The entire process of Supreme Court nominee hearings is a charade. But every so often the truth wins out. Witness Senator Jefferson Beauregard "Jeff" Sessions III in the current Kagan hearings: It’s difficult to know whether “you’d be more like John Roberts or more like Ruth Bader Ginsburg,” he said, referring to the justice nominated by Clinton who aligns with the court’s liberal wing.
What he wants is a conservative, but he ain't getting one, coz the Democrats won.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Today's Journal
This is what passes for journalism in the Wall Street Journal these days: on top of page A1, a picture accompanied by the caption: The mystery of bad hair days. Inside, the story: Wash Away Bad Hair Days.
Oy vay.
Oy vay.
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Opposites
Two different stories on opposite pages in today's Wall Street Journal tell two different, indeed opposite, stories.
After Orszag, Red Ink and Hard Choices: The OMB director is resigning, and the deficit and national debt are being discussed in this story on page A4.
Mr. Orszag's decision to resign as director of the Office of Management and Budget comes as the Obama administration—and the Democratic Party—begin to confront disagreements between those who believe near-term deficit reduction poses too much risk to the fragile economic recovery and those, such as Mr. Orszag, who say the deficit itself may be a more profound economic threat. Behind that economic argument is a political one: The steps that might be taken to reduce red ink—such as tax increases or spending cuts to Medicare and other popular programs—will be politically perilous, especially given the magnitude needed to make any real impact.
The headline and subheading of a story on page A5 are: States Face New Pinch as Stimulus Ebbs. Tax Receipts Aren't Rebounding Quickly Enough to Offset Declining Federal Aid; Push for Additional Medicaid Help Stalls
States have long known stimulus funds sent their way early in the recession would taper off in the first half of 2011. But many hoped a rebound in tax receipts would close the gap.
After Orszag, Red Ink and Hard Choices: The OMB director is resigning, and the deficit and national debt are being discussed in this story on page A4.
Mr. Orszag's decision to resign as director of the Office of Management and Budget comes as the Obama administration—and the Democratic Party—begin to confront disagreements between those who believe near-term deficit reduction poses too much risk to the fragile economic recovery and those, such as Mr. Orszag, who say the deficit itself may be a more profound economic threat. Behind that economic argument is a political one: The steps that might be taken to reduce red ink—such as tax increases or spending cuts to Medicare and other popular programs—will be politically perilous, especially given the magnitude needed to make any real impact.
The headline and subheading of a story on page A5 are: States Face New Pinch as Stimulus Ebbs. Tax Receipts Aren't Rebounding Quickly Enough to Offset Declining Federal Aid; Push for Additional Medicaid Help Stalls
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Haley keeps taking the Southern test
This is a litmus test, which if administered by Demmocrats would be excoriated by conservatives. But, this is South Carolina.
She was born in small-town South Carolina, attended South Carolina schools and won election three times to the state legislature. But in her surging campaign for governor, Nikki Haley has been tested far more than other candidates on her cultural connections to the state. Mrs. Haley, 38 years old, is an Indian-American, born into the Sikh faith, who converted to Christianity as an adult. Her background has prompted some voters to seek assurances that she is committed to her Christian faith and understands the feelings among some about the state's Civil War history.
It is both disgusting and hilarious that anyone in 2010, 145 years after the Confederacy was defeated, believes this nonsense. But they do, and those that do have influence in this state.
Like her three GOP rivals for the governor's office, Mrs. Haley sat this spring for a videotaped interview with the Palmetto Patriots, a local activist group that aims to "fight attacks against Southern Culture" and talks with candidates "to ensure compliance with conservative values."
Balderdash!
Nikki Haley Goes Extra Mile in Proving Commitment 2:15
Mrs. Haley's half-hour meeting with the Palmetto Patriots illustrated how she has sought to assure potential skeptics while also embracing her ethnicity. She pledged to retain a political compromise that gave the Confederate flag a place of prominence in front of the State House, a position that puts her within the mainstream among GOP leaders in the state. Further, Mrs. Haley noted that "as a minority female" she was ideally suited to counteract an ongoing boycott led by civil rights groups.
Being a minority female does not obviate the use of the Confederate flag: the stripes and bars are objectionable, no matter who the governor is in South Carolina.
Mrs. Haley chose her words carefully in talking about the causes of the Civil War. "You had one side of the Civil War that was fighting for tradition, and I think you had another side of the Civil War that was fighting for change," she said.
Tradition versus change, a curious way of putting a war over slavery.
She did not use the word "slavery" but hinted at it, saying that "everyone is supposed to be free."
Supposed to be?
She was born in small-town South Carolina, attended South Carolina schools and won election three times to the state legislature. But in her surging campaign for governor, Nikki Haley has been tested far more than other candidates on her cultural connections to the state. Mrs. Haley, 38 years old, is an Indian-American, born into the Sikh faith, who converted to Christianity as an adult. Her background has prompted some voters to seek assurances that she is committed to her Christian faith and understands the feelings among some about the state's Civil War history.
