Wednesday, November 30, 2011

“All these guys use their position of authority to try to target vulnerable people.”

To experts, Penn State case fits a familiar mold

Officials regularly see men in positions of trust accused of abuse

By Josh White, Wednesday, November 30,6:37 AM

Jerry Sandusky was an icon. He was fun, motivating, successful, trustworthy. He was a coach, a mentor, a family man, a churchgoer and a dedicated philanthropist who split his life between two pursuits: Penn State football and helping disadvantaged kids.

Now, Sandusky is alleged to have repeatedly courted, groomed and abused young boys for at least 15 years. Those who know him well can’t believe the accusations.

But police, prosecutors and sex crime experts say that Sandusky’s alleged abuse is illustrative of sex predation across the country. It is an extremely high-profile version of what police departments and social services offices see regularly: A man in a position of trust is accused of abusing those who are most vulnerable.

Capt. Bill Carson of the Maryland Heights, Mo., police department, a 32-year veteran who has studied imprisoned sex offenders, noticed similarities between his cases and the Penn State case right away.

“I interviewed a lot of charismatic people that would appear to be really nice people if you didn’t know what they were in prison for,” he said. “They came across as being very pleasant. A lot of them had been in a position of trust. They were youth pastors or school teachers or YMCA volunteers, Boy Scout leaders, Little League coaches.

“They were well respected and well thought of in their career,” Carson said. “And when the charges came down, everyone was shocked.”

Sandusky is alleged to have pursued what appears to be a long grooming process that involved his infiltrating the lives of his alleged victims, spending private time with them, and ultimately cajoling them into increasingly sexual situations. At a program such as Penn State’s, access to the football field, to the players and to the facilities would be attractive to fans of all ages, and perhaps especially to young boys.

A Pennsylvania grand jury said Sandusky pursued boys using his position at Penn State and at the Second Mile, a charity he founded for disadvantaged youths.

“What the grand jury report and the people we’ve been talking to show is a luring of young boys into being enamored of Sandusky’s stardom in the community, his ability to grant access to a citadel of sports fame and stadiums and contact with football players and bowl games,” said David Marshall, a Washington lawyer who is working with others who allege abuse in the case. “All of that certainly is designed for, and would have the effect of, making someone feel like they were in a very special relationship with a very special person.”

The Sandusky case is different in that it has forever affected a major college football program and a university with a previously sterling reputation. But the experts and law enforcement officials say the vast majority of predators share many of the same traits as Sandusky. They are teachers, counselors, clergymen and coaches who might be close to kids anyway, so the amount of time they spend with children and the close relationships they build don’t raise too many questions.

A similar pattern may be emerging at Syracuse University, where, after the Sandusky case became public, three men accused a longtime assistant basketball coach of molesting them when they were boys. Syracuse Chancellor Nancy Cantor fired Bernie Fine, 65, on Sunday — saying the emerging allegations “have shaken us all” — and law enforcement authorities are investigating. Fine has not been charged with a crime and has called the accusations “patently false.”

Sandusky likewise says he is innocent — and his attorney says that he will be vindicated — but what has emerged in court documents and from alleged victims paints a portrait familiar to police.

Sandusky’s attorney, Joe Amendola, said people have unfairly portrayed his client and have been too quick to judge a man who has a stellar record as a mentor and coach. He said Sandusky has worked with thousands of disadvantaged children since the 1970s.

“He’s a big, overgrown kid,” Amendola said. “It doesn’t mean he abused these kids. You can put him in that mold, or you can put him in the mold of someone who loves being around kids and helping kids.”

Amendola said Sandusky’s work with children makes him an easy target for such allegations.

“The bottom line is that if you want to take the approach that Jerry Sandusky is a pedophile, you can fit that idea into what he did, working with kids and the Second Mile,” Amendola said. “Or, you could say he was raised in a family who helped kids, and when he became an adult he wanted to help kids, too.”

‘He’s your best friend’

The shock in State College is similar to the shock other communities have felt when a revered leader has been accused of such crimes. Sandusky, 67, had been a part of Penn State football since the 1960s, after playing there. In 1977, he founded the Second Mile, which ultimately reached thousands of children.

Sandusky, a married father of six adopted children, presented himself as a role model; the kind of guy parents would trust with their kids.
“Jerry is like the guy next door,” said John Skorupan, who played linebacker for Sandusky at Penn State and later played in the NFL for the Buffalo Bills and New York Giants. Skorupan also took part in more than 15 charity golf tournaments for the Second Mile. “He’s your best friend who will do anything for you. He’s there to lead the charge. He’s fun, enthusiastic, light-hearted, but also intense.”

Those qualities, law enforcement officials say, are often what make predators so effective. They befriend the child and the child’s parents, earn their trust, develop a psychological hold over them and then begin their abuse. Because of their influence and standing, the predators know their word will probably be believed over a victim’s.

“They go toward vulnerable victims, people in vulnerable families, people with disabilities,” said a federal prosecutor who has handled sex crime cases, speaking on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk about Sandusky’s case.

“Just the fact that it’s a person in power elevates the situation. From the victim’s point of view, they’re put in the position of being a nobody, and if they accuse the person of abusing them, they’re going up against a powerful and well-liked person. Who’s going to believe them?”

It is that concern that experts say keeps victims quiet, sometimes for decades. Attorneys for accusers in Sandusky’s case said the boys felt silenced in part because they didn’t want to play a role in hurting Penn State, which holds enormous community influence.

As those who have come forward alleging abuse have told similar stories to a Pennsylvania grand jury and to their attorneys. Sandusky allegedly wooed them with gifts, money, trips, attention and access to the Penn State football program before ultimately making a move toward sexual activity, sometimes in a bedroom in his home, sometimes in a Penn State shower, sometimes on trips, the grand jury report said.

Amendola said Sandusky spent a lot of time with children because he was committed to helping them face challenges in their lives.

Relief and distress

Attorneys for those who say they were abused are learning details as they begin to open up. For them, the alleged abuse was a secret they harbored for years and are just now learning how to cope with.

“People that we have talked to have told us that Sandusky told them that they were very special and that he’d take care of them and protect them,” said Justine Andronici, a State College lawyer who is working with accusers in the case with Marshall and State College lawyer Andrew Shubin. “As more victims come forward, we believe that all of Jerry Sandusky’s victims are going to see that his promises are just more lies designed to keep them silent about the sexual abuse.”

Andronici said she is confident that the Penn State community will rally around the victims and protect them.

“The people we are speaking to are at all stages of dealing with this,” Andronici said. “Some of them have expressed some amount of relief, and others are in extreme distress.”

Experts say the silver lining of the Sandusky case is that it has brought the issue of sexual predation to the fore and appears to be bringing some victims out of hiding.

In Syracuse, for example, two former ballboys came forward after Sandusky’s arrest to accuse a coach of molesting them decades ago, and a third person reported that the same coach abused him in 2002. According to school officials, Syracuse investigated some of the allegations in 2005 but could not corroborate them at the time.

And in Manassas, a man in his late 20s reported two weeks ago that he was abused as an elementary school student in the 1990s. Police jumped on the case and arrested the suspect within days. Authorities say they think there might be numerous victims in that case.

“But for this Penn State thing, we probably wouldn’t have known about this,” said Prince William County Commonwealth’s Attorney Paul B. Ebert. “All these guys use their position of authority to try to target vulnerable people.”


Staff writers T. Rees Shapiro in State College, Pa., and staff writer Mary Pat Flaherty and staff researchers Julie Tate and Madonna Lebling in Washington contributed to this report.

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

"I Pay Your Salary!"

Televised congressional hearings often serve as a platform for members of Congress to berate, bloviate and showboat for the cameras, but at a House Natural Resources Committee hearing Tuesday, historian Douglas Brinkley wouldn't stand for it.

The topic at hand was drilling in the the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. The trouble began when Alaska Republican Rep. Don Young misstated historian Douglas Brinkley's name after referring to the hearing as "an exercise in futility." In a certain breach of protocol, Brinkley cut him off.


Young didn't like that one bit.

"You just be quiet," Young demanded.

"You don't own me," Brinkley shot back. "I pay your salary!"


Washington Republican Rep. Doc Hastings, the chairman of the committee, tried to break it up, but then Brinkley interrupted him.

"I work for the private sector," Brinkley said.

When the chairman returned the floor to Young, the rumble began anew.

"We're the ones who ask the questions, and you're the one who answers the questions," Young said. "Boy I'm really pissed right now."

Obviously, it's a must-watch; you can see the exchange in the video above.

Update: The Washington Post's Amy Argetsinger caught up with both parties after the showdown:

A spokesman for Young later called the episode "a publicity stunt by Mr. Brinkley in order to sell books." Witnesses, he said, "are invited to testify before Congress to answer questions and provide insight, not repeatedly interrupt."

Brinkley was unapologetic when we reached him, calling Young "a crazy zealot for molesting the refuge" and saying he wished he "could have gone mano-a-mano" with him. "I was hoping for the chance to get into a heated debate with him, but, alas, it's hard in that forum."

Jimmy Fallon, my new favorite late night host!

Late night host Jimmy Fallon apologized to Michele Bachmann Tuesday after his house band played an offensive song as she walked on stage during an appearance on his show Monday.

Fallon's house band, The Roots, played "Lyin' Ass Bitch" by Fishbone to welcome her to the late night show—a song most people, including Bachmann, didn't notice until Questlove, the band's drummer, hinted at it in a Twitter message.

On Tuesday, Fallon apologized to Bachmann via Twitter.

"I'm honored that @michelebachmann was on our show yesterday and I'm so sorry about the intro mess. I really hope she comes back," Fallon wrote. "Actually it was a fun interview. She helped me with my Minnesota accent. (I still sound Irish)."

But Fallon's apology doesn't appear to be enough for Bachmann, who accused NBC of sexism for not issuing an apology on behalf of the network. She told Fox News in an interview Wednesday whoever in the band chose the song should disciplined or fired and suggested NBC has a double standard in how it treats Republican women.

"This wouldn't be tolerated if it were Michelle Obama, and it shouldn't be tolerated for a conservative woman," Bachmann said, calling the song choice an "outrage."

But she's not the only one complaining. The song choice has come under fire from all sides of the political spectrum. New York Rep. Nita Lowey, a Democrat, trashed the show for its song choice in a statement to Politico and called on NBC, Fallon and the band to apologize.

"The choice of song to introduce Michele Bachmann on 'Late Night With Jimmy Fallon' last night was insulting and inappropriate," Lowey told Politico Tuesday. "I do not share Michele Bachmann's politics, but she deserves to be treated with respect. No female politician—and no woman—should be subjected to sexist and offensive innuendo like she was last night."

You can watch the song intro below.


Tuesday, November 22, 2011

It's Not Just the Packers on a Winning Streak!

Thousands rally against Wisconsin Republican governor


..MADISON (Reuters) - Thousands of people gathered at the Wisconsin capitol on Saturday to demand a recall of Republican Governor Scott Walker, whose controversial and successful drive to limit public unions last winter sparked the biggest protests in the state since the Vietnam War.

Former U.S. Senator Russ Feingold, a Democrat, signed a recall petition during a morning meeting with about 300 recall volunteers and pledged to help the effort through his political action committee.

With the crowd chanting "Run, Russ, Run," Feingold repeated that he would not run against Walker in any recall election.

"There will be a new governor in a few months. It won't be me, but it will be somebody good," Feingold said. "It's not about me. It's not about any particular candidate. It's about restoring civility and some kind of sense of unity to the state."

The Wisconsin Department of Administration estimated that between 25,000 and 30,000 people gathered at an afternoon rally at the Capitol building to boost the state-wide petition drive for a Walker recall election that began on November 15.

United Wisconsin, part of the coalition leading the recall effort, said more than 105,000 signatures had been gathered through the first four days of the effort. Organizers need 540,208 valid signatures by January 15 to trigger a recall vote.

Walker, who swept into office in the Republican rebound during the November 2010 mid-term national elections, made Wisconsin ground zero for the party's push for conservative reforms.

He cited budget reasons for an unyielding push for curbs in collective bargaining for public workers like teachers. The proposal set off mass protests and prompted 14 Democratic Senators to leave for Illinois to avoid a quorum. But the legislation passed along party lines in March.

The Walker recall push follows the successful removal of two Republican state senators in recalls this summer by energized Democrats.

Walker spokesman Cullen Werwie said on Saturday: "The only campaign Governor Walker is focused on is the one to help the private sector create 250,000 new jobs."

TWO MONTHS TO GATHER SIGNATURES

Many at Saturday's rally carried signs and shouted chants like "solidarity" and "union power" as they circled the Capitol building in chilly autumn weather.

Wisconsin AFL-CIO President Phil Neuenfeldt said Walker "doesn't get it. He keeps telling us that everything is okay, that everything is working. But we know better."


Feingold earlier fired up activists at the downtown Madison Majestic Theater, saying Walker never campaigned on eliminating collective bargaining rights and must be held accountable for his "unusual, exceptional attack on the working people of this state."

Feingold said that since the collective bargaining law cannot be put to a referendum and Walker refuses to repeal the measure, a recall election was the only option left.

"Our only choice is to remove this governor and lieutenant governor, and we need to do that now," he added.

State Republican executive director Stephan Thompson said the cost to taxpayers for the recall "is without precedent."

"While Governor Walker and the state legislature instituted bold reforms to cut wasteful spending, the Democrats and their liberal special interests simply want to increase it in their selfish pursuit to regain political power," he said.

In addition to the governor and lieutenant governor's offices, the political balance of the state Senate is at stake with 11 Republicans and 6 Democrats not already up for re-election eligible for recall efforts under state rules.

Lawmakers who have been in office one year and who have not already faced such a vote are eligible for recall in Wisconsin. Republicans now hold a majority of 17-16 in the state Senate.

(Reporting by Jeff Mayers, Adam Wollner and Hannah Shepard; Editing by Peter Bohan and Cynthia Johnston)

..

Sunday, November 20, 2011

Boehner's Buddies

Washington Banking Lobbysits, Clark Lytle Geduldig & Cranford

The Occupy Wall Street movement is a big enough problem for U.S. banks that they should pay for opposition research into the political motives of protesters, said a firm that lobbies for the industry.


Clark Lytle Geduldig & Cranford, a Washington-based firm, proposed the idea in a memo to the American Banking Association, an industry group which said on Saturday that it did not act on the idea.

The four-page memo outlined how the firm could analyze the source of protesters' money, as well as their rhetoric and the backgrounds of protest leaders.

"If we can show they have the same cynical motivation as a political opponent, it will undermine their credibility in a profound way," said the memo, according to a copy of it on the website of TV news channel MSNBC, which first reported on it. (See MSNBC's report http://upwithchrishayes.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/19/8896362-exclusive-lobbying-firms-memo-spells-out-plan-to-undermine-occupy-wall-street-video)

Clark Lytle Geduldig counts the banking association among its regular lobbying clients, U.S. Senate records showed.

Other clients include MasterCard Worldwide and a banking coalition concerned about interchange fees.

The firm did not respond to requests for comment.

.Its memo said it could deliver research, survey data and plans to use the information in 60 days at a cost of $850,000.

Banking association spokesman Jeff Sigmund told Reuters the memo is authentic, but his group was not interested.


"Our government relations staff received the proposal - it was unsolicited and we chose not to act on it in any way," Sigmund said.

The memo is dated November 24, five days after it became public. Sigmund did not respond to a follow-up question about the date. November 24 is also the Thanksgiving holiday.

The memo said U.S. financial firms should be concerned about comments that Democratic campaign consultants have made in the news media about trying to harness the energy of the Occupy Wall Street protesters.

"This would mean more than just short-term political discomfort for Wall Street firms," it said.

"If vilifying the leading companies of this sector is allowed to become an unchallenged centerpiece of a coordinated Democratic campaign, it has the potential to have very long-lasting political, policy and financial impacts on the companies in the center of the bull's-eye."

The memo is from Clark Lytle Geduldig's four name partners. Two of them, Sam Geduldig and Jay Cranford, are former aides to House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner, a Republican.

Using shorthand for Occupy Wall Street, the memo said:

"It may be easy to dismiss OWS as a ragtag group of protesters but they have demonstrated that they should be treated more like an organized competitor who is very nimble and capable of working the media, coordinating third party support and engaging office holders to do their bidding. To counter that, we have to do the same."
It is Not Skill or Wisdom that Makes 315,000 People Make More Money Than 315 Million

It IS The 2003 Bush Reduction in Taxes on Capital Gains

Capital gains are the key ingredient of income disparity in the US-- and the force behind the winner takes all mantra of our economic system. If you want even out earning power in the U.S, you have to raise the 15% capital gains tax.

Income and wealth disparities become even more absurd if we look at the top 0.1% of the nation's earners-- rather than the more common 1%. The top 0.1%-- about 315,000 individuals out of 315 million-- are making about half of all capital gains on the sale of shares or property after 1 year; and these capital gains make up 60% of the income made by the Forbes 400.

It's crystal clear that the Bush tax reduction on capital gains and dividend income in 2003 was the cutting edge policy that has created the immense increase in net worth of corporate executives, Wall St. professionals and other entrepreneurs.

The reduction in the tax from 20% to 15% continued the step-by-step tradition of cutting this tax to create more wealth. It had first been reduced from 35% in 1978 at a time of stock market and economic stagnation to 28% . Again 1981, at the start of the Reagan era, it was reduced again to 20%-- raised back to 28% in 1987, on the eve of the October 19 232% crash in the market. In 1997 Clinton agreed to reduce it back to 20%, which move was an inducement for the explosion of hedge funds and private equity firms-- the most "rapidly rising cohort within the top 1 per cent."

Make no mistake; the battle that is to be fought over the coming attempt to reverse this reduction in capital gains will be bloody and intense. The facts are clear according to the Congressional Budget Office more than 80% of the increase in income inequality was the result of an increase in the share of household income from capital gains. In fact, you can go so far as to claim that "Capital Gains income is the most unevenly distributed-- and volatile-- source of household income," according to Laura D'Andrea Tyson, University of California business professor and former chairwoman of the Council of Economic Advisers under President Clinton.

