RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Politics
Citigroup to Move Headquarters to U.S. Capitol Building Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=9160"><span class="small">Andy Borowitz, The New Yorker</span></a>   
Sunday, 14 December 2014 14:51

Borowitz writes: "The banking giant Citigroup announced on Friday that it would move its headquarters from New York to the U.S. Capitol Building, in Washington, D.C., in early 2015."

U.S. Capitol building. (photo:  Wikimedia Commons)
U.S. Capitol building. (photo: Wikimedia Commons)


Citigroup to Move Headquarters to U.S. Capitol Building

By Andy Borowitz, The New Yorker

14 December 14

 

The article below is satire. Andy Borowitz is an American comedian and New York Times-bestselling author who satirizes the news for his column, "The Borowitz Report."

he banking giant Citigroup announced on Friday that it would move its headquarters from New York to the U.S. Capitol Building, in Washington, D.C., in early 2015.

Tracy Klugian, a spokesperson for Citi, said that the company had leased thirty thousand square feet of prime real estate on the floor of the House of Representatives and would be interviewing “world-class architects” to redesign the space to suit its needs.

According to sources, Citi successfully outbid other firms, including JPMorgan Chase and Goldman Sachs, for the right to move its headquarters to the House floor.

The Citi spokesperson acknowledged that the extensive makeover of the House is expected to cost “in the millions,” but added, “It’s always expensive to open a new branch.”

Explaining the rationale behind the move, Klugian told reporters, “Instead of constantly flying out from New York to give members of Congress their marching orders, Citigroup executives can be right on the floor with them, handing them legislation and telling them how to vote. This is going to result in tremendous cost savings going forward.”

Klugian said that Citi’s chairman, Michael E. O’Neill, will not occupy a corner office on the House floor, preferring instead an “open plan” that will allow him to mingle freely with members of Congress.

“He doesn’t want to come off like he’s their boss,” the spokesperson said. “Basically, he wants to send the message, ‘We’re all on the same team. Let’s roll up our sleeves and get stuff done.’ ”


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
What's Next? Prosecuting a Pregnant Woman for Working Full Time? Print
Sunday, 14 December 2014 14:40

Kolbi-Molinas writes: "This summer, Tennessee thumbed its nose at doctors, nearly every national medical association, addiction experts, and women's right activists and passed a law that essentially criminalizes pregnancy. In short, this deeply misguided law risks the health of women and babies by threatening expectant mothers who struggle with addiction or substance abuse with jail time."

It's not just about abortion -- the right is locking up women when it deems them a threat to their fetuses. (photo: Shutterstock.com)
It's not just about abortion -- the right is locking up women when it deems them a threat to their fetuses. (photo: Shutterstock.com)


What's Next? Prosecuting a Pregnant Woman for Working Full Time?

By Alexa Kolbi-Molinas, American Civil Liberties Union

14 December 14

 

his summer, Tennessee thumbed its nose at doctors, nearly every national medical association, addiction experts, and women's right activists and passed a law that essentially criminalizes pregnancy. In short, this deeply misguided law risks the health of women and babies by threatening expectant mothers who struggle with addiction or substance abuse with jail time, forcing those women who need health care the most into the shadows.

Already, women are being arrested and separated from their children – instead of getting support – because they suffer from drug addiction.

Now, a federal prosecutor wants in on the action: The U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Tennessee William C. Killian issued a statement bragging that Lacey Weld would serve an enhanced (in other words, extended) sentence for her role in an alleged drug conspiracy because she was pregnant at the time, even though she had already fully cooperated with authorities in exchange for a reduced sentence. In other words, the prosecutor singled out Ms. Weld for harsher penalties solely because she was pregnant. Unfortunately, after a hearing riddled with medical and scientific inaccuracies, a judge agreed to the enhancement.

