07 February 21
It's Early But So Far, Very Few Donations
We are at fewer that “30” donations so far for February. That doesn’t bode well for RSN having a budget. Need to get your attention to the fundraiser. Important!
Thanks to all in advance,
Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News
If you would prefer to send a check:
Reader Supported News
PO Box 2043
Citrus Hts
CA 95611
07 February 21
It's Live on the HomePage Now:
Reader Supported News
Why Cable News Hates Medicare for All
Luke Savage, Jacobin
Savage writes: "From last year's Democratic primaries to this year's Biden agenda, TV news coverage of the health care debate is outrageously skewed against single-payer reform. To understand why, we need look no further than their business model."
f you watched any number of last year’s Democratic primary debates, there’s a good chance you noticed one of their most overt and recurring patterns: namely, a near total hostility toward the idea of a universal, single-payer health care system.
At times, this hostility could be almost baroque, with one voice or another invariably shouting it from the TV screen any time the subject of health care was broached. This extended not only to most of the candidates themselves (Bernie Sanders being the sole contender to unequivocally champion Medicare for All) but also to the panelists and commentators featured on the cable networks that hosted the debates. As Sanders himself pointed out during a Detroit event hosted by CNN, even the ad breaks generally offered no solace to those hoping for even a momentary cessation of the barrage: health insurance and pharmaceutical companies seizing every opportunity to bombard viewers with misleading industry agitprop about the breathtaking wonders of profit-driven health care.
On its face, the existence of this advertising effort likely surprised no one. Wherever their politics happen to sit, and whether they sympathize or not, most Americans probably grasp the idea of an industry using ad space to protect its business model. Even the hostility toward Medicare for All then expressed (and still expressed) by many Democratic politicians has a fairly straightforward explanation: a whopping majority of voters, after all, favor campaign finance reform and believe donations from corporations and special interests have a direct influence on the decisions those running for office make. It requires no great leap of the imagination to understand that politicians raising funds from figures in the very industry threatened by a particular policy aren’t going to be its most vocal champions.
This is what arguably makes the hostility directed toward Medicare for All by figures at the cable networks themselves the most insidious of all. Consider the following question, posed to Sanders during the Detroit debate by CNN’s Jake Tapper:
Let’s start the debate with the number-one issue for Democratic voters, health care. And Senator Sanders, let’s start with you. You support Medicare for All, which would eventually take private health insurance away for more than 150 million Americans in exchange for government-sponsored health care for everyone.
Despite his attempt at a somewhat balanced framing, and whether he realized it or not, Tapper was essentially regurgitating a talking point seeded by the insurance industry and its lobbyists (just take it from former Cigna-executive-turned-whistleblower Wendell Potter). Regardless, a question from a journalist tends to carry a lot more weight than a TV ad or even a spiel from a warm-and-fuzzy-sounding liberal politician.
We can’t know, obviously, how Tapper genuinely feels about the issue or even what role he played in writing the question. Given the near total uniformity of hostility to Medicare for All expressed on large cable networks, it’s far less relevant than the disjuncture between the perspectives they tend to showcase and majority public opinion — which consistently favors the creation of a universal, single-payer model.
The existence of media bubbles, of course, is one obvious explanation: exorbitantly well-paid and often politically insular communities of pundits and cable hosts inhabiting a completely different socioeconomic reality and being far better served by the current health care system than most Americans. To really understand why cable networks were so hostile toward Medicare for All throughout the Democratic primaries (and why they almost certainly will be for the foreseeable future), however, we have to ultimately look at their business model. Consider the following point made by Institute for New Economic Thinking executive director Rob Johnson during a recent interview when asked about Medicare for All:
Public opinion polls show more than 70 percent of the population is in favor of Medicare for All. It’s not the population that doesn’t want it, and they’re the ultimate voters. It’s vested interests and the struggle that has to do with the relationship between money-raising campaign war chests and the probability of re-election and what you might call the refractory influence of the mainstream media, where pharmaceutical companies in particular and insurance companies as well are very big advertisers. [emphasis added]
Concise though it is, Johnson’s remark is fairly close to a comprehensive explanation of why Medicare for All remains so marginal throughout the political class, despite the overwhelming popular support it boasts. What he calls the “refractory influence” of the mainstream media is arguably the most crucial factor involved: given the dependence of large networks on health insurance and pharma companies for advertising revenue, it’s really no wonder the astroturfed effort to discredit socialized medicine enjoys something approaching full-spectrum dominance on cable TV. As Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman wrote in their famous study Manufacturing Consent: “The power of advertisers over television programming stems from the simple fact that they buy and pay for programs — they are the ‘patrons’ who provide the media subsidy.”
