Tuesday, August 25, 2015

Oil Price Drops Raise Fears of Unrest From Venezuela to Iraq to Russia

For years - actually decades - oil producing countries (think OPEC) have played a game of economic blackmail on non-oil producing nations, worked to keep oil prices high and enjoyed power and influence that under any other standard they did not deserve.  The side effect that they seemingly never thought through was that over time, such blackmail (i) made exploration and production feasible in places it had never existed, (ii) made secondary and tertiary recovery economically practicable, and (iii) made alternate fuels attractive and more competitive.  The end result has been more worldwide production and falling oil prices - and revenues that have often propped up failed regimes.  As a piece in the New York Times notes, the chickens could be about to come home to roost as falling prices are setting the stage for possible political unrest.  Here are article excerpts:
Oil, the lifeblood of many countries that produce and sell it, appears to be rapidly turning into an ever-cheaper economic curse.

A year ago, the international price per barrel of oil was about $103. By Monday, the price was about $42, roughly 6 percent lower than on Friday.

In oil-endowed Iraq, where an Islamic State insurgency and fractious sectarian politics are growing threats, a new source of instability erupted this month with violent protests over the government’s failure to provide reliable electricity and explain what has been done with all the promised petroleum money. 

In Russia, a leading oil producer, consumers are now paying far more for imports, largely because of their currency’s plummeting value. 

In Nigeria and Venezuela, which rely almost completely on oil exports, fears of unrest and economic instability are building. 

In Ecuador, where oil revenue has fallen by nearly half since last year, tens of thousands of demonstrators pour into the streets every week, angered by the government’s economic policies.

Even in wealthy Saudi Arabia, where the ruling family spends oil money lavishly to preserve its legitimacy, the government has been burning through roughly $10 billion a month in foreign exchange holdings to help pay expenses, and it is borrowing in the financial markets for the first time since 2007. Other Arab countries in the Persian Gulf that are dependent on oil exports, including Kuwait, Oman and Bahrain, are facing fiscal deficits for the first time in two decades.

[N]ew anxieties about frailties in China, the world’s most voracious consumer of energy, have raised fears that the price of oil, now 30 percent lower than it was just a few months ago, could remain depressed far longer than even the most pessimistic projections, and do even deeper damage to oil exporters.

Although the price drop has most directly hurt oil exporters, it also may signal a new period of global economic fragility that could hurt all countries — an anxiety that already has been evident in the gyrating stock markets.

The price drop also has become an indirect element in the course of Syria’s civil war and other points of global tension. Countries that once could use their oil wealth as leverage, like Russia, Iran and Saudi Arabia, may no longer have as much influence, some political analysts said. Iran, which once asserted it could withstand the antinuclear embargo of its oil by the West, appeared to have rethought that calculation in reaching an agreement on its nuclear activities last month.

[W]hile lower oil prices stimulate economies of consuming countries, a protracted decline carries many unanticipated consequences — starting with the economic weakness in developing countries that buy increasing amounts of goods from the United States and others in the industrialized world.

A supply glut has been evident for some time, driven partly by a vast increase in Saudi production and a growing energy self-sufficiency in the United States, which was once heavily reliant on Middle East oil.

Saudi Arabia not only is producing a record amount, but also is increasing the number of rigs drilling for future production. And its Gulf allies, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait, are following suit. . . . all the exporters in the Middle East are struggling with each other to protect Asian markets, now that the United States is using much less of their oil.

The global glut is likely to worsen if the nuclear deal with Iran is approved, potentially releasing as much as one million more barrels onto the 94-million-barrel-a-day global market in a year or so.  Iran’s oil minister, Bijan Namdar Zanganeh, has made no secret about his country’s intentions. “We will be raising our oil production at any cost, and we have no other alternative,” he was quoted Sunday in Iran’s state-run news media as saying.

The big change in recent years has been the surge of United States oil production, adding more than four million barrels a day to global supplies. But in recent months the oversupply has been driven primarily by the Saudis, who have flooded the market in what economists regard as a deliberate attempt to drive down the price so that other high-cost producers can no longer compete — most notably the Americans.

