David G. Hartwell ’63 Science Fiction Symposium 10/23/2013

Posted on by
Reply
David G. Hartwell 63 Science Fiction Symposium Poster 10.23.2013

David G. Hartwell 63 Science Fiction Symposium Poster 10.23.2013
Photo (CC) Kit Latham

Williams College hosted a marvelous science fiction symposium October 22, 23, and 24. The David G. Hartwell ’63 Science Fiction Symposium featured public readings and panel discussions with leading writers and thinkers, including Samuel R. Delany, Kim Stanley Robinson, and prominent science fiction editor and Williams alumnus David Hartwell, for whom the event is named.

David G. Hartwell ’63 Science Fiction Symposium 10/23/2013

David Hartwell (Moderator), Paolo Bacigalupi, Elizabeth Kolbert, and Kim Stanley Robinson discuss climate change at The David G. Hartwell 63 Science Fiction Symposium 10.23.2013
Photo (CC) Kit Latham

The symposium brought together the best of the science fiction community in a setting similar to a science fiction convention. “Science fiction writers can appeal to a wider range of people than often attend a convention,” says Paul Park, lecturer in English and organizer of the event. “There is something magical that happens when a number of these writers get together, an aggregate consciousness that expands each other’s work. This symposium gives the community an opportunity to discover that.”

John Crowley at David G. Hartwell 63 Science Fiction Symposium 10.23.2013

John Crowley at David G. Hartwell 63 Science Fiction Symposium 10.23.2013
Photo (CC) Kit Latham

John Crowley, a recipient of the American Academy and Institute of Letters Award for Literature and the World Fantasy Lifetime Achievement Award. His critically acclaimed works include Little, Big; The Translator; Lord Byron’s Novel: The Evening Land; Four Freedoms; and the Ægypt novels. He teaches fiction writing and screenwriting at Yale.

Kim Stanley Robinson at David G. Hartwell 63 Science Fiction Symposium 10.23.2013

Kim Stanley Robinson at David G. Hartwell 63 Science Fiction Symposium Poster 10.23.2013
Photo (CC) Kit Latham

Kim Stanley Robinson, author of the Mars Trilogy. One of Time Magazine’s “heroes of the environment,” he has won numerous literary prizes, including this year’s Nebula Award for his novel 2312. He is on the board of the Sierra Nevada Research Institute and was one of the artistic fellows sent to Antarctica by the National Science Foundation. His new novel, Shaman, has just been published.

Paolo Bacigalupi at David G. Hartwell 63 Science Fiction Symposium 10.23.2013

Paolo Bacigalupi at David G. Hartwell 63 Science Fiction Symposium 10.23.2013
Photo (CC) Kit Latham

Paolo Bacigalupi, whose first novel, The Windup Girl, won the Hugo, Nebula, and John W. Campbell awards in 2010. His 2010 novel, Ship Breaker, was a finalist for the National Book Award for Young People’s Literature. Much of his work is set in an uncertain near-future when fossil fuels have run out. His third novel, The Drowned Cities, appeared in 2012.

Kelly Link at David G. Hartwell 63 Science Fiction Symposium 10.23.2013

Kelly Link at David G. Hartwell 63 Science Fiction Symposium 10.23.2013
Photo (CC) Kit Latham

Kelly Link, author of Pretty Monsters and Her Magic for Beginners, has received three Nebula Awards, a Hugo Award, and a World Fantasy Award. Her works combine science fiction, fantasy, horror, mystery, and realism. Link and her husband manage Small Beer Press in Northampton, Mass.

David Hartwell at David G. Hartwell 63 Science Fiction Symposium 10.23.2013

David G. Hartwell at David G. Hartwell 63 Science Fiction Symposium Poster 10.23.2013
Photo (CC) Kit Latham

David Hartwell, Williams class of 1963, senior editor at Tor Books, publisher of the New York Review of Science Fiction, and anthologist of Year’s Best SF and Year’s Best Fantasy. Hartwell has won dozens of genre awards in many categories, including best editor, best anthology, and best magazine. He holds a Ph.D. from Columbia in Comparative Medieval Literature
Flickr Set by David G. Hartwell – SF Seminar 10/22-24 2013

Terry Bisson at David G. Hartwell 63 Science Fiction Symposium Poster 10.23.2013

Terry Bisson at David G. Hartwell 63 Science Fiction Symposium Poster 10.23.2013

Terry Bisson, author of the novels Talking Man, Voyage to the Red Planet, and Pirates of the Universe, and Nebula Award-winning short stories “Bears Discover Fire” and “macs.” “They’re Made Out of Meat” has been adapted for film, and other stories have been adapted for the stage. He has written screenplays, comic books, and graphic novels, as well as biographies of Nat Turner and Mumia Abu-Jamal.

