Tag Archives: arabia

Donald Trump’s Top Ten Giveaways to Vladimir Putin

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The number of pro-Putin positions that Donald Trump has taken has assumed quite remarkable proportions:

  1. He wants to reduce America’s commitment to NATO and reorient its activities to the Middle East. This is perhaps Vladmir Putin’s greatest foreign policy desire.
  2. Says America has no moral standing to complain about human and civil rights violations.
  3. Welcomed Russia’s incursion into Syria.
  4. Considers Putin a great leader.
  5. Would consider eliminating sanctions against Russia and recognizing their annexation of Crimea.
  6. Wants to weaken American ties to its allies by insisting that he will walk away from them unless they pay us more for our military protection.
  7. Never mentions Russia in his otherwise endless litany of countries that are taking advantage of us.
  8. Opposes sending arms to Ukraine.
  9. Is pro-Brexit.
  10. Isn’t sure he would defend the Baltics if Russia attacked them.

Have I missed anything? I probably have. It’s hard to keep track.

Most of these are defensible positions on their own. I don’t support sending arms to Ukraine, for example. Plenty of conservatives are pro-Brexit. And plenty of lefties would like to see us reduce our military footprint worldwide.

But even if you personally agree with an item or three on this list, the whole thing adds up to something unprecedented for an American candidate for president. Donald Trump considers America at odds with virtually the entire world. He’s based his entire campaign on this. At various times he’s mentioned China, Mexico, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Germany, France, and the entire Pacific Rim. But never Russia. On the contrary, his list of positions toward Russia is basically Vladimir Putin’s dream foreign policy. For a guy suffering under crippling sanctions, a tanking economy, low oil prices, and a demographic time bomb, Donald Trump is offering him everything he could possibly want. And what does Trump want in return? For Russia—and only for Russia—he wants nothing.

As much as I loathe Putin, I’m not among those who now think Mitt Romney was right when he listed Russia as our #1 geopolitical threat. Conservative fearmongering on the subject leaves me cold. Nonetheless, this list is not a coincidence. There’s something behind the scenes guiding it. But what?

Visit site:

Donald Trump’s Top Ten Giveaways to Vladimir Putin

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Donald Trump’s Top Ten Giveaways to Vladimir Putin

The US Is One of the Top Executioners in the World

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The global death penalty rate is skyrocketing. According to the latest tallies, published today by Amnesty International, at least 1,634 people were put to death last year, a 54 percent increase from the previous year. That’s the highest number of recorded executions in more than a quarter century, and it’s not even counting deaths in China, the world’s top executioner, where death penalty data is treated as a state secret.

Most of those deaths were in the Middle East: Iran, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia accounted for nearly 90 percent of all executions in 2015. The vast majority of Iran’s executions were for drug-related crimes, while Pakistan lifted a moratorium on civilian executions in 2014 to more aggressively punish suspected terrorists. In Saudi Arabia, the justice system is so opaque that it’s hard to know what’s driving executions, but since the new king came to power last year, the country has drawn increasing international condemnation for its crackdown on dissidents.

While executions surged in those three countries, the trend elsewhere was more heartening. Four more countries abolished the death penalty last year, which means that for the first time ever, more than half of all nations have legally abolished it. (Other countries have abandoned it in practice, after not executing anyone for at least a decade.)

And where does the United States stand? Just like in 2014, it ranked fifth on the list of the world’s top executioners last year. The country recorded 28 executions, its lowest annual amount since 1991, and 52 new death sentences, the lowest since 1977. Since 1846, 19 states have abolished the death penalty, but even though lethal punishment here is on the decline, we’re still the only country in the Americas to execute people.

You can read Amnesty International’s full report here.

View this article:

The US Is One of the Top Executioners in the World

Posted in alternative energy, Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, solar, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The US Is One of the Top Executioners in the World

Tax Plan Showdown: Now We Have Bernie Sanders Too

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

And now we are five. The Tax Policy Center has analyzed Bernie Sanders’ tax plan, and we now have data for everyone still running except John Kasich, who hasn’t produced any tax proposals yet. The full reports are here: Donald Trump, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Hillary Clinton, and Sanders. Click the links for details. Or just look at the charts below for the nickel summary.

As before, the Republican plans are all the same: a tiny tax cut for the middle class as a sop to distract them from the enormous payday they give to the rich, and a massive hole in the deficit.

On the Democratic side, Hillary Clinton’s plan is fairly modest. It leaves the middle class alone and taxes the rich a little more. Once her domestic proposals are paid for, it’s probably deficit neutral. Bernie Sanders is far more extreme. He’s basically the mirror image of the Republicans: he’d tax the middle class moderately more and soak the hell out of the rich. This would raise a tremendous amount of money, which he’d use to pay for his health care plan and his other domestic proposals. It’s impossible to say for sure how this would affect the deficit, but the evidence suggests that it would blow a pretty big hole since he plans to spend quite a bit more money than he’d raise.

So that’s that. Quite a choice we have this year.