CNN’s Detroit debate is a case in point; the network was demanding at least $300,000 from companies advertising, with a single thirty-second spot costing an estimated $110,000 — and groups like the so-called Partnership for America’s Health Care Future (in practice, a front for various corporate interests), filled out many of the slots. Regardless of how anchors or hosts think about an issue like health care, the networks’ basic model essentially precludes meaningful critique of the status quo by design. As long as it persists, don’t expect to see the public interest or popular opinion reflected anywhere on cable TV.
Secretary of State nominee Tony Blinken speaks as President Joe Biden listens. (photo: Carolyn Kaster/AP)
Biden Administration Takes Steps to Dismantle Trump-Era Asylum Agreements
Sabrina Rodrigues, Politico
"The Biden administration has begun the process of ending agreements with El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala as part of its effort to undo Trump-era changes to the U.S. asylum system, Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced on Saturday."
It's the latest effort by the Biden administration to undo the Trump administration's immigration legacy on asylum-seekers.
The announcement means the termination of three asylum cooperative agreements that the U.S. signed in 2019 with each of the Central American countries to require migrants seeking asylum in the U.S. to first apply for protections in those countries.
The deals — effectively known as safe third country agreements — were part of former President Donald Trump and his administration’s efforts to curb the number of migrants able to seek asylum in the United States. They allowed the U.S. to deport migrants seeking asylum back to those countries, where hundreds of thousands have fled.
"In line with the President's vision, we have notified the Governments of El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras that the United States is taking this action as efforts to establish a cooperative, mutually respectful approach to managing migration across the region begin," Blinken said.
The agreement with Guatemala was already in effect, but transfers under that agreement have been paused since mid-March due to the coronavirus pandemic, Blinken said in the statement. The agreements with El Salvador and Honduras were never fully implemented.
"The Biden administration believes there are more suitable ways to work with our partner governments to manage migration across the region," Blinken said.
President Joe Biden on Tuesday signed three immigration-related executive orders with one focused on revamping the U.S. asylum system and how it handles migrants arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border. The others called for policy reviews, planning and recommendations on next steps, so Blinken's announcement is one of the first specific changes to take place.
The executive order set into motion Blinken's move. It specified the Secretary would "promptly consider" whether to notify the governments of El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras that the U.S. was planning to end the agreements. It also specified that the DHS secretary and the attorney general would review and determine whether to rescind the rule that implements the asylum cooperative agreements.
The same order directed Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas to review the Migrant Protection Protocols program, which has forced asylum seekers to remain in Mexico while they wait for their U.S. court proceedings.
Doctors and nurses from Universities hospital in Yangon hold up placards as they participate in a civil disobedience campaign against the military coup. (photo: Nyein Chan Naing/EPA)
Myanmar: Tens of Thousands Protest Against Coup Despite Internet Blackout
Rebecca Ratcliffe, Guardian UK
Demonstrators gather amid demands for release of elected leader Aung San Suu Kyi
ens of thousands of people have taken to the streets of Myanmar for a second consecutive day to protest against the country’s military seizing power, despite a nationwide internet blackout imposed to stifle dissent.
In the main city Yangon, large crowds gathered on both Saturday and Sunday in support of ousted leaders Aung San Suu Kyi and Win Myint, whose National League for Democracy party won a landslide election in November. The military detained both in raids early on Monday morning and they have not been seen in public since.
Reuters reported that people from across Yangon converged on Hledan township on Sunday, some walking through stalled traffic, and marched under bright sunshine in the middle of the road, chanting: “We don’t want military dictatorship! We want democracy!”
