Friday, April 3, 2009

Y! Alert: The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Yahoo! Alerts
My Alerts

The latest from The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Dan Sweeney: Newt Gingrich Speaks For Me! Top
In his latest move to become the Savior of the Republican Party (expect him to come riding into D.C. on a white horse sometime in the summer of 2011), Newt Gingrich has announced that the GOP needs to get its act together, or true conservatives may go third party in 2012. To that I say, AMEN! A split in the Republican Party has been a long time coming. The last Republican presidential primary saw the GOP fracture into its three main bodies, with social conservatives rallying behind Mike Huckabee, fiscal conservatives behind Mitt Romney and warhawks behind John McCain. McCain, of course, managed to gather in more moderate Republicans than the other two, which catapulted him to the nomination. But once he was there, no one really liked the idea. Sarah Palin was always a sop to disaffected right-wingers, and as she catered to the base's ugly side, she left independents out in the cold. The obvious answer, of course, is that the Republican Party no longer represents large portions of its base. What this country needs is, say, a Christian Democracy Party headed up by people like Huckabee and Palin; a Conservative Libertarian Party (colloquially known as the John Galts), which could fund itself through corporate sponsorships; and a Peace Party, which would actually be a hawkish party promoting massive defense budgets and an interventionist foreign policy, named in the Orwellian manner we've come to know and love in the Department of Defense. But don't think the Democrats are immune! With multi-billion-dollar bailouts dished out to billionaires, health-care "reform" talk in which insurance companies are put front and center (thus negating any chance for real reform), an increasingly hawkish stance in Afghanistan, and a too-polite refusal to treat the previous administration like the war criminals they are, it's not like the Democratic Party is doing a bang-up job of representing its base either. So, maybe Newt Gingrich is right. Maybe it's time to start thinking outside the two-party-system box. But Gingrich is mistaken about a mere third-party run. I think we need about ten of them, maybe more. Proportional representation, instant run-off voting, all the multi-party system goodies. Of course, as both political parties stand to lose from such a system, it would find no one in Washington to get behind it. Even Gingrich's own third-party threats are probably just the mere posturing of a man trying to paint himself as the one man staying true to conservative principles that the rest of the party has abandoned. Here in Florida, as in many states, we have the option of getting amendments inserted into the state constitution via popular referendum. Currently, Fair State Florida is making a push to end gerrymandering, forcing the state to draw congressional districts that are compact and community-based, instead of the bizarre shapes they now take, which ensure that many districts are so solidly Democratic or Republican that representatives essentially have no worries as to whether they'll be re-elected. Ending gerrymandering and promoting public financing of campaigns may not end the two-party system, but it should make that system for more responsive to the will of the people.
 
Ellis Cose: Rwanda 15 Years After Genocide Top
Next week will mark the 15th anniversary of the genocide in Rwanda. It was on April 6, 1994, shortly after 9 p.m., that the plane carrying Rwandan President Juvenal Habyarimana went down in flames. Habyarimana , President Cyprian Ntayamira of Burundi, and six others were victim of a rocket fired by perpetrators whose identity and purpose remain unclear to this day. Some believe the order came from Rwanda's current president, Paul Kagame, who was then leader of The Rwandan Patriotic Front, a Tutsi-controlled rebel group. Others place the blame at the feet of radical Hutus, who supposedly planned to use Habyarimana's death as a pretext for ethnic cleansing. Whoever gave the order, the consequences were tragic. The assassination ignited an orgy of violence. Somewhere between 800,000 and a million Rwandans perished -- well over a tenth of the population -- as the world looked on in horror; and did nothing. Work on "Against the Odds," my public radio documentary series, has taken me to Rwanda twice in the last year. I was trying to understand how a country copes with an implosion of such unimaginable magnitude. What I found is that, on the surface at least, the country is coping very well. There are few visible signs of the slaughter. Even the Hotel des Mille Collines (which became famous as "Hotel Rwanda") is now just another big, luxury hotel. During one visit, as I sipped a cocktail by the pool, an African visitor serenely did laps; it was hard to imagine a more peaceful scene. Yet, clearly the past is not yet buried. When I was in the country, almost exactly a year ago, I stopped by the Kigali Memorial Center. The memorial opened in 2004, on the tenth anniversary of the genocide. Some 258,000 bodies, or parts of them, are buried on its grounds. Rugenera Pierre Desire, a Rwandan TV journalist, went with me to the memorial. The guard at the gate recognized Desire from his TV work; so we chatted with him briefly before entering. We had been inside maybe ten minutes when a terrible explosion shook the building. We later learned that someone had tossed a grenade at the site, instantly killing the guard we encountered only moments earlier. The culprit has not been caught. During my more recent visit, Desire speculated that a disgruntled Hutu may have tossed the grenade. "They are not happy that we... remember our relatives" during the official week of mourning, he said. "After the plane" is a common phrase one hears in Rwanda, where memories are divided into two periods: the world before the plane went down and the world after. For in a country as tiny as Rwanda, virtually everyone was personally touched by the genocide. Virtually every family lost members -- or saw brothers turn into killers. As Anglican Bishop John Rucyahana told me: "Almost everybody knows someone who died, and knows somebody who killed somebody...We are dealing with the [still] fresh hurt of our people." Bishop Rucyahana, who has opened a boarding school for orphans of the genocide and who also ministers to perpetrators in Rwanda's prisons, believes Rwandans have no choice but to reconcile: "We have to do it now...those of us who have ... suffered both the loss and the guilt. If we don't reconcile and live the witness to the generation coming after us, our children shall have no reconciliation in the next generation either. It's not an issue of waiting until the pain is over. It's now." Rucyahana's point, of course, is that the past does not have to be forgotten or buried for one to move on; that sometimes life demands that you simply learn to live with the pain, and perhaps even embrace those who have caused it. If there is one lingering impression I have of Rwanda, it is of a beautiful yet tortured country, trying very hard to manage its pain. And once a year, during the official week of mourning, there is an attempt at a collective release as Rwanda--with fanfare and music, with sobs and moans--solemnly remembers its dead. At a memorial service in a place called Bugesera last year, President Paul Kagame declared, "We have been wronged more than we have wronged." The statement was part of Kagame's attempt to answer critics who had accused his men of complicity in post-genocide atrocities; but it was also an attempt to make a larger point; that Rwanda had to fight its way back from hell and that lots of hands (including those of the putative good guys) got bloody in the process. But in the end, he seems to be saying, Rwanda did what it had to do; it did it essentially on its own; and, all things considered, the result has not been so bad. Rucyahana sees an even larger message in Rwanda's tribulations: "I think God is using this, the humility, the brokenness, the ashes, to set an example for other countries...If Rwanda can recover from this...any other nations can recover. And if Rwanda can be reconciled, any other nations can be reconciled. Even America can reconcile its communities." Rwanda has not yet fully recovered and it is not exactly reconciled; but it does seem to have learned the collective lesson that embracing the future does not necessarily require comprehending or coming to terms with the past. More on Africa
 
Oprah Winfrey Network Launch Pushed Back To 2010 Top
OPRAH Winfrey's 2006 cross-country road trip with best pal Gayle King is the basis of a new series on Oprah's new cable network. The Oprah Winfrey Network -- OWN -- gave advertisers the first peek yesterday at some of the shows that will be on the new network. Buried in the announcement was news that the launch of the channel, originally promised for sometime this year, has been pushed back to 2010. More on Oprah
 
Jason Mannino: Unemployment: A Call To Self Discovery Top
If you take a look at statistics illustrated by major research companies you will consistently find that more than 50% of individuals lack satisfaction in their jobs. I have spoken to more than one executive who has referred to their job in the corporate jungle as "wearing golden handcuffs." The truth is that so many people experience what I refer to as "job dread." This is the experience of dragging your body into work while leaving your soul in a sweltering car with the windows rolled up. Unemployment could actually offer the well deserved time needed to resolve this experience. While conducting a job search you can begin to ask necessary questions and put necessary plans in place to support you in moving into a career position that integrates your soul's needs with your practical career needs. Of course, when significant change is triggered by events beyond our realm of influence,it is natural to go through a grieving process that includes panic, fear, anger, sadness, etc. Particularly, if you are newly unemployed, I encourage you to give yourself the time you need to fully experience the emotions that come forward for you without judgment. Also, gently remind yourself that this is not the first time in which you have had to overcome prior, seemingly impossible challenges. For instance, less than ten years ago many of us traversed significant challenges resulting from the dot com burst and pervasive post 9/11 cutbacks. After you have allowed yourself to experience the bulk of your instinctual response to the layoff, I invite you to refocus your attention on something positive. This can include activating your support system, and beginning to take an inventory of your unique skills and strengths that will remain with you wherever you go. Begin to ask yourself, "Is it just my job and company that are in flux or is it my industry and career sector that are in trouble?" If it is your industry then I encourage you to also ask yourself if you are one of the more than 50% lacking job satisfaction. If so, this lay off may just be your call to self discovery. I was recruited and hired into a new position that began right after 9/11 on September 17, 2001. At the time my work was Human Resources and Talent Acquisition. Within two weeks I discovered that I was hired as a recruiter into a company that was implementing a hiring freeze and reducing headcount. Guess who was one of the first to go? Right, yours truly. Three weeks after being hired I was laid off with two weeks of severance pay. Trust me; it was no fun being a recruiter in a job market that was experiencing significant cutbacks and unemployment. Over the course of that year I had moments when I didn't know if I could afford to eat lunch. Fortunately, I was blessed with a support network that fed me when I needed it. Not only did I manage to survive, I learned about the depths of my resourcefulness and what was truly important to me. I learned to listen to my gut, which was telling me to stay in my contract and not take the new position. Also, my desire to be of service was rekindled, and I went back to work for a non-profit career center while I submitted applications to graduate school. Many people often wait for adversity to engage in the process of self-discovery. Self-discovery in the context of career exploration means asking yourself a few probing questions. These questions include,"What is it that I truly love to do and that inspires me? What I would be willing to stay up all night doing, still feel energized in the morning, and not get paid for it?" These questions begin to tap into the source of your true inspiration, values, and preferred skills. In conjunction with National Career Exploration week (April 5-11) I encourage you to begin to ask yourself these questions and look for additional articles in the next few weeks that will offer strategies to continue your exploration. *** E-mail Jason with your career exploration questions at info@jmannino.com . Jason brings a decade of experience in Talent Acquisition to his work as a career coach. You can learn more at www.jmannino.com . More on The Inner Life
 
Jamal Dajani: Summits, A Queen, And A Drama Queen Top
I have never thought that watching summits could be nauseating but it was, thanks to the U.S. and British media which focused on the "Obamarama" and frenzied over Michelle's touching of the Queen of England. Then, there were the tedious analyses about the President sneezing during a press conference, the Queen flirting with him, and the comparison between Michelle and Jackie Kennedy amongst other juicy stories which have given the infamous tabloids of London enough material for several weeks. Meanwhile, President Barack Obama called the G-20 summit in London a "turning point" in the effort to reverse the global economic meltdown and praised the nations' joint efforts as a historic step on the road to stability. "I think we did OK," Obama said. "The document that has been produced, as well as the concrete actions that will follow, reflect a range of our priorities. ... Overall, I'm pleased." Now, the Treasury Department can print more money, and we can all forget about the global crisis. The demonstrators in London, who were labeled "anarchists" by several media pundits and were kept at bay from where the world leaders were meeting, can all go home and eat cake. This was not the only summit that was full of drama; more agonizing than watching the G-20 summit was keeping a tab on the Arab League's summit in Doha. There were no queens to gossip about there; however, there was one drama queen, the Libyan leader Muammar el-Qaddafi. The "brother leader," as he likes to be addressed, stormed out of the summit after denouncing the Saudi king and declaring himself "the dean of Arab rulers". The Libyan leader disrupted the opening of the summit by taking a microphone and criticizing King Abdullah, calling him a "British product and American ally". When the Qatari emir tried to quiet him, Qaddafi, the current Africa Union chairman, insisted he be allowed to speak, saying, "I am an international leader, the dean of the Arab rulers, the king of kings of Africa and the imam (leader] of Muslims, and my international status does not allow me to descend to a lower level". Later, Qatar's emir brought the Colonel and the King together for a reconciliation meeting. They kissed and made up for the time being. Meanwhile, Hosni Mubarak of Egypt is a no-show two summits in a row, without an official explanation. Jordan's King Abdullah reportedly went home early because he was upset that he wasn't met by the Emir of Qatar at the airport, and Sudan's al Bashir, who defied an arrest warrant from the International Criminal Court in The Hague by flying to Qatar, received overwhelming support by the attendees. Next year's summit is scheduled to be held in Tripoli, Libya. That should be entertaining. Jamal Dajani produces the Mosaic Intelligence Report on Link TV. More on Barack Obama
 
Paul Brest: Philanthropy by the Numbers Top
In this final post on the National Committee on Responsive Philanthropy's Criteria for Philanthropy at its Best ®, I will discuss its mandate that a foundation must provide "at least 50 percent of its grant dollars to benefit lower-income communities, communities of color, and other marginalized groups, broadly defined." NCRP makes a compelling case for philanthropy's role in addressing poverty and racism as deep systemic and structural problems--so compelling that one can't help but wonder why the Criteria are focused only on the United States when the vast majority of marginalized groups live in developing countries. Be that as it may, more foundation money for reducing poverty and discrimination, especially if spent strategically, would be valuable. But there are other important social goals as well. It is not hard to imagine alternative versions of the Criteria that argue that at least 50 percent of foundations' grant dollars should, for example, be spent on: • preventing or adapting to climate change • preventing nuclear proliferation • preventing global pandemics • addressing the coming crises in providing and financing health care, social security, and other entitlements • supporting research in all aspects of health and medicine • promoting international human rights • supporting global social and economic development • addressing the problems of aging • supporting museums, the arts, and other cultural institutions • preserving endangered species and habitats Of course, many of these issues have tremendous implications for the members of marginalized groups. Recognizing this, NCRP acknowledges that "if a foundation supports climate change, cancer research or the arts in ways that benefit marginalized communities, those grants certainly should 'count.'" NCRP puts scare quotes around "count" because it says it's not counting. In fact, its report devotes about fifteen pages to an honor roll of foundations that meet its various numerical Criteria. (Not that I'm counting.) But word play is not the main problem here. NCRP asserts that whatever a foundation's goals may be, it can meet its quota with an additional dose of diversity. For example, the version of the Criteria circulated for endorsement suggests that even a foundation "promoting animal rights can find important ways to advance its mission by investing in underserved populations." But effectively addressing structural racism and poverty is not something that a program officer with expertise in animal rights can do on the side. You don't improve a serious program for protecting animal rights by picking up stray dogs in impoverished neighborhoods; you just dilute its effectiveness. By trivializing the complexity of this work, NCRP relegates philanthropy for marginalized groups to the margin. One could make a similar point about NCRP's requirement that a foundation "devote at least 25 percent of its grant dollars for advocacy, organizing and civic engagement to promote equity, opportunity and justice in our society." Some foundations are likely to have much more impact on marginalized communities by providing direct services to them, or engaging in the sort of research about poverty and racism on which NCRP bases much of the Criteria. But the broader problem with this and NCRP's entire set of metrics is its effort to use crude proxies for impact--measuring the percent of grant dollars spent on advocacy or general operating support rather than focusing on impact itself. NCRP claims that the Criteria are not asking foundations to paint by numbers. Perhaps so. Rather, it is telling a painter that, whatever her subject, A Painting at its Best must have 25 percent red and 25 percent green paint, that 50 percent of the strokes must be done with a number 6 pointed brush, and so on. The Criteria cover some of the most important issues facing philanthropy today. NCRP states that its only goal is to press foundation board and staff members to come to terms with those issues. If so, it has lost a great opportunity by substituting meaningless metrics and tendentious advocacy for thoughtful, even-handed, empirically based analysis. * * * Almost five months of writing a weekly blog have increased my admiration of columnists who write several times a week, and philanthropy bloggers like Sean Stannard-Stockton , who come up with fresh material every day. Without planning to cease publication, I think I'll become more intermittent for a while. If nothing else, after this month-long slog through NCRP's Criteria, readers deserve a break.
 
Obama Laments "Frustrating" Loss Of Anonymity In Europe Top
Barack Obama acknowledged on Friday feeling some personal frustrations since moving into the White House. But in a town hall meeting in Strasbourg, France, the president insisted that the call to public service outweighed the occasionally-depressing loss of anonymity. "You feel a lot of weight on your shoulders, there is no doubt about it," said Obama, when asked in the event's final question whether he had experienced any frustrations with the job. "It's very frustrating now ... it used to be when I came to Europe that I could just wander down to a cafe and sit and have some wine and watch people go by and, you know, go into a little shop and watch the sun go down. Now, I'm in hotel rooms all the time. And I have security around me all the time. Losing that ability to just take a walk, that is something that is frustrating." Earlier, Obama had expressed a tinge of jealousy over the brevity of European presidential and prime minister campaigns, noting that his nearly two-year run for the White House had kept him away from a "wonderful wife" and "two perfect daughters." He added that the sacrifice was easier to cope with because it had been done for public, not personal gain. "I truly believe that there's nothing more noble than public service," said Obama. "Now, that doesn't mean that you have to run for president. You know, you might work for Doctors Without Borders or you might volunteer for an agency, or you might be somebody working for the United Nations, or you might be the mayor of Strasbourg, right? You might volunteer in your own community. But the point is that what I found at a very young age was that if you only think about yourself... over the long term, I think you get bored... I think if you're only thinking about yourself, your life becomes diminished and that the way to live a full life is to think about what can I do for others? How can I be part of this larger project in making a better world?" Get HuffPost Politics on Facebook , or follow us on Twitter . More on Barack Obama
 