It is both disgusting and hilarious that anyone in 2010, 145 years after the Confederacy was defeated, believes this nonsense. But they do, and those that do have influence in this state.
Like her three GOP rivals for the governor's office, Mrs. Haley sat this spring for a videotaped interview with the Palmetto Patriots, a local activist group that aims to "fight attacks against Southern Culture" and talks with candidates "to ensure compliance with conservative values."
Balderdash!
Nikki Haley Goes Extra Mile in Proving Commitment 2:15
As WSJ's Peter Wallsten reports, Nikki Haley is having to prove that she understands the traditions and culture of the state she is seeking to lead. Ms. Haley, an Indian-American, is the surging GOP candidate for governor in South Carolina.
Mrs. Haley's half-hour meeting with the Palmetto Patriots illustrated how she has sought to assure potential skeptics while also embracing her ethnicity. She pledged to retain a political compromise that gave the Confederate flag a place of prominence in front of the State House, a position that puts her within the mainstream among GOP leaders in the state. Further, Mrs. Haley noted that "as a minority female" she was ideally suited to counteract an ongoing boycott led by civil rights groups.
Being a minority female does not obviate the use of the Confederate flag: the stripes and bars are objectionable, no matter who the governor is in South Carolina.
Mrs. Haley chose her words carefully in talking about the causes of the Civil War. "You had one side of the Civil War that was fighting for tradition, and I think you had another side of the Civil War that was fighting for change," she said.
Tradition versus change, a curious way of putting a war over slavery.
She did not use the word "slavery" but hinted at it, saying that "everyone is supposed to be free."
Supposed to be?
Friday, June 18, 2010
New York Liberal (yea!)
Elena grew up to become dean of Harvard Law School and President Obama’s solicitor general, and if the Senate confirms her after hearings that begin on June 28, she would be the 112th justice of the United States Supreme Court. But before all that, she was the middle child in a New York family whose intellectual dynamism and embrace of liberal causes provide a window onto the social milieu and culture that shaped her.
Arm twistin'
President Obama’s successful move to force BP to establish a $20 billion compensation fund that the company will have no voice in allocating — just a down payment, the president insisted — may have been the most vivid example of what he recently called his determination to step in and do “what individuals couldn’t do and corporations wouldn’t do.” With that display of raw arm-twisting, Mr. Obama reinvigorated a debate about the renewed reach of government power, or, alternatively, the power of government overreach. It is an argument that has come to define Mr. Obama’s first 18 months in office, and one that Mr. Obama clearly hopes to make a central issue in November’s midterm elections.
I don't see it as being outrageous, though some do; I see as exercising leadership
I don't see it as being outrageous, though some do; I see as exercising leadership
Thursday, June 17, 2010
2 opposed views
It never ceases amazing me how differently two people can see the same event. Holman W. Jenkins, Jr., one of the resident right wingers in the Wall Street Journal editorial board (that is an oxymoron), and Thomas Frank, the token liberal write on the President and the Oil Company BP.
Leading off on the right, the message begins at the headline: Obama vs. BP (and You) and continues with the subheading: The government holds a company's stock price hostage.
The lefty takes a different approach: Britain Cries Foul Over BP and continues in the subheading: Thatcher's heirs may be the only people on the planet to regard Obama's response as swift and effective.
Frank only had to read the column at the top of the page where his appeared to see Thatcher's heirs are not the only ones.
In BP's case this week, the company's stock price hasn't just been taken hostage by Washington, it has been wrapped around management's neck and progressively tightened. The sight hasn't been an edifying one, not least because the target isn't just BP.
BP has authored one of the country's great industrial accidents and expects fully to pay through the nose. You could wish, in this light, Washington's politicians didn't seem quite so much like muggers standing on a street corner waiting for a vulnerable passerby. For one thing, it doesn't benefit the victims, who will continue to line up for years to come, if BP can't reinvest to sustain and grow its business.
Turns out they are not all muggers: here is a Republican representative:
Leading off on the right, the message begins at the headline: Obama vs. BP (and You) and continues with the subheading: The government holds a company's stock price hostage.
The lefty takes a different approach: Britain Cries Foul Over BP and continues in the subheading: Thatcher's heirs may be the only people on the planet to regard Obama's response as swift and effective.
Frank only had to read the column at the top of the page where his appeared to see Thatcher's heirs are not the only ones.
In BP's case this week, the company's stock price hasn't just been taken hostage by Washington, it has been wrapped around management's neck and progressively tightened. The sight hasn't been an edifying one, not least because the target isn't just BP.
