Tuesday, January 27, 2009
How bad will it Get? Economist Dent says much worse (GLOBEST)
From my story at GlobeSt.com
NEW YORK CITY-The current downturn is no ordinary economic crisis and nothing like it has been seen since the 1930s, economist Harry S. Dent told a CoreNet Global audience here on Friday. Author of The Great Depression Ahead: How to Prosper in the Crash Following the Greatest Boom in History, Dent warned attendees at the CoreNet luncheon not to expect miracles from President Barack Obama’s stimulus package.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
(GlobeSt.com) NYC: No 70's Reruns
by Cody Lyon
GlobeSt.com
LINK TO FULL TEXT at GlobeSt
Since 2005, New York City has claimed the distinct title as America’s safest large city—in other words, home to the lowest per capita crime rate among the nation’s 25 largest cities. That distinction is the apex of a years-long trend that has increased and solidified the city’s remarkable appeal as a place to work and live.
“Look at the quality of life afforded by a cleaner, safer city,” says James Lansill, senior managing director at Corcoran Sunshine Realty. He’s referring to the transformation of New York City, once perceived as simply crowded, foreboding and dangerous, into what might be appropriately seen as the nation’s urban crown jewel.
While there is no sociological consensus on what spurred that transformation, the timeline of crime that peaked during the crack cocaine epidemic of the 1980s indicates that marked dips can be traced to the years after 1993, when the nation and city began a period of economic resurgence.
But this was also a period when New York City began to rely more heavily on tax revenue from the financial sector as other industries dried up or downsized. Soon, the new infusions from Wall Street were helping pay for extensive but vital public services, including beefed up law enforcement.
LINK to Story
GlobeSt.com
LINK TO FULL TEXT at GlobeSt
Since 2005, New York City has claimed the distinct title as America’s safest large city—in other words, home to the lowest per capita crime rate among the nation’s 25 largest cities. That distinction is the apex of a years-long trend that has increased and solidified the city’s remarkable appeal as a place to work and live.
“Look at the quality of life afforded by a cleaner, safer city,” says James Lansill, senior managing director at Corcoran Sunshine Realty. He’s referring to the transformation of New York City, once perceived as simply crowded, foreboding and dangerous, into what might be appropriately seen as the nation’s urban crown jewel.
While there is no sociological consensus on what spurred that transformation, the timeline of crime that peaked during the crack cocaine epidemic of the 1980s indicates that marked dips can be traced to the years after 1993, when the nation and city began a period of economic resurgence.
But this was also a period when New York City began to rely more heavily on tax revenue from the financial sector as other industries dried up or downsized. Soon, the new infusions from Wall Street were helping pay for extensive but vital public services, including beefed up law enforcement.
LINK to Story
Thursday, January 08, 2009
(REUTERS) Israel accused by Red Cross
Israel accused by Red Cross (Reuters)
(02:19) Report
Jan 8 - The ICRC says Israel held up ambulances for days while starving children waited for help beside the bodies of their dead mothers.
The neutral International Committee of the Red Cross is accusing Israel of breaching international humanitarian law.
The Israeli army said any serious allegations would be investigated properly on receipt of a formal complaint.
Paul Chapman reports.
(02:19) Report
Jan 8 - The ICRC says Israel held up ambulances for days while starving children waited for help beside the bodies of their dead mothers.
The neutral International Committee of the Red Cross is accusing Israel of breaching international humanitarian law.
The Israeli army said any serious allegations would be investigated properly on receipt of a formal complaint.
Paul Chapman reports.
(REUTERS) Inside Gaza with the Israeli army
Inside Gaza with the Israeli army (REUTERS)
(01:39) Report
Jan 8 - A group of foreign television crews have been allowed into Gaza for the first time since the start of Israel's offensive, but restricted to accompanying Israeli troops.
The first footage captured by an embedded TV crew showed Israeli forces preparing for their entry and then crossing the border in tanks and armoured personnel carriers (APCs).
Once inside the Strip, the soldiers moved from house to house, with a muzzled dog, securing the locations.
Sonia Legg report
(01:39) Report
Jan 8 - A group of foreign television crews have been allowed into Gaza for the first time since the start of Israel's offensive, but restricted to accompanying Israeli troops.
The first footage captured by an embedded TV crew showed Israeli forces preparing for their entry and then crossing the border in tanks and armoured personnel carriers (APCs).
Once inside the Strip, the soldiers moved from house to house, with a muzzled dog, securing the locations.
Sonia Legg report
Monday, January 05, 2009
Nightmare After Christmas shows need for Air Passenger Bill of Rights
By Cody Lyon
The United States Department of Transportation says there is no federal requirement for airlines to compensate passengers who have been stranded because of a delayed or canceled flight.
That was a spooky post holiday truth I learned first hand in Milwaukee Wisconsin this past December 27 during an Air Tran airlines connection point on the way from Atlanta to New York City. The hours-long incident was a reminder that there is little, if any government oversight of some of our most basic but important consumer activities, like commercial airline travel.
Some might say, with the exception of safety, United States airline passengers are basically at the mercy of a profit driven business where passengers are basically left to their own devices to get from point A to B, almost like fighting your way onto the subway or buying a burger at a busy Manhattan McDonalds.
In most cases, if a flight is canceled, an airline will re-book you on the first available flight to your destination at no additional charge. But, as was the case in my experience, finding extra seats could prove difficult, especially if you’re out and about over the holidays. In a nutshell, this led to a couple of hours of travel trauma as my fellow passengers and I tried to make it back to New York City.
That night, flight, #514 from Milwaukee to New York, was the last leg of a long itinerary that had been delayed earlier because of mechanical problems in Tampa. Originally scheduled to depart Milwaukee at just after 5, the plane was eventually boarded at around 8:00 pm instead. Once all the passengers were seated, stowed, etc., the pilot unexpectedly came on the plane’s intercom and made an announcement saying we would all have to leave the plane. Apparently, there was a legal issue that involved the number of hours the onboard flight crew had worked.
These were problems beyond the airline’s control, but it was what happened after we had de-planed some might call questionable. To us on that plane, the next few hours were a sign that America’s airports are temples of chaos and abuse. If that night in Milwaukee is any indication of a greater picture, airlines are allowed to operate with no clear rules of consumer protection or mandated guidelines guaranteed by government oversight.
Back in Milwaukee, at around 9:00 pm after all the passengers had left the Air Tran flight confused and irritated, we watched as uniformed Milwaukee law enforcement officers slowly strolled up to the gate and perched against the podium as the agents on duty filled us in. Obviously, the arrival of “the law” signaled that the news passengers were about to get, would probably spark tempers among the passengers, some who were already barking at agents. Clearly, the agents had been through this sort of thing before.
But repeat performance or not, traveler anger was understandable. The agents told us there was nothing they could really do. Instead, passengers were told to call 1866-airtran and reschedule another flight to New York. It was then that the truly frightening moments of the evening arrived.
Most of us assumed that “rescheduling” meant we’d be booked on a flight that following day. But alas, ignorance is bliss.
In fact, when some passengers made the call to Air Tran’s customer service line, they were told the earliest they could fly would be the following Thursday, better known as New Years Day. The reason being that earlier Air Air Tran flights from Milwaukee to New York were booked solid.
I called right away, and was initially told Tuesday would be the earliest I could get home, but while speaking on the phone begging the agent for something earlier, she paused, then casually told me, oh well, ‘now that flight’s full,’ which then put me at Thursday as well.
The problem was, I had to work that following Monday. I felt the tears knocking on the door in this room full of strangers as a sense of helpless rage infected my soul. As I began to boil over, one of the uniformed Milwaukee deputies eyed me and after I exclaimed a loud “Oh No!” he told me to grow up and act like a man.
Truth be told, Air Tran agents on the scene and phone were clearly ill prepared for the questions they were being peppered with and that included: could other airlines accommodate us, what about a hotel room and others, instead the agents on duty ducked heads and typed furiously into the screens in front of them as they told the furious interrogators they were ‘checking on it.’
But then, after an hour or so of more tears, chaos and childlike confusion, one of the agents took a microphone and shouted to the stranded group that events were developing fast, that in fact, we might be leaving Milwaukee at 5 am that following morning. But, by then, a cloud of suspicion hung over the airport leading most in the room to not watch and question every move, not trusting anything they were hearing.
In fact, once the group fully understood the problem was due to over worked flight attendants, a few passengers decided to take things into their own hands and began begging and offering money to arriving flight attendants deplaning other planes, begging them to accompany us on the New York flight.
In the end, cash tips from passengers weren’t necessary.
Behind the scenes, a new plan was taking shape. Flight 514’s pilot was busy making phone calls to other planes. Along the way, he apparently secured another flight crew to fly with us to New York. Now, we wouldn’t have to wait a few days or until 5:00 am, but instead, it looked as if we would fly to La Guradia as soon as the new replacement crew landed in Milwaukee, scheduled for around midnight that same evening.
By the time the new crew arrived, the on edge passengers had bonded thanks to the shared trauma of it all. Some said they were shocked at America’s apparent lack of control over the beasts it had apparently created through full deregulation.
There were sweet moments in the night that included meeting several interesting individuals, including a New York Social worker who worked with elderly clients, a teacher and a former neighbor from the East Village. And, we all enjoyed an assortment of snacks and free soft drinks, provided by Air Tran. In addition to the snacks, we were compensated with a free round trip ticket any place that Air Tran flies, including Cancun, Puerto Rico or Alaska.
We arrived in Queens at around 430 am, around seven hours late.
In the end, nothing excuses the fact that many of us were almost stranded in an unfamiliar city for what could have been days. What if some of us had placed our employment in jeopardy by missing work? And, while it may seem petty, what about our holiday plans?
The truth is, if it hadn’t been for caring and diligent pilots along with the flight attendants who took our flight some of the passengers on Air Tran-Flight 514 might still be eating Wisconsin Cheese.
Perhaps its time for consumers to demand that government take cooperative steps with airlines in establishing some form of reasonable passenger rights legislation. Perhaps then, not only will Americans feel safer about flying, they might have time to relax as well and still enjoy hopefully reasonable air fares in the future.
The United States Department of Transportation says there is no federal requirement for airlines to compensate passengers who have been stranded because of a delayed or canceled flight.
That was a spooky post holiday truth I learned first hand in Milwaukee Wisconsin this past December 27 during an Air Tran airlines connection point on the way from Atlanta to New York City. The hours-long incident was a reminder that there is little, if any government oversight of some of our most basic but important consumer activities, like commercial airline travel.
Some might say, with the exception of safety, United States airline passengers are basically at the mercy of a profit driven business where passengers are basically left to their own devices to get from point A to B, almost like fighting your way onto the subway or buying a burger at a busy Manhattan McDonalds.
In most cases, if a flight is canceled, an airline will re-book you on the first available flight to your destination at no additional charge. But, as was the case in my experience, finding extra seats could prove difficult, especially if you’re out and about over the holidays. In a nutshell, this led to a couple of hours of travel trauma as my fellow passengers and I tried to make it back to New York City.
