Sunday, October 31, 2010
California cap and trade FAQ's show why hedge fund billionaires care so much about 'climate'
- A: All sales happen over-the-counter between buyers and sellers. At the moment there is no template contract for the sale or transfer of CRTs. However, we may develop one in the future. We are also in discussions with a major commodities exchange about allowing CRTs to be traded on their system."
- A: All project protocols contain provisions for verifying that projects registered with the Reserve comply with all local, state, and national regulations. Project developers are required to 1) sign a Regulatory Attestation that states the project is in compliance with all applicable regulations and 2) disclose specific regulations to which the project is subject. While verification bodies are not required to conduct a full regulatory audit as part of verification, they do use the information provided by the project developer and their professional expertise to assess the project’s regulatory compliance."
- A: Most projects require at least annual verification; the project developer may choose to verify more frequently. A project may be verified as soon as there are reduction tonnes to be verified. Some developers may choose to have their project verified when operations begin, just to make sure everything is being done correctly, but this is not required. The exception to this is for forest projects, which may not be verified sub-annually."
- "George Soros, the billionaire hedge fund operator, says money managers would find ways to manipulate cap-and-trade markets. “The system
- can be gamed,” Soros, 79, remarked.... “That’s why financial types like me like it -- because there are
- financial opportunities.”" from Bloomberg News, 12/4/09, "Carbon Capitalists Warming to climate market using derivatives" by Lisa Kassenaar
- Carbon markets are already the biggest profit centers at investment banks in Europe.
- Organized crime has found them easy markets to take over. The need to care for the environment should not be confused or hijacked by carbon trading profiteers.
Texas Rangers fan waves Texas flag, World Series game 3
Saturday, October 30, 2010
George and Laura Bush after Josh Hamilton home run
Ruling Class queen in Alaska spits up her caviar, middle class talk radio host at KFQD yanked after small tea party
About halfway through Fagan's show Thursday afternoon a caller phoned in to say he had just registered as a write-in candidate in the Senate race, which includes Miller, Murkowski, and Democrat Scott McAdams.
- The caller's provocation -- and the reason Fagan liked the idea -- was the Division of Elections' decision to provide voters who ask with a list of the write-in candidates. The Alaska Supreme Court is currently looking at the legality of that decision. Flooding that list with 150 names ranging from Michael Ames to Kathy Jo Zurek, Fagan figured, would mean fewer votes for Murkowski.
Fagan gave the addresses of the Anchorage and Wasilla offices of the Division of Elections and urged his listeners to drive over and register as write-in candidates.
- Branch Haymans, an Anchorage financial advisor, was angered by Fagan's show Thursday afternoon.
Haymans is a close friend of Murkowski's and has volunteered for her campaign, but is not part of her paid campaign staff.
On Friday morning, Haymans called KFQD and spoke with Joe Campbell, KFQD's program director. Haymans said he told Campbell
- that he thought Fagan's on-air behavior bordered on election tampering, but didn't threaten legal action or ask for Fagan to be taken off the air.
Campbell did not return a message requesting comment for this story.
"To send people with no legitimate reason other than to create confusion and chaos in an election seemed, to me, to be over the line," Haymans said. "He was no longer a talk show host. He was just a mouthpiece for Joe Miller."
Haymans also said that his phone call to KFQD was not coordinated with the Murkowski campaign in any way.
"If the campaign is having heartburn over Dan Fagan, they haven't told that to me and I haven't asked," he said.
- that he called KFQD to complain about Fagan's show Friday morning, and that he checked with the Murkowski campaign first.
Fagan said the station's general manager, Dennis Bookey, told him he was off the station Friday and they would evaluate the situation Monday.
- Diluting the list of write-in candidates isn't solely a conservative idea.
Kelly Walters, a McAdams supporter, walked into a polling place during early voting last week and was surprised and
- angry when an elections worker passed him a list of the write-in candidates after he asked for assistance.
- Walters said he e-mailed Fagan to ask him to tell his listeners to register as write-in candidates.
Walters helps with Moore's radio show and also co-created her weekly television show. On Thursday morning Walters faxed the Division of Elections his application to be a write-in candidate. But later that day, listening to Fagan on the air, Walters said he thought the conservative talk show host was taking the idea too far.
- "I thought he was over the top," Walters said. "It got to the point where I was questioning what I had done."
Walters said he had tried to convince Moore and popular liberal blogger Jeanne Devon to tell their listeners and readers to register as write-in candidates, but they both thought it was a bad idea.
