Monday, October 31, 2011

Barker's Newsbites: Monday, October 31, 2011


It's Halloween... there's frigg'n snow on the ground... and so...
Posted by at

6 comments:

William R. Barker said...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204528204577007932167790556.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTWhatsNewsCollection

* FILE UNDER: "THIS IS OBSCENE"

In one of the largest executive paydays in recent years, [the oil drilling company] Nabors Industries Ltd. is giving its chairman $100 million in cash in a severance-style deal, even though he isn't leaving the company.

(*HEADACHE*)

The payment exceeds the Bermuda-registered company's third-quarter net income, which was $74.3 million on revenue of $1.66 billion.

* HOW DO YOU JUSTIFY THIS...???

* OH... AND BTW... HOW DOES THIS "BERMUDA REGISTRY" WORK? IS IT A TAX DODGE? WAS NABORS A U.S. COMPANY PRIOR TO BECOMING A "BERMUDA-REGISTERED COMPANY?"

Eugene M. Isenberg, 81 years old, had been chairman and chief executive of the oil-drilling company since 1987. Late Friday afternoon, Nabors said it was promoting his longtime lieutenant, 57-year-old Anthony G. Petrello, to CEO, but that Mr. Isenberg would keep his job as chairman.

The shift triggered a clause in Mr. Isenberg's employment contract, entitling him to a payment of $100 million "as a result of this change in responsibility," Nabors said in a regulatory filing.

* REGULATORY FILING TO WHOM...? (I MEAN... IF IT'S A BERMUDA REGISTERED COMPANY...???)

By comparison, the highest-paid executive in the U.S. last year, according to a Wall Street Journal survey published in May, was Viacom Inc. CEO Philippe P. Dauman, whose 2010 compensation was valued at around $84.3 million. (Of that, Mr. Dauman received $13.9 million in cash; much of the rest came in one-time stock and option awards tied to a contract renewal.)

* STOCK AND OPTION AWARDS SHOULD BE MADE ILLEGAL. IF AN INDIVIDUAL WANTS TO BUY STOCKS... FINE... BUT THAT SHOULD BE A SEPARATE PERSONAL INVESTMENT. EXECUTIVES - LIKE ANY OTHER EMPLOYEE - SHOULD BE PAID IN SALARY AND BENEFITS SHOULD BE UNIFORM TO ALL EMPLOYEES. PERIOD!

The stock of Nabors has fallen 19% this year, and has underperformed the S&P 500-stock index for the prior one-year, five-year and 10-year periods.

* PERHAPS PARTLY DUE TO INVESTORS VIEWING "EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION" AT NABORS AS THINLY DISGUISED LOOTING OF THE COMPANY?

October 31, 2011 at 8:46 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/190641-second-energy-dept-backed-company-goes-bankrupt

A Massachusetts company that received a $43 million Energy Department...

* i.e. TAXPAYER

...loan guarantee last year filed for bankruptcy Sunday...

(*SHRUG*)

Beacon Power Corp., which develops energy storage systems, filed for bankruptcy protection in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Delaware.

* IRONIC... JOE BIDEN'S HOME STATE! (*LOPSIDED GRIN*)

Beacon Power had received federal loan guarantee to help build an energy storage plant in Stephentown, New York that began operating in January. The [Obama] Treasury Department’s Federal Financing Bank provided the loan.

* ACTUALLY, IT WAS THE POOR AMERICAN TAXPAYER WHO "PROVIDED" THE SQUANDERED LOAN. OBAMA'S TREASURY DEPARTMENT WAS SIMPLY THE MIDDLEMAN. (*SMIRK*)

The Beacon bankruptcy comes roughly two months after the California solar panel maker Solyndra, which had received a $535 million Energy Department (DOE) loan guarantee in 2009, went belly up and laid off 1,100 workers.

* WHAT'S THE NEXT SHOE TO DROP GONNA BE, I WONDER?

