The Truth Be Told: 05/29/15

Friday, May 29, 2015

The Daily Drift

Hey, wingnuts, yeah we're talking to you ...!

The Truth Be Told is read in 203 countries around the world.

Even this bat knows better than to trust Republicans ... !

Today is - Bats Day

Don't forget to visit our sister blog Carolina Naturally

Some of our readers today have been in:

The Americas

Argentina - Brazil - Canada - Colombia - Ecuador - Mexico - Nicaragua - Puerto Rico

Sint Eustatius/Saba - United States

Europe

Albania - Belgium - Bosnia/Herzegovina - Bulgaria - Czech Republic - England - France - Germany

Greece - Iceland - Ireland - Italy - Latvia - Moldova - Netherlands - Poland - Portugal - Romania - Russia Serbia - Scotland - Slovenia - Spain - Sweden - Ukraine - Wales

Asia

Bahrain - China - India - Indonesia - Israel - Japan - Jordan - Malaysia - Pakistan - Saudi Arabia

Africa

Madagascar - South Africa - Tunisia

The Pacific

Australia - Philippines

Do not call me girl

Women in the workforce

by Susan Grigsby
An African American woman working at her desk

Years ago, when my career depended on my being so much better at what I did than were the men I worked with, and my willingness to work twice as hard for 60.2 percent of their salary, I was forced to walk a very fine line between my feminist principles and my need for that truncated paycheck. I loved the work though; I was thrilled to be paid to analyze the physical and financial aspects of a business and to make a decision. Someone was actually willing to pay me to think. And to deal with abstract concepts, like finance and contracts and tort law. Heady stuff for one who was raised in an era when few women worked outside the home.
Even in my early twenties, I knew that the words we used shaped the way we think. Back before it was called politically correct, when it was merely seen as respect, we stopped referring to adult African American males as boys. But even the most liberal men of that era still referred to women as girls.
One day, up on that tenuous tightrope upon which the first woman in a man's job had to balance, I had a discussion with my boss, a Berkeley graduate working in San Francisco, about the word girl. Politely, with humor and a winning smile, I suggested that referring to an adult in the terms of childhood diminished her standing in his eyes. That it was not possible to see the professional woman when he was thinking of her as a child, as "less than" an adult member of his team. I remember saying that of course, it was his right to use whatever language he felt was appropriate, but that I did wish he would at least think about the word and what it implied, when he was using it.
Today, I am no longer in need of a paycheck issued by a man, so I can say it flat out, "Do not call me 'girl.' " I am not a child, and it doesn't matter how many women use the term to describe each other or themselves. It is inappropriate to label an adult as a child in any professional setting. Or in any discussion of adults in a professional setting.
The reason this needs to be said now, is that we are likely to nominate the first woman as president of the United States within the next year. We have to be prepared for the backlash that is sure to come, just as our black sisters and brothers have had to deal with the backlash created by the election of the first black president of the United States.

Last week Laura Clawson reported that there were United States congressmen who would not allow a female staff member to accompany them to evening events, be alone in a car with them or in a closed door, one-on-one, meeting.

As a result, women are kept out of important meetings and kept from developing the kind of professional relationships that are so crucial to advancing on Capitol Hill. Not because they've done anything wrong, just because someone might think it looks bad. These policies are in a minority of congressional offices, but they're also not a one-off thing. Such policies are discriminatory and illegal—yet they're coming from members of Congress tasked with making the law. Talk about inspiring absolutely no confidence.

Someone suggested that this illegal, discriminatory behavior was to protect the man from a sexual harassment claim. That intrigued my curiosity. How many actual claims of sexual harassment are filed every year? Is this a concern that most men should be troubled with? And if so, what should we do to eliminate it as a threat? According to the Department of Labor:

Of the 123 million women age 16 years and over in the U.S., 72 million, or 58.6 percent, were labor force participants—working or looking for work.

