Windows Wednesday

It's been a while since I've done a Windows Wednesday post. The reasons for missing my weekly post range from Hurricane Isaac, hospitalization, sick/dying cat, no electricity for a week, sick dog, etc.

But I'm back and have windows to show!

This was taken from the parking garage at the Westin Hotel at the foot of Canal Street

Taken from the same spot, a nice shot of the edge of the French Quarter

DREW BREES!!!!!

The Inequality Report Card

From The Institute for Policy Studies the "Inequality Report Card".

This interactive website allows you to click on your state/parish (county) to see which representative is related to a that section of your state. When you click on it, a pop-up pops-up, giving you information about contacting the person via telephone/Twitter/Facebook, etc. I think this website makes it extremely easy for people to get involved. But I guess only people who usually get involved will use this website. Kudos to IPS for putting this together!

From their site:

Members of Congress have the capacity to make sure that all Americans, not just a privileged few, share in the wealth that we all together create. This first IPS “inequality report card” evaluates current members on how well they are exercising this power.

The report card is based on 40 legislative actions taken over the past two years that relate to inequality. The bills range from legislation to establish a “Buffett Rule” minimum tax rate that all wealthy Americans must pay to a measure that would raise the minimum wage and index it to inflation.

Check it out!

Jarvis DeBerry to GOP: Wrong "Gotcha"

So there's this tape out. It's the right wing's rebuttal to the secretly recorded video that caught Mitt Romney writing off 47 percent of America as unworthy of his attention and the federal government's support. What does this June 2007 video "catch" then-candidate Barack Obama doing? Asking a gathering of black clergy in Hampton, Va., how come post-Katrina New Orleans was being asked to put up money for its recovery when post-9/11 New York was not.

Sen. Obama says early in the speech that he'd been asked if the Bush administration delayed help for New Orleans because most of its residents were black. "I say, 'Well, naw, this administration was colorblind in its incompetence.'" Still, the right-wing partisans touting the release of the video say it's proof Obama is a racial radical when he's speaking to mostly black crowds.

It's fair to point out that Obama sounds a lot more down home at Hampton than he typically does, especially since his birthplace in Hawaii is nowhere near down home. It's kind of silly to expect an orator to always sound the same, irrespective of audience, but if the president's critics want to make that their complaint, so be it.

But some offer a far more dishonest analysis. They insist that the candidate was lying, that New Orleans was given more grace than New York City. That's not just an attack on Obama. It's an attack on the truth - and on us.

The Stafford Act requires that, after a disaster, a community put up 10 percent toward its rebuilding costs. New York had its contribution waived, Obama pointed out. New Orleans did not. How do his critics respond? With a non-response. Tucker Carlson, editor-in-chief at dailycaller.com, which published the video, writes: "By January of 2007, six months before Obama's Hampton speech, the federal government had sent at least $110 billion to areas damaged by Katrina. Compare this to the mere $20 billion that the Bush administration pledged to New York City after Sept. 11."

The attacks on the Twin Towers damaged or destroyed 30 million square feet of office space in Manhattan, that is, slightly more than a square mile. About 145 square miles of previously dry land was under water in New Orleans alone after Hurricane Katrina. Altogether, Hurricane Katrina damaged 92,000 square miles of property. We did not receive 92,000 times more money.

And, for the most part, we did not have our share of recovery costs waived. The New York Times questioned that sudden stinginess in a February 2007 editorial. The federal government, it noted, waived Florida's match when 1992's Hurricane Andrew caused damage that came out to $139 per Floridian. The government waived New York's match when the 2001 terrorist attacks caused damage that worked out to $390 per New Yorker. Katrina and Rita damaged Louisiana to the tune of $6,700 per capita. We - and that we includes The Times-Picayune's editorial page and the Louisiana congressional delegation - begged Washington for mercy. We were repeatedly told no.

Yes, there was a waiver extended for debris removal and some emergency services, but in no way does that invalidate Obama's argument.