BP has authored one of the country's great industrial accidents and expects fully to pay through the nose. You could wish, in this light, Washington's politicians didn't seem quite so much like muggers standing on a street corner waiting for a vulnerable passerby. For one thing, it doesn't benefit the victims, who will continue to line up for years to come, if BP can't reinvest to sustain and grow its business.
Turns out they are not all muggers: here is a Republican representative:
GOP leaders forced Rep. Barton to retract apology to BP
Washington Post - - 2 hours ago
Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, accused the White House of conducting a "$20 billion shakedown" by requiring oil giant BP to establish a fund to compensate those hurt by the Gulf Coast oil spill.
Video: Biden: Barton Criticism of BP Fund 'Outrageous' The Associated Press
US Gulf Oil Spill BP's Ally The Associated Press
I am the walrus
Various stories and columns bandy about the disaster recovery plans of oil companies reference to walruses, which have not existed in the Gulf of Mexico for 3 million years.
The Atlantic: companies' plans for a similar disaster were basically 'cookie cutter' copies of BP's spill plan, all prepared by the same group, the Response Group. The plans include an assessment of the impact of a possible spill on walruses (which don't live in the Gulf) and the phone number of an expert who died in 2005 (well before the plans were submitted). 'ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, and Shell are as unprepared as BP,' said Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.). 'The only technology you seem to be relying on is the Xerox machine,' echoed Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.)."
Gail Collins: At the ritual Congressional lashing of C.E.O.’s this week, we learned that none of the major oil companies have any idea how to control a spill like this, and that their faux plans for handling one in the gulf were made up of boilerplate so undigested that several had sections on protecting walruses — mammals that have not been seen in the area since the Ice Age. “It’s unfortunate that walruses were included,” admitted Exxon Mobil’s chief.
ABC News (Australia): ExxonMobil ridiculed for walrus oil spill plan. ExxonMobil in particular was ridiculed for including plans to deal with walruses - an animal whose range is confined to the Arctic - in its plans for a Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
The Atlantic: companies' plans for a similar disaster were basically 'cookie cutter' copies of BP's spill plan, all prepared by the same group, the Response Group. The plans include an assessment of the impact of a possible spill on walruses (which don't live in the Gulf) and the phone number of an expert who died in 2005 (well before the plans were submitted). 'ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, and Shell are as unprepared as BP,' said Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.). 'The only technology you seem to be relying on is the Xerox machine,' echoed Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.)."
Gail Collins: At the ritual Congressional lashing of C.E.O.’s this week, we learned that none of the major oil companies have any idea how to control a spill like this, and that their faux plans for handling one in the gulf were made up of boilerplate so undigested that several had sections on protecting walruses — mammals that have not been seen in the area since the Ice Age. “It’s unfortunate that walruses were included,” admitted Exxon Mobil’s chief.
ABC News (Australia): ExxonMobil ridiculed for walrus oil spill plan. ExxonMobil in particular was ridiculed for including plans to deal with walruses - an animal whose range is confined to the Arctic - in its plans for a Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
I know what to buy, or short
Lawmakers Bet on Firms They Oversaw
In 2009, amid the federal government's most aggressive intervention in the U.S. economy in decades, some members of key congressional committees placed bets with their own money on the stocks of companies they helped oversee, according to a preliminary analysis by The Wall Street Journal of public disclosure filings made public Wednesday.
The Journal has reported that some members of Congress or their spouses made bets during 2008 that U.S. stocks and bonds would fall in value. There isn't evidence that any of the 2009 trades identified by the Journal involved nonpublic information or broke any laws. Members of both parties and both chambers traded regularly, although in some cases the trades were made by spouses rather than by the legislators themselves. Whereas many government officials are prohibited from making certain types of investments in which they might have a conflict of interest, members of Congress face relatively few restrictions.
Under the codes of ethics set by the House and Senate, members are generally free to trade stocks or other securities—and to "sell short," or bet that investments will fall in price—even in the case of companies whose fortunes may be directly influenced by legislative actions.
Nice way to make a living.
In 2009, amid the federal government's most aggressive intervention in the U.S. economy in decades, some members of key congressional committees placed bets with their own money on the stocks of companies they helped oversee, according to a preliminary analysis by The Wall Street Journal of public disclosure filings made public Wednesday.
The Journal has reported that some members of Congress or their spouses made bets during 2008 that U.S. stocks and bonds would fall in value. There isn't evidence that any of the 2009 trades identified by the Journal involved nonpublic information or broke any laws. Members of both parties and both chambers traded regularly, although in some cases the trades were made by spouses rather than by the legislators themselves. Whereas many government officials are prohibited from making certain types of investments in which they might have a conflict of interest, members of Congress face relatively few restrictions.
Under the codes of ethics set by the House and Senate, members are generally free to trade stocks or other securities—and to "sell short," or bet that investments will fall in price—even in the case of companies whose fortunes may be directly influenced by legislative actions.
Nice way to make a living.
Unbalanced and opinionated
Typical Wall Street Journal slant on the news.