Addiction is not a crime. Neither is being pregnant. That is why we joined a friend-of-the-court brief filed by the National Advocates for Pregnant Women, on behalf of leading constitutional, medical, and public health experts, asking the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals to reverse the decision to punish Ms. Weld for her pregnancy. We have also asked Attorney General Holder to renounce the federal prosecutor in Tennessee's actions and ensure that no other federal prosecutor takes this position in the future.

Not only is criminalizing pregnancy flatly unconstitutional, it's dangerous for women, families, and babies.

Though the prosecutor might claim that doling out extra punishment to pregnant women protects babies, the evidence is crystal clear that policies like these don't support healthy pregnancies. Leading medical groups like the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics have long opposed these types of laws and policies. By threatening pregnant women with prosecution, these policies can drive a woman struggling with addiction away from health care and discourage her from seeking treatment, including prenatal and pregnancy-related care.

Who does that help, other than extreme prosecutors or legislators looking to enhance their reputations?

We all want women and babies to be healthy, and that's why we should follow the lead of medical professionals here, not prosecutors. Pregnancy and addiction should be considered a public health issue, not a criminal one. We cannot allow emotion, stigma, and junk science, like the grossly inaccurate statements made during the course of Ms. Weld's sentencing hearing, to guide policy.

Pregnant women who struggle with addiction or substance abuse don't need harsher sentences. They need better access to health care.

If threatening the health of women and families weren't awful enough, moves like this fling open the door to prosecutions for a never-ending list of behaviors that are common because they "risk the health of the fetus." Do we really want to open the door for extreme politicians to punish pregnant women for an endless list of things – like not exercising enough, working long hours, being exposed to certain chemicals on the job, or being unable to afford regular prenatal care?

Politicians – and prosecutors – simply have no business playing doctor by trying to make pregnancy a crime, just as they have no business interfering with women's other medical decisions. When they do, the results can be disastrous.

Those really concerned with the welfare of women and babies would do well to make sure pregnant women struggling with addiction have better access to health care, not use them as examples to further their own private or political gain.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
FOCUS | How 'Awesome' Is America? Print
Sunday, 14 December 2014 12:33

Parry writes: "Fox News host Andrea Tantaros is facing some well-deserved ridicule for refuting the stomach-turning Senate Intelligence Committee report on torture by declaring that 'The United States is awesome. We are awesome' and claiming that the Democrats and President Barack Obama released the report because they want 'to show us how we’re not awesome.'"

Fox News host Andrea Tantaros. (photo: Fox News)
Fox News host Andrea Tantaros. (photo: Fox News)


How 'Awesome' Is America?

By Robert Parry, Consortium News

14 December 14

 

ox News host Andrea Tantaros is facing some well-deserved ridicule for refuting the stomach-turning Senate Intelligence Committee report on torture by declaring that “The United States is awesome. We are awesome” and claiming that the Democrats and President Barack Obama released the report because they want “to show us how we’re not awesome.”

Tantaros’s rant did have the feel of a Saturday Night Live satire, but her upbeat jingoism was only a slight exaggeration of what Americans have been hearing from much of their media and politicians for decades. At least since the presidency of Ronald Reagan, any substantive criticism of the United States has been treated as unpatriotic.

Indeed, a journalist or a politician who dares point out any fundamental flaws in the country or even its actual history can expect to have his or her patriotism challenged. That is how debate over “how we’re not awesome” is silenced.

Fox News may be the poster child of this infantile anti-intellectualism but the same sentiments can be found on the Washington Post’s neocon editorial pages or in the higher-brow New Republic. If you dare point out that America or one of its favored “allies” has done some wrong around the world, you’re an enemy “apologist.” If you regularly adopt a critical stance, you will be marginalized.

That’s why so many serious national problems have lingered or gotten worse. If we don’t kill the messenger, we denounce him or her as un-American.