They waved NLD flags and gestured with the three-finger salute that has become a symbol of protest against the coup. Drivers honked their horns and passengers held up photos of Nobel peace prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi.
The scenes broadcast on Facebook were some of the few that have come out of the country since the junta shut down the internet and restricted phone lines on Saturday.
“We cannot accept the coup,” said a 22-year-old who came with 10 friends, who asked not to be named for fear of retribution. “This is for our future. We have to come out.”
A woman in her early 30s who brought her family said they had not joined Saturday’s protests but refused to be afraid.
“We have to join the people, we want democracy,” she told Reuters.
By mid-morning Sunday about 100 people had taken to the streets on motorbikes in the coastal town of Mawlamyine in the south-east, and students and doctors were gathering in the city of Mandalay in central Myanmar.
Another crowd of hundreds spent the night outside a police station in the town of Payathonzu in Karen state in the southeast, where local NLD lawmakers were believed to have been arrested.
With the internet cut off and official information scarce, rumours swirled about the fate of Aung San Suu Kyi and her cabinet. A story that she had been released, which drew huge crowds on to the streets to celebrate overnight on Saturday, was quickly quashed by her lawyer.
The military had shut down the internet across the country in an attempt to stop the protests. The NetBlocks Internet Observatory reported that connectivity had fallen to 16% of ordinary levels by early afternoon on Saturday. The military had already blocked Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.
More than 160 people have been arrested since the military seized power in the early hours of Monday, said Thomas Andrews, the United Nations special rapporteur on Myanmar.
“The generals are now attempting to paralyse the citizen movement of resistance – and keep the outside world in the dark – by cutting virtually all internet access,” Andrews said on Sunday.
“We must all stand with the people of Myanmar in their hour of danger and need. They deserve nothing less.”
Myanmar’s military had shown that it believed it could “shut the world out and do whatever it wants”, said Phil Robertson, the deputy director of Human Rights Watch’s Asia division.
“They’re going to pull down the shutters and intimidate, arrest and abuse everybody who is daring to speak up. The question is how long people are able to do this and whether there will be any splits in ranks within the police or the military.”
The state-run broadcaster MRTV played scenes praising the military all day on Saturday, according to Reuters. Despite the internet blackout, several thousand demonstrators gathered near Yangon University.
“I always disliked the military but now I’m absolutely disgusted by them,” Maea, 30, said.
There was a heavy police presence during the demonstrations, including riot police and water cannon trucks, but according to agency reports there had been no clashes as of Sunday afternoon.
The protests were the biggest since the military seized power last week, prompting fury in the country and a flood of international condemnation. Myanmar spent about five decades under repressive military regimes before making the transition to a more democratic system in 2011.
A civil disobedience campaign has grown in recent days, with many doctors and teachers refusing to work. Every evening at about 8pm the sound of clanging metal rings out across Yangon as residents bang pots and pans in solidarity.
The army has justified its takeover by accusing the NLD of widespread fraud in November’s election, but has not provided credible evidence. The NLD won 396 of 476 seats, an even stronger performance than in the historic 2015 election, when the country held its first free vote in decades.
The military-backed Union Solidarity and Development party suffered a humiliating defeat, taking just 33 seats.
Aung San Suu Kyi, who previously spent 15 years in detention campaigning against military rule and remains hugely popular in the country, has been charged with illegally importing six walkie-talkies. President Win Myint is accused of flouting Covid-19 restrictions. Sean Turnell, an Australian economic adviser to Aung San Suu Kyi, said in a message to Reuters on Saturday morning that he was also being detained.
The UN security council released a statement last week that expressed deep concern at the arbitrary detentions, and the US has threatened sanctions.
The US introduced targeted sanctions against the commander-in-chief, Min Aung Hlaing, who now leads the country, in 2019 in response to the army’s brutal crackdown against the Rohingya people. UN investigators said the military operation included mass killings, gang rapes and widespread arson, and was executed with “genocidal intent”.
