I think I've seen (and posted) something at least like this before. The dolphin jetpack that lets you swim like one - YouTube "Franky Zapata uses a flyboard to zoom in and out of the water and leap through the air."
Thursday, December 15, 2011
Wednesday, December 14, 2011
The Milky Way's black hole may spring to life in 2013
The Milky Way's black hole may spring to life in 2013.
"In the nearly 20 years we've been observing Sgr A*, only two stars have ever come closer to it. But stars are held together by gravity; this cloud is too diffuse to have that sort of coherence. As a result, the authors expect that it will undergo dramatic changes as it blasts in to the neighborhood of the black hole. The shock of hitting the low-density, high-temperature gas will compress the cloud even as the black hole's gravity starts to stretch it out along the direction of its orbit. This could eventually split the cloud into multiple fragments, each of which may take a slightly different path around the black hole. As these fragments reach the point in the orbit closest to black hole, its temperatures may reach 10106K, hot enough for it to start emitting X-rays."
"In the nearly 20 years we've been observing Sgr A*, only two stars have ever come closer to it. But stars are held together by gravity; this cloud is too diffuse to have that sort of coherence. As a result, the authors expect that it will undergo dramatic changes as it blasts in to the neighborhood of the black hole. The shock of hitting the low-density, high-temperature gas will compress the cloud even as the black hole's gravity starts to stretch it out along the direction of its orbit. This could eventually split the cloud into multiple fragments, each of which may take a slightly different path around the black hole. As these fragments reach the point in the orbit closest to black hole, its temperatures may reach 10106K, hot enough for it to start emitting X-rays."
A Petition to Support the Saving American Democracy Amendment
Petition - A Petition to Support the Saving American Democracy Amendment "Sen. Bernie Sanders has proposed a constitutional amendment that would overturn the Supreme Court decision in a case called Citizens United vs. FEC. "
Lessig on The Daily Show
Lawrence Lessig was on The Daily Show last night talking about his book Republic Lost, here's the whole thing.
Tuesday, December 13, 2011
Stanley Kubrick’s Fear And Desire on TCM Wed at 8pm
Ain't It Cool News has the press release I couldn't find on TCM's website, Stanley Kubrick’s FEAR AND DESIRE To Be Televised 8pm Wednesday For The First Time Ever!! "Stanley Kubrick hated his first feature, 1953’s “Fear and Desire,” so much he actively sought out and bought old prints to keep it from the public’s eyes."
One Trillion Frames Per Second
Capturing video at the speed of light — one trillion frames per second "We have built a virtual slow-motion camera where we can see photons, or light particles, moving through space."
Inside Up With Chris Hayes
Tommy Christopher explains Inside Up With Chris Hayes: The Best (And Worst) Part Of Waking Up Weekends. It's definitely one of my favorite news shows. I TiVo it on weekends and turn it on when I wake up, usually part way through the show (it airs Sat 7-9a and Sun 8-10a).
Matt Langer wrote, "Have you been watching “Up” with Chris Hayes? You should be! It’s really, really wonderful. Though honestly kind of creepy? Because that man is smart. Freakishly so. As in: he does this weird thing where whenever one of his guests brings up some random new topic he’ll just recap it for everyone watching. Like, just off the top of his head? Without a teleprompter? And it’s crazy! Who let this man with a perfectly healthy frontal cortex on television?!"
I agree that his recaps are great and impressive, but I don't think its freakishly smart. I think all journalists should be able to do this on topics they cover but so few do (or can). In that sense, yeah, him doing it is freakish, but also really appreciated.
Matt Langer wrote, "Have you been watching “Up” with Chris Hayes? You should be! It’s really, really wonderful. Though honestly kind of creepy? Because that man is smart. Freakishly so. As in: he does this weird thing where whenever one of his guests brings up some random new topic he’ll just recap it for everyone watching. Like, just off the top of his head? Without a teleprompter? And it’s crazy! Who let this man with a perfectly healthy frontal cortex on television?!"
I agree that his recaps are great and impressive, but I don't think its freakishly smart. I think all journalists should be able to do this on topics they cover but so few do (or can). In that sense, yeah, him doing it is freakish, but also really appreciated.
Romney Is Done
ThinkProgress: Romney In 2002: 'My Views Are Progressive' "It’s well known by now that Mitt Romney is having a hard time convincing GOP primary voters that he’s a true conservative, as he used to hold more liberal views during his time in politics in Massachusetts. A new video uncovered by Andrew Kaczynski shows just how much Romney’s views have shifted. While campaigning for governor against Shannon O’Brien in 2002, Romney told a local TV news station, “I’m not a partisan Republican…my views are progressive.” Watch it:"
I'm pretty sure this will be the nail in the coffin of him getting the Republican nomination.
Update: Here's more on the 22 year-old who dug this up.
I'm pretty sure this will be the nail in the coffin of him getting the Republican nomination.
Update: Here's more on the 22 year-old who dug this up.
