ksmith: (Default)
From this morning's Washington Monthly:

"In a smart column today, Bruce Bartlett looks at why it will be so hard for politicians to cut government spending: because so many Americans who say they support cutting government programs don't realize just how much they benefit from them.

Remember, for example, when a town hall attendee famously told his congressman to "keep your government hands off my Medicare"? Apparently that bewilderingly blinkered sentiment is hardly unique."

Peak Oil

Feb. 9th, 2011 08:41 am
ksmith: (Default)
Just read the whole thing.


Wikileaks: Not Enough Saudi Oil...to keep Gas Prices down and Why the Republicans are OK with that.

The US fears that Saudi Arabia, the world's largest crude oil exporter, may not have enough reserves to prevent oil prices escalating, confidential cables from its embassy in Riyadh show. The cables, released by WikiLeaks, urge Washington to take seriously a warning from a senior Saudi government oil executive that the kingdom's crude oil reserves may have been overstated by as much as 300bn barrels – nearly 40%. [...]
Sadad al-Husseini, a geologist and former head of exploration at the Saudi oil monopoly Aramco, met the US consul general in Riyadh in November 2007 and told the US diplomat that Aramco's 12.5m barrel-a-day capacity needed to keep a lid on prices could not be reached.

According to the cables, which date between 2007-09, Husseini said Saudi Arabia might reach an output of 12m barrels a day in 10 years but before then – possibly as early as 2012 – global oil production would have hit its highest point. This crunch point is known as "peak oil".

Husseini said that at that point Aramco would not be able to stop the rise of global oil prices because the Saudi energy industry had overstated its recoverable reserves to spur foreign investment. He argued that Aramco had badly underestimated the time needed to bring new oil on tap.

Peak Oil

Feb. 9th, 2011 08:41 am
ksmith: (Default)
Just read the whole thing.


Wikileaks: Not Enough Saudi Oil...to keep Gas Prices down and Why the Republicans are OK with that.

The US fears that Saudi Arabia, the world's largest crude oil exporter, may not have enough reserves to prevent oil prices escalating, confidential cables from its embassy in Riyadh show. The cables, released by WikiLeaks, urge Washington to take seriously a warning from a senior Saudi government oil executive that the kingdom's crude oil reserves may have been overstated by as much as 300bn barrels – nearly 40%. [...]
Sadad al-Husseini, a geologist and former head of exploration at the Saudi oil monopoly Aramco, met the US consul general in Riyadh in November 2007 and told the US diplomat that Aramco's 12.5m barrel-a-day capacity needed to keep a lid on prices could not be reached.

According to the cables, which date between 2007-09, Husseini said Saudi Arabia might reach an output of 12m barrels a day in 10 years but before then – possibly as early as 2012 – global oil production would have hit its highest point. This crunch point is known as "peak oil".

Husseini said that at that point Aramco would not be able to stop the rise of global oil prices because the Saudi energy industry had overstated its recoverable reserves to spur foreign investment. He argued that Aramco had badly underestimated the time needed to bring new oil on tap.
ksmith: (aerynpistol)
Kaili Joy Gray over at Daily Kos collects the week's assaults against women's rights, courtesy of the GOP:

Boehner's equal rights bathroom may seem a silly and unimportant issue. But it represents a larger and more serious point: the fake concern for women's equality, even as Republicans attempt to pass further restrictions on women's rights. Republicans spent the better part of 2010 patting themselves on the back for the record number of Republican women running for political office, boasting of the new conservative feminist movement that was intended to persuade voters that the Republican Party supports equal rights for women.

But nothing could be further from the truth, and as Republicans have gained greater control of elected offices at the federal and state levels, we are witnessing the concerted effort to undo the very legislation intended to protect women's health, lives, and livelihood. Even as Republicans offer empty platitudes about equality and feminism, their agenda to legislate women into second-class citizenship has never been clearer.
ksmith: (aerynpistol)
Kaili Joy Gray over at Daily Kos collects the week's assaults against women's rights, courtesy of the GOP:

Boehner's equal rights bathroom may seem a silly and unimportant issue. But it represents a larger and more serious point: the fake concern for women's equality, even as Republicans attempt to pass further restrictions on women's rights. Republicans spent the better part of 2010 patting themselves on the back for the record number of Republican women running for political office, boasting of the new conservative feminist movement that was intended to persuade voters that the Republican Party supports equal rights for women.