Paul Park at David G. Hartwell 63 Science Fiction Symposium Poster 10.23.2013

Paul Park at David G. Hartwell 63 Science Fiction Symposium Poster 10.23.2013

Paul Park, author of The Starbridge Chronicles trilogy, Coelestis, Three Marys, The Gospel of Corax, A Princess of Roumania and its sequels, The Tourmaline, The White Tyger and The Hidden World. “The Persistence of Memory, or This Space for Sale” was nominated for a World Fantasy Award in 2010, the same year his novella “Ghosts Doing the Orange Dance” was nominated for a Nebula Award. He teaches writing at Williams.

Samuel Delany Houari B Flickr Hartwell 63 Science Fiction Symposium Poster 10.23.2013

Samuel Delany Hartwell 63 Science Fiction Symposium Poster 10.23.2013
(CC) Houari B Flickr

Samuel R. Delany, author of Babel-17, The Einstein Intersection, Nova, the best-selling Dhalgren, and the Nevèrÿon tetralogy. He is a professor of English and creative writing at Temple University. The recipient of four Nebula and two Hugo awards, in 2002 he was inducted into the Science Fiction Hall of Fame.

Kit Reed | David G. Hartwell 63 Science Fiction Symposium 10.23.2013Photo ©Gloria VillegasKit Reed by Gloria Villegas-RT-1000

Kit Reed | David G. Hartwell 63 Science Fiction Symposium 10.23.2013
Photo ©Gloria Villegas

Kit Reed, author of the novel Son of Destruction and collection The Story Until Now, which appeared earlier this year. What Wolves Know and Other Stories was a Shirley Jackson Award nominee in 2012, and two earlier collections were short-listed for the Tiptree Prize. A Guggenheim fellow and first American recipient of a literary grant from the Abraham Woursell Foundation, she is Resident Writer at Wesleyan University.
Kit Reed’s Website

Elizabeth Kolbert at David G. Hartwell 63 Science Fiction Symposium Poster 10.23.2013Elizabeth Kolbert

Elizabeth Kolbert at David G. Hartwell 63 Science Fiction Symposium Poster 10.23.2013

Elizabeth Kolbert, staff writer at The New Yorker and the author of Field Notes from a Catastrophe: Man, Nature, and Climate Change. She is a two-time National Magazine Award winner, recipient of the American Association for the Advancement of Science’s magazine writing award, and a Heinz Award winner.

Williams College Official Press release:
http://communications.williams.edu/news-releases/10_22_2013_sciencefiction/

The symposium was sponsored by the departments of English and theatre, Africana studies, American studies, environmental studies, the Class of 1960 Scholars Fund, comparative literature, the Lecture Committee, and the Oakley Center for the Humanities and Social Sciences.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License.

Why Advertising is Failing is Obvious to Anyone Paying Attention

Posted on by
Reply

Why Advertising is Failing 2013
Why advertising is loosing its effectiveness on the consumer.

Brands don’t realize that digital has made them transparent

It’s OK for brands to make mistakes. However, when they start lying about them and misleading the public, anything that a brand says is thrown into question, including in advertising. Here’s why your company’s “dead bodies” are going be known whether you want them to or not.

Consumers now define your image, not ads

Brands can’t shout from the mountaintop anymore about who they are. Here’s why consumers now define your public perception and why you should embrace this shift.

Customer reviews and social media are cutting through your marketing

When commercials were on the top of the marketing food chain, the public only got their information through the company. Now, with social media and customer reviews, the consumer’s main source of information comes from their friends, family, and peers.

You’re not being socially conscious

Socially conscious brands not only gain public support, but also make more money. Adding environmentally friendly initiatives can help your company, products, and advertising become more popular all while helping the bottom line.

Brands aren’t honest about their problems

If you simply explain to the public your company’s problems (be they past or present), you will gain a deeper trust with your audience. This case study explores a company that gave its customers an intimate look into its eco-harmful business practices and ended up with more loyal customers.

