC's "inconsistent, incompetent and incoherent" opposite claims case and fraudulent press release in mid-November that its proposal was just a "minor loosening of the (cross-ownership) ban....in (only) the very largest markets and subject to certain criteria and limitations." Left out of its comment was the fine print Free Press exposed below on November 26 in 10 facts:

(1) "Martin's proposal (hides) corporate welfare for Big Media (that will) unleash a buying spree in the top 20 (media) markets."

(2) "Loopholes (through waivers) open the door to cross-ownership" anywhere.

(3) "Loopholes allow newspapers to own TV stations of any size (and) top-rated stations to (buy) major newspapers."

(4) "FCC history shows weak standards won't protect the public (and) the FCC hasn't denied any temporary waiver request in years."

(5) "Cross-ownership doesn't create more local news" as dominant companies crowd out competition.

(6) "Cross-ownership won't solve newspapers' financial woes" that are greatly exaggerated.

(7) "The Internet is an opportunity, not a death sentence," and media consolidation won't help traditional media's financial problems.

(8) "Martin's plan would harm minority media owners" by making them takeover targets.

(9) "A broken and corrupt process creates bad policies" that are characterized by FCC's secrecy and rush to change media ownership rules for the media barons it supports.

(10) "The public doesn't want more media consolidation" expressed by 99% of comments to FCC opposing letting media giants "swallow up more local media."

The Prometheus Radio Project (dedicated to a "free, diverse, and democratic media") also expressed its concern about Chairman Martin's plan to weaken rules to allow "unchecked corporate power in media" and the inadequate timeline he set for public comments. Prometheus also wants scheduled proceedings delayed until the Localism Task Force (established in 2003 to strengthen broadcasting localism) integrates the results of its work into FCC's ownership proposals. It stresses that corporations don't own the airwaves. They belong to the public and "setting a reasonable set of limitations on ownership (won't burden) those (given) the privilege (to) broadcast signals for the public benefit." Prometheus wants FCC to retain current ownership rules and devote its efforts to establish more low power radio licenses, preserve net neutrality, expand cable access, better use unlicensed spectrum and promote diversity and localism.

The Senate Commerce Committee is now examining Martin's proposal, and Senator Byron Dorgan predicted it would be greeted by "a firestorm of protest" as in 2003. Other senators voicing concern include Republican Trent Lott and Democrat presidential candidate Barack Obama who called "the proposed timeline and process....irresponsible" and added "the Commission has failed to further the goals of diversity in the media and promote localism, and as a result, it is in no position to justify allowing for increased consolidation of the market." Dorgan and Lott began work on a bipartisan bill to prevent FCC from instituting new media consolidation rules. Dorgan predicted on October 24 he's "confident any plan to allow additional concentration of media ownership will be rejected" by Congress.

He and Lott also said they'd seek support in Congress for a "resolution of disapproval" to overturn the FCC rule if it's passed. It's a rare move that was only once before used in 2003 when the Powell-led FCC tried to change the rules. To take effect, it would have to pass both Houses by two-thirds margins because George Bush is certain to veto it. Presidential vetos are rarely overridden, but that pattern may not hold up this time.

Support is building in Congress to stop gutting media ownership rules. On October 24, over 40 House members sent a letter to Chairman Martin to "resolve significant shortcomings in (FCC's) plan regarding accountability, transparency, and scientific integrity" in its current proposal. Of particular concern were a lack of public hearings, the dismal state of female and minority media ownership, and FCC's tainted research to make its case for changing the rules. Senators Nelson and Snowe also were critical. They called media consolidation "a critical issue (that) requires a completely transparent process" and urged Martin to complete his proceedings on localism and minority ownership before addressing rules changes. Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Inouye agrees and intends to hold hearings on media consolidation, diversity and ownership to address these vital issues.