But nothing could be further from the truth, and as Republicans have gained greater control of elected offices at the federal and state levels, we are witnessing the concerted effort to undo the very legislation intended to protect women's health, lives, and livelihood. Even as Republicans offer empty platitudes about equality and feminism, their agenda to legislate women into second-class citizenship has never been clearer.
ksmith: (Default)
I have a job with insurance. Back in October, as I was getting ready for a busy Saturday, I felt a lump on my thyroid. I saw my doctor that week. Tests. Bloodwork. A few weeks of off-and-on heart-pounding fear as I wondered whether it was cancer.

Short form--no, it wasn't. But the point is that I was able to find this out within weeks, and put my mind at ease, and start the treatment to settle down my overactive thyroid. Peace of mind is a great thing. Treating conditions at an early stage is a great thing. Great things, yet simple. I wish everyone the simple things. It's the only humane course.

"Am I my brother's keeper?" All the Biblical verses being tossed around, but this one I'm not seeing.

Yes, yes, we are. Some things are about more than the almighty damned dollar.


Originally posted by [livejournal.com profile] ladyqkat at Dear GOP - the collective you are an Idiot
(Post originally seen in this post by [info]ramblin_phyl. I have been notified that it was originally posted by [info]suricattus in her journal post. The story and words are hers, but I do believe that it needs to go viral and that as many people as possible need to get their stories out there. Only by making a noise about this can we make a change in our society.)

There is a move afoot in the nation -driven by the GOP - to repeal the new health care laws, to protect corporate interests, to defend against fear-mongering (and stupid) cries of "socialism!", and to ensure that people are forced to choose between keeping a roof over their heads or getting necessary health care.

This movement is killing people.

Think I'm overstating the fact?

Ask the friends and family of writer/reviewer Melissa Mia Hall, who died of a heart attack last week because she was so terrified of medical bills, she didn't go see a doctor who could have saved her life.

From another writer friend: One person. Not the only one. That could have been me. Yeah, I have access to insurance -- I live in New York City, which is freelancer-friendly, and have access to freelancer advocacy groups. Through them, I can pay over $400/month ($5,760/year) as a single, healthy woman, so that if I go to the hospital I'm not driven to bankruptcy. But a doctor's appointment - a routine physical - can still cost me several hundred dollars each visit. So unless something's terribly wrong? I won't go.

My husband worked for the government for 30 years. We have government employee (retired) insurance. It is the only thing of value he took away from that job. His pension is pitiful. He still works part time. My writing income has diminished drastically. Our combined income is now less than what it was before T retired fifteen years ago. Inflation has diminished it further. In the last 30 days I have racked up over $8000 in medical bills for tests and the beginning of treatment. Our co-pay is 20% after the deductible. And there is more to come. Our savings are already gone. I have the gold standard of insurance and I still can't pay all the medical bills.

Another friend lost her insurance when her husband lost his job. She couldn't afford medication and ended up bed ridden for three months at the end of over a year of no job and therefore no insurance until he found work again.

It's our responsibility. All of us, together. As a nation.

EtA: Nobody is trying to put insurance companies out of business. They will always be able to offer a better plan for a premium. We simply want to ensure that every citizen - from infant to senior citizen - doesn't have to choose between medical care, and keeping a roof over their heads, or having enough to eat.

We're trying to get this to go viral. Pass it along.




I'm going to post my story as the first comment to this post if anyone would like to read it. If anyone wants to tell their story, please tell it on your own journal and post a link in the comments. Maybe, just maybe, TPTB will listen to the slaves peons who clean their toilets before they have to clean their own.
ksmith: (Default)
I have a job with insurance. Back in October, as I was getting ready for a busy Saturday, I felt a lump on my thyroid. I saw my doctor that week. Tests. Bloodwork. A few weeks of off-and-on heart-pounding fear as I wondered whether it was cancer.

