Monday, June 15, 2009

Y! Alert: The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Yahoo! Alerts
My Alerts

The latest from The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Marjorie Cohn: Agent Orange Continues to Poison Vietnam Top
From 1961 to 1971, the U.S. military sprayed Vietnam with Agent Orange, which contained large quantities of Dioxin, in order to defoliate the trees for military objectives. Dioxin is one of the most dangerous chemicals known to man. It has been recognized by the World Health Organization as a carcinogen (causes cancer) and by the American Academy of Medicine as a teratogen (causes birth defects). Between 2.5 and 4.8 million people were exposed to Agent Orange. 1.4 billion hectares of land and forest -- approximately 12 percent of the land area of Vietnam -- were sprayed. The Vietnamese who were exposed to the chemical have suffered from cancer, liver damage, pulmonary and heart diseases, defects to reproductive capacity, and skin and nervous disorders. Children and grandchildren of those exposed have severe physical deformities, mental and physical disabilities, diseases, and shortened life spans. The forests and jungles in large parts of southern Vietnam have been devastated and denuded. They may never grow back and if they do, it will take 50 to 200 years to regenerate. Animals that inhabited the forests and jungles have become extinct, disrupting the communities that depended on them. The rivers and underground water in some areas have also been contaminated. Erosion and desertification will change the environment, contributing to the warming of the planet and dislocation of crop and animal life. The U.S. government and the chemical companies knew that Agent Orange, when produced rapidly at high temperatures, would contain large quantities of Dioxin. Nevertheless, the chemical companies continued to produce it in this manner. The U.S. government and the chemical companies also knew that the Bionetics Study, commissioned by the government in 1963, showed that even low levels of Dioxin produced significant deformities in unborn offspring of laboratory animals. But they suppressed that study and continued to spray Vietnam with Agent Orange. It wasn't until the study was leaked in 1969 that the spraying of Agent Orange was discontinued. U.S. soldiers who served in Vietnam have experienced similar illnesses. After they sued the chemical companies, including Dow and Monsanto, that manufactured and sold Agent Orange to the government, the case settled out of court for $180 million which gave few plaintiffs more than a few thousand dollars each. Later, the U.S. veterans won a legislative victory for compensation for exposure to Agent Orange. They receive $1.52 billion per year in benefits. But when the Vietnamese victims of Agent Orange sued the chemical companies in federal court, U.S. District Judge Jack Weinstein dismissed the lawsuit, concluding that Agent Orange did not constitute a poison weapon prohibited by the Hague Convention of 1907. Weinstein had reportedly told the chemical companies when they settled the U.S. veterans' suit that their liability was over and he was making good on his promise. His dismissal was affirmed by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court refused to hear the case. The chemical companies admitted in their filing in the Supreme Court that the harm alleged by the victims was foreseeable although not intended. How can something that is foreseeable be unintended? On May 15 and 16 of this year, the International Peoples' Tribunal of Conscience in Support of the Vietnamese Victims of Agent Orange convened in Paris and heard testimony from 27 victims, witnesses and scientific experts. Seven people from three continents served as judges of the Tribunal, which was sponsored by the International Association of Democratic Lawyers (IADL). Testimony given by the witnesses showed the following: Mai Giang Vu, a member of the Army of South Vietnam, carried barrels of the chemicals on his back. His two sons could not walk or function normally, their limbs gradually "curled up" and they could only crawl. They died at the ages of 23 and 25. Pham The Minh, whose parents also served in the South Vietnamese Army, showed the Tribunal his severely deformed, crooked, skinny legs; he has great difficulty walking, as well as digestive and pulmonary diseases. To Nga Tran is a French Vietnamese who worked as a journalist during the spraying. Her daughter weighed 6.6 pounds at the age of three months. Her skin began shredding and she could not bear to have skin contact or simple demonstrations of love. She died at 17 months, weighing 6.6 pounds. Ms. To described a woman who gave birth to a "ball" with no human form. Many children are born without brains; others make inhuman sounds. Rosemarie Hohn Mizo is the widow of George Mizo, who served in the U.S. Army in Vietnam in 1967. He slept on contaminated ground and consumed food and drink that were also contaminated. George refused to serve after he was wounded for the third time; he was court-martialed and sentenced to 2-1/2 years in prison and a dishonorable discharge. George helped found the Friendship Village where Vietnamese victims live in a supportive environment. He died from conditions related to his exposure to Agent Orange. Georges Doussin, co-founder of the Friendship Village, visited a dormitory where he saw 50 highly deformed "monsters," who produced inhuman sounds. One man whose parent had been exposed to Agent Orange had four toes on each foot. Doussin said Agent Orange creates "total anarchy in evolution." Dr. Nguyen Thi Ngoc Phuong, from Tu Du Hospital in Ho Chi Minh City (Saigon), sees many children born without arms and/or legs, without heads or faces, and without a brain chamber. According to the World Health Organization, only 1 - 4 parts per trillion (PPT) of Dioxin in breast milk can cause severe deformities in fetuses and even death. But up to 1450 PPT are found in maternal milk in Vietnam. Dr. Jeanne Stellman, who wrote the seminal article about Agent Orange in the magazine Nature, testified that "this is the largest unstudied environmental disaster in the world (except for natural disasters)." Dr. Jean Grassman, from Brooklyn College at City University of New York, testified that Dioxin is a potent cellular disregulator which alters a variety of pathways to disrupt many systems. Children, she said, are very sensitive to Dioxin; the intrauterine or post natal exposure to Dioxin may result in altered immune, neurobehavioral, and hormonal functioning. Women pass their exposure to their children both in utero and through the excretion of Dioxin in breast milk. Many ecosystems have been destroyed and Dioxin continues to poison Vietnam, especially in the several "hot spots." Chemist Dr. Pierre Vermeulin testified that it was estimated that $1 billion would be required to restore one hectare of land in Vietnam. The cost of caring for the victims, many of whom need 24-hour care, is enormous. In 1973, President Richard Nixon promised $3.25 billion in reconstruction aid to Vietnam "without any preconditions." That aid was never granted. There are only 11 Friendship Villages in Vietnam; 1000 are needed to care for the child victims of Agent Orange. Last week, the Bureau of the IADL, meeting in Hanoi, presented President Nguyen Minh Triet of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam with the final decision of the Tribunal. The judges found the U.S. government and the chemical companies guilty of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and ecocide during the illegal U.S. war of aggression in Vietnam. We recommended that the Agent Orange Commission be established in Vietnam to assess the damages suffered by the people and destruction of the environment, and that the U.S. government and the chemical companies provide compensation for the damage and destruction. I told the President that it always struck me that even as U.S. bombs were dropping on the people of Vietnam, they always distinguished between the American government and the American people. The President responded, "We fought the forces of aggression but we always reserved our love for the people of America . . . because we knew they always supported us." An estimated 3 million Vietnamese people were killed in the war, which also claimed 58,000 American lives. For many other Vietnamese and U.S. veterans and their families, the war continues to take its toll. Several treaties the United States has ratified require an effective remedy for violations of human rights. It is time to make good on Nixon's promise and remedy the terrible wrong the U.S. government perpetrated on the people of Vietnam. Congress must pass legislation to compensate the Vietnamese victims of Agent Orange as it did for the U.S. Vietnam veteran victims. Our government must know that it cannot continue to use weapons that target and harm civilians. Indeed, the U.S. military is using depleted uranium in Iraq and Afghanistan, which will poison those countries for incalculable decades. Marjorie Cohn, a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and president of the National Lawyers Guild, served as a judge on the International Peoples' Tribunal of Conscience in Support of the Vietnamese Victims of Agent Orange. She is a member of the Bureau of the International Association of Democratic Lawyers. More on Vietnam
 
Dennis Ross To Move To NSC: U.S. Officials Top
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration's pointman on Iran is moving from the State Department to the White House to better coordinate inter-agency policy on the Persian Gulf region, U.S. officials said Monday. Dennis Ross, who is in charge of formulating President Barack Obama's outreach to Iran as special adviser for the Gulf and Southwest Asia, will take a similar position at the National Security Council, the officials said. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because details of the switch have not yet been finalized. The White House and State Department declined to comment on the matter but denied an Israeli newspaper report that Ross was being removed from his job. Ross worked on the Middle East peace process for the administrations of former Presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton. More on Israel
 
Davyde Wachell: Khaste Nabahsheen (Don't Be Tired) Top
Filmmaking with the Youth of Tehran in the Lead-Up to the Election We are screaming down Islamic Republic Boulevard at three in the morning in Ismael's car. We have just come from Shabdul Azim Mosque and he is happy to be showing North Americans his beloved Tehran. His sullen friend Reza tells me how difficult the government is in Iran, but Ismael wants to give a different perspective. He asks if we like Persian music. "Hatman," we say, "of course." He cranks up the radio as we zip past towering murals of mullahs and martyrs. Suddenly, he stops the car at the intersection of Valiasr and Jomhuri. He gets out, and begins to dance around. Two weeks later Tehran's youth would jubilantly parade through the same interscection in support of the "Green Wave." We came to Tehran with the hopes of making a film in two months. We had nothing: no contacts, no money, just a few family friends. After a desperate few weeks, we met Khani, our line producer, who not only helped us complete the film but introduced us to many young, spirited Tehranis. In the moments of work and laughter with them it felt like Iran was a free country. In our first days of casting we met a 75-year-old dervish who asked incredulously, "Why have you come here to make a film? Imagination is illegal, creativity is illegal, life here is illegal." We didn't have an answer. Instead we relied on the enthusiasm of Khani's crew who were glad to see a film being made about their country which didn't portray them as political fetish objects, or third world ragamuffins. Our crew consisted of people from all over the town; North and South, secular and religious. Khani prayed five times a day, but being a Western philosophy major he was eager to discuss Foucault and Heidegger. Mohamad played in a rock band, and Cyrus was an up and coming director who focused on female protagonists. Our pre-conceptions were constantly being shattered by their complexity and we were consistently humbled by their kindness. Our first morning on set, we sat cross legged around a stack of Barbari bread and some fresh Panir cheese. The camera assistant mentioned the upcoming election. Everyone began to speak in a hushed voice. Kaveh and Mohamad said they won't be voting because they think it will be business as usual in the Islamic Republic. Cyrus and Ali argued passionately that if there is enough people who vote there could be change. Everybody was checking over their shoulder suspiciously to see if we were being watched, even though we were safe within the walls of a closed estate. Later that evening we are working at our friend Rostam's. He tells us we should take a break. We sit down for a cup of tea and eat goje sabz (sour green plums). Rostam is studying for his masters in psychology. He asks if we are familiar with the classic psychological defense mechanisms. We say yes. He asks us to name a few. We rattle them off: denial, rationalization, identification and repression. "We know all about them here," he says with a pitch black grin, "my particular mechanism is rationalization, although repression is very popular." We laugh as he looks out the window towards the city. His smile quickly fades and he says, "I hope one day I can help everyday people as a therapist, they sure need it." On the last day of the shoot we stare at Leyla in the make-up mirror. We are negotiating how much hair and neck she can show in our film. We pull the headscarf back, and she pulls it the other way. Then she insists that she has to wear a turtle neck. Sara says, "But this scene is set in summer time. Leyla replies, "you don't wanna risk it. Sara, honey, you are finally getting a taste of how Bad-Bakt (unlucky) we are in this society." Leyla will later tell us that she was pulled out of the film business by her father, who made her stay at home because he didn't think the arts were a fitting profession. She tells us she hopes she can see the finished film in Tehran one day. After the film is done, Khani, our line-producer, drives up the winding roads of North Tehran past mansions with beautiful hidden gardens. He says without a trace of resentment, "The film is done, and you'll soon go back to America. We'll just be a memory. Enjoy the freedom you have. Just forget about us here because we don't stand a chance". We wanted to eat his despair. Sara said, "No, it will change, it can't stay like this forever." Khani replied without thinking, still looking forward, "It will never change." We continue on to a lookout point at the top of a mountain. We step out and look over the beautiful and weeping Tehran skyline. Although he says nothing, we know he is proud of his city and proud to be Iranian. This morning we woke to images of familiar streets filled with familiar youth refusing to accept their government's blithe denial of their will. Something had happened since we left. The Cyrusess had convinced the Kavehs that voting mattered, and that change in Iran was possible. Through text messages, social networks and word of mouth the young people of Iran decided they were deserving of the dignity of an elected government. To our young friends in Iran: the world has seen your courage and stamina in your struggle for freedom. To Khani, we want you to know that we will not forget about you, and you've proven today that you do stand a chance. Khaste Nabahsheen (don't be tired). More on Iran
 
Megan Fox In London: Backless Wonder (PHOTOS) Top
Megan Fox continues to dazzle as she's globetrotting around the world for the "Transformers" sequel. Monday in London Fox wore a floor-length black gown cut low and laced up the back. Despite the back it was more conservative than her premiere ensemble Sunday in Paris , a crimson dress slit up the leg with a side cutout and no bra. She's also livened up the premieres in Korea and Japan . PHOTOS: Having her hair tended to before the red carpet: Follow HuffPo Entertainment On Twitter! More on Celebrity Skin
 
