Monday, June 1, 2009

Y! Alert: The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Yahoo! Alerts
My Alerts

The latest from The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Ellen Sterling: Heading To Las Vegas: Susie Essman Top
Disclaimer: I am a Susie Essman fan. She makes me laugh and from the moment I first saw her -- actually heard her when I was on the phone in the next room -- shouting at her husband Jeff Greene on Curb Your Enthusiasm I was hooked. That is why I was so pleased to hear she'll be in Las Vegas with Richard Lewis for three shows this week. So if you choose to read on, do so with the caveat that this post -- based on a phone interview I did with her last week -- is written by a fan and, thus, has a definite pro-Susie bias. Essman hit the national consciousness in October 2000 when Cur premiered on HBO. Of course, she wasn't sitting around until then waiting to be discovered. Born in the Manhattan suburb of Mt. Vernon, New York to an oncologist father and a college professor mother Essman is a graduate of the State University of New York at Purchase. If Susie Greene's amp is at 11, Susie Essman's is at a very pleasant 5 and, in that pleasant voice, she explains that, despite floundering for many years, comedy is a natural career for her. "I don't think you learn to be funny. Either you are or are not. I always was. "I started doing standup at 28. Before that I thought I wanted to be an actress, I was waitressing to support myself. I was desperate and you only do this -- stand-up -- if you're desperate because it's so scary to get up on stage." How long did it take for success to come? "You know," she says, "stand-up time isn't like real time. It takes years to develop yourself. I started making a living after two years. But I didn't come into my own for about seven years." In the 24 years since she started making a living in comedy -- and her birthday was yesterday -- Essman has had her own half-hour HBO comedy special, hosted the American Comedy Awards appeared on Politically Incorrect, Crank Yankers, Law and Order, The King of Queens and Baby Boom on television. In film she was in Keeping the Faith, The Siege, Volcano and Punchline. Hers is the voice of Mittens the Cat in the animated film Bolt. She appeared in The Vagina Monologues off-Broadway. She also famously appeared in a Friars Club Roast of Jerry Stiller. It is there, the story goes, that Larry David saw her and cast her as Susie Greene in his HBO show. In fact, she's so at home at the Friars Club that she married real estate broker Jim Harder there on September 13, 2008. The ceremony was held in the George Burns Room; reception in the Milton Berle Room. Officiating was writer-producer Tom Fontana. Today, Susie Essman is very busy. She travels across the country to do stand-up and TV and film, but most often appears at Caroline's in New York. And that's the way she likes it. New York is home. "We do the show in LA," she says. "I go there, get a hotel room, drive back and forth to work. It's like being in a big suburb. In LA you don't see anybody not of your ilk. When not doing it, Essman clearly misses stand-up. Her time in The Vagina Monologues convinced her that, likely, Broadway isn't for her. "Maybe, if it was the right project and a great part, but I can't imagine doing eight shows a week of the same script. I prefer the stand-up audience response. There's no fourth wall and that's great. It's real life. "Right now," she goes on, "I'm looking out the window of my apartment. On the street I see all kinds of people. New York is exciting. The energy, the street life -- it's all fodder for comedy." What, besides the city she loves, inspires her? "My life, my four children, my mother, my hot flashes -- my everything." And who makes her laugh? "Richard Lewis. Larry David, Chris Rock, Joy Behar, a lot of the people I came up with. Gilbert Gottfried makes me crazy but he makes me laugh, too." What doesn't make her laugh? "Lots of things," she replies. "The war in Iraq makes me scream and get hysterical. Also, people losing their homes, people who are too rich and too poor." Upcoming, besides the new season of Curb Your Enthusiasm in the fall, Susie Essman will be a published author. Her book, What Would Susie Say? An Incomplete Guide To A No-Bullshit Life will be published by Simon & Schuster on November 10. Susie Essman and Richard Lewis will share the bill at the Venetian Las Vegas on June 4, 5 and 6. When I remarked that she and Lewis on the same bill provides quite a contrast, as he comes on stage laden with tons of baggage and she carries nothing, she laughs. "I don't know he does it. It must get so tiresome. If I were Richard I would tell myself to fuck myself."
 
Lita Smith-Mines: My Message To Tom Brokaw: We're New Yorkers & We'll Whine If We Want To! Top
I saw you briefly on Morning Joe Monday morning, and with all due respect, if my understanding of what you said is accurate, you set a low threshold for Baby Boomers, and wish New Yorkers would shut up. It sounds like you said we were whiners and it looked like you grimaced when a fellow guest opined that today's economic hardships might be creating another great generation of Americans. If I have it right, Mr. Brokaw, you implied that the middle of the country Americans you spoke with are approaching financial adversity properly, and that no generation that follows can ever be as great as those who successfully vanquished Hitler's evil. I admire you, Mr. Brokaw, and hope you are have no worries about paying your bills or keeping a roof over your family's head. But there are tens of thousands of us (maybe many more than that) who have seen the businesses we have built or the careers we have chosen or the companies we have toiled for crumple around us while the bills continue to stream in. We don't all have the ability to turn that devastation into a prime-time special or a news series, like you do, but we certainly can jabber on and on about our fears and our mounting financial troubles out loud, on the pages of the NY Times , on blogs, and on talk radio. New Yorkers by nature (and I know I'm generalizing) talk about everything excessively. We are not a stoic bunch like those who get up the morning after a flood and replant the fields, figuring there's no use in ranting against Mother Nature. We are competitive and talkative and frankly flabbergasted that we have all seen the comforts of our world demolished not by natural forces but mainly by market manipulations. Am I defending excesses and greed and those who chose to live beyond their means? Not by a long shot. But I am defending our right to talk! We find venting therapeutic, and many of us feel comforted to learn our fellow New Yorkers are in the same adrift boats. You should also know that while we're whining, as I think you put it, we're also working our tails off to get back on our feet, even reinvent ourselves if we need to. No one I know is motionless while we are moaning. Mr. Brokaw, I have as much admiration as you for the generation that fought World War II and came back to achieve spectacular things in the US. But many of us born after the war thought we had achieved personal success and on the whole made beneficial changes in the fabric of our country. Though your opinion is only one of many, why shake your head as if we are all sub-par and not worthy of accolades? If my parents and their friends were still alive today, I truly believe they would be proud of many of the ways we've expanded on the world they saved for us. Sorry, Mr. Brokaw, if our bellyaching bothers you. I personally think it's great. More on NBC
 
Chelsea-Lyn Rudder: Be Your Own First Lady Top
The position of first lady has always fascinated me. The opportunity to champion non-controversial causes, raise money for worthy charities and visit with dignitaries at events is appealing. It's a role that I have envisioned myself in; if I am honest about one of my daydreams. The problem, being first lady is inextricably linked to being married to a sitting mayor, governor, or president. Considering the ups and downs in politics the calculation is too risky for my palate. I would not want my position in life to depend solely upon my relationship with a man. To be first lady is a dream for many young women. Aspiring to be like First Lady Michelle Obama has made it more of a reality. Michelle Obama is married to the leader of the free world, but it is her intelligence, style and elegance that make her the subject of admiration. Mrs. Obama is well rounded; she has her own challenges and accomplishments. Michelle Obama is a tangible role model who has the power to inspire women throughout the world to become the "first lady" in their own lives. A year ago Michelle Obama's detractor's attempted to pigeon hole her into the caricature of "the angry black woman". Today, she is an American icon who is admired around the world. Her image as an educated, athletic, fashion forward, feminine woman is very different from the stereotypical images of U.S black women that are often exported. Mrs. Obama's persona is not like the guests that often appear on the Maury Povich Show . Michelle Obama is the new face of the black American woman and the world has noticed. The international attention that Mrs. Obama has captured is exciting. In her own way she has helped to restore some of America's soft power, which was diminished by the previous administration. A female African American friend of mine recently vacationed in Asia. She reported that she was often referred to there as "Lady Obama". Mrs. Obama has proven to be an excellent role model for women around the world. Particularly, women of color who are discriminated against because of their dark skin and coarse hair. The universal elevation of Michelle Obama has helped women to see themselves in her and to recognize their own strength and potential. John Blake of CNN.com recently wrote about Mrs. Obama's international appeal in an article called "Why Michelle Obama inspires women around the globe." Blake talked about the new message that impoverished Indian women are receiving due to the positive attention that Michelle Obama has gotten. The women referenced in the article are considered unattractive because of their dark skin and hair, and are "cursed" if they only have daughters. In Michelle Obama they see a woman who has dark skin and coarse hair but is praised for her style and beauty. "She walks next to her husband in public, not behind. And she has two daughters. But no one calls her cursed. They call her Michelle Obama, the first lady." By all indications Mrs. Obama feels blessed, not cursed by her two daughters, Sasha and Malia. She has spoken of many projects that she intends to pursue during her tenure in the White House, but she has said that her top priority is to be "Mom-in-Chief". It is the "Mom-in-Chief" demeanor of our first lady that has created a demand for her trademark hugs. Michelle Obama's most enviable quality is the magnetic energy that she creates when she walks into a room. She has shown that reaching out to others is important by being inclusive and personally welcoming visitors into the White House. In short order, the Obama's have brought a youthful, sociable and yes, fashionable presence to Washington D.C. Author Jane Stanton Hitchcock states it best in May's Vogue by saying that "Michelle Obama is proving there is nothing wrong- in fact there is something right about being youthful, chic and serious." Yes, it is possible to enjoy the parties, and also be passionate about the substantive issues of life. We cannot all attend state dinners or have tea with the Queen, but there are many aspects of Mrs. Obama's first lady life that all women can be inspired by and emulate. More on Michelle Obama Style
 
