Nitpicking Obama's speech

President Obama's speech to the U.S. Congress last Wednesday earned him a few positive reviews in the mainstream media.

The U.K. The Guardian thought that; He received widespread plaudits for a speech in which he discarded the soaring rhetoric of the campaign trail and adopted a more even pace, setting out details of how he would help the country out of recession, possibly as early as next year.

Certainly Obama appears to have had a small bounce in his job approval ratings recently (61 per cent on 24 February) after a steady drop since his inauguration and, I expect that lines like; "Tonight, I want every American to know this: we will rebuild, we will recover, and the United States of America will emerge stronger than before," will go down well across America and keep his rating steady.

However, there is always someone to prick that political bubble and, as always FactCheck gives this speech the once over with sometimes amusing results:

President Obama's first speech to a joint session of Congress was stuffed with signals about the new direction his budget will take and meant-to-be reassuring words about the economy. But it was also peppered with exaggerations and factual misstatements.

• He said "we import more oil today than ever before." That's untrue. Imports peaked in 2005 and are substantially lower today.
  
• He claimed his mortgage aid plan would help "responsible" buyers but not those who borrowed beyond their means. But even prominent defenders of the program including Fed Chairman Bernanke and FDIC chief Bair concede foolish borrowers will be aided, too.
  
• He said the high cost of health care "causes a bankruptcy in America every 30 seconds." That's at least double the true figure.
  
• He flubbed two facts about American history. The U.S. did not invent the automobile, and the transcontinental railroad was not completed until years after the Civil War, not during it.
  
• He claimed that his stimulus plan "prevented the layoffs" of 57 police officers in Minneapolis. In fact, it's far more complicated than that, and other factors are also helping to save police jobs.

The president also repeated some strained claims we've critiqued before.

Full FactCheck analysis here.

Don't forget to count the silver as he leaves.........

It's finally been announced that Sol Trujillo is quitting as Telstra's CEO in June 2009, after a less than stellar career which also saw him receive salary packages which turned many an Aussie corporate type green with envy:
Notwithstanding his substantial wealth, the Telstra board authorised payments to Trujillo of $8.7 million in 2006, $11.78 million in 2007 and $13.39 million in 2008 (Trujillo's 2009 remuneration will be revealed later this year). Remarkably, Trujillo also managed to receive between 86 and 88 percent of his short-term cash bonus in any of those three years, despite Telstra's share price underperforming rivals such as AT&T and SingTel.
Here in the Northern Rivers Telstra's mobile phone service is still patchy, Big Pond internet connections frequently don't operate at advertised speeds and retirees who included telecommunications stock as part of their nest egg are severely disappointed because Telstra share prices went down under Trujillo and stayed there.
When Sol left US West Communications he was said to have walked away with a cool US $72 million in his pocket.
We don't know how much Sol will get in his latest golden handshake, but will someone please count the family silver as he exits the country.

Monsanto According To Monsanto: no blog is too big or small, we read all of them

No blog is too big or small, we read all of them says Monsanto on its new blog Monsanto According to Monsanto.

On the first post by Kathleen our blog North Coast Voices gets not one but two links within the text.

So if all blogs are read - does someone also go out on behalf of Monsanto and take notes at any protest rally or town meeting?

Spin Watch tells us a little about corporate strategy in relation to the Internet.
Source Watch tells a similar story and Gene Watch records Monsanto's alleged attempts to deceive as well as quotes a section of the book Don't Worry, It's Safe to Eat .

Kathleen may like to think that she is the 'nice' face of a 'good' company.
Sadly for Kathleen I am too old to for fall for the froth and spin, when court transcripts and research papers (some discussed elsewhere on North Coast Voices) tell of a socially and environmentally irresponsible, destructive multinational who doesn't give a toss about the rest of the world.

Graphic is Kathleen's avatar

* This post is part of North Coast Voices' effort to keep Monsanto's blog monitor (affectionately known as Mr. Monsanto) in long-term employment.

Clarence Valley Council gets one decision right and another so very, very wrong

Maclean protestors with Nikki Holmes in the foreground.

Picture: The Daily Examiner

Reported in The Daily Examiner on Wednesday:

RESIDENTS of Maclean will wake up this morning sure of two things. The Maclean carpark is not for sale and the debate is finally over.

After months of heated debate within the community, at last night's council meeting councillors Tiley, Hughes, Dinham, Comben and Howe voted down the rescission motion that called for the carpark debate to be re-opened.

Their actions have effectively closed the door on any plans the council had to sell or lease the carpark to developers for the construction of a full sized supermarket on the site.

“I just think democracy prevailed,” Bruce Apps of Maclean said following the decision.

Another Maclean resident at the meeting, Jean Everson was also pleased with the result.

“I'm very thankful that our local councillors stuck to their word from the November meeting,” Mrs Everson said.