Obama Booed By Some Doctors At AMA Speech Top
WASHINGTON — Barack Obama isn't used to hearing boos. For all the young president's popularity, the response he got Monday from doctors at an American Medical Association meeting was a sign his road is only going to get rockier as he tries to sell his plan to overhaul the nation's health care system. The boos erupted when Obama told the doctors in Chicago he wouldn't try to help them win their top legislative priority _ limits on jury damages in medical malpractice cases. But what could they expect? If Obama announced support for malpractice limits, that would set trial lawyers and unions _ major supporters of Democratic candidates _ on the attack. Not to mention consumer groups. Every other group in the health care debate has a wish list and a top priority. Insurers don't want competition from the government. Employers don't want to be told they have to offer medical coverage to their workers. Hospitals want to stave off Medicare cuts. Drug companies want to charge what the market will bear. Obama can't give all of them what they want. Instead, he's got to figure what's just enough to keep as many groups as possible on board _ without alienating others. It's a fine line for him _ and sometimes for them. "It's a coalition issue," said Robert Blendon of the Harvard School of Public Health, an expert on public opinion and the politics of health care. "No major group is able by itself to sink health reform. But if numbers of them come together for different reasons, it could really hurt the direction the president wants to go in." The doctors were only Obama's first house call. He'll be making his case to the other groups _ and to the nation at large _ in an increasingly energetic campaign to get a bill passed by the end of his first year in office. AMA insiders shouldn't have been surprised by Obama's upfront refusal to consider malpractice caps. The group couldn't get that idea passed by a Republican Congress and president a few years ago. Some states have such curbs, but anyone who can count votes knows the chances for national limits are slim to none with Democrats in charge of Congress. Instead, Obama left the door open to some kind of compromise on malpractice. The president said he's willing to explore alternatives to taking doctors to court. In the past, he supported special programs in which hospitals and doctors are encouraged to admit mistakes, correct them and offer compensation. Studies have shown the approach can work, because doctors' refusal to acknowledge mistakes is one reason many families file suit. Doctors have special reasons to be wary of the president's plans to overhaul the health care system. Not long ago, doctors' decisions were rarely questioned. Now they are being blamed for a big part of the wasteful spending in the nation's $2.5 trillion health care system. Studies have shown that as much as 30 cents of the U.S. health care dollar may be going for tests and procedures that are of little or no value to patients. The Obama administration has cited such findings as evidence that the system is broken. Since doctors are the ones responsible for ordering tests and procedures, health care costs cannot be brought under control unless they change their decision-making habits. "Change is scary," said Dartmouth University's Dr. Elliott Fisher, a doctor turned costs researcher. "I think there is a fear of loss of autonomy, that someone is going to tell you what to do." Fisher collaborated on research that showed wild differences in health care spending around the country _ and no signs of better health in the high-cost areas. But Obama did not blame the doctors. Instead, he tried to woo them, much as he has done with recalcitrant foreign leaders. "It's the equivalent of international diplomacy. He's got to make them feel like it's possible to have dialogue about what the future looks like," said Blendon. "I think he's starting out with the AMA, but before the summer's over he's going to reach out to a lot of the other groups." Obama assured the doctors that his plan would provide them with objective information on what treatments work best, with new computerized tools to better manage their patient case loads, and with support for harried solo practitioners to form networks. He promised that Washington would not dictate clinical decisions. And he asked the doctors to imagine a world in which nearly every patient has insurance coverage and they can devote their full attention to the practice of medicine. "You did not enter this profession to be bean-counters and paper-pushers," Obama said. "You entered this profession to be healers _ and that's what our health care system should let you be." That line got him an ovation. ___ EDITOR'S NOTE _ Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar reports on health care policy for The Associated Press.
 
Usher's Estranged Wife Bites Back: Was 'Faithful And Loving' During Marriage Top
ATLANTA — A lawyer who's opposed rapper T.I. and boxer Evander Holyfield in child-support cases is representing R&B singer Usher's wife in their split. Usher filed for divorce on Friday from Tameka Foster Raymond after less than two years of marriage. The singer whose real name is Usher Raymond IV has two sons with Foster Raymond. Sports and entertainment family lawyer Randy Kessler said Monday his 38-year-old was a "faithful wife and loving mother." He declined to comment on the singer's conduct during the marriage. The singer wed his former stylist in a glitzy ceremony in August 2007. Kessler also represented rapper Mack 10 in his divorce from R&B singer T-Boz of TLC.
 
Craig Dubow, Gannett CEO, Taking Temporary Medical Leave Top
McLEAN, Va. — Craig Dubow, the CEO of the largest U.S. newspaper publisher, is taking a temporary medical leave of absence, Gannett Co. said Monday. Gannett, which publishes USA Today, said Dubow is taking time off following back surgery. Dubow, 54, also serves as the company's chairman and president. Gracia C. Martore, executive vice president and chief financial officer, will serve as the company's principal executive officer until Dubow is able to return to work, Gannett said. In a memo to staff, Dubow said his surgery Monday was successful. "This was major surgery, with all its potential for complications, but it is not rare," he wrote. "I have a great medical team and I hope to make a full recovery. My doctors have predicted I will need about a 4-month leave, but the exact length is unknown at this time. The company's shares fell 12 cents, or 2.8 percent, to close at $4.10.
 
Daley, Union Leaders Meet About City's Proposed Layoffs Top
Chicago Federation of Labor President Dennis Gannon emerged from an hour-long meeting with Mayor Daley today predicting that a painful package of union concessions in the works would eliminate the need for 1,504 employee layoffs.
 
Patrick Swayze 'The Beast' Officially Canceled Top
NEW YORK — A&E says "The Beast," its police drama with the ailing Patrick Swayze, will be not return for a second season. The series, which premiered in January, starred Swayze as a rogue cop in Chicago. Swazye battled pancreatic cancer throughout the 13-episode season's production. The 56-year-old actor went public with his diagnosis in 2008, and is continuing to fight the illness. The series, which drew an average audience of about 1.3 million viewers, was not deemed to be a ratings hit. A&E President Bob DeBitetto (DEE'-buh-TET-oh) called the series "a labor of love" and hailed Swayze's passion and tenacity.
 
Brad Schreiber: 30 Years of Mocking and Rocking Top
June 2009 marks the 30th anniversary of the pioneering Secret Policeman's Ball series of benefit shows for Amnesty International. The anniversary is being saluted with a major film festival in Los Angeles and New York: June 11 - July 31. Huffington Post bloggers are providing extensive coverage of the festival. Beyond a brain-melting display of world-class comedians and musicians, the Secret Policeman's Film Festival provides insight into the creative process. Take as Exhibit A the film Pleasure at Her Majesty's . This film -- which received its US premiere at the festival -- documents the 1976 benefit show that led three years later to 1979's inaugural Secret Policeman's Ball . Towering (though not faulty) Python John Cleese assembled a terrific group of the creme-de-la-creme of British comedic talent, stage-directed by Beyond the Fringe's Jonathan Miller, with Fringe cohorts Peter Cook and Alan Bennett, the Pythons, Barry "Dame Edna" Humphries, Eleanor Bron (remember The Beatles' Help! ?) In addition to highlights of the three sold-out, London performances, we get to see the only known footage of the Pythons rehearsing, plus backstage banter, thanks to the roving cameras of director Roger Graef. For performers and appreciators of comedy, there is a priceless backstage discussion between Cleese and Cook about a wonderfully silly sketch involving a witness in a criminal trial. However, the witness is most probably dead -- or as Cleese puts it -- "not at all well." These two gurus of goofiness debate whether yes or no questions should be consistently posed of the unseen character in a casket and their seriousness about deriving laughter is a marvelous moment and insight into the creative process. Secret Policeman's Ball co-creator/producer Martin Lewis, as usual, had terrific inside stories to share with the crowd prior to the screening. He recalled scoring a major casting coup in securing the agreement of David Bowie, a huge Python fan, to give a musical performance at the 1981 Ball -- conditioned only on him being allowed a small walk-on role in a Python skit. Cleese, notoriously not a rock aficionado -- and oblivious to Bowie's then recent thespian triumph as the Elephant Man on Broadway -- had this imperious reply for the astounded Lewis: "He's a pop singer. I'm not having him in a sketch. Tell him he can bring his banjo and do a song..." Bowie did neither. In conversation with Lewis, Python associate Neil Innes, shared stories of roller-skating onto stage in one Python skit billed as "the skating vicar" despite a total lack of experience or ability in skating. He also recalled rock legend Eric Clapton making caustic backstage mentions of Innes' glittering, lurex overalls at the 1981 show. "With talent like mine," Innes defended himself, "you need trousers like these." And with a talent list like this Festival, you need five weeks of screenings in L.A. and New York to present all the films... MORE ON HUFFINGTON POST ABOUT THE FILM FESTIVAL • Having a Ball for Amnesty... (includes ultra-rare film clips) • And Now For Something Completely Different: The Secret Policeman's Film Festival Monty Python & The Holy Grail... of Human Rights OFFICIAL FESTIVAL WEBSITE • • The Secret Policeman's Film Festival -- Official Website
 
Katy Hall: Larry David On 'Whatever Works': 5 Things He's Found To Complain About Top
Woody Allen's new movie, "Whatever Works" may seem to be driven by a familiar formula (old New York grouch reluctantly taken by spritely young ingenue)--and it is based on a script Allen wrote in the 1970s and recently resurrected. But this time Allen wanted someone younger and more graceful than himself to play the misanthropic old crank. Naturally, he chose the marginally younger and less neurotic Larry David. David recently shared his anxiety-addled thoughts about playing Allen's leading man, living in New York and dealing with the relentless voice inside his head. On his own "whatever works" coping mechanisms: I embrace the panic. Even if I turned on a ballgame, it wouldn't make a difference to me. I would still hear that sick, psycho voice going crazy in my head and there's nothing I could do. On his early years in New York: I grew up in Brooklyn, then I lived in Hell's Kitchen, from the time I got out of college until I moved to LA in my early 40s. So I remember very distinctly the smell of urine as I left my front door. I remember having to take my shoe off before I came in my apartment to kill the thousands of roaches that were in my bathtub. On his first reaction to being offered the part: This is not a good thing. This is not going to be a very good idea. I was intimidated and I don't really like challenges. I don't like to be out of my comfort zone, which is about half an inch wide. I called Woody and said, 'I don't know about this.' On playing a retired physicist: I tried to convince (Woody Allen) at some point before we started shooting that he should change the character's occupation to a former grandmaster. I didn't want to be a physicist because I thought I wouldn't be able to improvise because the character's so much smarter than I am. On his cell phone ringing in the middle of the press conference: I'm so sorry. I can't believe that happened. No one ever calls me! See photos from the movie's New York screening. "Whatever Works" opens June 19.
 
Nick Rabkin: Installation Starts On New Bricolage at Foster Viaduct Top
The viaducts beneath Lake Shore Drive are utilitarian gateways to lakefront neighborhoods, and the glories of our Lake Michigan parks. They are also dark, dirty, and loud. They are the last places one would expect to become points of community pride and pleasure. But the viaduct at Bryn Mawr Avenue has become the neighborhood destination in Edgewater over the last two years. "Living," and "Growing" a pair of bricolage tile mosaic murals were designed and installed in the viaduct by Chicago Public Art Group artists Tracy Van Duinen and Todd Osborne with Cynthia Weiss and a team of youth apprentices from Alternatives Youth Center, an uptown social services agency in 2007 and 2008. The glittering mosaics lining both its walls have become the neighborhood's "Cloud Gate", the must see landmark for the community. Another bricolage megamural will be created by the same Chicago Public Art Group team, to be installed on the dreary poured concrete walls of the Foster Avenue viaduct this summer, and it is likely to become equally popular. After months of community design and tile-making workshops that drew on local Native American history, over a hundred community volunteers, including many from the Native American community, painted the design outline for the piece on the north and south walls on a beautiful spring night in late May. A team of young apprentices started its installation Monday, June 15. Called "Indian Land Dancing", the piece will be the first major public art in Chicago that honors Native American perspectives and contributions to the city. It will cover some 3,400 square feet. 48th Ward Alderwoman Mary Ann Smith, who championed "Living", has been a prime mover behind the new piece. It was Smith who insisted that the bricolage focus on the Native American experience, and she was among the dozens of volunteers with paintbrushes who slowed traffic while the design was applied. Dorene Wiese, the President of the American Indian Association of Illinois, was there as well. "We've been waiting thirty years for something like this," she said. "Now there will finally be a place we can bring our kids that really reflects our pride." Before the end of summer the Foster viaduct will become a point of pride for the whole city, sparkling and timely evidence of the power of the arts to beautify and build communities.
 
