Newt has constantly denied that he once supported Mitt Romney's health insurance mandate in Massachusetts, but the wayback machine has something else to say about that. Here's a letter written by Newt in April of 2006:

The most exciting development of the past few weeks is what has been happening up in Massachusetts. The health bill that Governor Romney signed into law this month has tremendous potential to effect major change in the American health system.

We agree entirely with Governor Romney and Massachusetts legislators that our goal should be 100% insurance coverage for all Americans. Individuals without coverage often do not receive quality medical attention on par with those who do have insurance. We also believe strongly that personal responsibility is vital to creating a 21st Century Intelligent Health System. Individuals who can afford to purchase health insurance and simply choose not to place an unnecessary burden on a system that is on the verge of collapse; these free-riders undermine the entire health system by placing the onus of responsibility on taxpayers.

The Romney plan attempts to bring everyone into the system. The individual mandate requires those who earn enough to afford insurance to purchase coverage, and subsidies will be made available to those individuals who cannot afford insurance on their own. We agree strongly with this principle, but the details are crucial when it comes to the structure of this plan. Under the new bill, Massachusetts residents earning more than 300% of the federal poverty level (approximately $30,000 for an individual) will not be eligible for any subsidies. State House officials had originally promised that there would be new plans available at about $200 a month, but industry experts are now predicting that the cheapest plan will likely cost at least $325 a month. This estimate totals about $4000 per year, or about 1/5 of a $30,000 annual take-home income.

Continue reading »

Early Saturday morning the Virginia GOP announced that Newt Gingrich didn't secure enough signatures to be placed on their Super Tuesday primary ballot. Newt wasn't alone in this. It turns out that most of the GOP field failed to do this, leaving Va. Republican voters with a choice between Mitt Romney and Ron Paul.

So what caused this problem? Well if you ask the commenters at Tea Party Nation, it turns out they have figured it out (registration required):

I never knew that President Obama and the unions had such power that they could actually go in and take over the Virginia GOP like that. Rather amazing if you ask me.

OK, let's step back from conspiracy land and look to see who is really to blame. Here's what Newt said in his statement:

Continue reading »

From June of 2011 -- Stewart tells Chris Wallace that Fox News is like 'ideological regimes'.

This is my column from Dec. 21 2010. Never thought it'd be evergreen - but here we are. Note I updated the figures on poverty and unemployment to make it current.

Ever been stuck in holiday traffic fighting to be stuck in a holiday cashier’s line so you can purchase low-priced presents on your high-balance Visa listening to high-volume holiday music and think, “Why am I doing this to myself?! I don’t even really LIKE Christmas. It’s just a scheme to get me to gain more weight AND gain more debt.”

When you’re broke, there’s nothing like Christmas to make you feel bad about yourself.

Nothing shatters one’s contentment more quickly than that ever-looping commercial in which a guy buys his wife a bow-wrapped $100,000 Lexus as a “surprise.” Every time it airs I think to myself, “My husband would have to put just that bow on layaway, and I’d still KNOW.”

But if you confess this deepest of secrets – this latent loathing of holiday “cheer” and the futile materialism of these now six weeks out of the year - someone inevitably hurls the accusation: What are you…a Scrooge?

Yes, Englishman Charles Dickens penned an American Classic. His A Christmas Carol, published in 1843, is now a staple of the season. It’s been re-made, re-hashed and re-imagined more times than John McCain’s political convictions. In the story a stingy old man hates Christmas until ghosts scare him into being generous. He ends up loving the holiday and all the trimmings.

However, Dickens unknowingly created a character who is now used as propaganda to quash all voices of Christmas Present dissent.

The dreaded: You are a Scrooge.

To which I say: No, I am not. If you read the tale, Scrooge is rich.

This is a widespread yuletide misnomer. It must be stopped now. I’m not even going to comment on Christ never envisioning his birthday plagued by obligatory tchotchke acquisitions; senseless seasonal slaughter of Douglas Firs; or the pointless battle about Walmart greeters muttering “Happy Holidays” (a contraction of holy days) versus the more allegedly pious “Merry Christmas” to an indifferent public. Charles Dickens, an advocate for the poor, certainly never meant for Ebenezer Scrooge’s name to be applied to those with a paycheck the size of Bob Cratchit’s.

