DOWNLOADS: (271)

PLAYS: (4107)

Embed

Jon Stewart roasts Rupert Murdoch over his bid to buy the LA Times. Murdoch already had a chance at the news publishing business with his News of The World rag, which blew up in his face over criminal activities and now new arrests. So why would he be given a special waiver to buy the storied newspaper?

It appears that Murdoch's hope rest on one man's shoulders.

In weighing a bid for The Los Angeles Times, Rupert Murdoch finds himself in a familiar role: waiting for rule changes from the government. With the resignation last week of Julius Genachowski, the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, he may have to wait a little longer.

Mr. Murdoch, who has never shied away from a regulatory battle, has been beefing up News Corporation’s lobbying efforts in Washington in the last few months to urge regulators to revise a media ownership rule that would prevent the company from acquiring The Los Angeles Times and other newspapers in markets in which it already owns television stations.“He wants it,” one person close to Mr. Murdoch said of The Los Angeles Times.“They’re working on getting a waiver now,” added this person, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal talks. But another person close to Mr. Murdoch said he currently considered a potential deal more trouble than it is worth given the regulatory hurdles in Washington.

The resignation of Mr. Genachowski, a Democrat, could further stall a plan favored by the departing chairman that would relax a longtime ban on consolidation between television stations and newspapers in local markets. The F.C.C. signaled on Friday that a vote on easing media ownership rules would move forward despite Mr. Genachowski’s departure.Initially expected to be presented for a vote early this year, the measure has already faced several setbacks. Last month, Mr. Genachowski said there would be no vote until the Minority Media and Telecommunications Council, a Washington-based nonprofit, completed a study of the impact of cross-ownership on news gathering. That process could take several weeks, potentially pushing a vote to the summer.

(h/t Heather@VideoCafe)

In polite circles, among our political and financial classes, this is known as “the free market at work.” No, it’s “wage repression,” and it’s been happening in our country since around 1980. I must invoke some statistics here, knowing that statistics can glaze the eyes; but if indeed it’s the mark of a truly educated person to be deeply moved by statistics, as I once read, surely this truly educated audience will be moved by the recent analysis of tax data by the economists Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez. They found that from 1950 through 1980, the share of all income in America going to everyone but the rich increased from 64 percent to 65 percent. Because the nation’s economy was growing handsomely, the average income for 9 out of l0 Americans was growing, too – from $17,719 to $30,941. That’s a 75 percent increase in income in constant 2008 dollars.

But then it stopped. Since 1980 the economy has also continued to grow handsomely, but only a fraction at the top have benefitted. The line flattens for the bottom 90% of Americans. Average income went from that $30,941 in 1980 to $31,244 in 2008. Think about that: the average income of Americans increased just $303 dollars in 28 years.

That’s wage repression.

Why, yes it is, and an overwhelming majority of Americans, regardless of political leaning or income class, agree. From the LA Times, hardly a bastion of liberal values:

Continue reading »

Might be time for Steve Poizner to come in from the campaign trail and have a look at the newest rate increases. According to the LA Times, the Gang of Five here in California is ganging up on small business owners with less than 50 employees.

Five major insurers in California's small-business market are raising rates 12% to 23% for firms with fewer than 50 employees, according to a survey by The Times.

Similar increases are being felt by many small businesses across the nation, including those in Texas, Ohio and Florida — mainly the result of escalating costs for medical care and pharmaceuticals, insurers say.

Insurers claim they either underpriced their policies or had unusually high claims.

Blue Shield, for example, said hospital charges rose nearly 20% last year, while physician costs and pharmaceutical fees increased almost as much. Anthem Blue Cross also cited the cost of medical care in explaining its average rate hikes of 13% this year.

"We understand that one group that has been most hard hit by the economic downturn of the past few years is the state's more than 3 million small businesses, who we all rely on to be major contributors to our local economy," Anthem spokeswoman Peggy Hinz said.

"We want to be competitive in the marketplace, but we also want to take care of our members," Hinz added. "We work each day to do both."