“The hemorrhaging of government budgets reliant on oil will force dramatic cuts in spending or dangerous increases in borrowing, if not both,” Mr. Goldwyn said. “The countries without significant foreign exchange reserves are most at risk, and they include Nigeria, Angola, Algeria, Venezuela and Iraq. The countries which need to sustain investment to maintain political legitimacy need to be worried, and that’s Brazil, Russia and even Iran.”

[A] longer-term worry about possible miscalculations by Saudi Arabia, on both the duration and magnitude of the oil price drop.

“With a burgeoning population looking for jobs, education and health care every day,” she said, “the expensive social contract between the royal family and Saudi citizens will get more difficult, and eventually impossible, to sustain if oil prices do not recover.”
Past greed, arrogance and shortsightedness may well upset the political apple cart in many countries, especially Saudi Arabia and Russia.  

Monday, August 24, 2015

More Monday Male Beauty


Will Trump Rebrand GOP As a White Nationalist Party?


I swear that I try to find other things to write about other than the latest batshitery of GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump, but "The Donald" is making that effort difficult!  And even when Trump isn't spewing the batshitery himself, other GOP nominee want to be types are adding to the craziness: e.g., Jeb "Jebbie" Bush today when defending his "anchor baby" remark managed to insult Asian immigrants even as he sought to defuse his anti-Hispanic faux pas:
Bush said: "What I was talking about was the specific case of fraud being committed where there's organized efforts, and frankly, it's more related to Asian people coming into our country and having children in that organized effort."
These guys are truly the gang that can't shoot straight.  Talking Points Memo looks at what Trump is doing to the GOP:

MAINE: NOM Finally Hands Over Donors List and Only SIX Names Are On It


I and many others have long speculated that one reason why the National Organization for Marriage ("NOM") has fought tooth and claw and blatantly violated campaign finance disclosure laws was because did not want it disclosed that rather than being a "broad grass roots movement" it was really a front for a small group of anti-gay extremists.  These suspicions have now been now confirmed in Maine where NOM has been forced to disclose the names of the donors who contributed over $2 million to back NOM's anti-gay campaign.  ONLY SIX donors contributed the money expended. Worse yet for NOM, the vast majority of the money tracks back to a single individual. That's right, SIX donors. And, oh yes, the Knights of Columbus was one of the six donors and spent $140,000 better spent on true charitable works to deprive LGBT individuals their civil legal rights.  It is LONG past time that the K of C lost its tax-exempt status.  Here are highlights from the Bangor Daily News:
The National Organization for Marriage has filed details of its financial activities related to a 2009 effort to repeal Maine’s same-sex marriage law after a more than five-year legal battle over Maine’s campaign finance laws. 

Brian Brown, president and co-founded of the National Organization for Marriage, said by phone Monday that being forced to disclose donors was a “gross injustice” to his organization.

The National Organization for Marriage funneled more than $2 million to a political action committee called Stand for Marriage Maine, which represented about 64 percent of the PAC’s spending on the referendum that repealed a same-sex marriage law enacted by the Legislature and Gov. John Baldacci. Same-sex marriage became law in Maine after voters endorsed it through another referendum in 2012.

The National Organization for Marriage, which has been arguing that Maine’s campaign finance law should not apply to the disclosure of national-level donors, already has paid a record fine to the state of more than $50,000 in the matter. Wayne said Monday the filing appears on initial inspection to satisfy Maine’s campaign finance reporting requirements.

The donor list includes one Mainer and four out-of-state donors who gave the National Organization for Marriage between $50,000 and $750,000 in individual donations.
— Richard Kurtz of Cape Elizabeth, $50,000 on Aug. 5, 2009.
— John Templeton of Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania, $300,000 on Oct.1, 2009.
— Terrence Caster of San Diego, California, $300,000 on Oct. 9, 2009.
— Knights of Columbus of New Haven, Connecticut, $140,000 on Sept. 4, 2009.
— Sam Fieler of New York City, $750,000 on July 15, 2009, and $500,000 on Oct. 13, 2009.
— There were an additional $5,279 in smaller contributions that were not itemized on the report.
Like everything else that comes out of NOM - and the mouths of Brian Brown and Maggie Gallagher - the claims that NOM is a broad based "grassroots" organization is a lie and utter bullshit.  NOM is a front group for a handful of anti-gay bigots and anti-gay religious organizations like the Mormon Church, K of C, and U.S. Catholic bishops.  When the godly folk's lips are moving, the safest assumption is that they are lying - you will rarely be proved wrong.