The Bush administration contended it had fronted us the money for the match, a curious case of accounting that was typical for the administration post-Katrina. For example, the $110 billion included money that had been sent to five states for recovery from three hurricanes: Katrina, Rita and Wilma. Sixteen billion dollars had been paid out by the National Flood Insurance Program. We'd paid premiums for that. So why was it counted as a gift?

This really steams me up. This isn't in the prepared remarks." -- Then-candidate Barack Obama in June 2007
"This really steams me up," Obama says when begins to talk about Washington's requirement that we put up $1 for every $10 received. "This isn't in the prepared remarks." He mentions the forgiveness shown New York and Florida, which he argues communicated, "We're not going to wait for you to scratch it together - because you're a part of the American family."

"What's happening down in New Orleans? 'Where's your dollar? Where's your Stafford Act money?' Makes no sense....Tells me somehow the people down in New Orleans, they don't care about as much."

They didn't care as much. And few people down here, regardless of race, are likely to argue otherwise. That's why the video of Obama's speech fails so spectacularly as an attack. He's speaking up for people who have a legitimate claim to the government's money and not, like his current opponent, turning his back on those desperately in need.

Jarvis DeBerry can be reached at jdeberry@nola.com and at 504.826.3355. Follow him at http://connect.nola.com/user/jdeberry/posts.html and at twitter.com/jarvisdeberrytp.

Debates: Useless?

I was thinking about the recent presidential debate which aired on television last Wednesday.

Mostly, my thoughts focused on how totally useless debates are to me. Candidates can stand on the stage and spout of all kind of bull$hit just to gain points. And a lot of it is lies or misstatements.

But people go crazy over these events. I didn't watch the debate, but I monitored Twitter and Facebook while it was happening. I was so excited by what I was reading that I went to bed!



Because of his track record (including the fact that he dealt with a do-nothing House and Sentate), this man best represents my beliefs.



I will start calling Willard Big Bird for his stance on Public Television. This man is OUT OF TOUCH with normal Americans. But the rednecks and gun fanatics and Teabaggers will vote for him. Not me.

It's sad that people put credence in to the crap that comes out of debates. It's equally sad that the press drools over these events. A lot of Americans take politicians and pundits at their words, never thinking to fact check things. We'd be in a better place if they did.

Presidential Debate #1 Fact checked

from Factcheck.org


Summary
We found exaggerations and false claims flying thick and fast during the first debate between President Obama and his Republican challenger, Mitt Romney.


Obama accused Romney of proposing a $5 trillion tax cut. Not true. Romney proposes to offset his rate cuts and promises he won’t add to the deficit.
Romney again promised to “not reduce the taxes paid by high-income Americans” and also to “lower taxes on middle-income families,” but didn’t say how he could possibly accomplish that without also increasing the deficit.
Obama oversold his health care law, claiming that health care premiums have “gone up slower than any time in the last 50 years.” That’s true of health care spending, but not premiums. And the health care law had little to do with the slowdown in overall spending.

Romney claimed a new board established by the Affordable Care Act is “going to tell people ultimately what kind of treatments they can have.” Not true. The board only recommends cost-saving measures for Medicare, and is legally forbidden to ration care or reduce benefits.
Obama said 5 million private-sector jobs had been created in the past 30 months. Perhaps so, but that counts jobs that the Bureau of Labor Statistics won’t add to the official monthly tallies until next year. For now, the official tally is a bit over 4.6 million.

Romney accused Obama of doubling the federal deficit. Not true. The annual deficit was already running at $1.2 trillion when Obama took office.
Obama again said he’d raise taxes on upper-income persons only to the “rates that we had when Bill Clinton was president.” Actually, many high-income persons would pay more than they did then, because of new taxes in Obama’s health care law.
Romney claimed that middle-income Americans have “seen their income come down by $4,300.” That’s too high. Census figures show the decline in median household income during Obama’s first three years was $2,492, even after adjusting for inflation.
Obama again touted his “$4 trillion” deficit reduction plan, which includes $1 trillion from winding down wars that are coming to an end in any event.

