PELOSI DOESN'T GET IT

The following is a quote from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi regarding Hillary and Barack running together ...

I don't think it's a good idea...I think that first of all that the candidates, whoever he or she may be, should choose his or her own vice presidential candidate. I think that's appropriate. That's where you would see the comfort level on not only how to run, but how to govern the country and there's plenty of talent to go around ..for a good strong ticket. I'm not one of those who thinks that that's a good ticket.

So, here's my question ... What good does it do for one of them to pick a VP based on "comfort level" or some such thing if they lose to McCain? The point of having them run together is not so they can govern more effectively or whatever; it's to prevent alienating millions of Democrats who would stay home if their candidate doesn't get the nomination. That's the big fear right now after this nightmare battle they're waging.

My opinion is -- if you really want to be elected President in November -- you better suck it up and consider your rival. It's not unheard of ... Reagan picked Bush after all.

EDWORDS

Now, this John Edwards I would have voted for ...

ZELL AND MCCAW: SOUL MATES

As other bloggers have observed recently, there is a somewhat eerie connection between Sam Zell and Wendy McCaw. Mr. Zell is the billionaire eccentric who recently purchased the Tribune Co. (owner of the Los Angeles Times), and Ms. McCaw is .... well, you know. Another interesting connection shared by these two newsroom owners is an awesome decline in newspaper subscriptions since taking over their respective companies. To be honest, I only had a passing interest in these similarities until I read a Studio Briefing entry titled "Zell Goes On The Air -- Unbeknownst To Him." Here it is ...

National Public Radio's All Things Considered has played excerpts of a talk delivered by Tribune Co. owner Sam Zell to the company's top Washington journalists in February. In it, Zell accused of the journalists of not generating revenue for the company, "so all of you are overhead." He maintained that Tribune employees -- the company owns 23 TV stations and 11 newspapers -- have failed to find ways to attract more viewers and readers. "Three guys in a garage create YouTube, and we've got 800 people in Chicago [Tribune's headquarters] who don't know their ass from a hole in the ground." Since Zell took over the company, Tribune outlets have been hit with substantial layoffs and cutbacks. "And I promise you the next 60 days will be even more tumultuous," Zell added. While he declined to discuss his remarks with NPR, his lawyer, David Bradford, told the public broadcaster: "He's somebody who speaks the unvarnished truth."

Well, he speaks unvarnished something. At any rate, this got me thinking about Wendy's feelings towards the Santa Barbara News-Press employees. For example, when the meltdown first occurred back in 2006, the Independent reported the following regarding her "Note to Readers" ...

In that note to readers, McCaw dismissed the mass exodus of high ranking editors from her paper, "as disgruntled ex-employees," who left because she would no longer allow them to abuse her paper by using the news pages as a loudspeaker for their hidden and not-so-hidden political agendas.

The following year, attorney Barry Cappello gave us some more insight into Wendy's opinion of her journalists ...

Mr. Cappello said newspapers are anachronisms, and journalists have failed to realize this ..."The meteor has hit. We’re watching the end of the industry," he said. "Journalists think they can write what they want when they want. I don’t know if that can survive in this age."

So, here's my question ... What other cases have you heard of where the owner of a company blames all the employees for the company's problems? I mean, don't CEO's get paid hundreds of millions of dollars because they are responsible for the well being of their businesses? Think about this for a minute: these two people actually used a public forum to basically say that their entire staff is a bunch of morons. Most of us have worked for companies that employ a large number of people, and I'm sure all of these companies have had their fair share of problems over the years. But imagine how you'd feel if the owner went to an event or wrote a letter and stated that the company's ills were due to the incompetence of all the workers.

Over 50 people have quit or been fired from the News-Press since July of 2006. That is a HUGE number of people compared to the size of entire News-Press staff. And Wendy would actually have you believe that every single one of them had to go because of their unwavering desire to place bias in the paper. Are you kidding me!? Likewise for Mr. Zell; he wants you to believe that his company is losing money because 800 journalists don't know what they're doing. Well, I've got news for both Sam Zell and Wendy McCaw: that's not how it works. You don't get to buy a company, run it into the ground, and then say everything would be fine if not for those pesky idiots who run around and do their jobs all day. If that were the case, Wall Street would call for the ouster of the employees; not the executives.

