Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
marmar
marmar's Journal
marmar's Journal
December 18, 2013
(Daily News) New York City has the most robust transit system in the country. Serving more riders each day than the 20 next largest U.S. systems combined, the city’s subways and buses are a vital catalyst for economic prosperity. However those opportunities for prosperity have not extended to the whole city, especially parts of the outer-boroughs, where long distances, infrequent service, and complex routes can make it difficult, and nearly impossible, for New Yorkers to reach good-paying jobs. Indeed, more than 750,000 New Yorkers commute more than an hour each way to work — two-thirds to jobs that earn less than $35,000 per year.
What’s more, many employers in these neighborhoods are isolated from reliable transit, inhibiting the potential for business growth and economic development in these areas. As Mayor Bill de Blasio considers how to advance his campaign promises of equitable opportunities for economic growth across all neighborhoods, among the first places he should start is our city’s transit system.
But due to high costs, extended construction times, and persistent MTA budget issues, expanding the subway system is simply not feasible. Multi-billion dollar investments in the 7 line and the Second Avenue Subway are taking years to complete. The solution? Bus Rapid Transit.
Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is a high-performance transit option that combines the permanence, speed, and reliability of rail, with the flexibility of buses, at a fraction of the cost of a subway system. Compared to the $3 billion per mile cost of Phase 1 of the Second Avenue Subway, BRT will maximize taxpayers’ dollars. A full-featured BRT network that would streamline commutes for outer borough residents and create new economic opportunities for millions of New Yorkers is attainable through a reasonable allocation of capital funding and a strong commitment of political and community support. .........(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/case-bus-rapid-transit-article-1.1550943#ixzz2nqDDB9Qp
NY Daily News: The case for bus rapid transit
(Daily News) New York City has the most robust transit system in the country. Serving more riders each day than the 20 next largest U.S. systems combined, the city’s subways and buses are a vital catalyst for economic prosperity. However those opportunities for prosperity have not extended to the whole city, especially parts of the outer-boroughs, where long distances, infrequent service, and complex routes can make it difficult, and nearly impossible, for New Yorkers to reach good-paying jobs. Indeed, more than 750,000 New Yorkers commute more than an hour each way to work — two-thirds to jobs that earn less than $35,000 per year.
What’s more, many employers in these neighborhoods are isolated from reliable transit, inhibiting the potential for business growth and economic development in these areas. As Mayor Bill de Blasio considers how to advance his campaign promises of equitable opportunities for economic growth across all neighborhoods, among the first places he should start is our city’s transit system.
But due to high costs, extended construction times, and persistent MTA budget issues, expanding the subway system is simply not feasible. Multi-billion dollar investments in the 7 line and the Second Avenue Subway are taking years to complete. The solution? Bus Rapid Transit.
Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is a high-performance transit option that combines the permanence, speed, and reliability of rail, with the flexibility of buses, at a fraction of the cost of a subway system. Compared to the $3 billion per mile cost of Phase 1 of the Second Avenue Subway, BRT will maximize taxpayers’ dollars. A full-featured BRT network that would streamline commutes for outer borough residents and create new economic opportunities for millions of New Yorkers is attainable through a reasonable allocation of capital funding and a strong commitment of political and community support. .........(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/case-bus-rapid-transit-article-1.1550943#ixzz2nqDDB9Qp
December 18, 2013
It is 5:35 a.m.
"Let's go," Carmen says to Andy, 14, and Nicole,11, as they head up the street toward their Florence Avenue bus stop, all of them wearing backpacks.
On weekdays, Carmen Mendoza does not see the sun in her Bell Gardens neighborhood. She's out the door with her two kids before dawn, and the evening darkness always beats her home.
One reason for the 15-hour days is that like thousands of people in a region built for the automobile, Carmen Mendoza doesn't own a car. So she and the kids commute to work and school by bus, with lots of transfers along the way. On a typical day, the bus that takes them back home is their eighth or ninth of the day.
