ThinkProgress Logo

Media

BREAKING: Rush Limbaugh Syndicator Suspends National Ads For Two Weeks

By Judd Legum on Mar 12, 2012 at 9:24 pm

Radio-Info.com reports that Premiere Networks, which syndicates the Rush Limbaugh show, told its affiliate radio stations that they are suspending national advertising for two weeks. Rush Limbaugh is normally provided to affiliates in exchange for running several minutes of national advertisements provided by Premiere each hour. These ads are called “barter spots.” These spots are how Premiere makes its money off of Rush Limbaugh and other shows it syndicates.

But without explanation, Premiere has supended these national advertisements for two weeks. Radio-Info.com calls the move “unusual.” The development suggests that Rush Limbaugh’s incessant sexist attacks on Sandra Fluke have caused severe damage to the show.

From the memo:

Attention Traffic Managers of Premiere News/Talk Affiliates:

We are suspending the requirement to run barter spots for two weeks, March 12th and March 19th, for our News/Talk affiliates only.

Please replace/re-traffic any Premiere barter spots immediately. Contractual requirements to run barter spots are being suspended for these two weeks only. Replace them with Lifelock and Lear Financial or a local spot of your choice.

Earlier today, ThinkProgress exclusively reported that 140 advertisers, including dozens of major national corporations, had requested their ads no longer air on Rush Limbaugh. Lifelock and Lear Financial are among the only companies standing by Limbaugh.

Over the last several days much of the advertising time during the Rush Limbaugh show on his flagship station, WABC, has been filled with free public service announcements.

Update

In addition to the “barter spots,” many Limbaugh affiliates also pay a fee to run the program.

Climate Progress

Ken Caldeira: Natural Gas Is ‘A Bridge To A World With High CO2 Levels’, Deployment Is To R&D As Elephant To Mouse

By Joe Romm on Mar 12, 2012 at 6:38 pm

Ken CaldeiraEarlier, I wrote about a paper co-authored by climatologist Ken Caldeira.  A key point of the study is that we can’t slow projected warming with natural gas, you need “rapid and massive deployment” of carbon-free power.

I asked Caldeira about the implications of his work for the right mix of clean energy deployment vs. R&D

I have long been a big supporter of greatly expanded R&D for new near-zero-emission energy systems, but R&D is not a substitute for early deployment.

We will learn by doing. We need to do what we know how to do. We will learn a lot by doing that, and we will learn more (and different sorts of things) with a targeted R&D program. R&D cannot substitute for deployment, but R&D can made deployment cheaper and more effective. An R&D program without a deployment program is a sterile exercise.

Most technologies will be more expensive than the monetized costs of coal. What is the motivation to research and develop something if there is no plausible marketplace for the fruits of that research and development effort?

Caldeira elaborated on these points:

Whether it is prices or standards, we need drivers to deployment. Markets for near-zero-emission energy technologies will spur a lot of R&D in the private sector. There is also a role for public R&D, but public R&D cannot substitute for drivers for deployment.

Put it this way: I think we need both policies that drive deployment and public support for clean energy R&D. It is at least conceivable that drivers to deployment could spur the innovation we need to build the near-zero-emission energy and transportation systems of the future. However, it is inconceivable that public R&D alone can achieve that goal. So, if we had to choose one or the other, drivers to deployment or publicly funded R&D, I would pick drivers to deployment. However, we don’t need to make this either or, and we can do both.

In terms of dollars, the real cost is deployment. Globally, deployment costs will be in the trillions of dollars, while R&D costs might be in the tens of billions. We are talking about the elephant and the mouse.

I have tended to think that when we get truly serious about avoiding catastrophic global warming, we’ll want to spend at least 10 times as much money on deployment as R&D, as I’ve written before (see “Study Confirms Optimal Climate Strategy: Deploy, Deploy, Deploy, Research and Develop, Deploy, Deploy, Deploy“ —and yes we need to do those simultaneously, the repetition was always meant to represent the relative spending levels).

But Caldeira is probably right than when we are spending the requisite trillions of dollars on deployment, “Markets for near-zero-emission energy technologies will spur a lot of R&D in the private sector.” I certainly agree with him that if one were forced to choose, one would pick the “drivers to deployment” — prices or standards (preferably both of those). BUT that is a forced choice only folks who don’t  understand climate science or clean energy technology the way Caldeira does would ever think of making.

I also asked Caldeira about his view of natural gas as a bridge fuel. He replied bluntly:

Read more

Security

VIEWPOINT: Focusing Solely On Syrian Humanitarian Crisis Risks Wider Political Solution

By Guest Blogger on Mar 12, 2012 at 6:30 pm

By Sarah Margon

Syrian refugees at a camp in Turkey

The news from Syria is bad and doesn’t seem to be getting any better. Most recently, former U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan left Damascus without making any progress on the political front, U.N. Humanitarian chief Valerie Amos was unable to secure more than an agreement for a “limited [humanitarian] assessment by U.N. agencies and the Syrian authorities” and Paulo Pinheiro, chair of the U.N. Human Rights Council panel of experts, noted earlier today that the Syrian regime had subjected its people to “collective punishment.” In addition, pro-regime forces may be undertaking reprisal attacks in the recaptured city of Homs, where they appear to have killed at least 16 people — including a number of children.

Here in Washington, pundits, politicians and lawmakers continue to promote divergent recommendations for President Obama on what to do in Syria. But still, while the administration has been long on strong rhetoric and efforts to galvanize the international community, it has been short on action. Unsurprisingly, there is no international consensus on how best to proceed. Russia and China stonewall on a unifying plan in the U.N. in favor of quick bilateral negotiations. But their efforts have yielded nothing and the continued delay means governments in the region — and beyond — can change facts on the ground with weapons shipments to both sides.

Meanwhile, the humanitarian situation is devolving quickly, with access to food, medical supplies, and other basic services worsening dramatically. More than 7,500 Syrians have already died — a number only expected to increase in the near term. Tracking displaced Syrians is very difficult but reports indicate approximately 500,000 have been directly affected by the conflict — with at least 25,000 having fled to Lebanon, Turkey and Jordan. The International Committee for the Red Cross has ostensibly reached an agreement with the regime for a daily 2-hour ceasefire but unfortunately in practice that has yet to bear fruit.

The U.N. Security Council seems to be losing steam on a potential draft resolution that would call for immediate humanitarian access. Public pleas from high level officials and backroom negotiations continue but concrete proposals seem few and far between. Worryingly, if the international community is unable to find common ground on Syria, the potential for ad-hoc, irresponsible, and even unhelpful policies mounts. In these situations, the government officials tend to shift their focus on efforts to end a humanitarian crisis — instead of the broader political situation — if only because it seems easier.

Read more

Justice

Citizens United Has Already Doubled The Amount Of Outside Spending In Presidential Election Years

By Ian Millhiser on Mar 12, 2012 at 6:00 pm

Election law scholar Rick Hasen offers a truly stunning visual representation of the impact of Citizens United on our elections:

As his chart shows, spending by outside groups seeking to change the result of the 2012 presidential election is just under $90 million — or more than double the amount of outside spending by this point in the 2008 election. This is true, moreover, despite the fact that the 2012 cycle still has nearly eight more months to go, and despite the fact that there is only one contested primary in 2012 while both Democrats and Republicans had a hard-fought primary battle in 2008. As a possible sign of just how far Citizens United may go in injecting big money into the race, outside spending in in congressional election years grew nearly nine times between 2006 and 2010.

Lest there be any doubt, it also appears very unlikely that spending benefiting Democrats will simply cancel out spending benefiting Republicans. Rather, as of January, seventeen of the top twenty donors this cycle were conservatives:

Update

Professor Hasen emailed ThinkProgress and pointed out that this data measures total spending through March 8 in each election cycle, not through the entire election cycle. We have corrected that error and struck an erroneous part of one sentence.

Climate Progress

Greenhouse Goal Has Disappeared From Obama’s ‘Blueprint For A Secure Energy Future’

By Brad Johnson on Mar 12, 2012 at 5:51 pm

“Few challenges facing America, and the world, are more urgent than combating climate change,” President-elect Barack Obama said on November 19, 2008. “My presidency will mark a new chapter in America’s leadership on climate change that will strengthen our security and create millions of new jobs in the process,” he promised.

Obama reiterated the pledge he made on the campaign trail and in his transition-team energy and environment agenda.

We will establish strong annual targets that set us on a course to reduce emissions to their 1990 levels by 2020 and reduce them an additional 80 percent by 2050.

Almost four years later, Obama’s rhetoric on climate change has disappeared. In the Blueprint for A Secure Energy Future: A Progress Report released today, prepared by Heather Zichal, Deputy Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change, there’s only one mention of climate change other than Zichal’s title, in a voluntary international initiative on page 12. Last year’s Blueprint mentioned “global climate change” on page 37.

The blueprint does make several mentions of programs that reduce greenhouse pollution in individual sectors, but the Environmental Protection Agency’s work to regulate carbon pollution from power plants is not one of them.

Although the document does effectively explain that the Obama administration is working to moderately improve the health of our energy future despite intense partisan opposition, the abandonment of the goal of cutting carbon pollution in line with international obligations and scientific reality is a sad reflection of the power of the fossil fuel industry over American politics. It may also reflect the mistaken political calculation that Americans won’t support a leader who is willing to publicly fight the urgent challenge of climate change.

Politics

Romney: ‘I’ve Got A Lot Of Good Friends’ Who Are NFL Team Owners

By Alex Seitz-Wald on Mar 12, 2012 at 5:51 pm

Late last month, Mitt Romney was the butt of many jokes after he said that although he is not a huge NASCAR fan, “I have some great friends that are NASCAR team owners.” But Romney’s friends are more diverse than just car racing owners — they include professional football team owners as well.

Appearing on Alabama sports commentator Paul Finebaum’s radio show this afternoon, Romney was asked about which team he thinks quarterback Peyton Manning will sign with. Romney said he wasn’t sure, but noted that he has some very good friends who own NFL teams:

FINEBAUM: You are a Patriots fan, I know that you’ve had a lot of support from that family. Having said that, the most coveted free agent in NFL history is Peyton Manning. I know you want him somewhere away from New England, where do you think he ought to go?

ROMNEY: Well, you know I’m surprised to hear that Denver’s thinking about him, they’re — I don’t want him in our neck of the woods, lets put it that way, I don’t want him to go to Miami or to the Jets. But I’ve got a lot of good friends, the owner Miami Dolphins, and the New York Jets — both owners are friends of mine. But let’s keep him away from New England, so that Tom Brady has a better shot of picking up a championship for us.

Watch it:

Indeed, Dolphins owner Stephen Ross hosted a high-dollar fundraiser for Romney in June. New York Jets owner Robert Wood “Woody” Johnson IV also gave the maximum $2,500 to Romney’s campaign and another $5,000 to his leadership PAC.

Health

Pro-GOP Astroturf Group Running Deceitful Attack Ads Against Senate Democrats

By Josh Israel on Mar 12, 2012 at 5:45 pm

60 Plus Association national spokesman Pat Boone

60 Plus Association national spokesman Pat Boone

The 60 Plus Association has launched a series of “issue ads” attacking Senate Democrats up for re-election this November. On the surface, they appear to be a concerned group of senior citizens worried about the future of Medicare — but a closer examination reveals that the ads are really dishonest hits by a Republican-linked astroturf group.

Since 1992, 60 Plus has presented itself as a “seniors advocacy group with a free enterprise, less government, less taxes approach to seniors issues” and the “conservative alternative” to the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP). But unlike the 40-million-member AARP, 60 Plus is largely an “astroturf” with close ties to Republican direct mail pioneer Richard Viguerie, according to a 2003 AARP Bulletin report.

The series of ads — virtually identical in content — feature 1950s pop star Pat Boone criticizing Senators Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Claire McCaskill (D-MO), Bill Nelson (D-FL), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), and Jon Tester (D-MT). Boone, 77, a long time right-wing extremist, has previously compared liberals to cancer and called President Obama’s birth certificate a “photo-shopped fraud.”

The text of the anti-Tester spot:

Boone: Hi friend. I’m Pat Boone. Last year a lot of promises were made regarding healthcare reform. But America’s seniors knew forcing a bill through congress when Americans overwhelmingly opposed, it would be disastrous. And we were right.

Narrator: President Obama’s health care law cuts $500 billion from Medicare and creates a board of 15 unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats. It’s like a Medicare IRS, with the power to cut Medicare in order to pay for new government programs.

Boone: This IPAB board can ration care and deny certain Medicare treatments so Washington can fund more wasteful spending. Your choices could be limited and you may not be able to keep your own doctor. Medicare will be bankrupt in 9 years. But Washington politicians like Jon Tester are ignoring the problem, putting their own re-elections first. Call Senator Tester, urge him to support real Medicare reform and protect our seniors. Tell him unelected bureaucrats should never have the power to deny you the care you deserve.

Watch the ad:

Among the many problems with the ad:

  • The health care act passed two years ago, not last year.
  • Americans did not “overwhelmingly oppose” the law — most polls showed the nation closely divided on the bill at the time of passage.
  • The law did not cut $500 billion from Medicare, but rather slows the rate of future spending growth by that amount. PolitiFact has repeated called these claims false.
  • The IPAB board is nothing like the IRS and its proposed cuts can be rejected by Congress.
  • Even Republican Rep. Fred Upton (MI), chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee and a strong critic of the Affordable Care Act, says Medicare will not run out of money until 2024 — not in 9 years. Even the group’s own chairman said 10 years as recently as last month.
  • According to a study published by New England Journal of Medicine, the rate of spending growth for Medicare appears to have already gone significantly down since the passage of the healthcare reform law, making any cuts by the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) less likely.
  • The Affordable Care Act has already expanded choice for patients, rather than limit it.
  • On the one hand, Boone worries that Medicare will go bankrupt, but on the other, he worries about the possibility of IPAB cuts to the growth of Medicare. These “cuts” would, of course, be simply slowing the growth of the Medicare system, hardly a raid to pay for “more wasteful spending.”

