I remember running this post a couple of years ago:

An employee of KTVX-TV who apparently used the wrong Twitter account to send a slightly off-color message to KTVX’s 4400 followers has been dismissed, reports Lost Remote.

The staffer was trying to send the following to his/her personal account, not the account of the ABC station in Salt Lake City:

“I’m downtown eating. Surrounded by Mormons and repressed sexual energy.”

KTVX says it accepted the resignation of the staffer who got his/her wires crossed.

Little did I know how right that reporter was. I've been doing some reading about the LDS culture, and the duties of a Mormon bishop (like Mitt Romney) in particular. There's some pretty creepy stuff -- and a whole damned boatload of repressed sexual energy. We'll get to that later.

But first, what I'm coming up with are numerous accounts of child abuse -- and child sexual abuse, as spelled out in "Scout's Honor," an award-winning investigative series about how the LDS church and its Idaho Falls scouting program covered up for the sexual molestation of Scouts by a Mormon pedophile.

Funny thing: Peter Zuckerman, the reporter who did the series, was outed as gay in a full-page newspaper ad paid for by billionaire Frank VanderSloot, Romney campaign finance co-chair and chairman of Melaleuca, Inc., an MLM company. VanderSloot is famous for threatening reporters, bloggers and publications with lawsuits. He's also a major donor to the Restore Our Future superPAC.

I also discovered a long chain of stories about "ranches" and "camps" owned and run by very politically connected Utah Mormons - especially the World Wide Association of Specialty Schools, founded by Robert Lichfield, who was Mitt Romney's finance co-chair back in 2007. He either resigned or was asked to resign after the abuse stories broke:

Robert Lichfield, a businessman with no clinical training in psychology, formed the World Wide Association of Specialty Programs in 1998. The Utah-based organization promoted itself as an umbrella company that linked independently run programs operating under WWASP guidelines to families in need. Further investigations have revealed, however, that all programs were operated and run by family members and business associates of Robert Lichfield. WWASP operated programs both in the US and abroad.

Multiple lawsuits have led to the closure of all official WWASP facilities, though rumors persist that several schools have reopened under new company names. Accusations include locking children in dog cages, severe physical beatings, food and sleep deprivation, pepper spraying of minors, isolation, lack of communication to parents, unreported sexual abuse, unsanitary living conditions, and brainwashing/emotional abuse.

And you thought Mitt locking his dog in a cage on the car roof was bad? Kids were sent to these camps for crimes like being gay, or for refusing to attend early-morning LDS services.

Now, here's where it gets really interesting:

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (388)

PLAYS: (2611)

Embed

As Martin Bashir points out, what kind of job pays $174,000 a year, gives you nine weeks vacation and doesn’t expect you to do much in return?

President Obama made some digs yesterday asking Congress to lower student loan rates and make it possible for underwater homeowners to refinance their mortgages before “going on vacation” from legislative work, and Bashir took the message and ran with it. Little Luke Russert? Not so much.

Congress is "very upfront in the beginning of the year about what their schedule is," Russert said. He said this was "emblematic of the problems with our system," including gerrymandering and the money in the political system.

Bashir interrupted him: "Our listeners just heard champagne corks popping in the background!", telling the nervously laughing Russert, "this isn't funny!".

Young Luke explained that it was just a belated Queen’s Jubilee celebration.

Bashir retorted, "I thought we had a constitution that did not include monarchs and barons." Hah!

In October 2009, here's how Sen. Jay Rockefeller described the Medicare Advantage plans:

"It's a wasteful, inefficient program and always has been," Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.) said at a recent hearing. At its core, Rockefeller added, Medicare Advantage is "stuffing money into the pockets of private insurers, and it doesn't provide any better benefits to anybody."

Yes, the for-profit add-on plans the Republicans pushed through under Bush heavily subsidize services. (So much for "pay as you go," huh?)