I joined them for the journey recently, meeting Mendoza and her kids as they emerged from their home to go catch the first bus of the day. ......................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-1218-lopez-carmen-20131218,0,6026836.column#ixzz2nqCImLmz
LA Times: Buses are their route to a brighter future
It is 5:35 a.m.
"Let's go," Carmen says to Andy, 14, and Nicole,11, as they head up the street toward their Florence Avenue bus stop, all of them wearing backpacks.
On weekdays, Carmen Mendoza does not see the sun in her Bell Gardens neighborhood. She's out the door with her two kids before dawn, and the evening darkness always beats her home.
One reason for the 15-hour days is that like thousands of people in a region built for the automobile, Carmen Mendoza doesn't own a car. So she and the kids commute to work and school by bus, with lots of transfers along the way. On a typical day, the bus that takes them back home is their eighth or ninth of the day.
I joined them for the journey recently, meeting Mendoza and her kids as they emerged from their home to go catch the first bus of the day. ......................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-1218-lopez-carmen-20131218,0,6026836.column#ixzz2nqCImLmz
December 18, 2013
WASHINGTON -- New Jersey traffic jams have hit the nation's capital. On Monday, Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) asked the Department of Transportation to look into why officials in New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie's (R) administration abruptly shut down access lanes to the busiest U.S. bridge in September and caused massive traffic jams, a move that some Democrats have characterized as political retribution.
Between Sept. 9-13, drivers attempting to cross the George Washington Bridge by the three access lanes in Fort Lee, N.J., found two of the lanes closed. As a result, vehicles backed up into Fort Lee's local roads, creating a mess for both bridge and local traffic.
The closures were ordered by David Wildstein, a high-ranking Port Authority of New York and New Jersey official and an ally of Christie's. They came just weeks after Fort Lee's Democratic mayor, Mark Sokolich, refused to endorse Christie's reelection bid. On Sept. 12, Sokolich said he believed the closures were "punitive," although he later backed off that accusation.
Wildstein and his boss, former state Sen. Bill Baroni, have since resigned. Christie sought to quell the growing controversy last week by holding a press conference, but many Democrats have not been satisfied with his answers. ..................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/17/chris-christie-bridge_n_4459389.html?ncid=txtlnkushpmg00000037
Suggested reading for Chris Christie: Karma for A**holes
WASHINGTON -- New Jersey traffic jams have hit the nation's capital. On Monday, Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) asked the Department of Transportation to look into why officials in New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie's (R) administration abruptly shut down access lanes to the busiest U.S. bridge in September and caused massive traffic jams, a move that some Democrats have characterized as political retribution.
Between Sept. 9-13, drivers attempting to cross the George Washington Bridge by the three access lanes in Fort Lee, N.J., found two of the lanes closed. As a result, vehicles backed up into Fort Lee's local roads, creating a mess for both bridge and local traffic.
The closures were ordered by David Wildstein, a high-ranking Port Authority of New York and New Jersey official and an ally of Christie's. They came just weeks after Fort Lee's Democratic mayor, Mark Sokolich, refused to endorse Christie's reelection bid. On Sept. 12, Sokolich said he believed the closures were "punitive," although he later backed off that accusation.
Wildstein and his boss, former state Sen. Bill Baroni, have since resigned. Christie sought to quell the growing controversy last week by holding a press conference, but many Democrats have not been satisfied with his answers. ..................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/17/chris-christie-bridge_n_4459389.html?ncid=txtlnkushpmg00000037
December 18, 2013
Capitalism and Democracy: Year-End Lessons
Wednesday, 18 December 2013 09:12
By Richard D Wolff, Truthout | News
2013 drove home a basic lesson: US capitalism's economic leaders and their politicians now regularly ignore majority opinions and preferences. For example, polls showed overwhelming popular support for higher taxes on the rich with lower taxes on the rest of us and for reversing the nation's deepening economic inequalities. Yet Republicans and Democrats, including President Obama, raised payroll taxes sharply on January 1, 2013. Those taxes are regressive; they take a smaller percentage of your income the higher your income is above $113,700 per year. Raising the payroll tax increased economic inequality across 2013.