No wonder the super wealthy plutocrats obtained the largest share of national income-- 25% of the nation's wealth- greater than any other industrial nation in the the period of 1979 to 2005. Make no mistake; after unemployment-- this disparity between the 1%-- 3 million-- or the 0.1%-- the 300,000-- and the other 312 million citizens of the U.S. has become the major theme of the Occupy Wall Street movement-- and an important national debate.

I commend you to the late Justice Louis Brandeis warning to the nation that " We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." We have to make up our minds to restore a higher, fairer capital gains tax to the wealthiest investor class-- or ultimately face increased social unrest.

Friday, November 18, 2011

"I'd run over my mother to beat the Cowboys."






 I miss football, the way it used to be





Thursday, November 17, 2011

GOP Report: TSA hasn’t Improved Aviation Security

How Many Billions Have We Spent? 
How Many People Have Been Abused and Disrespected? 
How Many Gestapo Troops Has the Federal Government Hired And Paid Good Salaries To?

By Ashley Halsey III, Wednesday, November 16,11:28 PM

After a $56 billion federal investment in airline security, flying is no safer than it was before the Sept. 11, 2011, attacks and the bare hands of passengers might be the best defense once a terrorist gets on board, two members of Congress said Wednesday.

Deriding the Transportation Security Administration as a bloated bureaucracy that recruits security personnel with ads on gas pumps and pizza boxes, the two House Republicans said it needed to undergo almost a dozen reforms.

“Americans have spent nearly $60 billion, and they are no safer today than they were before 9/11,” said Rep. Paul C. Broun (R-Ga.). “We need to make travel safe in America, and right now it’s not.”

Broun joined House Transportation Committee Chairman John L. Mica (R-Fla.) at Reagan National Airport on Wednesday morning to present a harshly critical report on the TSA’s performance.

Broun said a terrorist bomb could be put aboard an airliner “very easily” at his home airport in Atlanta. “TSA has not prevented any attacks,” he said. “It’s just been very fortunate that we’ve had no attacks.”

TSA spokesman Greg Soule denounced the report.

“At a time when our country’s aviation system is safer, stronger and more secure than it was 10 years ago, this report is an unfortunate disservice to the dedicated men and women of TSA who are on the front lines every day protecting the traveling public,” Soule said. “TSA has developed a highly trained federal workforce that has safely screened over 5 billion passengers and established a multilayered security system reaching from curb to cockpit. ”

Mica and Broun, both longtime critics of the agency, challenged the need for 3,986 employees at its Washington headquarters, saying they earned an average of $103,852 a year.

“We never intended to have TSA grow into this massive bureaucracy,” Mica said.

Instead, the report said, the TSA should set standards for airport and airline security and be open to use of private contractors to carry them out. The TSA also should station more personnel abroad to intercept terrorists and to ensure that passenger screening and baggage inspections in foreign airports are up to U.S. standards.

The report cited data released this year showing that there had been 25,000 airport security breaches in the past decade. Given the leaky security network, it said, “passengers and crew offer our first and most effective line of defense.”

The report said that the TSA has wasted money on ineffective equipment and programs, has been slow to install explosive-detection devices at the nation’s largest airports and has deployed new high-tech body scanners in “a haphazard and easily thwarted manner.”

“Our concern is that explosives continue to be the focus of terrorists,” Mica said.

He said he was “not impressed” by the TSA’s planned evolution to a more risk-based approach. The agency has been criticized for applying the same security standards to all passengers, including children and the elderly.

Soule responded that the risk-based approach was “designed to maintain a high level of security, while improving the overall travel experience, whenever possible.”

“Each of these initiatives moves us away from a one-size-fits-all approach and enhances our ability to provide the most effective security, focusing on those who present the highest risk, in the most efficient way possible,” Soule said.

The TSA faced a public outcry last year after it introduced the new scanners, which critics thought were overly revealing, and procedures for vigorous pat-downs of those who refused to use the scanners.

They are no longer the most significant issue for regular travelers, according to the U.S. Travel Association. A survey released Wednesday by the travel industry group said the biggest objection voiced by frequent fliers was that other passengers delay security lines with too much carry-on baggage. They said passengers also dislike requirements that they remove their shoes, belts and jackets.

