Happy New Year! And because you can’t say “Feliz Año Nuevo” without saying “Evo”…well…
Ladies and gentlemen, may I present to you the King of the Andes?
And not only does he look good in shorts, he can also really keep his eye on the ball.The Nobel committee may have snubbed him, but he’s still man of the year from where I sit.Prospero Evo, everyone!
Translation mine. Notice that the story seems to have changed a bit from the other day. Now Ernestina Herrera claims she found both babies on her doorstep? And all these powerful individuals “intervened” on her behalf, to the extent of getting a judge fired just for detaining her? The hinkitude is strong in this one.Watch your back, Judge Bergesio.The federal police of San Isidro, Buenos Aires province, Argentina, raided the homes of the two adopted children of Ernestina de Noble Herrera on Wednesday. Herrera is owner of the Clarín media corporation, one of the largest in Argentina.With this operation, the police attempted to collect “scattered cells from the bodies” of Felipe and Marcela, the children of the businesswoman. According the the news agency Telam, quoting judicial sources, the procedure was performed on Wednesday morning, in accordance with the order of the judge presiding over the case, Conrado Bergesio. The same sources stated that the samples would serve to “establish bases of compatibility.”This was confirmed by the attorney of the two young people, Jorge Anzorreguy, who added that the authorities removed “toothbrushes and hairbrushes” from the homes of his clients.[…]Ernestina Herrera, the widow of the founder of the Clarín newspaper for some 30 years, said that in 1976, she found two abandoned babies on the doorstep of her house. In 1985, the Grandmothers of Plaza de Mayo began to receive the first denunciations that the list of children stolen from prisoners of the junta should also include Felipe and Marcela.The mothers of the disappeared, Estela Gualdaro and Mara Amelia Herrera de Miranda, submitted demands to try to get back their kidnapped grandchildren, suspected to have been taken by the Noble Herrera family. But the case did not become active until, in 2001, the Grandmothers of Plaza de Mayo entered themselves as plaintiffs.A year after that, the federal judge Roberto Marquevich detained Herrera de Noble for 66 hours on a charge of falsification of documents for the adoption of her children. Businesspeople, journalists, politicians, unionists, bishops and judges exercised pressure over the detention. In 2003, the jurist was removed from the case and 12 months later, dismissed by the Council of the Magistrature, which allegedly found irregularities in the detention of the most powerful media owner in Argentina.After the arrest of their adoptive mother, Felipe and Marcela agreed to submit to a DNA test in 2003.In 2009, the Congress approved a law that made it possible for DNA tests to be performed in the National Genetic Data Bank. However, on Monday, Judge Bergesio ordered that the genetic compatibility tests be done by the Medical Forensics Body.
Linkage added.Millions of shareholders. Sit back and let that sink in for a bit.Done soaking? All righty then:The sex scandal that engulfed Tiger Woods may have cost shareholders of companies endorsed by the world’s No. 1 golfer up to $12 billion in losses, according to a study by two economics professors from the University of California, Davis.The study, released on Monday by researchers Victor Stango and Christopher Knittel, gave an estimate for damage to the market value of Woods’ main sponsors caused by revelations of alleged extramarital affairs that surfaced after he was involved in a minor car accident outside his Florida home on November 27.“We estimate that shareholders of Tiger Woods’ sponsors lost $5-12 billion after his car accident, relative to shareholders of firms that Mr. Woods does not endorse,” the researchers wrote, adding that millions of shareholders were affected.
“…unlikely to stem from ordinary day-to-day variation in their stock prices.”Once more, sit back and soak that up, kiddies.And when you’re done with that, ask yourselves: Is it wise to “let the markets decide”? Especially if you’re one of the millions who lost money thanks to the indiscretions of the all-too-priapic Mr. Woods?I can’t tell you exactly what to do next (that, as always, is up to you, kids), but it may be prudent to reconsider two things held dear in Conservolandia: One, the reliance on markets for your well-being, instead of a proper social safety net; two, belief in the whole “family values”, squeaky-clean image thing. Obviously, neither of them has served certain parties here.And for the record: I divested myself of both stocks long ago, folkies.*Tiger’s real name, according to Bartcop. Bartcop also calls him “Tiger Woo”, and now we can see why.In their study, the two professors said they looked at stock market returns for the 13 trading days after November 27, the date of the car incident that ignited the Woods scandal.They compared returns for Woods’ sponsors during this period to those of both the total stock market and of each sponsor’s closest competitor. They also reviewed returns for four years before the car accident to build up a comparative picture of the sponsors’ market performance.[…]Overall, Knittel and Stango concluded that the scandal reduced shareholder value in the sponsor companies by 2.3 percent, or about $12 billion.They called the results statistically significant and said the overall pattern of losses at the parent companies was unlikely to stem from ordinary day-to-day variation in their stock prices.”