- Fagan broadcasts on KFQD 750, which is owned by Morris Communications, a media company headquartered in Georgia.
"Bottom line is that Lisa Murkowski is a very powerful person, and she has succeeded in taking me off the air the Friday before the election," Fagan said. "It's impressive."
- Fagan is sure Murkowski is behind his getting yanked, but Murkowski campaign spokesman Steve Wackowski said they didn't have anything to do with it."
from Alaska Dispatch, 10/29, "Talk radio host off the air after rallying listeners to run for Senate," by Joshua Saul, photo above Alaska Dispatch
- "Trick or Treat Alaskan Style: Tea Party Takes Action," American Thinker, 10/29
- Ruling Class on its last legs. ed.
San Francisco Giants treat Chris 'Mad Dog' Russo as 'Mr. Giant'- did show from Willie McCovey suite -Neil Best
- returning from a triumphant week in San Francisco.
The famously passionate Giants fan said the city is far more “juiced up’’ than it was in 1989 and 2002 in part because the team’s postseason run has been such a surprise and in part because this is a more likable team than those.
- “It’s a cozy, nutty, ragamuffin, misfit team,’’ he said. “They gravitate to that kind of team.’’
Russo said call volume to his show has been heavy as listeners react to his excitement as the self-described “loudest’’ Giants fan in America.
- The team itself treated him during his stay as “Mr. Giant,’’ he said,
giving him access to A-list guests and setting him up to do his show from
- Willie McCovey’s personal suite.
“It’s a fun team,’’ Russo said. “They can taste it.’’"
This is Chris 'Mad Dog Russo', very big SF Giants fan, one day while working at WFAN radio in late summer of 2005 or 2006. His show along with Mike Francesa was simulcast on the YES Network (thus the video). Mike was on vacation so Chris was having some fun. He hates the Yankees and was hoping that by wearing a Yankee ski cap and doing a rant in the summer that he would jinx them into not making the post season. I obtained the above image from Neil Best's WatchDog column on August 8, 2007. Chris of course now has his own show on Sirius XM.Tweet Stumbleupon StumbleUpon
NY Times rescuer Carlos Slim among those with stranglehold on Mexico's struggling economy, likened to Enron executive
- is part of [what] sends Mexican migrants across the U.S. border looking for them."...
- "A Dubious Benefactor," American Journalism Review, April-May 2009, by S. Ricchiardi
- about Mexico's "robber barons," a label he had pinned on the country's superrich?
"I'm not going to talk to you about that," said Eduardo Porter, abruptly ending the conversation. His refusal to comment was understandable. The article he had written 18 months earlier suddenly had come back to haunt him and his bosses.
- When Porter wrote the opinion piece, he was responding to a seismic shift in the world's financial sector. Fortune magazine had just reported that
- knew the consequences of Slim's massive wealth.
- "There's the issue of theft," Porter wrote. "Mr. Slim's sin, if not technically criminal, is like that of [John D.] Rockefeller, the sin of the monopolist."
- likened the telecom mogul to a Russian oligarch or an Enron executive, hardly flattering comparisons.
Fast forward to January 2009.
Like other American firms that own newspapers, the venerable New York Times Co. faced plummeting advertising revenue and mounting debt. The cash-strapped company faced deadlines for paying back $1.1 billion over the next few years, with a $400 million credit line due to expire in May. On January 19, the Times Co. accepted a $250 million loan at 14 percent interest from a controversial billionaire who already owned a 6.9 percent stake in the company.
- The benefactor: Carlos Slim Helú.
Immediately, questions swirled about the propriety of the nation's leading newspaper getting a bailout from a much-criticized subject of its own news coverage.
The New York Post blasted the headline "'Robber Baron' saves the Times." In a January 25 story, the Post reported that Slim's critics said he has "expanded his riches in a poor country, where the minimum wage is 50 cents an hour, by charging excessively high telephone rates with his near monopoly." (In March, Slim slipped to third place in the wealth sweepstakes, with Warren Buffett in second and Gates back at the top. Although Slim remains Latin America's richest man, his fortune has dropped to an estimated $35 billion, another victim of the global economic downturn.)
- The industry was abuzz with the apparent conflict of interest.
In a January 20 article for Slate, Andrés Martinez, who served on the Times editorial board from 2000 to 2004, asked, "Will Slim now be referred to as a 'robber patron?'"