That night, flight, #514 from Milwaukee to New York, was the last leg of a long itinerary that had been delayed earlier because of mechanical problems in Tampa. Originally scheduled to depart Milwaukee at just after 5, the plane was eventually boarded at around 8:00 pm instead. Once all the passengers were seated, stowed, etc., the pilot unexpectedly came on the plane’s intercom and made an announcement saying we would all have to leave the plane. Apparently, there was a legal issue that involved the number of hours the onboard flight crew had worked.
These were problems beyond the airline’s control, but it was what happened after we had de-planed some might call questionable. To us on that plane, the next few hours were a sign that America’s airports are temples of chaos and abuse. If that night in Milwaukee is any indication of a greater picture, airlines are allowed to operate with no clear rules of consumer protection or mandated guidelines guaranteed by government oversight.
Back in Milwaukee, at around 9:00 pm after all the passengers had left the Air Tran flight confused and irritated, we watched as uniformed Milwaukee law enforcement officers slowly strolled up to the gate and perched against the podium as the agents on duty filled us in. Obviously, the arrival of “the law” signaled that the news passengers were about to get, would probably spark tempers among the passengers, some who were already barking at agents. Clearly, the agents had been through this sort of thing before.
But repeat performance or not, traveler anger was understandable. The agents told us there was nothing they could really do. Instead, passengers were told to call 1866-airtran and reschedule another flight to New York. It was then that the truly frightening moments of the evening arrived.
Most of us assumed that “rescheduling” meant we’d be booked on a flight that following day. But alas, ignorance is bliss.
In fact, when some passengers made the call to Air Tran’s customer service line, they were told the earliest they could fly would be the following Thursday, better known as New Years Day. The reason being that earlier Air Air Tran flights from Milwaukee to New York were booked solid.
I called right away, and was initially told Tuesday would be the earliest I could get home, but while speaking on the phone begging the agent for something earlier, she paused, then casually told me, oh well, ‘now that flight’s full,’ which then put me at Thursday as well.
The problem was, I had to work that following Monday. I felt the tears knocking on the door in this room full of strangers as a sense of helpless rage infected my soul. As I began to boil over, one of the uniformed Milwaukee deputies eyed me and after I exclaimed a loud “Oh No!” he told me to grow up and act like a man.
Truth be told, Air Tran agents on the scene and phone were clearly ill prepared for the questions they were being peppered with and that included: could other airlines accommodate us, what about a hotel room and others, instead the agents on duty ducked heads and typed furiously into the screens in front of them as they told the furious interrogators they were ‘checking on it.’
But then, after an hour or so of more tears, chaos and childlike confusion, one of the agents took a microphone and shouted to the stranded group that events were developing fast, that in fact, we might be leaving Milwaukee at 5 am that following morning. But, by then, a cloud of suspicion hung over the airport leading most in the room to not watch and question every move, not trusting anything they were hearing.
In fact, once the group fully understood the problem was due to over worked flight attendants, a few passengers decided to take things into their own hands and began begging and offering money to arriving flight attendants deplaning other planes, begging them to accompany us on the New York flight.
In the end, cash tips from passengers weren’t necessary.
Behind the scenes, a new plan was taking shape. Flight 514’s pilot was busy making phone calls to other planes. Along the way, he apparently secured another flight crew to fly with us to New York. Now, we wouldn’t have to wait a few days or until 5:00 am, but instead, it looked as if we would fly to La Guradia as soon as the new replacement crew landed in Milwaukee, scheduled for around midnight that same evening.
By the time the new crew arrived, the on edge passengers had bonded thanks to the shared trauma of it all. Some said they were shocked at America’s apparent lack of control over the beasts it had apparently created through full deregulation.
There were sweet moments in the night that included meeting several interesting individuals, including a New York Social worker who worked with elderly clients, a teacher and a former neighbor from the East Village. And, we all enjoyed an assortment of snacks and free soft drinks, provided by Air Tran. In addition to the snacks, we were compensated with a free round trip ticket any place that Air Tran flies, including Cancun, Puerto Rico or Alaska.
We arrived in Queens at around 430 am, around seven hours late.
In the end, nothing excuses the fact that many of us were almost stranded in an unfamiliar city for what could have been days. What if some of us had placed our employment in jeopardy by missing work? And, while it may seem petty, what about our holiday plans?
The truth is, if it hadn’t been for caring and diligent pilots along with the flight attendants who took our flight some of the passengers on Air Tran-Flight 514 might still be eating Wisconsin Cheese.
Perhaps its time for consumers to demand that government take cooperative steps with airlines in establishing some form of reasonable passenger rights legislation. Perhaps then, not only will Americans feel safer about flying, they might have time to relax as well and still enjoy hopefully reasonable air fares in the future.
Sunday, January 04, 2009
(From GLOBEST.COM) How Offshore breezes could power 300K homes
(GLOBEST.COM)- ATLANTIC CITY-Ocean breezes, currents and waves could someday provide up to 1,000 megawatts of power to an estimated 300,000 homes in New Jersey if a Seattle developer sees his windfarm project to fruition off the coast here. And, in addition to the mitigation of global warming, the project could prove profitable for the developer and his investors.
Link to (my) story at Globest.com
Link to (my) story at Globest.com
(New York Times) Frank Rich lambasts our last Eight Years
By FRANK RICH
Published: January 3, 2009
WE like our failed presidents to be Shakespearean, or at least large enough to inspire Oscar-worthy performances from magnificent tragedians like Frank Langella. So here, too, George W. Bush has let us down. Even the banality of evil is too grandiose a concept for 43. He is not a memorable villain so much as a sometimes affable second banana whom Josh Brolin and Will Ferrell can nail without breaking a sweat. He’s the reckless Yalie Tom Buchanan, not Gatsby. He is smaller than life.
LINK TO "New York Times" Frank Rich Column
Published: January 3, 2009
WE like our failed presidents to be Shakespearean, or at least large enough to inspire Oscar-worthy performances from magnificent tragedians like Frank Langella. So here, too, George W. Bush has let us down. Even the banality of evil is too grandiose a concept for 43. He is not a memorable villain so much as a sometimes affable second banana whom Josh Brolin and Will Ferrell can nail without breaking a sweat. He’s the reckless Yalie Tom Buchanan, not Gatsby. He is smaller than life.
LINK TO "New York Times" Frank Rich Column
From Reuters: Should Government bailout Newspapers
By Robert MacMillan - Analysis
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Connecticut lawmaker Frank Nicastro sees saving the local newspaper as his duty. But others think he and his colleagues are setting a worrisome precedent for government involvement in the U.S. press.
LINK TO FULL STORY at REUTERS
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Connecticut lawmaker Frank Nicastro sees saving the local newspaper as his duty. But others think he and his colleagues are setting a worrisome precedent for government involvement in the U.S. press.
LINK TO FULL STORY at REUTERS
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Cody Lyon's View of NYC...well a photo at least....
View from 51st Street and 10th Avenue in the "Hell's Kitchen" section of Midtown Manhattan.
12/15/2008
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Choosing Kennedy would Send Wrong Message
by CODY LYON
by CODY LYON
As is often the case in the empire state, New York is under the spotlight as a bit of drama builds over who Governor David Patterson might pick, if, as planned, current Senator Hillary Clinton resigns some time next year to assume the Secretary of State position. As it stands, a number of worthy names have been whispered here and there, but only a couple of them have made their way to the main stages of discussion, debate and that sometimes annoying media glare from the rest of the country that has always seen New York as a national soap opera.
Among the whispers beyond Cuomo, several women have been floated, women who’ve served New York already, a couple who happen to be Latina and another from Up-State.
Of course, there’s no denying that the biggest name in the bunch, Kennedy, evokes a sense of political reverence, respect and legacy. But in spite of tremendous political accomplishment, the family through no fault of its own, has also come to represent an American dynasty, the oft clichéd version of our royalty.' And while there's nothing wrong with Americans expressing affection for the tradition that comes with royalty, there is reason to question, show concern or perhaps raise flags when one's family genes potentially provide an untested individual with what could be a potentially simple coronation into national political office where the power is more than symbolic.
History books teach us the United States is a free and open Democracy that consists of government by and for the people. So, considering that 'by' essentially equals election, it might seem more fair, that in choosing New York's next Senator, the one set to succeed Hillary Clinton, the Governor might consider appointing an individual who has at least gotten votes for public office, or consider tapping a public official who has earned more tangible political wings beyond being the daughter of one of the nation's most revered presidents and a high profile member of our nation's often romanticized but powerful political dynasties.
Picking Caroline Kennedy to succeed Hillary Clinton as Senator from New York might actually send a contradictory message to Americans, the world, but perhaps more importantly, to the children of New York state. It could, inadvertently impact the spirit of the message the election of Barack Obama reaffirmed, that hopeful and idealistic seed our parents plant when they tell us while we’re still young and naive, that anyone, regardless of race, income and yes, name, can be elected to high office in the United States.
Choosing Caroline Kennedy as the Senator from New York, based on nothing more than her familial association, dilutes that message, and at least on the surface, seems to say that like Royalty, position is indeed an attribute, even a card of entitlement in American politics.
by CODY LYON
As is often the case in the empire state, New York is under the spotlight as a bit of drama builds over who Governor David Patterson might pick, if, as planned, current Senator Hillary Clinton resigns some time next year to assume the Secretary of State position. As it stands, a number of worthy names have been whispered here and there, but only a couple of them have made their way to the main stages of discussion, debate and that sometimes annoying media glare from the rest of the country that has always seen New York as a national soap opera.
Among the whispers beyond Cuomo, several women have been floated, women who’ve served New York already, a couple who happen to be Latina and another from Up-State.
Of course, there’s no denying that the biggest name in the bunch, Kennedy, evokes a sense of political reverence, respect and legacy. But in spite of tremendous political accomplishment, the family through no fault of its own, has also come to represent an American dynasty, the oft clichéd version of our royalty.' And while there's nothing wrong with Americans expressing affection for the tradition that comes with royalty, there is reason to question, show concern or perhaps raise flags when one's family genes potentially provide an untested individual with what could be a potentially simple coronation into national political office where the power is more than symbolic.
History books teach us the United States is a free and open Democracy that consists of government by and for the people. So, considering that 'by' essentially equals election, it might seem more fair, that in choosing New York's next Senator, the one set to succeed Hillary Clinton, the Governor might consider appointing an individual who has at least gotten votes for public office, or consider tapping a public official who has earned more tangible political wings beyond being the daughter of one of the nation's most revered presidents and a high profile member of our nation's often romanticized but powerful political dynasties.
Picking Caroline Kennedy to succeed Hillary Clinton as Senator from New York might actually send a contradictory message to Americans, the world, but perhaps more importantly, to the children of New York state. It could, inadvertently impact the spirit of the message the election of Barack Obama reaffirmed, that hopeful and idealistic seed our parents plant when they tell us while we’re still young and naive, that anyone, regardless of race, income and yes, name, can be elected to high office in the United States.
Choosing Caroline Kennedy as the Senator from New York, based on nothing more than her familial association, dilutes that message, and at least on the surface, seems to say that like Royalty, position is indeed an attribute, even a card of entitlement in American politics.
Monday, December 08, 2008
CBS NEWS '60 Minutes: Saudi Arabia Bullish On Oil's Future
CBS) The good news is that the price of oil is falling - a lot; it's also the bad news if you're determined that the U.S. should kick its addiction to foreign oil. President-elect Barack Obama says now is the time to do that, even with the economy in recession.