Read more:

Tax Plan Showdown: Now We Have Bernie Sanders Too

Posted in alo, Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Tax Plan Showdown: Now We Have Bernie Sanders Too

Exciting Chip-and-PIN Update

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In the past, I have whined at great length about the fact that most new chip-based credit cards are chip-and-signature. This is both insecure—anyone can scrawl a signature—and incompatible with card readers in Europe. But the boffins who run our banks figured that Americans were too dumb to remember a PIN for their credit cards, so chip-and-signature it was.

However, my Wells Fargo debit card claims to be chip-and-PIN. Is it really? Today at the supermarket, a little sign told me that their card reader now accepts chip-based cards. So I stuck in my debit card. A few seconds later it asked for my PIN. Be still my heart! I entered it, and the transaction was approved.

So I can now report definitively that at least one debit card is true chip-and-PIN. And quite handily, the PIN is the same as the PIN for getting cash from the ATM, so it’s easy to remember. Thanks, Wells Fargo!

See original: 

Exciting Chip-and-PIN Update

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Exciting Chip-and-PIN Update

Three Numbers That Explain the Modern Political Ecosystem

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

If you want to understand how politicians manipulate today’s media environment, there are only three numbers you need to know:

Detroit debate viewership (TV plus streaming): 20 million
Daytime cable news viewership: 1-2 million
Print newspaper viewership: 1 million max

The last number is a guesstimate for the number of people who will see Donald Trump’s statement announcing that he’s had a change of heart about ordering the US military to torture prisoners. If anything, it’s generous. A printed statement just isn’t going to make the rounds much. Nor is it going to be a big deal on social media, especially among the Trump demographic.

So here’s what you get:

When Bret Baier asks Trump what would happen if the military refuses his order to torture prisoners, 20 million people hear and see him say, “They won’t refuse….I’ve never had any problem leading people. If I say do it, they’re going to do it.”
The next day, 2-3 million people read (or hear a network anchor recite) a bloodless statement that says, “I do, however, understand that the United States is bound by laws and treaties and I will not order our military or other officials to violate those laws and will seek their advice on such matters.”

The arithmetic here is pretty simple. There are at least 17 million people who hear Trump insist that he’s going to torture “these animals over in the Middle East” and never see the retraction. For Trump, this is a double win. His base continues to think he’s a tough guy. Elites breathe a small sigh of relief and figure that maybe this means Trump will calm down and listen to his advisors if he wins the presidency.

The exact numbers can vary, but the basic math plays out the same way all the time. Politicians have learned that they can lie without consequence. They tell the lie on television, where lots of people see it, and then count on virtually nobody seeing the earnest fact checks the next day.

Among younger voters, you probably have to factor in social media as well. But you also have to factor in the well-known evidence that fact checks rarely change anyone’s mind. Welcome to 21st century America.

UPDATE: There’s another piece of this that’s worth mentioning. Trump’s retraction was given to the Wall Street Journal, so naturally they’re playing it big on their front page. But I just checked USA Today, Fox, MSNBC, the LA Times, the New York Times, and the Washington Post, and none of them have so much as mentioned this on their home pages. This is not a coincidence. They hate having to acknowledge a competitor, and that causes them to downplay the news.

The one exception is CNN, which has plastered it at the top of their home page and mentioned it repeatedly on air. I don’t quite know why they’re the exception.

More – 

Three Numbers That Explain the Modern Political Ecosystem

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Three Numbers That Explain the Modern Political Ecosystem

Donald Trump’s Big Lie on Health Care

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

I realize that criticizing a Donald Trump policy is pointless, but Trump’s health care “plan” deserves a bit more attention. Say what you will about his immigration policies, but at least his written plan more-or-less matched his rhetoric. His health care plan doesn’t even come close. Here are its six proposals:

  1. Allow insurance companies to sell policies across state lines. Whatever you think of this idea, it only makes sense if you can truly buy a policy that’s regulated by another state. Ramesh Ponnuru: “But the plan says that people should be allowed to buy insurance out of state only ‘as long as the plan purchased complies with state requirements.’ That defeats the whole purpose of the reform, and means either that Trump is coming out for the status quo or that whoever wrote his plan garbled it.” Or that Trump has no idea what he’s talking about.
  1. Allow individuals to “fully deduct health insurance premium payments from their tax returns.” This may or may not be a good idea in concept, but implementing it as a deduction makes it meaningless for nearly everyone at the median wage or below. They already pay little or no income tax, so a deduction does them no good. This is why other Republicans have proposed doing this as a tax credit, which would benefit anyone. Even conservatives agree about this: “That’s not going to help,” said Joe Antos, a conservative health policy expert at the American Enterprise Institute.
  1. Allow individuals to use HSAs. Individuals have been allowed to set up HSAs since 2003. The only new wrinkle in Trump’s plan is that an HSA can be used by any family member. This is trivial.
  1. Price transparency. This is fine. It won’t do much to improve health care, but it’s a good idea.
  1. Block grant Medicaid. This would accomplish nothing except, probably, to make health care worse. States tend to do everything they can to use Medicaid dollars for non-health purposes, and giving them total control over Medicaid would only make this worse. Also, it would eliminate the automatic increase in Medicaid spending during recessions, when it’s needed most. Overall, this proposal would almost certainly result in less Medicaid spending and less effective Medicaid spending.
  1. Allow importation of prescription drugs. This is fine.

