Friday, November 5, 2010

If NPR was right to fire Juan Williams, should MSNBC fire Keith Olbermann? UPDATE: Olbermann suspended

We’ll see how this shakes out, but if Keith Olbermann can directly and deliberately violate NBC News policy on campaign contributions and keep his job, it shows an incredible hypocrisy on the part of the media.


MSNBC host Keith Olbermann made campaign contributions to two Arizona members of Congress and failed Kentucky Senate candidate Jack Conway ahead of Tuesday’s election — a potential violation of NBC ethics policies.

Olbermann, who acknowledged the contributions in a statement to POLITICO, made the maximum legal donations of $2,400 apiece to Conway and to Arizona Reps. Raul Grijalva and Gabrielle Giffords. He donated to the Arizona pair on Oct. 28 — the same day that Grijalva appeared as a guest on Olbermann’s “Countdown” show.


You will recall that NPR fired Juan Williams for merely stating an honest opinion about his feelings towards Muslims when getting on a plane.  NPR’s problem with Williams was apparently not what he said, but where he said it—on a Fox News broadcast of the O’Reilly Factor.

Olbermann’s transgression appears much more severe.  NBC's policy on political contributions is clear.  You don’t do it unless you get clearance from the top.  Olbermann apparently didn’t.

Should he keep his job?

UPDATE: Indefinitely Suspended

Finally: Decent news on the unemployment front

Before departing on an expensive, 12-day trip to Asia, El Presidente trumpeted today’s release of the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Employment Situation Summary.  He noted the 159,000 increase in private sector payrolls, but skipped over the fact that the unemployment rate is stuck at 9.6%, basically where it’s been since spring:


Nonfarm payroll employment increased by 151,000 in October, and theunemployment rate was unchanged at 9.6 percent, the U.S. Bureau ofLabor Statistics reported today. Since December 2009, nonfarm payrollemployment has risen by 874,000.

Household Survey Data

The number of unemployed persons, at 14.8 million, was little changedin October. The unemployment rate remained at 9.6 percent and hasbeen essentially unchanged since May. (See table A-1.)

Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rate for adult men(9.7 percent), adult women (8.1 percent), teenagers (27.1 percent),whites (8.8 percent), blacks (15.7 percent), and Hispanics (12.6 per-cent) showed little change in October. The jobless rate for Asians was 7.1 percent, not seasonally adjusted.

The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks andover) was about unchanged over the month at 6.2 million. In October,41.8 percent of unemployed persons had been jobless for 27 weeks ormore. (See table A-12.)

Both the civilian labor force participation rate, at 64.5 percent, andthe employment-population ratio, at 58.3 percent, edged down over themonth.


Population growth adds about 100,000 working age adults to the labor force each month.  However, continued advancement in technology and worker productivity means that the economy needs to add 125,000 new jobs to maintain pace with population, given the same level of output. In other words, month-to-month, it takes 125,000 new jobs to reduce unemployment, even though only 100,000 new job seekers enter the marketplace due to advancing technology, shifts in productivity and emigration of some jobs.

October is only the second month in 2010 that non-farm payrolls exceeded that number, and the margin of 34,000 is not much.  It would take the better part of a decade to work down the existing “labor inventory” of jobs lost since Obama and the 111th Congress took office. So, while today’s release was good news, the overall performance of Democrats on the economy, as told by the unemployment picture—is dismal.

Heartache on the Plains: Auburn’s Cam Newton embroiled in recruiting scandal?