Higgs Boson May Have Been Glimpsed
The BBC writes, LHC: Higgs boson 'may have been glimpsed' "Scientists say that two experiments at the LHC see hints of the Higgs at the same mass, fuelling huge excitement. But the LHC does not yet have enough data to claim a discovery."
"At a seminar at Cern (the organisation that operates the LHC) on Tuesday, the heads of Atlas and CMS said they see "spikes" in their data at roughly the same mass: 124-125 gigaelectronvolts (GeV). "The excess may be due to a fluctuation, but it could also be something more interesting. We cannot exclude anything at this stage," said Fabiola Gianotti, spokesperson for the Atlas experiment."
"None of the spikes seen by the experiments is at much more than the "two sigma" level of certainty."
"At a seminar at Cern (the organisation that operates the LHC) on Tuesday, the heads of Atlas and CMS said they see "spikes" in their data at roughly the same mass: 124-125 gigaelectronvolts (GeV). "The excess may be due to a fluctuation, but it could also be something more interesting. We cannot exclude anything at this stage," said Fabiola Gianotti, spokesperson for the Atlas experiment."
"None of the spikes seen by the experiments is at much more than the "two sigma" level of certainty."
Correlation or Causation?
Business Week has some fun examples of Correlation or Causation? "Need to prove something you already believe? Statistics are easy: All you need are two graphs and a leading question"
Sunday, December 11, 2011
A Mad Solution To An Imaginary Problem
Steve Benen gives an example of why I think the GOP is completely disingenuous, A mad solution to an imaginary problem.
"The House on Thursday afternoon approved legislation Republicans said was aimed at ensuring that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) cannot regulate so-called “farm dust.”"
"Just to refresh some memories, the legislation intends to stop proposed regulation that hasn’t, in reality, been proposed.
As Tim Noah explained this week, “It’s political bullshit. There is no pending farm-dust regulation. What there is, is an attempt by Republicans to persuade everybody that there is a pending farm-dust regulation so they can pass a new law exempting the agricultural industry … from an existing clean-air regulation that hardly ever affects farms (but, when it does, addresses a legitimate health issue).”
In other words, with plenty of real-world solutions in need of policymakers’ attention, the House yesterday approved legislation to address a problem that doesn’t exist."
Combine this with two stories I tweeted.
The truth at Crossroads. "The Republican attack operation, Crossroads GPS, led in part by Karl Rove, has had a difficult time over the last month or so. A few weeks ago, for example, a Montana station pulled a Crossroads ad that misled the public. Rove’s outfit was also caught blatantly lying about former President Bill Clinton, then got caught pushing obviously bogus claims in Massachusetts, then got caught making even more demonstrably false claims about former Gov. Tim Kaine (D), running in a competitive U.S. Senate race in Virginia." And now of course they're running a new ad saying Elizabeth Warren sides with the banks against the middle class. Karl Rove, still a liar.
Then in This year belongs to the Republicans, which was stated by a former GOP aide and reflected by Republicans in a poll by The National Journal. I agree with Benen, "The year has been so miserable, it’s tough to imagine what the GOP finds satisfying. Republicans’ approval rating dropped to levels unseen since Watergate; Congress’ approval rating dropped to a level unseen since the dawn of modern polling. Republicans held the full faith and credit of the United States hostage, on purpose, and caused the first-ever downgrade of the nation’s debt. Neither party has been able to pass any of its major legislative priorities, and thanks to Republican intransigence, compromise between the parties has become a laughable pipedream."
"The House on Thursday afternoon approved legislation Republicans said was aimed at ensuring that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) cannot regulate so-called “farm dust.”"
"Just to refresh some memories, the legislation intends to stop proposed regulation that hasn’t, in reality, been proposed.
As Tim Noah explained this week, “It’s political bullshit. There is no pending farm-dust regulation. What there is, is an attempt by Republicans to persuade everybody that there is a pending farm-dust regulation so they can pass a new law exempting the agricultural industry … from an existing clean-air regulation that hardly ever affects farms (but, when it does, addresses a legitimate health issue).”
In other words, with plenty of real-world solutions in need of policymakers’ attention, the House yesterday approved legislation to address a problem that doesn’t exist."
Combine this with two stories I tweeted.
The truth at Crossroads. "The Republican attack operation, Crossroads GPS, led in part by Karl Rove, has had a difficult time over the last month or so. A few weeks ago, for example, a Montana station pulled a Crossroads ad that misled the public. Rove’s outfit was also caught blatantly lying about former President Bill Clinton, then got caught pushing obviously bogus claims in Massachusetts, then got caught making even more demonstrably false claims about former Gov. Tim Kaine (D), running in a competitive U.S. Senate race in Virginia." And now of course they're running a new ad saying Elizabeth Warren sides with the banks against the middle class. Karl Rove, still a liar.
