Thursday, February 12, 2009

Y! Alert: The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Yahoo! Alerts
My Alerts

The latest from The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Jim Wallis: The Best Thing for the Economy, the Right Thing for the Poor Top
The economy and the nation are at a crossroads. Unemployment, poverty, and hardship are on the rise. For many years, official Washington has said, "It is not the time to deal with poverty," whether in good or bad economic times. The stars have now aligned in the midst of this economic crisis, and it is precisely the time to address the urgent issues of poverty in America. First, economists across the political spectrum agree that the economy desperately needs to be stimulated by federal investment in things that will generate immediate economic activity and jobs. Second, the same analysts also agree that benefits to low-income families will result in immediate economic stimulation as people in distress will spend the money they receive because they have no other choice. In other words, directly helping vulnerable people works because it will quickly help stimulate the economy, and it's right because it will immediately help poor and vulnerable people. How often do we get to do what works and what's right at the same time? At the heart of our religious traditions is the command to help the vulnerable and to have a bias for the poorest among us. The compromise the economic stimulus package agreed to in Congress yesterday takes some important steps in directly assisting poor and low-income people and stimulating the economy at the same time. Helping those who have fallen on hard times -- and helping states avert cuts in a range of critical services -- will do more to help the economy and create jobs than poorly targeted tax cuts. The package includes some significant funding increases for food stamps, increasing and extending unemployment benefits, health insurance for unemployed workers, Medicaid, Head Start, the Child Care Development Block Grant, and fiscal relief for states to assist them in meeting their budget deficits without cutting needed social services. It expands the Earned Income Tax Credit, including marriage penalty relief, and considerably expands the Child Tax Credit. While not all of these were funded at the levels we might have hoped for, taken together they do represent significant assistance to those in need. The economic forecasts are bleak and if unemployment reaches 9 percent, as many predict, the increases in poverty could be stunning. These provisions in the stimulus package all push against the rising tide of poverty and hardship. Economists have also concluded that they are among the most effective mechanisms for shoring up the flagging economy. The final stimulus package takes an important step toward doing the best thing for the economy and the right thing for the poor. Jim Wallis is the author of The Great Awakening , Editor-in-Chief of Sojourners and blogs at www.godspolitics.com . Click here to get e-mail updates from Jim Wallis More on Stimulus Package
 
Bradley Burston: Israel Election Guide: Can Netanyahu be stopped? Top
This post originally appeared on haaretz.com . Can Benjamin Netanyahu's cruise to the premiership be scuttled? Can Avigdor Lieberman's juggernaut be run off the road at the last moment? The answer, if current polling trends hold, is yes - but from the standpoint of coalition realities, it appears that only one of them can be blocked in his drive for power, not both. For months, Netanyahu has been treated as a shoe-in. For weeks, meanwhile, commentators have agreed that Lieberman is the story of this election campaign. But in a nation where tabloids have to compete with day-to-day life for sensationalism and drama, stories alone do not translate to votes, and no one knows better than Netanyahu - who overcame a 20 percentage point deficit in 1996 to defeat Shimon Peres for the premiership, that there is no such thing as a sure thing. As the order of the tables below suggests, it remains true that when a new government is sworn in about a month from now, Netanyahu will likely be the prime minister and Lieberman his key coalition partner. But the variables in the coalition-forming process are as numerous as the record number of parties, 33, on the ballot this time around. One striking example, as investigative reporter Mordechai Gilat noted in the Israel Hayom daily last week, is a growing uncertainty over a long-simmering police investigation into Lieberman's activities. Arguing politically motivated police harassment, Lieberman has turned the criminal probe to electoral advantage. Lieberman loyalists maintain that if Netanyahu is serious about stability as a major criterion for coalition building, he will have little option but to welcome a seat-rich Yisrael Beiteinu into the government. But if Gilat is correct, the case against Lieberman could give Netanyahu, or any potential coalition leader, second thoughts. "If, nonetheless, Netanyahu and Livni insist upon shooting themselves in the foot and attaching Lieberman to the government, they will be forced to bid him farewell within five to seven months," Gilat wrote. "Lieberman is apparently cornered; the noose is already around his neck. Some depositions abroad have already been completed, and two will soon take place in two nations overseas." Other scenarios envision the possibility that Lieberman could be a partner to a Netanyahu-free government. [See Dark Horse, below] The real story of this election may well prove to be the undecided vote, which has been conservatively estimated at a whopping 20 percent of the electorate, representing no fewer than 24 seats in the 120-seat Knesset. This, at a time when polls show that no individual party, even Netanyahu's survey-leading Likud, may win more than 25 or 26 seats. The enormous potential of the undecided vote - along with the opacity of the candidates' declarations - has thus given new meaning to the term "secret ballot." No one knows how many voters will show up, switch sides in the polling booth, or stay home. The bottom line: If Kadima and Labor gain even a modicum of strength as the finish line nears, and the Likud weakens, the effect on the futures of Netanyahu and Lieberman could be telling. COALITION CALCULATOR: [Numbers expressed are in Knesset seats expected to be won by parties, as predicted in a weighted average of six polls released at the end of the week. Number of Knesset seats needed for majority is 61. Not included was a Livni-led center-left coalition, which could expect only 45-59 seats.] NETANYAHU-LED RIGHT-CENTER COALITION LIKUD / NETANYAHU 26 YISRAEL BEITEINU / LIEBERMAN 19 LABOR / BARAK 15 NATIONAL UNION + JEWISH HOME 6 _______ TOTAL: 66 WITH SHAS: 76 NETANYAHU-LED LIBERMAN-FREE COALITION LIKUD / NETANYAHU 26 KADIMA / LIVNI 24 LABOR / BARAK 15 TOTAL: 65 WITH SHAS: 75 DARK HORSE: LIVNI-LED COALITION [IF KADIMA EDGES LIKUD] KADIMA / LIVNI 25 YISRAEL BEITEINU / LIEBERMAN 19 LABOR / BARAK 15 SHAS 10 TOTAL: 69 More on Israel
 
Daniel Abrahamson: Fixing California's Broken Prison System Top
Oh, to have November again! Just a few short months ago, California had the opportunity to usher in prison overcrowding solutions and recidivism-reduction programs that would have reduced prison spending by at least $2.5 billion. That proposal failed on the ballot, thanks to the pro-prison lobby and the nearly $3.5 million that prison guards and their allies spent on misleading TV spots. Now it's February, the prison population remains perilously high, and the state faces a likely population cap. According to a tentative ruling issued on Monday, the federal three judge panel overseeing California's unconstitutionally inadequate prisons has found overcrowding to be the primary underlying problem and that the state must address it. California has got to get it together. Legislative inaction led to this crisis - and it's the duty of the Legislature to pave the way out. Even the federal panel has said it wants the state to identify the best way out of this overcrowding mess. It's time California revisited the expert-recommended proposals that would have become law under the Nonviolent Offender Rehabilitation Act (Proposition 5). First, divert more nonviolent drug offenders to treatment instead of incarceration - both from court and from parole - and stabilize funding. California has extensive experience with diversion under Proposition 36, a highly successful program passed by 61 percent of voters in 2000. In just seven years, Prop. 36 has graduated 84,000 people, saved taxpayers nearly $2 billion and, according to independent UCLA evaluations, reduced recidivism. Second, emphasize recidivism-reduction programming and encourage participation through good time credits. California's prison system currently provides virtually no meaningful rehabilitation or treatment services behind bars. The Inspector General found that the little drug treatment provided behind bars is so poorly administered that it may do more harm than good; he called it a "billion dollar boondoggle." Prop. 5 would have improved recidivism-reduction programs and increased good time credit opportunities. Third, reduce the number of offenders under long-term parole supervision and stop sending technical violators back to prison (particularly where it comes to drug-addicted parolees). Almost all of the over 10,000 offenders released from prison in California each month are placed on parole for three years. During that time, 70 percent are returned to prison - twice as many as the national average. Prop. 5 would have required local sanctions for some nonviolent parolees and allowed well-behaved nonviolent parolees to earn their way off of parole supervision. These recommendations didn't stop being good ones in November. They continue to appear in every serious proposal to reform California's broken prison system, including the governor's. His proposal, which was approved by the Legislature in January as AB 8 , would have made significant changes to sentencing, good time credits and the parole system. Though AB 8 was vetoed as part of a larger budget package last month, the proposal should be a part of any 2009-10 budget approved by the Legislature and signed by the governor. California must not wait any longer. There's no mystery about what solving the prison crisis will take. All that's lacking is the political will. Daniel Abrahamson is the director of Legal Affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance, and a proponent of California's Proposition 5 (Nonviolent Offender Rehabilitation Act).
 
Jimmy Fallon's Awkward Lonely Island Interview (VIDEO) Top
The Lonely Island guys stopped by Jimmy Fallon's place to promote their new album, "Incredibad," but ended up promoting the NBC "bing-bing-bong" by playing it over and over again. One member of Lonely Island (the guys behind SNL's digital shorts) walked out as soon as the interview started. Andy Samberg told Fallon that NBC had given him a "kind of shitty gift." WATCH: More on Funny Videos
 
The Progress Report: A Necessary Recovery Compromise Top
by Faiz Shakir, Amanda Terkel, Satyam Khanna, Matt Corley, Benjamin Armbruster, Ali Frick, and Ryan Powers To receive The Progress Report in your email inbox everyday, click here . On Jan. 29, the House passed a $819 stimulus plan without a single Republican vote. On Tuesday, after a group of senators brokered a compromise to get three Republicans on board, the Senate passed its own version that would cost $838 billion. However, the compromise slashed important provisions from the House version -- including the elimination of $16 billion in funds for new school construction -- while adding tax credits that skewed toward the wealthy. A Center for American Progress analysis found that it would have created 9 to 12 percent fewer jobs than the House plan, even while costing $16 billion more. After two days of intense negotiations, the House and Senate ironed out differences in the bill to approve a $789 billion package. Announcing the deal yesterday, Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) bragged that the new version "creates more jobs than the original Senate bill and spends less than the original House bill." After all the wrangling, "the bill followed remarkably closely to the broad outline that Obama had painted more than a month ago." As the New York Times noted, the bill is "the most expansive unleashing of the government's fiscal firepower in the face of a recession since World War II." NOT PERFECT, BUT NECESSARY: Speaking on Feb. 4, President Obama urged lawmakers to pass a swift recovery package despite conservatives' complaints about certain provisions of the bill. "Let's not make the perfect the enemy of the essential," Obama said. "A failure to act and to act now will turn crisis into catastrophe and guarantee a longer recession." Indeed, Obama admitted this week that, despite all the work on the bill, "the plan is not perfect. No plan is." What is clear, however, is that a bill -- even an imperfect one -- is desperately needed, and fast. January saw the largest monthly job loss -- nearly 600,000 -- in over three decades, and 3.6 million jobs have been lost since the beginning of the recession. More jobs are being shed at a far quicker pace than during the last two recessions, closely matching the deep recession of the early 1970s. "This is the most dangerous economic crisis since the Great Depression, and it could all too easily turn into a prolonged slump," Nobel-prize-winning economist Paul Krugman warned last month. Writing this week, he emphasized, "The American economy is on the edge of catastrophe." IMPROVEMENTS OVER SENATE VERSION: The compromise improves many aspects of the version passed in the Senate, particularly bye expanding of "federal aid to an array of programs aimed at the poor and jobless, with billions of dollars for health care, unemployment insurance, food stamps and other programs." The bill extends federal unemployment benefits to 20 weeks, "with an additional 13 weeks for jobless in states with particularly high unemployment," and raises weekly payments by $25. After food stamp funding that passed the House was slashed in the Senate version, the compromise grants $20 billion in food stamp benefits. Nearly $46 billion will fund education and modernize schools, "considerably higher than the Senate's $39 billion total but far less than the House's $95 billion." The bill also allocates $30 billion for smart grid technology, advanced batteries, and energy efficiency measures, along with $5 billion for home weatherization and $4.5 billion to make federal buildings more energy efficient -- closer to the House version than the Senate's. The new compromise also "drastically reduced" the Senate's $15,000 tax credit for new home buyers, "placing income limits on who could benefit and reducing the overall cost from $35 billion to about $5 billion." Krugman derided the tax credit as a "bonus to affluent people who flip their houses" and concluded that it would have "cost a lot of money while doing nothing to help the economy." Even better, the compromise "all but eliminated" a big business giveaway that would have allowed money-losing companies to claim an estimated $67.5 billion in tax refunds this year and next -- a tax cut with the least stimulative impact per dollar, according to the Congressional Budget Office. PROBLEMS REMAIN: Though the bill is an improvement over the Senate version, it is too small and still includes non-stimulative tax breaks. The spending in the bill, the most stimulative component, fell from $604 billion as introduced in the House to $637 billion when later passed by the House, falling again to $545 billion in the Senate-passed version. The final compromise has only $513 billion in spending, with $276 billion in tax breaks. Some of these tax breaks, such as the credit for new home buyers, are particularly non-stimulative, the largest being the $70 billion tax break to spare millions of Americans from paying the alternative minimum tax. "Why is it in there? It has nothing to do with stimulus. It has nothing to do with recovery," said Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA). "I am not happy with it." "You are not looking at a happy camper." The compromise slashes aid to states to $44 billion, from the House's $80 billion, though it's an improvement over the $39 billion the Senate initially allocated. But with the massive budget shortfalls states are facing -- California alone faces a nearly $40 billion budget gap over the next two years -- the state aid will be unable to prevent severe cuts in state programs and will lead to cuts in jobs. Congressional Black Caucus leaders also objected to the elimination of $4.2 billion in neighborhood stabilization funding removed by the Senate and asked for funding to provide broadband Internet access to poor communities and to create more job training programs. More on Stimulus Package
 
Robert Koehler: Truth and Healing Top
Can we find ideas -- political ideas -- big enough to be worthy of this moment? You know, before the cynicism and the disappointment and the recession and the dumbed-down media and, oh yeah, the regrouping Republicans, conspire to dull Barack Obama's election into the bitter memory of hope and harass his presidency into something that resembles Clintonism and business slightly to the left of usual (if that). Right now and perhaps for the fabled "first hundred days," the sense of possibility is as palpable as it is vague. There's a yearning in the air, but for what? When I was at the post office the other day, the clerk could scarcely contain her enthusiasm for the Lincoln stamps she was showing me -- four views of Honest Abe, see. Here he is as a young man; now he's practicing law; now he's in Congress; and, finally, here's the 16th president, the Great Emancipator, deep and wise, the Lincoln we remember, in the embrace of history and myth. And we both knew, in some unstated way, that she was really showing me Obama stamps. This is what our expectations are, and they're impossible. Yes, of course. This yearning is probably too diffuse to leverage into political change. It will certainly drain off, be reabsorbed by the distractions of American life, unless we figure out how to act on it, aim it at the politicians we elected, demand that they represent us and begin shaping "hope" into collective action. The yearning, I am certain, is for spiritual breakthrough and deep national conversation about what just happened -- the Bush era -- and what we do next. All of which is a way to say, call Sen. Patrick Leahy. Doing so may be as good a place as any to start. This past Monday, the Vermont Democrat, in a speech at Georgetown University in which he decried the "dark days" that are just ending -- of torture and pre-emptive war, domestic spying, a hyper-politicized Justice Department, a screaming Constitution -- presented an idea that may be big enough to capture the spirit of the moment: "We need," said Leahy, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, "to get to the bottom of what happened -- and why -- so we make sure it never happens again. "One path to that goal would be a reconciliation process and truth commission. . . . not for purposes of constructing criminal indictments, but to assemble the facts. If needed, such a process could involve subpoena powers, and even the authority to obtain immunity from prosecutions in order to get to the whole truth. Congress has already granted immunity, over my objection, to those who facilitated warrantless wiretaps and those who conducted cruel interrogations. It would be far better to use that authority to learn the truth." Anger pauses. "Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." Something profound struggles to be born. Truth is a public commodity without which no society is free -- and how long has it been since we have been free? The secrets have been piling up for decades . . . for the entirety of my lifetime. George Bush simply accelerated the process. Leahy, by using the term "Truth Commission," has defined the seriousness of the crimes committed over the past eight years and linked his proposal to an international movement to examine out-of-control governmental power: to drag this behavior out of the shadows, to see it in full detail, not for the sake of punishing the perps, which, if that is the end, sets powerful counterforces into motion, but simply because change -- a moral upgrade of humanity -- is possible only if we know the truth. In his Georgetown speech, Leahy referred to two past truth commissions as models: South Africa's post-apartheid Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and the little known Truth Commission convened in Greensboro, N.C., in 2005, 16 years after Klansmen and neo-Nazis killed five people at an anti-Klan rally in that city (and all-white juries acquitted the six people arrested). Many other such commissions, on scales both large and small, have been convened over the years. Amnesty International makes note of 32 of them, in 28 countries -- including El Salvador, Guatemala, Chile, Uganda and East Timor -- between 1974 and 2007. Amnesty is also one of a number of groups that have called, since Obama's election, for the establishment of a Truth Commission in the United States. Veterans for Peace is another; it passed such a resolution at its 2008 national convention. And Leahy's House counterpart, John Conyers, has introduced legislation to establish a panel to probe the same dark terrain of Bush administration "unreviewable war powers." Will the public support a Truth Commission -- not a whitewash panel but a commission with teeth, including the power to issue subpoenas and grant immunity in exchange for full, honest testimony? Before Leahy can push on it, he needs to know where we stand. Please tell him. Call his office at (202) 224-4242 (or e-mail: senator_leahy@leahy.senate.gov). Hope will die unless we set it in motion. - - - Robert Koehler, an award-winning, Chicago-based journalist, is an editor at Tribune Media Services and nationally syndicated writer. You can respond to this column at bkoehler@tribune.com or visit his Web site at commonwonders.com. © 2009 TRIBUNE MEDIA SERVICES, INC.
 