For another example, many American cities and towns want to use eminent domain laws to help residents keep their homes and avoid foreclosure. Eminent domain is a hallmark democratic right as well as US law. It enables municipal governments to buy individual properties (at market prices) when doing so benefits the community as a whole. Using eminent domain, local leaders want to compel lenders (e.g., banks, etc.) to sell them homes whose market prices have fallen below the mortgage debts of their occupants. They would then resell those homes at their market prices to their occupants. With their mortgages thus reduced to their homes' actual prices, occupants could stay in them. They still suffer their homes' fallen values but avoid homelessness. Communities benefit because decreased homelessness reduces the fall of other property values, reduces the number of abandoned homes (and thus risks of fire, crime, etc.), reduces the number of customers lost to local stores, sustains property tax flows to local governments and so on.
Used this way, eminent domain forces lenders - chiefly banks - to share more of the pains produced by capitalism's crisis. Most Americans support that, believing it will help reverse income and wealth inequalities and also that banks bear major responsibility for the economic crisis.
Yet the country's biggest banks are using "their" money and laws (that they often wrote) to block municipalities' use of eminent domain. "Their" money includes the massive bailouts Washington provided to them since 2007. Big bank directors and major shareholders - a tiny minority - fund the politicians, parties and think-tanks that oppose municipalities' use of eminent domain. In these ways, capitalism systematically undermines democratic decision-making about economic affairs. ........................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://truth-out.org/news/item/20550-capitalism-and-democracy-year-end-lessons
Professor Richard Wolff: Capitalism and Democracy: Year-End Lessons
Capitalism and Democracy: Year-End Lessons
Wednesday, 18 December 2013 09:12
By Richard D Wolff, Truthout | News
2013 drove home a basic lesson: US capitalism's economic leaders and their politicians now regularly ignore majority opinions and preferences. For example, polls showed overwhelming popular support for higher taxes on the rich with lower taxes on the rest of us and for reversing the nation's deepening economic inequalities. Yet Republicans and Democrats, including President Obama, raised payroll taxes sharply on January 1, 2013. Those taxes are regressive; they take a smaller percentage of your income the higher your income is above $113,700 per year. Raising the payroll tax increased economic inequality across 2013.
For another example, many American cities and towns want to use eminent domain laws to help residents keep their homes and avoid foreclosure. Eminent domain is a hallmark democratic right as well as US law. It enables municipal governments to buy individual properties (at market prices) when doing so benefits the community as a whole. Using eminent domain, local leaders want to compel lenders (e.g., banks, etc.) to sell them homes whose market prices have fallen below the mortgage debts of their occupants. They would then resell those homes at their market prices to their occupants. With their mortgages thus reduced to their homes' actual prices, occupants could stay in them. They still suffer their homes' fallen values but avoid homelessness. Communities benefit because decreased homelessness reduces the fall of other property values, reduces the number of abandoned homes (and thus risks of fire, crime, etc.), reduces the number of customers lost to local stores, sustains property tax flows to local governments and so on.
Used this way, eminent domain forces lenders - chiefly banks - to share more of the pains produced by capitalism's crisis. Most Americans support that, believing it will help reverse income and wealth inequalities and also that banks bear major responsibility for the economic crisis.
Yet the country's biggest banks are using "their" money and laws (that they often wrote) to block municipalities' use of eminent domain. "Their" money includes the massive bailouts Washington provided to them since 2007. Big bank directors and major shareholders - a tiny minority - fund the politicians, parties and think-tanks that oppose municipalities' use of eminent domain. In these ways, capitalism systematically undermines democratic decision-making about economic affairs. ........................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://truth-out.org/news/item/20550-capitalism-and-democracy-year-end-lessons
December 18, 2013
Pt. I
Pt. II
Published on Dec 17, 2013
http://www.democracynow.org - Taken at face value, the latest figures on Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) suggest a growing epidemic in the United States. According to the Centers for Disease Control, 15 percent of high school children are diagnosed with ADHD. The number of those on stimulant medication is at 3.5 million, up from 600,000 two decades ago. ADHD is now the second most common long-term diagnosis in children, narrowly trailing asthma. But a new report in the New York Times questions whether these staggering figures reflect a medical reality, or an over-medicated craze that has earned billions in profits for the pharmaceutical companies involved.