Short form--no, it wasn't. But the point is that I was able to find this out within weeks, and put my mind at ease, and start the treatment to settle down my overactive thyroid. Peace of mind is a great thing. Treating conditions at an early stage is a great thing. Great things, yet simple. I wish everyone the simple things. It's the only humane course.

"Am I my brother's keeper?" All the Biblical verses being tossed around, but this one I'm not seeing.

Yes, yes, we are. Some things are about more than the almighty damned dollar.


Originally posted by [livejournal.com profile] ladyqkat at Dear GOP - the collective you are an Idiot
(Post originally seen in this post by [info]ramblin_phyl. I have been notified that it was originally posted by [info]suricattus in her journal post. The story and words are hers, but I do believe that it needs to go viral and that as many people as possible need to get their stories out there. Only by making a noise about this can we make a change in our society.)

There is a move afoot in the nation -driven by the GOP - to repeal the new health care laws, to protect corporate interests, to defend against fear-mongering (and stupid) cries of "socialism!", and to ensure that people are forced to choose between keeping a roof over their heads or getting necessary health care.

This movement is killing people.

Think I'm overstating the fact?

Ask the friends and family of writer/reviewer Melissa Mia Hall, who died of a heart attack last week because she was so terrified of medical bills, she didn't go see a doctor who could have saved her life.

From another writer friend: One person. Not the only one. That could have been me. Yeah, I have access to insurance -- I live in New York City, which is freelancer-friendly, and have access to freelancer advocacy groups. Through them, I can pay over $400/month ($5,760/year) as a single, healthy woman, so that if I go to the hospital I'm not driven to bankruptcy. But a doctor's appointment - a routine physical - can still cost me several hundred dollars each visit. So unless something's terribly wrong? I won't go.

My husband worked for the government for 30 years. We have government employee (retired) insurance. It is the only thing of value he took away from that job. His pension is pitiful. He still works part time. My writing income has diminished drastically. Our combined income is now less than what it was before T retired fifteen years ago. Inflation has diminished it further. In the last 30 days I have racked up over $8000 in medical bills for tests and the beginning of treatment. Our co-pay is 20% after the deductible. And there is more to come. Our savings are already gone. I have the gold standard of insurance and I still can't pay all the medical bills.

Another friend lost her insurance when her husband lost his job. She couldn't afford medication and ended up bed ridden for three months at the end of over a year of no job and therefore no insurance until he found work again.

It's our responsibility. All of us, together. As a nation.

EtA: Nobody is trying to put insurance companies out of business. They will always be able to offer a better plan for a premium. We simply want to ensure that every citizen - from infant to senior citizen - doesn't have to choose between medical care, and keeping a roof over their heads, or having enough to eat.

We're trying to get this to go viral. Pass it along.




I'm going to post my story as the first comment to this post if anyone would like to read it. If anyone wants to tell their story, please tell it on your own journal and post a link in the comments. Maybe, just maybe, TPTB will listen to the slaves peons who clean their toilets before they have to clean their own.
ksmith: (Default)
Over at The Washington Monthly, there's an article about yesterday's House signing of the DADT discharge petition:

Earlier, Democratic Rep. Patrick Murphy of Pennsylvania told the gathering of an e-mail he received from a company commander in Afghanistan, who mentioned how he often had to counsel soldiers who received divorce papers or "Dear John" letters from spouses or opposite-sex partners.

Murphy continued: "This young company commander, this captain, on his fourth deployment, wrote in that e-mail saying, 'I never thought I'd see the day when I got one of those letters myself. And I'm sitting here at three o'clock in the morning in Kabul, Afghanistan, and I have nowhere to go because I happen to be gay, and I can't walk to the chaplain, and I can't go to a battle buddy, and I can't walk to my commander's office, so I'm sitting here cradling my 9 mm pistol thinking about blowing my brains out. But I read this article about this Iraq war veteran named Patrick Murphy from Pennsylvania that's fighting for me, and it gives me hope.'"