But Saudi Arabia, the world's largest oil supplier - with the U.S. as its number one customer - is pulling all the levers and spending billions to keep the oil age going.
60 Minutes correspondent Lesley Stahl went to Saudi Arabia a few weeks ago to meet one of the most powerful men in the world, Ali Al-Naimi, the Saudi oil minister and de facto head of the OPEC oil cartel.
LINK TO FULL STORY AT CBSNEWS
But Saudi Arabia, the world's largest oil supplier - with the U.S. as its number one customer - is pulling all the levers and spending billions to keep the oil age going.
60 Minutes correspondent Lesley Stahl went to Saudi Arabia a few weeks ago to meet one of the most powerful men in the world, Ali Al-Naimi, the Saudi oil minister and de facto head of the OPEC oil cartel.
LINK TO FULL STORY AT CBSNEWS
Thursday, December 04, 2008
7 WTC Lands German Bank on top 3 Floors
Against a backdrop of artist’s renderings of the future World Trade Center complex, Mayor Bloomberg offered praise for Silverstein and his commitment to Downtown, congratulating him on the buildings now reporting 85% occupancy. Financial terms of the lease were not available and neither Silverstein nor WestLB managing director, Connie Kain would comment on the amount the bank will be paying.
WestLB, in New York City since 1975, is moving from its current headquarters at 1211 Avenue of the Americas to floors 50 through 52 of the 1.7-million square-foot building.
Link to my full story at GlobeSt.com
WestLB, in New York City since 1975, is moving from its current headquarters at 1211 Avenue of the Americas to floors 50 through 52 of the 1.7-million square-foot building.
Link to my full story at GlobeSt.com
Saturday, November 22, 2008
An under-discussed potential tragedy if Detroit fails
For some, thoughts of a massive financial bailout for the American Automobile industry strike chords of unease that some might say, reward the lack of innovation and enterprise that has been exhibited by some foreign auto manufacturing competitors. Futher, the auto industry, at least on the surface, has appeared to be in bed with 'big oil' by continuously producing oversized automobiles, ala SUV's and the like, cars that only encouraged a glutinous collective consumption of oil, as if that fossil fuel were pouring from spigots of plenty throughout the world. And, to top things off, executives flew in private jets to plea with leaders in Washington, furthering the epidemic of anger at what many see as a nation where greed and excess rule the day. And, its easy to understand why people subscribe to that image, thus, for vast swaths of America, it's become increasing hard to have sympathy for the legends of American industry and capital.
But there is another side that must be addressed with some sort of legislative mandate because if the auto world of Detroit is allowed to fail and sink behind the veil of protection that bankruptcy provides, the potential for great human tragedy becomes increasingly real for large groups of vulnerable Americans.
Last week, I entered had a conversation with a woman in Alabama, who's husband worked for many years in a union job at a public utility in that state. While she had misgivings about bailing a large industry like automakers, worrying that perhaps, it would lead to a rash of bailouts for other companies in trouble, or at least, calls for more, she also expressed deep worry about people in the same position she's in. She said, who's to say other companies might seek bankruptcy protection and legally do away with 'obligations' to its former employees.
Being the wife of a union retiree, she and her husband are able to survive in tough economic times thanks to a small pension and company healthcare benefits. This Alabama couple's drug costs would bankrupt many, and the struggle to pay bills, simply get by, is cushioned by the benefits negotiated and fought for years ago. Her husband and thousands of other's paid union dues, labor negotiations and more than a few days on picket lines which allowed them to earn a decent living and retire with a sense of security. While there's little chance a public utility will ever be in the same boat as automakers, there is still the fear among those people, those older union family Americans who thought contracts between the union and company was sacred and would always be there once they reached the golden years. The point is, in bankruptcy, the fear is that almost anything is possible, in this case, there is a chance that if the automakers of Detroit are allowed to fail, thousands, if not millions could see their pensions, health insurance and other benefits greatly diminished or simply go away because a judge or arbiter might rule the company can no longer afford to pay for them. That the company's survival is more important than the older people no longer producing product for profit.
It could be that this is the under-discussed potential tragedy of an auto-industry failure.
But there is another side that must be addressed with some sort of legislative mandate because if the auto world of Detroit is allowed to fail and sink behind the veil of protection that bankruptcy provides, the potential for great human tragedy becomes increasingly real for large groups of vulnerable Americans.
Last week, I entered had a conversation with a woman in Alabama, who's husband worked for many years in a union job at a public utility in that state. While she had misgivings about bailing a large industry like automakers, worrying that perhaps, it would lead to a rash of bailouts for other companies in trouble, or at least, calls for more, she also expressed deep worry about people in the same position she's in. She said, who's to say other companies might seek bankruptcy protection and legally do away with 'obligations' to its former employees.
Being the wife of a union retiree, she and her husband are able to survive in tough economic times thanks to a small pension and company healthcare benefits. This Alabama couple's drug costs would bankrupt many, and the struggle to pay bills, simply get by, is cushioned by the benefits negotiated and fought for years ago. Her husband and thousands of other's paid union dues, labor negotiations and more than a few days on picket lines which allowed them to earn a decent living and retire with a sense of security. While there's little chance a public utility will ever be in the same boat as automakers, there is still the fear among those people, those older union family Americans who thought contracts between the union and company was sacred and would always be there once they reached the golden years. The point is, in bankruptcy, the fear is that almost anything is possible, in this case, there is a chance that if the automakers of Detroit are allowed to fail, thousands, if not millions could see their pensions, health insurance and other benefits greatly diminished or simply go away because a judge or arbiter might rule the company can no longer afford to pay for them. That the company's survival is more important than the older people no longer producing product for profit.
It could be that this is the under-discussed potential tragedy of an auto-industry failure.
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Taliban Mosaic (REUTERS)
The Taliban mosiac
(01:57) Report
Nov 19 - Increasing talk about talking to the Taliban comes at a time when some members claim responsibility for killing French soldiers serving in Afghanistan.
When the US first went into Afghanistan, it was to rid the country of the Taliban and prevent al Qaeda from forming a safe haven there.
Deborah Lutterbeck reports.
(01:57) Report
Nov 19 - Increasing talk about talking to the Taliban comes at a time when some members claim responsibility for killing French soldiers serving in Afghanistan.
When the US first went into Afghanistan, it was to rid the country of the Taliban and prevent al Qaeda from forming a safe haven there.
Deborah Lutterbeck reports.
NATO urges African Lead on Pirates (REUTERS)
NATO urges African lead on piracy REUTERS
(01:53) Report
Nov 20 - Alliance chief Jaap de Hoop Scheffer says NATO is committed to helping improve security but expects African states to take the lead in fighting high seas piracy.
There's no shortage of unilateral proposals being made to fight the pirates. But nothing on a coordinated global basis as yet.
The Somalia-based pirates have become increasingly active, now holding at least 13 vessels with more than 270 crew.
Susan Flory reports
(01:53) Report
Nov 20 - Alliance chief Jaap de Hoop Scheffer says NATO is committed to helping improve security but expects African states to take the lead in fighting high seas piracy.
There's no shortage of unilateral proposals being made to fight the pirates. But nothing on a coordinated global basis as yet.
The Somalia-based pirates have become increasingly active, now holding at least 13 vessels with more than 270 crew.
Susan Flory reports
Saturday, November 15, 2008
"Mobile Press Register" New Emails Surface in Siegelman Appeal Case
aturday, November 15, 2008
By BRIAN LYMAN
MOBILE PRESS REGISTER
Capital Bureau
MONTGOMERY — Attorneys for former Gov. Don Siegelman said Friday new allegations of prosecutorial misconduct during his 2006 trial will factor into his upcoming appeal.
An employee in the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Middle District of Alabama has handed the Department of Justice e-mails suggesting that U.S. Attorney Leura Canary discussed the case with prosecutors in 2005, three years after recusing herself over a potential conflict of interest.
The e-mails also suggest improper contact between prosecutors and jurors — including romantic interest expressed by one juror toward a member of the prosecution team — that was not disclosed during the trial.
LINK TO FULL STORY
By BRIAN LYMAN
MOBILE PRESS REGISTER
Capital Bureau
MONTGOMERY — Attorneys for former Gov. Don Siegelman said Friday new allegations of prosecutorial misconduct during his 2006 trial will factor into his upcoming appeal.
An employee in the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Middle District of Alabama has handed the Department of Justice e-mails suggesting that U.S. Attorney Leura Canary discussed the case with prosecutors in 2005, three years after recusing herself over a potential conflict of interest.
The e-mails also suggest improper contact between prosecutors and jurors — including romantic interest expressed by one juror toward a member of the prosecution team — that was not disclosed during the trial.
LINK TO FULL STORY
Monday, November 10, 2008
Tyranny of a Straight Majority?
by CODY LYON-Opinion
On the day after the historic election of Barack Obama as President of the United States and once the tears of joy had stopped flowing from eyes across the nation, a dose of sadness and disillusionment settled upon many members of the country's LGBT community.
Proposition 8 had passed in California. The amendment essentially overturns an earlier California State Supreme court decision that had extended the rights provided by legal marriage to same sex couples.
Leading up to the election, the hopes for an Obama victory were enhanced by the belief that another high profile pothole might be filled on the highway to true equality for gay and lesbian people. Publicly, blame for Prop 8 passage is being directed at a number of entities like the Mormon Church, well organized and moneyed efforts by conservative and right wing organizations from outside California while some have engaged in unfortunate knee-jerk tactics , laying blame on the heavy African American turnout and the tremendous influence of the Black church has in that community.
Before the vote, disturbing whispers of infighting among LGBT organizations who were attempting to lay blame for worrisome poll numbers on various interests, organizations and individuals for not staying focused, careful and on point so as to sway public opinion.
But, after some pause and reflection, one could in fact argue, that despite some truths in the above, most of these charges are simplistic, maybe even lazy but motivated by understandable, justifiable and reactionary anger at what the voters themselves wrought.
The massive No on 8 public relations campaign that sought to impact the California majority's attitudes about same sex marriage was somewhat hasty, perhaps idealistic and maybe even too hopeful. That despite the newfound sense of activism bubbling throughout the LGBT nation, the gay community was set up for disappointment especially since the battleground was California, a state most see assumed to be more socially liberal, a place many assumed to be more tolerant and accepting.
In the end, despite the joy of Obama's landslide, millions of gay people found themselves feeling let down, left behind, it was as this vote was a referendum on all gay people, as if the inclusive mosaic the election seemed to paint along with the supposed more compassionate and progressive tidal wave the election signaled, did not fully include them.
Truth be told, deep inside the souls of countless gay people, little voices were whispering, you, gay person, are still a second class citizen. And, the voices doing the talking were the people, at least the majority so far, who have shown in state after state, they are unwilling to accept the idea of same sex marriage.
The fact is, what happened in California was a reality check. California, the west coast trend setting home of Hollywood and the gay promised land of San Francisco, proved that despite how far the gay rights movement has come and attitudes changed, the majority is, at least now, not willing to extend the legal rights conveyed by marriage to same sex couples. No matter how one spins it, no matter who one seeks to lay blame on, the facts are what they are.