image Here’s what’s known, so far. 
Last night, ESPN and the New York Times broke stories alleging that a former Mississippi State football player, Kenny Rogers, approached the program through another former player, John Bond, and claimed to be “representing” then Junior College transfer prospect Cameron Newton.  According to reports the man approached Bond and informed him that Newton was interested in playing for the Bulldogs, but Rogers told him that “it would take some cash to get Cam.”  Mississippi State refused the offer.
Newton later signed with Auburn.
According to stories posted this morning at al.com, Auburn University officials said that they knew of the issue last summer and that the Southeastern Conference had also been made aware of credible, specific allegations of recruiting improprieties surrounding Newton.
What’s also known is that Newton’s father, Cecil Newton, is a pastor at a church in Newnan, Georgia called the Holy Zion Center for Deliverance.  From June 2009 until Spring 2010, a time frame which includes the high profile recruitment of Cecil’s son, the church was under intense pressure from local building code enforcement officials to either renovate or demolish the church’s facility at 115 Temple Ave.  Stories describing the timeline of events regarding the church’s status are found here, here and here. 
To summarize the Times-Herald stories:  In summer 2009, the Holy Zion Center was under order to either show cause why it should not be demolished due to safety issues.  The church’s leadership sought and received an extension in early fall 2009.  In May 2010, the city was prepared to issue stop work orders on construction progress to that date.  But by the end of last month, all work had been completed and the church had been brought up to code.
Given the fact that this is the SEC, and that this is about football, and that Auburn is no stranger to NCAA improprieties (still the SEC’s most penalized program for major infractions), the timing of events regarding Newton’s recruiting and the church’s difficulties in saving its property from the bulldozer suggests something went down.  It’s important to note however that Auburn has not received any Letter of Inquiry from the NCAA. 
Kevin Scarbinsky’s column at al.com makes an argument that a super-sensitive compliance department at Auburn would have fallen on swords to prevent Newton from playing if there were any credible information about his eligibility:

OK. You're the Auburn compliance department. You're known in your own athletic department, and not always fondly, for your hyper-aggressive and extremely cautious nature.
Knowing the allegation against Newton, knowing the SEC knew, would you sit by and watch your coaches play him in the first game if you had any doubt about his eligibility or amateur status?
It would've been an indefensible risk.
That same source close to Auburn athletics said, as of late Thursday night, that there has been no NCAA allegation against Auburn or anyone on its staff regarding Newton's recruiting.
That source also said that Auburn investigated and discovered there was no contact between anyone at the school and Rogers, who allegedly portrayed himself as Newton's rep, at any time before or after Newton signed with the Tigers.

This makes sense—if you had any question at all about whether Newton’s recruitment was clean, why would you take the risk of playing him?  Why, until you had a letter or some other written statement from the NCAA or SEC that the matter does not affect his eligibility, would you risk becoming the SEC’s version of the USC – Reggie Bush fiasco?
Pete Fiutak, writing for Scout.com’s College Football News offers this:

Auburn, your reputation and your credibility could be on the line here. On the mere suspicion of impropriety, you have to make sure that there's nothing to this. Yes, your prize JUCO transfer, who left Florida after getting arrested on three felony counts relating to a stolen laptop computer, probably shouldn't wear an Auburn uniform until more of the story is uncovered, but that's not going to happen. (And Florida, you had better get working on your story about how you got Newton to come to Gainesville in the first place.)
No, Gene Chizik shouldn’t be in trouble right now without any investigation, and Newton doesn’t have to be booted off the team yet, but this simply doesn't look good.
Auburn, you have to be proactive here to the nth degree. It’s up to you to tell us what, if anything, happened, because if it’s the NCAA that ends up doing more legwork and finds out that someone in your program (like a booster) paid to have Newton come in and play quarterback, you’re going to become very familiar with three letters. U.S.C.

I am a dyed-in-the-wool Alabama fan. Auburn is the Crimson Tide’s cross-state rival.  The rivalry is tense and close because it has all of the flavor of an interfamily feud. But I wouldn’t wish an NCAA investigation on the Taliban. I agree with Fiutak.  Auburn needs to turn over every rock—in the full light of day—to demonstrate that they’ve done absolutely nothing improper, and that none of its boosters or other athletic interests had anything to do with that church getting rebuilt.  The timing of the events is highly suspicious, and even the bare allegations of impropriety in light of the USC – Bush affair are enough to derail Newton’s Heisman Trophy hopes.
Newton is an exceptionally gifted player, who has his team on the inside track to the BCS Championship and College Football’s most coveted personal award.  Auburn can’t screw this up.
UPDATE: A copy and paste from the City of Newnan’s Council Agenda, June 9, 2009:

image
No one by the name “Anthony Paige” is listed as a licensed professional contractor in the State of Georgia. You will however, find a registered sports agent by that name.  Too much coincidence?