New developments on November 8 came from a Senate Commerce Committee hearing at which Senators Dorgan and Lott said they'd introduce legislation to quash the FCC's rush to gut current rules. The bipartisan bill with many co-sponsors is called the "Media Ownership Act of 2007." The Senate Commerce Committee unanimously passed it on December 4, and it now goes before the full Senate. If it becomes law, it will require the FCC to publish any proposed rule changes in the Federal Register 90 days prior to a vote, give the public 60 days to comment and another 30 days for reply comments. If the FCC fails to do this, the bill voids any changes it approves. It also directs the FCC to conduct a separate proceeding on localism and create an independent minority and female ownership task force ahead of any efforts to change the rules.

This development, growing public opposition and calls for the FCC to complete its long-running study of how broadcasters serve local communities should have delayed the December 18 vote Chairman Martin wants. Instead, it's now on the agenda to be ruled on according to a December 12 FCC release that puts the agency on a collision course with key lawmakers in Congress who want more time to study the issue and greater public input. Martin is also defying A Media and Democracy Coalition poll released October 31 that showed 70% of respondents opposed media consolidation, and 57% said owning a newspaper and TV station in the same market should be illegal.

Then there's the StopBigMedia.com Coalition. It's made up of grassroots "groups across the spectrum that agree to a set of principles and have banded together to stop the FCC from allowing a handful of giant corporations to dominate America's media system." It's principles state:

-- democracy depends on a "free and vibrant media full of diverse, local and competing voices;"

-- media ownership consolidation "has dangerously reduced the number of (media) voices (that) seek to minimize competition" and promote profits over the public interest;

-- Congress and the FCC must ensure that our media system is "an uninhibited marketplace of ideas in which truth will prevail."

We have a long way to go to achieve these goals, but the StopBigMedia.com Coalition is committed to doing it. Its bottom line: "If we want better media, we need better media policies" that are made by Congress and FCC. But they won't come out of this FCC that's totally beholden to the media giants.

It shows in its practices and reports of its biased research, false claims, and a long history of ignoring the public interest. That has growing numbers on Capitol Hill saying FCC failed to make a case for further consolidation. It now remains to be seen if Congress and the courts will back the public interest the way they did in 2003.

Not if the Wall Street Journal's editorial page view prevails as it weighed in on this issue prominently on October 25. It accused Senators Dorgan and Lott of "shilling for local broadcasters who don't want the competition," when, in fact, that's exactly what they want. It also attacked the "political left's ideological paranoia (over) corporate media ownership" saying it has "no such objection to the left's operational control of National Public Radio or PBS" when, in fact, both broadcasters are corporate America tools and never met a US-led war they didn't love and support.

All the Journal can do is shill for the media giants and note how it's "long favored letting the free market determine the size of a company." It further cites media concentration as a fait accompli new technologies will allow to continue. By Journal logic (and the Martin FCC): "This has led not to monopolies but to a media landscape that is more diverse than ever (with) more news and entertainment options." Media theorist Neil Postman had a different view. He once called Americans the most over-entertained, under-informed people in the world and wrote about it in books like "Amusing Ourselves to Death." Further media consolidation guarantees much more of the same with the public, as always, the loser.

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization. He lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

Also visit his blog site at www.sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to The Steve Lendman News and Information Hour on www.TheMicroEffect.com Mondays at noon US Central time.

The Latest Poll Numbers from South Carolina

Here are the latest numbers from South Carolina.

THE NUMBERS - DEMOCRATS

Hillary Rodham Clinton, 42 percent

Barack Obama, 34 percent

John Edwards, 16 percent

___

THE NUMBERS - REPUBLICANS

Mike Huckabee, 24 percent

Fred Thompson, 17 percent

Rudy Giuliani, 16 percent

Mitt Romney, 16 percent

John McCain, 13 percent

Ron Paul, 11 percent

Rudy Giuliani- The 30 Million Dollar Question

I think that we have all seen enough corruption in Washington to last several life times. Apparently Republican presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani hopes to continue the filthy way the government now operates. Yesterday in Iowa, he had this to say about spending in Washington:

While he said repeatedly that government spending should be reduced, Giuliani said military spending is one part of the budget that should be increased. "I don't think we ever made up for the peace dividend we took in the 1990s," he said. Invoking Ronald Reagan, he said military spending sends a message to countries like China and Russia: "We need to say it doesn't make sense to get into an arms race with the United States."