According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Office in fiscal year 2014, there were a total of 26,027 claims filed alleging discrimination on the basis of sex. Those claims include sexual harassment as well as pregnancy and other sexually related claims. The total claims alleging sexual harassment were 6,862. Keep in mind that in order to file a federal lawsuit claiming sexual harassment, all administrative remedies, including an EEOC complaint, must be exhausted first. So in order to sue, a woman must first comply with all corporate procedures for filing a sexual harassment claim, submit to the corporation's attempts to mediate, and then if unsatisfied, she must file with the EEOC before a suit can be brought. There are a lot of hoops to jump through to file such a claim.
Although these numbers include a minority of male victims as well, I am using the feminine pronoun. But even if we were to assume that all claims were brought by women, that still results in a chance of .01 percent (6,862 divided by 72,000,000) that the woman sitting in your office will bring a claim against you if your office door is closed. And that assumes that some type of harassment actually occurs. The odds of a claim without reasonable basis (52.0 percent of filed claims), is .005 percent.
So for an infinitesimal chance that a false sexual harassment suit might be brought, women must be excluded from one-on-one meetings with men, staffing politicians at evening events and even serving as their drivers?
Sarah Mimms, for the National Journal, spoke with a representative from the congressional Office of Compliance about this issue.

"Policies, official or unofficial, that prohibit female staff from being alone with a Member can be discriminatory and create an unequal playing field in the workplace," OOC spokesman Scott Mulligan said in a statement to National Journal. "A practice like this means that women can never become trusted advisors or rise to high positions within an office based solely upon their gender. Employers should concentrate on ensuring that their staffs are trained in workplace rights laws and that the workplace is free from harassment and discrimination rather than trying to build unlawful fences around their female staff."

Women already, (still) face an unequal playing field in the competition for leadership rolls in the workplace.

Sanders: Campaign coverage should focus on issues instead of outrage, gossip and Facebook comments

by Meteor Blades

The senator speaks at “An Economic Agenda for America: A Conversation with Bernie Sanders”
event in D.C. in February this year.. We're all used to Sen. Bernie Sanders telling the truth whether people—including top-level Democrats—like it or not. He's done it again. Here's Ali Elkin:

“In terms of campaign coverage, there is more coverage about the political gossip of the campaign, about raising money, about polling, about somebody saying something dumb, or some kid works for a campaign and sends out something stupid on Facebook, right?” the Vermont senator said in an appearance Sunday on CNN's Reliable Sources, a program about media. “We can expect that to be a major story. But what your job is, what the media's job is, is to say, 'Look, these are the major issues facing the country.' We're a democracy. People have different points of view. Let's argue it.” [...] “I think that instead of coming up with the next news of the moment, 'Breaking news! There was an automobile accident and a cat got run over,' here's breaking news: For 40 years the American middle class has been disappearing and the rich have been getting richer. Why?” Sanders said.

Sanders knows the answer to that question. He's expressed it many times. But will the media spread his answer? Or stick to the polls and the horse race?
Here's a synopsis of Sanders's economic recovery proposal. Nothing radical here. Nothing socialist, just a commonsense social democratic program. Sanders himself has pointed out that the list is incomplete. Personally, I'd like to see a federal infrastructure bank and a state bank in the 49 states that don't have one the way North Dakota does. I'd like to see an emphasis on government encouragement of alternatives to corporate structure, worker cooperatives and a much bigger proportion of municipally owned utilities instead of the 15 percent now existing. But there's plenty worthwhile in Sanders's approach:

• Invest in our crumbling infrastructure with a major program to create jobs by rebuilding roads, bridges, water systems, waste water plants, airports, railroads and schools. • Transform energy systems away from fossil fuels to create jobs while beginning to reverse global warming and make the planet habitable for future generations.
• Develop new economic models to support workers in the United States instead of giving tax breaks to corporations which ship jobs to low-wage countries overseas.
• Make it easier for workers to join unions and bargain for higher wages and benefits.
• Raise the federal minimum wage from $7.25 an hour so no one who works 40 hours a week will live in poverty.
• Provide equal pay for women workers who now make 78 percent of what male counterparts make.
• Reform trade policies that have shuttered more than 60,000 factories and cost more than 4.9 million decent-paying manufacturing jobs.
• Make college affordable and provide affordable child care to restore America’s competitive edge compared to other nations.
• Break up big banks. The six largest banks now have assets equivalent to 61 percent of our gross domestic product, over $9.8 trillion. They underwrite more than half the mortgages in the country and issue more than two-thirds of all credit cards.
• Join the rest of the industrialized world with a Medicare-for-all health care system that provides better care at less cost.
• Expand Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and nutrition programs.
• Reform the tax code based on wage earners’ ability to pay and eliminate loopholes that let profitable corporations stash profits overseas and pay no U.S. federal income taxes.