Sunday, November 13, 2011

BLOGGER'S NOTE:  For the last few weeks I've been talking to friends about how amazing it is that something you need, often comes to you at just the right moment.  I don't believe it's coincidence. Right now my prayers are going out to my friends and colleagues, and of course to their families, some of whom have suffered terribly this year, losing children, parents, young neices and nephews.  Some are heroically battling devastating disease, and other personal losses, a marriage, aa home, a job.  I know it is painful for them to bear, and it is a pain that I carry in my heart for them.  It is a very real and a very physical pain, not just emotional or psychological.

We read about the tragedy in our newspapers everyday - the terrible way our military is treated, at home, on deployment, and even in death.  We know that our institutions are not infallible pillars of integrity, but it is still shocking to know that our judicial system and state and federal laws do not protect us from poisoned food, water and air; that our children are not safe in their homes, or their schools, or with those whom we trust to teach and guide them.  We are not safeguarded when we buy a home, or a car or even when we open a bank account.  It's devastating, it's frightening - overwhelming.  Most of us don't know where to start to fix it.  And we are paralyzed by having trusted in the wrong people and instituions before; by having made the wrong decision.  I don't have an answer, and I'm not sure that I'm ready to trust anyone who tells me that they do.  But today, I received this from my dear friend Roberta Brown, and tonight a I do feel a little better.





Friday, November 4, 2011



Customers are dumping their banks in droves ahead of the nationwide "Move Your Money" and "Dump Your Bank Day" movements this Saturday.

Given the recent spotlight on attempts -- and ultimate failures -- by some of the nation's biggest banks to tack on new debit card fees, thousands of disgruntled consumers have already either left or pledged to leave their current bank for a community bank or credit union, which are known for having fewer and/or lower bank account fees.

At least 650,000 consumers have already joined credit unions since Sept. 29, the day Bank of America announced plans to impose its controversial $5 debit card fee, according to a nationwide survey of credit unions by the Credit Union National Association. That amounts to $4.5 billion in new savings accounts, CUNA said.

And while Bank of America and other banks have since backpedaled on imposing the fees, consumers are making it clear they are still fed up. More than four in every five credit unions said new customers cited days like "Bank Transfer Day" and new fees imposed by their banks as reasons for opening accounts.

"We must flee all those banks now!!! They will be adding hidden fees shortly! Drop the credit cards and go to credit unions to avoid this pitfall," one CNNMoney reader wrote.

Meanwhile, the Independent Community Bankers of America said a poll of its 5,000 members conducted on Oct. 17 found that nearly 60% of community banks are gaining customers who are sick and tired of the big financial institutions. The association's community bank locator has seen more than 5,000 inquiries in the last few weeks -- an increase of nearly 500%.

By the end of this weekend, accounts at these credit unions and community banks could grow by tens of thousands more.

"Move Your Money Day" and "Bank Transfer Day" are backed by consumer groups like MoveOn.org and the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC), which are urging customers to switch banks by this Saturday -- and turning to social media outlets like Facebook to do their convincing.

"Bank Transfer Day," was started by a Facebook user who had heard about Bank of America's $5 fee and posted an event on Facebook. So far, 75,061 Facebook users have said they will be attending, while 16,007 will "maybe" attend.

The PCCC said it has already received pledges from about 52,500 people to take their money out of major financial institutions by Saturday as part of the Move Your Money "banxodus," with just under 22,000 consumers planning to remove their money from Bank of America specifically. About 6,900 customers told the PCCC they have already moved their money.

"They take your deposits and use them to buy politicians to de-regulate, give them immunity, interest-free loans and bailouts. Then they turn around and charge you fees to make them even richer," said one "Move Your Money" flyer posted on a Facebook page dedicated to the initiative (which has 43,679 "likes"). "Take your money to a credit union or a community bank that will use your money in your community and not to pervert the rule of law and fill their own pockets."

Occupy Wall Street has formed a separate united front, called "Dump Your Bank Day," which will take place on Tuesday, Nov. 8.

Even though Bank of America and other banks canceled plans to introduce the new debit card fee -- thanks to the mass uproar -- the momentum is still going strong. Plus, experts in the banking industry predict more fees -- and higher existing fees -- will be popping up soon.

"The big banks will not be charging me a dime in additional fees. I moved my accounts to a great credit union last week," a CNNMoney reader wrote. "Next week I get to tell Wells Fargo, to put it nicely, to take a hike."



New York City cop imprisons college student without ID for two days



Note to tourists visiting New York: Don't be caught out without your ID, or you could be caught in the city's penal system for days, if the recent experience of 21-year-old college student Samantha Zucker is anything to go by.

