This weekend served up a heaping helping of my entire personal stew of economic nightmares. So here it is, your global economic news for the weekend:
LA Times:Commodities tumble on fears that China will try to slow its economy. "The fast-running bull market in commodities hit a wall Friday as prices plunged on fears that China will try to slow its economy to tame inflation. Rumors of another Chinese interest-rate hike started a chain reaction of selling across financial markets worldwide...." Financial Times:Concern grows as Dublin spurns help. "Irish officials insisted on Sunday that they did not need fiscal assistance from the European Union, even as pressure mounted on Dublin to accept aid and present plans to restructure its banking system....Behind the scenes, the ECB has put pressure on Dublin to take steps within days that would provide an urgently needed boost to confidence in Ireland’s public finances and struggling banking system." Wall Street Journal:Credit Fears, QE2, Elections Prompt Muni Selloff. "Investors sold off long-term municipal bonds in the past week, sending a shiver through a normally stable market....In recent months, with reports of financial woes in Harrisburg, Pa., and of some municipal borrowers walking away from debts, some investors have begun to question whether government borrowers are as reliable as investors' presumed about repaying loans." Financial Times:Nervousness as bonds braced for Greek tests. "Eurostat, the Commission’s audit unit, is set to revise upwards Greece’s 2009 budget deficit figure to about 15.3 per cent of gross domestic product from the current estimate of 13.6 per cent of GDP....This could spark a sell-off in the Greek and other peripheral bond markets as investors are increasingly nervous about the ability of the weaker eurozone economies to turn round their economies and restore growth.....David Owen, chief European financial economist at Jefferies, the investment bank, said: [] 'If investors start to sell bonds of Spain and Italy in the way they have been selling Greek, Irish and Portuguese bonds, then the crisis will take on a whole new dimension.'"
All of these are trouble spots for the world economy. Throw in Eastern Europe and hot money flows into developing countries and you've got an even half dozen shocks that could send us into another tailspin. Hopefully none of them will happen. But all it would take is for one or two of them to unfold badly. Keep your fingers crossed.
I'm thrilled that my phone contract is up in February. I've been coveting the iPhone, which will be a welcome change after two years of toting around a clunky, barely web-enabled dinosaur. But when I upgrade to a smart phone, what will become of my dopey old dumb phone?
This very question is the subject of the The Story of Electronics[1], the latest installment of sustainability expert Annie Leonard[2]'s engaging Story of Stuff Project[3]. The eight-minute film explains that today's consumer electronics are "designed for the dump": After about two years, most gadgets are either obsolete or broken, and they're usually cheaper to replace than to repair. Technology is advancing at so fast a pace that every two years, the number of transistors placed on a circuitboard doubles, increasing computer memory and processing speed. (This continuing trend was first noticed in the late 1960s and is called Moore's Law[4].) Until that rate slows, or manufacturers begin to make cell phones with standardized replaceable parts, you'll still have to get a new phone every two years just to keep pace with technology.
More than 130 million cell phones in the US alone are retired every year, the USGS estimates[5]. Not great news for the planet, considering phones contain substances harmful to humans and the environment, like cadmium, lead, and beryllium (all carcinogins), as well as arsenic. So what's the best way to make sure your old phone's not leaking chemicals into the ground?
Most major wireless carriers participate in "take-back" programs, which allow you to send your dead phone back where it came from for free—or sometimes even a cash rebate. Once a cell phone arrives at a take-back facility, if it's still workable and a relatively recent model, it's likely going to get refurbished and resold, either on the consumer market or to a charity. (Verizon's HopeLine[6] program, for example, donates phones loaded with 3,000 free minutes to domestic violence victims.) Other refurbished phones are sold in Latin America and Africa, to people who don't mind using a secondhand, behind-the-times phone.
If your phone is really kaput, it will either get broken down and sold for parts or passed on to a smelter, where the entire phone is melted down and the liquids are separated to be reconstituted. (This process is sometimes called "above-ground mining.") Smelters harvest the little bits of valuable metals (gold, copper, iron, silver, zinc, nickel, platinum, tin) used in the circuitboards and soldering. In one metric ton of old cell phones without batteries (about 8,800 individual phones), there's an estimated[7] 308 pounds of copper, 7 pounds of silver, and half a pound of gold. The smelting process, also used to melt down recycled aluminum cans, does generate some greenhouse gases and slag (the discarded silica and metal oxides used to isolate liquid metal). But overall, the environmental and monetary costs of smelting down existing metals are lower than mining, transporting, and refining new ore. For example, one ton of gold ore only contains[8] .18 ounces of pure gold, while there's about 40 times that amount in one ton of cell-phone circuitry.
Breaking cell phones up and separating the parts is the process that most people are leery of. Annie Leonard points out that workers in China and Africa often dismantle electronics' harmful insides without proper personal or environmental protection: For example, in the town of Guiyu, China[9], 1.5 million pounds of e-waste are dismantled every year—often by workers without gloves—and leftover junk is disposed of in open fires.
