Amy Sullivan, Time, online Sat., Nov. 7, 2009, date of the House passage of H.R. 3962; this link; no excerpt.
Basically the argument is that Nancy Pelosi was too insensitive to Dem anti-abortion factions until the end when the nose count pushed her to a floor vote on the Stupak amendment where all the GOP types who voted against the bill were for the amendment and too many Dems were also scared of losing their seats. Mismanagement of leadership is the argument.
My feeling is Pelosi was too insensitive to the pro choice people to have not made it difficult to impossible for the Oberstars and Petersons in the House to act as they did.
Peterson, he arguably is less secure although Minnesota farmers voting out the Ag. Committee chair is hard to contemplate - can they be so stupid?
Oberstar, he's been there long enough. Baak is seeking the wrong office.
My feeling is the Dems have to regard and treat those who forced the Stupak amendment into being the way Humphrey regarded and treated the Dixicrats. Regardless how powerful in the party machinery -- Get rid of them, under any terms, clean house or suffer worse consequences for being too lenient too long with too many, long term.
Similar to the Ned Lamont - Joe Lieberman situation. Ned Lamonts, we need more of them and we know where. The Stupak amendment drew a roadmap.
Being outside of the Minnesota DFL as I am, because they are too middle-of-the-road for me to commit, I could enjoy more Ned Lamonts nationwide and in-state, and seeing more support for them.
Let all the anti-abortion forces seek to coalesce and seek refuge in today's GOP.
Unless they also drink the other nasty extremist Koolaid there, they will be unwelcome - as RINOs, or RINO wannabes.
It is, however, time that reproductive rights are viewed as non-negotiable within the entire Democratic apparatus; and that entire sorry pablum pro-insurance industry bill could have been assigned to the scrap heap as no great loss, but passing it as awful as it was AND adding the extra insult of the Stupak amendment - that should strike every progressive in the nation as intolerable.
________________
See this Crabgrass link, for a concise presentation of what the problems of the bill as passed are.
_________UPDATE_________
Try this on for size, sports fans: A cynical view, but then how all this healthcare stuff was handled yearns for cynicism and distrust of the politicians and the political process, with only the lobbyists' ingenuity to be seen there as a beacon of having clearly defined profit-oriented goals and getting them addressed.
Just suppose - a hypothetical of course - but suppose the dark forces in Congress [at this point you need to ask are there any others]; suppose those dark forces want this sorry and unnatural bill stuffed with pro-insurance industry goodies to pass under the attention span of the public.
So the leadership discussions then are about how to best deflect attention from the way the bill disadvantages all citizens every-which-way instead of fixing things - aka, how it dropped from the start "single payer" good sense and then had the August side shows, the Baucus and Snowe job, etc.?
You want to deflect attention and the answer is so easy. You simply put the reproductive rights issue in there, and posture it against good sense and decency, of course.
And, lo, that's precisely what they did.
It immediately becomes a red flag and lightning rod and way to get an outcry over one narrow but quite important part of things, engendering a groundswell of indignation to later allow the politicians to artfully lessen the obscenity of it somewhat and have folks then saying, "Oh, good ... good sense prevailed ...", and lo, attention is diverted and the entie rest of the garbage is ignored, swept along without real notice or protest, because the big monkey, the reproductive rights issue that is so major, will somehow be taken off our backs. And we then will be expected to be thankful and unquestioning in any further substantive direction(s).
"Oh, that's a deal killer, but wait - we can fix that ..." will be the jolly reassuring tune.
Great.
Deal's fixed.
Moving on, Afghanistan is looming, people lack jobs, ... at least we reformed healthcare ...
Is it a hosing or what?
Is it our politicians in Congress at work, or what?
Is it cause to respect the process and the people in it?
-------------
Doing it that way, polarizing healthcare with the reproductive rights debate means the 2010 citizen attention will be drawn from the dire economic things that have happened (and been done during lame duck Bush times and onward) - and lo, it will be emotion laden divisiveness, of all things, with the economically disadvantaged masses howling back and forth at each other from opposite sides of the reproductive rights issue, again doing it, and the puppet masters and propaganda purveyors will laugh and laugh.
Under the guise of working "that one difficulty" out in the course of healthcare "reform," a host of obscene pro-insurance firm mischief gets dumped on our society's sorry distracted heads.
Protect yourselves. Wear helmets. They are about to dump lots of gross stuff watching it trickle down, onto your heads. Trust me, it will happen. Look beyond the headlines and distractions of the moment, and ask, why not single payer, it makes all the sense in the world and the polls have always reflected the public wants single payer and trusts single payer when asked in unbiased ways with fairly worded questions and not under this flood of ongoing distracting propaganda.
So --- Heads up. Watch out. That is my best guess of how the drama will be played out. How the propaganda will be slung.
Or maybe not. And I am seeing ghosts.
Let us wait and see.
Monday, November 09, 2009
DFL's sd56 will host a Tarryl Clark event Nov. 18. A website calendar check showed all days to January 31 open, for a parallel Reed opportunity.
READERS PLEASE NOTE: The "FURTHER UPDATE" at the end of this post is reassuring - indicating that the sd56 people are intending to give Maureen Reed an equal opportunity within a reasonable time of the Tarryl Clark event. This is very good news, and hopefully soon, this page, will be updated for the Dec. 10 event. While this moots much of the post, rather than pull it I am putting the good news at the front and the end. Enjoy.
I was distressed last cycle to see the DFL leadership close ranks early, "it was Elwyn's turn," with Bob Olson frozen out before he had much of a chance to say boo.
Now, neither Maureen Reed nor Tarryl Clark appears to have the Elwyn Tinklenberg approach and doubtful appeal, each being in my view more promising, but again it looks as if there is an early closing of ranks and a freeze out. That is not good, since the caucus process, if it is to work, should not be biased early, by leadership's according blessings months before the first whiff of caucusing. That will start next year. It is counterproductive to an open party, and open options, to close things among party insiders before the voting folks even show up. I say that favoring Tarryl Clark at present over Maureen Reed, because Reed and her people have been floating the negative message that Clark is "too liberal" to win the district. That suggests either Reed is less liberal than Clark, who after all is a middle-of-the-road moderate and not much of a liberal at all, or that Reed and her advisers are playing games misrepresenting the goods. With either GOP-lite or misrepresentation suggested I am uncomfortable.
Reed has not explained fully the Hutchinson-Reed IP ticket and its opposition to the Hatch-Dutcher hopes progressives had to unseat the Pawlenty disaster and not see it continued. A Hatch win was something many wanted but something that narrowly did not happen.
The Reed camp has merely contended that Hatch-Dutcher blew the thing by a last minute blow-up, and that even Hatch people will say so. Well, I have not seen any such comment from either Mike Hatch or Judi Dutcher, and while Leslie Sandberg was a Hatch communications person now apparently retained by Reed, and might say something like that, if that is the basis Reed relies upon, it would be the opinion of a paid advisor and subject to scurtiny as such.
So I am favoring Clark as so far having a voting record and appearing less of a GOP-lite offering, but feeling Reed should be accorded fair chances to voice what is wrong with Michele Bachmann and what she could do better based on her expertise, experience and beliefs - something that can easily be done without any negative comments about a moderate opponent being "too liberal" which does not resonate at all well among those knowing a moderate when they see one.
Now - as someone who still feels that Bob Olson could have defeated Michele Bachmann had he merely been given the chance, and that he got little if any chance by being frozen out before caucusing, there is this - a screenshot of the webpage lead-in, here, as the first item listed on the site homepage.
That triggered my sending the email, shown below [please ignore the grammatical gaffe in the middle, I was in a hurry].
I sent that because everything there is sincerely felt. Featuring Clark is good. It informs people in the opposite end of Minnesota's Sixth Congressional of who Tarryl Clark is, giving them a chance to meet and greet and assess "the cut of her jib."
All good. Clark should be doing that since she's from the St. Cloud area and needs to have visibility throughout the district - the chance to face-to-face convince likely caucus goers that she is the better choice. Information and informed caucus goers is a positive thing. And that is precisely why Maureen Reed should be accorded the identical opportunity, and within a reasonable time from when Clark appears and listens and talks. Yet the webpage homepage has an sd56 events calendar on the top menu bar, and after the Clark appearance and opportunity, into next year and through the end of January, I see no comparable Reed opportunity and appearance booked.
What is happening, and is it good or bad? My email simply suggests that Reed and her people might enjoy a comparable opportunity. Implicitly, I contend that norms of fairness suggest she should be allowed that. Less is questionable conduct by sd56 insiders. Certainly, if Reed has that opportunity she surely could bury her chances by her and entourage showing up and going negative with the "too liberal" thing which plays into the hands of Bachmann and the GOP, and if that were to happen I expect the attendees would weigh that in decision making. They would be stupid not to.
So let Reed attend and discuss the last run for Lt. Governor, and other considerations, and how her healthcare background in Congress would be better than Bachmann because the legislation likely to be passed now will be full of bad compromises and likely will prove disruptive and unworkable, including poking a sharp stick in the eyes of those favoring reproductive choice, so that one skilled in healthcare matters AND WITH THE PROPER VIEW AND ATTITUDE should be worth listening to and talking to, in order to better understand the cost containment dimensions that might well be lacking in legislation that would be signed next year. Reed deserves that opportunity, and if instead she and folks blow it by talking of "polling" that might suggest Clark is "too liberal," well they make their campaign choices and I do not make choices for them.
But give Reed a fair shot - everbody in boss positions in the DFL. It is only being fair. Now is far, far, far too early for a freeze out.
___________UPDATE_________
I believe this is relevant. "Deeds proves you can’t run for office standing for nothing." A quote from a comment about last Tuesday's off-year election outcomes; this link.
Does that suggest a new version of an old saying - You can hide, but then you cannot run? Only a thought. Candidates hesitant to publicly define themselves early and often either have opponents define them, or become viewed as empty of passionate content. Now, it might be different for front runners, but trailing, why let a gap widen? Jesse was unusual, but he won by defining himself and defining his opposition. Yet none of that was within his own party, an intra-party contest. How that intra-party situation plays out will be most watched in both GOP and DFL governor races.
______FURTHER UPDATE_________
Very good news. Marc Drummond, on behalf of sd56 sent an email:
This is very good to see. Hopefully the sd56 calendar page will be updated soon, to avoid confusion. I was in error, this corrects a wrong premise. It makes me happy to have been proven wrong, in such a way.
I was distressed last cycle to see the DFL leadership close ranks early, "it was Elwyn's turn," with Bob Olson frozen out before he had much of a chance to say boo.
Now, neither Maureen Reed nor Tarryl Clark appears to have the Elwyn Tinklenberg approach and doubtful appeal, each being in my view more promising, but again it looks as if there is an early closing of ranks and a freeze out. That is not good, since the caucus process, if it is to work, should not be biased early, by leadership's according blessings months before the first whiff of caucusing. That will start next year. It is counterproductive to an open party, and open options, to close things among party insiders before the voting folks even show up. I say that favoring Tarryl Clark at present over Maureen Reed, because Reed and her people have been floating the negative message that Clark is "too liberal" to win the district. That suggests either Reed is less liberal than Clark, who after all is a middle-of-the-road moderate and not much of a liberal at all, or that Reed and her advisers are playing games misrepresenting the goods. With either GOP-lite or misrepresentation suggested I am uncomfortable.
Reed has not explained fully the Hutchinson-Reed IP ticket and its opposition to the Hatch-Dutcher hopes progressives had to unseat the Pawlenty disaster and not see it continued. A Hatch win was something many wanted but something that narrowly did not happen.
The Reed camp has merely contended that Hatch-Dutcher blew the thing by a last minute blow-up, and that even Hatch people will say so. Well, I have not seen any such comment from either Mike Hatch or Judi Dutcher, and while Leslie Sandberg was a Hatch communications person now apparently retained by Reed, and might say something like that, if that is the basis Reed relies upon, it would be the opinion of a paid advisor and subject to scurtiny as such.
So I am favoring Clark as so far having a voting record and appearing less of a GOP-lite offering, but feeling Reed should be accorded fair chances to voice what is wrong with Michele Bachmann and what she could do better based on her expertise, experience and beliefs - something that can easily be done without any negative comments about a moderate opponent being "too liberal" which does not resonate at all well among those knowing a moderate when they see one.
Now - as someone who still feels that Bob Olson could have defeated Michele Bachmann had he merely been given the chance, and that he got little if any chance by being frozen out before caucusing, there is this - a screenshot of the webpage lead-in, here, as the first item listed on the site homepage.
That triggered my sending the email, shown below [please ignore the grammatical gaffe in the middle, I was in a hurry].
I sent that because everything there is sincerely felt. Featuring Clark is good. It informs people in the opposite end of Minnesota's Sixth Congressional of who Tarryl Clark is, giving them a chance to meet and greet and assess "the cut of her jib."
All good. Clark should be doing that since she's from the St. Cloud area and needs to have visibility throughout the district - the chance to face-to-face convince likely caucus goers that she is the better choice. Information and informed caucus goers is a positive thing. And that is precisely why Maureen Reed should be accorded the identical opportunity, and within a reasonable time from when Clark appears and listens and talks. Yet the webpage homepage has an sd56 events calendar on the top menu bar, and after the Clark appearance and opportunity, into next year and through the end of January, I see no comparable Reed opportunity and appearance booked.
What is happening, and is it good or bad? My email simply suggests that Reed and her people might enjoy a comparable opportunity. Implicitly, I contend that norms of fairness suggest she should be allowed that. Less is questionable conduct by sd56 insiders. Certainly, if Reed has that opportunity she surely could bury her chances by her and entourage showing up and going negative with the "too liberal" thing which plays into the hands of Bachmann and the GOP, and if that were to happen I expect the attendees would weigh that in decision making. They would be stupid not to.
So let Reed attend and discuss the last run for Lt. Governor, and other considerations, and how her healthcare background in Congress would be better than Bachmann because the legislation likely to be passed now will be full of bad compromises and likely will prove disruptive and unworkable, including poking a sharp stick in the eyes of those favoring reproductive choice, so that one skilled in healthcare matters AND WITH THE PROPER VIEW AND ATTITUDE should be worth listening to and talking to, in order to better understand the cost containment dimensions that might well be lacking in legislation that would be signed next year. Reed deserves that opportunity, and if instead she and folks blow it by talking of "polling" that might suggest Clark is "too liberal," well they make their campaign choices and I do not make choices for them.
But give Reed a fair shot - everbody in boss positions in the DFL. It is only being fair. Now is far, far, far too early for a freeze out.
___________UPDATE_________
I believe this is relevant. "Deeds proves you can’t run for office standing for nothing." A quote from a comment about last Tuesday's off-year election outcomes; this link.
Does that suggest a new version of an old saying - You can hide, but then you cannot run? Only a thought. Candidates hesitant to publicly define themselves early and often either have opponents define them, or become viewed as empty of passionate content. Now, it might be different for front runners, but trailing, why let a gap widen? Jesse was unusual, but he won by defining himself and defining his opposition. Yet none of that was within his own party, an intra-party contest. How that intra-party situation plays out will be most watched in both GOP and DFL governor races.
______FURTHER UPDATE_________
Very good news. Marc Drummond, on behalf of sd56 sent an email:
Eric:
We will be having a similar event with Maureen Dec 10.
Thanks!
Marc
This is very good to see. Hopefully the sd56 calendar page will be updated soon, to avoid confusion. I was in error, this corrects a wrong premise. It makes me happy to have been proven wrong, in such a way.
Sunday, November 08, 2009
This for now. More later. NARAL and Planned Parenthood may wake up. The Senate is next. Conference committee follows. Time at some point runs out.
The same Taylor Marsh op-ed was cross posted, HufPo, and here on Marsh's own site. Test your acuity. Find at least one difference in the two posts. Hint: read this link.Taylor Marsh, same theme, another interesting use of an image, this link.
Read for the content, (it's actually less than a thousand words for each image). Follow the links. It's cumulative but not tediously repetitive.
Then this, send Nancy Pelosi a message. Every reader is asked to do so. Click the image below, for illustrative purposes. It is from the Pelosi website, with a message. For you to send a message, go to this page, here, this link. Then, give Nancy Pelosi the message.
AGAIN FOR SLOW LEARNERS: Be certain to send it to the Pelosi web contact page, with the message "properly" filled in:
http://rlv.zcache.com/coat_hanger_button-p145037034717466562t5sj_400.jpg
It is not as if she has not seen the message before, it is that she needs to see it now and on, and on, and on, and on --- until something, hopefully better, gets signed in the oval office. And as a bonus, each time you send the message, a follow-up thank you message appears in reply. Isn't web technology nice. Courteous, all that. Not needing Ms. Manners to remind Pelosi to always say thank you.
If enough people are on message and keep it up over time, who knows? It is not needed only once, but more than that. It grows with repetition. Keep sending the message, once or twice a week. It's not as if it takes much time, each time.
However, it might help a great deal when conference committee time arrives.
Things can percolate into even a semi-closed consciousness. As Speaker, Nancy Pelosi doubtlessly has a sharper than average consciousness, for things political.
So, make it not only percolate. Make it resonate.
That comes with familiarity. A "learning curve" phenomenon is our goal.
INCLUDING FOR NARAL AND PLANNED PARENTHOOD, PROBABLY NOW REALIZING THE WAKE-UP CALL WAS MISSED.
___________
NOTE: The same message can be sent by Minnesotans to Sen. Amy Klobuchar and Sen. Al Franken.
Klobuchar, this link.
Franken, this link.
The ball's in their court next, so make your voice heard.
And it's not that they are impervious to the message, or opposed. Each knows and feels that allowing choice is correct and in line with American notions of personal "liberty and pursuit of happiness." While each knows what's right, only good things can result from attention. A little attention and love never hurts. It lets them know you know and respect their powers, you helped elect each of them, and you care.
NOTE ALSO: A comment about Stupak and his amendment being a force of oppression and darkness and evidencing a Dark Ages mentality, it might not hurt to add that.
Finally, it is not disrespectful of the Papacy or the Roman Church to disagree with it's telling others, including those outside of the Roman Church, how to live. Nor is it disrespectful to contest their desire to impose their will and beliefs on others. They can think and counsel what they wish, that's freedom of religion, and they should not try to legislate, since that's separation of church and state.
We treasure what is our legacy of wisdom from the founding of the nation.
________UPDATE_________
For those in Minnesota's Sixth District, we know how the incumbent voted. So if we do not like it, we need to try to see what DFL candidates Tarryl Clark and Maureen Reed think of the Stupak Amendment. If we let them duck issues we only have ourselves to blame if "the wrong one" of the two moves on to the general election. Choice is important, and Bachmann is working her core constituency and can be expected to maximize her numbers of those like minded with her. The DFL wins with everyone else. Or loses if they field a candidate who stands for nothing or declines to reveal what her beliefs on the issues are.
“Necessitous men are not free men.”
It's not a new insight by any means, and it basically is the corporate-business view that labor needs to be kept in overabundance and priced and taxed so that "owe the soul to the company store" or "keep them on payments and keep them sublime" are cynical operative steps that do indeed work when put into practice by big business-government. And while Franklin Roosevelt talked the talk ---
He did do that, this link.
It is way past due time for the nation to walk the talk; and perhaps I was wrong voting for the school levy last Tuesday - given how we see a public coming out of public education and then letting themselves go into "the real world" and not even bleating while being fleeced.
He did do that, this link.
It is way past due time for the nation to walk the talk; and perhaps I was wrong voting for the school levy last Tuesday - given how we see a public coming out of public education and then letting themselves go into "the real world" and not even bleating while being fleeced.
Saturday, November 07, 2009
The Alliance for a Better Minnesota is looking at what a progressive governor might be, and how to elect one.
The governor situation; this link.
The website home page; this link: http://allianceminnesota.org/
My impression is this group has not looked at nor published about the candidates in Minnesota's Sixth Congressional District where the incumbent clearly is not a progressive. I did this site specific Google. From the lack of any relevant hits, it looks as if they are disinterested in MN 6 or have yet to reach it in setting their priorities.
I think the clear priority on the governor's race, with the census due next year, is probably a quite sound choice. That and keeping a DFL legislature [hopefully increasing among those majorities the number of progressive vs. moderate DFL'ers also might happen]. But getting the road block to prosperity and good governance out of the Governor's seat would surely be one very, very nice step. Well, he will be gone in any event, but keeping out a clone or worse one, that's the thing - eyes on the prize, etc.
________UPDATE__________
I would hope if the Alliance does address the Sixth District they would basically tell the truth - two moderate candidates, neither a "progressive" by many commonly accepted measures of what the word means, but two middle of the spectrum very high quality women, against an incumbent of a far lesser quality, and with far, far less of any notion of "progressiveness" going with the incumbency.
In the district both Clark and Reed seem sufficiently conservative to meet true middle-spectrum likes and dislikes that past elections have revealed. Each is more of a Klobuchar than a Kennedy or Bachmann. Each promises a better presence in DC than the do-nothing-but-seek-personal-headlines incumbent, Michele Bachmann.
Either Clark or Reed would serve the district more than being self-serving.
Either would vastly improve the quality of representation and the national regard given the district, now a laughingstock district because of the ongoing uninterrupted highly laughable and wholly unproductive Bachmann conduct.
Neither Reed nor Clark would fib, nor make up demonstrably false and outlandish "facts" to fit a tirade. Neither operates that way. Neither is a loose cannon.
The website home page; this link: http://allianceminnesota.org/
My impression is this group has not looked at nor published about the candidates in Minnesota's Sixth Congressional District where the incumbent clearly is not a progressive. I did this site specific Google. From the lack of any relevant hits, it looks as if they are disinterested in MN 6 or have yet to reach it in setting their priorities.
I think the clear priority on the governor's race, with the census due next year, is probably a quite sound choice. That and keeping a DFL legislature [hopefully increasing among those majorities the number of progressive vs. moderate DFL'ers also might happen]. But getting the road block to prosperity and good governance out of the Governor's seat would surely be one very, very nice step. Well, he will be gone in any event, but keeping out a clone or worse one, that's the thing - eyes on the prize, etc.
________UPDATE__________
I would hope if the Alliance does address the Sixth District they would basically tell the truth - two moderate candidates, neither a "progressive" by many commonly accepted measures of what the word means, but two middle of the spectrum very high quality women, against an incumbent of a far lesser quality, and with far, far less of any notion of "progressiveness" going with the incumbency.
In the district both Clark and Reed seem sufficiently conservative to meet true middle-spectrum likes and dislikes that past elections have revealed. Each is more of a Klobuchar than a Kennedy or Bachmann. Each promises a better presence in DC than the do-nothing-but-seek-personal-headlines incumbent, Michele Bachmann.
Either Clark or Reed would serve the district more than being self-serving.
Either would vastly improve the quality of representation and the national regard given the district, now a laughingstock district because of the ongoing uninterrupted highly laughable and wholly unproductive Bachmann conduct.
Neither Reed nor Clark would fib, nor make up demonstrably false and outlandish "facts" to fit a tirade. Neither operates that way. Neither is a loose cannon.
An interesting item that got swamped as news by the lobbying interests and their August astroturfing when Congress was in recess.
Strib reports U.Minn. researchers have published in Science, a paper on horse genomics. Will track handicappers now need bioinformatics degrees?
The link is here. The second headline sentence is spoofing, not serious. Most could figure that out, but the heads up is for the blog troll.
Strib Financial writer Chris Serres has been doing a continuing series of reports on bank failures and workouts.
For the sequence of reporting by Serres, this link.
The most recent item he wrote, this Friday, about the Friday closure of Prosperan Bank.
I urge readers to have a look, since it is a situation reflecting the overall economic shake out [shake down was a separate thing, the Paulsen, Bernanke, Bush and the TARP players on Wall Street and in Congress].
One thing I hope Serres would do is a focused series looking in detail at one bank, (his choice of which to autopsy), to see if he can get involved persons to talk about what real estate segment [if a single one] caused the failure, whether management might by better judgment have avoided closure, etc.
And hopefully besides his recent reporting on the big end of things, (his item on US Bancorp chain acquisition activity, and an earlier report on the same Minnesota based institution acquiring other assets besides its most recent takeover of an entire outlet chain), might be supplemented by a look at a smaller community bank acquisition target and takeover firm pairing, to report how things get done behind the specialized legal practice and non-public FDIC and Fed closed doors, and how with State chartered banks how the "shared burden of regulatory oversight" works out in actual practice and not just under issued platitudes from the players about doing their best.
Sometimes best is not enough, and I expect sometimes there is politics afoot. And when testifying before legislative fact-finding committees there often is the circle-the-wagons attitude of the regulatory system under scrutiny, and the don't-rock-the-boat-but-look-attentive motivations affectiing scrutinizing legislators who might be dwarfed in expertise by the players in the game.
In any event, it is a good reporting series on which Strib has allowed Serres to focus. They deserve praise and appreciation for that editorial decision.
________UPDATE__________
From the Prosperan Bank report, link given above, the paragraph I found most interesting:
That is a most delicate way for the acquiring firm's spokesperson to phrase things.
The most recent item he wrote, this Friday, about the Friday closure of Prosperan Bank.
I urge readers to have a look, since it is a situation reflecting the overall economic shake out [shake down was a separate thing, the Paulsen, Bernanke, Bush and the TARP players on Wall Street and in Congress].
One thing I hope Serres would do is a focused series looking in detail at one bank, (his choice of which to autopsy), to see if he can get involved persons to talk about what real estate segment [if a single one] caused the failure, whether management might by better judgment have avoided closure, etc.
And hopefully besides his recent reporting on the big end of things, (his item on US Bancorp chain acquisition activity, and an earlier report on the same Minnesota based institution acquiring other assets besides its most recent takeover of an entire outlet chain), might be supplemented by a look at a smaller community bank acquisition target and takeover firm pairing, to report how things get done behind the specialized legal practice and non-public FDIC and Fed closed doors, and how with State chartered banks how the "shared burden of regulatory oversight" works out in actual practice and not just under issued platitudes from the players about doing their best.
Sometimes best is not enough, and I expect sometimes there is politics afoot. And when testifying before legislative fact-finding committees there often is the circle-the-wagons attitude of the regulatory system under scrutiny, and the don't-rock-the-boat-but-look-attentive motivations affectiing scrutinizing legislators who might be dwarfed in expertise by the players in the game.
In any event, it is a good reporting series on which Strib has allowed Serres to focus. They deserve praise and appreciation for that editorial decision.
________UPDATE__________
From the Prosperan Bank report, link given above, the paragraph I found most interesting:
Missy Keney, a spokeswoman for Alerus, said the bank was still reviewing Prosperan's loan portfolio and did not know how the bank's financial position changed so abruptly. "We're not sure if it's them just not recognizing the bad loans, or they did know and just not say anything," she said. "We just don't know."
That is a most delicate way for the acquiring firm's spokesperson to phrase things.
A clear majority of people know this is true. Liars lie about it. Read it.
click it to enlarge and read - if reading it is too hard because of how Blogger provides the image, the original item is at this link.
Friday, November 06, 2009
Fear and loathing at a Republican rally. Live impressions by one who survived service in Balkan combat areas. Only a handful of rabid zealots, but ---
The Sixth District's "Blue Man in a Red District" blogger, Hal Kimball, and his wife were in DC yesterday, and he posted a few brief stream of consciousness thoughts on what he saw. Hal served in the Balkans, in armor not infantry, but with that as a background - his impressions are clearly of a revulsion that had to have permeated things to raise such strong thoughts in one who has seen a war zone situation -- the impressions are quoted in the sequence posted:
No time stamping on the posts, but the sequence is clear. And that last post pretty much nails things into a frame, gives a perspective. A handful of crackpots, vs. millions facing true hardship. And we know on which side of that divide Michele Bachmann stands. She and Fox made that clear in advance.
So. Venom aplenty, but a very, very, very low turnout that must have been disappointing to Michele Bachmann and the tubthumpers she's used at FOX, but one suggesting that the real truth in things is that the teabaggers and their thing earlier sapped the interest of the short attention span knuckle draggers that otherwise would have been there mixing it up with Michele Bachmann and her ilk. Bless them for their inability to retain much of anything over a few weeks' span, never mind history, in their untidy little thought zones. They let the loud lady's expectations fall short. Too bad. Too very, very bad, that it should happen to the likes of our Sixth Congressional District fact-manufacturer, Michele Bachmann.
.......................
That Bachmann-GOP garbage, and the most unfortunate shootings at Fort Hood, real news of a sad kind but unlike the manufactured hate mongering Kimball witnessed.
For coverage of that, Aubrey Immelman, here, has a lengthy analysis including a repost of MSNBC coverage, here; also NY Times coverage, this link.
............................
Well - Ms. Bachmann, the fact is that another crazy, this one not wanting to leave long standing ongoing stateside military duty for an Afghanistan tour stole your headline thunder.
A small possible suggestion of how to court yet another headline is offered in the best of intent and bipartisan spirit, as is your due, in the following post, below.
_______UPDATE________
Dumpbachmann has an interesting "official" DNC Dem's response to the mischief of Bachmann and others; it is short and worth having a look. It rings very true to me.
The DB post includes a reader's comment linking over to Think Progress exposing the entire thing as pure astroturf, (lobbyists reportedly paid and promoted to stage the thing). For all we know lobbyists probably wrote the scripts too and it had not a hint of real grassroots except for the few at the dancing end of the strings with the lobbyists hands on the working, behind the curtain end.
Very noteworthy, Think Progress reported the crowd as 4000. Blue Man was off at estimating it at 125% of the Think Progress number. Either way, a sorry showing by a handful of nuts.
_______SECOND UPDATE________
image source, here
Which one's Michele? Which end of the strings is hers?
Another DB comment finding things about the dog and pony show extremely offensive, this link.
Is there anything there to disagree with? It hangs together as true, for all I have seen of Michele Bachmann.
Landed in DC! We now have an hour to get our bags, get to the hotel, and to Bachmanns Capitol event!
Posted by Blue man at Thursday, November 05, 2009
At the capitol south metro stop...theres not enough hand sanitizer anywhere to clean this level of crazy up....
Posted by Blue man at Thursday, November 05, 2009
This rally ia absolutely nuts. Bachmann, Jon Voight, Cliff Claven and now Mike Pence. WHOLE LOT OF CRAZY HERE...wow!
Posted by Blue man at Thursday, November 05, 2009
Steve King says he can see Americans as far as the eye can see....um.....I see maybe 5000 here. Thats what the Capitol Police dude said...
Posted by Blue man at Thursday, November 05, 2009
"lets thank Michele Bachmann for her leadership"
crazy meter is pegged.
no amount of showers will rid me of the dirty feeling i have now
Posted by Blue man at Thursday, November 05, 2009
Should 5000 ticked off and crazy folks keep 48 millon that need help from getting it?
Posted by Blue man at Thursday, November 05, 2009
No time stamping on the posts, but the sequence is clear. And that last post pretty much nails things into a frame, gives a perspective. A handful of crackpots, vs. millions facing true hardship. And we know on which side of that divide Michele Bachmann stands. She and Fox made that clear in advance.
So. Venom aplenty, but a very, very, very low turnout that must have been disappointing to Michele Bachmann and the tubthumpers she's used at FOX, but one suggesting that the real truth in things is that the teabaggers and their thing earlier sapped the interest of the short attention span knuckle draggers that otherwise would have been there mixing it up with Michele Bachmann and her ilk. Bless them for their inability to retain much of anything over a few weeks' span, never mind history, in their untidy little thought zones. They let the loud lady's expectations fall short. Too bad. Too very, very bad, that it should happen to the likes of our Sixth Congressional District fact-manufacturer, Michele Bachmann.
.......................
That Bachmann-GOP garbage, and the most unfortunate shootings at Fort Hood, real news of a sad kind but unlike the manufactured hate mongering Kimball witnessed.
For coverage of that, Aubrey Immelman, here, has a lengthy analysis including a repost of MSNBC coverage, here; also NY Times coverage, this link.
............................
Well - Ms. Bachmann, the fact is that another crazy, this one not wanting to leave long standing ongoing stateside military duty for an Afghanistan tour stole your headline thunder.
A small possible suggestion of how to court yet another headline is offered in the best of intent and bipartisan spirit, as is your due, in the following post, below.
_______UPDATE________
Dumpbachmann has an interesting "official" DNC Dem's response to the mischief of Bachmann and others; it is short and worth having a look. It rings very true to me.
The DB post includes a reader's comment linking over to Think Progress exposing the entire thing as pure astroturf, (lobbyists reportedly paid and promoted to stage the thing). For all we know lobbyists probably wrote the scripts too and it had not a hint of real grassroots except for the few at the dancing end of the strings with the lobbyists hands on the working, behind the curtain end.
Very noteworthy, Think Progress reported the crowd as 4000. Blue Man was off at estimating it at 125% of the Think Progress number. Either way, a sorry showing by a handful of nuts.
_______SECOND UPDATE________
image source, hereWhich one's Michele? Which end of the strings is hers?
Another DB comment finding things about the dog and pony show extremely offensive, this link.
Is there anything there to disagree with? It hangs together as true, for all I have seen of Michele Bachmann.
Michele Bachmann pursues another cheesy, trashy, classless, disorderly way to get her name into press reports. Strib bites on the flashy, trashy lure.
This woman has no shame. Yet, Strib acts again as facilitator, for our prize diva; see here and here.Look at this next item, the clear unabashed child-like glee on the face. Never mind what the signs say, never mind the small turnout, this is me, me, me -- and a crowd.
I stand at the front of an attentive crowd. They love me. They love my act.
Life is so rewarding, if that's what you're after and you are Michele Bachmann, and in front of a crowd. Orderly, disorderly, that does not count. It is a crowd. Your crowd. You are important.
Who is this person? Like the lens grinder who fell into her machinery, making a spectacle of herself. Tacky or not does not matter. It is me. It is the event. I am the event.
Behind the facade, what makes this grandstander tick? Is it the paycheck and benefits? Or the high from being in the front of like minded angry people, being able to be divisive and to counter and belittle the work and goals of other hard-working folks wanting to make a better world, nation, and State for the citizens?
Michele if it is not needing a crowd but only wanting headlines, try this if you really want to feel the power and to get that adrenaline rush only some things can give you -- go to the BNSF tracks [now the Warren Buffett tracks], wait for the train, a big looming approaching high-speed train, stand there mid-track and yell "Stop, stop, I am Michele Bachmann, THE REAL ONE-AND-ONLY Michele Bachmann, listen and stop. Stop, stop, stop."
Please, it is a sincerely made suggestion so Michele, do not dismiss it too abruptly.
Give it a go. You can use that same raised right arm salute as at the rally. It's a good part of the act.
The adrenaline rush will be SPECIAL. The looming massive presence, the obedient screech of steel wheels on steel track as the brakes are applied, indeed to stop, as if commanded to, paying due attention and obeying.
Trust me. Do it, and you will be glad you did it. Have cameras and a sound truck around. It will get coverage. Trust me, it will. Do this - use the tracks right behind the Maureen Reed campaign headquarters, wait for the inaugural Northstar run, (you know already that will get press attention), just do it and upstage that upstart, Maureen Reed, right there by her campaign base camp.
It will play in the press.
____________
Images downloaded from here and here; second item hat tip (and good coverage); here. Photo free coverage, here.
Help for other bloggers wanting an easy way to cover Michele Bachmann's repeat act of capitol step mob incitement.
She did it in St. Paul. She now is on a bigger stage. Will it play on Braodway, where there unfortunately for Michele Bachmann, is no capitol? She could go to Albany, but it's really not the same. She finally gets to prime time, darling of Fox - but Rupert's been sharp enough to see he can get her for free, not having to give any book contract advance, as with other GOP divas. At any rate, to the point of the post.
First, making it easy, a Google = "generic rally" gives this lead picture, and whether copyrighted or not the oil-and-gas guy is unlikely to sue and you have the fair-use defense if he does:
Isn't that a helpful item? The signs all turned the other way, so it could be any rally; nobody will notice the short sleeves inappropriate for cold fall weather if you don't make a point of mentioning it; so it's fit for any Michele Bachmann rally, and you've a picture for a start.
It looks like a disorderly crowd, and if you want an orderly crowd, I have a picture for that too, this link, but, sorry B&W is all the posting party offered, I could not find it in color:
Perhaps some might be unable to imagine Michele Bachmann at such an orderly group thing. Others might see it differently. And sorry again, but if you want an orderly presentation of the orderly rally pic, you will have to use photo editing software to get rid of the original image's leaning-right tilt (unless you see that also as somehow appropriate for a Michele Bachmann hoopla event).
Plenty images of Michele, that's a must or she'd be unhappy with your coverage, and for this there is help online from Avidor who deserves credit for his subdued understated but fairly comprehensive multi-image study of this political phenomenon from Minnesota's Sixth District, with this particular item showing a determined demeanor for her will toward gaining goals for which she has striven.
Next, if you want the easy step of using a quote from somebody else's post, already online and ready, here is the best I have found, with links from the original included and an almost irrestible "dueling flow charts" theme honed to be properly suitable coverage touching upon the antics of Michele Bachmann and her rag-tag band of GOP wannabe-important hucksters and performers:
Now with flowcharts like that, what do we need Michele Bachmann for? Each side can tell its own story, far, far less stridently. (Do you get the flow of my argument?)
A few wrap-up helping items. Here's a canned pic of a well-fed corpulent GOP stuffed shirt throwing bill pages toward the mob - to make a sombre low-key studied and cogent rhetorical point, I guess:
This source. But again, it is a generic pic of an impressive style and grace. No telltale red tie, signs are illegible, paper is paper after all, and the lapel pin, we cannot identify it as a GOP-issue tiny flag pin (made in China). Use the pic anytime you want to show sophisticated rhetoric.
Michele Bachmann leading a rally in her inimitable way, (and luckily Marcus Bachmann must have selected the dress, to avoid any un-GOP demonstration of a kind we'd really not want to see, from Bachmann).
Last, Michele Bachmann, observing a rally, to round out things Bachmann - back to her early still-young-enough-to-be-able-to-crouch beginnings.
Okay, blog people. I hope I have helped.
__________UPDATE___________
Michele Bachmann trying to look like Michael Jackson, but without a smile or anyone to hold an umbrella.
First, making it easy, a Google = "generic rally" gives this lead picture, and whether copyrighted or not the oil-and-gas guy is unlikely to sue and you have the fair-use defense if he does:
Isn't that a helpful item? The signs all turned the other way, so it could be any rally; nobody will notice the short sleeves inappropriate for cold fall weather if you don't make a point of mentioning it; so it's fit for any Michele Bachmann rally, and you've a picture for a start.
It looks like a disorderly crowd, and if you want an orderly crowd, I have a picture for that too, this link, but, sorry B&W is all the posting party offered, I could not find it in color:
Perhaps some might be unable to imagine Michele Bachmann at such an orderly group thing. Others might see it differently. And sorry again, but if you want an orderly presentation of the orderly rally pic, you will have to use photo editing software to get rid of the original image's leaning-right tilt (unless you see that also as somehow appropriate for a Michele Bachmann hoopla event).
Plenty images of Michele, that's a must or she'd be unhappy with your coverage, and for this there is help online from Avidor who deserves credit for his subdued understated but fairly comprehensive multi-image study of this political phenomenon from Minnesota's Sixth District, with this particular item showing a determined demeanor for her will toward gaining goals for which she has striven.
Next, if you want the easy step of using a quote from somebody else's post, already online and ready, here is the best I have found, with links from the original included and an almost irrestible "dueling flow charts" theme honed to be properly suitable coverage touching upon the antics of Michele Bachmann and her rag-tag band of GOP wannabe-important hucksters and performers:
Flow Chart Wars
Posted by Dominic Holden on Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 9:49 AM
Republicans had a flowchart—an inscrutable, unwieldy, color-coded expanse of cardboard—that they toted around to town hall meetings to reveal the supposedly terrible, no good health care plan hatched by Democrats. You can see it by clicking here. And a photo of someone carrying the chart (next to a "kill the bill not grandma" sign) is over here.
Not to be outdone in the department of difficult visual communications, liberals have created their own (equally inscrutable) though more graphically appealing flow chart on Who Is Paying to Kill Health Care Reform, which stems from America's Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), the health insurance lobby. Click on the image to enlarge it.
Courtesy of Campaign for America's Future, via HuffPo.
Stay tuned for a flow chart of who is making flow charts. In the meantime, the best flow chart ever made is right here.
Now with flowcharts like that, what do we need Michele Bachmann for? Each side can tell its own story, far, far less stridently. (Do you get the flow of my argument?)
A few wrap-up helping items. Here's a canned pic of a well-fed corpulent GOP stuffed shirt throwing bill pages toward the mob - to make a sombre low-key studied and cogent rhetorical point, I guess:
This source. But again, it is a generic pic of an impressive style and grace. No telltale red tie, signs are illegible, paper is paper after all, and the lapel pin, we cannot identify it as a GOP-issue tiny flag pin (made in China). Use the pic anytime you want to show sophisticated rhetoric.
Michele Bachmann leading a rally in her inimitable way, (and luckily Marcus Bachmann must have selected the dress, to avoid any un-GOP demonstration of a kind we'd really not want to see, from Bachmann).
Last, Michele Bachmann, observing a rally, to round out things Bachmann - back to her early still-young-enough-to-be-able-to-crouch beginnings.
Okay, blog people. I hope I have helped.
__________UPDATE___________
Michele Bachmann trying to look like Michael Jackson, but without a smile or anyone to hold an umbrella.
Thursday, November 05, 2009
It is moot to Michele Bachmann. She would not answer it anyway.
Here.
________UPDATE________
Aside from Michele Bachmann grandstanding stupidities, there also were Fifth Amendment concerns in compelling persons in a civil law matter, the census, to admit to crime, illegal entry into the country.
Knee-jerk GOP sorts would tell you illegal entrants are the equivalent of non-uniformed combatant detainees, having no Constitutional protections because they are not US of A citizens; but marginalizing basic rights (thought necessary at the start of our current federal alignment) is simply bad for ALL people who value freedom from too heavy a government foot on things.
________UPDATE________
Aside from Michele Bachmann grandstanding stupidities, there also were Fifth Amendment concerns in compelling persons in a civil law matter, the census, to admit to crime, illegal entry into the country.
Knee-jerk GOP sorts would tell you illegal entrants are the equivalent of non-uniformed combatant detainees, having no Constitutional protections because they are not US of A citizens; but marginalizing basic rights (thought necessary at the start of our current federal alignment) is simply bad for ALL people who value freedom from too heavy a government foot on things.
Sidebar graphics - Newsmeat.com
In fifty words or less, explain in a comment how the two items interrelate, which party bends the curve up, which down, and then answer today's equivalent of the Vietnam question; why would it not at the price per day be cheaper to simply buy them off?
This homepage: http://www.newsmeat.com/
("Breaking News," on the top menu, to navigate back from a subpage.)
Stuff like this, a candidate earning her chops to run GOP for the Senate from California.
Stuff like this.
Stuff like this. Divisiveness freaks.
_________UPDATE__________
Boycott Dell Computers?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