Then in This year belongs to the Republicans, which was stated by a former GOP aide and reflected by Republicans in a poll by The National Journal. I agree with Benen, "The year has been so miserable, it’s tough to imagine what the GOP finds satisfying. Republicans’ approval rating dropped to levels unseen since Watergate; Congress’ approval rating dropped to a level unseen since the dawn of modern polling. Republicans held the full faith and credit of the United States hostage, on purpose, and caused the first-ever downgrade of the nation’s debt. Neither party has been able to pass any of its major legislative priorities, and thanks to Republican intransigence, compromise between the parties has become a laughable pipedream."
Friday, December 09, 2011
Dylan Ratigan Loses It On Air
I can quibble with some of this (particularly the first part) but there's a lot to like here in a Network kind of way.
EPA: Natural Gas Fracking Linked to Water Contamination
Natural Gas Fracking Linked to Water Contamination by Federal Agency: Scientific American "In a first, federal environment officials today scientifically linked underground water pollution with hydraulic fracturing, concluding that contaminants found in central Wyoming were likely caused by the gas drilling process."
"In the report released today, the EPA said that pollution from 33 abandoned oil and gas waste pits 2013 which are the subject of a separate cleanup program 2013 are indeed responsible for some degree of shallow groundwater pollution in the area. Those pits may be the source of contamination affecting at least 42 private water wells in Pavillion. But the pits could not be blamed for contamination detected in the water monitoring wells 1,000 feet underground. That contamination, the agency concluded, had to have been caused by fracking."
"The agency's findings could be a turning point in the heated national debate about whether contamination from fracking is happening, and are likely to shape how the country regulates and develops natural gas resources in the Marcellus Shale and across the Eastern Appalachian states.
Some of the findings in the report also directly contradict longstanding arguments by the drilling industry for why the fracking process is safe: that hydrologic pressure would naturally force fluids down, not up; that deep geologic layers provide a watertight barrier preventing the movement of chemicals towards the surface; and that the problems with the cement and steel barriers around gas wells aren't connected to fracking."
"In the report released today, the EPA said that pollution from 33 abandoned oil and gas waste pits 2013 which are the subject of a separate cleanup program 2013 are indeed responsible for some degree of shallow groundwater pollution in the area. Those pits may be the source of contamination affecting at least 42 private water wells in Pavillion. But the pits could not be blamed for contamination detected in the water monitoring wells 1,000 feet underground. That contamination, the agency concluded, had to have been caused by fracking."
"The agency's findings could be a turning point in the heated national debate about whether contamination from fracking is happening, and are likely to shape how the country regulates and develops natural gas resources in the Marcellus Shale and across the Eastern Appalachian states.
Some of the findings in the report also directly contradict longstanding arguments by the drilling industry for why the fracking process is safe: that hydrologic pressure would naturally force fluids down, not up; that deep geologic layers provide a watertight barrier preventing the movement of chemicals towards the surface; and that the problems with the cement and steel barriers around gas wells aren't connected to fracking."
GOP Objects To 'Millionaires Surtax'; Millionaires We Found? Not So Much
NPR has a fun piece GOP Objects To 'Millionaires Surtax'; Millionaires We Found? Not So Much.
"For the second week in a row, the Senate on Thursday voted down proposals to extend the payroll tax holiday through next year. In the case of the Democrats' proposal, Republicans objected to the "millionaires surtax" that would be used to pay for it...The argument is that many small-business owners report company profits on their individual taxes because of the way their businesses are structured. Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., says the surtax would hurt their ability to hire."
"We wanted to talk to business owners who would be affected. So, NPR requested help from numerous Republican congressional offices, including House and Senate leadership. They were unable to produce a single millionaire job creator for us to interview.
So we went to the business groups that have been lobbying against the surtax. Again, three days after putting in a request, none of them was able to find someone for us to talk to. A group called the Tax Relief Coalition said the problem was finding someone willing to talk about their personal taxes on national radio.
So next we put a query on Facebook. And several business owners who said they would be affected by the "millionaires surtax" responded."
And each of them said the marginal tax rate had no bearing on their decision to hire more people or not. Shocker. And which businesses are these that aren't incorporated in some way for limited liability protection? This is just like the myth of all those farmers who would lose the family farm because of the estate tax.
"For the second week in a row, the Senate on Thursday voted down proposals to extend the payroll tax holiday through next year. In the case of the Democrats' proposal, Republicans objected to the "millionaires surtax" that would be used to pay for it...The argument is that many small-business owners report company profits on their individual taxes because of the way their businesses are structured. Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., says the surtax would hurt their ability to hire."
"We wanted to talk to business owners who would be affected. So, NPR requested help from numerous Republican congressional offices, including House and Senate leadership. They were unable to produce a single millionaire job creator for us to interview.
So we went to the business groups that have been lobbying against the surtax. Again, three days after putting in a request, none of them was able to find someone for us to talk to. A group called the Tax Relief Coalition said the problem was finding someone willing to talk about their personal taxes on national radio.
So next we put a query on Facebook. And several business owners who said they would be affected by the "millionaires surtax" responded."