Unfortunately, there's no easy way to find out if your cell-phone carrier exports items abroad to be broken, because many of them work with third-party companies—three of which I tried unsuccessfully to contact by, um, telephone. (I did reach a T-Mobile rep who said his company works with a Dallas-based recycler called Touchstone[10] that separates phone components in the US. He also said 70 percent of the phones T-Mobile receives go on to be refurbished.) Newer phones like smart phones may be heavier than old candy-bar-style phones, but they contain a lot more electronics in a smaller package.
The good news: Cell phones are getting more environmentally friendly[11]. Today's phones are made with considerably less cadmium and lead than older models, and they're also getting lighter. The average phone weighs around 4 ounces, minus the battery—about half of what it weighed in 2000. Recycling rates are also improving: In 2003, fewer than 1 percent of owners recycled their phones, but now it's closer to 20 percent. Rep. Gene Green (D-Texas) recently introduced the Responsible Electronics Recycling Act[12] (H.R. 6252). It would outlaw sending e-waste to developing nations, but it's still hanging out with the House Committee of Energy and Commerce.
You can help minimize waste by opting for a refurbished phone (available through all major carriers) instead of a new one. Once you're done with your phone, there are a number of recycling systems you can participate in. To reduce the carbon footprint from ground transportation and reclamation, I prefer programs that handle large volumes of cell phones. Best Buy has kiosks[13] in nearly every store where you can drop off your used electronics. The program doesn't export[14] any non-working phones or components to developing countries, and it requires third-party partners to submit documentation of environmental compliance. If you're looking to make a few bucks off your phone, check out GreenPhone.com[15], which gives you cash for your old unit; offers you a free, printable shipping label; and will plant a tree every time you recycle a phone. The folks over at Earth911[16] recommend this website[17] to see if your local recycling outfit is certified as an "e-Steward"—which requires[18] strict control over exporting overseas, "full accountability for the entire downstream recycling chain," and disclosure on any airborne toxins released during the smelting process. If none of these float your boat, you can see an extensive list of drop-off and mail-in recycling programs at the EPA's eCycle site[19].
While top Democratic donors meet in Washington this week to start planning their 2012 election strategy, the Republican Party's presidential hopefuls have already begun filling their war chests with donations galore. As the New York Times reported Friday, GOP frontrunners including Mitt Romney and Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty are using various political action committees registered at the state level to drum up cash for their early presidential nomination bids. These pre-campaign PACs are formed at the state level where donation limits are often more lax than at the federal level.
Pawlenty, for instance, pulled in $60,000 from GOP donor Bob Perry in September, the Times reported; had the donation gone to a federal PAC, campaign finance laws would've limited Perry's gift to $5,000. Romney has set up state-level branches of his federal PAC in places like Michigan, Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina—all of which are bellwether states in presidential elections. Here's the Times' Michael Luo laying out the 2012 spending wars on the GOP side so far:
Mr. Romney has been by far the most assertive, according to interviews with a half-dozen top Republican fund-raisers, already pushing for commitments from major donors should he formally decide to run.
Over the summer, Mr. Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, invited top bundlers of campaign checks from key states to his vacation home in New Hampshire on several occasions to help firm up their commitments. Mr. Romney has already lined up an array of prominent supporters, including a billionaire, David Koch, who has donated heavily to conservative causes over the years, and Robert Wood Johnson IV, the billionaire owner of the New York Jets and one of the party’s most coveted fund-raisers.
Mr. Pawlenty has also been putting together a financial apparatus. On Monday and Tuesday evening, for instance, he met with top fund-raisers who flew to Minneapolis to listen to a briefing on his record as governor. Those were the latest in a series of such meetings that began in September, according to William Strong, a vice chairman at Morgan Stanley who has spearheaded fund-raising for Mr. Pawlenty’s political action committee, Freedom First.
Over the last year, Mr. Pawlenty has been methodically courting fund-raisers in get-acquainted, “friend-raiser” sessions and is now moving to deepen those relationships with a potential eye on 2012, Mr. Strong said.
Potential GOP candidates lagging behind include Sarah Palin, who's raised considerable funds through Sarah PAC, a federally-registered fund, but not much from larger donors. Mike Huckabee as well trails Romney and Pawlenty by a substantial margin in the money race.
So what's to make of this early wooing of fundraisers by top GOPers? Are people committing to individual candidates this early in the presidential campaign (which to say, before it's really begun)? In answering these questions, it's worth bearing in mind what one Washington lobbyist and Republican fundraiser told the Times: "People are shopping. People aren't buying yet."
OK, so now it’s official: conservatives aren’t just against any effort to boost demand with fiscal policy, they don’t want the Fed doing anything positive, either.
This open letter to Ben Bernanke is a remarkable document, not least for who signed it. Who knew that William Kristol was an expert on monetary policy? And who thought they’d gain credibility by adding someone who declared in 2005 that we needn’t worry about low savings, because Americans were doing fine thanks to rising home prices, then declared in 2007 that there was no reason to worry about the credit market?
