Update: MPW Exaggerates Own Importance
I hate to pick on them, because they do provide an important service to our community by reporting on the day-to-day details of Maryland political dynamics, but Maryland Politics Watch overdid it this morning, bragging about how important their post echoing the shower-nuts' attack on Duchy Trachtenberg was:
They showed a screenshot:
showing their post about the CRG's illegitimate attack on Duchy displayed fifth on Google's first page of a search for Duchy Trachtenberg's name, not in quotes.
And it might be fifth on Adam Pagnucco's computer, because he looks at his own web site a lot.
Not for the rest of us.
Google is smart. They analyze your online behavior and tailor your searches to display things they think you're going to want, for instance, sites you have visited in the past.
My wife has little interest in politics and has never visited Maryland Politics Watch or searched for Duchy's name -- hers is a virginal computer. So I searched for Duchy Trachtenberg on her computer. Here is a picture of the resulting screen.
I clicked through twenty entire Google screens and never did find a link to yesterday's Maryland Politics Watch slam.
Even when I narrowed the search to [ Duchy Trachtenberg CRG NOW ], there was no sign of yesterday's post anywhere on the first few screens.
The sixth item listed on a Google search from my wife's computer is an MPW post reporting something negative about Duchy from one and a half years ago, so I suppose they should get points for consistency.
Come on, Adam, what do you have against Duchy? How about giving the people of Maryland a fair reporting of the political climate?
And please. There is no honor in siding with the Citizens for Responsible Government against someone who has fought for civil rights for county residents, and then boasting that you have done grievous political damage to your victim because you are so powerful and so many people read your post. Even if they had.
One thing about the Internet is that it moves FAST. Our report on Maryland Citizens for a Responsible Government's (MCRG) allegations about Council Member Duchy Trachtenberg's mishandling of money at Maryland NOW is only a few hours old, but it is already fifth on Trachtenberg's first Google search page.
Now is the time that likely voters are paying attention and making up their minds on how they will vote. One way they do that is to enter a candidate's name in Google. When they do, they often end up on MPW, and that is one reason why our site traffic is currently at all-time highs.
If you are a candidate and voters find this [links to their own post] when they Google your name, well... you don't want to be that candidate. Google Picks Up MCRG/Duchy NOW Story
They showed a screenshot:
showing their post about the CRG's illegitimate attack on Duchy displayed fifth on Google's first page of a search for Duchy Trachtenberg's name, not in quotes.
And it might be fifth on Adam Pagnucco's computer, because he looks at his own web site a lot.
Not for the rest of us.
Google is smart. They analyze your online behavior and tailor your searches to display things they think you're going to want, for instance, sites you have visited in the past.
My wife has little interest in politics and has never visited Maryland Politics Watch or searched for Duchy's name -- hers is a virginal computer. So I searched for Duchy Trachtenberg on her computer. Here is a picture of the resulting screen.
I clicked through twenty entire Google screens and never did find a link to yesterday's Maryland Politics Watch slam.
Even when I narrowed the search to [ Duchy Trachtenberg CRG NOW ], there was no sign of yesterday's post anywhere on the first few screens.
The sixth item listed on a Google search from my wife's computer is an MPW post reporting something negative about Duchy from one and a half years ago, so I suppose they should get points for consistency.
Come on, Adam, what do you have against Duchy? How about giving the people of Maryland a fair reporting of the political climate?
And please. There is no honor in siding with the Citizens for Responsible Government against someone who has fought for civil rights for county residents, and then boasting that you have done grievous political damage to your victim because you are so powerful and so many people read your post. Even if they had.
posted by JimK at 6:54 PM
26 Comments:
Same here, Jim. I get that 2009 MPW post when I google Duchy Trachtenberg, nothing newer.
try "Duchy Trachtenberg NOW" or "Duchy Tractenberg Maryland Politics Watch"
comes up first
the voters deserve an explanation from Duchy beyond a dismissive "it has been resolved"
it sounds like she used contributions which were tax deductible for personal use and, when it was discovered, she paid some or all back, dispose of any documentation, and threatened to sue if NOW officials pursued her
NOW officials would understandably not want this story to go public since it might hurt their ability to raise funds if it were found that their internal controls were so weak as to allow a NOW offical to get away with this
if she thought she could do that with NOW funds, does she have ways to do the same with public funds?
the voters need answers so thanks for raising the profile on the story, TTF
Adam claimed he got that result by googling Duchy Trachtenberg's name alone and was too full of himself to realize that google tailors search results to each user. Who cares what you can get with other search terms than those the blowhard claimed proved his influence. You're both full of it.
Hey, Anon. I thought you'd be interested to know my Duchy and Dana campaign signs that had been in my front yard yesterday were replaced, again, in time for rush hour this morning, and they will be replaced each time you and your loser CRG buddies steal them. How petty can you guys get? I guess the weather was too nice for you to stay home and beat up gays in the comments sections on Vigilance last night, huh?
Only shower nuts could be nutty enough to think stealing yard signs will have any effect on the upcoming election. You guys don't even have any pro-discrimination candidates running in either the County Council at Large or District 18 Delegate race, and if you did, no shower nut candidate stands a chance at getting elected to office here in Montgomery County.
Why not? Because even moderate GOP politicians can't survive here.
Go ask Connine No Mo'rella.
Not only are you as full of it as Adam at MPW is, but you're just as dumb. Google tailors your google searches to what you read too.
When I google search for Duchy Trachtenberg NOW, here's what I get, tailored to my prior searches:
1. MPW piece from June 22, 2009 about Terry O'Neill, Duchy' chief of staff being elected as the new President of National NOW
2. MPW piece from Sept. 2, 2010 showing Duchy's mailer
3. voteduchy.org Duchy's campaign website
4. indiatimes.com doing what Adam at MPW did, that is, act as a shill for the CRG without stating an opinion about the CRG's desire to allow continued discrimination in housing, taxi service and public accommodations against some county residents
5. PFOX blog post from July 2010 dissing both Duchy and Dana
6. montgomerycounty.gov page about County Council member Trachtenberg
7. standardnewswire article doing the same as indiatimes.com and MPW, that is to act as a toothless shill for CRG by posting their newsletter without comment on the CRG's desire to allow discrimination to continue against some of our county residents
8. Washington Post search results for Duchy Trachtenberg
9. youtube of Duchy talking about the Great Seneca Science Corridor Master Plan
10. christiannewswire article about CRG's complaint against Dana in 2008
BTW, to the idiot who said there's been a "guilty" verdict, tell us who was the judge and which court issued this verdict you claim has been made. The fact is there has been no such verdict issued by any judge or court.
Here's another fact: Your lies reveal the truth about you.
well, the Google matter is a distraction
importantly, when voters go to MPW's site for information about candidates, questions will be raised about Duchy, as they should
the voters deserve an explanation from Duchy beyond a dismissive "it has been resolved"
it sounds like she used contributions which were tax deductible for personal use and, when it was discovered, she paid some or all back, disposed of any documentation, and threatened to sue if NOW officials pursued her
NOW officials would understandably not want this story to go public since it might hurt their ability to raise funds if it were found that their internal controls were so weak as to allow a NOW offical to get away with this
if she thought she could do that with NOW funds, does she have ways to do the same with public funds?
maybe there's more to the story but the voters deserve answers
thanks for raising the profile on the story, TTF
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
You're welcome. I'm happy to reveal the truth of CRG's personal vindictiveness at their perpetual loser status here in Montgomery County, Maryland.
you wouldn't care if you didn't worry about the story
questions have been raised and Duchy is doing a Nixonion stonewall
we'll see if the voters catch on
even Fidel Castro realizes that governmental intervention in the economy doesn't work
when will Barack catch on:
"(Sept. 9) -- None other than Fidel Castro himself now appears to have given up on Cuba's archaic communist system.
The revolutionary leader last week launched a surprise attack on the state-controlled economy he helped create 50 years ago during an interview with Jeffrey Goldberg, a correspondent for The Atlantic magazine.