BP PLC, under intense legal and political pressure from President Barack Obama, agreed Wednesday to put $20 billion into a fund to compensate victims of the Gulf oil spill, and said it would cancel shareholder dividends for the first three quarters of this year to offset that cost. BP said it would pay another $100 million to a separate fund to help oil-industry workers sidelined by the Obama administration's moratorium on deepwater drilling.
The payments far exceed the letter of U.S. law, which caps economic liabilities in oil spills at just $75 million. BP agreed to waive that limit. In a pact hammered out in a four-hour White House bargaining session, BP agreed to "set aside" $20 billion in U.S. assets as a guarantee that it would make good on the promised $20 billion in cash by 2013.
The deal is the latest in a series of interventions by the Obama administration in the operations of private businesses in crisis. Mr. Obama sent an emissary to demand that the then-head of General Motors Corp., Rick Wagoner, resign prior to the government-led rescue of GM. The administration has pressed Wall Street banks in the aftermath of the financial crisis, calling for sharp cuts in executive pay.
If GM was to receive taxpayer funds, the government had a legitimate right to write conditions on disbursing said funds. It is more than the Administration that has pressed for cuts in executive pay; Congress and the public have, too.
BP PLC, under intense legal and political pressure from President Barack Obama, agreed Wednesday to put $20 billion into a fund to compensate victims of the Gulf oil spill, and said it would cancel shareholder dividends for the first three quarters of this year to offset that cost. BP said it would pay another $100 million to a separate fund to help oil-industry workers sidelined by the Obama administration's moratorium on deepwater drilling.
The payments far exceed the letter of U.S. law, which caps economic liabilities in oil spills at just $75 million. BP agreed to waive that limit. In a pact hammered out in a four-hour White House bargaining session, BP agreed to "set aside" $20 billion in U.S. assets as a guarantee that it would make good on the promised $20 billion in cash by 2013.
The deal is the latest in a series of interventions by the Obama administration in the operations of private businesses in crisis. Mr. Obama sent an emissary to demand that the then-head of General Motors Corp., Rick Wagoner, resign prior to the government-led rescue of GM. The administration has pressed Wall Street banks in the aftermath of the financial crisis, calling for sharp cuts in executive pay.
If GM was to receive taxpayer funds, the government had a legitimate right to write conditions on disbursing said funds. It is more than the Administration that has pressed for cuts in executive pay; Congress and the public have, too.
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
Obama Goes Small
Quick impression: the president went a good way toward reasserting that he is in charge and BP is trouble. The no-nonsense tone, martial imagery ("battle plan"), the three-part plan, the identification of a bad guy (BP's CEO) who is going to be dealt with sternly, who was scolded for "recklessness," and whose company will be paying for the cleanup and damage--not asked, but told to pay, evidently--all of this was good theatrics, and moderately reassuring. But the address struck me as notably defensive in places, such as when the president tried to explain away why he so confidently, and rather arrogantly, proposed to expand offshore drilling while waving away concerns just three weeks before the explosion. Obama said he was "under the assurance that it would be absolutely safe," which seems like buck-passing to whatever experts were whispering in his ear. I'm all in favor of the moratorium on drilling, a national commission to understand the causes of this disaster, and the idea that we need to move toward developing sources of clean energy. But I thought Obama reached for some pretty cheap platitudes on the latter point. "Seizing the moment," invoking World War II vets and the moon landing are all well and good, but it rang pretty hollow to me. What stood out was that for all his praise of the House climate bill and talk about the "consequences of inaction" and so forth, not once did he utter the phrase, "It's time to put a price on carbon." And that suggests to me that this speech was primarily about containing the damage to his administration, and was not the pivot point in the energy debate that many people were hoping for.
Joshua Green in The Atlantic.
The president says he was assured? Goodness, me, even the president is covering his ass; but, he can't, he's in charge.
Joshua Green in The Atlantic.
The president says he was assured? Goodness, me, even the president is covering his ass; but, he can't, he's in charge.
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
UAW Fund: $45 Billion For Investing
"... a newly independent fund born out of the remaking of the Detroit auto business three years ago is busy figuring out where to place its roughly $45 billion in assets. That doesn't include ownership stakes in two of the three U.S. auto makers. The new pool is sure to tantalize money managers across the country, some of which, like BlackRock Inc., have already gotten business from the fund, called the UAW Retiree Medical Benefits Trust. The trust has put out requests for proposals to manage parts of its global stocks and fixed-income portfolios.
In contrast, Calpers had assets of $193 billion as of 9 June 2010.
Known as a VEBA, for voluntary employee beneficiary association, in January the trust became one of the world's largest such funds after accepting large stakes in General Motors Co., Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler Group LLC as part of a cost-cutting deal with the auto makers. The VEBA relieves the car companies of responsibility of lifelong health-care benefits for 800,000 retired auto workers and their spouses.
