Home
> Uncategorized > Hank Sims to Join Me on KMUD
Hank Sims to Join Me on KMUD
To wrap up election talk – local to national. Thursday, 7:00 p.m.
Leave a Reply
Recent Comments
 | Flying Duck on Quick Notes |
 | Advantage Conditioni… on Happy Sink o’ de Ma… |
| Anonymous on Eureka Fair Wage Act — W… |
 | Anonymous on Quick Notes |
 | Thirdeye on EiC meets EPD |
 | rubensf.com on Bank Transfer Day Nov. 5t… |
 | Thunderbird on EiC meets EPD |
Top Posts & Pages
Eric, Somewhat off topic but possibly something to bring up on air. Given the congressional Democrat wins in CA , are your doubts allayed about the redistricting process?
Two big time libtards. Pink,pinker,pinkest. This should be a real snorrrrrrr!
That would be a good topic, Nan. I’ve been reading a lot of rants about the red states being so gerrymandered now that they’ll never change color.
Hank Sims & Eric Kirk speaking to the choir. How boring. How about some balance, somebody you don’t agree with 95% of the time? Like say (gasp) a conservative?
NAN – I originally felt that by giving a minority party half of the seats on an unelected commission, it was giving too much influence to that party. Either the Republicans on the commission were honest, or the Democrats maneuvered very well. California is a blue state and the representation should reflect that. I’m relieved by the results.
However, I still have a problem as a matter of principle of turning the process over to unelected officials. I don’t think you can remove the politics, and so I worry about the accountability. But we don’t have to worry about it for another 8 years.
My KHSU show is actually going to be dedicated to bringing different voices together for debate. Already had a great debate on the ballot propositions on the first show. I will have conservatives, libertarians, and various perspectives represented on a regular basis.
I’m bringing Hank onto this show not so much to argue the politics, but to analyze them. He has a keen understanding of politics, and with the election over, the arguments are superfluous at this point.
How is “Gerry-mandering” even legal?
I’m bringing Hank onto this show not so much to argue the politics, but to analyze them.
-analyze them one-sidedly.
moviedad – because outside of the Voting Rights Act laws which are race specific, there are no federal laws against it.
suzy – I don’t think you’ve heard Hank on my show before. He’s very balanced.
-if you think Hank is “very balanced” you need to get out of your bubble.
“He has a keen understanding of politics”….
Banter junkies can be impressive and fun to listen to as long as listeners do not expect any big-picture context. To be fair, the same is true for nearly all media sources these days…especially “journalism”….bereft of relevance and useful information.
Last April, 2012, the HSU Lumberjack featured the abysmal 10% turnout of student voters who graduate to join the vast majority of eligible Americans who also chose not to vote. Front page news, finally! There’s never been a story like it in the LJ, nor anywhere else in local, or national media. It is extraordinarily rare!
Imagine how damaging it would be to the public perception of media’s election-hoopla, the advertisers, and Wall Street, if the the public was routinely reminded that the election-Pinata being beaten was actually empty! The U.S. has referred to the non-participation and disenfranchisement of citizens of “rogue nations” as evidence of failed democracies before, during, and after we’ve invaded them.
Ditto on local election corruption. No local media dares to break the complete silence on who dominates local campaign contributions, why they do it, and where that has taken this county and its cities. Local building moratoriums were dutifully reported…without a wit of context…the stories died long before the moratoriums. Local greed and corruption is untouchable, just like the state and national brand!! Most Americans are still wondering what Wall Street’s corruption was about, how much they’re still looting from the Treasury, and where it’s taking us.
Election punditry, including all journalism, is completely irrelevant and illegitimate when the overwhelming context is routinely self-censored.
(You have my permission to use my comments on KMUD as a desperate plea for some relevance).
Why was a blogger selected for this discussion? What does Hank bring to the table in terms of an understanding of county elections?
Anonymous: Hank is more than “a blogger” having served as the news editor of the North Coast Journal as well as writing stories for other publications (The Eye, Anderson Valley Advertiser).