And each of them said the marginal tax rate had no bearing on their decision to hire more people or not. Shocker. And which businesses are these that aren't incorporated in some way for limited liability protection? This is just like the myth of all those farmers who would lose the family farm because of the estate tax.
My Occupy LA Arrest, by Patrick Meighan
My Occupy LA Arrest, by Patrick Meighan. "My name is Patrick Meighan, and I’m a husband, a father, a writer on the Fox animated sitcom “Family Guy”, and a member of the Unitarian Universalist Community Church of Santa Monica. I was arrested at about 1 a.m. Wednesday morning with 291 other people at Occupy LA."
Thursday, December 08, 2011
Cern to Announce Higgs Boson Next Tue?
The BBC says Cern scientist expects 'first glimpse' of Higgs boson. "The teams are sworn to secrecy, but various physics blogs, and the canteens at Cern, are alive with talk of a possible sighting of the Higgs, and with a mass inline with what many physicists would expect."
"Next Tuesday, two separate teams will each reveal the outcome of trawling through their latest data from LHC collisions. A spokesman for one of these teams told us that this year alone they've searched the remains of some 350 trillion collisions, with only ten or so producing candidates for a reliable sign of the Higgs."
"The teams at Cern will not claim next week's result as an official "discovery" - a so-called 5-sigma event. This is because they have not yet produced enough experimental data to make that claim. That will come next year, probably by the summer."
"Next Tuesday, two separate teams will each reveal the outcome of trawling through their latest data from LHC collisions. A spokesman for one of these teams told us that this year alone they've searched the remains of some 350 trillion collisions, with only ten or so producing candidates for a reliable sign of the Higgs."
"The teams at Cern will not claim next week's result as an official "discovery" - a so-called 5-sigma event. This is because they have not yet produced enough experimental data to make that claim. That will come next year, probably by the summer."
Khan Academy ponders what it can teach the higher education establishment
Inside Higher Ed has an interesting article, Khan Academy ponders what it can teach the higher education establishment.
"“I think too much conversation about Khan Academy is about cute little videos," Khan said in an interview last week. “Most of our resources, almost two-thirds of [the staff], are engineers working on the exercises and analytics platform. That, I think, is what we’re most excited about.”"
"Using math and computer science concepts decidedly more advanced than most of those in Khan’s video library, the Khan engineers have trained the website’s exercise platform how to predict, with startling accuracy, how likely it is that a student will correctly answer the next practice problem -- and whether that student will be able to solve the same type of problem a week, two weeks, and a month later."
"“If [a user is] logged in, then we have the entire history of every problem they’ve done, and how long it took them, and how they did,” says Ben Kamens, the lead developer at Khan Academy. “So whenever anybody does a problem, we see whether they got it right or wrong, how many tries it took them, what their guess was, what the problem was, how many hints they used, and how long they took between each hint.”"
"“I think too much conversation about Khan Academy is about cute little videos," Khan said in an interview last week. “Most of our resources, almost two-thirds of [the staff], are engineers working on the exercises and analytics platform. That, I think, is what we’re most excited about.”"
"Using math and computer science concepts decidedly more advanced than most of those in Khan’s video library, the Khan engineers have trained the website’s exercise platform how to predict, with startling accuracy, how likely it is that a student will correctly answer the next practice problem -- and whether that student will be able to solve the same type of problem a week, two weeks, and a month later."
"“If [a user is] logged in, then we have the entire history of every problem they’ve done, and how long it took them, and how they did,” says Ben Kamens, the lead developer at Khan Academy. “So whenever anybody does a problem, we see whether they got it right or wrong, how many tries it took them, what their guess was, what the problem was, how many hints they used, and how long they took between each hint.”"
No, the Payroll Tax Cut Doesn't Hurt the Trust Fund
Kevin Drum explains No, the Payroll Tax Cut Doesn't Hurt the Trust Fund "Normally, a reduction in the payroll tax would indeed reduce contributions to the Social Security trust fund, but last year's bill specifically made up for this loss from the general fund. The trust fund got every penny it normally would have, and all the proposals on the table this year do the same."
Would shifting regulatory power to Congress usher in a lobbying bonanza?
Ezra Klein wrote Would shifting regulatory power to Congress usher in a lobbying bonanza?.
"Republicans are trying to shift regulatory power from the executive branch to Congress in a bill that’s expected to pass the House today. The REINS Act would send any “major rule” that’s estimated to cost the economy more than $100 million to Congress — or have adverse effects on consumers, the business climate and individual industries — for an up-or-down vote. If Congress doesn’t approve the regulation in 70 days, it won’t take effect. The bill is dead-on-arrival in the Senate, but it underscores some of the GOP’s biggest anti-regulatory talking points."
"But federal regulators heading up that process don’t have campaign coffers to fill. Shifting the approval of such rules to Congress would, accordingly, shift their lobbying over to elected lawmakers who rely on campaign contributions. So although Republicans argue that the status quo lets “major decisions to be made by unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats,” their alternative accordingly makes more regulations vulnerable to deep-pocketed contributors who shape the electoral cycle."