Let The Real News explain it all to you…
No surprise here: If you have a lot of money to play with, you can make a lot of money in the “free” market. But that doesn’t mean it’s right. And it doesn’t mean that the economy is grounded in reality. Even those who made a lot of money in it say it’s time for a change. Time to bring back Glass-Steagall; time, too, to learn from the ALBA countries, none of which was “crashed” by the events of ’08.
And for those who think the government of Colombia is above doing such things in Venezuela, remember: They do it at home all the fucking time.And it’s not as if they (or the whore media, acting on their behalf) haven’t run around squawking like Chicken Little about you-know-whose imagined aggression against Colombia, either.But yeah, let’s just pretend that Colombia isn’t being furnished with fully armed drones. Or that the bombing of Ecuador in March of 2008 didn’t happen, much less that it couldn’t have happened without a lot of help from their gringo friends. I mean, that’s what the whore media is doing, right?The president of Venezuela, Hugo Chávez, denounced on Monday that the government of Colombia, supported and directed by the United States, is preparing a “false positive” to justify a military action against his country.[…]The president said that the plan is to create local and worldwide public opinion that Venezuela is supporting the presence on its soil of FARC guerrilla camps, and that the Colombian government, with US backing, is fabricating the “proofs” to justify the attack.“It shouldn’t be strange that [the government of Colombia], who are killing so many people in Colombia, will kill I don’t know what people, or how many people, on Venezuelan territory in the mountains. They’ll build some huts, an improvised encampment, then bring in some guns and propaganda, and then say ‘there is the camp’,” Chávez said.
Excuse me, the Internets have an announcement to make:
Damn. I never even knew there WAS such a thing, and now it’s been cancelled on me! I think I need a drink.Oh, and speaking of “need a drink”, read this and weep in thy beer, O my friend and neighbor to the south of us:
Really, Gene? Really, Barack? Our single-payer system up here, which is popular with nine out of ten of us, and which could bring down even a majority Conservative government if it ever foolishly tried to gut it, is just an “abstract” one? You “free”, “independent” Yanks are that powerless against the corporations down there? Or are you just that cowardly? What do you have a government for, if not to put a leash on those snarling, dog-eating dogs, and muzzle them?Oh, I get it. The dogs are the ones holding the leash in the United States of Amnesia, and with a wad of Benjamins, they muzzle YOU. Spare us the old Soviet Union jokes, we’ve heard them all before.Good thing Tommy Douglas is a-moldering in his grave, or he’d chew your asses up so badly, you’d never sit down again. He faced as much pressure from the forces of “free market medicine” as any US president ever could, but he didn’t back down. Even when doctors went on strike in Saskatchewan, he just brought in doctors from elsewhere who were willing to take up the slack until those misguided MDs realized their mistake and came into the fold. In Venezuela, it was so bad that Chavecito brought in Cuban doctors, as did Evo in Bolivia. Both of them had the gonads to go up against the oligarchs of their respective countries and do it, just as Tommy Douglas had the gonads to do here. So, Barack, where are YOUR ‘nads at?And sorry, Gene, but imperfection is NOT a start…except to an even bigger débâcle down the road. Forcing fellow-citizens to buy insurance they couldn’t afford in the first place is not going to provide them with the care they need. It will, however, help ensure that they can’t afford a house, or a car, or maybe even food and clothing. All of which they’re gonna need before they need a doctor or a hospital.No, this gradualist approach is NOT going to lead to gradual improvements. It’s going to lead to people avoiding care for as long as they can, until an emergency drives them to it. And you can never underestimate the stupid stubbornness, or the stubborn stupidity, of a conservative, either. They WILL hold out until an emergency, or death, whichever comes first. They will spend the duration of their nasty, brutish and short lives muttering under their breath about how hard they work for their money, and about the dangers of relying on Big Government. And for once they may be right, although not the way in which they think they are. In the US, government is beholden to Big Money. All US governments, Democratic or Republican, are conservative that way. Even FDR didn’t make good on his early impulse to de-fang Wall Street! And a government beholden to moneyed interests is a government doomed to the distrust of its own citizens no matter their political affiliations. That distrust, of course, is richly deserved, because the citizens are the ones who will be left out in the cold. Unless, mirabile dictu, the government grows a spine and tells Big Money to go screw. And understands that it will have to fight–REALLY fight–for what’s right.Tommy Douglas saw that coming when he took the plunge in Saskatchewan, and did what the progressives of that province elected him to do. No gradualism for him; he knew what was right. He didn’t go halfsies, and neither should anyone else whose intention it is to provide universal healthcare.Now, I REALLY need a drink.Here are a few truths: First, we’ve been living in a one-dollar, one-vote corporatized democracy for a long time. If this is news to you, then you’re probably also shocked to learn that the U.S. Constitution, by awarding two senators to each of what H.L. Mencken called “the cow states” — no insult to the cows in my own barn — was deliberately crafted to make fundamental change difficult. Who made “moderates” like Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Joe Lieberman of Aetna mini-presidents? Alas, the founding fathers did.Living in such a polity, anybody who thought entrenched interests like the insurance, pharmaceutical and hospital industries weren’t going to find ways to make money off healthcare reform probably wasn’t paying attention back at the beginning, when Obama said that despite the abstract appeal of a Canadian-style single-payer system, it was a political non-starter.
Translation mine.Certainly the timing of these adoptions alone makes them hinky. The Argentine military coup happened on March 24, 1976; any adoption taking place between then and 1983 has the potential to be a case of child-stealing (as well as murder, since the natural parents of all known stolen children have never been found; the dictatorship “disappeared” them permanently.) Since the two children in question were “adopted” in May and July of 1976, both under highly questionable circumstances, the odds are strong that they, too, are children of the disappeared. Or to put it another way: Isn’t it interesting that the same rich, well-connected, right-wing woman would just so happen to find a “foundling” on her doorstep less than two months after the military coup–and then, two months after that, become an adoptive parent for a second time, to a son whose natural mother had a fake name and a man’s ID card? Lightning may strike twice in the same place, but all of that is just a little too coincidental to be a true coincidence.Legal obstruction of the case pressed by the Grandmothers of Plaza de Mayo, along with the public prosecutor’s office, only serves to compound the general smell of rotting fish about the whole affair. The son and daughter–possibly acting on the “advice” of their adoptive mother–have previously refused to come forward and let a doctor swab their cheeks for a few epithelial cells, claiming instead to have had their DNA privately tested. But then there’s another catch: They didn’t release those purported private test results. Why not, if there is nothing to hide? Wouldn’t they be eager to lay this case definitively to rest, instead of obstructing and obfuscating matters further? Such transparent delaying tactics are not exactly a convincing show of innocence.In the meantime, compulsory DNA testing is now required of all orphans and adoptees generated by the Argentine Dirty War. There are about 500 of them in all, and so far, 98 have been conclusively identified, all with the help of DNA tests. One such adoptee has sued her adoptive parents over the deception in which they participated. It’s very likely that she endured psychological trauma as a result of growing up amid what she knew to be a pack of lies. Many Dirty War stolen children have been emotionally and physically abused by their strict, fascistic adoptive parents, and it’s very possible that we will hear of other suits like this one.It’s not likely that the Herreras will do the same to their wealthy and powerful adoptive mother, but it will be interesting to see what other bugs shake out of this very creepy family tree.A tribunal has ordered DNA testing on the adopted children of the president and shareholder of the daily newspaper, Clarín, Ernestina Herrera de Noble, to determine whether the children are from parents who “disappeared” during the last military dictatorship in Argentina (1976-1983).According to adoption facilitators, Herrera found her adopted daughter, Marcela, on her doorstep in May of 1976, while her adopted son, Felipe, was given up by his biological mother two months later.“However, we have found many irregularities in the adoption process,” said Alan Iud, attorney for the association of the Grandmothers of Plaza de Mayo. “In the case of Marcela, two ‘witnesses’ came forward claiming to be neighbors, but who turned out to be Herrera’s chauffeur and a woman who did not live in that neighborhood.”The woman said to be the biological mother of Felipe, on the other hand, “is a nonexistent person”, said Iud. “The identity card number given was that of a man, and the name given is false.”Clarín alleged yesterday on its own pages that the case corresponds to a request filed privately by Marcela and Felipe in 2003. Iud denies this. “These tests have been ordered by the Federal Chamber of San Martín in response to a suit filed by the Grandmothers of Plaza de Mayo and the public prosecutor’s office.”[…]Herrera has been implicated since 2002 in an investigation over falsification of public documents in the process of the adoption of her children. The case was paralyzed because there was not enough evidence to prosecute her or to close the case.The Clarín director’s children must now submit to DNA testing. If they refuse, the Supreme Court has ordered that genetic samples be obtained from their personal effects.