A study released yesterday by a major consulting firm found that premiums for Medicare Advantage plans offering medical and prescription-drug coverage jumped 14.2 percent on average in 2010, after an increase of 5.2 percent the previous year. Some 8.5 million elderly and disabled Americans are in the plans, which provide more comprehensive coverage than traditional Medicare, often at lower cost.

Lee Durrwachter, a retired chemical engineer from Grand Marais, Mich., said his premiums more than doubled this year - even though he switched plans to try to save money. "It doesn't bode well," he said. "It's unaffordable."

The Medicare findings are bad news for President Obama and his health-care overhaul that is bogged down in Congress. That is because the higher Medicare Advantage premiums for 2010 followed a cut in government payments to the private plans last year. And the Democratic bills pending in Congress call for even more cuts, which are expected to force many seniors to drop out of what has been a rapidly growing alternative to traditional Medicare.

Republicans have seized on the Medicare Advantage cuts in their campaign to derail the health-care bills, and seniors are listening. Polls show seniors are more skeptical of the legislation than the public as a whole, even though Democrats would also reinforce original Medicare by improving preventive benefits and narrowing the prescription-coverage gap.

It seems that there is an explanation of Tim Geithner's actions in the backdoor AIG bailout: He didn't know, according to the NY Fed's general counsel:

Jan. 9 (Bloomberg) -- Timothy Geithner, the former Federal Reserve Bank of New York president, wasn’t aware of efforts to limit American International Group Inc.’s bailout disclosures because the regulator’s top lawyer didn’t think the issue merited his attention, the attorney told lawmakers.

“Matters relating to AIG securities law disclosures were not brought to the attention of Mr. Geithner,” Thomas Baxter, general counsel of the New York Fed, said yesterday in a letter to Representative Darrell Issa, a California Republican, and Edolphus Towns, Democrat of New York. “In my judgment as the New York Fed’s chief legal officer, disclosure matters of this nature did not warrant the attention of the president.” Geithner, who helped orchestrate the bailout of AIG when he led the New York Fed, is now Treasury Department secretary.

Geithner and Baxter were asked yesterday to testify before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee about e- mails from the New York Fed in 2008, when Geithner led the regulator, asking AIG to withhold data about payments to banks. Firms including Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Societe Generale SA were fully reimbursed on swap guarantees from AIG, prompting Issa to call its rescue a “backdoor bailout” of banks.

Issa said it was “staggering” that Baxter felt he didn’t need to notify Geithner about discussions with New York-based AIG about what records the insurer should make public in Securities and Exchange Commission filings. Baxter’s “letter raises more questions on the inner-workings of the New York Fed during one of the most pivotal periods in our nation’s history,” he said in an e-mail.

They're released data from the earliest cases of swine flu deaths, showing that people over 50 who were admitted to the hospital were likelier to die. This has a different curve from seasonal flu deaths, where adult deaths are typically people over 80:

An analysis of more than 1,000 California patients hospitalized with H1N1 flu during the first four months of the pandemic found that infants were most likely to be admitted, and patients 50 and older were most likely to die once admitted.

In the first four months of the pandemic, H1N1, like the seasonal flu, was especially severe in older people, who are more likely to have underlying health conditions, says lead author Janice Louie, a public-health medical officer at the California Department of Public Health.

However, Louie says, unlike seasonal flu, older people are far less likely than children and young adults to contract the H1N1 flu in the first place. For that reason, the study won't lead the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to add healthy older people to the list of priority groups for H1N1 vaccine, director Thomas Frieden told reporters Tuesday.

Of 1,088 patients hospitalized with H1N1 flu in California, 11%, or 118 patients, died, and 30%, or 340 patients, were admitted to intensive-care units, Louie and her co-authors report in today's Journal of the American Medical Association. In patients 50 and older, the death rate was up to 20%, compared with about 2% in hospitalized patients under age 18.