    Given 60 Plus’s history of backing a risky Social Security privatization scheme, they hardly have credibility on preserving the safety-net for America’s seniors. Last month, 60 Plus Chairman Jim Martin said “Seniors don’t matter to Democrats, only scaring them to win elections does.” How sadly ironic that that is precisely what his group is attempting to do with these deceitful ads.

    Update

    An earlier version of this story identified the 60 Plus Association as being funded by the pharmaceutical industry. The group asserts it has not received pharmaceutical contributions since 2002. We edited the title to reflect that.

    • Economy

    Unemployment For Younger Workers Hits Lowest Point Since January 2009

    By Pat Garofalo on Mar 12, 2012 at 5:30 pm

    In the wake of the Great Recession, younger workers have had a significant amount of trouble entering the labor force, with unemployment for workers aged 25-34 hitting 10.5 percent back in May. But according to the latest data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there is a glimmer of hope for younger workers, as their unemployment rate last month hit its lowest level since January 2009:

    Jobs for 25-to-34-year-olds increased by 116,000 to 30.5 million in February. Their unemployment rate fell from 9% in January to 8.7%, the lowest since January 2009, according to the Labor Department.

    Just as important, the portion of Americans in that age bracket who were employed — known as the employment-to-population ratio — rose to 74.7% from 74.5% and is up from a 29-year low of 73.2% in July. In a normal economy, about 80% of 25-to-34-year-olds have jobs.

    Not only has the Great Recession been bad for workers entering the workforce, but as the Economic Policy Institute noted, the entire last decade has essentially been lost in terms of entry-level wages. As this chart shows, the entry level rage of college graduates today is below where it was in 2000:

    And the picture is even worse for entry-level workers with just a high school degree. As the Wall Street Journal noted, “The drop in average wages for young adults is in contrast to U.S. government figures showing that average inflation-adjusted hourly wages for production and nonsupervisory workers of all ages and education levels are up 3% from a decade ago.”

    NEWS FLASH

    POLL: DADT Repeal Has ‘No Effect’ On Sixty-Nine Percent Of Troops | Six months after the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell took effect, a new survey shows that 69 percent of members of the armed forces feel that it has had “no effect” on their units, compared to the 59 percent who expected it not to. Additionally, the number of troops who have actually seen a “negative impact” is only 13 percent, lower than the 15 percent expectation. Asked what effect someone’s coming out might have on their unit, 73 percent said there would be “no impact,” with five percent even reporting there would be a “positive impact.” This shouldn’t come as a surprise, considering that one year after the repeal originally passed, gay and lesbian members of the military said that they were better able to focus on their mission, and that there had been few to no consequences from repealing the law. Currently, according to the report, only 13 percent of troops still oppose repeal.

    Security

    Report: Number Of Anti-Muslim Groups Tripled In 2011

    By Eli Clifton on Mar 12, 2012 at 5:25 pm

    The number of anti-Muslim groups in the U.S. tripled in 2011 according to a new report released last week by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).

    The dramatic increase in anti-Muslim groups, according to SPLC Senior Fellow Mark Potok, occured as part of a rapid growth in “radical right” groups, “fueled by superheated fears generated by economic dislocation, a proliferation of demonizing conspiracy theories, the changing racial makeup of America, and the prospect of four more years under a black president who many on the far right view as an enemy to their country.”

    Anti-Muslim groups, which jumped from 10 groups in 2010 to 30 in 2011, resulted from an growing political space for Islamophobia as politicians and anti-Muslim activists stirred up controversy over a planned Islamic cultural center in lower Manhattan.

    While the so-called “Ground Zero Mosque” controversy pushed fringe anti-Muslim activists like Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer into the spotlight, the nationwide anti-Muslim movement gained more momentum with the “anti-Shariah” campaigns in various state legislatures. Anti-Shariah bills, which would forbid the use of Islamic Shariah law in state courts — “a completely unnecessary change, given that the U.S. constitution already rules that out,” writes Potok — have now been introduced in over twenty states.

    Indeed, the SPLC is correct to point out the growth of anti-Muslim groups across the country. But, as discussed in the Center for American Progress’ report Fear Inc.: The Roots of the Islamophobia Network in America, many of the anti-Shariah initiatives are styled on model legislation drafted by anti-Muslim attorney and right-wing activist David Yerushalmi.

    Potok also credits Rep. Peter King’s (R-NY) March 2011 hearings on the radicalization of U.S. Muslims and a “swelling of truly vicious propaganda” as demonizing American Muslims.

    The SPLC also found sizable growth in anti-gay, black-separatist, Christian Identity, Klu Klux Klan, nativist extremist, neo-confederate, racist skinhead, and white nationalist groups.

    Older

    Switch to Mobile
    ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

    Sign Up