|
|
|
Check out this photo of the lava flow from that Alaska volcano erupting this week. Remember how John McCain, Bobby Jindal and their fellow anti-"big government" phonies ridiculed federal funding for things like volcano observatories?
Blogger John Aravosis posted a relevant commentary at AMERICAblog.com earlier this month. He was in Anchorage the last time the same volcano blew, in 1989.
Here's an excerpt:
I remember it was a clear sunny day, except for the black mass that was slowly advancing on us as we drove down the highway. By the time we got to my friend's sister's house, the sky was black. Pitch black. Street lights came on. It was the middle of a sunny day. And it was darker than the darkest closet, lights off, middle of the night. But there were no stars. Nothing. I've seen few things as creepy, and nothing as apocalyptic-seeming, in my life. The city initiated a quarantine, so I was stuck at my friend's sister's for 24 hours. Then the ash fell. Fascinating. A snowshower of volcanic ash - they're these sort of large grey snowflakes that fall even slower than snowflakes. Beautiful in a way. But not very good for you, healthwise. Volcanic ash has a way of making you choke. It nearly brought down a commercial airliner after it got sucked into the planes engines and they all turned off. Check out the whole article. A good commentary on the ignorant Republican attacks on federal funding of important programs they deride as "pork barrel."
GALL AND CHENEY
by Lawrence Albright
Hell hath no fury like an ex-Vice President scorned. Or so it seems.
Former Vice President Dick Cheney, still smarting over the fact that former President George W. Bush failed to grant a full and complete pardon to Lewis "Scooter" Libby, has grabbed a rhetorical shotgun and and toothbrush and is shooting his mouth off again. This time he states that Americans feel less safe now that President Barack Obama is in the White House.
I cannot speak for anyone else, but unless Vice President Joe Biden accidentally shoots one of his friends in the face while hunting small and defenseless birds, I am feeling decidedly more safe.
Among the remarks made by Cheney and reported by the Associated Press was his assertion that Iraq will never "go back to producing weapons of mass destruction." Of course, there were no weapons of mass destruction, as anyone who has follows the historical record, including the "Downing Street memo" can attest. I had a greater sense of anxiety worrying whether I was going to get Salmonella after eating a Reece's peanut butter cup.
And of course Cheney had to do a bit of crowing about how safe Americans were at thwarting plans for terrorist attacks after 9/11 due to the repressive measures offered up by the Bush administration. But when pressed for details, Cheney stated such things were classified and couldn't be disclosed.
At least he didn't opt for the old (and not very good) joke: "I would tell you but then I would have to kill ya." That would have made us feel so much safer!
What would make me feel both safe and content is for the media to stop reporting Mr. Cheney's utterances. Yes, he's entitled to speak his mind, but I don't think he intends being a contender for the GOP nomination in 2012. I also want to point out there is precedent for a "mute button" on former Vice Presidents: Spiro T. Agnew and Dan Quayle come immediately to mind. Historically, of course, many Vice Presidents were muted within 24 hours or so after taking the oath. I mean, is there anyone who can name the VP's for Coolidge, Hoover and Benjamin Harrison without looking up that information?
From United Farm Workers
http://www.ufwaction.org/campaign/chavezholiday09/
Join the Petition Drive for a National Cesar E. Chavez Holiday!
As UFW Founder Cesar Chavez? March 31st birthday approaches--an official holiday in eight states and dozens of cities and communities throughout the nation--we want to ask for your support in making Cesar's March 31st birthday a national holiday.
Sen. Robert F. Kennedy called Cesar, "one of the heroic figures of our time." He led the historic non-violent movement for farm worker rights and dedicated himself to building a movement of poor working people that extended beyond the fields and into
cities and towns across the nation. He inspired farm workers and millions of people who never worked on a farm to commit themselves to social, economic and civil rights activism. Cesar's legacy continues to educate, inspire and empower people from all walks of life.