David Kirby: Notes From the Big "Anti-Vaccine" Conference Top
Last weekend, the Autism One organization held its annual conference in Chicago, attended by thousands of parents, doctors, educators and others, to discuss a wide array of autism-related issues. The New York Times labeled it an "anti-vaccine" conference and the Chicago Tribune portrayed it as a freak-show spectacle straight off the island of Dr. Moreau. Yes, there was some discussion of vaccines - and some admittedly unconventional, and controversial, autism therapies. But there was so much more than that. Out of nearly 150 presentations, only a few dealt directly with vaccines at all. Most of the days were filled with topics such as "Creating Theater with Autism Spectrum Youth," "Epilepsy in Autism: An Overview," and "Perspectives from cell biology and autism risk factors and treatments," a fascinating talk by the forward-thinking Dr. Mark Noble, Professor of Genetics and Neurobiology and Anatomy at the University of Rochester. My own remarks dealt with vaccines, and so much more as well, including environmental mercury, wild-type viruses, tainted food, air pollution, pesticides, arsenic, antimony, formaldehyde in household products, even pet shampoo. I believe that most ASD cases have environmental triggers (probably more than one) that activate certain genetic predispositions (again, probably more than one) and create some of the symptoms that we call "autism." I also believe that vaccines may have played a role in triggering some - though certainly not all - cases of regressive autism. Even if that number is a small minority, it seems sensible to me to study the mechanism of action, in hopes of finding clues to the development of autism in all those other children. Because my own interest in the cause of autism extends well beyond thimerosal, MMR vaccine, or the immunization program itself, I chose to speak about three potential factors in autism - metals, myelin (which coats the brain and nerve cells) and mitochondria - that could possibly trigger the disorder, with or without the involvement of vaccines or vaccine components. I believe that the study of environmental triggers - other than vaccines - can provide some sorely needed middle ground in what has turned out to be one of the most contentious and vitriolic issues of our day. That doesn't mean that research into genes - or vaccines - should or would stop. But it might provide for a way forward from here. Most reasonable people agree that autism has an environmental component. Recent analyses from California show that widening diagnostic criteria are not responsible for the explosive growth in autism cases in that state. And stay tuned for new numbers coming out of the US Military that will shatter the current national estimate of 1-in-150 kids - which, by the way, was calculated in 2002, by analyzing children born in 1994. That's right, our most current CDC autism statistics are seven years old, and describe people who are now at least 15 years of age. The CDC cannot even tell us when it might finish analyzing its 2004 data - on children born in 1996 - though it knows exactly how many H1N1 cases are in, say, California today. As I said in my remarks, these are just my own personal musings, spoken out loud. I offer proof of nothing, and answers to no questions. I draw no conclusions. My only point is that, if we are going to find the actual environmental triggers to autism, we had better get busy. Heavy metals, damage to myelin, and the role of mitochondria are just three of the many, many areas where I believe that Federal research dollars should be targeted. I am sure that this modest proposal will spark the usual hew and cry from the usual gallery of reactionaries - one of whom just wrote at Daily Kos that, even if all autism cases were caused by vaccines, there would be no reason to alter or even examine the immunization program. People who ask questions about vaccine safety are now being called "pro-disease." Some are supporting censorship of any talk about vaccines and autism. Yet many of these same voices balk and squawk at the very idea of researching potential factors like mercury from coal, live viruses, pesticides, aluminum, formaldehyde, jet fuel and many other toxins. That mystifies me. If science could pinpoint the exact triggers that produce autism - and they had nothing do with vaccines - this debate would end, as far as I am concerned, and happily so. METALS, MYELIN & MITOCHONDRIA - PATHWAYS TO AUTISM? -- Remarks by David Kirby, Autism One, Chicago, May 2009 I first want to say that this conference was described by The New York Times as "an anti-vaccine conference." And, you know, when I read that I actually laughed out loud. And I thought, "What would you even do at an anti-vaccine conference, anyway?" And I know there are some people in this audience who are anti-vaccine, and they have that right. I just don't happen to be one of those people. The reason I get upset at being called "anti-vaccine" is that, A), it's untrue, and B), I do think vaccines are important. And I think we can vaccinate more safely than we do in this country. But the label is used as a weapon. It is used as a tool against people like me. And even though it's a lie, it is so much easier to dismiss somebody if you think that they're anti-vaccine. "He's a kook. He's a nut. He doesn't know what he's talking about." And now we're into the rhetoric that has gotten so heated that people like me are called "pro-disease." It's like Karl Rove is writing the playbook for these people. Because it's gotten that political, it's gotten that nasty. So, I'm going to fight back against that label. This is not an "anti-vaccine conference." There's a discussion tonight about athletics in autism, and one on relationships in autism. And we are here to talk about a lot more than vaccines. And that's sort of the theme of my speech, too. Because for quite a while now, I have believed there are many, many different ways to get to what we call "autism." And I think we really need to step back from vaccines, we need to step back from Thimerosal, we need to step back from MMR and other specific vaccine components. We need to work backwards and look at the world in its entirety. We need to look at food, air, water, and medicine. And by medicine, yes, that would include vaccines. Now, the Obama administration just announced they're going to have a national meeting on toxins; and how toxins affect people. And that's exactly where I think this conversation should go. I'm ready for a little middle ground. I'm really tired of the screaming back and forth, you know. We need to find out what's making these kids sick. And I think there's more consensus now that something in the environment or some things in the environment are contributing to that. So let's look at those things in a more general sense. And that's where - I think - it gets really, really interesting, and where we may find some common ground in science - that there are things in nature that are triggers for autism. I truly believe there are things in the environment that can trigger autism that have nothing to do with vaccines. I am just a journalist, I'm a layperson, so I view things in a slightly different way than scientists. And I have the luxury of doing that because I get to, you know, play around with theories a little bit, ask different kinds of questions and try to see connections between different things. And when I look at the situation, I think we've moved way past thimerosal as the one and only cause of autism. And I've just picked three possible routes - Metals, Myelin & Mitochondria - that we'll be talking about tonight. Now, you could make up a very, very long list of potential pathways to autism. But what's so interesting about these three pathways -- and remember, this is all just theory, this is just me, kind of musing out loud -- is that they're found in the natural environmental, or the man-made environment, and they're also found in vaccines. The other thing that's interesting about these three things is they're interactive. So you might have metals as a contributing factor to autism, but you can't separate that entirely from the fact that metals can also destroy myelin. Metals can destroy mitochondria. They're all interrelated. And I think that we should look at ALL metals. And I think one reason that we haven't looked at all metals is because two of those metals happen to be aluminum and mercury, and those metals also happen to appear in childhood vaccines. If there never was mercury in vaccines, I can pretty much state that we would be much further along at this point in researching heavy metals in autism. The same with live viruses. Measles virus can affect myelin as a matter of fact. Well, there is live measles virus in the MMR vaccine. Maybe that's one reason why there's been some reluctance to look more carefully into how viruses might be triggers of autism. And the same is true of mitochondrial dysfunction and overstimulation of the immune system - all sorts of things can happen in that situation. And it does happen in nature - a lot. But talk with Jon and Teri Poling, and you'll find out it can also happen when you give a child nine vaccines in one day. So maybe what it might take to try to find some middle ground and move research forward is to just put - even for a day - vaccines aside. And let's just look at metals. And let's just look at myelin damage - what can damage myelin. And let's look at mitochondria - and many, many other things. But I am here to discuss these three things. And, I am not here to give you any answers. I don't have any answers. My job is to ask the questions. I also draw no conclusions. But my message to you is this: If I were running the show, and if I were dishing out the research dollars, these are some of the areas that I would be pursuing, posthaste. And if I were a scientist, these are some of the things that I would be wanting to study with federal money, including some money coming into the NIH right now. The rest of the transcript, with slides, has been posted here: More on Autism
 
Mike Lux: Political Violence in America Top
I have been meaning to write about this topic for several days now, in part because of Cheney and the right-wing movement's proud defense of torture, and in part because of having finally finished (after much delay because of my book tour) Rick Perlstein's masterful book Nixonland . I got started yesterday morning, and then got the terrible news about Dr. Tiller, and had to stop for awhile. I hesitated to keep writing because I want to be careful with tying this terrible event to the conservative movement, and indeed I want to start with some caveats. But there are some things that just have to be said on this dark day. My first caveat is a big one, and an obvious one: most conservatives do not in any way support this kind of political terrorism, and are in fact saddened by it. There is no question about that, and I think when discussing the issue of political violence and American fascism, we should be very clear about that important point. In addition, I think it is extremely important that progressives be very slow and very careful in calling conservatives fascist or supporters of political violence unless they actually show themselves to be that. A person may passionately believe, for example, that abortion is murder, and still strongly oppose any kind of domestic terrorism. One final caveat: if you look back at the history of political violence in America, as I do in my book The Progressive Revolution: How The Best In America Came To Be, there is no question that progressive-minded folks have also engaged in political violence. The Revolutionary War, the Civil War and World War II were all led by progressives and you don't get much more violent than a war (not that I would have opposed those wars, I would have supported them). John Brown in the 1850s believed and fought for a violent slave rebellion, and occasionally leftist leaders in the 1960s went over the line and committed acts of violence. And anarchists assassinated William McKinley in 1901. Having said all of that, though, it is also undeniably true that there is a dangerous and virulent streak of violence and fascism in American conservatism, now and throughout our country's history. Conservatives in the South who vehemently and violently defended and fought for slavery and Jim Crow are the most obvious example: From the vicious caning of political opponents on the floor of the Senate, to the fighting of the bloody Civil War, to the gunning down of hundreds of freed slaves in the reconstruction era, to the lynching of thousand of African-Americans in the 90 years after the Civil War, to all of the horrible violence of the civil rights struggles in the 1950s and 60s, the story of race relations in the South has been long and incredibly bloody. The North wasn't exactly pure on race issues either, from the mass murder of blacks in Tulsa in 1921 to the rock throwing mobs of Chicago greeting Martin Luther King. Racial violence hasn't been the only from of political violence by those opposed to progressive change in this country either. Labor leaders have been assassinated; women suffragists and other progressive reformers have been tarred and feathered, and violently harassed. Tim McVeigh, the perpetrator of the country's biggest single act of domestic terrorism was a far right-wing, militia activist. Sadly, the Tiller killing is only the latest in a long string of anti-abortion activists bombing clinics and murdering people. Even more serious, though, is the kind of domestic political violence we have seen by certain politicians. Everyone should read Nixonland , which shows the depth of depravity of the kind of political movement Richard Nixon was leading - blatantly breaking the law right and left, seriously considering the firebombing of a think tank they didn't like, gloating over gunning down the four students at Kent State. This is the administration Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, Donald Rumsfeld, Pat Buchanan, George H.W. Bush, G. Gordon Liddy, and many other modern day conservatives happily and proudly worked for. It is no wonder that we see them today so blithely defending the violation of the Geneva Convention and our own Bill of Rights. These are political leaders who have no qualms about torturing people, either, which is perhaps the ultimate example of political violence. Just as political conservatives of an earlier generation had no problems aligning themselves with segregationists of the South while mobs were beating freedom riders almost to death, Bill Connor was sicking German Shepherds on children, and terrorists were firebombing churches with little girls inside them, there is a virulent strain of political conservatism today that is not troubled by political violence. Let us hope that progressives win the day over this kind of conservatism. If we don't, I think it is safe to say we should fear for our country. More on Dick Cheney
 