Jerry Weissman: Person-to Person at the Commonwealth Club Top
On Tuesday, at the kind invitation of Jim Koch, Professor of Management at the Leavey School of Business and Administration at Santa Clara University, I spoke at the Commonwealth Club in Silicon Valley. My presentation was about my newest publication, The Power Presenter . As support of one of the key techniques in the book, treating presentations as a series of person-to-person conversations, I showed a video clip of Libby Dole at the 1996 Republican National Convention. Mrs. Dole, in an endorsement of her husband, Senator Bob Dole, departed from the usual dais speech from on high and descended to the floor of the convention. There, she proceeded make a series of one-to-one engagements with people who had been involved in projects with her husband. After my presentation, Bill Peacock, a member of the Commonwealth Club's Silicon Valley Board of Advisors, and the man who had graciously introduced me, concluded the evening with a short story - about Libby Dole. She had been a fellow classmate of Bill's at Harvard Law School where they were involved in a special project to present a legal brief to a group of sitting judges; one of whom was a member of the U.S. Supreme Court. Because of the amount of research and the density of each brief, the law students were provided a lectern to hold their detailed information, and from which to address the panel of judges. Each member of the class delivered the brief from behind the podium - except for Libby Dole, at the time, under her maiden name, Elizabeth Hopkins. She started from behind the podium for just a few moments, and then walked out to engage directly with each judge, in a series of person-to-person conversations. So effective was her presentation, she was declared the winner. Libby Dole learned the power of person-to-person conversations at an early age, and carried that insight throughout her career. It worked for her, it can work any presenter. It can work for you .
 
Harut Sassounian: "Obameter" Keeps Track of President's Campaign Promises Top
All those interested in finding out whether Pres. Barack Obama is keeping the hundreds of promises he made during the presidential campaign now have a simple tool to keep track of them. A group of journalists, headed by Bill Adair, Washington Bureau Chief of the St. Petersburg Times of Florida, have set up a website -- www.politifact.com -- that tracks down the promises made by various politicians during their campaigns. Politifact.com has received widespread media attention from scores of newspapers and various TV networks, including CNN. Such public scrutiny makes it more difficult for politicians to evade their pledges to the voters. The website promises to "provide an up-to-the-minute report card" on how Pres. Obama is faring with his agenda of change. Visitors to the website can find out the status of his campaign promises by checking the "Obameter" which is divided into three categories: No Action, In the Works, or Stalled. After action is taken by the President on a particular issue, it is rated as either Promise Kept or Compromise or Promise Broken. The website's scorecard indicates that in his first three weeks in office, Pres. Obama has already kept 7 promises, compromised on 1, broke 1, stalled on 1, 18 are in the works, and no action is yet taken on the remaining 482. Two weeks ago, when I first checked the website's "Obameter," it had a list of 510 Obama promises, everything from "requiring large employers to contribute to a national health plan" to "directing military leaders to end war in Iraq." But there was no trace of Pres. Obama's campaign promise to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide. I immediately sent an e-mail to the administrator of Politifact.com, alerting him that Pres. Obama's pledge on the Armenian Genocide was missing from the website. Staff writer Angie Holan quickly responded, acknowledging that this particular promise was not in their database. She thanked me for bringing this matter to her attention and promised to add it to the website as soon as possible. To expedite matters, I provided to Ms. Holan the text of various statements made by Senator Obama on the Armenian Genocide during his presidential campaign. A few days later, I received an e-mail from Ms. Holan, informing me that Pres. Obama's promise on the Armenian Genocide was added to the Politifact.com website, under this link . By clicking on the above link, one can find Pres. Obama's promise number 511 on the Armenian Genocide which the website describes as follows: "Barack Obama Campaign Promise No. 511: Recognize the Armenian genocide "'Two years ago, I criticized the Secretary of State for the firing of U.S. Ambassador to Armenia, John Evans, after he properly used the term 'genocide' to describe Turkey's slaughter of thousands of Armenians starting in 1915... As President I will recognize the Armenian Genocide.' Source: "Barack Obama on the Importance of US-Armenia Relations" We add promise on the Armenian genocide Updated: Wednesday, January 28th, 2009 | By Angie Drobnic Holan When we started looking for President Obama's campaign promises, we knew we might not find all of them, and we hoped our readers would alert us to promises we had missed. Today we are adding our first promise based on reader feedback: Obama's pledge to recognize the Armenian genocide. The issue has been a hot-button issue on the world stage because the government of Turkey has objected to the use of the term 'genocide' as inaccurate and inflammatory. A 2007 resolution in the U.S. House of Representatives said the Armenian genocide was carried out by the Ottoman Empire between 1915 and 1923, and resulted in the deaths of 1.5 million. The resolution failed in the face of Bush administration concerns that it would alienate Turkey, which borders Iraq. So we add this promise to our database as promise No. 511. Sources: Los Angeles Times : House delays Armenian genocide vote , Oct. 26, 2007; House Resolution on the Armenian genocide, 2007; BBC News: Q&A: Armenian genocide dispute , July 10, 2008." This website is yet another reminder to Pres. Obama and his White House aides that the President has a promise to keep on the Armenian Genocide and that both the media and the public will judge his credibility by his actions rather than words.
 
Bob Giloth: Unrealistic Criticism of President Obama in Wednesay's WaPo Top
"The first however-many days of Barack Obama's presidency have been a study of amateurism." Kathleen Parker , " So Far, Amateur Hour ," The Washington Post, February 11, 2009. Dismissive words like featherduster, lightweight, dilettante and many others haunted FDR before and after being elected. I always thought amateur had a wonderfully populist and democratic connotation. Weren't Darwin and Lincoln amateurs? The evidence: Obama not controlling a stimulus bill that passed in record time and letting Congress do its job; admitting mistakes and taking ultimate responsibility for poor vetting of appointments (and I still don't quite understand all the swooning over Daschle); the press conference in which he answered rather than dismissed questions; reading to kids; and taking the debate out of DC to where the pain is in our cities and communities. Not bad for three weeks. And then he says judge me by whether I'm successful. Very amateur. "Absent is maturity -- that grown-up quality of leadership that is palpable when the real deal enters the room. There's a reason why elders are respected.." You mean like "Sully?" Certainly not the bank or auto CEOs. The mad spoutings of Lindsey Graham and Rush Limbaugh? Let's not do a McCain rerun. Of course Obama will make some mistakes, live the life of trial and error. That challenge doesn't cease even when your an elder. What Republican elected official or conservative columnist has stood up (of whatever age) and admitted the huge policy failures of the last 8 years and the depth of today's economic crisis? Where's the maturity, the real deal? Originally posted at BobGiloth.com More on Stimulus Package
 
Brenda Scott Royce: Ape Advocate Cries Foul Over Super Bowl Simians Top
What do chimpanzees and motor oil have in common? If you said nothing, you probably missed Super Bowl 43, when these otherwise incongruent entities shared the screen in a 30-second commercial for Castrol Edge. In the spot (titled "Grease Monkeys" despite the fact that its simian stars are not monkeys but apes ), a slacker lounges in his garage as chimpanzee "mechanics" work on his car. Crowned with an oil filter, the man tells his neighbor that the chimps have made him their king. The half-minute commercial may have generated a few laughs, and somehow even spiked motor oil sales, but the price paid by the animal actors isn't worth it, according to Patti Ragan, founder of the Center for Great Apes in Wauchula, Florida. Ragan's facility is home to 42 chimpanzees and orangutans, many of whom are retired from show business. Some starred in previous Super Bowl commercials, including popular spots for E-Trade and CareerBuilder.com. It's because she is caring for these former Super Bowl stars that Ragan was troubled by the new Castrol spot. "Having animals that have appeared in Super Bowl commercials before, and knowing what the issues are, it made me very sad to see those chimps, and to see that we haven't moved beyond that," Ragan said in a phone interview. "People don't think about what happens to these animals after they appear in these commercials. They don't know that we're sacrificing an endangered animal's future to make money for a company selling a product." The use of apes in entertainment is nothing new (just ask Bonzo ), but thanks to recent campaigns by Jane Goodall and other primatologists, we now know the problems inherent in the practice. On her website , Goodall points out that performing primates are separated from their mothers as infants and discarded by the time they reach puberty. Since chimpanzees live 50 to 60 years in captivity, that means these hirsute has-beens will require decades of costly care after the end of their short show-biz careers. The lucky ones -- like Jason Alexander's orangutan sidekick from Dunston Checks In -- end up at places like the Center for Great Apes. The Castrol chimps may not be so fortunate. "I'm beyond capacity," Ragan says, noting she has more than a dozen apes on her waiting list but lacks the resources to take them in. It costs approximately $15,000 a year to care for one ape, and like most non-profits, the Center is feeling the pinch of the current economic crisis. While everyone involved with a commercial -- from the network and ad agency to the actors, caterers, and animal trainers -- makes money, nothing is put aside for the animals' future. No residual checks are wending their way to Wauchula for the former stars of the CareerBuilder ads, even though their likenesses are still being used on the company's website. "CareerBuilder has stopped using chimpanzees in their commercials, which is wonderful, however they still have their Monk-E Mail campaign on their website," Ragan says. "They have our chimpanzee Bella, in a pink dress and pearls, and Ellie, a female that was seven-years-old, whom they put makeup on to make her look like an old male executive." (Bella is pictured above; Ellie is below left in the CareerBuilder ad, and right, at the center.) Ragan, who has urged the company to remove the chimps from its website, adds, "I would like CareerBuilder to consider the revenue they get from exploiting those chimps that we are now taking care of, and to think about where those chimps are right now." Beyond their effect on the lives of the individual apes in the ads, commercials like Castrol's may have a negative impact on conservation, according to a recent study published in Science . The study found that because chimps are so widely used in TV shows and commercials, people assume they must be thriving -- a dangerous misconception according to lead author Steve Ross, chair of the American Zoo and Aquarium Association's Chimpanzee Species Survival Plan. "This inaccurate and inappropriate portrayal of chimpanzees may negatively influence the way the public perceives this endangered species, which is in need of serious conservation efforts," Ross said. Needless to say, dressing chimps in clothing and prompting them to mimic human behavior further distorts public perception of these apes. Such depictions may tickle the funny bone, but at what cost? "For us to get a few yuks," Ragan says, "it doesn't justify jeopardizing the lives of these animals -- taking them away from their mothers, using them for a few years, and leaving them with an uncertain future." Some advertisers have chosen to get out of the ape business altogether. Honda, Subaru, and Yahoo! are among the companies that have pledged to quit using apes in their advertisements. Ragan applauds those companies and urges others to follow suit. She also calls on the advertisers, networks, and the Super Bowl itself to consider their complicity. "The people who write these commercials and sell the companies on using great apes, and the people who buy these commercials and sell the airtime, they need to think about what they're doing to impact wildlife, impact animal welfare, impact people's attitudes about conservation, and impact these individual animals' lives." More on Advertising
 
Obama's Remarks On Employee Free Choice Act Makes Labor "Very Pleased" Top
Labor officials are "VERY pleased" with statements made by President Barack Obama on the Employee Free Choice Act during a sit down interview with 15 regional papers on Wednesday. The president, as reported by the Detroit Free Press , "said he believes there is no economic risk to workers organizing and making a living wage." The Philadelphia Inquirer , meanwhile, quoted Obama as saying he didn't "buy the argument that providing workers with collective-bargaining rights somehow weakens the economy or worsens the business environment." Moreover, the paper reported that Obama "would not urge a delay in consideration of the Employee Free Choice Act." The directness of the remarks is something that caught labor officials (pleasantly) by surprise. A few weeks ago, Obama was quoted in the Washington Post, hedging a bit on the time-frame by which he would like to see EFCA considered. This is "more definite," said a labor official. "[He] wants [Congress] to take it up." "From what the White House was saying behind the scenes, we were still confident [Obama] was behind [EFCA]," the source added. "Him putting it on the record in public makes me feel a lot better." As it stands now, Senate Democrats appear likely to wait until Minnesota Democrat Al Franken is seated (if he is seated) before taking up the contentious legislation. In his Wednesday interview, Obama did add a wrinkle to the debate. Reflecting his usual predisposition again political fights, he discussed the notion of compromise between business-backed forces that view EFCA as a poison pill to the economy, and the labor community that has poured countless time and resources to the legislation's passage. "Whether those conversations can bear fruit over the next several months, we'll see," the president said. "But I'm always a big believer in before we gear up for some tooth-and-nail battle, that we see if some accommodations can't be found." Inside labor, however, there is scant talk of compromise on EFCA, primarily because the key provisions are so cut and dry -- either employees can form a union by having a majority of workers sign authorization cards, or they can't. "We don't mind [the compromise talk] because he is Obama and that is what he does," said the source, "but this isn't really something you can compromise on... You could tweak around the outsides like have more time until it's implemented. But on the core card-check part, you either do it or you can't, not much wiggle room." More on President Obama
 
Joanna Pacitti DISQUALIFIED From "American Idol" Top
LOS ANGELES — One of the contestants on "American Idol" who made the top 36 has been disqualified. "American Idol" has issued a statement saying Joanna Pacitti of Philadelphia is ineligible to continue, but without saying why. Felicia Barton of Virginia Beach, Va., has replaced Pacitti in the top 36. Pacitti could not immediately be reached for comment. More on American Idol
 
Feds Search North Side Home In Connection With Rash Of Anti-Semitic Synagogue Vandalism Top
Federal agents are executing a search warrant this morning at a North Side apartment building in connection with last month's vandalism at five synagogues and Jewish schools in Chicago and Lincolnwood, sources said. FBI agents were searching an apartment in the 6000 block of North Artesian. No arrests have been reported. A computer hard drive was taken out of the building. More on Religion
 
Henry Blodget: Why Geithner's Banking Fix Won't Work Top
Nouriel Roubini, aka Dr. Doom, offers an excellent explanation of why Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner's latest brainstorm won't fix the banking system. The bottom line is that someone has to take the losses on the $1+ trillion of depreciating assets that are still crushing bank balance sheets, and we taxpayers have woken up to the fact that we don't want it to be us. Geithner is therefore trying to find some way to stick us with the losses without our noticing, and this is easier said than done. Temporary receivership and restructuring is a much more effective way to go. (Nouriel also makes his case without mentioning the most persuasive bit of evidence: The Geithner Plan is the same as The Hank Paulson Plan, just bigger, and The Hank Paulson Plan didn't work. Hard to be surprised that Geithner's sticking with it, though, inasmuch as he was likely the one who created it). The very cumbersome U.S. Treasury proposal to dispose of toxic assets - that was presented by Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner... - can be best understood (subject to the large fog of uncertainty about its many details) as combining taking the toxic asset off the banks' balance sheet with providing government guarantees to those private investors that will purchase them (and/or public capital provision to fund a public-private bad bank that would purchase such assets). But this plan is so non-transparent and complicated that it received a thumbs down by the markets as soon as it was announced today as all major US equity indices went sharply down. The main problem with the Treasury plan - that in some ways it may resemble the deal between Merrill Lynch (ML) and Lone Star (LS) - is the following: Merrill sold its CDOs to Lone Star for 22 cents on the dollar; and even in that case ML remained on the hook in case the value of the assets were to fall below 22 as LS paid initially only 11 cents (i.e. ML guaranteed the LS downside risk). But today a bank like Citi has similar CDOs that, until recently, were still sitting on its books, at a deluded and fake value of 60 cents. So, since the government knows that no one in the private sector would buy those most toxic assets at 60 cents it may have to promise a guarantee (formally or informally by putting capital into a public-private bad bank that will receive extra lending from the private sector) to limit the downside risk to private investors from purchasing such assets. But that implicit or explicit guarantee would be hugely expensive if you need to induce private folks to buy at 60 what is worth only 20 or even 11. So the new Treasury plan may end up being again a royal rip-off of the taxpayer if the guarantee is excessive given the true value of the underlying assets. And if instead the implicit or explicit guarantee is not excessive (if the public-private bank truly tries to discover the value of such assets as in the formal Treasury proposal) the banks need to sell the toxic assets at their true underlying value that implies massive writedowns that will uncover the insolvency of such banks. I.e. the emperor has no clothes and a true valuation of the bad assets - without a huge taxpayers' bailout of the shareholders and unsecured creditors of banks - implies that banks are bankrupt and should be taken over by the government. Once you understand this, it's no mystery why it's taking Geithner so long to develop the details of this plan. Now that the country has figured out that the whole story about "temporarily depressed market prices vs. intrinsic value prices" is just a crock designed to stick taxpayers with bank losses, it's harder to do that. But someone has to take the losses. Which is why most smart economists are clamoring for temporary nationalization. See Also: Roubini: Nationalization Is The Only Way To Go Is Tim Geithner Actually Smarter Than He Looks? More on Timothy Geithner
 