Forgive me if I'm skeptical of this. It seems suspect to me that the group slammed with high increases is the same group who is eligible for a Federal tax credit of up to 35%. Further, why wasn't that tax credit mentioned in any of the reports about the rate increases? The employers they use as examples are likely to be the same ones eligible for the 35% break.

Why not mention that in this context, LA Times?

I have heard anecdotal reports that health insurance agents here in California representing one of these companies are visiting small business clients and telling them the apocalypse is upon them. Statements range from claims of outlandish premium increases to the outright falsehood that employers will only have one plan to choose from after reform. They begin by informing employers who they finally managed to shift into high deductible plans with Health Savings Accounts that HSAs are dead. (They're not dead, just reduced to reflect improved insurance options).

By the time they're done, they've convinced these small business owners that Satan lives in the form of health care reform. This is no different than what they did when California passed laws limiting auto insurers' rate increases. While these stories are anecdotal and not indicative of a widespread policy on the part of those companies, it still strikes me as part of a larger strategy to undermine confidence in the health care reform law.

What we have here is a group hissy fit thrown by the insurers who, until now, have had complete freedom to raise rates and lower benefits at will. While increases may be warranted in some cases, there's no reason to believe they're warranted to this extent or only on this group. It seems to me they chose the most vulnerable and least powerful group to pick on.

Kevin Drum has exactly the right answer for the insurers' woes:

If conservatives want to avoid the specter of federally funded single-payer healthcare in the United States, this is what they need to come to terms with. Canada provides high quality healthcare for everyone — including small businesses and the elderly — for a cost per person of about $4,000 per year. Ditto for France and the Netherlands. Britain and Japan do it for about $3,000. Ann Terranova is being asked to pay more than $6,000 per person — and that's for three working-age employees.

Insurers know single payer is still a hammer over their heads. We're seeing Vermont adopt an experimental program with it now. If it's successful, I expect other states to try it. Here in California, it's only a governor's signature away, provided we actually elect the right Governor.

DOWNLOADS: (610)

PLAYS: (1283)

Embed

As Art Linkletter useta say ...

"My mom said … Barack Obama is going to take away everybody that doesn't have papers," one girl told the first lady.

"Yeah, well, that's something that we have to work on, right?" Mrs. Obama replied. "To make sure that people can be here with the right kind of papers, right? That's exactly right."

The girl countered, "But my mom doesn't have any."

"Well, we have to work on that, we have to fix that and everybody's got to work together in Congress to make sure that happens. That's right," Mrs. Obama said before moving on to the next question.

I know Rahm Emanuel and his Blue Dogs wanna put immigration reform off for as long as they can. But I'm not sure how long they're going to be able to. The real-world pressure to solve this mess is mounting. And the best part is: progressive solutions will work.

As the LA Times piece notes:

"This heartbreaking exchange says more about the current state of the immigration debate than the remarks of the two presidents in the Rose Garden," said Frank Sharry, executive director of America's Voice, a pro-immigration reform group, noting that deportations nationally have gone up under Obama.

The Department of Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency says its priority is to remove illegal immigrants who are violent criminals. But it maintains a goal of 400,000 deportations this year, which would be a record. Most of those people would not fall into the criminal category, agency statistics show, and some probably would include parents of children who are U.S. citizens.

No doubt the right-wingers will demand that federal officials track down this little girl's mother and deport her posthaste. Sounds like a job for Stalkin' Malkin.

Ephphatha Poetry: Imagine if the Tea Party Was Black

cab drollery: The LA Times business columnist David Lazarus aske the right questions and provides some damn good answers

slatev: Cartoonist Mark Fiore explains how the big banks manage to win by losing

The Washington Monthly: Guy Fawkes, New Republican Hero

Connecting.the.Dots: Jules and Julia

HOLY CRAP: Franklin Graham cut from prayer event...Islamic death threat...God talks to Glenn Beck...Prayerful Fox gets served...We can’t hear you...Imagine this!...Helms was right...Fly Me to The Moon...Vatican rewards homophobia...Donohue makes a funny...Christian nation?...Book Lernin’...