A pipe-dream? It doesn't have to be.

Nailed It!

'Ugly' potential fallout from Supreme Court health care case

Ruling may gut 'Obamacare,' but Republicans would feel the heat if millions lose subsidies

by Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar

'Ugly' potential fallout from Supreme Court health care case

A Supreme Court ruling due in a few weeks could wipe out health insurance for millions of people covered by President Barack Obama's health care law. But it's Republicans — not White House officials — who have been talking about damage control. A likely reason: Twenty-six of the 34 states that would be most affected by the ruling have Republican governors, and 22 of the 24 GOP Senate seats up in 2016 are in those states.
Obama's law offers subsidized private insurance to people without access to it on the job. In the court case, opponents of the law argue that its literal wording allows the federal government to subsidize coverage only in states that set up their own health insurance markets.
Most states have not done so, because of the intense partisanship over "Obamacare" and in some cases because of technical problems. Instead, they rely on the federal HealthCare.gov website.
If the court invalidates the subsidies in those states, an estimated 8 million people could lose coverage. The results would be "ugly," said Sandy Praeger, a former Kansas insurance commissioner.

"People who are reasonably healthy would just drop coverage," she said. "Only the unhealthy would keep buying health care. It would really exacerbate the problem of the cost of health insurance."

Praeger, a Republican who retired this year, called it "a classic death spiral," using a term for market collapse.
Oral arguments on March 4 revealed a divided court. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Anthony Kennedy seemingly are key to the outcome, which won't be known until late June.
If the subsidies survive, the Affordable Care Act will look like settled law to all but its most passionate opponents. But if they are overturned, the shock could carry into next year's elections. Some potential consequences:
BAD TIMING
Around the time when the court announces its decision, insurers will be working to finalize premiums and plans for the coming year. Contracts with the government for 2016 health law coverage have to be signed by early fall. If the subsidies are overturned, insurers would have to tear up their projections about markets in more than half the states.
Populous states such as Texas, Florida, Ohio, Illinois, New Jersey, Georgia and Pennsylvania would be among those affected.

State lawmakers could mitigate the impact by setting up their own insurance markets, or exchanges. But that can't be done overnight.

States might try authorizing an exchange, and then contracting with the federal government to run it. But that sort of end run might prompt lawsuits from opponents of the law.
In any case, most state legislatures will be out of session by the summer.
During arguments, Justice Samuel Alito raised the possibility that the court might be able to delay the effective date of its decision. Even a delay through the end of this year wouldn't buy much time. Enrollment for 2016 health law plans is scheduled to start Nov. 1.

HOUSE OF CARDS

The health law was designed as a balancing act. Insurers can't turn people away because of health problems, but most healthy people are required to contribute to the insurance pool, and the government subsidizes most of the premium for low- to middle-income households.

Take away subsidies, and the other two parts become unstable.

The law's requirement to carry insurance, never popular, would probably become the biggest target for repeal.

"My guess is there would be overwhelming political support for the elimination of the individual mandate if people can't afford the premiums," said former Sen. Tom Daschle, D-S.D., who was an influential Obama adviser on health care.

Insurers would demand relief from provisions of the law intended to limit premium increases, or they might drop out of the insurance exchanges.

STICKER SHOCK FOR SELF-PAY CUSTOMERS

Many people still buy individual health care policies directly from an insurance company, bypassing the law's markets and paying the full cost. They tend to be small-business owners, self-employed professionals and early retirees.

But even they would not escape the tumult in states losing subsidies.

The health law created one big insurance pool in each state, combining customers who purchase their policies directly with those who buy through the government market. If healthy people exit the insurance exchanges in droves, premiums for those buying directly would go up. Some may be unable to afford the higher cost.