I'm sure the Republicans were quick to applaud his tough guy stance on defense and his calls for increased spending. After reading an article in Time today, one must wonder if the following is the real reason that he supports increased defense spending.

Not long after he stepped down as mayor of New York City, Rudy Giuliani received an intriguing offer. A group of officials from a Florida company called Seisint Inc. asked him to promote a powerful new database technology capable of tracking potential terrorists and other criminals. Their timing was perfect. Giuliani had just opened Giuliani Partners (GP), a consulting shop that planned to specialize in helping companies like Seisint grow. "Nobody knew us; everybody knew him," says Michael Brauser, a major shareholder who negotiated the December 2002 contract between GP and the Boca Raton based firm. "It was an unbelievable fit."

For Giuliani's new company, it was a remarkably profitable fit too. GP pulled in more than $30 million for just one year's work on Seisint's behalf, company records show. Big paydays have not been unusual for GP, which in just five years has reaped tens of millions of dollars from clients at home and abroad, a business success story closely linked to Giuliani's fame as a hero of 9/11. That same legacy has propelled him to the top tier of Republican presidential candidates.

The lines between public and private business continues to blur. Politicians consistently espouse many issues that resonate with the public only later to be exposed as having an ulterior motive behind their actions. We have all seen how the Cheney-Halliburton connection was exploited to the hilt with profits of Halliburton increasing dramatically over the last few years.

These Conservatives talk a good game when telling their supporters that they will solve the nations economic woes. Free markets, less taxes, personal responsibility. This will do it! No 'nanny state' as Giuliani so proudly proclaimed when denouncing any type of government health care reform. The only problem is, you see, that more money for programs that can help people like me and you ultimately means less money for the Halliburtons and Giuliani Partners of the world. Pretty simple when you think about it.

Kucinich Left Out of Democratic Debate

This is wrong on so many levels.

Dennis Kucinich has been excluded from Thursday's Democratic debate.

In a press release, the Kucinich campaign fumed: "The highest polling Democratic Presidential candidate among the Party's progressive, grassroots, activist base, Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich, has been excluded from the Des Moines Register-sponsored Presidential debate here on Thursday because his Iowa field director operates from a home office rather than a rented storefront."

In a statement included in the Kucinich release, the Register said it "was our determination that a person working out of his home did not meet our criteria for a campaign office and full-time paid staff in Iowa." The person they are referring to is Kucinich Iowa Field Director and State Coordinator Marcos Rubinstein, "who coordinates campaign activities from his home office in Dubuque, bolstered by a dozen-or-so other senior campaign staff who have traveled the state over the past several months," according to the Kucinich campaign.

In the latest Register poll of likely Democratic caucus-goers in Iowa, Kucinich came in at 1 percent support, the same as Chris Dodd. In the most recent CBS News/New York Times poll of Democrats nationally, Kucinich had 2 percent support – more than Dodd and the same as Bill Richardson and Joe Biden. Dodd, Richardson and Biden were all invited to Thursday's debate.

Interestingly, the Register is including Alan Keyes in it's Republican debate today, despite the fact that he has little support and has been left out of most debates thus far.

No matter what your personal feelings about his candidacy, his exclusion from the debate is wrong. I happen to agree with him on many of his positions on the issues today. I will still watch the debate but personally feel that an important voice has been silenced by this decision.

Alan Keyes- He's Back Again!

Alan Keyes, the self-righteous perennial Republican candidate, showed up at the Iowa GOP debate today. He has slowly inched back into the scene after his humiliating loss to Senator Obama back in 2004. The following clip will give you a good idea of why politics on the GOP side have reached the heights of lunacy.




It is getting a little tired watching the Republicans try to outdo each other in the area of morals and religion. No issue is left untouched. Problem with the schools? Why Alan Keyes claims it's the fault of judges who drove God out! Huckabee is running around apologizing to Romney about a remark he made in regards to Mormans. They are all constantly screaming about who is the most Conservative (whatever the hell that means) and how they appeal to the 'value voters' (once again, what is that?!).