True, the Right played dirty, and no doubt the hyperbole they spewed played a role in the outcome. Funded by millions of dollars from across the right wing stratosphere, all manner of insidious ads, pulpit pleas and viral campaign tactics attempted to spook, prejudice and misinform voters into doubt on Tuesday. There was even the always reliable Anita Bryantesque use of the children, as rumors and lies were spread that, if Prop was not passed, the state's schools would be teaching students about the joys of gay coupling.
But, does all of his beg a greater question about who and how equality is dispensed in America?
Most supporters and experts have said that the road to full marriage equality will be a years long process that travels a highway of state by state activism and struggle. The consensus being, that the courts will pass it off to an eventual federal solution, most likely the Supreme court, provided there is an evolution of public opinion in the ballot box.
But, as indicated by the sobering California vote on Proposition 8, the majority is not always willing to take the necessary steps towards full equality.
At the risk of sounding simplistic, imagine if it had been left up to the majority white population to dispense equality to African Americans in America.
While it would be wrong to equate efforts to secure full marriage equality and the tremendous years long struggle for individual equality, dignity and the ladders of opportunity that were built as a result of the 1960's civil rights movement, there are are clues from history that might be worth studying.
First, it took heroic efforts, foot soldiering and the activism of black leaders who along with thousands of individuals, bravely stood up through countless marches, beatings, demonstrations and tragedy which along the way forced America to look in the mirror and confront the cancer of racism and all it had wrought. Every square inch of the Southern United States region, was essentially segregated.
History shows, the majority of whites, stirred on by segregationist leaders coupled with a fundamental sense of denial that was cushioned by the false comforts of separate but equal, were unwilling to take it upon themselves and tear down the barriers the segregated South presented. It was not until the courts and judges took on cases and allowed morality to rule over what had become the tyranny of the majority in the South.
In 1956, at the time of the Montgomery bus boycott, there was no state wide vote, after then US District Court Judge for the Middle District of Alabama, Frank Johnson, ruled in the Browder v Gale case that Brown v Board decision applied to public transportation as well as public schools, effectively integrating the state capital's bus system.
Subsequent decisions by Judge Johnson led to the integration of Alabama's public accommodations, libraries and agricultural services.
But, it was a later decision that brought out the true rage of many white Alabamians at the time,
After the 1954 Brown v Board Supreme Court decision ruling that separate but equal public schools were un-constutional, throughout the South, individual school districts continued to take their time on full integration. In 1963, most districts in Alabama were still balking at the ruling. But, when faced with the Lee vs Macon County Board of Education case, Judge Johnson issued Alabama's first statewide desegregation order. Johnson bravely endured death threats and other insults as he went against the majority of his home state.
Had it not been for the sense of urgency and the thirst for equality and justice by activists and leaders of the movement coupled with the actions of courts and judges of that time, America may have taken a slower path to the moment we witnessed in this years election.
Interestingly, the very idea that Judge Johnson's decisions would have ever been put before voters is nothing short of laughable.
There are plenty of Southerners, who today, will seek to explain, why, in all the years preceding the Civil Rights movement, they simply believed this was the way we lived, we knew nothing else and sometimes, they will say in no uncertain terms, we were in a state of denial about how difficult it was for a black person to exist with any sense of dignity in the deep south much less to get ahead in a white world.
But, they will also share, that they were taken aback, when they had to be forced to accept that that this way of life, was no longer acceptable, that everything segregation in America stood for, was in fact, the antithesis of what this nation supposedly stood for, that it was in fact unconstitutional. Black people in the south were living in a society where the tyranny of the majority stood firm. If it had not been for the efforts of the movement's soldiers, but also what today might be called by certain politicians, activist judges and courts, the majority may have maintained that un-just status quo even longer.
It appears that most Americans support the injustice of denying same sex couples the almost 700 federal rights and privileges that marriage conveys. But, it also appears that vast portions of the lesbian and gay community have been slow to recognize what passage of amendments like Proposition 8 say about the nation we call home. Perhaps California was a wake up call. Perhaps too, the California decision offered evidence that this section of the fight for full equality may not be won in the public's courtroom of opinion. Instead, the Prop 8 decision might be a call for more intense activism that seeks to challenge the status quo through the courts with the goal being an eventual Supreme Court ruling.
On the day after the historic election of Barack Obama as President of the United States and once the tears of joy had stopped flowing from eyes across the nation, a dose of sadness and disillusionment settled upon many members of the country's LGBT community.
Proposition 8 had passed in California. The amendment essentially overturns an earlier California State Supreme court decision that had extended the rights provided by legal marriage to same sex couples.
Leading up to the election, the hopes for an Obama victory were enhanced by the belief that another high profile pothole might be filled on the highway to true equality for gay and lesbian people. Publicly, blame for Prop 8 passage is being directed at a number of entities like the Mormon Church, well organized and moneyed efforts by conservative and right wing organizations from outside California while some have engaged in unfortunate knee-jerk tactics , laying blame on the heavy African American turnout and the tremendous influence of the Black church has in that community.
Before the vote, disturbing whispers of infighting among LGBT organizations who were attempting to lay blame for worrisome poll numbers on various interests, organizations and individuals for not staying focused, careful and on point so as to sway public opinion.
But, after some pause and reflection, one could in fact argue, that despite some truths in the above, most of these charges are simplistic, maybe even lazy but motivated by understandable, justifiable and reactionary anger at what the voters themselves wrought.
The massive No on 8 public relations campaign that sought to impact the California majority's attitudes about same sex marriage was somewhat hasty, perhaps idealistic and maybe even too hopeful. That despite the newfound sense of activism bubbling throughout the LGBT nation, the gay community was set up for disappointment especially since the battleground was California, a state most see assumed to be more socially liberal, a place many assumed to be more tolerant and accepting.
In the end, despite the joy of Obama's landslide, millions of gay people found themselves feeling let down, left behind, it was as this vote was a referendum on all gay people, as if the inclusive mosaic the election seemed to paint along with the supposed more compassionate and progressive tidal wave the election signaled, did not fully include them.
Truth be told, deep inside the souls of countless gay people, little voices were whispering, you, gay person, are still a second class citizen. And, the voices doing the talking were the people, at least the majority so far, who have shown in state after state, they are unwilling to accept the idea of same sex marriage.
The fact is, what happened in California was a reality check. California, the west coast trend setting home of Hollywood and the gay promised land of San Francisco, proved that despite how far the gay rights movement has come and attitudes changed, the majority is, at least now, not willing to extend the legal rights conveyed by marriage to same sex couples. No matter how one spins it, no matter who one seeks to lay blame on, the facts are what they are.
True, the Right played dirty, and no doubt the hyperbole they spewed played a role in the outcome. Funded by millions of dollars from across the right wing stratosphere, all manner of insidious ads, pulpit pleas and viral campaign tactics attempted to spook, prejudice and misinform voters into doubt on Tuesday. There was even the always reliable Anita Bryantesque use of the children, as rumors and lies were spread that, if Prop was not passed, the state's schools would be teaching students about the joys of gay coupling.
But, does all of his beg a greater question about who and how equality is dispensed in America?
Most supporters and experts have said that the road to full marriage equality will be a years long process that travels a highway of state by state activism and struggle. The consensus being, that the courts will pass it off to an eventual federal solution, most likely the Supreme court, provided there is an evolution of public opinion in the ballot box.
But, as indicated by the sobering California vote on Proposition 8, the majority is not always willing to take the necessary steps towards full equality.
At the risk of sounding simplistic, imagine if it had been left up to the majority white population to dispense equality to African Americans in America.
While it would be wrong to equate efforts to secure full marriage equality and the tremendous years long struggle for individual equality, dignity and the ladders of opportunity that were built as a result of the 1960's civil rights movement, there are are clues from history that might be worth studying.
First, it took heroic efforts, foot soldiering and the activism of black leaders who along with thousands of individuals, bravely stood up through countless marches, beatings, demonstrations and tragedy which along the way forced America to look in the mirror and confront the cancer of racism and all it had wrought. Every square inch of the Southern United States region, was essentially segregated.
History shows, the majority of whites, stirred on by segregationist leaders coupled with a fundamental sense of denial that was cushioned by the false comforts of separate but equal, were unwilling to take it upon themselves and tear down the barriers the segregated South presented. It was not until the courts and judges took on cases and allowed morality to rule over what had become the tyranny of the majority in the South.
In 1956, at the time of the Montgomery bus boycott, there was no state wide vote, after then US District Court Judge for the Middle District of Alabama, Frank Johnson, ruled in the Browder v Gale case that Brown v Board decision applied to public transportation as well as public schools, effectively integrating the state capital's bus system.
Subsequent decisions by Judge Johnson led to the integration of Alabama's public accommodations, libraries and agricultural services.
But, it was a later decision that brought out the true rage of many white Alabamians at the time,
After the 1954 Brown v Board Supreme Court decision ruling that separate but equal public schools were un-constutional, throughout the South, individual school districts continued to take their time on full integration. In 1963, most districts in Alabama were still balking at the ruling. But, when faced with the Lee vs Macon County Board of Education case, Judge Johnson issued Alabama's first statewide desegregation order. Johnson bravely endured death threats and other insults as he went against the majority of his home state.
Had it not been for the sense of urgency and the thirst for equality and justice by activists and leaders of the movement coupled with the actions of courts and judges of that time, America may have taken a slower path to the moment we witnessed in this years election.
Interestingly, the very idea that Judge Johnson's decisions would have ever been put before voters is nothing short of laughable.
There are plenty of Southerners, who today, will seek to explain, why, in all the years preceding the Civil Rights movement, they simply believed this was the way we lived, we knew nothing else and sometimes, they will say in no uncertain terms, we were in a state of denial about how difficult it was for a black person to exist with any sense of dignity in the deep south much less to get ahead in a white world.
But, they will also share, that they were taken aback, when they had to be forced to accept that that this way of life, was no longer acceptable, that everything segregation in America stood for, was in fact, the antithesis of what this nation supposedly stood for, that it was in fact unconstitutional. Black people in the south were living in a society where the tyranny of the majority stood firm. If it had not been for the efforts of the movement's soldiers, but also what today might be called by certain politicians, activist judges and courts, the majority may have maintained that un-just status quo even longer.
It appears that most Americans support the injustice of denying same sex couples the almost 700 federal rights and privileges that marriage conveys. But, it also appears that vast portions of the lesbian and gay community have been slow to recognize what passage of amendments like Proposition 8 say about the nation we call home. Perhaps California was a wake up call. Perhaps too, the California decision offered evidence that this section of the fight for full equality may not be won in the public's courtroom of opinion. Instead, the Prop 8 decision might be a call for more intense activism that seeks to challenge the status quo through the courts with the goal being an eventual Supreme Court ruling.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Hope, Fear and Race in America
by CODY LYON
On the sunny, crisp and final Monday of October 2008, three friends met at around 1 p.m., in Downtown Manhattan's financial district for lunch.
The three then headed to a pub located on a narrow cobblestone street deep within the cavernous patch of land where buildings inspired by finance touch the sky.
Inside, dim light, drab wood tables and a line of customers at a steam table that included Turkey and cranberry sauce, Cajun Strip Steak, vegetables and crusted macaroni and Cheese.
Sitting at the tables were business attired patrons on lunch breaks.