Solyndra and the broader loan guarantee program are under investigation in the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. “This latest failure is a sharp reminder that DOE has fallen well short of delivering the stimulus jobs that were promised, and now taxpayers find themselves millions of more dollars in the hole,” said Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-FL)...in a statement to The Hill and other outlets.

“The Department’s loan guarantee is for the project Stephentown Regulation Services, LLC, not the parent company, and the loan was set up in a way that ensures the Department is not directly exposed to the liabilities of the parent company,” Energy Department spokesman Damien LaVera said in an email Monday.

The department also sought to contrast the Beacon Power project and Solyndra, noting that Solyndra stopped manufacturing operations when it went bankrupt, while Beacon Power intends to continue operating the New York energy storage plant.

“It is important to note that this plant itself, which is operational and generating revenue, is a valuable collateral asset. In addition, under the terms of our loan guarantee agreement, Stephentown Regulation Services, LLC currently has cash reserves and proceeds from the plant that it was required to hold as collateral on the loan,” LaVera said.

The Energy Department also noted that the federal government retains its “senior status” for repayment in the loan agreement with Beacon Power.

* AH... BUT HERE'S THE PROBLEM, KIDS... (READ ON!)

Beacon’s bankruptcy filing lists assets of $72 million and debt of $47 million, according to Bloomberg.

* LEAVING ONLY $25 MILLION IN VALUE - PERIOD; BEST CASE! JUST THE TAXPAYER LOAN ALONE WAS FOR $43 MILLION!

* IN ANY CASE, LET'S NOT FORGET THE FOLLOWING:

The loan guarantee program was first authorized in a 2005 energy bill crafted under GOP control of Congress and signed into law by then-President Bush, and expanded under President Obama’s stimulus law.

* THAT SAID...

[The] first loan guarantees were not issued until the Obama administration took power.

October 31, 2011 at 1:03 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/10/31/politicos_martin_were_just_not_going_to_get_into_the_details_of_exactly_what_happened.html

Politico [hitman] Jonathan Martin, who co-wrote their [hit piece] on Herman Cain, told MSNBC this morning that he just isn't "going to get into the details" of what Cain allegedly said, did or "gestured."

(*SNORT*)

* FOLKS... DOESN'T THAT PRETTY MUCH TELL YOU EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO KNOW?

(*SNICKER*)

* ON A SERIOUS NOTE, THOUGH... WHAT HAVE I ALWAYS TOLD YOU GUYS ABOUT POLITICO? AND WHAT HAVE I BEEN SAYING ABOUT THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA?

* FOLKS... NOW MORE THAN EVER... YOU NEED NEWSBITES.

(*WINK*)

October 31, 2011 at 2:44 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/editorials/2011/10/foia-obama-wants-license-lie

It's not often that the liberal American Civil Liberties Union and conservative Judicial Watch agree on anything, but the Obama administration's lack of transparency has brought the two together.

Obama's Justice Department has proposed a regulatory change that would weaken the Freedom of Information Act.

* I COVERED THIS THE OTHER DAY, BUT IT'S AN IMPORTANT ISSUE DESERVING OF REPETITION.

Under the new rules, the government could falsely respond to those who file FOIA requests that a document does not exist if it pertains to an ongoing criminal investigation, concerns a terrorist organization, or a counterintelligence operation involving a foreign nation.

* NOW, FOLKS... I WANT YOU TO CONSIDER THIS BEFORE YOU READ ON: WHETHER YOU'RE "LEFT" OR "RIGHT," AS YOU CONTINUE READING ASK YOURSELF IF YOU'D THINK DIFFERENTLY IF IT WERE A REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATION TRYING TO DO THIS. I KNOW I WOULDN'T.

* WITH THAT IN MIND, I'D ALSO ASK THAT YOU CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING AS WELL:

Under FOIA's current national security exemption, bureaucrats can already deny access to documents without acknowledging their existence.