"Slim's investment will be a factor, even if unspoken, in editorial decision-making" at the Times, predicted Martinez, who served as editorial page editor of the Los Angeles Times from 2004 to 2007. Later, he wondered "whether the New York Times will have the same credibility as it once had in reporting on excessive wealth created by
- politically connected monopolists at home and overseas."
"Second-guessers will ask why the paper of record doesn't take a closer look at what its white knight, Mr. Slim, is up to in Mexico," he wrote.
Even if the Times doesn't neglect coverage, there could be the appearance of a conflict and conspiracy theories, Martinez told AJR. "The Times would never strike this deal with Bill Gates or other American tycoons. They wouldn't do it with a Russian oligarch or a Chinese billionaire. Why Carlos Slim?"
On January 20, Time magazine pointed out that the Times press release about the loan didn't mention previous controversies over Slim's operations. "Having Slim come to the rescue may be a bit of an embarrassment to The Times. His past business practices may be pristine, but there have been reasonable observations that they have not been," wrote Time's Douglas McIntyre, who noted that
- Slim would be a "perfect target for investigative reporters" if he were in the United States.
A January 26 editorial in the Seattle Times said what many in the industry were thinking: "The New York Times is not just a company, but an institution. It is a major player in American democracy.
It should not fall into the hands of a capitalist with loyalties to a foreign state."
The Times Co. declined requests for an interview about the company's connection to the Mexican billionaire. Catherine Mathis, senior vice president of corporate communications, wrote in an e-mail to AJR: "Our journalistic and business operations are independent of one another. No institutional shareholders have a say in the journalism of the New York Times."
- Slim's son-in-law and spokesman, Arturo Elias Ayub, declined a request for an interview with Slim or a family member for this story.
Warren Buffett and Bill Gates are the superstars of the global financial scene, drawing crowds and publicity wherever they tread. Until recently, the name "Carlos Slim" was not well-known in the United States.
Slim is the descendant of Lebanese emigrants who cast their lot in Mexico. His mother, whose parents arrived in the late 19th century, was born in Mexico.
- His father, Julian Slim Haddad, moved to Mexico in 1902 and made a fortune as a merchant and in real estate.
- When he died, Julian Slim left his six children well heeled.
Carlos Slim operated under the radar until he entered the telecom business in 1990 during Mexico's push to privatize state monopolies. That year, he won voting control of the state-owned phone company, Teléfonos de México, which he renamed Telmex, for $1.7 billion. Slim had a knack for being in the right place at the right time
- with the right powerful friends.
In his August 2007 Times column, Porter noted that in 1990, the government of President Carlos Salinas de Gortari sold Slim the national phone company,
- "along with a de facto commitment to maintain its monopoly for years."
Then the government awarded him the only nationwide cell phone license, Porter wrote.
Only a handful of American journalists have spent time with the 69-year-old Slim. On August 4, 2007, the Wall Street Journal published a highly detailed profile under the headline "The Secrets of the World's Richest Man," by Latin America bureau chief David Luhnow. The piece outlined the economic impact Slim had on
- his poverty-stricken homeland and noted that
between 2005 and 2007, he made an unimaginable $27 million a day while a fifth of Mexico's population got by on less than $2 a day.
Luhnow reported that Slim's fortune grew "faster than any in the world" during those two years, swelling from more than $20 billion to about $60 billion. His companies account for 7 percent of Mexico's annual economic output, Luhnow said.
In February, Luhnow talked about his impressions of Slim after four or five interviews over the years. "He is a genius monopolist. He is an incredibly smart, hard-working, driven guy who wants every bit of money he can get. The problem is, he was doing it in a country where the state wasn't strong enough to stop him. I admire the guy on one hand, but totally disapprove of what he's done."
In his story, Luhnow describes a chatty, friendly man with a quick temper and strict sense of thrift. Slim is "an insomniac who stays up late reading history" and likes to study "[Genghis] Khan and his deceptive military strategies." He is a business tycoon who prefers pen and paper to computers and doesn't travel widely.
- An avid New York Yankees fan who could build palaces anywhere in the world, Slim "proudly says he owns no homes outside of Mexico." (No longer true, bought 5th Ave. mansion in Manhattan, ed.)
So, what does Slim own? According to Luhnow's piece, "it's hard to spend a day in Mexico and not put money in [Slim's] pocket." Beyond his iron grip on telecommunications, he controls more than 200 companies — he told Luhnow he had lost count — in several areas. Across the border, he has bought an interest in Citigroup and in the luxury retailer Saks Fifth Avenue, among other holdings.