"It would set off cascading events," said Larry Levitt of the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation. "The individual market would empty out as premiums rise significantly."

America's crumbling infrastructure

By Kaye Foley

America’s infrastructure could be reaching a breaking point. Literally. When it comes to our transportation infrastructure — that’s railroads, water pipelines, ports, dams, bridges, airports and roads — the United States has gotten way off track. In fact, the American Society of Civil Engineers’ most recent report card gave America’s infrastructure a D+. And according to the World Economic Forum, the U.S. ranks 16th in quality of overall infrastructure, behind countries like France, Spain and Japan.

Our roads, for example, require a lot of maintenance, especially after a long winter. All those potholes and rough roads cost drivers an estimated $324 a year spent on car repairs. Many roads are often jammed with traffic. Forty-two percent of America’s major urban highways are considered congested. And that costs the economy an estimated $101 billion in wasted time and fuel each year.

It’s not just the highways and roads. Around 70,000 bridges are structurally deficient, which means they’re not unsafe but are in poor condition due to deterioration.

So why is America’s infrastructure beginning to crumble? Maintaining and improving infrastructure is expensive — really expensive. According to the ASCE report, an estimated $1.7 trillion is needed by 2020 for our surface transportation to be improved.
State and local governments largely finance infrastructure in the U.S., but when they’re short on funds, infrastructure moves down the priority list.

The federal government provides crucial funding through something called the Highway Trust Fund, which gets its revenue mostly from a gas tax. It’s 18.4 cents per gallon, but it hasn’t been raised since 1993. The tax brings in around $34 billion each year, which isn’t enough for all the infrastructure projects across the nation.

Over the years, Congress has passed a series of fixes to keep the fund going, but it is expected to go broke on May 31 if lawmakers don’t act quickly. On May 19 the House passed a two-month extension, and it is expected to also pass in the Senate. Still, a more permanent fix is needed. Politicians on both sides of the aisle agree that this is a critical issue. Boehner, R-Ohio, said in January, “We’ve got to find a way to deal with America’s crumbling infrastructure.”

But so far for Congress, and even the White House, the road forward doesn’t include raising the gas tax. And they can’t see eye to eye on other spending to allocate for infrastructure either.

Your tax money at work

YouTube link.

A railgun is an electrically powered electromagnetic projectile launcher based on similar principles to the homopolar motor...
Railguns are being researched as a weapon with a projectile that would use neither explosives nor propellant, but rather rely on electromagnetic forces to achieve a very high kinetic energy... railguns can potentially exceed Mach 10, and thus far exceed conventionally delivered munitions in range and destructive force, with the absence of explosives to store and handle as an additional advantage.
Railguns have long existed as experimental technology but the mass, size and cost of the required power supplies have prevented railguns from becoming practical military weapons. However, in recent years, significant efforts have been made towards their development as feasible military technology.

It’s Official: White Folks in Red States are the Biggest Food Stamp ‘Moochers’ in the Country!

by Sky Palma

In an ironic twist to the GOP’s war on the poor, it turns out that the people who are the most negatively affected by Republican cuts in food programs – are Republicans themselves.
Statistics reveal that the city holding the most beneficiaries of the SNAP program (a favorite target of the GOP) is 99.22% white and 95% Republican. Owsley County, Kentucky earns the lowest median household income in the country, but they are the most prolific government-takers in U.S. existence.

According to a TIME analysis of county-by-county food stamp enrollment data, GOP politicians represent more districts that majorly participate in SNAP than Democrats.
From the TIME report:

While congressional districts with the absolute highest levels of enrollment are more likely to be represented by Democrats, many rural districts with very high participation in the program are represented by Republicans leading the charge in cutting billions from the program. In Kentucky’s 5th district, represented by Republican Hal Rogers, 1 in 3 people receives SNAP benefits. After the House passed its version of the farm bill, however, Rogers wrote: “Struggling children, seniors, veterans and families, clearly in need of assistance … compete against scammers, lottery winners, gamblers and others who may be able to work, but simply refuse.