Brad Friedman: Exclusive: The New Voter Fraud Complaint Filed in CT Against the GOP's Ann Coulter Top
New allegations of absentee ballot fraud in '02 and '04, follow on her multiple voter fraud crimes in FL in '05, for which she was never 'cleared', as some media have inaccurately reported... An official state investigation is now underway into multiple voter fraud charges against Rightwing author and one-time attorney Ann Coulter in Connecticut. The investigation began after a complaint was filed with the state's Elections Enforcement Commission on January 29, 2009. The BRAD BLOG has exclusively obtained a copy of that one-page complaint which is posted in full, as filed with Joan M. Andrews, Director of Legal Affairs and Enforcement for the commission, at the end of this article. The complaint was filed by Daniel Borchers, a conservative Christian critic of Coulter's following allegations in the New York Daily News in January, that she had illegally voted by absentee ballot in CT, using her parents address there, in 2002 and 2004, despite being a resident of New York City at the time. Previously allegations by Borchers against Coulter have been the subject of a number of articles over the years here at The BRAD BLOG , and he has, on occasion, even guest blogged a number of times here for us himself. Though the allegations of Coulter having committed voter fraud in CT in 2002 and 2004 would be her first known instances of casting ballots illegally, they are not the first allegations of such crimes against Coulter. In 2005, after she moved from NY to Palm Beach, FL, she knowingly falsified her Voter Registration Form (a 3rd degree felony), knowingly voted at the wrong precinct (a 1st degree misdemeanor), as well as gave a false address for her drivers license (another 3rd degree felony). Despite an inaccurate report from AP in May of 2007, subsequently picked up by other media, Coulter was never "cleared" of the voter fraud charges in FL. The BRAD BLOG has posted indisputable evidence of her FL crimes, including her actual fraudulent Voter Registration Form on which she lied when filling out her own address, official testimony from a Palm Beach pollworker (and the county's former Supervisor of Elections) detailing her knowingly having voted in the wrong precinct, as well as a report from the Palm Beach Township Chief of Police , verifying the crimes. Coulter, however, was able to escape accountability for the illegalities in FL, due to an inappropriate (and likely illegal) intervention from a former boyfriend of hers in the FBI , and gaming of the legal system, such that the crimes were eventually nullified by the statute of limitations there. The most recent complaint from Borchers follows articles by the New York Daily News and Lee Stranahan at Huffington Post last month, detailing her apparently-illegal CT absentee voting. But it would not be the first time he would play a roll in this continuing saga. In May 2007, after the Palm Beach County Sheriff declined to prosecute, and dismissed the charges, it was revealed that the reason given for the dismissal was the intervention of FBI agent, John Fitzgerald. A phone call made by Fitzgerald on Coulter's behalf, to the rookie detective looking into the local case of voter fraud, included a claim that Coulter had used the address of her real estate agent, Suzanne Frisbie, because she was being stalked by Borchers. Had she been found guilty of the charges, she might have faced a $5,000 fine, and three years behind bars for the one third-degree felony alone. As we pointed out at the time , when the Palm Beach County Sheriff had dismissed the charges, even if the allegations of Borchers being under investigation for stalking were true -- and evidence shows they are not -- it would have been incredibly inappropriate to reveal the name of someone who was the target of such an active FBI investigation. At the time, the FBI promised an internal probe into the incident. The BRAD BLOG has been unable to receive information on that investigation, and if it was ever even carried out, despite several attempts to reach the FBI on the matter. Moreover, Coulter's expressed fears of being stalked are belied, and revealed as extraordinarily disingenuous, by yet another incident involving Coulter and a BRAD BLOG guest blogger. In November of 2005 , Coulter posted the private address and family phone number of Lydia Cornell, an actress and citizen journalist who had filed a story critical of the GOP superstar on these pages. Coulter had access to Cornell's personal information, after our blogger had sent her a private email requesting comment on the story before it was published. Though Coulter didn't reply to the email prior to publication, she later posted it, in full, after the story ran here. After news of the dismissal of the case by the Palm Beach County Sheriff's office, the matter was picked up by the Florida Election Commission who took long enough looking into the issue, that they were eventually able to to dismiss it in late 2007 , on the basis that Florida's two-year Statute of Limitations had run out. While the Associated Press incorrectly reported that Coulter was "cleared" of the charges, following the intercession of the FBI's Fitzgerald, she had decidedly not been. Nonetheless, as they never issued a correction to the story, a number of media outlets have since mis-reported the AP report, as fact, while covering the more recent charges in CT. Borchers, the founder of CoulterWatch and Citizens for Principled Conservatism, told The BRAD BLOG this morning that he was "surprised" by the number of media outlets which have contacted him for interviews since the recent story of his CT complaint broke in Sunday's New York Daily News . He was quoted by the Daily News as saying "For over 10 years, Ann Coulter has gotten away with illegal, immoral and unethical behavior, ranging from plagiarism to defamation, perjury to voter fraud." In our phone call with him this morning, he once again dismissed the notion that he was under investigation for stalking Coulter, despite have been a years-long critic of hers, documenting, among other things, her frequent use of violent, eliminationist rhetoric against political foes , and positions that he alleges are hypocritical in that they are neither Christian nor Conservative. In regard to the stalker allegations against him, made via her attorney and her former boyfriend at the FBI, Borchers notes that, "even if that were true, it doesn't make sense that she'd put her realtor in jeopardy, as well as her parents in Connecticut," by using their respective addresses on official voter forms, rather than her own. Coulter's FL realtor Frisbie had said she had no idea that Coulter used her address to fill out her Voter Registration Application in Palm Beach, until after the story had broken in the media. Borchers told us that, since the story broke yesterday, he has received "dozens of emails, and only two of them were not supportive" of his efforts. Unlike in FL, there is no Statute of Limitations for voter fraud charges in CT, Borchers notes. He also added that he was told by the CT Election Enforcement officer that "anybody, anywhere", could file for an official investigation of such crimes. Borchers is a resident of Maryland. Voter Fraud and the GOP The voter fraud allegations against Coulter are particularly troublesome for the GOP, given that their election strategy has long been to allege massive Democratic voter fraud -- despite evidence to the contrary -- in hopes of furthering legislation that would require Photo ID restrictions for voters at the polling place. Such legislation, countless non-partisan and bi-partisan studies have shown, would adversely disenfranchise minorities, the elderly, and students -- all of whom tend to vote overwhelmingly Democratic -- due to the fact that anywhere from an estimated 20 to 30 million of such legal voters in the United States do not currently possess the type of ID which would be needed to meet the restrictive voting requirements of such laws. To date, we are aware of none of the Rightwing media outlets who routinely decry "massive Democratic voter fraud" (without actually providing such evidence) having called for Coulter to be held accountable for her very well-documented voter fraud crimes in Florida, and now in Connecticut. • • • Articles and evidentiary documents from the entire Coulter Voter Fraud saga have been indexed, from over the years, at this BRAD BLOG Special Coverage page . We told the entire story in full, for the first time, including additional information from Borchers and more, in this article , as published in the April 2008 edition of Hustler magazine . Borchers' official complaint, filed on January 29, 2009 with the CT State Elections Enforcement Commission, follows below. We've redacted some of his personal information, and the version submitted to CT was notarized, as per state law... Originally published at The BRAD BLOG... Please contribute to our Ann Coulter Dishonor Fund via an online donation to The BRAD BLOG in order to help continue the investigation of the criminal Coulter, and many others like her.
 
Obama Lincoln Bicentennial Remarks (LIVE VIDEO) Top
President Obama and congressional leaders are celebrating the 200th anniversary of Abraham Lincoln's birth in a celebration at the Capitol Rotunda. CNN reports that Obama's speechwriter called on Lincoln biographer Doris Kearns Goodwin in crafting today's remarks. Obama spent Wednesday evening at a performance saluting the renovation of Ford's Theatre, where Lincoln was assassinated in 1865. He planned to return to Springfield, Illinois Thursday night to deliver the keynote address at the Abraham Lincoln Association's annual banquet. Watch: Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News , World News , and News about the Economy Obama's full remarks (as prepared for delivery): It is an honor to be here - a place where Lincoln served, was inaugurated, and where the nation he saved bid him a last farewell. As we mark the bicentennial of our 16th President's birth, I cannot claim to know as much about his life and works as many of those who are also speaking today, but I can say that I feel a special gratitude to this singular figure who in so many ways made by own story possible - and who in so many ways made America's story possible. It is fitting that we are holding this celebration here at the Capitol. For the life of this building is bound ever so closely to the times of this immortal President. Built by artisans and craftsmen, immigrants and slaves - it was here, in the rotunda, that union soldiers received help from a makeshift hospital; it was downstairs, in the basement, that they were baked bread to give them strength; and it was in the Senate and House chambers, where they slept at night, and spent some of their days. What those soldiers saw when they looked on this building was a very different sight than the one we see today. For it remained unfinished until the end of the war. The laborers who built the dome came to work wondering whether each day would be their last; whether the metal they were using for its frame would be requisitioned for the war and melted down into bullets. But each day went by without any orders to halt construction, and so they kept on working and kept on building. When President Lincoln was finally told of all the metal being used here, his response was short and clear: that is as it should be. The American people needed to be reminded, he believed, that even in a time of war, the work would go on; that even when the nation itself was in doubt, its future was being secured; and that on that distant day, when the guns fell silent, a national capitol would stand, with a statue of freedom at its peak, as a symbol of unity in a land still mending its divisions. It is this sense of unity, this ability to plan for a shared future even at a moment our nation was torn apart, that I reflect on today. And while there are any number of moments that reveal that particular side of this extraordinary man - that particular aspect of his leadership - there is one I'd like to share with you today. In the war's final weeks, aboard Grant's flagship, The River Queen, President Lincoln was asked what was to be done with the rebel armies once General Lee surrendered. With victory at hand, Lincoln could have sought revenge. He could have forced the South to pay a steep price for their rebellion. But despite all the bloodshed and all the misery that each side had exacted upon the other, no Confederate soldier was to be punished, Lincoln ordered. They were to be treated, as he put it, "liberally all round." All Lincoln wanted was for Confederate troops to go back home and return to work on their farms and in their shops. He was even willing, he said, to "let them have their horses to plow with and...their guns to shoot crows with." That was the only way, Lincoln knew, to repair the rifts that had torn this country apart. It was the only way to begin the healing that our nation so desperately needed. For what Lincoln never forgot, not even in the midst of civil war, was that despite all that divided us - north and south, black and white - we were, at heart, one nation and one people, sharing a bond as Americans that could not break. And so even as we meet here today, at a moment when we are far less divided than in Lincoln's day, but when we are once again debating the critical issues of our time - and debating them fiercely - let us remember that we are doing so as servants to the same flag, as representatives of the same people, and as stakeholders in a common future. That is the most fitting tribute we can pay - and the most lasting monument we can build - to that most remarkable of men, Abraham Lincoln. Thank you. More on President Obama
 
Chicago Yachting Association Members Told Not To Speak Out Against Olympics Top
Lots of boaters are unhappy with plans to use Monroe Harbor as the rowing venue for the 2016 Olympics should Chicago win the Games, but you won't hear many complaints. The Chicago Yachting Association, an umbrella group for 15 yacht clubs in the Chicago area, has asked members to keep a lid on it, noting in a memo obtained by the Tribune that yacht clubs "are vulnerable to retribution." Mayor Richard Daley's office and the Chicago Park District have made it clear "that they do not wish to talk about issues that may be confrontational until after October 2009," according to the memo by an association committee charged with formulating an approach to the city's Olympic plans. More on Olympics
 
Jamie Malanowski: Obama's Bad Luck Top
Call it bad luck. President Obama gets passed a stimulus bill aimed to revive the economy, and Karl Rove says that what he's really done is revive the GOP. Arguing in The Wall Street Journal that ``sometime late this year or early next the economy'' would have rebounded ``on its own,'' Rove contends that the bill sets us on a path to wasteful spending, higher taxes, and the return of Republicanism. Obama, Rove says, ``has already re-energized the GOP and sparked a spending debate that will last for years. The president won this legislative battle, but at a high price -- fiscally and politically.'' So it's bad luck for Obama that he took over when the economy had merely cratered and hadn't yet bored a hole so deep that we could see magma coming up from the center of the earth, because this sets the stage for a return to the policies that Americans repudiated last November. Bad luck that the permissive, `party on!' policies of Bush and Greenspan and the other bubblemasters had produced only a paralytic credit crisis and a wolf of a recession at the time of the election, and not a full blown depression complete with riots, shantytowns, and marathon dances, because Rove--without the agreement of any credible economist on the left or the right--can now speciously argue that the economy would have recovered on its own. Bad luck that Obama passed this bill before more people were out of work, more people were evicted, more businesses closed, more kids had to drop out of school, because now Rove can believe that people not driven to the depths of utter desperation will all the sooner ingratefully wonder `what have you done for me lately?' Bad luck that the party whose tax cuts for the rich stimulated a whopping deficit that we carry into this recession still myopically views tax cuts as stimulating a way out. Bad luck that millions of jobs lost in the last months didn't include Karl Rove's slot at the Journal , because now the Boy Pseudo-Genius whose divisive, destructive and fear-mongering tactics gave this country arguably the worst president in its history (arguably, as in, one could argue the point--but I won't) still has a forum in which to propound his thoroughly invalidated views. More on Karl Rove
 