For instance, the data on racial disparities in police killings and prison incarcerations have long been available, but the vast majority of whites seem oblivious to these continued injustices. To point out that the United States has still not done the necessary hard work to correct these history-based imbalances makes you seem out of step amid the happy-face belief that whatever racism there was is now gone. We have a black president, you know.

So, when white police shoot or otherwise apply excessive violence against blacks at a wildly disproportionate rate to whites, many white Americans just shrug. They even get annoyed if black athletes join in some symbolic protests like raising their hands as Michael Brown did before he was shot to death in Ferguson, Missouri. Many people hate to have the real world intrude on their sports entertainment.

In reaction to such events, Fox News and much of talk radio find reasons to ridicule the victims and the protesters rather than address the real problems. The unwelcome evidence of racism is just another excuse to roll the eyes and infuse the voice with dripping sarcasm.

Mundane Neglect

On a more mundane level in Arlington County, Virginia, where I live, many whites simply don’t see the racial disparities though they are all around. While overwhelmingly white North Arlington benefits from all manner of public investments, including a state-of-the-art subway system which cost billions upon billions of dollars and amenities likes a $2 million “dog park renovation,” racially diverse South Arlington, the historic home of the County’s black population, is systematically shortchanged, except when it comes to expanding the sewage treatment plant.

When the County Board finally approved a much cheaper light-rail mass-transit plan for South Arlington’s Columbia Pike and voted for a public pool complex in another South Arlington neighborhood, North Arlington residents rose up in fury. The local newspaper, the Sun-Gazette, which doesn’t even distribute in much of South Arlington – due to the demographics – rallied the political opposition.

Before long, the County Board was in retreat, killing both the public pools and the light-rail plan, all the better to free up taxpayer money for more North Arlington projects. Yet, when I have noted the racial component to how the two halves of the county are treated, many Arlington whites get furious. They simply don’t see the residual racism or don’t want to see it. They view themselves as enlightened even as they favor neglecting their black and brown neighbors.

After I wrote a column about the history of Columbia Pike, which became an African-American freedom trail after President Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation and ex-slaves escaped up the roadway toward Washington, one reader complained that I had slighted Robert E. Lee by saying he had “deserted” the U.S. Army when his fans prefer saying that he “resigned his commission,” which sounds so much more proper.

The point is interesting not only because the commenter didn’t seem nearly as concerned about the fate of the African-Americans, some of whom joined the U.S. Colored Troops to fight for the final defeat of slavery. And not only because General Lee violated his oath as a U.S. officer in which he swore to “bear true allegiance to the United States of America” and to “serve them honestly and faithfully against all their enemies or opposers whatsoever, and observe and obey the orders of the President of the United States.”

But the commenter’s point is also interesting because it underscores how white Americans have excused and even glorified the Confederate “heroes” who were fighting to protect a system based on the ownership of other human beings. If you have any doubt about the glorification, just visit Monument Avenue in Richmond, Virginia, where towering statues of Confederate generals dominate the skyline.

Or, if you’re in Arlington and driving on Route One, you might notice that it is still named in honor of Jefferson Davis, the president of the Confederacy who was a fervent white supremacist and a major slaveholder. And, if President Davis and General Lee had been successful in their war of secession, it could have meant that slavery might never have ended. Yet, these protectors of slavery are treated with the utmost respect and any slight toward them requires a protest.

Crude Racism

My writings about Thomas Jefferson also have elicited anger from some people who wish to idolize him as a noble philosopher/statesman when the reality was that he was a crude racist (see his Notes on the State of Virginia) who mistreated his Monticello slaves, including having boys as young as ten whipped and raping one and likely other of his slave girls. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “Thomas Jefferson: America’s Founding Sociopath.”]

Much like the defender of Robert E. Lee who preferred more polite phrasing about the general’s betrayal of his oath, defenders of the Jefferson myth expressed much more outrage over my pointing out these inconvenient truths about their hero than they did about the victims of Jefferson’s despicable behavior and stunning hypocrisies.