Sales for ADHD drugs like Adderall and Concerta topped $9 billion in the United States last year, a more than 500 percent jump from a decade before. The radical spike in diagnoses has coincided with a 20-year marketing effort to promote stimulant prescriptions for children struggling in school, as well as for adults seeking to take control of their lives. The marketing effort has relied on studies and testimonials from a select group of doctors who have received massive speaking fees and funding grants from major pharmaceutical companies. We are joined by four guests: Alan Schwarz, an award-winning reporter who wrote the New York Times piece, "The Selling of Attention Deficit Disorder"; Jamison Monroe, a former teenage Adderall addict who now runs Newport Academy, a treatment center for teens suffering from substance abuse and mental health issues; Dr. Gabor Maté, a physician and bestselling author of four books, including "Scattered: How Attention Deficit Disorder Originates and What You Can Do About It"; and John Edwards, the father of a college student who committed suicide after he was prescribed Adderall and antidepressant medications at the Harvard University Health Services clinic.
The Selling of ADHD: Diagnoses, Prescriptions Soar After 20-Year Marketing Effort by Big Pharma
Pt. I
Pt. II
Published on Dec 17, 2013
http://www.democracynow.org - Taken at face value, the latest figures on Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) suggest a growing epidemic in the United States. According to the Centers for Disease Control, 15 percent of high school children are diagnosed with ADHD. The number of those on stimulant medication is at 3.5 million, up from 600,000 two decades ago. ADHD is now the second most common long-term diagnosis in children, narrowly trailing asthma. But a new report in the New York Times questions whether these staggering figures reflect a medical reality, or an over-medicated craze that has earned billions in profits for the pharmaceutical companies involved.
Sales for ADHD drugs like Adderall and Concerta topped $9 billion in the United States last year, a more than 500 percent jump from a decade before. The radical spike in diagnoses has coincided with a 20-year marketing effort to promote stimulant prescriptions for children struggling in school, as well as for adults seeking to take control of their lives. The marketing effort has relied on studies and testimonials from a select group of doctors who have received massive speaking fees and funding grants from major pharmaceutical companies. We are joined by four guests: Alan Schwarz, an award-winning reporter who wrote the New York Times piece, "The Selling of Attention Deficit Disorder"; Jamison Monroe, a former teenage Adderall addict who now runs Newport Academy, a treatment center for teens suffering from substance abuse and mental health issues; Dr. Gabor Maté, a physician and bestselling author of four books, including "Scattered: How Attention Deficit Disorder Originates and What You Can Do About It"; and John Edwards, the father of a college student who committed suicide after he was prescribed Adderall and antidepressant medications at the Harvard University Health Services clinic.
December 18, 2013
(Mother Jones) To hear the industry tell it, anti-microbial soaps are humanity's last best option in a war against germs that lurk everywhere. On a site called Fight Germs Now—"the official source on anti-bacterial hygiene products"—the American Cleaning Institute sings their praises, warning that "sometimes plain soap and water is not good enough." The fast-growing market for anti-bacterials—most of which rely on an active ingredient called triclosan—is estimated at $1 billion. Triclosan is also in items such as socks, yoga mats, cutting boards, ice cream scoops, and pencils. No wonder the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that it's present in the urine of three-quarters of Americans.
