Thursday, September 18, 2008

Liar, Liar


It doesn't even seem like candidates care that they get caught telling their tall tales. (Click graphic to enlarge.)

Read story here: http://www.mije.org/richardprince/boldly-telling-lies-media

Now, I'm sure Sen. Joe Biden, and the heads of each one of these political tickets have made some mis-statements - or told outright lies - as well. Afterall, politicians tend to fall into this trap.

Unfortunately, when I went to fact-check.org, I didn't find any for the other candidates. If you can think of lies some of the other candidates have told, please post them below so that we can all shake our dayum heads and step lightly through the BS.



No More Lies - Michelle

Wednesday, September 17, 2008

While we bail out Wall Street, they give millions to McCain, Obama

President Bush is throwing millions of dollars in corporate welfare to companies like Bear Stearns and AIG, the latest giant to fall.

Again, this is yet another example of what is being done in our names, but not necessarily with our consent.

At the same time we give Wall Street millions in bailout money, they give millions to the presidential candidates, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. I'm not saying who is giving what to whom, you can see that for yourself below. And if you want to learn more, click here.

TOP CONTRIBUTORS

This table lists the top donors to this candidate in the 2008 election cycle (click on names of companies to view past contributions). The organizations themselves did not donate, rather the money came from the organization's PAC, its individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families.

John McCain (R)

Merrill Lynch $298,413
Citigroup Inc $269,251
Morgan Stanley $233,272
Goldman Sachs $208,395
JPMorgan Chase & Co $179,975
AT&T Inc $174,487
Blank Rome LLP $150,426
Credit Suisse Group $150,025
Greenberg Traurig LLP $146,787
UBS AG $140,165
PricewaterhouseCoopers $140,120
US Government $137,617
Bank of America $129,475
Wachovia Corp $122,846
Lehman Brothers $117,500
FedEx Corp $113,453
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher $104,250
US Army $103,613
Bear Stearns $99,300
Pinnacle West Capital $97,700

Barack Obama (D)
Goldman Sachs $691,930
University of California $611,207
Citigroup Inc $448,599
JPMorgan Chase & Co $442,919
Harvard University $435,769
Google Inc $420,174
UBS AG $404,750
National Amusements Inc $389,140
Microsoft Corp $377,235
Lehman Brothers $370,524
Sidley Austin LLP $350,302
Moveon.org $347,463
Skadden, Arps et al $340,264
Time Warner $338,527
Wilmerhale Llp $335,398
Morgan Stanley $318,070
Latham & Watkins $297,400
Jones Day $289,476
University of Chicago $278,885
Stanford University $276,038


For the Love Of Money - Living For The City - Troop & Levert

Tuesday, September 16, 2008

Monday, September 15, 2008

Some of my best friends are white


Glamour Magazine's October issue asks whether you have friends of other races and ethnicities.

Now, this might sound like a silly question to you but the magazine is doing it in response to a little dust-up they had about a year ago when editors there criticized black women in the workplace for wearing their hair in natural styles like afros (I blogged about it here).

I got to thinking about the story earlier today after a reporter called and asked if she could interview me about race and the election. She's from a Swiss television network and said people there are really interested in how prominent the topic of race is in this country and about the role it is playing in national politics.

She asked if Americans will really vote for or against Sen. Barack Obama based on his skin color, or is that a false impression given off by the American media.

The Swiss hardly ever discuss race. It is something they never think about, she said.

Hmmm... my immediate thought, though I didn't say it to her, was that the reason they don't talk about it is because there are no black people in Switzerland. I know that is an exaggeration, but you know there aren't that many of us there so don't even front. A Swiss person can probably yodel from one end of the country to the other without ever having a black person be within earshot.

Back on topic, a recent poll found that 86 percent of Americans say they have friends of different races, but another poll shows that only about 15 percent say they have a close friend of another race.

You have to ask, in this day and age why is that?