Being that it was a few days before Halloween, fake spider webs coated the ceiling.
And, since it was only eight days before a national election, much of the soft but steady conversation filling the room was punctuated by Obama, Palin and McCain and Biden.
After the three settled into one of the the worn wooden booths, they too joined the conversation between bites of the hearty food and syrupy flat soda.
Despite polls predicting otherwise, one of the three raised doubts about a Democratic win, a hope they all said they subscribed to.
The doubter worried that while the potential election of the African American candidate created the appearance that race no longer plays an active role in American politics, the worry remained, racism could rear its ugly head on election day.
At that point, one of the three teased the doubter about his Southern upbringing, while the other, a New York native laughed but with caution, chimed in, saying what goes on behind the curtain of a voting booth, often stays behind the curtain.
The doubter kept saying that this is America, a place where hypocrisy and secrets often reveal themselves in subtle fashions. He charged that America was still a place where inequity could be measured along racial and class lines and that it was on full display in policy and even in the most mundane activities of day to day life.
This was after all, a nation that would legitimize campaign questions based on rumors about one man's religion while failing to live by a "golden rule" that clearly calls for all people to be treated, as they themselves would want to be treated, with decency, compassion and respect.
Evidence of his charges could be found in countless news stories, statistics and facts. This was a nation where prejudice and discrimination were still tolerated, offering as an example, California, where the threat of Proposition 8 offered reaffirmation that we as a nation allowed the majority to pick and choose who was worthy of equality.
After more polite discussion, lunch was finished, and the three rejoined the day outside where despite the crisp weather, the mood on the sidewalks appeared as flat as the earlier soda, a place where worry infected the collective mindset as fears of financial upheaval, two major wars and a sense of lost direction dimmed the lights at the end of the tunnel.
The downtown streets surrounding the epicenter of business were filled with camera ready tourists and cigarette puffing traders who quietly strolled, all mingling together amidst security barriers, television crews and checkpoints manned by men with guns.
The three friends then made there way back to the original gathering point, and dropped off the one who worked in the area. The other two, hopped on bikes and headed out of the cavernous old New Amsterdam, and over to the open air of the Harbor where the statue of Liberty beckoned. Then, after texting friends and some small talk about the past weekend, the two headed uptown along the river.
Along the way, the two noticed a group of around four casually dressed people who were staring down at the ground. One of them was taking a picture of what appeared to be either a large grey bug. After a good bit of pointing, giggling and conversing in what sounded like Italian, the group, obviously tourists, lumbered along leaving the small creature on the concrete surface.
The two, still on their bikes decided to have a look.
As they made there way over to the little spot, one of the two exclaimed "it's a tarantula!"
"No, it's a sea crab," said the other.
It was in fact a small crab, obviously from the harbor. The crab was moving sideways at the pace of caterpillar, apparently trying to make its way around the concrete barrier into the nearby weeds.
The two stood there and watched the little grey creature, which suddenly began to scurry into the safety of bushes and tall grass.
The crab was then gone, at least, the two on the bikes could no longer see it. They had no desire to dig and find it either, so, they continued to bike north.
As they rode along, they spotted yet another small group of people. Among them this time, a little girl petting what appeared to be a tiny spotted leopard.
"It's a virtual zoo out here!" remarked one of the two friends to the other.
"What is that?" he asked?
In this new group of three, a middle aged looking woman with perfectly white hair, had a large spotted cat on a leash. The cat was eying a squirrel that seemed to be teasing the cat. The squirrel bobbed its head and nibbled on food it took from the ground. The cat, sat with its neck stretched, at full attention, transfixed on the squirrel. The little girl, continued to pet the cat with caution, keeping her distance, while the cat did not seem to notice she was even there. A short distance away, another woman manned an empty stroller.
After a few minutes of staring at this scene, the two on bikes continued uptown.
Finally, they stopped at the World Financial Center, a modern complex of buildings on the shore of the river that adjoins the World Trade Center Site, also known as Ground Zero.
In the small marina at the base of the complex, are several yachts, sail boats and other marine vessels.
The two on bikes bought some peaches and cream gelato at an ice cream store in the complex, then sat outside on a concrete bench and enjoyed the sun.
Here too, despite the sunny day, the mood appeared quiet, subtle, as if New York City was calm before a storm.
The afternoon marched on, the two spent more time taking, pondering their hopes for the future, discussing their belief that government can and should do great things for its people. But still, one of them worried, that on election day polls mean nothing, that in America, even among liberals, racism is like cancer, it whispers as it destroys.
On this Monday in 2008, beneath the ghost of a shadow cast by twin towers that are now gone, the two pondered their hopes for the future, a future they hopped would begin next Tuesday.
After a while, one of the two continued uptown and left the other alone. The doubter sat and thought for a moment. Soon, his worries began to evolve back into bright light of hope.
When hope is real, it usually trumps the the fear of the past.
On the sunny, crisp and final Monday of October 2008, three friends met at around 1 p.m., in Downtown Manhattan's financial district for lunch.
The three then headed to a pub located on a narrow cobblestone street deep within the cavernous patch of land where buildings inspired by finance touch the sky.
Inside, dim light, drab wood tables and a line of customers at a steam table that included Turkey and cranberry sauce, Cajun Strip Steak, vegetables and crusted macaroni and Cheese.
Sitting at the tables were business attired patrons on lunch breaks.
Being that it was a few days before Halloween, fake spider webs coated the ceiling.
And, since it was only eight days before a national election, much of the soft but steady conversation filling the room was punctuated by Obama, Palin and McCain and Biden.
After the three settled into one of the the worn wooden booths, they too joined the conversation between bites of the hearty food and syrupy flat soda.
Despite polls predicting otherwise, one of the three raised doubts about a Democratic win, a hope they all said they subscribed to.
The doubter worried that while the potential election of the African American candidate created the appearance that race no longer plays an active role in American politics, the worry remained, racism could rear its ugly head on election day.
At that point, one of the three teased the doubter about his Southern upbringing, while the other, a New York native laughed but with caution, chimed in, saying what goes on behind the curtain of a voting booth, often stays behind the curtain.
The doubter kept saying that this is America, a place where hypocrisy and secrets often reveal themselves in subtle fashions. He charged that America was still a place where inequity could be measured along racial and class lines and that it was on full display in policy and even in the most mundane activities of day to day life.
This was after all, a nation that would legitimize campaign questions based on rumors about one man's religion while failing to live by a "golden rule" that clearly calls for all people to be treated, as they themselves would want to be treated, with decency, compassion and respect.
Evidence of his charges could be found in countless news stories, statistics and facts. This was a nation where prejudice and discrimination were still tolerated, offering as an example, California, where the threat of Proposition 8 offered reaffirmation that we as a nation allowed the majority to pick and choose who was worthy of equality.
After more polite discussion, lunch was finished, and the three rejoined the day outside where despite the crisp weather, the mood on the sidewalks appeared as flat as the earlier soda, a place where worry infected the collective mindset as fears of financial upheaval, two major wars and a sense of lost direction dimmed the lights at the end of the tunnel.
The downtown streets surrounding the epicenter of business were filled with camera ready tourists and cigarette puffing traders who quietly strolled, all mingling together amidst security barriers, television crews and checkpoints manned by men with guns.
The three friends then made there way back to the original gathering point, and dropped off the one who worked in the area. The other two, hopped on bikes and headed out of the cavernous old New Amsterdam, and over to the open air of the Harbor where the statue of Liberty beckoned. Then, after texting friends and some small talk about the past weekend, the two headed uptown along the river.
Along the way, the two noticed a group of around four casually dressed people who were staring down at the ground. One of them was taking a picture of what appeared to be either a large grey bug. After a good bit of pointing, giggling and conversing in what sounded like Italian, the group, obviously tourists, lumbered along leaving the small creature on the concrete surface.
The two, still on their bikes decided to have a look.
As they made there way over to the little spot, one of the two exclaimed "it's a tarantula!"
"No, it's a sea crab," said the other.
It was in fact a small crab, obviously from the harbor. The crab was moving sideways at the pace of caterpillar, apparently trying to make its way around the concrete barrier into the nearby weeds.
The two stood there and watched the little grey creature, which suddenly began to scurry into the safety of bushes and tall grass.
The crab was then gone, at least, the two on the bikes could no longer see it. They had no desire to dig and find it either, so, they continued to bike north.
As they rode along, they spotted yet another small group of people. Among them this time, a little girl petting what appeared to be a tiny spotted leopard.
"It's a virtual zoo out here!" remarked one of the two friends to the other.
"What is that?" he asked?
In this new group of three, a middle aged looking woman with perfectly white hair, had a large spotted cat on a leash. The cat was eying a squirrel that seemed to be teasing the cat. The squirrel bobbed its head and nibbled on food it took from the ground. The cat, sat with its neck stretched, at full attention, transfixed on the squirrel. The little girl, continued to pet the cat with caution, keeping her distance, while the cat did not seem to notice she was even there. A short distance away, another woman manned an empty stroller.
After a few minutes of staring at this scene, the two on bikes continued uptown.
Finally, they stopped at the World Financial Center, a modern complex of buildings on the shore of the river that adjoins the World Trade Center Site, also known as Ground Zero.
In the small marina at the base of the complex, are several yachts, sail boats and other marine vessels.
The two on bikes bought some peaches and cream gelato at an ice cream store in the complex, then sat outside on a concrete bench and enjoyed the sun.
Here too, despite the sunny day, the mood appeared quiet, subtle, as if New York City was calm before a storm.
The afternoon marched on, the two spent more time taking, pondering their hopes for the future, discussing their belief that government can and should do great things for its people. But still, one of them worried, that on election day polls mean nothing, that in America, even among liberals, racism is like cancer, it whispers as it destroys.
On this Monday in 2008, beneath the ghost of a shadow cast by twin towers that are now gone, the two pondered their hopes for the future, a future they hopped would begin next Tuesday.
After a while, one of the two continued uptown and left the other alone. The doubter sat and thought for a moment. Soon, his worries began to evolve back into bright light of hope.
When hope is real, it usually trumps the the fear of the past.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
A Shameful Message of Hate and Lies
by CODY LYON-OPINION
Barring a vision from the Lord himself,there is probably no way to alter the thinking of those who subscribe to the philosophy of fringe right wing groups like the Columbus Ohio based Mission America and its leader Linda Harvey.
And, if it weren't for the particularly nasty tone or incessantly misleading words contained in an October 20 opine by Linda Harvey in the conservative "World Net Daily", any response to Mission America's typically insecure, filth laced and fright filled hyperbole wouldn't be worthy of time or effort.
But, in this case, a word or two, perhaps even a counter attack are warranted because, in her latest poisonous diatribe, Harvey not only spews lies about one of the LGBT community's most respected organizations, the Gay Lesbian and Straight Education Network, or GLSEN, but also attempts to link her lies to the candidacy of Democratic Presidential Candidate Barack Obama.
Understanding just how fringe Mission America is easy. This is a group that beckons visitors to its web page by advertising "learn the truth about homosexuality, witchcraft, changing Christian Church, Radical Feminism and the Youth Culture. Even more "mainstream" right wing groups may find this a bit outrageous.