But the real question is, what is their model of the mess we’re in? What do they think is happening?
I know what my model is: I believe we’re suffering from a severe deleveraging shock, in which the immediate problem is to get someone to make up for the loss of debtors’ spending. (The Greek-letter and funny diagram version is coming soon.) According to that view, the Fed needs to do all it can to reduce the real rates unconstrained borrowers face, and could badly use help from fiscal policy, too. Quantitative easing is literally the least the Fed can do.
Obviously, these guys disagree. But what is their model? How do they think we got into a crisis that has depressed employment all around the advanced world?
I don’t think they have an answer; I think all they have are wild stories about how Obama’s Sharia-law Marxism has unnerved business, or something, with the effects mysteriously spreading to Spain and Latvia.
And in the name of whatever it is they believe, they’re doing their best to ensure that the slump goes on.
Embattled Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) struck a defeated tone Monday, hours after he walked out of his own ethics trial.
Rangel reiterated his claim that his due process rights had been violated over his lack of legal representation at the trial that began Monday morning.
"I hope that my colleagues in Congress, friends, constituents and anyone paying attention will consider my statement and how the committee has been unfair to me," he said in a prepared statement. "They can do what they will with me because they have the power and I have no real chance of fighting back."
The longtime lawmaker made waves when he threatened to leave the hearing after tussling with ethics committee chairwoman Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) over the absence of his legal representation.
Rangel's attorneys parted ways with him in October, and the congressman said he could not afford to hire new representation after spending almost $2 million in legal fees over the past two years.
The adjudicatory subcommittee is meeting behind closed doors Monday afternoon to determine if Rangel committed the 13 counts of House ethics violations that are alleged against him.
If he is found guilty of the violations, he could face a full House vote on his expulsion or a lesser punishment. Rangel said he will continue to serve despite the proceedings.
"Now, I am going forward — not backwards — to do the job I was elected to do. That is to serve my district and to serve my country, as I have tried to do for the past 50 years," he said. "In the end, I hope that I would be judged by my entire record that determines that I have been a credit to the House and to my family, friend and supporters who have entrusted me with this honorable duty."
D.C. attorney's presence at Rangel trial raises questions
By Susan Crabtree - 11/15/10 04:30 PM ET
Watchdogs are questioning the presence of power lawyer Abbe Lowell at Rep. Charles Rangel’s (D-N.Y.) ethics hearing, even as Rangel publicly bemoaned the absence of an attorney to represent him.
In contentious remarks before an adjudicatory ethics panel on Monday, Rangel asked the House ethics committee to delay his long-anticipated public ethics trial because he and his legal team had parted ways in October and he had been unable to secure an attorney.
One of the reasons Rangel said he did not have an attorney was that he had run out of funds to pay for legal services after spending nearly $2 million on lawyers over the past two years. House rules bar lawyers from providing pro bono work to members of Congress. Yet, Lowell accompanied Rangel to the hearing and departed with him, the conservative news site Human Events reported.
Lowell, a partner at McDermott Will & Emery, often represents political figures who find themselves in hot water, such as lobbyist Jack Abramoff and former Rep. Gary Condit (D-Calif.). He also worked for House Democrats during the impeachment process for President Clinton.
Rangel's office said Lowell was there as a friend.
"Abbe Lowell was at the hearing as a long-time friend and supporter of Congressman Rangel's. If the Committee had not violated Congressman Rangel's Constitutional right to counsel and effective representation, Mr. Lowell might have been selected to represent the Congressman. Mr. Lowell recognizes that under the dictates of the Committee, whoever represented Congressman Rangel would have too little time to adequately represent the Congressman," said Rangel spokesman Emile Milne.
Watchdogs want to know exactly what conversations have taken place between Lowell and Rangel and whether Lowell should have charged for them.
“Is Rangel going to have an ethics problem over how he has conducted his ethics trial?” asked Melanie Sloan, the executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. “Abbe Lowell is a very expensive lawyer and his presence there required at least one prior conversation.”
“It’s not like [Rangel] can’t hire Mr. Lowell if he wants to … but it’s downright unethical if you have Abbe Lowell there and you’re saying you don’t have an attorney. That’s like telling us black is white. He’s not sitting next to Mr. Rangel because they’re good buddies.”
Democracy 21’s Fred Wertheimer also questioned Lowell’s presence there and whether his conversations with Rangel constitute any kind of legal representation.
Rangel, however, insisted that Lowell was not his attorney.
“Trial lawyers want to give me counsel without a fee,” Rangel told reporters outside the hearing room, after he walked out of the trial as a protest to the committee’s refusal to postpone it.
Rangel said he knew he couldn’t accept any free legal advice because the ethics committee would consider it an illegal gift.
“They said that any free legal advice given to me by legal counsel … would be considered a violation of the gift ban,” Rangel said as Lowell stood next to him.
“I’m not his lawyer,” Lowell told Human Events. “I’m watching the same as you.”