- The day after the Journal profile ran, Luhnow was summoned to Slim's office.
He found the billionaire sitting with the article in front of him heavily underlined in red.
- Slim insisted they go through it line by line
so he could point out what he considered to be unfair, incorrect or based on misunderstandings.
"This took around two hours; he was very thorough. When he finished, he said in Spanish, 'You harbor ill will against me,' and he wanted to know why I had it in for him," Luhnow recalls. "I said, 'Honestly, I don't. But you're a monopolist, and I think all monopolies are bad.'" Slim appeared unfazed by Luhnow's comments.
- "I genuinely can't figure out whether he's incredibly cynical or genuinely believes what he says. He will defend it to the hilt," says the bureau chief, who was born in Mexico and has been with the Journal since 2000.
Journalists invited into the inner sanctum often are struck by what Stephanie Mehta, an assistant managing editor at Fortune, called the "juxtaposition of austerity and wealth."
"Just by looking at him, you would never know he is a billionaire," says Tim Padgett, Time magazine's Miami and Latin America bureau chief. Forbes reporter Helen Coster had a similar reaction when she spent time interviewing Slim for a lengthy profile.
In her March 26, 2007, story, Coster said Slim's office has a bookshelf with works about other billionaire superstars — Buffett, Rockefeller and J. Paul Getty, to name a few. On that same shelf, Slim kept five ledgers from his childhood. Each Sunday, his father would give his son a 5-peso allowance, requiring him to meticulously record each expenditure....
- Coster began working the Mexico beat for Forbes in 2005. For two years, she prodded sources to get her an interview with Slim, with no luck. Then suddenly, through what she describes as "some very roundabout channels," he agreed to meet.
"I had a sense that he knew he would soon be in the international spotlight and wanted to tell his story," says Coster, who spent four hours with Slim and his family in his Mexico City office.
She found him "incredibly gracious, very unassuming and personable." During the interview, Slim made a point of telling the reporter he was unaffected by what his critics were saying. "When you live for others' opinions, you are dead. I don't want to live thinking about how I'll be remembered," he told her.
Coster's instincts about why he finally agreed to an interview appeared on target. Slim was named the world's richest man a few months after her story ran, setting off a media explosion. Mehta was already pursuing a story about the Slim family when he dethroned Gates. Like Coster, she wrote about his lack of self-aggrandizement.
- During a visit to the headquarters of Inbursa, Slim's financial business, Mehta was led to a room that was "a bit shabby... poorly lit and [smelling] faintly of cigarettes" but also filled with valuable art. There was an ordinary folding table in the middle. "Mr. Slim sometimes likes to eat his lunch here," son-in-law Elias told her.
In her August 2007 piece, Mehta wrote that "anyone expecting to find monuments to the Slim financial empire in Mexico City — a gleaming TelMex tower jutting out of the skyline or an América Móvil stadium — would leave disappointed. In fact, América Móvil, Latin America's largest provider of wireless services, is housed in a converted tire factory."
- "He's a very thrifty guy," says Mehta, who spent time with one of his sons but interviewed Slim only by telephone.
One of Mehta's sources was George W. Grayson, a Latin America expert at the College of William and Mary, who she said "coined the term 'Slimlandia' to describe how entrenched the Slim family's companies are in the daily life of Mexicans." How did he come up with that label?
"There was no epiphany," Grayson told AJR. "It's just that one can eat meals in a restaurant owned by Slim, make calls via his phone company, purchase insurance sold by his company, bank at a facility that he owns, go to work in a building that belongs to him, etc. In other words, you can spend your life in a Slim bubble."
That could explain why not all Mexicans are cheerleaders for Carlos Slim. Time magazine's Tim Padgett reported in an April 14, 2007, article that
Mexico's "archaic system of monopolies and oligopolies" helps to keep nearly half its population in poverty. How does that happen?
"By choking oxygen away from the rest of the economy," Padgett wrote. In his story, he noted that while U.S. authorities have "thwarted Gates' subjugation of the PC software business in recent years, Mexico has done precious little to rein in ubiquitous business empires like Slim's," which control industries from "telecom to tobacco."
