The Fulcrum

Friday, October 15, 2004

Disobeying Direct Orders in Iraq 

Thanks to regular reader oddjob for pointing out this story over at AmericaBlog. Seems an entire supply platoon refused to run a "suicide mission" and is under detention - without access (so far) to a JAG lawyer. This is more of the same from this goddam quagmire.

Check out the whole story here.


Thursday, October 14, 2004

Our Steadfast Allies 

This is a must-read article in today's New York Times. Seems that Saudis, from the truck driver to the princes, are becoming more and more angry with America. Do they hate our freedoms? No. Seems they're not at all happy with our policies on Israel and Palestine and our invasion-gone-bad in Iraq.

Seventeen months into a shadowy terror campaign that has killed more than 100 people, numerous Saudis express less anger at the insurgents than at the United States for its invasion of Iraq, the signal event that they say touched off the attacks inside the kingdom.

In interviews over the last week, the Saudis condemned the terror attacks, aimed primarily at foreigners, but called them a small inconvenience that has not forced them to make significant changes in their daily lives. By contrast, they expressed unremitting disdain for the United States.
How long before these feelings bubble up into the palace? How long will the House of Saud continue to publicly support the US? What happens then?

More bitter fruit from the caustic, ethnocentric foreign policies of BushCo. and their friends, the NeoCon nitwits.


Democracy Still on the March in Iraq 

In case the debates have taken your mind off of Bush's biggest accomplishment, things are going just great in Iraq. The Green Zone, the safest spot in all of Baghdad is the shining jewel in the crown of Iraqi democracy.

In a brazen attack that punctured any illusions of a safe haven in the capital, five people, including three American civilians, were killed today when two separate explosions were set off inside the heavily controlled Green Zone in central Baghdad.


Why the "Market" Shouldn't Have a Hand in Health Care 

Here is the Republicans' beloved "market" (WSJ - subscription) doing its thing in health care:

Florida's attorney general, responding to complaints that some suppliers of flu vaccine are raising prices amid the severe shortage of shots, filed a lawsuit alleging that a Fort Lauderdale, Fla., drug distributor attempted to sell the vaccine for as much as 10 times its normal price.

The lawsuit comes amid a scramble across the country to find suddenly scarce flu shots before they run out.

[snip]

In a survey by the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, more than half of 677 hospital pharmacists said they had been contacted during the past week by distributors offering flu vaccine at four to 10 times the regular price, the trade group said. Some pharmacists reported that distributors were charging at least $800 for a 10-dose vial of flu vaccine [normal price is $63 to $85 a vial - ed.]. More than 80% of the pharmacists in the survey said they wouldn't buy the vaccine at inflated prices, even though three-fourths said they don't have as many doses as they need.


Health Care Costs 

If you wonder where all that money that disappears into health care is going - and why for more money you get less coverage - you need only look as far as the latest earnings reports from insurance providers:

The biggest health insurer in the U.S. today said its net income climbed to $698 million, or $1.04 a share, compared with $476 million, or 77 cents a share, in the year-earlier period. The latest results reflect a tax benefit of one cent a share.

[snip]

Revenue rose 36% to $9.86 billion from $7.24 billion, led by growth in revenue generated from premiums, which increased to $8.92 billion from $6.4 billion.
There are dozens of large health insurance providers and none of them are having financial problems right now.

If you wonder why a Republican lead Congress, with the putative assistance of a Republican President, will not address the issue to the benefit of consumers, or if you wonder why Republicans insist on "market forces" controlling costs in the health insurance field, you need only look as far as the latest earnings reports from insurance providers; who just happen to love donating to Republicans.


Wednesday, October 13, 2004

Kerry Eats Babies 

That's what a sign said behind Wolf Blitzer just a few moments ago.

That's what I love about American politics; such intelligent discussion about important issues.


Bush to Join The Producers 

Tonight was clear evidence that enough rehearsal can almost make a silk purse from a pig's ear. By the third debate, one would hope that the President could answer most questions without stuttering or pausing in dead silence. There were still a few moments of silence, but not as long as they were. There were still a few stammers and stutters, but not like before. Bush knew at least some points pertaining to every question.