Hank is a good writer. Just a poor thinker and worse journalist. He is a libs,lib. Why do you think the Cleary crew keeps his sorry excuse for a news blog funded.
I’d love to listen in, but I don’t know where to look on the dial. It appears that blogs are just as useful as print and TV these days.
Right, so, a former local journalist, turned blogger, has opinions about elections. I’ll repeat the questions. Why was a blogger selected for this discussion? What does Hank bring to the table in terms of an understanding of county elections?
Today’s media “table” is made for this world’s “Sims”.
Media decision makers invite word smiths that provide advertisers with the snappy entertainment they believe attract readers, listeners and viewers.
Exploring ironies, revealing uncomfortable truths, exposing injustice, corruption, double standards and hypocrites in high places, ….or simply providing useful information relevant to working families…. all died 40 years ago with the labor section of daily newspapers. We get a glimpse of journalism in the NCJ 2 or 3 ties a year, albeit, without follow up
I’ve heard publishers blame illiteracy for the collapse of newspaper’s. In fact, there’s little of value in the media for average Americans, certainly not readily available, unless they’re checking for estate sales, storage unit auctions, and foreclosures.
Self-censored propagandists have families to feed just as they’ve had in every other human tyranny.
Know your era!
Anonymous: If such is the direction of print media, where do you suggest one turn for information as one did 50 years ago.
Partisan bias in U.S. House elections
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/wiping-out-partisan-bias-in-us-house-elections/2012/11/15/bb8279be-2d2d-11e2-a99d-5c4203af7b7a_story.html
Everyone who was 18 in 1968 is 62 now. The youth of the 60′s are in charge and what do we have? Global Climate Change, Endless War, with growing upper & lower classes and a shrinking middle class. The 60′s Revolution was a completely failed revolution, the Establishment rules supreme (the Military Industrial Complex and their Lap Dog ‘Free Press’). The Greedy Pigs control the economy and the political landscape. That being said, I have never trusted anyone who is part of the Establishment. Hank is part of the Establishment. His Overlord, Cleary, is the Establishment.
Guess we have to amend the saying to “Never trust anyone over 60.”
Jane, that editorial was interestingly partisan itself – as it was written by the FairVote.org people, not WaPo reporting staff.
I also think it’s difficult to understand, being in some form of insider Beltway-speak, or just because these people are focused on their own navel, or because they really are trying to obscure with that peculiar American flannel-mouthing.
Once you realize what they’re up to, it seems there’s a big flaw. You can see that flaw on their own site easily if you try at their example map, and see how Oregon districts would be redrawn.
Answer: all of Oregon would be one district!
I can tell you from having lived there that the interests of Oregon big cities, small towns, and the rural/ranching areas are very different, and that persons there would not like this lumping at all. They prefer their own representatives who they can talk to, of course.
Of course this blurs when all you want to do is gain advantage on party lines, but that blurring is hardly fair to real and detailed local interests.
The point made on their materials that incumbents tend to stick is probably right.
But perhaps what really points to the problem is the note about decreasing presence of party-line-crossing moderates: Democrats who will vote their district’s concerns along with otherwise fair and progressive values, and thus can win elections over Republicans.
Somewhere fishing around in here is the idea that an open mind and balanced intent is a lot more effective than a closed partisan one, no?
At least that’s the interest I got out of it.
Never trust anyone who is part of the Establishment, Never!
Ah, but there are so many establisments, are there not??
Are there editorial opinions that aren’t biased? It is one view, there are others. Surely you aren’t suggesting that there is no gerrymandering done by legislators to preserve their majority control?
“This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence — economic, political, even spiritual — is felt in every city, every statehouse, every office of the federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society. In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals so that security and liberty may prosper together.”
-President of the United States (and former General of the Army) Dwight D. Eisenhower
But he was WAY over 60 and about as establishment as it’s possible to get, Smarty.
Actually, Jane, that’s the thing that had me spend any time with this — and part of the confusion factor.
They are stating up front that gerrymandering isn’t much of the problem.