Your online content is not original

If you keep re-purposing your television creative for digital purposes, you’re not communicating your brand very effectively. Here’s why original digital content is vital to believable and effective online advertising.

Your company culture is weak, and it’s affecting brand perception

A great company culture will create happy employees. Happy employees work harder for their company. If your advertising is not connecting with consumers, you might need to look within your organization for the true problem.

Brands put too much emphasis on display ads

When marketing went from the billboard to the banner ad, some marketers declared victory and stopped innovating. Here’s why you need to gradually move from display to innovative digital marketing tactics.

The moments between the moments are being ignored

How does Virgin Airlines spend 95 percent less on advertising compared to their competitors, but receive the highest customer satisfaction? If you focus on your customer’s entire experience, you won’t need positive advertising. The customer will do it for you.

If your product is bad, the customer feels lied to

You will never survive if you keep trying to sell a bad product. Fixing your brand’s core issues first will make your advertising efforts incredibly easier in the long run.

You’re marketing the “how” and the “what,” not the “why”

To advertise well, you need to step back and ask yourself why you are selling a product or brand. Marketing what your product stands for is an incredibly powerful way to communicate your message.

Customer service is being undervalued

Don’t abandon your customers after they buy your product. Marketing isn’t just a process that takes place before a purchase; it’s an ongoing communication of the company’s values. Treating your customer just as well after a purchase is something that should be at the top of your company’s list, not last.  Link

The author of this above piece hits all the point, however, none of this is new to any of us in the digital trenches over the last few years. The general tone deafness by corporations across the spectrum has been quite stunning, in the face of over whelming data.  Not just data, but the conversations that have been taking place across social media and across the Web.

It is hard to know where to start to list examples of companies that reflect this tone deafness and denial. Denial is a strong word, but quite apt in this regard.  The election cycle of 2012 is a good place to start, as it is recent history, and the results are finally starting to come in, from John’s Pizza, to Wallmart vs Costco to Darden Restaurants to the GOP (Republican Party).

There is a split happening here, between people who are using the Web to get their information and people who rely on traditional media. Some call it the ‘digital divide’, others call it the different between those who participate in ‘critical thinking’ and those that don’t.

I don’t have time to finish this post right now, will return later and add more thoughts, in the interim, here is an interesting link to a research article giving some hard stats and data about this very topic.  It is tangential, but relevant to the topic of ‘why the traditional advertising model continues to fail in America :

Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism and Internet & American Life Project

Boston Marathon Explosion – Terrorist Attack, Patriots Day 4/15/13

Posted on by
Reply

Boston Terrorist Attack 4.15.2013

Two explosions rocked the Boston Marathon near the finish line, causing multiple casualties and sending the city into chaos. Another explosion occurred at the JFK Library, but authorities were unsure if the incidents were linked.

The blasts downtown in Copley Square occurred just before 3:00 p.m.

The number of casualties changed rapidly throughout the afternoon. Two people were killed and more than 130 others were injured, according to a preliminary statement from the Boston Police Department. The number rose to more than 100 injured shortly after 5 p.m. and kept growing as the day progressed, the Boston Globe reported.

The first blast filled a spectator gallery near the finish line with a gray cloud of smoke. Screaming witnesses immediately fled the area. Ten seconds later, a second explosion jolted the crowd.

Streets reserved exclusively for runners filled with emergency crews, as first responders climbed fences to reach wounded athletes and spectators. Flags from nations represented in the race were thrown to the ground.

Here we go again, another attack, another name for it is ‘Black Flag’ or ‘ruse de guerre’ (ruse of war) ~ a technique of deception, under the circumstances, the very nature of this attack implies there is another agenda at work.

The timing, place of this attack + choice of explosive points to a domestic group (USA), which again, could be another ‘black flag’. In the final analysis, the ‘who’ becomes less important then the long term damage, which will be our civil liberties.

Having worn the ‘tin foil hat’ on many occasions, I can certainly identify with the impulse to look for a simple answer in order to make things black + white, therefore easier to process and accept, but the answer is often complex, and not made clear, which is the goal. There are many forces at work in this world that use media as a tool and a weapon, and acts of terror depend on media to serve the primary agenda, whatever that might be.

