Fausta’s Blog

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Gov. Christie on Saving Money & the Hard Decisions We Have to Make

Sorkin: Are you not worried though about spending in your state in terms of those teachers who are actually going to be taking these cuts, whether they are going to be able to keep spending in the state and what that means for the economy?

Christie: First of all, they’re not taking any cuts. I asked them to take cuts, and they said no. So, what cuts are they taking? These teachers are still getting their four or five percent increases. That interplay that you just saw was about me trying to convince people that they need to take a freeze, but, in the end, they didn’t. The state teachers union said–they had a rally in Trenton against me. 35,000 people came from the teachers. You know what that rally was? The “me first” rally. “Pay me my raise first. Pay me my free health benefits first. Pay me my pension first. And everybody else in New Jersey, get to the back of the line.” Well, you know what? I’m not going to sit by and allow that to go unnoticed, so we’ll shine a bright light on it, and we’ll see how the people react. But I think we are seeing how the people of New Jersey are reacting, and that’s how you make it politically palatable in other states in the country. Just shine a bright light on greed and self-interest.”

Indeed!

John Callahan, Cartoonist, Dies at 59

John Callahan, a quadriplegic, alcoholic cartoonist whose work in newspapers and magazines made irreverent, impolitic sport of people with disabilities and diseases and those who would pity and condescend to them, died Saturday in Portland, Ore. He was 59 and lived in Portland.

The causes were complications of quadriplegia and respiratory problems, his brother Tom said.

Definitely not Charles Schultz, Callahan was a big favorite of two friends of mine who were severely disabled,

Very funny stuff, and a lot of it not suitable for work, if you read his bios.

(click on image to enlarge)

Judge Blocks Key Parts of Immigration Law in Arizona (emphasis added)

In a ruling on a law that has rocked politics coast to coast and thrown a spotlight on the border state’s fierce debate over immigration, United States District Court Judge Susan Bolton in Phoenix said some aspects of the law can go into effect as scheduled on Thursday.

But Judge Bolton took aim at the parts of the law that have generated the most controversy, issuing a preliminary injunction against sections that called for officers to check a person’s immigration status while enforcing other laws and that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times.

Judge Bolton put those sections on hold while she continues to hear the larger issues in the challenges to the law.

Federal immigration law requires immigrants to carry their papers at all times.

William Jacobson analyzes the ruling:

The decision has to be viewed as a near complete victory for opponents of the law, as it restricts the state from routine and compulsory checks of immigration status as a matter of legislative mandate.

The decision would not, as I read it, prevent police from checking immigration status in a particular case, but would prevent a statewide system to do so.

The result of the decision will be to have a chilling effect on law enforcement officers who, in the absense of the law, would have checked immigration status based on reasonable suspicion anyway. Enforcement of immigration laws in Arizona, as a result of the decision, will be even more difficult than prior to S.B. 1070.

The U.S. v. Arizona – Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction below the fold:

Read the rest of this entry »

WikiLeaks Reportedly Outs 100s of Afghan Informants

Hundreds of Afghan civilians who worked as informants for the U.S. military have been put at risk by WikiLeaks’ publication of more than 90,000 classified intelligence reports which name and in many cases locate the individuals, The Times newspaper reported Wednesday.

Click here to see The Times article, but note, it’s behind a subscription firewall.

The article says, in spite of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange’s claim that sensitive information had been removed from the leaked documents, that reporters scanning the reports for just a couple hours found hundreds of Afghan names mentioned as aiding the U.S.-led war effort.

Richard Fernandez is eloquent in his outrage:

The news came as Wikileaks founder Julian Assange expressed fears he could be arrested. The Telegraph says he “has been warned by ‘inside sources in the White House’ not to return to the US as he could be arrested.”

He’s had more warning than the individuals in Afghanistan who will more than likely be identified by al-Qaeda support cells in Western Europe or the Middle East who will pore through the Wikileaks documents. The names of the traitors to radical Islam will be duly transmitted to the avengers who will then go out severally into the night to on their missions of revenge. Recently Radio Netherlands described what Afghans who are suspected by the Taliban can expect to endure. The Taliban have cut off the hands of construction workers who build government-funded projects; sent a suicide car bomb against a district chief believed to have been working with US special forces.  Death in many forms will be their lot. One informant Radio Netherlands described “holds a thick yellow sheet tightly around his face”  to preserve his anonymity. Now it turns out he shouldn’t have bothered. If the London Times is right, his name might be one of the several hundred the British reporter has found in just a few hours.