"Chavez left a legacy as an educator, environmentalist and a civil rights leader. And his cause lives on. As farmworkers and laborers across America continue to struggle for fair treatment and fair wages, we find strength in what Cesar Chavez
accomplished so many years ago. And we should honor him for what he's taught us about making America a stronger, more just, and more prosperous nation. That's why I support the call to make Cesar Chavez's birthday a national holiday. It's time to
recognize the contributions of this American icon."
--Barack Obama
"I have been a farm worker since I was 8 years old. Even now, working in the fields is hard work, but before Cesar it was so much harder. Cesar made such a difference to the farm workers out in the fields. He unified us all, not just Mexicans, but
Filipinos, Black, White and other all other races. He gave us the courage to fight for our rights. He made many huge changes for the people who work in the fields. He got us breaks, bathrooms, unemployment insurance, the ALRB and so much more. He
also got rid of many dangerous pesticides and he not only worried about farm workers but for all people so that their food would be safe. Cesar deserves a holiday and so much more."
--Josephina Flores
"He evoked a spirit and a challenge to all of us to do what was right for its own sake...A national holiday honoring Cesar Chavez would secure his profound legacy."
--Martin Sheen
The Cesar Chávez National Holiday Coalition is gathering signatures asking Congress to designate March 31--Cesar's birthday--as Cesar Chávez Day. The United Farm Workers and the Cesar E. Chávez Foundation are proud to support the grassroots efforts of the Cesar E. Chávez National Holiday Coalition.
Please help us ensure all Americans learn about Cesar's life and work by signing the petition asking Congress to designate March 31 as Cesar Chavez Day.
Sign the petition today! Go to: http://www.ufwaction.org/campaign/chavezholiday09/
Tell-A-Friend: Forward this message to at least 10 friends or family and ask them to sign the petition too.
http://www.ufwaction.org/campaign/chavezholiday09/
Interesting take on the Senate vote shape up...
From Congress Matters http://www.congressmatters.com/story/2009/3/11/134348/804/242/769
EFCA head-counting
by Nathaniel Ament Stone
Wed Mar 11, 2009 at 10:43:48 AM PDT
The Employee Free Choice Act was introduced yesterday as H.R.1409 (George Miller with 222 cosponsors) and S.560 (Ted Kennedy with 39 cosponsors). With 223 total sponsors in the House, obviously the House is ready to approve EFCA, no questions asked. But what about that darned Senate? 40 total sponsors, with 60 votes needed for cloture.
Well, all 40 sponsors are Democrats (including Lieberman and Sanders in that definition). Knowing that Franken hasn't yet been seated but likely will be by July, we can be close to 100% sure that there are 41 votes locked in for cloture (the Dems won't be dumb enough to miss out because of Kennedy's ailing health...nor would he miss that vote for the world. If he resigns before then, his replacement will make it, but either way, there will be a second Massachusetts vote for cloture.)
Which 18 Democrats aren't signed on as cosponsors?
Arkansas: Lincoln and Pryor (Pryor is supposedly leaning toward support, but doesn't want to be too vocal, while Lincoln is wavering. Both are getting their arms twisted by Walmart, the unchallenged corporate king in Arkansas.)
California: Feinstein (I'm nearly 100% sure she supports it, though.)
Colorado: Bennet and Udall (pretty sure they both support it...it's just that they're both rather quiet folks.)
Indiana: Bayh (here's a fun fact: he's been the least loyal Democrat, other than Ben Nelson, so far in the 111th Congress, bucking us frequently on amendment votes though rarely bucking us on cloture. But Indiana is hurting economically, and is pretty pro-labor as swing states go.)
Louisiana: Landrieu (getting tons of pressure from the mucky-mucks in the oil, natural gas, and fishing industries, all of whom hold a lot of sway in right-to-work Louisiana. She's worth working over, though...)