I don't know what to add to this, except that I don't know how opponents of the repeal can believe that this sort of emotional isolation promotes unit cohesion, trust, and all those other qualities they claim to feel so strongly about. I won't mention the basic inhumanity of the situation, because that doesn't appear to be a concern of theirs.
ksmith: (Default)
Over at The Washington Monthly, there's an article about yesterday's House signing of the DADT discharge petition:

Earlier, Democratic Rep. Patrick Murphy of Pennsylvania told the gathering of an e-mail he received from a company commander in Afghanistan, who mentioned how he often had to counsel soldiers who received divorce papers or "Dear John" letters from spouses or opposite-sex partners.

Murphy continued: "This young company commander, this captain, on his fourth deployment, wrote in that e-mail saying, 'I never thought I'd see the day when I got one of those letters myself. And I'm sitting here at three o'clock in the morning in Kabul, Afghanistan, and I have nowhere to go because I happen to be gay, and I can't walk to the chaplain, and I can't go to a battle buddy, and I can't walk to my commander's office, so I'm sitting here cradling my 9 mm pistol thinking about blowing my brains out. But I read this article about this Iraq war veteran named Patrick Murphy from Pennsylvania that's fighting for me, and it gives me hope.'"


I don't know what to add to this, except that I don't know how opponents of the repeal can believe that this sort of emotional isolation promotes unit cohesion, trust, and all those other qualities they claim to feel so strongly about. I won't mention the basic inhumanity of the situation, because that doesn't appear to be a concern of theirs.
ksmith: (Default)
Steven D's essay-slash-rant over at The Booman Tribune. Not the best way to start the day, but not much in the way of news is these days:

The last time I saw shelters made out of scrap wood was back in 1985 on a trip to Jamaica. Is that where we are headed? Is that what are politicians who will do anything, apparently, to make their lobbyist friends and corporate contributors happy, really want? Are they in deep denial about what a decade of excess, lax federal legislation of the financial sector, costly and unnecessary wars and tax cuts that primarily benefited the rich has accomplished or do they, in the recesses of their moldy corrupt hearts, simply not give a damn?

Or will the Fall of the House of Bank of America (and a likely bailout by the Fed or Congress) finally be the the "event" that triggers an outpouring of outrage at the policies that have defended the wealth of the rich while chipping steadily away at the income and net worth of the middle and lower classes in America? Somehow I doubt it, especially when one considers the manner in which news is slanted to the right in this country (and no, I don't mean merely Fox News). A country where defending social security and medicare and health care reform and all the other parts of our threadbare safety net are considered "hard left" positions that only a socialist or Marxist could support.


In a post entitled "Playing Cards with Judas," mistermix over at Balloon Juice describes what's going on between Democrats and Republicans in DC as akin to the break-up of a marriage:

The only analogy that springs to mind when I look at the Republicans’ recent behavior is a bad divorce. Think of a situation where Lisa and Bob are getting a divorce, and Bob is so hell-bent on hurting Lisa that he doesn’t care about their kids or their bank account. Bob will deploy a hundred variations on the same tactic: put the Lisa in a bind where she has to choose between damaging the children and losing money. Lisa will lose money almost every time in order to save the children.

In this situation, capitulation is inevitable, the only question is what form it will take.


Maybe he's right, but despite Lisa's determination to be an adult in all this, I really wish that once, just once, she'd draw a little blood. The pearl clutching and shocked howls of "Unfair! Unfair!" would be worth the incremental loss.

I don't know what in Hell some people thought they were voting for when they pulled the lever for R, but if you're not a multimillionaire and you think anything they do will help you at all? I have this bridge..
ksmith: (Default)
Steven D's essay-slash-rant over at The Booman Tribune. Not the best way to start the day, but not much in the way of news is these days:

The last time I saw shelters made out of scrap wood was back in 1985 on a trip to Jamaica. Is that where we are headed? Is that what are politicians who will do anything, apparently, to make their lobbyist friends and corporate contributors happy, really want? Are they in deep denial about what a decade of excess, lax federal legislation of the financial sector, costly and unnecessary wars and tax cuts that primarily benefited the rich has accomplished or do they, in the recesses of their moldy corrupt hearts, simply not give a damn?

