Saturday, February 28, 2009

Y! Alert: The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Yahoo! Alerts
My Alerts

The latest from The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Heather Robinson: Bangladeshi Journalist, Champion of Free Speech in the Muslim World, Attacked Top
On Monday, a gang of thugs stormed the newspaper office of The Weekly Blitz , an independent newspaper based in Dhaka, Bangladesh, and physically attacked its editor, Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury. Choudhury, 39, advocates normalized relations between his country and Israel, and also has worked to expose the widespread brainwashing of Bangladeshi youth into radical Islam. Choudhury sustained injuries to his eye, shoulder and neck in last Monday's attack, which he believes was perpetrated by members of Bangladesh's ruling Awami League party. In a phone interview from Bangladesh on Tuesday, Choudhury shared details of the attack. "I don't say these people were sent by the government, but they are members of the ruling party," he said. "They were beating me and shouting I am a Mossad agent. Many people here are anti-Israel and they were trying to capitalize on anti-Israel sentiment. "Since the new government [came to power] in January, this is the first attack on a news office." Choudhury suggested the Bangladeshi police were not effectual in protecting him or his staff, several of whom were beaten alongside him in broad daylight. There is, he maintains, "a kind of silent cooperation from law enforcement." "The police came but did not stop them," he said. "The police were interested in escorting us but they did not do anything to the attackers." The attackers confiscated his laptop, which he says contained much of the material for his book, Inside Madrassa. The book concerns widespread brainwashing of children that takes place in the madrassas of Bangladesh, which are not accountable to the government, as well as institutionalized discrimination against women in his country, he says. This is not the first time the Bangladeshi government has tried to stifle Choudhury, who is a Sunni Muslim, for his investigative reporting and his views. In 2003, as he was attempting to travel to Israel, government agents arrested him. They incarcerated him, held him for 17 months, and tortured him. During those 17 months, he was denied medical treatment for his glaucoma, which worsened as a result of his incarceration. After Choudhury was imprisoned, Dr. Richard Benkin, an American human rights activist and retired college sociology professor with whom he had exchanged information online, became aware of Choudhury's plight. Benkin brought the case to the attention of his Congressman, Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), who pressured the Bangladeshi government to release Choudhury. At that time, the government in Bangladesh was a center-right government. Bangladesh's present government, which came to power in December, is a left-wing government known as the Awami League that holds secularist and anti-American views. But Choudhury explains that, left or right, those in power in Bangladesh have not exhibited tolerance for free speech. "Whether Muslim or secular, they are anti-Zionist. Because I promote relations with Israel, for me there is no mercy with them," he says. His family also suffers. "My wife and children are terrorized," he says. "But it is the life they have learned to live, in adversity." As a journalist, he feels it is his duty to continue raising awareness, particularly about the mass indoctrination of children taking place in many of the schools of Bangladesh. "The madrassas are not accountable to the government," he says. "[Children] are taught to hate the Jews and Christians ... kill them and remain good Muslims." As of Thursday, Choudhury was in the process of healing physically, but still under threat and unable to go to his newspaper's office. He continues to publish The Weekly Blitz online from his home. His staff is unable to go in to the office because they do not have police protection. Benkin continues to advocate for Choudhury, and told me in a phone interview today that it is vital to raise awareness about Choudhury's plight. Benkin has received support for Choudhury from leaders in the U.S. Congress from both sides of the aisle. "I approached Dick Durbin and Rick Santorum around the same time--as far left and as far right as you can go--and both were equally supportive," Benkin said. "Both recognized the value in opposing this sort of human rights violation." Benkin said U.S. citizens can reach out to their representatives in Congress and urge them to enforce House Resolution 64, which passed in 2007 by a vote of 409 to 1. That resolution called upon the government of Bangladesh to stop harassing Choudhury, and drop charges against him. "[The current Bangladeshi government] figured they could [harass Choudhury] without anyone caring," Benkin said. "There's a new administration in Dhaka and a new one in Washington and they are trying to figure out if they can harass journalists without any consequences."
 
Jacob Heilbrunn: Democrats Should Support Obama's Troop Plan Top
Leading Democrats such as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate majority leader Harry Reid are raising some reservations about President Obama's plan to leave up to 50,000 troops in Iraq. Pelosi told MSNBC's Rachel Maddow: "I don't know what the justification is for 50,000, a presence of 50,000 troops in Iraq. ... I do think that there's a need for some." Democrats should stop bickering and rally around Obama by supporting his troop plan. If Iraq remains or becomes even more stable in 2010, then Obama will almost surely draw down troops even more quickly than he's currently announcing. The 50,000 number is obviously a preventive measure, to make sure that the situation in Iraq doesn't deteriorate into factional violence. Imagine the criticism Obama would come under if Iraq is in a lot worse shape a year from now. A "Who Lost Iraq" debate would erupt, with the GOP claiming that cowardly Democratic policies had led directly to defeat. Consistent with his pragmatic bent, Obama has struck out a middle course, knowing that in 2011 all U.S. combat troops are obligated to depart Iraq. The entire sordid Iraq mess is coming to an end. Iraq will rapidly fade from American consciousness, though the damage it has done to that country, including creating millions of refugees living in Syria, Jordan and elsewhere, will not. If Democrats want to worry about something, it shouldn't be Iraq, but Afghanistan and Pakistan, which pose a mortal threat to Obama's presidency.
 
Vegas Casino Sells 2-Foot, 6-Pound Burrito Top
LAS VEGAS — A Las Vegas casino cafe is rewarding patrons who can put away a 2-foot, 6-pound burrito with a most logical prize _ free unlimited rides on a roller coaster that runs in both forward and reverse. The offer comes with a caveat, though: Those who accept the challenge but can't finish "The Bomb" burrito have to take a picture with an extra small, pink T-shirt that says "Weenie." The NASCAR Cafe at the Sahara Hotel & Casino began selling the cheese-and-guacamole slathered burrito on Thursday for $19.95. Those who can finish the monstrous entree get it for free, along with two unlimited coaster passes and a T-shirt proclaiming they "Conquered the Bomb."
 
The Man With His Own Subtitles (VIDEO) Top
This inventive video explores the life of a man with his own subtitles that he can't get rid of, only alter the size by whispering or shouting. He can't buy condoms, talk on the phone, or gossip without ridicule. WATCH: Subtitled Man - watch more funny videos More on Funny Or Die
 
Obama's Iraq Speech Receives Mixed Reviews On Capitol Hill Top
The reaction of Capitol Hill lawmakers to President Obama's Iraq troop drawdown speech today has been rather mixed. Interestingly, the President seems to be drawing strong support from Republicans, while Democratic reaction has mostly been mixed, with general support for the drawdown but caution or outright criticism of the fact that as many as 50,000 troops will remain after August 2010. The Democratic leadership seems to hedge by showing both support for the troops but also issuing caveats regarding the residual force presence. From Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office: "As President Obama's Iraq policy is implemented, the remaining missions given to our remaining forces must be clearly defined and narrowly focused so that the number of troops needed to perform them is as small as possible. The President's decision means that the time has come at last for Iraq's own security forces to have the prime responsibility for Iraq's security." And from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid: "I strongly believe that we must responsibly end the war in Iraq to make America more secure, and must keep in Iraq only those forces necessary for the security of our remaining troops and the Iraqi people. I look forward to further discussing this plan with the President and working with him to ensure we are doing what is best for America's security interests and ensuring our military remains the strongest fighting force in history." Meanwhile, a press release from House Minority Leader John Boehner voices strong agreement with the 50,000 figure: "I believe he has outlined a responsible approach that retains maximum flexibility to reconsider troop levels and to respond to changes in the security environment should circumstances on the ground warrant." And on the flip-side, some House Democrats are vociferously attacking the plan for being utterly insufficient. For example California Democrat Lynn Woolsey calls it "unacceptable": "Call such a troop level what you will, but such a large number can only be viewed by the Iraqi public as an enduring occupation force. This is unacceptable." And from Dennis Kucinich, the one other Democratic primary runner other than Barack Obama to have voted against the Iraq War: "I support President Obama for taking a step in the right direction in Iraq, but I do not think that his plan goes far enough. You cannot leave combat troops in a foreign country to conduct combat operations and call it the end of the war. You can't be in and out at the same time." More on Nancy Pelosi
 
Rowe to make jukeboxes in Mexico, not Michigan Top
GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. — Rowe International Corp. says it will move the production of its jukeboxes to Mexico after nearly a century of making them in Grand Rapids, Mich. The iconic music-machine maker told about 100 factory workers on Thursday that the change will take place in August. Rowe, one of the largest makers of commercial and residential coin-operated jukeboxes, was founded in Chicago in 1909 and moved its headquarters a few years later to Grand Rapids, where more than 1 million of the machines have been made. A St. Louis-based private equity firm owns the company. John Margold, vice president of sales, said Rowe plans to keep about 70 administrative positions in engineering, sales and accounting in Grand Rapids. "The downturn in the economy became too much, and we'd done all we could do to keep the company viable here," Margold told The Grand Rapids Press. Production will be transferred to a facility in Reynosa, Mexico, near the Texas border. Some Grand Rapids employees will be offered jobs there, according to a release issued Friday by the company. Rowe closed a Philadelphia bar-top game plant two years ago and brought work to Grand Rapids to try to contain costs, Margold said. The industry has weathered staggering changes due to technological advances. Jukeboxes have evolved from vinyl-platter players to the boom days of the compact disc to Internet-enabled machines. Rowe adapted by building machines that accepted credit cards instead of change and by building models that had the company earning a percentage of every song played.
 
