Monday, April 13, 2009

Y! Alert: The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Yahoo! Alerts
My Alerts

The latest from The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

"IRON MAN" ROBOT SUIT Cyberdyne: HAL in 2009 (PHOTOS) (VIDEO Top
Ever dream of being Iron Man? Well, that dream might not be as far fetched as you might think. Cyberdyne, a Japanese company founded Professor Sankai, creator of the "Robot Suit", has developed a real life Iron Man exoskeleton called HAL. While this name might take remind you of a certain evil robot from 2001: A Space Odessey, HAL actually stands for Hybrid Assistive Limb Suit. The Post Chronicle reports on the development of Cyberdyne's robot : The 'Iron-Man' robot suit from Cyberdyne. The idea of melding human flesh and bone with robotic parts is something more than a few people have looked into...Cyberdyne is a Japanese robotics company, and HAL is Hybrid Assistive Limb, designed to help people with weak muscles or disabilities. The purpose of HAL? Cyberdyne explains specifically who HAL is for: "HAL" is expected to be applied in various fields such as rehabilitation support and physical training support in medical field, ADL support for disabled people, heavy labour support at factories, and rescue support at disaster sites, as well as in the entertainment field. The Scientific American expands on the abilities of the "Real-Life Iron Man" : CYBERDYNE...designed the HAL exoskeleton primarily to enhance the wearer's existing physical capabilities 10-fold. The exoskeleton detects--via a sensor attached to the wearer's skin--brain signals sent to muscles to get them moving. The exoskeleton's computer analyzes these signals to determine how it must move (and with how much force) to assist the wearer. The company claims on its Web site that the device can also operate autonomously (based on data stored in its computer), which is key when used by people suffering spinal cord injuries or physical disabilities resulting from strokes or other disorders. Interested in having your own HAL? The Post Chronicle reports that the HAL is going into production and will be available soon in Japan for around $4,200 while the Scientific American claims that the HAL exoskeleton is already available but only for rent in Japan for around $1,300 a month. THe Cyberdyne cite states that HAL is in fact currently available for Japanese residents, for varying costs depending on region, and that HAL will soon be available to consumers in the European Union. Breakdown of how the HAL suit helps: MORE PHOTOS: WATCH: More on Technology
 
Security Council Agrees To Condemn NKorea Launch Top
UNITED NATIONS — All 15 Security Council nations have agreed to a statement that would condemn North Korea's rocket launch and toughen U.N. sanctions against the reclusive communist nation, a spokesman for the council president said Monday. The agreement paves the way for the formal adoption of the statement at a council meeting Monday afternoon. The five permanent veto-wielding members _ the U.S., China, Russia, Britain and France _ and Japan reached agreement on the text Saturday and then distributed it to the nine other council members who had to consult their capitals. No objections were received by the noon EDT deadline, said Marco Morales, spokesman for Mexico's U.N. Ambassador Claude Heller, the current council president. The draft statement "condemns" North Korea's April 5 "launch" _ without specifying whether it was a missile or a satellite. It makes clear that it was a violation of a Security Council resolution adopted after the North conducted a nuclear test in 2006 which bans any missile tests by the country. "We want to do everything we can in getting a message to the North Koreans that this type of activity cannot happen again, mustn't happen again," U.S. State Department spokesman Robert Wood said in Washington. "The international community is very focused on this." North Korea carried out the launch in defiance of intense international pressure, claiming it had put a satellite in orbit which is allowed under a U.N. space treaty. The United States, Japan and South Korea claim North Korea was really testing long-range missile technology, which Pyongyang is banned from doing. The draft statement demands that North Korea not conduct further launches. And it reiterates that North Korea must fully implement the 2006 resolution, which also ordered Pyongyang to suspend all ballistic missile activities and "abandon all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programs in a complete, verifiable and irreversible manner." The proposed statement calls for expanding sanctions under the 2006 resolution, which ordered a financial freeze on assets belonging to companies or organizations engaged in supporting North Korean programs related to nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles and other weapons of mass destruction _ and banned specific goods used in those programs. It asks the Security Council committee monitoring sanctions against North Korea to report to the council by April 24 on the companies, items, and technologies to be added to the list. If the committee fails to act, it says the Security Council itself will then come up with a list by April 30. South Korea's Yonhap news agency reported Monday, citing an unnamed South Korean official, that about 10 North Korean companies will likely be blacklisted under expanded sanctions. Foreign Ministry officials were not available Monday evening to confirm the report. The breakthrough in the council's response to the rocket launch came after Japan on Saturday backed down from a demand that the council adopt a resolution, which is the strongest response that the U.N.'s most powerful body can give. China and Russia, the North Koreans' strongest allies, refused to go along with a new resolution, which the United States was also seeking. But while Japan kept insisting on a resolution, the U.S. indicated it would also accept a strong presidential statement from the council, council diplomats said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the negotiations were held behind closed doors. While U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice said a presidential statement would be legally binding, other diplomats and U.N. officials disagree. North Korea has warned that any move to censure it at the U.N. could prompt its withdrawal from six-party talks aimed at dismantling its nuclear program. The talks involve China, Japan, Russia, South Korea and the U.S. In the draft statement, the council expresses support for the six-party talks and "calls for their early resumption." It also expresses the council's desire "for a peaceful and diplomatic solution to the situation." ___ Associated Press writer Matthew Lee in Washington contributed to this report. More on United Nations
 
Andy Schupak: Letter from Cuba Top
Visiting Cuba is like landing on another planet. Contrary to what we read, this is no Orwellian nightmare. I saw no thought police, just about no murals with Fidel's image, and I did not see one person who looked defeated. In fact, the people generally look happier, and have more spirit, than the typical New Yorker. That's not to say this is a utopian dream. The photos you've seen of the 57' Chevys, the war torn houses, and the hospitals that look like garbage dumps are real. In fact, Havana makes Detroit look like the Upper East Side of NYC. Other images you might have expected are missing. I saw very few policemen. And I didn't see one tank patrolling the streets. The only soldiers I did see were guarding the Museum Of The Revolution, and I wouldn't be surprised if they were just part of the display. I did see a lot of spirit and national pride displayed, especially when it came to the Cuban national team playing in The World Baseball Classic. I even saw religious services. Even though Cuba is officially an atheist state, Catholics, Protestants, Jews and Christians are allowed to practice their faith. I heard there is virtually no major crime, though I did see prostitution, and the black market runs rampant. Just about everyone I met tried to sell me something, or asked me to send something from America that they could sell Now here's something you might never expect: strong criticism of the government. The openness was surprising. I didn't see one person who didn't criticize it. Young people generally called Fidel and Raul dictators, with ministers that are "old men," out of touch with reality. But, interestingly, many people I met say the Castros only exert authority when they have strong disagreements with Cuba's elected assembly. Others say the assembly makes the laws and approves any dictums that come down from Raul. Who knows? It's obvious to Cubans, especially younger ones, that if socialism is supposed to improve the quality of life, Castro has failed big time. They see that Cuba is just another 3rd world country with a failed economy, where people live on the equivalent of $25 per month. To be fair, the government does guarantee Cubans a certain percentage of caloric in-take to stay healthy. And Cubans do look very healthy. In fact, their life expectancy is exactly the same as ours. Cubans are also guaranteed health care and an education, and illiteracy has virtually been eliminated. That's the good news about education. The bad news is that a good percentage of people with Masters Degrees are forced to wait tables. One of my tour guides learned six languages as an undergraduate and graduated law school. I gotta tell you, he's pissed." Why," he asks, "provide such a great education without being able to make use of it?" I found something even more surprising than open criticism of the government. The younger generation, the angriest group of the Cubans I spoke to, do not want to lose the gains made by the revolution. While they do want to get rid of the Castros' repressive government, they want to keep the socialist economic system. Criticism is also on display in the National Museum of Fine Arts, where there are many works of art that make critical statements about the government. One, for example, is a "birdcage" in the shape of Cuba that clearly expresses the anger Cuban people feel about being caged in by a repressive government. I didn't see too many pieces praising the revolution. I did see many wonderful paintings with Jose Marti, Cuba's national hero and advocate of freedom of expression, as the main subject. Next door to the art museum is the Museum of The Revolution, where praise for the revolution and its leaders, Fidel and Che, are on display. Remember that photo of Fidel riding into Havana on a tank? The tank sits right in front of the museum. (It's always great to see the real thing.) But also on display is the museum itself, showcasing the failures of the revolution. I've never seen a museum in such disrepair, just like many of the other government buildings. This museum is really the only place I saw something praising the revolution. I barely saw billboards with Fidel's image. It's almost sad; Fidel and Che images are most visible in gift shops for tourists! These iconic figures are not pushed as heroes of the revolution, but peddled as pop hero merchandise. Talking about merchandise being peddled: There are malls in Cuba with stores that sell the same name brands we're familiar with! What you don't see are ads in newspapers advertising our name brands. The daily newspaper is just what you'd expect. It's a mouthpiece of the government. The paper has just one editorial writer who's Frank Rich, Rush Limbaugh, and Keith Oberman rolled into one. Fidel Castro!! He writes a daily column. And evidently Fidel's got something in common with Rush. Both fulminate about Barrack Obama scheming to destroy their way of life. I know this. If the paper accepted letters to the editor, I'm sure we'd see a lot of angry response to Fidel's Obama columns. Most Cubans I spoke to cheer the election of Obama. They believe he'll improve relations and end the American economic embargo. In the main, the people I spoke to believe the American embargo has just the opposite effect intended. It provides Castro with the propaganda tool he needs to maintain control, and contributes to the repression and starvation the Cuban people experience. The end of the blockade, the Cuban people feel, will bring American tourists with the money and freedom needed to create a new beginning for Cuba. Andy Schupak is a freelance journalist living in New York. More on Travel
 
Andy Schupak: Letter from Cuba Top
Visiting Cuba is like landing on another planet. Contrary to what we read, this is no Orwellian nightmare. I saw no thought police, just about no murals with Fidel's image, and I did not see one person who looked defeated. In fact, the people generally look happier, and have more spirit, than the typical New Yorker. That's not to say this is a utopian dream. The photos you've seen of the 57' Chevys, the war torn houses, and the hospitals that look like garbage dumps are real. In fact, Havana makes Detroit look like the Upper East Side of NYC. Other images you might have expected are missing. I saw very few policemen. And I didn't see one tank patrolling the streets. The only soldiers I did see were guarding the Museum Of The Revolution, and I wouldn't be surprised if they were just part of the display. I did see a lot of spirit and national pride displayed, especially when it came to the Cuban national team playing in The World Baseball Classic. I even saw religious services. Even though Cuba is officially an atheist state, Catholics, Protestants, Jews and Christians are allowed to practice their faith. I heard there is virtually no major crime, though I did see prostitution, and the black market runs rampant. Just about everyone I met tried to sell me something, or asked me to send something from America that they could sell Now here's something you might never expect: strong criticism of the government. The openness was surprising. I didn't see one person who didn't criticize it. Young people generally called Fidel and Raul dictators, with ministers that are "old men," out of touch with reality. But, interestingly, many people I met say the Castros only exert authority when they have strong disagreements with Cuba's elected assembly. Others say the assembly makes the laws and approves any dictums that come down from Raul. Who knows? It's obvious to Cubans, especially younger ones, that if socialism is supposed to improve the quality of life, Castro has failed big time. They see that Cuba is just another 3rd world country with a failed economy, where people live on the equivalent of $25 per month. To be fair, the government does guarantee Cubans a certain percentage of caloric in-take to stay healthy. And Cubans do look very healthy. In fact, their life expectancy is exactly the same as ours. Cubans are also guaranteed health care and an education, and illiteracy has virtually been eliminated. That's the good news about education. The bad news is that a good percentage of people with Masters Degrees are forced to wait tables. One of my tour guides learned six languages as an undergraduate and graduated law school. I gotta tell you, he's pissed." Why," he asks, "provide such a great education without being able to make use of it?" I found something even more surprising than open criticism of the government. The younger generation, the angriest group of the Cubans I spoke to, do not want to lose the gains made by the revolution. While they do want to get rid of the Castros' repressive government, they want to keep the socialist economic system. Criticism is also on display in the National Museum of Fine Arts, where there are many works of art that make critical statements about the government. One, for example, is a "birdcage" in the shape of Cuba that clearly expresses the anger Cuban people feel about being caged in by a repressive government. I didn't see too many pieces praising the revolution. I did see many wonderful paintings with Jose Marti, Cuba's national hero and advocate of freedom of expression, as the main subject. Next door to the art museum is the Museum of The Revolution, where praise for the revolution and its leaders, Fidel and Che, are on display. Remember that photo of Fidel riding into Havana on a tank? The tank sits right in front of the museum. (It's always great to see the real thing.) But also on display is the museum itself, showcasing the failures of the revolution. I've never seen a museum in such disrepair, just like many of the other government buildings. This museum is really the only place I saw something praising the revolution. I barely saw billboards with Fidel's image. It's almost sad; Fidel and Che images are most visible in gift shops for tourists! These iconic figures are not pushed as heroes of the revolution, but peddled as pop hero merchandise. Talking about merchandise being peddled: There are malls in Cuba with stores that sell the same name brands we're familiar with! What you don't see are ads in newspapers advertising our name brands. The daily newspaper is just what you'd expect. It's a mouthpiece of the government. The paper has just one editorial writer who's Frank Rich, Rush Limbaugh, and Keith Oberman rolled into one. Fidel Castro!! He writes a daily column. And evidently Fidel's got something in common with Rush. Both fulminate about Barrack Obama scheming to destroy their way of life. I know this. If the paper accepted letters to the editor, I'm sure we'd see a lot of angry response to Fidel's Obama columns. Most Cubans I spoke to cheer the election of Obama. They believe he'll improve relations and end the American economic embargo. In the main, the people I spoke to believe the American embargo has just the opposite effect intended. It provides Castro with the propaganda tool he needs to maintain control, and contributes to the repression and starvation the Cuban people experience. The end of the blockade, the Cuban people feel, will bring American tourists with the money and freedom needed to create a new beginning for Cuba. Andy Schupak is a freelance journalist living in New York. More on Travel
 
Steve Ralls: A Mother, Her Son and a Test of America's New Foreign Policy Top
In recent months, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans have begun cautiously expressing hope that, in addition to recent, hard won victories here at home, we may be on the verge of a little bit of progress abroad, too. Our community rightly cheered when the Obama administration recently reversed a Bush administration policy and endorsed a United Nations declaration on protecting the world's LGBT people. And we looked on with admiration and pride again as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton recently said that she and President Obama intend to stand against anti-gay animus on the world stage, too. Speaking in March to a group of enthusiastic supporters in Brussels, Clinton told the crowd that "Human rights is and always will be one of the pillars of our foreign policy. In particular, persecution and discrimination against gays and lesbians is something we take very seriously." The remark, press outlets reported, brought about wild applause and, for perhaps the first time, sent a clear message to foreign leaders that the United States intends to speak out against anti-gay atrocities abroad. It was, to paraphrase Secretary Clinton's famous words as America's First Lady, intended to put the world on notice that we believe "human rights are gays rights, and gay rights are human rights, too." But, as noble as the sentiment of both actions were, they gave little comfort to Kathy Gilleran, a mother from upstate New York whose son, Aeryn, has been missing in Austria for more than a year and a half. Because, while Kathy would love to believe that a new day has dawned in diplomatic affairs, she continues to struggle in her heroic efforts to learn the truth about her gay son and continues to meet roadblock after roadblock in her quest to uncover the facts about what happened in Vienna. As we reported last year here at HuffingtonPost , Aeryn Gillern was last seen in October 2007 in Vienna, where he was working with the United Nations International Development Organization, or UNIDO. He disappeared suddenly, without any prior warning, and for no apparent reason. According to his mother, Aeryn seemed happy and content with his life abroad the last time they spoke, just shortly before he vanished, and there were no indications that anything was amiss. "Aeryn loved the history and the culture [of Vienna], especially the architecture and music," Kathy writes at the website she has set up to honor her son, where she also notes that she often switches, in her writing, between the past and present tense when talking about him. "I think you will find that I switch back and forth because although I believe Aeryn is no longer alive, he is and he was," she says. And, by all measures, he had much going for him in life. Aeryn was successful in his career, had a loving, supportive mother and was enjoying his life in Austria. And, he was also openly gay, which, as far as Kathy was always concerned, was nothing close to a big deal. But mounting evidence indicates it may be why his disappearance continues to be shrouded in mystery and why, despite numerous efforts, Kathy can't seem to get Austrian officials to take his case seriously. In fact, Kathy has now flown to Vienna twice since her son vanished, and has implored local investigators to launch a comprehensive investigation into what happened on the night Aeryn disappeared. She has implored the U.S. State Department to intervene and press Austrian officials to do the right thing. And she has even met with members of the Austrian parliament. And this is what it has gotten her so far: A statement from investigators in Vienna to the press characterizing Aeryn as "an emotionally unbalanced gay man." Charges - to his own mother - that Aeryn likely committed suicide because, as a gay man, he was likely HIV-positive and despondent about his health. Disproven reports that DNA samples were available to investigators. And a parliamentary inquest that resulted in local police defending their own actions and concluding, after investigating themselves, that they did nothing wrong. Meanwhile, Aeryn Gillern is still missing and there don't appear to be enough people who are taking it very seriously. And, more and more, it seems likely that the lack of initiative is being driven by an over-abundance of homophobia. Several people, Kathy Gilleran told me when I spoke with her yesterday, have recently come forward to give her information on other people missing abroad - missing in Vienna, even - whose disappearances have been thoroughly investigated. Those cases, they point out, have warranted the intervention of the U.S. Embassy and the interest of other diplomatic venues and officials. The only difference between those missing persons and Aeryn Gillern is that Aeryn happened to be gay. In a letter sent this week to New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, who represents the Gilleran family in the Senate, Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays ( PFLAG ) - the only organization, Gilleran says, who has stood by her side throughout the entire ordeal - encouraged the new Senator to push for a full investigation. "PFLAG has been proud to support Ms. Gilleran in her quest to learn about the details surrounding Aeryn's disappearance, and we support all efforts to discover the details about what happened in Vienna," the organization wrote. "We hope that Congress, the State Department and the U.S. Embassy in Austria will take the case seriously and explore every viable option for discovering the details about what happened to Aeryn. It is simply unacceptable that Ms. Gilleran has been unable to learn the facts about her son's disappearance and disheartening that Austrian authorities appear not to have taken the case seriously." Indeed, the case of Aeryn Gillern may be an early test of just how LGBT-inclusive America's new foreign policy will be, and how much diplomatic pressure officials are willing to exert to protect, defend and stand up for LGBT people living - and missing - abroad. Because until the search for Aeryn is taken seriously, we cannot truly say that LGBT equality - and respect for the dignity of LGBT people - is a pillar of U.S. foreign policy. For more information on Aeryn's case, visit www.aeryngillern.com .
 
Cameron Sinclair: The Architect's Dilemma : Part 2 Top
A few days ago there was a great followup by Francis Anderton on my piece last week regarding excess vs. relevance in architecture . She suggests that the debate is irrelevant and that we only talking about a resistance sculptural objects. However the idea that this is a black and white matter is simply not the case. Certainly, as she clearly points out, many 'big name' architects have done socially responsible work - although far less than the sort of pro bono requirements laid out in the medical or legal profession. The debate is not about individuals or replacing one ism with another, it is about investigating what happens in the vacuum left with a global downturn in the economy. Will the profession retrench to just super-rich clients or become more theoretical while we ride out the recession OR is there a role to play for the expanding architecture into realms that are more relevant to the current climate? The debate that sparked this back and forth was under the umbrella of the Corbusian legacy and the ethics of architecture. I think we can agree that within the public realm his work has been diluted over the decades into poorer implemented social housing. From Quito to Kigali, what happens when these sky-piercing towers are replicated 'on a dime'? What corners are cut and what are the affects on the community at large? The other issue I take with her stance is that this is not about particular people but how the practice of architecture evolves over the next few years. By naming names Francis repositions this as a personal issue but the fact is most architects have practiced excess and relevance from within their firms. Take for instance some of the projects done by Studio Gang, Frank Gehry , Morphosis or a personal favorite and future Pritzker winner David Adjaye . On face value Francis lumps them into the 'stararchitect' group but on finer inspection you find a more complex practice. I'm interested to see how these practices evolve over the next 20 years. This is not a profession of individuals. The dilemma we have is not starachitect vs. non-starachitect but how we adapt and change as a group of professionals that is dedicated to improving the physical environments that we call life. Here we are talking about affects to the environment, the local community and resource depletion. There is no 'architecture with a big A' there is only architecture and how we implement buildings matters not just for the state of the world but the survival of the practice.
 
Easter Egg Roll At White House (VIDEO) Top
President Obama and his family hosted the annual White House Easter Egg Roll Monday. An estimated 30,000 people attended the day's events, which included musical performances, sports and storytelling. Watch the actual roll, where Obama lends one little kid a hand: See live video of the day's festivities and learn more about the history of the event here .
 
Rep. Danny Davis Considering Run For Burris Senate Seat Top
Congressman Danny Davis lobbied for a Senate appointment last fall - before then-governor Rod Blagojevich was arrested for, among other things, allegedly trying to profit from that appointment. Now Davis is mulling a run in next year's election for Senate ...
 
Disgrasian: Bobby "The Copycat" Jindal Top
Bobby Jindal is writing a book ! He's reached an agreement with Regnery Publishing, which has published the works of Newt Gingrich, Chuck Norris, and Ann Coulter, to write a book that mixes, according to Jindal , "lessons I've learned throughout my life" and policy issues. The book is slated for release in 2010, a year before Louisiana's gubernatorial election. Jindal was going to title the book, Dreams from My Father , until he was told that that title had already been taken. The Louisiana governor is currently trying to decide between Hey! I'm Brown and the Child of Immigrants, Too! and Piyush Jindal Is Also a Funny Name and If You Squint Really Hard at the TV and Cover Your Ears, You Just Might Mistake Me for You-Know-Who (Although Probably Not) . More on Bobby Jindal
 
Senate Guru: MN Supreme Court Justice is a Norm Coleman Donor and Should Recuse Himself Top
( Originally posted at MyDD. Visit my blog, Senate Guru . ) Last week, I took a look at the political leanings of the five Minnesota Supreme Court Justices who will decide Republican Norm Coleman's likely appeal. Of one of the five Justices, Justice Christopher J. Dietzen, I suggested that he "has the clearest partisan background" of any of the Justices, pointing to facts including Dietzen serving as a campaign lawyer on Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty's 2002 campaign. Of Dietzen's service on Republican Pawlenty's campaign, I sarcastically noted: So, Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty's campaign lawyer is one of the five judges that will decide Republican Norm Coleman's appeal. Nothing wrong with that. Clearly, one of the Justices being active in Republican politics is sketchy, but I didn't go so far as to call for Justice Dietzen to recuse himself from any further cases before the state Supreme Court involving Norm Coleman and the Senate seat. Until now. DownWithTyranny! took my analysis a little further and found out that Justice Dietzen is himself a two-time Norm Coleman donor ! A simple search on OpenSecrets.org finds that Justice Dietzen has given to a number of Republican committees and candidates, including: Contributor Occupation Date Amount Recipient Chris Dietzen Larkin Hoffman 12/3/01 $250 Coleman, Norm (R) Chris Dietzen Larkin Hoffman 1/21/04 $250 Coleman, Norm (R) FYI, Larkin Hoffman is one of the law firms that Dietzen worked at before becoming a judge. Remember that two of the Minnesota Supreme Court's seven Justices recused themselves from hearing Coleman's appeal to the state Supreme Court because they served on the state Canvassing Board. Those two Justices wanted to avoid the conflict of having served on the Canvassing Board and then serving on the Court that will hear an appeal of, in part, the Canvassing Board's actions and decisions. Well, one of the remaining Justices that will decide Norm Coleman's electoral fate is a two-time Norm Coleman donor! Heck, one of the two contributions occurred in the six years leading up to Coleman's 2008 re-election bid - in other words, it was put toward this very election whose result Coleman is preparing to appeal. This is a crystal clear conflict of interest. Justice Dietzen should recuse himself from any Coleman appeals to the state Supreme Court in order to prevent the (rather obvious) appearance of bias. If you feel the same way, you should let Justice Dietzen know by contacting his office at (651) 297-7650, and - very respectfully - urging Justice Dietzen to recuse himself in order to avoid a clear conflict of interest and the appearance of bias by having a previous Norm Coleman donor rule on Norm Coleman's electoral fate. More on Al Franken
 
Tree Growing In Man's Lung Removed Top
"I blinked three times and thought I was seeing things," Surgeon Vladimir Kamashev told the newspaper. Doctors believe Sidorkin somehow inhaled a seed, which later sprouted inside his lung. The spruce, which was touching the man's capillaries and causing severe pain, was removed. More on Russia
 
Ian Welsh: Just the Facts, Ma'am Top
Dave Johnson's got an excellent piece up in which he points out that laughing at the right is stupid. They're doing now exactly what they did to Clinton in the 90's, and it worked then. In fact they're back to being as crazy and paranoid as they were when Clinton was President. Remember the accusations that Clinton and Hillary were murderers, that Hillary personally killed Vince Foster, that Clinton ran a drug-smuggling operation out of an airstrip, that he was looking through FBI files, that he fired the travel office to put a cousin in, that he "sold" plots in Arlington cemetery, that he held up runway traffic to get a $500 haircut, that he used cocaine in the White House, that he hung obscene ornaments on the White House Christmas tree and the other fabrications that came daily? We laughed then, too, and how did that work out? They took over the Presidency, the House and the Senate. Then they started wars. They tortured people. They appointed corporate lobbyists to run every agency. They filled the courts with Federalist Society judges that rule for the corporations and religious right every time. They stole billions... Let me add two more facts: For ordinary people, the economy is never going to fully recover, ever (well, not in the next 4 years anyway). The administration's own numbers show this, with an overoptimistic model that assumes tax cuts will have the average effect of the last thirty years, rather than the effect they had when Bush did them (a big fat flop). But even if you don't think they're overoptimistic, it doesn't matter. Again, their own numbers show employment will not recover before the next recession. Obama and co. are doing a huge giveaway to the richest people in America. By the time they're done it will probably be as large or larger than anything Bush did. Since it will not work in the sense of helping ordinary people enough, it will be used by Republicans to fuel populist rage. Sure, that's hypocritical, but does that matter? We all know it doesn't. So I'm with Dave. Enjoy mocking Republicans all you want, but in your cold hard calculating heart, take them very very seriously.
 
Jay Glatfelter: On Lost "Dead is Dead" Top
Benjamin Linus The Follower. That statement just doesn't make sense to me. At the end of the new episode "Dead is Dead," a spectral Alex threatened Ben to follow John Locke or be destroyed. Ben said yes but can we really believe him? "Dead is Dead" was the conclusion to last season's gripping "The Shape of Things to Come," in which Ben watched his daughter Alex being killed at the hands of the ruthless Keamy. A lot has happened since then, but it was nice to bring a close to that story line. Ben's revenge against Widmore for the death of his daughter became an introspective journey and he came to the conclusion that is was his own fault for Alex's death. He saved her life from Widmore before and could have done it again, but Ben became too corrupt and too confident in his manipulative ways. Just as Charles Widmore had become. Did this episode actually bring about a real change in Ben? Would the show be the same without the love-to-hate bad guy proclaiming to be a good guy puppet master? I, for one, wont hold my breath. Ben does not like the new John Locke (now with Swagger) and despite dead Alex's threats, I think Ben is still going to try and overthrow Locke. I want to believe otherwise, but how many times can you be burned by Ben? What is up with new character Ilana and the mysterious question, "What lies in the shadow of the statue?" It appears to obviously be referencing the 4-Toed statue that we have been waiting to see. Why does she seem to know what it is all about? Seems to be a "Are you one of us" code. People have speculated that she is in the same vein as Richard Alpert, a 3,000 year old immortal of sorts. After watching the episode a second time, the scene between Ben and Ilana gives the impression that she is actually working for Ben. At first glance, it seems like a friendly convo, but we all know Ben doesn't just have normal conversations. Perhaps it was a little check up to see how their "plan" was going? Also, why would Ben kill Ceasar? Was it for Locke? No way. He scoped out Ceasar and found out he had a gun. This made Ceasar a threat to Ben's plans, so Ben took him out. Whatever is going on with Ilana and crew is definitely going to have to do with this upcoming war. Dead is Dead was another riveting emotional episode. The scene with Penny and Ben as he attempted to kill her was one of the most suspenseful scenes in the entire series. The relief that she wasn't killed and that Penny and Desmond could still live happily ever after was one of the greatest reliefs in the show's history. Last but not least: To have John Locke finally confident and back to his Season One self is so awesome and I can't wait to see where they go with Locke the Leader. More on ABC
 
It's Official: Mayor Daley Doesn't Use Email Top
Long rumored, it's now official: Mayor Daley doesn't use email. The Sun-Times ' Tim Novak got confirmation of Daley's aversion from the city's law department: "The mayor doesn't use e-mail," says Jennifer Hoyle, the city's Law Department spokeswoman, explaining why she rejected a Sun-Times request to review e-mails Daley has sent and received this year. That creates a bit of an inconsistency, as Novak notes , with Daley's new YouTube channel .
 
Lee Camp: A Detailed Analysis of The Tea Bag Revolution (short VIDEO) Top
 
Romney Leads Anti-EFCA Charge, Spurs Presidential Discussion Top
Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney hosted a conference call with the Workforce Fairness Institute on Monday in an attempt to drum up opposition to the Employee Free Choice Act. Ideologically, it was an obvious position for the 2008 Republican presidential candidate to take. Politically, lending his voice to a cause dear to the conservative movement's heart will undoubtedly spur additional speculation that Romney is gearing up for another run at the Oval Office in 2012. The former governor has been building the institutional base within the Republican Party that he lacked during the '08 primary. While not in elected office, he has lent his voice to various other candidates and committees, either through speeches or fundraising. His appearance at the CPAC convention was one of the most widely attended and crested with him winning the conservative group's informal presidential straw poll for the third year in a row. One highly respected Republican strategist said he was incredibly impressed with the path Romney was taking. "He's building relationships and staying relevant," said the strategist, who added that Alaska Governor Sarah Palin would be well suited to follow such an example. The EFCA call was another step in that process. A rallying cry for conservatives, the legislation doesn't lend itself well to the Massachusetts Republican. Romney's former firm, Bain Capital, was responsible for the loss of jobs for hundreds of workers and was accused of using off shore tax havens to store its profits. As Eddie Vale of the AFL-CIO noted in an email to reporters: "As you will see below Romney's business career is the PERFECT EXAMPLE of why workers need the Employee Free Choice Act." And yet, the GOP and business community is more than willing to use the multi-millionaire former CEO as a pitchman for its anti-EFCA efforts. In part because Romney dutifully plays the part. "This is not just a matter of 'oh, let's help the working folks,'" he declared during Monday's conference call. "That's not what this is. This is a matter of: 'let's get the money for the unions.' This is really targeted at small business as well as big business. Take something like Wal-Mart, 1.4 million U.S employees at Wal-Mart. If unions were able to get, you know, $400 in union dues annually from each one of those folks, you are talking a half a billion dollars in revenues to unions. And a hundred million dollars would go into elections in this country, their favorite politicians. This is about money and about politics and it is sacrificing the rights and freedoms of the American worker to be able to get big bucks for the unions bosses." More on Mitt Romney
 
Public Library Bans People With 'Offensive Bodily Odors' Top
Patrons of the Schaumburg Township District Library have never been allowed to bring in the noise. Now they can't bring in the funk. The library recently added "offensive bodily odors" to its list of prohibitions, joining more traditional no-nos such as running, rowdiness or toting an uncovered beverage.
 
Lee Schneider: Seeing is Believing and Believing is Seeing Top
I have been staring at a $20 bill on my desk for an hour now but it has yet to turn into $40. If I think about this blog really hard, will it write itself? There are those who believe beliefs can manifest into things, that action and thought are entangled. There's a kind of chocolate on the market called Intentional Chocolate . Dr. Dean Radin , a senior scientist at the Institute of Noetic Sciences, co-authored a study on it, a randomized, placebo-controlled double-blind study, to see whether chocolate exposed to the positive intentions of people meditating would make a difference in the mood of people who ate the chocolate. Turns out, according to the paper, that people who ate the "positive thought" chocolate reported feeling better than those who ate regular chocolate. Huh. Would that work with pizza? Dr. Radin admits to being surprised at the outcome of the test, but he says he's interested in asking questions about how the world works, regardless of prejudices. Well, scientists do tend to freak out when you suggest that the consciousness of somebody can change the outcome of an experiment. Richard P. Sloan , a professor of behavioral medicine in the Department of Psychiatry at Columbia University, was quoted in the Los Angeles Times about the chocolate experiment: "There's nothing in the way that we understand the universe that would explain how a group of people could influence the well-being of others by blessing their chocolate," he was quoted in the article. "Besides, if chocolate could be blessed, it could also be cursed." Cursed chocolate bunnies aside, Dr. Sloan is an important crusader against quack science and I admire his stand. But there are other beliefs about belief. One of the premises of quantum physics is that the observer, by the act of watching, affects observed reality. Trying to get my brain around that makes me want to lie down in a darkened room and eat chocolate. But according to a study published in Nature , scientists have demonstrated how a beam of electrons is affected by the act of being observed. Dr. William Tiller , a Professor Emeritus of materials science at Stanford, believes that human consciousness can change what we call physical reality. His view is that physics has been examining the interaction of mass and energy and he now wants to bring consciousness to the party. He thinks mass can be converted into energy which in turn can be converted into consciousness. That supports the formula t/C*10=a2. That is, thinking (t) about consciousness ( C ) for ten minutes equals taking two Advil (a2) and lying down in a darkened room. We all know the saying "I'll believe it when I see it." It's at the heart of "show me" scientific thinking. Dr. Radin argues we have this backwards. It should be, he says, "I'll see it when I believe it." Lynne McTaggart is one researcher who is taking a close look at this, inviting people worldwide to participate in her intention experiments. Using her website, people hook up to sync up and send an intention to a war zone, a hot spot, or a person. She reports that thousands of volunteers from 30 countries around the world have participated in intention experiments thus far. The results? Researchers working with her report that focusing "grow" intention on plant seedlings may have given them more energy and caused more of them to sprout than normal. A recent experiment focused an intention of peace toward war-torn Sri Lanka and coincidentally or not could have reduced violence there. McTaggart is planning more intention experiments. Like Dean Radin, she seems interested in asking questions about how the world works, regardless of prejudices. More on Happiness
 
Permanent Democratic Majority: New Study Says Yes Top
A growing number of political scientists, analysts and strategists are making the case for a realignment of political power in the U.S. to a new Democratic majority based on two trends: 1) the increasing numbers of black and Hispanic voters, and 2) a decisive shift away from the Republican Party by the suburban and well-educated constituencies that once formed the backbone of the GOP. Arguments supporting a Democratic realignment are based on well-researched population and voting data. Nonetheless, at a time when the economy remains in crisis and when international tensions are intensifying across the globe, any claim that Democratic (or Republican) ascendance is inevitable should be viewed with caution. In a March, 2009 51-page paper [PDF] "New Progressive America: Twenty Years of Demographic, Geographic, and Attitudinal Changes Across the Country Herald a New Progressive Majority," Ruy Teixeira makes a strong case that "progressive arguments are in the ascendancy," that demographic and geographic "trends should take America down a very different road than has been traveled in the last eight years. A new progressive America is on the rise." To further buttress his case, Teixeira has put together "a very cool interactive map that includes 7 levels of exit poll demographics and county-level vote shifts going back to 1988." Teixeira is by no means alone. The New Republic 's John Judis, who collaborated with Teixeira on the 2001 book The Emerging Democratic Majority , wrote an article titled "America The Liberal" the day after the November 4, 2008, election. Judis made a similarly well-argued case that the election of Obama "is the culmination of a Democratic realignment that began in the 1990s. ... The country is no longer 'America the conservative.' And, if Obama acts shrewdly to consolidate this new majority, we may soon be 'America the liberal'." On April 9, 2009, Emory political scientist Alan Abramowitz published a paper arguing that Obama's victory "was made possible by long-term changes in the composition of the American electorate, especially the growing voting power of African-Americans, Hispanics, and other nonwhites. As a result of these demographic changes, the Democratic Party enjoys a large advantage over the Republican Party in the size of its electoral base -- an advantage that is almost certain to continue growing for the foreseeable future." All three authors make overlapping and similar cases. Teixeira, for example, found that in many of the fastest growing sections of the country -- including metropolitan Las Vegas, Orlando, Florida, and Virginia's northern suburbs -- Obama's margin was an extraordinary 35 to 48 points higher than Dukakis' was 20 years earlier. He concluded that "where America is growing, progressives are gaining strength and gaining it fast." Teixeira noted that pro-Democratic minorities have, over the same 20 years, grown from 15 to 28 percent of the electorate. Judis demonstrated that professionals have gone from a solidly pro-Republican constituency to favoring Obama by a 58-40 margin. They have also grown from seven percent of the electorate in the 1950s to a solid 25 percent of voters in 2008. Abramowitz presented a series of tables to back up his case: Teixeira, Judis, Abramowitz and others all back up their analyses with census data and other statistics. It is difficult to dispute Teixeira's assertion that "a new progressive America has emerged with a new demography, a new geography, and a new agenda." From the Republican vantage point, no scenario could be better: an adversary comfortable in victory is an adversary vulnerable to defeat. After the election of 1992, many analysts -- and even many Republicans -- were convinced that Bill Clinton had cracked the Republican lock, and that conservative hegemony was at an end. "There is no doubt that current demographic trends favor the Democrats, based on the voting preference of those demographic groups in the last election," Republican pollster Whit Ayres conceded. But, Ayres added, "why has virtually every past prediction of a 'permanent Republican majority' or an 'emerging Democratic majority' or a 'Republican lock on the Electoral College' been proven wrong? Because those predictions are invariably based on linear projections from recent elections, and they underestimate the parties' and politicians' ability to adapt to new realities." "Republicans had a lock on southern electoral votes, until Clinton and then Obama figured out a way to pick the lock. Democrats had a lock on the west coast, until Arnold [Schwarzenegger] figured out a way to pick the lock. Democrats look like they have a lock on Asian and Hispanic voters, at the moment. But Republicans are looking at the same trends as Ruy [Teixeira], and we will figure out a way to broaden our appeal to those groups. Just like in economic markets, there is a self-correcting mechanism in our politics. Losing is a wonderful corrective when either party gets too far from the mainstream." Teixeira told the Huffington Post that conservative domination from the late 1960s to the turn of the century only provides support for his argument. "There were some real demographic trends that helped produce the rise of conservatism -- a growing middle class that was less dependent on unionized, blue-collar jobs; the movement of whites, especially working-class whites, to the suburbs in search of order, security, and living space; the increasing population of the Sunbelt and so on -- but there was also, and related to those demographic shifts, big changes in the voting preferences of key groups, first and foremost, the white working class. The shift of these voters to the conservatives was central to the rise of conservatism. This is typically the way it is -- there are not only demographic trends that affect the size of different groups, but shifts within those groups in how they behave. Both are relevant to explaining big political changes and both can have durable effects. That was true of the rise of conservatism and it is true of the current rise of progressivism. Asked about the potential for a conservative reemergence, Teixeira responded: As for conservatives being able to come back by making gains among some other group besides the white working class, this is certainly possible and I assume they will try to do that. The problem at the moment is they have nothing much to sell at this point that the rising demographic groups and areas are interested in buying. And they still seem pretty far away from recognizing that fact. But eventually they will, which should lead to some modernization of their program and jettisoning of outdated ideology....But this could take a while. In the meantime, the long-term shifts I talked about in the report should continue to advantage the progressive side of American politics." Judis told the Huffington Post that "The only circumstances that could bring back the Republicans is Obama's failure to stem the recession." "Obama does have to succeed, and so far, he's pretty much on the right track, and the Republicans are definitely not. That suggests to me that he and the Democrats will be able to solidify their majority in 2010 and 2012," Judis said. "But again, I don't fully understand what is going on in the world, and events could defy demography." Perhaps the strongest evidence in support of the Teixeira-Judis-Abramowitz thesis is, however, the current inability of the Republican Party to respond to market pressures. Defeat has, ironically, diminished the GOP's capacity to respond to loss. As the elected leadership gets smaller, the strength of the most dogmatically rigid and least elastic faction has grown. On issues running the gamut from immigration to the economy, this dominant faction has yet to demonstrate "a wonderful corrective" in reaction to losing. Instead, they have retreated further inside an ideological shell that began to show cracks -- Bush I in '92, Dole in '96, and Bush v. Gore -- well over a decade ago.
 
Obama Reads "Where The Wild Things Are" At White House, Roars At Kids Top
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama welcomed thousands of children and families to the White House Easter Egg Roll Monday, calling it "one of the greatest White House traditions." Shortly after kicking off the event, the first family walked to the storytime stage to read to a group of children. Entering the area, Obama shook hands with many of the children in the front row. The president read "Where the Wild Things Are" by Maurice Sendak, which he called "one of my favorite books." He stood in front of the seated children, slowly rotating the book, so that everyone could see the pictures. Obama pointed to one picture in the book and said, "That's a wild thing. It's like a dragon-looking thing." At one point, he got the group of children to try staring without blinking their eyes. One little girl's eyes were so big the President started laughing. Mr. Obama asked the children if they had ever been in a "wild rumpus" like the book was describing. As he read about the imaginary beasts in the book and the adventures of the book's main character (a little boy named Max wearing a wolf suit), Mr. Obama howled and spoke in a monster voice. "You guys look like you have a wild rumpus all the time," he told the kids. At the end of the story he asked, "Are there any wild things here? I just want to make sure," and issued a soft wild thing-like growl along with the cheering of the crowd. Next, Mrs. Obama and her mother took turns reading "If You Give a Mouse a Cookie," by Laura Joffe Numeroff . The first daughters turned the pages of an oversized copy of the book to show the illustrations. Music star Fergie sang the National Anthem before the president greeted the crowd. The White House allotted tickets for the event to gay and lesbian parents as part of the administration's effort to reach out to diverse communities. Representatives from Family Equality Council, Human Rights Campaign, National Gay and Lesbian Task Force and other groups confirmed earlier that they were invited and encouraged to have their members participate.
 
Deepak Chopra: The dilemma of the "good" Muslim Top
Even before his inauguration, President Obama signaled a change of attitude toward Islam. He renounced the term "war on terror" and has never even flirted with another right-wing favorite, "clash of civilizations." Since taking office he has addressed the Islamic world with respect -- a key concept in that culture -- and recently declared in Israel that the United States is not at war with Islam and never will be. This shift in attitude seems like exactly the right one. But it has infuriated some people, not all of them on the right. The attacks on 9/11 were used by the Bush administration to deliberately inflame opinion against the Muslim world. All of us have been overwhelmed with negative images that reinforce prejudice and hatred. How does one ease images of riots in the Arab street, American flags set on fire, women being stoned for adultery, suicide bombings, berserk clerics, and the whole incendiary image of "them," an alien enemy that stands for everything barbaric and backward? The key to change lies in ourselves, naturally, since we know rationally that the extremists and jihadis form a tiny minority among the billion Muslims across the globe. But to reach a state of accord, we also need an image of good Muslims to offset the bad. Who is the good Muslim? At this moment, the image is clouded. One can't help but think back to Germany and the rise of Hitler. Hitler made quite clear his intentions, used violence from the first moment, and called upon the general anti-Semitism prevalent at every reach of European society. There was no room for "good" Germans to claim they were quiescent, unknowing, or not in agreement. By the same logic, "good" Southerners didn't know that blacks were being mistreated. Likewise, good Muslims have no defense for tolerating anti-Semitism and the oppression of women. One of the most powerful points Obama made on his recent European tour was that ordinary French and Germans entertain a casual anti-Americanism that is nonetheless insidious. I imagine that's how many Arabs feel about Israel. They wouldn't lift a hand to attack Israel, and they realize full well that Israel has a right to exist. Yet by casually allowing their neighbors, relatives, students, and countrymen to foment virulent anti-Israeli sentiments, the damage is done. It is all the more insidious for being casual. So for us to believe in good Muslims, we need more. We -- and here I mean the entire world -- need the vast majority of Muslims to wake up and then to stand up. Fear is the greatest ally of terrorism, but denial comes in a close second. The rise of al-Jazeera and al-Arabia brought uncensored news and opinion to the Arab world for the first time. Free speech without fear of reprisal was a huge step forward. Yet all too easily "free" went the way of "good," as these media outlets fell into lockstep by portraying Israeli violence out of balance with the threat of terrorism, by casually exploiting the U.S. as invaders and crusaders, and by not speaking out sufficiently against ruthless oligarchs and military regimes. I do not monitor these outlets every day. Like everyone else, I depend on professional analysis of the situation, and therefore specifics get turned into generalities. But it seems to be agreed that the Muslim press and news media are slanted to tell their viewers and readers what they want to hear (the same thing happens in the West, too). The point is that little public incentive is offered for good Muslims to find their power of protest. If hundreds of millions of Muslims oppose Al-Qaeda and the Taliban, where are the street demonstrations, outraged lawmakers and judges? When the funds of the ruling class in every Arab country are diverted, either openly or barely in secret, to support extremists, jihadis, and "freedom fighters" who are actually terrorists, the hope for making an alliance with "good" Muslims quickly turns sour. These are painful truths, but they need to be told. Otherwise, the festering mistrust and hatred of Islam will never change. The left will look the other way while the right keeps throwing fuel on the fire. The plight of good Germans became tragic, and they emerged from the conflagration ashamed, guilty, and impotent. It would be doubly tragic to see that happen in the Islamic world. Published in the San Francisco Chronicle
 
Replacing Styrofoam With Fungi, But Can It Scale? Top
Now, the company he founded with classmate Gavin McIntyre -- Ecovative Design -- is angling to provide not just a mass-market, organic insulation material, but also a replacement for Styrofoam, the non-biodegradable, carbon-intense material used widely in packing and shipping. Both are both produced through microbinding, in which local agricultural waste -- including buckwheat, rice and cottonseed hulls and other materials high in lignin, a complex organic polymer found in many plants -- is mixed with cells from a specific type of fungi. Within about a week, Mr. Bayer said, the fungus digests the lignin, producing a strong biological matrix. The mixture is poured into a mold and then dehydrated, creating the finished product.
 
Nan Aron: Bipartisan Support Continues to Grow for Johnsen and Koh Top
This weekend two prominent conservatives added their voices to the calls to confirm Dawn Johnsen and Harold Koh. Douglas Kmiec and Kenneth Starr have come out in unequivocal support for Johnsen and Koh respectively. Kmiec has long been a leading conservative legal scholar; he currently holds the Caruso Family Chair at Pepperdine University School of Law. He also held the same job to which Dawn Johnsen has been nominated: assistant attorney general for the Office of Legal Counsel. He served that office under both Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. So, as a former head of the OLC, he certainly understands the background and qualifications needed to handle the job. As he said in his endorsement of Johnsen in today's Legal Times , he recognizes that she is eminently qualified to take the helm at the OLC: Dawn Johnsen's nomination to head the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel is caught up in an unjustified effort to hand President Barack Obama his first major loss. Some Senate Republicans seek to filibuster Johnsen into effective defeat. This would be a mistake... Her history demonstrates that Johnsen can and will separate law from politics and discharge the OLC's unique duty to assess the constitutionality and legality of executive initiative and legislative proposal. Even if the president did not also deserve the Senate's deference on the choice of his executive team, Dawn Johnsen merits confirmation. In another surprising move, the Yale Daily News reports today that "in a speech at Yale Law School on Thursday, conservative icon Kenneth Starr announced his support for Koh [to be legal advisor to the State Department] before an audience of about 95 students and professors. Starr, in addition to his most famous turn as an independent prosecutor, served as solicitor general under President George H.W. Bush and is currently dean of Pepperdine School of Law; his support of Koh is yet more evidence that Koh is extremely qualified and any attempts to stymie his nomination are little more than rank partisanship. As Akhil Amar, a professor at Yale University who attended Starr's speech, noted: Amar said Starr's endorsement of Koh was also important given the past history between the two. When Koh challenged the right of the administration of George H.W. Bush... to detain Haitian refugees at Guantanamo Bay in the early 1990s, Starr -- then U.S. solicitor general -- argued on behalf of the administration. But Starr's respect for Koh never wavered, said Amar, who sat on a panel with Starr at Pepperdine in late March. Starr and Kmiec were able to put politics aside and recognize how extraordinarily qualified both Koh and Johnsen are for the posts to which they are nominated. It is time for Senate Republicans to do the same. When Congress reconvenes next week the Senate should move to confirm these two exceptional individuals without delay.
 
Michael Hais and Morley Winograd: Everybody's Wrong But Us Top
In Wednesday's Washington Post , conservative columnist Michael Gerson, citing a recent Pew Research Center poll, says that the "polarization" between Democrats and Republicans in their approval of President Barack Obama's performance is greater than for any other president in surveys stretching back to the early days of the Nixon administration. In the Pew survey, a nearly unanimous 88 percent of Democratic identifiers, as opposed to a scant 27 percent of Republicans, approved of the president's performance, a gap of 61 percentage points. Independents (57% approve) fall precisely between the Democrats and Republicans. Overall, in that survey, 59 percent of all Americans approved of the job the president was doing, a number that rose slightly (to 61%) in the most recent Pew survey, conducted in the wake of Obama's European trip. While Gerson's statement of the facts may be correct, his interpretation is dead wrong. The election of President Obama last year brought America into a new civic era, a turning point that has occurred roughly every eighty years throughout American history. Each time the country enters a civic era there is a rise in partisan identifications, a more coherent ideological divide between the two parties, and an increase in straight ticket voting. Even Gerson noted that polarization might be a good thing when it is a "decisive" and "ambitious" president like Franklin D. Roosevelt who is doing the polarizing to achieve overriding national goals. Despite Gerson's attempts to blame Obama for our current level of partisan divide, the truth is that such a division is inevitable in a civic era. The polarization between Democrats and Republicans in the Pew and every other survey has much less to do with President Obama's personal and political style, as Gerson suggested, than it does with the inability of his own Republican Party to adapt to this new era. From the earliest Pew survey conducted in 1989, the first year of George H.W. Bush's administration, through 2005, there was near parity in the distribution of party identifiers within the electorate; no more than three or four percentage points ever separated the Democrats from the Republicans. By contrast, since 2006 the percentage of Americans identifying themselves as Democrats has risen significantly, while the number saying they are Republican has fallen. In the most recent Pew study, conducted early this month, the Democrats held a clear 52% to 35% lead over the Republicans in party ID, a 13 percentage point shift toward the Democratic Party since 2004. And, only 21 percent of American voters are "pure" Republicans, a group that consists only of those willing to call themselves Republicans and does not include independents that say they lean toward the GOP. This is the smallest number of "pure" partisans for either party in any survey ever conducted by Pew. Quite simply, the GOP has become an ever-declining corps of conservative true believers. A recent Frank N. Magid Associates survey indicates that while Democratic identifiers are almost evenly divided between liberals or progressives (45%) and moderates (42%), among Republicans, conservatives outnumber moderates by more than 2:1 (61% vs. 26%). As a result, Republicans see things very differently than almost everyone else. The latest Daily Kos weekly tracking poll, for example, indicates that more than two-thirds of Americans (67%) have a favorable opinion of President Obama. In that poll at least sixty percent of both women and men and all age and ethnic groups have a positive impression of the president. Only among Republicans (23%) and in the geographic center of the GOP, the South, (41%), is only a minority favorable toward Obama. Given the distance of the Republican Party from the current American political mainstream, and the increased sense of party loyalty felt by many Americans, it shouldn't be surprising that most of the public is reticent to see President Obama compromise with Republicans on important public policy questions as Gerson suggests. In a March CBS/New York Times poll, a clear majority (56%) wanted President Obama to pursue the policies he promised in the campaign rather than working in a bipartisan way with Republicans (39%). An even larger majority (79%) wanted Congressional Republicans to work in a bipartisan way with the President rather than sticking to Republican policies. By refusing to do so, it is the Republicans and not Barack Obama who are now polarizing American politics and, as a result, it is they who are polarized from most of their fellow citizens as well. If Republicans like Michael Gerson truly want to see bipartisan policymaking, they will have to retreat from their position as a corporal's guard on the right wing of American politics and join the rest of the country in seeking real solutions to the major issues facing the United States at the dawn of the 21st Century. Cross-posted at the NDN Blog . More on GOP
 
Lloyd Chapman: Obama Ignores Simple Solution to Stimulate Economy Top
President Barack Obama is a smart man, and he has no doubt surrounded himself with a multitude of well-educated and extremely intelligent individuals. With that in mind, it is difficult to understand why he has consistently ignored some of the most fundamental principals of the U.S. economy, and the suggestions of some of our nation's leading economic experts in drafting his stimulus plan. President Obama's stimulus plan ignores the fact that 98 percent of all firms in the United States have less than 100 employees. Over 26 million firms fall into that category. They employ approximately 50.4 percent of the private sector workforce and create over 80 percent of all new jobs in America. These firms are responsible for over 90 percent of all U.S. exports and over 90 percent of all technological innovation in America. Large businesses on the other hand, have not created one net new job in America since 1977. If President Obama wants to stimulate the national economy and create jobs, he needs to adopt policies and legislation to direct federal infrastructure funds to America's 27 million small businesses. Recently, Carly Fiorina and Laura Tyson were on CNN regarding the economy. Dr. Laura Tyson was the Chair of the U.S. President's Council of Economic Advisers under the Clinton Administration. Carly Fiorina was the former CEO of Hewlett-Packard and one of Senator John McCain's top economic advisors. They both agreed the best way to stimulate the failing U.S. economy is to direct federal infrastructure funds to small businesses. ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jR-fWcpkOHM ) When Congress passed the Small Business Act in 1953, its members realized what President Obama seems to have missed, that small businesses are the heart and soul of the U.S. economy. The Small Business Act was an economic stimulus plan, and it worked. Existing federal law states that a minimum of 23 percent of the total value of all federal contracts and subcontracts shall be awarded to small businesses. Unfortunately, during the Bush Administration, the Small Business Act and all the benefits it provided to our national economy were significantly damaged. Since 2003, over a dozen federal investigations found Bush officials in every federal agency allowed billions of dollars in federal small business contracts to be diverted to some of the largest firms in the U.S. and even Europe. ( http://www.asbl.com/documentlibrary.html ) Investigative stories by ABC, CBS and CNN as well as many of the nation's largest newspapers have reported that hundreds of billions of dollars in federal contracts that by law were intended for small businesses, actually went to firms such as Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics, Raytheon, L-3 Communications, British Aerospace (BAE) and Rolls-Royce. (ABC, http://www.asbl.com/abc_evening_news.wmv ; CBS, http://www.asbl.com/cbs.wmv ; CNN, http://www.asbl.com/showmedia.php?id=1170 ) The American Small Business League (ASBL) won a series of federal lawsuits against the Bush Administration that forced the release of over 30,000 pages of information on the actual recipients of federal small business contracts. Many of the federal investigations into the diversion of federal small business contracts to corporate giants were based on information provided by the ASBL. Based on information obtained through years of litigation, and information gleaned from several current and former government executives, the ASBL estimates over $100 billion a year in federal small business contracts are diverted to Fortune 500 firms and other large businesses. So far, nothing President Obama has proposed to stimulate our nation's failing economy would be as effective and cost efficient as simply adopting policies and legislation that would redirect over $100 billion, year-after-year, back into the middle class economy. If President Obama sincerely wants to create jobs and stimulate the national economy he needs to start by making good on a campaign promise he made in February of 2008 when he stated, "Small businesses are the backbone of our nation's economy and we must protect this great resource. It is time to end the diversion of federal small business contracts to corporate giants." ( http://www.barackobama.com/2008/02/26/the_american_small_business_le.php ) -###- More on Barack Obama
 
Scarlett Johansson: The Skinny Top
While training for an upcoming film, I've come to this conclusion: chin ups are near impossible and lunges suck. There is no magic wand to wave over oneself to look good in a latex catsuit. Eating healthy and getting fit is about commitment, determination, consistency and the dedication to self-preservation. While I've never been considered a gym rat, I have, in fact, worked up a sweat in the name of cardio before, and although I enjoy a grilled cheese as much as the next person, I combine the not-so-good foods I crave with an all-around balanced diet. People come in all shapes and sizes and everyone has the capability to meet their maximum potential. Once filming is completed, I'll no longer need to rehash the 50 ways to lift a dumbbell, but I'll commit to working out at least 30 minutes a day and eating a balanced diet of fruit, vegetables and lean proteins. Pull ups, crunches, lunges, squats, jumping jacks, planks, walking, jogging and push ups are all exercises that can be performed without fancy trainers or gym memberships. I've realized through this process that no matter how busy my life may be, I feel better when I take a little time to focus on staying active. We can all pledge to have healthy bodies no matter how diverse our lifestyles may be. Since dedicating myself to getting into "superhero shape," several articles regarding my weight have been brought to my attention. Claims have been made that I've been on a strict workout routine regulated by co-stars, whipped into shape by trainers I've never met, eating sprouted grains I can't pronounce and ultimately losing 14 pounds off my 5'3" frame. Losing 14 pounds out of necessity in order to live a healthier life is a huge victory. I'm a petite person to begin with, so the idea of my losing this amount of weight is utter lunacy. If I were to lose 14 pounds, I'd have to part with both arms. And a foot. I'm frustrated with the irresponsibility of tabloid media who sell the public ideas about what we should look like and how we should get there. Every time I pass a newsstand, the bold yellow font of tabloid and lifestyle magazines scream out at me: "Look Who's Lost It!" "They Were Fabby and Now They're Flabby!" "They Were Flabby and Now They're Flat!" We're all aware of the sagas these glossies create: "Look Who's Still A Sea Cow After Giving Birth to Twins!" Or the equally perverse: "Slammin' Post Baby Beach Bodies Just Four Days After Crowning!" According to the National Eating Disorders Association (NEDA), as many as 10 million females and 1 million males living in the US are fighting a life and death battle with anorexia or bulimia. I'm someone who has always publicly advocated for a healthy body image and the idea that the media would maintain that I have lost an impossible amount of weight by some sort of "crash diet" or miracle workout is ludicrous. I believe it's reckless and dangerous for these publications to sell the story that these are acceptable ways to looking like a "movie star." It's great to get tips on how to lead a healthier lifestyle, but I don't want some imaginary account of "How She Did It!" I get into and stay in shape by eating a proper diet and maintaining a healthy amount of exercise. The press should be held accountable for the false ideals they sell to their readers regarding body image — that's the real weight of the issue. The NEDA goes on to say, "the media is one of our most important allies in the effort to raise awareness about the dangers of eating disorders...we strive to work with the media to produce accurate, insightful and informative pieces that will resonate with the public, while maintaining hope and avoiding glamorizing or promoting copycats." But how are we, the reader, to decipher friend from foe? How are we supposed to view articles highlighting celebrity cellulite and not sulk in the mirror, imagining a big red arrow pointing to various parts of our bodies? The media has packaged for us an unhealthy idea that one must suffer loss, be in the middle of a nervous breakdown, feel pressure from friends or coworkers, battle divorce or have a bitter dispute with an ex in order to get into acceptable bikini shape. So why do these publications do so well? After appearing on the cover of US Weekly's "Did They or Didn't They? A Plastic Surgery Guide for Dimwits" issue and battling for a retraction , I learned that the magazine profited $1.4 million from the issue alone (money I felt should be donated to Operation Smile or an equally well-managed charity helping those in need of reconstructive surgery). The concept of 'Stars Are Just Like Us!" makes us feel connected to lifestyles that can sometime seem out of this world. Yes, celebrities are just like us. They struggle with demons and overcome obstacles and have annoying habits and battle vices. That said, I would be absolutely mortified to discover that some 15-year-old girl in Kansas City read one of these "articles" and decided she wasn't going to eat for a couple of weeks so she too could "crash diet" and look like Scarlett Johansson. I'm not normally the type to dignify toilet paper rags with a response, but in this case I feel it's my responsibility to comment. In a way, I'm glad some dummy journalist (and I use the term "journalist" loosely) is banking on my "deflating" so that I can address the issue straight from my healthy heart. For more information on eating disorders and/or treatment options, please visit: http://www.nationaleatingdisorders.org/ *Follow HuffPostLiving on Twitter and become a fan of Huffington Post Living on Facebook * More on Health
 
Apple Planning A Store At North And Clybourn After Pulling Out Of Block 37 Top
In an apparent snub of State Street, Apple Inc. has picked the Clybourn Corridor for its next Chicago store. More on Apple
 
Dave Johnson: Take The Right Seriously, Please Top
We're all laughing at the right's nuttiness, especially the teabagging campaign. They say Obama isn't and American, that he is a communist, that in ten weeks he is responsible for the bush deficit, that he is planning to put everyone in concentration camps, that he is going to replace the dollar with a world currency, that he is gutting the military... And he has only been in office ten weeks. In fact they're back to being as crazy and paranoid as they were when Clinton was President. Remember the accusations that Clinton and Hillary were murderers, that Hillary personally killed Vince Foster, that Clinton ran a drug-smuggling operation out of an airstrip, that he was looking through FBI files, that he fired the travel office to put a cousin in, that he "sold" plots in Arlington cemetery, that he held up runway traffic to get a $500 haircut, that he used cocaine in the White House, that he hung obscene ornaments on the White House Christmas tree and the other fabrications that came daily? We laughed then, too, and how did that work out? They took over the Presidency, the House and the Senate. Then they started wars. They tortured people. They appointed corporate lobbyists to run every agency. They filled the courts with Federalist Society judges that rule for the corporations and religious right every time. They stole billions -- in one documented case actually having the Fed ship truckloads of pallets of hundred dollar bills directly to Iraq to be distributed to Bush cronies. They destroyed the economy of the world. And they worked hard to destroy the world itself -- the arctic is melting, the fisheries are depleted, the resources are plundered... And they get away with it -- who is being held accountable for any of that? When Joe McCarthy was spreading his poison we dismissed him as a nutcase. We laughed at the John Birch Society's paranoia, when they called Eisenhower a communist, and they ended up getting Bolton appointed to the UN. We thought the "Impeach Earl Warren" campaign was a joke and now they have the Supreme Court majority. We laughed at Jerry Falwell's Moral Majority and Pat Robertson's campaign and the religious right ended up staffing the administration with their followers. ... And now we mock them for being insane over Obama. So I want to say, please take the right seriously. They may appear to be crazy - and they are - but this doesn't mean it isn't going to work. Let me explain. In another life I was involved in direct mail. I learned a lot. Direct mail lets you measure the effect of every smallest thing. You can change the color of the paper the letter is written on and then measure the effect this has -- and by the way, the color actually makes a measurable difference. Changing the price from $9.99 to $9.95 can have a significant effect on the number of people who choose to buy what you are selling. So what I am getting at is that the most important lesson I learned was there is a reason that direct mail is worded the way it is, and looks the way it looks. That reason is that it works . "Buy now" is a call to action, and if you put "buy now" at the right place in your offer, people ... buy now. Every single word, the color, the font, the thickness of the ink, the headline, even the placement of periods and commas have all been tested and they are there because putting them there that way increases the number of people who make the decision to buy. Repeat: they do it because it works . What the right did in the Clinton years worked . They know how to do this stuff. That is why people across the country are reporting that a mass robo-call effort is underway to invite people to these tea parties. This is a funded strategic operation. They are reaching out to the general public with their message that Obama and "liberals" are to blame for the economy. They are setting the stage to own the issue when the economy gets worse. Going out and talking to the general public with their message is effective, and that is what they are doing. Everything with them is about shaping public opinion. Everything is propaganda, saying whatever they need to say and refining what they say until it is having an effect, and then repeating and repeating that message. It's just standard marketing and advertising. And they get away with it because they are the only ones doing that . They have an entire TV channel dedicated to telling the public that conservatives and their ideology are good, and that everything that is bad in their lives is the fault of the liberals. They still have dozens - hundreds - of radio shows repeating that message 24 hours a day across the country. They still have hundreds of paid operatives writing op-eds, books, speaking to groups, appearing on their TV and radio shows, always always always repeating a coordinated strategic message. It works. They're doing it and they are funded and strategic. We aren't. We're right and they are wrong, progressive policies and candidates are better for people than conservatives ones, but we aren't telling the public. We have no coordinated marketing effort to explain to the general public how and why progressives and progressive ideas and policies are better for them than the conservative approach. Until we do the right remains just as dangerous as ever.
 
Madoff's Mets Tickets Bidding War Top
Jailed financier Bernard Madoff had two Delta Club Platinum season tickets which had a face value of up to $695 (£474) per game. For the previous three days the tickets for Monday's game, against the San Diego Padres, have been the subject of an intense bidding war on internet auction site eBay, eventually fetching $7,000.
 
Michael Wolff: Pray for Me, Barack Obama Top
Barack Obama is looking for a church, but what's his religion? Through the campaign, he was dogged by the rumor that he's secretly a Muslim, a sleeper-believer in the West. His purported bow to the Saudi King on his recent trip, categorically denied by the White House, got the conspiracists going again (the more the conspiracists fulminate, the more his virtue and reasonableness seem evident). The "dip," or perhaps the canny appearance of a dip, did, however, certainly win him (and the US) points in the Arab world. Of course, then there was the first Seder in the White House, in which the president no doubt would have liked to be the one asking the four questions. (It's rather amazing no previous president has thought of a White House Seder--especially with Passover becoming such a sought-after invitation among non-Jews.) Before he went to Chicago, there was his period of non-belief, which he writes about in his memoir. He was, when it came to religion, a normally dismissive Ivy League Man. Continue reading at newser.com
 
Jerry Weissman: Beware of Jokes - I Top
One of the most pervasive pieces of advice bandied about in the presentation trade is to start a speech or a presentation with a joke. Wrong! No one can guarantee the success or failure of any joke; certainly not a business person - but not even a professional comedian. Consider Johnny Carson. The legendary talk show host spent 30 years on late night television telling jokes written by a crack team of professional, experienced comedy writers; but the jokes didn't always work. Fortunately, one of Johnny's greatest assets was his ability to recover from failed jokes. Whenever a scripted gag elicited no reaction or even groans from his audience, Carson would mug a silent take or make a comment about the bomb; either of which would often produce more laughter than some of the scripted jokes. Consider one of Carson's most prominent successors, Jon Stewart of "The Daily Show." Although Stewart's adulatory studio audiences worship and roar at almost every word he utters, he occasionally produces a dud. Stewart recovers with one his many rubber-faced expressions or trademark cackles which, as with Carson, often produces more laughter than the planned gags. If Johnny Carson and Jon Stewart can't guarantee a laugh how can you? Still, the temptation persists to use humor in presentations to break the ice, to lighten up the proceedings, entertain, or engage the audience; all of which are noble intentions, but still risky business. For, even if a joke beats the odds and gets a laugh, the laughter is a digression from the main message of the speech or presentation. The risk of humor is made even riskier by the diversification of audiences brought about by globalization. Diverse cultures, however, still retain their original sensibilities, and comedy does not cross borders easily - even when there is a common language. U.S. humor and U.K. humour differ by much more than a single letter. If you have any doubt, watch Americans in the audience of a British music hall comedy. They are the only ones not laughing. If, despite all these caveats, you still insist on telling a joke in your speech or presentation, make it self-deprecating. If you fail at making fun of yourself, your failure will be far less onerous. But even that strategy can backfire - as you'll see in the next post. More on Jon Stewart
 
Shana Ting Lipton: Kid Kouture Top
A standout piece in the Autumn/Winter 2009 couture collections -- if you're a pop culture fanatic like myself -- is undoubtedly a very special coat made of 'animal pelt' created by French designer Jean-Charles de Castelbajac. But no animals were harmed in the creation of the garment, unless of course you count Kermit the Frog as an animal (and many of us children of the early '80s do...sob). Castelbajac has always toyed with, well toys...in his designs. Who can forget his teddy bear coat way back when? But now, his timing is even more impeccable as we continue to wade, knee-deep, in a style culture of childhood and youth. First it was the Furries fixation (fetishizing stuffed animals through plush costumes intended for adult play) chronicled in Vanity Fair . Then it was the Grups ...a term first coined in a New York magazine article in 2006 to define garage band daddies, snowboarding CEO's and hipster post-Grunge parents. Now, fashion/art is kidding around more than ever and the toy is the ultimate accessory. About a week ago, a news item hit some style blogs about Heidi Klum's fashion shoot for German Vogue . One blogger says she was clad in "a black dress, split on one side, complete with blue shoulder pom poms and what appeared to be a pink plastic toy hanging off her waste. We kid you not." 'Kid' is the operative word. I recently went to a media event at Royal/T , a cool art/restaurant/boutique space in West L.A. and got to experience the Japanese-for-American-consumption version of the hyper-stylized youth fetish. The gallery is home to whimsical 'buggy-eyed' Jap inspired pop art -- the kind you want to squeeze or sit on if you're a kid (or a Grup ). The boutique sells cute pillbox hats fashioned after sushi and Gothic Lolita dolls. The latter have been part of a dark chiffon craze in Japan for decades (think: Kirsten Dunst character in Interview with the Vampire ). And you can get a cutesy tasty high tea served by girlish waitresses in frilly little girl/milk maid outfits. Of course Japan has always been a notorious upholder of the Lolita look and its concomitant sexual style -- from Sanrio for adults (the popular Hello Kitty vibrator) to the practically mythic tales of panties vending machines. Japan is also the birthplace of Cosplay , a subculture of people who congregate in Manga, graphic novel and character inspired costumes for special reenactments. Beyond the insular borders of L.A.'s Japantown, Royal/T has become a more accessible den for such aesthetically inspired gatherings. The hot spot hosted a Mad Tea Party last month that saw L.A. (gothic and traditional) Lolitas, plushy rabbits and top-hat sporting guys come out en-masse . China too has embraced the Cult de Kid if the recent-ish opening of mega pop artist Zhao Bandi's boutique in Beijing is any indicator. Commonly known as the Panda Man , his signature pieces are colorful panda plushy toys -- to be encased in glass in our future museums, no doubt, and displayed alongside carbon-dated graffiti tagged wall remnants, of course. One would have thought that Kid Kouture would have become a retro relic of the '80s along with grown-ups toting kitsch Incredible Hulk and Dukes of Hazard lunchboxes. But in the midst of an economic downturn (and tax season) being a grown-up seems overrated. Besides, recessions are great times to save money by digging into those heaps of hand-me-downs and clothes you haven't worn in years -- or in this case, decades. More on Fashion
 
Chuck Todd To Get MSNBC Weekend Politics Show Top
MSNBC is developing a weekend politics show to be moderated by Chuck Todd, the New York Observer 's Felix Gillette reports . Todd, who was reportedly in consideration for the "Meet the Press" moderator gig before it went to David Gregory, burst onto the TV news radar during the 2008 election season as NBC News' Political Director. He was promoted to Chief White House Correspondent in December. Gillette reports that the show will debut in late spring and that many specifics are still up in the air: According to sources, the specifics of the show--live vs. taped, one-on-one interview vs. a panel of guests, half-hour vs. an hour, Saturday vs. Sunday--are still being worked out. Presumably the show will originate out of NBC's Washington D.C. bureau, where Mr. Todd is stationed. Staffing has yet to be determined. The move towards original weekend programming is a bold step for MSNBC, (in)famous for its weekend slate of prison-style documentary programming. More on MSNBC
 
Melissa Kirsch: New York Times CorrectionWatch: Brilliant Idea Was Totally Bogus Top
Come on, New York Times . It pains me (albeit, only a tiny bit) to have to point out once again where you've blundered, but I can't let this go. It's true, the Charlton Heston Obituary Debacle was embarrassing, but this one is just downright hilarious. From April 12, 2009's Corrections: Editor's Note: Magazine An article in the Year in Ideas issue on Dec. 14, 2008, reported on Josh Klein, whose master's thesis for New York University's Interactive Telecommunications Program proposed "a vending machine for crows" that would enable the birds to exchange coins for peanuts. The article reported that beginning in June 2008, Klein tested the machine at the Binghamton Zoo, that the crows learned how to use it and that after a month the crows were actually scouring the ground for loose change. The Times has since learned that Klein was never at the Binghamton Zoo, and there were no crows on display there in June 2008. He performed these experiments with captive crows in a Brooklyn apartment; he told the reporter about the Brooklyn crows but implied that his work with them was preliminary to the work at the zoo. Asked to explain these discrepancies, Klein now says he and the reporter had a misunderstanding about the zoo. The reporter never called the zoo in Binghamton to confirm. And while the fact-checker did discuss the details with Klein, he did not call the zoo, as required under The Times's fact-checking standards . In addition, the article said that Klein was working with graduate students at Cornell University and Binghamton University to study how wild crows make use of his machine, which does exist . Klein did get a professor at Binghamton to help him try it out twice in Ithaca, with assistance from a Binghamton graduate student, and it was not a success . Corvid experts who have since been interviewed have said that Klein's machine is unlikely to work as intended . These discrepancies were pointed out to The Times by the Binghamton professor several weeks after the article was published; this editors' note was delayed for additional reporting. These details should have been discovered during the reporting and editing process. Had that happened, the article would not have been published. I have sympathy for reporters who are on deadline and are trying to summon a wacky entry for that increasingly bizarre Year in Ideas issue of the NYT Magazine. My question, once again, is where are the editors? The reporter's negligence is called out, the fact-checker's flouting of Times "standards," but there's just a cursory note about the "editing process." It's one thing to get a few facts wrong, it's another to report a totally fabricated tall tale and single it out as one of the best ideas of 2008. I'm mostly amused at the fact that a CROW VENDING MACHINE turned out to be a fake (and disappointed, because I've been laboring for four long months under the assumption that a bird could get peanuts for coins at the zoo). But I'm once again questioning the Paper of Record's editing process (we can only assume that Ideas issue was in the works for months) and wonder what kind of supervision the daily breaking news stories are getting. I tend to think if it's in the Times , it's true. Is this latest gaffe indicative of the breakdown of editorial process in the Age of the Blog? Previously: New York Times Violates (At Least) Ten Commandments of Journalism in Reporting Charles Heston's Death New York Times Correction Tally on Heston Obituary Now Officially Farcical New York Times Obituary Correction Watch: We'll Fix It When We Get Around To It Melissa Kirsch is the author of The Girl's Guide to Absolutely Everything .
 
Lincoln Under Siege From Both Sides For EFCA Position Top
Sen. Blanche Lincoln's decision to oppose the union-backed Employee Free Choice Act, two years after supporting it, seemed at the time to take a thorny topic off the electoral table for 2010. The moderate Arkansas Democrat faces a reelection campaign in the same state as the company most symbolic of the anti-EFCA effort: Wal-Mart. But in the days since she said she would not support the bill in its current form, Lincoln has watched criticism and scrutiny build. Union officials, feeling burned, have begun organizing campaign activities in the state to bring the Senator back into the fold. That was expected. But Lincoln's move hasn't placated the conservative crowd either. In an overlooked tweet, the day Lincoln announced her opposition , Tim Griffin, the former U.S. Attorney and a possible Arkansas Senate candidate, wrote: "Sen. Lincoln can't support EFCA in 'current form.' How is the 'current form' different from the legislation she co-sponsored and later voted for?" In an Arkansas News article a few days later, Griffin declared: "I'm glad that she is coming my way on this issue. I'm disappointed that it took years for her to get there." The chairman of the state's GOP, meanwhile, framed Lincoln's decision as purely political. "The length of time it has taken Sen. Lincoln to make this decision makes me wonder about her judgment," said Doyle Webb. "I question under what circumstance will she vote for that, since she sponsored a similar bill only two years ago, and what will be her decision two years from now or three." The multifaceted criticisms have re-opened, however slightly, the debate over how moderate Democrats should approach labor politics. Lincoln remains in a strong position for her reelection campaign, having raised $1.7 million in the first three months of 2009. But even in that fundraising venture, she managed to offend a chunk of the labor movement. The Senator didn't come out against Employee Free Choice Act until after she raised $1 million of that $1.7 million during a kick-off event with Vice President Joe Biden, a prominent EFCA supporter. Some union folks viewed the timing with suspicion. Meanwhile, local labor leaders are beginning to make overt political shows of disappointment within her home state, including a 150-person rally outside Lincoln's Arkansas office led by prize-winning author Barbara Ehrenreich. And national figures say they are formulating an appropriate push-back against the Democrat. "Lincoln said she can't support the bill AS IS, so the question now is if actions are going to back up her words," said one labor official. "As the bill comes up for debate, there are going to be amendments and other ideas for major labor reform. Is she going to support working Americans or stand with big business? In this terrible economy, workers are struggling to keep their jobs and their homes while greedy executives take millions in bonuses and taxpayer money. Which side is she going to choose?" In the end, the numbers facing Lincoln are complicated. Arkansas has only 85,000 workers under union contract -- a 7.3 percent density that is well below the national average, according to unionstats.com. Had she supported EFCA, she would have found herself a prime target from the business community -- she still might. But, had the legislation passed, it would have meant 75,000 more union members rallying to her cause in Arkansas and, according to the Center for American Progress , $166 million in increased wage earnings in her state.
 
Mets excited to open Citi Field on Monday night Top
MIAMI — On his first visit to Citi Field, New York Mets pitcher Mike Pelfrey was happy to see the high outfield wall and 415-foot sign in deep right-center. He figures the spacious dimensions will look especially appealing when he stands on the mound Monday night to throw the first pitch against the San Diego Padres as the Mets open their sparkling new ballpark. "I might as well just throw the ball down the middle and let them hit it," Pelfrey said. "They might have to hit it twice just to get it out of there. It's definitely a big park. It definitely seems that way. I guess we'll find out." While the early consensus is that Citi Field will be pitcher-friendly, the Mets figure it will take much of the season to fully assess their new home. The $800 million ballpark with 41,800 seats replaces Shea Stadium, the team's home since 1964. The Mets played in the old Polo Grounds during their first two seasons, 1962-63. The club went 3-3 on a season-opening trip that ended Sunday with a 2-1 loss at Florida, then headed for Queens and a night of pomp and celebration. Hall of Famer Tom Seaver will throw out the first pitch to former New York catcher Mike Piazza, and the Broadway cast of "West Side Story" will perform the national anthem. The game will be televised in Rockefeller Center and Times Square, and the Empire State Building will be lit in Mets' orange and blue. Pelfrey, who went 13-11 with a 3.72 ERA last year in his first full major league season, will pitch in the brightest spotlight of his career. "I imagine it's going to be kind of like a playoff atmosphere with all of the fans there and the excitement," he said Sunday. "I don't want to get too amped up and start overthrowing and get away from executing pitches. I'm going into it like it's going to be another start, but the reality is that it's going to be an awesome time." The most expensive seats at the new stadium average $495, but under the Mets variable pricing format they cost $695 for opening night. Two tickets owned by Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities were sold for $7,500, the highest of 68 bids in an eBay auction that ended at 9:56 a.m. EDT Sunday. Citi Field gets its name from Citigroup, criticized by some congressmen for its $400 million, 20-year naming rights deal with the Mets because the company accepted a government bailout to stay in business. With its intricate brickwork and Jackie Robinson Rotunda, the cozy ballpark was designed to invoke the charm of Ebbets Field, beloved home of the Brooklyn Dodgers until 1957. The Mets played two exhibition games at Citi Field against the Boston Red Sox in early April, and reviews were favorable. Players liked the training room, the weight room and a clubhouse 2 1/2 times the size of the Shea locker room. "It has all the best new amenities you can put in a ballpark," third baseman David Wright said. "That's only going to help us. You feel comfortable, and guys start showing up a little earlier. You get more of that team chemistry. It's going to make it a lot more fun coming to the ballpark every day." But Wright and other Mets said there will be a learning curve because of the crooked angles along the outfield fence, the wall that changes height seven times, and the small amount of foul territory. "It will take time for everybody," center fielder Carlos Beltran said. "It's a new atmosphere with new dimensions. We have to learn how to play the ball in the outfield. How the sun and wind are going to play, we don't know." Mets manager Jerry Manuel agreed. "It's going to take us until we get through a summer to understand what the park is going to do because of weather, wind, those kind of things," he said. While it may take awhile for the Mets to become comfortable, they figure they'll have an immediate home-field advantage thanks to the intimate atmosphere. "The fans are right on top of you," Wright said, "and everybody knows they voice their pleasure and displeasure. With the fans being closer, I think that's going to be good for us." Everyone agrees Citi Field will be better than Shea, a multipurpose facility that seated 57,343 and cost $28.5 million to build. Its final traces were razed in February. "I was tired of walking through the halls at Shea with water dripping on you in the tunnels," Pelfrey said. It will be a week of new-stadium extravaganzas in the Big Apple. Eight miles from Citi Field, New York's other major league team plays its first regular-season game in the new Yankee Stadium on Thursday against Cleveland.
 

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)