Harry Potter Plagiarism Claims Denied Top
LONDON (Reuters) - Bloomsbury Publishing Plc on Monday denied allegations that author J.K. Rowling copied "substantial parts" of a book by another children's author when she wrote "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire."
 
Venice Mayor To Residents: Switch To Tap Water Top
Italians are the leading consumers of bottled water in the world, drinking more than 40 gallons per person annually. But as their environmental consciousness deepens, officials here are avidly promoting what was previously unthinkable: that Italians should drink tap water. More on Italy
 
Kimberly Krautter: Terry McAuliffe's Achilles Heel was not the Clintons Top
They say when you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail. So sums up the not-so-surprising defeat of Terry McAuliffe in his race to become the Democratic Party nominee for Virginia Governor. It's also not surprising to find all of the national pundits and Beltway insiders scratching their heads over his defeat with a good deal of hand wringing over "what that means for the Clintons." Dan Balz's post mortem of the election in the Washington Post spent several paragraphs arguing whether or not the Clinton connection was an asset or a liability and what McAuliffe's defeat means to the Clinton brand. Frankly, the usually astute Balz missed the point -- as did all of the pundits and insiders. They always have. They simply do not understand the nuances of the Southern or Heartland voter and the importance of relationships over marketing. They continuously (and erroneously) assume that the voters outside of New England and any of the top MSA's can be swayed (read: bought) by slick advertising in lieu of authenticity. Basically, they think we're stupid. Or a bunch of backwater Jim Crow racists and therefore unworthy of their time. What we are is savvy, and we demand the respect borne out of an honest determination to connect with us and our communities. We do not expect candidates to be in lock-step with us, and we don't even mind a non-native running for office. But, just because you've lived in the neighborhood for a while, if you haven't been, well, neighborly, then you haven't earned our trust. I am eternally baffled why most Democratic campaign directors think they can get different results using different strategies in different regions. Why would drive-through fundraisers work in the South or in the Heartland versus the intense, personal outreach and ground campaigns they routinely use to capture New England, Florida, California and the Swing State-Voter-of-the-Month? Certainly Obama's campaign strategy defied such conventions as employed to the demise of Kerry and Gore. If anyone had cause to write-off the Southern voter, history would have excused Obama. Instead he courted votes in the most rural areas of the South and was rewarded with a strong plurality of support , stirring Democratic affinities that went dormant when the DNC -- and the DLC -- ignored the South after 1992. About halfway through the WaPo article, Balz finally hinted at this reality: "His early lead in the polls disguised the fact that ... of the three candidates ... McAuliffe had the least connection [to voters]." How can one live in a state for two decades with aspirations to statewide political office and have done so little to nurture a connection outside of Beltway? It's offensive. McAuliffe presented himself as a carpetbagger, pure and simple. The irony of the matter is that his political mentor Hillary Rodham Clinton was able to overcome a similar handicap when she had the temerity to run for U.S. Senate after only living in the Empire State for a couple of months when she left the White House. Admittedly, I did not follow every tactical move of the McAuliffe campaign in Virginia, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt (as we Southerners are wont to do since it is the polite thing), and assume that his campaign trotted him out to listening parties, town hall meetings and the like. If that happened, and he was still unable to forge a connection with voters, then it was simply his personal failure to resonate. Blaming the Clintons is grossly unfair to the former President and the Secretary of State. I met Terry McAuliffe during the 2004 Presidential Primary campaign when I was championing Howard Dean who (despite a Walt Whitman-esque Yawp) succeeded McAuliffe as national Party Chairman and did more to elect Democrats in all 50 states and win back the White House than McAuliffe ever accomplished. Balz and others have hinted at McAuliffe's brassy personality. After my encounters with him, I would call him pugnacious... to the point of rude. Frankly, this endemic character flaw probably hurt McAuliffe's electoral chances more than anything else. While his "brass" probably was what the Party and the country needed to elect and re-elect Bill Clinton and to corral the herd of cats that is the many cantankerous factions of the DNC, it's not something that translates into the warm humility needed to inspire people to give you their vote. As I write this, I can almost feel McAuliffe's famously rapid-fire sneer, and I can easily imagine him wind up to a dismissive retort about how Fauntleroys don't get elected. He would be right. But humility doesn't make you a Fauntleroy, whereas being an inauthentic politician loses elections every time.
 
Mike Doyle: Bottom(s) Up For Chicago Bloggers: Time For Our Own Summit On Sustainability Top
The nutshell? Chicago needs a BLOGGERS ROUNDTABLE, or strategy charrette, to discuss how WE want to achieve future sustainability for OUR community, OUR ability to disseminate local news and OUR financial bottom lines. Read on for more... Last week, Chicago independent media sought the key to a sustainable future by sitting down to study their collective navel. Two industry conferences a day apart brought together journalists, bloggers, public relations professionals and interested academics to explore the state of local media -- especially online media -- and figure out how to keep news coming to the masses in an era of declining revenue for traditional media outlets. I attended both conferences. Overall, the agony outweighed the ecstasy, with the latter being largely confined to Community Media Workshop's mid-week Making Media Connections 2009 conference hosted at Columbia College. I schmoozed my way through a day-and-a-half of panels and meet-and-greets, and had the pleasure of moderating a discussion on the sustainability of online neighborhood news (with panelists including Daniel X. O'Neil of Everyblock.com , Geoff Dougherty of the Chi-Town Daily News , Silvana Tabares of Extra Bilingual News and Dan Weissmann of Vocalo.org .) Besides naming my personal blog, CHICAGO CARLESS a Top 20 community Web site , the Workshop's conference made clear that the future of news dissemination lay online, and substantially with smaller community- and niche-news sites. However, as I reported Friday on Chicagosphere , the conference also pointed out a pernicious lack of understanding about the nature of the blogosphere on the part of some traditional media types. That alone was enough to drive anyone with a virtual clue about the Internet (pun intended) to drink. So Friday night I wasn't surprised to find myself holed up in a dank corner of Boystown's favorite over-rated Mexican dive, Las Mananitas, with my neighbor, Mattcountant, trying to shed the stress of the week. Though when you wait an hour for your meal and have to go on an expedition across the dining room to find where the waitstaff absconded with your still-unlit candle, how much stress can one really leave behind? "Let's order a pitcher of margarita, top shelf," said Matt, to my hesitant gaze. "I had a rotten day, so don't worry. I'm paying." It's amazing how much more sloshed the good stuff can get you, especially when you're a two-drink-maximum lightweight like me. The next morning my doorwoman reminded me Matt had to escort me all the way up to my apartment. That's the moment I realized I'll never be able to drink like the Windy City columnist I dream of becoming. ___ From its title, alone, Saturday afternoon's Chicago Media Future conference (impressively organized in a teeny timeframe by Mike Fourcher, founder of Purely Political Consulting , Barbara Iverson, Columbia College journalism professor and publisher of ChicagoTalks.org , and Scott Smith, Senior Editor at Playboy.com ) should have been four hours of deep discussion about ways to make local news sustainable online, over the air and in print. Unfortunately, most of the day's two panels were bogged down in discussion of what once was, what might have been and what's never coming back in the world of journalism. The few questions from the audience regarding potential ways to make online news pay were by turns rebuffed, shrugged at or glossed over. Given the power crowd that was in attendance, what a shame. The conference Web site linked above chronicles lots of as-it-happened action (including a live blog and Twitter discussion ). Out of the schaff, a few observations stuck in my mind from each of the two panels: "Consuming the News" ( Panelists: Rich Gordon , Medill Readership Institute/Director of Digital Technology in Education, Medill School at Northwestern; Andrew Huff , Editor and Publisher of Gapers Block ; Amanda Maurer , Social Media Producer, Chicago Tribune ; Daniel X. O'Neil , People Person, Everyblock ; Hilary Sizemore , Interactive Content Manager at Barrington Broadcasting Group | Moderator: Dan Sinker , Columbia College professor, founder of Punk Planet .) The first panel doted on the decline of the 20th-century media industry, with Gordon almost incessantly moaning -- and sharing statistics about -- the past. It was informative, but not helpful. Gordon's observation that the current informational "sea of abundance" makes it hard for the media to help citizens act as citizens was particularly irritating. Whenever old media bitches that it's no longer the public's conscience but somehow has a right to be, it's the equivalent of telling the public that they're intellectual children with no innate capacity for rational thought. Uh-huh. I and most people I know do a good job discerning real news from bull shit, thanks. Equally useless was a belabored discussion about the definition of journalism. We get it, there's hard news and opinion. Always has been. Always will be. The real question, as Maurer pointed out, was whether online media have the capacity to tell the whole story and tell it correctly. More relevant were admonitions to be where your online audience is (Maurer), stop fretting about distribution (O'Neil), and learn the rules of the Internet community (also Maurer), as well as Huff's observation that the death of geographic news monopolies doesn't mean that local news, itself, isn't still there, waiting to be told. "Selling the News" ( Panelists: Brad Flora , Publisher and Founder, Windy Citizen ; Tom Lynch , Director of Client Satisfaction at IMP!; Steve Rhodes , Founder, The Beachwood Reporter ; Patrick Spain , CEO, Newser | Moderator: Barbara Iverson , Columbia College professor, Co-publisher, ChicagoTalks .) This should have been a discussion of potential financially sustainable models of local news gathering and dissemination on the Internet. Mostly, it turned out to be a discussion of Search Engine Optimization (SEO) practices. As ChicagoTechNews scribe Todd Allen pointed out to me after the conference, SEO practices are a way to attract page views, nothing more. Whether and how you monetize those page views is another story. This panel concentrated on the practices and largely ignored the whether and how. The best part of the panel was its first half, with the live Twitter feed projected over the heads of the panelists for all to see. As the real-life discussion devolved into useless SEO posturing, the virtual debate was far livelier -- including dissatisfaction regarding the panelists' answers, annoyance at the racial makeup of the room and disgust at the inclusion of anyone other than journalists at a media conference. (That last bit of pure nonsense was from, ahem, recently laid-off Trib food writer Emily Nunn , whom, as Chi-Town Daily News blogger Lou Grant notes , I accused of trolling the live Twitter feed for locally bridge-burning tweets such as this , this and this . I originally encountered Nunn when she personally smeared me as part of her ongoing troll -- for example, here , here , here , here and here -- of the Trib and ChicagoNow bloggers. Axe Grinder, party of one, your table is ready...) Even so, panelist Spain proved the day's most notable participant. He largely and very obviously ignored, talked over, interrupted or derisively gazed sideways at the other panelists, especially bloggers Flora and Rhodes. His open dismissal of the potential for any news site without 5 million viewers, SEO-crafted headlines or a distaste for narrow-casted content--i.e. any site different from Newser -- was obnoxious. It was also untenable -- the jury's still out on Newser's future lifespan, just like every other news site on the Internet. Rhodes was the hero here, rebuffing Spain's SEO-heavy-handedness by saying, "I don't want to live in that kind of world. My brand couldn't be what it is without [satisfying headlines]." He was also the only panelist to elucidate an approach for reaching sustainability: Creating a stable of six to eight sites and seeking partners, collaborators and investors, instead of wasting time chasing meager local advertising dollars. ___ In the end Chicago Media Future was yet another missed opportunity for real discussion about survival. Why are we afraid of talking about the problem head on? As I spent a post-conference dinner at Opera with advanced-urban-thinker Aaron Renn (blogging as The Urbanophile ) and his lovely wife, the three of us spent some time debating the uneven impact the Internet has had on metropolitan versus rural areas. I couldn't help but realize our increasingly tipsy discussion was more relevant than most of the four hours of commentary I had heard earlier in the day. I could be wrong -- that moment of remembered collective media hubris could have been the result of the thankfully watery Singapore Sling I was sucking down (or the giddiness from the transcendent Kung Pao tofu it was accompanying.) Either way, sobered by a Sunday of doing nothing for the first time in a week, here's what I think this town needs: a blogosphere roundtable : We local bloggers ought to get together for a strategy charrette one weekend afternoon in a modestly-sized group in a shabby conference hall surrounded by pizza, beer and a phalanx of flip charts and have a frank discussion amongst ourselves about where we want our sites to go, how we're trying to get there -- and most importantly, how we can work cooperatively to make sustainability happen. Then we should take we we've learned from each other, package it into a manifesto and vet it at a community-wide conference. Now that would be a conference I'd want to attend. When you get right down to it, the point isn't to recreate billion-dollar mid-century media firms or copy self-aggrandized national sites. The point is to find the happy intersection of building community, sharing the news and making a living in Chicago for Chicago bloggers and Chicago audiences. I wish sites like Newser loads of success, but I'd much rather hear what my blogosphere colleagues have to say. Without being pushed towards a non-profit solution by the luminaries of the local foundation community or pestered by some self-important Internet CEO trying to talk us down.
 