Yet the dead are the lucky ones. The more unfortunate may wind up in a torture chamber similar to one found by Coldstream Guards. It features such amenties as chains to hang prisoners from walls. Not that the inmates would want to walk on the floor: that features broken glass. And there is limb amputation, kneecapping with an electric drill, eye gouging, bone-breaking or ritual rape to smash the will. Where the offender is not himself available punishment will be visited on his relatives.

When Julian Assange released these documents he assured the public that it had been carefully reviewed to avoid putting people at risk.  He said it with the greatest apparent confidence. Now it emerges that either he didn’t know how to avoid putting innocents in the line of fire or didn’t care to. But competence is not required to sit in judgment of others. Not today.  All it really takes is enough self-righteousness to impose your amateurish viewpoint on the world because on the theory that nobody else has ever been as clever as you. We are always the people we’ve been waiting for.

Yet Assange can be forgiven for thinking that viewpoint and style were the sum total of qualification needed to engage in the life and death business of publshing secrets in time of war. White House spokesman Robert Gibbs, explaining that the White House didn’t try to stop the publication said he met with reporters from the New York Times and sent a message through its reporters to Assange asking that he redact information in the documents that could harm US military personnel. As for the Afghans? Well what about them? Wikileaks made its pathetic effort to sanitize the data didn’t they? And if it was good for the Times and Gibbs, why shouldn’t Assange have concluded it was good enough period?

One or more of those connected with this story may in the next few weeks, under questioning from critics, express their sincerest and most heartfelt regret at the death or danger which their leak has exposed men,  women and children to. But poise your finger on the pause button; watch for it carefully before it flashes past to the standard peroration on the noble purposes of showing the “true nature” of war. Because the regret may last all of five seconds, though for those who will lose a loved one to Taliban reprisal the pain will last much longer. But the wretched of the earth will endure, as only those who have accustomed themselves to being the moral guinea pigs and butt of jokes of the great and good can endure.

Assange will sleep safely hiding behind the skirts of the Swedish government, which allows Assange to publish classified material with no consequences.

Elsewhere, people will die for Wikileaks’ Nobel Prize.

UPDATE
Gerard lets it rip on Assange, and on traitor Pfc. Bradley Manning, and it’s NOT SUITABLE FOR WORK.

I just remembered, traitors earned a place in Dante’s ninth circle of hell. While Liberals may applaud Manning and Assange, betraying the Afghans who risked their lives in a futile hope for a better life has earned Manning and Assange places in the 9th circle.

Post updated with photo

On the Surface, Gulf Oil Spill Is Vanishing Fast; Concerns Stay

The oil slick in the Gulf of Mexico appears to be dissolving far more rapidly than anyone expected, a piece of good news that raises tricky new questions about how fast the government should scale back its response to the Deepwater Horizon disaster.

The immense patches of surface oil that covered thousands of square miles of the gulf after the April 20 oil rig explosion are largely gone, though sightings of tar balls and emulsified oil continue here and there.

Reporters flying over the area Sunday spotted only a few patches of sheen and an occasional streak of thicker oil, and radar images taken since then suggest that these few remaining patches are quickly breaking down in the warm surface waters of the gulf.

Now the question is, will Obama undo that drilling moratorium?

Don’t count on it.

————————————-
Due to a number of tasks that need to be completed this morning, there will be no podcast today.

At IBD,
Venezuela: Haven For Terrorists?

As the world does nothing, Venezuela aids the Colombian narcoterrorists known as FARC, which is an act of war. In effect, Chavez looks the other way as some 1,500 drug-dealing FARC guerrillas use Venezuela as a safe haven. Colombia wants it stopped.

These facts have been known for years, so it’s likely that, as President Alvaro Uribe prepares to leave office, he wants this for the record — perhaps to build an international court case. But Uribe also may be trying to warn the world that narcoterror could spill over regional borders.

