GoDaddy restored some services on Monday as the company battled online attacks that severely impacted its hosting and domain-name registration operations.
GoDaddy is the service provider that I use for this blog, my web site in general, and my email.
I am very surprised that Thomas Creamer would post such a link. It is patently false in its assertions about the Democratic National Convention. Furthermore, the referenced article uses stereotyping and intolerance of minorities to promote its political views.
I have always thought of Thomas Creamer as a thoughtful human being, who is willing to listen to all sides of a story and decide on a plan of action using logic as free of bias as possible. He is one of the few Republicans politicians that I can talk to nowadays. As a self proclaimed Lincoln Republican, he always seemed to me closer to a moderate Democrat than a radical Republican. His compassion for people seemed genuine to me.
His blog postings lately seem to be deviating from this calm approach to politics that I could vote for in a town election for selectman. It is such a shame to see zealotry for the national party positions to rob us of a reasoned voice on the town board of selectmen and women.
Deval Patrick, governor of Massachusetts, spoke at the 2012 Democratic National Convention criticizing Mitt Romney’s record as Governor of Massachusetts. He also spoke about the successes of President Obama’s years in office, despite Republican opposition, and about the need for a President that supports public education.
Sometimes people forget how rousing and on point a speech by Deval Patrick can be.
“I love that we can trust Barack to do what he says he’s going to do,” she told the convention hall, “even when it’s hard – especially when it’s hard. ”
Mitt Romney said in a CNBC interview that voters should give him six months to a year to get his economic policies in place. That “six months to a year” standard applied to President Obama’s term shows him creating three to four million jobs.
Even when the other media claim to try to give the President the benefit of the doubt by showing how the Republican obstructionism led decline in public sector employment detracts from the good private sector job growth record of Obama, they don’t give the President the benefit of this suggested change of starting dates from Mitt Romney.
Here is a video clip of Elizabeth Warren’s appearance on the Today show.
She starts out well with a terrific answer about where we were 4 years ago compared to where we are today.
I think she fell down a little at the end.
I know Elizabeth can get her point across much better than this. I have heard her do it in many other videos and in person.
As for Mitt Romney’s qualifications, the interviewer practically handed the words to Elizabeth, but she missed it.
“Mitt Romney is the type of person who broke the system. He is not qualified to fix it, because he wants to do more of what broke the system in the first place.”
This kind of lapse is what has me worried about how Elizabeth will do in debates.
The central point for Obama is that he has spent the last four years trying to fix what Mitt Romney broke, and Mitt Romney’s allies have blocked the road at every turn. I know there is the old drunkard’s cure of “The hair of the dog that bit you”, but I don’t think we want to risk the country on this remedy. Romney is not the man to fix what is wrong with the economy.
Where might we be today if Obama had gotten himself on TV every day saying, “Congress could fix the economy tomorrow. Just pass my jobs bill.” This should be a meme so deeply rooted in the public’s mind that the Republicans couldn’t make it go away. Instead, few in the public even know there is a jobs bill pending before Congress and they won’t even allow a vote on it, let alone passing it.
Jane McAlevey has a book coming out this fall from Verso called “Raising Expectations (and Raising Hell): My Decade Fighting for the Labor Movement.” I started by asking her to introduce herself, and then to talk about hell-raising in Wisconsin and the lessons the labor movement might draw from that experience, with relevance to the elections that loom just ahead of us.
.
.
.
JM: I think the top lesson in our view is that there is not enough internal radical, political education taking place inside of America’s unions. If there was one thing we had to do differently, it’s actually trust that our rank and file can handle a lot of the information and that the rank and file will know what to do with real facts, real information, and what’s really happening.
The above video plays for me if I use Google Chrome, but I cannot get it to work for me in Firefox.
Jane McAlevey speaks rapidly, so you might also want to consult the transcript published in the article.
This is interview provides insights as to what we should be doing in our efforts to get Elizabeth Warren elected as Senator from Massachusetts. I am still working on learning how to do what Jane suggests.
One topic of the conversation is that the credit rating agencies are again becoming the enablers of Wall Street fraud.
What the credit rating agencies discovered, though, was that they were the key to making Wall Street possible to make their fortunes. And so they learned to negotiate, and they became not just credit rating agencies; they became advisers on the same deal that they were rating, despite the obvious conflict of interest. And so they would structure the deal to ensure that it would get a AAA rating and it would get a AAA rating even though the great bulk of the loans backing it were fraudulent liars’ loans. And so a chart of income for the rating agencies looks like, you know, an incredibly steep ascending hill, and they made an absolute fortune.
They got embarrassed, but you’ll note that they didn’t get sued successfully, and, of course, they didn’t even get threatened with prosecution. So that embarrassment period where they supposedly tried to toughen up their act only lasted around a year. And what they found was whoever was toughest lost business to whoever was weak—again, this race to the bottom or Gresham’s dynamic, in which bad ethics drives good ethics out of the professions. And the result is that they’ve pitched, you know, thrown to the curb the only guy at Standard & Poor’s—which is the biggest of the rating agencies—who was their symbol of trying to be tougher.
What really irks me about this is that one of the fundamentals of my investing strategy depends on a selection of S & P A-rated companies. I have to be extra vigilant about believing anything from S & P. Since they did this before, I guess this is not anything new with them.