Karen Ocamb: Five Reasons Not to March on Washington DC This October Top
With all due respect to Cleve Jones and David Mixner, who I've known and covered for many years, I think we seriously need to question the wisdom of convening a march on Washington this October. Yes, LGBT people are angry and disappointed that President Barack Obama hasn't lived up to his promises and our expectations -- something David knows about intimately, having been failed by his one-time friend Bill Clinton. Cleve, too, knows deeply about government scorn and neglect, having created the profound remembrance of those we lost as a result -- the AIDS Memorial Quilt. And I understand the call for a march. I am among Obama's critics -- I am stunned that he has so flagrantly forgotten, despite being a constitutional scholar, that equality is the first core founding principle of this country, and as leaders in the civil rights movement so aptly pointed out -- "justice delayed is justice denied." That Obama is still allowing the military to kick out qualified gays who are willing to die for this country -- at a time when we are fighting two wars and may be called on elsewhere in the world -- is the pinnacle of absurdity. Congress, too, should be ashamed for not repealing the ridiculous "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law. All that said, here are five questions about the wisdom of holding a march this October 10-12: 1. If the point is to demand equal rights from Obama and Congress, wouldn't it be better to hold the march when they're in town and not over the Columbus Day holiday? Who's making the decision that this is what we all need to do -- without any prior discussion from the "community" that's supposed to attend? 2. Given the four month-deadline and the economic downturn - and no matter how bare-bones the production -- who's paying for the stage, the equipment, the permits, the hotel-set asides, etc -- all the vendors who will not make a contribution to the cause, will not defer payment or volunteer? 3. Given that Maine is voting to repeal their marriage equality in November -- shouldn't the LGBT nation's eyes be turned towards Maine? If they lose, we could have a domino effect in the Northeast and in California in 2010. There's also the effort to re-elect New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine -- for without him, the effort to secure marriage equality there will suffer a tremendous setback. 4. The ballot language for the 2010 initiative to repeal Prop 8 is due in September. Though outreach efforts are already underway, the filing date is a perfect time to announce a massive grassroots field and fundraising effort -- considering that California is huge (one-eighth of all US residents lives here) and there would be only 14 months from that date to change enough hearts and minds to win in November. Why take people away from the 2010 effort for a three-day feel-good trip to Washington that few can afford to make? 5. The aforementioned economic downtown is no joke. California is $24 billion in the red; on Friday, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger announced $2.8 billion in cuts -- with threats to shut down both the state's Healthy Family Program a health insurance program for over 900,000 children and Cal-Works, the state welfare program that gives the poor temporary financial assistance and provides the severely disabled with a caregiver. The state and local AIDS agencies are also losing considerable funding. "Government doesn't provide services to rich people," says Mike Genest, the state's finance director. So folks in California are going to be asked to help out -- as well as being asked for money for gubernatorial candidates and the ballot initiative, to name just a few. Isn't that money better spent here than on a march on Washington that may not yield any tangible results? At least one person agrees with me. This is from Geoff Kors, executive director of Equality California: It will take all of us being focused and doing everything we can to win marriage back in California. EQCA is focusing our resources on doing grassroots field work in California and being on the ground where the work needs to happen. That is what we need to do to win marriage back. EQCA will also support our brothers and sisters in Maine and will encourage our volunteers to go to Maine in October to help them defeat their anti-marriage initiative in November 2009. For people who are concerned about poverty and social and economic issues as I know David Mixner and Cleve Jones are -- it seems an odd time to re-direct resources and attention without something close to an assured outcome. Given their considerable talent for inspiring others, I would humbly request that David and Cleve consider shifting their attention to helping LGBT people, people with HIV/AIDS and our allies (labor, teachers, nurses) at the state and local levels survive this very difficult time while also pressing hard for full equality. Linking arms to confront the problems immediately before us only strengthens our sense of community as we all become foot soldiers marching to fulfill the promises of the American Dream. More on Gay Marriage
 
Robert Weissman: Bankrupt Thinking Top
What in the world is the Obama administration thinking? The GM bankruptcy -- entirely avoidable -- seems designed to hurt every constituency it is supposed to assist. First, as to the avoidability issue: There's no doubt that chronic mismanagement and the deep recession have left GM in dire straits. But with the government pouring tens of billions of dollars into the company, it is clear that needed restructuring could have been done outside of bankruptcy. By last week, even the problem of bondholders who sought $27 billion from the company (the government and GM were offering a 10 percent stake in the new company) was moving to resolution. Yet the Obama administration's auto task force has plunged GM into bankruptcy nonetheless. Why? There's no obvious answer to that question. Why does it matter? It matters because bankruptcy may further tarnish GM's already very weakened brand, and make recovery for the company much more difficult. It matters because it creates some unique problems. And it matters because it forecloses -- or, at least makes more difficult -- other ways to reorganize the company. The GM/auto task force plan for bankruptcy and restructuring -- shaped by a secretive, unaccountable group of Wall Street expats without expertise in the industry -- seems designed above all to perpetuate GM as a corporate entity. Preserving corporate GM should be not an end, but a means to protecting workers and their communities, preserving the U.S. manufacturing base, forcing the industry onto an innovative and ecologically sustainable path, and advancing consumer interests. It fails to meet any of these objectives, in entirely avoidable ways. GM probably needs to be downsized, but there are questions about the extent to which it should be downsized and the method. There are very significant questions about decisions being made to eliminate brands, close factories and terminate dealer relationships. The auto task force may well be needlessly costing tens or hundreds of thousands of jobs at auto plants and suppliers. It has authorized the closing of many hundreds of GM and Chrysler dealerships, even though these dealerships do not impose meaningful costs on the manufacturers. Dealership closings alone will result in more than 100,000 lost jobs. While there is probably a need to reduce GM's capacity, there is no need to cut worker wages and benefits. Auto worker wages contribute less than 10 percent of the cost of a car, so even the most draconian cuts will do little to increase profits. Yet the Obama administration's auto task force helped push the United Auto Workers into further acceptance of a two-tier wage structure that will make new auto jobs paid just a notch above Home Depot jobs. This will drag down pay across the auto industry, with ripple effects throughout the entire manufacturing sector. Stunningly, the Obama administration brags that "the concessions that the UAW agreed to are more aggressive than what the Bush Administration originally demanded in its loan agreement with GM." The ultimate evidence of the task force's disconnect from its public mission is its approval of GM plans to increase outsourcing production of cars for sale in the United States. GM has now disclosed its intent to begin production in China for sale in the United States. What is the possible rationale of permitting a company propped up with U.S. taxpayer funds to increase production overseas for sale in the U.S. market? The point of the bailout is not to make GM profitable at any cost, but to protect the communities that rely on the automaker, as well as U.S. manufacturing capacity. Finally, if the Chrysler bankruptcy is a harbinger, the bankruptcy is likely to wipe out the legal claims of people injured by defective and dangerous GM cars. None of this need be so. The government could have averted bankruptcy. It could have sent its plans to Congress for more careful review. It could have demanded that worker wages and conditions be maintained or improved, rather than worsened. It could have been more surgical in the downsizing it is requiring, and more forward-looking at preserving manufacturing capacity. The government could (and still can) choose to accept sucessorship liability in the New GM for the injuries inflicted on real people by Old GM. Some of these avoidable harms can still be averted, if the Obama administration chooses to exert the control that attaches to owning 60 percent of GM. Unfortunately, President Obama says, to the contrary, that "our goal is to get GM back on its feet, take a hands-off approach, and get out quickly." More on a different way to manage the GM restructuring in my next column.
 