It’s rather this combination they whomped up of sticky incumbents and lack of moderate vote-taking Democrats.
I think there is truth to this analysis, but that the main truth is that the country is confused and polarized — thus upsetting the way we used to have elections work better.
Their solution? I don’t think it’s either practical or feasible.
Why I said I am interested in stated open minds and balanced intents. But then, I always would be.
Read a recent article in some depth which would suggest he was much more independent than establishment, no aging grandfather, and about as tricky as a protege we might remember, at least in not showing many of his hands.
Not sure where I found it; library magazine I think.
Considering Lyndon Johnson, and one or two more recent examples also, it’s just possible that the better forms of tricky are often needed. You have to break logical logjams somehow, when they must seem to be out in public.
I’ll probably get roasted for that one. But if you really want to see an example of how multiple and distinctive thinking and speaking can be interesting, consider the narrative first part of this investigation into how Cosimo and thus the Medici family came to power:
https://webshare.uchicago.edu/users/jpadgett/Public/papers/published/robust.pdf
For those who don’t want to or find difficult to download the paper, here’s the abstract at least.
Maybe some points sounding just a bit interesting to progressive thinking?
“We analyze the centralization of political parties and elite networks that underlay the birth of the Renaissance state in Florence. Class revolt and fiscal crisis were the ultimate causes of elite consolidation, but Medicean political control was produced by means of network disjunctures within the elite, which the Medici alone spanned. Cosimo de’ Medici’s multivocal identity as sphinx harnessed the power available in these network holes and resolved the contradiction between judge and boss inherent in all organizations. Methodologically, we argue that to understand state formation one must penetrate beneath the veneer of formal institutions, groups, and goals down to the relational substrata of peoples’ actual lives. Arnbiguity and heterogeneity, not planning and self-interest, are the raw materials of which powerful states and persons are constructed.
Sure Jane. Ignore a dire warning from an insider on his way out. The death of critical thinking is painful to witness.
I was trying to be funny, Smarty. Major fail I guess.
A warning from an “outsider” would have been dismissed as “sour grapes” or “fear mongering” or simply fanning flames for political purpose. A warning from an Insider is about as credible as one can receive. Most Presidential Farewell speeches are pep rallies to self-aggrandize one’s accomplishments on the way out, help the Historians write history. For the man who led the US to victory in WWII and then become President to ultimately come out against the “Military Industrial Complex” is un-matched in history.
Okay, re-read it. I get the irony. thx
The military industry strategy was to spread their growing influence across many states with good jobs in the defense industry insuring cuts to defense spending would have bipartisan opposition. Lots of industries have used similar tactics to advance their political goals.
Here’s another prescient note from Ike:
Dwight David Eisenhower, writing to his brother in 1952:
“Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H.L.Hunt…, a few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid.”
This is from a weblog where Ursula Le Guin writes, and her closing comment on this, where she thinks he was not prescient enough:
“What’s terrifying about this is how Eisenhower’s party in just a few decades has proved him wrong, wrong in everything he says except, possibly, the last word.”
Of course, that’s the thing. It’s not Eisenhower’s party any more.
Buy in from all 50 states plus a revolving door between the Military, the Industry, and Congress (State or Federal) and presto! You’ve got a Military State no matter who’s elected. Add to that the increasingly busier revolving door between the Banks/Investment firms and the Executive Branch the past 20 year, and Presto! You’ve got America Inc.
That splinter stuck itself into the heel of the broadcast media and grew into an unrivaled propaganda machine, fixed on the message 24/7 with unlimited wealth supporting it and putting politicians in office to cut taxes to insane levels while they squander our education dollars, create economic crises by shipping our jobs overseas and gutting the regulations to keep it stable while they wage wars on the credit card and now global austerity grinding the bones of the working classes to pay for it all. The shareholders get the profits from war and they get the interest from the debt to pay for the war, and they’re hoping to be the only cash buyers at the fire sales.