UPDATE II: Cam Newton has a brother, Cecil Newton, Jr.  Newton was eligible for the 2009 NFL Draft after playing for Tennessee State. In a Q&A from the Draft Bible:

Who is your agent/agency and what factors went into your decision?
Newton: My agent is Tony Paige with Perennial Sports and Entertainment. My father did a lot of background on potentially 10-15 other agencies that were recruiting me. Tony was a great selection because of his knowledge and experience in the industry.

Too much more coincidence?  In the al.com and ESPN.com stories, the agent alleged to have approached Mississippi State was Kenny Rogers, who works for Game Sports and Entertainment.  Anthony Paige however, is identified as working for Perennial Sports and Entertainment.  There does not appear to be a connection between the two.
Based on this new information, it’s hard not to conclude that Newton’s eligibility is in question.
UPDATE III: No one person by the name of Anthony Paige, but here’s this LinkedIn profile. 
UPDATE IV: John Bond (the man approached by Rogers) has released a statement about the matter.

Thursday, November 4, 2010

Volcker warns of inflation risk with Quantitative Easing

image When he was about to take office after the 2008 election, I was surprised that Barack Obama named Paul Volcker as one of his senior economic advisors.  Volcker was one of the many architects of the 1980’s economic revival, relentlessly pursuing a tight money policy during his term as Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board. As economists go, Volcker is a conservative inflation hawk.

After many years of loose money policies at the Fed, combined with progressive fiscal strategies from the Carter White House and Congressional Liberals, the country was literally on its economic knees. Volcker slammed on the brakes at the Fed, with the central bank regularly tightening credit to reduce the money supply and rein in inflation. That, combined with the new Reagan fiscal and tax policies, put the country on a record run of growth and prosperity.  That run, according to many, persisted right through the Bush 41/Clinton/Bush 43 years, ending only with the financial collapse of 2007-2008.

So, when a man like Volcker warns that Ben Bernanke’s second round of quantitative easing (flooding the banking system with liquidity) could have inflationary consequences down the road, everybody should take heed.

I don’t care who his boss is, now.  When Paul Volcker speaks, the world needs to listen up:


“It does worry people” that “we’re going to create so much money that down the road we’ll create inflation,” Volcker, 83, said in response to a question about the global implications of quantitative easing at an event at the National University of Singapore today. “I don’t think that’s beyond the capacity of the central bank to deal with in the future. But they’re going to have to deal with it.”

…

“It doesn’t alarm me that they’re thinking about buying Treasuries,” he said, referring to quantitative easing. “It’s the volume which they choose to do and we don’t know what that is,” he said, adding that “if money is too easy for too long, we’ll have more” asset bubbles.

As Fed chairman from 1979 to 1987, Volcker raised interest rates to as high as 20 percent to tame inflation, triggering a recession. “Dealing with inflation and inflation potentials is always a challenge,” he said. “It’s manageable but not easy.”

…

[New financial regulations] include limits to investments by commercial banks in private equity or hedge funds, known as the “Volcker Rule” because of Volcker’s advocacy for the change. Under a measure that may not take full effect for as long as a dozen years, banks can invest in private-equity and hedge funds, though they will be limited to providing no more than 3 percent of the fund’s capital. Banks also can’t invest more than 3 percent of their Tier 1 capital.


Quantitative easing, or QE, is a massive infusion of cash from the central bank.  The Fed buys billions in outstanding Treasury securities from member banks, in the hopes that the member banks will ease credit, begin lending more and stimulate the economy through capital investment.

The problem is, the return on capital is so low right now that banks and captains of industry are more likely to seek a less risky, albeit smaller rate of return by parking the new cash in short term, safe cash accounts and short CD’s.  Until capital demand rises enough to make the return on capital worth the risk of investment, little expansion occurs and there’s no new employment.  The cash sits on the sidelines in an economic phenomenon known as a “liquidity trap.”

The risk is that the return on capital does begin to move, and then begins to move rapidly, as all of that liquidity suddenly comes off the sidelines and starts chasing a limited supply of capital goods and the goods and services produced by the economy.  As more cash chases relatively fewer products, prices rise in a ruinous inflationary cycle, similar to what was seen in the late 1970’s. It’s a real, but longer term threat that won’t likely be fully felt until late 2011 or 2012.