Kevin Powell: Rihanna/Chris Brown: Ending Violence Against Women and Girls (The Remix) Top
By Kevin Powell Writer's note: Given all the hype and controversy around Chris Brown's alleged beating of Rihanna, I feel compelled to post this essay I originally wrote in late 2007, so that some of us can have an honest jump off point to discuss male violence against females, to discuss the need for ownership of past pains and traumas, to discuss the critical importance of therapy and healing. Let us pray for Rihanna, first and foremost, because no one deserves to be beaten, or beaten up. No one. And let us also pray that Chris Brown gets the help he needs by way of long-term counseling and alternative definitions of manhood rooted in nonviolence, real love, and, alas, real peace. And let us not forget that Rihanna and Chris Brown happen to be major pop stars, hence all the media coverage, blogs, etc. Violence against women and girls happen every single day on this planet without any notice from most of us. Until we begin to address that hard fact, until we all, males and females alike, make a commitment to ending the conditions that create that destructive behavior in the first place, it will not end any time soon. There will be more Rihannas and more Chris Browns. In my recent travels and political and community work and speeches around the country, it became so very obvious that many American males are unaware of the monumental problems of domestic violence and sexual assault, against women and girls, in our nation. This seems as good a time as any to address this urgent and overlooked issue. Why is it that so few of us actually think about violence against women and girls, or think that it's our problem? Why do we go on believing it's all good, even as our sisters, our mothers, and our daughters suffer and a growing number of us participate in the brutality of berating, beating, or killing our female counterparts? All you have to do is scan the local newspapers or ask the right questions of your circle of friends, neighbors, or co-workers on a regular basis, and you'll see and hear similar stories coming up again and again. There's the horribly tragic case of Megan Williams, a 20-year-old West Virginia woman, who was kidnapped for several days. The woman's captors forced her to eat rat droppings, choked her with a cable cord and stabbed her in the leg while calling her, a Black female, a racial slur, according to criminal complaints. They also poured hot water over her, made her drink from a toilet, and beat and sexually assaulted her during a span of about a week, the documents say. There's the woman I knew, in Atlanta, Georgia, whose enraged husband pummeled her at home, stalked her at work and, finally, in a fit of fury, stabbed her to death as her six-year-old son watched in horror. There's the woman from Minnesota, who showed up at a national male conference I organized a few months back with her two sons. She had heard about the conference through the media, and was essentially using the conference as a safe space away from her husband of fifteen years who, she said, savagely assaulted her throughout the entire marriage. The beatings were so bad, she said, both in front of her two boys and when she was alone with her husband that she had come to believe it was just a matter of time before her husband would end her life. She came to the conference out of desperation, because she felt all her pleas for help had fallen on deaf ears. There's my friend from Brooklyn, New York who knew, even as a little boy, that his father was hurting his mother, but the grim reality of the situation did not hit home for him until, while playing in a courtyard beneath his housing development, he saw his mother thrown from their apartment window by his father. There's my other friend from Indiana who grew up watching his father viciously kick his mother with his work boots, time and again, all the while angrily proclaiming that he was the man of the house, and that she needed to obey his orders. Perhaps the most traumatic tale for me these past few years was the vile murder of Shani Baraka and her partner Rayshon Holmes in the summer of 2003. Shani, the daughter of eminent Newark, New Jersey poets and activists Amiri and Amina Baraka, had been living with her oldest sister, Wanda, part-time. Wanda was married to a man who was mad abusive--he was foul, vicious, dangerous. And it should be added that this man was "a community organizer." Wanda tried, on a number of occasions, to get away from this man. She called the police several times, sought protection and a restraining order. But even after Wanda's estranged husband had finally moved out, and after a restraining order was in place, he came back to terrorize his wife--twice. One time he threatened to kill her. Another time he tried to demolish the pool in the backyard, and Wanda's car. The Baraka parents were understandably worried. Their oldest daughter was living as a victim of perpetual domestic violence, and their youngest daughter, a teacher, a girls' basketball coach, and a role model for scores of inner city youth, was living under the same roof. Shani was warned, several times, to pack up her belongings and get away from that situation. Finally, Shani and Rayshon went, one sweltering August day, to retrieve the remainder of Shani's possessions. Shani's oldest sister was out of town, and it remains unclear, even now, if the estranged husband had already been there at his former home, forcibly, or if he had arrived after Shani and Rayshon. No matter. This much is true: he hated his wife Wanda and he hated Shani for being Wanda's sister, and he hated Shani and Rayshon for being two women in love, for being lesbians. His revolver blew Shani away immediately. Dead. Next, there was an apparent struggle between Rayshon and this man. She was battered and bruised, then blown away as well. Gone. Just like that. Because I have known the Baraka family for years, this double murder was especially difficult to handle. It was the saddest funeral I have ever attended in my life. Two tiny women in two tiny caskets. I howled so hard and long that I doubled over in pain in the church pew and nearly fell to the floor beneath the pew in front of me. Violence against women and girls knows no race, no color, no class background, no religion. It may be the husband or the fiancé, the grandfather or the father, the boyfriend or the lover, the son or the nephew, the neighbor or the co-worker. I cannot begin to tell you how many women--from preteens to senior citizens and multiple ages in between--have told me of their battering at the hands of a male, usually someone they knew very well, or what is commonly referred to as an intimate partner. Why have these women and girls shared these experiences with me, a man? I feel it is because, through the years, I have been brutally honest, in my writings and speeches and workshops, in admitting that the sort of abusive male they are describing, the type of man they are fleeing, the kind of man they've been getting those restraining orders against--was once me. Between the years 1987 and 1991 I was a very different kind of person, a very different kind of male. During that time frame I assaulted and or threatened four different young women. I was one of those typical American males: hyper-masculine, overly competitive, and drenched in the belief system that I could talk to women any way I felt, treat women any way I felt, with no repercussions whatsoever. As I sought therapy during and especially after that period, I came to realize that I and other males in this country treated women and girls in this dehumanizing way because somewhere along our journey we were told we could. It may have been in our households; it may have been on our block or in our neighborhoods; it may have been the numerous times these actions were reinforced for us in our favorite music, our favorite television programs, or our favorite films. All these years later I feel, very strongly, that violence against women and girls is not going to end until we men and boys become active participants in the fight against such behavior. I recall those early years of feeling clueless when confronted--by both women and men--about my actions. This past life was brought back to me very recently when I met with a political associate who reminded me that he was, then and now, close friends with the last woman I assaulted. We, this political associate and I, had a very long and emotionally charged conversation about my past, about what I had done to his friend. We both had watery eyes by the time we were finished talking. It hurt me that this woman remains wounded by what I did in 1991, in spite of the fact that she accepted an apology from me around the year 2000. I left that meeting with pangs of guilt, and a deep sadness about the woman with whom I had lived for about a year. Later that day, a few very close female friends reminded me of the work that some of us men had done, to begin to reconfigure how we define manhood, how some of us have been helping in the fight to end violence against women and girls. And those conversations led me to put on paper The Seven Steps For Ending Violence Against Women and Girls. These are the rules that I have followed for myself, and that I have shared with men and boys throughout America since the early 1990s: 1. Own the fact that you have made a very serious mistake, that you've committed an offense, whatever it is, against a woman or a girl. Denial, passing blame, and not taking full responsibility, is simply not acceptable. 2. Get help as quickly as you can in the form of counseling or therapy for your violent behavior. YOU must be willing to take this very necessary step. If you don't know where to turn for help, I advise visiting the website www.menstoppingviolence.org, an important organization, based in Atlanta, that can give you a starting point and some suggestions. Also visit www.usdoj.gov/ovw/pledge.htm where you can find helpful information on what men and boys can do to get help for themselves. Get your hands on and watch Aishah Shahidah Simmons' critically important documentary film NO! as soon as you are able. You can order it at www.notherapedocumentary.org. NO! is, specifically, about the history of rape and sexual assault in Black America, but that film has made its way around the globe and from that very specific narrative comes some very hard and real truths about male violence against females that is universal, that applies to us all, regardless of our race or culture. Also get a copy of Byron Hurt's Beyond Beats and Rhymes, perhaps the most important documentary film ever made about the relationship between American popular culture and American manhood. Don't just watch these films, watch them with other men, and watch them with an eye toward critical thinking, healing, and growth, even if they make you angry or very comfortable. And although it may be difficult and painful, you must be willing to dig into your past, into the family and environment you've come from, to begin to understand the root causes of your violent behavior. For me that meant acknowledging the fact that, beginning in the home with my young single mother, and continuing through what I encountered on the streets or navigated in the parks and the schoolyards, was the attitude that violence was how every single conflict should be dealt with. More often than not, this violence was tied to a false sense of power, of being in control. Of course the opposite is the reality: violence towards women has everything to do with powerlessness and being completely out of control. Also, we need to be clear that some men simply hate or have a very low regard for women and girls. Some of us, like me, were the victims of physical, emotional, and verbal abuse at the hands of mothers who had been completely dissed by our fathers, so we caught the brunt of our mothers' hurt and anger. Some of us were abandoned by our mothers. Some of us were sexually assaulted by our mothers or other women in our lives as boys. Some of us watched our fathers or other men terrorize our mothers, batter our mothers, abuse our mothers, and we simply grew up thinking that that male-female dynamic was the norm. Whatever the case may be, part of that "getting help" must involve the word forgiveness. Forgiveness of ourselves for our inhuman behavioral patterns and attitudes, and forgiveness of any female who we feel has wronged us at some point in our lives. Yes, my mother did hurt me as a child but as an adult I had to realize I was acting out that hurt with the women I was encountering. I had to forgive my mother, over a period of time, with the help of counseling and a heavy dose of soul-searching to understand who she was, as well as the world that created her. And I had to acknowledge that one woman's actions should not justify a lifetime of backward and destructive reactions to women and girls. And, most importantly, we must have the courage to apologize to any female we have wronged. Ask for her forgiveness, and accept the fact that she may not be open to your apology. That is her right. 3. Learn to listen to the voices of women and girls. And once we learn how to listen, we must truly hear their concerns, their hopes and their fears. Given that America was founded on sexism--on the belief system of male dominance and privilege--as much as it was founded on the belief systems of racism and classism, all of us are raised and socialized to believe that women and girls are unequal to men and boys, that they are nothing more than mothers, lovers, or sexual objects, that it is okay to call them names, to touch them without their permission, to be violent toward them physically, emotionally, spiritually--or all of the above. This mindset, unfortunately, is reinforced in much of our educational curriculum, from preschool right through college, through the popular culture we digest every single day through music, sports, books, films, and the internet, and through our male peers who often do not know any better either--because they had not learned to listen to women's voices either. For me that meant owning the fact that throughout my years of college, for example, I never read more than a book or two by women writers. Or that I never really paid attention to the stories of the women in my family, in my community, to female friends, colleagues, and lovers who, unbeknownst to me, had been the victims of violence at some point in their lives. So when I began to listen to and absorb the voices, the stories, and the ideas of women like Pearl Cleage, Gloria Steinem, bell hooks, Alice Walker, of the housekeeper, of the hair stylist, of the receptionist, of the school crossing guard, of the nurse's aid, and many others, it was nothing short of liberating, to me. Terribly difficult for me as a man, yes, because it was forcing me to rethink everything I once believed. But I really had no other choice but to listen if I was serious about healing. And if I was serious about my own personal growth. It all begins with a very simple question we males should ask each and every woman in our lives: Have you ever been physically abused or battered by a man? 4. To paraphrase Gandhi, make a conscious decision to be the change we need to see. Question where and how you've received your definitions of manhood to this point. This is not easy as a man in a male-dominated society because it means you have to question every single privilege men have vis-à-vis women. It means that you might have to give up something or some things that have historically benefited you because of your gender. And people who are privileged, who are in positions of power, are seldom willing to give up that privilege or power. But we must, because the alternative is to continue to hear stories of women and girls being beaten, raped, or murdered by some male in their environment, be it the college campus, the inner city, the church, or corporate America. And we
 
Retail Sales Rise Unexpectedly In January Top
WASHINGTON — U.S. retail sales jumped 1 percent in January, reversing a six-month declining trend and defying economists' expectations by posting the biggest increase in 14 months. But higher gasoline prices and sales, and buyers snapping up other items on post-holiday discounts appeared to aid last month's results. Analysts cautioned that the relief is unlikely to last. The Commerce Department reported Thursday that January retail sales rose 1 percent from December after having fallen for six straight months. Wall Street economists surveyed by Thomson Reuters had expected January sales to show a drop of 0.8 percent. They plunged a revised lower 3 percent in December, which marked the weakest holiday selling season since at least 1969. "This is a big surprise, though the net rise in sales is less impressive than it looks because (December and November) were revised down by 0.3 percent each," Ian Shepherdson, chief U.S. economist at High Frequency Economics, wrote in a research note. "The headline relief today is welcome but it is unlikely to last." The January report shows strong increases in sales of automobiles and in general merchandise stores _ the "big box" outlets _ though sales by department stores, carrying fewer varieties of items, posted a decline. Wal-Mart Stores Inc., the world's largest retailer, is an example of a discounter that has benefited from strapped consumers' focus on necessities like groceries and on bargains for other items. Sales at gas stations jumped 2.6 percent in January _ the biggest increase since June, while sales of autos and parts rose 1.6 percent. Total retail sales excluding autos and parts still rose 0.9 percent, which again easily beat estimates by economists who expected a decline of 0.5 percent. Nonstore retailers, such as Internet and mail-order shopping, advanced 2.7 percent in January, while sales of food and beverages rose 2.1 percent. Health and personal care stores registered flat sales last month. Despite the leap last month, retail sales were down 9.7 percent from January 2008, amid the ravages of the recession, thousands of job losses and falling home prices. Many of the nation's retailers last week reported sales declines for January. The Labor Department said retailers slashed about 45,000 jobs last month as they closed stores and tried to preserve cash while consumers curtailed spending. Wal-Mart said Tuesday it will cut 700 to 800 jobs at its Arkansas headquarters as it builds fewer new stores this year and makes other operational changes. The cuts are coming in Wal-Mart's real estate, apparel, and health and wellness departments. Macy's Inc. last week said it will eliminate 7,000 jobs, or almost 4 percent of its work force, while Bon-Ton Stores Inc. and apparel maker Liz Claiborne Inc. also disclosed major job cuts. More on Economy
 
Biden Surprised By House Dems Anger: "We're Not Rolling Anyone" Top
A day before the House and Senate negotiators reached agreement, Biden went on to say that he was "a little surprised" to find so little understanding and no sympathy at all among House Democrats for the compromises in the stimulus bill needed to persuade a handful of Senate Republicans to join the Democrats in blocking a filibuster. "The House guys complain that you [in the administration] are rolling us," Biden told me. "We're not rolling anyone. We're looking to get 60 votes." More on Joe Biden
 
Michael Wolff: Can Nancy Pelosi Be Tom DeLay? Top
The conservatives, when they were in the majority, used to portray Nancy Pelosi as somebody seriously working above her pay grade. A happenstance leader who got to high rank in a minority party because nobody else especially wanted the job. A flake. When she became Speaker of the House in 2006, the conservatives were sure her implosion was imminent and that it would help bring them back to power. They were, instead, confounded by her success. The implosion may just have been postponed. Dealing with weak minority Republicans turns out to be easier than dealing with powerful majority Democrats, all of whom are on a binge for more power. One of the great power struggles of the post-conservative era has begun. In a suddenly open field, in which virtually all power is available to the Democrats, a vast realignment of standing and clout and gravitas and who needs who is taking place. Pelosi's maneuver has been to be the president's loyalist , or, as seems more and more accurate, his lap-dog. She's the most goo-goo eyed Democrat in Washington, or at least playing that role. The Senate, and its leader Harry Reid, seem to be positioning themselves more critically , or churlishly . The Senate seems to be wanting the junior kid in the White House to come to them. More on Barack Obama
 