Lowell sat in a reserved seat in the front row and shielded Rangel from reporters as the two walked down the hallway. —This post was updated at 5:17 p.m.
Rangel investigator disputes charges against veteran lawmaker
By Jordan Fabian - 11/15/10 04:45 PM ET
A member of the committee that investigated Rep. Charles Rangel's alleged House ethics violations disagrees with the scope of the charges brought against the 20-term congressman.
Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Va.), a member of the Congressional Black Caucus who also served on the investigatory subcommittee that authored the 13 violations of House rules Rangel (D-N.Y.) allegedly committed, said that the Harlem lawmaker did not act in a corrupt or self-serving manner and should be served only with a letter of reproval from the House.
"I do not condone improper conduct by any member of the House but the circumstances of this case are not consistent with the precedents of the Standards Committee where a member has received or the committee has recommended a reprimand," Scott wrote in a letter dated Aug. 12.
The House ethics committee on Monday made public a 65-page dissent authored by Scott on the same day Rangel was brought to public trial by an adjudicatory subcommittee. The panel is now deliberating the charges against him.
Rangel made waves by walking out of the trial after he accused the committee of violating his due process rights by depriving him of legal representation. Committee chairwoman Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) said that Rangel failed to take advantage of chances to obtain counsel.
The congressman has maintained that he did not violate House rules, but only made sloppy mistakes.
Scott disputed the committee's recommendation that Rangel be formally reprimanded by the House, saying that a lesser penalty (a letter of reproval) would better fit his violations and bring an end to the saga more quickly.
Scott, who formerly served on the ethics committee, says that Rangel did not violate House rules by using a rent-controlled apartment as a campaign office. He also claimed that Rangel is only guilty of sloppiness for soliciting donations for the proposed "Rangel Center" at the City College of New York and mistakes on his tax returns and financial disclosures, which include back taxes on a Dominican villa.
The Virginia lawmaker said that those actions did violate House rules, but that Rangel did not intend to personally benefit from them.
"There is no evidence that Representative Rangel attempted to conceal a conflict of interest or engaged in any of the corrupt conduct that has traditionally warranted a reprimand, Scott wrote. "Representative Rangel's conduct is the result of good faith mistakes and misunderstandings of legal standards and the scope of his official duties. His violations of House rules were caused by his sloppy and careless record-keeping, but were not corrupt."
Scott's language echoes the chief counsel of the ethics committee who tried the case against Rangel, Blake Chisam, who said at the trial that he does not believe Rangel engaged in corruption. But Chisam still believes Rangel violated all the House rules he is accused of breaking.
"I see no evidence of corruption. It's hard to answer the question of personal financial benefit. The short answer is probably no," Chisam said. "I believe that the Congressman quite frankly was overzealous in many of the things that he did and at least sloppy in his personal finances."
As Senate Republicans mull an earmark ban, they have organizations to remind them such spending is unpopular with voters, according to the senator leading the push for a moratorium: Tea Party groups who want spending shrunk.
Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) said on Sunday that although he has earmarked federal dollars for his home state in the past, the success of the Tea Party movement is a reminder that politicians who fail to help rein in spending can get tossed out of office.
Noting that he went "cold turkey" on earmarks four years ago, DeMint called himself "a recovering earmarker."
"Thankfully, there's support groups all over the country, and they're called Tea Parties," he said in an interview on Fox News Sunday.
DeMint is leading a group of Senate Republicans who want their colleagues to pass a two-year earmark ban, mirroring a similar moratorium in the House.
DeMint said he disagrees with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.), who has said this ban will not have a significant impact on spending.
"Mitch is a good friend," DeMint said. "On this issue, we disagree. You would see spending go down dramatically if you took out all the earmarks."
Demint said he expects the ban to pass despite opposition from some Republicans.
"I think we'll win the vote," he said. "Just about every new freshman" supports the ban, he said.
One reason an earmark ban would have a larger savings impact than the dollar value of each earmark, Demint said, is that members are more likely to vote for a fat appropriations bill if it is laden with takeaways for their state.
Washington contains "just over 500 congressman and senators who think its their job to bring home the bacon and that takes your eye off the ball," he said.
Comments
Quit spending and reduce taxes; that's how an economy grows.BYhonest abeon 11/14/2010 at 10:42
Obama's economic view is Rejected on World stage
Free trade deal with South Korea eludes progressive President
FACT: SEOUL — President Obama's hopes of emerging from his Asia trip with the twin victories of a free trade agreement with South Korea and a unified approach to spurring global economic growth ran into resistance on all fronts yesterday, putting Obama at odds with his key allies and largest trading partners. http://www.boston.com/news/world/asia/articles/2010/11/12/us_south_korea_trade_accord_not_a_done_deal/
In fact, After five largely harmonious meetings in the past two years to deal with the most severe downturn since the Depression, Major disputes broke out between Washington and China, Britain, Germany, and Brazil.
Each Rejected core elements of Obama’s progressive strategy of stimulating growth before focusing on deficit reduction.