RJ Eskow: Could Doctors Go the Way of Record Companies? Top
Those of us who follow health care may be overlooking the big picture. Most of the profound (and sometimes disruptive) changes of the last half century -- computers, the Internet, social networks -- weren't initiated by the political process. They arose through a combination of technology, economics, and mass social change. So here's something to think about: Could the medical profession go the way of the record industry? Consider the path that led to the current crisis in the music business: 1. An industry with a near-total monopoly experiences a minor disruption (in music's case, with the invention of cassette tape recording). 2. It 'relaxes' and assumes the crisis has past. 3. An even better technology comes along (the Internet) that includes lateral as well as vertical connections. (Individuals could only make tapes for themselves; sharing was possible but cumbersome, until the Net and mp3s made it instantaneous and worldwide.) 4. The industry fails to recognize the long-term significance and risks of this new tech. 5. Enterprising individuals use this new technology to distribute "information" of mutual interest - songs - through "P2P" (peer-to-peer) file sharing. The result? A massive and ongoing implosion of the music biz. (David Byrne provided an excellent overview in Wired , with some corrections on his blog .) Could the same thing happen to the medical profession? Many people's immediate reaction will be to say 'no.' They'll list the many barriers to what we might call a 'P2PMed' disruption of our medical economy (with 'P2P' here meaning either 'peer-to-peer' or 'patient to patient'.) Doctors are too respected. Regulations won't permit it. Doctors control access to medications. Medical information is walled off behind expensive, subscription-only medical journals. It's unthinkable. That's pretty much how the record industry reacted in the 1990s. Let's look at those objections: 160 million people looked up medical information on the Internet circa 2007, according to Harris polling data . Yet they still go to doctors. That's true -- just as millions of people made tape copies of music for decades without seriously undermining musical economics. Each of these searches was a solitary activity. The difference will come when a new technology allows lateral information-sharing in a way that people trust. It hasn't happened yet, but smart people are banking on the idea that it will soon. I agree with that assessment, although none of the many projects I've looked at so far struck me as a breakthrough. But a lot of folks are working on it. Doctors monopolize access to medications through the power of the prescription pad. That monopoly's already eroding as online pharmacies provide low-cost 'doctor consults,' a legal work-around that allows -- to an sometimes disturbing extent -- easy access to meds. Where there is demand, there will be suppliers. People won't spend money based on self-referral. The multi-billion dollar complementary medicine industry demonstrates this is untrue. Most "CAM" (complementary and alternative medicine) transactions are based on self-referral out of the traditional MD/patient relationship. Medical information is walled off. True, but a backlash against the sequestering of research data is already underway. Case in point: A new publication called The Journal of Participatory Medicine hopes to provide peer-reviewed articles on self care for patients, as board member Kevin Kelly writes . The Journal 's Advisory Board reads like a Who's Who of Internet and medical business pioneers (and it's an open-source publication, meaning its content will be free to all). The Journal goal of helping patients take "responsibility for their own health and healing" (in Kevin Kelly's words) aligns with decades of movement toward a more patient-centric model championed by both the Left (as "patient's rights") and the Right (as with high-deductible "consumer-directed health plans"). Once again, the left/right paradigm is ill-suited for new developments... and don't blame initiatives like the Journal if medicine goes the way of record labels. They're symptoms of broader socio-informational change, not its cause. Not all doctors would go out of business after such a transition, of course. They're still selling some CDs, too. So who would be most likely to thrive after the transformation? High-touch practitioners: Empathetic, comforting, and warm doctors. "Mechanics": The most gifted and accomplished surgeons sometimes use this word to describe themselves. We will need talented neurosurgeons, cardiac surgeons, and other "fixers" for the foreseeable future (at least until the self-programmable nanobots take over). Innovators: Doctors who are always exploring, changing, and trying new things, staying one step ahead of the curve. Integrators: Doctors who can bring together seemingly unrelated ideas and solutions, whether in diagnosis or in treatment. Integration is the foundation of creativity, and creative doctors will always be valued. Who'll fail? Doctors who function by rote, who make routine diagnoses, and who connect patients to other resources based on past relationships and not need. Anyone whose expertise and connections are easily replicated on the Internet (think "travel agents") will struggle to survive. Watching the AMA defends its turf on issues like doctor reimbursement is like watching the RIAA file copyright lawsuits against teenagers, even as its business model collapses around it. You can't fight your own market and win, and you can't fight yesterday's battles. Doctor groups should look more like think tanks and less like a lobbying groups. (Come to think of it, so should the RIAA.) Predicting this kind of change is not the same thing as endorsing it. But, like it or not, we should be talking about it now. Because -- like it or not -- it's coming. RJ Eskow blogs when he can at: A Night Light The Sentinel Effect: Healthcare Blog
 
Harold S. Luft: The Road from McAllen to El Paso Top
Dr. Atul Gawande provided a chilling description of the problems facing true health reform in his recent article in The New Yorker . In "The Cost Conundrum" he describes how medical care is provided in McAllen, Texas, which is second only to Miami as the most expensive healthcare market in the country. McAllen's expenditures are twice as high per person as in El Paso, Texas, a city with similar demographics. There are no good reasons for the differences. McAllen's population isn't demonstrably sicker and the care isn't measurably greater. Hospital heads and average citizens weren't able to explain the city's dubious distinction. But it's easy to see how the medical care environment in El Paso will become like McAllen's. If that happens, the nation's cost problems will worsen. Taking Theories into Practice In areas like McAllen there seems to be a more than necessary use of tests, procedures and admissions than in towns like El Paso. One way to reverse this cost increasing tide is to foster a better relationship between primary care physicians and their patients. Research has shown that more access to, and time with, primary care physicians can lead to better management of chronic illness and less interventional work and costs. We also need to redistribute resources from the well-intentioned, but test-dependent, interventionists to primary care and ambulatory-based clinicians. The overuse of interventional services often occurs because ongoing care by ambulatory physicians is under-compensated. To address that problem, we need to redirect patients toward those physicians who provide high quality care at lower overall cost -- often by spending more of their own time and making more judicious referrals. Interventionists should collaborate with the facility where they do most of their work. They could create partnerships built from voluntary associations of a facility like a hospital and those physicians whose work depends on access to that facility. It would include not just the radiologists, anesthesiologists and pathologists, but also surgeons, interventional cardiologists, and the hospitalists who provide the daily monitoring of patients. The team would specifically exclude the office-based physicians who are largely responsible for the ongoing treatment of patients who may need to be admitted. Additionally, it need not include all eligible physicians at the hospital. Bringing the whole medical staff to the table for negotiations will prolong making key decisions. The hospital, however, must allow physicians who opt out of team membership to practice there as long as they meet other established staff requirements. The key is that the team takes responsibility for an entire episode of care at a fixed price -- whether or not its members provide all of the related services. A comprehensive realignment of the payment system can accomplish this, but that's something we must work toward. To get there we can use a voluntary major risk pool covering all hospitalizations and chronic illness. This coverage will not be sold to individuals, but to insurers who wish to purchase coverage. This will make them have no need to underwrite insurance policies or design them to be unattractive to people with significant health problems. McAllen and El Paso are almost 800 miles apart -- a long day's drive. If we truly want to move away from the McAllen model, we need to chart and plan the right course. Building on the self-interest of the players, we can encourage the voluntary changes needed to reform the system. Without reining in costs and restructuring the incentives, we'll never get to where we need to go. For more information and to read a detailed explanation visit my post at The Health Care Blog or my Web site, SecureChoice.info More on Health
 
Gadhafi Sues 3 Moroccan Newspapers Top
Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi on Monday sued three Moroccan newspapers for defamation, seeking eight million euros in damages for "attacks on the dignity of a head of state." More on Africa
 
Gerald Bracey: Robots in Education Top
Engineers have made great advances in robotics in recent years. Everyday-robots can vacuum rugs and mop floors. More advanced models can act as secretary of education. Call it the Arne model. Boot it up and it talks and talks and talks. But it appears to lack two functions, the ability to say anything concrete and the ability to link its various sayings with the old human function known as logic. For instance, in his June 14 speech to a National Governors Association meeting, Robot Arne said, "The genius of our system is that much of the power to shape our future has wisely been distributed to the states instead of being confined to Washington." Yet in an interview after that talk he said, "What you've seen over the past couple year is a growing recognition from political leaders, educators, unions, nonprofits--literally every sector--coming to realize that 50 state doing their own thing doesn't make sense." A concept goes from wisdom to nonsense in a single speech! In none of the speeches I've heard or read--and I've been tracking them pretty closely, has the robot Arne used the word "constitution," a document which, in the field of education is supposed to ensure that each state does its own thing. What he does often mention, as in his speech to the National Press Club in late May, is, "What we have had as a country, I'm convinced, is what we call a race to the bottom." That the two "we's" obviously have different referents is of little import. What is, is that in that downward race, some 35,000 schools have been identified as "failing" under that Katrina of public education, No Child Left Behind. "Last year," Duncan told the governors," "there were about 5,000 schools in 'restructuring' under NCLB. These schools have failed to make adequate yearly progress for at least five years in a row." These are presumably the 5,000 chronically under-performing schools that robot Arne wants to close and "turn around." Such an action raises several questions. First, just where are 5,000 excellent principals to run these schools? Have our star leaders just been waiting in the wings all this time? And what about the needed tens of thousands of ace teachers? Where are they? Are they lurking out there somewhere in the bayous of Louisiana or the sands of Nevada? Second, Duncan told an audience at a breakfast sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor he wants "college-ready, career-ready international standards, very high bar." (Often when he speaks extemporaneously I hear the sound of grammarian teeth-gnashing). Well, if our race to the bottom has generated 35,000 failing schools, 5,000 of which are hopeless in robot Arne's eyes, what will a much higher bar produce? Finally, supposing for a moment we could find all those teachers and principals, would that be enough? Even an outlet not known for its searching questions to people in positions of authority, U. S. News & World Report, caught the lack of logic here. "Would simply replacing teachers and principals work? If all the other factors in a low-achieving student's life--family, neighborhood, social life--were to remain constant, would substituting an outstanding teacher for an ineffective teacher reverse the achievement levels? Are good teachers and principals all that is needed to turn around struggling schools, the majority of which are in impoverished communities where the parents might not have the time to help their children succeed in school?" The magazine stops short of describing the full range of the problems kids in impoverished neighborhoods face: lack of adequate prenatal care, ingestion of alcohol and drugs, having only one parent, food insecurity, toxins such as mercury and lead, and inadequate or missing health care (that kid who's having trouble learning to read might need an eye doctor; the kid who's inattentive might not be able to hear what the teacher is saying; the kid who can't concentrate might have a head full of tooth cavities). Finally, robot Arne told the governors he was throwing $350 million into test development to back up the new high standards because, "I think in this country we have too many bad tests." I'm sure ETS, CTB-McGraw Hill, Pearson, etc., loved that one since they make most of them, but if that's true, then logic might make one wonder if those "bad tests" were the right ones to identify the bad schools. But as I said at the start, Robot Arne doesn't do logic. And it's too bad the reporter covering the talk didn't ask Arne what a "good" test would look like. That question would have produced a deluge of clichés ("tests that measure whether students are mastering complex materials and can apply their knowledge," etc.), but nothing specific because, as I said at the start, Robot Arne doesn't do concrete.
 
Giuseppe Rossi Leads Italy Over USA In Confederations Cup Top
PRETORIA, South Africa (AP) New Jersey-born Giuseppe Rossi scored twice in the second half and Daniele De Rossi had a goal, leading Italy over the United States 3-1 Monday night in its opener at the FIFA Confederations Cup. More on Sports
 
GOP, Dems Struggle To Reach Senate Power-Sharing Deal Top
ALBANY --A week after Republicans wrested power of the State Senate away from Democrats, their thin majority collapsed on Monday, leaving the chamber in a tie for the first time in state history. Democrats and Republicans struggled to reach a power-sharing agreement.
 
"Keeping The Faith": Kerry Wants To Produce Iraq Vet Doc Top
WASHINGTON — Sen. John Kerry has made it in politics. Now he wants to be a movie producer. The Massachusetts Democrat has asked the Senate ethics panel if he can use $300,000 from his campaign funds to invest in a documentary about injured Iraq war veterans. Kerry has also sought approval from the Federal Election Commission. The former Democratic presidential nominee hopes to be an executive producer for a movie tentatively entitled "Keeping Faith" by White Mountain films. The senator, who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, would help line up investors and obtain interview subjects for the film. Kerry would not be paid, but he could get up to a 120 percent return on his $300,000 investment, according to a March 16 letter he sent to the FEC. The movie is expected to cost between $3 million and $5 million to make. "After he gets a decision from Senate ethics and the FEC, he will make his own decision on what to do," said Kerry spokeswoman Jodi Seth on Monday. Kerry has $3.5 million in his campaign account and does not face re-election until 2014. A decorated Vietnam War veteran who served as a Navy swift boat commander, Kerry has long been active in veterans causes. Kerry was asked by friends who are involved in veterans issues to become an executive producer of the movie, Seth said. The film's director and producer is George Butler, a longtime Kerry friend. Butler had success with his 1977 documentary "Pumping Iron" about a then-unknown bodybuilder named Arnold Schwarzenegger. Butler also made "Going Upriver: The Long War of John Kerry" that came out during Kerry's 2004 White House run against former President George Bush. The movie showed Kerry's military exploits as well as his efforts leading veterans protesting the war after coming home. Kerry's presidential ambitions were thwarted by attacks on his military service and consistency. (This version CORRECTS Corrects movie name in 3rd graf to "Keeping Faith" sted "Keeping the Faith".)
 