Or will the Fall of the House of Bank of America (and a likely bailout by the Fed or Congress) finally be the the "event" that triggers an outpouring of outrage at the policies that have defended the wealth of the rich while chipping steadily away at the income and net worth of the middle and lower classes in America? Somehow I doubt it, especially when one considers the manner in which news is slanted to the right in this country (and no, I don't mean merely Fox News). A country where defending social security and medicare and health care reform and all the other parts of our threadbare safety net are considered "hard left" positions that only a socialist or Marxist could support.


In a post entitled "Playing Cards with Judas," mistermix over at Balloon Juice describes what's going on between Democrats and Republicans in DC as akin to the break-up of a marriage:

The only analogy that springs to mind when I look at the Republicans’ recent behavior is a bad divorce. Think of a situation where Lisa and Bob are getting a divorce, and Bob is so hell-bent on hurting Lisa that he doesn’t care about their kids or their bank account. Bob will deploy a hundred variations on the same tactic: put the Lisa in a bind where she has to choose between damaging the children and losing money. Lisa will lose money almost every time in order to save the children.

In this situation, capitulation is inevitable, the only question is what form it will take.


Maybe he's right, but despite Lisa's determination to be an adult in all this, I really wish that once, just once, she'd draw a little blood. The pearl clutching and shocked howls of "Unfair! Unfair!" would be worth the incremental loss.

I don't know what in Hell some people thought they were voting for when they pulled the lever for R, but if you're not a multimillionaire and you think anything they do will help you at all? I have this bridge..
ksmith: (coffee cup)
Courtesy of Steve Benen at The Washington Monthly

A newly-elected Republican congressman wants his healthcare, dammit. An excerpt:

Harris spent months condemning the idea of Americans being entitled to taxpayer-subsidized health care coverage. Now that the election's over, Harris suddenly feels entitled to taxpayer-subsidized health care coverage -- and wants it immediately. (For the record, Harris and his family will probably rely on COBRA to stay insured until his coverage kicks in. COBRA, of course, is another government program that the right opposed.)

That Harris apparently sought a public option for him and his family just makes the whole story that much more hilarious.

Just to clarify, I don't actually blame the far-right congressman-elect. He wants coverage for him and his family, and doesn't want to have to worry about a 28-day gap in which he, his wife, and his kids would have no protections if they get sick.

I do, however, blame the far-right congressman-elect for failing to realize that millions of American families want the same peace of mind he's seeking.

Harris wants to know "what he would do without 28 days of health care"? I don't know, Andy, what have tens of millions of Americans, including millions of children, done without access to quality health care for years? Why are you entitled to government-subsidized health care, but they're not? What will those families do after you repeal the Affordable Care Act? Wait for tort reform to magically cover everyone?
ksmith: (coffee cup)
Courtesy of Steve Benen at The Washington Monthly

A newly-elected Republican congressman wants his healthcare, dammit. An excerpt:

Harris spent months condemning the idea of Americans being entitled to taxpayer-subsidized health care coverage. Now that the election's over, Harris suddenly feels entitled to taxpayer-subsidized health care coverage -- and wants it immediately. (For the record, Harris and his family will probably rely on COBRA to stay insured until his coverage kicks in. COBRA, of course, is another government program that the right opposed.)

That Harris apparently sought a public option for him and his family just makes the whole story that much more hilarious.

Just to clarify, I don't actually blame the far-right congressman-elect. He wants coverage for him and his family, and doesn't want to have to worry about a 28-day gap in which he, his wife, and his kids would have no protections if they get sick.

I do, however, blame the far-right congressman-elect for failing to realize that millions of American families want the same peace of mind he's seeking.

Harris wants to know "what he would do without 28 days of health care"? I don't know, Andy, what have tens of millions of Americans, including millions of children, done without access to quality health care for years? Why are you entitled to government-subsidized health care, but they're not? What will those families do after you repeal the Affordable Care Act? Wait for tort reform to magically cover everyone?
ksmith: (Default)
"The fears of one class of men are not the measure of the rights of another." George Bancroft (Sec. of the Navy, founder of U.S. Naval Academy at Annapolis)
ksmith: (Default)
"The fears of one class of men are not the measure of the rights of another." George Bancroft (Sec. of the Navy, founder of U.S. Naval Academy at Annapolis)

Hmmmm...