Eric Williams: Nattering Nabobs of Negativism '09 Top
The Republicans seem to be taking "opposition party" as their sole defining characteristic as they flounder for their place in the new political landscape. Considering how much they bitched when they controlled the White House and both chambers of Congress, it's not surprising that their current situation would leave them surly and uncooperative. So President Obama meets with Republican leaders and the stimulus bill gets crammed with GOP-friendly tax cuts, but not a single Republican Congressman votes for it anyway, because they don't agree with every syllable it contains. Hey, folks, bipartisanship can't be accomplished unilaterally. No one expects genuine philosophical differences to disappear, but in frightening times like these, surely it's possible to find some common ground untainted by political calculation. Remember that brief, soul-elevating spirit of cooperation after our country was attacked seven years ago? Well, our economy just blowed up real good , and we need people on all sides to be striving honorably to fix it. This is not a time to simply cross your arms, stamp your feet and yell, "More tax cuts!" The concept of a presidential "honeymoon period" apparently having been obliterated, anti-Obama pronouncements are already popping up. Mitt Romney gave the administration a whole two weeks before telling Time magazine that "the simple solutions and the hopes that were sold by the Obama team are inadequate to the task ahead." I guess impeachment proceedings should be starting any day now. Dick Cheney, Lord of the Sith Emeritus, seemingly believing it is still his legal responsibility to periodically scare America, emerged to inform us that any terrorist attack from this point forward will be the fault of the Obama administration's lack of understanding of the grave threats we face -- oblivious to the natural conclusion that 9/11 must have resulted from the Bush administration's cluelessness about the same. Astonishingly, congressional aides even received political advice from "Joe the Plumber", about whom Andy Warhol returned from the dead to proclaim, "No, for him, fifteen seconds." Among the pearls of wisdom dropped by Mr. Wurzelbacher was this nugget of non-nuance for our complex world: "I don't believe there's two sides to every story. It's black and white. There's right and wrong." Gee, maybe he has been the Repubs' strategic guru. But leaping into the leadership void and striving to assert his relevance as the antidote to all that "Hope" and "Change" b.s., Rush Limbaugh led The-Hell-With-All-You Chorus with his notorious, pre-inaugural, four-word benediction for our new president: "I hope he fails." Under the premise of taking a slightly more cooperative tack, Limbaugh put forth the "Obama-Limbaugh Stimulus Plan of 2009," in which 54% (Obama's share of the popular vote, plus the 1% who voted for "wackos") of the stimulus money would be "spent on infrastructure and pork as defined by Mr. Obama and the Democrats," while 46% (equivalent to Senator McCain's slice of the electorate) would go to Limbaugh-approved tax cuts. "Then we compare," said Limbaugh. "We see which stimulus actually works. This is bipartisanship!" A novel suggestion, one which I did not hear from Rush and his ideological kin when "the Decider" was in office -- and certainly not when that same "Uniter-Not-Divider" received fewer popular votes than "Ozone Man". That would have been fun, seeing slightly more Democratic than Republican ideas enacted under Dubya's dubious leadership. Heck, why limit the Limbaugh System to divvying up the stimulus? Why shouldn't Obama be president 54% of the year and McCain hold the office the other 46%? I mean, as long as we're ignoring the concept of majority rule and all... At the close of his Wall Street Journal piece proposing this plan, Limbaugh went on to assert, "The economic crisis is an opportunity to unify people, if we set aside the politics... Let's stop the acrimony." I completely agree. And who better to end the acrimony and lead us into a new era of gracious, civil discourse than Mr. "I Hope He Fails"? Limbaugh's internal inconsistencies are stunning, except when you realize that his job is to bloviate unchallenged into a microphone for 15 hours a week. No one is allowed to ask the Great and Powerful Rush to explain how "I hope he fails" can logically coexist with his more conciliatory statement that Obama "may end up being one of the greatest presidents ever. Frankly, I hope so. I have doubts, but if he is, I'll be the first one to say so." No, Rush, I actually think you'll be the last one. (Wait, that's not fair. Michael Savage will be the last.) I can accept the intellectual consistency of the position that, if you vehemently oppose a candidate's positions, you would wish him ill in office, country be damned. But how can you hope someone fails and, even with caveats, also hope he becomes one of our greatest presidents? I'd wager Rush's feelings are more accurately reflected in these other remarks from his "I Hope He Fails" broadcast: I disagree fervently with the people on our side of the aisle who have caved and who say, "Well, I hope he succeeds. We've got to give him a chance." Why do we have to accept the premise here that because of the historical nature of his presidency, that we want him to succeed? This is affirmative action, if we do that. We want to promote failure, we want to promote incompetence, we want to stand by and not object to what he's doing simply because of the color of his skin? Yes, Rush, the alleged non-racist who brought "Barack The Magic Negro" to our airwaves, has once again made it all about race. Somehow the simple concept of hoping that our country succeeds and prospers under a president's leadership, regardless of his party, has been contorted through the poisonous workings of Limbaugh's thought process into "We gotta be nice to the darkie." To Rush, Barack Obama is not the duly-elected leader of the United States of America. He is merely the Donovan McNabb of politics. It's not news that a self-aggrandizing blowhard like Limbaugh is trying to seize the spotlight by being outrageous. Remember last year's Operation Chaos, during which he encouraged his army of Dittoheads to disrupt the election process? For proof of the success of Limbaugh's manipulation of the workings of our democracy which he claims to revere, one need only think back to President Romney's decisive victory over Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, whose nomination came amid the Limbaugh-inspired riots which have left the still-smouldering city of Denver uninhabitable. While the failure of Operation Chaos demonstrates that Limbaugh may not exert the power he thinks -- or wishes -- he had, he continues to preach daily to a sizeable nationwide congregation who take his word as gospel and are unlikely to hear him refuted. It is his influence over that audience which has allowed Limbaugh to assert such authority in the GOP's current power vacuum, and it is the safe cocoon of his radio kingdom, where he controls who may speak, which allows him to pontificate with such certitude. Rush, if you really want to test whether your theories on how to run the country are correct, run for office. Be a man. Like Al Franken. And if you lose, you've already got a ready-made excuse: You're white. More on Stimulus Package
 
Sarah Chasis: Offshore drilling announcement is promising, but still raises yellow flags Top
I was reminded Tuesday that there's a new administration in Washington. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar made some positive announcements about the future of offshore drilling in America - though it's important to note we aren't out of the woods just yet. Secretary Salazar announced he is going to thoroughly review the new five-year OCS oil and gas leasing plan that the Bush administration initiated development of in its last business day in office. These midnight regulations proposed opening up areas along the Pacific and Atlantic coasts that had been protected from drilling for decades. Salazar's announcement indicates a stronger commitment to sound science, public input and America's clean energy future than we have seen in the past eight years. And he hit on a few themes NRDC has been fighting for when it comes to oil and gas drilling in the OCS: ---We need better scientific data and understanding when it comes to the resources available in the OCS and the impacts of accessing them. ---The public must have a greater say in what we do in the OCS. ---We need a regulatory framework for developing offshore renewable energy - such as wind, tidal and wave power - so we can incorporate their significant potential in the nation's offshore energy strategy while protecting the ocean environment. As Secretary Salazar said: "The Bush Administration was so intent on opening new areas for oil and gas offshore that it torpedoed offshore renewable energy efforts." However, this week's announcement does not stop drilling in the OCS. There are still leases that will go forward in Alaska and Virginia and we could still see drilling there. As Secretary Salazar moves through his review process, he should put all offshore drilling on hold in Alaska and Virginia - as he did in the areas along the Atlantic and Pacific coasts that Bush opened up in the midnight reg - so that these parts of the country get the same careful reviews, precautions and protections as Salazar says he will provide the other areas. And while the shift toward offshore renewable energy bodes well for the direction the new administration is headed, it will also be important moving forward to involve agencies that deal with our oceans' living resources (like NOAA - the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) to make sure that any plans for offshore renewable, oil and gas projects are done in a way that minimizes their impact on our oceans. Offshore oil and gas drilling could cause permanent damage to our beaches and coastal economies - threatening serious impacts to our $32 billion commercial fishing and $60 billion tourism and recreation industries. Tourism alone supports more than 3.5 million jobs in the coastal U.S. states - and the number of jobs in states with new drilling would pale in comparison to those that rely on oil-free beaches. Not to mention, new drilling risks oil spills from Florida to Maine, and all along the Pacific Coast. This could not only cause tremendous damage to fishing and tourism industries, but destroys habitat for plants and animals, and hurts all of us who live, work and vacation in these places. We all remember the aftermath of the Exxon Valdez spill. If that occurred on the East Coast, it would have extended from Massachusetts to North Carolina. No one wants that. Action on OCS continues this week, as the House Natural Resources Committee kicked off a series of hearings on the impacts of offshore drilling yesterday - with testimony from the likes of ocean advocates Phillipe Cousteau and Ted Danson - as we continue the conversation about the future of energy development off our coasts. We won't know the full impact of Secretary Salazar's announcement until the scientific and environmental reviews he is calling for are given the chance to play out. But we hope the outcome is a greater - and environmentally responsible - investment in developing offshore renewable energy, and an end to oil and gas drilling offshore. This post originally appeared on NRDC 's blog. More on Green Energy
 
Employers Move To Block Unemployment Benefits In Record Numbers Top
It's hard enough to lose a job. But for a growing proportion of U.S. workers, the troubles really set in when they apply for unemployment benefits. More than a quarter of people applying for such claims have their rights to the benefit challenged as employers increasingly act to block payouts to former workers. More on Job Cuts
 
Paula B. Mays: A "Stimulating" Evening Attending an Economic Recovery House Event Top
President Obama has asked citizens to continue grassroots efforts which were successful in the campaign to help pass his proposed economic stimulus package. The package which is estimated to be between 700 and 800 million dollars is supposed to stimulate the economy, put people back to work, and preclude a virtual meltdown of the U.S. economy. Urgency in the passage of the bill was again stressed by the President in his speech Monday as thousands lose their jobs daily and the rest stop spending. But there has been much debate about the efficacy of the proposed stimulus plan. To gather support for the bill, President Obama requested through "Organizing for America," that citizens attend various house meetings last weekend to discuss the plan. I attended one such event in Northern Virginia at the invitation of my friend Julie which was advertised as: " Eat, Drink and Be Informed (Economic Recovery Meeting) We'll gather with friends and neighbors to view a short video that will describe The President's Economic Recovery Plan. It will also answer questions submitted by fellow citizens ." The event began with a video from our own Virginia former Governor, now head of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) Tim Kaine, answering questions from citizens around the country, and encouraging those present to discuss the economy and how it is affecting us personally. My group which consisted of an intelligent and thoughtful collection of Northern Virginia residents was eager to take on the task. Discussion ranged from: whether there should be a tax on gasoline to support the use of alternative fuels, to a universal 4% mortgage rate, to the importance of increased funding for education in the bill. Northern Virginia residents also voiced its objection to amending the bill too much to include tax cuts, while deleting portions which provide for more direct as well as long term relief. Our group developed an action plan to support the stimulus plan, and agreed to continue our grassroots efforts together. It was a very fruitful evening and we all felt a part of the solution. An article in the New York Times , however, by Sarah Wheaton seems to make light of this grassroots meeting effort. Ms. Wheaton states: "In addition to creating the impression that the government is listening to Americans' woes, the White House will be able to use the anecdotes to refine its pitch for the package." She also defines the house meetings as merely a "repurposing" of the campaign efforts. As one who attended one of these events I cannot agree. While the last 8 years were marked by decision-making in a bubble which led to the current economic crisis, by contrast, the "house" economy plan meetings represent real change, to wit: an opportunity to solicit a variety of ideas and opinions in order to make the best decisions for the country. Millions of real people are affected by this economy and instead of making light of the house gatherings and the President whom she described as "chillin" this weekend in Camp David, Ms. Wheaton would do better to applaud the involvement of "we the people" in our economic and national future.
 
Betsy Perry: How Much Do I Love Dr. Phil And Oprah: Cheap Therapy For Times When $350/Hour Is Just Too Much Top
God bless you Dr. Phil for ranting against octuplet-mom and saving me from the inner turmoil I struggle with wondering how anyone could be so self indulgent at our expense these days. And by the way, has no one picked up on her rhinoplasty aka nose job, plumped up lips and Botox-ed forehead? Last I heard her disability money was supporting the original 6 kids but did some get siphoned off into a mad money account for self improvement? A Dr. Phil viewer did point out a striking resemblance to Angelina Jolie and when pictures are placed side by side , there's little doubt who Multiples Mom is trying to emulate. (Will we now have to pay for her in-institution shrinkage when most of us can't even afford our own out patient care?) One of Dr. Phil's consulting doctors said it would take her 30 hours a day to breast feed eight kids and I'm hoping that will not be documented by Annie Leibovitz - Animal Planet maybe? Dr Phil absolutely hated this mom and brought out a fertility doctor, bio-ethicist and even Mother of Eight Kate, whose charming TV show on TLC has probably kept a roof over the heads of that brood. Even Kate looked really glam - actually unrecognizable to be honest - and she opined about what lies ahead and sleep isn't one of them. Is it possible the octet may one day be put up on Craigslist for adoption? And God bless you Oprah for the lie detector promoting one on one with M. Gary Newman discussing his book on why men cheat on their wives. I'm down with the reasons: not enough attention, loneliness, infrequent sex and if you ask me, the inability to say 'no" when the pheromone scent is in the air - why didn't I write this book? And here's the deal - men aren't looking for hotter sex, they just want it when they want it and if you can also act interested in what they do for a living, it's an unbeatable combo...kind of like peanut butter and jelly before salmonella set in. Unless you're a shrink on a pharma payroll pushing happy meds, I would imagine business is down but for patients there isn't a problem that can't be addressed on television if you have cable and can surf from 1-100. I'm big on body dysmorphic behavior but repulsed by the Biggest Losers in jog bras and spandex. If you lived in NYC and had to walk Fifth, trust me, you'd never look like that nor could you find a Denny's (though Olive Garden with their unlimited pasta bowl lurks somewhere in the city). So when it becomes a choice between those on sale beige suede Marisa Noel boots I'm lusting after or re-hashing my same old problems, I'm in for the boots and Dr. Phil. More on Recession
 
Most Americans Want Bush Lawbreaking Investigated: Poll Top
 
Bob Franken: For Sale: United States Top
First of all, we need to remember that Congress and the President Obama are working on "Plan B". Their predecessors have already botched Plan A, to the tune of 350-billion dollars. Sooner or later, we're going to run out of letters in the alphabet. And money. So, let's not be too tough on the fat cats. We're going to need their ill-gotten gains when the time comes to pay back the trillions we're laying out to try and clear up their huge litter box. It's not too early to begin planning for ways to get them to pay their fair share...well maybe FAIR share is asking too much, but maybe a little bit more than the tax crumbs they have been grudgingly giving up when their lobbyists aren't entirely successful, which is, like, never. Let's face it, they're not going to pay more to rescue their country than they absolutely must. I mean, let's not carry this patriotism thing too far. We need to be creative. We need to come up with some ways to make these captains of finance part with their own money, instead of everybody else's. Here are some ideas they might buy: *NAMING RIGHTS TO FEDERAL BUILDINGS From the sports world we know how these guys love their corporate monuments...think Enron Field. Wouldn't it be so cool if the Treasury Department worked out of the Goldman-Sachs building, so the bosses (from both parties), could feel right at home? Better yet, how about the Payday Loans building. As a special bonus, the offices could be decorated by John Thain. Can you imagine the bidding war by insurance companies to have their brand on the HHS structure? Oh, I forgot, they already do. The possibilities at Transportation are equally boundless...so obvious they don't even need to be outlined here. *CONGRESSIONAL LOGES The use of the galleries, those seating areas where people can watch the House and Senate inaction is a missed earnings opportunity. They don't even make us pay to use them. At least directly. Sometimes its easy to miss the obvious. Why not build special boxes there instead and charge companies an arm and a leg to rent them. Think of the convenience for staff members when the lobbyists influence them with invitations to watch the games going on below. It's just a short walk back to the Congressional office to pay back the gift with legislative favors. VACATION HOMES We know how the rich love having as much real estate as possible. So they will clamor to spend big bucks to buy still another place to fly their private jets. Where else features tropical sun, surf, beautiful beaches and an unparalleled seclusion? Of course, I'm referring to Guantanamo Bay. Whatever you do, Mr. President, do NOT close down GITMO! Particularly since the condominium units are already there. Talk about a gated community. And talk about solid construction. Of course, we'll have to do something about the current residents, but how difficult could it be to relocate them? It should be a, uh, slam dunk. One approach might be condemnation proceedings. From what I understand there were already efforts underway to condemn some of them. By now, you get the point. At the same time we're nationalizing so many industries, we need to make plans now for when the time comes to go back and return our government to control by the private sector. These are just a few outside-the-box suggestions. And what makes all of these so appealing is that the corporations can pay for them by tapping into their bailout money. More on Economy
 
Blagojevich Probe Looking At O'Hare, City Contracts Top
Federal authorities are investigating five construction companies that collectively have gotten hundreds of millions of dollars in construction work at O'Hare Airport under Mayor Daley, the Chicago Sun-Times has learned. One question being looked at, sources said, is how the companies landed those city deals. [...] The investigation appears to be an outgrowth of the probe of former Gov. Rod Blagojevich, whose fund-raiser Christopher G. Kelly was a top roofing contractor at O'Hare. Kelly worked at O'Hare when John Harris was a top city aviation official. Harris, who later became Blagojevich's chief of staff, was arrested with Blagojevich on Dec. 9 on federal corruption charges. More on Rod Blagojevich
 
John Standerfer: The Mythical Manufacturing Job Top
Much has recently been made of the decline of manufacturing as a percent of GDP in our country. Along with being a pivotal issue during the election in the traditional battlefield states of Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania and the rest of the rust belt, it's a rare article about the cause of our current economic issues that fails to lament the decline of "good manufacturing jobs that have been shipped overseas". This phrase has been repeated so often, that it has achieved a mythical status as a cure for all that ills us. Unfortunately for politicians and those cities pinning their hopes on a resurgence of domestic manufacturing, these jobs are not coming back and that is not nearly as bad of a thing as it's been made out to be. The primary drivers for the shift of manufacturing jobs from the US to overseas locales have been well documented - lower labor costs, less environmental regulations, lower land costs, geographical proximity to supply chains, etc. However, what has often been overlooked is what would have happened had US companies not adapted to the changes in the global economy and kept their manufacturing jobs in the US. For an example of what the impact is when companies with fundamentally different cost structures collide, think back to the invasion of Japanese consumer electronics in the 1980's. Traditional US television companies such as Zenith and RCA were completely unprepared to compete with Japanese competitors such as Sony and Panasonic. The result was that US companies RCA and Zenith went from controlling 33% of the US color television market in 1986 to being a footnote today. If US companies had not aggressively moved their manufacturing to keep their cost structures in line with foreign competitors, the above scenario would have been repeated across industries. Company after company would have been forced to cut not only the manufacturing jobs - which were moved overseas - , but also the sales, marketing, finance and executive jobs that currently remain in the US. Like it or not, this is a reality of current global economics and no amount of legislation, tax incentives or trade negotiations can change it. The second often overlooked point is the commoditization of manufacturing ability. With the exception of a few specialized examples, such as Intel's multi-billion dollar chip fabrication plants, manufacturing ability is no longer a differentiator or competitive advantage. 30 years ago, one of the primary concerns of a company launching a new product would have been how to actually "make" it. Today, any individual or company with a modest amount of money can use the same companies and facilities that manufacture Apple's iPhone, Microsoft's XBOX 360 or Nike's latest basketball shoes. Almost anything that can be designed can be built cheaply, accurately and quickly by companies that specialized in outsourced manufacturing. The result of this has been that the balance of power has shifted away from manufacturing and to softer skills such as design, marketing and distribution. A recent Ted Koppel documentary on China revealed that on a $299 iPod (designed in California and assembled in China), Apple makes an $80 profit while the Chinese assemblers only receive $4. This huge discrepancy in the difference between what the designer and marketer of a product earns versus what the assembler can charge has resulted in most manufacturing jobs being no more valuable than the oft-derided call center or fast food job. Don't get me wrong, America has many economic problems, but the notion that there are millions of high paying manufacturing jobs that have been exported is not one of them. The cold reality is that not exporting these jobs would have cost even more American jobs and what manufacturing jobs were exported have far less value than most people realize. More on Economy
 