A review of Slim's holdings over the years shows that he became rich by being a good bargain hunter, buying up weak companies. He has a gift for spotting undervalued investments and making them profitable. Case in point: The Wall Street Journal reported that from 2002 to 2004, he amassed a 13 percent stake in bankrupt carrier MCI, later selling it to Verizon Communications Inc. for a stunning $1.3 billion. Reuters reported that Slim stood to gain as much as $900 million from the deal....
For the past two-and-a-half years, Mexican business writer Eduardo Garcia has produced a quarterly feature called Slim Watch, tracking the tycoon's fortune and business practices. He posts the column on his online financial publication Sentido Común.
- "Nobody knows this subject better than Eduardo," Padgett says.
Mexicans have mixed feelings about Slim. On one hand, they take pride that one of their own has become such a standout in the international financial arena. At the same time, they are
- painfully aware that his wealth comes from monopolistic practices.
They know they pay a lot more for the basics, such as telephone service, because of Slim.
"They are frustrated that one man can amass such a large fortune at the expense of the rest," says Garcia, who was bureau chief in Mexico City for Bloomberg News before striking out on his own seven years ago.
Garcia says experts believe Slim's companies account for one-third of all advertising dollars spent in Mexico,
- effectively silencing many detractors
who fear the repercussions of tossing pebbles at a giant.
His companies are major advertisers in both print and broadcast media in Mexico. "It is not healthy for a nation to have someone with that much power," Garcia says.
He explains that Mexican consumers during the past 15 years have paid some of the highest telephone rates in the world, for both fixed-line and mobile calls, transferring vast amounts of wealth to Slim. Businesses pay large telecom fees, leaving them with fewer resources to plow back into their companies. "When companies invest, there is more job creation and there is more economic growth.
- Monopolies [like Slim's] often cap the growth potential of their industries and their country's economy," Garcia says.
Exactly how did Carlos Slim amass his fortune?
According to an Associated Press story, Slim's critics accuse him of running "ruthless monopolies that illegally block competitors."
Rivals or regulators who dare take him on find themselves lavishly outspent, facing a
- barrage of legal hurdles that can drag on for years in court.
Over the years, he has been dogged by criticism for chumming up to political elites like former Mexican President Salinas de Gortari, a family friend, to grease the skids for business deals.
By 26, Slim had already accumulated $400,000 in wealth from his business ventures and from his mother (his father died when Slim was 13). Forbes' Coster reported that Slim obtained a degree in civil engineering and had a keen eye for "unloved assets." He took a scattershot approach to buying businesses. "There was no overarching strategy except to make a profit," Coster wrote in March 2007.
Today, he profits from the goods and services basic to the daily lives of Mexicans. In his April 2007 story, Time's Padgett asserts that Bill Gates' "fortune is part of an engine that creates jobs; Slim's, say critics,
- is part of [what] sends Mexican migrants across the U.S. border looking for them."
Denise Dresser, a political science professor at the Autonomous Technological Institute of Mexico — and one of Slim's staunchest critics — repeatedly points out how his dominant position in the telecommunications market
- has sapped economic growth from her country.
"There are so few outspoken critics of him in Mexico, I can count them on one hand. His critics are portrayed as grumpy, strident people who just don't get that he's a nice guy," Dresser says. "The issue is not whether he's evil or good. The issue is the way what he's doing is holding Mexico back" by blocking healthy competition.
Dresser says one of his companies has interfered with her work. She co-authored a satire on Mexican politics that was published in April 2006. Dresser says Sanborns, a retail chain Slim owns, asked the publisher to send page proofs referring to Slim before it came out.
- The critical passages, Dresser says, kept the book out of Sanborns until a boycott convinced the company to carry it....
She doesn't place all the blame on Slim. She views him as the product of a Mexican governmental system that paved the way for monopolies like Telmex and other fiefdoms run by the country's superrich at the expense of average citizens. She reasons that the state helped create his monopoly and allows him to keep control of a key area of the economy without forcing him to compete fairly.
"It's the Mexican government's fault out of weakness, out of corruption, complicity, and lately out of fear because he's become so powerful," Dresser says. "When you talk to government regulators here, they will say things like, 'Oh well, we'll have to wait until he dies, then maybe we can regulate his sons.'"
Slim has recently turned much of his business operation over to his three sons and increased his philanthropic efforts, including contributing $100 million to former President Bill Clinton's charitable foundation to fight poverty in Latin America.
The New York Times' Elisabeth Malkin reported in June 2007 that Slim pledged to increase the endowments of his companies' foundation from $4 billion to $10 billion over the next four years. Slim told her there would be no ceiling on his donations.