Alan Lurie: Heaven at Work Top
I recently had the great pleasure and privilege of interviewing Martin Rutte and Vince Brewerton; two people who are at the forefront of a cultural development that offers the potential for powerful personal and societal transformation. Martin is the Chair of the Board at the Centre for Spirituality and the Workplace, Sobey School of Business, St. Mary's University in Halifax, Nova Scotia, and Vince is the Centre's Executive Director. I first met Martin at the Business and Consciousness conference in Santa Fe in 2007, where he was a speaker and organizer. Since then, we've become dear friends, sharing a love of transformative spiritual practices. Martin brings a combination of business skill and savvy with soulful wisdom to his passion for helping others to find meaning and purpose at work. As his told me in our conversation, his journey toward founding the Centre began in 1986 when, at a retreat, he had an experience that re-directed his life: "I went in to a funk and I didn't know why", Martin recalled. "I looked at my marriage and my work, and loved both of them, so I couldn't see the source. I ended up at an Augustinian Monastery, where I had a very profound epiphany experience. A phrase kept coming in to my head: 'It's about God'. This was very powerful for me." Martin came back from the retreat and told his staff at the management company he was running and his family about this experience. He told them that he'd like to explore the idea of bringing spirituality in to work. Martin told me that, "Everyone said, 'No, no, no. Don't use the word 'spirituality'. Use the word 'ethics' or 'values' or 'integrity' instead'. I realized that they were concerned that I'd be viewed as proselytizing and that my business reputation might suffer. But I knew that there was no integrity for me if I avoided using the word 'spirituality'. I also knew that I had to break through this blockage, so I looked at the source of proselytizing and realized that it's based on the idea of having 'the answer' that is shoved down someone's throat. But I said, 'Spiritually is not about having the answer, because that's what can turn into proselytizing. Instead, it's about having a question, an on-going question -- an inquiry. '" In the same way a business person continuously inquires, 'How do I make my business more successful?' we could engage in the inquiry, 'What is spirituality at work?' The longer we inquire, the deeper and richer would be our insights." As someone committed to, and deeply immersed in, the business world, Martin decided to start a center that would teach spirituality in this way; as an inquiry. And he knew that he wanted to establish a center at a business school - instead of a theology school - where it could directly impact the workplace. He approached the Dean, faculty, and students of the Sobey School of Business at St Mary's University and they loved the idea. In 2004 the Centre for Spirituality and the Workplace was born. During its first four years of life, the Centre was run by two Saint Mary's professors, each on a part time basis. The Centre's mission is; Positively and strategically influencing the conversation and accomplishments about spirituality and the workplace globally. The Centre engages academics and leaders in various sectors and organizations in collaborative conversations about spirituality and work. The outcomes of these conversations include: community-based research projects, networking and support for leaders wanting to inspire their workplaces, and consulting projects. The Centre works with faculty from Saint Mary's University as well as workplaces, other universities, and religious organizations, to develop lectures, courses, and programs, and to disseminate the latest developments about spirituality and work. It has an international email database that enables it to communicate with more than 1,000 people in 24 countries. The Centre currently works with four PhD students, holds two undergraduate courses, and hosts visiting professors from academic institutions around the world. The Centre has received enthusiastic international press coverage, as the only institution of its kind in Canada, and only one of three or four in the world. Early this year, Vince Brewerton was appointed the Centre's first full-time Executive Director. Like Martin, Vince has a long and successful background in business, including as a management consultant for 23 years. "At the start of my consulting career, I worked for a large international consulting firm. After six or seven years there, I found that the primary focus on money no longer spoke to me", Vince told me. "I was experiencing a change in values, which led me to start my own consulting business that focused exclusively on the charitable sector in Canada. This step enabled me to work with people that I found incredibly inspiring; people who are devoted to a worthy cause. I soon realized that for me and for many others, it's not about finding work with meaning, but about finding meaning in our work. Like Martin, this was my epiphany moment. From that point on, I helped organizations open up to the hunger that people have for meaningful conversations at work." When the Centre for Spirituality and the Workplace began looking for a its first full-time Executive Director, Vince was the clear choice. "The goal of the Centre", Vince explained, "is to change the way organizations and people work. Not in a way in which we tell people what to do, but to really encourage a change in workplaces so that conversations about meaning and purpose can take place there. As individuals, so much of our focus and time is devoted to our work; the workplace is where these conversations are most needed. To support this change, there is a growing body of research that shows that when these conversations happen, organizations and employees prosper more." Both Martin and Vince stressed that for some, spirituality is expressed through religion, and the Centre deeply supports this. The problem that can arise when religion or spirituality are taken to extreme is that they become dogmatic. The issue then is not the religion or the spirituality but the dogmatic nature of it. That tends to turn others off, and being turned off they are reluctant to engage in the inquiry. It closes the door. Inquiry, on the other hand, does the opposite by opening doors. Inquiries can be about the questions that, as human beings, we yearn to explore; questions such as: What is my purpose? Where can I find meaning? How can I connect more deeply with others? How can I experience and express more of my spiritual essence at work? Both men see work as the place where inquiry in to these questions is desperately needed, and where powerful transformation can occur. This is what Martin calls, "The New Prosperity",. "We must transform work, and because work is such a huge lever in temporal society, we could therefore transform the world", Martin said. "People have a notion of the kind of world they want, and it's often suppressed for a variety of reasons; maybe we think this kind of transformation is not possible, but I believe that it is. Our vision is a society in which people can have authentic conversations about the deepest yearnings. This is authenticity in the chaos and mud of the world. We can create a new narrative of what it means to be a human, and what it means to participate in humanity. We can create Heaven on Earth." As a Rabbi - a person devoted to nurturing the spirit - and a businessman - a person who must focus on sales and profits - I have often been asked the question, "Is there really any place for spirituality at work?" Martin and Vince are leaders in positively and enthusiastically answering this question in a way that is directly implementable, and that is changing the vision of both work and spirituality; a vision that is nothing less, as Martin reminds us, than Heaven on Earth! You can hear my interview with Martin and Vince at http://www.fiveminutesonmondays.com/dialogues-with-martin-rutte-and-vince-brewerton/ If you'd like to lean more about the Centre or get on their e-mail list, please go to, http://www.spiritualityandtheworkplace.ca/
 
Naomi Wolf: Why No Investigation? Top
Last week, I blogged here on The Huffington Post with evidence rebutting the Pentagon's denials of Taguba's confirmation to the British newspaper the Telegraph that male-on-male rape and male-on-female rape are pictured in the detainee abuse photos that Obama has suddenly decided to suppress. All weekend, though, I had an uneasy feeling -- that feeling you have when you've had a nightmare while you were sleeping that you can't quite recall. As I was researching this story today, I remembered what it was: think back to 2005. We were still in shock after the Abu Ghraib photos came out. The Bush White House -- oddly, it seemed to me at the time -- invited scores of lawmakers from both parties to a private screening of the abuse photos and even four videos that did not get released at that time. They emerged, to a man and a woman, shocked. They spoke in public, on the record, by name, of having witnessed scenes of rape, sodomy, and violent sexual assault against children. I even wrote about this screening in The End of America ; I had interpreted the motivation for showing these scenes as being one of intimidation. Now I am not so sure -- now I think the motive was to implicate any potential opposition. If Bush et al showed these images, and the Congresspeople did nothing -- a damn good bet -- well, the Bush team would have taken the wind out of any prosecutorial impulses. Why are the Congressional leadership of both parties bizarrely silent now, when the American people are demanding an investigation and prosecution of the crimes represented in just two of 87 of those scenes? Because they were there then -- saw it -- all of it -- at a weirdly perverse, practically red-carpet, private snuff-film screening -- and they evidently went along with it. Read this quote, which appears again below, carefully: The military later screened some of the images for lawmakers, who said they showed, among other things, attack dogs snarling at cowed prisoners, Iraqi women forced to expose their breasts, and naked prisoners forced to have sex with each other. It would seem that the lawmakers, having personally witnessed these same images, did nothing. Pursued nothing. Investigated nothing. Accepted a whitewash. Called to prosecute nothing. This is a news report from Editor and Publisher , July 23, 2005 called "Why the Pentagon Is Blocking Release of Remaining 87 Abu Ghraib Images": "So what is shown on the 87 photographs and four videos from Abu Ghraib prison that the Pentagon, in an eleventh hour move, blocked from release this weekend? One clue: Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told Congress last year, after viewing a large cache of unreleased images: "I mean, I looked at them last night, and they're hard to believe." They show acts "that can only be described as blatantly sadistic, cruel and inhumane," he added. A Republican Senator suggested the same day they contained scenes of "rape and murder." No wonder Rumsfeld commented then, "If these are released to the public, obviously it's going to make matters worse." Yesterday, news emerged that lawyers for the Pentagon had refused to cooperate with a federal judge's order to release dozens of unseen photographs and videos from Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq by Saturday. The photos were among thousands turned over by the key "whistleblower" in the scandal, Specialist Joseph M. Darby. Just a few that were released to the press sparked the Abu Ghraib abuse scandal last year, and the video images are said to be even more shocking. [...] One Pentagon lawyer has argued that they should not be released because they would only add to the humiliation of the prisoners. But the ACLU has said the faces of the victims can easily be "redacted." To get a sense of what may be shown in these images, one has to go back to press reports from when the Abu Ghraib abuse scandal was still front page news. This is how CNN reported it on May 8, 2004, in a typical account that day: "U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld revealed Friday that videos and 'a lot more pictures' exist of the abuse of Iraqis held at Abu Ghraib prison. [...] "The embattled defense secretary fielded sharp and skeptical questions from lawmakers as he testified about the growing prisoner abuse scandal. A military report about that abuse describes detainees being threatened, sodomized with a chemical light and forced into sexually humiliating poses. [...] "'The American public needs to understand we're talking about rape and murder here. We're not just talking about giving people a humiliating experience,' Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina told reporters after Rumsfeld testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee. 'We're talking about rape and murder -- and some very serious charges.' "A report by Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba on the abuse at the prison outside Baghdad says videotapes and photographs show naked detainees, and that groups of men were forced to masturbate while being photographed and videotaped. Taguba also found evidence of a 'male MP guard having sex with a female detainee.' "Rumsfeld told Congress the unrevealed photos and videos contain acts 'that can only be described as blatantly sadistic, cruel and inhuman.'" [...] The military later screened some of the images for lawmakers, who said they showed, among other things, attack dogs snarling at cowed prisoners, Iraqi women forced to expose their breasts, and naked prisoners forced to have sex with each other. [...] "Basically what happened is that those women who were arrested with young boys/children in cases that have been recorded. The boys were sodomized with the cameras rolling. The worst about all of them is the soundtrack of the boys shrieking that your government has. They are in total terror it's going to come out."
 