Missouri: McCaskill (I'm pretty sure she's on the right side...like Bennet and Udall of Colorado, she doesn't like being identified too obviously with union bosses, but she's one of the biggest common sense populists in the Senate. Missouri is a major labor state, at that...Dick Gephardt built his career on it.)
Montana: Baucus and Tester (not a right-to-work state or an especially anti-union one, though nowhere in the Mountain West is labor very powerful except Nevada. They might want to avoid the shrillness of this controversy and stay out, but Baucus chairs the Finance Committee and was the manager of SCHIP expansion and the stimulus in the Senate. I think they'll go for it in the end, Baucus being a major Dem wheeler-dealer and Tester being a freshman who needs to stay on Reid's good side.)
Nebraska: Ben Nelson (says he opposes the bill in its current form. A right-to-work state, and an especially anti-union one at that. He'll be the toughest to get back. Lincoln, Pryor, and Landrieu are more worthwhile efforts. The good news is that, once Kennedy is back/replaced and Franken is seated, we can get 60 without Nelson if Specter stays on the right side of this one. Tough, but doable.)
New Mexico: Bingaman (a Feinstein Democrat...he's low-key but will come down on the right side.)
North Carolina: Hagan(also rumored in the Politico article. North Carolina is probably the second-most anti-union state in the nation, following only South Carolina. Remember that this is the land of Norma Rae, and has a union membership of...get this...2%! By comparison, even famous right-to-work states like Georgia, Florida, Alabama, etc. are more unionized. But, Hagan is a moderate-to-progressive and is a freshman needing to stay in Reid's favors.)
North Dakota: Conrad and Dorgan (both rather quiet, but Dorgan is avowedly pro-labor and Conrad is a key Obama ally and budget guru. They'll vote for it.)
Virginia: Warner and Webb (both fiscal conservatives and social moderates-to-progressives. Another right-to-work state with low union membership. But like Hagan and Tester, these are freshmen and Reid can keep them from moving up the ladder if he chooses. They'll be kept in line...if Reid is as smart as we hope he is.)
Wisconsin: Kohl (a businessman, but one of the more reliable liberals in the Midwest. Don't worry about him.)
Some of these people were cosponsors in 2007...what's up with that? I suppose the stakes were lower when cloture was impossible, and now that it's within reach, the "moderates" are getting cold feet. Special props to people like Tim Johnson, Bill Nelson, Mark Begich, and Sherrod Brown, who are cosponsoring S.560 despite coming from swing or conservative states. Johnson and Nelson hail from right-to-work states, at that.
So, some counting...40 sponsors of the bill + Feinstein, Bennet, Udall of CO, McCaskill, Baucus, Tester, Bingaman, Hagan, Conrad, Dorgan, Warner, Webb, and Kohl = 53 "lean" votes for EFCA (including Kennedy or his replacement in MA). 60, of course, are needed. Lincoln, Pryor, Bayh, Landrieu, and Nelson of NE are all serious concerns, and the latter may be lost for good. If so, the best case scenario is 57 right now, meaning we need Specter, Franken, and someone else (Voinovich of Ohio, a relatively pro-union Republican who is retiring?). Of course, those five Democrats all voted for cloture in 2007, so what real reason other than pressure from business hacks do they have to switch?
This will be the most dramatic cloture vote of 2009.
In the middle of the worst crisis of our lifetimes, the Texas Senate has thrown its full energies into solving a problem that doesn’t exist! Even the Dallas daily paper, usually as anti-worker as any mainstream press, ended their lead editorial with “Someone should end this charade.”
They referred to the “Voter-ID” bill that was passed by Republicans in the Texas Senate on March 11 with a precise partisan vote. If it is also passed by the state House, it will require all Texas voters to present a state-provided picture identification card in addition to their registration card. Thousands of blind, disabled, and older voters would thus be required to buy these cards or quit voting. The Republican Lieutenant Governor, David Dewhurst, maneuvered to suspend Senate rules specifically to pass this particular bill.