Terrorism, like Propaganda, is a form of persuasive communication. Like propaganda, it is a pejorative term. Some have referred to it as propaganda of the deed. It is hard to define because its definition depends on whether one agrees with the message. If one does, neither propaganda nor terrorism is the term that is normally used to describe such activity.

 

 

Banana Republic – We The People

Posted on by
Reply

“There is a corruption at the heart of American politics, caused by the dependence of Congressional candidates on funding from the tiniest percentage of citizens. That’s the argument at the core of this blistering talk by legal scholar Lawrence Lessig. With rapid-fire visuals, he shows how the funding process weakens the Republic in the most fundamental way, and issues a rallying bipartisan cry that will resonate with many in the U.S. and beyond.” Lawrence Lessig

Lessig’s talk is snappy, hard-hitting, and make a compelling case that no matter what you think the most important issue is, you’re just not going to get it until this problem is addressed. Like many pundits, Lessig feels a need to decorate his speech with a bit of “both sides do it” (in this case, saying that real small government Republicans are also losers because the system provides little incentive for politicians to let go of the levers that give them some power over the money men) without owning up to the fact that the left (otherwise known as the positions, economic well-being, and security of a large majority of Americans) takes the brunt of the damage in this rich get richer system. Why is there no pressure from the right for this kind of reform? Because the system as it is rewards the right.

Even so, Lessig’s arguments are entertaining, his facts sobering, and his ultimate position—that this problem is far from insurmountable—is cheering. Being told you’re living in an ex-republic is not fun, but the path back to democracy might not be as stony as those who benefit from the current system want you to think.

How Corporate America Kills Innovation in 6 Simple Steps

Posted on by
Reply

Simple Steps as to How Corporate America Kills Innovation
Having worked in corporate America, this guy outlines all the major points as to why innovation continues to be stifled in the corporate workplace.  An excerpt from a thread found today on Slashdot about Steve Jobs:
Steve Jobs’ First Boss: ‘Very Few Companies Would Hire Steve, Even Today’

“I’ve written multiple books, done award-winning work, and have sterling recommendations/references from people that can say all kinds of fabulous stuff about me. But all of my best work in life has been done in the contracting/consulting space, where I was basically a lone wolf.

Virtually every time a company has hired me, they have immediately put me in a box.

Step 1: Refuse to allow him to use his own tech tools/toolchains crafted over years and with which he is fabulous and familiar.

Step 2: Make sure that there’s no allowance for him to do intense/creative work on his own daytime schedule; meetings are mandatory and if that means that the only time left for actual work is during hours when his brain isn’t at its best, oh well.

Step 3: Lock him into a narrow chain of hierarchy/command so that he can’t ever talk directly to the role players that he needs in order to directly get things done; instead, ensure that he’s always stuck playing telephone through many organizational layers and that his immediate contact has an MBA and doesn’t ever understand what he’s saying.

Step 4: Evaluate him immediately (always too early) and on a linear progress model with synthetic “benchmarks,” whether or not any of this matches the natural trajectory of the task at hand or not, so that instead of doing great things in the best way, he’s working to “hit benchmarks” in ways that often interfere with the actual work, either slowing it tremendously or significantly reducing the potential of the final outcome.

Step 5: Take away any physical and psychological comfort and idiosyncrasy that enables him to act naturally and think clearly; dictate dress, office layout and organization, hours, speech and communications channels, venues, and characteristics, so that he’s not even himself most of the time when he’s working for you (you know, the self that did the great work that you want to have).

Step 6: Toss assorted new tasks and underlings into his lap that have no relationship to what he was actually hired to do and/or his actual area of expertise, ensuring that he’ll spend more and more time doing stuff for which he is not the optimal laborer, again taking away from the work that you actually hired him to do.

Step 7: Undervalue or refuse to value at all any research work, preliminary design/development work, or anything that isn’t clearly “making product” and “hitting benchmarks” and be sure to stop by the desk every ten minutes and remind him that he wasn’t hired “to do that” but instead to “produce.”

Under conditions of “employment” this has happened to me so many times that I hesitate to accept “employment” now and prefer to consult instead. I’m tired of seeing excitement turn into bewilderment of the “He came so highly recommended!” sort after just about every last thing that makes the best work that I’ve done possible (the work that they wanted to see done again, on their time) was methodically written out of my work life.