DOWNLOADS: (663)

PLAYS: (4554)

Embed

Sean Hannity latest teabagging event has come to a violent halt when he pulled out at the last minute. WLWT reported that there were some technical issues and then it would seem that Hannity blamed it on personal reasons.

Fox News commentator Sean Hannity has cancelled his appearance and broadcast at a Tea Party rally at Fifth Third Arena.Hannity planned to tape his television show from the event, which starts at 6 p.m. at the University of Cincinnati.Organizers of the rally said there were technical issues, but that the overriding factor for the cancellation was a personal matter that Hannity needed to attend to in New York. WLWT was the first to report that there were issues when Hannity failed to appear at a book signing at 4:30 p.m. Minutes later, Hannity's bus was seen leaving the campus.Hannity's newscast will broadcast from New York with a guest host.

However that story isn't holding water. The LA Times is reporting that Sean took a scolding from FOX News execs and they are making him do his show tonight from his studio.

Angry Fox News executives ordered host Sean Hannity to abandon plans to broadcast his nightly show as part of a Tea Party rally in Cincinnati on Thursday after top executives learned that he was set to headline the event, proceeds from which would benefit the local Tea Party organization.

Rally organizers had listed Hannity, who is on a book tour, as the headliner of the four-hour Tax Day event at the University of Cincinnati. The rally, expected to draw as many as 13,000 people, was set feature speakers such as “Liberal Facism” author Jonah Goldberg and local Tea Party leaders. Participants were being charged a minimum of $5, with seats near Hannity’s set going for $20, according to the Cincinnati Enquirer, which reported that any profits would go to future Tea Party events. Media Matters for America noted that Hannity’s personal website directed supporters to a link to buy tickets for the Cincinnati rally.

But senior Fox News executives said they were not aware Hannity was being billed as the centerpiece of the event or that Tea Party organizers were charging for admission to Hannity’s show as part of the rally. They first learned of it Thursday morning from John Finley, Hannity's executive producer, who was in Cincinnati to produce Hannity's show.

Furious, top officials recalled Hannity back to New York to do his show in his regular studio. The network plans to do an extensive post-mortem about the incident with Finley and Hannity's staff.

“Fox News never agreed to allow the Cincinnati Tea Party organizers to use Sean Hannity’s television program to profit from broadcasting his show from the event," said Bill Shine, the network’s executive vice president of programming. "When senior executives in New York were made aware of this, we changed our plans for tonight’s show.”

Before the tea party movement got going, FOX News was very excited to use their entire network to promote them because a Democratic politician was elected to the White House. Now, they are trying to make believe that never happened. I wonder if their legal department got involved when money was changing hands with the teabaggers?

UPDATE: More News from FOX 19:

A statement was released by the Vice president of Programming of FOX News, Bill Shine.

"FOX News never agreed to allow the Cincinnati Tea Party Organizers to use Sean Hannity's television program to profit from broadcasting his show from the event. When senior executives in New York were made aware, we changed our plans for tonight's show." FOX News has confirmed that Sean Hannity's broadcast of tonight's show from New York City.

Yep, it's all about the cash. Well they still have Joe the Plumber and Bill Cunningham to entertain them...

Poor Glenn Reynolds of Pajamas Media has been there waiting for Hannity to arrive and now can be counted as the people who were surely disappointed by Hannity's sudden departure.

DOWNLOADS: (1640)

PLAYS: (6917)

Embed

Sometimes something you see on TV does come as a surprise no matter what the motivation behind it. The Factor highlights Goldberg with a Weekdays With Bernie segment so that FOX can bang the drum on librul bias. Bernie Goldberg has made a living out of trying to uncover and expose all the dirty hippie liberal bias in the media, but as BillO was playing the usual conservative victim card that FOX News lives on, Bernie stunned the loofah man. Oh Bernie, said BillO. Why oh why are we attacked so much? We're the only network that is fair and balanced and ... sniff...sniff ... we pay such a heavy price for it.