The Fed would have to combat that in much the same way Volcker did in the early 80’s, and the consequences would be exquisitely more painful now than they were then.  In the 1980’s, if the US economy sneezed the world caught cold.  Today, if the US economy sneezes, China and the rest of the world’s emerging economies would die of pneumonia.

Oh My: Obama trails Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney in 2012 hypothetical

image In a new CNN/Opinion Research poll released this morning, President Barack Obama trails the two putative leaders for the GOP 2012 presidential nomination. He trails former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee by 52-44 and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney by 50-45.  Those are troubling numbers so soon into the still fluid 2012 race, because both of the two top GOP hopefuls are already hitting 50% figures.  Against Sarah Palin however, Obama would win 52-44.

You have to dig a little into the CNN.com article to find the numbers, as the piece initially sounds as if Obama’s sitting well for 2012, then starts off the matchup discussions with the numbers versus Palin.


In a possible general election showdown, Obama leads Palin 52-44 percent among all registered voters.

…

"Looking ahead to 2012, it may be too early to count Barack Obama out, particularly if Sarah Palin is his opponent," said CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. "The former Alaska governor gets a lot of attention, but she is in third place when Republicans are asked to pick a presidential nominee, and in a hypothetical matchup with Obama she is arguably the weakest candidate of the top-tier GOP hopefuls."

In a hypothetical 2012 matchup, Huckabee leads Obama 52-44 percent, while Romney has a 50-45 point advantage, which is within the poll's sampling error. Obama holds a 49-47 percent margin over Gingrich.


The poll, conducted prior to Tuesday’s midterm elections, may have some sampling bias issues.  Of the registered voters sampled, 500 identified themselves as Republican or leaning Republican and 453 as Democrats or leaning Democrat.  That’s probably oversampling Republicans a bit, so the gaudy numbers of Obama vs Huckabee and Obama vs Romney are probably a little too rosy for the GOP. But by the same token, if they are oversampling the GOP, it shows just how steep the hill is for Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich.

And given the sour mood of the electorate just before the election, these results may simply reflect an attitude of “Anybody BUT Barack Obama, EXCEPT Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich.”

We’ll see.  The fluidity of the 2012 candidate pool will start to solidify right after Christmas.

Beaten, unbowed: Nancy Pelosi says Dems lost because they didn’t do enough

image The capacity of the Democrat leadership to persist in their state of utter denial either represents psychosis, or an incredible ability to look straight at the American people and lie through their teeth.  Never was that made more apparent than Nancy Pelosi’s interview with Diane Sawyer yesterday afternoon.

Does she really believe that Tuesday’s historic election sweep was not a strong, clear message for Washington to stop and change course?  Or is she just psychotic?

Both?

Via the Daily Caller:


“Let’s understand the message,” Pelosi told ABC’s Diane Sawyer. “The message was not, ‘I reject the course that you are on.’ The message is it didn’t go fast enough to produce jobs.”

…

“I believe that Barack Obama will serve eight years as President of the United States,” Pelosi said, citing the “investments that he’s made.”

“Some of them are longer term, because he thinks in a statesman-like way, and that’s why they didn’t get the full impact now.”

…

But again, no regrets about the health care for all Americans, consumer protections of an historic nature, Wall Street reform, the list goes on,” Pelosi said.

“As to the agenda that we’ve put forth, progress wasn’t fast enough. And that’s really what the challenge is,” she said.

“No regrets. Because we believe we did the right thing,” Pelosi said. “I feel very at peace with how things have proceeded.”

She also blamed money from outside conservative groups for tipping the scales toward a GOP House takeover.


Shorter Democrat party line: “It’s never our fault when we lose elections.  We were doing everything right. It’s just that those mean old Republicans didn’t let us do enough, they distorted our message and brought in all those evil, nasty corporations and foreign money to pay for negative advertising.”

Pelosi’s comments were little different from the President’s, or of Harry Reid. “Um, no. The peasants didn’t really reject our policies or our agenda. They dislike that it wasn’t enough. No, we’re not gonna change a thing.”

Don’t let the arrogance of these statements escape you. Elitists like Obama, Reid and Pelosi are convinced—perhaps psychotically—that you don’t know what’s good for you and that it’s their duty to shove what’s good for you right down your throat.  Yesterday really wasn’t a civil revolt.  To Pelosi and her ilk, this was just a petulant child escaping the clutches of abusive parents and running for it.  To them, as soon as they can get their claws back on the little peasants, they’ll go right back to serving up dishes of tyranny in lethal quantities.  And smile the whole time.