Goldberg asked the aging leader if Cuba's economic system was still worth exporting to other nations and was stunned by Castro's brutally honest response. "The Cuban model doesn't even work for us anymore," said the 84-year-old former president."
in case you Obama-idolizing looney birds missed it, yesterday major health insurance companies said they will make special increases in their rates in the coming weeks to directly pay for extra benefits required under Obamacare
thanks, Barry
but, didn't you say your reforms were going to bring costs down?
"(Sept. 9) -- President Barack Obama called upon a Florida pastor not to burn the Quran, denouncing the act as "completely contrary to our values" and warning that it could become a "recruitment bonanza" for al-Qaida.
"If he's listening, I just hope he understands that what he's proposing to do is completely contrary to our values," the president said. "This country has been built on the notions of religious freedom and religious tolerance.""
there you go again, Barry
no need for you to raise the profile of this event
the pastor in Florida is exercising his constitutional right to freedom of religion
he hasn't interferred with anyone else's freedom of religion
he is expressing his disagreement with Islam
such a thing has never been considered intolerant before
tolerance doesn't mean we can't express differences
but when the President starts trying to pressure a citizen into not expressing his religious viewpoint, it's time to start worrying
long past time to start, in fact
The Wall Street Journal reports that health insurance companies across America are jacking up their rates. Which has basically been the case every year, for years now. But this year, they can -- and will -- blame the Democrats.
The premium increases are happening at a terribly convenient time for insurers opposed to healthcare reform: Provisions voters like kicked in this summer, giving insurers an excuse to raise rates just before the midterms, to punish the "socialists."
So the story is, Obamacare leads to rate increases. But insurance companies can only blame a fraction of the rises specifically on the new benefits they're required to provide.
For example:
Regence BlueCross BlueShield of Oregon said the cost of providing additional benefits under the health law will account on average for 3.4 percentage points of a 17.1% premium rise for a small-employer health plan. It asked regulators last month to approve the increase.
ODS in Oregon, planning a 21 point rise, can only pin 6 points on Obamacare. In other words, huge premium rises were on the way regardless, and even insurance companies themselves are only attributing a fraction of the increases to the healthcare reform bill.
"About half of all states have the power to deny rate increases," the Journal reports, but even among those states the extent of that power varies widely.
The healthcare reform law's rate reviews -- which would force insurers to spend between 80% and 85% of premiums directly on healthcare -- don't kick in, of course, until 2011. So you can see why insurers might have an incentive to jack up rates now.
The top executives at the nation's five largest for-profit health insurance companies pulled in nearly $200 million in compensation last year — while their businesses prepared to hit ratepayers with double-digit premium increases, according to a new analysis conducted by healthcare activists.
The leaders of Cigna Corp., Humana Inc., UnitedHealth Group and WellPoint Inc. each in effect received raises in 2009, the report concluded, based on an analysis of company reports filed with the Security and Exchange Commission.
H. Edward Hanway, former chief executive of Philadelphia-based Cigna, topped the list of high-paid executives, thanks to a retirement package worth $110.9 million. Cigna paid Hanway and his successor, David Cordani, a total of $136.3 million last year.
Only one executive in the list actually saw his paycheck shrink last year: Ron Williams, the CEO of Hartford, Conn.-based Aetna Inc., earned nearly $18.2 million in total compensation, down from $24.4 million in 2008.
"Most families are struggling to hang on. Employers are struggling to stay in business. And these guys were giving themselves huge raises," said Ethan Rome, executive director of Health Care for America Now, a coalition of advocacy groups that prepared the report.
A spokeswoman for WellPoint said executives' compensation reflects their effort to improve care and hit corporate goals. Representatives of the other four insurers either declined to comment Tuesday on the report or did not respond to questions [AKA "Nixonion stonewall"] .
The executive packages were calculated by adding base salaries, bonuses, stock awards and other compensation reported on company financial statements. It did not include the value of exercised stock options.