Louise McCready: Salty Sweet Top
Last year, a study in Israel announced babies born with low sodium are more likely to crave salt and consume more sodium throughout their life. However, when my boyfriend recently accused me of being "salty," I had a sneaking suspicion he wasn't referring to my natal body composition. Recently transplanted to New York and conscious of my antiquated vernacular, I looked up my denominator. Turns out my lexicon lover wasn't whispering sweet nothings. According to urbandictionary.com , salty's primary definition is "pissed, upset." The next most popular definition: "Upset, embarrassed or indignant as a result of humiliation or wrong-doing by another person. Salty was most often heard in Chicago up to about the mid-nineties." Third (and my personal favorite): "A word originating in Philadelphia generally meaning that you just got played, or are looking stupid, either because of something you did, or something that was done to you. " With Valentine's Day approaching -- the annual holiday devoted to calculated displays of affection as cloyingly sweet as the overpriced bonbons so eagerly consumed -- I decided to learn more about salt and attempt to embrace my epithet. Salt is vital to human life. I'm not just talking about dashing salt on food to make it tasty (though imagining a life of saltless popcorn or mashed potatoes conjures unpalatable images of cardboard). The Salt Institute reports that salt makes up .28% of the human body by weight. Sodium is one of the electrolytes advertised in sports drinks. Too little sodium in the body leads to dehydration, but over-consumption may increase the risk for more serious health problems like high blood pressure and can cause bloated fingers and toes. (Note to self: do not eat Chinese food the day before skinny jean shopping.) Humans have understood the value of salt from time immemorial. Mark Kurlansky's book, Salt: A World History , opens in China where people harvested salt in 6000 BC. Salt had a cameo in the Bible: lesson learned -- never look back. (Though, too bad Lot didn't bring his damned wife with him.) Salt was so valuable that spilling it meant you were susceptible to demons -- hence the sacrificial dash over the shoulder. In Salt: Grain of Life , Pierre Laszlo contends salt is responsible for the Roman's system of payment (and the word "salary"), as well as the domestication of the camel, the Dutch revolt against the Spanish and Ghandhi's resistance to the British. Salt is a big business. The American Medical Association and salt lobbyists recently went to war over the question of whether the FDA should consider salt a food additive. While the only wars so far waged on behalf of the condiment have been nonviolent, it is ironic that one of most well known acronyms from the Cold War is SALT (Strategic Arms Limitation Talks). In light of this winter's flurries, what would we do without our dependable salt-spraying dumptrucks? The owner of the Soho restaurant Salt found it fitting to pay homage to the ubiquitous spice because of her restaurant's cross-cultural menu and communal seating. And an offshoot, Salt Bar, recently opened -- a sign that salt is undoubtedly an ingredient in the recipe for success. Importance of salt established, nothing's better than the original salt-and-pepper combo. Correction: Salt-N-Pepa. Yes, I was raised in the sheltered South, but I also had cable and an older sister. Thanks to the Misses Salt Pepper, we not only talked about sex, but learned it ain't nuthin' but a she-thing . (Taking those lyrics to heart is much more liberating than burning bras.) So perhaps my valentine was born a low-salt baby -- he prefers pretzels to praline and pistachios to peanut butter cups. Fortunately for me, my anatomical ratio is less sugar than spice. With Morton's salt girl as my inspiration, I can't wait to whip up a Valentine's Day dessert as salty as me. Perhaps President Obama's favorite -- salted caramels . Eat your heart out Betty Crocker. More on valentine's day
 
Sirius XM, DirecTV In Talks As Karmazin Tries To Fend Off Ergen Top
Sirius XM Radio, the satellite radio giant that is on the brink of bankruptcy, is in preliminary talks with Liberty Media, the conglomerate controlled by John C. Malone, people briefed on the negotiations said on Wednesday. Liberty Media, the conglomerate controlled by John C. Malone, is in preliminary talks with the satellite radio giant Sirius XM Radio, people briefed on the negotiations said. A deal between Sirius XM and Liberty, which owns a controlling interest in DirecTV, could create a battle for control of the satellite radio company. EchoStar, the television satellite company, has been acquiring Sirius XM's debt and has been angling to take over the company as part of a negotiation to keep Sirius from falling into bankruptcy. DirecTV is the nation's largest satellite television provider by subscribers, ahead of the Dish Network from EchoStar.
 
Bush Torture Memo Author Yoo Gets New Gig Top
Academic freedom is very important. Universities exist to produce knowledge, unconstrained by political winds or the whims of wealthy donors. If professors live in fear of termination without good cause, they cannot contribute their university's mission. So even though I would have fired John Yoo from the Berkeley faculty--not because of his repugnant viewpoints, but because his incompetent representation of a former client, the United States of America, calls into question his ethical fitness to train young lawyers--I am sympathetic to the reasons why Berkeley allows him to stay.
 
Derek Shearer: After The Stimulus: It's Time for a New Foundation Top
The Obama administration needs a stronger narrative. If the President is to succeed in the recovery from economic recession, repair the multi-faceted damage of the Bush years, and create sustainable economic growth for the future, he has to have a compelling story line. Most Americans don't easily understand economics--but they do experience economic reality. They need an explanatory framework, if they are going to support far reaching reform efforts led by the President and the government. Obama's Inaugural address was a let down to many who had expected not just soaring rhetoric but clarity as to the tasks ahead. Critics of the speech point out that no memorable lines were spoken--nothing on the political scale of FDR's famous, "We have nothing to fear but fear itself" (see Adam Cohen's new book Nothing To Fear for the origins of the phrase, as well as a brilliant depiction of FDR's key advisors). The speech was vague as to why the nation is at a crossroads; we were not told who or what is to blame, nor exactly what must be done. Instead, there was a call for a new era of responsibility. It was inspirational to see an African-American sworn in as President, but the nation expects more from Obama than simply being the first black President (as he no doubt does of himself). His supporters and admirers want him to be a great President--a transformational rather than a transitional leader. Obama's performance at his first press conference was a marked improvement. It was, as one ABC reporter put it, "a teaching moment." In a calm and confident voice, the President conducted a public seminar on the economy, explaining in laymen's terms the Keynesian rationale for his stimulus package--the $790 billion Economic Recovery Act that he will soon sign. He offered clear metrics by which to judge his performance on the short-term economic front: job creation, revival of the credit markets, and stabilization of the housing market. Unfortunately, Secretary of the Treasury Tim Geithner did less well in his first public outing with the press. He was not clear and often sounded tentative and unsure of himself. Unlike the stimulus bill, the administration's credit revival plan appears less than adequate. It..."seems to be yet another child of the failed interventions of the past one and half years: optimistic and indecisive," comments Martin Wolf, the well regarded economics columnist for The Financial Times. Wolf argues that it is a plan that hopes for the best, but does not deal boldly enough with the deteriorating financial sector. My wife Sue Toigo (who works in the investment business and knows many of the bankers who are apologizing before Congress) thinks that Obama needed a strong woman to clear up the nation's financial mess, and that he should have asked former New York Banking Superintendent Muriel Siebert, the first woman to have a seat on the NY Stock Exchange, Sheila Bair, the no-nonsense head of the FDIC, or Laura Tyson, former chair of the Council of Economic Advisors and a business school dean, to be his Secretary of the Treasury. Even if he had picked one of these capable women to be his Iron Lady, she too would need a narrative from which to work. There was one line that went little noticed in Obama's Inaugural that might provide language for framing his economic story when he addresses a joint session of Congress on February 24. In his January speech, the new President pledged to reform the Federal government's approach to education, health care, science and infrastructure in an effort to "lay a new foundation for growth"--and he repeated the words "new foundation" in passing at his first press conference. The phrase "a new New Deal" (mea culpa: I popularized it in the fall) has been overworked by the media to describe the Obama administration--and the White House has not suggested other words. It's time to replace the New Deal rhetoric--even the First 100 Days imagery--with Obama's own words: A New Foundation. In his upcoming speech to Congress, President Obama could begin by saying that the state of the union is not good. "The economic situation is dire. While we have moved boldy with the economic recovery bill and banking reforms to stabilize the economy, these measures will take time. There is no magic bullet. Above all, we cannot return to the old ways of speculation and private excess.... "To restore genuine economic prosperity for all Americans, we need to build a New Foundation for economic growth. We cannot go back again to the days of easy credit, greed on Wall Street, and borrowing abroad to purchase foreign made consumer goods. We need to build a New Foundation for a 21st Century economy--one that is environmentally sustainable, fair to working families, and builds on our American strengths as a hard working, innovative people. We need to become an America that builds and creates, not just borrows and consumes. To accomplish this will require all of us working together to build this New Foundation upon which we can construct genuine prosperity." The President's speechwriters can elaborate on the rhetoric. The point is that Obama needs this kind of story line to sustain his political efforts in the months and years to come. As Nobel Prize winning economists Paul Krugman, Joe Stiglitz and other progressives have argued, the economic change of course that is needed is serious, deep seated and difficult. It will continue to be opposed by conservatives who dislike an expanded role for government, and by many who are stuck in old ways of thinking about the economy. Above all, it will be a challenge to the idea that any kind of economic growth is good, and that simply reviving the GNP is enough to measure success for a President and his administration. "We've been consuming rather than investing. We're suffering from investment-deficit disorder," notes NYT economic columnist David Leonhardt (in his survey article in the Sunday NYT magazine, February 1). If we are not to return to the old model of consumption-led economic growth, then what might take its place? What will be the engines of growth for the future--and what will be measures of successful outcomes? President Obama has offered some hints of his thinking with talk of "green jobs"--job creation by retrofitting public buildings, revamping the auto industry for greater energy efficient vehicles, and moving the economy over time to non-fossil fuels. A down payment on retrofitting is included in the stimulus bill, but it's just a beginning. The existing stock of 110 million homes could be made more energy efficient. The US Postal Service could go almost completely green. Postal Rate Commissioner Ruth Goldway has called for the conversion of over 200,000 US mail vehicles to electricity, and for Post Office buildings to become solar powered, complete with electric docking stations. A green postal service would be a highly visible, daily reminder of Obama's commitment to a new economic strategy (even the uniforms could be changed to green). Public investment can provide some of the funds for these efforts, but as U Mass economist Robert Pollin points out, the mobilization of private capital will also be necessary. Banks could be required to devote a precentage of loan portfolios to green investments. Expanded tax credits could be provided to homes and businesses for installation of solar and other renewable energy. Funds from a cap-and-trade emissions program or a carbon tax can be recycled back to the public in rebates to spend on energy saving measures. Retrofitting and other green efforts will create jobs in the US. Pollin writes (in the Nation's special February 16 issue on Green Recovery): "The central facts here are irrefutable: spending the same amount of money on building a clean energy economy will create three times more jobs within the United States than would spending on our existing fossil fuel infrastructure. The transformation to a clean energy economy can therefore serve as a major long-term engine of job creation." The Obama administration can also spur technological innovation in the private sector through creation of a Green NASA at the Department of Energy to fund research into more energy efficient batteries, solar cells, lighting, heating and cooling systems, and even fertilizers. Other government departments could fund research into affordable low-tech energy devices suitable for export to developing countries, and make purchase of these products part of a new foreign assistance strategy. A serious program to develop high speed rail corridors in the US would not only create jobs; it could lead to more balanced economic growth. Just as commerce and housing has developed along major highways like Route 128 in Boston or I-50 in the south, many mid-size cities would expand or undergo renewal along high speed rail corridors in California, the Upper Mid-West, and parts of the Northeast and South. Innovation in health care and educational technology an also spur healthy economic growth. Harvard Business School Professor Clay Christensen is certain of it. In his recent books, Disrupting Class, and The Innovator's Prescription, he and his colleagues explain how more sophisticated and strategic use of electronic technology combined with networking can "disrupt" stagnant centralized systems and decentralize education and healthcare to improve outcomes for individuals (and society), and create new waves of economic growth. Christensen deserves to be nominated for the Nobel Prize in economics for his work, and he should be consulted by the Obama administration (fyi: he is a distant cousin). Reducing health care costs, combined with universal coverage, eliminates one of the anchors weighing down American companies. Healthier citizens are more productive and happier, and healthy children come to school better able to learn. Better educated, healthier children commit less crime, reducing societal costs of policing and incarceration. Diagnostic products developed by "distruptive technology" become sources of jobs, and new products to be exported as well. American education, especially higher education, is a leading export by attracting foreign students to the US. New learning technologies can become export products for innovative US firms to sell in Latin America and Africa where educational systems are weak and in need of modernization and expansion. The correlation between investment in education, technology and economic growth is well established (and documented in Claudia Goldin and Lawrence Katz' new book, The Race Between Education and Technology). The synergy between public and private universities and the private sector in the Bay Area led to the development of Silicon Valley industries. The school of winemaking at UC Davis has played a role in the successful development of California's wine industry. Many of the leading vintners in Napa and Sonoma studied at Davis, and it is a continuing source of human capital and scientific research. These are just a few examples of how public investment in education creates the foundation for an innovative private sector--truly effective public-private networks. State colleges and community colleges provide retraining for out-of-work Americans, as well as life long learning opportunities for older Americans, and boot strap programs for making the transition from high school to higher education. Public and private educational institutions are also centers of culture for communities, providing homes for orchestras, dance companies, public radio stations, and theater groups. In the current economic crisis, many state governments are cutting back on just these kinds of educational investments, when they should be increasing them. That's why the economic recovery package with its financial aid to states and localities is vital as a stopgap measure---but it is only a necessary first step. Public investment in non commercial sports facilities can also be a part of a New Foundation strategy. During the New Deal, the WPA and related agencies built 12,700 playgrounds, 8,500 gymnasiums, 750 swimming pools, 1,000 ice skating rinks, 64 ski jumps, and numerous public golf courses. In the 1930s, membership in private golf courses and country clubs dropped, but municipal golf courses and public tennis courts were crowded. Soft ball leagues boomed, as did use of public beaches and swimming pools. Leisure time was democratized. The nation needs a similar growth in sports facilities, especially in urban areas. Sports activities reduce health costs, improve quality of life and reduce crime. A campaign led by the hoopster President could make us a nation of players, not just spectators (amateur athletes purchase lots of gear too). Of course, professional sports will go on, fans will cheer for their favorite teams--but corporate sponsorships and over the top Super bowl parties might diminish. A renaissance of healthy, safe food can be promoted by the new First Family. Already a new assistant chef has been hired who likes to cook healthy, locally grown foods. The expansion of urban farmers markets (a political movement begun in Santa Monica in the 1980s) allows small local farmers to make a living and creates jobs in the restaurant and food industries. Michelle Obama might want to pay a visit to one of the farmers markets in the DC area (there is one every week on the grounds of the National Institutes of Health). Successful small businesses have grown from start-up stalls at local food and crafts markets. Another part of a New Foundation strategy should be a make-over of the Small Business Administration into a center for the support of entrepreneurship and innovation. The country needs more of what INC columnist Bo Burlingham calls "small giants"--companies that produce good products while treating their workers fairly, respecting their customers, and protecting the environment (see his book, Small Giants--Companies that Chose to Be Great Instead of Big for examples). A New Foundation banking system would provide loans and business advice to these kinds of dynamic small businesses rather than make speculative, nonproductive investments. A New Foundation strategy for spurring both public and private investment can lead to more jobs, and to changing the contours and content of economic growth. We need to measure the outcomes of the economy in more human terms. An international commission headed by Nobel economists Joe Stiglitz of Columbia and Amatya Sen of Harvard is reviewing alternative economic indicators, and looking at how to devise better ways to assess quality of life--new measures of economic, social and environmental status. The report is due this April. President Obama could embrace the report by inviting Stiglitz and Sen to the White House to discuss their findings, An added benefit is that the commission was championed by French President Nicholas Sarkozy, so the meeting could also make for good public diplomacy. President Obama's speech to Congress this month is a chance to refine and reboot his message of change by explaining to Americans his vision of what the change will be. He can offer concrete examples of how he will ignite these engines of growth, and explain the human metrics by which he wants his efforts judged. He can ask the nation to join him in building a New Foundation of prosperity--one that will make a more decent, fairer and more productive society. The New Deal is history. The challenge of constructing a New Foundation is Obama's clear and present opportunity.
 