Moe Thuzar, the co-coordinator of the Myanmar Studies Programme at ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute in Singapore, said more general sanctions risked hitting the public. “Past experience has shown all of us that sanctions didn’t hurt the people against whom they were intended primarily, but really set back the country’s development and just created even more socio-economic disparities,” she said.
It was possible that countries with economic ties to Myanmar, such as Japan, could negotiate with the military, focusing on protecting the immediate needs of the people, such as the Covid-19 vaccination programme, Thuzar added.
Myanmar civil society organisations urged internet providers and mobile networks not to comply with the junta’s orders to restrict the internet, accusing them of “legitimising the military’s authority”.
Donald Trump. (photo: Andrew Harrer/Getty Images)
Trump Funneled Money From Donors Into Private Business After Election Loss, Report Finds
Alex Woodward, The Independent
Campaign finance filings follow concerns among watchdogs over former president’s self-dealing while in office
onald Trump has funnelled thousands of dollars from his donors into his private business after his loss in the 2020 presidential election.
The former president’s reelection campaign moved roughly $2.8 million from donors into the Trump Organisation over his term, including at least $81,000 since Mr Trump lost the election, according to Forbes, based on campaign finance reports submitted to the Federal Election Commission.
One of his campaign’s joint-fundraising groups working with the Republican Party also moved another $4.3 million from donors into the former president’s business over the course of his time in office, including $331,000 after Election Day.
A week after news media outlets called the results of the election for Joe Biden, a joint-fundraising committee paid his hotels nearly $300,000 for room rentals, space and catering.
Nearly a month after Election Day, the campaign paid $38,000 to Trump Tower Commercial LLC, the business under which the former president owns a stake in his namesake tower in New York.
The filings reflect concerns among lawmakers and watchdog groups over the former president’s self-dealing and enrichment while in office, relying on public funds and his campaign to inflate his private business.
He made more than 500 visits to his properties while in office, while 346 executive branch officials made 993 visits to his properties while he was in office, and at least 143 members of Congress made 361 visits to properties he owns, according to Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington.
His campaign and the joint-fundraising committee with the RNC, along with Trump-affiliated super PAC America First Action, spent more than $7 million and held 32 events at properties owned by the former president, CREW found.
The watchdog organisation found that special interest groups likely spent more than $13 million at properties he owns.
“In the past four years special interest groups, foreign governments, and political groups together held more than 250 events at 14 Trump properties, likely resulting in tens of millions of dollars of revenue for the Trump Organization,” the group reported. “In all, special interest groups have hosted 142 events, political groups have hosted 100, and foreign governments or foreign government-sponsored groups have hosted another 13.”
Roger Stone, former adviser to President Donald Trump, is flanked by security during a rally at Freedom Plaza, ahead of the U.S. Congress certification of the November 2020 election results, during protests in Washington, D.C., Jan. 5, 2021. (photo: Jim Urquhart/Reuters)
Congressional Investigators Probe Videos of Trump Associates' Actions Ahead of Capitol Riot
Katherine Faulders and Benjamin Siegel, ABC News
Impeachment managers on Thursday invited Trump to testify.
ongressional investigators preparing for former President Donald Trump's impeachment trial are zeroing in on the actions of the president and his associates around the insurrection at the Capitol, multiple sources familiar with the matter tell ABC News.
The House impeachment managers and their team of lawyers are examining materials, including videos, photos and social media posts, for possible links between individuals close to Trump and some involved in the riot at the Capitol, a source with knowledge of the House impeachment managers' investigation told ABC News.
They include a newly surfaced video first reported by ABC News showing longtime Trump adviser Roger Stone in Washington, D.C., the morning of Jan. 6. In the video, Stone is flanked by members of the Oath Keepers militia group just hours before the deadly Capitol riots -- including one man who appeared to later have participated in the Capitol assault, according to online researchers.
"So, hopefully we have this today, right?" one supporter asks Stone in the video. "We shall see," Stone replies. Stone has maintained that he played "no role whatsoever in the Jan. 6 events" and has repeatedly said that he "never left the site of my hotel until leaving for Dulles Airport" that afternoon.