Based on the conversation with Jack Abramoff I saw the other day, this would be a complete disaster. It also makes complete sense that Congress would want this new source of income. Republicans at work.
"Republicans are trying to shift regulatory power from the executive branch to Congress in a bill that’s expected to pass the House today. The REINS Act would send any “major rule” that’s estimated to cost the economy more than $100 million to Congress — or have adverse effects on consumers, the business climate and individual industries — for an up-or-down vote. If Congress doesn’t approve the regulation in 70 days, it won’t take effect. The bill is dead-on-arrival in the Senate, but it underscores some of the GOP’s biggest anti-regulatory talking points."
"But federal regulators heading up that process don’t have campaign coffers to fill. Shifting the approval of such rules to Congress would, accordingly, shift their lobbying over to elected lawmakers who rely on campaign contributions. So although Republicans argue that the status quo lets “major decisions to be made by unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats,” their alternative accordingly makes more regulations vulnerable to deep-pocketed contributors who shape the electoral cycle."
Based on the conversation with Jack Abramoff I saw the other day, this would be a complete disaster. It also makes complete sense that Congress would want this new source of income. Republicans at work.
Other Than That, Mr. Cain, How Was the Campaign?
Nate Silver wrote Other Than That, Mr. Cain, How Was the Campaign?.
"Mr. Cain’s polls were headed on a sharp upward trajectory until Oct. 31, when Politico first reported on accusations that he had sexually harassed two women. They then reversed course and embarked upon an equally sharp downward trajectory. Not a whole lot more complicated than that."
It turns out the Onion was completely correct.
"Mr. Cain’s polls were headed on a sharp upward trajectory until Oct. 31, when Politico first reported on accusations that he had sexually harassed two women. They then reversed course and embarked upon an equally sharp downward trajectory. Not a whole lot more complicated than that."
It turns out the Onion was completely correct.
Daily Show on Indefinite Detentions of Citizens
Stewart did a pretty good job on this topic. It seems ridiculous to me that this could happen. You can't just make a law that trumps a constitutional protected right, particularly such a significant one. It seems clear that the Supreme Court would overturn this though I suspect Roberts in particular would be a stickler on standing which would mean someone would need to be (indefinitely?) detained without charges. And how would we know about it? And could he (or she) bring a case? Well I think they've already decided that even Guantanamo detainees can bring habeus petitions so this is exactly that. But seriously, any Representative, Senator or President who voted for this should be impeached.
Here's the ACLU on it Nov. 29. Senate Rejects Amendment Banning Indefinite Detention and this from yesterday, Behind Closed Doors: Congress Trying to Force Indefinite Detention Bill on Americans.
Update: The administration's position is here. While what Stewart described is kinda right, the real issue is this, "The Administration strongly objects to the military custody provision of section 1032, which would appear to mandate military custody for a certain class of terrorism suspects." So they want the flexibility to use civil courts (like with the Times Square bomber) which is a good thing.
Here's the ACLU on it Nov. 29. Senate Rejects Amendment Banning Indefinite Detention and this from yesterday, Behind Closed Doors: Congress Trying to Force Indefinite Detention Bill on Americans.
Update: The administration's position is here. While what Stewart described is kinda right, the real issue is this, "The Administration strongly objects to the military custody provision of section 1032, which would appear to mandate military custody for a certain class of terrorism suspects." So they want the flexibility to use civil courts (like with the Times Square bomber) which is a good thing.
Can Occupy and the Tea Party team up?
Salon wrote Can Occupy and the Tea Party team up?. "In a Virginia art gallery, supporters of the two movements quietly explore the possibilities."
"But once in the same room, any discomfort members of the two groups might have felt seemed to melt away. The discussion proceeded straight toward questions of constitutional theory — whether the 220-year-old foundational document is best salvaged or scrapped after having been so pillaged by elected officials and corporate interests in the intervening years."
"And listening to their hopes and fears, another delineation emerges. The Tea Party members rely on their early American history classes, exhibiting an almost encyclopedic knowledge of the Federalist Papers and obscure letters exchanged between the Founding Fathers as they make arguments to return to what they believe are strict interpretations of the Constitution’s intent. Their Occupy counterparts know plenty about applied constitutional theory, but they really only perk up when it comes to 20th century history. The occupiers paint the rise of the middle class after World War II, aided by the strength of unions, high taxes on the wealthy and a robust manufacturing-based economy, with vivid imagery that evokes memories of Rosie the Riveter. The movements emerge from two very different conceptions of what is important in American history."
"But once in the same room, any discomfort members of the two groups might have felt seemed to melt away. The discussion proceeded straight toward questions of constitutional theory — whether the 220-year-old foundational document is best salvaged or scrapped after having been so pillaged by elected officials and corporate interests in the intervening years."