Romney sometimes came off as a serial exaggerator. He said “up to” 20 million might lose health insurance under the new law, citing a Congressional Budget Office study that actually put the likely number who would lose employer-sponsored coverage at between 3 million and 5 million. He said 23 million Americans are “out of work” when the actual number of jobless is much lower. He claimed half of all college grads this year can’t find work, when, in fact, an AP story said half either were jobless or underemployed. And he again said Obama “cut” $716 billion from Medicare, a figure that actually reflects a 10-year target for slowing Medicare spending, which will continue to grow.


Note: This is a summary only. The full article with analysis, images and citations may be viewed on our website:

http://factcheck.org/2012/10/dubious-denver-debate-declarations/

Freedom of Speech

Brad Staats, a GOP congressional candidate in Tennessee, drew some negative attention to his campaign this week after posting a picture of his handgun to Facebook and using it as a springboard to "welcome" President Barack Obama to Tennessee.

Staats, who is running to unseat five-term Democratic incumbent Rep. Jim Cooper, made the original post on September 27 on his campaign's fan page.

"Many people in Tennessee keep asking me about my opinion on Second Amendment rights. Apparently Tennesseans are part of that crazy crowd that Obama says 'cling to their religion and guns.' Well, then I must be part of that crazy crowd," he wrote in a caption beneath an upside-down picture of his gun. "Here is something that I usually have with me. Welcome to Tennessee Mr. Obama, where we appreciate our 2nd Amendment rights and the Constitution that was wisely given to us by our founding fathers."

The message appears to be a reference to the famous audio recording of then-candidate Obama saying at a fundraiser in 2008 that he wasn't surprised some communities "cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them."

I

You Can't Make This Stuff Up

SCOTTSBLUFF, Neb. —

A western Nebraska man is jailed after assaulting his wife with a sandwich.



Larry Spurling, 50, of Melbeta, pleaded no contest to disturbing the peace in connection with the incident that happened late Sunday.

According to the arrest affidavit, Spurling's wife called 911 and reported he pushed her down during an argument and rubbed a sandwich in her face.

The woman told deputies that Spurling had become irate for "making him live in the county" and "being bored since there is no place for him to walk."

She said that the argument went on for some time, during which Spurling drank three 24-oz cans of Natty Daddy, a malt liquor with 8 percent alcohol content.

The woman told deputies that she "got tired" of the argument and made herself a sandwich and went to a bedroom.

Spurling followed her, according to the affidavit, pulled her hair, pushed her onto the bed and rubbed the sandwich on her face.

A deputy said he found several pieces of lunch meat on the carpet outside a bedroom and some pieces of bread in the bedroom.

The woman said she had mayonnaise in her hair and on her face as a result of the attack, but she cleaned herself up before deputies arrived.

Spurling entered the no contest plea on Monday and was sentenced to five days in jail.

Idiots on Parade 4

Is it the cold weather? This woman's been cah-ray-zee for a long time, but now she's bordering on completely off her rocker. I cannot BELIEVE there are people who elected this bimbo:



Minnesota Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann courted controversy today by claiming that falafel and other "jihadi foods" should be banned from school lunches in the United States.

In an interview with local television station KSTP in Minneapolis, Bachmann explained that after visiting a local elementary school she was shocked to find that falafel - a fried vegetable patty popular in the Arab world - was being served as a option on the vegetarian menu.

Now, instead of being pleased that these schools are taking the opportunity to introduce new foods to kids, she's turning it into a "holy war". What an embarassment.

Bottega Veneta Spring 2013 Ready-To-Wear at Milan Week

I just found a designer who speaks to me!  Whoda thought?  Too bad I'll never be able to afford it.

The Best and Worst of Times.......

Filmed at The Moth, a New York City based nonprofit organization that conducts live storytelling events.