Examining the actions of Trump, his aides and allies before and during the riot could help House impeachment managers make their case that the 45th president's comments to supporters at a Jan. 6 rally outside the White House were the culmination of a weekslong effort to overturn the election results. It could also shed light on the actions of those around Trump and whether they could have been more familiar with the riot -- and some of those who participated in it -- than initially disclosed.
An ABC News investigation into the nearly 200 accused rioters facing federal charges for their involvement at the Capitol -- based on court and military records, interviews and available news reports -- found that at least fourteen individuals who stormed the Capitol building have since said they were following Trump's encouragement.
Democrats also are working to piece together what Trump did behind closed doors the day of the insurrection, sources familiar with the matter tell ABC News.
Impeachment investigators are looking into the actions of former senior staffers to Trump, including former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, and what action they may or may not have taken related to the Capitol attack, the sources said.
Reached by ABC News on Friday, a spokesman for Meadows declined to comment.
Trump was only away from the White House for less than two hours, leaving only to speak to his supporters gathered at the "Save America" rally when he told them to head to the Capitol and repeatedly urged them to fight for him.
ABC News previously reported that when Trump returned to the White House, he moved between the private dining room and the Oval Office, watching the events play out in real time as a small group of advisers, including Meadows, urged the president to condemn the violence.
While Democrats are expected to extensively cite video and social media records from Jan. 6, it's not clear whether they will be able to call witnesses who could shed new light on Trump's actions around and during the riot.
The Senate has yet to strike an agreement on the contours of the trial, and whether either side can call witnesses to testify -- a move that would certainly extend proceedings in the Senate.
Impeachment managers on Thursday invited Trump to testify in his trial under oath, a surprise offer that Trump's legal team rejected and dismissed as an unconstitutional "public relations stunt," pointing to Trump's current status as a private citizen.
"Despite his lawyers' rhetoric, any official accused of inciting armed violence against the government of the United States should welcome the chance to testify openly and honestly -- that is, if the official had a defense," Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., the lead House impeachment manager, said in a statement Thursday night.
"We will prove at trial that President Trump's conduct was indefensible. His immediate refusal to testify speaks volumes and plainly establishes an adverse inference supporting his guilt," Raskin said.
Sunday Song: Josh Ritter | Harrisburg
Josh Ritter, YouTube
Excerpt: "It's a long way to Heaven, it's closer to Harrisburg. And that's still a long way from the place where we are."
Portrait of singer, songwriter, poet Josh Ritter. (photo: Laura Wilson)
Romero got married on the fifth of July
In our Lady of Immaculate Dawn
Could have got married in the revival man's tent
But there ain't no reviving what's gone
Slipped like a shadow from the family he made
In a little white house by the woods
Dropped the kids at the mission, with a rose for the virgin
She knew he was gone for good
It's a long way to Heaven, it's closer to Harrisburg
And that's still a long way from the place where we are
And if evil exists, it's a pair of train tracks
And the devil is a railroad car
Could have stayed somewhere but the train tracks kept going
And it seems like they always left soon
And the wolves that he ran with moaned low and painful
Sang sad miseries to the moon
It's a long way to Heaven, it's closer to Harrisburg
And that's still a long way from the place where we are
And if evil exists, it's a pair of train tracks
And the devil is a railroad car
Rose at the altar withered and wilted
Romero sank into a dream
He didn't make Heaven, he didn't make Harrisburg
He died in a hole in between
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train
A kangaroo rushes past a burning house in Lake Conjola, Australia, on Dec. 31, 2019. (photo: Matthew Abbott/NYT/Redux Pictures)
One year Since Australia's Devastating Wildfires, Anger Grows at Climate Change 'Inaction'
Nick Baker, NBC News
Baker writes: "Not long after Jack Egan's home burned down during Australia's 'Black Summer' wildfires a year ago, he made a life-changing decision."
“I feel ashamed of our country as it’s allowed some sort of short-term cynical politics to prevent proper climate action,” one survivor said.
At 60, Egan quit his job so he could spend his days campaigning for stronger action on climate change, a national and global challenge he said was “akin to a war.”