"He has granted several interviews in his office, which is tucked above a branch of his bank and down the hall from a gallery showing works from his collection of European and Mexican art," Malkin wrote. "The interviews, and a four-hour news conference in March, seem to be part of an effort to soften his robber baron reputation." During the interview, Slim was unabashed about his fortune. Instead, he told Malkin, wealth is "like an orchard, a fruit tree. You have to distribute the fruit, not the branch. You have to plant more seeds to create more wealth."
Slim's rescue of the Times Co. invests some of that fortune in both his business and his image. "It gets him respect, prestige, and it is a very cheap way for him to get a foothold in an arena that interests him," Dresser says.
But what does his investment really mean? Does his $250 million foothold plus the 6.9 percent he already owned in the Times Co. signal that Slim has designs on arguably the world's most important newspaper?
No one can say for sure, but should Slim decide he wants a world-class media jewel in his crown, former newspaper editor Alan Mutter offers a formula for how it might happen.
In a January 20 entry on his Reflections of a Newsosaur blog, he explained that the loan to the Times Co. not only nets Slim the hefty 14 percent annual interest rate but also enables him to buy enough stock in the company to more than double his stake to 17 percent of its common shares. Slim has earned the right to "a detailed view of the company's finances" and "to put the screws" to the newspaper "the minute it violates any of the terms of the loan," wrote Mutter, former deputy editor of the San Francisco Chronicle.
He reported that "after the company's operating profits fell by 38% in the first nine months of 2008, NYT was forced ... to cut its dividend by three-quarters," a huge blow to the "Ochs-Sulzberger family members who own the super-voting shares that control the company." Their collective annual stipend was trimmed to less than $7 million from $28 million.
Mutter paints this scenario: "If the newspaper business continues to deteriorate, NYT would be forced to choose between making further cuts in the dividend or making substantial reductions in the ample resources still afforded the flagship newspaper." That could lead to a fight "between the family members who want to preserve what's left of their dividends and those who want to maximize resources" to keep the Times a world-class newspaper.
The Times has stressed in news articles that Slim would have no representation on the company's board or any shares with special voting rights. But if Slim exercises the warrants he holds from the loan, he will be among the largest single shareholders in the Times Co., owning up to 17 percent of the common shares outstanding; family members hold a total equity stake of 19 percent and wield control through special voting shares, reported Times writer Eric Dash.
Veteran Slim watchers like Eduardo Garcia don't see him in the role of media mogul. According to Garcia, Slim's investment in the Times fits neatly the business model he has practiced for many years. He spots a company in financial trouble, analyzes it and recognizes profit potential. He buys shares on the market to own a stake, and then lends resources to get the company back on its feet. His share prices then go up, he makes money off the interest on the loan and can sell at a profit.
"I see this totally as a business deal," Garcia says. "I don't think his motivation is to own the newspaper. With him, investments come first, reputation second."
Arturo Elias Ayub has been quoted in news reports saying his father-in-law is not interested in meddling in the world-renowned newspaper's coverage. Slim called his investment in the Times Co. a good business move, not a foray into journalism, according to the AP.
But questions of journalism are at the heart of this move for the New York Times."...
Tweet Stumbleupon StumbleUpon
Mayor Ed Koch and Yankees best exemplify NY-Wall St. Journal poll
- But wait—it gets worse for the Amazin' Mets. Even voters in Queens, the Mets' home base, gave the team the Bronx salute. According to the poll, 52% of Queens voters picked the Yankees, while only 13% chose the Mets.
So, who is the most quintessential New Yorker? Former Mayor Ed Koch topped that list, with 20% support, followed by Mr. Giuliani, with 18%."...
- "New Yorkers' picks to take a hike," WSJ, 10/29, M.H. Saul, via John Batchelor show
Friday, October 29, 2010
Rich guys gone wild-James Cameron and Google chief say it's criminal not to buy their version of global warming
The two made the comments during a recent on stage conversation at a private event in Silicon Valley.
“If that continues, business as usual as our leaders in Washington say is OK for us to do, we will have extincted 70% of the species on the planet by the end of the century.” Cameron responded to Schmidt’s line of discussion on global warming.
During the same conversation Schmidt stated,
- “There are people who in my view
- criminally doubt some of the science.”
- “I agree, criminally, I agree with that.” Cameron interjected.
“People, we need to evolve mentally and philosophically to something that has never existed before.” the Avatar director continued.