Sep. 24th, 2010 08:14 pm
ksmith: (c&h_nightmare)
My Twitter account feeds into my Facebook page as well as this one, and one of the articles I linked the other day was flagged as “abusive.” It was a Think Progress article about Koch-backed groups in Wisconsin that helped kill a law “Designed To Prevent Voter Suppression Plot Hatched By Koch-Backed Groups.”

Here's the link. Here. Right here.

Looks like I’ll have to link to it again…

Hmmmm...

Sep. 24th, 2010 08:14 pm
ksmith: (c&h_nightmare)
My Twitter account feeds into my Facebook page as well as this one, and one of the articles I linked the other day was flagged as “abusive.” It was a Think Progress article about Koch-backed groups in Wisconsin that helped kill a law “Designed To Prevent Voter Suppression Plot Hatched By Koch-Backed Groups.”

Here's the link. Here. Right here.

Looks like I’ll have to link to it again…
ksmith: (Default)
...not that you'll hear about it from the MSM.

Obama's Unbelievable Winning Streak.

To be sure, the summer of 2010 could go down as the moment Obama doubled down on his dubious Afghan war strategy, bringing in David Petraeus and thus tipping the bureaucratic balance against a significant troop withdrawal next year. And it could go down as the moment when the oil spill and the recession lost him his majority in Congress. But even if Obama never manages another legislative victory, he’ll already have pulled off one of the most impressive opening acts in American political history. The question is why we’re paying so little attention.

The answer is that the media views policy through the lens of politics. Unless a policy victory brings political benefits—rising poll numbers, better prospects for the next elections—it is not treated as a big win. Thus, the Tea Party movement is considered an ominous sign for Obama, evidence that the country is turning against him. But the reason that the Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin crowd is so angry is that Obama has expanded the federal government’s relationship with the private sector in fundamental ways. In political terms, the Tea Party movement may be a sign of Obama’s weakened position, but in policy terms, it is a testament to his success.


UPDATE: Aaaaaaand the first anonymous strafe comment has been deleted. I attach my name to my opinions--it's pretty obvious what my views are by the links I post. If you can't be bothered to sign your name to your opinions, go post somewhere else.
ksmith: (Default)
...not that you'll hear about it from the MSM.

Obama's Unbelievable Winning Streak.

To be sure, the summer of 2010 could go down as the moment Obama doubled down on his dubious Afghan war strategy, bringing in David Petraeus and thus tipping the bureaucratic balance against a significant troop withdrawal next year. And it could go down as the moment when the oil spill and the recession lost him his majority in Congress. But even if Obama never manages another legislative victory, he’ll already have pulled off one of the most impressive opening acts in American political history. The question is why we’re paying so little attention.

The answer is that the media views policy through the lens of politics. Unless a policy victory brings political benefits—rising poll numbers, better prospects for the next elections—it is not treated as a big win. Thus, the Tea Party movement is considered an ominous sign for Obama, evidence that the country is turning against him. But the reason that the Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin crowd is so angry is that Obama has expanded the federal government’s relationship with the private sector in fundamental ways. In political terms, the Tea Party movement may be a sign of Obama’s weakened position, but in policy terms, it is a testament to his success.


UPDATE: Aaaaaaand the first anonymous strafe comment has been deleted. I attach my name to my opinions--it's pretty obvious what my views are by the links I post. If you can't be bothered to sign your name to your opinions, go post somewhere else.
ksmith: (Peter)
An interesting, involved article about the failure of supply side economics, the WPA, German labor unions, and other thing:

FDR was vilified in his day as a Socialist, a Communist and a traitor. He didn't back down from that fight, calling the large moneyed interests who fought against him what they were: economic royalists who sought greed over simple human decency. They hated the New Deal with a passion because there wan;t enough in it for them, and too much for the "little people."

July 2025

S M T W T F S
  123 45
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 20th, 2025 08:40 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios