Tuesday, May 4, 2010
Barker's Newsbites: Tuesday, May 4, 2010
On annoying thing about YouTube is that videos often "disappear;" here today, gone tomorrow!
Well... this happened - literally - with today's "Newsbites Theme Song."
Peter Frampton (yeah... that Peter Frampton) is coming out with a new album (ok... ok... new CD... new "digital product... whatever) titled "Thank You Mr. Churchill" (which is also the title track).
The video I found yesterday was of higher sound quality... (*SHRUG*)... but what can you do - right?
BTW... if this link "disappears" just find the song for yourself; it's pretty good!
Now... on to the newsbites...!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
http://www.house.gov/htbin/blog_inc?BLOG,tx14_paul,blog,999,All,Item%20not%20found,ID=100503_3697,TEMPLATE=postingdetail.shtml
* FROM CONGRESSMAN RON PAUL'S "TEXAS STRAIGHT TALK" NEWSLETTER:
Last week Congress did something fiscally responsible. It’s not very often I can say that. Granted, it was small in the grand scheme of things, but I was glad to be an original cosponsor, along with Congressman Harry Mitchell of Arizona, of a bill to block the automatic pay raise that Congress otherwise receives every year. Every Member of Congress gets this raise unless it is expressly voted down. For the second year in a row Congress has voted to freeze its own pay, which, in a time of skyrocketing deficits and high unemployment, is the very least Congress can do.
http://www.concordcoalition.org/publications/2010/0503/congress-should-not-duck-its-responsibility-approve-budget-resolution
Our deficit is hovering near post-WWII record levels and is on an unsustainable path.
Our debt is projected to double over the next 10 years, reaching an alarming 90% of the gross domestic product.
The President submitted a budget in February... Yet, there is an increasing possibility that the House will produce no budget at all; not in committee and not on the floor. If so, it would be a first since the current budget process was enacted in 1974.
* JUST TO RECAP BASIC CIVICS... THERE IS NO FILIBUSTER IN THE HOUSE AND THE DEMOCRATS CONTROL AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY IN THAT BODY; THE REPUBLICANS CAN'T STOP SQUAT; THERE'S LITERALLY NO ONE TO BLAME OTHER THAN THE DEMOCRATS FOR THIS SHIRKING OF RESPONSIBILITY ON THE PART OF NANCY PELOSI AND HER CAUCUS.
The Senate Budget Committee, to its credit, approved a five-year plan.... [but it] has not been slotted for consideration on the Senate floor.
* AGAIN... LIKE IT OR NOT THIS IS PURELY (AT LEAST AT THIS POINT) INTERNAL DEMOCRATIC POLITICS AT PLAY. (*SHRUG*)
There is simply no way to make the [Obama budget] numbers look good. Deficits will remain unusually high over the next five years with or without a budget resolution, and heading into the fall elections, many Democrats do not want their names on a budget plan that looks so bad.
Their solution? Don’t pass a budget.
* AND EVEN WITHOUT A RAISE THESE CLOWNS ARE MAKING $174,000/YR. PLUS "BENEFITS" WORTH TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS... PLUS OFFICIAL PERKS... PLUS ALL THE PERSONAL GAINS THEY'RE ABLE TO SHAKE FROM THEIR CAMPAIGN SPENDING TREES... ETC.
Failure to adopt a budget resolution when fiscal “resolution” is needed most would send the worst possible signal. It would say to investors in Treasury securities, foreign and domestic, that the federal government is still in denial about its fiscal problems and has no plan to address the situation any time soon. It would say to the public that their leaders are incapable of leading or unwilling to do so.
* YOU GUYS HAVE ALL READ SHIRLEY JACKSON'S "THE LOTTERY," RIGHT...??? WHAT SAY WE CREATE A "LOTTERY" FOR MEMBERS OF CONGRESS...?!?!
[W]ithout a budget resolution Congress has no framework within which to enforce trade-offs among competing priorities. Without a budget, Congress would likely “deem” spending limits for 2011.
* SERIOUSLY, FOLKS... NOW OF COURSE I'D NEVER SUGGEST A VIOLENT, ILLEGAL "SOLUTION" TO THE PROBLEM OF A TOTALLY OUT OF CONTROL CONGRESS, HOWEVER... STOCKING UP ON AMMO AS A HEDGE AGAINST INFLATION IS NEVER A BAD IDEA... (*DARK CHUCKLE*)
http://gao.gov/products/GAO-10-492
Over $81 billion has been committed under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) to improve the domestic auto industry's competitiveness and long-term viability.
* AT LEAST THAT'S THE PLAN... RIGHT...? (*SMIRK*)
The bulk of this assistance has gone to General Motors (GM) and Chrysler, who sponsor some of the largest defined benefit pension plans insured by the federal Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC).
The "new" GM and the "new" Chrysler that were established during each company's bankruptcy process in the summer of 2009 assumed sponsorship for all the old companies' U.S. defined benefit plans.
In early 2009, prior to the new companies assuming sponsorship, PBGC estimated that its exposure to potential losses for GM's and Chrysler's plans to be about $14.5 billion.
* THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT $14.5 BILLION (ABOVE AND BEYOND THE PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED $81 BILLION) OF ADDITIONAL TAXPAYER BAILOUTS BEING ON THE TABLE.
Meanwhile, automaker downsizing and the credit market crisis have created significant stress for suppliers and their pensions.
During 2009, there was a rise in the number of supplier bankruptcies, liquidations, and pension plan terminations. In July, the nation's largest auto parts supplier, Delphi Corporation, terminated its pension plans with expected losses to PBGC of over $6.2 billion. Across the auto sector as a whole, in January 2009, PBGC estimated that unfunded pension liabilities totaled about $77 billion, with PBGC's exposure for potential losses due to unfunded benefits of about $42 billion, leaving plan participants to bear the potential loss of the $35 billion difference through reduced benefits.
* SO LET'S SEE... $81 BILLION... PLUS $14.5 BILLION... PLUS $42 BILLION... (OH... AND THAT'S ASSUMING THE DEMOCRATS DON'T TURN AROUND AND SIMPLY "MAKE WHOLE" - VIA INCOME REDISTRIBUTION - UNION RETIREES RATHER THAN FORCE THEM TO SWALLOW "THEIR FAIR SHARE" - THE $35 BILLION MENTIONED - OF LOSSES. (*SHRUG*)
* NAH... NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT FOLKS... CLEARLY OBAMA, PELOSI, AND REID HAVE MATTERS... er... WELL IN HAND.
(*SMIRK*)
http://preview.bloomberg.com/news/2010-05-04/obama-plans-5-billion-for-business-to-pay-for-early-retirees-health-plans.html
Companies will get $5 billion from the U.S. government to help pay for retiree health insurance, a benefit of the health-care overhaul that will offset some of the millions of dollars in costs employers such as Caterpillar Inc. and Deere & Co. announced after the law’s signing.
(*TEARING MY HAIR OUT*)
* FOLKS... HERE'S A QUESTION: WHERE IS THE U.S. GOVERNMENT GETTING THE $5 BILLION FROM...?!?!
* FOLKS... EARTH TO READERS... WE'RE FRIGG'N BEYOND BROKE; WE'RE DEFICIT SPENDING...!!!
* FOLKS... REMEMBER HOW THE PRESIDENT CLAIMED INCREASED SPENDING WOULD SOMEHOW REDUCE DEFICITS...??? (*STILL TEARING MY REMAINING HAIR OUT*) AND NOW HE'S ADDING AN ADDITIONAL $5 BILLION ON THE COST SIDE...?!?!? (WOW... HOW MUCH MORE WILL SPENDING AN ADDITIONAL $5 BILLION SAVE...?) (*SNORT*)
[C]ompanies will be able to start tapping the funds on June 1, according to a statement provided by an administration official who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
* OF COURSE HE/SHE DID... (*SMIRK*)
The money is meant for early retirees older than age 55 who aren’t eligible yet for Medicare...
* SOUNDS LIKE ADDITIONAL UNFUNDED, UNSUSTAINABLE ENTITLEMENT SPENDING EXPANSION TO ME...!!!
Under the program, the government will reimburse businesses for 80% of early retirees’ health care expenses, amounting to from $15,000 to $90,000 per individual. There is no limit on what size companies can apply for the subsidy, according to the law signed by Obama in March.
* YEP! YOU READ THAT RIGHT, KIDS... UP TO $90,000 PER INDIVIDUAL... NO LIMIT ON COMPANY SIZE..
* YOU FOLKS SURELY DON'T MIND KICKING IN EXTRA TAXES TO ENSURE THE RETIREMENT LIFESTYLES OF RETIRED FORTUNE 50 EXECUTIVES DO YOU...??? (HOW COULD ANYONE BE SO... er... HEARTLESS.)
* $90,000 PER INDIVIDUAL PER YEAR, FOLKS... KEEP ON TELLING YOURSELF OBAMA AND THE DEMS ARE LOOKING OUT FOR "THE LITTLE GUY."
Obama’s effort would make it easier for employers that provide health coverage to workers who retire...
* HEY... WE DON'T WANT TO CUT INTO THESE FOLK'S TEE TIMES, DO WE?!
* KEEP ON IGNORING THIS SHIT, FOLKS... KEEP YOUR HEADS IN THE SAND... "SOMETHING WILL TURN UP," RIGHT...??? (*SMIRK*)
http://wcbstv.com/breakingnewsalerts/times.square.car.2.1672788.html
Sources tell CBS 2 that the suspect in the Times Square bombing attempt, who was arrested overnight while aboard a plane at John F. Kennedy Airport, should have been on the United States terror watch list, and that because he wasn't, he was able to board the plane.
* WELL... MAYBE. I'LL GIVE "GOVERNMENT UNDER OBAMA'S WATCH" THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT AT LEAST UNTIL I SEE MORE EVIDENCE SUPPORTING THE ABOVE CLAIM.
http://preview.bloomberg.com/news/2010-05-03/greek-workers-escalate-protests-over-budget-cuts-that-can-t-be-accepted-.html
Greek government workers shut down schools and hospitals and disrupted flights as demonstrators occupied the Acropolis in an escalation of protests...
* JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY... WHAT GOOD IS "FREE GUARANTEED HEALTH CARE" WHEN THE HOSPITALS ARE SHUT DOWN...??? (HEY... JUST ASKING...)
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704342604575222110918360260.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTTopOpinion
* ONE MORE TIME...
At the end of 2009, [Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's combined] total debt outstanding (either held directly on their balance sheets or as guarantees on mortgage securities they'd sold to investors) was $8.1 trillion.
That compares to $7.8 trillion in total marketable debt outstanding for the entire U.S. government.
The debt has the implicit guarantee of the federal government but is not reflected on the national balance sheet.
The public has focused more on taxpayer bailouts of banks, auto makers and insurance companies. But the scale of the rescue required in September 2008 when Fannie and Freddie were forced into conservatorship - their version of bankruptcy - was staggering. To date, the federal government has been forced to pump $126 billion into Fannie and Freddie.
That's far more than AIG, which absorbed $70 billion of government largess, and General Motors and Chrysler, which shared $77 billion. Banks received $205 billion, of which $136 billion has been repaid.
* THOUGH LARGELY VIA SMOKE AND MIRRORS ACCOUNTING GIMMICKS WHERE A BANK "BORROWS" MONEY AT TINSEY-WEENSIE TAXPAYER SUBSIDIZED INTEREST RATES FROM THE FEDERAL RESERVE AND THEN "LOANS" THIS "BORROWED" MONEY BACK TO THE TREASURY AT A HIGHER INTEREST RATE.
* WHY NOT HAVE THE FED LOAN DIRECTLY TO THE GOVERNMENT AND BYPASS THE MIDDLEMAN - AND THUS THE INTEREST PAYMENTS...? EASY! BECAUSE THE WHOLE POINT OF THE EXERCISE IS TO ENRICH THE BANKS AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE FOR THEIR NO RISK "SERVICES" RENDERED.
* FOLKS... UNDERSTAND... YOU'RE BEING RIPPED OFF DAY IN AND DAY OUT!!!
Fannie and Freddie continue to operate deeply in the red, with no end in sight. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that if their operating costs and subsidies were included in our accounting of the overall federal deficit - as properly they should be - the 2009 deficit would be greater by $291 billion.
Worst of all are the tracts of foreclosed homes left behind by households lured into inappropriate mortgages by the lax credit standards made possible by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and their promise to purchase and securitize millions of subprime mortgages.
* IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THE WORD "SECURITIZE" MEANS... GOOGLE IT. (*WINK*) (*SMIRK*)
According to a 2004 Congressional Budget Office study, the two GSEs enjoyed $23 billion in subsidies in 2003 - primarily in the form of lower borrowing costs and exemption from state and local taxation. But they passed on only $13 billion to home buyers.
[O]ne former Fannie Mae CEO, Franklin Raines, received $91 million in compensation from 1998 through 2003.
* $91 MILLION... IN FIVE YEARS... FIVE YEARS WHEREIN HE AND HIS FELLOW INCOMPETENTS HELP PLUNGE THE UNITED STATES - AND THUS THE WORLD - INTO AN ECONOMIC CRISIS. (NICE WORK IF YOU CAN GET IT... HUH?)
* OH... BTW... MR. RAINES IS NOW HEAVILY INVOLVED IN CAP & TRADE RELATED SPECULATION - ALONG WITH MANY OF HIS FELLOW DEMOCRATS. (THINK THIS IS PARTISAN SNARK... DO SOME SIMPLE RESEARCH.) (*SMIRK*)
In 2006, the top five Fannie Mae executives shared $34 million in compensation, while their counterparts at Freddie Mac shared $35 million.
* NICE, HUH...???
In 2009, even after the financial crash and as these two GSEs fell deeper into the red, the top five executives at Fannie Mae received $19 million in compensation and the CEO earned $6 million.
(*CLAP-CLAP-CLAP*)
This is not private enterprise - it's crony capitalism, in which public subsidies are turned into private riches.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704342604575222472358019534.html
The infrequency of big [off shore oil] spills is extraordinary considering the size of the offshore oil industry that provides Americans with affordable energy.
According to the Interior Department's most recent data, in 2002 the Outer Continental Shelf had 4,000 oil and gas facilities, 80,000 workers in offshore and support activities, and 33,000 miles of pipeline. Between 1985 and 2001, these offshore facilities produced seven billion barrels of oil.
The spill rate was a minuscule 0.001%.
According to the National Academy of Sciences - which in 2002 completed the third version of its "Oil in the Sea" report - only 1% of oil discharges in North Americas are related to petroleum extraction. Some 62% of oil in U.S. waters is due to natural seepage from the ocean floor, putting 47 million gallons of crude oil into North American water every year. The Gulf leak is estimated to have leaked between two million and three million gallons in two weeks.
Washington's aversion to drilling closer to shore has pushed the [oil] industry into deeper, more difficult, waters farther out to sea. BP's well is 5,000 feet down, at a depth and pressure that test the most advanced engineering and technology. The depth complicates containment efforts when there is a disaster.
* IN OTHER WORDS, FOLKS, BEWARE THE LAW OF UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.
As for a drilling moratorium, it is no guarantee against oil spills. It may even lead to more of them. Political fantasies about ending our oil addiction notwithstanding, the U.S. economy will need oil and other fossil fuels for decades to come. If we don't drill for it at home, the oil will have to arrive by tanker and barges. Tankers are responsible for more spills than offshore wells, and those spills tend to be bigger and closer to shore - which usually means more environmental harm.
The larger reality is that energy production is never going to be accident free. No difficult human endeavor is, whether space travel or using giant cranes to build skyscrapers. The rest of the world is working to exploit its offshore oil and gas reserves despite the risk of spills. We need to be mindful of such risks, and to include prevention and clean up in the cost of doing business, but a modern economy can't run without oil.
* THOUGHT FOR THE DAY: ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER IS A FRIGG'N IDIOT!
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703866704575224260060609090.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTTopOpinion
The Obama Administration has tirelessly pushed the line that it has employed every available tool to fight the Gulf oil spill from "Day One."
(Well, it's certainly true that every media resource is being deployed to squelch comparisons with the slow-footed 2005 Bush administration response to Hurricane Katrina.)
(*CHUCKLE*) (*SMIRK*)
But as for having actual oil-spill fighting technology on hand before the crisis, as the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 requires, the administration was clearly caught unprepared.
(*SHRUG*)
* NOW THE QUESTION IS, WOULD THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION HAVE BEEN CAUGHT "UNPREPARED" AS WELL? PERHAPS. THING IS... BUSH AIN'T BEEN PRESIDENT SINCE JANUARY 2008. THE BUCK STOPS AT OBAMA'S DESK.
After the Transocean rig blew up two weeks ago, it turns out the federal government didn't have a single fire boom on hand in the Gulf to enable a controlled burn of the oil slick, according to The Press-Register of Mobile, Alabama. Instead, the government quickly purchased the only fire boom that an Illinois-based manufacturer had in stock, and then asked the company to call its customers around the world to see if the U.S. government could borrow their booms.
* UNFRIGG'NBELIEVEABLE, HUH? AND AS NOTED IN YESTERDAYS NEWSBITE THREAD, THESE BOOMS ARE RELATIVELY INEXPENSIVE; WHY DOESN'T THE COAST GUARD HAVE THEM STOCKPILED...???
Ever since 1989 Exxon Valdez tragedy, the federal government has been required by law to keep spill-fighting equipment in place for an emergency. Ron Gouguet, who once led such efforts for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, told the Press-Register that a quick controlled burn might have captured 95% of the oil spilling from the offshore well.
[This being "The Age of Obama], it took federal officials eight days to conduct the first test burn of the leaking oil. By then, strong winds and rough seas inhibited its effectiveness.
(*SHRUG*)
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704342604575221943592328492.html?mod=WSJ_hps_MIDDLEThirdNews
* DID YOU GUYS KNOW THAT...
[T]he Oil Pollution Act of 1990, passed in the wake of the Exxon Valdez, caps economic damage liability at $75 million.
* SO... ASK YOURSELVES... WHAT'S ALL THIS TALK FROM OBAMA CONCERNING HOW "BP'S GONNA PAY...???"
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d48a2fc4-579c-11df-855b-00144feab49a.html
The revival of the US consumer in recent months has been cheered by economists as a sign that the recovery is on a more solid footing.
* BECAUSE MOST ECONOMISTS ARE ABJECT INCOMPETENTS... OR WORSE!
* FOLKS... WISE UP... READ THE NEXT LINE OF THE FINANCIAL TIMES' ARTICLE:
But there may be a dark side to this resurgence: on Main Street and in shopping malls across the country, Americans are once again spending more than they are earning.
* NEED I SAY MORE...?
“Speculation that consumers are reforming, repenting and rebalancing now looks either premature or overstated,” says Michael Feroli, economist at JPMorgan.
* YA THINK...?!?! (*SNICKER*)
http://media.www.thespartandaily.com/media/storage/paper852/news/2010/04/06/News/Sjsu-Officials.Continue.To.Suspend.Blood.Drives.Citing.Gay.Discrimination-3900434.shtml
* I'M SURROUNDED BY THE CRIMINALLY INSANE...!!!
Former San Jose State University President Don Kassing found that the Food and Drug Administration policy that bans gay men from donating blood violates the school's non-discriminatory laws.
(*HEADACHE*)
In an online message to the campus on Jan. 29, 2008, he stated there would be a suspension of blood drives on campus.
(*MIGRAINE HEADACHE*)
Men who have had sexual relations with other men continue to be banned from donating blood, according to the FDA's Web site.
President Jon Whitmore decided to continue the suspension against blood drives, said Pat Lopes Harris, director of media relations at SJSU.
(*ANEURISM THREATENING TO BLOW*)
"He reviewed the material and he knew the Academic Senate felt strongly about the blood drive suspension," Harris said. "He respects the position we had taken."
* EARTH TO LUNATICS; PLEASE SEE:
http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/BloodBloodProducts/QuestionsaboutBlood/ucm108186.htm
* IS IT ME, FOLKS...??? IS IT FRIGG'N ME...???
http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/04/pf/taxes/bush_obama_tax_cuts/index.htm
They're often called the "Bush" tax cuts. But at this point they might as well be called the Bush-ama tax cuts.
That's because President Obama has embraced the tax relief measures introduced in 2001 and 2003, proposing they be extended indefinitely for most Americans.
* WELL... THAT LITTLE WORD "MOST" IS THE ANT AT THE PICNIC AS CONCERNS THIS OP-ED. WHILE TECHNICALLY TRUE, THOSE ABOVE THE "MOST" CATEGORY ARE GOING TO GET HAMMERED AND ACCORDING TO STATIC ANALYSIS AT LEAST, THIS WILL BRING IN A LOAD OF REVENUE.
* REMEMBER, FOLKS... I'M NEVER USE NEWSBITES TO TRY AND "FOOL" YOU OR TO HIDE THE TRUTH FROM YOU. JUST BECAUSE "MONEY.CNN" IS "PREACING TO THE CHOIR" HERE DOESN'T MEAN I'M NOT GONNA "CALL 'EM" WHEN THEY TRY TO PULL A SLICK MOVE. (*WINK*)
* NOW... WHERE WAS I....??? (OH, YEAH...)
Another reason for the new Bush-ama moniker: Like President Bush, President Obama has not called on Congress to pay for the cost of the tax cuts. In fact, the extension of the cuts is exempt from the new "pay-go" rules that Obama signed into law recently.
* NOW THAT'S TRUE! AND AS FOR THE EXEMPTION FROM THE "PAY-GO" RULE... THAT'S AN INTERESTING NUGGET THAT I WASN'T AWARE OF.
Extending the tax cuts for most Americans will increase the federal deficit by an estimated $2.2 trillion over 10 years.
* AND DON'T FORGET, OBAMA AND THE DEMS HAVE ACTUALLY ADDED TAX CUTS - ONE EXAMPLE, THE "MAKING WORK PAY" LEGISLATION THAT WAS BASICALLY A MIDDLE-CLASS GIVEAWAY. (MARY AND I GOT IT. WE DIDN'T "NEED" IT. WE COULD HAVE LIVED JUST FINE WITHOUT IT. IF I HAD BEEN A MEMBER OF CONGRESS I WOULDN'T HAVE VOTED FOR IT; I WOULD HAVE OPPOSED IT.)
"Why do you spend over $2 trillion in your budget -- the most you spend on any single policy item -- on your predecessor's tax policy, which you repeatedly explain is to blame for the deterioration and unsustainability of our nation's fiscal outlook?" Diane Rogers, chief economist for the Concord Coalition, wrote in her blog Economistmom.com.
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/05/mathematicians-should-run-the-fed/
* I JUST ENJOY THE SPIRIT OF THIS OP-ED! (*WINK*) (*GRIN*) IT'S ACTUALLY VERY... er... "BILL-LIKE" IN ITS CONDESCENDING AND DEMEANING TONE! (*CHUCKLE*)
For the longest time, I was astonished at what looked like gross incompetence and utter lack of comprehension at the US Federal Reserve. I previously found it mind boggling.
I no longer get upset over this, as I have discovered the fundamental flaw of the Federal Reserve errors. Wore than easy money, worse than Greenspan’s “flawed” ideology, is a simple error that the Fed keeps making.
Math.
The Fed seems to be somewhat ignorant of basic mathematics. As far as I can tell, they are unfamiliar with standard deviations. They don’t grok mean reversion. Change in delta, 2nd derivatives seemingly perplex them. Even mortgage amortization tables appear beyond their ken.
How else could you explain the recently released transcripts that show the Fed rationalizing away the burgeoning what their ultra-low rates had done? How on earth could a Fed researcher claim “the rise in house prices is rooted in fundamentals” ?
The Fed completely missed the credit bubble, and seemingly ignored the nascent Housing boom in 2004.
Greenspan continually insisted that not only could the Fed not identify a bubble in real time, but could not possibly pop it. Its cheaper to clean up afterwards the Maestro said.
The only explanation that makes any sense to me is that they are innumerate — the mathematical equivaency of illiteracy. All it required to identify any of these — as we, and plenty of others did — was to look at the prior history and compare metrics:
-- Median Federal Overnight Rates (20th Century)
-- Total Credit and Mortgage Available
-- Median Home price to Median Income
-- Rental versus ownership costs
Any one of these would have clued the Fed into something aberrational occurring. And yet they managed to miss this completely.
From now on, I will cease calling the Fed incompetent, and begin using the more accurate phrase “innumerate.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100504/ap_on_go_ot/us_times_square_probe
The no-fly list failed to keep the Times Square suspect off the plane.
As federal agents closed in, Faisal Shahzad was aboard Emirates Flight 202. He reserved a ticket on the way to John F. Kennedy International Airport, paid cash on arrival and walked through security without being stopped.
By the time Customs and Border Protection officials spotted Shahzad's name on the passenger list and recognized him as the bombing suspect they were looking for, he was in his seat and the plane was preparing to leave the gate.
The Obama administration played down the fact that Shahzad, a U.S. citizen born in Pakistan, had made it aboard the plane.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano wouldn't talk about it, other than to say Customs officials prevented the plane from taking off.
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said the security system has fallback procedures in place for times like this, and they worked.
And Attorney General Eric Holder said he "was never in any fear that we were in danger of losing him."
But it seemed clear the airline either never saw or ignored key information that would kept Shahzad off the plane, a fact that dampened what was otherwise hailed as a fast, successful law enforcement operation.
The no-fly list is supposed to mean just that. And Shahzad's name was added to the list early Monday afternoon as a result of breaking developments in the investigation, according to a law enforcement official, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation. But when Emirates sold the ticket, it was working off an outdated list. Airline officials would have had to check a Web forum where updates are sent if it were to flag him. Because they didn't, law enforcement officials were not aware of his travel plans until they received the passenger list 30 minutes before takeoff, the official said. By that time, passengers are usually on board.
Gibbs blamed the airline...
Post a Comment