Zorianna Kit: My Interview with the Jonas Brothers Top
I had a chance to sit down with the Jonas Brothers for Fandango . The three star in Jonas Brothers: The 3D Concert Experience , out Friday, Feb. 27th. The video is below:
 
James Zogby: "Arabesque" Top
Last Friday, the "Weekend" section of the Washington Post featured a cover story on "Arabesque: Art of the Arab World," the Kennedy Center's three-week-long festival of Arab arts and culture. There is no better way to begin a reflection on the program, than to quote the opening lines of the marvelous "Weekend" review by Ellen McCarthy. She wrote: "The residents of Washington might now know it yet, but something extraordinary is about to take place on the banks of the Potomac. Something that has never happened here - or anywhere, really." McCarthy was so right. From the moment the curtains opened on "Arabesque's" first night, I knew something quite remarkable was occurring, and I was, quite simply, overwhelmed. "Arabesque" is a wonder. Negotiating the logistics and politics necessary to assemble the festival was monumental. Locating the talent, securing visas, transporting sets, costumes and works of art was, itself, a remarkable undertaking, a tribute to the foresight and vision of the Kennedy Center's Director, Michael Kaiser, and the determination and the commitment of his staff to see the project to fruition. Five years in the making, the Director and staff of Washington's prestigious Kennedy Center, traveled across the Arab world to assemble a wide range of artists from all 22 Arab countries. Eight hundred performers, in all, have come to the U.S., from the traditional (Berber singers from Morocco), to the more avant-garde (Marcel Khalife, or Debbie Allen's remarkable "Omani Dancers"). There were musicians, singers and dancers, poets and painters, story-tellers, artists and craftsmen represented in the group. "Arabesque" provides Americans and Arabs alike with a profound learning experience. As Secretary General of the Arab League, Amr Moussa, noted, never before have artists from all 22 Arab countries been represented under one roof in one festival. As the festival unfolds over its three-week run, tens of thousands of Americans will see the richness and diversity of Arab culture, in all its many exquisite forms. On each day of the program, there are multiple events taking place on the Kennedy Center's many stages. On one night, for example, there were Syrian dervish dancers, a performance by a Palestinian theater troupe, and a Somali hip-hop group. At the same time, the Kennedy Center's interior has been transformed. There are exhibits of Arab bridal dresses and examples of Arabic architecture. And the basement of the Kennedy Center has become a veritable Arab souk, displaying crafts from Morocco to Iraq, for appreciation by and sale to the thousands of tourists who visit the Kennedy Center each day. Arabs, too, will learn. As I have come to note, not only do Americans (and even Arab Americans) not know the richness and diversity of Arab culture; but Arabs, too, have not been exposed to the variety of cultural expression across their broad region. We "know of" each other, but do not always "know" each other. But, here we are, thanks to the Kennedy Center, all under one roof. The experience of "Arabesque" will shatter stereotypes, and put new definition to the meaning of being Arab. For too many Americans, Arabs exist only as one-dimensional political beings, lacking hearts or souls. I remember what was, for me, a profoundly hurtful moment: on the 25th anniversary of the founding of the state of Israel, hearing comments by them-Prime Minister Golda Meir, who observed that she felt "so sad" for the "other side" (read: "Arabs"). We (read: "Israelis") are a joyful people, who laugh, make art, and love beauty. They, on the other hand, know only how to be angry and make war. This, of course, was but an elaboration of a theme developed by Chaim Weizmann in the 1930s , when he characterized the conflict that was unfolding in the region as being between "the forces of civilization and the barbarism of the desert." This was later given artistic form on the book and film "Exodus," which portrayed Israelis as fully human, and Arabs as one-dimensional war-like figures, without value. During the next three weeks, this caricature of Arabs will be destroyed. And so, when the curtain rose on the opening night of Arabesque, and I saw 140 Syrian children of the Al-Farah Choir, I was, in fact, overwhelmed. Thankful, that after thirty years of combating negative stereotypes and defending my heritage, I would see the day when, in my nation's premier cultural center there would be a celebration of Arab arts and letters. The culture of my people was being recognized. I looked at the smiles and joyful movements of those youngsters and felt pride in their accomplishment. They are our little ambassadors. They, and the hundreds of others on the program who traveled thousands of miles to join the festival, were defining, better than any politicians, what it means to be an Arab, using the universal language of art. There are lessons to be learned from "Arabesque." It should be repeated. The seeds that have been planted by this festival will grow on their own - but how much better if they are nurtured and cultivated? The lesson here is that, not only is the Arab past glorious, but that the present and future are, as well. All of us owe thanks to the Kennedy Center for reminding us of that, and challenging us to do better at remembering it.
 
Presented By: Top
 
14 Ways To Fight The Blues Top
Contrary to popular perception some of us find living in hell easier than stepping out and creating a heaven for ourselves. Living with things that are perpetually going bad numbs our senses and we resign to the situation thinking that we are victims of some celestial conspiracy and that we might as well resign to the troubles we are going through. More on Happiness
 
Esther J. Cepeda: Help Fellow Latinos Understand: You Don't Leave Kids Unattended in Cars! Top
Well, thank goodness little Gael Dominguez is home safe and sound. If you hadn't heard, last Sunday morning four-year-old Gael was sitting in the back seat of his family's SUV, that his daddy had left running in front of their house for "just a minute" on Chicago's Northwest Side, when a thief stole the van - with Gael in it. I can just imagine the alarm the thief must have felt when he realized there was a small person in the car he'd helped himself to. Certainly not as bad as the feeling dad, 24-year-old Javier Dominguez, had when he walked out and realized what had happened - and then when he had to tell Gael's mom, Elizabeth Cruz. It makes my stomach hurt just thinking about it. The thief abandoned the van about a mile away from the family home with Gael inside who, according to his mom Elizabeth, had hidden between two child seats in the back and exchanged no words with the driver, according to Monday's story in the Chicago Sun-Times . Really? Does that mean he had not been securely fastened into his own child seat - or merely that he was a master at unbuckling himself from it? Shake your head wearily. Latinos don't get it when it comes to child vehicle safety - they just don't. O.K., yes, not all Hispanics, obviously, but too many. Gael Dominguez's excellent adventure was just the latest in a string of incidents. We can go back to July when Ricardo Gonzales, a 35-year-old Midlothian, Illinois man, was charged with misdemeanor child endangerment for locking his two-year-old and five-year-old daughters in a makeshift cage in his pickup truck (read my column here ). Back on November 28, 2008 seven-month-old Osiel Hernandez was whisked to a hospital to be checked out after spending about 12 hours inside a Dodge Caravan which was stolen when his mom had left it running - with him inside it - at a factory in Skokie as she ran into pick up materials for her job. There are a million reasons: from ignorance of this country's laws, to poverty, to desperation. I'd insert a really good quote from a Latino public health specialist here if any of them had wanted to talk about this disturbing issue. But as one Latino community leader told me off the record, "that's one of those things you're not going to be able to get too many people to talk about." No kidding! My take: all of these people were poor, relatively recent arrivals to the U.S. (and therefore ignorant of the laws against leaving children unattended in cars), monolingual (all used translators to communicate to police and media), and probably scared of police because of immigration-related anxiety. And all those like them - in those same life situations - need our help. It's not a matter of taking sides over the immigration issue and it's not about whether parents "should" know better - do a Google search, plenty of U.S.-born citizens make the bone-headed move of leaving their kids in cars, they're just usually not scared to call police - it's about raising awareness in communities. Simple to say and hard to do because it seems overwhelming, but don't let it be. Talk about these incidents with people, then suspend your desire to judge and reach out to someone who might need a friendly piece of advice about securing their kids in car seats and not leaving them alone in the car. I talked to Juan Valenzuela, an Illinois State Police Sergeant and Public Information Officer and a designated officer for Hispanic Community Affairs: "We don't keep statistics on race about who leaves kids in the car unattended," Sgt. Valenzuela told me, "but we do do presentations in local communities where there is a need." "We can present to specific groups, like at the Mexican Consulate and at immigrant welcoming centers where we teach about our laws. We can be topic-specific when providing presentations," Valenzuela said. "If it's Latino-related I would provide them but we also have 21 other education police officers in the state." "If anyone wants to set up a presentation they can reach me directly at valenzj@isp.state.il.us or by calling me at 312-814-8368." His final words on the subject: "We recommend nobody leaves a vehicle with a child in it or with a key in the ignition even if there is no child present and that goes across all lines - never leave a child in a car for any amount of time. Regardless."
 