The fund trust still owns 68% of Chrysler common stock and 17.5% of GM common stock plus warrants for an additional 2.5%. Because of its holdings, the VEBA has a seat on each company's board, giving the union a voice in the running of the companies through the trust.
To create the UAW VEBA, GM transferred $23.6 billion while Ford contributed $15 billion and Chrysler handed over $6.8 billion. Those payments are in addition to the common stock and warrants awarded at each of the car companies to the trust.
In his retirement speech at Cobo Hall in downtown Detroit on Monday, UAW President Ron Gettelfinger credited the creation of the VEBA with helping the auto makers survive the sharp downturn in auto sales in 2008 and emerge from the bankruptcies at Chrysler and GM last year.
He said that the union was able to preserve most of the health-care benefits for retirees, concluding that "this was unprecedented" during a time of bankruptcy reorganization.
Mr. Henry declined to say whether the current level of benefits could be sustained in the decades to come.
"The UAW Retiree Medical Benefits Trust has sufficient assets to provide medical benefits to all covered retirees for the foreseeable future," Mr. Henry wrote in the email exchange. "Our operation commenced just over five months ago and we are still gathering data on our short history of benefit payments."
In contrast, Calpers had assets of $193 billion as of 9 June 2010.
Known as a VEBA, for voluntary employee beneficiary association, in January the trust became one of the world's largest such funds after accepting large stakes in General Motors Co., Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler Group LLC as part of a cost-cutting deal with the auto makers. The VEBA relieves the car companies of responsibility of lifelong health-care benefits for 800,000 retired auto workers and their spouses.
The fund trust still owns 68% of Chrysler common stock and 17.5% of GM common stock plus warrants for an additional 2.5%. Because of its holdings, the VEBA has a seat on each company's board, giving the union a voice in the running of the companies through the trust.
To create the UAW VEBA, GM transferred $23.6 billion while Ford contributed $15 billion and Chrysler handed over $6.8 billion. Those payments are in addition to the common stock and warrants awarded at each of the car companies to the trust.
In his retirement speech at Cobo Hall in downtown Detroit on Monday, UAW President Ron Gettelfinger credited the creation of the VEBA with helping the auto makers survive the sharp downturn in auto sales in 2008 and emerge from the bankruptcies at Chrysler and GM last year.
He said that the union was able to preserve most of the health-care benefits for retirees, concluding that "this was unprecedented" during a time of bankruptcy reorganization.
Mr. Henry declined to say whether the current level of benefits could be sustained in the decades to come.
"The UAW Retiree Medical Benefits Trust has sufficient assets to provide medical benefits to all covered retirees for the foreseeable future," Mr. Henry wrote in the email exchange. "Our operation commenced just over five months ago and we are still gathering data on our short history of benefit payments."
Saturday, June 12, 2010
The Courage to Leave, by Bob Herbert
There is no good news coming out of the depressing and endless war in Afghanistan. There once was merit to our incursion there, but that was long ago. Now we’re just going through the tragic motions, flailing at this and that, with no real strategy or decent end in sight.
The U.S. doesn’t win wars anymore. We just funnel the stressed and underpaid troops in and out of the combat zones, while all the while showering taxpayer billions on the contractors and giant corporations that view the horrors of war as a heaven-sent bonanza. BP, as we’ve been told repeatedly recently, is one of the largest suppliers of fuel to the wartime U.S. military.
What’s happening in Afghanistan is not only tragic, it’s embarrassing. The American troops will fight, but the Afghan troops who are supposed to be their allies are a lost cause. The government of President Hamid Karzai is breathtakingly corrupt and incompetent — and widely unpopular to boot. And now, as The Times’s Dexter Filkins is reporting, the erratic Mr. Karzai seems to be giving up hope that the U.S. can prevail in the war and is making nice with the Taliban.
There is no overall game plan, no real strategy or coherent goals, to guide the fighting of U.S. forces. It’s just a mind-numbing, soul-chilling, body-destroying slog, month after month, year after pointless year.The truth is that top American officials do not believe the war can be won but do not know how to end it. So we get gibberish about empowering the unempowerable Afghan forces and rebuilding a hopelessly corrupt and incompetent civil society.
Ultimately, the public is at fault for this catastrophe in Afghanistan, where more than 1,000 G.I.’s have now lost their lives. If we don’t have the courage as a people to fight and share in the sacrifices when our nation is at war, if we’re unwilling to seriously think about the war and hold our leaders accountable for the way it is conducted, if we’re not even willing to pay for it, then we should at least have the courage to pull our valiant forces out of it.
Friday, June 11, 2010
GOP Newcomers Raise Fall Stakes
Midway through a volatile primary season that has seen the electorate move right and a spate of incumbents knocked out, Republican voters are placing a clear bet that a roster of outspoken, anti-government candidates, many new to the national stage, can ride the country's anti-Washington mood to victory.