Frank Dwyer: Political Haiku: Broadway Barack Top
How dare Obama see play while GM fails! (Or drive while Broadway does?) More on Barack Obama
 
Megumi Sasaki: Herb & Dorothy Top
What makes our life fulfilling, particularly in today's economy, where the word "uncertainty" is a mantra that surrounds us? I never really considered this until I met Herb and Dorothy Vogel. Through them I found that the answer was simple: passion and love. They succeeded with these two things, in the world of art collecting no less, where money and social status tend to rule. In February 2002, I was working as a field producer for an educational program featuring the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude. We were shooting their exhibition at the National Gallery of Art in Washington DC, and I noticed that all the works came from the Herb and Dorothy Vogel collection. I did some more research and became so intrigued by their story. A postal clerk and a librarian, who built a world-class art collection, a collection that was crammed in their one-bedroom apartment in NYC, who never sold a piece, and let go all the works to the museum? I couldn't believe it was true. At the end of the shoot, I went to the museum bookstore and bought a catalog of their collection. I didn't know what to do with the story at that point. The catalog stayed in my bookshelf and their story stayed at the corner of my heart for the next two and half years. In 2004, I happened to meet them in person at an event. Their presence was so powerful, although they were both small in stature. I introduced myself and told them I was interested in telling their story. They invited me to their apartment one week later and that's when it all started. HERB & DOROTHY tells the extraordinary story of Herbert Vogel, a postal clerk, and Dorothy Vogel, a librarian, who managed to build one of the most important contemporary art collections in history with very modest means. In the early 1960s, when very little attention was paid to Minimalist and Conceptual Art, Herb and Dorothy Vogel quietly began purchasing the works of unknown artists. Devoting all of Herb's salary to purchase art they liked, and living on Dorothy's paycheck alone, they continued collecting artworks guided by two rules: the piece had to be affordable, and it had to be small enough to fit in their one-bedroom Manhattan apartment. Within these limitations, they proved themselves curatorial visionaries; most of those they supported and befriended went on to become world-renowned artists including Sol LeWitt, Christo and Jeanne-Claude, Richard Tuttle, Chuck Close, Robert Mangold, Sylvia Plimack Mangold, Lynda Benglis, Pat Steir, Robert Barry, Lucio Pozzi, and Lawrence Weiner. After thirty years of meticulous collecting and buying, the Vogels managed to accumulate over 2,000 pieces, filling every corner of their tiny one bedroom apartment. "Not even a toothpick could be squeezed into the apartment," recalls Dorothy. In 1992, the Vogels decided to move their entire collection to the National Gallery of Art in Washington, DC. The vast majority of their collection was given as a gift to the institution. Many of the works they acquired appreciated so significantly over the years that their collection today is worth millions of dollars. Still, the Vogels never sold a single piece. Today, Herb and Dorothy still live in the same apartment in New York with 19 turtles, lots of fish, and one cat. They've refilled it with piles of new art they've acquired. While making the film we unearthed over 1000 archival photos, hours of footage, and selected images from over 4000 artworks by 200 artists in the collection. Six months into the production I was battling the fact that Herb and Dorothy don't always talk about their collection or explain the reasons why they have chosen certain pieces. When I asked them why certain pieces entered their collection, they would answer "because we liked them," or "because they are beautiful." Then Lucio Pozzi, the first artist I interviewed for the film, opened my eyes. His response to my dilemma was: "That is why the Vogels are very special. Why should you explain art? Herb and Dorothy only look, look, and look. That's their way of communicating with art and artists." Then it struck me that art doesn't need to be intellectualized, just shared with a willing audience. I look forward to sharing their incredible story with you. HERB & DOROTHY (Arthouse Films) opens in New York on June 5 at The Beekman Theatre and Cinema Village. The film will be release nationwide in early July. For further information please visit www.herbanddorothy.com HERB & DOROTHY is directed by first time filmmaker Megumi Sasaki. The film received the Golden Starfish Award for the Best Documentary Film and Audience Award from the 2008 Hampton's International Film Festival. It has also received Audience Awards from the 2008 SILVERDOCS Film Festival and the 2009 Philadelphia Cinefest. Palm Springs International Film Festival named HERB & DOROTHY one of their "Best of Fest" films in 2009. More on Energy
 
Norm Kurz: Bibi: Take "Yes" For An Answer Top
Now into his second hundred days on the job, Barack Obama is doing what no recent President was willing to do: jump right into the Middle East peace process and make it a centerpiece of his entire foreign policy agenda. While it is a radically different approach, Obama telegraphed his intentions repeatedly during the long campaign. No one should be surprised that even while the fresh paint on the White House walls is barely dry, Israeli and Palestinian leaders are scrambling to figure out their next steps. Some elements in the American Jewish community are sounding alarms over what they perceive as pressure on Israel. In Jerusalem, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is said to be upset there is little wiggle room in the American position, which he heard over and over from the President in the White House, from Secretary Clinton at the State Department, and even from Israel's friends on Capitol Hill. But for all the public complaining, Israeli leaders ought to be relieved. Instead of digging in and holding fast to ideologically driven positions, Netanyahu should take "yes" for an answer by using Obama's framework as his own. With Netanyahu and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas having come and gone from the White House, Obama's demand are simple and clear. Israel must cease expansion of existing settlements, even for so-called "natural growth" that would accommodate the needs of growing families wanting more space. Palestinians must continue to improve the security situation in the West Bank and, as the President articulated openly for the first time, "make progress in reducing the incitement and anti-Israel sentiments that are sometimes expressed in schools and mosques and in the public square, because all those things are impediments to peace." For Israel, despite the anxieties, the U.S. demands are not onerous. They don't begin to touch on dismantling of existing settlements, thereby reducing Israel's footprint in the West Bank. The potential physical confrontations between the Israeli army and the settler movement are minimized, with only stray outposts having to be pulled down to satisfy the freeze policy. The tough stuff is far down the road. But for the Palestinians, the demand is not only to maintain and increase the level of peace and security on the West Bank - no small challenge - but to change the entire culture of hate that for generations has permeated Palestinian and Arab societies. The maps of the region that refuse to show Israel, the schoolbooks that demonize Jews, the curricula that challenge Israel's right to exist, the speeches that incite violence, the TV shows geared to children that encourage killing of Jews, the sermons extolling "martyrs" and terrorism - all this and more are now President Abbas' burden, and rightly so. Perhaps Israel's leaders are complaining now to mask their relief that Obama has not demanded something that truly would be hard to accomplish, like a unilateral pullback from West Bank settlements. After the Gaza experience - where Israel evacuated all its settlements and its military, only to be rewarded with thousands of near-daily rocket attacks launched by Hamas at Israeli civilians - no Israeli government will act unilaterally to give up West Bank territory. That will come only in the context of negotiations with a credible partner, one strong enough to live up to its agreed obligations, including those Obama just wrapped around Abbas' neck. Even so, a large majority of Israelis know they must end their rule over the Palestinians, just as Israel is better off for having ended its occupation of Gaza and south Lebanon. Israel's long-term health and welfare depends on achieving that strategic goal, and it will be easier to accomplish with its U.S. relationship intact. This week, as Obama prepares to make his long awaited, high profile speech to the Muslim world in Cairo, Netanyahu would be smart to say he understands, appreciates and agrees with the priority Obama is placing on Middle East peace, and that he pledges to do his part by acceding to the President's terms. At the same time, he should say that Israel expects an equally forthcoming effort by Abbas to comply with Obama's stated wishes, and for Obama to use his Cairo speech to press the entire Arab world to take concrete steps toward the kind of normalization he spelled out in the Oval Office. A cynic might point out that prospects for peace would come to a crashing halt for at least a generation if there was no movement until the culture of hate was eliminated. That wouldn't be in Israel's best interest, but it sure would buy it a lot of time. The writer is President of The Kurz Company, an international communications firm. He served as Communications Director to then-Senator Joe Biden, and spokesman for Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, from 2000-2006. More on Barack Obama
 
