Times-Union Makes A Bigger Audience For Itself

If there is any one word to describe the newspaper industry, it is "decline." Many institutions have closed and advertising revenues are falling across the board. The fact is, people are getting more of their news online and from sources that aren't always first found in print. There has certainly been a lot of complaining from newspaper executives that whine about the big bad internet, the same medium they had belittled not ten years ago. Of course that doesn't apply to every publication, like New York's very own Times-Union, which despite losing a chunk of their print audience, still managed to add readers at a clip that puts them in the top ten of the nation.

From The Times-Union:

The newspaper's net combined audience of print and online readership increased 8.7 percent to 506,929 for the six months prior to March 31, the seventh-best growth of any U.S. daily, according to Editor & Publisher, an industry trade journal. The measurement includes those who have read a newspaper's print edition in the past seven days and its Web site within the past 30 days.

The Times Union also recorded a slight increase in Sunday circulation, rising to 141,105 for the October-to-March period from 141,064 in the same six months a year earlier.

But the newspaper's average Monday-through-Friday circulation decreased to 78,973 in the most recent reporting period from 89,257 a year earlier. That's an 11 percent decline.

The reality about print newspapers is that they are on their way out. What the newspaper industry does about it is up to them. For the Times Union at least, they are doing something right to gain overall readers and for that, they are commended.

Rep. Walter Jones Speaks On The Floor About PTSD

Congressman Walter Jones (R-NC) spoke truthfully about the problems of PTSD and TBI on the floor of the House. Due to the overwhelming problem the military faces because of these illinesses, he helped introduce a smart bill so that the government begins to take the problems of PTSD seriously and is able to treat our soldiers.

M.T.A. Budget Woes Go From Bad To Worse

The Senate Democrats are finally starting a conversation bill to address the M.T.A.'s massive budget deficit. They might want to add today's news from the transit authority to that talk, as things are even worse than what they seemed to be only a few weeks ago when the doomsday budget was voted on. We aren't just talking a little worse, this is on the scale of hundreds of millions of dollars.

From The NY Times:

Plummeting revenues from ridership, tolls and taxes mean that even after it raises fares by up to 30 percent and slashes service, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority faces a $621 million deficit this year, officials reported on Monday, as they presented a revised budget forecast. According to the new forecast, next year’s deficit will be more than $1 billion.

The authority’s financial outlook has become worse as the regional economy sinks deeper into an economic slump.

The authority has been hoping that the Legislature in Albany would pass a rescue package to help it balance the books this year and next year and provide long-term funding for its crucial capital program, which pays for the purchase of new buses and train cars and critical maintenance and modernization of the transit system.

The economy is putting the hurt on the M.T.A. in so many ways. Less riders and less real estate taxes, coupled with years of being debt-riddled by the legislature is making the situation extremely painful. As long as the state senate remains gridlocked by a few obnoxious and egotistical Conservadems within their ranks, the problems that confront straphangers will continue to mount. What the city needs is a comprehensive plan that funds the M.T.A.'s projects (with good oversight), keeps service going and trims the massive amount of debt that has been lying around. Without a solid plan, New Yorkers will be met with another fare increase, whether it be to $3.00 or more by the same time next year.

Abu Zubaydah Interrogator Speaks Out, "Torture Was Wrong"

Terrorism is bad, really bad. We all get that, whether you were in Lower Manhattan on September 11th or in a crowded Baghdad market where a bicyclist with a bomb detonated himself. Terrorism happens all over the world, and those that seek to terrorize should be stopped and interrogated in order to glean information about what they know about in terms of their organization and future attacks. That would be the basics. How you get that information from them is entirely different story. In the case of FBI interrogator Ali Soufan, it is one hell of an incredible story.

From The American Prospect:

The story of FBI interrogator Ali Soufan plays out like a movie. The son of an immigrant from Lebanon, Soufan, using traditional interrogation methods, gleaned from Abu Zubayda a plot to plant a dirty bomb in the United States and the alias of 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed. He turned the jihadis greatest weapons against them, citing Qu'ranic verses from memory and using his knowledge of Islam to gain the trust of terrorist detainees, then using the trust he had gained to get information that saved American lives. When he discovered that the CIA was planning on torturing Zubayda, his reaction was that of a lawman: "I swear to God," he reportedly said to FBI assistant director for counterterrorism Pasquale D'Amuro, "I'm going to arrest these guys!"