But on December 16, the FDA issued a proposed rule that would require companies to provide "more substantial data to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of antibacterial soaps" before selling these products. The move is in response to the mounting evidence that triclosan might not be as effective as manufacturers claim. Bill Schaffner, a professor of preventive medicine and infectious diseases at Vanderbilt University, points out that triclosan soap products are useless when it comes to most seasonal infections: They target bacteria, not the viruses that cause colds and flus. And they don't work any better on bacteria than standard soap—which also gets rid of viruses. In a 2008 review in the American Journal of Public Health, researchers scrutinized hundreds of hand hygiene studies and found "little evidence" that anything beat regular washing in reducing the symptoms associated with infectious gastrointestinal or respiratory illnesses.
Not only that, but there is strong evidence that anti-bacterial soaps contribute to antibiotic resistance. In 2004, a team of University of Michigan researchers found that exposing bacteria to triclosan increased activity in cellular pumps that the bugs use to eliminate foreign substances. These overactive excretory systems "could act to pump out other antibiotics, as well," says Stuart Levy, one of the study's authors and a leading researcher on antibiotic resistance at the Tufts University School of Medicine. That's a problem, since troublesome bacteria like streptococcus, staphylococcus, and pneumonia are already evolving defenses against our best weapons. Worse, there aren't enough new drugs in the production pipeline. Over the past 15 years, the FDA has approved just 15 new antibiotics—in the preceding 15 years, it approved 40. The World Health Organization now views antibiotic resistance as "a threat to global health security." And while triclosan's contribution to the problem hasn't been adequately studied, Levy believes it could be "significant."
.....(snip).....
After learning about all of this, I was worried I might have to abandon my habit of squirting Purell all over my hands every time I get off the subway. But there's no triclosan in Purell. In fact, most hand sanitizers rely on alcohol, which slays germs on contact instead of killing some and just weakening others, as the anti-bacterials do. Vanderbilt's Schaffner assures me that alcohol-based hand sanitizers "will absolutely not contribute to the problem of antibiotic resistance, since they are not antibiotics." .......................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/12/germophobia-superbug-hygiene-soap-bacteria
Does Purell Breed Superbugs? The dirty truth (and the good news) on hand hygiene.
(Mother Jones) To hear the industry tell it, anti-microbial soaps are humanity's last best option in a war against germs that lurk everywhere. On a site called Fight Germs Now—"the official source on anti-bacterial hygiene products"—the American Cleaning Institute sings their praises, warning that "sometimes plain soap and water is not good enough." The fast-growing market for anti-bacterials—most of which rely on an active ingredient called triclosan—is estimated at $1 billion. Triclosan is also in items such as socks, yoga mats, cutting boards, ice cream scoops, and pencils. No wonder the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that it's present in the urine of three-quarters of Americans.
But on December 16, the FDA issued a proposed rule that would require companies to provide "more substantial data to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of antibacterial soaps" before selling these products. The move is in response to the mounting evidence that triclosan might not be as effective as manufacturers claim. Bill Schaffner, a professor of preventive medicine and infectious diseases at Vanderbilt University, points out that triclosan soap products are useless when it comes to most seasonal infections: They target bacteria, not the viruses that cause colds and flus. And they don't work any better on bacteria than standard soap—which also gets rid of viruses. In a 2008 review in the American Journal of Public Health, researchers scrutinized hundreds of hand hygiene studies and found "little evidence" that anything beat regular washing in reducing the symptoms associated with infectious gastrointestinal or respiratory illnesses.
Not only that, but there is strong evidence that anti-bacterial soaps contribute to antibiotic resistance. In 2004, a team of University of Michigan researchers found that exposing bacteria to triclosan increased activity in cellular pumps that the bugs use to eliminate foreign substances. These overactive excretory systems "could act to pump out other antibiotics, as well," says Stuart Levy, one of the study's authors and a leading researcher on antibiotic resistance at the Tufts University School of Medicine. That's a problem, since troublesome bacteria like streptococcus, staphylococcus, and pneumonia are already evolving defenses against our best weapons. Worse, there aren't enough new drugs in the production pipeline. Over the past 15 years, the FDA has approved just 15 new antibiotics—in the preceding 15 years, it approved 40. The World Health Organization now views antibiotic resistance as "a threat to global health security." And while triclosan's contribution to the problem hasn't been adequately studied, Levy believes it could be "significant."