NYC Marriage Bureau Turns Away Hundreds Of Same-Sex Couples Top
NEW YORK — Hundreds of same-sex couples seeking to wed were turned away from the city marriage bureau Thursday, part of a nationwide protest aimed at recent decisions restricting the right to marry to a man and a woman. Wearing signs that said "Just Not Married," the activists were part of a wave of demonstrations expected throughout the day at marriage bureaus or county clerks' offices from New York City to California, in communities large and small. Matt Flanders, 37, of Brooklyn, participated with his 29-year-old partner, Will Jennings. Both wore gold engagement rings. When he was denied a marriage license, Flanders said he told officials: "'I should be able to marry the person I love.' And they said, `We can only offer you a domestic partnership.'" Micah Stanek, 23, stood outside in a floor-length wedding veil after he and his partner were rejected. He said he moved to New York from San Francisco after gay marriage was outlawed in California on the November ballot. "New York is especially important because the rest of the country follows what happens here," he said. Outside the bureau, protesters sang "Love and Marriage" and chanted, "What do we want? Marriage! When do we want it? Now!" One man held a sign that read: "Love your husband? Let me love mine!" The protests, part of the 12th annual Freedom to Marry Week, were considered more important than ever this year because they come in the wake of California's Proposition 8 vote that overturned gay marriage and just as New Yorkers look to their state Senate to pass legislation that could lead to legalized gay marriage. Some of the largest gatherings were expected in California, where the state's Supreme Court will hear oral arguments March 5 over whether to restore California same-sex marriages. The court could render a decision as early as June. In New York, same-sex marriages cannot legally be performed. However, Gov. David Paterson has issued a directive requiring that all state agencies recognize same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions. Senate Majority Leader Malcolm A. Smith has suggested that he and his fellow Democrats lack the votes needed to pass a same-sex marriage bill this year. However, Smith said several days ago that he and fellow legislators are "committed to pursuing its passage." The line at the New York City's marriage bureau also included straight engaged couples. "They didn't bother us on our big day and they have a right to protest," said King Lau, 30, as his bride-to-be, Cheryl Zhang, 25, nodded in agreement. Freedom to Marry events around the country are listed on Web sites, including those run by two major organizations behind the protests _ Join the Impact and the national grass-roots organization Marriage Equality USA. ___ On the Net: Marriage Equality USA: http://www.marriageequality.org Join the Impact: http://jointheimpact.com Family Research Council: http://www.frc.org More on Gay Marriage
 
Nicole Williams: Reignite the Spark in Your Career Top
It happens to the best of relationships. The fire is alive and burning in the beginning, and then several months down the road the passion is gone and we find ourselves wondering what turned us on in the first place. Using the same practices for spicing up your love life, you can rekindle the fire for your work and actually start enjoying your job again. Go Back to the Way Things Were Remember how it was when you started? Work was fun and you were motivated to look and do your best. Now the project that was once new and exciting has started to gray. Go back to how it was: you had a clean desk, a clear vision, and an optimistic, take-charge attitude. Make a list of what you like doing best and dedicate more time to those items. Set deadlines for finishing any other tasks so they'll be out of the way. Get in the habit of politely rejecting volunteer projects or menial tasks that can be delegated. Make Time for Each Other When was the last time you zoned out the rest of the world and really spent some intimate time with your favorite parts of the job? Steal moments of quiet time with the door closed or a set of headphones on so you can really focus. Forget multi-tasking, concentrate on crossing off one item from your To-Do list at a time, and give it your full attention so you can crank out your best work. Take a Reality Check At some point we all catch ourselves fantasizing about the cute cop or the mailman in uniform. It's a natural tendency to wonder if we'd be happier in a different situation -- whether it's in work or in romance. What you wouldn't give for a more flexible schedule, better benefits, an office with a no-jerk policy... But the reality is that no one is 100 percent happy with their jobs. So talk with others in your industry at different companies, and you'll probably discover the grass isn't necessarily greener. Take comfort in their anguish (secretly, of course) and be grateful for the positive aspects of your position. Get Yours When you're constantly giving and don't pause to think about what you're getting in return, burn out comes on full speed. Take stock of what you're getting out of the hours you're slogging. Are you learning a ton? Are your skills are improving? Have you made a nice network of people you can call upon for advice? If you're still feeling cheated, make sure your boss is aware of how you prefer to be rewarded and acknowledged for your hard work. Do you want recognition in meetings? To be included in higher-level discussions? A bonus? You name it. The worst they can say is 'no,' which every smart person knows just means 'not now.' More on Careers
 
Chris Campbell: Alex Rodriguez's Admission Top
If pressed to cite my longest-running passion, it would have to be the New York Yankees. I began visiting the Stadium before I could walk. I was there for Charlies Hayes' catch as the Yankees secured the World Series in 1996. By pure luck, I sat far up the right field upper deck when David Wells tossed his perfect game. I saw Seaver's 300th win in 1985. And there were the dramatic shots by Tino and Derek in the 2001 Series. And yes, I was there for many dreadful games during the eighties. In addition to being on hand for many memorable games and moments, the circus that is often Yankees baseball has provided years and years of memories. From Billy Martin to Yogi's boycott and Winfield's bird incident to Jack McDowell's own bird incident, through ups and downs, the Yanks are never lacking in excitement and drama. I can vividly remember the day the Yankees surrendered Alfonso Soriano for Alex Rodriguez. Despite his massive talents and a decade-plus of years ahead of him, I was devastated. Not only was Soriano one of my favorite Yankees, but I just couldn't imagine a player like A-Rod transitioning to New York. The Yankees' run of the late 90's was not brought on by any superstar talent, but rather a collection of gutsy, hard-working and selfless players, the likes of Tino Martinez, Paul O'Neill, Scott Brosius, El Duque and David Cone. There was a cohesiveness to those teams that I just couldn't imagine A-Rod fitting into. And then there was the pressure of tossing on the pinstripes. Many gifted players have signed on to the Yankees over the years, and quickly saw their talents buried under the pressure of the New York media and fans. Those were my fears with Alex Rodriguez. How Rodriguez has fared with the Yankees in his first five years is well documented. He puts up massive numbers during the regular season but disappears in the postseason. His on-and-off the field distractions and endless tabloid appearances anger the fans to no end. There was the slap at Bronson Arroyo and the pop-fly incident in Toronto. But through all the ups-and-downs, he remained a Yankee, and as such, most of us defended him. Or at the very least, we simply kept quiet. As he continued to struggle in the postseason, patience started to wear thin. How could a player of such enormous talent and ability fall so flat in October? It was pretty clear that it was all in his head. The pressure of New York didn't manifest itself so much over the course of a long regular season, but once it came down to the meaningful at-bats that could determine the season's outcome, A-Rod would seize up. But again, he was a Yankee, and after the 2007 signing, he wasn't going anywhere. We would continue to pull for him. And then came Saturday morning. The whole baseball world was turned inside out again, as arguably the greatest talent ever to play the game, Alex Rodriguez, had tested positive for steroids in 2003. Unlike the media at large, I didn't immediately pounce at the opportunity to finally put an end to supporting A-Rod. Not because he's a Yankee, but rather because I've never considered individual players as the primary deviants throughout the steroid era. Before you click to close this page, let me briefly explain. At some point in the 90s or so, performance-enhancing drugs started to run rampant throughout baseball. As the culture almost became the norm, the league reaped the benefits. Following the strike season of 1994, baseball needed something to shine the spotlight back on this wonderful game. As 1998 rolled around and baseballs were leaving parks at a rapid rate, the public started to move past '94. We all remember the spectacle of Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa. Once again, baseball was everywhere. It was thrilling to see them chase Maris and ultimately move past him. We'd later learn that this was all a scam. Those records were attained not solely by talent and hard work, but also by drugs. The purest game in America was suddenly turning sour fast. We questioned everyone and everything. And through it all, Bud Selig, the commissioner of the game, turned a blind eye. As more and more players turned to the juice, what were the clean players supposed to do? Should they allow a portion of the league to put up tainted numbers and watch their hard work be overshadowed by cheaters? And since the league's top brass were doing very little to stop this behavior, this only added to the lure. I am in no way excusing those who cheated the game, but this fiasco is deeper than any one player's indiscretions, as egregious as they may be. After two days of nothing from Rodriguez, he has now come forward and admitted that he did take performance-enhancing drugs while a member of the Texas Rangers. Unlike Clemens, McGwire and Palmeiro, who are about as easy to track down as bin Laden, and unlike Giambi and Pettitte who offered up somewhat weak admissions, after first viewing, it appears as if Rodriguez is saying a lot. He has admitted to taking substances for well over two seasons. Sure, maybe he had no choice but to come clean, but my initial reaction to his first statements is that I'm finally seeing this amazing talent let his guard down. He's finally dropped the false pretenses and revealed his insecurities and errors. And despite all the baggage that his past and the last few days' news has brought, at least for today, we're seeing a side of Alex Rodriguez that fans just might accept.
 
Adam Sachs: An Open Letter To The Ladies On Valentine's Day...From Some Dudes Top
Ladies, we want you to know that Valentine's Day is the most confusing and frightening day of the year for men. We love you and our only intention is making this day special for you, or at the very least, not disappointing you. The problem is that the harder we try to make this day perfect, the wronger our instincts ultimately prove to be. If we were smart, we'd pull a George Costanza and recognize that "if every instinct we've ever had is wrong, then the opposite would have to be right." But instead of ditching the proverbial tuna on toast for "chicken salad, on rye, untoasted...and a cup of tea," we let our instincts guide us. This inevitably leads to disappointment and miscommunication in the triumvirate of Valentine's Day events: Dining, Gifting, and Romping. Dining For weeks leading up toe the big day we're scanning the Internet, looking for the most romantic restaurant in town. Worried that you'll think we copped out by discovering that we chose the number four restaurant in Zagat's list of Top 10 Romantic, we remember a special meal that we had in October that we paid a fortune for. You loved that meal (at least you said you did) and the vegetarianna that you are even ate red meat for the first time in seven years. We think, wow you really enjoyed that meal so much that you even made a dietary exception to get their namesake dish. This is going to be perfect. So we make the reservation, preparing to shell out another $300 for dinner and wine, make you close your eyes in the cab and when we get there, you're pissed. "Why are we at Peter Luger's on Valentine's Day?? Did you forget I'm a vegetarian?" FAIL. Gifting Giving VDay gifts to us is super easy. We like cool stuff. The Chumby you got us for our desk at work is the perfect Valentine's Day prezzie. For us, if a gift is romantic, in our heads that means it's not something we can use after tonight. If you want to give us something romantic, give us something cool. Because we like cool, practical gifts, we can't seem to shake the fact that you simply do not. For us, the gift giving is a source of extreme stress. They say that from great constraint comes great creativity. That couldn't not be more true in this case. Somebody once told us that being romantic means being a really good listener. With that in mind, we think back to different items you've recently mentioned wanting. High-waisted shorts? Yeah you've been dying for those. This is going to knock her socks off . We picture you talking to your friends on the fifteenth: Friend: He got you SHORTS?? You: Yes, but he overheard me say that I was browsing for high-waisted shorts online at work and he REMEMBERED! It's so romantic. Friend: OMG is he single?! Oh wait, he's your boyfriend. But that's not what happens. Instead, it goes like this: Friend: He got you SHORTS?? You: Yeah, he's a shmuck. Friend: Glad he's not my boyfriend. Romping If we've done even a passable job in the Dining and Gifting categories and we didn't get in a huge argument after dinner, this tends to be the time in the night where you Ladies start to feel the immense pressure that we've been feeling leading up to this day. You want to reward us, and in your heads, that means you have to use your memory and come up with something creative that we might like. So, you think back to that hungover brunch where we mentioned that we wanted to make love to the omelette we were eating and the next thing we know there are egg whites and feta joining us in the VDay sack and Philippe, the line cook, is standing in the corner over a griddle cooking up some hash browns. ... The truth is, we're simple creatures and really just enjoy the normal stuff that we do all the time. Sure, we'll occasionally make a "joke" about how we'd like to try a threesome and chuckle insincerely while we attempt to judge your reaction. But in reality we don't really need to stray to far from the routine to enjoy ourselves, so don't fret. With that, ladies, our hope is that on this Valentine's Day, you will try to believe that all of our actions leading up to now have been driven solely by love and the desire to please you. We want to create a flawless day for you because that is what you deserve. All we ask for in return is that you cut us some slack and enjoy your porterhouse. *** Adam Sachs is co-founder and CEO of Ignighter.com , a NYC-based, venture funded group dating site providing a safer, less awkward, more fun alternative for young professionals to meet new people. More on valentine's day
 
Shelly Palmer: FCC May Ban Stations From Switching to Digital Early: MediaBytes with Shelly Palmer February 12, 2009 Top
FCC chairman Michael Copps noted that TV stations looking to make the digital transition before June 12th may be barred from doing so . As many as 690 local TV stations want to make the transition now to save thousands of dollars in broadcasting fees. So far only 190 stations have been granted permission to make the the switch. As expected, the Justice Department is set to investigate the Live Nation, Ticketmaster merger . The deal, worth a reported $2.5 billion, would create a monopoly in the entertainment industry. CNET is reporting that Apple will introduce a $99 iPhone this summer . The entry-level iPhone, which would carry 8GB of memory, would run on the EDGE networks and may have a "light" data plan at half the cost of regular iPhone plan. If Apple does release a cheaper iPhone and agrees to a deal with Walmart, the iPhone could become increasingly more prevalent in the marketplace. Liberty Media , the parent company of DirecTV , is in early discussions with Sirius XM about a possible merger . Liberty Media is the direct competitor of EchoStar (who owns Dish Network), who made an unsolicited bid for Sirius in December and has been looking to taking over the company. Some analysts believe that Liberty Media's talks with Sirius could be a ploy to get EchoStar, their arch nemesis, pay an inflated price for the company. According to the AP, Facebook is now being valued at $3.7 billion . The AP notes that the appraised value of the social network came from court documents from a lawsuit against Facebook which claimed Marc Zuckerberg stole fellow students idea. The $3.7 billion valuation was the set value used to deliver employee stock options. Shelly Palmer is a consultant and the host of MediaBytes a daily show featuring news you can use about technology, media & entertainment. He is Managing Director of Advanced Media Ventures Group LLC and the author of Television Disrupted: The Transition from Network to Networked TV (2008, York House Press). Shelly is also President of the National Academy of Television Arts & Sciences, NY (the organization that bestows the coveted Emmy® Awards ). You can join the MediaBytes mailing list here . Shelly can be reached at shelly@palmer.net More on Apple
 
Christopher Warren, Fraud Suspect, Caught At Border With $70,000 In Cowboy Boots, $1M In Swiss Bank Certificates Top
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — A suspect in a nationwide mortgage fraud scheme who fled the country was caught at the Canadian border with $70,000 stuffed in his cowboy boots and nearly $6,000 worth of platinum, authorities said Wednesday. Christopher J. Warren, 26, was arrested early Wednesday while entering the United States at Buffalo, N.Y. After he disappeared Feb. 3, Warren was charged with conspiracy, fraud and conducting a continuing financial crime. If convicted, he faces life in prison. Warren is the second of three fugitives to be caught in the ongoing fraud investigation of Loomis Wealth Solutions, a Roseville, Calif.-based investment company, and several related companies. Court documents alleged they defrauded investors and mortgage companies of $100 million since 2006. The fraudulent deals involved 500 homes and condominiums in California, Florida, Nevada, Illinois, Colorado and Arizona, according to Internal Revenue Service affidavits. Warren flew to Ireland on Feb. 3 on a chartered private jet, then traveled to Lebanon and Canada, acting U.S. Attorney Lawrence Brown said. U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents were on the lookout for him when he took a taxi from Toronto to the border at Buffalo. Prosecutors said Warren had photocopies of assay certificates showing the weight and purity of $1.1 million worth of gold, but it was unclear if he actually had ownership of that gold. They earlier had said he was carrying $1 million in Swiss bank certificates. Authorities believe Warren also had brought to Lebanon $4 million to $5 million in gold, which he had shown some of the flight crew, but that has not been recovered, Brown said. "He's a man of high style _ all of it ill-gotten," the prosecutor said. Brown also said Warren was carrying two fake passports with an alias, and authorities previously said he had obtained a passport with another name and indicated he planned to go to Mexico. Warren had an initial court appearance in Buffalo on Wednesday, Brown said. He was represented by a federal public defender, Roxanne Mendez Johnson, who declined comment. Don Heller, Warren's lawyer in Sacramento, said he was disappointed that his client chose to flee, adding: "I think he will now pay the price." On Tuesday, authorities announced that a second suspect in the case, Garret Griffith Gililland III, 27, of Chico, had been apprehended in Spain in October. He is fighting extradition to the U.S. Authorities are still looking for Scott Cavell, 25, of Sacramento, who they said fled the country a day after Warren left. Lawrence Leland "Lee" Loomis, president of Loomis Wealth Solutions, has not been charged with any crime. His attorney denies any wrongdoing by his client. Brown said the investigation into the mortgage scheme was ongoing. ___ Associated Press writer Carolyn Thompson Buffalo, N.Y., contributed to this report.
 