Jane Minogue: The Ever-changing Definition of Marriage Top
When I Google "marriage-in-the-news" up come numerous links to articles on how the states are either adding a "defense of marriage" amendment to their constitution or battling to revise it. Hawaii, the first state to have such an amendment, is now in the cross-fire to legalize same-sex civil unions. Also in the news, a pastor in West Virginia writes that he fears that activist judges will overturn his state's "defense of marriage" amendment, which could impinge on his religious freedom and erode the traditional definition of marriage. It's great for the people to have a say about marriage, but, truly, the definition of marriage is always evolving. Marriage is not a fixed thing like the sun rising in the morning and setting at night. We tend to think that way because of our own upbringing and the society we have known (not to mention what we see in the OzzieandHarrietLeaveItToBeaverFatherKnowsBest shows that still air today in the boondocks of our cable networks). However, the definition changes to meet social and economic needs. As someone involved in medieval studies -- yes, medieval studies -- who looks at love and marriage, I can tell you that regulating human sexual behavior has always been a battleground. You might say, you've got to be kidding. How can looking at medieval love and marriage be even remotely relevant? That's a great question. It's relevant because the ethos that developed in Europe during the Middle Ages regarding sexuality is part of modern thought and practice. Many of the laws that developed regarding sexuality are part of modern laws. Human sexual behavior, including marriage, adultery, rape, celibacy, and homosexuality, affects us economically, regarding property and how we set up ours households. Human sexual behavior also affects our ideas of morality. This has caused conflict between secular laws that regulate property and religious laws that watch out for our souls. For the last 2,000 years, Western marriage and the regulation of sexual behavior by custom, secular law, and ecclesiastical law have never been static. However, by the mid-twelfth century, the canon law of the Christian Church in Europe became the dominant legal system on sexual morality. There were debates by theologians and jurists on whether marriage began with saying "I do" or with consummation. Should marriage be for procreation? Or should married couples be chaste companions? (Really. A sexless marriage was under consideration.) Debates raged on through the centuries regarding celibacy for the clergy (yes, in the first millennium priests used to marry), on divorce, and on consent from the parties involved rather than their parents or kin group. The Church tried out all kinds of laws. At one point, you couldn't marry your cousin up to seven times removed because it was considered incest. In 1215, the Fourth Lateran Council changed the rule to four times removed. You couldn't even marry the cousins of your godparents, because then you were committing spiritual incest. Talk about intruding into the bedroom. Starting in the seventh century, handbooks for confessors had guidelines for married couples. For example, husbands and wives were to abstain from marital relations during the forty days of Lent and the four weeks of Advent. In some handbooks, couples were to refrain from whoopee on certain days of the week, such as all Wednesdays, Fridays, and Saturdays. And you couldn't love your wife too much, or it started to be considered the sin of adultery. On the other hand, husbands and wives owed each other a "conjugal debt" to have sex with each other when a partner desired it. This right of a married person to bonk on demand could take priority over other duties and was such serious business that, until a decretal from Pope Innocent III (1198-216), a man needed his wife's permission to go on a Crusade because without him home she might be led to commit adultery. One of the great achievements of the medieval efforts was to have the same marriage rules for rich and poor alike. Also, it was an achievement of hundreds of years to require the consent of the couple involved rather than their parents or kin. However, the medieval efforts to rid society of fornication, premarital cohabitation, adultery, prostitution, and sodomy -- just to name a few -- through the legal system failed. And the debates to control sexual behavior and to define marriage continue to this day. More on Gay Marriage
 
Is Your Work Killing You? How Jobs Influence Longevity Top
In an attempt to live longer and protect against health problems, you may have given up trans fats, started to monitor your cholesterol, or learned to work the elliptical trainer at the gym. But there's increasing evidence that another factor may be just as important: your job. A constellation of work-related factors--whether you're employed, how secure you are in your job, how much you enjoy your work--may influence both your day-to-day health and how long you live. And that has serious implications, not only for those affected by the current recession, but for everyone, all the time. "We spend 8, 10, 12 hours a day at work," says William Gallo, a research scientist at the Yale School of Public Health. "That may be more important than whether you're on the Zone Diet." More on Health
 
Mike Stark: The Most Important Story of the Year Top
I know, it sounds like hyperbole, but it isn't. It really, really isn't. You and I and our friends in various progressive organizations are going to leave a mark on American politics. The last time we saw this kind of quantum leap in populist empowerment was probably 2002-3 when Howard Dean -- with an assist from the nascent blogosphere -- reminded us all, "You have the power." Until now, Dean's insight has occasionally borne fruit, but our victories -- victories that could not have happened without bloggers'/activists' agitprop and organization -- have been infrequent. We stopped a Democratic debate on the Fox News network. We exposed and forced the resignation of James Guckert, aka Jeff Gannon. We defeated Joe Lieberman in the Connecticut primary. I may have missed a few more, but the point is that for all of Howard Dean's encouragement, and all of our enthusiasm and engagement... well... Politics has been hard for us. We've lost too frequently when we should have won. For example: While the Iraq war ground on through 70% disapproval in the polls, a Democratic-led House and Senate continued to pass war-funding resolutions with no strings attached; Democrats caved to George Bush on telecom immunity; Democrats allowed Bush and his cronies to defy Congressional subpoenas; Democrats passed a miserably drafted TARP bailout; Not to mention -- and I know this is difficult to face, but it's true: Democrats are every bit as susceptible to wasteful earmark spending and ethical lapses as their Republican colleagues. It's already gotten some of our favorite leaders into mildly hot water. (One last pet peeve: the "Ethics Truce" seems to be immutable. Even after Democrats ran against the "Culture of Corruption", they've done nothing to hold any of their fellow House Members accountable for grave ethical breeches. That, as much as anything else, proves the folly of blind party loyalty. Democrats may be "better than the alternative," but their house is not in order by a long shot.) Anyway, I've taken much too much time to get to the point: with the formation of Accountability Now PAC , progressives have developed a tool that provides the ability to set standards and, in some cases, exact accountability when our elected leaders fall short. Full disclosure: I've had conversations with ANP regarding fundraising for them. I've developed an idea that I'm hoping to roll out on their behalf; in exchange, I expect that I would be paid for my work. As of now, there is no agreement. With that said, I began discussions with the leaders of ANP because I had settled on idea of organized accountability through the primary process on my own. While I was in the initial stages of researching the feasibility of the project, a friend told me about ANP . All of this is to say that regardless of how things pan out in terms of any business relationship that may develop, I believe in the ANP mission whole-heartedly and without reservation. So let me take you under the hood; let me make the case for why this is the next epochal change in the evolution of on-line politics. First some background (in case you haven't clicked the link yet). ANP will raise money to challenge (for now, mostly Democratic) incumbents at the primary stage. Money will be spent identifying, developing and funding progressive challengers to incumbent officeholders that have established a record of prioritizing the corporate agenda at the expense of their constituents' best interests. ANP will be selective and discriminating in executing their mission; the idea that some districts are more conservative than others is not lost to them. If you are looking for an example of what ANP will do, look no further than Lamont in '06 or Donna Edwards in '06/'08. In both cases, the incumbents (Lieberman and Wynn, respectively) repeatedly betrayed the Democrats that elected them. In both cases, the primary process was utilized to marginalize (and in the case of Wynn, ultimately defeat) the incumbent. Realize this: until Republicans ran their gravy train off the rails in '06 and '08, incumbents enjoyed a re-election rate that approached or exceeded 95%. Once elected, officeholders had very little reason to keep their doors open to constituent concerns. It was a lot more fun to go golfing with the lobbyists. Best of all? These same lobbyists were going to keep your campaign war-chest topped off at all times... so long as you were diligent in doing what they asked you to do. Then came 2006. When Lieberman lost his primary, a shiver ran up and down the spines of every elected official in Washington (except, perhaps, the completely oblivious George Bush). When Edwards turned out Wynn, the shiver returned with a vengeance. And that is the stroke of genius that will make ANP a force in Washington. Put simply, a primary isn't necessary to exact better behavior from our elected officials. The threat of a primary is sufficient. To the extent that ANP exists to substantiate that threat, incumbents are now saddled with a new weight on the scales when they have to choose between doing the right thing by the people that elected them or dancing to the tune of their corporate benefactors. Please. Don't take my word for it. Ask Ellen Tauscher . Ask Jane Harmon . Go ahead, click the links. OK, I knew you wouldn't, so here's a snip: So far, Pelosi and her leadership team seem determined to protect Tauscher and her 60 New Democrats -- up from 47 before the election. In fact, the day after Working for Us, the new progressive political action committee, targeted Tauscher, Pelosi sought her out at a caucus meeting and assured her: "I'm not going to let this happen." House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) spent 20 minutes complaining to Working for Us founder Steve Rosenthal, who swiftly removed the hit list of "Worst Offenders" from the group's Web site. Said Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly: "We want to protect our incumbents. That's what we're about." Democratic leaders want their activists to focus on beating Republicans. But the grass roots and Net roots believe the political tide is shifting their way, and they can provide the money, ground troops and buzz to challenge Democratic incumbents they don't like. MoveOn.org had two Bay Area chapters before the election; now it has 15, and they could all go to work against Tauscher in a primary. "Absolutely, we could take her out," said Markos Moulitsas Zúniga -- better known as Kos -- the Bay Area blogger behind the influential Daily Kos site. Tauscher was reelected with 68 percent of the vote, but she said she takes this threat seriously; she has already used it in fundraising appeals. And though she has always highlighted her independence -- shortly before the election, she warned Democrats not to "go off the left cliff" -- she's now emphasizing her party loyalty. She was once the only California Democrat to oppose Pelosi's campaign for leadership, but she now marvels that the speaker's performance has been "absolutely perfect -- and she looks so beautiful doing it!" Tauscher's Web site no longer features photos of her with Bush or Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (Conn.), who lost a Democratic primary of his own last year but won reelection as an independent. ... Why are they going after Ellen Tauscher? She has annoyed the left by supporting legislation to scale back the estate tax, tighten bankruptcy rules and promote free-trade agreements. She served as vice chair of the pro-business Democratic Leadership Council, which many liberal activists dismiss as a quasi-Republican K Street front group. And she voted to authorize the Iraq war, although she did so with caveats, and she was quick to express her displeasure with its execution. From Jane Hamsher: We learned in 2006 how the very idea of a primary challenge could immediately change behavior. When blue dog Ellen Tauscher started complaining about the "liberal" committee chairmen who were going to be problematic, people on the blogs and in her community started talking about a primary challenge. Tauscher moved immediately to the left, joined the Out of Iraq caucus, and stopped having her picture taken with George Bush. Primaries. Terrify. Incumbents. Why? Media is relatively cheap in primary season: a little bit of money from a challenger goes a long way. Time pressures: time spent defending your flank is time you cannot spend raising money from lobbyist and corporate allies. The truth hurts: do you really think an incumbent in a blue district want his or her constituents to know that they voted against, oh.. say... foreclosure reform? Or for telecom immunity? Of course, there are many other reasons incumbents live in fear of primaries, but how many do we need? If primaries are the avenue to better representation, then let's have more of them. And if the threat of a primary is every bit as effective as the real thing... well, all the better for us. Of course, as ANP moves with caution and prudence, choosing their targets based upon a matrix of record crossed with vulnerability, we may very well win a race or two here and there (i.e, Donna Edwards). And of course, every time that happens, we move the entire Congress a couple of iotas in the direction of the American people. We all know that the political discourse in this country has been hijacked by a beltway elite whose ideology more closely aligns with that of John Thain, Newt Gingrich and Joe Lieberman than it does with the great unwashed out here in the hinterlands of America. In truth, the Overton Window has been pulled far to the right. ANP will counter that phenomenon by changing the nature of Congress. It will take a while, but the process will grind on. And think about it: with every election of a new progressive, you get one more vote for the environment, for choice, for social justice, for animal rights, for clean energy, for sane drug policy, for etc. etc. etc. Yes, I'm ramping up to something here: an ask . The fact of the matter is that every one of us is driven by a particular set of concerns. There are as many avenues to progressive politics as there are progressive causes. Some of us are used to contributing money to the Sierra Club. Others have prioritized NARAL or Emily's List or Planned Parenthood. Many of us loves us some Russ Feingold. Others think the DNC needs our discretionary spending. Still others send money to BlogPAC (where I am Director of Activism). Let me suggest something to you. ANP is a organization that will further the aims of everyone of the aforementioned groups. Every one of them. So yeah... It's time for us to get behind ANP . Many of your respected colleagues (Jane Hamsher, Glenn Greenwald, Nate Silver and of course, Kos) are leading the effort. Several respected organizations (Color of Change, SEIU, MoveOn, BlogPAC, the Steelworkers) have examined the model and found it worth their investment. I hope you will find likewise. Donate Here
 