Which gets us back to Andrea Tantaros and how “awesome” America is. The context for her remarks was the release of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s torture report which detailed what can no longer be euphemized away as “enhanced interrogation techniques” or EITs as CIA officials prefer.

The only word that can now apply is torture, at least for anyone who has read the page-after-page of near drownings via waterboard, the hallucinatory effects of sleep deprivation, the pain inflicted by hanging people from ceilings, and the sexual sadism of keeping detainees naked and subjecting them to anal rape under the pretext of “rectal rehydration” and “rectal feeding.”

The various apologists for this torture – people like Tantaros, Vice President Dick Cheney and Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer – prefer to counterattack by questioning the patriotism or the intellectual consistency of those Americans who are outraged at these actions. The torture defenders excuse the behavior because we were scared after 9/11 and wanted the Bush administration to do whatever it took to keep us safe.

All of these excuses are designed to prevent the sort of soul-searching that one should expect from a mature democratic Republic, a country that seeks to learn from its mistakes, not cover them up or forget them.

Instead of Americans confronting these dark realities of both their history and their present – and making whatever amends and adjustments are necessary – the torture apologists or those who don’t see racism would simply have us wave the flag and declare how “awesome” we are.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Sea Swallows the Last House in Doomed Virginia Beach Town Print
Sunday, 14 December 2014 08:00

Hanscom writes: "Richard F. Hall will land in the history books, if he makes it at all, alongside dreamers and hucksters who sold swampland in Florida and on parched mesa tops in New Mexico."

Cedar Island, Virginia. (photo: Gordon Campbell/Altitude Photography)
Cedar Island, Virginia. (photo: Gordon Campbell/Altitude Photography)


Sea Swallows the Last House in Doomed Virginia Beach Town

By Greg Hanscom, Grist

14 December 14

 

ichard F. Hall will land in the history books, if he makes it at all, alongside dreamers and hucksters who sold swampland in Florida and on parched mesa tops in New Mexico. Hall was the developer who tried to build a beach town on Cedar Island, a patch of wind- and wave-tossed sand off the Virginia coast.

Here’s Tom Horton, writing in The Baltimore Sun in 1998:

Once, Cedar was touted as the mid-Atlantic’s next premier beach resort. “Ocean City, Virginia,” it was dubbed in a glowing, 1950s sales brochure published by developer Richard F. Hall.

“The new Chesapeake Bay Bridge now nearing completion brings the great cities of Washington and Baltimore within pleasant driving distance,” Hall wrote in 1951.

He envisioned a bridge to the island from the Accomack County mainland and a highway running the length of Cedar. Without either one, Hall sold some 2,000 lots …

The bridge and the highway never materialized. Still, Hall’s granddaughter, Elizabeth, and her developer husband, sold more land on the island in the 1980s, even as the houses that people built there washed, one by one, into the sea.

Those who had the means moved their vacation homes away from the advancing surf. A few of them hung on for decades. But now comes the news that the sea has swallowed the last house standing on Cedar Island.

From Rona Kobell at the Bay Journal:

The pretty red fishing cabin has joined the remnants of dozens of other homes — some with grand pianos — in the waves of the Atlantic Ocean. But the owners of the last house wanted to be responsible, so they burned the cabin when they knew the end was near. [They] did not want their septic tanks, their drywall, to pollute the ocean. Their care is remarkable only because so many failed to do even the minimum to protect the natural environment that drew them there, and then did what it was always going to do: it turned on them.

Scientists warned that building on Cedar was like trying to sink a foundation into a cloud. Driven by storms, wind, and waves, the island shifted hundreds of feet in some years. As Horton explained in that Sun story, there is simply not enough sand in the surrounding water for the waves to rebuild Cedar Island when storms wash it away. State regulators knew this, but allowed the development anyway.