1930s British Ladies Kick Bandit Ass Top
In this forward-thinking British newsreel from the 20s or 30s, Miss May Whitley and her bandit friend show ladies how to defend themselves from scoundrels. Using Jujitsu she makes short work of her fiendish foe. It all ends up looking like a Marx brothers movie at some point, but the slow motion at the end is particularly fabulous. WATCH: In this second newsreel we learn that not only a man but a WOMAN could give an attacker some "tender moments" using this method of self-defense. For your entertainment Bob Gregory and company show you how... WATCH: (via BoingBoing) More on Funny Videos
 
Avigdor Lieberman, Kingmaker Of Israel's Right, Courted By Rivals Top
Both claiming to have won Israel's general election, foreign minister Tzipi Livni and Likud opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu yesterday each began intensive efforts to court the hard-right populist Avigdor Lieberman as a coalition partner. Mr Lieberman has emerged as one of the main beneficiaries of Tuesday's vote, with a probable 15 seats and considerable power to make or break each leader's chances of forming a government. He met each of them in Jerusalem yesterday, without committing to either. His apparent indispensability casts serious doubt on whether any government capable of negotiating a peace deal with the Palestinians can emerge from the current political imbroglio. His support is indispensable especially to Ms Livni, who faces a much tougher battle to form a workable government, despite her impressive personal showing in keeping the centrist Kadima party intact. Most analysts believe that Mr Netanyahu has a significantly better chance than Ms Livni of becoming Prime Minister. Even if it is not his preference, he should be able to form a government from the right-wing bloc which will now command a majority of the Knesset's 120 seats. With 99 per cent of the results in (leaving only military and absentee ballots to be counted before this afternoon) Ms Livni, who unlike Mr Netanyahu is pledged to continue talks on a peace deal with the Palestinians, had won 28 of 120 Knesset seats in Tuesday's vote, with Likud at 27 seats. Mr Netanyahu has little interest in negotiations on a "final status" deal with the Palestinians. Ms Livni is likely to find herself heavily constrained if she depends for survival on Mr Lieberman - and possibly, despite its stated preference for Mr Netanyahu, on the right-wing ultra orthodox party Shas, which now has 11 seats. On the pronounced shift to the right demonstrated by the election results, the prominent Haaretz commentator Aluf Benn said yesterday: "The Obama message of new hope and new energy in the peace process failed to reach Israeli voters." Although Mr Lieberman suggested early yesterday that his preference was for a right-wing nationalist coalition, he indicated he would keep talking to Ms Livni, who is likely to offer concessions towards his aspirations for reforms leading to a more presidential system of government. Ms Livni also broadly shares Mr Lieberman's broadly secular outlook. She said after her meeting with Mr Lieberman: "The public decided and established who it wants to see as the prime minister. This is an opportunity for unity that can promote the issues that are important to you as well." But she also faces strong opposition to sitting in a coalition with Mr Lieberman from within other potential coalition partners she needs on the (severely diminished) left. The Ynet news service yesterday reported that Ehud Barak, leader of the Labour Party, which crashed to a record low of 13 seats in the election, had told his parliamentarians he now envisaged the party going into opposition. Mr Lieberman, who wants to reduce the number of Arab Israeli citizens, and fought his campaign on his proposal for a "loyalty" test for Israeli Arabs, left Ehud Olmert's coalition in January in 2008 in protest at its negotiations with the moderate Palestinian leadership in the West Bank. While he does not oppose two states in principle, he is likely to be a formidable brake on such negotiations in the foreseeable future. He also made clear in his post-election speech that Hamas would have to be "toppled" by any government he joined. Mr Barak's stance - if reinforced in practice - would also be a blow to Mr Netanyahu's aspiration to widen the base of his government beyond the right - not least in the hope of establishing better relations with the new US presidency. Mr Benn said yesterday that the Likud leader's main regret about Mr Netanyahu's previous premiership from 1996 to 1999 was that he had not brought Labour into his coalition. Narrow right-wing support, said Mr Benn, would increase pressure on Mr Netanyahu "to build more settlements, use force. He is afraid of that - how afraid, I don't know". With both parties seeking urgently to build coalitions which can last for a whole parliament, spokesmen for both Likud and Kadima were quick to reject the idea of a rotating premiership - as took place after the 1984 election. The proposal might be one way that President Shimon Peres, a founder member of Kadima and advocate of a two-state solution, could bring Ms Livni to power when he selects a party leader to form a government next week. "There won't be a rotation," Silvan Shalom, the former Likud foreign minister told Army Radio. "That method is chosen when there is a 60-60 balance between the blocs, and that just is not the case now. The victory is clear." As debate continued among commentators on the possibility of a rotating premiership, Kadima minister Meir Sheetrit said: "A rotation is a bad thing, a kind of experiment to square out the round... I suggesting we stop experimenting on the state." Related article: Anne Penketh: Obama will need all of his 'out-of-the-box' thinking to tackle Israel Read more from the Independent. More on Israel
 
Stuart Whatley: Book Review: Why Evolution Is True Top
200 years ago today, Charles Darwin was born. And in November of this year, the theory of Darwinism and the evolution-creation debate that it fuels, will be 150 years-old. It has traversed myriad battlefields from science journals to school boards to the courtroom and now predominantly to books, blogs, and magazines directed towards average Americans. This seems to be both where it belongs and where it will stay. When Darwin published The Origin of Species in 1859 it was soon thereafter accepted by most scientists worldwide. 150 years later, one must be obstinately delusional to reject it on academic grounds, and yet this tragically describes a massive segment of America. In fact, according to biologist Jerry Coyne in his new book Why Evolution Is True , it's 40 percent of the population (and a new Gallup poll this week confirms that alarming ratio). In this sense, we rank as the second most atavistic country in Western civilization, with the culturally Islamic, Ottoman vestige of Turkey occupying first place. This explains why America's evolution-creation clash metastasizes into public school boards, which are comprised of scientific laypeople who are yet charged with deciding science curricula. Sometimes these school boards choose to favor majority-held belief over accepted scientific knowledge, and the "democratic" effect is what H.L. Mencken described as "the collective wisdom of individual ignorance." (The possibility of belief trumping knowledge in science classes was most recently averted in the case Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District , in Pennsylvania in late 2005, wherein the court ruled that Intelligent Design is analogous to religious creationism.) Coyne's prerogative in Why Evolution Is True is to point out that Darwinism is a scientific theory , which according to the Oxford English Dictionary is, "a hypothesis that has been confirmed or established by observation or experiment, and is propounded or accepted as accounting for the known facts ." It is a theory in the same ways that gravity and relativity are theories--it is for all intents and purposes a verified and observable fact. This is perhaps the foremost misconception plaguing the matter. And such is the premise for Why Evolution is True . Coyne, a professor at the University of Chicago's department of ecology and evolution and co-author of the textbook, Speciation , has written his latest screed for scientific laypeople. And by framing the implications of countless breakthroughs in paleontology, embryology, genetics, molecular biology and various other fields, he seeks to render the last vestiges of Darwin's opposition categorically baseless. After reading Coyne, one cannot help but judge rejecters of Darwinism as co-attendants to some intellectual school that still believe the world to be flat or that diseases result from inexorable divine caprice. The book is concise but thorough, laden with example after example of instances wherein an unyielding point becomes clear: that Darwinian evolution is the only explanation for countless biological phenomena found in nature. Some of what Coyne gives us is but a refresher of points we have presumably heard before, notably the argument that makes light of the unintelligence in our "design". If we were intelligently created, why was it done so maladroitly? Why do humans have vestigial features--such as the appendix, which biologists have labeled a purely injurious organ--if we were divinely created rather than evolved? What about the prostate? As Coyne notes, "a smart designer wouldn't put a collapsible tube through an organ prone to infection and swelling." The subject matter, needless to say, is not all new. However, much of the empirical evidence Coyne cites is, and it plays a vital role for updating the debate. As recently as 2004, for example, the paleontological discovery of the 375 million year-old Tiktaalik roseae --a truly transitional form between fish and amphibian--is appropriately described as "one of the greatest fulfilled predictions of evolutionary biology." Coyne also reveals to his reader what he considers to be his favorite evidentiary example of all: the fetal lanugo , a coat of "fur" human fetuses develop at around 6 months that is later shed before birth. And, if this hirsute monkey-like stage of our development isn't revealing enough, he directs us to an even earlier stage: the human embryo, which at first glance is almost indistinguishable from that of a fish embryo. Incidentally, our individual development seems to follow a very similar path to the macro-evolutionary progression of our ancestors--from a fish-like stage to an amphibian-like stage to the mammalian stage. In another chapter, Coyne stresses the importance of biogeography, that is, the peculiar arrangement of species on continents versus different island types. His primary example is the Juan Fernandez island chain, about 400 miles west of Chile. The islands have a disproportionate variety of birds, insects, and plants but not a single endemic species of amphibian, reptile, or mammal. As Coyne points out, this is an unsolvable puzzle for a strict creationist but actually quite predictable to an evolutionist when the inevitable movement of continents and the migratory capabilities of the native species' ancestors are taken into account. Furthering this repletion of direct empirical evidence, Coyne also points out the fascinating phenomenon known as sexual selection , such as a male peacock's tail feathers or Central American male Tungara frogs' recognizable mating vocalizations. For these species, and many others, such attributes do nothing to aid survival, but are the sine qua non of mating to pass on one's genetic code. As Coyne notes, no benevolent creator would burden these species with such a proverbial target on their back. The only explanation is that these pronounced attributes are effective enough to allow the most conspicuous members of the species to reproduce before they are picked off. The ironic result is that those with more outlandish features end up passing on their DNA while their more camouflaged competition falls by the evolutionary wayside. This not only verifies a reasonable prediction of Darwinism, it also undermines the Intelligent Design claim that evolution is guided . As with all of his examples, Coyne notes that sexual selection can only be explained either by evolution or by a designer who is no more than a prankster. This is telling, however, in that it reveals the book to be inextricably oriented around countering Intelligent Design--a moniker and argument first attributed to author-scientist Michael Behe--rather than being a purely insulated book about biology. The books on evolution published by Coyne and his colleagues (Dawkins, Miller, et al.), as well as Behe and his colleagues (Dembski, Wells, et al.) on the other side of the aisle, are ostensibly directed towards a wider audience of laypeople. And one cannot help but notice that they follow up every point made with a careful explanation for why it is important in specifically debunking the others' claims. It is, as it were, an academic "cage match" to be watched by all those interested. Coyne's approach is not that of a dispassionate, robotic lecturer, but rather a belabored, embattled centurion of science. Evident as he expounds on each of his examples is trenchant frustration with what he considers to be scientific skullduggery by the opposition--currently known as the school of Intelligent Design, but formerly known as Creation Science, which itself was formerly known just as Creationism (and so forth). In a microcosm of the larger feud, Coyne himself has sedulously rebuked in speeches, blogs, and other publications the ongoing claims made by his foils on the other side of the debate (especially Behe). In an excoriating review for The New Republic of Behe's newest book, The Edge of Evolution (2007), Coyne attacks the full extent of Behe's resume. Among other points, he describes Of Pandas and People , the Intelligent Design textbook Behe helped write, as "a Trojan horse poised before the public schools: a seemingly secular vessel ready to inject its religious message into the science curriculum." Permitting an indulgence in analogy, one cannot help but notice that the arguments for Darwinism versus creationism have themselves evolved. With Coyne's side sharing a common ancestry in Darwin and Behe's side in Thomas Aquinas (via William Paley), both have now developed their argument in the laboratory but eventually must convince a mostly non-academic jury. The ironic effect is that two experts are vying for validation from laypeople. (It should be noted that Behe does actually accept the age of the earth to be 5 billion plus years and that species share common ancestry. His differences arise more out of his belief that genetic mutations are guided, rather than being random occurrences.) To the average American, Coyne and Behe's crucial disagreement may be viewed as nothing more than academic pedantry. However, it is important all the same because their point of contention is precisely the point where, for many, secular science and religious belief clash. Behe's primary arguments--irreducible complexity and non-random mutation--are the vehicles for his conclusion that there is a designer. Though a majority of biologists have refuted these arguments from a scientific standpoint, what matters to rejecters of Darwinism is not that it is bad science, but that it gets away with adopting the appellation of "science" at all--they require no further confirmation to be satisfied. It is for this reason that Coyne's book may have little effect on those who hold such concrete beliefs. Tragically, this is even admitted in his Preface, when Coyne writes that, "for those who oppose Darwinism purely as a matter of faith, no amount of evidence will do--theirs is a belief that is not based on reason." And while Coyne and his colleagues have been forced to address Intelligent Design's scientific claims head on, they are also obliged to offer commensurate psychological/spiritual rewards for accepting Darwinism over creationism. This is undoubtedly their most daunting challenge. Belief in a designer has all the appeal to mystery and security and lazy axiomatic explanation that gave rise to religion in the first place. Darwinism offers the beauty of nature and the pursuit of knowledge. But in the fight for many peoples' visceral convictions, it is abjectly outgunned. Naturalists can attempt to substitute for their inherent metaphysical bankruptcy until they turn blue, it surely will not satisfy the truly faithful. Nevertheless, Coyne concludes with a plea to his reader to not give in to the misconception that "accepting evolution will somehow sunder our society, wreck our morality, impel us to behave like beasts, and spawn a new generation of Hitlers and Stalins." This may be demonstrably true on a broad societal basis, but it is difficult to see how most individual believers, who just aren't satisfied by the beauty of nature alone, will ever embrace Darwinism entirely--even if it is an indisputable fact. This is unfortunate, but it is certainly no fault of Coyne's.
 
Keith Olbermann Apologizes, Corrects Erroneous Story On Rupert Murdoch (VIDEO) Top
Keith Olbermann apologized and issued a correction over an erroneous transcript of a Rupert Murdoch quote from a recent News Corp earnings call. Olbermann has enjoyed repeating Murdoch's claim that News Corp has "never been a company that tolerates facts." However, the transcript of the call — provided by SeekingAlpha.com — misreported the Aussie mogul's statement, which actually said that News Corp has "never been a company that tolerates fat ," an obvious major distinction. "SeekingAlpha.com has yet to correct or apologize for its mistake, so we will," Olbermann said. In the next breath, Olbermann awarded Bill O'Reilly the silver medal for Worst Person in the World, and stuck it to Murdoch over News Corp's stock price: Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News , World News , and News about the Economy Incidentally, while Olbermann would apologize for his error, O'Reilly refused to apologize Wednesday night for likening Helen Thomas to the "wicked witch of the east." Watch that segment here . More on Video On HuffPost
 

CREATE MORE ALERTS:

Auctions - Find out when new auctions are posted

Horoscopes - Receive your daily horoscope

Music - Get the newest Album Releases, Playlists and more

News - Only the news you want, delivered!

Stocks - Stay connected to the market with price quotes and more

Weather - Get today's weather conditions




You received this email because you subscribed to Yahoo! Alerts. Use this link to unsubscribe from this alert. To change your communications preferences for other Yahoo! business lines, please visit your Marketing Preferences. To learn more about Yahoo!'s use of personal information, including the use of web beacons in HTML-based email, please read our Privacy Policy. Yahoo! is located at 701 First Avenue, Sunnyvale, CA 94089.
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)