Josh Dorner: Will-ful Deceit at the Washington Post Top
The earth may be warming at an ever-quickening pace, but it's the climate blogoshpere that's been burning white hot this week. After years of soft-pedaling the science around global warming and actively abetting the Bush administration's strategy of sowing doubt about the problem, it seemed like the media had more or less gotten its act together when it comes to reporting on climate change. This past couple weeks, however, we got an unfortunate reminder that denialism is alive and well on the editorial pages of some of America's most prominent newspapers. Two weeks ago George Will, occasional bow-tie wearer and one of the media elite's favorite conservative blowhards, penned a column (based at the Washington Post but syndicated nationally) attacking the so-called alarmist doomsaying (read: reality) around global warming. Conservatives ranting about global warming alarmism is of course nothing new, but this column struck a nerve because it blatantly misstated (read: lied about) some basic scientific facts around sea ice and global temperatures. Others have done an excellent take-down of the distortions , so I won't waste time there. The real story is the ridiculously cack-handed response from Will and the Post . First, the brand-spanking new ombudsman, Andy Alexander, dug the hole deeper by defending the Post 's "fact-checking" and editing process. He pointed out that an astonishing FIVE editors at the Post had looked over the column. He then not only refused to concede the column's obvious and glaring errors, but doubled down on them in Will's defense. No correction has been issued. This stands in marked contrast to the New York Times , which offered repeated corrections to arch-conservative Bill Kristol's notoriously shoddy columns during his brief tenure on their opinion page. It's somewhat ironic that after being kicked to the curb by the Times , Kristol is now going to start writing a column for the Post . (It should be of additional embarrassment to the Washington Post that the Center for American Progress discovered that Will has essentially recycled this same column approximately ten times over the years--stretching all the way back to 1992.) The blogosphere was already seething and the Post 's non-response response was so troubling that Sierra Club and other groups wrote a letter of protest to Alexander (noting, in part, that Will was entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts), but things really kicked up a notch when Andy Revkin of the Times took on Will . (Revkin also misguidedly attacked Al Gore by equating his supposed overplaying of warming to Will's lying, which then caused its own separate flap in the blogosphere.) And its not just bloggers, enviros, and media watchdogs who are upset. The Oregonian had refused to run Will's column and Galen Burnett, the paper's commentary editor, had this to say of the Post's response: "I was a little troubled by the response from the Washington Post editors which was basically dismissive of people's challenge of the column. That's the more troubling aspect to me. I would expect more of the Post ." And then it just got totally nuts. Speaking to the Columbia Journalism Review , the Post 's opinion page editor, Fred Hiatt, not only defended Will , but then bizarrely asserted that those demanding accuracy and truth when it comes to science were in some way advocating censorship. It gets better. Hiatt then defended Will's right to interpret science as he sees fit and even said that Will has no obligation to even mention that the scientists he is citing vehemently disagree with his characterization of their research. The escalation has only continued today, with Will writing a new column attacking his naysayers (including Andy Revkin) and doubling down on his original lies. Revkin then hit back , citing scientists discussing science (what a novelty!). Our friends at Media Matters and bloggers continue to pile on. Should be interesting to see if Andy Alexander actually does some ombudsman-ing in his column this Sunday or just continues to defend the nonsense being spewed by Hiatt and Will? At this rate, I'm guessing the hole under Fred Hiatt's desk may reach China before Will makes the rounds on this Sunday's talk shows. More on Wash Post
 
Beyonce: I'm A Slob At Home Top
"I'm a little messy!" the singer, 27, confesses to Ebony magazine in the issue hitting stands March 10. "Oh, yeah." Seems the pressure to look tailored in public can weigh on her - and when she's out of the spotlight, she feels the need to kick back.
 
Richard Walden: China's 10 Million Quake Victims Remain Victims Top
Despite the best of intentions and an unprecedented financial commitment by the Chinese Government, China's 10 million-plus victims of last May's Sichuan Earthquake remain largely in massive temporary prefabricated housing complexes, in tents or under blue tarps in partially damaged homes. Thousands of schools also collapsed when the quake struck in May, 2008. Of the more than 80,000 who perished last May, many of the dead and injured were students and teachers caught in classrooms built of adulterated cement without rebar or of stacked rocks without adequate reinforcement. While allowing for public expressions of grief and demands for compensation, recent attempts by victims' families at organizing themselves have been met with disapproval or downright hostility by Chinese officials who apparently feel their openness to receiving international aid to help rebuild schools should be a substitute for a serious public review as to why these schools were built so poorly in the first place. Many bridges, dams and roadways also collapsed and it is here where public funds have been allocated. China's public sector recovery has in fact been impressive with legions of bright, focused local and national officials mobilizing resources. The comparison with Hurricane Katrina's recovery after 3 1/2 years is inevitable and indeed painful for an American to look at from close-up. Ordinary Chinese citizens are being given a limited amount of funding to fend for themselves in rebuilding homes or re-establishing businesses or other economic activity. [I'm tempted to describe this as a US-style Republican Party approach to disaster relief but that would be unfair to the Chinese Government]. A trip made last week to Chengdu in Sichuan Province was eye opening. In just one quake affected county 2 hours west of the City, there are 67 school reconstruction projects well underway, with the first US-funded project due for completion in late April. This school project, a joint venture between US based Honeywell Hometown Solutions (whose parent, The Honeywell Corporation, has a major manufacturing presence in China) and Operation USA, a Los Angeles-based international aid group, has local and national government support and is using private Chinese construction companies. This should serve as a model for an approach to disaster recovery. Everyone's self-interest coalesced in fast tracking this project, unlike trying to do this in New Orleans where far less has been done over a period 5 times as long and with chaos at every level of government. Here, at least, China's centralized planning process and top down "blessings" were of great help to getting something done. But the tragedy for millions in Sichuan Province is continuing as many are left to fend for themselves. They face a world economic crisis which has dried up outside aid funds; a competition for skilled construction labor which is driving up local costs despite massive lay-offs in manufacturing; and, an economy where food costs are up as a result of both the dislocation of local farmers and a serious drought elsewhere in China. For more, see opusa.org More on China
 
Mike Lux: Next Big Change Up: Health Care Reform Top
While the work on stabilizing the banking system, passing the Obama budget, and working on the other big issues the President has prioritized will all continue steadily along in the coming months, it is clear that health care reform is the next big debate on the President's mind. The first big signal of this was the way he deftly, and rightly, turned the fiscal responsibility summit into mainly a discussion on health care reform, and then announced on the spot that there would be a health care summit next week. Then, in his speech to the nation Tuesday night, he made a push for fundamental reform this year. And finally this week, his budget includes a $634 billion "down payment" on the money needed for health reform. Clearly the President is gearing up for a big battle. As one of the earliest members of the Clinton White House health care team, I am very encouraged by the early strategic signs coming from President Obama. As I discuss in my book, The Progressive Revolution: How the Best in America Came to Be , we made some big mistakes in the Clinton drive for health care reform that doomed our chances for victory, and President Obama's early decisions suggest that they are learning at least some of the right lessons from that experience. Here are some things I am encouraged about: 1. Obama said we needed to do serious reform this year. In early 1993, President Clinton got convinced by Bob Rubin and other corporate Democrats to delay pushing for health care until 1994, after the first budget fight and after they could push their beloved NAFTA through. President Obama set a great tone in his speech Tuesday night: We're going to go big, and we're going to do it this year. 2. Putting a down payment into the budget. Rubin and his allies also convinced President Clinton that reducing the deficit was more important than health care, and that money for health care should all be done later. It was a huge mistake, making the budget numbers for health care reform politically unpalatable. While President Obama hasn't put in every dollar needed for health reform in this budget, he has sent a budget that does have a significant $634 billion down payment. 3. Leaving the details to Congress. Another major mistake was to take the first year of Clinton's term to write an excruciatingly detailed piece of legislation. The result was that we spent a year being lobbied by every outside group imaginable on every detail of the bill (I personally met with over 1,500 different groups on the bill that year) and then as soon as it got sent to the Hill, that same lobbying process began with Capitol Hill. In the meantime, we lost momentum and passion, and the insurance industry picked us apart by focusing on the tiny details of the bill in their infamous Harry and Louise ads. Obama is sending clear signals that he is going to leave the details of the legislation up to Congress. We have a long way to go to pass a serious health reform bill, and the obstacles are big to getting it done. Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, Truman, LBJ, even Nixon all tried before President Clinton's plan went up in flames. But Barack Obama knows how messed up our health care system is, and he knows we need big change. I'm glad he has the guts to take it on, and I'm glad to see his early strategic moves on it are smart ones. Mike Lux is the author of The Progressive Revolution: How the Best in America Came to Be .
 
Willie Geist's Week In Review: Bush, Slumdog, Pelosi, Jindal, White House Top
"Morning Joe" co-host Willie Geist shared his top five stories on the week in his Week in Review Friday morning. The five most ridiculous stories that made his list: 5. Life after the Presidency: Bush goes to the hardware store 4. Slumdog takes over the Oscars: Tiny stars become huge celebrities — and hopefully not Gary Coleman 3. Nancy Pelosi loves Obama's speech: Speaker's Standing Os set to "I'm So Excited" 2. Bobby Jindal's response — and the pundits' painful reactions 1. Morning Joe goes to the White House Watch: Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News , World News , and News about the Economy More on Video On HuffPost
 
Presented By: Top
 
Contessa Brewer Pushes Pat Buchanan On Who'll Lead The GOP (VIDEO) Top
The Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) kicked off its three-day agenda Thursday morning in Washington, DC. The overwhelming question about the conference centers around whom conservatives will pick as their leader. The agenda features many a ghost of this campaign season: Joe the Plumber spoke Thursday; Sarah Palin's purported "media assassination" is a big theme; and Michelle Bachmann was Master of Ceremonies of the Presidential Banquet even though she called Obama "very anti-American" during the campaign. MSNBC's Contessa Brewer put former Nixon staffer and analyst for the network Pat Buchanan on the spot to name the next conservative leader. Buchanan refused to name names, but he did make a strong pitch that conservatives have a real opportunity to turn their lemons into lemonade. WATCH IT: Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News , World News , and News about the Economy
 
Craig and Marc Kielburger: Fixing the System Top
All 50,000 refugees who come to Canada each year have their own settlement challenges. Some cannot communicate the problems with their apartments. Others cannot find rewarding work. Still more are children left to navigate the system alone. For two weeks, we have highlighted some of these challenges. Now, we want to highlight the solutions. Canadians sometimes forgot getting here is half the battle. Integration is a much harder process that can stifle the potential of the refugees here to start a new life. So, how do we fix that? First, imagine a system that assists with shelter. Shelter is among the most basic of human needs. Sadly, there isn't much affordable shelter here - next to the United States, Canada has the smallest non-market housing sector among industrialized nations. In Toronto alone, few new rental-units have been built and existing prices have increased at twice the rate of inflation. That makes for a tough market. "Refugees don't know anyone," says Mario Ayala, refugee services director at the Inland Refugee Society of B.C. "They have no references when applying for rent so no one is willing to rent to them." Short-term shelters provide the services integral to settlement. But, there simply aren't enough, meaning refugees must turn elsewhere. In 2001, Toronto homeless shelters reported 800 refugee claimants at any given time. When shelter is found, entire families often share squalid, one-bedroom apartments. The families rarely complain and authorities rarely check-in. To fix this problem, more settlement councilors are needed to explain tenant rights and help find suitable housing. Transition assistance could then give refugees the deposits they need, moving them from temporary to permanent housing more quickly. To further help, imagine a system that works towards better mental health. It's no secret many refugees have experienced immeasurable trauma on top of having to flee a country, leaving everything behind. In an already overburdened mental health system where wait lists can last months, Mario Ayala says therapists aren't always essential. Churches, mosques, community groups and cultural associations can support and welcome a newcomer. Including contact names in welcome material and ensuring on an individual level that newcomers bond with their community ensures they are not isolated - not left alone to cope. Next, imagine a system that strives for building careers. The story of the cab driver whose engineering degree isn't recognized is so common, it's cliché. But, career counseling could help him. In the struggle to pay for rent, food and survival, trained refugees take minimum-wage jobs that don't realize their potential. With the help of a councilor, he could better navigate the process of certification. Then, through an established volunteer program or training service he could gain Canadian experience and make contacts in the field. If his potential goes to waste, Canada loses out. But, most importantly, these measures are essential to imagine a system that puts children first. Child refugees are particularly vulnerable. Affordable housing is most often available in the poorest areas. When parents struggle in minimum-wage jobs, the prospect of money through gang membership is appealing - especially when some gangs actively recruit from refugee populations. "Minors, especially those who come unaccompanied, are easy prey for gangs and drug dealers," says Ayala. That's why helping their parents find housing and work is so important. That eliminates the worry. Then, focused attention at school and mentoring through organizations like Boys & Girls Clubs or cultural associations can drive home the future opportunities. When those opportunities aren't realized, we not only fail our newest citizens - we fail ourselves. The 50,000 refugees will come to Canada are not just 50,000 stories of integration. They are people with potential if just given the opportunity. That's the system we imagine. Let's make that system happen.
 
Laurie Rosenfield: What's Your Real Worth? Top
A client recently lamented, "My portfolio says I'm worth about a third of what I was last year. My former company said I'm not worth paying anymore, and by the way, pay us now for your health insurance if you want to keep it. My house, even with the new historically hospitable paint job in Chestertown Buff from last spring, would sell for about a third of what it would have sold for a year ago...if a buyer could even be found. And now, after an unplanned and protracted lay-off, I actually have a job offer but I'm finding it difficult to be really excited about it. I think there's something wrong with me." Let's start at the beginning of this tale. This client, a successful executive, was the victim of the downturn a year before it hit Main Street. Even before the word recession was being hatched in the collective unconscious, companies were no doubt seeing a future that called for some retrenchment in order to survive what they saw as inevitable. With her comfortable severance package and a strong resumé, at first the lay-off seemed more like a much-needed break from the rat race. A time to renew. A time to consider options, soul-search, volunteer, and finally embark on a health kick that would ultimately result in a near 80-pound weight loss. "What, me worry," was more likely the refrain than "Why me!" What a difference a year makes. So why the languorous lament? One of the obvious issues is that her current offer, while well-paying by most Main Street perspectives, offers a lower base salary than her previous position. And, while this is not a TARP-funded company, the bonus opportunities are equally as diminished in contrast to the incentives given in her last gig. Welcome to the Brave New World. While the new order may or may not present a huge paradigm shift in the way we are compensated, executives have very real concerns about their perceived value in the marketplace. "If I take this job at this salary," she worried, "I will have just taken a huge step backwards. And when we come out of this recession and I go to get my next job, they will base an offer on this lower salary level." I had only three comments: First, I reminded her that her worrying in advance is too easy -- because no one has a crystal ball. Second, I told her to be grateful that she had secured a respectable job offer at a solvent company. And finally, I suggested she also volunteer at a soup kitchen! On a practical level, and as a former executive recruiter, I can say that no matter what happens with executive compensation going forward, 2009 will live in infamy. Just like previous economic downturns, a personal salary downturn will be easily explained in the future. I can't tell you how many resumés I've seen that have shown that year-long blip that was the tech bust of 2000-2001. But there is a phenomenon going on for my client and others that runs even deeper. Many of us measure our self-worth by what others are willing to pay for our services. While motivators are as varied as occupations, there are few righteous among us who work solely for the good of our fellow man. We can also develop -- after years of dues-paying, self-sacrificing, ladder-climbing efforts -- an unhealthy sense of entitlement. In 2009, a job itself is a coveted commodity. It's really not about your perceived value. As my client soon came to understand, right now it's about affordability and practicality. And regarding her worth, she's still the same person she was. She's back to thinking about building her new team, leading it as she always has -- with strength, strategic thinking, humor, and a high level of emotional intelligence . The compensation model has changed out of necessity, but her value in the marketplace has not. More on Careers
 
Unemployment Money To Increase For Illinois' Jobless Top
SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (AP) -- As jobless rates climb toward record highs, Illinois residents looking for work will see an extra $25 a week in unemployment benefits. The bump begins next week and comes from the federal stimulus package. The program guarantees the extra money to any resident collecting unemployment checks through the end of the year or until their benefits run out. Illinois' unemployment rate was 7.2 percent in December, similar to national statistics which show unemployment rates at a 16-year high. Unemployment is expected to climb again in January. The extra money will be added to benefits paid out on debit cards or direct deposit accounts every two weeks. More on Job Cuts
 
Mexican Migrants Return Home As US Economy Suffers Top
Every Saturday for nearly four years, Elena Trujillo has gone to the local department store in Morelia, Michoacán, to pick up money wired home by her 34-year-old son, Ángel. This 59-year-old mother of three is one of the between 16 and 35 million Mexicans who depend on remittances from relatives in the United States to boost their incomes. But in late September -- for Trujillo and for countless others -- the wire transfers stopped coming. Confused at first, Trujillo was reassured by Ángel on the phone: Everything is OK; I have a surprise for you. The next week, Trujillo received another transfer, this one much larger than normal. She was ecstatic. Ángel's construction work must finally be paying dividends, she thought. Then, just a few days later, Ángel came back to Michoacán. "I couldn't believe it. He had given up and come home," Trujillo said. "He had given up on the American Dream." More on Mexico
 
Bill Daley May Run For Burris Senate Seat: Report Top
Former U.S. Commerce Secretary and mayoral brother Bill Daley is considering running for the U.S. Senate seat currently occupied by Roland Burris, Sun-Times columnist Michael Sneed reports : Sneed is told Daley plans to emerge as a major contestant for the controversial Senate seat once held by Barack Obama; now held by the embattled Roland Burris! The stats: Daley, who will trade on his stature and experience, has already talked to potential fund-raisers and plans to make an announcement in mid-April. A Senate bid, as Sneed notes, would potentially pit Daley against State Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias, a Democratic rising star being pushed by Sen. Dick Durbin, and Chicago Urban League CEO Cheryle Jackson . Daley had publicly weighed a 2010 gubernatorial run but shelved his plans after Rod Blagojevich was impeached.
 
Jamie Metzl: Marriage Counseling for the United States and Russia Top
co-authored by Matt Rojansky The relationship between Washington and Moscow has sometimes resembled a hot-and-cold romance over the past ten years. In 2001, when then-President Bush looked into the soul of Vladimir Putin at their first summit meeting in Slovenia, the two countries seemed headed for a period of unprecedented trust and cooperation. In spite of this, the relationship soon stumbled over Iraq, missile defense, and NATO expansion, reaching a low point during Bush's second term punctuated by mutual recriminations and thinly veiled threats. With the Obama administration now in office, many are hoping for an improvement in US-Russian relations. This hope was initially challenged only a day after Obama's election victory last year, when Russian President Dimitry Medvedev announced plans to place short range Iskander missiles in Kaliningrad, just a few miles from the Polish border. But Putin and Medvedev both quickly backpedaled, warming to the new Administration as a potential "partner," and apparently putting the missile deployment on hold. When Vice President Joe Biden asked for a fresh start with Russia, the Kremlin offered Russian help getting supplies to US and coalition forces in Afghanistan. (This, of course, came at the same time that Moscow was pressuring Kyrgyzstan to close the US air base in that country, which provided the best alternative supply route into the region.) Even if US-Russian relations improve, conflicts of interests between the two countries are still likely to exist. A top foreign policy objective of the Kremlin appears to be securing a "sphere of influence" around its borders, and it continues to apply political, economic and military power to lay claim to this privileged space and to keep the U.S. at bay. Moscow's repression of domestic political dissent, and its heavy handed tactics in Russia's economy are also cause for concern. Nevertheless, the Obama Administration is right to pursue renewed cooperation based on identifying and pursuing mutual interests. Repairing the US-Russia relationship will pay significant dividends for both countries. To get there, however, far more needs to be done on both sides. Our organization, Partnership for a Secure America (PSA), has released a bipartisan policy roadmap to suggest some of these steps. Among the recommendations are: • Emphasizing the importance of the NATO-Russia Council and inviting Russia to participate fully in a collective security strategy, beginning with peace and stability for Afghanistan; • Engaging in discussions aimed at securing Russian cooperation to establish effective defenses against missile attacks for Europe while providing Russia with security assurances; • Encouraging Russia to take a leadership role in multilateral negotiations with Iran to stop uranium enrichment; • Advancing the US-Russia dialogue on arms control and non-proliferation, and working to extend or replace the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), which could be followed by another stage of verified nuclear disarmament; • Reiterating U.S. support for Russia's WTO candidacy, calling on Congress to repeal the "Jackson-Vanik" trade sanctions, and encouraging other member states to offer Russia a clear path to membership based on its commitment to the WTO Charter; and • Expanding the US-Russia dialogue on energy and climate change, to include seeking common ground on environmental concerns and new oil and gas pipelines to guarantee reliable energy supplies for the entire North Atlantic region. (The complete text of the statement and the full signatory list is available on PSA's website .) Clearly, this is neither a detailed policy prescription nor an exhaustive list of all possible high level initiatives the Obama Administration could pursue with Russia. What these ideas offer, however, is a path towards improving levels of collaboration. As new leaders, Presidents Obama and Medvedev have an invaluable opportunity to reestablish trust and work toward a stronger partnership based on shared interests. This should be a top priority for the President as well as for Democrats and Republicans in Congress. As difficult as the issues dividing the United States and Russia may seem, there is too much at stake to miss this opportunity for reconciliation. Divorce is not an option, so we must all work to make this relationship as strong as it can be. Jamie Metzl is Co-Chairman of the Board of Partnership for a Secure America. Matt Rojansky is the organization's Executive Director. More on Russia
 
Michael B. Laskoff: Please Raise My Taxes President Obama Top
When I was at Harvard Business School, we inherited a joke that has passed from class to class. It goes something like this: the whole HBS education can be reduced to two simple ideas. More money is better than less money; money now is better than money later. Practice that little adage, and you can save yourself two years of tuition money. Knowing that, and at least harboring a hope of great wealth, I should oppose President Obama's suggested ten-year budget. And yet I don't. In fact, I think that raising taxes is an excellent idea, albeit one that will almost certainly not produce all of the intended effects. I'm no communist: I'm a realist who would rather have something to share - in the name of civic virtue - than nothing at all in the name of short-term greed (cloaked in the flag). Consider a consistent theme of history: when too few people in a society accumulate too much of the wealth the majority arms itself and tries to take it back. You can call this anarchy, rebellion, revolution or social Darwinism, but I'd rather share more - pay higher taxes - than have to live through any of them. And let's not forget that we have been trying it the Republican way since Ronald Reagan crammed Voodoo Economics down our throats. (Thank you for your curve Arthur Laffer.) Throw on a little Republican Revolution, courtesy of Newt Gingrich, George W. Bush, Rush Limbaugh and company, and you get the reality of our record-breaking economy. Banks, the Dow and the housing market are all dropping like flies. Meanwhile more Americans are unemployed, uninsured and less educated than they used to be. In technical parlance, this is known as, "...going to a hell in a hand-basket." When I think about Bear Stearns, Citibank, Stanford, AIG, Madoff and Stanford, I wonder just how much more free market practice the country can handle. Finally, the best part of democracy is that we get throw the bums out every now and again - allowing us to take advantage of new ones. Perhaps the Democrat notion of a more egalitarian society will also end in disaster but as the current course is about to carry us off a cliff, let's try turning anyway. It goes without saying that much of Obama's plan will never become reality and some of it will cause all new horror shows. Nevertheless, we had all better hope that the President gets it right or none of us will have enough in 2011 to qualify for the higher tax rates. More on Timothy Geithner
 
Emma Coleman Jordan: Individual Responsibility, Subprime Mortgages and Race by Nicholas Austin Top
The Subprime Mortgage Crisis: Individual Responsibility & Why Race Still Matters By Nicholas Austin -- Like it or not, race still permeates every crevice of American life. From drawing school district boundary lines, to healthcare, nothing escapes this basic conflict. The subprime mortgage crisis offers textbook examples of racial 'scapegoating' and factual distortions.. Injecting race into the crisis distorts the complex reality of America's financial picture and ignores the true culprits of this crisis, all of us. For some financial experts, America's financial markets provided equal access to capital, credit and economic vitality. Adam Smith, the father of modern economics, argues in his classic treatise, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations that "the greater good for all is achieved through a market of free exchange, guided by an invisible hand where a willing buyer and seller agree to a transaction at arms length." Today, conservative economists cite Smith for their view that people entrapped by subprime mortgage debt were exclusively responsible for their own financial misery. Some pundits have even branded minorities and poor as the sole cause of the collapse of the global financial system. In these vignettes the villains are the unaffordable homes and unsustainable life-styles of the working poor. This analysis failed, to see that predatory practices combined with misinformation, and lack of knowledge cluttered Smith's utopian vision of the bargaining table. They failed to see that Smith's buyers and sellers' arms length transactions were not done in vacuums. Gerhard Lenski's 1966 book Power and Privilege theorized that a "Class Perspective Theory of Economic Inequality" existed. He argued that a structured system of economic inequality was intrinsic to the economic realm and was not "fundamentally altered by economic mobility of individuals." He argued that modern economic relations perpetuated class differences that are transmitted from generation to generation. Lenski viewed race, gender and ethnicity as interacting with class to create mutually defining structures that shape both consciousness and success. Lenski's theories fill in the gaps left by Smith. While the poor bargained with mortgage brokers in hopes of buying homes, they remained unaware of the economic and financial factors surrounding their transactions. They came to the table unaware of the full financial ramifications of their decisions. Dr. Kathe Newman, a professor of urban planning and policy development at Rutgers University, also noted that the casual observer blamed "irresponsible borrowers" for the crisis while ignoring "the evolution of the mortgage banking industry and its role in creating the structural basis for the crisis." Many actors, including individual homeowners, lenders, mortgage brokers, government sponsored enterprises, ratings companies, speculators, contributed to the current chaos in our economy. Did homeowners (white, black, native American, Arabic, Asian, Hispanic, etc.) evaluate their personal finances and buy homes they could afford? Were the realtors selling homes for the commission, even while they knew their clients could not afford the house over the long run? Were the banks and mortgage lenders honest with their clients on the repayment terms surrounding variable rate mortgages and other risk- laden loan structures? Did they seek to ensure that their clients understood all the risks of their decisions? Did the agencies rating the loan bundles being sold to investors bybanks investigate them as thoroughly as they should have? Did the investment banks investigate the stability of the loan bundles they purchased from banks? Did the government officials do all they could to ensure this area of securities was being regulated effectively? Did the elected officials make any effort to correct the problems before they snowballed or work to fix legislative loopholes that contributed to the creation of the crisis? If we answer these questions, instead of engaging in racial stereotyping, we will have learned enduring lessons from this crisis. Failure to pursue these questions will doom us all to repeat these mistakes in the future. Nicholas Austin is a third-year law student at Georgetown University in Washington, DC Disclaimer: The views expressed in the student blog entries do not represent my views, or those of Georgetown University. They are the individual expression of each student, who is solely responsible for the content of their message.
 
Presented By: Top
 
Emma Coleman Jordan: Subprime Crisis: Georgetown Law Students Tackle Economic Justice Questions in the Financial Meltdown Top
As the state of the economy grows more dire every day, it is tempting to throw up our hands in frustration, or take refuge in our disorientation. Yet, the economic and political decisions being made today will affect the lives of young people for the foreseeable future. I want to sample the views of members the generation that will have to live with the decisions we make today to save the financial system, create a universal access to affordable health care, withdraw from Iraq, and change tax policy. To bring these views to this space I have invited students enrolled in a new course that I teach at Georgetown Law Center, Contemporary Issues in Economic Justice: The Subprime Crisis, to blog in this spot, on a topic of their choosing, related to the financial crisis and the challenge of our social backdrop of economic inequality. This course will provide an introduction to the social justice critique of free markets. Our efforts will be guided by economic and social theory, as well as financial regulatory policy. We will establish a foundation for this critique through an introduction to classic economic theories beginning with the theories of human motivation found in Adam Smith and continuing through modern economists including Becker and Friedman. After the foundation of traditional rationales for free markets has been established, the course will proceed through a series of social justice problems for which the answers of the classic theorists have proved unsatisfactory. We will take up the puzzle of persistent empirical evidence of race and gender discrimination, notwithstanding economic theories that posit the elimination of discrimination by the market itself. For the spring semester of 2009, the course will be concerned with the subprime mortgage crisis and the governmental response to repair the damage done to both the financial sector and the broader economy by the rapid declines in housing values. We will undertake an in depth exploration of the current global financial crisis and its origins in the regulatory response to risky innovation in the models for origination, distribution and financing of home mortgages in the United States. The subprime financial crisis will provide an unparalleled contemporary laboratory for testing alternative economic theories for predicting the economic behavior of actors in a variety of markets. We will investigate and analyze the viability of established economic theories for financial and consumer regulation. We will discuss whether the descriptive and normative models of neoclassical economics failed during the current crisis. Alan Greenspan, a former Chairman of the Federal Reserve, responded to a Congressional investigation of his role in the collapse of financial markets with the admission that his worldview of economic behavior was "flawed". Greenspan went on to note that: "Those of us who have looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholders' equity, myself included, are in a state of shocked disbelief," What do these admissions of ideological failure mean as we seek to shape a recovery from the crisis? What are the alternative paradigms available to reconstruct the U.S. financial regulatory system? Are any of these theories sufficiently advanced to serve as models for implementing reforms? We will examine the attributes of home mortgage origination markets, public and private policies that supported expansion of the market for home ownership, the racial and ethnic characteristics of borrowers who were sold high priced home loan products, we will also examine the relationship of legal rules to the distribution of housing wealth. The course will emphasize the race, gender and other identity variables that work to create and preserve economic inequality. A central exploration of the course will be the problem of race and gender discrimination in the home mortgage lending market and the governmental response to that longstanding economic and social problem. We will make use of a range of materials taken from sociology, economic argument, political theory, constitutional discourse and the critical legal theories of race, gender and social class. Two blog entries from students enrolled in this course follow. Disclaimer: The views expressed in the student blog entries do not represent my views, or those of Georgetown University. They are the individual expression of each student who is solely responsible for the content of their message. More on Alan Greenspan
 
Christopher Herbert: Weekly Foreign Affairs Roundup Top
By Christopher Herbert and Victoria Kataoka Rebuffet The Week's Top Stories in Foreign Affairs: American Economic Leadership Recognized Facts: US President Barack Obama made his first address to American Congress in the style of a State of the Union speech. He acknowledged the gravity of the global financial crisis and defended his ambitious plans to bolster the US economy in both the immediate (plans for mortgage assistance, bank stabilization and economic stimulus) and long-term (plans to boost education, health care and energy independence). Awaiting the G20 meeting in London next April where it is hoped the top 20 world economies will cement a plan for global economic recovery, the world seemed somewhat relieved by Obama's plan of action, even if the financial markets were more skeptical particularly related to his bank rescue plans. SI Analysis: Pundits the world over comment on how global attention and hope has indeed turned to the US to be the leader out of the economic slowdown. Though there is a little bit of schadenfreude towards the American crisis, the repercussions are so dire the world over that America has become the economic superpower that people love to hate to love, but love all the same. American leadership on financial matters and security concerns seems to have gained a bit of clout and recognition despite the negative state of the American economy. Pakistani Quagmire Facts: Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi traveled to Washington for trilateral talks along with US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Afghan Foreign Minister Rangeen Dadfar Spanta. He reportedly asked for American provision of drones to help his nation's fight against insurgents. Reports emerge explaining that the US has sent special forces to arm and train certain Pakistanis to fight other Pakistani extremists. And yet other reports have revealed that the Pakistani Army is arming civilians in the North West Frontier Province (NWFP) to combat Taliban and al-Qaeda insurgents themselves. Also this week, the Taliban announced a unilateral ceasefire in Bajaur Agency in northwestern Pakistan. This follows a steep campaign in the area by the Pakistani army that has allegedly killed 1500 militants in the area. However, some reports suggest that Pakistan may have paid millions of dollars to obtain this particular ceasefire, not to be confused with last week's ceasefire in the Swat Valley. SI Analysis: Geopolitical analysts continue to warn that Pakistan is teetering on the brink of collapse -- FBI Director Robert Mueller explained that the greatest terror threat in the world is coming from the Pakistan-Afghanistan border region. It appears that Pakistan is refining a dual policy of negotiating with domestic tribal leaders and Taliban, while also more aggressively pursuing certain extremists and foreign insurgents. Analysts are divided on whether or not this move will truly increase security in Pakistan, boost NATO efforts in Afghanistan and restore order. Some argue that the truce extension in the Swat Valley merely gives the Taliban more time to regroup in order to attack the NATO mission in Afghanistan. Some see these latest developments as "last ditch attempts" to save Pakistan. Others however see this as an intelligent change in policy to address the growing problem of lawlessness by distinguishing between foreign and domestic insurgents. Some experts assert that the ceasefire suggests some of Pakistan's military campaign against insurgents is succeeding, despite the Islamic law-for-peace agreement forged last week. Mexico - A Failed State? Facts : Reports of drug gang violence against other gangs, civilians and Mexican security and police forces have exponentially multiplied over the past few months. Some accounts say that Mexican authorities are loosing total control of certain provinces and many say the US fears that the conflict will spill over into American borders . This week the US arrested 750 people across the nation in connection with the Mexican Sinaloa drug cartel. SI Analysis : Reports emerge that the American Department of Homeland Security has drafted contigency plans in the case that drug violence moves north. Recent American action is seen as a move by the Obama administration to combat the drug trade south of its border, as Attorney General Eric Holder announced that drug cartels " will be destroyed ". Some analysts argue that dwindling Mexican stability could be America's greatest security risk; having a failed state on the southern border could invite a whole host of chaos onto American soil. Iran - Going Nuclear For Real Facts: Iranian and Russian officials successfully tested the controversial Bushehr nuclear power plant in Iran. The plant is expected to be fully operational by the end of 2009. Recent reports by the International Atomic Energy Association and others suggest that Iran may have more enriched uranium than previously thought. A few hours after the test is announced, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak issues a statement revealing that " all options are on the table " to confront Iran and prevent it from acquiring nuclear weapons. In other news, France, Germany and the UK (the EU3) propose a tougher sanctions package against Iran that could boost the Obama agenda. And as for Obama's agenda, US Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice announced on Thursday that the US' goal is to end Iran's mission for "illicit nuclear capacity" . Iran responds to this with an angry letter to the UN Security Council saying that Obama needs to " stop talking like Bush ." Iranian posturing in general is on the rise as Tehran has territorial altercations with Bahrain and the GCC (whom Iran has previously been courting). SI Analysis : Some suggest that the reports of Iranian advancement are exaggerated to give Iran a face-saving bargaining position to negotiate on its nuclear program. Other factors to consider include Iranian elections in June and the global economic crisis -- including the declining price of oil -- which has certainly weighed down Iran's ability to maintain a strong stance on its nuclear program while maintaining economic and political stability. Therefore some analysts suggest that some of Iran's posturing is an indication of a nervous Iranian leadership perhaps more vulnerable than before and perhaps finally willing to negotiate with the West. Others say that the posturing is simply proof that the Iranian agenda is advancing according to its own agenda and that sooner or later a nuclear Iran will be a reality . Speculation of the Week: "Non-Military Goods" making their away across Central Asia Facts: Following the Kyrgyz Parliament's revocation of permission to use its strategic Manas Air Base, the US military and NATO urgently seek out alternative ways to supply their operation in Afghanistan. Presidents Islam Karimov of Uzbekistan and Gurbanguly Berdimuhammedov of Turkmenistan have both somewhat unexpectedly outwardly acknowledged that they have granted permission to the US and NATO to transfer non-military goods across their territory and airspace. SI Speculation : Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan, both former Soviet republics, are in Russia's backyard. They seem to be looking westward, and, as long as they publicly insist that they allow non-military convoys, it may not matter what is actually transported across their territories. The development could be a new sticking point in improving relations between Washington, NATO and Moscow. Under the Radar: Mosul Falling Away? Facts : Reports emerge that US President Obama is formalizing his plan for a withdrawal from Iraq. At the same time, there is more and more evidence that some areas of Iraq, notably in Diyala Province and the city of Mosul, may require a sustained American presence so as not to fall into lawlessness. SI Analysis: There are indications of tensions in Mosul beyond the traditional Arab/Kurd rivalry . Other minorities as well complain that they are underrepresented and marginalized politically. Furthermore, violence could be exacerbated. There is indication of political infighting , allegations of corruption and general instability within the Kurdish Regional Government itself. On another note, Tom A. Peter of the Christian Science Monitor writes an informative piece describing some of al-Qaeda in Iraq's rural and desert strategy. North Korea Posturing Facts : North Korea says it will launch a new missile in an effort to put a communications satellite into space. Most Western military analysts expect a long-range missile to be fired and argue that the launch is just another excuse by North Korea to further its nuclear program. The BBC has a good background video here: North Korea Launch on BBC . Despite US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's strong words and the continuation of 6-party talks, North Korea appears to be steadfast in its military mobilization . South Korean leaders announce that Pyongyang has deployed a new missile and increased numbers of its elite forces. Seeking to guarantee Washington's continued concern, Seoul says that North Korea's new missile is capable of striking Guam . SI Analysis: Many regional experts assert that North Korea is actively seeking to advance its nuclear program, which many see as a desperate effort as the country falls deeper into economic stagnation under a possibly fatally ill Kim Jong-Il. Human Rights Slight of the Week: Closing Tibet and US State Department Report Facts : Beijing announced that the region of Tibet will be closed until the end of March to tourists. This marks the anniversary of the violent Tibet uprisings that occurred during the Tibetan New Year celebrations in 2008 that saw more than 200 Tibetans killed. A Chinese crackdown on Tibet is expected this year. While some Tibetan monks protested within China, Tibetans in exile marked the anniversary with silent protest. Though US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton demurred from broaching the issue of Human Rights while in China earlier this week, the US State Department issued a scathing report on human rights . China gave a curt response to the report telling Washington not to interfere in Chinese internal affairs. SI Analysis : Nothing will change for Tibet now because China is firmly in control of the region. The US State Department's report was poorly timed . The economic downturn does not allow for niceties like addressing human rights with key partners like China. For more Simple Intelligence, visit simpleintelligence.org More on Foreign Policy
 
Matt Easton: In the Dock and Under the Gun in Colombia Top
It's been a rough week for law enforcement in Colombia. First, a senior domestic intelligence official was forced to resign following reports that his agency had illegally wiretapped judges, politicians, activists, and journalists - and then sold the information to criminal groups. On February 24 my organization piled on by launching a report in Bogota on a related - and very dangerous - practice. In Baseless Prosecutions of Human Rights Defenders in Colombia: In the Dock and Under the Gun, Human Rights First documents 32 recent cases of unfounded prosecutions against human rights activists. You can see a short video about the problem, here . Throughout Colombia, officials target human rights defenders for prosecution based on evidence that is false, uncorroborated, or, even nonexistent. As the newspaper Semana summarized, in their comprehensive article on the report, "Whoever decides to work for the defense of human rights in Colombia could easily become the target of legal charges, in many cases without foundation." Authorities in Bogota have not addressed the widespread problem, and sometimes even encourage the practice by labeling human rights defenders as terrorists and guerrillas. Many of these cases eventually get thrown out of court, but by then the damage is done. Ivan Cepeda, spokesman for the Movement of Victims of State Crimes, explained at the report launch that as a result of these proceedings "the credibility of human rights defenders is destroyed." Human rights activists spend months or even years fighting the charges. Some undergo lengthy detentions, including several who remain in prison today. You can take action on one such case here . What's more, in Colombia, even false charges can amount to a death sentence. Alfredo Correa de Andreis was a well known human rights activist and university professor. He was detained in June 2004 and accused of rebellion. Soon after a judge found the case to be baseless and released him, Alfredo was killed by presumed paramilitaries. As Correa's sister told the newspaper El Espectador: They didn't kill Alfredo on Friday. They really killed him when they arrested him. That was the day they placed the tombstone over him. According to my colleague Andrew Hudson, "Baseless prosecutions must be prevented before the damage is done. It is time for the Prosecutor General to create safeguards against corruption and overzealous prosecutors." More on Colombia
 
Ed McMahon Hospitalized In Los Angeles Top
LOS ANGELES — Ed McMahon, former sidekick to Johnny Carson on "Tonight" and a familiar TV commercial pitchman, was hospitalized in intensive care, a spokesman said Friday. McMahon, 85, was suffering from pneumonia and other ailments and had been in the hospital for several weeks, spokesman Howard Bragman said. He declined to identify the Los Angeles facility or the other illnesses. "It's serious," Bragman said when asked about McMahon's condition, noting his age. But, Bragman added: "We're hopeful." McMahon's wife and family are with him and appreciate the public expressions of concern, the spokesman said. McMahon had broken his neck in a fall in 2007. He faced foreclosure on his home last year because he said the injury left him unable to work, but a deal was announced last December that would allow him to stay in the house. McMahon was Carson's announcer and second banana on "Tonight" from 1962 until Carson's retirement in 1992, introducing him with a resounding "H-e-e-e-e-e-ere's Johnny!" and bolstering the host with hearty laughs. (Carson died in 2005.) McMahon also appeared in commercials for American Family Publishers' sweepstakes and had supporting roles in movies including "Fun with Dick and Jane" (1977) and "Just Write" (1997) and in TV shows including the 1997 WB sitcom "The Tom Show" with Tom Arnold.
 
Katie Couric Gives White House Media Tour With Her Flip Camera (VIDEO) Top
Katie Couric decided to get behind the lens during a recent White House visit. The anchor gave a quick tour on her Flip camera. Watch Katie as she meets the press, talks to CNN's John King, engages in a conversation about reporter smelliness and questions a production team member about his lunch choice. If you want to see another White House tour, watch the one conducted by Press Secretary Gibbs for the "Morning Joe" crew. More on Katie Couric
 
Iberiabank Gives Back TARP Funds, Among The First To Do So Top
Iberiabank is giving back its TARP funds, one of the first banks to do so. Iberiabank had accessed nearly $91 million via the government's Capital Purchase Program. It said it wanted to give back the funds because of the additional restrictions the government has placed on banks that access the TARP program. The restrictions were not in place when Iberiabank had accessed the funds. "The Capital Purchase Program under TARP has assisted in the effort to provide stability to the financial services industry during this period of unprecedented uncertainty. When we decided to accept funds under this program, we believe we were the type of healthy bank that could employ the funds in the manner consistent with the goals initially set out by Congress and the Treasury in supporting the expansion of credit to the markets we serve. We believe recent actions, interpretations, and commentary regarding various aspects of the program places our Company at an unacceptable competitive disadvantage. Our Board of Directors has determined that continued participation in this program is no longer in the best interest of our Company and its shareholders. Our Company occupies a unique position of strength, growth, and opportunity relative to other participants in the financial services industry. We are pleased to be able to redeem the Treasury's investment in our Company." In related news, community banks do not consider the CPP to be TARP , and have been working to get their message across that the program is not a bailout.
 
Ali al-Marri, Alleged Al-Qaida Agent, Indicted In Illinois Federal Court Top
WASHINGTON — Federal authorities have unsealed an indictment against alleged al-Qaida sleeper agent Ali al-Marri, moving him into the civilian court system as the Obama administration considers a new strategy for handling terror suspects. Al-Marri has been held in a Navy brig outside Charleston, S.C. for more than five years since President George W. Bush declared him an enemy combatant. He will now be transferred to Peoria, Ill., to face trial in a civilian court on a charge of providing material support to al-Qaida and a related conspiracy count. The charges carry a maximum prison sentence of 15 years each. Al-Marri has a case before the Supreme Court challenging the president's authority to arrest terror suspects in the United States and hold them indefinitely without charges. Now that he has been indicted, Justice Department officials said they would ask to have the Supreme Court case dismissed. Al-Marri's transfer is the first signal of how the Obama administration is likely to handle accused terrorists, a significant shift from the strategy of the Bush administration. Since shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, government lawyers argued that the president has the wartime authority to send the military into any U.S. neighborhood, capture a citizen _ or legal resident like al-Marri _ and hold him in prison without charge, indefinitely. With al-Marri's indictment, President Barack Obama ordered the military to turn al-Marri over to the Justice Department, when requested by Attorney General Eric Holder. It was not immediately clear when that handover would take place. Holder said in a statement the charges show the government's "resolve to protect the American people and prosecute alleged terrorists." The attorney general said the Obama administration "will hold accountable anyone who attempts to do harm to Americans, and we will do so in a manner consistent with our values." The government has said al-Marri is an al-Qaida sleeper agent who has met Osama bin Laden and spent time at a terrorist training camp in Afghanistan. A legal U.S. resident when he was arrested, al-Marri has been held in solitary confinement at the brig since 2003. Al-Marri was arrested in late 2001 as part of the FBI's investigation of the Sept. 11 attacks. Prosecutors at first indicted him on charges of credit card fraud and lying to the FBI, not terror charges. In June 2003, Bush said al-Marri had vital information about terror plots, declared him an enemy combatant and ordered him transferred to military custody. More on Terrorism
 
Jamie Court: Will Facebook's Experiment with Democracy Spread? Top
Facebook has taken the unusual step of allowing 30% of its members to decide privacy policies.  CBS News and CNET's Larry Magid and I talked the change over in t his interview late last night . The jujitsu by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerman is no doubt meant to counter a recent populist revolt against a change in Facebook's fine print that seemed to suggest Facebook owned user profile data even after a user deleted their account. The backlash killed the policy, and Facebook obviously realized it had tapped a powerful populist force. The bottom line is that with 175 million members it will take 30%, or 53 million,  to change a privacy policy on the site. It's hard to get 53 million people to vote on anything, let alone vote the same way. So Facebook's new Populism 2.0 approach may be more appearance than substance, as Magid and I discuss. One thing's for sure, though, Facebook won't be able to control the populism it unleashes, and it will have to continue to be receptive to members.  The big question is whether companies like Google will be forced to embrace this new populism. Would Google agree to let a certain percentage of its members dictate privacy policies at the company? If so, Google would no dout have to put an "anonymize me" button on its search engine and other products, as we have called for.  Is Google 2.0 enough to take the Facebook challenge? How about My Space, or MSN, or Twitter. Will they give users a vote over their privacy controls? It's a powerful proposition...stay tuned. More on Facebook
 

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)