Bernie begins by sticking up for Roger Ailes and his right wing propaganda network, but then Bernie took a U-turn into reality. He praised FOX for breaking stories that the MSM won't and they are sooo jealous that they throw spitballs at the battles ship ... BUT ....

Goldberg:...this is what the so called mainstream media do. They get angry at FOX. This is wrong. This is the spitballs at the battleship argument, but sometimes Bill -- and whether you acknowledge it or not I'm going to state it -- sometimes FOX brings on the criticism itself. There are some programs on FOX that are not only NOT fair and balanced, they're commentary shows. They don't have to be, but they brag about how fair and balanced they are. They don't cover rallies and tea parties, they cheerlead rallies and tea parties, and as a journalist I am totally against that.

O'Reilly: All right ...

Goldberg: And to that extent the criticism is legitimate. By and large it's not...

O'Reilly: The problem there though is that all editorial pages cheerlead for their crew so if you read any newspaper, the Chicago Tribune, the LA Times, any newspaper in the country, they'll be cheerleading for the country global warming and they'll be saying, hey get out on Earth Day...

Goldberg: Right.

O'Reilly: Do this, do that, OK, fine and I don't have any problem with that. Wait Bernie. I don't have any problem with get out on Earth Day and be environmentally correct. No problem, they all do it. But if you then take a commentary, clearly label this and then they say, hey you tea party people, go on out there and show them that you don't like this big government intrusion. What's the difference?

Goldberg: the difference...I don't want to get too inside baseball with you.

O'Reilly: Come on, Bernie. What's the difference?

Goldberg: Here's a good answer. Don't pretend that you're being objective. Don't go on the air ... I don't mean you, I mean others on this network. Don't go on the air and say these tea parties are a cross section of America, they are not a cross section of America. Don't pretend to be a journalist if you're not a journalist. If you want to be a commentator and comment then be ...

BillO:...well let's get Glenn Beck do, Glenn beck comes on and he basically says I'm every man, I'm not a journalist, he says he's not a journalist, "I'm every man and I'm worried about the country and this is why I'm worried," and he has the blackboard and he has this and this is who I like, tea party guys and this is who I don't like, whoever Beck doesn't like...I don't see any subterfuge there, Sean Hannity comes on right after the Factor and Hannity says look, I'm a Reagan Republican, that's who I am, Sean Hannity. He's not trying to fool anybody, not trying to say anything like that. he says, "I'm a Reagan Republican so this is how I see the world. I mean, come on Bernie, these are legitimate stances, every man, Reagan Republican. What's the beef.

Goldberg: The commentary part of it is totally legitimate, but to give false information to because you're a commentator is unacceptable.

O'Reilly: If it's false information I agree, but I haven't seen a lot of that.

Goldberg: Wait a minute, are you telling me that you think those people at the tea parties were a cross section of America. There are as many liberal democrats as conservatives, there are as many people who support Obama

O'Reilly:I didn't hear any person say there were as many liberal democrats...

Goldberg: Oh, I did..I did, you want a few names?

O'Reilly: No!

Goldberg: You want a few names? Yea I know you don't...

Those people pretend that they're journalists at the same time I'm not a journalist. Well, if you're not a journalist don't pretend to be one ...

---

Goldberg: They go on the air and give their opinions, which is fine with me. They then state as facts things..

O'Reilly: Facts?

Goldberg:Facts, things that aren't facts at all.

Bernie called them liars. Wow, and he got hot and bothered with BillO in this segment -- and when he challenged Bill, The O Dog backed down. Why wasn't Beck worried about the country for eight years under Bush when this country was almost demolished by the conservative movement? Because a Republican was in office -- so his everyman act is a lie, but we know that. The folks here at C&L understand that. Hannity and Beck aren't the only two people making a mockery out of the FOX News brand. I wish Bernie would have gotten mad enough to drop a few names to BillO's audience. He may have gotten fired over it.

It's the whole network that cheers on the tea parties, that attacks almost every position President Obama was elected to legislate and that make up facts to conform to their opinions.