The scam of the Century: Wealthy Americans pay substantially lower tax rates than working Americans, then they spend tax dollars at the Industries they own (military, etc.), run up the budget and deficit, and then loan money to America so Working Americans can repay that loan. The revolving door of Wealthy not paying taxes, but instead, being PAID by working Americans to loan us money they should have paid as taxes all along. What a Scam!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Not so smart 5th Grader,
Well, your first sentence (#20) is true, regarding the age of a ‘baby boomer.’ “Global Climate Change” – are you referring to the worn-out psycho babble about the Earth heating up? If so, we’re traveling at 240KM per second as we race toward the galactic center – OF COURSE the Earth is heating up, SO ARE ALL OF THE OTHER PLANETS – where’s the surprise? “Endless wars” – 14,600 recorded wars in the past 5,000 years, and s o m e h ow
you seem to imply that the ’60′s generation continued this??? And, that the ’60′s Revolution was a failure” — ahhh, who stopped the Vietnam War? “Industrial Military Complex” – a complex, a govern mental disorder. The “Greedy Pigs” – 1%/300 families inbreeding for centuries, will of course, breed madness/insanity . . .who have been controlling the economy and politics (poly- many, ticks- blood suckers). You also confuse the word ‘establishment’ with administration.
So, guess who’s going to extend a hand and pull you, screaming and hollering, through this transition while you’re eyes are wide shut?
NWO – there’s going to be a New World Order alright, and the insane, gone mad, PTW
(powers that were) ain’t gonna like it.
. . . time to start sharpening the wooden stakes.
See Jane? No need to reply to the wackos, just those engaged in meaningful discussion. Less frustration.
Forest Queen, I don;t know when you’ll be on a connection where you can watch and hear this — it’s Seal, in a very good live performance of ‘Crazy’.
I thought you might particularly appreciate it’s recognition how it’s important and valuable, maybe survival itself, for there to be persons who see things not just as others do.
We know this, of course, when we’re not postured to be defending, but it is also the art out of someone’s deep recognition, which is always part of being reminded.
Anyway, a smile down there (up there, actually) among some redwoods. And know I liked this one for its singing, and the way some lyrics have grown in change over time.
“take the chance, price of that, talk about the people going under…
what the child knows
A man decides after seventy years
That what he goes there for, is to unlock the door
While those around him criticize and sleep”
Anyone who doesn’t know, the scars on his face are from a form of lupus. The rest, you are either tolerant of where part of this comes from, for its value, or should just enjoy the emotion. I think that’s the door I came in…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8CO_tvPmgY
jr
November 15, 2012 at 9:54 pm | #18
Quote
“Anonymous: If such is the direction of print media, where do you suggest one turn for information as one did 50 years ago.”
Answer:
“The Progressive Populace” publishes all the best liberal writers in the nation.
Jr., there will continue to be painfully little progressive advancement in the U.S. until the other half of the nation starts voting.
Even “Mitch” doesn’t like to debate about “those people”…as he calls them, probably for the same reason they are ignored by all media sources….”those people” take the legitimacy out of all the election hype that pundits congratulate themselves for manufacturing like busy little bees keeping the myth of democracy alive!
Anonymous: Thank you. I have not heard of this publication. How does it compare with The Progressive, The Nation, In These Times, Mother Jones, and Yes Magazine? Where is it available locally (or only by subscription?)
jr, I think he must mean Progressive Populist – at least that’s what I couid find..
http://www.populist.com/
There’s also a journal Mitch pointed out, which has interesting articles.
http://www.guernicamag.com/
Thanks Narration, my mistake.
The Progressive Populist is the reason I cancelled my subscriptions to Mother Jones, In These Times, Utne, The Progressive, among others.
I just listened to another interview of Dr. Cornell West and Tavis Smiley on their new book “The Rich and the Rest of Us”. Lots of discussion about the nation’s exploding poverty and the near-complete self-censorship of the topic in the 2012 election…but, not one word about the larger half of this nation that refuses to vote.
It will undoubtedly be the largest national epiphany in my lifetime.
Over half this nation’s voters are ignored at everyone’s peril.
One of the best news sites going on the web is “Common Dreams.” Some accuse them of leaning too far towards the Democrats at the expense of independent progressives and socialists. But I notice that just about every public utterance of Bernie Sanders (socialist) finds room on Common Dreams.
http://www.commondreams.org
notice how it’s more difficult to navigate the web when you’re only using “.org” sites? Two-tiered highway? Commercial sites=fast, Non-Profit sites=slow, or “error?”
Common Dreams is good, Moviedad. For journalism from further left, http://www.counterpunch.com/ is good.
Anonymous: It is a shame that you gave up on The Progressive, but I can understand doing so with the Utne Reader and perhaps Mother Jones. Mother Jones has not been cutting edge since Mark Dowie left, but I still subscribe as a charter subscriber when it was founded in Feb 1976 (with Jerry Brown on the cover of vol 1). Where’s Warren Hinckle when we need him?
Millions in Prop 30 Tax Revenues Will Be Diverted from Higher Ed to Wall Street, Thanks to Regents
by: Leighton Woodhouse
Wed Nov 14, 2012 at 15:17:49 PM PST
Cross-posted from Firedoglake and Dog Park Media.
Millions of dollars in new tax revenue earmarked for the University of California system as part of the state’s recently passed Proposition 30 will instead be routed to major financial firms, because of bad bets made by a Wall Street-influenced UC Board of Regents.
Over the last decade, tuition and fees for undergraduates in the UC system have tripled, adding enormous debt burdens to UC graduates and pushing lower-income students into the already overburdened state college and community college systems, or out of higher education altogether. Members of the UC Board of Regents, which governs the system and which approved the tuition hikes, have blamed the increases on the bad economy and on politicians.
However, according to a new report written by five doctoral students at UC Berkeley, in the years preceding the 2008 financial collapse, members of the Board of Regents themselves had overseen “a qualitative shift in the financial practices of the University of California” by employing the same kinds of exotic financial instruments that precipitated the meltdown on Wall Street – primarily, bond issuances hedged by interest rate swaps.
Leighton Woodhouse :: Millions in Prop 30 Tax Revenues Will Be Diverted from Higher Ed to Wall Street, Thanks to Regents
An interest rate swap is essentially a bet that interest rates will rise. UC would issue a bond with a variable interest rate, then make regular payments to a third party (typically an investment bank) based on an agreed-upon fixed interest rate. The bank would then pay back to UC a dividend based on the variable interest rate of the original bond, if the variable rate were higher than the fixed rate. If the variable rate were lower than the fixed rate, then the money would go the other way: UC would owe money to the investment bank.
Between 2003 and 2007, the report explains, UC acquired interest rate swaps with five investment banks in order to issue over $600 million in bonds to finance development of medical centers on three campuses. Medical schools and hospitals are major profit centers for universities. As UC used debt financing to expand these profit engines, tuitions for students continued to rise. Since the risky contracts the Board of Regents entered into were made possible by the collateral afforded by UC student tuition costs and by the Board’s ability to jack up tuition and fees at its discretion, the same students whose ballooning debts and tuition payments to the university were making the UC system’s exotic financial bets possible were receiving no tuition relief from the university out of the profits generated by those bets.
The result of these complicated arrangements has become a familiar story since the 2008 meltdown. The Board of Regents’ pursuit of cheap money to increase UC profits left it exposed to the financial collapse. According to the report, UC’s risky bets have now cost it $57 million, which could rise to over $250 million over the next three decades. Between May 2007 and the end of last year, the Regents doubled UC’s debt load. The UC system is currently paying about three quarters of a million dollars per month to Wall Street firms as a result of the swaps.
Clearly, there needs to be a clean-up in the regents. About 30 years ago I worked for a catering company which serviced the regents’ meetings in SF, and the conversations I overheard didn’t evoke confidence in their abilities as I was about to enter the UC system.
Certainly the Regents aren’t the only group of people who got caught up in the market hype, but what is so far missing is an acknowledgment of the folly of the whole approach and assurance that it won’t happen again.