For the incoming majority in the House of Representatives, and for the incoming majorities in most of the statehouses in the country, this is no time for compromise with these people. In fact, there is no room for compromise with these people, because there is no common ground between liberty and tyranny.

Wednesday, November 3, 2010

Hundreds of seats: GOP sweeps statehouses, too

image Winning at least six seats in the Senate and sending a host of bona fide conservatives to the upper chamber was big. Winning an outright majority and at least 60 seats in the US House of Representatives was a bomb. But maybe the best impact in last night’s forty trillion megaton Republican victory will keep radiating for at least the next ten years.

The GOP’s power reached way down the ballot, sweeping Democrats out of state legislatures across the country. In some states, like Alabama, Republicans took control of both houses of the legislature and won the Governor’s Mansion.  And the Attorney General’s office. AND every seat up for election on the State Supreme Court.  Why are such down-ballot victories so important? This Foxnews.com story tells us why:


The GOP picked up at least 19 chambers and hundreds of seats, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures -- though the tally is not final and Republican recruitment arm GOPAC pegs the party's chamber pickups at about 23. In several states, Republicans took control of both chambers and the governor's seat.

Though the taking of the U.S. House of Representatives overshadowed the victories for the Republican Party on the state level, the state legislatures take on outsized importance ahead of the 2012 cycle. State governments are responsible for redrawing the congressional districts in accordance with the results of the 2010 Census, and the GOP now has a much stronger voice in that process. 

"It is truly historic that we could flip that many legislative chambers in one off-year election," GOPAC Chairman Frank Donatelli told FoxNews.com. "It's broad, it's deep and it's across the entire country."

…

The state-level GOP wave could help their congressional counterparts build a bigger majority in the next cycle. Donatelli noted that it also gives Republicans an immediate chance to push their agenda while the U.S. Congress potentially falls prey to political deadlock.

"We can now begin the reform process in a lot of these states right now. We don't have to wait for 2012 to happen," he said.


For generations, Democrats have used statehouse majorities to carve Congressional District boundaries in ways that protect their incumbency, such as the Texas 18th, the North Carolina 12th, the California 38th and dozens of others. With so many states having new Republican majorities in the legislatures, a lot of those boundaries can be redrawn to blunt the Democrats’ built in advantage and make it easier to consolidate the House majority. With the 2012 Senate election shaping up to be difficult battleground for Democrats, the GOP could have solid majorities in both houses.

That’s why the 2010 election has to be viewed as nothing more than a very important first step.  Tuesday was a big victory, but it’s part of a long process that the left—and the media it uses to maintain its relevance—will battle every step of the way.

Diane Sawyer to interview Nancy Pelosi

h/t JammieWearingFool:

I'm almost tempted to watch what's sure to be a sobfest as hard-hitting journalist Diane Sawyer helps poor Nancy come to grips with the harsh reality she may soon have to fly coach.
Outgoing Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) will sit for an interview Wednesday with ABC News as House Democrats wait for a decision on her future in Congress.
The decimated Democratic caucus is “in a holding pattern,” one Democratic aide said Wednesday, hours after the party suffered a landslide loss of their House majority.
Unlike Republicans, who are now jockeying for leadership posts in the 112th Congress, House Democrats are keeping their powder dry until they get a signal from Pelosi, who has given no indication of whether she intends to remain in the party leadership or stay in Congress at all.

A pity party, courtesy of Diane Sawyer.
What’s the next stop—The View? 

Healthcare Vote costly for Democrats

Via The Hill, if there was one Golden Thread woven through the fabric of last night’s crushing defeat in the House of Representatives, it was that Democrats who voted for the final Obamacare legislation were mowed down like weeds.


The evening started pretty well for Democrats who voted for healthcare reform, with Rep. John Yarmuth of Kentucky handily winning reelection with 54.5 percent of the vote. Yarmuth's seat was listed as "likely Democratic" in the Nov. 1 edition of The Cook Political Report, one of 77 "yes" vote seats in play Tuesday evening.

Things quickly went downhill from there.