No doubt Goldberg is thinking of scenes like this one from Sean Hannity's show, featuring "reporter" Griff Jenkins positively cheerleading the Tea Party Express crowds.

BillO uses false equivalencies to justify FOX's behavior, which is wrong. FOX bills itself as the only fair and balanced network and even runs ads denouncing other cable news networks ... for their failures to cover the tea parties the way they did.

Obsidian Wings: Are there really two sides to the torture question? The WaPo declares itself unable to find the truth.

Balloon Juice: Stupid and Proud of It

The Reality-Based Community: There's been a lot of hand-wringing about the financial troubles of newspapers, but now it's quite obvious how reporters are handling the situation: they are just moonlighting for the insurance industry and the RNC. Nice work if you can get it.

Nameless Cynic: We're Communicating ll

Politics in the Zeros: Zero Hedge Whols. They don't want you to find them

HOLY CRAP: Oh ye hypocrites...GWB antichrist...Ugly Christian...No Gimmick Church...How Shall You Die?...Proof we're a 'Christian' nation...Hard-Wired for sin...Catholic Bishops assail health plan...Pious torturers...Followers of the Way... Atheists' Armageddon pet rescue...The last nail...

Harold's Left: The socialism of Firemen

Majikthise: Emerging narrative: Shut up liberals, you're ruining it. But the squeeky wheel gets the grease

Mondoweiss: LA Times columnist: Jerusalem is 'apartheid city' in 'apartheid country'

Calitics: The deliberate strangulation of democracy

Threat Level: Guantanamo defense lawyers being investigated over CIA photos

ANNALS OF JOURNALISM: Anatomy of a column...Don Hewitt, RIP...I. F. Stone and Robert Novak...When wingnut CEOs write op/ed pieces...Murdoch outs Rove as a liar...The Anal Cyst...Where do they find these people?...Apparently this business rag is run by hacks...News Corp. pushing for consortium...An explosion of truthiness...Ask This...Zell sells the Cubs...A Taylor-made Globe?

After reading this, I have to conclude that Conservatives really can't tell reality from fantasy and are easily manipulated by movies and TV. I'm starting to understand why the Brent Bozells are always trying to sue some TV show or other. They think it's real; I mean, why would anyone sue a Buffy TVS episode, right?

Anyway, Digby's post covers the Jack Bauer influence on the right wing party.

It's very creepy and disturbing.

The Wapo also reports that the thing was just about to be operational before the plug was pulled last month. The plot thickens.

The LA Times says that the "CIA Was A Long Way From Jason Bourne" but when I read that description of a secret hit squad with no limits, I was reminded of something else, which I wrote a year ago:

Fanboy Interrogations

Dahlia Lithwick has a great column in this week's Newsweek about the biggest influence on the thinking of members of the Bush administration in regards to its "interrogation" policies: Jack Bauer.

I've written a ton about this shocking phenomenon over the years, but even I didn't know that John Yoo actually cited the show in his book:

"What if, as the Fox television program '24' recently portrayed, a high-level terrorist leader is caught who knows the location of a nuclear weapon?"...read on

Read her full article because she ends with this.

Rush was actually asking the right question. I laughed at him at the time,thinking he was an embarrassing torture fanboy. But it turns out that the military really was getting ideas from the show:

According to British lawyer and writer Philippe Sands, Jack Bauer—played by Kiefer Sutherland—was an inspiration at early "brainstorming meetings" of military officials at Guantanamo in September of 2002. Diane Beaver, the staff judge advocate general who gave legal approval to 18 controversial new interrogation techniques including water-boarding, sexual humiliation, and terrorizing prisoners with dogs, told Sands that Bauer "gave people lots of ideas."

This probably worries me as much as anything I've heard about the antics of the Bush administration. These people are so fundamentally unserious that they found inspiration in a television show when the stakes were about as high as they could possibly be. It's horrifying to think these powerful people were this daft. But they were.

It seems it was actually worse than I thought.