I cannot wrap my brain around these holier-than-thou right wing politicians who wear religion on their shoulders while condoning torture and illegal wars. They speak of the sanctity of life while allowing companies to pour toxic gases in the air and pollute our water. They oppose the use of birth control while denying health care to children who had the misfortune to be born poor. I could go on and on in exposing their brand of right wing hypocrisy.

The sad fact of this is that we should not even be discussing religion in regards to politics and policy. There was, at one time, something called the separation of church and state.

2008 Election- It's that Important

The focus of this blog since its inception has been on the economy and the effects that free trade and globalization have had in our world today. While I will continue to talk about these issues, I will shift some of the focus on the upcoming 2008 election. Although I often said back in 2004 that no other election was ever so important, that feeling is much more urgent this time around. I do not think that the country (or world, for that matter), can continue on this path that we now follow.

The issues of the economy, globalization and free trade are all very important to me personally, but the disastrous Republican foreign policy (or the lack of) that we have experienced the last few years deserves serious attention.

I will be shifting the focus somewhat for the foreseeable future and examining some of the positions taken by the prospective candidates from both parties. It is only by understanding the issues that people can really cast their ballots. God, gays and guns needs to go the way of the wagon wheel. The politics of division and fear have done nothing but cause internal strife and have created more and more problems along the way.

It is time for Americans to get out of their collective bubble and reflect on where we are as a nation. Renditions, torture, economic disparity, false wars of aggression- this is not our country. We must stop worrying about what sweatshop goods are on sale this week and take a good look in the mirror. Do we really want to be like so many other rogue regimes of the past and consistently endorse the worst elements of human nature or do we want to rise up and start repairing our country and the crumbling image of America in the world today? Do we wish to tackle the hard economic problems that we face or simply look the other way and let another generation worry about it?

These are some of the things that I will focus in the foreseeable future. It's only by understanding and talking about the issues as well as holding politicians accountable that any real meaningful change will occur.

YouTube Politics- John Edwards America Rising

John Edwards kicks off the America Belongs to Us bus tour in Iowa.

YouTube Politics- Hillary on Good Morning America

An excellent interview on ABC World News.

YouTube Politics- Obama in 2008

Barack Obama's Iowa Retrospective.

National Association of Realtors- Housing to Stabilize

The National Association of Realtors announced today that the housing market is on the verge of stabilizing and forecasts bright times ahead

Bucking conventional wisdom, a trade group for real estate agents on Monday said the battered housing market is on the verge of stabilizing and inched up its outlook for 2007 and 2008 home sales.

The revised monthly forecast from the National Association of Realtors, which followed nine straight months of downward revisions, calls for U.S. existing home sales to fall 12.5 percent this year to 5.67 million — the lowest level since 2002. Last month, the association predicted 5.66 million existing homes would be sold this year.

The Realtors' group also forecast sales will rise slightly in 2008 to 5.7 million, up from last month's prediction of 5.69 million.

Numerous other economists, however, are far less optimistic than the trade group. They predict weak sales and falling prices through next year and beyond and emphasize that those problems could worsen if the economy sinks into a recession.

Looking back, I vaguely remembered this same trade group making a big announcement last year in regards to the housing market.

The key word for the housing market in 2006 is balance, with a return to a more normal rate of price growth, according to the National Association of Realtors®.

David Lereah, NAR's chief economist, said current trends in the housing sector are healthy. "We don't need to break a record every year for the housing market to be good - in fact, cooling sales are necessary for the long-term health of this vital sector," Lereah said. "A modest slowdown in home sales, coupled with improvements in housing inventory, means the market is in the process of normalization. That will help to bring balance between home buyers and sellers, yet sales will remain historically strong."

The National Association of Realtors must have the biggest pair of rose-colored glasses on the planet. Believe what you will, but beware the rosy projections coming from this 'trade group'.

**Update: Check out this site to see the foreclosures in your area. Healthy market, indeed.

Veto of Spending Bill Is Threatened

Here we go again.

The White House budget director warned on Saturday that President Bush was prepared to veto a $500 billion spending package being assembled in Congress if Democrats pushed for too much additional money for domestic programs.

Jim Nussle, the director of the Office of Management and Budget, accused Democrats of trying to tie money for combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan to what the president considers excessive spending for federal agencies and home-state projects.