The study focuses on patients who were hospitalized between April 23 and Aug. 11. Whether H1N1, or swine flu, will eventually mutate and cause more severe illness is not yet known, Louie says: "Influenza is pretty unpredictable."

Nearly a third of all the hospitalized patients in her study were reported to have no underlying conditions, such as lung disease, associated with an increased risk of flu complications.

But a disproportionate number of them were obese, an observation that also has been made in other countries, the authors write. Obesity doesn't appear to be a risk factor for seasonal flu.

Of the 361 patients whose body mass index – or BMI, a number based on height and weight – was known, half were obese, and half of those patients were morbidly obese, defined as having a BMI over 39, or roughly 100 pounds overweight.

This is conservative thought at its best.

I'm not kidding.

DSCC has a mock site going.

CNN has a piece on it.

As former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina prepares to enter the 2010 California Senate race on the GOP side, her quirky new Web site is being ridiculed by the online community — and not just by those on the political left.

Republicans are also snickering about her bare-bones site, CarlyforCalifornia.com, which launched Monday and welcomes visitors with an animation describing a potential showdown between Fiorina and Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer in curious terms.

"It's Day and Night," the bright red Web site reads. "It's Dogs and Cats. It's Good and Bad. It's Carly vs. Boxer."

After hinting that the Republican's official entry into the race is "coming soon," the animation concludes with a pun: "Carlyfornia dreamin!!!"

She's showing off those hi-tech chops that she demonstrated so shrewdly while driving H-P into a ditch, I guess.

See, here's the thing about the very concept of "bipartisan" compromise: The only Republican officials left are from the far fringe of their party. So you really can't negotiate with them in any meaningful sense - you can only capitulate.

And that's pretty much what the members of Max Baucus's little private party have done. They've stripped anything resembling real competition from their secret healthcare proposal. I wonder why Republicans are running this process? (And please note: not one member of this cabal is a progressive, nor from an urban area. Not quite representative of the rest of us, wouldn't you say?)

This would be a very good day to flood the offices of Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., Sens. Kent Conrad of North Dakota and Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, the Democrats slicing and dicing away our future, with PHONE CALLS (not emails) telling them you want a strong public option - unlike President Obama, apparently.

WASHINGTON – After weeks of secretive talks, a bipartisan group in the Senate edged closer Monday to a health care compromise that omits a requirement for businesses to offer coverage to their workers and lacks a government insurance option that President Barack Obama favors, according to numerous officials.

Like bills drafted by Democrats, the proposal under discussion by six members on the Senate Finance Committee would bar insurance companies from denying coverage to any applicant. Nor could insurers charge higher premiums on the basis of pre-existing medical conditions.

But it jettisons other core Democratic provisions in a reach for bipartisanship on an issue that has so far produced little.

[...] In the Senate, officials stressed that no agreement has been reached on a bipartisan measure, and said there is no guarantee of one. They also warned that numerous key issues remain to be settled, including several options to pay for the legislation. They spoke on condition of anonymity, saying they were not authorized to discuss matters under private negotiations.

They said any legislation that emerges from the talks is expected to provide for a non-profit cooperative to sell insurance in competition with private industry, rather than giving the federal government a role in the marketplace. The White House and numerous Democrats in Congress have called for a government option to provide competition to private companies and hold down costs.

[...] The senators involved in the negotiations are all members of the Senate Finance Committee, and include Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., the chairman, and Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, the senior Republican. Others participating are Democratic Sens. Kent Conrad of North Dakota and Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, and Republicans Olympia Snowe of Maine and Mike Enzi of Wyoming.

But here's the real money quote:

Individuals would have a mandate to buy affordable insurance, but companies would not have a requirement to offer it.

Ladies and gentlemen, this is why we voted for Democrats - so we could hand over our fate yet again to the Republicans. Let them know what you think.

It's good that I'm not a reporter anymore. I had this unfortunate habit of telling politicians what I thought of their policies (I once asked one, "How do you look at yourself in the mirror?"), and we know that sort of behavior just wouldn't help me get ahead in the Beltway media bubble.