.....(snip).....
After learning about all of this, I was worried I might have to abandon my habit of squirting Purell all over my hands every time I get off the subway. But there's no triclosan in Purell. In fact, most hand sanitizers rely on alcohol, which slays germs on contact instead of killing some and just weakening others, as the anti-bacterials do. Vanderbilt's Schaffner assures me that alcohol-based hand sanitizers "will absolutely not contribute to the problem of antibiotic resistance, since they are not antibiotics." .......................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/12/germophobia-superbug-hygiene-soap-bacteria
December 18, 2013
As if things weren't bad enough for "60 Minutes," the newsmagazine has now been given a prize nobody wants: Poynter's "Error of the Year" award, which it won for its disastrously botched story on the Benghazi attacks.
Craig Silverman, the media world's top error maven, wrote that "60 Minutes" took home the prize partly "because of the mistake itself, and partly because of the mistake’s fallout."
Silverman would probably not find disagreement in too many corners for his choice. "60 Minutes" seemed to mess up at every turn, from relying on a known liar as its main source; to failing to disclose its corporate ties to the book the source was writing; to stonewalling the media when questions were raised about the source's veracity; to giving an apology that few felt was sufficient. ..................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/18/60-minutes-benghazi-error-of-the-year_n_4465483.html?ncid=txtlnkushpmg00000037&ir=Politics
60 Minutes......Ouch !!!
As if things weren't bad enough for "60 Minutes," the newsmagazine has now been given a prize nobody wants: Poynter's "Error of the Year" award, which it won for its disastrously botched story on the Benghazi attacks.
Craig Silverman, the media world's top error maven, wrote that "60 Minutes" took home the prize partly "because of the mistake itself, and partly because of the mistake’s fallout."
Silverman would probably not find disagreement in too many corners for his choice. "60 Minutes" seemed to mess up at every turn, from relying on a known liar as its main source; to failing to disclose its corporate ties to the book the source was writing; to stonewalling the media when questions were raised about the source's veracity; to giving an apology that few felt was sufficient. ..................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/18/60-minutes-benghazi-error-of-the-year_n_4465483.html?ncid=txtlnkushpmg00000037&ir=Politics
December 18, 2013
A group of Occupy protesters suing South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley (R) over their ejection from the State House grounds have a "viable" claim that she violated their First Amendment rights, a federal appeals court ruled on Monday.
Nineteen Occupy Columbia protesters were camped out on November 16, 2011 when Haley had them arrested on two hours notice. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals found Monday that their arrest may have been unconstitutional, because they were arrested without a formal rule change banning sleeping, and so their lawsuit can continue.
Fourteen of the protesters sued Haley in 2011, stating, "The reason why the Occupy protests are so controversial and uncomfortable for governmental officials to endure is that it is the most persuasive form of peaceful, nonviolent protest."
"What Governor Haley objects to is Plaintiffs' message and she would not have evicted Plaintiffs if she were aligned with Plaintiffs," their suit said. .........................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/17/nikki-haley-occupy-protesters_n_4462066.html?ncid=txtlnkushpmg00000037
Nikki Haley May Have Violated Occupy Protesters' Free Speech Rights, Court Finds
A group of Occupy protesters suing South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley (R) over their ejection from the State House grounds have a "viable" claim that she violated their First Amendment rights, a federal appeals court ruled on Monday.
Nineteen Occupy Columbia protesters were camped out on November 16, 2011 when Haley had them arrested on two hours notice. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals found Monday that their arrest may have been unconstitutional, because they were arrested without a formal rule change banning sleeping, and so their lawsuit can continue.
Fourteen of the protesters sued Haley in 2011, stating, "The reason why the Occupy protests are so controversial and uncomfortable for governmental officials to endure is that it is the most persuasive form of peaceful, nonviolent protest."
