Fox Cuts Away in the Middle of Obama Town Hall Live Feed to Air Critic’s Views – For the second time in less than a week, Fox News on Tuesday cut away from a live broadcast of a presidential address to air comments from a critic of President Obama.
Speaking at a town hall meeting in New Hampshire, the president laid out his argument that health care reform would actually save the government money in the long term by reducing health care costs.
“Well there you have it, a rather long answer to a question about health care from a recovering cancer patient,” said Fox News host Megyn Kelley, before introducing Dr. Marc Siegel, a Fox News contributor and critic of the president’s health care reform agenda.
During the wide-ranging debate that even some conservative commentators admitted the president won, Fox cut away mid-broadcast and went to a news-less interview with Rep. Peter King (R-NY).
Rush Limbaugh Says He Loves the Women’s Movement ‘Especially When Walking Behind It’ – Rush Limbaugh, the man credited with popularizing the term “feminazi,” says he’s a fan of the women’s movement — “especially when walking behind it.” Limbaugh made the comment to Fox News’ Gretchen Carlson on Wednesday, when Carlson asked him about his role as a judge in the 2010 Miss America contest, and noted that some critics say Limbaugh hasn’t “been a supporter of women in the past.”
Republican Strategist Gives Marching Orders on How to Kill Financial Regulatory Reform – Republican pollster and strategist Frank Luntz turned many heads this summer when he penned a report detailing how the GOP can sink health care reform. Now, a new document indicates he’s at it again, this time plotting to kill financial regulatory reform.
Like his health care paper, Luntz’ new 17-page memo dated January 2010, titled “The Language of Financial Reform,” — obtained by the Huffington Post’s Sam Stein — focuses on framing the issue in a way that generates distrust among constituents toward President Obama and Democrats’ reform proposals.
(Now you know what’s coming. Remember – They will say anything to gain control, no matter how much it may harm the principles of our nation – JLV).
Bank of America Approved Over $4 Billion in Pay for Investment Bankers and Traders – Bank of America Corp. approved more than $4 billion in 2009 pay for its investment bankers and traders, meaning those workers will collect an average of $300,000 to $500,000 for the year, according to a person familiar with the matter. The payout represents about 19% of the roughly $23 billion in revenue generated by investment-banking and capital-markets activities, this person said. The 2009 average will be close to what the bank paid during its peak compensation year of 2006, this person said. Unlike some rivals, Bank of America doesn’t disclose bonuses for its investment bankers, who typically are among the highest-paid employees at the nation’s largest bank in assets.
$100 Million Bonus Plan at A.I.G. – The American International Group has agreed to cut employee bonuses by $20 million and will distribute about $100 million on Wednesday, according to people with knowledge of the negotiations. But the reductions may not be enough to appease the company’s critics, who do not accept the company’s argument that it has to honor contracts established before its government bailout. A.I.G. first promised the retention bonuses to keep people working at its financial products unit, which traded in the derivatives that imploded in September 2008, leading to the biggest government bailout in history.
The Problems with the Bush Vision for Space – Anyone shocked by the cancellation of the Bush Vision for Space (Constellation Program) did not pay attention to the warnings given in 2006 and 2007:
From a Statement by Joan Johnson-Freese, Chair, National Security Decision Making Department, Naval War College, Newport, RI, Testimony before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, Space, Aeronautics, and Related Sciences Subcommittee, May 7, 2007:
Politically, the 2004 Bush space vision was always a vision bordering on fantasy. Though perhaps well intended, it was effectively doomed from the start. The vision as announced was a very broad-brush outline of intent, describing a return manned mission to the moon, as well as manned missions to Mars and beyond. But the devil is in the details, and those details must be in some way attached to reality. Three major circumstantial realities predetermined the outcome of that new vision. First were the budget issues. The domestic budget has been, and will likely remain, an effective hostage to the war in Iraq, homeland security concerns, and clean-up for Hurricane Katrina – and like events in the future…
Then, and now, I believe the vision did not consider even the basic tenants of successful strategy execution; matching goals, strategy to achieve the goals, and the resources required to carry out the strategy. …
The shortsighted and unrealistic timetables included in the Vision, including acceptance of a gap in U.S. spaceflight capabilities between the retirement of the Shuttle and the new vehicle becoming operational, created the Rubic’s Cube that we are dealing with today.
From a 2007 interview with Carl Wunsch, a professor of physical oceanography at MIT: – In February of 2006, NASA quietly dropped from its mission statement the phrase “to understand and protect our home planet.” In a report from the National Research Council released in January of 2007, a committee appointed by the Council’s Space Studies Board warns that a number of measurements providing critical information about Earth processes will cease to be made over the next few years. By 2010, it says, the number of Earth-observing missions will drop dramatically, and the number of operating sensors and instruments on NASA spacecraft will decrease by 40 percent. “The United States’ extraordinary foundation of global observations is at great risk,” the report’s authors write. …But the change seems to be more than symbolic. These days (2007), it isn’t clear why a good engineer or scientist interested in the Earth would want to work for NASA.
(When you hear conservatives howl about the renewed emphasis on Earth science, remember that science is the friend of real progress and the enemy of the status-quo (conservatism). Conservatives may say we need more scientific knowledge before taking action on climate change or pollution, but they will oppose conducting that very science. – JLV)
‘Climate Gate’ Charges Were False; Scientists Did Not Suppress or Falsify Data – Michael Mann, of Penn State University, featured regularly in the more than 1000 emails that were hacked from the University of East Anglia in the UK last November. His emails and comments have since then featured in countless blogs and news articles. Some have claimed the emails reveal that mainstream climate scientists have massaged data in order to demonstrate that climate change is caused by human activities. The scientists in the emails, including Mann, have also been accused of seeking to prevent the publication of skeptical research in academic journals.
Penn State University opened an enquiry into Mann’s behavior in November, shortly after the emails were leaked into the public domain. After sifting through 1075 emails and focusing on 47 that were deemed relevant to public accusations of misconduct leveraged against Mann, they have, by and large cleared his name.
The internal enquiry has found that Mann did not “participate in, directly or indirectly, any actions with an intent to suppress or to falsify data”. Nor did he “delete, conceal or otherwise destroy emails, information and/or data” relating to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s 2007 report.For the full report, click here (pdf).