Trump has been extravagant in his promises about health care: “I would end Obamacare and replace it with something terrific, for far less money for the country and for the people.” He’s said that he would cover everyone. He’s said he would cover pre-existing conditions. He’s said he wouldn’t let people die in the streets. He’s said he would allow Medicare to negotiate drug prices.

His plan includes none of that. He just flatly hasn’t kept any of his promises. Instead he’s offered up something that looks like a fourth grader cribbed it from other Republican plans without really understanding what they said. Even by GOP standards—which is a very low bar—his health care plan offers virtually nothing of substance. It’s completely hollow.

Source: 

Donald Trump’s Big Lie on Health Care

Posted in Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Donald Trump’s Big Lie on Health Care

Quote of the Day #2: "I wasn’t being held hostage"

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Chris Christie a few minutes ago:

OMG. Can you imagine a supposedly serious politician actually having to say something like this? The humiliation just never ends.

Originally from: 

Quote of the Day #2: "I wasn’t being held hostage"

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Quote of the Day #2: "I wasn’t being held hostage"

Chart of the Day: Another Sign That Dodd-Frank Is Working

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Via Matt O’Brien, this chart from JP Morgan shows financial sector leverage over the past few decades. As you can see, leverage skyrocketed during the Bush era, which contributed to the 2008 financial meltdown, and then plummeted shortly thereafter. Then it flattened out for a couple of years, and under normal circumstances it probably would have started to climb again when the economy began to recover. Two things stopped it: Dodd-Frank and Basel III, both of which mandated higher capital requirements and thus lower overall leverage levels. This has reduced Wall Street profits but made the banking system safer for everyone.

In other words: financial regulation FTW. Nothing is perfect, and Wall Street is doing everything it can to undermine Dodd-Frank during the rulemaking process, but if it accomplishes nothing except encouraging less leverage it will have done its most important job.

Visit site – 

Chart of the Day: Another Sign That Dodd-Frank Is Working

Posted in Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Safer, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Chart of the Day: Another Sign That Dodd-Frank Is Working

Conservative Culture and the Fear of Reverse Racism

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Bruce Bartlett has written a new paper that examines the role of “reverse racism” in the rise of Donald Trump. Bartlett touches on a number of topics—e.g., changing demographics, partisan realignment, the media promotion of race as an in-group marker—but the cornerstone of his narrative is a simple recognition that fear of reverse racism is deep and pervasive among white Americans. Here’s the basic lay of the land from a bit of research done a few years ago by Michael Norton and Samuel Sommers:

As you can see, everyone agrees that racism was endemic in the 50s, and everyone agrees that it’s improved since then. But among whites, a majority believe that racism against blacks has improved so much—and reverse racism against whites has intensified so much—that today there’s literally more bias against whites than against blacks.

The Norton-Summers study doesn’t break down racial views further, but it’s a safe guess that fears of reverse racism are concentrated primarily among political conservatives—encouraged on a near daily basis by talk radio, Fox News, and Republican politicians. Given this, it’s hardly any wonder that Trump’s barely-coded appeals to racial resentment have resonated so strongly among Republican voters. Trump himself may or may not have any staying power, but his basic appeal is rooted in a culture of white grievance that’s been growing for years and is likely to keep growing in the future as white majorities continue to shrink. No matter what happens to Trump himself, he’s mainstreamed white victimhood as a political force to be reckoned with for the foreseeable future.

Original link: 

Conservative Culture and the Fear of Reverse Racism

Posted in Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Conservative Culture and the Fear of Reverse Racism

Saudi Arabia’s US-Backed Air War in Yemen May Have Committed War Crimes—Again

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Saudi Arabia is yet again adding to its trail of destruction in its war in Yemen, and its tactics are drawing condemnation from the United Nations. The Saudi’s latest actions include firing missiles on civilian buildings in the capital, Sanaa—striking a wedding hall, the Chamber of Commerce, and a center for the blind—as well as dropping US-made cluster bombs on at least two of Sanaa’s residential neighborhoods.

This morning, a spokesman for United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon condemned the latest strikes, and stated that the use of cluster munitions in civilian areas “may amount to a war crime.”

This is by no means the only time the US-backed, Saudi-led coalition has been called out for potentially violating the laws of war in Yemen and using US-made cluster munitions in civilian areas. (See our previous reporting on that here, here, here, and here.) Now, nine months into the conflict against Houthi rebels who ousted the Saudi-backed government of President Abdu Rabu Mansour Hadi last January, nearly 3,000 noncombatants have been killed, the majority of them from Saudi-led airstrikes. Despite increasing concern over civilian deaths, the United States continues to ink arms deals and provide intelligence and logistics support to the Saudi coalition.

Excerpt from: 

Saudi Arabia’s US-Backed Air War in Yemen May Have Committed War Crimes—Again

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Saudi Arabia’s US-Backed Air War in Yemen May Have Committed War Crimes—Again