"What Governor Haley objects to is Plaintiffs' message and she would not have evicted Plaintiffs if she were aligned with Plaintiffs," their suit said. .........................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/17/nikki-haley-occupy-protesters_n_4462066.html?ncid=txtlnkushpmg00000037
December 18, 2013
The Geopolitics of Election Approval: The US Response to Honduras and Venezuela
Tuesday, 17 December 2013 09:37
By Lauren Carasik, Susan Scott and Azadeh Shahshahani, Truthout | News Analysis
Credible concerns about electoral fraud in Honduras remain, yet Secretary of State John Kerry sanctioned the results just 17 days after the election, before challenges to its legitimacy had been fully resolved. Kerry's official statement, which came quickly on the heels of the Organization of American States' (OAS) similar congratulations to Juan Orlando Hernandez on December 11, lauded the election's record turnout, commended a process that he characterized as "generally transparent, peaceful, and reflecting the will of the Honduran people" and praised the Honduran government's commitment to "promoting fiscal stability and economic growth, combating poverty, and guaranteeing security, justice, and human rights for all Hondurans."
The Obama administration's prompt recognition of ruling National Party candidate Juan Orlando Hernandez, who is expected to continue his predecessor's friendliness toward US geopolitical and business interests, stands in stark contrast to its steadfast and unfounded refusal to give its imprimatur to the election of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro. Maduro's April victory was quickly recognized by most governments in the region, the British and Spanish governments and others. Maduro's challenge to US hegemony in the region and the neoliberal agenda it promotes has prompted US intransigence on Maduro's election, even though it was declared clean, free and fair by election monitors from the Union of South American Nations, the National Lawyers Guild in the United States and others.
Although complaints of electoral malfeasance in Honduras surfaced before the polls closed, US Ambassador to Honduras Lisa Kubiske took to the airwaves within hours of the close of polls to announce her own cheerful conclusion - that the elections had been transparent and peaceful - and she continued to congratulate the Honduran people for days afterwards. Both Kerry's and Kubiske's statements completely ignore the fact that the majority of Honduran voters voted against the notorious right-wing president of the "coup" Congress and winner, Juan Orlando Hernandez, and that many of the 36.8 percent of the ballots which the Electoral Tribunal (the TSE - controlled by Hernandez's National Party) claims he won are contested by two of the opposition parties. Shortly after the close of the polls, LIBRE party officials denounced discrepancies between the official results and the actual tallies ("actas"
provided to LIBRE representatives at the voting stations. LIBRE claims that a review of 80 percent of the actas in their possession indicates a 1.8 percent margin of victory for their candidate, Xiomara Castro de Zelaya. .......................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://truth-out.org/news/item/20675-the-geopolitics-of-election-approval-the-us-response-to-honduras-and-venezuela
The Geopolitics of Election Approval: The US Response to Honduras and Venezuela
The Geopolitics of Election Approval: The US Response to Honduras and Venezuela
Tuesday, 17 December 2013 09:37
By Lauren Carasik, Susan Scott and Azadeh Shahshahani, Truthout | News Analysis
Credible concerns about electoral fraud in Honduras remain, yet Secretary of State John Kerry sanctioned the results just 17 days after the election, before challenges to its legitimacy had been fully resolved. Kerry's official statement, which came quickly on the heels of the Organization of American States' (OAS) similar congratulations to Juan Orlando Hernandez on December 11, lauded the election's record turnout, commended a process that he characterized as "generally transparent, peaceful, and reflecting the will of the Honduran people" and praised the Honduran government's commitment to "promoting fiscal stability and economic growth, combating poverty, and guaranteeing security, justice, and human rights for all Hondurans."
The Obama administration's prompt recognition of ruling National Party candidate Juan Orlando Hernandez, who is expected to continue his predecessor's friendliness toward US geopolitical and business interests, stands in stark contrast to its steadfast and unfounded refusal to give its imprimatur to the election of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro. Maduro's April victory was quickly recognized by most governments in the region, the British and Spanish governments and others. Maduro's challenge to US hegemony in the region and the neoliberal agenda it promotes has prompted US intransigence on Maduro's election, even though it was declared clean, free and fair by election monitors from the Union of South American Nations, the National Lawyers Guild in the United States and others.