Do you have friends of other races? I'm not talking about folks you work with that you might occasionally do lunch with every now and then. I'm talking about true friends.

People with whom you tell your deepest secrets, talk with on a regular basis. You go to their house and chill and vice versa. Someone you can talk to about anything and everything. You know, that someone of the opposite race who is down for you whenever and however, and vice versa.

A real genuine friend dammit, you know what I mean.

If you do, what are some of the challenges to interracial friendship? What are some of the rewards? If you don’t have friends of other races, why not?

Sunday, September 14, 2008

Is Michigan the new Ohio, erhhhh, Florida?

The chairman of the Republican Party in Macomb County, Michigan, a key swing county in a key swing state, is planning to use a list of foreclosed homes to block people from voting in the upcoming election as part of the state GOP’s effort to challenge some voters on Election Day.

“We will have a list of foreclosed homes and will make sure people aren’t voting from those addresses,” party chairman James Carabelli told Michigan Messenger in a telephone interview earlier this week. He said the local party wanted to make sure that proper electoral procedures were followed.

State election rules allow parties to assign “election challengers” to polls to monitor the election. In addition to observing the poll workers, these volunteers can challenge the eligibility of any voter provided they “have a good reason to believe” that the person is not eligible to vote. One allowable reason is that the person is not a “true resident of the city or township.”

The Michigan Republicans’ planned use of foreclosure lists is apparently an attempt to challenge ineligible voters as not being “true residents.”

One expert questioned the legality of the tactic.

“You can’t challenge people without a factual basis for doing so,” said J. Gerald Hebert, a former voting rights litigator for the U.S. Justice Department who now runs the Campaign Legal Center, a Washington D.C.-based public-interest law firm. “I don’t think a foreclosure notice is sufficient basis for a challenge, because people often remain in their homes after foreclosure begins and sometimes are able to negotiate and refinance.”

As for the practice of challenging the right to vote of foreclosed property owners, Hebert called it, “mean-spirited.”

Read the rest here.


MAKE SURE YOUR VOTE COUNTS


Wednesday, September 10, 2008

Dumb and Dumber

Democratic Presidential nominee Barack Obama says that American voters are smart enough to see through Republican spin and trickery. Republican Presidential nominee John McCain says that American voters are smart enough to ignore Democratic hype and see who the real change agents are in this election.

What if neither of them are right?

The Washington Post published a story earlier this week that supports scientific views that today's voters are more uninformed than ever. Today's voters, the article states, don't follow politics and they don't know how their government works either. According to an August 2006 Zogby poll, only two in five Americans know that we have three branches of government and can name them. A 2006 National Georgraphic poll showed that six in ten young people (aged 18 to 24) could not find Iraq on a map.

Worse, they found that only 49 percent of Americans know that the only country ever to use a nuclear weapon in a war is their own.

True, voters can tell you the name of Sarah Palin's daughter and that she's pregnant or that Barack Obama's father was black and his mother was white. But most of what they know about the candidates' positions on the issues -- and remember, our candidates are running to make policy, not talk about their family members -- comes from television.

Some say that if you just give Americans the facts, they'll be able to draw the right conclusions.

Wrong.

"Many social scientists have long tried to downplay the ignorance of voters, arguing that the mental "short cuts" voters use to make up for their lack of information work pretty well," the Post reported. "But the evidence from the past few years proves that a majority can easily be bamboozled."

Just before the 2003 invasion of Iraq, after months of unsubtle hinting from Bush administration officials, some 60 percent of Americans had come to believe that Iraq was behind the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, despite the absence of evidence for the claim, according to a series of surveys taken by the PIPA/Knowledge Networks poll. A year later, after the bipartisan, independent 9/11 Commission reported that Saddam Hussein had had nothing to do with al-Qaeda's assaults on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, 50 percent of Americans still insisted that he did. In other words, the public was bluntly given the data by a group of credible, bipartisan officials, and Americans still didn't absorb the most basic facts about the most important event of our time.