Within hours, a dozen members had lost reelection, including four freshmen elected in the 2008 Democratic wave: Reps. Tom Perriello and Glenn Nye of Virgina and Suzanne Kosmas and Alan Grayson of Florida.

They weren't alone: Democratic Reps. Baron Hill (Ind.), Carol Shea-Porter (N.H.) and Allen Boyd (Fla.) quickly joined them. So did Pennsylvania Reps. Kathy Dahlkemper, Chris Carney and Paul Kanjorski, all of whom were main targets of the anti-abortion-rights group the Susan B. Anthony List.

Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), who voted for the bill when her vote was crucial but later voted no on reconciliation, was also defeated.

The trend is even worse when factoring in yes votes who weren't running for reelection.

Retiring Rep. Bart Gordon (Tenn.) left Democratic candidate Brett Carter to get pulverized by Republican Diane Black, 29.3 percent to 67.5.


The Hill piece doesn’t mention the Michigan 1st District, where retiring Bart Stupak had his seat snatched away by newcomer Dan Benishek. It was Stupak’s compromise on his pro life principles that led to the final vote last March, and that compromise cost the Democrats a seat that had been in their hands for many years.

If this tells Congress anything at all, it tells them that the American people don’t want Obamacare.  They want it repealed, and they were willing to turn out long-serving Democrats in order to make their voices heard.  Yes, last night was a referendum on President Obama, but it was also a referendum on his “signature” legislation.  They don’t like it, don’t want it, and they were disgusted by the way it was rammed through.

Republicans will almost certainly resubmit legislation to repeal the law when the 112th Congress is seated.  Democrats who survived last night should take heed.  The American people are watching you, and you’re just as likely to get your asses kicked as your former colleagues were last night if you don’t listen.

A Crimson Red Tide sweeps Alabama

image For the first time since Reconstruction, the Alabama Legislature will be controlled by the GOP. Combine that with a win by Republican Robert Bentley in the Gubernatorial race, a win by Republican Kay Ivey in the Lieutenant Governor’s race, Republican Luther Strange’s win in the Attorney General’s race, complete control of the Alabama Supreme Court and there is no other conclusion: Alabama is now a Crimson Red state.

Via the Mobile Press-Register:


An apparently energized electorate painted Alabama a deeper red Tuesday as Republicans hammered Democrats, winning the governor's office easily and a majority of seats in the Legislature for the first time since Reconstruction.

Dr. Robert Julian Bentley, who until June was a little-known Republican legislator and retired Tuscaloosa dermatologist, was elected Alabama's 53rd governor.

…

Republican Kay Ivey rode the anti-incumbent tide to upset Jim Folsom Jr., who was seeking a third term as lieutenant governor.

With 95 percent of the vote counted, Ivey, who is completing a second term as state treasurer, had 740,522, votes or 51.3 percent to Folsom's 702,239, votes or 48.7 percent.

…

Republican Luther Strange defeated Democrat James Anderson in the race for Alabama attorney general tonight.

"I'm honored, I'm happy with the results and I'm ready to go to work for the people of Alabama," Strange said from his campaign celebration in Homewood.

Strange, 57, of Birmingham, campaigned on a pledge to fight public corruption and restore integrity to an office held since 2004 by Republican Troy King.


Alabama Republican Senator Richard Shelby also cruised to reelection, as did AL-01 Representative Jo Bonner.  But in yet another example of the wave that swept the state last night, Montgomery’s Martha Roby swept political rival Bobby Bright out of the AL-02 race, leaving Alabama with one gerrymandered blue District, the AL-07. But with GOP control of the House, the Senate, the Governor’s Mansion, the AG’s office and the whole state Supreme Court, you can expect that District to get retooled in years to come.

Late last month, I implored you to vote a straight ticket.  It looks like many of you heeded that call and I’d love to take credit for starting the ripple that became the wave.  But I can’t pat myself on the back. In truth, the credit goes to the candidates and the Alabama Republican Party, all of whom worked tirelessly to make last night such a historic event. But I don’t doubt that the bloggers, facebookers and twitterers in this state had an impact.  You made history last night.

From the Shoals to the Wiregrass.  From Little River Canyon to the Fish River Bridge, Alabama is now painted in a cheery new shade of Crimson Red.