“Instead of trying to leverage troop-funding for more pork-barrel spending, Congress ought to pass responsible appropriations bills and the funding for the troops our commanders say they need to build on their battlefield success,” Mr. Nussle said.

Democratic leaders accused the White House of responding hastily to news accounts of the proposal, which is being developed behind closed doors. They said Democrats were determined to devote more resources to national needs like homeland security and law enforcement.

This is absolutely absurd. The Republicans are all over themselves screaming about fiscal responsibility and taking care of the 'people's money' while in the same breath screaming for more unaccountable funds to be sent to the money pit in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is truly amazing that more people haven't caught on to their con by now.

It wasn't that long ago that the Republicans in Congress were spending money like there was no tomorrow. The bloated Highway Bill, passed in 2005, is a perfect example. Let's take a look back.

Even by the standards of Alaska, the land where schemes and dreams come for new life, two bridges approved under the national highway bill passed by the House last week are monuments to the imagination.

One, here in Ketchikan, would be among the biggest in the United States: a mile long, with a top clearance of 200 feet from the water -- 80 feet higher than the Brooklyn Bridge and just 20 feet short of the Golden Gate Bridge. It would connect this economically depressed, rain-soaked town of 7,845 people to an island that has about 50 residents and the area's airport, which offers six flights a day (a few more in summer). It could cost about $200 million.

The other bridge would span an inlet for nearly two miles to tie Anchorage to a port that has a single regular tenant and almost no homes or businesses. It would cost up to $2 billion.

Republicans screaming about the 'people's money'? Hardly! As Rep. Don Young (R) Alaska said at the time,

''I'd like to be a little oinker, myself,'' Mr. Young told a Republican lunch crowd here, taking mock offense at the suggestion that Ted Stevens, the Alaska Republican who is chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, directs more pork to their state than he does. ''If he's the chief porker, I'm upset.''

And did Bush go to the fainting couch protesting about the pork laden bill? Hardly! As he said at the time of the signing at a Caterpillar plant

"If we want people working in America, we got to make sure our highways and roads are modern," Mr. Bush said. "We've got to bring up this transportation system into the 21st century."

"I mean, you can't expect your farmers to be able to get goods to market if we don't have a good road system," he said. "You can't expect to get these Caterpillar products all around the United States if we don't have a good road system."

And the con job continues...

Brave New Films- Capitalism Gone Wild!

A peek into the beautiful world of the 'have mores'.

CompUSA to Close Stores After Holidays

CompUSA is the latest casualty in this 'robust' economy today.

Consumer electronics retailer CompUSA said Friday it will close its store operations after the holidays following sale of the company to Gordon Brothers Group LLC, a restructuring firm. Financial terms weren't disclosed.

CompUSA operates 103 stores, which plan to run store-closing sales during the holidays.

Privately held CompUSA, controlled by Mexican financier Carlos Slim Helu's Grupo Carso SA, said discussions were under way to sell certain stores in key markets. Stores that can't be sold will be closed.

Gordon Brothers will also try to sell the company's technical services business, CompUSA TechPro, and online business, CompUSA.com. It would be up to the buyers whether to continue the CompUSA name.

It’s almost certain competition from Best Buy, Circuit City and Wal-Mart were the final nails in the coffin for CompUSA.

Friday Night Disco- Eurythmics- Sex Crime (1984)

With all the doubleplusgood doublespeak this week, I thought that this song was appropriate tonight.

Consumer Confidence Near 2-Year Low

This is not what retailers want to hear during the holiday shopping season.

Consumer confidence barely budged from a two-year low as housing troubles, a credit crunch, high energy prices and turbulence on Wall Street continue to make people uneasy about the economy and their own financial situations.

The RBC Cash Index showed confidence clocking in at 65.9 in early December. That hovered close to a reading of 64 in November, which marked the worst showing since the devastation wrought by the Gulf Coast hurricanes in 2005.

"There's a great deal of angst out there," said economist Ken Mayland, president of ClearView Economics. "There is a great deal of fear and foreboding."