"And listening to their hopes and fears, another delineation emerges. The Tea Party members rely on their early American history classes, exhibiting an almost encyclopedic knowledge of the Federalist Papers and obscure letters exchanged between the Founding Fathers as they make arguments to return to what they believe are strict interpretations of the Constitution’s intent. Their Occupy counterparts know plenty about applied constitutional theory, but they really only perk up when it comes to 20th century history. The occupiers paint the rise of the middle class after World War II, aided by the strength of unions, high taxes on the wealthy and a robust manufacturing-based economy, with vivid imagery that evokes memories of Rosie the Riveter. The movements emerge from two very different conceptions of what is important in American history."
Wednesday, December 07, 2011
BP Says Halliburton 'Intentionally Destroyed Evidence' After Gulf Oil Spill
CNN reports BP says Halliburton 'intentionally destroyed evidence' after Gulf oil spill. Shocker!
"BP alleges in its filing that Halliburton destroyed evidence on cement testing and violated court orders by not bringing forth "inexplicably missing" computer modeling results.
"Halliburton has steadfastly refused to provide these critical testing and modeling results in discovery. Halliburton's refusal has been unwavering, despite repeated BP discovery requests and a specific order from this Court," the documents state.
"BP has now learned the reason for Halliburton's intransigence -- Halliburton destroyed the results of physical slurry testing, and it has, at best, lost the computer modeling outputs that showed no channeling. More egregious still, Halliburton intentionally destroyed the evidence related to its nonprivileged cement testing, in part because it wanted to eliminate any risk that this evidence would be used against it at trial," the BP papers say."
"BP alleges in its filing that Halliburton destroyed evidence on cement testing and violated court orders by not bringing forth "inexplicably missing" computer modeling results.
"Halliburton has steadfastly refused to provide these critical testing and modeling results in discovery. Halliburton's refusal has been unwavering, despite repeated BP discovery requests and a specific order from this Court," the documents state.
"BP has now learned the reason for Halliburton's intransigence -- Halliburton destroyed the results of physical slurry testing, and it has, at best, lost the computer modeling outputs that showed no channeling. More egregious still, Halliburton intentionally destroyed the evidence related to its nonprivileged cement testing, in part because it wanted to eliminate any risk that this evidence would be used against it at trial," the BP papers say."
2011: The Year in Photos
In Focus presents 2011: The Year in Photos, Part 1 of 3 "2011 was a year of global tumult, marked by widespread social and political uprisings, economic crises, and a great deal more. We saw the fall of multiple dictators, welcomed a new country (South Sudan), witnessed our planet's population grow to 7 billion, and watched in horror as Japan was struck by a devastating earthquake, a tsunami, and a nuclear disaster. From the Arab Spring to Los Indignados to Occupy Wall Street, citizens around the world took to the streets in massive numbers, protesting against governments and financial institutions, risking arrest, injury, and in some cases their lives. Collected here is Part 1 of a three-part photo summary of the last year, covering 2011's first several months. Part 2 is now live, and Part 3 of the series will go up tomorrow - totaling 120 images in all. [40 photos + 1 more]"
And part 2.
and part 3.
And part 2.
and part 3.
Tuesday, December 06, 2011
I Saw Lawrence Lessig Interview Jack Abramoff
When I woke up today I had no idea I'd ask Jack Abramoff a question.
I follow Lawrence Lessig on twitter and saw this tweet so I went. It was the start of a new lecture series In the Dock, Lawrence Lessig interviews Jack Abramoff about corruption, what's not to like?
I had seen Abramoff on 60 Minutes recently so I knew he had written a book about corruption in Washington and at least seemed repentent. I haven't read his book yet and in fact still haven't read Lessig's latest, though I own it and got it signed tonight.
So Lessig started by describing two stories from Abramoff's book. First how he worked on getting the MX Missle program passed Congress and how one Congressman in particular said I will vote for this bill if you do this thing in my district (I missed the details). The other story was him trying to get into a particularly popular entertainment law class at Georgetown. He got the professor sports tickets and a lunch at the white house via a friend (again, I'm not sure on the details). Both worked. He learned to bring extraordinary means and often irrelevant benefits to achieve a goal.
He said (and I agree) "Not all politics is corrupt and not all lobbying is corrupt" but Lessig followed up on the irrelevant part, particularly when it's money in the form of cash or contributions. Abramoff told a story about Tom DeLay. He wanted some money from Walmart but they said they didn't want to sully themselves with politics. They came one day wanting help with a road access issue and he said he didn't want to sully himself with it. Microsoft was in DeLay's office wanting something and DeLay told this story and said "and they'll never get anything from him". The next day Microsoft gave $100,000 to the party (or something).
DeLay isn't the only one doing this but he was nicknamed The Hammer. Lessig asked if it was always like this and Abramoff said it wasn't always this subtle. LBJ would way where's your $100,000 in cash? Now a Congress member will say "I'm having a fundraiser tomorrow night..." and that's code that they want a donation.