Obama's Trade Strategy Runs Into Stiff Resistance
FACT: In the wake of the Tsunami battering his party took in the Historic/Epic 2010 midterm elections at home last week, Mr. Obama has cast his Asia trip as mission to revive the American economy and bolster job growth.
But, in fact, BHO's progressive policies, contentious at home, have proved contentious overseas as well, and he faced stiff challenges during the Group of 20 gathering in Seoul, South Korea, from the leaders of China, Britain, Germany and Brazil over currency policy and his contention that the United States could pump money into its economy to stimulate growth before concentrating on reducing the deficit.
FACT: Vote demsout always sources Facts; web-links, Poll, News source, YouTube, Google, etc. etc.
BYVOTE DEMSOUT 2010/12on 11/14/2010 at 10:50
Banning earmarks is a step toward a fiscally responsible attitude, the kind of attitude that needs to be strong when it comes to entitlements.
BYMICKon 11/14/2010 at 10:59
Let Americans keep more of the money they earn. Do this and the people will be able to stimulate the economy by buying what they want or by making investments. There are books available on this subject at most libraries if you are interested.
BYlloyd canditaon 11/14/2010 at 11:18
Wow LLOYD, that sound so easy. Why do the Democrats make it so hard and complicated?
BYhonest abeon 11/14/2010 at 11:39
HONEST ABE because that is what we do best,we make it hard on everybody who works. Get it now?
BYlloyd canditaon 11/14/2010 at 11:46
No LLOYD I don't. I don't work. I sit at home all day smoking crack while collecting welfare, food stamps, medicaid and unemployment. This thing you call work, how does it work?
BYhonest abeon 11/14/2010 at 11:54
Well Abe they tell me that a person goes and asks for a job. If he/she gets it he/she has to be on time at the job site and do the things they tell he/she to do and some of it is dog gone hard. They might even make you wear certain kinds of clothing, ie, safety equipment and/or a uniform. I know it sounds like it's for the birds but, at the end of the week they give you some money to spend. Sometimes if you are good you get a vacation (sometimes a paid one). However, we want most of that money so our elected leaders can do with as they wish. I don't know what they wish to do with it 'cause I just vote for them. That clear it up any?
BYlloyd canditaon 11/14/2010 at 12:13
Nah LLOYD, why do that work thing when Obama gives me food, money and health care for FREE, — all for doing nothing at all. All I have to do is vote for him and I'm on easy street.
BYhonest abeon 11/14/2010 at 12:39
I agree with ya ABE, but a lot of other folks aren't as reasonable as you and I. They have a frame of mind that nobody owes them a living and that they should be taking responsibilty for themselves. We can't all be perfect and they probably think that we are the ones that are whacked up. Sad isn't it?
BYlloyd canditaon 11/14/2010 at 12:56
Republicans May Yet Have Upper Hand in Senate
FACT: On paper, the numbers tell you the Democrats held on to a majority in the Senate last week.
OPINION: In reality, things won't be quite that neat.
In fact, on some issues the Republicans actually may have a functional majority, given the sentiments likely to prevail among certain Democrats who face the voters in two years.
FACT: But life is never that simple in the Senate and certainly won't be now. Among the Senate Democrats, 23 will face re-election in just two years, and, having just witnessed the Tsunami drubbing some in their party took at the polls, they likely will be even less willing now to toe the party line.
Independent Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, who caucuses with Democrats, often leans rightward, anyway.
More important, in fact, among those 23 Democrats who face voters in 2012 are a handful of incumbents from the kind of moderate to conservative states where Democrats took a Tidal Wave beating last week…
GOP Tsunami driving Democrats from office in rural areas, the suburbs and virtually the entire South — and unseating a Generation of powerful Democratic centrists.
Over 60 House seats and over 680 State Legislative Democratic seats were swept away so far… http://www.ncsl.org/
UNEMPLOYED DEMOCRATS will be Most since 1928
Google http://www.ncsl.org/
BYvote demsout 2010/12on 11/14/2010 at 13:47
How do you tell your Winnie spanking buddies in the Democratic Party keep your hands out of your pants?
BYJust4thefaxon 11/14/2010 at 14:43
"Mitch is a good friend," DeMint said.
You can tell they're really just the best of pals. LOL.BYTooConon 11/14/2010 at 16:13
VoteDemsOut, I do share your goal of kicking Dems out of power but I must say I find annoying your "spamming" all threads with your "Facts". I doubt it is having the impact you envisage aside annoying both your supporters and detractors.BYTheRightManon 11/14/2010 at 17:29
How about starting with a buget so small there's no money for earmarks?BYbillon 11/14/2010 at 18:35
The argument that McConnell makes, that eliminating earmarks does not reduce expenditures may be technically correct, but the fact remains that they are used as bribes to buy votes for bad legislation.