Last year was highly profitable for most of the country's big publicly traded insurers. In the first two quarters of this year, profits for many insurers have continued to soar more than 20%.
Aetna's net income jumped more than 40% in the second quarter of 2010 compared with a year earlier. Indianapolis-based WellPoint recorded a 51% increase in its profit in the first quarter compared with the same period in 2009.
"Representatives of the other four insurers either declined to comment Tuesday on the report or did not respond to questions."
A classic "Nixonian stonewall" by 4 of the big 5 co-conspirators in ripping off health insurance consumers.
Why do they need to increase consumers' premium rates when they are already reaping in 20%-40% profits?
Greed, that's why.
And if the GOP retakes control of Congress, everybody KNOWS we will all pay higher and higher premiums until we can't afford them anymore. The fat cats will keep getting fatter while we make do without health insurance. This is how corporate death panels operate.
CRW's attack on Ms. Trachtenberg is simply personal vindictiveness. Those opposed to the very existence of lgbt people see no moral limitations on their own actions. N.B. anon's comments here.
"Retiring Sen. George Voinovich (R-Ohio) said he plans to help push a package of small-business incentives through the Senate next week, a move that would give President Obama and congressional Democrats a key victory on the economy in the final weeks before the November midterm elections.
In an interview, Voinovich said he could no longer support efforts by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to delay the measure in hopes of winning the right to offer additional GOP amendments. Most of the proposed amendments "didn't have anything to do with the bill" anyway, Voinovich said, and amounted merely to partisan "messaging."
"We don't have time for messaging. We don't have time anymore. This country is really hurting," Voinovich said. Voinovich said he told Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) that he would add his vote to that of 59 Democrats. That would give the majority party the 60 votes needed to overcome possible a GOP filibuster and move the package to final passage when Congress returns to Washington next week.
The small-business bill is a top priority for Obama, who has called repeatedly on Senate Republicans to drop their "blockade" of the measure. He mentioned it again during a speech Wednesday in Cleveland, arguing that the weeks of delay in the bill's passage "is actually leading [small-business owners] to put off hiring."
The package of tax breaks and other incentives includes a new loan fund that would encourage community banks to provide up to $30 billion to small businesses, improving access to credit - a problem hurting small businesses in Ohio, Voinovich said. He cited the case of a constituent whose business was turned down for a loan by 42 banks.
"We don't have time anymore to play games," Voinovich said. "I happen to believe these small-business people can't get money to save their souls."
Voinovich, a longtime champion of federal transportation spending, said he also plans to work with Obama to pursue a six-year reauthorization of the federal highway bill, and to jump-start the measure with $50 billion in immediate spending.
"(Sept. 9) -- A Christian pastor today canceled his controversial plan to burn copies of the Quran, saying he had received a "sign from God" when a Muslim cleric agreed to move an Islamic center planned for a site near ground zero in New York.
Terry Jones, head of the Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, sparked an international uproar when he announced his church would burn copies of the Muslim holy book on Saturday, the ninth anniversary of the Sept. 11 terror attacks. President Barack Obama condemned the plan and Gen. David Petraeus, the U.S. commander in Afghanistan, warned it could endanger American troops. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates telephoned Jones earlier today and urged him to reconsider."
so, basically, we have the entire U.S. military trying to pressure this guy into not expressing his religious beliefs
"Jones announced this afternoon he had decided to call off the Quran burning and would instead fly to New York on Saturday to meet with the Muslim cleric who wants to build an Islamic center a few blocks from the site of the former World Trade Center.
"Our thought was the American people do not as a whole want the mosque at ground zero. If they were willing to cancel the mosque at the ground zero location or if they were willing to move that location, we would consider that a sign from God," Jones told reporters today.
"We have been in contact with the imam in New York City. I will be flying up on Saturday to meet with the imam at the ground zero mosque. He has agreed to move the location," Jones said.
Meanwhile, real estate mogul Donald Trump said he had offered $6 million to buy out a major investor in the planned Park51 Islamic center -- 25 percent over the $4.8 million purchase price of the location.
"I am making this offer as a resident of New York and citizen of the United States, not because I think the location is a spectacular one, but because it will end a very serious, inflammatory, and highly divisive situation that is destined, in my opinion, to only get worse," Trump told the investor in a letter.
The investor, Hisham Elzanaty, rejected the offer. "This is just a cheap attempt to get publicity and get in the limelight," said his attorney, Wolodymyr Starosolsky."
sounds like a friendly, tolerant type of guy
Imam Muhammad Musri, president of the Islamic Society of Central Florida, appeared with Jones at his news conference.
Jones, the author of a book called "Islam Is of the Devil," had never previously cited the New York Islamic center as a reason for Quran burning.
Opponents of the Islamic center say it is unfair to families whose loved ones died on 9./11 to locate a mosque so close to the World Trade Center, where Muslim extremists flew hijacked planes into the twin towers."
(Sept. 9) -- A Christian pastor today canceled his controversial plan to burn copies of the Quran, saying he had received a "sign from God" when a Muslim cleric agreed to move an Islamic center planned for a site near ground zero in New York. But the cleric said there was no such deal, and the preacher later said he was having second thoughts.
Terry Jones said tonight he had been "clearly, clearly lied to" about what he said was a promise to change the location of the New York mosque.
A federal judge in California ruled Thursday that the law that forbids openly gay people from serving in the military is unconstitutional.
U.S. District Court Judge Virginia A. Phillips said the "don't ask, don't tell" policy violates the 1st Amendment rights of gay and lesbian service members and has had a "direct and deleterious effect" on the military.
Phillips said she would issue an injunction ordering the government to stop enforcing "don't ask, don't tell."
But the Justice Department, which argued for the 1993 law during a two-week trial, will have an opportunity to appeal the decision.
The case was filed by the Log Cabin Republicans, the largest political organization for gays in the GOP, in 2004.
"The premium increases are happening at a terribly convenient time for insurers opposed to healthcare reform: Provisions voters like kicked in this summer, giving insurers an excuse to raise rates just before the midterms, to punish the "socialists.""
don't know why you think insurers oppose Obamacare
despite Obama's effort to use them as a whipping boy, they supported the changes all along
why wouldn't they?
they'll now receive premiums from tens of millions whose constitutional rights have been breached and who will be forced to buy insurance
this is the best thing that ever happened to insurance companies
courtesy of our anti-colonial president
"So the story is, Obamacare leads to rate increases. But insurance companies can only blame a fraction of the rises specifically on the new benefits they're required to provide.
For example:
Regence BlueCross BlueShield of Oregon...3.4 percentage points of a 17.1% premium rise
ODS in Oregon, planning a 21 point rise, can only pin 6 points on Obamacare"
sounds like some pretty big "fractions", especially considering these are the ones you chose to make your point
"In other words, huge premium rises were on the way regardless, and even insurance companies themselves are only attributing a fraction of the increases to the healthcare reform bill"
everyone knew big increases were on the way regardless
Obama promised that his plan would lessen increases, not add to them
this is just what opponents of Obamacare said would happen and the Democrats denied
like to say we were fooled again but, really, we all realized this before Congress passed it
it's why Scott Brown was elected
it took anti-democratic measures to push it through
"Why do they need to increase consumers' premium rates when they are already reaping in 20%-40% profits?
Greed, that's why."
health insurance company profit margins are much lower than that
"And if the GOP retakes control of Congress, everybody KNOWS we will all pay higher and higher premiums until we can't afford them anymore."
if that were true, polls wouldn't indicate a GOP tsunami on the horizon
Obamacare will be defunded until January 2013, when it will be repealed
"CRW's attack on Ms. Trachtenberg is simply personal vindictiveness."
the opposite is true, Robert
you only defend because she a gay agenda advocate
if not, you would think these allegations need to be addressed by more than an evasive "it has been resolved"
the voters need to know how it was resolved
was she found to have used contributions made to tax-exempt organization for personal expenses or not?
did she abuse her position in thta organization or not?
simple questions that should be expected to be asked of any public servant
even a lunatic fringe gay advocate
Oh I see, voters want to know about Duchy but it's cool if Martha Schaerr hides her record, in fact, she's got your vote!