There are also non-money things they do. Now interests will use leverage to set up a congressional hearing for their enemy. Hearings take weeks to prepare for and this can cost a million dollars or more. They're always designed to achieve something that's never expressed. They can destroy your reputation or put you in jail for perjury or contempt (there's even a cell in building).
It's more important for a lobbyist to have influence on the staffers than the Congressman. This goes back to Lessig's point that Congress is a farm league for K Street (lobbyists). Daniel Webster had no staff. They wrote their own bills. Now the ones that make the decision or give you access are the staff. Most members are lazy, they don't want to do the work or read the bills, and they want to be on TV. Abramoff didn't hire members (only once as a favor and the guy was useless) but hired staff. At first he would say can you start tomorrow, then he learned to say "I want to hire you when do you want to leave the hill?" Even if they said in two years, Abramoff now owned him in the mean time and the guy had more access to things during that time than Abramoff's own staff.
He said he didn’t innovate his techniques, he learned everything he did though he may have pushed boundaries. His conviction had nothing to do with these things, they weren't illegal. It's not what’s illegal that’s the problem it's what’s legal that's the problem.
His suggested reforms in the book are:
- Eliminate entirely any contribution by lobbyists or contractors, anyone who gets a specialized benefit from government.
- eliminate the revolving door for members or staff (they can't become lobbyists)
- term limits (three House terms, two Senate terms)
- He wants to repeal the 17th amendment (direct election of senators)
- all laws need to apply to congressmen (now exempt from some but I'm not sure which though see this note from factcheck.org)
The important ones are the first two which take the money out of the system and the promise of future employment. Abramoff figures that with these reforms, lobbyists would be forced to lobby on the merits and philosophy of the issues.
Lessig wondered about the details of such a system. How do you determine what is a specialized benefit and could someone still get around that? Abramoff cited examples of legalizing pot which would affect everyone equally. Lessig mentioned cutting taxes on the rich and would the rich be banned from contributing for that and Abramoff said the current debate is about lowering taxes for all it's just the rich that benefit the most from that. But Abramoff wasn't firm on these, he said he wasn't a law crafter and would be find leaving such details to others, the point was to take away money from a lobbyist's arsenal. He was also open to Lessig's idea of a voucher system for small campaign contributions.
He then took questions from the audience, I only got notes on a few of them.
Someone asked that since MA just legalized casino gambling, what should we be on the look out for from the lobbyists? He didn't know anything about the MA law but he said all gambling is political and it's easier to stop than pass so it's remarkable it got through. We should probably be trying to pass a law that prevents the industry from donating money to any political level. That seems unlikely but otherwise the gambling industry will own the state. They will probably want to consolidate regulation, make it so it can't be undone, allow expansion, but never allow a fourth casino.
Another good question was how do Congressmen determine the prices they want? Lessig followed up saying it's an important question because the price seems far too low and it's an argument that money really isn't corrupting the system because the ROI is so high. Abramoff said they ask for what they think they can get and it's low because they're dealing in stolen goods.
Someone else asked how do you corrupt a new member? Congressman first meet their leadership who say your seat is important to us. You must first retire your debt, meet these lobbyists who can help you do that. Maybe they avoid it for a few years but after a few years they are in. They sell their vote for a glass of water. If someone does something nice to you it's natural instinct to do something nice for them.
In response to some question he told the story of when his story first broke. He was in such denial, in such another world that he didn't even realize it as a problem. Previous stories talked about how he charged his clients a lot and they put it on their web site as advertising. Their initial response to the first Washington Post story was asking if they should put it on the website too! Then his process was that it would blow over, or it wasn't a big deal, that everyone was doing it, just not as well, etc. It took him a long time to come to terms with the fact that his actions and the system were completely corrupt and being inside he had no idea.
Based I that I asked my question. I asked if members of Congress and their staff are as in denial as he was. He said absolutely. They see someone go to jail for insider trading, exactly what they're doing and they make connection and are happy that the guy is going to jail. It's just a completely different world. He said he's still occasionally talks to a few congress members though they don't want it known that they're talking to him. I wondered how after his conviction and jail term he still has so much more access than an average citizen.
I follow Lawrence Lessig on twitter and saw this tweet so I went. It was the start of a new lecture series In the Dock, Lawrence Lessig interviews Jack Abramoff about corruption, what's not to like?
I had seen Abramoff on 60 Minutes recently so I knew he had written a book about corruption in Washington and at least seemed repentent. I haven't read his book yet and in fact still haven't read Lessig's latest, though I own it and got it signed tonight.
So Lessig started by describing two stories from Abramoff's book. First how he worked on getting the MX Missle program passed Congress and how one Congressman in particular said I will vote for this bill if you do this thing in my district (I missed the details). The other story was him trying to get into a particularly popular entertainment law class at Georgetown. He got the professor sports tickets and a lunch at the white house via a friend (again, I'm not sure on the details). Both worked. He learned to bring extraordinary means and often irrelevant benefits to achieve a goal.