But I found him unbelievable; well rehearsed but without belief in his own answers. Even those things that he said that he likely really believes sounded as though he didn't. Like the multiple times he tried to link Kerry to Ted Kennedy or called him a "Senator from Massachusetts" (although that was probably rehearsed as "the liberal Senator).

Kerry performed almost exactly as he has throughout these debates; obviously well informed and knowledgeable and somewhat flat. He came through as likeable enough at times, but he's got such a dry sense of humor and is just so intelligent that I think it's difficult for him to come across as overly friendly.

But I do not believe you need to like the President. You need to trust him.

So the debates are over. Kerry, through his performance and easy knowledge closed a large gap in the polls to enter this last debate in a dead tie with G.W. That's an impressive performance by any standard. If he gets a decent lead from this, one even outside the margin of error, there is a very good chance for him to hold that lead into the election. That will bode very well for a country in need of a change.


Unsurprising... 

I suppose cynicism is the only true defense against the news these days. I heard yesterday on NPR that Congress had passed a huge tax break bill for businesses. It was so bent towards giving business what they wanted that it defined the baristas at Starbucks as "manufacturers." Our Republican Congress was so intent on giving business campaign contributors what they wanted that the bill goes into the definition of what a gourmet chef is and that his efforts to create a sausage defines him as a manufacturer and gives his business access to manufacturing tax breaks.

The sell - publicly at least - was that these tax breaks would be used to help ensure that these companies could begin hiring again. That was yesterday. Today, we get this headline in the Wall Street Journal (subscription):

Tax Windfall May Not Boost
Hiring Despite Claims
Surprised? No... me neither.

So just what will these corporations do with this election year windfall? Do you really need to ask?

Big companies long lobbied for a tax cut on their overseas profit as a way to spur U.S. job growth. But now that it has been granted, much of the windfall won't go toward hiring but for such uses as strengthening balance sheets, buying back shares and making acquisitions.

The one-year break, included in a sweeping tax bill that cleared the Senate and went to the president this week, will allow hundreds of billions of dollars in overseas profit to be brought home by dozens of U.S. companies at a steeply reduced tax rate. By some estimates, U.S. companies have parked as much as $500 billion in profit abroad to avoid taxes back home.
And what about those overseas profits? Repatriating them should provide a revenue benefit to the treasury - one that's badly needed. But will it? Do you really need to ask?

Companies say the repatriated money, which would be taxed at a 5.25% rate instead of 35%, will provide stimulus and better position them for hiring in the long run. Software company Oracle Corp., for instance, likely will use some of the billions it will bring home to help finance its aggressive acquisition strategy. Computer maker Hewlett-Packard Co. says it may devote a substantial portion of the several billion dollars it plans to bring back to paying down debt from its purchase of Compaq Computer Corp. -- a transaction that led to layoffs.

[snip]

Last week, Treasury Secretary John Snow wrote that an analysis by the Council of Economic Advisers "indicates that the repatriation provision would not produce any substantial economic benefits." Allen Sinai, the Wall Street economist who was one of the bill's biggest backers, says he thinks the bill might create only 50,000 jobs annually for the next few years, far lower than the 500,000 figure that some politicians have invoked while citing his work.
Did you really need to ask?


We Were On a Break! 

You've probably noticed that I haven't been posting so much lately. This past weekend was Canadian Thanksgiving, so we were in Canada with my wife's family for three days; through Monday. Work has been crazy and seems like it's going to stay that way for a while. All that's to say that posting is going to be light for some time.

I'm not going away, I'm not going to stop posting, but you might not hear from me quite as often as you have lately.

I hope you'll keep coming by and leave comments, and most of all I hope you'll visit lots of those fine blogs in my blogroll. Thank you!


Stuff

Politics
Move On


Previous Posts

Google

Web The Fulcrum
Free Google Page Rank Checker

TTLB Ecosystem

Bloggers Parliament
Bloggers Parliament

Issues and Google Bombs
visit LIBERAL FORUM

Shopping

Directories

Site Stuff

Creative Commons License

The Fulcrum Archives

Refering Sites

Who Links to Me