I smell a hypocrite!
The top executives at the nation's five largest for-profit health insurance companies pulled in nearly $200 million in compensation last year — while their businesses prepared to hit ratepayers with double-digit premium increases, according to a new analysis conducted by healthcare activists.
The leaders of Cigna Corp., Humana Inc., UnitedHealth Group and WellPoint Inc. each in effect received raises in 2009, the report concluded, based on an analysis of company reports filed with the Security and Exchange Commission.
H. Edward Hanway, former chief executive of Philadelphia-based Cigna, topped the list of high-paid executives, thanks to a retirement package worth $110.9 million. Cigna paid Hanway and his successor, David Cordani, a total of $136.3 million last year.
Only one executive in the list actually saw his paycheck shrink last year: Ron Williams, the CEO of Hartford, Conn.-based Aetna Inc., earned nearly $18.2 million in total compensation, down from $24.4 million in 2008.
"Most families are struggling to hang on. Employers are struggling to stay in business. And these guys were giving themselves huge raises," said Ethan Rome, executive director of Health Care for America Now, a coalition of advocacy groups that prepared the report.
A spokeswoman for WellPoint said executives' compensation reflects their effort to improve care and hit corporate goals. Representatives of the other four insurers either declined to comment Tuesday on the report or did not respond to questions.
The executive packages were calculated by adding base salaries, bonuses, stock awards and other compensation reported on company financial statements. It did not include the value of exercised stock options.
Last year was highly profitable for most of the country's big publicly traded insurers. In the first two quarters of this year, profits for many insurers have continued to soar more than 20%.
Aetna's net income jumped more than 40% in the second quarter of 2010 compared with a year earlier. Indianapolis-based WellPoint recorded a 51% increase in its profit in the first quarter compared with the same period in 2009.
your gripe against Schaerr involves political disagreements
Duchy's problems are ethical
I know liberals have a hard time understanding that
which is one reason liberals don't get much understanding from the American voter
" "Why do they need to increase consumers' premium rates when they are already reaping in 20%-40% profits?
Greed, that's why."
health insurance company profit margins are much lower than that "
The LATimes reports:
"Last year was highly profitable for most of the country's big publicly traded insurers. In the first two quarters of this year, profits for many insurers have continued to soar more than 20%.
Aetna's net income jumped more than 40% in the second quarter of 2010 compared with a year earlier. Indianapolis-based WellPoint recorded a 51% increase in its profit in the first quarter compared with the same period in 2009."
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/aug/11/business/la-fi-insurance-salaries-20100811
That same LA Times article pointed out that CEO's of the 5 biggest health insurance companies made $200 million themselves last year "while their businesses prepared to hit ratepayers with double-digit premium increases" Only AETNA's CEO's pay was lower in 2009 than it had been in 2008, the other 4 CEO's pay went up, way up.
As Ethan Rome so aptly put it, "Most families are struggling to hang on. Employers are struggling to stay in business. And these guys were giving themselves huge raises."
"A spokeswoman for WellPoint said executives' compensation reflects their effort to improve care and hit corporate goals. Representatives of the other four insurers either declined to comment Tuesday on the report or did not respond to questions."
Is anyone surprised by this refusal to explain the connection between huge raises for themselves and double digit premium hikes for we the people?
So it's ethical to hide your political views when running a political race according to "Go Team Schaerr?"
That's good for the voters to know! Thanks for schaerring!
Calling a PTSA meeting with "members of the CAC" to answer parents' questions" and then only inviting Ruth Jacobs, who was on the losing end of most votes by that committee and then sued MCPS and the SBOE to try to stop CAC approved curricular changes is ethical to Ms. Schearr herself?
That's good for the voters to know too! Thanks, Jim.
Post a Comment
<< Home