Many economists agree that food stamps trigger economic activity when poor people utilize their benefits, which more than makes up for the cost. Republicans, however, take the opposite approach; they believe tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires is what stimulates growth, all the while cutting programs that help the poorest in society.
When ranking what methods help the economy, economists say that food stamps rank among the top three, while tax cuts to the rich rank about 12th.

Good evening. How much Scott Walker would you like to buy tonight?

by Hunter

'For $1 million Scott Walker's super PAC will give you an "exclusive" pin. Some special access, too.

The best thing about Scott Walker's three-star super PAC price guide is that they've made it look like a menu, making it crystal clear that you're buying something. Would you prefer one private dinner with an unnamed VIP Special Guest, wink wink, or two? Would you care for Members Only briefings, or are you in more of a conference call mood? And, of course, your pin. It goes without saying that purchasers of the $1,000,000 Scott Walker package will get a considerably better commemorative pin. Thank goodness none of this smacks of corruption or the appearance of corruption.

Greatest Disaster

John Ashcroft’s son pushing constitutional amendment to allow voter ID in Missouri

John Ashcroft’s son pushing constitutional amendment to allow voter ID in Missouri Photo ID requirements for voting have been unconstitutional in Missouri since 2006.

A Defeated Rush Limbaugh Admits He’s Outdated And Irrelevant

Somebody must have spiked Rush Limbaugh’s Viagra with a dose of reality. In a recent post on his Facebook page, Rush admitted that he’s lost touch with what advertisers would consider the most relevant demographic:

That entirely different view and experience is what people in that key demographic would call real life, something Limbaugh has never had a firm grasp on.
For decades, moderates and liberals have been inundated with Limbaugh’s racism, conspiracy theories, misogyny and all around stupidity, not on the radio per se, but from co-workers, friends and their crazy Uncle Rudy.
Limbaugh has ruined countless lunch breaks, Sunday dinners and Facebook conversations by planting his idiocy in the heads of the intellectually challenged.
Some good news recently circulated for Chicago residents who would rather hear the complete works of Justin Bieber than Limbaugh’s crass vitriol from 11AM to 2PM Monday through Friday, however: a source inside WLS claims that Limbaugh is being shut down in the Windy City, one of the nation’s largest radio markets, come the end of March.
A spokesperson for Cumulus Media denied the claim, but media vet Robert Feder wrote:

If all goes as planned, Limbaugh’s syndicated talk show, which airs from 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. Monday through Friday, will be dropped by the end of March, according to insiders at WLS.
A Cumulus Media spokeswoman [at first] declined immediate comment. But a source familiar with the decision said it was based on the show’s diminished ratings and failure to generate advertising revenue for the station, adding: ‘It’s impossible to sell.’

Poor Rush. Had he not spent so much time alienating everyone but conservative white men over 55 he might have had a chance of keeping his show in Chicago, but with revenue down considerably and a 10 percent decrease in audience, his relevance is quickly and quietly slipping away.

Chinese Law Firm to Merge With American Firms, Employ Howard Dean, Newt Gingrich

by Lee Fang

Dacheng, one of the biggest law firms in the People’s Republic of China, is set to merge with two major American law firms, Dentons and McKenna Long & Aldridge, making it the largest law firm in the world.
The merger will reportedly give Chinese companies that Dacheng represents — including major Chinese state-owned firms — access to advice from attorneys and policy professionals in the United States employed by Dentons and McKenna Long — and vice versa.
McKenna Long and Dentons also engage in lobbying, giving Dacheng’s clients a new avenue for understanding and influencing the American system.
The arrangement will bring together a unique arrangement of policy professionals all under the same roof. The new mega-firm will employ, via Dentons: former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, former Democratic National Committee Chair Joe Andrew, and former Rep. Van Hilleary, R-Tenn., among others. McKenna Long’s political roster includes: former Democratic National Committee Chair Howard Dean, former D.C. Mayor Anthony Williams, former Rep. Bill Owens, D-N.Y., and former Sen. Gary Hart, D-Colo. Many of the individuals, like Hart, do not have a law degree or practice law, but work in the “government affairs” departments of the two firms, a catch-all phrase to describe lobbying-related business.
McKenna Long, already touting the size of “what its merged government affairs team looks like,” emailed the Atlanta Constitution-Journal to boast that the new team will not only include Howard Dean, but also four former U.S. congressmen, four former state attorneys general, and an array of other high-level former government officials.
“The personal relationships they have with the C.E.O.s of private companies and big, state-owned enterprises is obviously something that creates a tremendous opportunity for us, with all that work that is now coming out into the West,” Joe Andrew told The New York Times, celebrating the merger with Dacheng.
Gingrich announced his intention to join the new firm, which will be known as Dacheng Dentons, in a press release posted on Wednesday. “The Firm is committed to doing something unique, challenging the traditional and innovating in the legal profession with an emphasis on knowing and understanding communities around the world for the benefit of clients,” said Gingrich, who is joining the firm under its lobbying division.