Anti-government candidates seeking to enter government, running as Washington outsiders to go to Washington and be inside the government. There's logic there somewhere, but it escapes me.
Anti-government candidates seeking to enter government, running as Washington outsiders to go to Washington and be inside the government. There's logic there somewhere, but it escapes me.
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
Ankle-deep oil
Mousse-like oil on beach at Alabama-Florida line
By MELISSA NELSON
Associated Press Writer
PENSACOLA, Fla. -- Emergency officials on the western Florida Panhandle went into battle mode late Wednesday as heavier oil washed on shore at the Alabama state line and threatened inland bayous and estuaries in both states. Escambia County officials said the substance was ankle deep Wednesday on the beach outside the landmark FloraBama Lounge, on the Florida side of the line on Perdido Key. Signs were posted Wednesday on Perdido Key warning people to stay out of the water, but the beaches there remain open.
County Commissioner Gene Valentino said booms that the county had placed along its inland estuaries and waterways were being locked into place late Tuesday and would be monitored overnight. "Through the weekend, significant portions of the plume will be pushed into the Panhandle," County Commissioner Gene Valentino said.
Coin-sized tar balls began washing up along the shoreline from Perdido Key through Pensacola Beach and the Gulf Islands Seashore National Park seven days ago. On Wednesday, thicker oil was first reported near the state line and health warnings were posted on six miles of Florida beaches. Valentino said the county would do everything to protect the beaches and inland waters and deal with reimbursement from the federal government and BP later. "We will be deploying all of our resources," he said.
Earlier Wednesday, Greg Hall had watched dolphins off Pensacola Beach as he took his daily walk. The lifelong resident of the area is monitoring the beach for county officials. He was among the spotters who reported the first tar balls Friday. "Those guys are too close to shore, I haven't seen them that close in before. The water is pretty shallow there," he said as watched the dolphins. Moments later, the dolphins turned toward deeper water. Hall was relieved. "I snorkel a lot and I know there is so much more to this," he said. "How does BP compensate for an entire ecosystem?"
Florida officials were angry at officials in Alabama for giving late word on the heavy oil breaching booms designed to protect inland waterways on that side of the state line. John Temperilli, a contractor with the Washington-based James Lee Witt Group for crisis management, said the Coast Guard failed to relay the message. "No one bothered to notify us when they first intercepted the oil coming through the pass. Perdido Pass is our back door," he said.
By MELISSA NELSON
Associated Press Writer
PENSACOLA, Fla. -- Emergency officials on the western Florida Panhandle went into battle mode late Wednesday as heavier oil washed on shore at the Alabama state line and threatened inland bayous and estuaries in both states. Escambia County officials said the substance was ankle deep Wednesday on the beach outside the landmark FloraBama Lounge, on the Florida side of the line on Perdido Key. Signs were posted Wednesday on Perdido Key warning people to stay out of the water, but the beaches there remain open.
County Commissioner Gene Valentino said booms that the county had placed along its inland estuaries and waterways were being locked into place late Tuesday and would be monitored overnight. "Through the weekend, significant portions of the plume will be pushed into the Panhandle," County Commissioner Gene Valentino said.
Coin-sized tar balls began washing up along the shoreline from Perdido Key through Pensacola Beach and the Gulf Islands Seashore National Park seven days ago. On Wednesday, thicker oil was first reported near the state line and health warnings were posted on six miles of Florida beaches. Valentino said the county would do everything to protect the beaches and inland waters and deal with reimbursement from the federal government and BP later. "We will be deploying all of our resources," he said.
Earlier Wednesday, Greg Hall had watched dolphins off Pensacola Beach as he took his daily walk. The lifelong resident of the area is monitoring the beach for county officials. He was among the spotters who reported the first tar balls Friday. "Those guys are too close to shore, I haven't seen them that close in before. The water is pretty shallow there," he said as watched the dolphins. Moments later, the dolphins turned toward deeper water. Hall was relieved. "I snorkel a lot and I know there is so much more to this," he said. "How does BP compensate for an entire ecosystem?"
Florida officials were angry at officials in Alabama for giving late word on the heavy oil breaching booms designed to protect inland waterways on that side of the state line. John Temperilli, a contractor with the Washington-based James Lee Witt Group for crisis management, said the Coast Guard failed to relay the message. "No one bothered to notify us when they first intercepted the oil coming through the pass. Perdido Pass is our back door," he said.
Monday, June 7, 2010
Spill Shows a Profit
After reading article by Curtis C. Ebbesmeyer by last week in Journal, I took out and have started reading his book, Flotsametrics and the floating world
Saturday, June 5, 2010
Under seige
Within five minutes I took calls for these two books; if they are to be believed, we are in deep trouble. Deep doo-doo.