Mission America calls itself a public policy analysis foundation. According to its 2007 tax returns, the private non operating foundation Mission America took in a meager $12,000 in contributions and donations. On its IRS Form 990 PF on a question where it asks did the foundation attempt to influence any national, state or local legislation or participate in any political campaigns, Harvey, or whoever filled out the returns, checked NO.
That said, there's no doubt Harvey and her writing is indeed attempting to influence this year's campaign. And, she's using a tired tactic, one long used by those on the far right that attempts to plant seeds of fear, be they racial, spook tactics on national security or in this case, the always reliable hot button homosexual agenda.
Currently featured in a prominent spot on the group's web page is a link to the article "Advocate of homosexual corruption of kids is leader in Obama's campaign.
That link then takes visitors to 'Gay" pedophilia and Obama', the "World Net Daily" piece where Linda Harvey asks if Obama agrees with his GLBT supporters.
Harvey's article charges that the LGBT organization GLSEN's mission "has been to plant 'gay' clubs and training programs in as many schools as possible" calling those groups a Trojan Horse into America's school children's minds.
She says that the "more closely one reads the GLSEN material, the worse it gets," implying that all manner of sexually suggestive material and pedophilia are acceptable behaviors. She says "just about every sexual practice imaginable is apparently acceptable and even worthy of celebration by any age student or teacher as far as GLSEN is concerned."
Then she asks "is this the kind of 'school reform' Obama has in mind?"
Harvey makes these charges because GLSEN's founder, Kevin Jennings, happens to be a prominent fundraiser in the LGBT community for the Obama campaign.
In the article, she says that Obama should remove Jennings from his 'position' and that voters need answers to a series of questions from Obama regarding his stance or beliefs about the origins, practice and acceptance of homosexuality especially when it comes to school aged children.
She then kicks her piece with "if we want a totalitarian, pansexual society, with its accompanying disease, dysfunction and abuse, and no room for nobility, goodness and tradition, then we need to make sure we vote for Obama with all his various revolutionary hangers-on, including Jennings." If, on the other hand, we envision another America, it's time to speak up now."
Well, Ms Harvey is correct, we do need to speak up.
It's nothing short of pathetic that Mission America would resort to such disgusting misleading smears that use vulnerable children in a Presidential campaign.
Perhaps her desperation arose out of the clear indication that If the "another America" Harvey envisions resembles the noble, good society where the 'tradition' of the past eight years are celebrated, according to a number of polls, most Americans plan to pass this go round.
Clearly, most voters are choosing to look beyond the political smokescreen of far right groups like Harvey's Mission America that have long sought to steer voters from the true issues affecting their lives, and their children's futures by raising false charges about candidates like Harvey does in her Obama/GLSEN piece. There are greater concerns occupying the minds of voters than an LGBT fundraiser at the Obama campaign.
But, besides that, if Americans look at the fine work of all the LGBT organizations in America, GLSEN has the distinction of perhaps being one of the more politically benign. It's mission is clear and it actually speaks to a fundament of who we are as a nation, the opportunity for all Americans to receive a quality education in a safe learning environment.
The Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network narrows its mission 'to assure that each member of every school community is valued and respected regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity/expression.'
Exactly how does that mission mission cross over into pedophilia?
GLSEN's battles have been defined by its own research.
According to a recent GLSEN survey of almost seven thousand school children across the nation, 86.2% of LGBT students reported being verbally harassed, 44.1% reported being physically assaulted because of their sexual orientation. Around 74 percent heard derogatory remarks like "faggot" or "dyke" used often at school. According to the survey, more than 60 percent of students felt unsafe because of their sexual orientation.
Linda Harvey and her friends at Mission America must not remember what goes on in the hallways or schoolyards of America's schools. The truth is, kids can be extremely cruel, often resorting to name calling and bullying, unfortunate behaviors usually directed at the most vulnerable, those perceived as different or weak, maybe the less than masculine male, or the masculine appearing female. Harvey fails to understand that those taunts, those abuses, that even the victims themselves are often ashamed of, have the ability to leave a child feeling isolated, alone and damaged. Those insults backed up by much of society's deep prejudices have the ability to cripple the self esteem and psychological health of children for years, if not lifetimes.
And, what good does it do the child issuing those taunts, or more importantly, the child on the receiving end of those taunts, when his or her parent, has read a piece like Linda Harvey's or any of the other vicious material on her website, where she has equated the mission of GLSEN and the candidacy of Barack Obama to pedophila or the "homosexual agenda?"
While GLSEN does indeed help in the establishment of what are called Gay Straight Alliances in schools across the nation, the fact is, they are more prominent in places that tend to be more tolerant, places with more socially open school districts, and rarely in the rural hamlets of Mississippi or Alabama, places where if a child who happens to be different, perhaps gay or lesbian, life can be hellish, perhaps destructive and very lonely.
If parents in those more conservative areas are subscribing to the hate filled vitriol of Linda Harvey and her crowd, a child may feel he or she has no place to turn.
Back in 1989, the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued its "Report on the Secretary's Task Force on Youth Suicide," which found that "a majority of suicide attempts by homosexuals occur during their youth, and gay youth are 2 to 3 times more likely to attempt suicide than other young people.
In 2001, the American Psychological Association said that suicide is the number one cause of death for gay teens.
Calling someone heterosexual or straight is not a common insult or perceived as hurtful. In most school yards, shopping malls, social functions or other gathering places the straight jock or pretty cheerleader has less to worry about when it comes to the prejudices facing them. But the prejudices, even disregard for humanity that gets reinforced by the rhetoric of ghoulish figures like Linda Harvey, individuals who spew poisonous rhetoric, reinforcing hate for political gain into the minds of concerned parents and voters is nothing short of shameful.
Barring a vision from the Lord himself,there is probably no way to alter the thinking of those who subscribe to the philosophy of fringe right wing groups like the Columbus Ohio based Mission America and its leader Linda Harvey.
And, if it weren't for the particularly nasty tone or incessantly misleading words contained in an October 20 opine by Linda Harvey in the conservative "World Net Daily", any response to Mission America's typically insecure, filth laced and fright filled hyperbole wouldn't be worthy of time or effort.
But, in this case, a word or two, perhaps even a counter attack are warranted because, in her latest poisonous diatribe, Harvey not only spews lies about one of the LGBT community's most respected organizations, the Gay Lesbian and Straight Education Network, or GLSEN, but also attempts to link her lies to the candidacy of Democratic Presidential Candidate Barack Obama.
Understanding just how fringe Mission America is easy. This is a group that beckons visitors to its web page by advertising "learn the truth about homosexuality, witchcraft, changing Christian Church, Radical Feminism and the Youth Culture. Even more "mainstream" right wing groups may find this a bit outrageous.
Mission America calls itself a public policy analysis foundation. According to its 2007 tax returns, the private non operating foundation Mission America took in a meager $12,000 in contributions and donations. On its IRS Form 990 PF on a question where it asks did the foundation attempt to influence any national, state or local legislation or participate in any political campaigns, Harvey, or whoever filled out the returns, checked NO.
That said, there's no doubt Harvey and her writing is indeed attempting to influence this year's campaign. And, she's using a tired tactic, one long used by those on the far right that attempts to plant seeds of fear, be they racial, spook tactics on national security or in this case, the always reliable hot button homosexual agenda.
Currently featured in a prominent spot on the group's web page is a link to the article "Advocate of homosexual corruption of kids is leader in Obama's campaign.
That link then takes visitors to 'Gay" pedophilia and Obama', the "World Net Daily" piece where Linda Harvey asks if Obama agrees with his GLBT supporters.
Harvey's article charges that the LGBT organization GLSEN's mission "has been to plant 'gay' clubs and training programs in as many schools as possible" calling those groups a Trojan Horse into America's school children's minds.
She says that the "more closely one reads the GLSEN material, the worse it gets," implying that all manner of sexually suggestive material and pedophilia are acceptable behaviors. She says "just about every sexual practice imaginable is apparently acceptable and even worthy of celebration by any age student or teacher as far as GLSEN is concerned."
Then she asks "is this the kind of 'school reform' Obama has in mind?"
Harvey makes these charges because GLSEN's founder, Kevin Jennings, happens to be a prominent fundraiser in the LGBT community for the Obama campaign.
In the article, she says that Obama should remove Jennings from his 'position' and that voters need answers to a series of questions from Obama regarding his stance or beliefs about the origins, practice and acceptance of homosexuality especially when it comes to school aged children.
She then kicks her piece with "if we want a totalitarian, pansexual society, with its accompanying disease, dysfunction and abuse, and no room for nobility, goodness and tradition, then we need to make sure we vote for Obama with all his various revolutionary hangers-on, including Jennings." If, on the other hand, we envision another America, it's time to speak up now."
Well, Ms Harvey is correct, we do need to speak up.
It's nothing short of pathetic that Mission America would resort to such disgusting misleading smears that use vulnerable children in a Presidential campaign.
Perhaps her desperation arose out of the clear indication that If the "another America" Harvey envisions resembles the noble, good society where the 'tradition' of the past eight years are celebrated, according to a number of polls, most Americans plan to pass this go round.
Clearly, most voters are choosing to look beyond the political smokescreen of far right groups like Harvey's Mission America that have long sought to steer voters from the true issues affecting their lives, and their children's futures by raising false charges about candidates like Harvey does in her Obama/GLSEN piece. There are greater concerns occupying the minds of voters than an LGBT fundraiser at the Obama campaign.
But, besides that, if Americans look at the fine work of all the LGBT organizations in America, GLSEN has the distinction of perhaps being one of the more politically benign. It's mission is clear and it actually speaks to a fundament of who we are as a nation, the opportunity for all Americans to receive a quality education in a safe learning environment.
The Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network narrows its mission 'to assure that each member of every school community is valued and respected regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity/expression.'
Exactly how does that mission mission cross over into pedophilia?
GLSEN's battles have been defined by its own research.
According to a recent GLSEN survey of almost seven thousand school children across the nation, 86.2% of LGBT students reported being verbally harassed, 44.1% reported being physically assaulted because of their sexual orientation. Around 74 percent heard derogatory remarks like "faggot" or "dyke" used often at school. According to the survey, more than 60 percent of students felt unsafe because of their sexual orientation.
Linda Harvey and her friends at Mission America must not remember what goes on in the hallways or schoolyards of America's schools. The truth is, kids can be extremely cruel, often resorting to name calling and bullying, unfortunate behaviors usually directed at the most vulnerable, those perceived as different or weak, maybe the less than masculine male, or the masculine appearing female. Harvey fails to understand that those taunts, those abuses, that even the victims themselves are often ashamed of, have the ability to leave a child feeling isolated, alone and damaged. Those insults backed up by much of society's deep prejudices have the ability to cripple the self esteem and psychological health of children for years, if not lifetimes.
And, what good does it do the child issuing those taunts, or more importantly, the child on the receiving end of those taunts, when his or her parent, has read a piece like Linda Harvey's or any of the other vicious material on her website, where she has equated the mission of GLSEN and the candidacy of Barack Obama to pedophila or the "homosexual agenda?"
While GLSEN does indeed help in the establishment of what are called Gay Straight Alliances in schools across the nation, the fact is, they are more prominent in places that tend to be more tolerant, places with more socially open school districts, and rarely in the rural hamlets of Mississippi or Alabama, places where if a child who happens to be different, perhaps gay or lesbian, life can be hellish, perhaps destructive and very lonely.