The American people are speaking up and demanding that all of these backroom shenanigans be stopped. The Cornhusker Kickback and the Louisiana Purchase were both a form of earmark bribes that bought the votes necessary to ram through Obamacare. We are sick of this corruption! McConnell can either accept the reality of the awakening of conservatives, or he can be defeated in his next primary, just as Bennett was in Utah.
American conservatives to McConnell and Inhofe: NO MORE BUSINESS AS USUAL!! We can't afford any more "turtle tunnels". NECESSITIES ONLY! Get with the program, or get swept aside
.BYSamAdams25on 11/14/2010 at 19:00
Why do people post under other peoples' names?
BYLloyd Con 11/14/2010 at 19:36
And work on those term linits while you are at it.
Alaska Senate candidate Joe Miller said Saturday that he won't drag out the ballot battle if the numbers aren't adding up, but stressed that he isn't throwing in the towel until absentee ballots from the military are counted.
Those are expected next week with a Wednesday deadline, and Miller believes he could get a boost from the servicemembers' votes.
"I think to call the race, to say that their vote doesn't matter, to forget about counting their votes, I think that's an inappropriate approach," Miller said, according to the Associated Press.
The Saturday scrutiny of write-in ballots showed 89.6 percent cast without dispute for Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska). Another 7.9 percent was being credited to Murkowski but being challenged by the Miller campaign on the basis of factors such as spelling and penmanship.
The Miller camp has claimed that misspellings of the senator's name may not be mistakes but actually protest votes.
The AP reprorted that Miller spokesman Randy DeSoto said the court fight will go forward "if the contested vote makes the difference."
Comments
It shouldn't have even been carried this far. It's nice having the left in there. They're lame anyhow and besides, 2012 is on it's way. Not taking the senate is the best thing that could have happened to conservatives right now. Keep them exposed. In 2012 the left will be so insignificant, and pitiful they won't be anything a simple roll of the eyes couldn't fix. They're like that now, just too angry, delusional and stupid to see it.
BYJustMeon 11/14/2010 at 10:24
I'm sorry,
You are a bunch of stupid idiots in Alaska to vote this waste of a human back in after loosing the Primary !!!
You get what you deserve ! BYStupid Alaskanson 11/14/2010 at 10:43
If miller was a Democrat he would drag this out for months.
BYlloyd con 11/14/2010 at 10:55
you guys need a reality check
bush prescription drug program cost more than
stimulus
bailouts
healthcare reforme
COMBINED!
factor in
the ill concieved tax cuts
and war based on lies (see eating their own young, but here they killed the young of others, repubs never seem to send their own, for power & warped ideology)
and they have destroyed the Country for the forseeable future…
even reagans top economic advisor called the repubs liars re: tax cuts, and said the whole thing should expite, not just the top 2%…
you people are blinded by hate, and they have you exactly where they want you..blind, dumb and angry…distracted from the reality & truth of the situation…
BYArton 11/14/2010 at 11:23
Rejecting Miller is a sign of things to come. The American people are starting to realize that ignorance and hate is not the way to keep this country as the greatest country in the world. Generation to come will see the emergence of the Tea Party as the beginning of the Dark Ages for America. Wake up "…hate for hate only intensifies the existence of hate and evil in the universe".
BYjaion 11/14/2010 at 11:49
Let's see…
Murkowski lied to Alaskans when she said during the primaries that she would bow out and support whoever became the Republican nominee.
After going in as a writein, she handed out items with her name to citizens to take into the voting booths which, as a voting judge, I know is illegal as that is considered electioneering.
After the voting, she gets her lapdog Lt, Gov,, Sec. of State, and others to totally disregard Alaska law as regards spelling.
And on and on and on.
Oh yeah, Alaska, you really need to continue the Murkowski/Stevens fiefdom up there with you all as the forelock pulling serfs.
BYANNIEon 11/14/2010 at 11:57
Alaska gets more federal subsidies per person than any other state. Yet Sarah Palin and other conservatives talk about what independent frontiersmen they are. Hype versus reality. They deserve Miller but it looks like they will get Murkowski.
BYarmasson 11/14/2010 at 12:07
Murkowski would though, that is the difference between moderates and conservatives.
BYWilliamon 11/14/2010 at 12:18
Hey ART! What do you call a guy with no arms, no legs hanging on a wall? A deranged liberal who is suffering from being SCRAPED on NOV 2. SHUT UP!
BYkarencon 11/14/2010 at 18:56
Nice Karen. dehumanizing democrats.
thats okay. Canadian soldiers will find you when Canada finishes taking over America.
The Washington Post’s Steve Mufson hit the road with Energy Secretary Steven Chu and came back with a nice Sunday piece on the Nobel prize-winning physicist.
A few tidbits:
* Chu had early doubts about initial estimates of how much oil was flowing from BP’s blown-out well. He thought they were too low, and he was proven right.
Here’s the Post story on Chu’s role in the spill response:
“Chu's scientific bent was unexpectedly useful over the summer, when the Obama administration was desperate to stop the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Chu was dispatched to BP's Houston offices to see what could be done.”