(*SHRUG*)

* A "NATIONAL SECURITY EXEMPTION" ALREADY EXISTS! IT EXISTED UNDER BUSH. IT WAS GOOD ENOUGH FOR BUSH! THINK ABOUT THAT! (OK... NOW READ ON...)

There are two problems with the Obama proposal to allow federal officials to affirmatively assert that a requested document doesn't exist when it does:

First, by not citing a specific exemption allowed under the FOIA as grounds for denying a request, the proposal would cut off a requestor from appealing to the courts. By thus creating an area of federal activity that is completely exempt from judicial review, the proposal undercuts due process and other constitutional protections.

Second, by creating a justification for government lying to FOIA requestors in one area, a legal precedent is created that sooner or later will be asserted by the government in other areas as well.

* I'D GUESS THAT'S EXACTLY CORRECT.

In instances where there is a legitimate grounds for not confirming a document's existence, "the agency should simply respond that 'we interpret all or part of your request as a request for records which, if they exist, would not be subject to the disclosure requirements of FOIA pursuant to section 552(c), and we therefore will not process that portion of your request.' This response requires no change to the current FOIA regulation."

* AND, AGAIN... HERE'S THE DEAL, KIDS:

Such a response would preserve a requestor's right to appeal to a federal court.

(*NOD*)

Chris Farrell, director of investigations and research for Judicial Watch, may have the answer for why the Obama administration wants the new liar's rule. Judicial Watch has been fighting the White House over a FOIA request for copies of its visitor logs. The White House insists, absurdly, that the documents are not theirs but belong to the Secret Service.

(*SNORT*)

"Every day," Farrell notes, "the Obama administration misrepresents and conceals the true, complete record of who is going in and out of the White House - all the while proclaiming themselves champions of transparency. It's truly Orwellian."

The proposed new rule could add a patina of legality to the refusal to acknowledge the existence of the visitors logs as White House documents.

* Hmm... VERY INTERESTING...

October 31, 2011 at 2:58 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.wyff4.com/r/29638219/detail.html

* SUBFILE UNDER: "BILL'S KINDA GUY!"

The Spartanburg South Carolina County Sheriff is known for speaking his mind, and at a news conference on Monday, he didn't hold back his anger and frustration after a woman was attacked in a park over the weekend.

Investigators said 46-year-old Walter Lance grabbed a woman who was walking her dog in Milliken Park on Sunday afternoon.

They said Lance choked the woman, made her take off her clothing and tried to rape her.

Lance is in custody and was denied bond on Monday.

Wright said Lance had been charged numerous times with crimes again women, and other crimes such as resisting arrest and escape.

Wright said Lance had been on probation for a federal gun charge.

* Hmm... DID LANCE EVER WORK FOR HOLDER'S "JUSTICE" DEPARTMENT?!

(*SNICKER*)

[The Sheriff'] referred to Lance repeatedly as an "animal," and expressed his disgust about Lance's long record and the attack. He said Lance "doesn't fight police or men folk - he just goes after women."

Wright said he knows "liberals don't think you can just keep people in jail," but that Lance "should not have the right or opportunity to violate a good, upstanding woman. "It's too bad someone with a concealed weapons permit didn't walk by. That would fix it."

He said people are tired of doing the right thing and criminals getting away with their actions. "This is a horrific crime … her life was threatened so many times."

"Our form of justice is not making it," and the Sheriff said, "I'm really aggravated." He [advised], "Carry a concealed weapon. That'll fix it."

October 31, 2011 at 3:12 PM
Mike D said...

"Going forward, anytime the American people want to know something that I or a former president wants to withhold, we will have to consult with the Attorney General and the white house counsel, whose business it is to ensure compliance with the rule of law. Information will not be withheld just because I say so; it will be withheld because a separate authority believes my request is well-grounded in the Constitution. Let me say it as simply as I can: transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency"


Condensed version - Information will not be withheld just because I say so, but rest assured, it will be withheld.

November 1, 2011 at 10:34 AM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)