If parents in those more conservative areas are subscribing to the hate filled vitriol of Linda Harvey and her crowd, a child may feel he or she has no place to turn.
Back in 1989, the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued its "Report on the Secretary's Task Force on Youth Suicide," which found that "a majority of suicide attempts by homosexuals occur during their youth, and gay youth are 2 to 3 times more likely to attempt suicide than other young people.
In 2001, the American Psychological Association said that suicide is the number one cause of death for gay teens.
Calling someone heterosexual or straight is not a common insult or perceived as hurtful. In most school yards, shopping malls, social functions or other gathering places the straight jock or pretty cheerleader has less to worry about when it comes to the prejudices facing them. But the prejudices, even disregard for humanity that gets reinforced by the rhetoric of ghoulish figures like Linda Harvey, individuals who spew poisonous rhetoric, reinforcing hate for political gain into the minds of concerned parents and voters is nothing short of shameful.
Thursday, October 02, 2008
Rolling the Dice?
by CODY LYON
This past week, as it became increasingly clear that an infusion of $700 billion in taxpayer capital might be necessary to stave off national economic "calamity", a number of Americans expressed increased feelings of doubt, confusion and frustration.
In fact, according to a "Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times" Sept 19-22 poll, by a margin of 55 to 31 percent, "Americans say it's not the government's responsibility to bail out private companies with taxpayer dollars, even if their collapse could damage the economy."
Even in New York City, the home Wall Street of Wall Street Giants, talk on the streets, bars and boutiques beyond the cavernous streets downtown is mixed with worry and anger.
"I do not believe the American taxpayer should have to bail out another business like Bear Stearns" said Scott Woodward, CEO of Sewbranded, a marketing and branding firm in New York.
"My inclination is to let it play itself out naturally, and maybe the goings on of Wall Street as we knew it, will halt the greed and corruption of how CEO's run firms for short term personal gain will subside," said Woodward.
In his initial appearance before lawmakers in Washington, Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson urged that the bailout plan, as it's commonly called, be passed "quickly and clearly" and that inaction could lead to a "recession."
President Bush used similar language during a number of television appearances.
Despite acknowledging the use of shrill language, a number of experts appear to believe that the doing nothing is simply not an option.
"The use of recession sounds to me like a scare tactic," said David Backus, Heinz Riehl Professor of International Economics and Finance at New York University's (NYU) Stern School of Business.
But Backus says that a "reasonably rapid response to problems in the financial sector are important."
"Japan is the obvious case of the opposite (inaction),"said Professor Backus.
From 1986 to 1990, Japan experienced what many call an asset price bubble where real estate and stock prices. When the bubble collapsed, gradually, the next 10 years became known in economic circles as the "lost decade."
"The government there ignored the onset of serious problems, and the economy stopped growing," Backus said.
"That's not a recession, it's much worse, that is ten to fifteen years of slow growth," he said.
According to Investorwords.com, a nation's economic growth rate is measured by economic growth during a given interval. Gross National Product and Gross Domestic Product are the fundaments used to measure those growth rates.
Still, understanding the evolution of, and accepting the severity of what a slowdown could mean, has at best, proven to be challenging.
The bailout plan would allow the Treasury Department to buy bad mortgages from banks, and if and when the market improves, then sell them, in the best case scenario, at a profit.
But, ultimately, the Government would pump billions of dollars into the economy by buying up bad debt and restoring credibility to firms like AIG, Freddie Mac and Fannie, providing clean balance sheets, so banks can start lending to one another again.
In a recent broadcast of the PBS program "Newshour'" Paul Solmon explained that in this most recent and current era of "credit," the collapse of firms like Lehman Brothers was not a net loss of faith in stocks, but in bonds, basically, the debts of firms like Lehman, Fannie , Freddie and AIG.
Bonds are like official IOUs isued by governments and corporations.
Newshour's Solmon points out that credit is the most important ingredient in an economy. Futher, he says in the report that 'firms, from railways to high tech, pay for their equipment , offices, and workers as they try to grow or expand, on credit.
The availability of fast and easy credit via credit cards, loans, and mortgages has enabled American consumers to buy cars, homes, television sets and vacations basically with a bet that future income from work will allow them to cover debt, or at least allow them to keep up with monthly payments .
Still, many wonder why taxpayers should bail out an industry they view as profiteers of misfortune or bad financial decisions of average citizens...especially during the era of the perjorative term, predatory lender.
Of course, it isn't just sub-prime mortgage lenders who have the appearance of predators who capitalize off the inability of countless individuals who fail to to pay in full or on time.
Just look at the commercial banking industry's biggest arm of profit.
Back in 2004, the PBS documentary series Frontline in collaboration with the "New York Times" produced its "Secret History of the Credit Card" that revealed over 145 million Americans carried charge cards. Of those individuals, 55 million paid their full payments monthly. 90 million of them carried balances while 35 million paid only the minimum required amounts.
FRONTLINE pointed out that the average credit card amount owed by consumers was $8,000.
The documentary meticulously reported how around 25 years ago, 'the banking industry successfully eliminated a critical restriction: the limit on the interest rate a lender can charge a borrower' setting in motion what has proven to be one of the most profitable profit streams for the banking industry.
As most consumers know, a credit card might be issued at a low interest rate of perhaps, 6 percent. But, if the consumer misses or is late on a payment, hidden within the fine print of most charge card agreements are stipulations that allow the bank to raise the rate to as much as 29 or more percent.
According to the FRONTLINE report by Lowell Bergman, the industry's most profitable customers, the ones being sought by creative marketing tactics, are the "revolvers:" the estimated 115 million Americans who carry monthly credit card debt.
To the extent the current the current 'crisis' would affect credit card lending is not yet known.
But as Jocelyn Slovak, a former New York City Public School Teacher, said last week, she's worried that if some sort of plan doesn't save the sector, it's pretty clear that a good bit of the financial freedom that credit provides might be be taken away.
"We've always had the luxury to take risks, through credit and other means, and it looks like that's going to change rather quickly," said Slovak.
So how did America arrive at a place where luxury and now it appears, big houses on credit became the norm?
In a June, 2006 "New York Times Magazine" article titled "The American Way of Debt" Jackson Lears, editor of Raritan: A Quarterly Review wrote During the 1980's, while real income continued to stagnate for most Americans, the ascendancy of Ronald Reagan gave government sanction to unprecedented consumer spending. Reagan's rhetorical refusal of limits combined with the deregulation of the lending industry to detach dreams of luxury from previous constraints.
The lack of constraint and de-regulation apparently created an industry that led to the current bubble linked to credit, a bubble that now appears to be popping most loudly on Wall Street.
Back on street level in New York, Scott Woodward said while he worries that the pain of not bailing out Wall Street will be immediate and extreme, his adverse opinions to this plan's particulars were only strengthened when he heard Secretary Henry Paulson first detail and defend the initial bailout terms with "no attached conditions", conditions that Woodward and plenty of others saw as a gift to CEO's and other players.
"I'd love to know the headhunter that was able to devise the notion of million dollar severances for executives that get fired for running their firms into the ground and not performing," he said.
Headhunters aside, it's understandable why Woodward would blast one of the more high profile companies that will be receiving Washington, ahem, taxpayer money, the nation's largest insurer or AIG. (American International Group Inc.)
For consideration, AIG, whose $85 billion dollar bailout is in addition to the $700 billion figure being crafted in Washington, has what some would might call a less than stellar record in some of its past corporate dealings.
For example, according to Austin based non profit organization Texans for Public Justice, after the 9/11 attacks in New York and Washington, AIG's former chair and CEO, Maurice "Hank" Greenberg, led "a lobbying blitz to get taxpayers to bail out terrorism-related insurance losses.
TPJ also reported in a series called Bush donor profiles, that AIG had helped the now infamous Enron Corporation "cook its books" by investing in its LJM2 partnership along with Merril Lynch.
In 2003, AIG paid $10 million to settle Securities and Exchange Commission fraud charges that it helped a struggling mobile phone company pad its earnings by selling it a phony, back-dated insurance policy. Further still, AIG paid $126 million in 2004 to settle criminal and civil charges that it similarly helped PNC Financial Services hid $762 million in poorly performing loans in 2001.
According to TPJ, former AIG CEO Greenberg, while sitting on the New York Stock Exchange , helped approve what became a publicly condemned $187 million retirement package leading to the ouster of NYSE Chairman Dick Grasso.
TPJ goes on to say that "around that time, Greenberg got Grasso to pressure NYSE buyers to prop up AIG's stock price.
And while such alleged mischief leaves a bad taste in the mouths of countless taxpayers, experts caution that AIG's assets must go someplace and the bailout of AIG and others is probably necessary.
"It's entirely legitimate for people to ask questions about why we're doing this and who benefits as long as this isn't used as an excuse to delay action," said New York University's David Backus.
"To the extent we might want to blame somone, there's more than enough evidence of bad judgement by both parties with Fannie and Freddie being the most obvious examples," he said.
But, there are some holdouts.
As Ari J. Officer and Lawrence J. Officer opined on September 29 in TIME Magazine, 'the $700 billion (ultimately $1 trillion or more) bailout is not predominantly for mortgages and homeowners. Instead, the bailout is for mortgage-backed securities. In fact, some versions of these instruments are imaginary derivatives. These claims overlap on the same types of mortgages.
The Time article said that many financial institutions wrote claims over the same mortgages, and these are the majority of claims that have "gone bad."
One solution that might provide some level of palatability to taxpayers who others who view the bailout as extreme is an "institutional risk insurance premium."
The idea was touted in a September 17, "New York Times" Op-Ed by Jonathan G S Koppell, Director of the Millstein Center for Corporate Governance and Performance at Yale.
Koppell asked "why not make investment banks and other companies pay premiums for this catastrophic insurance." He argues further that the "goal should be to limit the contagion of failure rather than prevent the failure itself."
Later, in an email message, Professor Koppell wrote that the idea of 'failure tax' "could be used to emphasize that the public should not be providing insurance to these companies gratis."
"The American people don't get the profits so why should they be stuck with the losses," he said.
Such input from experts and others has only fueled the ongoing informal conversations, questions and nighttime arguments over who, what and how this will all play out in the end for those beyond the busy trading floors in the financial district and the halls of Government in Washington.
"In a nutshell, we are an over-inflated economy that has placed to much trust in synthetic trades," according to one New York stock analyst who asked to remain anonymous while sipping drinks with a friend who works for a major New York City bank.
The annonymous analyst said that Wall Street is all about leverage. He went on to say that leverage is like odds, you bet one, but if you lose, you lose a thousand.
During that same conversation at a downtown bar, the analyst said that Wall Streets assets are based on synthetic value, mere blips on a screen.
Whatever that means, it seems clear, that Wall Street has been and will continue to capitalize off of every day American's debt, and that debt, has allowed Americans to operate, often beyond their means.
Still, as the anaylist in New York pointed out, ordinary Americans don't really have a say here.
"Whether you think it's good, bad or you're indifferent, you have no control," he said to his banker friend.