- “We need to become techno-indigenous people of an entire Earth, not of a nation, not of a state, but of a planet.”
- as admitted recently by both Professor Phil Jones, the figure at the head of the Climategate scandal, as well as one of the most prominent AGW advocate groups in existence, The Royal Society,
you should be locked up.
Presumably the two would want to see thousands and thousands of scientists have their rights taken away and their freedoms eliminated, for merely expressing disagreement or dissent with the much lauded, rarely present “consensus”.
- After all, questioning hypotheses and presenting counter-evidence and alternative theories has nothing at all to do with science – no no no, that’s the behaviour
- of morally corrupt criminals.
Cameron is of course, another green celebrity hypocrite. The man owns three large houses in Malibu, totaling 24,000 square feet – ten times the average US home. He also owns a 100 acre ranch in Santa Barbara and numerous private luxuries such as helicopters, Harley motorbikes, super cars, a yacht, and even a fleet of submarines. Nevertheless he demands that we all “live with less” because it is us that are responsible for killing the planet.
- Earlier this year, Cameron said he wanted to debate the “deniers”, but then pulled out at the last minute even after the “criminals” agreed to endless dubious stipulations he kept demanding, such as no recording of the debate and no media coverage.
Cameron has also just given $1m to help defeat California’s Prop23 which will overturn the Global Warming Bill, legislation that critics have argued would cause unemployment to sky rocket, effectively killing dead the already crippled economy.
- One wonders what punishments Cameron and Schmidt have in mind for global warming denying criminals? Perhaps execution, in line with the recent 10/10 propaganda campaign."
from PrisonPlanet.com by Steve Watson, "James Cameron and Google CEO: Questioning warming science is "criminal," via Tom Nelson
- Foreign interference in our elections was supposed to be bad.
Bud Selig MLB PAC 2010 election cycle, 66% to democrats, 32% to republicans
- OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE
- Location: WASHINGTON, DC 20036"
- (66% to Democrats, 32% to Republicans) $344,000)
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Saudi Prince Alwaleed says Ground Zero mosque must relocate
- In his first public comments on the issue, he said: “I heard and saw a lot of news about me being associated with it and this is all wrong. We did not finance this thing.
“I say that I am against putting the mosque in that particular place. And I’ll tell you why. For two reasons: first of all, those people behind the mosque have to respect, have to appreciate and have to defer to the people of New York, and not try to agitate the wound by saying 'we need to put the mosque next to the 9/11 site'.
"The wound is still there. Just because the wound is healing you can’t say 'let’s just go back to where we were pre-9/11'," he said.
- “I am against putting the mosque there out of respect for those people who have been wounded over there.”
Prince Alwaleed added: “More importantly, the mosque is not in the best location, the mosque has to be in a dignified location. It can’t be next to a bar or a strip club, or in a neighbourhood that is not really refined and good. The impression I have is that this mosque is just being inserted and squeezed over there.
- So I am personally against putting the mosque over there…"
"I believe that Christians have the right to build churches where they want and Jews have the right to put synagogues where they want and Muslims have the right to put a mosque where they want. But you have to take care and respect the dignity of those New Yorkers who have been hit badly.
- Ten years ago is nothing when you talk about history.”
Several US news organizations claimed earlier this month that the prince had been involved in funding the construction of the mosque.
- In the interview, the prince argued that the wounds of the twin terror attacks could take up to 30 years to heal....
“I don’t want to exaggerate and say things are falling apart, they are not. Most governments are pragmatic, most people are logical. There are pockets of extremism in Israel, in the US and in the Muslim world. But we have to fight them with reason, with logic and with compassion. We can’t just say ‘go to hell,’ we cannot do that.”
- *The full interview with HRH will be published at 8am UAE time on Sunday 31 October on www.arabianbusiness.com."...
10/28, "World Exclusive: Prince Alwaleed 'against' Ground Zero mosque," Arabian Business Journal, by A. Bhoyrol
Comments to article at ArabianBusiness.com
"Posted by: arabgirl Thursday, 28 October 2010 6:22 PM[UAE] - uae
Well said. Its construction will be like a reminder for what had happened in 9/11/ It's not the place to build a mosque at all. There are lots of mosques in NYC anyway, but building one in the twin tower area is actually 'an insult' to the dead. We should be sensitive to the memory of the tragedy. I'm a muslim woman.Posted by: jb Thursday, 28 October 2010 5:30 PM[UAE] - UAE
Now I know why he is the best boss in the Gulf region. He certainly is a wise man. No wonder he can get the best from the people working from him...My great respect to you sir..."
photo from ArabianBusiness.com
Tweet Stumbleupon StumbleUpon
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Mexico town's entire 14 man police force quits amid Calderon failure to stem violence
How "journalists" at NY Daily News represented Cliff Lee's statements a greater cause for concern than a few drunks at the Stadium-Neil Best
- and what the Daily News' headline turned it into -
- than about a few drunk yahoos at Yankee Stadium
- as I weigh my free agency options.