American conspiracies : lies, lies, and more dirty lies that the government tells us / by Jesse Ventura, with Dick Russell.
Jesse Ventura takes a systematic look at the gap between what the American government knows and what it reveals to the American people. According to this former Navy SEAL, former pro wrestler, and former Minnesota governor, the media is complicit in these acts of deception. For too long, the mainstream press has refused to consider alternate possibilities and to ask the tough questions. In Ventura's eyes, the murder of Abraham Lincoln and the assassinations of the Kennedys and Martin Luther King, all need to be re-examined. Was the CIA involved in Watergate? Did the Republican Party set out to steal two elections on behalf of George W. Bush? Has all the evidence been presented about the 9/11 attacks? And finally, is the collapse of today's financial order and the bailout plan by the Federal Reserve the widest-reaching conspiracy ever perpetrated?
All the way back to Lincoln? Yop.
The first not-alone-nut: John Wilkes Booth -- The big-money plot to overthrow FDR -- The Kennedy assassination: biggest cover-up of my lifetime -- The assassination of Malcolm X -- The murder of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr -- The assassination of Robert Kennedy -- Watergate revisited: the CIA's war against Nixon -- The Jonestown Massacre -- "October surprise": the first stolen election -- Your government dealing drugs -- The stolen elections of 2000, 2004 (and almost 2008) -- What really happened on September 11? -- The Wall Street conspiracy -- The secret plans to end American democracy.
Booth was part of a conspiracy. What does that have to do with 9/11? One this for sure, the Guv'ner will make money from this book.
The grand Jihad : how Islam and the Left sabotage America.
A second patron just asked for it (3.15pm); I was writing this blog entry as he did.
Claims that the United States is under attack from Islamist forces that have united with the American Left, under the leadership of Barack Obama, to overthrow the Constitution and end democracy.
The writer is a former prosecutor, and he seems to have lost his marbles.
Jesse Ventura takes a systematic look at the gap between what the American government knows and what it reveals to the American people. According to this former Navy SEAL, former pro wrestler, and former Minnesota governor, the media is complicit in these acts of deception. For too long, the mainstream press has refused to consider alternate possibilities and to ask the tough questions. In Ventura's eyes, the murder of Abraham Lincoln and the assassinations of the Kennedys and Martin Luther King, all need to be re-examined. Was the CIA involved in Watergate? Did the Republican Party set out to steal two elections on behalf of George W. Bush? Has all the evidence been presented about the 9/11 attacks? And finally, is the collapse of today's financial order and the bailout plan by the Federal Reserve the widest-reaching conspiracy ever perpetrated?
All the way back to Lincoln? Yop.
The first not-alone-nut: John Wilkes Booth -- The big-money plot to overthrow FDR -- The Kennedy assassination: biggest cover-up of my lifetime -- The assassination of Malcolm X -- The murder of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr -- The assassination of Robert Kennedy -- Watergate revisited: the CIA's war against Nixon -- The Jonestown Massacre -- "October surprise": the first stolen election -- Your government dealing drugs -- The stolen elections of 2000, 2004 (and almost 2008) -- What really happened on September 11? -- The Wall Street conspiracy -- The secret plans to end American democracy.
Booth was part of a conspiracy. What does that have to do with 9/11? One this for sure, the Guv'ner will make money from this book.
A second patron just asked for it (3.15pm); I was writing this blog entry as he did.
Claims that the United States is under attack from Islamist forces that have united with the American Left, under the leadership of Barack Obama, to overthrow the Constitution and end democracy.
The writer is a former prosecutor, and he seems to have lost his marbles.
Not a spill, a gusher
In the early 1990s, thousands of desperate Cuban balseros cast themselves adrift on rafts, tires and any other makeshift craft that could float. They shoved off even from the island's far shore, entrusting their lives to the powerful Loop Current that pushes north from the Yucatán, rounds Cuba, rushes through the Florida Straits, and spills into the Atlantic, seeding the Gulf Stream. Many drowned or perished from thirst. But others survived to wash up on Florida's east coast.
Now the Loop Current is in the news once again. Oil from the Deepwater Horizon gusher—please don't call it a "spill"—has begun trickling into the current, prompting anxious speculation as to how much will be swept up and where it will be borne. Only a small quantity of surface oil has been seen entering the current, but much more swirls below. Given the complex natures of both petroleum and marine waters, these underwater plumes will be extremely difficult to measure and track.
Language used belies prejudices and lack of information. To call what is happening in the Gulf of Mexico a spill is erroneous. A spill is to cause or allow (a liquid substance) to run or flow from a container.The Exxon Valdez disaster was a spill, for petroleum spilled out of the ship. This current disaster is not a spill.
