Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Samantha

Samantha's Journal
Samantha's Journal
April 1, 2012

At this Current moment, perhaps we all need to discuss everyone's mistakes, right Mr. Hyatt?

By Current's own admission, it is Joel Hyatt who "guides" the network's development, production and programming content:

"Joel Hyatt, co-founder and Chief Executive Officer of Current Media, has guided the network's development since its inception, achieving recognition for the company's innovative approach to producing and programming content by and for its audience. Under Hyatt's leadership, Current TV has grown to 70 million subscriber households, expanded internationally, received two Emmy® Awards, the youngest network ever to win an Emmy, and won virtually every other journalistic award for outstanding investigative journalism."

http://current.com/s/management.htm

The following is a link to the Cain story as reported by The New York Times and referenced by Keith Olbermann with regard to recent events:

http://www.nytimes.com/1990/04/13/us/law-bar-lawyer-with-aids-wins-legal-victory-gives-his-employer-some-unwelcome.html

The article is very telling regarding the ethics of Joel Hyatt. Read it closely to see if you can spot plays in his approach to labor problem solving issues. Of special note is the Judge's remark that Hyatt had mounted a "corrupt assault on the defendant's dignity."

Additionally, here is the Internet address of The National Report article referencing Joel Hyatt's apology to Cain, saying he had made a mistake. A "mistake" -- that was his word? Think about this for a moment -- a corrupt assault on the dignity of a man dying of AIDS is referenced by Hyatt in his apology as a "mistake." That was a tragedy of almost incomprehensible cruelty, but his apology only came after the judge hearing the case found in favor of Mr. Cain. The opinion was extremely rapidly issued since by that moment, Cain's passing was imminent.

http://books.google.com/books?id=usADAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA55&lpg=PA55&dq=National+Report+Philadelphia+Story+similar+Cain&source=bl&ots=aRtC6oNEbT&sig=wjDprpv-1ivVy6OLA1BkKZVE23I&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Hpd3T7nAC-P40gGEsIGwDQ&sqi=2&ved=0CCAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=National%20Report%20Philadelphia%20Story%20similar%20Cain&f=false

Hyatt, himself an attorney, apparently does remember the playbook for discarding employees he finds too expensive to keep.

It seems only fair if negative comments about Keith Olbermann's relationships with his co-workers are going to come into the wash of his departure from Current, we must take a look at everyone's dirty laundry who is connected to this matter. Keith Olbermann called his decision to join Current a mistake, but his mistake compared to the admitted mistake in Joel Hyatt's history with regard to the late Mr. Cain is infinitesimal. Hyatt's will be remembered as long as the movie Philadelphia remains imprinted on the brains of those who have watched this movie.

I have nothing but the highest regard for Al Gore. He is a national treasure. I have followed him since he was in Congress and give him my greatest respect. Additionally, I treasure Keith Olbermann. During the Bush* years, Keith Olbermann helped me retain my sanity by publicly holding Bush* accountable for his appalling conduct in the Oval Office. Olbermann did this knowing he was putting his job at risk, but that didn't stop him. To Keith Olbermann, his credibility as a journalist was more important than his career. That is indeed a rarity in journalists.

As is often said, reasonable people can disagree on issues. I see absolutely no reason not to keep that thought in mind as the mudslinging against Keith Olbermann erupts into the public domain.

Sam

February 17, 2012

Speculation by 5 investment banks "betting" on the future price of oil

Additionally, the Koch Brothers have bought huge supplies of oil while the price is low, wait for Wall Street to drive the prices up, and then sell high. They have supertankers parked off shore with huge supplies of oil. They are simply waiting for the price to shoot up to sell.

Saudi Arabia has already said it could replace any shortages which occurred by Iran's withholding or inability as a result of a war to supply oil, so it strains credibility for the investment banks to project huge increases in cost as a result of a decreased availability, but it is very easy to believe they are simply attempting to grease their own financial pockets. All it takes is trades between the banks to start driving up prices, and they have shown in the recent past they are willing to do whatever it takes to maintain their projected profit levels.

Although the link below is an older article, it just shows what MSNBC revealed yesterday. There are 5 major banks currently speculating in oil and driving up the price. Additionally, 20 to 40 cents of the price one now spends on each gallon of gas goes directly to the Koch Brothers. (Sorry, I can't remember which MSNBC show showed the chart; it was a long news day yesterday....) But Morgan, Stanley and Goldman, Sachs were two of the five investment banks listed as currently driving up speculative prices.

Sam

http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/intelligent-energy/obama-asks-doj-to-investigate-oil-speculators/5759

and an interesting article on the Koch Brothers and their influence over the price of oil through speculation:

http://thinkprogress.org/report/koch-oil-speculation/

January 22, 2012

The right-wingers have backed themselves into a political corner

They felt compelled to choose between a Mormon (Mormonism is not considered a "Christian" religion by many Southerners) and a serial adulterer who they perceive can truly "take the fight" to President Obama in future debates. Casting aside all pretenses of religious purity, they were forced in their own minds to vote for the serial adulterer, touting the principle of forgiveness of sin as their excuse. In this process, they exhibited their own religious hypocrisy, shades of racism and willingness to disregard the Constitution's guarantee of religious freedom to all citizens (despite their claims of being strict constructionists).

In short, most of these voters played the role of the emperor wearing no clothes, hoping no one would notice. Most of us did.

Sam

January 5, 2012

"Romney won the bar fight, Santorum is drinking the free drinks and Newt Gingrich is

waiting outside with a broken bottle."

This loose quote should be credited to a commentator I heard today on The Ed Show, whose synopsis of the current situation within the Republican party seems simply perfect.

Nothing in my opinion is uglier than the seedy underbelly of our political domestic combat unless it is the pure, raw sight of Republicans devouring Republicans. Hey, but better "them" than us.

And they are just getting started....

Sam

Profile Information

Member since: 2001
Number of posts: 9,314
Latest Discussions»Samantha's Journal