Soufan's courage and respect for American values contrasts sharply with former CIA official Michael Scheuer, who insists that the only way to protect America is through torture and that anyone who believes otherwise is anti-American. This contradicts the CIA Inspector General's own 2004 findings that there is no conclusive information that tortured yielded information that foiled "specific imminent attacks." Scheuer's belief in the power of torture is not empirical, but ideological, just like that of James Mitchell, the former Air Force psychologist who helped design the torture program and who, despite having never interrogated a prisoner a day in his life, told Ali Soufan he had no idea what he was doing.

Soufan knew what he was doing and did it well, for the benefit of millions of American lives. Scheuer and others like him however, let their machismo go to their heads, not only compromising the ability to obtain truthful information, but destroying the credibility of the United States in the world's eyes. Tenet may have been given a medal of freedom by President Bush, but Obama should snatch it back and bestow it upon Mr. Soufan.

Assemblyman Dinowitz Threatens Change On Maria Baez

Assemblyman Dinowitz pulled no punches for change in the Bronx. The borough certainly needs it with many self-serving politicians living in and out of the area. He was talking specifically about the representation within the City Council and quite possibly Maria Baez. Whomever it was, one thing is for sure, it was a subject that sorely needs to be discussed and acted upon.

Tedisco Lost For Micro And Macro Reasons

The Albany Times-Union penned an article today on why Tedisco lost the race to Murphy. How could a local, well-known politician in the area and without high negatives lose a six-week campaign to a young, unknown businessman in a traditionally Republican district? The Times-Union covers their bases, but in title they point to a lack of unity in and among the GOP.

From The Times-Union:

State chairman Joseph Mondello wanted Tedisco, 58, as did Saratoga County's John "Jasper" Nolan, whose opinion was powerful because the leaders' votes were weighted by county population. But Washington and Essex counties lined up behind Betty Little, a popular state senator from Queensbury. Warren County voted narrowly for Tedisco. Elsewhere, Republicans in Columbia, Rensselaer, Delaware and Greene counties wanted Faso. Richard Wager in Dutchess County, who ran briefly against Kirsten Gillibrand in 2008, also had support, but Dutchess went for Tedisco.

As a result, Little — already in a delicate spot because she is related to Murphy by marriage — didn't go out of her way to help Tedisco in the North Country, and Faso didn't help in the south. Little was one of the first regional Republicans to suggest, once the vote count began to shift away from Tedisco, that he should start looking for an exit strategy.

Michael Grasso, the Warren County Republican chairman, praised Tedisco and said he was chosen fairly. But he admitted a lack of unity hurt the cause.

Grasso also said Little would have won, and theorized Murphy — an unknown who needed the North Country support — wouldn't have gotten in the race if Little had been the Republican candidate. He also said Tedisco ("a great guy who has always been there for the taxpayer") could have won with a different campaign.

"But hindsight is 20-20," Grasso said.

Hindsight is 20-20 but the vision, or lack there of from Tedisco and his party as a whole was pretty clear. For Tedisco himself, he immediately shot himself in the foot by not answering the question on the stimulus bill. It reflected negatively on whether he had principles to stand on and that matters to voters, especially in these economically sour times. His campaign ran too many negative ads against Murphy and not enough positive information on himself.

On the macro level, Republicans are becoming known as the party of no and without any ideas but to oppose the Democratic party on pretty much everything they propose to do for the nation. While national Republicans may think being the loyal opposition is the way to go, it doesn't work for a special election in a district that voted for Gillibrand in 06' and along with Barack Obama in'08. Furthermore, the NRCC did a terrible job despite spending a sizeable sum on the race. Making it a referendum on Obama's nascent Presidency was also a big mistake.

Basically, a lack of unity was a problem in selecting Tedisco as the candidate, but that by no means assured his eventual loss. When he started out in February, Tedisco was up by over 20 points. In the end, he lost by several hundred votes.

Paterson's Choice To Blow Off WFP Not Too Bright

Perhaps Paterson thinks (or at least says) that he's got the Democratic primary in the bag next year, but the reality of the situation is far from it. Paterson must deal with a very dissatisfied public following the Senate appointment fiasco and especially the budget debacle where Dr. Transparency morphed into Mr. Secrecy. The weekend before last the governor responded to the LCA with a skit that lampooned the efforts of the unions in the budget process and apparently that feeling goes beyond the stage he performed his skit on. The unions' fusion party, the WFP is being left out of the process by Paterson and he doesn't seem to care. What does that mean for Paterson's chances then?

From The NY Daily News:

The WFP is unlikely to endorse a Democratic challenger against the state's first black governor - if one emerges - and almost certainly wouldn't support Rudy Giuliani or any other Republican.

Still, an unenthusiastic WFP could hurt the governor when it comes to the get-out-the-vote operation for which the party is well-known. In addition, tensions between the WFP and Paterson could leave the party less inclined to help Senate Majority Leader Malcolm Smith widen his 32-to-30 majority - and more likely to back challengers against his members.

"[Smith] can't deliver for the governor," the source said. "[Paterson] has to help the Senate win more seats. The governor alienating some of the very forces central to helping Malcolm is not smart."

Paterson has very few friends left after his first year and this attitude of misplaced centrism (this is New York, not North Dakota) will not fool conservatives nor please the Democratic base that puts the man (or someday a woman) into the Governor's mansion. Working Families Party may not be the all-powerful constituency in the state, but if their focus is elsewhere, such as putting more labor-friendly Dems in office then Paterson may find himself getting an education far from the halls of power in Albany.

Sunday Talk Roundup

I missed most of the Sunday talk shows yesterday on account of the cast of Family Guy (they were on Inside the Actors Studio at Pace and the taping started at 1pm and wasn't over until 7:30. Thankfully though, we all have TPM and their amazing editors that can shrink it all down into four minutes:

GOP Saw Pandemic Flu Prep As "Wasteful Spending"

It almost feels like on every "do-gooder" issue, the Republican party falls woefully behind. Two months ago Bobby Jindal was ridiculed for mocking volcano monitoring, only to be further embarrassed when Mt. Redoubt in Alaska blew its top. While the lava and ash was thankfully going in the direction away from population centers, we knew that because there was money to fund programs that (gasp!) monitored the volcano.

Now the big panic in this country is all about the dreaded swine flu, infecting thousands in Mexico and somewhat sparsely (for now at least, hopefully) here in the U.S. and many other countries. Pandemic flu preparedness has been a concerning matter for health experts for many years, especially when the avian flu made news from East Asia a few years back. In this year's stimulus bill, Democratic Representative David Obey wanted to put in a measure for flu preparedness but guess who helped block that "wastefulness"?

From The Nation:

When House Appropriations Committee chairman David Obey, the Wisconsin Democrat who has long championed investment in pandemic preparation, included roughly $900 million for that purpose in this year's emergency stimulus bill, he was ridiculed by conservative operatives and congressional Republicans.

Obey and other advocates for the spending argued, correctly, that a pandemic hitting in the midst of an economic downturn could turn a recession into something far worse -- with workers ordered to remain in their homes, workplaces shuttered to avoid the spread of disease, transportation systems grinding to a halt and demand for emergency services and public health interventions skyrocketing. Indeed, they suggested, pandemic preparation was essential to any responsible plan for renewing the U.S. economy.

But former White House political czar Karl Rove and key congressional Republicans -- led by Maine Senator Susan Collins -- aggressively attacked the notion that there was a connection between pandemic preparation and economic recovery.

Now, as the World Health Organization says a deadly swine flu outbreak that apparently began in Mexico but has spread to the United States has the potential to develop into a pandemic, Obey's attempt to secure the money seems eerily prescient.

And his partisan attacks on his efforts seem not just creepy, but dangerous.

Dangerous is the key word here. It is dangerous when partisan hacks like Rove can dictate to supposed "moderates" like Susan Collins that investing money in flu preparedness is something to attack Democrats on. If anything, there should have been more money in there for disease control and prevention, not less. In a country where tens of millions are uninsured and many more are under-insured, the potential for a pandemic is serious business. Yet the only thing Karl Rove and his disciples care about is scoring cheap political points and defending the tax breaks given to the rich.