There are 80 easily verifiable terrorist camps inside Venezuela, which the OAS declined to investigate. But besides harboring terrorists and five top FARC leaders, there’s a disturbing sense that FARC has penetrated Venezuela’s government at the highest levels — which makes Mexico’s vicious war against drug lords look tame by comparison.

Three Venezuelan officials designated by the U.S. Treasury Department in 2008 as low-level kingpins for helping FARC have achieved high positions in Chavez’s regime.

General Henry Rangel Silva was promoted to Strategic Operational Commander of the Bolivarian Armed Forces, according to the reliable blog site Caracas Gringo, a command second only to Chavez.

Former Interior Minister Ramon Rodriguez-Chacin, whose FARC ties date to the 1980s, claims to be dying of cancer. But his top lieutenant, Col. Miguel Rodriguez Torres, now heads Sebin, Chavez’s new spy service. Meanwhile, the third of the narco-triumvirate, Gen. Hugo Carvajal, remains head of Venezuelan military intelligence.

With a crew like that, it’s no surprise that Venezuela permits 80 FARC camps inside its own borders.

But FARC’s presence is even more widespread in Venezuela than that. For instance, FARC controls 60% of Colombia’s cocaine trade, and U.S. officials say that drug flights out of Venezuela have never been higher.

FARC also kidnaps for ransom. That’s become common, not just at the Colombian border, but across the Venezuelan llano, farmers in Yaracuy state have told IBD. They say the only people they can sell land or cattle to in Chavez’s atmosphere of Marxist expropriation are well-armed FARC thugs, whose land likely won’t be confiscated.

Meanwhile, Chavez has threatened to cut off oil to the US. Here’s why he won’t:
Hugo Chávez oil threats: Why Chávez won’t cut off oil to the US

Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez threatened to cut off oil to the US on Sunday. The latest Chávez oil threat comes amid a rising diplomatic spat with neighboring Colombia, a staunch US ally in the region.

Many had hoped that as Juan Manuel Santos takes over the presidency in Colombia on Aug. 7, the relationship between Colombia and Venezuela could begin to heal, even though Mr. Santos served as defense minister at the time of the Ecuadorean raid. Now it seems the hurdles are higher.
Chávez cancels trip to Cuba

On Sunday, Chavez said he had new intelligence, which he did not identify, saying the threat of an attack from Colombia was higher than ever. He canceled a trip Monday to Cuba, where his allies Raúl Castro and Fidel Castro are celebrating Revolution Day today, to address the threat, he said.

Ms. Cardozo says she believes there is no real threat, and that his motivation is to stir up nationalist sentiment ahead of crucial legislative elections in September and deflect attention from economic woes in the country.

“As president, Chávez always does this,” says Eric Farnsworth, vice president of the Council of the Americas, a consultancy based in New York. “He is trying to turn a very significant accusation against his country into a win for himself domestically.”

The regional group of South American nations called UNASUR will be meeting in Ecuador soon to try to resolve the conflict, but the US is likely to stay on the sidelines, says Larry Birns, director of the Council on Hemispheric Affairs in Washington.

“Chávez is going through a predictable scenario …. Of marching up the hill and then marching down again,” says Mr. Birns. “Chávez has always indicated that the oil weapon is in his quiver, but … his threat is more bark than bite.”

Border security is a matter of national security for the USA:

Report at the Washington Post,
Mexican drug cartels bring violence with them in move to Central America

Drug cartel violence in Mexico is quickly spilling south into Central America and is threatening to destabilize fragile countries already rife with crime and corruption, according to the United Nations, U.S. officials and regional law enforcement agents.

How bad is it?

The Northern Triangle of Central America — Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras — has long been a major smuggling corridor for contraband heading to the United States. But as Mexican President Felipe Calderón fights a U.S.-backed war against his nation’s drug lords, trafficking networks are burrowing deeper into a region with the highest murder rates in the world.

The Mexican cartels “are spreading their horizons to states where they feel, quite frankly, more comfortable. These governments in Central America face a very real challenge in confronting these organizations,” said David Gaddis, chief of operations for the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration.