Bob Cratchit - Scrooge's underpaid underling - is nice to people all year round even though he’s paid hardly anything. You know, Tiny Tim’s dad. That’s who 98 percent of Americans are.

We’re a nation of Bob Cratchits who are terrified of being Scrooges.

Yes, the difference between a venerable philanthropist and a charitable person – is a charitable person works for a living.

But we want the picture-perfect holiday gift-buying guidebook Christmas. So we fret, agonize and figure out a way. We create for ourselves unnecessary annual stress. And then it all goes on a credit card with interest paid perennially. All because we don’t want to be seen as a miser. We have to do Christmas, or we haven’t done something right.

Not giving on Christmas is a moral shortcoming. Or so we’re told. Not having money? A sin.

In a Dickensian reality, if we haven’t made enough money to fall in a certain tax bracket the Ghost of Christmas Past won’t even waste his time with us. Any apparitions 98 percent of us see are from the 90-proof in our eggnog. Holiday ghosts and specters – we’ll call them executive bonuses.

From Cratchit’s point of view he just worked hard, enjoyed his family and was pleasantly surprised when his boss had a change of heart.

The U.S. poverty rate is now at 15.1 percent. Our current unemployment is 8.6 percent. Our once robust middle-class is looking a little anemic. The vast majority of us are stretched thin. My point is: It’s time to lighten up…mainly on ourselves.

We are not Scrooges. We do, however, work for some (author’s note: except MY editor, of course).

This is Fox 11's Gigi Graciette. Gigi doesn't cover Dodger games or the Rose Parade by mentioning the debris discarded by attendees, but apparently that's how she covers a international protest's local chapter: they have trash left behind after they've been arrested en masse. Gross trash, too. Way to inform the public.

No question as to why 292 Angelenos all but volunteered to be arrested last night. No mention of what nonviolent struggle has accomplished in American history (ahem civil rights). No mention of the cruel irony of the protesters getting evicted because they brought homeless people to the steps of City Hall instead of the usual safe distance of two blocks east. No mention of the politics involved and how the City decided to support the protest, then negotiated with them and then suddenly reneged - made apparent by the 1400 LAPD officers in riot helmets on the streets of Los Angeles last night.

But here's the thing that really makes this clip disgusting from a basic journalism perspective: Gigi doesn't know and didn't find out what that mysterious white liquid was in those water bottles before she reported on them. She didn't know and instead of being hesitant to make accusations or start any rumors - she just does it without pause. I saw her there at around 11pm - she was there all night and never asked anyone what it was before she went live?! You're supposed to know MORE than the people on their couches watching you - because you're on the scene! This is hackery at its worse.

The white liquid is more than likely Maalox. They had it on site because it is supposed to neutralize the pain of pepper spray and tear gas. Yes, there's a story - there were hundreds of Angelenos willing to be pepper sprayed for a political statement. They were (their phrase) militantly nonviolent and had been spending days training and planning to be raided by police and THAT is what that mysterious white liquid symbolized - that's what it meant. They were willing, to quote Mario Savio "put their bodies upon the gears."

Since I will always assume the best in people, I will guess it's just laziness. Just not caring about telling a real story about Occupy LA and opting for the easy "look at the stuff on the ground" to fill up airtime. I say laziness and not incompetence or malice. But I'm feeling generous today.

“The media,” as it’s referred to, is not a monolith. We don’t just have one channel, one paper or one site with one nefarious dude pulling levers. “The media” consists of books, newspapers, magazines, television, billboards, radio, blogs, vlogs, ebooks, webcasts, podcasts and movies etc. The media is a vast and (kind of) diverse way of communicating information.

Let’s talk news. And where the majority of Americans – as in over 50 percent (by most estimates) – still get their news – from their local nightly news show. Any discussion about how unaware Americans are when it comes to news needs to have its finger pointed at the proper culprit: Your local broadcast.

Yes, everyone hates Congress but loves their Congressman. Everyone thinks “the media” is biased, wrong and awful – but tunes in to their local anchor with admiration and trust. A pox on them all, except our guy…

Last week a PublicMind FDU poll went viral with the line, “Fox News [viewers] are five-points more likely than those who watch no news at all, to incorrectly say it’s the U.S. that is bailing out European countries.” The under-reported story (buried lede as we call it in “the media”) was of those polled 67 percent said they watched their local news. And that could explain why 36 percent said they didn’t know who was bailing out Europe and only 30 percent gave the correct answer (Germany).