That isn't only dangerous, it's psychotic.

Assembly Vs. Senate On M.T.A. Bailout

There is a little more than a month to go before the dreaded twenty-five percent (give or take a few percent depending on what fare you pay) hike in the cost of mass transit coupled with service cuts for the NYC subway system. Up in Albany though, politics and ego, not the deadline is what the leadership in the Assembly and Senate care most about. Sure, they want to get something done to appease their constituents, but "what" they want depends on which side you're on.

From The NY Daily News:

Negotiations over an MTA bailout deal blew up Friday amid bitter squabbling between Senate and Assembly leaders, sources said.

A conference call to discuss the rescue collapsed when Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver's staff learned the state Senate had already introduced its own bill and planned to vote on it next week, sources said. "Malcolm and Shelly are having a huge fight," said one source with ties to both Silver and Senate Majority Leader Malcolm Smith, a Queens Democrat. "The staffs are not speaking."

Multiple sources said Silver was upset Smith formally introduced his bill. "This is one-upping the Senate to show you're still in charge," said a source close to Smith.

It really is pathetic that there has to be so much squabbling over such a dire issue. Millions of people who can't afford another fare increase will be forced to deal with $103 a month for a Metrocard with less service for the price.

While much of the blame can be placed at the feet of the Pataki Administration and the Republican State Senate in the past for putting so much debt on the M.T.A., Smith should have been ready for this when he assumed power early this year. His district is directly affected by this matter, along with many other Democrats that represent the New York City metro area. How he can let Kruger, Espada, Diaz and Monserrate push him around on this is absolutely ridiculous. I hate to say it, but Shelly Silver has the best plan out of anyone on this, and if Smith cares about the city more than his ego, he'll try his best to make sure the closest thing to the Ravitch Plan is what passes when all is said and done.

Dana Gould On NRA, Take My Freedoms As Long As I Can Keep My Gun

On Real Time with Bill Maher, guest Dana Gould made a great point about guns and the NRA. While not all of their members are on the fringe, many that are help control the agenda. Sadly, that agenda is perfectly fine with taking the rights away that those guns were supposedly meant to protect.

Repeat As Needed: "Torture Doesn't Work"

Despite the onslaught of Cheney interviews where he says that we needed to torture use enhanced interrogation to get information out of terrorists, the facts are simply not on the ex-VP's side. All Cheney is trying to do is to cover his ass, and so is every single Bushie coming out of the woodwork now that pushes the false idea that torturing terror suspects gets good information out of them. The reality is, in words a three-year-old can understand is, "nuh-uh."

From McClatchy:

WASHINGTON — The CIA inspector general in 2004 found that there was no conclusive proof that waterboarding or other harsh interrogation techniques helped the Bush administration thwart any "specific imminent attacks," according to recently declassified Justice Department memos.

That undercuts assertions by former vice president Dick Cheney and other former Bush administration officials that the use of harsh interrogation tactics including waterboarding, which is widely considered torture, was justified because it headed off terrorist attacks.[...]

The IG's report is among several indications that the Bush administration's use of abusive interrogation methods was less productive than some former administration officials have claimed.

Even some of those in the military who developed the techniques warned that the information they produced was "less reliable" than that gained by traditional psychological measures, and that using them would produce an "intolerable public and political backlash when discovered," according to a Senate Armed Services Committee report released on Tuesday.

Even with everything that we've learned to date, there is still more classified material out there that government has not released. It has been hinted at that the documents and videos the CIA had destroyed were more horrific than anyone in the outside world has seen to date. With all of this evidence, it leads us back to two simple points, that torture does not work and that those that engage and/or order it should be held accountable for their actions. The United States knew it didn't work back in World War II and we even executed Japanese soldiers at that time who practiced techniques such as waterboarding on our very own troops. There is no reason that our standards should change as a nation that respects the rule of law, whether we are fighting Hitler, Mussolini and Hirohito or Al Qaeda and the Taliban.