“We're third generation in Maclean and we don't want public land sold in this town.”

Unfortunately Clarence Valley Council also voted to continue with the urban development of natural flood storage land at West Yamba vulnerable to innundation and bushfire, when it endorsed the latest West Yamba Local Environmental Plan.

This move by councillors is not surprising given the estimated $7.3 million involvement of Billabong owner Gordon Merchant and the relentless political pressure brought to bear by local developers in the Mitchell family.

When Yamba feels the full effect of less adjoining land to absorb flood water, when more people may need to evacuate over a single narrow bridge due to adverse weather events or bushfire due to climate change, the names Merchant and Mitchell will be mud amongst residents.

Followed by the names of all those councillors and council staff who continued to push this development in the face of known risks.

Unfortunately, under the leadership of Nationals protégée Mayor Richie Williamson, this council thinks that throwing one sop to the Lower Clarence offsets the environmental and social vandalism it is advocating for West Yamba.
Even former mayor Ian Tiley appears to have lost his way in relation to the big picture.

No level of government in Australia is taking the potential impact of climate change (on the 7 kilometre-wide coastal edge of the continent) seriously.
The posturing and prevarication is bordering on a lack of care for coastal communities.

Who's to blame for all that hot air?

Every so often the teev features an advert advising us all to eat less meat in the name of combating global warming. Go Veg! it exhorts.
It appears that cows are being blamed for releasing enormous amounts of methane into the atmosphere.
Indeed one Andy Thorpe "an economist at the University of Portsmouth, found a herd of 200 cows can produce annual emissions of methane roughly equivalent in energy terms to driving a family car more than 100,000 miles (180,000km) on more than four gallons (21,400 litres) of petrol."
Fair enough, but what about the average bloke and blokette?
How many times do we all pass the wind around each day and how much nitrogen, carbon dioxide and methane does this represent?

This is what population numbers looked like on Monday:
World 6,762,457,963
16:20 GMT (EST+5) Feb 23, 2009
Multiply this total by a factor of at least 10-14 'incidents' per day per person and that's a lot of hot air rising.
And what about all those sewerage treatment plants and sanitary landfill sites - how much methane do they produce globally?
I'm betting that cows are getting a run for their money from humans in the personal greenhouse gas stakes.
So I won't be giving Bessie a kick next time I pass her grazing paddock.
As for that irritating advert - meat is a luxury for most of the world anyway and I can hardly eat less than I do already.

A hole in Conroy's censorship net?

The Federal Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, Senator Stephen Conroy, attended a Senate estimates committee hearing last Monday 23 February 2009.

Quite rightly much has been made of his continuing refusal to rule out censoring legal but 'unwanted' content if the Rudd Government's national mandatory ISP-level Internet filtering scheme is implemented.

However, there is another little gem in Monday's transcript of the Standing Committee on Environment, Communications and the Arts: Estimates which indicates that Conroy's proposed vastly expanded blacklist may be vulnerable at the outset:

Senator MINCHIN—I do not mean any criticism by this, because I think it is beyond your control, but there is another issue that I want to raise with you. It has been drawn to my attention that primarily because in answering this complaint by email you obviously referred to the site in question, which is understandable, the complainant, as I understand it, made the address of that site widely available via the publication of your email. Are you concerned that that is a significant flaw in your very worthy and, I think, comprehensive endeavours to ensure that the blacklist itself is not published or made available more widely than is absolutely necessary?

Ms O'Loughlin—That is a difficult question. In general, we were disappointed that that was distributed further, but we do not have the capacity to stop a complainant from making their complaint public.

Senator MINCHIN—But do you acknowledge that this is potentially a major hole in the security of the contents of the blacklist?

Ms O'Loughlin—In many respects, our main concern is the totality of the blacklist. That is something that we are distributing and we can make sure that there are appropriate security provisions in place for it. I think it is difficult for us then to take a step further and require complainants to keep their complaints to themselves. They know the consequences of the listing. We are disappointed by it, but it is difficult for us to do much more than encourage people not to distribute those things much further.

Senator Conroy—Just to clarify: this is the existing blacklist under the existing law that was in place for most of the period of the former government. It is the existing blacklist and the existing law that we are having a discussion about.

Senator MINCHIN—Yes, I accept that, Minister. I also accept that, if there is a loophole here, it has existed for some time, but perhaps it is just now being exploited. So is not an offence in any way, under any law or regulation, for anybody to publish a site, a page or whatever it is that has been blacklisted as a result of a complaint made.

It is evident that Senator Conroy will have to broaden his censorship net to make it unlawful for correspondence with the Australian Communications and Media Authority to be published, if he doesn't want any part of his precious blacklist to be leaked.
It appears likely that that he is be considering this option.

There is no end to the stupidity flowing from the Rudd-Conroy Great Firewall of Australia.