Political Linkage

Today's comic by Tom Tomorrow is The bad intelligence:
EU dropped pesticide-control laws under U.S. pressure in negotiating the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership.
Proposed fedeal regulations on CO₂ emissions would cut coal production:
Production of coal in the United States would drop by one-fifth in the next five years and almost one-third by 2025 under the Obama administration’s regulatory crackdown on carbon emissions from electric power plants, the Energy Department’s statistical branch said on Friday. Retirements of coal-fired power plants would double, with about 50 gigawatts more in lost capacity compared with business as usual, the new analysis by the department’s Energy Information Administration found. At first, power plants would mainly switch to natural gas, but over time, solar and wind capacity would soar.
R.D. Kaplan says it’s time to bring imperialism back to the Middle East. When did it ever leave? This guy repented for his active participation in pressing for the invasion of Iraq. Then he said he deeply regretted it. Now he's at it again. Repentance requires a vow not to repeat the offense. Guess he missed that part.
Iran adviser says U.S. let ISIL take over Ramadi:
An Iranian newspaper is quoting the chief of an elite unit in Iran's Revolutionary Guard accusing the U.S. of allowing the Islamic State group to seize the Iraqi city of Ramadi, the latest criticism to follow the fall of the city.
Deadline for releasing final JFK assassination-related documents fast approaching:
A special team of seven archivists and technicians with top-secret security clearances has been set up at the National Archives and Records Administration to process all or portions of 40,000 documents that constitute the final collection of known federal records that might shed light on the events surrounding JFK’s murder, POLITICO has learned — files that according to law must be made public by October 2017. But the records’ release is not guaranteed, says Martha Murphy, head of the National Archives’ Special Access Branch. While the JFK Records Act of 1992 mandated the files be made public in 25 years, government agencies that created the paper trail can still appeal directly to the president to keep them hidden. And some scholars and researchers, not to mention the army of JFK conspiracy theorists, fear that is exactly what will happen given the details about the deepest, darkest corners of American spy craft that could be revealed — from the inner workings of the CIA’s foreign assassination program and front companies to the role of a CIA psychological operations guru accused of misleading congressional investigators about alleged assassin Lee Harvey Oswald’s activities.
Former S.C. GOP executive director Todd Kincannon says he threatened wife because cough medicine made him "completely crazy".
Canada's truth commission nears the end of its seven-year probe into residential schools for Indians:
Between 1929 and 1974, St. Michael's Indian Residential School was home to thousands of kids enrolled in often year-round boarding school. Under the watchful eye of RCMP officers, aboriginal parents were forced to give up their children as young as 4-years-old to Indian agents, or face possible fines or imprisonment. From tiny communities across the coast of BC, the children were brought into the cold, brick rooms of St. Mike's. Run by the Anglican church under the authority of the Indian Act, St. Mike's was where those little kids learned that their hair and bodies were disgusting, that their families were demonic, and that no amount of work, physical and sexual abuse, or distance from their backwards communities would cure them of the stain of Indian-ness. [...] Many have urged the UN to classify the residential school system under the 1948 Genocide Convention. It seems to fall squarely within the boundaries, not only of the softer cultural genocide, but also as straight-up genocide, the definition of which includes "forcibly transferring children... with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group."