Monday Morning Male Beauty


Donald Trump's Immigration Lunacy


As noted before on this blog, historically the Richmond Times-Dispatch has been one of Virginia's most conservative newspapers and it has all too often been either a supporter of or apologist for Republican Party lunacy.  And like the GOP establishment, the paper seem to revel in the short term benefits of empowering Christofascists and low life types of the GOP base for short term political expediency.  Now, belatedly, the Times-Dispatch seems to recognize the Frankenstein monster that was created and now embodied in Donald Trump's insane candidacy.  Here are highlights from an editorial condemning Trump's immigration lunacy that is being embraced by far too many in the ignorance worship Republican Party base:

Apparently goaded by complaints far and wide that his campaign was long on bloviation and short on specifics, Donald Trump finally unrolled a policy proposal. Be careful what you wish for.
The Donald’s plan to address immigration reads like something a seventh-grader might have come up with. It contains the inevitable proposal to build a giant wall along the Mexican border, because “a nation without borders is not a nation.”
Trump says he would make Mexico pay for the wall. If it doesn’t, he will “impound remittances” — money sent back to the home country — made with illegal immigrants’ wages. How is he going to do that, exactly?

He would have to trace all international monetary transfers back to their originating point, and then try to figure out if the sender is legally present in the U.S. That takes considerable time. Legal immigrants also send remittances. Ergo, Trump wants to impound all remittances — and then, after sufficient research, release some of them. Good luck getting the courts to approve such guilty-until-proven-innocent logic.

But for Trump, that’s just an appetizer. He also wants to triple the size of ICE, amend the Constitution to prevent birthright citizenship, and impose a nationwide E-Verify system so no business can hire anybody until the government agrees.   This is the favorite in a party that claims to want smaller government?
Trump’s proposals have so little connection to facts or logic that they are laughable. But then, facts and logic are irrelevant; his fans are not interested in them, and to bring them up simply proves, to Trumpmaniacs, that you are part of The Enemy.

Trump is the candidate of the primal scream. Like a primal scream, his campaign has no coherent message, no organizing principle, no concrete agenda. It is an emotional volcano, a geyser of raw id. Like a volcano, it is a phenomenon to behold. But if it isn’t capped soon, both the GOP and the nation could end up badly burned.


ISIS Blows Up Ancient Temple in Syrian Ruins


ISIS is continuing its campaign to destroy ruins and priceless artifacts from the past that relate to non-Islamic religious traditions.  The latest lost treasure are the ruins of the Temple of Baalshamin, part of the ancient ruins of Palmyra, which was blown up by the religious extremists of ISIS.  While the world is stunned by such behavior, everyone would do well to remember that what ISIS is doing has a long history.  Travel to Greece and see scatter churches doting the countryside that were built where pagan temples had existed before the Roman Catholic and then Orthodox Church had them destroyed.  Travel to Mexico City and visit the city's main cathedral  that sits on the site of the former great temple of the Aztecs.  Sadly, throughout time succeeding religious cults and traditions have felt it necessary to stamp out reminders that other beliefs have existed and in some cases held sway for far longer periods of time than more modern cults/inventions such as Islam.   The New York Times looks at this latest travesty done in the name of religion.  Here are excerpts:

Militants from the Islamic State destroyed a temple in the ancient ruins of Palmyra in Syria, activists and government officials said on Sunday, continuing a pattern of destruction that they have visited upon historical sites across the territory they control there and in Iraq.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, an activist and monitoring group based in Britain, said Sunday in a statement that Islamic State fighters detonated “a large quantity of explosives” that they had arranged around the Temple of Baalshamin, one of the most grand and well-preserved structures in the sprawling complex of ruins. A government official told reporters that it was heavily damaged by the blast.

The temple stood “dozens of meters” away from a Roman amphitheater where the Islamic State held a mass execution, killing 25 prisoners, in a video released last month, the activist group said. The entire ancient city of Palmyra is a Unesco World Heritage site.

The destruction of the temple is just the latest in a string of horrors that the Islamic State has inflicted upon Palmyra since seizing the city in May. Last week, the group beheaded Khalid al-Asaad, 83, who had served as the chief of the city’s antiquities department for more than 50 years. After they killed him, Islamic State militants strung his headless body as a warning to others. Last month, the group demolished half a dozen ancient statues, smashing them with sledge hammers, and in June they blew up two historic tombs.

The Syrian government rushed to bring as many antiquities as possible from the city to the relative safety of Damascus before it fell to the Islamic State, but left behind many more of the city’s archaeological treasures, not to mention thousands of its residents.

Members of the Islamic State consider artifacts that date from before the birth of Islam to be symbols of paganism that must be destroyed, although they have in the past sold some of the more valuable ones that fall under their control as a way to help finance operations.

The Temple of Baalshamin was built more than 2,000 years ago and was dedicated to the Phoenician god Baalshamin.

As I have said so often, religion has been a great evil throughout history.  ISIS is reminding us of this reality.  We need to remember the blood on the hands of Christianity and the past destruction done in the name of God. 

Sunday, August 23, 2015

Sunday Morning Male Beauty


Today's GOP: Not Just Anti-Hispanic

Racism is one of the pillars of today's Republican Party.  Other pillars include religious extremism that tends toward a Christian Dominionist agenda.  Another is greed and selfishness that argues for throwing the poor and less fortunate in the gutter.  Donald Trump is pandering to all of these ugly undercurrents, but his embrace of racism is what seems to be holding at the top of GOP polls.  In doing so, however, he may be reinforcing the Republican Party's transition to a wholly white party (give or take a few Uncle Tom's like Clarence Thomas).  A piece in Slate looks at this trend that over the long term may be the death of the GOP.  Here are excerpts:
Most of the time, when we talk about immigration, we’re talking about Latin America. Donald Trump isn’t threatening to round up Irish immigrants in Boston who entered the country illegally or to build a wall between us and Canada; he’s threatening Latinos and tapping into an ugly strain of racist nativism. It’s why “anchor baby”—slang for the American-born children of unauthorized immigrants—is such a charged term. To many, it’s racial code for often brown-skinned, Spanish-speaking children.

[R]hetoric aside, America’s immigrant community goes beyond Latino and Hispanic Americans. It includes Africans, Europeans, and Asians, one of the fastest growing groups in the country. Not all Asians are tied to the immigrant experience—more than a quarter are native-born, with long and durable ties to the United States. But the large majority are foreign-born, with roots in a variety of different countries, from China and Japan to Korea, Vietnam, India, and Bangladesh. Moreover, they’re a rising share of the electorate—in 1996, just 1.6 percent of voters were Asian. In 2012, it was 3.4 percent. As second- and third-generation Asian Americans take the stage in national life, that voting block will increase.

When Republicans attack immigration—and increasingly, immigrants—we know it alienates Hispanic and Latino voters. Indeed, between Trump and his chorus of imitators, the party has all but abandoned its outreach to that community. But in this analysis, we shouldn’t ignore Asian Americans. This rhetoric matters to them too, and if Republicans aren’t careful, they’re set to lose two groups and likely seal their fate for next November.

Obama scored an enormous win among Asians. His 73 percent share of the Asian vote was a significant increase from the previous election and a bright spot in his overall performance. It would have been one thing if, like blacks, Asians were Democratic stalwarts. But they weren’t.

In 2012, Asians were primed to follow the national trend and vote a little more Republican. But they didn’t. Just 26 percent voted for Mitt Romney, the lowest GOP total in 20 years. What happened? What turned a small Democratic edge into an outright advantage?

Again, the answer is immigration, and specifically, the sense of exclusion that came from the GOP. In the 2012 primary, like this one, Republicans were torn over immigration policy, with candidates having a strong incentive to oppose comprehensive reform. Throughout the primary process, candidates fought to surpass one another with draconian solutions for dealing with unauthorized immigrants . .

The simple intervention of making an Asian subject feel excluded with respect to ‘Americanness’ and being suspected of not being a U.S. citizen increased negative dispositions towards the Republican Party and increased positive views of the Democratic Party . . . Asian voters tied the Republican Party to racial discrimination.

Indeed, in its recent probe of party affiliation, Pew found an almost 3-to-1 divide among Asians: 65 percent identified with the Democratic Party, 23 percent with the GOP.