Economists said a host of factors were to blame for the still gloomy mind-set of consumers. The collapse of the housing market, which has dragged down home values, has made people feel less wealthy. Home foreclosures have shot up to record highs. Harder-to-get credit has made it difficult for some to make big-ticket purchases. High energy prices are squeezing wallets and pocketbooks. And, Wall Street's gyrations have made some worry about the value of their nest eggs.

Over the past year, consumers' confidence has deteriorated sharply, reflecting the toll of the problems facing the economy. Last December, confidence stood at a solid 86.9. The index is based on the results of the international polling firm Ipsos.

Keith Olbermann on the Iran NIE Report

What to say? Keith Olbermann sums it up quite well...

The US-Peru Free Trade Agreement

I found this great article, written by a Mississippi farmer, while doing some research on the US-Peru Free Trade Agreement. Here is a snippet of what he had to say.

As harmful as the Peru FTA will be for American farmers and ranchers, the effects on Peruvian farmers will be just as devastating. As an African American farmer, I am particularly concerned about the impact the agreement will have on the millions of Afro-Peruvian and indigenous farmers. The same international grain traders who dumped below-cost grain into Mexico after NAFTA, driving over a million farmers off the land and fueling illegal migration into the United States, will now do the same in Peru. Many of those displaced Peruvian corn and rice farmers facing economic catastrophe will be forced to migrate or grow illicit drug crops to survive. In July, four million Peruvians took to the streets to voice opposition to the FTA.

Farmers at home and abroad need a new direction on trade and agriculture policy that protects rural livelihoods and promotes food sovereignty. The first step in that new direction must be rejection of the Peru Free Trade Agreement and the upcoming agreements with South Korea, Panama and Colombia. Family farmers want to produce for our families and our local communities, not export markets. Free trade directly undermines and weakens renewed consumer demand for local and healthy foods. We have already outsourced our energy security. Why are we doing the same with our food security? Food sovereignty, not free trade, needs to be the foundational basis of our policies if we are to build a more healthful and just food system.

This 'free trade' pact was overwhelmingly passed in the House by a vote of 285 to 132 and in the Senate 77 to 18. All that is left is for Bush to sign which I am sure will be any day now.

Not waiting on the ink to dry, Bush is already pressing Congress to pass a 'free trade' agreement with Colombia. This agreement is not a sure thing, however. Colombia, it seems, has a little problem with
violence directed at the country's labor unions.

The current policy the United States maintains in relations with Latin America, with free trade being the only tool utilized while ignoring the economic disparities and the often devastating consequences that these agreements produce, will ultimately prove to be a disaster.

Peruvian Night at the US Congress

Take a look at this little party sponsored by the Peruvian Embassy shortly before Congress was to vote on the US-Peru Free Trade Agreement. The agreement, which basically sells out the farmers in Peru and here in the U.S., has been since approved by the Senate and only waits Bush's signature.

China fills up U.S. Medicine Cabinets

It's not enough that we have had to contend with antifreeze toothpaste, poison dog food, date rape toys and formaldehyde candies, now worry about your medicine cabinet.

The medicine cabinet in the average U.S. home is filling with drugs made in China , and some experts say that could be a prescription for trouble.

China's booming pharmaceutical industry has doubled exports to the United States in the past five years, undercutting competitors and making American consumers reliant on the safety of Chinese factories and captive to any disruptions in Sino-U.S. commerce.

It might seem like merely a trade issue. But industry experts in Europe and the United States say national-security concerns are edging into the debate.

I wonder why this is occurring. Could it be this?

The Chinese and Indian companies are all but exempt from oversight by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration .

"Only 13 inspections were conducted in China in 2007," Rep. John Dingell , a Michigan Democrat who chairs the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, said at a hearing Nov. 1 . "At this rate, it would take the FDA 55 years just to clear this backlog."

By giving China a virtual pass on FDA inspections, Acker said, Chinese firms get a cost savings of about 25 percent above American companies, which face unannounced on-site inspections at any time.

I encourage you to read the whole article. It is a testament to the failure of this globalized system of 'free trade' and 'open markets'. When consumer safety is relegated to the back burner in the drive for ever increasing profits, we all lose in the end.