Ming Holden: Witnessing Mongolia's Election Top
In the Ulaanbaatar Hotel, a large square building off the southeast side of Sukhbaatar Square in Mongolia's capital city of Ulaanbaatar, about 27 expats gathered with as many Mongolians last Friday to learn about being International Observers at Mongolia's Presidential election. Leading the presentation was Tim Meisburger, an elections expert based in The Asia Foundation's Bangkok office who has seen virtually every election in Asia unfold in-country for the last several years. The world now knows that the Democratic opponent, Elbegdorj, beat out the incumbent People's Party representative, Enkhbayar, for the Mongolian Presidency on May 24th. It was a sunny day here in Ulaanbaatar, and I watched it happen, from start to close, as a member of a small international election-observing mission organized and funded by The Asia Foundation. We were each paired with a Mongolian citizen after a registration process that required a passport photo and basic affiliation information beforehand. We were then outfitted with badges and Asia Foundation shirts that said "Election Observor" on the back in Mongolia's modern Cyrillic script. My partner, Oggii, was a quiet and pleasant woman who works in the same office I do at the Asia Foundation but on a vastly different project (I'm editing a short story translation; she'll start her biology PhD with a Fulbright grant in Wyoming this fall). Oggii, as the interpreter, was the one with the double-duty of both observing and interviewing voters up to and on election day. The interviews were given (but never in polling stations) according to a survey Tim wrote that meant to measure how safe and informed Mongolians felt in their right to vote, their government and their media. As an observer, I wasn't sure how uneasy to feel about injecting myself into the thick of things, since last year's June 1st Parliamentary elections resulted in riots on Sukhbaatar Square, the deaths of five people, and the torching of a building or two. We were instructed to leave if a situation felt uncomfortable -- "that's all we need to know," said Tim, "because if you're not comfortable, that's not en environment conducive to a free and fair election." The Mongolians I spoke with weren't worried; like England, Mongolia's Parliament holds much more power than nominal heads of state and so a presidential election carried with it less weight and passion. Observers were to visit five or six polling stations, which were public buildings like schools and fire stations, per pair. Oggii and I were at School #23 in Ulnaabtaar at 7am when the polls opened with a ceremonial showing of the big blue ballot-boxes, counting of absentee ballots, and singing of the National Anthem. Two agents from each of the two parties were present, a fact that was more or less true in every polling station Oggii and I visited (though there were many polling stations we didn't). Tim had mentioned during the preparation presentation with slight bafflement that while Mongolia's elections were on a Sunday and had the longest open hours in all of Asia -- 7am-10pm -- Mongolian voters still ran in to the polling stations at 9:59pm. The room, full of Mongolian interpreters paired with international observers from The Asia Foundation and the U.S. Embassy as well as local NGOs and Fulbright students, answered him resoundingly and in unison: "It's Mongolia!" It's difficult to report on an experience as a member of the media that, during the experience itself, I was not allowed to comment to the media on. Election observers have a specific job: observe and report what they see at the polls and in the election environment to the coordinator, who formulates a report based on everyone's data, not just the reports of one or two of us. It defeats our purpose for one of us to say that what he or she saw was a fair and free election or that it wasn't; I was not present all day at each of the polling stations in all of Mongolia with eyes in the back of my head. I can say that Mongolians reported in past years that vote telegraphing, as it's called, resulted in the illegal buying of votes outside polling stations, and that we were instructed to keep our eyes peeled for that and any other obstructions to the democratic process. I can also say that the day I observed was a peaceful one, which meant that what I noticed had more to do with admiring the commitment of the Mongolian people to a vote they haven't always had. "We did vote," explained the Arts Council of Mongolia chairwoman Ariunaa Tserenpil to me last week, "but we only had one box to check." The elder sector of the population of Ulaanbaatar came to vote in their very best deels, elder couples helping one another up the stairs of the school that served as their polling station. It wasn't unusual to see one or several pins connoting different lifetime achievements; many grandmothers boasted Communist-era Medals of Motherhood over their deels (Buddhist-symbol-embroidered robes that have not changed in their basic design since the days of Genghis Khan). What impressed me was that they looked wonderful; what astounded me was that each of these elderly people carried with them memories of a Mongolia where they could not exercise the freedom to vote between two different people to determine, as a populace, who would get the honor of being their President. In the week since, I kept my eyes and ears open for post-election observation. There was something of a scandal when it was revealed that Enkhbayar's wife allegedly had a Swiss bank account with well over $1 billion in it, of course, but on the streets of Ulaanbaatar, things went on as usual. Late May proffered its usual hail, rain, snow, and high-80's sunlight in the same day. In the upscale Nayra Cafe, the largely foreign clientele were instructed that Thursday's internet password was "Elbegdorj." Ganbat, the author leading the latest effort at forming a Mongolian Center of International PEN, sported the inked forefinger of a citizen who had voted when I had lunch with him. Neither the top lawyer at the Ministry of Justice nor the young Mongolians I am friends with did much but shrug when I asked them to opine on the election results. "It's fine, but the other guy would have been just about as fine," seems the general opinion, as far as I can see. But then again, I have the eyes of only one person.
 
Rebecca Booth: Who Took My Collagen and How Can I Get it Back? Top
Hormonal aging is one of the least known or discussed causes of wrinkles, dry, and sagging skin. Knowing the impact of waning estrogen on our skin can provide you with understanding of how combat some of the fallout of hormonal aging. Today I became brave enough to buy one of those tiny but powerful magnifying mirrors in order to better check my eye makeup (I'm still in denial of my 50-something declining vision). It's frightening to face in (15X) focus the reality of the deepening crow's feet. What I know about this I have explained to many of my patients for years: with menopause it is the loss of elasticity that causes these changes; in the face, in the joints, in the walls of our arteries...and of course in the vaginal tissues. The fact is that estrogen has a very powerful role in the promotion of our human elastic glue: collagen. This means that with hormonal aging (accelerated by menopause) we women stand to lose more than our reproductive responsibility. It may sound like vanity to wax poetic about the plumped up lips I have envied in my estrogen-ripe OB patients, or the flowing hair of my 14 year old as she matures into her femininity. But what of other areas that seem less shameful to miss: bone and joint flexibility, moist eyes, resilient ligaments, and so many other features that seemingly come "unglued," as collagen declines with hormonal aging? It simply isn't fair for the females of our species to abruptly lose such an important substance... and why? Of course estrogen enhances flexibility in the pelvic bones to help with vaginal delivery, and I can understand that the "glow" of peaking estrogen in skin is useful as a signal of who is fertile (and who is not) for the warrior or hunter returning home on a brief leave from his duties, but what is the evolutionary benefit of the matriarch becoming a "little old lady" as a result of her menopause-accelerated loss of bone matrix collagen? Men have a very gradual decline in testosterone (also a collagen supporter) as their gonads do not have a programmed retirement; this helps them maintain their bone density, muscle strength, even experiencing less wrinkling compare to same aged women for whom Mother Nature has relieved reproductive duty. It's an unfair advantage, and it can put women out of sync with men... a potential problem on many levels. What can be done? • Avoid collagen killers: Smoking, too much sun, diabetes, poor nutrition, stress (from excess cortisol), and poor hydration. • HRT (hormone replacement therapy) can dampen the effect of declining skin elasticity, loss of bone density, and even positively effect elasticity in arteries; but there are well-defined risks along with these benefits. Ask your doctor to help you understand the full risk-benefit profile if you feel you are in need of HRT. • A diet high in plant protein (soy protein, hummus, nuts, nut butters, foods made with almond flour, etc) can offer the support of plant estrogens, or phytoestrogens, which have been demonstrated to have a positive effect on collagen. • Omega 3 fatty acids (fish oils and flax seed oils) are excellent "lubricators" of joints (to help with flexibility), improve dry eye, and a host of other metabolic and mood elevating properties. • Vitamin D: (at least 1000 IU a day) now being thought of as a hormone as it has so many varied effects on body systems, can contribute to a healthy, flexible, bone matrix...and has positive effects on skin as well. • Calcium: 1000mg prior to, and 1500 mg a day, after menopause through diet or supplements; best spread out through the day, as the body cannot absorb more than 500 to 600mg at once. • Vitamin C: 400mg day can help support healthy collagen. • Exercise: Muscle development can stimulate new growth of collagen and prevent atrophy, or loss of muscle mass that can contribute to sagging tissues and declining bone density. • Biotin: 1000 mcg a day may help support hair and nail strength that often decline with menopause. • Phytoestrogen supplements: With the decline of estrogen at menopause plant estrogen supplements can help offset the fallout. For a woman not on HRT, 70 mg of isoflavones a day may help support collagen and promote bone health. • Topical vaginal estrogens: Very effective for vaginal dryness and loss of elasticity, ask your doctor to consider if a prescription is right for you. As bone density is strongly tied to collagen content, a bone density test can be said to roughly reflect a body's collagen. I'm just as afraid to step into my office bone density (DEXA) machine (now that I've hit menopause), as I was to pick up the magnifying mirror. My inspiration? My dear friend and patient Melinda: slender, late-forties, osteopenic, not on hormones; just had her test. She is devoted to exercise, eats the right foods, takes the right supplements, corrected her low vitamin D level 2 years ago, and despite my trepidation, her density is up...and she has glowing skin! With an understanding of the challenges and a strategic plan, you can hold off the collagen loss...even if you don't have you-know-who's lips. More on Health
 
Jeffrey Feldman: The Politics of "Murder" Top
The violent killing of yet another American doctor at the hands of yet another right-wing political activist forces us to ask a crucial question: Why does the right-wing anti-abortion movement in America repeatedly give rise to people who see murder as a legitimate form of protest? The answer does not lie in any single procedure (e.g. "late term abortions"), but in the violent rhetoric that defines a political movement. The murderer of Dr. George Tiller is the product of a political movement that has so thoroughly expanded the definition of "murder" that it now includes everything and everyone who rejects or even questions the idea that a zygote is a citizen. Until that movement changes its focus, it will continue to give rise to activists who kill doctors. So called "late term abortion" is a hotly contested and controversial practice debated in living rooms and judicial opinions alike. But it is not the reason a right-wing activist shot another doctor. Dr. George Tiller was killed in his church because the right-wing has built a political movement around a violent idea: that America has been transformed by liberals into a culture that "murders" babies. Like a giant river supported by millions of tiny underground streams, this movement is supported by everyone who defines those with whom they disagree on abortion policy as supporters of "murder." For those Americans whose worldview has been saturated and distorted by this political movement, "murder" is not just a throwaway term from TV, radio or church. For these few, "murder" has become a dark lens through which they view all of contemporary American society--a poisonous paradigm that leads them to believe the only way to end this new holocaust is to refresh the tree of liberty with the blood of patriots. But those who kill doctors are only one part of the problem. Even among those who would never condone violent acts in politics, many feel perfectly comfortable contributing to the political rhetoric that has steadily expanded the definition of "murder" to the point where it cultivates actual political violence. In 2009, the right-wing definition of what constitutes the "murder" of babies goes far beyond the actual abortion of a fetus to encompass a vast range of political views, situations and people. It has become commonplace on the right, for example, to talk about defrosting frozen embryos as an act of "murder." Many on the right talk about the so-called "morning after pill" and the RU486 "abortion pill" as "murder." Many on the right even talk about birth control as "murder." Murder, murder, murder--the drumbeat is hypnotic. When the right is talking about abortion, they are accusing the left of "murder." Watching Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity or other right-wing media figures discuss abortion offers a good glimpse into how these debates take shape, but it is not the only cause. In political debates, right-wing voices almost always use certain controversial procedures to define abortion as "murder," but even when the subject moves beyond those procedures they continue to use "murder" to describe all other aspects of abortion. The phrase "baby murderer," then becomes short-hand for referring to "liberals" in other contexts. This right-wing rhetorical strategy is used so often, people barely give it any notice anymore. Calling people "murderers" and "baby killers" has become a normal part of U.S. media. Guests on TV and radio shows who routinely accuse their debate opponents of supporting or condoning "murder" are invited back time and time again to repeat the accusation. Steeped in this expanding definition of "murder," almost all right-wing political participants choose violent rhetoric over violent action. They choose to call someone a "murderer, rather than killing a doctor, as a protest against abortion. But because the rhetoric has steadily expanded to such a vast range of political views and actions that have all been encompassed by one giant concept of "murder," there are some right-wing activists who do chose violent action as the best way to bring about political change. No matter how many or how few late term abortions are performed, so long as the right-wing anti-abortion movement continues to fold dissent into an ever-expanding definition of "murder," then the right-wing will continue to give rise to activists who kill doctors.
 