“He recommended that BP use gamma rays to see into the blowout preventer; its several inches of steel were obscuring other methods of figuring out whether the shear rams were clamping into the drill pipe.”
“He also tapped into his Stanford network to get names of engineers who could give advice, and he told Obama early on that the flow rate of oil pouring into the gulf might be greater than what BP was letting on. Weeks later, he marveled about how little innovation there was in the deep-water drilling business and how few gauges and backup mechanisms were installed on the blowout preventer.”
* Chu fears the U.S. is moving backward on recognizing the urgency of climate change (legislation collapsed on Capitol Hill this year) despite overwhelming evidence of warming.
“His biggest disappointment, he says, is that ‘two or three years ago I thought America and the world was really going to break forward and recognize that climate change is important, and now they are backtracking on that. The world economic recession has something to do with that, but the people who are against [climate action] have also tried to muddy the waters.’”
“Ironically,” he adds, “in the last couple of years we know more and every year it gets more compelling.”
* He breaks the bicycle speed limit on the Capital Crescent Trail while commuting to work.
The overall piece looks at Chu’s efforts to speed up adoption of low-carbon technologies like solar power, the perils of a physicist's plunge into D.C. politics, and more.
Comments
Fook Chu…nuffsaid!
BYnuffsaidon 11/14/2010 at 09:52
Don't give in folks… The enviro-pagans are full of lies. Anthropogenic global warming is a lie. The Planet does what it does… Nothing humans can do about it. It's called Nature…
BYex mea sententiaon 11/14/2010 at 10:03
Liberalism is a Mental Disorder.
Liberalism is ALL LIES.
Global Warmning is the biggest humdinger of them all.
Everything about Obama and his Czars are lies.
They should all be locked up.
Prominent scientists have come out and admitted the global warming farce is just that - A FARCE.
But who cares? Libs made up Carbon Footprints. And who has the biggest Carbon Footprint of them all? BARACK "INSANE" OBAMA AND IT'S BECAUSE HE HAS STOLEN FROM OUR COFFERS TO PAY FOR HIS AND HIS BITTER HALF'S LAVISH LIFESTYLE.
So let's spend trillions and trillions of dollars so Algore can buy 10 more DC10s so he can go to grade schools to brainwash the little kiddies into thinking killing their parents and themselves would save the earth.BYSickofobamaon 11/14/2010 at 10:32
Since when has the human footprint failed to make a mark on the planet and perhaps the pollution resulting from excessive human consumption of fossil fuels has contaminated the human mind? How arrogant to suggest that its cause is NATURE, as opposed to an absence of human nurturing of our blue-green planet! The lack of accountability by those narcissistic, myopic global warming detractors and delayers reminds me each night, as I gaze at the moon, why the US has failed to significantly advance scientifically since 1969.
BYStacy Clarkon 11/14/2010 at 12:00
Stacy put the Kool Aid and the joint down long enough to see just how insignificant man is and what he does and or has done to the planet. Your belief is brought to courtesy of MYTHBUILDERS who only are using the gullible to profit from their schemes. This planet is billions of years old and quite frankly, it is going to do what the H3LL it wants to do regardless of mankind!
BYnuffsaidon 11/14/2010 at 13:54
Stacy, you conveniently tried to incorporate global warming and pollution. Two different issues. We all understand that mankind can pollute our local cities. But to suggest my cars exhaust can overcome the jet stream, the Sun, the Ocean currents, oceanic evaporation and resulting rains et-al is pure flapdoodle. How is it the USA is responsible for GW and India, China, Mexico, all of the middle east etc are not? This constant attack on the USA as the culprit is pure liberal idiocy. Think about it, the Pacific Ocean creates weather patterns that flow eastward and somehow is unable to overcome automobile exhaust..??? You need to put down the bong…
Shortcomings in Republican efforts during the elections are a reason Michael Steele should not continue as chairman of the Republican National Committee (RNC), a senator said in an interview Sunday.
"Our ground game was not as strong as it could've been. We were outmanned on the ground," Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) said on Fox New Sunday.
DeMint said Steele should be ousted because Republicans could have done a better job reaching voters.
Noting that he appreciated Steele's service, DeMint joined a current of criticism for GOP fundraising and get-out-the-vote efforts after the elections. These assessments have dogged the RNC chairman despite Republican gains.
"We need a strong national Republican organization to help organize the Tea Parties and other citizen action organizations," DeMint said, referring to the 2012 elections.
Democrats outmatched Republicans during the midterms in terms of "boots on the ground," DeMint said.
As for whether he might be at the top of the ballot in 2012, DeMint said he has "no plans to run for president."
Comments
BYnot trueon 11/14/2010 at 12:14
Et tu brute? I'm disappointed Senator DeMint. I thought you truly understood the power play involved here.
Michael Steele did an excellent job campaigning for the Conservative Candidates in the 2010 election. His tireless work during the campaign connected many voters and he he DID help get out the vote.
I am getting tired of everyone blaming Michael Steele for lack of donations to the RNC. as many people donated directly to the Candidates.