Despite being more educated than our parents and grandparents, studies find that our generation is less politically savvy than our forefathers and mothers. In 1940, six in ten Americans hadn't made it past the eighth grade.

Education levels are far higher today, but as the Post reports, schooling does not equal better educated voters.

In the 1950s, only 10 percent of voters were incapable of citing any ways in which the two major parties differed, according to Thomas E. Patterson of Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, who leads the Pew-backed Vanishing Voter Project. By the 1970s, that number had jumped to nearly 30 percent.

One of the biggest myths today, the article says, is that young voters are paying a lot of attention to the news, and thus will make intelligent choices in the voting booth.

Wrong again.

Despite all the hoopla about young voters -- the great hope of the future! -- only one news story in 2001 drew the attention of a majority of them: 9/11. Some 60 percent of young voters told Pew researchers that they were following news about the attack closely. (Er -- 40 percent weren't?)

Another Pew survey measured public knowledge of current events and found that the young (aged 18 to 29) "know the least." A majority of young respondents scored in the "low knowledge" category -- the only demographic group to do so.

And some other statistics are even more alarming. How many young people read newspapers? Just 20 percent. (Worse, studies consistently show that people who do not pick up the newspaper-reading habit in their 20s rarely do so later.) But surely today's youth are getting their news from the Internet? Sorry. Only 11 percent of the young report that they regularly surf the Internet for news.

Do you want uninformed people in the voting booth this fall?

Monday, September 8, 2008

Oprah Tells Republicans To Kiss Her Ass



Well, not really, but she is probably thinking it.

A group of Republican women are boycotting billionaire media mogul Oprah Winfrey because she refuses to put Vice Presidential Nominee Sarah Palin on her television show.

"Women in Florida helped build Oprah into the icon she is today," said Linda Ivell, President of the Florida Federation of Republican Women, the group leading the boycott.

"With our Republican sisters across the nation, we have collectively enjoyed her entertaining, informative and female-driven programming as we raised our families and became more empowered as women. We are deeply disappointed in Ms. Winfrey's decision to sit out the greatest political moment in the history of women since suffrage," said Ms. Ivell in a press release issued on Friday.

Winfrey, who endorsed Sen. Barack Obama and had him on her show before he formally announced his run for the White House, said at the beginning of the presidential campaign that she would not allow her show to be used as a platform by any political campaign.

Winfrey agreed Palin would be a "fantastic interview," but wouldn't invite her on until after the November elections.

Ms. Ivell said her 58 year old group, the largest political organization in Florida, is also encouraging women to join the grassroots national movement to cancel their subscriptions to O Magazine.

"We find it to be an abuse of her power –gained on the backs of our patronage of her advertising empire - to use her program to so blatantly support Obama in the face of this historic moment. So, we are tuning out and cancelling our subscriptions to O Magazine and encourage other women to do the same. Maybe not forever, but at least until 'after the election'," said Ms. Ivell in a direct reference to Oprah's refusal not to host Governor Palin until 'after the election'.

Ms. Ivell stated that her members respect Ms. Winfrey's personal endorsement of the Democratic ticket as every American is entitled to their personal opinion and vote. The boycott is a part of the FFRW's new truth in the media and fair reporting watch dog committee organized in direct response to what Ivell termed as "the unfair and misleading reporting regarding the selection of Sarah Palin as running mate on the Republican ticket."

Yes, it is Oprah's show and she can do with it what she wants, but nobody should be surprised that the Republicans are making an issue of her decision not to invite Palin on.

Oprah put herself in this position by coming out so publicly for Obama and then bringing him on the show so close to when he officially announced his plans for the presidency. If the Fairness Doctrine were still in place, Ms. Winfrey might have found herself in a much stickier situation. But thanks to the Republicans, the doctrine is no more and they have their heralded Ronald Reagan to thank for that.

The knife cuts both ways.


What would you tell these women if you were Oprah?