Union spokespersons say that the Republicans are trying to impose a new poll tax to restrict voting rights. The Republicans say that they are trying to stop “massive voter fraud” when imposters, specifically Latino immigrants, illegally impersonate voters. The problem with their argument is that, despite years of effort entailing millions of dollars, Republicans haven’t been able to find a single incident of any imposter voting in any Texas election!
Republican Attorney General Greg Abbott, who has already been shamed by his failure to find any of his highly-touted “massive voter fraud,” was conspicuously absent from the Senate discussions, according to the Texas AFL-CIO.
One of the many people who traveled to the state capitol in Austin was Texas Alliance for Retired Americans President Annie Banks, a retired teacher. According to the Texas AFL-CIO, Banks traveled from Houston, then waited 23 hours in the capitol, though the night of March 11, to give her testimony.
On the day after the Senate’s action, the Ft Worth newspaper ran the story of a 97-year old African American woman who had already made three separate attempts to get a picture-id from the state, and had been turned down every time!
The worst part of the debacle isn’t in most reports: the state’s unemployment trust fund, doling out unprecedented amounts in recent months, is running out of money while the legislature dawdles! Last year, despite gathering economic storm clouds, Governor Perry pushed through a cut in the employers’ tax for the fund. This year, it is clear that the legislature will have to borrow money, and pay interest, to keep the fund going. Texas cannot qualify for the $555 million in federal stimulus money for the unemployed unless the state legislature acts to update its rigid anti-worker qualifications. Presently, an unemployed Texas worker has less chance of actually receiving any unemployment benefits than workers in any other state. Several politicians, including Perry, have made it clear that they want to keep it that way!
Why would Governor Perry, Lieutenant Governor Dewhurst, and Attorney General Abbott disgrace themselves and the state so thoroughly? A good answer came from Austin political expert Harvey Kronberg during the Texas AFL-CIO Legislative Conference on January 28. He said that right wingers are positioning themselves to win the Texas Republican primary elections in 2010. He expects U.S. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson to resign her seat in order to run for Governor against Perry. Dewhurst, Abbott, and others are likely preparing themselves to run for Hutchinson’s Senate seat. The Texas Republican primary is a small election, with usually fewer than 600,000 voters in a state of over 20 million people. Republican candidates do not care what the general public, or the world, thinks of them as long as they can win that small race – and the key is to be the most right wing of all the candidates!
By pushing the nonsensical “voter-ID” legislation and ignoring the suffering of the unemployed, Texas Republicans are grasping for power!
--Jim Lane, flittle7@yahoo.com
By sometime PWW contributing sports writer and labor activist Chas Walker via Rhode Island's Future, www.rifuture.org:
The New York Times has a story today about families hurt by the economic crisis who are living out of motel rooms and cooking off of those plug-in electric burners many of us know as hot plates. The article and accompanying photos show the strain and suffering that the wonders of capitalism have bestowed upon working people in America - and in this case, Orange County, California. In the evening, the smell of pasta sauce cooked on hot plates drifts through half-open doors; in the morning, children leave to catch school buses. Families of three, six or more are squeezed into a room, one child doing homework on a bed, jostled by another watching television. Children rotate at bedtime, taking their turns on the floor. Some families, like the Malpicas, in a motel in Anaheim, commandeer a closet for baby cribs. If you haven't read it already, check out Cheap Motels and a Hot Plate by Monthly Review editor Michael Yates, which came out a few years ago. The book is "An Economist's Travelogue," chronicling Yates' and his wife's journeys around the country, working mostly in service industry jobs and living on the margins of society - in cheap motels with a hot plate. The book is full of powerful anecdotes as well as statistics about work, poverty, race, and environmental degradation in America.