And democracy is in peril,

The expansion of cartel power in the Northern Triangle threatens to undermine democratic gains made since the end of civil conflicts here in the mid-1990s. Analysts say the lucrative profits of the drug trade wield powerful influence in these countries, where half the people live in poverty.

ad_icon

“The Guatemalan government is weak, and the drug cartels provide services that the state does not,” such as health clinics, soccer fields and schools, said Fernando Giron Soto, a researcher at the Myrna Mack Foundation, a human rights organization in Guatemala City whose doors are guarded by armed sentries. “It’s the same thing that Pablo Escobar used to do in Medellin” during the 1990s in Colombia, he said.

In many areas of the Northern Triangle, police are ineffective, if they exist at all, experts say. Guatemala and Honduras have fewer than half as many police per capita as Mexico, U.N. data show. In Guatemala, as many as seven of the country’s 22 provinces appear to be under the control of criminals, according to the International Crisis Group report.

It’s not just a distraction: this is a crucial problem for our national security.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Here’s what happens when the interviewer is not paying attention to what the interviewee is saying:
Paul Ryan Schools Chris Matthews on Tax Hikes, Budgets and Economics 101

CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: Congressman Ryan, is there any tax role for reducing our $1.4 trillion to $1.7 trillion debt this year — deficit this year? Is there any role in tax increasing to help do that job?

REP. PAUL RYAN (R), WISCONSIN: I don`t think it`s a good idea, especially when we`re trying to come out of a jobless recovery in a slow- growth economy.

Look, we have got unemployment at almost 10 percent. The last thing we should be doing is raising taxes on the economy. Look, the worst thing for deficit reduction is a slow economy. You hit small businesses with these kinds of tax rate increases and you will slow down the economy further.

Look, 75 percent of those who will get hit with these higher tax rates are successful small businesses. Tens of millions of our jobs come from these small businesses. Now, if you try to blame these tax cuts and the wars for all of our fiscal problems, the numbers just don`t add up.

At best, 14 percent of the evaporation of the surplus came from these tax cuts. It all came from other circumstances: spending, economic growth declining, 9/11, all these other things.

MATTHEWS: Yes.

RYAN: So, I think what Joe earlier said is right, which is these taxes will go up. And I think that`s a mistake. And I think it`s going to hurt the economy.

MATTHEWS: Well, let me ask you one question as a follow-up.

It seems to me every Republican that goes on “Meet the Press” lately is asked, where will you cut? They say nothing. They will not mention any cuts.

(CROSSTALK)

RYAN: Chris…

MATTHEWS: No, I have had Congressman Pence on, who won`t say any cuts.

(CROSSTALK)

MATTHEWS: So, you won`t cut — you won`t raise taxes and you won`t cut spending.

RYAN: Chris…

MATTHEWS: So, in other words, all this bitching about the deficit doesn`t mean squat, because you won`t do either, raise taxes or reduce spending.

RYAN: Let me answer it, then.

MATTHEWS: Neither one.

RYAN: This year, Congress isn`t even doing a budget, but, last year, when we did a budget, I brought a budget to the floor that specifically cut $4.8 trillion of spending out of the budget and paid for all of these tax cuts and debt reduction. Two months ago, we put out $1.3 trillion in very specifically listed and enumerated spending cuts. So, I can go on with you on cuts. I can show you all the kinds of cuts.

Good answer, right? Here was Matthews’ astonishingly addle-minded response:

MATTHEWS: But that`s one-three hundredth (ph) of the deficit. That`s 0.3 of 1 percent you`ve talked about.

One-three hundredth of the deficit? $1.3 TRILLION?

The lesson continued:

RYAN: Four-point-eight trillion dollars is not .3 of 1 percent of the deficit.

MATTHEWS: OK, 4.8 trillion. OK.

RYAN: And 1.3 trillion is not peanuts.

MATTHEWS: OK.

RYAN: It`s nothing to sneeze at.

MATTHEWS: OK. Let me go.

(CROSSTALK)

RYAN: Two things –

From here it became obvious what Matthews was up to. He’s not interested in balancing the budget. He’s certainly not interested in cutting spending.

What he’s interested in is getting Republicans to say what programs they want cut so that Democrats can use that against them in the upcoming elections.