Although complaints of electoral malfeasance in Honduras surfaced before the polls closed, US Ambassador to Honduras Lisa Kubiske took to the airwaves within hours of the close of polls to announce her own cheerful conclusion - that the elections had been transparent and peaceful - and she continued to congratulate the Honduran people for days afterwards. Both Kerry's and Kubiske's statements completely ignore the fact that the majority of Honduran voters voted against the notorious right-wing president of the "coup" Congress and winner, Juan Orlando Hernandez, and that many of the 36.8 percent of the ballots which the Electoral Tribunal (the TSE - controlled by Hernandez's National Party) claims he won are contested by two of the opposition parties. Shortly after the close of the polls, LIBRE party officials denounced discrepancies between the official results and the actual tallies ("actas"
provided to LIBRE representatives at the voting stations. LIBRE claims that a review of 80 percent of the actas in their possession indicates a 1.8 percent margin of victory for their candidate, Xiomara Castro de Zelaya. .......................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://truth-out.org/news/item/20675-the-geopolitics-of-election-approval-the-us-response-to-honduras-and-venezuela
December 18, 2013
Published on Dec 17, 2013
http://www.democracynow.org - A federal judge ruled Monday the National Security Agency''s bulk collection of American's phone records "almost certainly" violates the Fourth Amendment's prohibition against unreasonable searches. U.S. District Judge Richard Leon described the NSA's activities as "almost Orwellian." He wrote, "I cannot imagine a more 'indiscriminate' and 'arbitrary invasion' than this systematic and high-tech collection and retention of personal data on virtually every single citizen." Judge Leon was appointed to the bench by Republican President George W. Bush in 2002. Leon suspended enforcement of his injunction against the program pending an expected appeal by the government. The lawsuit was brought by conservative attorney Larry Klayman, the founder of Judicial Watch and based on information leaked by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden. In a statement Monday, Snowden said, "I acted on my belief that the NSA's mass surveillance programs would not withstand a constitutional challenge, and that the American public deserved a chance to see these issues determined by open courts. Today, a secret program authorized by a secret court was, when exposed to the light of day, found to violate Americans' rights. It is the first of many." We are joined by Sascha Meinrath, director of the New America Foundation's Open Technology Institute. He served as an expert witnesses on the Review Group on Intelligence and Communications, which was tasked by President Obama to review NSA's activities.
As Judge Rules NSA Surveillance "Almost Orwellian," Obama Prepares to Leave Spying Program Intact
Published on Dec 17, 2013
http://www.democracynow.org - A federal judge ruled Monday the National Security Agency''s bulk collection of American's phone records "almost certainly" violates the Fourth Amendment's prohibition against unreasonable searches. U.S. District Judge Richard Leon described the NSA's activities as "almost Orwellian." He wrote, "I cannot imagine a more 'indiscriminate' and 'arbitrary invasion' than this systematic and high-tech collection and retention of personal data on virtually every single citizen." Judge Leon was appointed to the bench by Republican President George W. Bush in 2002. Leon suspended enforcement of his injunction against the program pending an expected appeal by the government. The lawsuit was brought by conservative attorney Larry Klayman, the founder of Judicial Watch and based on information leaked by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden. In a statement Monday, Snowden said, "I acted on my belief that the NSA's mass surveillance programs would not withstand a constitutional challenge, and that the American public deserved a chance to see these issues determined by open courts. Today, a secret program authorized by a secret court was, when exposed to the light of day, found to violate Americans' rights. It is the first of many." We are joined by Sascha Meinrath, director of the New America Foundation's Open Technology Institute. He served as an expert witnesses on the Review Group on Intelligence and Communications, which was tasked by President Obama to review NSA's activities.
Profile Information
Gender: MaleHometown: Detroit, MI
Member since: Fri Oct 29, 2004, 12:18 AM
Number of posts: 77,092
