Tonight, Thursday, Jan 27, 6pm pacific | 9pm eastern
Tom Levenson on Virtually Speaking with Jay Ackroyd
More up now at http://blog.virtually-speaking.com/
Friends of James O’Keefe! How strange is it that they really believe Planned Parenthood wouldn’t report this? That they really think they’re in the business of covering up? They apparently believe their own insane talking points.
So in the next couple of weeks, I finally meet with a psychiatrist to decide what medications they think will help with the ADD and depression. My shrink told me yesterday he thinks I have chronic low-level anxiety, which kind of surprised me.
“Do you think you don’t?” he said.
“No, it’s just that no one has ever said that to me before. It hadn’t occurred to me,” I said. But the more I thought about it, the more sense it made. We discussed medication (he’s a psychologist and is as cautious about drugs as I am, which I like) and I told him I’d heard many bad things about anti-anxiety drugs. I’ve also seen them kick off a whole cascade of related problems in people I know, so I’m very wary.
He said he’s seen a pattern in which I overwhelm myself with information and stress out about the possibilities of things.
“I’m a blogger,” I said. “It’s kind of inherent in the job description.”
I read over the transcript from yesterday’s blogger meeting with Axelrod, and I have to say, I wonder how accurate it is to say that jobs have been “restructured,” that businesses simply don’t need as many people anymore. That’s not what I hear from my friends who are still employed. They describe one person having to take on two or three jobs, and much more outsourcing to avoid paying benefits.
I think it’s been a systematic stripping of rights, benefits and job security. But that businesses have simply become more efficient in two years? I’m not convinced. My last job was at a management consulting firm, and those kind of changes take a LONGGGGG time to design, and then implement.
I don’t believe it.
And if they’re making policy decisions on the basis of misinformation, they’re making the wrong decisions.
Chris Bowers of Daily Kos reports on the blogger roundtable held at the White House yesterday:
The answers that we received are not answers that will make anyone entirely happy. Here is what I took from them:
The Obama administration is not willing to repudiate the “crisis” narrative surrounding Social Security that dominates the national political media. President Obama explicitly repudiated privatization of Social Security in his speech last night, and David Axelrod reaffirmed that repudiation today. If there is going to be a “bi-partisan” agreement to alter Social Security, it will be brokered by President Obama himself. Congress is not going to pass a deal to which President Obama has not given his prior approval. President Obama strikes generally strong notes in defense of Social Security when it comes to other possible ways to cut the program. However, other than privatization, both he and his administration are unwilling to get too specific about where the line is drawn.
The best thing you can do right now is write letters to your congress critters and/or your local papers, since as venal as they are, they still have to worry about getting reelected.
It really pisses me off that people are so ignorant about the facts of the famous “McDonald’s coffee lawsuit” story — and how the media collaborated with the corporations to make it seems like a legal outrage, helpfully fueling their campaign for tort “reform”.
I’m very glad this documentary was made, and that Amy Goodman is spotlighting it.
It looks like Taibbi was right! Not only did they steal our money, they immediately started lobbying for big bonuses, I guess as after-dinner mints:
Goldman Sachs collected $2.9 billion from the American International Group as payout on a speculative trade it placed for the benefit of its own account, receiving the bulk of those funds after AIG received an enormous taxpayer rescue, according to the final report of an investigative panel appointed by Congress.
The fact that a significant slice of the proceeds secured by Goldman through the AIG bailout landed in its own account–as opposed to those of its clients or business partners– has not been previously disclosed. These details about the workings of the controversial AIG bailout, which eventually swelled to $182 billion, are among the more eye-catching revelations in the report to be released Thursday by the bipartisan Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission.
The details underscore the degree to which Goldman–the most profitable securities firm in Wall Street history–benefited directly from the massive emergency bailout of the nation’s financial system, a deal crafted on the watch of then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, who had previously headed the bank.
“If these allegations are correct, it appears to have been a direct transfer of wealth from the Treasury to Goldman’s shareholders,” said Joshua Rosner, a bond analyst and managing director at independent research consultancy Graham Fisher & Co., after he was read the relevant section of the report. “The AIG counterparty bailout, which was spun as necessary to protect the public, seems to have protected the institution at the expense of the public.”
Goldman Sachs denies, denies, denies!