Oil is far from a homogenous substance, even before it gets emulsified by waves, currents and sun. It's a complex mixture of liquids, gases and waxy solids that vary widely in weight and solubility. Ocean waters are likewise not uniform; they are made up of distinct water slabs differentiated by temperature and salinity, and propelled by wind and currents. When I first began using monitoring equipment—newly available in 1967—I tracked these water bodies-within-bodies and dubbed them "snarks" because of their elusiveness.
Expertise has not been brought to bear; BP has been allowed to run the show. More than a month ago an academic ascertained that much more than 5,000 barrells a day were gushing out into the Gulf; no one made much of that. Even the media let it go, too busy with finding the sensational.
Some eddies veer west, bouncing along the continental shelf at about three miles per day toward Texas. By late last month, according to mapping by Mitchell A. Roffer's highly regarded ocean forecasting service, this process had already begun: Tentacles of oil were extending west past the Loop Current. One eddy appears to have broken off and begun crawling to Texas. It may entrain escaping oil deep underwater for several months, relieving the Florida, Alabama and Mississippi coasts and the upper water column where most marine life lies.
Now the Loop Current is in the news once again. Oil from the Deepwater Horizon gusher—please don't call it a "spill"—has begun trickling into the current, prompting anxious speculation as to how much will be swept up and where it will be borne. Only a small quantity of surface oil has been seen entering the current, but much more swirls below. Given the complex natures of both petroleum and marine waters, these underwater plumes will be extremely difficult to measure and track.
Language used belies prejudices and lack of information. To call what is happening in the Gulf of Mexico a spill is erroneous. A spill is to cause or allow (a liquid substance) to run or flow from a container.The Exxon Valdez disaster was a spill, for petroleum spilled out of the ship. This current disaster is not a spill.
Oil is far from a homogenous substance, even before it gets emulsified by waves, currents and sun. It's a complex mixture of liquids, gases and waxy solids that vary widely in weight and solubility. Ocean waters are likewise not uniform; they are made up of distinct water slabs differentiated by temperature and salinity, and propelled by wind and currents. When I first began using monitoring equipment—newly available in 1967—I tracked these water bodies-within-bodies and dubbed them "snarks" because of their elusiveness.
Expertise has not been brought to bear; BP has been allowed to run the show. More than a month ago an academic ascertained that much more than 5,000 barrells a day were gushing out into the Gulf; no one made much of that. Even the media let it go, too busy with finding the sensational.
Some eddies veer west, bouncing along the continental shelf at about three miles per day toward Texas. By late last month, according to mapping by Mitchell A. Roffer's highly regarded ocean forecasting service, this process had already begun: Tentacles of oil were extending west past the Loop Current. One eddy appears to have broken off and begun crawling to Texas. It may entrain escaping oil deep underwater for several months, relieving the Florida, Alabama and Mississippi coasts and the upper water column where most marine life lies.
“I simply misremembered it wrong”
It happened again. Another candidate for office is struggling to reconcile misleading statements he made about his record in the military. This time, it is Representative Mark Kirk, a Republican from Illinois running for the Senate, apologizing for misleading statements he made about, among other things, serving in the first Iraq war and in Kosovo.
“I simply misremembered it wrong,” he said, a remark that was blared across the front page of The Chicago Sun-Times on Friday. A few weeks ago, it was Richard Blumenthal, the Connecticut attorney general and Democratic candidate for Senate, trying to explain misstatements suggesting he had served in Vietnam.
“I simply misremembered it wrong,” he said, a remark that was blared across the front page of The Chicago Sun-Times on Friday. A few weeks ago, it was Richard Blumenthal, the Connecticut attorney general and Democratic candidate for Senate, trying to explain misstatements suggesting he had served in Vietnam.
Friday, June 4, 2010
Big guv'ment? Sure. Not then, but now.
In Criticizing Cleanup, Jindal Finds His Voice is the headline. And this is the picture the Journal runs with the story.
Getty Images - The governor's aggressive stance has helped ratchet up pressure on the federal government.
This is the same government Governor Jindal and other Republicans wanted out of their way so the states and the entrepreneurs they championed could get things done. Yet once BP's gusher sent tens of thousands of barrels of petroleum toward the Louisiana shoreline, the Governor started calling for the same government to come to his state's aid.
Now, Mr. Jindal, an ardent conservative who attacked big government in his rebuttal speech, is demanding greater federal aid.
That was then, this is now, and now is different. Now theorizing has given way to pragmatism.
Getty Images - The governor's aggressive stance has helped ratchet up pressure on the federal government.
This is the same government Governor Jindal and other Republicans wanted out of their way so the states and the entrepreneurs they championed could get things done. Yet once BP's gusher sent tens of thousands of barrels of petroleum toward the Louisiana shoreline, the Governor started calling for the same government to come to his state's aid.
Now, Mr. Jindal, an ardent conservative who attacked big government in his rebuttal speech, is demanding greater federal aid.
That was then, this is now, and now is different. Now theorizing has given way to pragmatism.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