Actually, Zucker barely qualifies as an out-of-towner, since she hails from the Westchester town of Ardsley. And the underlying charge that led to her tour in jail was a minor trespassing citation, dismissed by a presiding judge in no time.

But no matter: A vigilant NYPD officer deemed her a sufficient threat to public safety to have her handcuffed and jailed in two different cells across the length of Manhattan.


The whole ordeal began with a trip to Riverside Park, as Zucker recounts to New York Times columnist James Dwyer. Zucker is enrolled in a design program at Pittsburgh's Carnegie-Mellon University; together with 80 of her colleagues, she spent a long day on Oct. 21 scouting out prospective employment scenarios in New York's sprawling fashion industry. After pounding the pavement, she dropped off her bags at her West Harlem hotel. From there, she and fellow student Alex Fischer decided to stroll over to Riverside Park, to gaze out on the Hudson.

There was just one problem: The two park visitors arrived at around 3 a.m. on Oct. 22, and the park is officially closed to visitors as of 1 a.m. A police car pulled up, and the officers in it informed the two students of their trespass. Zucker and Fischer explained that they hadn't known of the park's curfew, and turned around to leave. By then, however, another NYPD car appeared, and the officer driving it announced he was citing them for trespassing, and demanded their IDs. Fischer produced his driver's license and was let go--but Zucker had left her identification back at the hotel, two blocks away. She apologized, and told the officer that she could have Fischer or another friend fetch it.

But no dice. "He said it was too late for that, I should have thought of it earlier," she told Dwyer. At that point, as Dwyer writes, the wheels of justice locked grimly into gear; Zucker was handcuffed and led into a surreal maze of detention:

For the next 36 hours, she was moved from a cell in the 26th Precinct station house on West 126th Street to central booking in Lower Manhattan and then — because one of the officers was ending his shift before Ms. Zucker could be photographed for her court appearance, and you didn't think he was going to take the subway uptown while his partner stayed with her at booking, did you? — she was brought back to Harlem.

It's not against the law, of course, to be out on New York's streets without identification--but the courts can detain people without identification in jail until their arraignment in lieu of issuing them a summons. As Zucker waited in her cell for her court appearance, she heard NYPD employees marvel that the arresting officer didn't permit her the opportunity to have a friend retrieve her ID. At another point, Zucker says, she heard two NYPD staffers say that the arresting officer--identified as Officer Durrell of the 26th District in Zucker's police records--had a "short fuse." When Zucker finally got her court appearance, the presiding judge dismissed her trespassing citation in less than a minute.

Durrell apparently worked off some tension by taunting his prisoner in her cell. "He was telling me that I needed to get a new boyfriend, that I should get a guy who takes me out to dinner," Ms. Zucker said. "He mocked me for being from Westchester." (For the record, Fischer is not Zucker's boyfriend.)

The officer also instructed Zucker--twice--to refrain from calling him a profane name that she did not in fact utter. "I said, 'Sir, I never used that word.' " Then again, projection is no crime--any more than being out in a park without an ID is.

BLOGGER'S NOTE: I am ALWAYS, ALWAYS, absolutely delighted when I read a story like this; because being on the receiving end of this kind of insane behavior on the part of authority figures is everyday business for minorities - and no one believes it.  You truly have to experience this nonsense firsthand to believe it can happen, in the land of the free and the home of the brave.  And of course the very best part of the story is that it made the national press.  The NYPD is embarrassed, the officer is cited and disciplined (whether or not they admit to that), and everyone is on alert for the next jackass to try something similar.  Does anyone know if she was strip searched?
How to demoralize people 101:

Get them to think you're really open to hearing about their needs,
ideas, and preferences. Encourage them, widely, to stand up and share
what hurts, what matters to them. Let them think you WANT them to
take a risk, be vulnerable, and truly communicate deeply.

Then, when you have received and collected all the thoughts, feelings,
and ideas you asked for, dismiss and disregard it all. Minimize it
all. Neglect it like a garden you want to simply die. Make it go
away.

That is how you demoralize those who, otherwise, might have thought
you actually cared about them and their issues.

(And, as a side benefit, you thus help to spread the cynicism, about
the absurd idea of government by and for the people, that infects your
own world so deeply! Hooray.)

WE THE PEOPLE

By Joseph Marks 10/31/2011

After using its first official We the People petition response to advance a minor policy shift to reduce student loan debt, the White House is now getting to the larger share of online petitions that won't launch policy changes.

In a blanket response emailed Friday evening to signers of eight petitions calling for reforming marijuana laws, the Obama administration declined to back any policy changes.

The response from Gil Kerlikowske, director of the White House's Office of National Drug Control Policy, said marijuana is "not a benign drug" and is "associated with addiction, respiratory disease and cognitive impairment."