Trump isn’t just popular; he’s shaping Republican policy, and several candidates have even turned against birthright citizenship—a historic achievement of the once–party of Lincoln.

Democrats are watching the Republican primary. They are recording and polling and testing. Come next year, they will blanket immigrant communities with the greatest hits of Republican rhetoric, and over the course of the campaign, countless people—teachers, factory workers, small business people, and others—will remember the comments about “illegals” and “anchor babies.” And they’ll act accordingly.

On Friday, a writer for the Federalist—a conservative website—asked if the GOP was the “party of freedom” or the “party of white identity.” If the party keeps moving on its present path, there will be no answer but the latter.

How Changeable Is Gender?

I've often noted that being gay and coming to terms with one's sexual orientation is not easy, especially for those of my generation or older who spent their teen years in an era where homosexuality was literally treated as a form of mental illness.  Hence, my years in therapy (the first years were focused on overcoming the anti-gay poison I was exposed in the Catholic Church) and two serious suicide attempts.   That said, what we gays experience is mild compared to the treatment experienced by those who are transgender.  I admittedly cannot wrap my head around what that experience must be like, but I do know that what these individuals feel is real.  An op-ed in the New York Times looks at gender identity. Some of what the author has to say may well outrage the transgender community.  Other aspects of the piece my be applauded.  Like it or hate it, the article does underscore something: (i) as with gays and lesbians, the brains of those who are transgender individuals differ from those of their heterosexuals counterparts, and (ii) the differences happen before we are born.  Here are a few column highlights:
We’re learning to be more accepting of transgender individuals. And we’re learning more about gender identity, too.

[R]ecent neuroscience research suggests that gender identity may exist on a spectrum and that gender dysphoria fits well within the range of human biological variation. For example, Georg S. Kranz at the Medical University of Vienna and colleagues elsewhere reported in a 2014 study in The Journal of Neuroscience that individuals who identified as transsexuals — those who wanted sex reassignment — had structural differences in their brains that were between their desired gender and their genetic sex.

He used a high-resolution technique called diffusion tensor imaging, a special type of M.R.I., to examine the white matter microstructure of subjects’ brains.

What Dr. Kranz found was intriguing: In several brain regions, people born female with a female gender identity had the highest level of something called mean diffusivity, followed by female-to-male transsexuals. Next came male-to-female transsexuals, and then the males with a male gender identity, who had the lowest levels.

In other words, it seems that Dr. Kranz may have found a neural signature of the transgender experience: a mismatch between one’s gender identity and physical sex. Transgender people have a brain that is structurally different than the brain of a nontransgender male or female — someplace in between men and women.

It turns out that the sexual differentiation of the brain happens during the second half of pregnancy, later than sexual differentiation of the genitals and body, which begins during the first two months of pregnancy. And since these two processes can be influenced independently of each other, it may be possible to have a mismatch between gender-specific brain development and that of the body.

Is it really so surprising that gender identity might, like sexual orientation, be on a spectrum? After all, one can be exclusively straight or exclusively gay — or anything in between. But variability in a behavior shouldn’t be confused with its malleability. There is little evidence, for example, that you really can change your sexual orientation. Sure, you can change your sexual behavior, but your inner sexual fantasies endure.

The critical question is not whether there is a range of gender identity — it seems clear that there is. Rather, it is to what extent and in which populations gender identity is malleable, and to what extent various strategies to change one’s body and behavior to match a preferred gender will give people the psychological satisfaction they seek.
Readers may or may not agree with some of the other views of the author, but one thing is clear.  Being transgender is real and not some made up experience.  No one chooses to be gay and no one chooses to be transgender.   We are born this way and we deserve to be respected and treated equally.  Not understanding someone's experiences and/or differences does not make the mistreatment of others acceptable.  Being gay, being transgender, being black, or being some other racial minority is not something that any of us got to choose.  We need to learn to allow everyone to live their life and respect differences.  Those most opposed to this are, sadly, typically are the ignorance and hate embracing Christofascists.  When the Christofascists seek to depict the those who are transgender as would be sexual predators seeking to prey on women and girls, it underscores what horrible people they truly are. It is they who need to be the societal outcasts.