This is disgraceful and if the RNC continues to humiliate Mr. Steele in this manner, I WILL NEVER GIVE ANOTHER PENNY TO THE RNC…EVER!
We're gonna have to agree to disagree on this one…sighBYtexason 11/14/2010 at 13:06
I don't know where on earth you folks pick up your facts. From my, on the ground perspective, the old line Republican committee's problems were expending so much money on RINOs and moderates, that when help was needed for Conservatives/Tea Party candidates … they were slow and claimed a lack of funds. I have stopped donating to them and instead contributed to the Senate Conservatives Fund and Individual Candidates. Conservative leaders and Palin helped many worthy candidates, several of whom were elected.
BYTooConon 11/14/2010 at 12:04
Well DeMint's statement contradicts what I heard before the election, that the RNC sent Steele on that Pelosi bus trip because they didn't want him directing the 'ground game'. From all accounts, the reason the GOP didn't pick up enough seats in the Senate is because of DeMint's tea party lunatic candidates, not because of any 'ground game'.
BYCrying Vettaon 11/14/2010 at 11:30
Michael Steele's strength is that he has kept the party focused on average folks, and it's proven a stunningly successful strategy. Jim DeMint, on the other hand, worked furiously to help the Democrats retain Senate seats yet now feels somehow worthy to comment on the success of Michael Steele. Instead DeMint should be named an honorary Democrat for his great success electing Democrats.
I'LL TAKE THE JOB
BYSarah Palinon 11/14/2010 at 11:02
"Democrats outmatched Republicans during the midterms in terms of "boots on the ground," DeMint said."
That's because the majority of Democrat "boots" are on 'entitlements' and have nothing better to do.
BYwe the peopleon 11/14/2010 at 11:12
"That's because the majority of Democrat "boots" are on 'entitlements' and have nothing better to do."
It's also because Steele saw fit to funnel financial aide to RINOs instead of those capable of winning. I for one am tired of voting for "moderates." I want candidates with character and the intestinal fortitude to stand up for what they know is right. Steele is a mealy mouthed weasel and he, John McCain and kind need to do the honorable thing and resign.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) predicted Sunday that Congress would pick up Chinese currency manipulation after President Obama was rebuffed on the issue at the G-20 summit.
The leaders of the world's top 20 economies refused to get behind a U.S. effort in Seoul this weekend to condemn "competitive devaluation" of currencies.
"The currency issue was disappointing to me," Graham said on ABC's "This Week."
"Clearly, China does manipulate the value of the yuan to get an advantage in exports. They already have enough advantages. I was disappointed with the other nations who would not get behind President Obama to push the Chinese to change their currency policy."
He called the meetings "dispappointing" on the front of a lack of a trade agreement with South Korea and no movement in the currency fight with China.
"And I think you're going to see the Congress get more involved on the currency front after this trip," Graham said.
House Democrats advanced a currency manipulation bill before Congress left for the campaign recess.
"For years, the Bush Administration, the Obama Administration, and Members of Congress have tried to persuade the Chinese government to allow its currency to respond to market forces. No significant progress has been made," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said then. "It is time for Congress to pass legislation that will give the Administration leverage in its bilateral and multilateral negotiations with the Chinese government – so that U.S. businesses and workers have a more level playing field in world trade."
try to slow its economy to tame inflation. Rumors of another Chinese interest-rate hike started a chain reaction of selling across financial markets worldwide...."
FACT: Hides It on Website…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96Uu_tI0hTw
Obama's economic view is Rejected on World stage
Free trade deal with South Korea eludes progressive President
FACT: SEOUL — President Obama's hopes of emerging from his Asia trip with the twin victories of a free trade agreement with South Korea and a unified approach to spurring global economic growth ran into resistance on all fronts yesterday, putting Obama at odds with his key allies and largest trading partners.
http://www.boston.com/news/world/asia/articles/2010/11/12/us_south_korea_trade_accord_not_a_done_deal/
In fact, After five largely harmonious meetings in the past two years to deal with the most severe downturn since the Depression, Major disputes broke out between Washington and China, Britain, Germany, and Brazil.
Each Rejected core elements of Obama’s progressive strategy of stimulating growth before focusing on deficit reduction.
Obama's Trade Strategy Runs Into Stiff Resistance
FACT: In the wake of the Tsunami battering his party took in the Historic/Epic 2010 midterm elections at home last week, Mr. Obama has cast his Asia trip as mission to revive the American economy and bolster job growth.
But, in fact, BHO's progressive policies, contentious at home, have proved contentious overseas as well, and he faced stiff challenges during the Group of 20 gathering in Seoul, South Korea, from the leaders of China, Britain, Germany and Brazil over currency policy and his contention that the United States could pump money into its economy to stimulate growth before concentrating on reducing the deficit.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/12/business/global/12group.html?src=me&ref=business
FACT: Vote demsout always sources Facts; web-links, Poll, News source, YouTube, Google, etc. etc.