Did you know that Iceland is having a revolution as a direct result of the economic meltdown centered in the U.S. housing market? How about Syria being sanctioned by the Arab League? Vladamir Putin has gotten himself back on the ballot in Russia?

And it’s not just the “reading off BBC headlines” news the local news misses – it’s the actual local news: Investigative news in the public interest. News about the economy, politics and local issues.

Your local news opts to put a camera in the face of a crime victim and be a staple of “fear porn” rather than ever tackle difficult segments holding the school board/city council/mayor/state legislature/governor accountable for anything.

Why can I assume without sitting down and watching a week of your local newscast that they’re more than likely gleefully doing a recap of what happened on Dancing With the Stars/American Idol/Survivor tonight? Because your local broadcast news is more than likely ratings driven. And because of the last couple of decades of ratings driven local news our Edward R. Murrows have all become Harvey Levins.

Why are Americans not even rising to the level of ill informed and topping out at totally clueless? Because as Homo sapiens, we are effectively distracted by shiny objects and Kardashians. Plus our monkey brains got a chance to evolve this long by being on hyper-alert for danger, so we eat up any story telling us about “the hidden dangers lurking in our homes!” So of course we tune-in as told and in that way reward our local yokels for their reportage. And local yokels as Homo sapiens … also like rewards. It’s a vicious circle.

Continue reading »

In a closed press conference - on Black Friday - at the very end of the day (read: serious news dump) - Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa - a mayor who has presided over a May Day Melee, massive foreclosures and the arguably the worst homeless problem in the country declared Occupy LA a success for changing the national dialog.

He said in the press conference, "Occupy LA has brought needed attention to the growing disparities in our country and I look forward to its ongoing efforts to build an economy that works for everyone."

And then proceeded to tell the protesters that it's time for them to leave. More specifically, Monday morning at 12:01 am is time for them to leave. The park will be closed.

Here's the thing: this is civil disobedience. This is occupying a public space - breaking rules that don't hurt anyone. They're doing it to bring to attention things which we would otherwise ignore. It's supposed to make our elected officials uncomfortable. It's not a comforting message: they're in office and things are bad.

But, the hubris of a politician thinking he can placate civil disobedience by saying it has changed the national dialog is stunning. Really Villaraigosa? I hate to say this but at least we know where Michael Bloomberg is coming from. This "I agree with you but you have to go" seems slimier. Especially since Villaraigosa made no offer of policy changes that would show he, in fact, has heard any message from the protest. (They have made a list of grievances and, yes, they are mostly local issues...ya know, the jurisdiction of a mayor.)

Speaking of slime, in the mayor's statement on Facebook he clarifies that a "free speech area" - the west steps of City Hall will remain open. As if free speech is something that can be designated. Not how that works. Besides it's the freedom of peacefully assembly that's being pushed to its limits to make a point, not speech.

Occupy LA's response:

We reject outright the City’s attempts to lure us out of City Hall and into negotiations by offering us nebulous, non-transparent and unconfirmed offers which fail to even begin to address our local grievances. We will continue to occupy this space, in solidarity with our global movement, until the forces of the few are forced to capitulate to the power of the people.

The Occupiers are planning to defend the park. Some are planning to be arrested. I'm told even if they lose the park, they will still be Occupying. Shepard Fairey tweeted this last night:

Full statement from the mayor after the break:

Continue reading »

LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa ran virtually unopposed for his second term and still only got 55 percent of the vote. Between a sex scandal involving a member of the press - to wide reports of his all around hesitancy to do actual work - he's not well liked in Los Angeles. In fact, just the most basic tiny improvements to the city like planting a million trees or making a major thoroughfare a one-way during rush hour have failed during his tenure. Politically it's the end for Mayor V, he's not going to run for higher office. He's done.

So now as he's really accomplished little in his two terms to help a city whose unemployment is 12.2 percent - whose crumbling infrastructure is highlighted in car commercials as an obstacle course - Villaraigosa's next move is to give the boot to Occupy LA.

From local NBC4:

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa’s office will reportedly give Los Angeles occupiers a 72-hour window to close the City Hall lawn encampment as early as Monday.