Too many MBAs and HR drones out there in the corporate world that are really only comfortable seeing other MBAs and HR drones buzzing about the office, wondering why nobody outside of management and HR seems to be “getting anything done.”

Found in Article comment stream (with attributing link at the end)
Link to Comment

Fear Of Memes

Posted on by
Reply

Fear Of Memes ~ I love the concept!

Sorry, Middle East governments, but the people have spoken, and they want their damned memes. And, actually, that brings to mind the obvious question: how the hell are memes a threat to you to begin with?

The Tunisian Government  seem to have a problem with this Gangam Style, Harlem Shake combo-video produced by some apparently fun-loving Tunisian students (the original was taken down due to a highly questionable copyright claim, by the way, because while even the Tunisian government wasn’t evil enough to block the video, a bogus DMCA claim had no such qualms).

For reasons that will never make sense to me, the Tunisian government apparently had a problem with the video and its popularity, prompting an investigation. And if you think about it for five seconds, you’ve probably already guessed what the response from Tunisia’s people has been.

They danced en masse to the song and posted their exploits on YouTube. That prompted a quarter of a million hits and reports of an investigation by the country’s minister of education and that prompted a backlash. Video after video after video of Tunisians proudly doing the Harlem shake in defiance.

Dear Tunisian people: congratulations! You’ve officially been made full members of the internet community now that you’ve engaged in trolling your own government as a form of protest. It’s only a matter of time before you’ll be naming soft drinks after fluid-expelling geriatrics. TechDirt

The Speed of Cultural Transmission

Posted on by
Reply

Ever since the Hong Kong action-movie boom of the 1980s, the film industries of East Asia have arguably been better at making old-fashioned, hard-boiled crime thrillers than Hollywood has. Martin Scorsese’s Oscar-winning “The Departed,” after all, was a remake of the 2002 Hong Kong thriller “Infernal Affairs” (albeit an excellent remake with its own spirit and considerable subtlety). While Asian pop cinema remains just off the radar screen of mainstream American culture, it’s a whole lot easier to find than it used to be. This week, Korean writer-director Park Hoon-jung’s byzantine, slick and bloody mob drama “New World” opens theatrically in numerous North American cities, just a few weeks after its smash-hit premiere in Korea.

Part of this new accessibility is simply about the speed of cultural transmission; no doubt pirated copies of “New World” are already available on the Internet, or on the sidewalks of Asian immigrant neighborhoods. If the film’s producers and distributors want to make any legitimate American (or Canadian) dollars off the damn thing, they have to get it out right now. But this also speaks to the rapidly changing demographics of our society; even five years ago, it’s tough to imagine a new movie in Korean, with no actors who count as stars outside East Asia, playing at multiplex theaters in Atlanta, Dallas, Las Vegas and Philadelphia. Furthermore, in this case it’s totally justified. While I’m not sure “New World” will attain the same near-classic status as “Infernal Affairs” or Johnnie To’s mid-2000s “Election” movies, on first viewing it’s pretty close.

We’re in familiar territory here, whether the setting is Asian, American or otherwise: sterile but luxurious settings, hard men in impeccable suits, a quasi-Shakespearean moral landscape of shifting alliances and repeated betrayals. Park, previously best known as the screenwriter for Kim Jee-woon’s hit serial-killer drama “I Saw the Devil,” handles it all with stern, commanding detachment. (The cinematography is by the terrific Chung Chung-hoon, who has shot most of Park Chan-wook’s recent films.) This aloofness extends both to camera movement and to character development, and I suppose it’s both the film’s major flaw and dominant quality. If our central focus is on Ja-sung (Lee Jung-jae), an undercover cop who has risen near the top of the Goldmoon crime syndicate, he remains a moral chameleon throughout, and we observe his torment only from the outside.

The Speed of Cultural Transmission

Pope Benedict XVI’s Red Shoes, did a gay blackmail scandal bring down the pope?

Posted on by
Reply
Pope Benedict XVI’s Red Shoes

Pope Benedict XVI’s Red Shoes

Now that the shock of Pope Benedict XVI’s surprise resignation has settled in, conspiracy theorists are having a heyday trying to figure out if there is more to the story than meets the eye. With no papal funeral to prepare for and the pope’s final appearances fairly routine, Vatican watchers and bored reporters have been fleshing out a number of theories on why the pope may have really resigned.

Was the pope under the influence of a secretive “gay lobby” within the Vatican itself? That’s the claim put forth by Italian daily newspaper La Repubblica.

On Thursday, the popular paper published an article alleging that Pope Benedict XVI’s decision to resign this month was partly prompted by a report that accused Vatican officials of being under the influence of several internal lobbies, reportedly including a gay one.

The Irish Times reports that Benedict commissioned the report after the Vatileaks scandal broke last year. The report, written by a trio of cardinals, concluded that “various lobbies within the Holy See were consistently breaking” the sixth and seventh commandments, “thou shalt not commit adultery” and “thou shalt not steal.”

(The sixth commandment referencing adultery has historically been tied to the Catholic Church’s doctrine banning homosexuality.)

The nearly 300-page dossier would be passed on to pope’s successor, the report added.

Father Federico Lombardi, the Vatican spokesman, released an arguably vague statement about the accusations.

“Neither the cardinals’ commission nor I will make comments to confirm or deny the things that are said about this matter,” he said, according to the Guardian. “Let each one assume his or her own responsibilities. We shall not be following up on the observations that are made about this.”

The Guardian also reported that a separate Italian daily, Corriere della Sera, mentioned a “disturbing” dossier in an article published soon after the pope’s resignation announcement.

Scandalous revelations involving the Vatican and gay sex have been published by La Repubblica before. In 2010, the newspaper revealed wiretaps and police documents that showed a Vatican chorister and an elite papal usher had been involved with a gay prostitutes ring. Both men were dismissed from their duties, the Telegraph notes.

La Repubblica’s allegations are only the latest in a string of theories relating to the pope’s sudden departure, which has prompted rampant speculation.

Benedict himself has further confused matters with his Ash Wednesday homily, in which he referenced vague internal “divisions.”

Beyond the gossip about why the pope might have really resigned are growing conspiracies that there is a faction of cardinals who don’t think the pope should live inside Vatican City after he retires. Several unnamed cardinals have been quoted in the Italian press saying that it would have been better if he returned to Bavaria in Germany or lived out his days somewhere like Monte Cassino, a hilltop abbey south of Rome. Asked if the pope consulted a group of cardinals about where to live after he retires, Lombardi said that he didn’t have to. “The successor and cardinals will be very happy to have nearby a person who more than anyone understands the spiritual needs of the church and his successor.”

But many Vatican experts in Rome have been writing that whether the former pope should stay will actually be up to the new pope. After all, he will have full charge of all the affairs inside Vatican City. Archbishop Rino Fisichella told Corriere della Sera that he thought the pope should “rethink his plans” even before that, saying that having two popes inside Vatican City can only lead to trouble. Citing a potential “cohabitation issue” Fisichella says that he believes the pope will eventually choose to move out.

Whether any of the rumors will prove true is anyone’s guess. But with little happening beyond cardinals lobbying for the pope’s old job from now until the conclave begins sometime after March 15, there is no question that the rumor mill will keep churning.

Post Script:  Salon

Friday, Feb 22, 2013 02:56 PM EST
Did a gay blackmail scandal bring down the pope?
The pope’s abrupt retirement gets stranger: Now an Italian newspaper alleges corruption at the Vatican

So how’s that “Trickle Down” working?

Posted on by
Reply

Source: Uploaded by user via Kit on Pinterest

 

On Jan. 1, Social Security payroll taxes rose 2 percentage points after a temporary tax cut expired. That sliced about $1,000 from the annual take-home pay of a household earning $50,000.

Isn’t that what these companies have been asking for? Make all those “entitled” people in the working class who want “government hand outs” pay more so we can protect the tax cuts for the super wealthy CEO’s of these same companies.

So how’s that “Trickle Down” working? Not enough “Trickle Down” to keep your customers coming in? Maybe you can do like Papa John and raise the price of your products and put all your employees on part time to decrease their benefits, let them go on Medicaid., but whatever you do don’t decrease your profits and don’t give the workers anymore spending power. It’s much more important for the CEO to have a 22 car garage at his 20,000 sq. Ft. home than it is for your employees to have more than they need to exist or for you business to have customers. Keep wages low and profits high forever it’s a winning formula.

You got your “Supply Side Economy” where the supplier dictates the market in your new “Free Market” economy. What you didn’t get as a result of concentrating wealth in a handful of families is a viable customer base.