And people bought it, some of them fully aware that the clock was ticking on the place. As one of the last residents told Horton, even if his place were to wash into the ocean the following week (and it very well may have), “it was worth it to be out here.”

That comment brought to mind a conversation I had with a bookstore clerk in Miami Beach last spring. That community, also built on a barrier island, has spent millions to replenish its eroding beaches — all in an effort to avoid, or at least delay, the same fate as Cedar Island and others before it.

The clerk asked me how much time the community had before the waters that are already lapping at its doorsteps swamp it completely. I told him that scientists believe that the seas will rise three feet or more by the end of the century.

“Well, that’s a couple more mortgage cycles, at least,” he said, optimistically. “As long as there’s money to be made, I don’t think people here are going anywhere.”


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Top 5 Planks of GOP 2016 Platform? Torture, War, Bank Corruption, Paid-For Elections Print
Saturday, 13 December 2014 12:45

Cole writes: "This week, the release by the Senate of a report on torture as practiced in the zeroes by the CIA, along with Thursday night's dramatic vote on an omnibus spending bill, laid bare the shape of the GOP platform in 2016."

Juan Cole; public intellectual, prominent blogger, essayist and professor of history. (photo: Informed Comment)
Juan Cole; public intellectual, prominent blogger, essayist and professor of history. (photo: Informed Comment)


Top 5 Planks of GOP 2016 Platform? Torture, War, Bank Corruption, Paid-For Elections

By Juan Cole, Informed Comment

13 December 14

 

his week, the release by the Senate of a report on torture as practiced in the zeroes by the CIA, along with Thursday night’s dramatic vote on an omnibus spending bill, laid bare the shape of the GOP platform in 2016. (Some Democrats were dragooned into voting for the spending bill, but key provisions or riders were clearly inserted by the GOP). However much the party or its members deny it, the practical actions and concrete words of party leaders make clear their priorities.

1. With a few noble exceptions like Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), Republican Party spokesmen, Republican politicians, and Republican media like Fox Cable News, defended torture. This defense was mounted from so many directions by so many Republicans that it now seems indisputable that the party stands for the principle of rectal hydration. Since torture is illegal in American law, presumably they want to repeal the 5th and 8th amendments to the constitution.

2. The Republican Party stands for the principle that elections should be stolen by the rich who pay the most for them. The new bill multiplies permitted donations by a factor of ten.

3. The GOP wants the US taxpayer to be made to bail out risky, casino-like “derivatives.” After the 2008 crash, caused by some corrupt Wall Street financiers stealing our money, Congress had removed FDIC protection from the riskier derivatives. The GOP, plotting in smoke filled rooms far from the light, just put the taxpayer right back in the sights the next time the bankers need a bailout. The provision was actually written by CitiBank, which won’t get my business. They think, much better to gamble with the taxpayers’ money; they would, but why would GOP lawmakers agree to be their ventriloquist’s dummy?

4. The bill blocks aid to the Palestine authority if it becomes a member of UN agencies without Israeli permission. Palestine has been recognized as a non-member observer state at the UN, and is gradually joining key committees. It likely will sign the Rome Statute, join the International Criminal Court, and sue Israel for war crimes. But in the fantasyland of Congress, none of this may be allowed to happen. The PA has other sources of money than the US, and all this provision does is further weaken the ability of the US to do effective diplomacy.

5. This fall, most Republicans ran on putting troops back into Iraq and getting even more deeply involved in the Syrian civil war than the US already is. This is a plank in their platform that leads to sanguinary wars.

These, then, are the major issues on which the GOP is running for the presidency in 2016. They underline that the party represents the 3 million wealthiest Americans, and has no scruples that might interfere in doing exactly what the 1% tells them to do.

But do these planks really amount to the platform Americans want to vote for in 2016? On the surface, no. But time shall tell.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
<< Start < Prev 2621 2622 2623 2624 2625 2626 2627 2628 2629 2630 Next > End >>

Page 2622 of 3432

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN