Wednesday, May 13, 2009

Y! Alert: The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Yahoo! Blog Alert
Yahoo! Alerts
My Alerts

The latest from The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Art Institute Reducing Admission Price Increase After Criticism Top
Following public pressure from the City Council, the Chicago Park District late this afternoon agreed to cut entry fees to the Art Institute of Chicago that were scheduled to take effect May 23. Instead of paying $18, adult art admirers will have to pay $16---a $2 decrease, according to a park district spokeswoman.
 
Michael Rowe: Obama's First Steps Down a Shameful Road Top
The recent dismissal by the U.S. Army of West Point graduate Lt. Dan Choi, 28, on the grounds of his sexual orientation goes beyond the contentious issue of gay and civil rights, and strikes at the very heart of America's commitment to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Choi, a New York National Guardsman, was an Arabic Languages major at West Point, and is a fluent Arab language speaker. If then-senator Obama hadn't specifically made the point on the campaign trail that discharging gay and lesbian military personnel on the basis of sexual orientation during wartime, especially Arab-language speakers, was an intolerable abuse of resources, Dan Choi's case might have been less striking. Coming as it does on the eve of the deployment of some 20,000 additional soldiers to Afghanistan, it raises disturbing questions about the human cost of political agendas. How committed is the White House? Committed enough to be willing to marshal every available, qualified soldier, especially Arab-language speaking West Point grads with stellar military records? Apparently not. In response to the Choi case, Bob Magninnis, a senior strategist with the U.S. Army, was unsympathetic, according to ABC News. "You have people that are throwing themselves on the mercy of public sympathy to persuade Congress to change direction," he said. "But if you want to rescind the law you need both houses to rescind it and then get the president to agree. I'm not sure we have sufficient votes to rescind the law. This is not one of the more important issues, frankly. It has little consequence to effectiveness of the organizations. A few hundred people a year isn't of any significance." The White House apparently agrees. Following an impassioned plea from Choi directly to President Obama, the official line was that the president would not interfere in individual cases of dismissal based on sexual orientation. Choi was fired on May 19th, joining the 12,000 patriotic and qualified Americans ejected from the army for not lying about their sexual orientation effectively enough. The sight of President Obama appearing to cave into conservative pressure on this issue in spite of his campaign promises to end Don't Ask, Don't Tell is extremely disturbing, especially to his millions of supporters. It's disturbing because it suggests that while he claims the U.S. is committed to winning in Afghanistan, the military is still prepared to place antiquated prejudices before practical exigencies, for instance expelling a popular, highly-qualified soldier, a soldier who can speak the language of America's "enemies" at a time when winning their "hearts and minds" is apparently still a priority. One can only imagine how Lt. Choi's linguistic abilities might have been put to use last weekend, for instance, when a U.S. air strike killed 100 Afghan civilians on the ground, or in Iraq, where resentment of the U.S. military presence still seethes, endangering the lives of U.S. servicemen and women every day. By what insane rationale does dismissing gay military personnel who can speak the language of the occupied make the servicemen and women serving with them safer? Or the mission more likely to succeed? When do campaign promises start to manifest as presidential leadership? When does the time finally arrive that the right thing is done, and not just for the gay and lesbian soldiers who are willing to give up their lives for an ideal, but for the well-being of the country itself? There are precedents, after all, for doing the right thing, even in politics. On July 26, 1948, nearly fifty-one years ago, then-president Harry Truman, considered by many to have held many of the typical racial prejudices of his day, issued Executive Order 9981, which forever ended legal racial segregation within the ranks of the U.S. Armed Forces. The order unambiguously detailed Truman's commitment to equal opportunity for all military personnel irrespective of color, race, national origin, or religion. In addition, it created a committee on equality, and empowered it examine, identify, and remove any rules impeding the goal of full integration. Most importantly, it ordered and mandated cooperation with the committee of every agency of the Federal Government. A year earlier, addressing Annual Conference of the NAACP in a speech about "civil rights and human freedoms," he'd said, "It is my deep conviction that we have reached a turning point in the long history of our efforts to guarantee a freedom and equality to all our citizens. And when I say all Americans, I mean all Americans." It's difficult to picture Truman having much patience for military brass worrying about a "breakdown in unit cohesion" resulting in whites being forced to live, and serve, with blacks, or a potential recruit shortage among racists, It's hard to imagine him entertaining demands by conservative politicians for "more studies" on the topic of the "dangers" of full equality within the ranks. He knew that soldiers obey orders, and that leadership, not "studies" were required. Would that, instead of hiding behind platitudes from his press secretary about "not intervening" in "individual cases," President Obama would take a page from President Truman's book. Would that he would fulfill one of his most important campaign promises. Would that he recognized one of the most important civil rights and moral imperatives of his presidency in the same way that Truman recognized his own. Namely, that whatever a president's own personal or political reservations might be, legislated bigotry is not only wrong, but a counter-productive impediment to the expression of patriotism in its purest form: the willingness to die for one's country when it's needed most, in a time of war.
 
Is Outing Of Closeted Political Figures A Useful Tactic? Top
KIRBY DICK'S documentary "Outrage", which opened nationally last week, has turned gay activists' controversial tactic of exposing closeted public figures--in this case, closeted Republicans perceived as advancing anti-gay policies in their public lives--into a feature-length film.
 
Madigan On Senate Run: Focus On Governor Race, Washington 'Not Appealing' Top
Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan appears to be leaning strongly toward running for governor-- not US Senate. More on Senate Races
 
Peraica Uses Twitter To Rebuke Stroger On County Budget Cuts Top
Cook County Commissioner Tony Peraica defied Board President Todd Stroger's claim that his critics have no solutions to the county's budget woes by offering seven of his own -- 140 characters at a time. On Wednesday Peraica, one of Stroger's most outspoken opponents, posted on his Twitter feed measures he said would cut hundreds of millions of dollars from the county budget. "Since Todd Stroger does not know how to run the county govenment [sic] without raising taxes, and needs input from his critics, here it goes:," Peraica wrote. Slashing jobs, diverting non-violent drug offenders from the county jail and patients with non-life-threatening conditions from county hospitals, overhauling the pension system and merging certain county offices were among Peraica's recommendations. "I could go on with a lot of smaller adjustments that would similarly streamline operations and reduce cost of county gov...but, point made," Peraica tweeted, adding that he had sent the same recommendations to the commissioners, to Stroger and to Joseph Fratto, the county's chief financial officer. Stroger spokesman James Ramos said he had not seen the list and that if Peraica wants to propose substantive change he should do so before the board. "Putting it on Twitter or Facebook is just not going to work," Ramos told the Huffington Post. "He has to bring it to the board if he's serious about it." On Tuesday Stroger defended his veto of a 1 percent sales tax rollback and accused his opponents of "slashing the system for political gain" and refusing to provide alternate sources of funding. "Did anybody come with some kind of plan on how they're gonna fill that hole?" Stroger said at a press conference at Provident Hospital. "No, they didn't come with anything. All they said was 'oh, this is too much money.' No, that's just politics." Peraica told the Huffington Post that he took his proposals to Twitter because of Stroger's comments. It didn't hurt that several journalists are among his 1,700 followers. "Todd Stroger says none of the commissioners ever submit ideas," Peraica said. "That's nonsense. I submitted these as budget amendments during the budget process. I've submitted them as independent agenda items. But I can never get nine votes for the amendments, and the budget items get buried in committee." A staffer in the office of Commissioner John Daley, chair of the finance committee, confirmed receiving a memo with cost-saving proposals from Peraica's office weeks ago. A spokesman for Joseph Fratto said Fratto had not seen a new memo from Peraica but that the two have spoken before about these issues. Ramos said county hospitals already try to redirect non-life-threatening cases from the emergency room. "I can tell you right now the hospitals are doing the best they can to divert patients," Ramos said. Stroger has laid off more than 2,000 employees in the last two-and-a-half years, Ramos said, though he acknowledged that the board president would not be calling for any job cuts this budget year. Peraica's Budget Cut Tweets : 1. Reduce county payroll from present 25,000 to 22,000 over two years. Savings=@$150M...county's natural annual attrition is @1300/year 2. Divert non-violent drug self-abusers from the county jail (@cost of $100/day/detainee) to EM @ local treament centers @cost of $25/day Diversion of detainees to EM (electornic monitoring), day reporting, etc., along with direct police station adj'ts save @$100M/year 3. Change county pension system for non-vested and new employees from a defined benefit to a defined contribution one. Savings= @$50M 4. Change the benefits contribution and co-pay rates for county employees to something more than token amounts charged now...Savings=@$50M 5. Divert non-life-threatening patients from county hospital emergency rooms ($1000/patient) to local medical clinics ($50/patient) = $100M 6. Combine county treasurer, assessor and recorder of deeds office functions under one umbrella. Savings @ $20M 7. Combine county clerk, secretary to the board and clerk of the circuit court under one umbrella. Savings @ $40M More on Twitter
 
Frances Beinecke: House Democrats Close to a Deal on Clean Energy Bill Top
On Wednesday, before President Obama answered reporters' questions about his new health care plans, he took a moment to praise House Democrats "who've made such extraordinary progress in reaching a deal on comprehensive energy reform and climate legislation." I echo Obama's praise. He was referring to the fact that Rep Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, is close to a deal on a draft bill that move America to a clean energy future, create millions of jobs and whole new industries in America, and reduce global warming pollution. The past few weeks of negotiations have been tough, but Waxman has addressed the concerns of key legislators on how to craft a bill that the 59-member committee can approve . Judging from what Waxman said on Tuesday night, several key issues have been agreed among Committee Democrats, and Waxman is confident the bill will pass out of Committee next week and head to the House floor for a vote. The working draft now: • Creates a cap on carbon emissions--requiring a 17 percent reduction in the pollution that causes global warming by 2020, and 80 by 2050 • Sets a timeline for implementing carbon-capture-and storage technology for new coal plants • Calls on all states to generate 15 percent of their electricity demand from renewable sources such as wind and solar by 2020 and to reduce energy use by 5 percent by 2020 by improving energy efficiency • Establishes a system for distributing allowances to release carbon pollution that includes a mix of auctions and free allocations designed to benefit consumers and the competitiveness of U.S. industries Although the bill contains compromises, the legislative process is by its nature one comprised of multiple interests. The top priority for NRDC remains setting firm limits on carbon pollution that will unleash energy investments that take us down a cleaner energy pathway. This bill will get us moving in that direction. It also sends a message that the world has been waiting to hear. In the past few months, I have met with various international leaders, from Minister Xie Zhenhua, the lead climate negotiator for China, to Connie Hedegaard, the Danish minister of the environment. Each one of them has asked me if Congress is serious about addressing climate change. After years of delay due to big oil and other special interests, Congress is finally moving forward and fulfilling President Obama's vision of America's clean energy future. Now let's get this through the committee and to the floor. More work lies ahead.
 
Evelyn Leopold: SRI LANKA: UN SECURITY COUNCIL MAKES ITS FIRST MOVE Top
UNITED NATIONS - The U.N. Security Council finally spoke out on the tragedy in Sri Lanka, telling the government to stop firing heavy artillery at civilians in a war zone and the Tamil Tiger rebels to "lay down their arms" and allow non-combatants to leave the conflict area. But the statement, endorsed by all 15 member nations on Wednesday, was issued to the press rather than at a formal meeting or in a legal document. Still the action, the body's first response to the bloody conflict, was considered by its main sponsors - Britain, France and Austria, backed by the United States - as putting public pressure on Sri Lanka. Said Britain's U.N. Ambassador John Sawers: "This is an important step forward by the Security Council....We have for the first time produced an official written statement by the council addressing the worsening humanitarian crisis in Sri Lanka." The move came in response to the largest report attack on civilians over the weekend, called a "bloodbath" by a U.N. spokesman. Hundreds were reported killed after government troops attacked a narrow strip of northeast beach territory in an effort to surround the rebels. Some 50,000 civilians are believed trapped in what was once a "no-fire zone." U.N. figures last month estimated that more than 6,400 civilians had been killed in three months of fighting this year, many used as human shields by the Tamil Tigers who have not let them leave the zone. President Obama in Washington also spoke out forcefully , telling reporters: "Tens of thousands of innocent civilians are trapped between the warring government forces and the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka with no means of escape, little access to food, water, shelter and medicine," he said. "Without urgent action, this humanitarian crisis could turn into a catastrophe." He urged the Tamil Tigers to halt warfare and release civilians and said the government should stop using heavy weapons, stop "indiscriminate shelling" and allow international aid groups access to refugees in camps, some reported in deplorable condition. Russia, China, Libya and Vietnam had opposed putting the issue on the agenda of the Security Council, the U.N.'s most powerful body, considering the war an internal matter rather than a threat to international peace and security. But they relented in issuing a statement after the Western council members agreed to discuss a U.N. report on Israel's war in January in Gaza that the United States and its allies did not want raised, diplomats said. The council issued a brief press statement, shorter than the one on Sri Lanka, expressing concern about the report's findings, which were critical of Israel. The Council's Sri Lanka statement "strongly" condemned the LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam) "for its acts of terrorism over many years and for its continued use of civilians as human shields." It acknowledged the "legitimate right of the Government of Sri Lanka to combat terrorism" and demanded the LTTE lay down its arms and allow "tens of thousands" of civilians in the conflict zone to leave. It said the Sri Lankan government should "fulfill its commitment" in regard to reports "of continued use of heavy caliber weapons in areas with high concentrations of civilians." The Council also called on the government to allow "urgent delivery of humanitarian assistance" and to cooperate with aid groups, such as the United Nations and the International Committee of the Red Cross. The Colombo government has said it stopped using heavy artillery in that area almost three weeks ago. But there have been steady reports from the region of indiscriminate artillery raids by government forces, including attacks on makeshift hospitals. The description of a "bloodbath" came on Monday from the U.N. spokesman in Sri Lanka, Gordon Weiss: "The U.N. has consistently warned against the bloodbath scenario as we've watched the steady increase in civilian deaths over the last few months. The large-scale killing of civilians over the weekend including the deaths of more than 100 children, shows that that bloodbath as become a reality." Sri Lanka, a former British colony, has been wracked by violent conflict for most of the past 25 years, suffering more than 100,000 deaths in fighting between the separatist Tamil Tigers, who traditionally lived in the northern and eastern regions, and Sinhalese, who inhabit the central and southern regions. A peace process began in 2002 but talks broke down and a ceasefire agreement crumbled in 2006 when full-scale military action resumed. The fighting escalated in 2008, with the government having won nearly all the territory in the Northern Province. More on Sri Lanka
 
Lindsey Graham: Bush Administration Saw Law As 'Nicety We Could Not Afford' (VIDEO) Top
The Hill flags this interesting line from Senator Lindsey Graham about the way the Bush administration viewed the rule of law. During a hearing on the interrogation of detainees, Graham said that the Bush administration did not commit any crimes, but that they "saw the law as a nicety we could not afford." Graham also questioned the validity of the hearing itself, speculating that it was a political stunt. [WATCH] More on Video
 
Chris Weigant: First Milestone Approaches In Iraq Withdrawal Timetable Top
America is approaching an important date for our military involvement in Iraq. By the end of next month, American combat forces are supposed to pull out of Iraqi cities. Little attention has been paid to this first withdrawal deadline in the American media, but as the date gets closer hopefully they'll realize what is about to happen. Because the next phase of America's military presence in Iraq could determine how fast President Obama can draw down the total number of American troops in the country. As always in Iraq, things could go either way at this point. The chaos of sectarian violence could come back, or relative stability could give the central Iraqi government enough support to finally address the contentious issues they have been stalling on for years -- what to do with the oil revenue and the Kurdish situation in the north, among others. But before drawing conclusions, we first must examine what the June 30 deadline means, and where the country currently stands.   The June 30 deadline I examined the Status Of Forces Agreement (SOFA) in depth back in December when President George W. Bush signed it together with his counterpart Prime Minister Nouri Al Maliki of Iraq. The history of the struggle between Bush and Maliki over Article 24 of that agreement -- including the history of the rhetoric about a "timetable for withdrawal" -- raged throughout the 2008 election season in America. If your memory needs refreshing about how Maliki forced Bush to accept just such a timetable, you can read what I had to say about it back then. But all we really need to review here is the actual language from the SOFA. From Article 24 (the entire document is available as a PDF file from the New York Times ): Recognizing the performance and increasing capacity of the Iraqi Security Forces, the assumption of full security responsibility by those Forces, and based upon the strong relationship between the Parties, an agreement on the following has been reached: . . . 2. All United States combat forces shall withdraw from Iraqi cities, villages, and localities no later than the time at which Iraqi Security Forces assume full responsibility for security in an Iraqi province, provided that such withdrawal is completed no later than June 30, 2009. 3. United States combat forces withdrawn pursuant to paragraph 2 above shall be stationed in the agreed facilities and areas outside cities, villages, and localities to be designated by the JMOCC before the date established in paragraph 2 above. . . . 5. The Parties agree to establish mechanisms and arrangements to reduce the number of the United States Forces during the periods of time that have been determined, and they shall agree on the locations where the United States Forces will be present. There is also a lesser deadline for June 30, which requires the U.S. to hand back to Iraq ownership of all bases we have constructed, as well as all permanent structures and improvements contained on those bases. But the big deadline is the one in Article 24 -- our troops must be out of the cities. Kind of. What it will mean in reality is that all combat troops will be pulled back mostly to large bases on the outskirts of the cities. Combat troops will still have similar duties within the cities, but will (as I heard one military source quoted saying) "now have to commute to work." In other words, not a whole lot of difference than the way things are now. Or is it? Part of the success of the "surge" was that American soldiers adopted more of a "take and hold" strategy within the cities, setting up many small outposts all over the cities, to have a local presence in all the neighborhoods. It can be argued how much this one tactic had to do with the lessening of violence, but this is the main tactic which will now be reversed, as all the soldiers manning such outposts will now return to bases on the edge of town. This will lessen the "footprint" of the American military presence, but nobody knows exactly what this will mean for the security of the city residents. We are about to find out. We will find out in the cities we are going to pull out of, that is. Because there is some possible wiggle room in the SOFA. While everyone expects American forces to pull out of Baghdad and most other Iraq cities and towns, there are still a few which even the Iraq government may not want to see us out of quite yet. Mosul, in particular. There are a few other hotspots in Iraq that may explode if we leave, as well. Now, Maliki seemed to preclude this a few weeks ago, by stating that there will be no "extension" of American troops in Iraqi cities, and that he fully expected America to adhere strictly to the June 30 deadline. But Maliki is a consummate politician, and his remarks were largely for the benefit of his own domestic audience, in anticipation of the national elections Iraq will be holding next year. Kicking the Americans out remains politically popular in Iraq, and Maliki is speaking to that. Both American and Iraqi analysts believe Maliki will hold firm on not allowing an "extension" of the deadline, but may quietly accept an "exemption" for certain cities. Splitting political hairs? Sure, but it's not like Americans don't play this same game at times (see: Bush attempting "an aspirational goal for a time horizon for withdrawal," instead of admitting he had agreed to a "timetable").   The situation in Iraq today The security situation in Iraq today is a lot better than it used to be. Violence and deadly attacks and suicide bombings are down overall, although they have rather ominously ticked upwards in the past month or so. Meaning it's hard to predict what will happen next. Politically, the unwillingness to tackle the enormous issues facing Maliki's government shows no signs of changing for the better in the near future. The status of the Kurds is still completely up in the air. The Kurds signed their own oil deals with outside companies, but it remains to be seen whether their oil will be allowed in the national pipelines, and even if it is, who will get the revenue from it. Oil revenues in general are still up in the air, and are being handled by what seems an almost ad-hoc basis -- patched together, but never truly agreed upon. Kurdish elections in Kirkuk still have not happened, and even counting who is a resident and voter (the precursor to elections) has still not been agreed upon. The Sunni "Awakening" groups are now being paid by the Iraqi government (theoretically), and are (again, theoretically) being integrated into the national security services. In reality, some of the tribal leaders who participated in the Awakening Councils are being arrested by the Iraq government, to answer for crimes they (allegedly) committed before they were being paid by Americans (America gave the Awakening groups immunity when we signed them up, but the Iraqis insist that this was only immunity for attacks against Americans , and did not cover attacks against Iraqis). One of the leaders of an Awakening council (and his young son) were just killed by a bomb attached to the bottom of his car. And only a handful of the Awakening members have been allowed into the Iraqi Army or national police force. Which has led to rising fears from the Sunnis whether or not their rights as a minority in Iraq will actually be taken seriously by the Maliki central government. But although the recent spate of bombings appears to be designed to exacerbate sectarian tensions, no wave of sectarian violence has followed. Yet, at least.   Conclusion America pulling combat forces out of Iraqi cities is going to have multiple effects within the country. At this point, nobody can accurately predict what those effects are going to be with 100 percent reliability. American troops could wind up doing exactly the same job (and being exactly as necessary or unnecessary as they were before), and the only change may be "commuting to work." Shi'ite or Sunni groups could increase their attacks or counterattacks, leading back to widespread sectarian violence on a scale not seen in months. The security situation may improve in some areas of Iraq, as the Iraq security forces prove to be capable of handling their own cities without American help. Maliki's government could tackle the tough political questions facing them, and move towards a resolution of the problems within Iraq which the "surge" has not solved. Or, conversely, they may decide that "it's an election year," and continue to ignore the hard choices which ultimately must be made. Localized flareups may occur (in Mosul or Diyala Province, for example) which force Maliki and President Obama to reluctantly admit that U.S. forces may be needed in some areas for a longer time than the June 30 deadline. Or, if things go well for a few months, Obama may be able to begin actually withdrawing American forces out of Iraq on a quicker timetable. Soldiers may start returning home in large numbers this fall, if this best-scenario case plays out. But while all of these are possible, it's hard to say which are probable. Saying "Iraq could go either way" is about the only thing that is certain at this point (as it has been at so many other points in the past). We began the discussion of where we find ourselves now with semantics. What constituted a "timetable for withdrawal" and whether it was "waving the white flag of surrender" or not was a bitter political battle in America last year. In the end, America's politics didn't matter, as this deadline was forced on Bush by Maliki (who had Iraqi politics to worry about). Which puts us where we are now -- approaching the first milestone in the withdrawal timetable. And whether it is judged a success or not may also depend on semantics. Because the debate after the withdrawal occurs is going to hinge around how America defines what is "an acceptible level of violence" in Iraq. If the violence is at an "acceptible" level in Iraq (in other words, not spectacular enough to be featured on American news programs on a nightly basis), then pulling combat troops out of the cities will be judged a success. If violence reaches such a peak that people begin using the term "civil war" again about Iraq, then President Obama will face much harder choices about what to do next. Public perception of the success or failure of meeting the first milestone on the road to complete withdrawal from Iraq is going to play an important role in determining what happens next. The speed of withdrawing our troops over the next year or so may be heavily influenced by what happens in Iraq in the next two or three months. No matter what your stance is on how fast we should get out of Iraq, it will be worth paying attention to these next few months -- because what happens there could either tie Obama's hands and force him to order the troops to stay put, or even free him up to order the troops out faster than expected.   Chris Weigant blogs at: ChrisWeigant.com   More on Barack Obama
 
Carl Pope: The Logic of Terror Top
Washington, D.C. -- A classic definition of the logic of terror is "the severing of the link between the target of violence and the reason for violence."   By this definition, hostage-taking is the original terrorist act. Recent behavior by the Republican Senate leadership, although violent in a political rather than a physical sense, reflects the same underlying logic: We are in the minority, but we know we are right, so we can attack innocent parties until we get our way from the majority. Yesterday's case study was the successful Republican filibuster to block the confirmation of David Hayes as Deputy Secretary of the Interior. Hayes's nomination was blocked when only a majority of the Senate voted, 57-39, to approve him -- falling three votes short of the 60 needed to overcome the Republican leadership's filibuster. No one even pretended that they objected to Hayes. Indeed, many of the Republican Senators who voted against him, at the behest of their party's leadership, had voted to confirm him for exactly the same job when he held it during the Clinton administration. And in-between, Hayes worked for a prominent firm that represents major corporations on issues relating to natural resources. Hayes was merely the latest hostage in the leadership's campaign of political terror. Utah Senators Bennett and Hatch, and Alaska Senator Murkowski, are upset with Interior Secretary Salazar, who would be Hayes's boss, for canceling oil and gas leases approved by the Bush administration in Utah and off our coasts. Since Salazar, who by law is responsible for leasing, wouldn't let the three senators dictate how he does his job, they decided to punish him by denying him the ability to put his deputy in place. The Republican leadership, stunningly, chose to make this vote a matter of party loyalty -- and almost every Republicans in the Senate went along. Only Arizona's Jon Kyl and Maine's Olympia Snowe had the courage to vote against the logic of terror by saying, in effect, "Hayes is a good nominee. He deserves to be confirmed. Therefore it is my duty under the Constitution to confirm him." The rest of the Republican caucus, in my view, violated their Constitutional duty to give "advice and consent" to the president on the matter of nominees. Most of these Republican senators are on the record, vociferously, as arguing that the president's nominees should be confirmed unless they are morally corrupt or manifestly unqualified. But they gleefully threw all of their past statements overboard when their leaders declared that party loyalty trumped the Constitution. There is something profoundly sick in the culture of the U.S. Senate that allows the personal preferences of individual senators to be elevated to a virtual government by a minority of one (or, in this case, three). This personalization of public services exists on both sides of the aisle -- but it is the Republican leadership that has put minority rule on steroids, beginning in 1993 when Bob Dole decided, for the first time in American history, to use the filibuster against every program Bill Clinton offered that he didn't like -- and now, with Mitch McConnell's decision to convert the "hold" by which an individual senator can slow a confirmation into a veto by which an entire party caucus will turn such a hold into an actual veto of an appointee.
 
Travis The Chimp On Xanax When He Went On Rampage Top
NEW HAVEN, Conn. — A chimpanzee that mauled a Connecticut woman had the anti-anxiety drug Xanax in its system, according to toxicology tests, but investigators haven't determined whether the drug played a role in the attack, a prosecutor said Wednesday. Authorities are still weighing whether to file criminal charges against the chimpanzee's owner, Sandra Herold, said Stamford State's Attorney David Cohen. The 200-pound chimp, named Travis, attacked Stamford resident Charla Nash on Feb. 16. She lost her hands, nose, lips and eyelids in the attack. Doctors at Ohio's Cleveland Clinic say she is blind and faces two years of surgical procedures. Nash's family has sued Herold for $50 million. The suit alleges, among other things, that she had given Travis medication that further upset the animal. "I think it provides tremendous support for the plaintiff's case," said Paul Slager, a catastrophic injury attorney in Stamford. "I think it's understood by everyone that Xanax is medication intended to be used by people, not animals. I suspect that experts will agree it's difficult to predict how an animal like a chimpanzee would respond to taking a medication like Xanax." Herold has made conflicting public statements about whether she gave Travis Xanax the day of the attack. Police have said Herold told them that she gave the animal Xanax that had not been prescribed for him to calm him because he was agitated. Herold's attorney, Robert Golger, declined to comment Wednesday, saying he hadn't seen the toxicology results, which were first reported by The Hour of Norwalk. A telephone message left for an attorney for Nash's family wasn't immediately returned. Herold's attorneys have said there was no way to predict Travis would attack Nash. On the day of the attack, Herold called Nash to her home to help lure the animal back into her house. Herold has speculated that the chimp was trying to protect her and attacked Nash because she had changed her hairstyle, was driving a different car and was holding a stuffed toy in front of her face to get Travis' attention. The attack lasted about 12 minutes, and ended when police fatally shot Travis as he attempted to open a police cruiser's door. Herold owned the 14-year-old chimp nearly all its life, dressed the animal and fed it human foods. When he was younger, Travis starred in TV commercials for Old Navy and Coca-Cola, made an appearance on the "Maury Povich Show" and took part in a television pilot. Police Capt. Richard Conklin said a necropsy determined the chimpanzee died from multiple gun shot wounds. It also showed two substantial knife wounds to the back, confirming the owner's account that she stabbed her beloved pet with a butcher knife in an effort to rescue her friend, he said. The report also concluded the chimpanzee was obese, weighing over 200 pounds, Conklin said. He said police will meet with experts in the coming weeks to try to determine if the level of Xanax found would affect the chimpanzee's behavior. "It doesn't look like a large amount," of Xanax, Conklin said. Humans who are aggressive or unstable can get worse under the influence of Xanax, said Dr. Emil Coccaro, chief of psychiatry at the University of Chicago Medical Center. "They just have more frequent and severe outbursts," Coccaro said. He said he did not know how Xanax might affect a chimpanzee. April Truitt, who runs the Primate Rescue Center in Kentucky, said she's heard of private primate owners giving valium to their animals. "It's been well known in primate circles that giving valium to monkeys and apes, particularly if their adrenaline is up, can have a very different effect and not be sedating," Truitt said. Truitt said she did not know of any cases involving an owner giving Xanax to a chimpanzee. "It's never occurred to us to try," Truitt said. "What an awful postscript to this whole thing."
 
Jeff Sessions Cites "Tropical Breezes" As Reason To Keep Guantanamo Open Top
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) today defended the continued detention of al-Qaeda prisoners at the military facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, calling it a "logical" site that also provides inmates with "tropical breezes." More on Guantánamo Bay
 
Shaun Casey: Ashton Kutcher: History's Greatest Monster? Top
A recent Simpsons episode declared Jimmy Carter to be history's greatest monster. Ok, it aired for the first time 12 years ago, but I recently watched it again, and thought to myself, self, why are we laughing at this? I think it is funny, but I'm not really sure why I do. I don't even have a vague recollection of a time or event when Jimmy Carter was relevant in any way to me. Anyone under the age of thirty probably doesn't either. If we don't know the past, we are doomed to repeat it. In the spirit of this, I thought it was necessary to give the old history books a little tune up, and am selecting a new History's Greatest Monster. In selecting a new History's Greatest Monster, it was important to try the make them relevant to the youth of the world because frankly, children are the future. (Side note: I briefly considered making children the new History's Greatest Monster). Kids need someone to piss on, cuz' it helps them build self esteem, so we need to give them a fresh face to hate, or, if their parents are Republicans, pattern their voting after. The list of choices can be easily be built by opening an LA or DC phone book and blindly pointing a finger, so I had to narrow it down. I was looking for someone with cultural relevance of the pop variety that really didn't bring any substance to the table, has a weird interpersonal relationship that makes gay marriage seem old-fashioned and comfortable, and who was Internet savvy, cuz' the kids, they love that Internet. I could only come up with one truly worthy candidate. He is the man who brought Twitter to the masses, turned banging cougars into a lifelong celebration of commitment and inter-generational love (ewwww), as well as invented and probably trademarked the phrase "punk'd" (which I am guessing the Huff Post is probably writing him a cheque for right now for its mere mention). I am talking of course about Ashton Kutcher. He crushed any lingering hopes of Hollywood's premiere 80's power couple reuniting, became the first twitterbird to break a million friendsters or whatever the fug those greasy little urchins who sit on The Google all day and play with their ipods call it, and I'm still waiting for the blood work to come back, but I'm pretty sure he slept with and impregnated my high school girlfriend. And that's just the stuff we know about. Now he even has Shaq doing this ridiculous thing called twittering. Getting a 7 foot tall, 320 pound man to do anything called twittering is insidious, especially when it involves creating a following. Also, Kutcher, your cheek bones are too high. (Ok, I admit another reason I don't like you because you are too good looking. There, I said it. You look like you could star in a porno re-make of Dazed and Confused with your forty-something but still hot wife, and I would probably shell out $40 for the DVD even though you are destroying my favourite PG-13 teenage sex romp period piece. And I hate that you have that kind of marketing pull on me. Damn your chiseled features!) But it's the twittering that really gets me. You are introducing a social media that is a cultural atrocity to a generation that already is battered with so many stupid and hokey gimmicks that pass for using your brain or communicating with people using real words. The modern teenager's communications are so banal they barely make it to 140 characters as it is, now you are limiting them to this? Not to mention exposing them to the vapidness of a celebrity's daily lives, like they needed more? So get out your tweet pad kids, and spread the word: "Kutcher is a morally reprehensible ding dong that is ruining your future. He is history's greatest monster. Pass it on." I think that is less than 140 characters. I hope the message spreads, because when it comes down to it, it is all about the children. P.s. Kids, don't even bother trying to twit me or tweet me or whatever and tell me what you think, because I don't twitter, and you shouldn't either, it makes your pee smell funny. More on Twitter
 
Andrea Chalupa: Must Watch Video: Guys feel pain, too, in the dressing room Top
This new video by Details magazine, directed by Rakesh Baruah and the Southern Mothers, asks "When did the dressing room become the depressing room?" Instead of females bemoaning the harsh lighting and inescapable multiple mirror angles, its the guys' turn to feel the pain. (Evil laugh begins now.)
 
Eduardo Barragan Charged With Murdering Wife Of 1-800-Mattress Founder: Reports Top
The wife of 1-800-Mattress founder Napoleon Barragan was found dead in her home and her son is charged with murdering her, according to reports. Kay Barragan, who helped her husband start the chain known for its ubiquitous television commercials by loaning him $2,000 in 1976, was discovered at the bottom of a flight of stairs at her home in Searingtown, Long Island, reports the New York Post . Neighbors saw her son Eduardo -- handcuffed and wearing a robe -- being led away by police a short time later. Cops wasted little time in charging Eduardo with her murder. A spokesman for the firm said he had "a history of mental incapacity." Kay Barragan had been suffering from several illnesses, he said. 1010-WINS reports: The 60-year-old woman was found by a handyman around 7:19 a.m. when he came to the home on Sunset Drive, police said. Another son, Luis Barragan, who was president of the company, died of an accidental drowning in Connecticut in 2006.
 
Police Brutality: Cops Punt Man In The Head, Then High-Five (VIDEO) Top
NBC Chicago highlights a nasty piece of police brutality that was caught on tape in El Monte, California. After leading police on a high-speed chase, a suspect flees on foot but quickly realizes he can't escape and lies on the ground with his hands and legs spread awaiting arrest. A cop runs over and promptly, and viciously, kicks him in the face. As NBC Chicago notes , the police added insult to injury by high-fiving each other after the incident. More details can be found here . [WATCH] View more news videos at: http://www.nbcchicago.com/video . More on Video
 
Senate Rejects Limit On Credit-Card Interest Rates Top
Despite complaints that banks and credit card companies are gouging customers by charging outrageous interest rates, the Senate on Wednesday easily turned back an effort to cap interest rates at 15 percent.
 
Lonnie Nasatir: Keep Housing Fair Top
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, which sits in Chicago, will rehear arguments on Wednesday in a case that implicates the rights of millions of Americans to practice and express their faith in their homes. The plaintiffs in the case are some condominium unit owners who have alleged that their condominium association repeatedly removed mezuzot, small unobtrusive objects that observant Jews place on their doorposts in fulfillment of Jewish law, from the doorways of Jewish unit-owners' homes. Having displayed their mezuzot for 30 years without incident, the unit-owners contend that they were baffled when the association removed their mezuzot. The association claimed that the mezuzot violated a standing rule banning objects like mats, boots, shoes and carts outside unit entrance doors. But to the Jewish unit-owners, the mezuzot are not decorative choice, but a serious religious obligation, and the mezuzah ban was tantamount to an eviction. The unit-owners suit, alleges that the association's hallway rule as applied to mezuzot constituted unlawful, intentional religious discrimination in violation of the federal Fair Housing Act. This mezuzah problem is not unique to this condominium association in Chicago. Indeed, residents on Long Island, in Houston, and in California have recently reported that their homeowners' associations have demanded the removal of mezuzot. Legislators in Texas are currently considering amending state housing law, as Illinois lawmakers have done, to prohibit this type of religious discrimination under state law. And while these amendments to state law are welcome, the Seventh Circuit should find that the Fair Housing Act prohibits the condominium association's interpretation of its hallway rule to prohibit the posting of religious objects. In an earlier, divided ruling, the Seventh Circuit held that the Fair Housing Act does not reach the condominium association's conduct because of two reasons: 1) the alleged discrimination was not a constructive eviction and it took place after the residents had moved into the property, rather than before the sale of the property; and 2) the hallway rule was not intended to be discriminatory when it was written. These arguments unduly restrict the Fair Housing Act. As Judge Wood, the dissenting voice explained, the text of the statute does not compel an interpretation that the law covers only pre-sale activities. Indeed, how could the stated purpose of the Act, which is "to provide, within constitutional limitations, for fair housing throughout the United States," be achieved if the law did not protect minority residents from harassment after their arrival into a previously unintegrated neighborhood? Undoubtedly, that type of pervasive, discriminatory interference with minority housing rights instigated the passage of the Fair Housing Act of 1968. The consequence of a ruling upholding these kinds of facially neutral rules could deny access to fair housing for minorities. Minorities will not have access to fair housing in the future if condominium associations can hide their intentional discrimination behind facially neutral rules. Here, the hallway rule nominally applies to objects common to any unit-owner (such as shoes), but its enforcement against mezuzot would forbid Jews -- and not any other members of the association -- from complying with a religious obligation in their homes. Judge Wood concluded that there should be a trial because the association's reinterpretation of its hallway rule to prohibit mezuzot may have "transformed it from a neutral [rule] to one that was targeted exclusively at Jewish residents," wrote Judge Wood. Judge Wood's legal concerns are right. The Seventh Circuit should uphold the text and spirit of the Fair Housing Act by finding that housing is not "fair," within the meaning of the Act, if homeowners associations can use neutral rules to bully fellow homeowners because of their religion.
 
Patrick Takahashi: My Year With The Huffington Post Top
My very first posting, on May 29th 2008, was written during the heat of the Obama-Clinton race for the Democratic nomination, and was entitled " Well, Barack, We have a Problem ." I suggested that he was the only individual capable of ameliorating the economic cataclysm to come. Well, two for two, as he did become President and seems to be making the right moves. I further intimated that the best way to secure funds would be to reduce the defense budget. He did, sort of, but nothing close to the 10% cut I recommended, to be followed by 10% each year if all other countries did the same. Soon, then, his legacy would be: Peace on Earth forever. Ridiculous, perhaps, but something to consider. The thought of posting an article a week for the entire year was way beyond my wildest dreams, but here I am, in mid-May, with this, my 52nd article. A couple got no comments, but one went beyond a hundred. In general, as traditional columnists report on the obvious, I thought I would focus on the unobvious. Yes, except for the Farm Lobby, we all know that ethanol is bad , but my answer is the direct methanol fuel cell. There was very little support, especially none from the U.S. Department of Energy. I even went so far as to express caution regarding the plug-in electric car and the hydrogen economy. I got heartburn from the responses. Just wait, though, for I predict that the biomethanol economy will be just around the corner (okay, at least ten to twenty years away). No one writes about ocean opportunities. Former President George W. Bush, for example, took pride in closing down portions to development, as historically has the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. A former chief scientist waxed about her fishy friends and their only ocean technologist was fired more than decade ago. As NOAA reports to the Department of Commerce, you would think that at least one office would promote intelligent commercial development of the seas. Nope. I cheer Patri Friedman and his Seasteading, Inc., and provide encouragement to Ted Johnson and his OTEC crew from Lockheed Martin and Makai Ocean Engineering, but there seems to be no real interest in something I have termed, the Blue Revolution , to develop the seas for humanity in harmony with the marine environment. There is almost a unanimity of world opinion that we screwed up our lands and atmosphere, so, let's not destroy our ocean. Nonsense, for sustainable resources, green materials, exciting new habitats and more can become our future if we do it right. One of my recent tactics is the use of doomsday, for if sound logic does not work, maybe fear might. I have a few friends who are preparing for the end, and even an active internet forum on the general subject. My Daily Blog covers these activities, including serializing those two books on Simple Solutions I recently wrote shown in one of the boxes to the right. As of today, 73 countries have visited that site. Anyway, one of those chapters is entitled The Venus Syndrome , hinting that the vast deposit (said to be twice as much more than the known amount of oil, coal and natural gas) of marine methane hydrates at the sea bottom could well reach the surface and turn Planet Earth into Planet Venus at 900 degrees F. Methane, as most don't know, compared to carbon dioxide, is more than 20 times worse for inducing global warming. A novel on the subject is in the works. I carped on why we have no national energy policy (this most prosaic of postings drew more than 100 comments), why Republicans like fossil fuels and not care that much for the environment, the amount we spend on national security , and our more recent tendency to copy rather than build something better . On the more positive front, I explained why renewable electricity is our only viable option , identified the ideal biofuel for development and provided a solution for our domestic auto industry . You will be stunned about how Americans view " Evolution, Global Warming, Doomday and the Afterlife " and might still be confused about the ethnicity of Barack Obama . As miserable as the world has been over the past year, we now have no Cold War and will soon exit Iraq, do not worry much about the population bomb and, by the way, what happened to acid rain? The economy is now rising, there is change in D.C. and the Sun will continue to shine . Thank you for a wonderful year with HuffPo. More on Barack Obama
 
Obama ASU Address: Watch The Commencement Speech Live Top
President Obama is delivering the commencement address at Arizona State University tonight. Read about the controversy surrounding the event HERE . Watch Live from ASU Sun Devil Stadium at 10pm EST. If the U Stream link below fails then go HERE . More on Barack Obama
 
Emma Ruby-Sachs: What the Supreme Court Appointment Could Mean for Gay Rights Top
Much has been made of the two open lesbians on the list of potential Supreme Court picks: Kathleen Sullivan and Pam Karlan. According to NPR , both are in the running, though fall behind Sonia Sotomayor, Diane Wood and Elena Kagan. Either one would, no surprise, be groundbreaking diversity appointments to the Court. Both Sullivan and Karlan have support from the LGBT community and many liberals think that it would be a huge victory to have a lesbian voice at the Supreme Court when cases like the Massachusetts DOMA challenge make their way before the panel of nine Justices. They might be right (although I would remind them that Sullivan did appear as attorney for Shell Oil in a case arguing against Shell's liability for toxic waste - not my idea of a "liberal" position). The debate over whether Sullivan or Karlan could make it through the approval process given their sexual orientation is an important one, and it illustrates just how far America has to go towards tolerance and equality. But it may not be the right debate for those who are interested in seeing LGBT rights litigated successfully. A few weeks ago I saw a presentation by Lambda Legal lawyer Camilla Taylor (part of the team that won gay marriage rights in Iowa) speak on a panel about gay justices. One member of the audience talked about how important it was to have judges who know gay people, have gay family members or have considered the issues facing LGBT Americans in their everyday lives. Taylor responded by pointing out that it makes far more sense to look for judges who are smart, rigorous and fair, than those that agree with you before you go into the courtroom. Her point is important now, when the discussion focuses on one justice that may have a large role in determining the fate of thousands of same-sex couples in this country. The argument for same-sex equality does not rest on conflicting evidence or complicated reasoning. It is a clear claim for equal treatment under the law for two identically situated categories of Americans. The argument that there is some rational basis to the continued discrimination against same-sex couples relies on quasi-scientific studies and emotional claims. But the lawyers arguing for legal discrimination against LGBT people are talented, they have extensive resources and produce a lot of paper and many statistical studies that must be sorted, analyzed and dealt with in any decision. Smart, rigorous judges go through each box of material, weigh the evidence and determine that equality must prevail. The overwhelming lack of concrete evidence supporting discrimination against LGBT Americans has been pointed out by conservative and liberal judges in Florida, Iowa, California, Massachusetts, Connecticut as well as other states. However, it would be easy for a judge to skip the analysis, take the volume to mean something about the quality of the evidence, and determine that a rational basis for discrimination exists. Worse, it would be possible for a judge to use the volume of evidence to confirm their own gut feeling or belief. I would celebrate the appointment of Sullivan or Karlan. However, we don't need a diverse judge to win rights that protect diversity. We just need someone with a little integrity, patience and intelligence. More on Supreme Court
 
Mike Doyle: Tasmanian Michael Goes to Bermuda: How Recovery Came and Found Me (Again) Top
"... Landshark." An old 12-step adage says no matter how willingly you're off the wagon, sometimes recovery comes and finds you. One day you're sitting there in your living room wrapped around your addiction of choice when you hear a knock at the door. You peer through the peephole and there's no one there. But you could have sworn ... Pastry Chef Chris has a saying for how I behave when I turn away from my codependence recovery. "We can't talk to you when Tasmanian Michael comes to town," he told me recently. "We want to tell you how you're acting, but you won't listen. You just spin faster and faster and we all have to step back. No one can ever get through to you until Tasmanian Michael goes to Bermuda." I'd love to pretend Tasmanian Michael doesn't exist, but I've woken up one too many times to find his bags gone, a fifty missing from my wallet for cab fare to O'Hare and a line of friends banging on my front door ready to wring my neck. "What did I do?" is seldom a good question to ask of others at times likes these. It just tends to make them raise the torches and pitchforks a little higher. You'd think I'd have learned by now. Trouble is, for co-dependents, you rarely know the damage you're doing to the people you care about most until it's already done. And usually irreparable. That seemed to be the case when my boyfriend of two years, Devyn , told me if I didn't leave his apartment he'd have me removed physically as we broke up the hard way in 2007. In hindsight, it was the best thing anyone ever did for me. Sometimes a painful dose of reality is all that can snap us back into it. "No one enters these rooms from a happy place." Last weekend, my program friend Russian Roulette laid it all out for me. "No one enters these rooms from a happy place, Michael," she told me over a mouth-blisteringly hot eggplant parmigiana sandwich in Lakeview. "But it's always good to be back." Before you enter recovery, you wonder why your life seems to be a series of such not-happy places. The day, shortly after Devyn left, when I came across the list of co-dependent tendencies on the Internet, I sat on the floor and cried. In that blunt list of behaviors I browsed on a laptop screen, I saw my life reflected back to me. I minimize, alter or deny how I truly feel. I perceive myself as completely unselfish and dedicated to the well being of others. I judge everything I think, say or do harshly, as never "good enough." 
I do not perceive myself as a lovable or worthwhile person. I value others' opinions and feelings more than my own and am afraid to express differing opinions and feelings of my own. I put aside my own interests and hobbies in order to do what others want. I accept sex when I want love. I believe most other people are incapable of taking care of themselves. I attempt to convince others of what they "should" think and how they "truly" feel. I control. I try to control anyone who gets close to me so I won't be hurt again, like I was as a child. It wasn't until I was 24 that my homebound mother finally told me the man in the black-and-white portrait who died before I had a chance to know him wasn't my father after all. My brother, John, and sister, Patricia, both a generation older, knew him as their father before he died from alcoholism. Six years before I was born. By the time my mother found love again, she wasn't ready to re-marry. My real father wasn't ready to wait around for her to change her mind. And, as they entered their twenties, my brother and sister were already advanced-stage alcoholics and drug addicts. No one is born co-dependent. I was born like all children, with a need -- and a right -- to be loved by the adults in my life. How else can children learn to love themselves? What becomes of those children when the adults in their lives ignore their innocent needs for emotional, psychological, physical well-being? Sitting at the dinner table at six years old, I remember asking my mother why John's girlfriend, Mary, was sleeping in her mashed potatoes. In grade school, I was used to my sister sleeping it off on the kitchen floor. In junior high school, when Patricia stabbed Mary with a steak knife and brought the bloody object to my nephew, Little John, born with fetal alcohol syndrome eight years before, screaming, "Look! I just killed your mother!", I wasn't even surprised. When I finally moved away from home, to Brooklyn, at the age of 25, I felt a sense of liberation. I was finally free of the madness. I remember telling friends, "I feel lucky I made it out without becoming an alcoholic myself." I was proud of that fact. Little did I know. "They say you called 911 ..." These past few years in Chicago, I've often turned to my hip-suburban-chick friend, Val, to help me gain perspective on my life. We're like two peas in a lonely pod. After each one of my Windy City boyfriends has walked on, she's told me, "I wish I could tell you how not to close off your heart after this, but I don't have an answer to that, myself, anymore." During my eight years in Brooklyn, I hadn't yet put the pieces together. Every boyfriend I had ever known had left me, never the other way around. It was always their fault. They didn't fulfill my emotional needs, they didn't love me enough, they didn't care what I wanted. It hurt less to let everyone else take the blame. Though it sure made it hard to understand why my friends were always urging me think about things a little more deeply. When I entered recovery after Devyn's departure, I thought I had it made. Not happily made -- no one wants to think they'll need to attend support meetings for the rest of their life. No one wants to think they're that broken. But made enough to find some serenity in my life. Whether you're addicted to control or Ketel One, thinking easy happiness is just around the corner is a great strategy for falling off the wagon. Meeting the unconditionally warm-hearted Pastry Chef Chris sure seemed like I didn't have a care in the world. When he broke up with me last May, he told me, "I can't be with you, but I'm going to be there for you. If you need someone to talk to after your meetings, I will be there." Roulette is right on the money about how we find our way back to recovery. I cried my way back to the rooms, but in gratitude this time. For the first time, the one I had hurt most of all -- other than myself -- remained in my life. I had to be getting somewhere. I hoped so. Co-dependence is a cyclical beast. Not only does it keep bringing you around to the same place of emotional devastation in your life, but each time the damage is a little bit greater. If you're not careful, eventually you just don't have the heart to get on that carousel anymore. I imagine that's what John C. was thinking last year the evening he didn't show up for our recovery meeting. He had talked me down from many personal ledges in the off-and-on-again year I had spent in the program. They say he called 911 so his family wouldn't have to find him with the gun still in his hand. I don't know whether Colleen called 911 too, a month later. In shock, I had already run as fast as I could away from the rooms. And away from myself. "Do you feel lucky, punk? Well, do you?" But as co-dependents, round and round we go. Oh, the joy of meeting the delightful, dancing Sonny earlier this year. Oh, the happiness I felt to be a part of his life. I bet you can fill in the next part of the story. In heartache, I always seem to arrive back where I started: sitting in a 12-step meeting next to a recently released rehabber. Who smells. Wondering what on earth I have in common with the troubled souls surrounding me. At least, until they start sharing their stories. And with every description of the heartbreak they've created in their lives, I hear them telling me my life story. Last week, as I heard others detailing pain that could easily be my own, I was moved a little deeper. I cannot explain why, but I knew it was time, finally, to continue the work I began two years and three heartaches ago. I took the weekend, sat down, and worked Step Four. I wrote down an inventory of my co-dependent behaviors. I wrote in detail, putting down all the ways I could see them in myself and all the ways I had hurt the people in my life. I didn't pull any punches. I wrote for three days. I made sure to detail my strengths and positive behaviors, too, so that I ended up with a fair appraisal of the man I guess I've never really known. Thirty-five pages later, for the first time in my life, I could finally see the balance of who I am. There was no denying my patterns of control. There it was before me, over and over, cutting across every love, platonic and work relationship I've ever experienced. There was a sickening realization, too. As denial slipped away, so did the fiction that my co-dependent behaviors only come out when I'm stressed or unhappy. Or ever switch off at all. My inventory was clear. I have only one way of interfacing with other human beings -- the way I learned in childhood. The way that may progressively kill me. Oh, God. "I accept your apology." The last thing I wanted to do was hold that awful realization inside me, alone. Step Five is what it is for a reason: "[We] admitted to God, ourselves, and another human being the exact nature of our wrongs." Telling God was easy, the Universe and I have been on good terms for a long time. Telling myself was a lot harder. I had no idea how I was going to tell another person. Out of nowhere, I emailed Devyn and told him I was in recovery. That evening, for the first time in two years, I saw his name appear on my caller I.D. Two hours later, we both finally had closure, and forgiveness. And he told me to stick with it. Last Wednesday morning, I sobbed for an hour before I left the house to meet with a minister whom I know and trust. I was better composed as I sat before him for an hour and read him my inventory. Every tendency. Every hurt. Every discovery in it. Unlike some other 12-steppers, I did not feel "bulletproof" when I was finished. Mostly, I was left with a punishing sense of, "What now?" Keep it up? Work the steps? Let go and let God? If there's anything I hate about recovery it's all the aphorisms that are bound up with it. That morning after Step Five, I didn't want to hear another pithy saying. All I wanted was some iota of hope for the future. "You have to believe we are magic." Sitting in a secluded corner of the Lurie Garden at Millennium Park, I thought about the work before me. I watched the field of flowers in front of me fade into the soft shadows of sunset and asked God to lead me forward. Even for all the damage I've wrought in my life, I happen to love the life I lead. I love my friends. I love those with whom I work. I love my opportunities. I love my viewers. Is it possible I am not merely the sum of my co-dependent behaviors? Can I finally come to love me, too? Can I finally learn to stop leaning on my past and grow up? I sat quietly and shared it all with God. I did not expect an answer. As I got up to leave, something strange in the Shoulder Hedge caught my attention. Ever since Millennium Park opened, this border row of trees surrounding the Lurie Garden has been criss-crossed with a system of metal trusses. They were there to give support to the newly planted, young saplings, so that they would have a chance to survive the harsh Chicago weather and grow. It took me a while to comprehend what I was seeing. My eyes passed across the whole Shoulder Hedge, from end to end. I didn't know whether to smile or cry. The supports were gone. Not one was left. I suppose the trees didn't need them anymore. They had finally grown mature enough to stand on their own. I couldn't help but think of the sage words shared by an unexpectedly wise woman from another time: "You have to believe we are magic, nothin' can stand in our way." I don't know what the future holds, but from where I stand, maybe I have a shot at home free after all. More on Happiness
 
James W. Fondren Charged With Spying For China Top
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A Defense Department official was charged Wednesday with conspiring to give U.S. defense secrets to an agent for the Chinese government under the mistaken impression that the agent was working for Taiwan. James W. Fondren Jr., 62, is the second Pentagon official charged with giving classified documents to New Orleans furniture salesman Tai Shen Kuo, who pleaded guilty to spying for Beijing and was sentenced last year to nearly 16 years in prison. Kuo, a Taiwan native and naturalized U.S. citizen with prominent family ties in Taiwan, has admitted that he masqueraded as a Taiwanese agent when in reality he was working with an agent of the Communist regime in Beijing _ what spy-hunters call a "false flag" operation. Prosecutors contend that between 2004 and 2008, Fondren gave Kuo classified information through "opinion papers" he sold to Kuo for between $350 and $800 apiece. Eight of the papers allegedly contained classified information, according to investigators. The papers dealt primarily with U.S.-Taiwanese military relations. At an initial appearance Wednesday in U.S. District Court, a magistrate ordered that Fondren can remain free while he awaits indictment, but required that he be subject to electronic monitoring. His attorney, former Republican congressman Asa Hutchinson, declined to comment on the specifics of the case but emphasized that Fondren "did not knowingly provide any information to any agent of the People's Republic of China." "You cannot present this case as a typical espionage case," Hutchinson said. In an affidavit, FBI agent Robert M. Gibbs says it is clear that Fondren did not know Kuo was working for Beijing, but Fondren believed the information was being forwarded to Taiwanese officials, which is illegal. If convicted, Fondren faces up to five years in prison. In a statement, Acting U.S. Attorney Dana Boente said, "Providing classified information to a foreign agent of the People's Republic of China is a real and serious threat to our national security. The U.S. government places considerable trust in those given access to classified information, and we are committed to prosecuting those who abuse that trust." Fondren worked at the Pentagon, holding top secret clearance as the deputy director of the Washington liaison office for U.S. Pacific Command. He has been on administrative leave since February 2008, when Kuo was arrested at Fondren's home. Last year, former Defense Department employee Gregg Bergersen pleaded guilty to providing secrets to Kuo, who plied Bergersen with at least $7,000 in cash and gifts from Kuo, including $3,000 in cash for a poker game on a 2007 Las Vegas trip. Bergersen was sentenced to nearly five years in prison. The Kuo case is one of more than a dozen in the last few years involving either traditional spying or economic espionage related to China. U.S. officials have warned of increasing espionage efforts by Beijing. ___ Associated Press writer Devlin Barrett contributed to this report from Washington.
 
Kanye West Lashes Out Against Twitter, Impostors Top
NEW YORK — Kanye West doesn't like impostors. And he doesn't care much for Twitter, either. In a blog posting, the outspoken rapper railed against the micro-blogging site for allowing users to set up accounts under fake names. West called on the site to take down the user tweeting under his name _ and Twitter listened. The user _ named KanyeWest _ was suspended Wednesday. The site doesn't allow impersonation, but does allow parody impersonations clearly meant as a joke. Fake celebrity Twitter accounts have been a fact of life for the rapidly growing Twitter, but the site says it's working to combat the problem. Twitter co-founder Biz Stone said in an e-mail that Twitter is looking at how best to implement an account verification system. Either way, West doesn't plan to join. He said he's "too busy actually being creative most of the time" and that "everything that Twitter offers I need less of." More on Twitter
 
Elizabeth Edwards' Interview Condition: Don't ID Rielle Hunter Top
NEW YORK — Elizabeth Edwards set an unusual condition before agreeing to interviews about her new book: She would only talk if the media outlet agreed not to mention the name of her husband John's former mistress. The wife of the former presidential candidate and U.S. Senator has appeared with Oprah Winfrey, Larry King and Matt Lauer within the past week to discuss her book, "Resilience," in which she writes about the affair and her battle with terminal cancer. The idea of setting ground rules for an interview is hardly unusual in the celebrity world. Sometimes the interviewers, whether with an entertainment or news organization, agree. Sometimes they overlook the restriction. Sometimes it's a deal-breaker. Winfrey, who had the first interview with Edwards, agreed not to identify videographer Rielle Hunter, but asked on the air why it was requested. "Somebody wants to stand in the light that shines on John, that's one thing," Edwards said. "If they, somehow, you know, work at destroying my family and my home in order to get in that light, I'm really not interested in them being in the light too much. It's not about this woman. It's about this family." The Associated Press would not agree to the demand and was twice turned down for interviews with Edwards. "It's simple," said Michael Oreskes, vice president and senior managing editor of the AP. "We don't let other people edit our wire." He said the request was puzzling considering that Hunter's name was in the news and had been widely distributed. The AP did report Edwards' quotes from the Winfrey interview about her husband's 2006 affair in a story, and used Hunter's name. On the "Today" show, Matt Lauer said Edwards had asked "out of consideration" that NBC not use Hunter's name. "We're a news show," he said while interviewing Edwards, "but, and out of consideration, I won't use the name." "Thank you," Edwards replied. Jim Bell, executive producer of "Today," said the Edwards interview had been booked without this request being made. If it was done as a demand, "Today" would not have done the interview. Still, the request had the same effect. Given the interview's subject matter _ Edwards' battle with cancer, the loss of a son and her husband's affair _ "it was a courtesy, not a condition," Bell said. In a "Larry King Live" interview on CNN Tuesday, Hunter's name was not mentioned. King talked about the affair at some length, even asking Edwards whether she was curious about "the woman" and wanted to meet her. ("I don't think that's a very useful experience," Edwards replied.) King said Edwards had requested Hunter not be named "out of consideration," and CNN agreed. Edwards' attorney, Bob Barnett, referred questions about the interview requests to David Drake, publicity director for publisher Broadway Books. Drake did not immediately return telephone and e-mail messages. The taste for celebrity news, and the competition for it, can sometimes tip the balance in favor of celebrities _ or at least make them feel it has. Actress Angelina Jolie recently asked that reporters sign a promise not to ask questions about her family. Reality TV star Kate Gosselin, facing rumors that she and her "Jon & Kate Plus 8" husband were cheating on each other, is trying to publicize a book without having reporters ask about her marriage. Comic Sacha Baron Cohen once demanded questions be submitted several days before an interview, to help him come up with Borat-like responses. The trend is present in sports, too, when publicists say "baseball questions only" in a clubhouse to avoid embarrassing stories. Sometimes it can get truly bizarre: Billy Bob Thornton, talking about his rock band with CBC Radio in Canada, grew angry when his interviewer introduced him as an "Oscar-winning screenwriter, actor and director." Thornton said, "You were instructed not to talk about ... that." These are difficult questions for news organizations in tough financial times, too: Do you reject a potentially marketable interview for journalistic principles? Kelly McBride, ethics group leader at the Poynter Institute media think tank, said readers come to news organizations expecting that its journalists are making decisions on their behalf, not at the behest of their interview subjects. "The name of the woman is relevant to the story and the decision about whether to name the woman or not should be made by the editors and reporters doing the story," she said.
 
Michael Markarian: The Front Group Behind Cockfighting Criminals Top
Imagine a drug dealer peddling heroin in a schoolyard, and then using the ill-begotten gains to hire a professional lobbyist to advocate for relaxing the drug laws. Or using drug money to make political contributions, hoping to curry favor with lawmakers. That's precisely the type of behavior that Virginia cockfighters pleaded guilty to yesterday in federal court in Charlottesville. According to the Harrisonburg Daily News-Record and the Northern Virginia Daily , the Virginia Gamefowl Breeders Association admitted a money laundering conspiracy, and the group's former president, Chester William Fannon III, conceded that he made nearly $9,000 in illegal political donations to state and federal candidates. The United Gamefowl Breeders Association and its state affiliates masquerade as people who raise and show chickens, as if there were a Westminster for birds. But this nefarious network has a transparent purpose, as it is the main group that consistently and vigorously opposes state and federal legislation seeking to strengthen laws against animal fighting. It wants to keep weak laws on the books -- some no more severe than a parking ticket -- for strapping razor-sharp knives to the legs of roosters and forcing them to hack each other to death for gambling profits and the enjoyment of spectators who are titillated by the bloodletting. When a congressional committee held a hearing on a measure passed in 2007, making it a federal felony to move animals across state lines for the purpose of fighting, the UGBA's president, Jerry Leber, testified against the bill . It was the New Mexico Gamefowl Breeders Association that filed a lawsuit to overturn the state's 2007 ban on cockfighting, their claims rejected by the state appeals court just yesterday. When states like Alabama and Ohio consider proposals to upgrade their anti-cockfighting laws, it's the UGBA affiliates that hire paid lobbyists and pack the hearing rooms with cockfighters -- the only people with a vested interest in keeping the weak laws on the books and getting away with a slap on the wrist. In the Virginia case, federal prosecutors called the VGBA "a statewide organization devoted to the preservation of 'gamefowl' (also known as 'fighting roosters' and 'cocks') and cockfighting." They accused Fannon of collecting the money generated through paid membership and entrance fees to cockfighting matches, and using those funds to make political contributions to state and federal candidates on behalf of the cockfighters. According to the indictment, Fannon and the VGBA devised an elaborate ruse to make it look like the funds were coming from his personal account, rather than from the cockfighting profits. In recent years, The HSUS, along with Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) , has made repeated complaints to the Internal Revenue Service for granting the UGBA a 501(c)(5) nonprofit tax exemption. This guilty plea and conviction should settle the question of whether these so-called "gamefowl breeding associations" are anything more than criminal syndicates who make their living collecting door fees at illegal cockfighting events and then laundering the money back into political campaigns to block the enactment of stronger animal fighting laws. We hope the IRS will now investigate the UGBA's tax exempt status, and no longer give tax shelter to this front group for cockfighting criminals.
 
Chicago Becomes First Major City To Ban BPA Baby Bottles, Sippy Cups Top
CHICAGO — Chicago on Wednesday became the first U.S. city to adopt a ban on the sale of baby bottles and sippy cups containing the chemical BPA. The Chicago City Council approved the ban on a 48-0 vote and a spokeswoman for Mayor Richard M. Daley said he intends to sign it. The ban is slated to take effect Jan. 31, 2010. "This is an important step in a landmark consumer protection initiative. This legislation will protect Chicago's children and send a clear message to other jurisdictions considering similar legislation," said Alderman Manny Flores, co-sponsor of the measure. BPA, or bisphenol A, is used to harden plastics in many consumer products including CDs, sports safety equipment and reusable bottles. It's also present in some food container linings. Experts disagree on whether it poses health risks to humans, but some manufacturers of baby bottles have voluntarily removed it because of safety questions. "We should err on the side of caution and not needlessly expose people to the harmful effects, especially children," said Alderman Edward Burke, the measure's other sponsor. Advocates say Chicago is the third jurisdiction in the country to ban BPA from baby bottles and sippy cups. New York's Suffolk County became the first last month, and Minnesota passed a ban last week. Last year, Canada became the first country to announce plans for a similar ban. Some scientists and environmental advocates argue that BPA can mimic hormones and cause reproductive problems in children, but the chemicals industry says consumer products containing BPA pose no health threat. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has said that FDA-approved products containing BPA that are currently on the market are safe; its review of BPA research is ongoing. A proposed federal ban on BPA in food containers is pending in Congress, and 24 states have pending bills that would restrict BPA, said Max Muller, program director of Environment Illinois, an advocacy group that supported Chicago's ban. He called the city's action "a good first step. Children have the highest exposure. It's a limited approach but it's targeting the most vulnerable people." Consumer Reports publisher Consumers Union, which has sought a national ban on BPA in food containers, praised Chicago's decision. "Nationwide consumers will remain at risk until federal action is taken. We are hopeful that the new leadership at FDA will act swiftly to address this important public health concern," said the group's Urvashi Rangan. The American Chemistry Council, an industry group, issued a statement saying Chicago's ban is unwarranted. "The new Chicago law is contrary to the global consensus on the safety of BPA and ignores the expert evaluations of scientists and government bodies from around the world," the council said. Chicago's ordinance requires retailers to post notices declaring that products they sell do not contain BPA. Violators could be fined up to $100 or more per offense and could lose their licenses. ___ On the Net: NIH: http://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/docs/bpa-factsheet.pdf FDA: http://www.fda.gov More on Health
 
William Bradley: What Does Obama's Afghan Command Change Mean? Top
The Obama Administration wanted "a fresh look" and General David McKiernan seemed attuned to the wrong sort of campaign. For the first such change in wartime since Harry Truman replaced General Douglas MacArthur during the Korean War in 1951, Barack Obama is replacing General David McKiernan in Afghanistan. Obama is moving both to change a stalemated war in Afghanistan and to scale back expectations there. In the process, the Obama Administration is signaling that there will be no massive military surge preferred by General David Petraeus, as well as, seemingly, an end to nation-building fantasies and a preference for more special operations while searching for compromise. McKiernan, the commander of conventional ground forces for the 2003 invasion of Iraq, is being replaced by a rather controversial special operations expert, Lieutenant General Stanley McChrystal. As head of Joint Special Operations Command, McChrystal oversaw the capture of former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and the killing of Abu Musab al Zarqawi, the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq. McChrystal, a West Pointer who became a Green Beret not long after graduation, following a stint as a platoon leader in the 82nd Airborne Division, is currently director of the Joint Staff at the Pentagon, the executive staff to the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The new deputy commander, filling a new slot, will be Lieutenant General David Rodriguez, the top military aide to Defense Secretary Bob Gates and former commander of the 82nd Airborne Division, who currently travels with him around the world. Defense Secretary Bob Gates announced the sacking of McKiernan and designation of McChrystal, as well as his own top aide, Rodriguez, as deputy commander. The new American commander in Iraq, whose appointment was announced by Gates on Monday, has to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate. He doesn't come without a nimbus of controversy. McChrystal's former outfit, Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), which he commanded from 2003 to 2008, has been criticized by some on the left, including journalist Seymour Hersh, as "an executive hit squad." JSOC is a combination of many of the various military service's top special operators, i.e., commandos, including the Delta Force. It was formed in the aftermath of the failed 1980 attempt to rescue hostages from the American embassy in Iran. Some of McChrystal's troopers have been criticized for using torture during interrogations. The family of football star-turned-Ranger Pat Tillman, killed by "friendly fire" in Afghanistan, want to know what McChrystal knew and when he knew it. And the family of Pat Tillman, the football star who became a Ranger after 9/11 and died in a "friendly fire" incident in Afghanistan, criticizes McChrystal for approving Tillman's Silver Star citation for bravery "in the line of devastating enemy fire" just a day before distributing a memo saying that it was "highly possible" the former Arizona Cardinals safety was killed by his own colleagues. None of which has dissuaded Obama from making McChrystal -- with, perhaps not coincidentally with a president who so values the spoken word, a reputation as an outstanding briefer -- his commander in what is now America's most troubled war. So why the switch? Unlike McChrystal, a West Pointer who went airborne, then Special Forces, McKiernan is a College of William & Mary ROTC graduate who went into the armor section of Army, going up the ranks commanding units focused on tanks and other armored vehicles. Working under the overall commander, General Tommy Franks, McKiernan commanded the conventional ground forces in the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Which, actually, went very well. Then the trouble, probably predictably, really started with the various Iraq insurgencies emerging. In Afghanistan, McKiernan, drawing on the lesson that the Iraq force started out far too small to provide stability after Saddam was ousted, has repeatedly insisted on more troops for that mountainous, farflung country. President Barack Obama made it known before he took office that there would be a new direction for the troubled war in Afghanistan. General David Petraeus, who oversees Afghanistan as well as Iraq now as head of U.S. Central Command, has also been pushing for more troops for Afghanistan. But Obama, backed by Gates, is delivering about half as many troops as Petraeus and McKiernan wanted. Putting McChrystal -- whose expertise is in carefully-targeted, highly-lethal, mostly ground force raids on jihadist leaders and cadre -- in command reinforces the message that there will not be the sort of massive surge of American troops into Afghanistan that current commanders wanted. Incidentally, though the exact numbers are classified, McChrystal's vaunted JSOC may number no more than a few thousand. Under McKiernan's command, American forces in Afghanistan have been increasingly criticized for air strikes that result in many civilian casualties. The administration says that air strikes will continue. But sources say that the air strikes will be more discriminating and targeted. The probability of civilian casualties goes up in the absence of experienced soldiers on the ground calling in the strikes, something which is a function of the special operations forces McChrystal has served with throughout his career. Then Vice President-elect Joe Biden met with McKiernan in Kabul on January 10th. The move from McKiernan to McChrystal also seems to signify an end to nation-building fantasies in Afghanistan. The Bush/Cheney Administration spoke of building a much more modern nation-state in Afghanistan, which is not nearly as modern as Iraq. Not much was actually accomplished, however, as the fateful Iraq fixation took hold and became the chief enterprise of an entire presidency. When Obama announced his new strategy for Afghanistan -- and Pakistan, the deterioration of which during the Bush years accelerated into outright crisis -- on March 27th, there were distinct overtones of nation-building. Not so much now. Oh, they're still moving to stabilize what passes for a central government, do more in the vast rural areas, and provide more economic development aid, as well as real training for the Afghan army and police forces, but it's all with an eye to compromise rather than outright victory. There've been a variety of apparently desultory talks with the Taliban in the past, with all but ousted former Afhan leader Mullah Omar, now ensconced in Pakistan, seen as being in the ballpark. That was then. Today Reuters reported that former Taliban officials , working with the administration of Afghan President Hamid Karzai, have contacted Mullah Omar and other top Afghan Taliban leaders to set up peace talks. On the table, among other things, asylum for militants in Saudi Arabia in exchange for withdrawal of foreign forces, as well as negotiation on the shape of a new constitution and government. Not exactly unconditional surrender. The Obama Administration seems to be focusing on the original ostensible purpose for going into Afghanistan in the first place after 9/11: To disrupt Al Qaeda and deny it a base in Afghanistan. You can check things during the day on my site, New West Notes ... www.newwestnotes.com. More on Barack Obama
 

CREATE MORE ALERTS:

Auctions - Find out when new auctions are posted

Horoscopes - Receive your daily horoscope

Music - Get the newest Album Releases, Playlists and more

News - Only the news you want, delivered!

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

Weather - Get today's weather conditions




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

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)