Who would have thought the joy ride on the backs of your fellow citizens would ever end?   Link to Comment

Darden Restaurants Blames Sliding Sales On Higher Payroll Taxes Huffington Post

President Obama accomplishments listed by Rachel Maddow Novemeber 5, 2012

Posted on by
Reply


Karl Rove Melts Down on National Television November 5th, 2012

Maddow then played a clip of Karl Rove contesting Fox News’ call that Obama won the state of Ohio, and therefore the presidency on Tuesday night. She then launched into a rant which can only be described as epic for comprehensively denouncing every conspiracy theory that cropped up during the 2012 election cycle. She said:

Rachel Maddow Truth Teller

“Ohio really did go to President Obama last night, he really did win. He really was born in Hawaii, and he really is, legitimately, president of the United States again. And The Bureau of Labor Statistics did not make up a fake unemployment rate last month. And the Congressional Research Service really can find no evidence that cutting taxes on rich people grows the economy. And the polls were not skewed to oversample Democrats. And Nate Silver was not making up fake projections about the election to make conservatives feel bad. Nate Silver was doing math.

And climate change is real. And rape really does cause pregnancy sometimes. And evolution is a thing! And Benghazi was an attack on us, it was not a scandal by us. And nobody is taking away anyone’s guns. And taxes have not gone up. And the deficit is dropping, actually. And Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction. And the moon landing was real. And FEMA is not building concentration camps. And UN election observers are not taking over Texas. And moderate reforms of the regulations on the insurance industry and the financial services industry in this country are not the same thing as communism.”

Maddow said that the Republicans “got shellacked” Tuesday night in a way that conservatives did not see coming because of what Maddow called their “vacuum-sealed, door-locked spin cycle of telling each other what makes them feel good.”

“Unless they are going to secede,” Maddow added, “they are going to need to pop the factual bubble they have been so happy living inside if they do not want to get shellacked again…Come on guys, we’re counting on you.”

Link to MSNBC Rachel Maddow Video

Party of Angry, Old, White Men on the Road to Ruin

Posted on by
Reply

17republicans-articleLarge

” One afternoon last month, I flew with Anderson to Columbus, Ohio, to watch her conduct two focus groups. The first consisted of 10 single, middle-class women in their 20s; the second, of 10 20-something men who were either jobless or employed but seeking better work. All of them voted for Obama but did not identify themselves as committed Democrats and were sufficiently ambivalent about the president’s performance that Anderson deemed them within reach of the Republicans. Each group sat around a large conference table with the pollster, while I viewed the proceedings from behind a panel of one-way glass.

The all-female focus group began with a sobering assessment of the Obama economy. All of the women spoke gloomily about the prospect of paying off student loans, about what they believed to be Social Security’s likely insolvency and about their children’s schooling. A few of them bitterly opined that the Democrats care little about the working class but lavish the poor with federal aid. “You get more off welfare than you would at a minimum-wage job,” observed one of them. Another added, “And if you have a kid, you’re set up for life!”

About an hour into the session, Anderson walked up to a whiteboard and took out a magic marker. “I’m going to write down a word, and you guys free-associate with whatever comes to mind,” she said. The first word she wrote was “Democrat.”

“Young people,” one woman called out.

“Liberal,” another said. Followed by: “Diverse.” “Bill Clinton.”“Change.”“Open-minded.”“Spending.”“Handouts.”“Green.”“More science-based.”

When Anderson then wrote “Republican,” the outburst was immediate and vehement: “Corporate greed.”“Old.”“Middle-aged white men.” “Rich.” “Religious.” “Conservative.” “Hypocritical.” “Military retirees.” “Narrow-minded.” “Rigid.” “Not progressive.” “Polarizing.” “Stuck in their ways.” “Farmers.”

Anderson concluded the group on a somewhat beseeching note. “Let’s talk about Republicans,” she said. “What if anything could they do to earn your vote?”

A self-identified anti-abortion, “very conservative” 27-year-old Obama voter named Gretchen replied: “Don’t be so right wing! You know, on abortion, they’re so out there. That all-or-nothing type of thing, that’s the way Romney came across. And you know, come up with ways to compromise.”

“What would be the sign to you that the Republican Party is moving in the right direction?” Anderson asked them.

“Maybe actually pass something?” suggested a 28-year-old schoolteacher named Courtney, who also identified herself as conservative.