Instead, I get to tell the world what I think of Max Baucus: that he's an amoral ass, someone who's more interested in successful horse-trading over a bill than actually achieving the goal of insuring people who genuinely need help:

A group of key Senate negotiators has found a way to further reduce the price tag of the health care reform bill, bringing it in line with a $1 trillion target and moving the Senate Finance Committee closer to a deal, Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) said Thursday.

"We have options that would enable us to write a $1 trillion bill fully paid for," Baucus said.

But the bipartisan group of Senate negotiators issued a statement saying they were moving ahead. It was meant to signal that, despite the slow going and the many issues that have yet to be resolved, they intend to reach a compromise.

"As we have been for the last several weeks, we are committed to continuing our work toward a bipartisan bill that will lower costs and ensure quality, affordable care for every American," the group said.

Well, no. Not every American. But really, they figured out something that's so cool, you won't believe it!

[...] The cost became the top concern of Finance Committee senators after they received an estimate last week from the Congressional Budget Office claiming that an early version of the bill would top $1.6 trillion, or $600 billion more than expected.

The senators said they found $400 billion in savings earlier this week, largely by reducing the amount of subsidies for low-income individuals to buy insurance.

Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) said they found much of the additional $200 billion in savings by further adjusting the level of subsidies. It is unclear, however, whether they would reduce the amount of each subsidy or lower the income level at which people become eligible.

Now, how clever is that? The way to solve the problem is to make sure that the poorest Americans have to cough up more money. In other words, the law will require them to be insured - but they won't be able to afford it. Problem solved!

"It is now a process of determining where does the support lie for which of these options that are chosen," Conrad said. "This is very substantial movement, very significant progress and very encouraging. Everybody who heard these numbers this morning had smiles on their faces, I can tell you that."

Must. Go. Bang. Head. On. Wall...

You gotta love it when a long shot wins - and it wasn't even close. Creigh Deeds took 50 percent of the vote in a three-way primary. [Note for political junkies: McAuliffe beat Deeds in only one district, the 3rd - where he sent Bill Clinton to campaign for him in the African-American community.] Deeds, a well-liked and personable guy, is also moderately conservative. Watch as the Democratic-consultant lemmings everywhere decide this means he won because he's a conservative, not in spite of it, and start yanking candidates ever rightward:

R. Creigh Deeds, a longtime state legislator from rural Bath County, won a stunning come-from-behind victory in the Democratic primary for Virginia governor last night, overwhelming a pair of better-funded and better-positioned opponents.

Deeds beat Brian Moran and Terry McAuliffe in every region of the state, including vote-rich Northern Virginia, despite a pro-gun stance and relatively conservative positions that are out of line with many of the area's voters. His victory was so dominant that he captured 10 of the state's 11 congressional districts, including the one held by Moran's brother, U.S. Rep. James P. Moran Jr.

All three campaigns and state political experts had agreed that Deeds was coming on strong in the final days of the race, but no one expected him -- or the other candidates -- to come close to winning the 50 percent of the vote that he captured. In an e-mail sent to supporters less than two hours before polls closed, McAuliffe's campaign predicted that "this thing could come down to the wire." McAuliffe came in second, with 26 percent of the vote, followed by Brian Moran with 24 percent.

Deeds, 51, will face Republican Robert F. McDonnell in a general election battle that amounts to a rematch of the race for attorney general four years ago, which McDonnell barely won after a late surge by Deeds.

When asked how many lobbyists work at the McCain campaign, Rick Davis told Katie Couric: "we don't make it a litmus test for employment at the McCain campaign." But in May, after a series of reports about McCain's campaign being run by lobbyists, Davis wrote a memo outlining a new campaign policy that said: "No person working for the Campaign may be a registered lobbyist or foreign agent, or receive compensation for any such activity." (h/t Sam)

Confused yet?

TPM has more....