He said (and I agree) "Not all politics is corrupt and not all lobbying is corrupt" but Lessig followed up on the irrelevant part, particularly when it's money in the form of cash or contributions. Abramoff told a story about Tom DeLay. He wanted some money from Walmart but they said they didn't want to sully themselves with politics. They came one day wanting help with a road access issue and he said he didn't want to sully himself with it. Microsoft was in DeLay's office wanting something and DeLay told this story and said "and they'll never get anything from him". The next day Microsoft gave $100,000 to the party (or something).
DeLay isn't the only one doing this but he was nicknamed The Hammer. Lessig asked if it was always like this and Abramoff said it wasn't always this subtle. LBJ would way where's your $100,000 in cash? Now a Congress member will say "I'm having a fundraiser tomorrow night..." and that's code that they want a donation.
There are also non-money things they do. Now interests will use leverage to set up a congressional hearing for their enemy. Hearings take weeks to prepare for and this can cost a million dollars or more. They're always designed to achieve something that's never expressed. They can destroy your reputation or put you in jail for perjury or contempt (there's even a cell in building).
It's more important for a lobbyist to have influence on the staffers than the Congressman. This goes back to Lessig's point that Congress is a farm league for K Street (lobbyists). Daniel Webster had no staff. They wrote their own bills. Now the ones that make the decision or give you access are the staff. Most members are lazy, they don't want to do the work or read the bills, and they want to be on TV. Abramoff didn't hire members (only once as a favor and the guy was useless) but hired staff. At first he would say can you start tomorrow, then he learned to say "I want to hire you when do you want to leave the hill?" Even if they said in two years, Abramoff now owned him in the mean time and the guy had more access to things during that time than Abramoff's own staff.
He said he didn’t innovate his techniques, he learned everything he did though he may have pushed boundaries. His conviction had nothing to do with these things, they weren't illegal. It's not what’s illegal that’s the problem it's what’s legal that's the problem.
His suggested reforms in the book are:
- Eliminate entirely any contribution by lobbyists or contractors, anyone who gets a specialized benefit from government.
- eliminate the revolving door for members or staff (they can't become lobbyists)
- term limits (three House terms, two Senate terms)
- He wants to repeal the 17th amendment (direct election of senators)
- all laws need to apply to congressmen (now exempt from some but I'm not sure which though see this note from factcheck.org)
The important ones are the first two which take the money out of the system and the promise of future employment. Abramoff figures that with these reforms, lobbyists would be forced to lobby on the merits and philosophy of the issues.
Lessig wondered about the details of such a system. How do you determine what is a specialized benefit and could someone still get around that? Abramoff cited examples of legalizing pot which would affect everyone equally. Lessig mentioned cutting taxes on the rich and would the rich be banned from contributing for that and Abramoff said the current debate is about lowering taxes for all it's just the rich that benefit the most from that. But Abramoff wasn't firm on these, he said he wasn't a law crafter and would be find leaving such details to others, the point was to take away money from a lobbyist's arsenal. He was also open to Lessig's idea of a voucher system for small campaign contributions.
He then took questions from the audience, I only got notes on a few of them.
Someone asked that since MA just legalized casino gambling, what should we be on the look out for from the lobbyists? He didn't know anything about the MA law but he said all gambling is political and it's easier to stop than pass so it's remarkable it got through. We should probably be trying to pass a law that prevents the industry from donating money to any political level. That seems unlikely but otherwise the gambling industry will own the state. They will probably want to consolidate regulation, make it so it can't be undone, allow expansion, but never allow a fourth casino.
Another good question was how do Congressmen determine the prices they want? Lessig followed up saying it's an important question because the price seems far too low and it's an argument that money really isn't corrupting the system because the ROI is so high. Abramoff said they ask for what they think they can get and it's low because they're dealing in stolen goods.
Someone else asked how do you corrupt a new member? Congressman first meet their leadership who say your seat is important to us. You must first retire your debt, meet these lobbyists who can help you do that. Maybe they avoid it for a few years but after a few years they are in. They sell their vote for a glass of water. If someone does something nice to you it's natural instinct to do something nice for them.
In response to some question he told the story of when his story first broke. He was in such denial, in such another world that he didn't even realize it as a problem. Previous stories talked about how he charged his clients a lot and they put it on their web site as advertising. Their initial response to the first Washington Post story was asking if they should put it on the website too! Then his process was that it would blow over, or it wasn't a big deal, that everyone was doing it, just not as well, etc. It took him a long time to come to terms with the fact that his actions and the system were completely corrupt and being inside he had no idea.
Based I that I asked my question. I asked if members of Congress and their staff are as in denial as he was. He said absolutely. They see someone go to jail for insider trading, exactly what they're doing and they make connection and are happy that the guy is going to jail. It's just a completely different world. He said he's still occasionally talks to a few congress members though they don't want it known that they're talking to him. I wondered how after his conviction and jail term he still has so much more access than an average citizen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)