The session with the young men was equally jarring. None of them expressed great enthusiasm for Obama. But their depiction of Republicans was even more lacerating than the women’s had been. “Racist,” “out of touch” and “hateful” made the list — “and put ‘1950s’ on there too!” one called out.

Showing a reverence for understatement, Anderson said: “A lot of those words you used to describe Republicans are negative. What could they say or do to make you feel more positive about the Republican Party?”

“Be more pro-science,” said a 22-year-old moderate named Jack. “Embrace technology and change.”

“Stick to your strong suit,” advised Nick, a 23-year-old African-American. “Clearly social issues aren’t your strong suit. Stop trying to fight the battle that’s already been fought and trying to bring back a movement. Get over it — you lost.”

“… the problem for the G.O.P. extends well beyond its flawed candidate and his flawed operation. The unnerving truth, which the Red Edge team and other younger conservatives worry that their leaders have yet to appreciate, is that the Republican Party’s technological deficiencies barely begin to explain why the G.O.P. has lost the popular vote in five of the last six presidential elections. The party brand — which is to say, its message and its messengers — has become practically abhorrent to emerging demographic groups like Latinos and African-Americans, not to mention an entire generation of young voters. As one of the party’s most highly respected strategists told me: “It ought to concern people that the most Republican part of the electorate under Ronald Reagan were 18-to-29-year-olds. And today, people I know who are under 40 are embarrassed to say they’re Republicans. They’re embarrassed! They get harassed for it, the same way we used to give liberals a hard time.”

Comments: (535 at the time of this post)
Reader voted Top Comment:

  • Sean
  • Philadelphia

I also had a conversation with a young Republican who voiced the same lines here, that young people would just line up with the GOP on economic issues if it just weren’t for the toxic social stuff. It’s wishful, delusional thinking.

I was born in 1983, and I’m 29 years old. If you’re a person my age, the GOP hasn’t done a single thing to improve the economy for your entire lifetime. They have done a great number of things to harm it, and they continue to do so. Oh, sure, they have done some good things for Halliburton and Walmart and Exxon Mobil and Goldman Sachs and Koch Industries. But there has not been a single GOP policy has benefitted you economically for your entire lifetime.

The GOP really just doesn’t get it. It’s not just gay marriage. You can’t actively screw over the vast majority of Americans at every opportunity for over three decades and then expect those people not to notice.”

  • Peter
  • Knoxville

I was a Republican through Nixon. Ford, Reagan and Bush one. The party doesn’t need to be saved, it needs to be obliterated. Wiped clean from the surface of the planet. It is nothing but a coalition of the short sighted, rapaciously greedy ultra rich and the stupid, ignorant and anti-intellectual mob. A party of liars, cheaters and intolerant religious fanatics that is the greatest threat to democracy in this country’s history.

  • Pat Choate
  • Washington, VA

Until the GOP dumps the Tea Party types and entertainment conservatives, such as Limbaugh, it cannot change its basic policies.

If the recent election revealed anything, it is that the majority of American voters will not support candidates who:

1. Wage political war on women;
2. Put the interests of the elites above those of working people;
3. Disdain immigrants;
4. Prefer obstructionism over compromise;
5. Advocate an austerity based economic policy;
6. Use political blackmail to secure political points.

Until the GOP changes policies on these issues, it might was well use typewriters and telegrams to convey its message.

NYTimes 2/18/13 LINK to original Article

 

Party of Corporate, Ruling Class Shills

Posted on by
Reply

Party of corporate, ruling class shills
One point must also be raised about these so-called Republicans (whose very name is ironic and a lie) – they willfully engineered the theft of both “elections” that put Bush and Cheney and their appalling cronies into power. In addition, they make a mockery of the electoral system by their continued efforts at gerrymandering districts so that they will prevail despite the fact that the changing demographics of this country are against them.

The whole idea of a “bi-partisan” Congress and government has been destroyed by this party of corporate, ruling class shills. With the help of the corporate media whose agenda they also represent, this pattern will continue to the detriment of our country. While Americans remain paranoid of exaggerated threats to the “Homeland” the real threat to our country comes from these anti-democratic, corrupt and intellectually bankrupt zealots of the Right.

This is late-stage capitalism and late Rome all rolled up into a frightening package and I frequently despair for my country when I see how militaristic and inhumane it is becoming.

Link to Comment on Salon