Daniel Cubias: Nothing Abstract About It: A Report from the Recently Downsized Top
In my most recent post , I wrote that the economic collapse has hit Latinos particularly hard. This pain is not confined to day laborers and construction workers (although they are hurting more than others), but also extends to those Hispanics who have ventured into the white-collar world... like your most humble blogger. Yes, recently I was laid off from my day job (not the Huffington Post). Thus, I have joined the 8.3% of Americans, and 11% of Latino males, who have said adios to regular paychecks. My company, hereafter referred to as "the ex-job," canned four other people the same day. For the conspiratorial among you, let me be quick to point out that my fellow downsizees are all white. They include a woman who devoted twenty years to the organization and another who is a single mom. I was surprised to get the news, of course, but not shocked. The ex-job is struggling, and if the economy doesn't stop hemorrhaging, I fear that the thirty or so people who still work there will be joining me in the nation's cool new fad of updating resumes and emailing LinkedIn requests. At the same time, I would be lying if I said that I don't harbor some hostility toward the ex-job. I worked six years as a business writer for them, and it's impossible to not feel like a sap when your boss says, "Your performance has been excellent, thanks for your great work and loyalty, and now... bye." One reason for my WTF reaction is that despite the very real fact that it is a business decision, there is also a personal judgment being made: You (the freshly unemployed) have been determined to be less valuable to the company than those who remain. You are more expendable. Since my number came up in the great economic-misadventure lottery, I haven't been depressed or even worried (my wife and I are in better financial shape than many people in a similar situation). But there are still bursts of anger, which I've always thought is the most productive of the negative emotions. Nothing sets off this anger more than the banal clichés thrust at me by well-meaning friends. In the past few weeks, I've learned that it's always darkest before the dawn, that what doesn't kill me makes me stronger, that there's a reason for everything, and that God never gives us more than we can handle. By the way, I find this latter statement theologically dubious - people who commit suicide, for example, obviously got a lot more than they could handle. But speaking of the Almighty, I've also heard that when God closes a door, he opens a window. If you've just been blindsided with a layoff, however, you don't feel like God has been messing around with doors and windows. You think that he just dynamited your house. Still, I remain optimistic about the future - not just for me but for all of us. Common sense, the laws of economics, and basic karma all say that we'll pull out of this financial freefall soon. Perhaps the Obama plan will be the answer. At the very least, maybe the stimulus package will help me land a construction job. I hesitate to look into this, however, not because I'm too good or genteel for blue-collar labor, but because I was really looking forward to continuing Hispanic America's infiltration into the white-collar world. Also, I'm much better with words than I am with a backhoe. Trust me on this. So until I land that next office gig, I will be sharpening skills, hustling for freelance gigs, and networking like an overly caffeinated, extroverted state senator up for reelection. Perhaps I will even let Huffington Post readers know that I'm available for writing assignments. But I better be careful about that. I have to be very subtle.... More on Barack Obama
 
Iowa Gay Marriage Ban Ruled Unconstitutional Top
DES MOINES, Iowa — The Iowa Supreme Court issued a unanimous ruling Friday finding that the state's same-sex marriage ban violates the constitutional rights of gay and lesbian couples, making Iowa the third state where marriage is legal. In its decision, the court upheld a 2007 district court judge's ruling that the law violates the state constitution. It strikes the language from Iowa code limiting marriage to only between a man a woman. "The court reaffirmed that a statute inconsistent with the Iowa constitution must be declared void even though it may be supported by strong and deep-seated traditional beliefs and popular opinion," said a summary of the ruling issued by the court. The ruling set off celebration among the state's gay-marriage proponents. "Iowa is about justice, and that's what happened here today," said Laura Fefchak, who was hosting a verdict party in the Des Moines suburb of Urbandale with partner of 13 years, Nancy Robinson. Robinson added: "To tell the truth, I didn't think I'd see this day." Des Moines attorney Dennis Johnson, who argued on behalf of the gay and lesbian couples, said "this is a great day for civil rights in Iowa." "We have all of you courageous plaintiffs to thank: Go get married, live happily ever after, live the American dream," he said. Court rules dictate that the decision will take about 21 days to be considered final, and a request for a rehearing could be filed within that period. That means it will be at least several weeks before gay and lesbian couples can seek marriage licenses. But Polk County Attorney John Sarcone said the county attorney's office will not ask for a rehearing, meaning the court's decision should take effect after that three-week period. "Our Supreme Court has decided it, and they make the decision as to what the law is and we follow Supreme Court decisions," Sarcone said. "This is not a personal thing. We have an obligation to the law to defend the recorder, and that's what we do." The case has been working its way through Iowa's court system since 2005 when Lambda Legal, a New York-based gay rights organization, filed a lawsuit on behalf of six gay and lesbian Iowa couples who were denied marriage licenses. Some of their children are also listed as plaintiffs. The suit named then-Polk County recorder and registrar Timothy Brien. The state Supreme Court's ruling upheld an August 2007 decision by Polk County District Court Judge Robert Hanson, who found that a state law allowing marriage only between a man and a woman violates the constitutional rights of equal protection. The Polk County attorney's office, arguing on behalf of Brien, claimed that Hanson's ruling violates the separation of powers and said the issue should be left to the Legislature. Lambda Legal scheduled a news conference for early Friday to comment on the ruling. A request for comment from the Polk County attorney's office wasn't immediately returned. Around the nation, only Massachusetts and Connecticut permit same-sex marriage. California, which briefly allowed gay marriage before a voter initiative in November repealed it, allows domestic partnerships. New Jersey and New Hampshire also offer civil unions, which provide many of the same rights that come with marriage. New York recognizes same-sex marriages performed elsewhere, and legislators there and in New Jersey are weighing whether to offer marriage. A bill that would legalize same-sex marriage in Vermont has cleared the Legislature but may be vetoed by the governor. Richard Socarides, an attorney and former senior adviser on gay rights to President Clinton, said the ruling carries extra significance coming from Iowa. "It's a big win because, coming from Iowa, it represents the mainstreaming of gay marriage. And it shows that despite attempts stop gay marriage through right wing ballot initiatives, like in California, the courts will continue to support the case for equal rights for gays," he said. The ruling in Iowa's same-sex marriage case came more quickly than many observers had anticipated, with some speculating after oral arguments that it could take a year or more for a decision. ___ On the Net: Iowa Supreme Court: http://www.judicial.state.ia.us/ Lambda Legal: http://www.lambdalegal.org/ More on Gay Marriage
 
Janice Taylor: Kathy Ireland: Overweight, Overwhelmed Top
Top model, former Sports Illustrated swimsuit cover girl, Kathy Ireland, plumped up and packed on 25 pounds "without even knowing it!" Kathy, like HOLA! I gained 3 pounds last month and could tell immediately; as soon as my 'love muffin' (more than just a top) came peaking out and then tumbling over my very tight jeans. Still, I get your point. You stopped taking care of yourself and went into denial. Your mind was so cluttered with business matters and family matters that you didn't matter. And, I'm guessing here that you did, indeed, have some idea that you were gaining weight -- one can only blame the dry cleaners for shrinking their clothes for so long and 25 pounds is the equivalent to three sizes (8 pounds per size) -- but 'it' spiraled a tad out of control, so you buried your feelings in food, and jumped another size. You were on the "downward spiral." Nevertheless, you turned it around, got it together, didn't you? You reached out to a nutritionally sound friend. Smart! Support is key! You learned from it; and have made it a part of your story (a talking point for your new book -- Real Solutions for Busy Moms ). You are now on the "upward spiral." Busy moms (busy women) take care of everyone else first; from the kids to their partners, their significant other, spouse, job, boss, family member, community obligations, friends and goodness knows what else/who else. And Kathy's photo in People Magazine told her tale. When you put everyone before yourself and stop paying attention to your own needs, stop doing the things that you love to do, stop connecting to yourself, you effectively don't exist. You've lost your identity. I'm big on real conversations and would love to have one with Kathy Ireland. Here's how I'd kick-start the gab-fest. Kathy, how specifically are you taking care of yourself; putting yourself first? When Oprah spoke of her personal battle with weight on her TV show, she said that she was taking care of herself first by putting exercise on her calendar. Sorry, that doesn't cut it for me. Yes, put exercise on the calendar! Great idea. I'm curious to know, how will you nurture your soul? Stay connected to your core being? Your goal, praise be, is not to schedule a bikini- appearance on Oprah . Rather, your goal to be healthy, to be there for your husband and your children. What does that look like, exactly? I'd love to hear more because that's such a pat answer, and I suspect you are deeper than sound bytes. Kathy, write me ; let's talk! Note to Our Lady of Weight Loss fans: Those three pounds I gained merely visited; they did not move back in! -------------------------------------------- Janice Taylor permanently removed over 50 lbs. 7 years ago. She is the author of the best-selling Our Lady of Weight Loss books. Visit Janice: Our Lady of Weight Loss Our Lady of Weight Loss, the Beliefnet Blog
 