- Just sayin'....
- "World Series to go on as planned despite absence of Yankees," from Neil Best Watchdog, Newsday, 10/27/10
Looks like MLB Network Radio has job openings if you want to work in the Beltway
- Sirius XM Radio - Washington, DC
- SIRIUS XM Radio is America's satellite radio company delivering to subscribers commercial-free music channels, premier sports, news, talk, entertainment, and traffic and weather.
- XM Radio - Washington, DC
- Associate Producer, MLB Job ID: 5749 Location: US-DC-Washington Pos. Type: Regular - ... facility * Must have working knowledge of MLB Requirements and General Skills: *...
- Sirius - Washington, DC
- Producer, MLB Job ID: 5637 Location: US-DC-Washington Pos. Type: Regular - Full-Time ... to meet broadcast deadlines * Work with Associate Producer(s) to gather work parts...
- Work In Sports - Washington, DC
- team to create superior radio programs for MLB Home Plate. Supports creative processes, ... facility Must have working knowledge of MLB Requirements and General Skills:..."
WPA career post season leaders per Sean Forman
- Career WPA leaders in post season as of 10/26:
- Mariano Rivera 11.185
- Curt Schilling 4.105
- John Smoltz 3.591
- Andy Pettitte 3.364
- Orel Hershiser 2.836"
- from NY Times Bats Blog by Sean Forman, "Keeping Score: Which players have made the bisggest impact?" 10/26/10
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
California's 12.4% unemployment can set the pace for much worse as a deformed society of lemmings is piously predisposed to punishment
- to question a deformed society or re-examine its underlying myths.
- predisposed by his pious culture and primed now for discipline and sacrifice."...
- Reference: From "Opposing Views on Global Warming: The Corporate Climate Climate Coup," by Prof. David F. Noble, 5/4/07, Toronto:
stood in front of the giant jumbotron,
an electronic extravaganza, encircled by a ring of dancing corporate logos and advertising,
- and exhorted every person in the crowd, preposterously, to go out and
- buy an energy-efficient light bulb.
- They applauded."...
- in the midst of the world-wide global justice movement,
- it has restored confidence in those very faiths and forces which that movement had
- worked so hard to expose and challenge:
- globe-straddling profit-maximizing corporations and
- their myriad agencies and agendas."...
NPR taxpayer subsidies closer to 29%, Corp. for Public Broadcasting gives $90 million to stations-Slate
- when it changed its name from National Public Radio to NPR....
- only about 2 percent of its $161.8 million annual budget from
- The biggest source of NPR revenues, the network states,
- "comes from program fees and station dues
- paid by member stations that broadcast NPR programs." On average, those program fees and dues account for about
- 41 percent of NPR's revenues.
But where do the member stations get their loot? As Tim Graham of the Media Research Center wrote in 2008, "NPR receives substantial money from the CPB—through member stations," a fact that can be easily gleaned on the NPR Web site. In Fiscal Year 2008, NPR acknowledges on its site,
- CPB funds accounted for 10.1 percent of all public-radio-station revenue.
The New York Times puts the dollar amount of CPB largesse to local stations at about $90 million.
- In what looks suspiciously like money laundering, the feds give money to CPB,
- CPB gives $90 million of it to member stations,
- and the local stations give a chunk of it
- to NPR.
- another 5.8 percent of their revenues from federal, state, and local government.
- Universities, many publicly supported, chip in another 13.6 percent.
- could be as high as 29 percent.
- obviously higher than 2 percent...
Republican threats (to defund NPR) never go anywhere...because the GOP's primary goal is to "whip" the networks into line, not to defund them. NPR and PBS have been such useful campaign targets for Republicans that if they didn't exist, the Republicans would have to invent them."...
- 10/25, "The best way to end Republican meddling with NPR: Kill it, and let it be reborn," Slate, Jack Shafer, via RadioDailyNews