How nice would it have been if Ms. McCaw and Mr. Zell held a conference call early on with all the employees and said, "You know, times are tough. But you are all great folks, and we're going to get through this, because you are some of the most professional people I've ever had the pleasure to work with." That's what you call leadership. Instead, though, these two chose to declare war on the very people they need to succeed. And they both seem to have a disdain for the very profession in which they chose to be involved.

I have to wonder what Zell and McCaw see upon viewing a hole in the ground.

SC ON THE TV

From Studio Briefing ...

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has spoken out strongly against allowing courtroom proceedings to be televised -- be they those of the high court or lower courts. As reported by Broadcasting & Cable, Scalia said on C-SPAN's Students and Leaders: "To make entertainment out of real people's legal troubles is quite sick. ... You want to entertain the public? Hire actors and put on Perry Mason or something. I don't think it is right to make enjoyment out of litigation, civil or criminal." He said that he would not be opposed to gavel-to-gavel coverage of Supreme Court proceedings on C-SPAN, but, he said, for every person watching such coverage, "there would be 100,000 who would watch a 15-second take-out from the C-SPAN feed. And I guarantee you that the 15-second take-out would not be characteristic of what we do."

And what exactly do you do, Mr. Scalia? Because, from what I can tell, all you do (along with Thomas, Roberts, and Alito) is rule in favor of every Bush-backed, neo-con, far right piece of garbage that comes through your (not so supreme) court. I think what you really fear is the public getting a glimpse of how incompetent this court has become. I would just love, for example, to see the audience "entertained" by Thomas asking no questions and stating no opinion ... unless, of course, it's to rabidly defend Bush's Guantanamo Bay fiasco.

I say, "Lights, camera, action!"

EPA BAILS OUT GREKA'S OIL

If you've been paying attention, you know that Greka Oil & Gas Inc. has spilled more oil around here recently than the Governator uses to fill up his Hummers. And it seems that no amount of public or private pressure has encouraged them to adequately clean up its messes. Therefore, it looks as if the EPA is going to step in and do it for them. Here's a portion of the recent Santa Maria Times article on the subject ...

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is taking over the cleanup of an oil spill in Santa Barbara County after failed efforts by Greka Oil & Gas Inc., a company whose long record of inland oil spills could soon lead to new legislation.

Officials announced the federal takeover of the Bell lease site in Santa Maria today, saying Greka has not removed petroleum-contaminated soil in a creek in the two months since the spill.

Greka, which state officials have called California’s worst inland oil polluter, has been responsible for three spills at the site since last summer totaling more than 29,000 gallons of crude oil and toxin laden water.

“That they’re federalizing this is a big deal,” said Steve Edinger, assistant chief of the state Department of Fish and Game. “It’s basically the EPA saying ‘We need to step in and make sure the environment is taken care of and cleaned up.’ It’s not something that happens very often.”

If you're like me, you probably read the headline "EPA federalizes cleanup of oil spill at Greka site" and gave it about ten seconds of thought before moving on to more exciting news items. Well, I'm glad I gave it a another look, because -- if you'll indulge me -- I'd like to show how the Greka issue really points to a more disturbing trend. And I'd like to start by talking about another quote from the article ...

Robert Wise, who works at EPA’s Superfund division, scoffed at the idea that the company headed by Randeep Grewal does not have the funds.

“There’s really no question as to whether Randy Grewal has the money — oh yeah, he has the money,” Wise said. “The question is whether he wants to pay for this.”

Yeah, that is a good question. If not him, then who? Let's come back to that ... As I stated in a previous post, the recent government bailout of Bear Stearns really left a bad taste in my mouth. It's not that I necessarily blame the Fed for taking this action, but I am mostly disturbed by the fact that Bush would bail out a corporation while, at the same time, refusing to help the average man who is losing his home ...

"It’s not the government’s job to bail out speculators," Mr. Bush said, "or those who made the decision to buy a home they knew they could never afford."

What the Greka and Bear Stearn incidents really bring to light is a fatal flaw with the "free markets will fix everything" philosophy. These corporations (and many like them) want to have their cake and eat it too. They claim that government regulations are unnecessary and inhibit profits. But look who has to jump in and save them when things go bad. I think Bill Maher said it best on a recent episode of Real Time ...

"They (Corporations) believe in the free market for profits but they want to socialize losses."

That's exactly right. And it leads us right back to the question of who pays when these types of events occur ... We do!