Raymond J. Learsy: Gaming The Bailout: How Washington Continues Making The Saudi Arabia of Bond Funds Ever Richer Top
In a troubling example of how access, power, and influence over the government and media is literally lifting billions from the pockets of taxpayers,one need go no further than focus the incestuous relationship between the government and a firm called PIMCO. Those in the biz know Pimco well. You see, Pimco is the largest bond fund magager in the nation. Pedaling a reputation of being savy and ahead of the curve (Pimco talking heads have almost daily access to the media, TV and Op-ed columns) purportedly steering clear of subprime paper that has ensared many others. Reputedly its investments are focused on high quality securities issued by government sponsored entities. Really? Well you see there was this billion dollar moment back in September 2008. Then and before Pimco turned tail on its reputed investment strategy of quality only and made huge investments in quintessential junk, namely Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac subordinated debt.The subordinated debt carried a higher coupon and therefore was at significantly higher risk then that of the regular bond holders. Further it represented but 1% of the companies' debt, hardly critical to the functioning of Fannie and Freddie given the disastrous straits they already found themselves. As the situation at Fannie and Fredddie worsened investors in Fannie and Freddie reasonably expected a subordinated debt wipeout or at the very least a massive restructuring tantamount to a significant hair cut, . Yet PIMCO piled in, loading up on the subordinated debt for pennies on the dollar. Certainly the beaten down status of Fannie and Freddie sub debt was far outside the purview of their broadcast purchase parameters limited to high quality product. Why? Well, perhaps the following played a role: -PIMCO's Bill Gross had almost unlimited access to CNBC where he could lecture listeners and those in government about the systemic dangers of a Fannie and Freddie collapse, scaring us to the point of hiding under the covers. And never before the "rescue" of Fannie and Freddie being asked by his CNBC interlocutors specifically whether a Fannie/Freddie bailout would benefit Pimco in any way. -Access to Hank Paulson with whom he would confer regularly (please see "Bailout Ballet: The NewYork Times Reports on Hank Paulson/Pimco's Bill Gross Pas De Deux" 9.28.08). According to Gross then, he was not out of line in pushing for a bailout from which Pimco would benefit outrageously because,as he would say "Pimco had no official role in formulating the plan...we want safe agency guaranteed mortgages. We don't want to take a lot of risk in subprime space". As though, before the bailout, Fannie and Freddie subordinated debt was not the gorilla of subprime paper. And then, as if it were a preamble to the outrage of the billions of taxpayer dollars being shelled out by AIG at 100 cents on the dollar, without thought of renegotiation or shared risk, the FannieFreddie sub debt was covered 100 cents on the dollar in the bailout by the Treasury. It thereby set the standard for covering Wall Street speculation and excess in all that was to come thereafter. Others could bet and lose, but Wall Street would be given a pass. At the time the Wall Street Journal, with rightful outrage penned an editorial "Bailout For Billionaires." 9/11/08, suggesting the subdebt bailout enriched "some of the world's richest people and largest financial institutions." Both Pimco and Goldman Sachs were mentioned as was a refernce made to Hank Palson's prior Goldman ties, "where Mr. Paulson used to work" For PIMCO it was the biggest one day pay day in their history, an outrageous and unconsiousable $1.7 billion dollars virtually lifted from taxpayers pockets to PIMCO coffers. But wait, don't go away, it continues. In the administration's new trillion dollar Term Asset backed Securities Loan Facility (TALF) claims it wants to partner with private investors. Well, put that wallet back in your pocket, you needn't apply. You see, the Treasury doesn't want your money. The only people they want to deal with are the likes of Pimco and Goldman and three and four others. You see if you are big and powerful and hold political sway and have much of the press in your pocket you receive privileged access in the beltway. As for the gang a Treasury one begins to suspect that Geithner and Summers are under the care of the same hearing aid practitioner as John Thain. The selected firms will be positioned to reap enormous profits, esprcially given their post position in the running, not to speak of collecting fees and profit sharing from all those others who want to participate. (WSJ editorial "Treasury's Very Private Asset Fund" April.1.09 and this not an April Fool's joke) Last September the New York Times reported ("For Hire:Bailout Advisor" 09.25.08) that Bill Gross, who knows how to lay it on, volunteered, "If the Treasury wanted our help, it would come, you know, free and clear". Well, this is Bill Gross and Pimco's moment. Does that mean returning to the Treasury all fees made from managing these assets and returning all appreciation accruing to PIMCO from those securites they bought in under the program?? CNBC, this is the moment to ask Bill Gross a few questions. More on Financial Crisis
 
Nan Aron: Why Did Republicans Boycott the Senate Judiciary Hearing on Hamilton? Top
Most of the Senate Judiciary Committee's Republican members boycotted the confirmation hearing on President Obama's first judicial nominee, Judge David Hamilton. A few weeks ago, all 41 Republican Senators sent a letter to President Obama , threatening that they will use filibusters to prevent majority votes on any nominee who will not rule based on the political agenda of the Republican senator from their home state. Just what is that agenda? To find out, just look at the record of the judges President Bush put on the federal bench with the enthusiastic support of these same Republican senators. Recent appointees to the courts of appeals found that: Consumers can be required to pay for merchandise received in the mail even if they never ordered it. Hospital executives could fire a nurse after she said publicly that she believed new staffing policies jeopardized the health of mothers and their babies. An employee could be fired for complaining about serious racially inflammatory comments in the workplace. Republicans were all in favor of a straight majority vote - with no filibustering - to support judges with that kind of political agenda. With the appointment of Judge Hamilton, President Obama has signaled that he will nominate highly qualified judges who will uphold our Constitution and the law to provide equal justice and protect personal freedoms for everyone in America, not just a few. The boycott is especially ironic given that Judge Hamilton not only meets those high standards, he is supported by the Republican Senator from his home state of Indiana, Richard Lugar (R-IN). Still not sure that the Republicans are doing all they can to ensure the courts carry out their political agenda? What else explains the blatant hypocrisy of saying the Senate had no right to question President Bush's nominees, but President Obama must first get the Republicans' blessing before making his nominations? Look at what Senator Mel Martinez (R-FL) said to Democrats about President Bush's nominees in a statement on the floor of the Senate in 2006: "We simply do not have the prerogative of deciding who it is we would prefer to see on the Court or who it is we might find more philosophically suitable to us or more to our liking." The American people can't let the Republicans block nominees who don't support their political agenda. We can't continue to have a country where there is one set of rules for a few at the top and a different set for the rest of us. Find out more about Judge Hamilton and the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals at www.allianceforjustice.org.
 
Shelly Palmer: Google In Talks to Buy Twitter: MediaBytes with Shelly Palmer April 3, 2009 Top
According to several sources, Google is in late stage talks to acquire Twitter . If it happens, it will be pretty much what everyone expected. Google can help monetize the Twitter's traffic and, maybe more importantly, they have the infrastructure to handle Twitter's remarkable growth. Research In Motion beat its quarterly estimate , with revenue for the fourth quarter of fiscal 2009 up 84% over the same period last year. While many feared smart phone user growth would slow due to the recession, BlackBerry gained 3.9 million net new subscribers during the quarter, and launched their BlackBerry application store yesterday. While Jay Leno is still the king of the late night ratings, ABC's Nightline knocked off perennial number two David Letterman for the first time in six years . Nightline, whose future is reportedly in jeopardy, averaged 3.6 million viewers for the first quarter of 2009. Nightline has done increasingly well with Adults 25-54, taking in 1.69 million viewers with the advertising friendly demographic, and beating Letterman for 3 straight quarters. IBM reportedly will purchase Sun Microsystems for $7 billion . Sources say that IBM will pay $9.50, down from a bid of $10 a share. While reps at both IBM and Sun have declined to comment, it is reported that a deal could be announced as early as today. Deutsche Telekom , who has the rights to the iPhone in Germany, said that users caught using Skype's VOIP service could have their contract terminated . The parent company of T-Mobile noted that "For one-and-a-half years the use of Voice over Internet Protocol, or VoIP, and instant messaging applications is prohibited in all our data tariffs." Shelly Palmer is a consultant and the host of MediaBytes a daily show featuring news you can use about technology, media & entertainment. He is Managing Director of Advanced Media Ventures Group LLC and the author of Television Disrupted: The Transition from Network to Networked TV (2008, York House Press). Shelly is also President of the National Academy of Television Arts & Sciences, NY (the organization that bestows the coveted Emmy® Awards ). You can join the MediaBytes mailing list here . Shelly can be reached at shelly@palmer.net . More on CBS
 
Sarkozy To Obama: France Will Take Gitmo Detainee Top
STRASBOURG, France — Welcomed with thunderous cheers, President Barack Obama pledged on Friday to repair damaged relations with Europe, saying the world came together following the 2001 terrorist attacks but then "we got sidetracked by Iraq." "We must be honest with ourselves," Obama said. "In recent years, we've allowed our alliance to drift." The new U.S. president said that despite the bitter feelings that were generated by Iraq, the United States and its allies must stand together because "al-Qaida is still a threat." Speaking before a French and German audience at a town-hall style gathering, Obama also encouraged a skeptical Europe to support his revamped strategy for rooting out terrorism suspects in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and said Europe should not expect America to shoulder the burden of sending in combat troops by itself. "This is a joint problem," Obama said on the cusp of the NATO summit. "And it requires a joint effort." He opened his appearance with a 25-minute prepared speech in which he set a dramatic, long-term goal of "a world without nuclear weapons." He said he would outline details of his nonproliferation proposal in a speech in Prague on Sunday, near the end of a European trip that is spanning five countries in eight days. "Even with the Cold War now over, the spread of nuclear weapons or the theft of nuclear material could lead to the extermination of any city on the planet," Obama said. He held the campaign-like event in the midst of his first European trip as president as he sought to strengthen the United States' standing in the world while working with foreign counterparts to right the troubled global economy. Obama said the United States shares blame for the crisis, but that "every nation bears responsibility for what lies ahead _ especially now." Back home, his administration was trying to weather the fallout of another dismal monthly jobs report that was announced as Obama spoke in France. The jobless rate jumped to 8.5 percent, the highest since late 1983, as a wide range of employers eliminated a net total of 663,000 jobs in March. Overseas, Obama invited questions from his French and German audience heavily made up of students in a sports arena. Even though Obama talked about the event as a way to interact with young foreigners, he did most of the talking and took only a handful of questions. He acknowledged "my French and German are terrible" but noted that translators were on hand. Much like during his presidential campaign, Obama paced the stage with a microphone, like a talk show host. In his opening remarks, he underscored European and American ties and appeared intent on improving the U.S. image abroad, which suffered under George W. Bush. "I've come to Europe this week to renew our partnership," Obama said, bluntly claiming that the relationship between the United States and Europe had gone adrift, with blame on both sides. "In America, there's a failure to appreciate Europe's leading role in the world," Obama said. Instead of celebrating Europe's dynamic union and seeking to work with you, Obama said, "there have been times where America's shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive." "But in Europe, there is an anti-Americanism that is at once casual, but can also be insidious. Instead of recognizing the good that America so often does in the world, there have been times where Europeans chose to blame America for much of what's bad," Obama said. He added: "On both sides of the Atlantic, these attitudes have become all too common. They are not wise. They do not represent the truth." Obama also encouraged Europe to support his new Afghanistan-Pakistan strategy. "I understand there's doubt about this war in Europe," Obama said. "There's doubt even in the United States." But he said the United States and its allies must continue to work to defeat the "terrorists who threaten all of us." And, he said Europeans and Americans had to look past disagreements over Iraq. Obama opposed the Iraq war, which divided America from many of its traditional allies and was the source of bitter relations between the U.S. and Europe. "We got sidetracked by Iraq and we have not fully recovered that initial insight that we have a mutual interest in ensuring that organizations like al-Qaida cannot operate," he said. "I think it is important for Europe to understand that even though I am president and George Bush is not president, al-Qaida is still a threat." The president said he wants to look back at his tenure and know his work drastically lessened the threat of terrorism, particularly nuclear terrorism. "We can't reduce the threat of a nuclear weapon going off unless those that possess the most nuclear weapons _ the United States and Russia _ take serious steps to reduce our stockpiles," Obama said. "So we want to pursue that vigorously in the years ahead." Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev earlier this week pledged a new effort to both nations' nuclear arsenals. Touching on topics controversial in Europe, Obama also promoted his decision to close the U.S. prison camp at Guantanamo Bay within a year, and said "without equivocation that the United States does not and will not torture." Earlier, in a symbolic gesture, French President Nicolas Sarkozy told Obama that France would accept a prisoner from the detention center where terrorist suspects are held if that would facilitate its closing. Saying that he was determined to "speak the truth," Sarkozy said that Guantanamo "was not in keeping with U.S. values." He said democratic states have a responsibility to speak honestly and do what they say, and that Guantanamo was a contradiction in that standard. Obama said the U.S. needs help in finding a place to send those held at the center. He thanked Sarkozy for "being good to his word." About 240 detainees are still held _ some without charge _ at the Guantanamo Bay prison, which was set up after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to hold so-called "enemy combatants" accused of links to the al-Qaida terror network or the Taliban. Spain and Portugal have already said they could accept prisoners, while Germany and others remain tightlipped whether they will accept non-nationals. (This version CORRECTS an Obama quote to say `this war' instead of `his war' )) More on France
 
Robert D. Stolorow: Don't Expect a Miracle! Top
When a society has been subjected to collective trauma, as Americans have been by the attack of 9/11 and the current economic crisis, its members tend to fall under the spell of one or another form of what I call "resurrective ideology"--shared beliefs that seek to restore illusions shattered by trauma. One form such reactive ideology may take is the attribution of messianic powers to an admired leader, an attribution that, when it is disappointed as it inevitably must be, brings further traumatization. In the context of the economic crisis, President Obama has been wisely discouraging such messianic attributions, letting us know that we need to keep our expectations of him and his administration within the limiting bounds of human possibility and fallibility. Although he has repeatedly demonstrated, as he did at the G-20 meetings, that he is a calming presence with an acute grasp of the complexities of our collective situation, he has also consistently emphasized that the road to economic recovery will be a long, difficult, and painful one, requiring perseverance, hard work, sacrifice, patience, and self-discipline. Obama can no more miraculously save us from the cumulative consequences of many years of economic foolishness than Bush's holy war against the "forces of evil" could resurrect our lost illusions of grandiose invincibility. More on G-20 Summit
 
Sherman Hospital Twitters Surgery, Posts YouTube And Facebook Updates Of Hysterectomy Top
Sherman Hospital in Elgin reportedly became the first hospital in Illinois to Twitter surgery Thursday when staffers posted live updates and video of a laparoscopic hysterectomy procedure from inside the operating room on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube. Dr. Raja Chatterji, the presiding surgeon, answered questions about the procedure and the decision to track it live here . Watch a WGN feature on the procedure: Watch a YouTube clip of the surgery, posted by the hospital: More on Twitter
 
Paul Helmke: Mexican Gangs With American Guns: "A Threat To U.S. National Security" Top
A war is being waged by Mexican drug cartels that is killing thousands of ordinary citizens, police, and government officials. According to an analysis by the Pentagon, the violence is even beginning to jeopardize the stability of Mexico - a nation of almost 110 million people on our southern border. Last November the Pentagon's Joint Forces Command concluded that Mexico was at risk of a "rapid and sudden collapse" due in part to "sustained assault and pressure by criminal gangs." The Pentagon further concluded that "[a]ny descent by Mexico into chaos would demand an American response based on the serious implications for homeland security alone." U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder calls it nothing less than " a threat to U.S. national security ." What makes this dire situation even worse is America's nearly non-existent gun violence prevention safety net . Arizona's Attorney General Terry Goddard told CNN that America is "the gun store for a great deal of the world," a fact that Mexican drug gangs know too well. As the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) reports, 90 percent of firearms recovered at Mexican crime scenes have been traced to gun sellers right here in the United States. The Brady Center described the cost of putting American guns in the hands of Mexican gangs last week in a comprehensive report, Exporting Gun Violence: How Our Weak Gun Laws Arm Criminals in Mexico and America . In a nutshell, criminals follow the path of least resistance. Mexico has some of the strongest gun laws in the world, and America has some of the weakest. Mexican gangs sell their drugs in the United States and buy their guns here, where we make it lethally simple for dangerous people to arm themselves . Gangs then take those guns - assault weapons, .50 caliber sniper rifles and semi-automatic handguns - south of the border to kill police, innocent civilians and each other. The same gun trafficking principle applies within the United States, as well. Domestic gun traffickers buy their firearms in weak gun law states like West Virginia and Mississippi, and distribute them to criminals in strong gun law states like New Jersey and Massachusetts. This is nothing new. Officials in Washington have long known that America's weak gun laws facilitate Mexico's gang killings , just as they know that those same legal loopholes and corrupt gun dealers arm American criminals as well - producing over 10,000 gun homicides in this country each year (compared to just 52 in the United Kingdom last year). Columnist Ruben Navarrette said recently, "No point in denying it. Much of the death and destruction south of the border is stamped: 'Made in the U.S.A.' Americans helped make this mess. It's only right that we do whatever we can to help clean it up - not just for Mexico's own good, but for ours." Specifically, what Congress and President Obama can do is show some leadership, confront the gun lobby, and put America's national security first. > The President and Congressional leaders should require Brady criminal background checks for every gun sale in this country, including at gun shows . > They should restrict access to military-style assault weapons such as AK-47s that can fire 30 body armor-piercing rounds in 6 seconds , as well as .50-caliber sniper rifles that can shoot through armored vehicles and shoot down helicopters. > Congress and the President should also crack down on the small percentage of corrupt licensed gun dealers who account for almost 60% of crime guns in this country. These are concrete steps our elected officials can take to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people. American voters strongly support them because they will help save lives - not just in Mexico but right here at home. (Note to readers: This entry, along with past entries, has been co-posted on bradycampaign.org/blog and the Huffington Post .) More on Mexico's Drug War
 
Will Bunch: Giving Away Free Netbooks to Save America's Newsrooms Top
Not that long ago, I wrote about the bond between the Daily News and its unique readership here in Philadelphia , which surveys have shown tend to be much more blue-collar and more African-American , among other things, than the typical American newspaper customer. The numbers and the anecdotal evidence from the streets of Philly also suggest that our readers are somewhat less likely to be the kind of person who toils in front of computer screen all day -- meaning that a rapid move away from the emphasis on the print edition would leave thousands of ink-only readers in the dust. But the problem isn't completely unique to the City of Brotherly Love. Most major American cities have a " digital divide " -- a sizable gap between computer ownership and usage in working class and poorer urban neighborhoods and Internet activities out in the more affluent suburbs. But a problem -- like the digital divide -- also creates an opportunity. The arrival of much cheaper and more user friendly laptops called "netbooks" make it possible to kill two birds with one stone. A massive philanthropic efforts by large news organizations to bring these simpler computers into once-deprived households would create a bond of community between the media and its new, grateful online readers, and also make it easier for newsrooms to move more quickly away from the expensive print distribution model and into a bold new digital age. The New York Times had a fascinating article this week about netbooks . It said, in part: Personal computers -- and the companies that make their crucial components -- are about to go through their biggest upheaval since the rise of the laptop. By the end of the year, consumers are likely to see laptops the size of thin paperback books that can run all day on a single charge and are equipped with touch screens or slide-out keyboards. The industry is buzzing this week about these devices at a telecommunications conference in Las Vegas, and consumers will see the first machines on shelves as early as June, probably from the netbook pioneers Acer and Asustek. "The era of a perfect Internet computer for $99 is coming this year," said Jen-Hsun Huang, the chief executive of Nvidia, a maker of PC graphics chips that is trying to adapt to the new technological order. "The primary computer that we know of today is the basic PC, and it's dying to be reinvented." If America's battered newsrooms were smart, they would jump on this. I know what you're saying, and you're right: Newspaper companies have not been smart, not for a number of years. Even now we struggle to catch up -- a lot of newspapers are now ambitiously launching...blogs (or in newspaperspeak, "blogs, which is short for Web logs") even as many of 2004's hot bloggers now spend much of their day on Twitter. It's not completely too late, though, for some real outside-the-box thinking -- not now, when having nothing left to lose is another word for freedom. Big-city newspapers should be giving away netbooks. They should have teams of people walking up and down the rowhouse streets of a city like Philly, giving these newfangled devices away to people who've been left behind by the Computer Age, and perhaps also offering them at reduced prices to people who can afford them and simply want easier or more convenient online access. In return, these news organizations -- you really couldn't call them "newspapers" anymore if this scheme were successful -- would reap enormous benefits, including a community-relations coup and a closer bond with newfound online readers, a golden opportunity for branding their website (the Web address could, and should, be advertised on the new device), and the chartitable operation could even lead to a new news-gathering eco-structure (more on that in a second.) The newsroom-sponsored netbook drive would even offer flexability in the search for the Holy Grail of a new business model -- the goodwill generated by this could encourage voluntary donations from those with the ability to pay, in the mode of NPR, or it could possibly advance the paid subscription model coupled with free access to the neediest of the new netbook owners. Here is an excellent article about how legislation could help newspapers reform as Low-Profit Limited Liability Corporations, which would allow news orgs to function more like a charity because of their demonstrrated "social benefit." The effort is sure to get snickers from a lot of people -- especially the politically involved on the left and the right -- who think that journalists are deluded into grossly overstating the social benefits we provide. That's a legitimate debate, but what if newsrooms put their remaining muscle behind a program to provide information to the public and close the digital divide at the same time? That's "social benefit" we can beleive in! Look, we all know that newspapers don't have much spare cash tucked under the mattress these days, not with so many in Chapter 11. But what if a newspaper like the Philadelphia Daily News were able to partner with one of the larger charitable organizations in town -- you (and they) know who they are -- to launch a netbook-giveaway program. What if the cost for these devices really comes down to $99 (and less if purchased in bulk). Do the math: A $1 million annual program could provide netbooks to some 15,000 families, and a 10-year program would close the digital divide in a large city like Philadelphia for good. News orgs and their new philanthropic partners could leverage this effort in many ways. There surely could be an overt effort to link the computer giveaway to increasing readership of the news Web site. The netbooks could come programmed or even hardwired to automatically make Philly.com its homepage, or the data -- like email addresses -- collected through the project could be used to promote readership by blasting out major news stories. But a truly innovative newsroom would find even more clever ways to use a program like this, to completely rearrange the relationship between the journalist and the community. By that I mean the people spending their work days giving away the computers shouldn't just be functionaries but "news evangelists" - people who could work with these new netbook owners to convert those who are motivated into a network of engaged citizen journalists. They could also serve as the newsroom's eyeballs in these now under-covered urban neighborhoods, working to come up with new story ideas. This netbook model would help solve two of the biggest problem facing today's newspapers: It would increase online readership and brand loyalty while speeding the move away from paper and thus the high costs of newsprint, printing presses and delivery trucks that are associated with it. It would not solve the revenue problem of online journalism, but it would buy some time and allow newsrooms to get their foot in the door, or on the rowhouse stoop, until that problem is solved. Investing money to grow the brand and attract new readers, as opposed to a death spiral of cost-cutting? Crazy talk, I know. But Hunter S. Thompson, who would not have allowed journalism to die without a fight, said famously that when the going gets weird, the weird turn pro. And this idea might actually be weird enough to work. More on Newspapers
 
Karen Nussbaum: "Don't Lie, Don't Steal" New Rules for Wall Street Top
What does a warehouse worker in Columbus, Ohio, have in common with Nicolas Sarkozy? It's certainly not the foie gras. They both think deregulation of the financial industry in the United States has been a disaster. Workers support President Obama and the G-20 in rescuing the global economy by learning from our recent past. Greedy corporate executives rewrote the rules, stole billions of dollars and left our economy in flames. The corporate agenda and financial deregulation was a bust. Now workers stand with Obama and the G-20 in calling for re-regulation. We need to re-write the rules and make corporations play by them. What's the framework? Transparency, accountability and limits on risk--or "don't lie, don't steal and don't gamble." More than 130 consumer, labor, community, civil rights, housing and investor groups recently endorsed these principles, which were first laid out in the Congressional Oversight Panel's Special Report on Regulatory Reform. Obama's economic recovery program and budget are essential, but new rules for Wall Street may be the most important solution in the long run. Working America is going to Main Street to challenge Wall Street lobbyists to support Obama's proposals to regulate the financial industry. Our canvassers launched a "Don't Lie, Don't Steal" campaign this week. Working America supports Obama's proposals and wants to make sure the regulator overseeing system-wide risk is fully transparent to the public--basically, we want a strong Wall Street cop who will be accountable. The Obama administration's plan for financial re-regulation, announced last week, is a positive framework for developing comprehensive and effective financial regulation that works for all. The G-20's move to tighten restrictions on financial institutions is also an opportunity to move the economy in the right direction. Like President Obama and the G-20, today's workers know the only way to make the system work for all of America is to make corporations play by the rules, and to build a fairer and more sustainable world economy for the future. Donna Cavey, 61, is an unemployed worker and one of the 2.5 million Working America members. She changed her mind about market regulations after she lost her job as a mortgage settlement officer in 2007--after being in the real estate industry for more than 30 years in Pasadena, Maryland. "The industry went to hell in a handbasket," she says. Since then, she has filed more than 3,000 job applications, but has not found work. Before the real estate market crashed and burned, Cavey resisted regulation on corporations. She now feels that what corporations need is more oversight and more regulation. Corporations can't gamble with our nation's future, and they should use any bailout money to create fair, sustainable jobs, she says. This week a global union delegation met in London on behalf of workers like Cavey to call on the G-20 to create a plan that incorporates: a coordinated international recovery and sustainable growth plan to create jobs and ensure public investment; nationalization of insolvent banks and new financial regulations; action to combat the risk of wage deflation and reverse decades of increasing inequality; far-reaching action on global warming; and a new international legal framework to regulate the global economy, including reform of global financial and economic institutions such as the International Monetary Fund, World Bank, OECD and the World Trade Organization. America's workers need Obama to dedicate more funds to the crisis, but they also need those funds to create more jobs. Without strong regulations, tossing government bucks at the institutions that started the fire is like throwing gas on the flames. Workers support Obama and the G-20 in helping America to get back to work. They want us to reel in the corporations who lied, cheated and gambled away trillions of dollars, throwing the economy into peril. Now, without oversight, executives of these corporations would use government money only for golden parachutes for themselves, leaving the rest of us in the burning building. At the G-20, Obama helped ensure regulations and reforms to our economy to make the economy work for working Americans like Donna Cavey. Anything less would only get us halfway there, and let the flames of the crisis devour even more of what America has worked so hard to build. More on Barack Obama
 
Agapi Stassinopoulos: Recycle Your Bottles, Not Your Thoughts Top
Recycled thoughts are not healthy for sustainable living. Have you noticed how often the same thoughts circle through your mind? They come while we're getting dressed for work, driving, during any activity, even in our sleep. They can be incomplete feelings, incomplete thoughts or actions -- regrets of some kind. Thoughts like: "I shouldn't have done that," "I shouldn't have said that." Or things we haven't said; things we wanted to do but haven't, things we fear to attempt . For example, while I was in the dentist's chair recently, I looked down at my feet and I was again reminded that my favorite black jeans were too short. When I bought them, I had asked that they be shortened only a little, but the woman at the store did not do this and took too much off the bottom. They are the perfect fit, yet every time I wear them I am irritated about this woman and that my jeans don't feel right. At the dentist, I realized that I had been recycling these thoughts every time I wore these jeans since I bought them four months ago. I decided to do something about it . There seemed to be at least four things I could do. I could go back to the shop and tell the woman that I think she shortened the jeans too much and that they are ruined. I would accept that it was my mistake for not doing this earlier since she may say there is nothing she can do, and that I should have complained sooner. I could let go of the past and give them away. Or I could accept that fact that they are shorter than I want. Whatever I chose, I decided that I was done with this recycling of inner complaining about the woman's actions. This internal dialogue prompted me to think about how the incomplete, recycled thoughts drain our life energy. There are hundreds of these thoughts - from the mundane to the major- that come up in a day, and to keep them from depleting our energy, we must take mental dominion and deal with them right then and there. The task at hand is to catch ourselves when we have repeating thoughts and ask ourselves, "Is there something I need to express or address about this? Or what do I need to do to declare it complete?" When we catch repeated thoughts, we can give them a voice and an action -- a completion. This frees up our energy. For our own growth, we need to be dedicated to seeing what 's the message in these thoughts; and once we discover the wisdom they might be hiding we can understand ourselves more fully. The little things that happen give us insight into how we're made our personal patterns how we've conditioned ourselves and how we can course-correct and put ourselves in alignment again. They can become a signposts for awareness . We must ask ourselves why we keep coming back to this thought. Is there a lesson to be learned about something we didn't do or where we didn't listen to ourselves or honor our needs? Is there wisdom to be gained that we have not yet realized? I ended up giving my jeans to a friend who was shorter than me. I knew that, though I loved them, every time I put them on the thought was going to come up, and I didn't want to expend that energy. I wanted peace more than the jeans. Ultimately, we choose what takes up our consciousness, so, for me, I had to remove the jeans from my vision, so they ll be removed from my consciousness, for the thought to be complete in me. We learn from our experiences. We integrate them and evolve. They sharpen us and make us more efficient as they teach us to course-correct. When I have pants altered now, I know exactly what to ask for, and I have them made longer. I always check the length before I leave the store. And this learning can be applied to the more important experiences in our life. Tips for Completing Thought Cycles: 1. Catch yourself doing it. 2. Express the unexpressed. 3. Look for the wisdom to be learned. 4. Declare it complete or decide what action you want to take that would complete it for you. 5. Take that action and declare it complete. Life happens in the moment. If you train yourself to respond in the moment, then you are empowered. This allows you to start to pick up on the nuances in life, the subtext, and begin to really listen to what people are saying, what they are feeling and where they are coming from. Completing recycled thoughts does two things. It frees up energy and aligns us with ourselves. By removing the web of incomplete thoughts, we can develop a real connection to ourselves. Instead of asking each other, "How are you?" how about be asking, "Are you connected to you?" -- what connects us to ourselves is not the big things, but the little things that go on every day. By completing these thoughts, we harness our energy. If we allow incomplete thoughts to circle through our heads, we step away from ourselves. To live a peaceful, productive life, we have to be strong, ruthless protectors of our life's energy. We cannot engage in endless conversations that take us round and round, consuming time, focus and energy. We're designed for bigger, more important conversations. More on The Inner Life
 
Pollsters Increasingly Important To Shaping White House Message Top
As President Barack Obama works to sell the American people on a sweeping agenda of domestic spending and policy changes, he's relying on three men who have gone through neither Senate confirmation nor cable news spin cycles. Data from pollsters Joel Benenson and Paul Harstad has become increasingly important to shaping the White House's message as the crucial battle over the president's budget intensifies. More on Barack Obama
 
Bob Burnett: Nationalizing Citi Top
On Monday, March 23rd, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner revealed his plan to deal with toxic bank assets: a Public-Private Investment Program. While Geithner's strategy was well received by the stock market, leading economists - notably Paul Krugman - remained dubious. They fear Geithner is avoiding the inevitable - "nationalization" of large banks - and the longer the delay, the bigger the problem. What would it mean to nationalize a bank as large as Citigroup? Almost every week the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation takes over a failing bank . Typically these are relatively small institutions, with a few million dollars in assets, and the FDIC arranges for them to be acquired by a neighboring bank. But Citi has roughly $2 trillion in assets. It's one of the world's largest financial institutions, offering diverse services including investments and insurance. (Citigroup is the holding company; Citibank is the bank component, and Citi is the term commonly used to refer to them.) Currently, there are roughly $12 trillion in US bank assets . More than half are held by four gigantic US bank holding companies: JPMorgan Chase, Citi, Bank of America, and Wells Fargo. (These four plus HSBC - the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation, headquartered in London - account for 95 percent of trading in the complex derivatives that many believe precipitated the bank crisis.) Citi, Bank of America, and Wells Fargo are said to be teetering on the edge of insolvency. Citi is the weakest. A March 2nd TIME analysis by Stephen Gandel indicated Citi had an equity-to-asset ratio of 3.8 percent, significantly below the 5 percent the market expects as the minimum requirements for viability. (At its current price of approximately $2 per share, Citi is worth roughly $14 billion, far less than the $50 billion the US government has invested in it.) A November 23rd New York Times article , traced the recent history of Citi as it broadened its scope of business and began to engage in a wide variety of financial activities. With this expansion came problems of control and oversight. Earning pressure caused Citi bond traders to increase participation in risky markets, particularly collateralized debt obligations, which repackaged sub-prime mortgages for resale to investors. The expansion of this niche business was fueled by its profitability - fees were unusually high and, therefore, traders made million in bonuses - and the lack of oversight. Two years ago, Citi was the world's largest financial company. The collapse of the housing bubble caused its stock to plummet from $26 to $2 per share. Nonetheless, many observers feel that the full extent of Citi's exposure from bad assets has yet to be accurately expressed. NEW YORK TIMES financial writer Joe Nocera notes there are two categories of toxic assets. The first is "mortgage-backed securities have been marked down to levels that have started to approach reality... under mark-to-market rules ." Experts estimate that Citi has marked down its mortgage-backed securities to one-third of their original value. The second category of toxic assets is non-securitized loans. Citi has more than $660 billion in large loans: buyout, commercial, credit card, and small business loans. Because of lax regulations, these loans do not have to be marked to market. In many cases, Citi hasn't acknowledged these loans are in deep trouble. A recent noted at the end of 2008, Citi "had potential current losses of $140.3 billion, exceeding its $108 billion in reserves, and future losses of $161.2 billion." Geithner's Public-Private Investment Program will focus on this toxic loan portfolio. As one of the world's largest financial concerns - with 250,000 personnel in 12,000 offices in 107 countries - many believe Citi is "too big to fail." Federal officials point to the abrupt dissolution of Lehman Brothers, and the catastrophic immediate consequences of the failure to wind it down slowly, as evidence that insolvent humongous bank holding companies have to be handled very carefully. Since November, the Federal Government has invested $50 billion in Citi. Besides size, there are two practical reasons why the Federal government has yet to nationalize Citi. It's an international institution, and its largest stockholders include Saudi Prince Prince Walid bin Talal, the governments of Kuwait and Singapore, and Pacific Rim investment groups. Foreign investors hold much of Citi's $486 billion debt. The bank's main deposit base is overseas. Therefore, the nationalization of Citi would have worldwide consequences. Nonetheless, the main problem appears to be pragmatic. TIME financial writer Justin Fox noted "FDIC chairwoman Sheila Bair and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke have both said they don't have the authority to wind down global financial conglomerates like Citi." In his most recent appearance before Congress, Treasury Secretary Geithner asked for this authority: "we must create a resolution regime that provides authority to avoid the disorderly liquidation of any [bank holding company] whose disorderly liquidation would have serious adverse effects on the financial system or the U.S. economy." Citi can't be nationalized until new laws are passed. Once new regulations take effect, it's likely the Geithner-Bernanke-Bair team will nationalize Citi and Bank of America. (In Bernanke's words they'll be "wound down in a safe way.") America's humongous bank holding companies will be broken up; the new entities that hold toxic assets will file for bankruptcy.
 
5 Steps to Reclaim Your New Year's Resolution Top
The New Year, Chinese or otherwise, has now passed. The parties, and any hangovers, are long gone. Unfortunately, for many of you, your New Year's resolutions are only memories. The gym bag sits forlorn in the corner, the bean sprouts wilt in your fridge. Your intentions were good, I know. You resolved to get into a new exercising habit, eat better, spend more time at work, spend more time with the family, or volunteer for a local charity. Or maybe all of the above (Yikes!) To those of you who are sticking to your New Year's resolutions I say CONGRATULATIONS! Don't be too smug. For those of you who have not, I say CONGRATULATIONS!
 
Thai, Cambodian Troops Clash On Border In Bitter Feud Over Ancient Temple, Killing 2 Top
Thai and Cambodian troops fought heavy gunbattles on their disputed border Friday, leaving at least two soldiers dead in the biggest flare-up for months in a bitter feud over an ancient temple. Soldiers exchanged rocket, machinegun and mortar fire near the 11th-century Preah Vihear temple on the frontier, following a brief skirmish earlier in the day, officials from both sides said. More on Thailand
 
Eliza Skinner: Top
 
Spain To Send More Troops To Afghanistan Top
Spain has announced it will boost its troop numbers in Afghanistan. It is expected to add a further 220 soldiers to the 780 already deployed as part of the 62,000-strong NATO force. More on Afghanistan
 
China Jails Teachers, Parents For Hi-Tech Exam Cheating Top
Eight parents and teachers have been jailed on state secret charges after using hi-tech communication devices to help pupils cheat in college entrance exams, Chinese media reported today. More on China
 
Ian Welsh: The Job Report In Context Top
The headline number you'll be hearing is 663,000 , which is from the survey of businesses (the establishment survey). The population survey (where they call households) show's a reduction in employment of 861,000 jobs, with 161,000 leaving the workforce, for a total increase in unemployment of 694,000 (you aren't counted as unemployed if you've given up looking.) The official unemployment rate jumped from 8.1 to 8.5%. The only sector still adding jobs is the health sector, though not by much. Goods producing workers are being hammered, taking almost half the losses despite accounting for less than a sixth of the economy. The US continues to shed precisely those jobs it needs in order to deal with its addiction to borrowing from foreigners to buy foreign produced goods. The establishment survey is generally considered more accurate, though the household captures losses and gains of self-employed workers. Employment is generally considered a lagging indicator, and the general consensus at this point amongst economists is that the leading indicators are beginning to turn around. I think they're calling it a bit early, but I expect that when the "recovery" does come it will initially be a jobless recovery, similar to those of the early 2000 and 90's recessions. When jobs do start to be created they will not be created fast enough, or in great enough quantities to make up the job losses, and the economy will shake apart due to inflation into the next recession long before all jobs have been regained. I wouldn't be surprised if this occurs by late 2010 or early 2011, since the actual stimulus spending is neither sufficient nor well put together. Remember that any "recovery" won't hit you for quite some time, unless you're attached somehow to the spigot of money that Bernanke and Geithner are spewing into the financial sector. In the meantime I'd expect that we're going to see quite a few more devastating months. I wouldn't expect to see any job gainst before 2010. and they won't be very large. I would, however, expect to start seeing some inflation in parts of the economy, while deflation continues in other areas.s.
 
Craig Crawford: Making the G20 More Palatable Top
These global summits always make me hungry, thinking about foods from the various countries. In this CQ Politics Video , I find out what the G20 Summit might look like if it were a tasty stew -- But keep your Pepto-Bismol handy! Craig blogs daily at craigcrawford.com Follow Craig on Twitter and Facebook
 
France Will Take Guantanamo Detainees: Sarkozy Top
STRASBOURG, France — Welcomed with thunderous cheers, President Barack Obama pledged on Friday to work repair damaged relations with Europe, saying the world came together following the 2001 terrorist attacks but then "we got sidetracked by Iraq." "We must be honest with ourselves," Obama said. "In recent years, we've allowed our alliance to drift." The new U.S. president said that despite the bitter feelings that were generated by Iraq, the United States and its allies must stand together because "al-Qaida is still a threat." Speaking before a French and German audience at a town-hall style gathering, Obama encouraged skeptical Europe to support his retooled strategy for rooting out terrorism suspects in Afghanistan and Pakistan. "We got sidetracked by Iraq and we have not fully recovered that initial insight that we have a mutual interest in ensuring that organizations like al-Qaida cannot operate," he said. "I think it is important for Europe to understand that even though I am president and George Bush is not president, al-Qaida is still a threat." More on France
 
Lorelei Kelly: Prague 09: Swan Song for Star Wars Top
When President Obama reaches Prague this Sunday, he'll be riding the wake of an eventful week. While most of the world followed the G-20, Russian-US rapprochement and our dreamy First Lady, here in DC we were preoccupied with budgets and the President's new policy for defeating terrorism and Al Qaeda (Afghanistan Review). This policy review--which importantly takes a regional lens to the problem--intends to to help Afghanistan and Pakistan become more prosperous and less violent. It embraces a broad view of security--recognizing the vital influence of economics, political institutions and information sharing. Whether one agrees or disagrees with the US military increase in Afghanistan, at the very least be glad that this review explicitly and enthusiastically endorses a comprehensive approach where non-military security needs are recognized and prominent. That's why it was shocking when, just a few days later, the House Budget Committee whacked 5 billion dollars out of the civilian funding account for national security (called the 150 or State Department funding for shorthand) and then the Senate whacked 4 billion. The defense budget, of course, was off the table. Untouchable. Which means that, despite the fact that we have a new president, with a bold new set of ideas and a willingness to take risks. Who is modernizing our strategy to lead more by example and less by coercion. Who wants to put citizens in line before commercial interests in government. Who will, hopefully, reverse the lingering doubts among our allies that still exist because we dragged everyone through the mud for 8 years. And Congress can't even fund a budget that reflects this strategic vision. We need a security strategy that keeps us safer and costs less. There's no reason this can't happen. But it will also cause economic dislocation, re-distribution of tax dollars and a Congress that puts the nation's collective interest first. We are beyond the protection of the military in today's world. For us to move forward, Congress must quit making defense spending off limits. If we've learned anything over the past decade, its that more defense spending does not purchase more security--to the opposite. Here's what it does: It separates defense strategy from spending decisions, it causes unaccountable behavior by the Defense Department and it buffs up the mansion construction trade in Virginia. We've spent hundreds of billions of dollars on this program since it started. Given how dubious the technology, that's like 800 million bridges to nowhere in space... We can't afford Star Wars anymore. We just can't. The practical reason we need to ditch this program--and I'll be more specific here and just focus on European Missile Defense--is that it doesn't work. The strategic reason is that its ability to protect us doesn't rank high enough within the domain of risks that we face. What will keep us safer is the stuff the Congress cut from the budget. In today's world, a legitimate criminal justice system in Pakistan will keep us safer than missile defense. An Israel Palestinian peace process will do more. Funding more international nuclear inspectors and making a deal with Iran will keep us safer than this program. We need to fund the Coast Guard, for Heaven's sakes! Oh, and the Europeans don't want it. (the Polish and the Czech publics consistently reject it) European Missile Defense is projected to cost between 9-14 billion dollars to implement. In his speech to Congress earlier this year, the President promised to cut obsolete weapons programs that were devised in the last century to defend against an enemy that disappeared nearly two decades ago. Here are some greatest hits about why this program should be terminated: It is set to deploy despite inadequate testing and inconclusive demonstrations. Our moves to deploy make a farce of what used to be the golden rule of defense procurement: "fly before you buy". European Missile Defense has never been tested under anything approaching realistic conditions. The former head of Pentagon weapons testing likened it to "comparing the results of an open book exam" Those in charge of evaluation consistently move the goalposts so that there is no clear information about results. Our own Government Accountability Office issued a report this month that claimed that the Missile Defense Agency at DoD produces and fields asssets before they are fully demonstrated through testing and modeling..." and those tests and simulations produce less validation of performance than planned....." Missile Defense has never been subject to a comprehensive and accurate risk assessment--this includes any Iranian missile threat--we actually don't know enough to make any certain statements. (according to recent CRS research report) This is inexcusable given what we have learned about global threats over the past decade, because we are stuck in an old framework, we ignore non traditional threats like pandemic disease and criminal networks--at our peril. the Europeans don't want it The parliaments of neither the Czech Republic or of Poland has agreed to the missile defense agreement. The Czech parliament, in fact, pulled the missile defense vote in March because they lacked the votes to pass it. The Czech president stepped down recently in part over this issue. The Czech public is hostile to the program. The Polish public, though less organized, is not supportive either. Moreover, Europeans don't feel particularly threatened by Iran. The USA has not made an official commitment to this program. Time to break up and move on to create policies and a relationship that meets today's real security needs. A better way to ensure the safety of Europe is for the USA to truly pursue our self interests and lead a new international effort to modernize international non-proliferation--including at the upcoming Non Proliferation Treaty review conference, and to continue developing alternatives for working with Russia and Iran. Poland and the Czech Republic have legitimate security concerns--but these will be far better served through other allied activities, including securing dangerous materials at their source through the nuclear threat reduction program--and improved cooperation on law enforcement. (since we already said we will put 100 ground based Patriot missiles in Poland. Fine for whatever psychological comfort that is worth -- (the PAC3 is best known for its friendly fire kill record). As for North Korea, their leadership might be looney, but its not suicidal. And if we're not taking action before or when they put something dangerous on the launchpad--we've got way bigger problems than I thought. American States who will fight any cuts: Top states for this program are Alaska, Alabama, Arizona. The PR campaigns of the top weapons contractors have begun in full force and they are flooding Congress. They are defending their interests for sure... to shift defense spending to more effective national security programs will cause lots of economic dislocation. Check out the Center for Public Integrity's website if you want to trace the dollars. Boeing cites involvement of 32 companies at 38 facilities in 19 states, including Washington, Oregon, California, New Mexico, Colorado, Kansas, Iowa, Nebraska, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York, Massachusetts, Maryland, Florida and Georgia. My advice to local peace and anti-war groups...if you want to move policy priorities in the coming years, dust off those old economic conversion plans from the 1980's and start talking to your friends and neighbors in communities like Huntsville, Topeka, Tucson and Fairbanks because the shift we need to keep us safe is going to cause uncomfortable changes-- Last month at a defense budget forum on Capitol Hill, Representative Barney Frank (MA) spoke of the need for the peace movement to pursue a two stage strategy on shifting defense spending--especially given the economic straits we are in. What we need is to cut programs, but not insist on transfering the money. (i.e. no guns vs. butter framing) Just give the money back to the Treasury for now. One success like this will garner momentum and wedge open an entire conversation about redefining security altogether. Our nation basically needs a twelve step program to recover from a Cold War addiction. Cutting European Missile Defense--and helping the communities impacted convert to other security priorities (energy, environmental tech) or other economic activities--is step one. p.s. an amendment by Senators Kerry and Lugar restored the State Department (150) funding. Thank you gentlemen.
 
Petal Blossom Rainbow: Jamie Oliver Has Baby Girl Top
It's a third girl for celebrity chef Jamie Oliver, who became a father again on Friday. Oliver's wife, Jools, gave birth to Petal Blossom Rainbow at 2:46 a.m., PEOPLE has confirmed. The baby, who weighed 6 lb., 10 oz., joins sisters Poppy Honey, 7, and Daisy Boo, 5, in the Oliver household. Her anticipated arrival was first announced in September. More on Celebrity Kids
 
YouTube Ends Music Videos In Germany Top
BERLIN -- YouTube has stopped showing music videos in Germany as a dispute over royalty payments in Europe spreads. On Tuesday night, YouTube, a unit of Google, began blocking music videos in Germany after the expiration of its 17-month contract with GEMA, an agency representing songwriters, composers and music publishers. YouTube made a similar move three weeks ago in Britain after a contract expired there. Under the old agreement, Google had agreed to pay a set fee to GEMA for every streamed music video. Neither party would disclose the previous payment amount. More on Germany
 
Facebook, YouTube At Work Make Better Employees: Study Top
Caught Twittering or on Facebook at work? It'll make you a better employee, according to an Australian study that shows surfing the Internet for fun during office hours increases productivity. The University of Melbourne study showed that people who use the Internet for personal reasons at work are about 9 percent more productive that those who do not. Study author Brent Coker, from the department of management and marketing, said "workplace Internet leisure browsing," or WILB, helped to sharpened workers' concentration. "People need to zone out for a bit to get back their concentration," Coker said on the university's website (www.unimelb.edu.au/). More on Facebook
 
Obama Calls Out European "Anti-Americanism" And American "Arrogance" Top
Urging a common effort to restructure the world economy and rebuild international alliances, President Barack Obama did not hesitate on Friday to call out his own country for "arrogant" patriotism and Europe for "insidious" anti-Americanism. "In America, there is a failure to appreciate Europe's leading role in the world. Instead of celebrating your dynamic union and seeking to partner with you to meet common challenges, there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive. But in Europe, there is an anti-Americanism that is at once casual, but can also be insidious. Instead of recognizing the good that America so often does in the world, there have been times where Europeans choose to blame America for much of what is bad. On both sides of the Atlantic, these attitudes have become all too common. They are not wise. They do not represent the truth. They threaten to widen the divide across the Atlantic and leave us both more isolated. They fail to acknowledge the fundamental truth that America cannot confront the challenges of this century alone, but that Europe cannot confront them without America." These were, perhaps, the sharpest and most condemning words that Obama offered to the largely adoring crowd. Speaking at a town hall meeting in France, the president outlined and pledged a new internationalism, one forged on commitments from disparate nations and melded around common interests. In this frame, he pledged a united front tackling climate change, the war in Afghanistan, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the global financial crisis. He also noted several changes that his administration has already made that put American more in line with international sentiment. The list included the impending closure of Guantanamo Bay and the outlawing of torture, both of which -- when announced -- drew great applause from the crowd. "America is changing," he declared at one point, "but it cannot be America alone that changes." Time and again, however, he reverted back to need to move beyond the divisions that had marked the presidency prior to his. Stressing a "renewed relationship for a new generation" his speech brought the crowd to applause on several occasions. "It's more difficult to break down walls of division than to simply allow our differences to build and our resentments to fester," he said. "So we must be honest with ourselves. In recent years, we've allowed our alliance to drift. I know that there have been honest disagreements over policy, but we also know that there is something more that has crept into our relationship... This is our generation, this is our time, and I am confident that we can meet any challenges as long as we are together." More on Barack Obama
 

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)