By Center for American Progress
President Barack Obama takes a first step today toward bringing the United States back to the scientific cutting edge by issuing an executive order that lifts the existing restriction on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. This will allow the National Institutes of Health to award competitive, merit-based grant funding to scientists who wish to conduct research with any ethically derived human embryonic stem cells, not just those deemed acceptable by the Bush administration. It also paves the way for Congress to pass legislation that will lay out important ethical guidelines to ensure that all stem cell research is conducted responsibly and safely. A recent report from the Center for American Progress, “A Life Sciences Crucible,” outlines how to construct these guidelines.
Federal funding for embryonic stem cell research will have far-reaching effects; here are eight of the most important:
1. The federal government will be able to set ethical guidelines that will allow research to progress cautiously and responsibly. An executive order paves the way for Congress to pass legislation that outlines policy guidelines to ensure that all stem cell research—embryonic and otherwise—is carried out with the highest ethical standards. The legislation should provide broad, principled ethical standards so that the science itself can evolve in the direction that experimentation and serendipity takes it—alongside easily adapted regulations governing the research, based on the broad ethical standards approved by Congress. Specifically, the legislation should charge the National Institutes of Health and the Department of Health and Human Services with the duty to update at regular intervals its regulations for embryonic stem cell research in light of new science.
2. The United States can stake a claim as the world leader in regenerative medicine. Regenerative medicine is a new therapeutic approach that works by rebuilding damaged tissues in a patient’s body. This can involve cultivating a small sample of a patient’s own cells, reprogramming them, and using them to heal—without the risk of rejection or severe side effects that usually result from introducing foreign therapeutic materials. The potential therapies range from transforming the pancreatic cells of diabetics so they can produce insulin to reconnecting the nerves in severed spinal cords. It will be a vital component of cutting edge life sciences in the 21st century, but for medical researchers to participate competitively and responsibly, the federal government must reform its stem cell research policy in order to fund embryonic stem cell research.
3. Research on all other forms of stem cells will move forward. Opponents of human embryonic stem cell research often champion human adult stem cells, umbilical cord blood stem cells, and induced pluripotent stem cells as suitable alternatives to embryonic stem cells. Yet these approaches cannot be successful without research on human embryonic stem cells. The New York State Stem Cell Foundation reported in July 2008 that its chief scientific officer, Kevin Eggan, produced adult stem cell lines from patients with Lou Gehrig’s disease. Yet Eggan said he will still continue his work on human embryonic stem cell research because, “we couldn’t possibly be where we are now without first doing extensive work with human embryonic stem cells ... they remain the stem cell gold standard” against which all cells brought forth as alternatives must be measured.
4. The search for life-saving cures will resume. Nothing is more valuable than the lives that will be saved and improved with the therapies and cures that may arise from embryonic stem cells. And the federal government, state governments, universities, and private industry all need to work together to get stem cells from bench to bedside in an efficient, equitable, and safe manner. The Bayh-Dole Act, which allows universities to patent the results of federally funded research and then license to corporations the right to develop products from those results, will speed translation of basic research into cures. Federal funding of stem cell research will generate many of these patents.
5. Drug testing can become safer and more efficient. Scientists can differentiate cells into specific cell types upon which they can quickly test whether a drug has a desired effect. For instance, researchers could test drug toxicity with a group of differentiated liver cells rather than in a living person’s system. This will make the drug development process and then the clinical trial process much safer and more efficient.
6. Scientists will be able to learn more about genetics and unique human traits. It is a longstanding research paradigm to study failures of development by determining when, where, and how genes malfunction. The ultimate goal is to develop a guidebook that will tell us exactly how each gene or combination of genes contributes to the development of a unique individual. This will greatly enhance our understanding of basic genetics and could allow scientists to develop drugs that can prevent the diseases from developing in the first place. But they can only do this by tracing the development of human cells from the very beginning. Therefore scientists need to conduct research on embryonic stem cells so that they can discover how these all-purpose cells can change into any one of the more than 200 different cell types in the human body.