Steve Kirsch: Waxman-Markey: Three Tough, Unanswered Questions Top
On June 10, 1Sky sponsored a conference call with Waxman, Markey, and their staff to talk about the American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES) a.k.a. the Waxman-Markey bill. I had three really tough questions that weren't addressed in the call, so I e-mailed the House staffers who spoke on the call. I received a response which I've included below, but the response didn't directly answer my questions. So I thought it would be fun to speculate at how they might have responded if they were required to answer each question directly, without being "politically correct." Question #1: Jim Hansen did an analysis of the bill. He told me on June 7 that he will write something soon showing that Waxman-Markey "locks in terrible results for two decades." Now we all know that Hansen is a really smart guy that we wished we had listened to back in 1988 when he first testified about global warming. His prognostications have all materialized. Since we are so late in addressing climate change, and we really cannot afford to make any mistakes this time around (our last chance), how can you be so certain that Hansen is wrong in his assessment of Waxman-Markey? Do you have an expert who is as smart as Hansen (and as right in his prognostications) who has convinced you that Hansen is wrong? Answer #1: No, we haven't seen Hansen's analysis. Question #2: Both Secretary Chu and the President of MIT point out that nuclear has to be a key part of the energy mix going forward. We can't supply all our clean energy needs relying on just renewables. Yet this bill has over 932 pages, and the word "nuclear" only appears twice. That seems pretty odd considering that 70% of our CO2-free power is from nuclear. Even more odd considering we haven't built a new nuclear plant in 30 years and it's still 70% of our clean power! I'm sure you all know that the energy content contained in light water reactor (LWR) spent fuel and depleted uranium exceeds all the known oil reserves in the world. It's an energy resource that is 10 times bigger than the energy of the coal we have in the ground . And that's just the stuff we have on hand! That's not even counting the stuff we haven't mined. Using fast reactors, we can run the entire planet for over 700 years on just the uranium "waste" we have on hand and for millions of years if we are willing to use the uranium that hasn't yet been mined. So we have this huge energy resource just lying there and we invented the fast reactor technology (known as the Integral Fast Reactor (IFR)) at Argonne National Laboratory 25 years ago to use it 100 times more efficiently than in an LWR with minimal waste, lower cost, and better safety than existing nuclear plants. It also solves our nuclear waste problem since it uses the existing nuclear waste for fuel. But we aren't talking about it at all in this bill on clean energy security. It's not even a footnote in the bill. Secretary Chu is talking about fast reactors as a critical piece to moving forward, yet nobody in Congress in the last 15 years has brought it up and it sure isn't anywhere in this bill. Isn't this a bit short sighted to not even mention this in the bill? The current DOE funding for this is ridiculously inadequate. I spoke to the former top guy in charge of civilian nuclear for DOE (Ray Hunter) and he thinks this is a travesty. He was so disgusted he sent a letter to Senator Reid and a few other Senators explaining all of this, but they all ignored his letter (Senator Mikulski's office sent him a "thank you for writing us" response). That's a bit odd considering this is our biggest energy resource and this guy was the top civilian nuclear guy at DOE. Unfortunately, this bill is no different. Jim Hansen has been building a fast reactor as one of his top 5 priorities for Obama to fix global warming. I heard that Congressman McNerney was briefed on fast reactors and tried to have a hearing on it. Nothing happened and this bill has nothing on it at all. Is there any chance we can fix that? Or at least acknowledge the reason for this stunning omission? Answer #2: No. Congressman Markey hates nuclear and he always has. He isn't going to let little things like "facts" and "science" change his beliefs. Even if nuclear supplied 99% of our clean energy, it still wouldn't be called out in the bill. However, the bill doesn't penalize utilities for constructing nuclear plants. Question #3: One of the reasons we are in this crisis is due to our government's lack of a long term vision and a viable strategy with respect to global warming. This seems to me not to have changed. Am I wrong? On the call, Markey correctly pointed out that in order to control climate change, we not only have to reduce our emissions at home, but we also have to get other countries to dramatically reduce their emissions. Coal is the big problem. If we can't virtually eliminate coal use worldwide, we are just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Is there a strategy for how we are going to move other countries off of coal? Markey talked about developing and then exporting carbon capture and sequestration (CCS), but such a strategy would rely on exporting a technology that doesn't exist (at scale), that may never exist, that nobody really wants, that would raise the price of electricity to be unaffordably high, and which can only be retrofitted onto coal plants originally designed to capture CO2 of which there are none. That's a lot of assumptions. Is that our official core strategy to save the planet??!?!?! Wouldn't it make more sense to invest in commercializing the IFR fast reactor technology that we invented 25 years ago, spend lots of money to modularize and mass produce the pieces, have the US finance construction of the plants in foreign countries, and make in-country joint partnerships with the local government to build and operate the plants? Such a plan could displace existing coal plants because it would provide power at a cheaper cost. It would be the equivalent of Walmart moving into town and displacing higher priced competitors. And of course, it will also eliminate the construction of new coal plants. The benefits to the US would be huge: a nice recurring profitable revenue stream helping our trade deficit and creation of a huge number of high paying jobs to build these plants and the parts for them and to operate them. So we make tons of money and create lots of jobs. And the benefits to the world are huge in terms of CO2 reduction. We'd also virtually eliminate the nuclear waste worldwide. And the host country gets cheaper power. Everyone wins. Isn't the latter a fundamentally better strategy than Markey's "pray for CCS" strategy? Or is there a better strategy for getting other countries to eliminate CO2 from all power generation? Answer #3: Sure, a strategy that relies on pure economics for getting people to abandon coal is better than a strategy of relying on an uneconomic and unproven technology and the threat of economic sanctions for non-compliance. Carrots are always better than sticks. Look at our own country for example. We are having a heck of a time getting enough votes for this bill and it we've already watered down the renewable portfolio standards so much that they basically don't require much change from the status quo at all. So sure, that's a better strategy, but that's not the strategy we are pursuing. Look, it's not about economics or what is in the public's best interest for saving the planet. If you are trying to get enough votes to pass a bill in Congress, the political realities are this: We want to do the right thing for the planet and for the public. But If we don't have a strategy that makes the coal, oil, and gas companies happy, they'll spend lots of money on misleading ads to try to ensure that we don't get re-elected. Unfortunately, there are a lot of Members who are afraid of that. The official response Here is the response to the three questions that I did receive from one of the House staff members: Thanks for your emails. We wanted to provide some information on how the Waxman-Markey bill (ACES) provides opportunities for new nuclear power: ● Because nuclear power generates far fewer greenhouse gas emissions than fossil fuels, utilities will need to hold far fewer emission allowances for the nuclear plants to comply with the carbon limitations in ACES. According to EPA modeling, twice as many new nuclear plants would be built by 2025 under ACES than without the legislation. ● Under the federal Renewable Electricity Standard, electricity generated from new nuclear units is not added to a utility's baseline electricity level. As a result, the addition of a nuclear plant would not require a utility to obtain additional renewable electricity. This ensures that the RES provides no disincentive to the construction of new nuclear units. ● ACES establishes a self-sustaining Clean Energy Deployment Administration (CEDA) within the Department of Energy to promote the domestic development and deployment of clean energy technologies. CEDA would be empowered to provide direct loans, loan guarantees, and letters of credit to support clean energy technologies that might otherwise be unable to secure financing, including nuclear power. ● ACES includes reforms to the existing Department of Energy loan guarantee program. The Department has received applications for federal loan guarantees from 21 proposed nuclear power plants, totaling $122 billion in requested assistance. Chairman Waxman is committed to developing the strongest legislation that can pass Congress. Our staff is all working very hard to get the bill ready for the House floor next week, but if you'd like to talk about this issue or others, please let us know and we'll be glad to talk to you during the next recess.
 
Prakash Gossai Died Top
Shri Prakash Gossai has died. News of Prakash Gossai's death has spread across the Hindu comunity where the Special Assistant to Office of the President was a greatly loved spiritual leader. More on India
 
Andy Plesser: Huffington Post Gets New CEO Top
Eric Hippeau,veteran publishing executive and venture capitalist has replaced Betsy Morgan, the company announced this afternoon. I have published an interview we did with Eric from February of 2008 on his view the change nature of news content and the evolution of the Huffington Post. The story was first reported by paidContent . You can find my original post up on Beet.TV You can find quite a lot of coverage of the story up on Techmeme
 
Dr. Jeffrey McCombs: The Adventures of a Preterm Daddy Top
As we sat with my family at Thanksgiving last year, my wife announced that we were going try to get pregnant. This was happy news for my mother who has been waiting for her 50 year old son to contribute to the family line like my two sisters and brother have done previously some 20-30 years earlier. Little did we know that as we sat there, she was already 1-2 weeks along in her pregnancy. Three store-bought, do-it-yourself pregnancy tests later in the first half of December, and we find out that she's pregnant. This celebrated news was followed up a couple of weeks later with new information that we were having twins, courtesy of a diagnostic ultrasound scan due to some concerns of her doctor at that time. A diagnostic ultrasound in our family is not a choice taken lightly. I'm a 3rd generation Doctor of Chiropractic, never vaccinated as a child, grew up on vitamins with each meal and weekly if not daily adjustments. Ultrasound is a type of radiation that can be used therapeutically or diagnostically. My educational and clinical experience with ultrasound has been as a therapy. Ultrasound produces sound waves (a type of radiation) that pass through the tissues. The tissue's resistance to and absorption of these waves causes heating of the tissues and some other metabolic effects that can be desirable in promoting healing. Therapeutic ultrasound is not recommended during pregnancy, over tissues such as the eyes, heart, spinal column, growing bones, testes, epiphyseal plates, carotid sinuses, cervical stellate ganglion, and vagus nerve. Although you may not be familiar with these anatomical tissues, they are all found in developing babies and everyone else. Given my clinical experience, I naturally questioned its use as a diagnostic tool. This philosophy of questioning comes from a statement found in the Hippocratic Oath that I took upon graduation from school that states, "First do no harm." It's the responsibility of a doctor to always assess the methods being used to determine that there is no harm being done to the patient as a result of medications or procedures. Diagnostic ultrasound uses a similar frequency range, much like sonar on a submarine, to produce images. It is used to screen for abnormalities of the developing fetus. For more information on the benefits and risks of ultrasound, visit - http://www.ob-ultrasound.net/. Like therapeutic ultrasound, the resistance to and absorption of the sound waves, plays a role in the creation of the images. To me, this indicates some degree of heating of the tissues in a developing baby. Is this enough to create some type of damage to the baby? Currently, the risks are not considered to be relevant but the US National Institute of Health recommends against its use in routine scanning of the fetus and developing embryo and 'although its use doesn't appear to be associated with any known hazards, investigators should continue to evaluate risks.' Hmmm. Additionally, some research points to correlations between diagnostic ultrasound and the Autism/Aspergers spectrum of developmental disorders. The bottom line on ultrasound is that it should be used based on a 'benefit vs. risk' assessment, a term that I'll talk more about later. Most doctors and sonogram technicians oppose its use by moms who want to have periodic pictures to show everyone. To me, its use is a big question mark that may or may not have complications years later. Okay, well we had one ultrasound that seemed to be necessary, but we decide that we probably won't elect to have any others unless absolutely necessary. There is a saying that goes something like this, "Man plans, God laughs." During the course of our journey through this pregnancy, we will seem to keep God amused. My wife's 1st obstetrics doctor recommended a list of questionable procedures (amniocentesis, CVS, Rhogam vaccine) and handed us a couple of boxes of prenatal vitamins. Medical doctors get about 5 hours of training in nutrition during medical school. This was very apparent by the box of vitamins that we were handed. The prenatal vitamin's list of nutrients and additional ingredients consisting of synthetic dyes, synthetic nutrients, chemical fillers, and toxic fats which we quickly donated to the trash can in his waiting room on our way out of his office. It was time to ask around for references and interview a few OB doctors. Obstetrics (OB) is surgical specialty dealing with the care of women and their children during pregnancy. Although our intention is to have a natural home birth attended by a midwife, we will still need an OB doctor and a hospital as a back-up. This is common practice in California for parents who choose homebirths. Unfortunately, twin homebirths in California is against the law and a midwife who attends one can end up in jail. This was interesting since other states allow this practice which dates back to the beginning of man. Concerns about the possible complications associated with mothers carrying multiple babies however, means that this is left to the hospitals and obstetrics doctors in California. I'm not sure if this is a policy based on previous experience or a philosophy of better safe than sorry. We consider traveling out of state to Tennessee where the midwife of midwives, Ina May Gaskin, holds court when she's not teaching midwives and doctors across the country. They inform us that they like to have couples come 6 weeks before the due date and if our babies don't make it to 34 weeks gestation and decide to come out early, we would end up going to a hospital in Tennessee. Since twins seem to have a habit of coming early, this option doesn't sound too inviting. Given the logistics and hassles of travel and the possibility of an early delivery, we opt for a natural delivery at an LA hospital attended by an OB doctor, a midwife, and 2 or 3 other people. It's not home, but we want to make it as intimate as possible. I thought I heard God laughing? We selected our OB doctor, Jessica Schneider, MD and our midwife was Elizabeth Bachner. Dr. Schneider wants an ultrasound every month once we hit 20 weeks, but we decide on one detailed anatomical ultrasound at 20 weeks and then one just before birth to determine positioning of the babies. This approach was also recommended by an assistant to Ina May Gaskins and it sounds good to us. The ultrasound comes back normal and we begin to make all of the necessary arrangements. We have a doctor and a midwife, and my wife has become a walking encyclopedia on pregnancy, twins, and birth. She's exercising every day, eating well, taking her vitamins, and spending quiet time with herself and the babies. Her due date is mid-August and so in early April we settle into what we expect to be a nice long pregnancy...and God giggles. Next: Cedars-Sinai, an epic voyage.
 
Dems Plan For Byrd "Contingencies" Top
Sen. Robert C. Byrd's state of health has prompted some quiet, behind-the-scenes discussions in the event the senator is unable to return to office. I understand Gov. Joe Manchin met with state Democratic Party chairman Nick Casey last week, with U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., on a conference call to discuss contingencies. As noted before, Casey is generally regarded as the consensus choice to serve as a placeholder for Byrd's Senate seat in the event Byrd would have to step down prior to the 2010 elections.
 
Boystown Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Top
CHICAGO (AP) -- Bar owner Geno Zaharakis sat one busy evening at the window of his gay nightclub, watching as groups of straight women celebrating bachelorette parties made their way along a strip of bars in Chicago's gay-friendly "Boystown" neighborhood. That's when he made a decision now posted for all to see: "No Bachelorette Parties." Though the small sign has been there for years, it's suddenly making a big statement amid the national debate over gay marriage. While most gay bars continue to welcome the raucous brides to be, Zaharakis's bar Cocktail is fighting for what he sees as a fundamental right, and his patrons - along with some peeved bachelorettes - are taking notice. "I'm totally losing money because of it, but I don't want the money," Zaharakis said. "I would rather not have the money than host an event I didn't believe in." Gay bars are popular with bachelorettes, both for the over-the-top drag shows that some offer and for the ability to let loose in a place where women are unlikely to be groped or ogled. Some bars welcome the women and their free spending, even advertising weekend shows. Zaharakis, though, instructs his bouncers to turn away groups of women sporting beads, boas, tiaras and phallic plastic necklaces. His customers say they like knowing they're not going to encounter such displays. "It is throwing it in our face that they can get married and we can't," said Dion Contreras, a 29-year-old Chicago litigation manager, while having a drink at Cocktail with friends. "I just think they're ignorant to our situation. I want women to think twice about this issue." When Zaharakis posted the sign in 2004, it got a little local attention, but it was mostly the surprised bachelorettes turned away at the door who took note. The November passage of California's gay marriage ban Proposition 8, though, helped sparked chatter about the ban on Internet blogs, which in turn attracted more media attention and debate. The California Supreme Court upheld the state ban last month. Six states have legalized gay marriage. Some of the biggest proponents of gay marriage aren't on board with Zaharakis' approach. Evan Wolfson, executive director of Freedom to Marry, said while he agrees with Zaharakis' stand on marriage equality, he would express it differently. "I'd rather invite people in," Wolfson said. "Celebrate their happiness and ask them to take a stand for us by helping change the law." And Ed Yohnka of the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois - well-known for fighting for the legalization of gay marriage - says the ban may violate state anti-discrimination laws. "The way is not to bar or discriminate against or harass other people," Yohnka said. In Washington D.C., when bachelorette partygoers enter the gay bar Town Danceboutique they're asked to sign a petition in support of gay marriage. Owner Ed Bailey sends the petitions to the customer's representative in Congress. Bailey says in the year he's had his petition policy, no one has refused to sign. "That's the way to handle it instead of alienating all these people," Bailey said. "You have to get the consensus built out there. Why not try to convince people, 'Hey, why wouldn't you support this?'" Down the street from Chicago's Cocktail, another gay nightclub, Circuit, welcomes bachelorettes. Owner Jeff Binninger doesn't think the women's antics are meant to hurt anyone. "The girls want to come and see the dancers," Binninger said. "I don't think it's on their mind at all, 'We can get married and, oh, you can't.' I don't think the girls are malicious in their intent." Where Zaharakis took offense, Binninger saw a market niche and started producing the male revue "Sinzation" on Saturday nights, advertised specifically to bachelorette parties. One recent Saturday night, 25-year-old Tiffany Casto of Canton, Mich., and eight girlfriends waited for the male dancers to start the show. Casto wore a hot pink feather boa, while her friends had matching white sunglasses, reflecting the dozen disco balls spinning from the ceiling as Beyonce's "Single Ladies" played. "I wouldn't think I'm flaunting it at all," Casto said. But Zaharakis is standing firm. At Cocktail, where about once a month staff turn away bachelorettes, the sign will stay. And for those who ask about it, he's ready with a written statement: "Until same-sex marriage is legal everywhere and same-sex couples are allowed the rights as every heterosexual couple worldwide, we simply do not think it's fair or just for a female bride-to-be to celebrate her upcoming nuptials here at Cocktail." "I'm not going to tell anybody about how to run their business," Zaharakis said. "This is just how I run mine. The political climate has made it more charged. We're standing up in our factions and groups and making statements about how this should stop." --- On the Net: Cocktail Bar Chicago: http://www.cocktailbarchicago.com/ Circuit Night Club: http://www.circuitclub.com/ Town Danceboutique: http://www.towndc.com/ -ASSOCIATED PRESS More on Gay Marriage
 
Lloyd Garver: Iran Election Top
Some people keep insisting that an American-style democracy can be developed anywhere in the world, including the Mideast. Up until this weekend, they were encouraged by the fact that Iran was having a presidential election. Now that the election is over, the party in power has declared that they have won. The oppositon is outraged, and says that the declared "winner" cheated and stole the election. Sounds pretty much like they way our elections work after all. Lloyd Garver has written for many television shows, ranging from "Sesame Street" to "Family Ties" to "Home Improvement" to "Frasier." He has also read many books, some of them in hardcover. He can be reached at lloydgarver@gmail.com . Check out his website at lloydgarver.com and his podcasts on iTunes .
 
Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman: Facing the Bushes' Iranian Whirlwind Top
The parallels between the stolen Iranian election of 2009 and the American of 2000 and 2004 are tempting. The histories -- and futures -- of the two nations are inseparable. Bound up in their tortured half-century of crime and manipulation are the few glimmers of hope for lasting peace in the Middle East. In both countries, a right-wing fundamentalist authoritarian with open contempt for human rights and the Geneva Convention has come up a winner, with catastrophic consequences. In both countries, the blowback of two George Bushes loom large. In the US, two "defeated" candidates -- Al Gore and John Kerry -- said and did nothing in the face of two stolen elections. But an unprecedented election protection movement arose from the ashes of those defeats to assure the 2008 victory of America's first African-American president. In Iran, the "defeated" candidate---Mir Hussein Moussavi---is fighting back, along with massive grassroots resistance. How far they get will define the Iranian future---as well as that of the Middle East. In a fluid and unpredictable situation, here are some indisputables: 1) A half-century ago, the people of Iran attempted a democratic revolution led by a moderate progressive, Dr. Mohammed Mossadegh, whose social-democratic inclinations have been revived by Moussavi. 2) Prime Minister Mossadegh was overthrown by the Eisenhower Administration and its Central Intelligence Agency, which wanted to wall in the Soviet Union and protect western oil interests. 3) Norman Schwarzkopf, Sr. (father of the Gulf War general of the same name) used a suitcase full of US taxpayer dollars to bribe Iran's anti-democratic sympathizers and help overthrow Mossadegh. 4) They installed the pro-U.S. general Fazlollah Zahedi, who handed control of Iran to the brutal and vicious Shah. The Shah ruled through the infamous secret terror/torture police force Savak, which Schwartzkopf helped train. 5) A prototypical CIA asset, the Shah used his iron torturer's hand to "westernize" the country and make it more user-friendly to US oil interests. 6) Among other things, the U.S., France and other western powers were moving to provide the Shah with up to 36 atomic power plants designed to provide electricity and, ultimately, radioactive materials with which to build his own atomic bombs. 7) Despite his ostensible commitment to human rights, President Jimmy Carter made a point of spending a high-profile New Year's with the Shah, evoking the bitter hatred of millions of Iranians. 8) The Shah's overthrow by fundamentalist Ayatollah Khomeini led to the 1979-80 hostage crisis that finally sank Carter's presidency. Amidst indications of a secret deal involving past and future CIA Directors George H.W. Bush and William Casey, the release of the hostages was delayed long enough to guarantee Carter's defeat, thus inaugurating the Age of Ronald Reagan, with 12 of its 28 years under the two Bushes. 9) Secret dealings between Reagan/Bush and the Iranians led to the Iran-Contra Affair, when covert operatives like Oliver North funneled arms to the Iranians and laundered cash and drugs through the reactionary Contra forces fighting revolution in Nicaragua. 10) The Contras in turn flooded the US with cocaine, feeding a horrific crack epidemic that has crippled the black and Hispanic communities here for two decades. 11) Those US-financed arms were used to fight the Iraqis and Saddam Hussein, whom the US also supported, and whom Donald Rumsfeld publicly embraced in the early 1980s. The American goal seems to have been to weaken both Iran and Iraq through a horrifying war that claimed at least a million casualties, ultimately infuriating both citizenries. After a half-century of dictatorship under the Shah and the CIA, followed by the Ayatollah and the fundamentalists, the Iranian public appears desperate to return to the social-democratic vision of Mossadegh, denied so long ago. In the US in 2000 and 2004, the corporate/religious right put George W. Bush in the White House -- and then kept him there -- with a sophisticated election theft machine built around elimination of voter registrations, manipulation of the vote count, and a wide array of supporting tactics. The US Supreme Court set it all in stone with its infamous Bush v. Gore decision, which prevented a true vote count in Florida 2000. History repeated itself in Ohio in 2004. In Iran 2009, the ruling fundamentalist elite has barely pretended to count the votes at all, merely rushing to announce a pre-determined outcome. The reigning Ayatollah has played the role of the US Supreme Court by certifying the outcome before a real ballot tally could possibly occur. Holes in the texts of Iranian newspapers and an electronic blackout created by official censors reflect the ongoing vacuum in the US corporate media, which has yet to seriously face up to what happened to the American elections of 2000 and 2004. What will happen next in Iran is anyone's guess. George W. Bush fueled its fundamentalist right by calling it a "terror state" whose nuclear weapons ambitions are fueled with materials produced by the "Peaceful Atom" Eisenhower inaugurated in 1953, around the time he was disposing of Mossadegh. Bush's counterpart, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is now turning the state terror apparatus -- reminiscent of the Shah's -- against those who would mention the illegitimacy of his rule. Thus tragedy looms at the brink of opportunity. That democracy in Iran so clearly won at the polls is a sign of great courage and hope on the part of the Iranian people. They are fighting terrible odds, not of their making. Should they break free, the storm would re-shape the Middle East -- and much more. In the meantime, perhaps their American counterparts, instructed by the ghost of Mossadegh, might finally face up to the true price of sowing such cynical, lethal whirlwinds. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman have co-authored four books on election protection. Bob's FITRAKIS FILES are available via www.freepress.org, where this article first appeared. HARVEY WASSERMAN'S HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES is at www.harveywasserman.com. More on Ahmadinejad
 
Paul Szep: The Daily Szep: David Letterman Top
More on Political Humor
 
Lanny Davis: Sotomayor and the New Haven Firefighters Case: More Myths Than Facts Top
By now, most people have heard -- negatively -- about the 2006 case Ricci v. DeStefano, in which 18 New Haven firefighters (17 white and one Hispanic) were not promoted after passing the required tests because there were no blacks whose test scores were high enough to qualify them for promotion. From a surprisingly broad left-to-right spectrum, the Conventional Wisdom punditry seems to have decided that Judge Sotomayor was wrong on the law and on allowing reverse racial discrimination and that this case is her chief problem in getting confirmed by a substantial margin. But once again, the CW is wrong. It has too easily accepted five myths that are contradicted by facts. Let's take a look. 1. The case is often referred to as "Judge Sotomayor's" opinion. Very misleading. Judge Sotomayor was one of three judges on the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel. The three affirmed the District Court's decision "per curiam" -- meaning all spoke together, without any one of them taking the lead. Then 13 judges on the appeals panel then were asked to re-hear the appellate arguments. Seven of them (including presumably the three on the first panel) voted no, six voted yes, although some of the latter still might have upheld the District Court decision after hearing the argument. 2. Judge Sotomayor is portrayed as unsympathetic to the white firefighters. Wrong. In the "per curiam" opinion, the three-judge panel wrote: "We are not unsympathetic to the plaintiffs' expression of frustration. Mr. Ricci, for example, who is dyslexic, made intensive efforts that appear to have resulted in his scoring highly on one of the exams, only to have it invalidated." 3. This case proves she is a "liberal activist" judge, driven by race- based goals. Totally false -- indeed, to the contrary. The Ricci case was based on 38 years of jurisprudence, beginning with a Supreme Court case decided in 1971. Griggs v. Duke Power Company was a unanimous 8-0 opinion written by the conservative Chief Justice Warren Burger, appointed by Republican President Richard Nixon. It was Justice Burger who wrote: Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act "proscribes not only overt discrimination but also practices that are fair in form but discriminatory in operation" and requires a job-related or business necessity reason to justify such disparate effect (and that there are no better alternatives). Subsequently, the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission (EEOC) issued the "four-fifths rule" -- i.e., if minorities passed the test at a rate less than 80 percent of the group with the highest rate, then that test is presumptively illegal due to the "disparate effect" of the test, a presumption that could be overcome only if the employer could show there was no better job-related alternative that produced less of a disparity. While this rule does not have the force of law, courts have usually used it as an unofficial standard. The New Haven case clearly came in far below the EEOC guideline. Less than half as many black firefighters as white firefighters passed the test. The District Court was applying the law of the established precedents of the 2nd Circuit, as it was required to do. In two cases -- in 1983 and 1984 -- 2nd Circuit panels held that it was permissible under the then-existing Title VII to "race norm" the test results -- for example, lower passing grades for minorities to achieve a more proportionate result. Said the 1984 panel: "a showing of a prima facie case of employment discrimination through a statistical demonstration of disproportional racial impact constitutes a sufficiently serious claim of discrimination to serve as a predicate for employer-initiated, voluntary race-conscious remedies," such as "race norming." In the New Haven case, as the court pointed out, there was no "race norming" -- the city civil service board simply decided to start over in search of more reasonable alternatives. Thus, the New Haven District Court Judge, the three-judge panel on which Judge Sotomayor served, and seven circuit court judges who voted to deny a re-argument were all following precedent and strictly construing the underlying statute -- just like good conservative strict constructionists are supposed to do. 4. The ruling against the white firefighters is supported by President Obama's Justice Department. Wrong. The Justice Department has asked the Supreme Court not to affirm the 2nd Circuit panel and the New Haven court, but rather, to send the case back to the New Haven court for further evidentiary hearings. At such hearings, evidence can be heard on whether New Haven had any reasonable alternatives to the testing system that would be equally job-related but would not have produced this level of disparate effect. In fact, there probably are several such alternatives that could be demonstrated at such a hearing. It is undisputed that blacks historically perform less well than whites on written tests. Most experts believe this is because of disadvantaged schools and lower-income family culture. Thus, one alternative for New Haven might be considered would be to adjust the weighting system required by the union contract -- 60 percent written test, 40 percent verbal examination. Instead, New Haven could use the weighting system applied by neighboring Bridgeport -- 30 percent written, 65 percent verbal, and 5 percent seniority. Experience has shown that this might produce less of a disparate impact on minorities. Another method suggested by an expert at the New Haven trial was to give some weight to candidates who can "demonstrate" how they would address a particular problem as opposed to just verbally saying so. That too could have produced different, non-racially-disparate results. 5. The case should be reversed by the U.S. Supreme Court and this will show that Judge Sotomayor was wrong. Balderdash. The Supreme Court probably will reverse, but that doesn't make Judge Sotomayor wrong. Only the Supreme Court can overrule or modify a prior Supreme Court decision and numerous appeals-court decisions. This would not be the first time that a majority of this particular Supreme Court chose to ignore years of precedent and the conservative doctrine of "stare decisis", and in effect, reach a desired outcome first, then find legal arguments to support it second. I may be missing something, but that doesn't sound like strict construction to me. Wouldn't the better answer to the plight of Mr. Ricci and other whites suffering what they believe to be "reverse discrimination" be to change the law -- rather than legislating from the bench? Stay tuned. Lanny J. Davis, a Washington lawyer and former special counsel to President Clinton, served as a member of President George W. Bush's Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board. He is the author of Scandal: How 'Gotcha' Politics Is Destroying America . This piece appeared in Mr. Davis' weekly column, "Purple Nation," in the Washington Times today, June 15, 2009. More on Sonia Sotomayor
 
Cristina Page: Operation Rescue's Extreme Facebook Friends Top
Can you imagine how much greater the campaign scandal would have been if Bill Ayers, the former radical bomber who was linked to Barack Obama, had been if Obama had him as a Facebook friend? That, no doubt, would have been considered evidence of a relationship, a sign of intimacy even. Of course, they weren't Facebook friends because that wasn't kind of relationship they had. But isn't it interesting that at least one leading anti-abortion activist who claims to be against the kind of violence that recently took the life of Dr. George Tiller is Facebook friends with some of the most virulently pro-violence anti-abortion crusaders that exist? When PBS asked me to debate Troy Newman , president of Operation Rescue, I did a little research on him. I discovered his Facebook page and with it questions about those he consorts with, at least online, and consequently, questions about his sincerity. Newman has been in the news more than most anti-abortion leaders these days because his organization has been ensnared in the murder of Dr. Tiller, an abortion provider. Seven years ago, the group moved its headquarters to Wichita--to focus exclusively on protesting Tiller, his employees and his patients. In the days and weeks before the murder, alleged assassin Scott Roeder was in regular touch with Newman's second in command at Operation Rescue (who herself spent nearly two years in jail for conspiring to bomb an abortion clinic). A post-it note with her name and phone number was stuck to the dashboard of the Roeder's get-away car. After the shooting, Operation Rescue was one of the first organizations out with a statement condemning and distancing itself from the act. The statement , released within a couple of hours after the murder, read, "We denounce vigilantism and the cowardly act that took place this morning... Operation Rescue has diligently and successfully worked for years through peaceful, legal means, and through the proper channels to see to it that abortionists around the nation are brought to justice. Without due process, there can be no justice." Newman has continued to make strong statements against violence. Most recently, in our PBS online debate , Newman claimed the murder of Dr. Tiller, "was not justice, but vigilantism, which must be abhorred by a society that embraces the rule of law over anarchy." But, it appears that Newman feels friendly enough towards the supporters of just such vigilantism to make them his Facebook friends. He may want to officially distance himself and his organization from violence against providers, but he doesn't want to go as far as to stop socially networking with individuals who endorse it. Of the twenty people that Wikipedia lists as most associated with the Army of God , described as "an extremist anti-abortion organization that sanctions the use of force to combat abortion in the United States," Newman is Facebook friends with three. (Keep in mind, of the other 17 listed, three are currently in jail for killing abortion providers, and one is incarcerated for attempted murder.) Dan Holman is one such friend. Holman told CNN he 'cheered" when he learned of the murder of Dr. Tiller. Holman, of Missionaries to the Pre-born, has long supported violence against abortion providers. He wrote on the website Army of God, "Those who object to the use of force to protect pre-born children do no truly believe in their humanity and worth!" He continued, "To condemn the use of force to protect unborn children is a tacit admission that their lives are not worth defending. It is to say that that some have more of a Right to Life than others. It is a frank admission that pre-born children are somehow sub-human. If they truly believe the life of the unborn is worth less than the life of the abortionist than why defend the babies at all?" About Paul Hill, who murdered abortion provider Dr. John Bayard Britton and James H. Barrett, a volunteer clinic escort, Holman seemed to lament that there are no suicide bombers in the anti-abortion cause. He writes , "Most of us are not as courageous as Paul Hill. There are no Christian suicide bombers blowing up abortion clinics. We need to confess and acknowledge our lack of love toward God and the pre-born. It is wrong to vilify the courageous acts of Paul Hill to put our own weakness and cowardice in a better light." Another Facebook friend Newman shares status updates with is Neal Horsley. The Guardian UK interviewed Horsley after the murder of Dr. Tiller. Horsley states, "The thing about Tiller's assassination that was really appropriate is that they killed him in church. While he was there collecting the money, counting the money, his blood poured in to those thick carpets in that church. That was a fitting send off." Matthew Trewhella, the third of Newman's pro-violence-against-providers Facebook friends, is a signatory of the infamous letter supporting the murders of abortion providers and calling for all charges be dropped against Michael Griffin, the assassin of Dr. David Gunn. The letter read, "We, the undersigned, declare the justice of taking all godly action necessary to defend innocent human life including the use of force. We proclaim that whatever force is legitimate to defend the life of a born child is legitimate to defend the life of an unborn child. We assert that if Michael Griffin did in fact kill David Gunn, his use of lethal force was justifiable provided it was carried out for the purpose of defending the lives of unborn children. Therefore, he ought to be acquitted of the charges against him." Newman, if he wishes to be taken seriously as an anti-abortion leader who is opposed to violence should, as a first step, break all ties with the small band of anti-abortion figures who cheer on murderers. You don't need a PR genius to tell you that. As I suggest to him in the debate , "You, more than anyone are poised to help prevent future acts of violence by alienating and condemning these forces or by helping to try to rehabilitate these extremists. Otherwise, all the anti-violence talk is simply meaningless." Rather than take this simple step, Newman has offered to buy Tiller's clinic to run operations out of, just the kind of victory lap that will be celebrated by his violent friends. My PBS online debate with Troy Newman is here . They ask you to vote on who won. Troy has got the anti-abortion blogs driving his supporters to the site to vote which, at the time of this posting, seems to working in his favor. Even though the voting doesn't end until Thursday, he's already claiming victory . Please take a look at the debate and vote!
 
John Gartner: Clean Coal: Fuel of the Future or a Fallacy? Top
In a surprising reversal of a reversal, the Department of Energy has announced new funding for the "FutureGen" clean coal project, less than 18 months after the previous DOE Secretary pulled the plug . DOE Secretary Stephen Chu , who previously called coal "very, very bad," said the government will spend more than $1 billion on research on a prototype coal power plant that will capture and sequester the CO2 produced. That's more than double the amount that the private sector will spend on the joint venture. Though the DOE's plan has turned plenty of heads, down under they are acting even more decisively on clean coal technologies. German company Direct Invest will put $1.5 billion into clean coal development in Australia. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries is also reportedly working on a deal on a clean coal plant in Australia. The use of the words "clean coal" has sparked an advertising war between the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCCE), a consortium of coal industry companies, and The Reality Coalition, whose participants include the Alliance for Climate Protection, Sierra Club, National Wildlife Federation, the Natural Resources Defense Council and the League of Conservation Voters. "Clean coal" is a bit of a misnomer since most of the technologies being developed aren't really cleaning the coal burning process but capturing and storing the CO2. Clean diesel was introduced into the marketplace a few years ago with much less contention because the EPA standards required cleaning up diesel fuel's environmental impact in many aspects. Since CO2 is only one of many pollutants generated, for the clean moniker to be applied to coal, a future generation of coal power plants should also greatly reduce the amount of nitrogen oxides, mercury, sulfur dioxides and particulates. The government's investment in the FutureGen project of more than 2:1 to private dollars is disproportionate when considering who will benefit if the project is a success. The burden should at the minimum be equally split between the public and private sector. Having the DOE lead the building and financing of a small scale production plant is an aberration from how government research usually works. The DOE's research is ordinarily aimed at basic research for a specific scientific challenge, not the entire process of an industry. For example, the DOE didn't help out the auto industry by funding the creation of a prototype plug-in hybrid and charging infrastructure; it limited support to components of basic research, such as advanced battery chemistry. (The power of the coal lobby and the President's time spent in Illinois probably had something to do with the revival of interest in FutureGen.) Because of the importance of coal in the global economy, clean coal in theory is worth pursuing. (We're still spending federal money on hydrogen fuel cells for vehicles after more than 30 years of trying, and today it remains even more of a technical challenge.) Clean coal is needed even more so in developing nations such as China, India and South Africa, whose rapidly growing future energy needs would make a transition to renewables a substantial economic challenge, so it should really be an international effort. A more effective (and less contention) role for the U.S. government in facing environmental/energy challenges would be to set a new standard requiring an industry-wide reduction in emissions, and then along with basic research provide generous tax incentives for research and implementation of whatever technologies are needed to comply. The private sector should lead in product development, not the DOE. One significant obstacle is that coal plants can't be easily retrofitted to clean up the process, so the new standard will likely only be required when replacing existing coal plants that reach their end of life. Finally, rather than putting coal underground in the hopes that it won't impact future generations, shouldn't the aim be to either use CO2 as an energy source as has been proposed , or to have nature take care of it by aggressively planting trees and other plants?
 