Ryan saw through the charade:

MATTHEWS: I just don`t see — I just don`t see any program cuts. You`re talking in general terms, but let me tell you this: the major Republicans that come on television will not cut Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. They won`t cut the military. They can`t cut debt servicing. They won`t — they won`t get rid of a major cost of government.

They`ll talk about, you know, let`s freeze discretionary spending or discretionary and domestic in some sort of generalized way. But they won`t get rid of government. They seem to like government. In fact, they love to talk against it.

RYAN: Go to Americanroadmap.org and you will see a very comprehensive piece of legislation that the CBO has scored that`s actually paying off the debt –

Indeed, this Roadmap was released last week, but I digress:

MATTHEWS: OK.

RYAN: — with specific reforms to the entitlements you mentioned.

MATTHEWS: Name a major piece of the 1.4 trillion to 1.7 trillion. No, just take –

RYAN: OK.

MATTHEWS: — just take a chunk out that 1.4 trillion by getting rid of a big program or good expenditure that people now watching can understand.

Straightforward question. Now watch Ryan give a straightforward answer that Matthews will summarily brush aside like a fly in front of the camera:

RYAN: I would rescind the unspent stimulus funds. I would rescind all the TARP funds that aren`t spent. I would do a federal hiring freeze and pay freeze for the rest of the year. And I would go back and cut discretionary spending back to `08 levels and freeze that spending going forward.

Now, you and I can get into a debate about Keynesian economics, whether it worked or didn`t. I don`t think it did. We increased domestic discretionary last year by 84 percent. I don`t think we should continue to build that kind of a base. Let`s go back and cut discretionary spending back to `08 levels.

MATTHEWS: OK.

RYAN: Rescind stimulus, rescind TARP and do a federal hiring and pay freeze. Those are just a few ideas that add up to $1.3 trillion right there.

Now, let’s understand that at the beginning of this segment, Matthews asked Ryan how he plans on reducing our $1.4 to $1.7 trillion deficit. The Congressman just gave cuts to eliminate $1.3 trillion, and Matthews dismissed it totally:

MATTHEWS: OK. Congressman Crowley, I still don`t see any cuts in entitlements there. But go ahead.

Matthews is just not paying attention. Must be that tingle up his leg acting up again.

Here’s the link to American Roadmap.org.

If you’re wondering what your tax bill will look like next year, go do the worksheet at the 2011 Income Tax Calculator.

First, Mr. Darcy takes a dive,

And, the fight club, via both Mr. Bingley and Darleen,

While we talk about the Afghan war document dump (and the eventuality of a hasty withdrawal and defeat in Afghanistan), here are a few noteworthy news items:

Signals in the Yellow Sea
China tries to deny U.S. aircraft carriers access to international waters.

The People’s Daily tips China’s hand that the top priority is keeping the carriers away. Not only is Beijing going to try to forbid the activity of surveillance in its economic zone, any ship with surveillance capability is unwelcome: “As the Yellow Sea is a high sea, the aircraft carrier can also detect the hydro-geological conditions of China’s submarines’ channels out to sea. Therefore, the two purposes of the joint military exercise, strategic reconnaissance and testing initial combat plans, will pose a threat to China.”

Such a blatant attempt to expropriate the rights of the U.S. Navy or any other navy to operate in international waters is not acceptable. The Chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen said recently that his attitude toward China has “moved from being curious to being genuinely concerned.” It’s easy to see why.

China Rejects U.S. Suggestion for Asean Mediation on Territory

The dispute has raised concerns that an increasingly powerful Chinese military could seek to dominate Asian waters. Tensions have risen as Chinese companies have increased exploration efforts in the region to look for new deposits of energy and minerals.

North Korea Threatens to Nuke South

Iran Will Retaliate if Inspected

And one more step towards the narcostate at the southern border,
Mexico prisoners ‘freed for killings’ in Durango state
Gunmen who killed 17 people at a party in northern Mexico earlier this month were let out of prison to carry out the attack, state prosecutors say.

As my friend Richard said, when I asked if there’s lots more to come, “probably, but you wouldn’t know it if you were at the golf course.”

Worried yet?