Phil Bronstein: GOP Pols Believe in Outsourcing -- the Dirty Work Top
Republicans may be struggling in the dunk tank since the last national elections, holding onto each other for warmth and flotation in the Senate and House and fractiously searching for a new overarching identity to avoid being the outlying party for the next several decades. But, don't be fooled by the Perils of Pauline act. The GOP is keeping its cutting cultural edge over the Dems. The latest piece of functional brilliance: let the conservative "entertainers" do the wet work , the dirty parts of the job, while the pols take the high road and hang onto their seats. First come the populist bombers, then the statesmen behind them sweeping up the debris and tut-tutting for the cameras. You can have it both ways. Bottom feed around the talk shows over the weekend or in between the lines of the political news stories and you'd see very clearly this next phase in the culture wars: another shrewd Republican plan to get and keep people's attention, often contradictory public impulses. Rush Limbaugh, the flame-throwing Jabba the Hut you can't afford to ignore, calls both Barack Obama and Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor "racist." Newt Gingrich, making his own spotlight comeback as a Republican arsonist, says the same. The public is inflamed, titillated -- there may even be a fair amount of agreement in places around the country -- and gets mesmerized by the fire. Phase One, complete! Then on the Sunday talkies, Republican senate leader Mitch McConnell, South Carolina senator Lindsey Graham, Alabama's Jeff Sessions and Texan Kay Bailey Hutchison disown the "racist" claim, mildly scolding the performers appearing in the center ring of their own tent. On Face The Nation Sunday, Mr. McConnell had to get pushed hard by host Bob Schieffer to actually say he doesn't agree with the language of the Limbaugh/Gingrich attack. "I've got better things to do than be the speech police," he said, attempting a dodge. Senator Sessions invoked the commentators' right to free speech, while dismissing the commenting. Only Lindsey Graham let the real plan slip: "They've got an audience to entertain," he said on Fox News Sunday of Limbaugh/Gingrich. "I'm a United States senator." Bingo. In politics, that's often a distinction without a difference. But, he made the point. The GOP gets the flash of a charged-up base and the functionality of senatorial moderation. Aside from good ratings, this just might also be the way to avoid directly pissing off the growing Latino vote, a good chunk of it often conservative on a lot of issues. Years ago in the Philippines, there was a Muslim warlord who heroically rescued (negotiated for ransom money) several nuns kidnapped by Islamic secessionists. I visited the convent with him and the sisters were in heaven about what he'd done for them. A day's walk into the jungle, where this guy's private army hid out, he introduced me to two of its members: the kids who'd kidnapped the nuns. Like the Republican approach, there's the whole thing, nicely bookended. So what do the Democrats do in response? They go "left-wing in theory, right-wing in practice," as David Zirin puts in in The Nation . Zirin, a sports writer, looked at Judge Sotomayor's court votes on professional sports issues and contends that while she made "strong statements for union rights," she also "faithfully serv(ed) the interests of money and power... no wonder she clicked so smoothly with the current administration." Her patron, Mr. Obama, has lately been accused of the same -- on same-sex marriage , don't ask/tell , Afghanistan, taxes, detainees, and a rainbow of other issues. Even San Francisco's Democratic hopeful governor and boy mayor , Gavin Newsom, has talked left but moved right (advocating non-governmental solutions to solve government's drastic cutting of social programs, accepting big campaign bucks from an anti-rent-control advocate , successfully selling his multi-million dollar home in a down market and otherwise behaving kind of like a wealthy Republican. If this strategy worked, we'd have a fair contest. But the Dems don't seem to understand that you need different people to speak different lines; the same pol can't play two parts at the same time. Their act is also missing a key element: the entertainment factor. Jon Stewart is working hard, but with Al Franken in electoral limbo, who's the rampaging stage act for the Democrats? Michael Moore? Well, he was right about GM . But nothing kills humorous entertainment like moral certitude. More on Sonia Sotomayor
 
Josh Sugarmann: Scott Roeder: Latest Guy With a Gun Who Made the Rules Top
What do Scott Roeder, the alleged killer of abortion doctor George Tiller, Richard Poplawski, arrested in April for ambushing four police officers in Pittsburgh, killing three and injuring one, and Wayne LaPierre, the executive vice president of the National Rifle Association all have common? They all believe that " the guys with the guns make the rules "--the rallying cry LaPierre offered attendees at this year's CPAC convention. LaPierre's red-meat statements to pro-gun activists--cynical, incendiary bafflegab designed to anger up their hearts and open up their wallets--has effects that go far beyond the NRA's own political and financial interests. The NRA likes to brag about its alleged four million members and its ability to sway a compliant Congress with the merest hint of displeasure. But when asked whether it should ever be held accountable for the effect its language (both as potential instigator and chronic validator) has on the fringe of American gun ownership its public response is a surprised, "Who, me?" On the rare occasions when it has been called to account--for example, when during the Clinton Administration it stated that the "final war has begun" and former member Timothy McVeigh took the organization at its word, blowing up the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City--the organization has made slight tacks in its language (so long "final war," hello "culture war") but has always retained the disparate combination of bullying and paranoia evident in LaPierre's words The danger lies in the literal interpretation of LaPierre's statement and the NRA's publications. According to the Wichita Eagle , "Those who know Roeder said he believed that killing abortion doctors was an act of justifiable homicide." The Eagle also reports that Roeder had at one time been a member of the anti-government "Freemen" movement. Poplawski feared the Obama administration would ban his guns. According to news reports , "One friend, Edward Perkovic, said Poplawski feared 'the Obama gun ban that's on the way' and 'didn't like our rights being infringed upon.'" Right now there is a consensus that our nation--from the president down to the cop on the beat--is at increased risk of violence from extremist organizations. And each time a smoldering ember sparks resulting in death and injury, the question that should be asked is who is fanning the flames? More on CPAC
 
Rob Cohen: I'm a Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here! -- The Train Wreck to End All Train Wrecks Top
It's hard to believe that the last season of I'm a Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here! was on the air in the US just 6 short years ago. How have we survived since 2003 without the nightly foibles of semi-celebrities romping through the jungle, thousands of feet (maybe even miles) from the nearest luxury resort? So much has happened on television between then and now, it's almost impossible to imagine a world in which names like Tila Tequila and Flava' Flav weren't household, but reality TV has come a long way. And while the last six years have brought us award winning comedies like The Office and 30 Rock , the end of groundbreaking shows like The Sopranos and Sex and the City , and the bulk of cult favorites like 24 , Lost , and Arrested Development , in the canon of brilliant, industry-changing television programming, they all pale in comparison to I'm a Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here! Those shows have helped us bide our time between seasons, but it's finally back, and, dare I say it, better than ever. Mostly thanks to Rod Blagojevich. I'll admit I wasn't super-interested in the show until I learned that Blago was a contestant... or at least was trying to be. Though some news outlets reported that he was officially cast, turns out he did some illegal stuff, or something, and might be on probation, maybe, and isn't allowed to leave the country, I guess. Come on! Who do you have to buy off in Hollywood just to illegally escape the legal system you took an oath to uphold? Whether or not he realized what he was doing (which may be dependent upon whether or not he realized Costa Rica isn't in the United States), the controversy is now moot, as he is awaiting trial in the US and forbidden from competing on the show. Lucky for us, though, his wife, Patricia, is taking his place, which might be the most brilliant move NBC has made in the last decade besides canceling ER . Talk about D-list celebrities... Mrs. Blago would be completely unheard of if it weren't for the disgusting, grossly illegal, incredibly corrupt, and embarrassingly disgraceful actions of her husband as Governor. Glad to see that she's making the best of her situation, most likely by humiliating herself even further. But hey, the cast does get paid a fair amount for appearing on the show... maybe she's trying to raise money to buy her husband's seat as Governor back from Roland Burris. In any case, Jeff Zucker, I salute you. (Side note: IMDB still has a photo of Rod, as if he were a contestant. It's fantastic. Makes me wish we could banish him into the jungle forever. And that's not all. Over the next few weeks, I'll be following the show and chronicling the mishaps of the entire cast, which this season includes Heidi and Spencer of The Hills , Sanjaya of American Idol , John "Spider" Salley, Stephen Baldwin, Frangela, Janice Dickinson, Lou Diamon Phillips, and Torrie Wilson. Each has his or her own reason for appearing on this show, none of them sensical. I guess they do have a little something to gain, and absolutely nothing left to lose. Just the way I like it. So join me on this journey, every night (Monday to Thursday) at 8pm from June 1 to June 24 with recaps, commentary, and in-depth analysis shortly following each episode. And yes, you heard right: four nights a week for four weeks. It's the most jam-packed chunk of nonsense on NBC since The Tonight Show with Jay Leno. More on Reality TV
 
Kimora Lee Simmons: Mother To Mother: I Feel Her Pain Top
I watched this video on GlobalGrind.com , astounded, as two uniformed police officers manhandled this bloodied, black male teenager. I could not believe what I was seeing. I have since read that the two grown men choked and beat 14-year-old Trevor Casey so badly that his own mother, Karen, was unable to recognize him afterwards. He was not a "thug," he was a child. He could've been yours or mine. I am not trying to rush to judgment against the police officers, but it was clear from the video that something obviously went wrong. Writ large in the video, a metaphor: an overly aggressive and out of touch system using excessive force on our youth and our communities. But the video tells a larger story than the violent incident visited upon the Caseys of Toledo, OH. It's a story about the on-going conflict across our country between our communities and the agencies created to police them. Too often, these victims are black males. This is important to note since I've come to realize that, because this incident has been largely overlooked by the mass media, and also because it's dawned on me that our children may not be safe. As a mother of two beautiful daughters and one son, I am horrified at the way that our young black males are stereotyped: as negligible and disposable and destined for trouble. Mortified, then, is a good word to describe my reaction at having seemingly witnessed an attack on thin-limbed Trevor, who can't weigh more than 115 lbs -- including his non-threatening attire: summer shirt and wind shorts. I'm writing this in support of Trevor and Karen Casey and anyone else who has suffered at the hands of those who have a sworn duty to protect and honor them. I'm also championing anyone who is working towards ending brutality -- including law enforcement personnel who do the right thing for their agencies and their communities. However, I hope we stop for a moment and begin to analyze or explore why these confrontations continue to occur and what's being done to stop them. Until justice is served in this matter, we should all be vigilant in holding accountable not only those who use their authority and force to undermine our rights as citizens -- but also all of the officials, officers and citizens who let them get away with it. A fund will be established to aid the Caseys in their legal proceedings and I will be pleased to contribute and encourage you all to do so, as well. Any amount you can give will help. No amount is too small. I will be sending out the information once the fund is set up. Until then, please spread the word. Originally published on Global Grind .
 
Dick Cheney Questioned On Susan Boyle (VIDEO) Top
TMZ chased former Vice President Dick Cheney out of the National Press Club to ask him a pressing question about Susan Boyle. Watch: More on Susan Boyle
 
In Which Urban Beekeeping Looks Like A Religous Experience (PHOTO) Top
NEW YORK: An urban beekeeper inspects part of her colony of Italian honeybees on the roof of her Brooklyn building May 30, 2009 in New York City. Beekeeping is a growing phenomenon among environmentally-conscious urban dwellers in cities nationwide, and practioners cite the health benefits of natural honey as well as the boon to gardening that bees provide by pollination. (Photo by Chris Hondros/Getty Images) Get HuffPost Green updates on Facebook and Twitter ! More on Green Living
 
Green Turtles Rescued, Released In Indonesia (PHOTO) Top
Foreign tourists help in the release of a green turtle into the sea in the Kuta district of Denpasar on the Indonesia resort island of Bali on May 31, 2009 after Indonesian police seized six green turtles from a fishing boat in nearby Nusa Dua on May 30. Indonesia, home to important migrations routes at the crossroads of the Pacific and Indian Oceans, is home to six out of seven of the world's turtle species. AFP PHOTO / Sonny Tumbelaka (Photo credit should read SONNY TUMBELAKA/AFP/Getty Images) More on Animals
 
Merrill Lynch: Australian Insider Trading Claims False Top
Merrill Lynch, one of the most famous names in banking, has denied allegations that it engaged in what would be the biggest case of insider trading in Australian corporate history. More on Merrill Lynch
 
Police Officer Dies After Being Shot In The Head While On Duty Top
UPDATE 4:25 P.M. CHICAGO (AP) -- A plainclothes Chicago police officer who was shot in the head while investigating reports of gunfire on the city's South Side has died. Chicago Police officer John Mirabelli said Monday afternoon that the slain officer is 27 years old and a 3-year department veteran. He didn't identify the officer, but officials have said he works in the department's 7th District. Police say the shots were fired from a vehicle shortly after midnight Monday in the city's West Englewood neighborhood. Authorities say the officer was also wounded in the leg. Chicago police say they are investigating. UPDATE 4:00 P.M. The police officer who was shot in the head in Englewood early Monday morning has died, the Sun-Times reports : Supt. Jody Weis made the announcement this afternoon, soon after police officers who had gathered at the 27-year-old's bedside spilled out of Stroger Hospital, many of them crying and embracing each other. View more news videos at: http://www.nbcchicago.com/video . Check back for details. Read the entire Sun-Times story here . * * * CHICAGO (AP) -- Authorities say a Chicago plainclothes police officer was shot in the head and critically injured while investigating reports of shots being fired on the city's South Side. Chicago Police News Affairs Officer John Henry says the shooting occurred shortly after midnight Monday in the 6000 block of South Hermitage Avenue in the city's West Englewood neighborhood. Chicago Fire Department spokesman Larry Langford said the wounded officer was taken to Stroger Hospital in critical condition. Police later said the officer was in surgery early Monday. Police Supt. Jody Weis (WEES) held a brief news conference about the shooting early Monday, but declined to release the officer's name. The department said the wounded man was 27 years old and had been on the force for three years. -ASSOCIATED PRESS
 
Natasha Henstridge: Diets And Pills Hurt My Body Top
Playing a genetically-altered alien/human hybrid in the movie trilogy Species, Natasha Henstridge blew viewers away with her out-of-this-world body. But what it took for the model-turned-actress to maintain that killer physique was close to "extreme." "I've done some things that probably weren't the smartest things in the world," reveals Henstridge, now 34, of taking "pills" and over the counter supplements to give her an "extra boost" to be thinner. "I've even been to Chinese herbalists who've given me herbs and acupuncture," she says, thinking that they were "innocent and healthy."
 
Nonprofit Yoga Group Links Cancer Survivors With Free Memberships To Local Studios Top
Stephanie Adams' active life came to a screeching halt last year when she was diagnosed with breast cancer at the age of 27. "It was very hard for me to do my everyday normal activities, yet alone go out running and snowboarding like I used to," said Adams, who lives on the upper East Side. That's where Yoga Bear stepped in. The nonprofit links cancer survivors with free memberships to local yoga studios. The goal is to help build and maintain active and healthy lifestyles post-treatment. More than 140 yoga studios participate in the nationwide program, including 21 in the New York area. "It's an easy way to give back," said Tara Stiles, owner of Strala Yoga. "It's not hard to give up one spot in a class to make sure someone who has gone through so much regains their strength and wellness." More on Yoga
 
COLOR HER BAD...AND GOOD: Vote For Hillary Clinton's Prettiest And Not-So-Pretty Pantsuits (PHOTOS, POLL) Top
*Follow Huffington Post Style on Twitter and become a fan of Huffington Post Style on Facebook * More on Hillary Clinton
 
Obama Near Proposal To Revamp Financial Regulations Top
WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration will soon propose a comprehensive plan to expand the authority of the government to seize large troubled companies, create a new regulator for companies that pose risks to the financial system and possibly establish an agency to oversee consumer debt like mortgages and credit cards, federal officials and lawmakers briefed on the proposal said. More on The Fed
 
Pakistan Drone Attacks Guided By Planted 'Chips' Top
It sounds like a tinfoil hat nightmare, come to life: tiny electronic homing beacons, guiding CIA killer drones to their targets. But local residents and Taliban militants in Pakistan's tribal wildlands say that's exactly what's happening. More on Pakistan
 
Fox News Accuses Norm Coleman Of Judicial Activism Top
On Monday, Fox News Reporter Steve Brown was asked to analyze just where the Minnesota Senate recount stood as both sides brought their cases before the state Supreme Court. His answer was that Coleman needed the very thing that he and his GOP colleagues endlessly decry: judicial activism. "Well, what we heard today was a one-hour presentation," Brown said. "The five justices, five of seven -- two recused themselves on the Minnesota Supreme Court -- were very aggressive with their questioning on both sides as to the merits of their particular case. It basically comes down to the term, and it wasn't used in court today but I'm going to use it, judicial activism. That is exactly what it is that Norm Coleman's camp seems to want from the Minnesota Supreme Court. He wants the Supreme Court in this state to send it back to that three-judge panel and make them look at some ballots that they would not take a look at, based on standards, very liberal standards if you will, of how absentee ballots were counted in Minneapolis and other metropolitan areas." With the launch of Sonia Sotomayor's Supreme Court confirmation process, charges of judicial activism are flying around more frequently and with greater political weight. But it's rare for a Republican Senator to be accused of supporting it -- and by Fox News in particular. If this frame sticks, it could create some image or messaging issues for the GOP, with the party painting Obama's SCOTUS pick as an activist while cheering its former Senator's judicial activism in Minnesota. On a related note, the Minnesota Supreme Court heard oral arguments from Coleman and Franken's prospective legal teams on Monday, in what could be the last stage of the recount process. The justices asked tough and fairly pointed questions of Coleman's lawyer, hoping to nail down whether or not they believed widespread fraud had corrupted the election. That said, the former Senator's lawyer, Ben Ginsburg said he was "very encouraged" by the proceedings. Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!
 
Ken Salazar's Department Makeover: Addressing Climate, Bush Shortcuts Top
At the same time Salazar is working on those internal issues, he is also at the forefront of Obama's agenda for energy and climate change, which is now being worked on intensively on Capitol Hill. "We have a huge amount to contribute to that agenda here in the department because we control 20 percent of the land mass," he said. "We have driven through the tangles of the jurisdictional disputes and have now finalized the rules for the development of offshore wind [power] here in the United States. We're doing the same thing with solar and wind onshore. ... We are on the verge of what I think is going to be a major step forward with respect to the whole renewable energy world." More on Climate Change
 
VIDEO: GM CEO Fritz Henderson Talks Bankruptcy Top
General CEO Fritz Henderson appeared on CNBC earlier today to talk about bankruptcy and what the future holds for the the century-old automaker. Watch the full video below.
 

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)