He went on to say that taxpayers will be rolling the dice with the $700 billion dollar bailout. First, there is no way of knowing whether or not the market will buy back the distressed debt at any point in the future and whether or not, this will put the country back on the path to greater growth.
According to an August 2008 report from the Office of Macroeconomic Analysis, the United States economy has "remained on a path of slower growth since late 2007.
To this, many Americans are asking whether or not this plan that allegedly provides a shot in the arm of the market abyss will impact their own income streams.
"There is absolutely no guaruntee this $700 billion will do anything to stave off a catastrophe in the longterm," the anonymous analyst said wearily over a Grey Goose martini with olives.
This past week, as it became increasingly clear that an infusion of $700 billion in taxpayer capital might be necessary to stave off national economic "calamity", a number of Americans expressed increased feelings of doubt, confusion and frustration.
In fact, according to a "Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times" Sept 19-22 poll, by a margin of 55 to 31 percent, "Americans say it's not the government's responsibility to bail out private companies with taxpayer dollars, even if their collapse could damage the economy."
Even in New York City, the home Wall Street of Wall Street Giants, talk on the streets, bars and boutiques beyond the cavernous streets downtown is mixed with worry and anger.
"I do not believe the American taxpayer should have to bail out another business like Bear Stearns" said Scott Woodward, CEO of Sewbranded, a marketing and branding firm in New York.
"My inclination is to let it play itself out naturally, and maybe the goings on of Wall Street as we knew it, will halt the greed and corruption of how CEO's run firms for short term personal gain will subside," said Woodward.
In his initial appearance before lawmakers in Washington, Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson urged that the bailout plan, as it's commonly called, be passed "quickly and clearly" and that inaction could lead to a "recession."
President Bush used similar language during a number of television appearances.
Despite acknowledging the use of shrill language, a number of experts appear to believe that the doing nothing is simply not an option.
"The use of recession sounds to me like a scare tactic," said David Backus, Heinz Riehl Professor of International Economics and Finance at New York University's (NYU) Stern School of Business.
But Backus says that a "reasonably rapid response to problems in the financial sector are important."
"Japan is the obvious case of the opposite (inaction),"said Professor Backus.
From 1986 to 1990, Japan experienced what many call an asset price bubble where real estate and stock prices. When the bubble collapsed, gradually, the next 10 years became known in economic circles as the "lost decade."
"The government there ignored the onset of serious problems, and the economy stopped growing," Backus said.
"That's not a recession, it's much worse, that is ten to fifteen years of slow growth," he said.
According to Investorwords.com, a nation's economic growth rate is measured by economic growth during a given interval. Gross National Product and Gross Domestic Product are the fundaments used to measure those growth rates.
Still, understanding the evolution of, and accepting the severity of what a slowdown could mean, has at best, proven to be challenging.
The bailout plan would allow the Treasury Department to buy bad mortgages from banks, and if and when the market improves, then sell them, in the best case scenario, at a profit.
But, ultimately, the Government would pump billions of dollars into the economy by buying up bad debt and restoring credibility to firms like AIG, Freddie Mac and Fannie, providing clean balance sheets, so banks can start lending to one another again.
In a recent broadcast of the PBS program "Newshour'" Paul Solmon explained that in this most recent and current era of "credit," the collapse of firms like Lehman Brothers was not a net loss of faith in stocks, but in bonds, basically, the debts of firms like Lehman, Fannie , Freddie and AIG.
Bonds are like official IOUs isued by governments and corporations.
Newshour's Solmon points out that credit is the most important ingredient in an economy. Futher, he says in the report that 'firms, from railways to high tech, pay for their equipment , offices, and workers as they try to grow or expand, on credit.
The availability of fast and easy credit via credit cards, loans, and mortgages has enabled American consumers to buy cars, homes, television sets and vacations basically with a bet that future income from work will allow them to cover debt, or at least allow them to keep up with monthly payments .
Still, many wonder why taxpayers should bail out an industry they view as profiteers of misfortune or bad financial decisions of average citizens...especially during the era of the perjorative term, predatory lender.
Of course, it isn't just sub-prime mortgage lenders who have the appearance of predators who capitalize off the inability of countless individuals who fail to to pay in full or on time.
Just look at the commercial banking industry's biggest arm of profit.
Back in 2004, the PBS documentary series Frontline in collaboration with the "New York Times" produced its "Secret History of the Credit Card" that revealed over 145 million Americans carried charge cards. Of those individuals, 55 million paid their full payments monthly. 90 million of them carried balances while 35 million paid only the minimum required amounts.
FRONTLINE pointed out that the average credit card amount owed by consumers was $8,000.
The documentary meticulously reported how around 25 years ago, 'the banking industry successfully eliminated a critical restriction: the limit on the interest rate a lender can charge a borrower' setting in motion what has proven to be one of the most profitable profit streams for the banking industry.
As most consumers know, a credit card might be issued at a low interest rate of perhaps, 6 percent. But, if the consumer misses or is late on a payment, hidden within the fine print of most charge card agreements are stipulations that allow the bank to raise the rate to as much as 29 or more percent.
According to the FRONTLINE report by Lowell Bergman, the industry's most profitable customers, the ones being sought by creative marketing tactics, are the "revolvers:" the estimated 115 million Americans who carry monthly credit card debt.
To the extent the current the current 'crisis' would affect credit card lending is not yet known.
But as Jocelyn Slovak, a former New York City Public School Teacher, said last week, she's worried that if some sort of plan doesn't save the sector, it's pretty clear that a good bit of the financial freedom that credit provides might be be taken away.
"We've always had the luxury to take risks, through credit and other means, and it looks like that's going to change rather quickly," said Slovak.
So how did America arrive at a place where luxury and now it appears, big houses on credit became the norm?
In a June, 2006 "New York Times Magazine" article titled "The American Way of Debt" Jackson Lears, editor of Raritan: A Quarterly Review wrote During the 1980's, while real income continued to stagnate for most Americans, the ascendancy of Ronald Reagan gave government sanction to unprecedented consumer spending. Reagan's rhetorical refusal of limits combined with the deregulation of the lending industry to detach dreams of luxury from previous constraints.
The lack of constraint and de-regulation apparently created an industry that led to the current bubble linked to credit, a bubble that now appears to be popping most loudly on Wall Street.
Back on street level in New York, Scott Woodward said while he worries that the pain of not bailing out Wall Street will be immediate and extreme, his adverse opinions to this plan's particulars were only strengthened when he heard Secretary Henry Paulson first detail and defend the initial bailout terms with "no attached conditions", conditions that Woodward and plenty of others saw as a gift to CEO's and other players.
"I'd love to know the headhunter that was able to devise the notion of million dollar severances for executives that get fired for running their firms into the ground and not performing," he said.
Headhunters aside, it's understandable why Woodward would blast one of the more high profile companies that will be receiving Washington, ahem, taxpayer money, the nation's largest insurer or AIG. (American International Group Inc.)
For consideration, AIG, whose $85 billion dollar bailout is in addition to the $700 billion figure being crafted in Washington, has what some would might call a less than stellar record in some of its past corporate dealings.
For example, according to Austin based non profit organization Texans for Public Justice, after the 9/11 attacks in New York and Washington, AIG's former chair and CEO, Maurice "Hank" Greenberg, led "a lobbying blitz to get taxpayers to bail out terrorism-related insurance losses.
TPJ also reported in a series called Bush donor profiles, that AIG had helped the now infamous Enron Corporation "cook its books" by investing in its LJM2 partnership along with Merril Lynch.
In 2003, AIG paid $10 million to settle Securities and Exchange Commission fraud charges that it helped a struggling mobile phone company pad its earnings by selling it a phony, back-dated insurance policy. Further still, AIG paid $126 million in 2004 to settle criminal and civil charges that it similarly helped PNC Financial Services hid $762 million in poorly performing loans in 2001.
According to TPJ, former AIG CEO Greenberg, while sitting on the New York Stock Exchange , helped approve what became a publicly condemned $187 million retirement package leading to the ouster of NYSE Chairman Dick Grasso.
TPJ goes on to say that "around that time, Greenberg got Grasso to pressure NYSE buyers to prop up AIG's stock price.
And while such alleged mischief leaves a bad taste in the mouths of countless taxpayers, experts caution that AIG's assets must go someplace and the bailout of AIG and others is probably necessary.
"It's entirely legitimate for people to ask questions about why we're doing this and who benefits as long as this isn't used as an excuse to delay action," said New York University's David Backus.
"To the extent we might want to blame somone, there's more than enough evidence of bad judgement by both parties with Fannie and Freddie being the most obvious examples," he said.
But, there are some holdouts.
As Ari J. Officer and Lawrence J. Officer opined on September 29 in TIME Magazine, 'the $700 billion (ultimately $1 trillion or more) bailout is not predominantly for mortgages and homeowners. Instead, the bailout is for mortgage-backed securities. In fact, some versions of these instruments are imaginary derivatives. These claims overlap on the same types of mortgages.
The Time article said that many financial institutions wrote claims over the same mortgages, and these are the majority of claims that have "gone bad."
One solution that might provide some level of palatability to taxpayers who others who view the bailout as extreme is an "institutional risk insurance premium."
The idea was touted in a September 17, "New York Times" Op-Ed by Jonathan G S Koppell, Director of the Millstein Center for Corporate Governance and Performance at Yale.
Koppell asked "why not make investment banks and other companies pay premiums for this catastrophic insurance." He argues further that the "goal should be to limit the contagion of failure rather than prevent the failure itself."
Later, in an email message, Professor Koppell wrote that the idea of 'failure tax' "could be used to emphasize that the public should not be providing insurance to these companies gratis."
"The American people don't get the profits so why should they be stuck with the losses," he said.
Such input from experts and others has only fueled the ongoing informal conversations, questions and nighttime arguments over who, what and how this will all play out in the end for those beyond the busy trading floors in the financial district and the halls of Government in Washington.
"In a nutshell, we are an over-inflated economy that has placed to much trust in synthetic trades," according to one New York stock analyst who asked to remain anonymous while sipping drinks with a friend who works for a major New York City bank.
The annonymous analyst said that Wall Street is all about leverage. He went on to say that leverage is like odds, you bet one, but if you lose, you lose a thousand.
During that same conversation at a downtown bar, the analyst said that Wall Streets assets are based on synthetic value, mere blips on a screen.
Whatever that means, it seems clear, that Wall Street has been and will continue to capitalize off of every day American's debt, and that debt, has allowed Americans to operate, often beyond their means.
Still, as the anaylist in New York pointed out, ordinary Americans don't really have a say here.
"Whether you think it's good, bad or you're indifferent, you have no control," he said to his banker friend.
He went on to say that taxpayers will be rolling the dice with the $700 billion dollar bailout. First, there is no way of knowing whether or not the market will buy back the distressed debt at any point in the future and whether or not, this will put the country back on the path to greater growth.
According to an August 2008 report from the Office of Macroeconomic Analysis, the United States economy has "remained on a path of slower growth since late 2007.
To this, many Americans are asking whether or not this plan that allegedly provides a shot in the arm of the market abyss will impact their own income streams.
"There is absolutely no guaruntee this $700 billion will do anything to stave off a catastrophe in the longterm," the anonymous analyst said wearily over a Grey Goose martini with olives.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
Stumble It!