7. Federal guidelines will ameliorate the confusion caused by the patchwork of state regulations, facilitate scientific collaboration, and generate good jobs in the biotech industry. The patchwork of state initiatives and regulations introduced wasteful legal and bureaucratic complexity into the overall enterprise of stem cell research. For instance, until November 2008, when voters amended the state constitution, it was illegal in Michigan to derive embryonic stem cells because the state constitution banned the destruction of embryos for research. As a result, researchers at Michigan’s large and prestigious state universities had to import cells from out of state. A report from last year estimated that lowering the barriers to stem cell research in that state could generate almost 800 jobs. Healthy stem cell research requires interstate collaboration among various institutions, including private industry and academia.
8. States may rescind or revise their own stem cell research restrictions. Some states have adopted laws that either explicitly or implicitly ban or inhibit human embryonic stem cell research. Hopefully, with a robust and comprehensive federal policy, states will repeal or revise these laws in order to take full advantage of federal research dollars. Thus, the states would allow talented research scientists in academia and industry throughout the nation to maximize their efforts.
Report: A Life Science Crucible
Interactive timeline: A Brief History of Stem Cell Research
From Crooks and Liars: By David Neiwert http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/glenn-mccarthy-beck-tries-link-commu Glenn Beck's getting increasingly strident and desperate in his attempt to portray the Obama White House as a den of Communism. Yesterday he opened up with yet another "Comrade Update" that actually depicted visiting British Prime Minister Gordon Brown as a totalitarian simply for having extolled "cooperation." By that standard, I guess, Sesame Street is a Commie Indoctrination Program. And at this point, I honestly wouldn't be surprised to find out the Beck indeed believes that to be the case. In any event, he followed this smear by immediately having on Sam Webb of the Communist Party USA, claiming that Webb had declared Barack Obama a Communist ally: Beck: You said that he was not only a friend, but an ally. Webb: I don't think I said that. I only said that he is a people's advocate. Beck: No, you said an ally. Webb: No, I don't think I did. I made the speech, you didn't. Actually, if you peruse the speech in question, you'll see that Beck is wrong. Maybe this is the part he's thinking of: In the meantime, we have some immediate struggles on our hands But the good news is that the broad movement that elected President Obama and larger majorities in the Congress is up and running. This movement, or if you like, this loose coalition in which labor plays a larger and larger leadership role, can exercise an enormous influence on the political process. Never before has a coalition with such breadth walked on the political stage of our country. It is far larger than the coalition that entered the election process a year ago; it is larger still than the coalition that came out of the Democratic Party convention in August. The task of labor and its allies is to provide energy and leadership to this wide-ranging coalition. Yes, we can bring issues and positions into the political process that go beyond the initiatives of the Obama administration. But we should do this within the framework of the main task of supporting Obama’s program of action. We can disagree with the Obama administration without being disagreeable. Our tone should be respectful. We now have not simply a friend, but a people's advocate in the White House. What is in fact most remarkable about Webb's speech is that, unlike conservatives, Communists -- who have clear philosophical differences with Obama and could similarly wish for him to fail -- are more concerned that Obama's plan succeed because it's better for the country. In other words: A bunch of Commies are more concerned about the nation's economic well-being than Conservatives are. Beck in any event tries, McCarthylike, to bait Webb into casting Obama in the line of Communist thinkers, like Marx or Lenin -- and Webb refuses. Webb: He's not a Socialist, he's not a Marxist. Beck: Why do you push yourself away from Lenin and Marx? Webb: I don't, myself, but Barack Obama does. He's not a Socialist, he's not a Communist. You know, you bandied that about during the campaign, and now people are bandying it about town, and the answer is no.
Beck at this point interrupts Webb, and spends the next three minutes talking over him and badgering him. At one point he asks: "Why can't you have a real conversation?" Answer should have been: "Because you keep interrupting, you moron!" But there you have it, folks. Glenn Beck: A New McCarthy for a New Century!
|
|