The response touted President Obama's "balanced" approach to drug enforcement, noting the administration spent about $10 billion on drug education and treatment programs in the past fiscal year compared with $9 billion on drug-related law enforcement.

Two more responses quickly followed.

The first was from Joshua DuBois, executive director of the White House's Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, who declined to take action to remove the phrases "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance or "In God We Trust" from currency. Those phrases, DuBois said, "represent the important role religion plays in American public life, while we continue to recognize and protect the rights of secular Americans."

The second response, simply titled "Why We Can't Comment," referred petitioners to a clause in the We the People terms of service stating the White House could decline to comment on certain petitions. "For important policy reasons, this includes specific law enforcement and judicial ethics matters," the response said. The petition at issue asked the White House to investigate alleged prosecutorial misconduct in the case of Sholom Rubashkin, an ultra-Orthodox Jewish businessman who was convicted of financial fraud in connection with a kosher meatpacking plant he ran in Postville, Iowa.

The White House launched We the People in September as a one-stop shop for citizens to petition the federal government. The site allowed petitioners to stump for signatures through other social media and promised to respond to petitions that got more than 5,000 signatures in a month. Officials later raised that threshold to 25,000 signatures, after nearly three dozen petitions topped the initial bar in the site's first week.

The first response posted to the site sped up enactment of 2010 legislation aimed at lowering income-based student loan repayments -- a change the White House can make by executive order and that has been called for by several advocacy groups, including Occupy Wall Street and Occupy D.C. protesters. Most other popular petitions on the site, though, either are significantly more controversial or outside the White House's direct authority.

Unlike the student loan petition response, the other petition responses aren't featured on the We the People home page.

Erik Altieri, who authored the most popular marijuana legalization petition, told Nextgov on Monday that he was disappointed with the administration's pro forma response, especially the fact that eight substantially different petitions had been lumped together in the same response.

Altieri is communications director for NORML, a marijuana legalization advocacy group.

"I really expected to at least get a more direct response instead of the same, old talking points," he said. "It seems as if the White House just wanted to put up a response to show they were listening to people, but it's the same, weak bullet point response we're used to hearing."

Georgetown University Professor Diana Owen, who studies social media in politics, has warned that too many responses that don't produce substantive policy changes could lead to a sort of petition fatigue with petitioners becoming more cynical, rather than less, about their government's responsiveness.

J.H. Snider, a Harvard University fellow, has argued We the People will be most effective at the margins -- bringing attention to issues that might not otherwise have crossed the administration's radar -- rather than at changing policy on big-ticket issues such as marijuana reform.

Snider is founder of iSolon.org, a think tank devoted to enhancing democratic participation with Internet technology.

Michael Cornfield, director of The George Washington University's political management program and a proponents of the We the People concept called Friday's marijuana response "respectful," but complained that it brought "the dialogue to a peremptory close."

"I wonder what some of the 70,000 signatories have to say about it," he continued, "and where they will say it."

Some legalization advocates voiced their responses on the We the People site itself Friday.

One petition, posted just hours after Kerlikowske's response, called for separate responses for each of the eight lumped-together marijuana petitions. Another asked for a response that wouldn't apply equally well to alcohol and a third cited the bundled response in seeking Kerlikowske's ouster.

Kerlikowseke's response did not loop in two other marijuana-related petitions that have reached the response threshold. One of those petitions calls for an end to the "destructive, wasteful and counterproductive war on drugs." The other asks for easy access to medical marijuana for veterans suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder.

A third, related petition asks the government to legalize the growing of industrial hemp, a crop related to marijuana.


BLOGGERS'NOTE: Thanks Robert. I would add that the entire Obama administration has been an exercise in raising hopes that this is 'a government by and for the people', and then quickly dashing all hope that our thoughts, dreams, opinions, lives mean anything to anyone.







Thursday, November 3, 2011

This Is Why Americans Are Going Broke:

30 Corporations That Paid No Total Income Tax in
2008-2010

Pepco Holdings
General Electric
Paccar
PG&E Corp.
Computer Sciences
NiSource
CenterPoint Energy
Tenet Healthcare
Atmos Energy
Integrys Energy Group
American Electric Power
Con-way
Ryder System
Baxter International
Wisconsin Energy
Duke Energy
DuPont
Consolidated Edison
Verizon Communications
Interpublic Group
CMS Energy
NextEra Energy
Navistar International
Boeing
Wells Fargo
El Paso
Mattel
Honeywell International
DTE Energy
Corning

Read the report by Citizens for Tax Justice and The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy HERE