Deputy Mayor Matt Szabo told Occupy L.A. representatives during an early afternoon meeting that the city would officially declare the 1.2-acre park surrounding City Hall closed sometime next week, according to National Lawyers Guild attorney Jim Lafferty.

The LA City Council unanimously passed a resolution in favor of Occupy LA. This week, it leaked that the Mayor's office has been trying to buy off the protesters with office space and farm land. So they first went for appeasement and because the protesters are not going away - it's time to change tactics.

Here's the thing: Occupy LA and City Hall are a few blocks from Skid Row - where tens of thousands of people have been sleeping in tents for decades on the streets. And somehow the mayor - a Democrat - whose managed to do little (and little right) is going to split hairs and try to kick out protesters angry about extreme wealth inequality?

This is what you call Tony's golden touch and it's about to meet Occupy. This will go well.

I saw this picture a couple of days ago and I wasn't going to write about it. I don't think Herman Cain is going to get the nomination. He's not going to ever have any real elected power. He's just a local radio talk show host Americans for Prosperity has propped up to be the straight-talking reason the tea party isn't racist (wink, wink). Speaking of which, yesterday I was on a right-wing radio show (he says he's "independent"...wink) and there were John Birch Society ads running during the break and the narrator had a distinctly African-American voice. Interesting.

Anyway, it wasn't until last night at the 84th GOP primary debate when Cain called the first female Speaker of the House "Princess Nancy" right in the middle of his sexual harassment scandal did he really get my ire up. "Queen" I think I'd be OK with. But really? Princess? She's a history maker, a grandmother and a respected Democrat wrangler - not a vacuous tween irritant. Men who don't see women as equals, don't get how not to be demeaning.

Plus when you're not a schmuck who uses your influence to get women to do you sexual favors and you're accused of doing that - you don't start blaming "democrat machines" and fingering whomever you think leaked the story. A "leak" by the way, denotes truth - as opposed to a "smear" which is false. A true story is leaked...probably by Romney.

So in the wake of the "Princess Nancy" projectile: I submit this picture of Herman Cain and Chicago broadcaster, Amy Jacobson. This picture was released after Jacobson said she was a witness to Cain and his first public accuser, Sharon Bialek, hugging at an event a month ago. This was after Cain said he'd never met the woman accusing him of sexual harassment (and groping).

Continue reading »

Paul Simon - The Boy in the Bubble

Staccato signals of constant information
A loose affiliation of millionaires
And billionaires and baby
These are the days of miracle and wonder
This is the long distance call
The way the camera follows us in slo-mo
The way we look to us all
The way we look to a distant constellation
That's dying in a corner of the sky
These are the days of miracle and wonder
And don't cry baby, don't cry

The Chinese proverb/curse "May you live in interesting times" keeps knocking about in my brain this week. We certainly are living in interesting times. Whether it proves to be a blessing or a curse is yet to be seen. But it is amazing to me to think that just 50 years ago, my parents marched for the rights of African Americans to overcome Jim Crow in the South and now we have a black man in the Oval Office. That in my pocket right now is a device with more computing power than the room-sized server that I learned to program Fortran on 25 years ago in college. That after 10 long, frustrating years, we can finally say that we will have no military in Iraq this Christmas (although we'll still have defense contractors there at inflated rates for the foreseeable future, don't get me wrong). And after two years of constant talk about addressing the deficit by taking away every single social safety net, our Republican politicians have abandoned deficit-speak for job-speak (oddly, their solution appears to be the same for both problems). These really *are* the days of miracle and wonder.

ABC's "This Week" - Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton; Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.

NBC's "Meet the Press" - Clinton; 2012 GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul; White House adviser David Plouffe.

NBC's "The Chris Matthews Show" - Gloria Borger, Michael Duffy, David Ignatius, Kelly O'Donnell. Topics: Would Mitt Romney Be the Most Unlikeable Presidential Nominee Since Richard Nixon? Would the Obama Campaign Use Romney's Mormon Religion Against Him?

CBS' "Face the Nation" - 2012 GOP presidential candidates Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum.

CNN's "State of the Union" - Vice President Joe Biden; Clinton; Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.

CNN's "Fareed Zakaria GPS" - Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

"Fox News Sunday" - Clinton; Bachmann; Sen. Lindsey Graham R-S.C.

So, what's catching your eye this morning?