“I was working quite happily in aged care … but the fires caused me to devote the rest of my life to volunteer on climate action. I took an early retirement and that’s what I do full time now,” he said.
Egan, whose property in Rosedale on the country’s south-east coast has still not been rebuilt, recalled how “the fires had a behavior that was new to Australia, or new to me at least … and the length of the fires — months — was really shocking.”
February marks one year since Australia’s catastrophic wildfire season started to ease, after leaving 34 people dead and torching at least 18 million hectares of land (nearly 44.5 million acres). It was, in the words of one state premier, “the most devastating natural disaster in living memory.”
For Egan, it has been a year not only of recovery, but also of action. He spreads the word on “climate solutions and the benefits therein” around small, regional communities and was part of a delegation of survivors that took the remnants of their charred homes to Australia’s Parliament House, urging politicians to do more.
“It [the Australian government] is doing as little as possible, as little as they can get away with,” Egan said. “I feel ashamed of our country as it’s allowed some sort of short-term cynical politics to prevent proper climate action.”
Despite a chorus of scientists saying climate change is contributing to longer and more intense wildfire seasons, Prime Minister Scott Morrison refused to introduce any major climate measures after the disaster. Mass protests were held across the country calling for tougher climate action, but Morrison remained unmoved.
Morrison leads a conservative coalition government, which has been in power since 2013. His government’s track record on climate includes repealing the country’s carbon tax and Morrison famously bringing a lump of coal into Parliament, saying, “Don’t be scared, it won’t hurt you.”
The prime minister’s office did not respond to requests for comment.
Morrison has acknowledged the threat of climate change and routinely defends a “sensible” response. As part of the Paris climate agreement, his government committed to cutting greenhouse gas emissions by at least 26 percent by 2030 compared to 2005 levels.
But climate advocacy groups say much stronger commitments are needed, especially as Australia has one of the world’s highest per capita levels of emissions and is among the biggest fossil fuel exporters.
“We know very clearly the Black Summer fires were fueled by climate change and that Australia has to play a much bigger part in addressing its contribution to that problem,” Simon Bradshaw of the Climate Council, an advocacy group, said. “But we haven’t seen the federal government do anything further to actually tackle the root cause of the climate crisis.”
“We’ve seen the government refuse to strengthen its 2030 emissions reduction targets,” Bradshaw added, “ … and also refuse to commit to achieving net zero emissions by 2050 or earlier. At this point, we’re pretty much alone among developed countries having refused to do either of those things.”
More than 100 countries have set net zero targets. This week, Morrison went as far as saying that net zero emissions by 2050 would be “preferable.” But when pressed for specifics, he said, “When I can tell you how we get there, that’s when I’ll tell you when we’re going to get there.”
In the meantime, the research group Climate Action Tracker rates the government’s response as “insufficient.”
As a political battle around climate change is being fought in Australia, the country is also counting the cost of the wildfires on its flora and fauna.
Basha Stasak, the nature program manager at the Australian Conservation Foundation, said the disaster “really hit all swaths of the animal world.”
“It’s estimated that 3 billion animals were killed or displaced by the bushfires last summer,” Stasak said. “This includes really iconic species that are known around the world, like the koala, which lost an estimated 30 percent of its habitat in New South Wales.”
A report by WWF-Australia found that more than 60,000 koalas were affected by the infernos, which it called “a deeply disturbing number for a species already in trouble.”
There is slightly better news when it comes to Australia’s flora.
Patrick Norman, an ecologist at Griffith University and a researcher with the Bushfire Recovery Project, said most Australian forests have adaptations in order to survive fire.
“[Many forests] are recovering how they should, and are responding particularly well after a La Niña year, which has been excellent. Most of the areas impacted had a good, high amount of rainfall in 2020.”
But he said some subalpine areas in New South Wales and Victoria, along with wetter forests in northern New South Wales were not recovering as well due to the especially brutal fire conditions.
“They [the fires] were just an enormous event,” Norman said. “It’s definitely scary looking into the future, at a further warming climate. We’re only just starting to see the impacts now.”
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.