Dr. Johnny Benjamin: NASCAR is Begging for a Visit From Rev. Al Sharpton Top
History has taught us that when supposedly decent people sit idly by when venomous racist spew their hate, tragedy often follows. How long must be people be terrorized before we truly address it? You cannot sit at an NBA, NFL or MLB game and chant racist hostilities at the athletes without it being immediately addressed. No one will turn a blind eye if a member of an opposing team's coaching staff got in the face of a WNBA star at a game and screamed profanities and sexist filth. Unfortunately, rampant racism is common and apparently tolerated in NASCAR. A young and talented white driver (I will not mention his name because he is in no way associated with this vile behavior) is a top circuit NASCAR darling. While a young and talented Black driver struggles to secure sponsorship and endures racist tirades in the Nationwide developmental league. Marc Davis is the talented 19 year old young man that is attempting to live his dream by becoming a champion NASCAR driver. But he, unlike any of his other peers, must silently endure the bitterness of open and aggressive racial hostility. Marc must be silent or he risks being black balled. (Why isn't it called green balled?... Just a thought.) During a 2006 race at Hickory Speedway in North Carolina, Marc -- then 16 years old -- was serenaded by the crowd with "N!@@&% (racial slur) go home". This week he reportedly was accosted with a profanity laden rant that included racial slurs by Bryan Gaughan the crew chief for a team owned by NASCAR legend and ESPN commentator, Rusty Wallace. The crew chief has been suspended. NASCAR fines, suspends and loses law suits but apparently these measures have proved to be inadequate in eradicating their longstanding and not-so secret cancer. When the national brands (called sponsors) that adorn the cars and provide the zillions of dollars required to fuel the NASCAR circuit are held publicly responsible, significant change may then come. Divestiture is a powerful and alarming word. NASCAR should institute a zero tolerance policy with harsh sanctions and team suspensions for violations. It should also better monitor fans in attendance. Common decency should be sufficient motivation for NASCAR officials. Sponsors should be good corporate citizens. Morality has failed thus far; so maybe lightening their pockets will work. During these crippling economic times, NASCAR may be forced to finally realize that they can no longer continue to alienate a potentially huge source of revenue -- minority fans both Black and Hispanic. NASCAR is at a crossroads. Either they can privately take out the trash or endure public scrutiny and the pressure that can be applied until they hemorrhage major dollars. To date, NASCAR has not adequately addressed this scourge of deep seated racism. But when the Rev. Al Sharpton shows up the stock car world will scream foul and say that the 'race' card is being played. Funny... why isn't the 'world' screaming now for Marc Davis and common decency?
 
Sabria Jawhar: One of Islam's Greatest Threats is Dick Cheney and Those Who Bow to Him Top
I finally discovered the threat to my well-being as a Muslim living in the West. His name is Dick Cheney. At first I thought the threat was the anti-hijabers who want to pass laws banning head scarves in public buildings because they seek to liberate the Muslimah from an oppressive patriarchal society. Or maybe it's because modest women make white guys nervous. I dunno. Then I was sure it was Fox News. They did their best to ridicule and then dissect President Obama's speech to the Ummah. They were certain there were hidden messages to terrorists in his quotes of the Qur'an, and then wondered why he threw Israel and all Muslim women "under the bus" for reasons only they know. But then Fox newsman Shepard Smith expressed alarm about the crazies "way out there on a limb" over Obama. Suddenly, I have warm fuzzy feelings for Fox. But, no. It's Cheney. The well-spoken and forthright Dick Cheney has been making the talk show and lecture circuit rounds sounding the alarm that Obama is making the Western world less safe from terrorists. Every former president and vice president for the past 200-plus years has managed to keep his mouth shut and let the new administration do its job. But Cheney feels an obligation to tell the world that the new administration is ready to let terrorists win. How does this make Cheney a threat to me? He invokes the memories of 9/11 at every opportunity, reminding Americans that nearly 3,000 people died at the hands of Islamic extremists. We should never forget the events of 9/11 and who perpetrated those crimes. But there's a difference of remembering and honoring the dead and using the tragedy as crass exploitation to wage fear. He says shutting down Guantanamo Bay and bringing detainees to prisons on U.S. soil will make America less safe. Cheney says the Bush administration did a heck of a job keeping terrorists from striking again. But it's only a matter of time before the Obama administration lets one get through and the U.S. has another 9/11 on its hands. The subtext in Cheney's speeches is that Muslims are a threat to U.S. security. I remember a few weeks ago a video clip from Jon Stewart's Daily Show showed an imprisoned convicted killer describing how he ate portions of his victim, prompting one to wonder just who is the threat: a cannibalistic killer escaping from a maximum security prison or a 19-year-old wanting to prove his manhood on the battlefields of Afghanistan. Cheney doesn't talk about a cannibal's threat within America's borders because it's not germane to his argument. We assume that convicted serial killers and mad-dog rapists are safely behind bars. But for some reason the wily terrorist with a secondary education, no family, no English language skills and zero understanding of American culture outside of Steven Segal and Arnold Schwarzenegger movies, will wreak havoc on Anytown, USA. By reminding the American public that terrorists may be your next door neighbor, Cheney encourages the Ann Coulters and the Michael Savages and their extremist followers to spew their hate. These modern-day Father Coughlins acquire new recruits to wage a war against imaginary threats of the Islamification of the West, the implementation of Shariah at the local traffic court, and wearing the hijab that seems to threaten Western civilization. Cheney's speeches give the appearance of reasonable dissension of Obama's policies, but they are calculated to whip the right-wingers into an anti-Muslim frenzy. This will embolden state legislators to pass laws banning the hijab in public buildings and on government-issued identification cards. We've already seen such attempts. The Oklahoma state legislature attempted to pass a law banning the wearing of the hijab on driver's licenses and other government photo IDs. The bill was dismissed in April. Yet these efforts, fanned by Cheney and right-wing pundits, create an intolerant climate. I worry for my brothers and sisters in the West. I hear nary a beep of concern over the demonization of our religion and the fact the all of us are branded with the terrorist label by Cheney and is ilk. No, Cheney didn't tell the world that my best friend in Canada is a terrorist, or that my small circle of Saudi girlfriends in Newcastle, UK, are terrorists. But he might as well have. We're in Canada, the US and the UK for an education. But every time Cheney spouts off, his 21st century brown shirts write endless "Every Muslim is a Terrorist" tracts. More on Barack Obama
 
Bob Fertik: E-Democracy Also Threatens Conservative Rule in Washington D.C. Top
Powered by the Internet, e-Democracy is threatening conservative power in Iran. But it's also threatening conservative power in Washington DC, even if the media isn't covering the story. In Iran, citizens are confronting police in the streets to protest a stolen election. Despite Iran's government-controlled media, this rebellion is visible to the world through digital photos and videos which are being uploaded and forwarded through Facebook, Twitter, and other global networks. In the U.S., citizens are also using the Internet to rebel against conservative rule. But it's a quieter rebellion that is being ignored by the world's media, despite its past successes. This rebellion began in 2002 as massive street protests against George Bush's planned invasion of Iraq. Because e-Democracy was in its infancy, Bush was able to ignore those protests and start a disastrous war. So progressives got smarter and created the "blogosphere" and the "netroots." These high-tech anti-war forces powered Howard Dean's insurgency in 2004, the Democratic takeover of Congress in 2006, and the election of President Obama in 2008. This week, this anti-war rebellion is making a quiet but dramatic effort to end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. While anti-war Democrats in Congress are a minority, just 39 House Democrats can block the President's latest funding request by joining with 178 Republicans who oppose IMF funds in the same bill. 34 Democrats will vote no, and 35 more may join them . A defeat in the House would send shockwaves through Washington's conservative power structure. There is also a rebellion against the powerful health insurance industry. Activists are demanding a real alternative -- single payer -- which is anathema to conservatives in Washington, even Democrats. Nevertheless, e-Democracy activists have enlisted the support of 83 House Democrats , which may be enough to win a "public option" as a first step towards single-payer. In the short term, the prospects for e-Democracy activists in Iran are uncertain, and so are the prospects for e-Democracy activists in the U.S. But in the long term, "people-power" will inevitably succeed, as long as the Internet remains free of government control. More on Iran
 
Rayfield Dupree: 82-Year-Old Gets 5 Years For Selling OxyContin Top
FAIRBANKS, Alaska — An 81-year-old man has drawn a five-year sentence for illegally selling the powerful prescription pain reliever OxyContin. Rayfield Dupree was sentenced Friday. Dupree, who turns 82 next month, originally was charged with five felony counts of drugs misconduct. He pleaded guilty to one consolidated count in a plea deal with prosecutors. He will be eligible for parole after serving 20 months, but until then can take medical parole for health reasons if necessary. Public defender Amy Allen said Dupree suffers from an irregular heartbeat. Superior Court Judge Paul Lyle ordered Dupree to report to jail by June 22. Dupree has been free on bond since shortly after his November arrest. ___ Information from: Fairbanks Daily News-Miner, http://www.newsminer.com More on Crime
 
Make Your Own Solar iPhone Charger (SLIDESHOW) Top
Got an iPod? Got access to sunlight? Then have we got the green-it-yourself project for you! Thanks to Jerome Kelly from Instructables.com and Earthjustice you can try your hand at a solar-powered charger designed for the iPhone and Ipod Touch, but useful for many devices that charge using a USB. And you can make it in less than an hour. ENJOY! How to make a solar iPod/iPhone charger -aka MightyMintyBoost - More cool how to projects More on iPhone
 
New York Loses Its Last Music Megastore Top
The sounds of the Velvet Underground echoed in the Virgin Megastore in Union Square on Sunday afternoon, as bargain-hunting passers-by and hard-core music shoppers poked through what few items remained at the last large-scale record store in New York City.
 
FireDavidLetterman.Com: Palin Supporters Plan Rally Against Host Top
The very public spat between Sarah Palin and David Letterman has evolved into a kind of symbiotic relationship, providing Palin an excuse to hold numerous TV interviews, and Letterman with a well-timed ratings boost. More on David Letterman
 
Judge: Holocaust Museum Suspect Can't Appear In Court Top
WASHINGTON — The white supremacist accused of killing a guard at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum is in no condition to appear in court, a federal judge found Monday. After a brief private conversation with attorneys from both sides, U.S. Magistrate Judge John Facciola said at a hearing that he had determined that it would not be possible for James von Brunn to have an initial appearance in the next week, either at the courthouse or in his hospital room. James von Brunn, 88, has been charged with first-degree murder in the death of 39-year-old Stephen T. Johns, a museum security guard who was black. Authorities say von Brunn shot the guard in the chest with a vintage rifle after Johns opened the door for him. Authorities say von Brunn was shot in the face when other museum guards returned fire. FBI officials have said that von Brunn is likely to survive. Little else was revealed about his condition at the hearing. Prosecutor Nicole Waid said von Brunn is in critical but stable condition. She asked to approach the bench for any further discussion, and Facciola called all the attorneys up for a confidential talk. "Obviously, he's not able to get to court," Facciola said after their discussion. He scheduled another hearing for next Monday to get an update. Von Brunn's court-appointed attorney A.J. Kramer would not comment further about his client's condition, citing health privacy laws, but said he was able to meet with him at the hospital on Sunday. Von Brunn's son has come out publicly against him, saying the shooting was unforgivable and he wished his father had died instead. Erik von Brunn told ABC's "Good Morning America" that he and his father didn't like each other. The interview followed ABC's release Sunday of comments by the son that his father had long burdened their family with his white supremacist views and should have died in the attack. "I loved my father. But what he did was unforgivable," Erik von Brunn, 32, said. ABC played a short video of Johns' mother Jacqueline Carter reacting to Erik's statements about his father. "I hope that in time his son will be able to forgive his dad and find some peace within his heart also," Carter said. In response, Erik von Brunn told ABC, "Forgiveness is very difficult right now." "You know, the only bond we had was father and son. We didn't like each other very much."
 
Glenn Beck: "The Fringe Groups Hate My Guts" Top
If you follow Glenn Beck carefully, you'll see that he's savvy enough to know that it's smart to temper his outsized weirdness to fit his audience. Especially since he's basically a man of many wealth-accruing gimmicks. That's why his chat today with the Washington Post is annoyingly tame by Beckian standards -- no wishing California would burn or dire warnings of X-Files plots come to life . Here's a clear example: His only criticism with regards to health care is this one: "As for health care, the idea that my company is going to be taxed higher because I provide coverage for my employees is an insult and should tell you what direction this country is going." See, that's a perfectly mainstream criticism (and it's one that Obama savaged McCain for proposing on the campaign trail). But this is Glenn Beck , for Pete's sake! Where's the broad fear and plainly stated warnings of TEH SOCIALISMS that we who receive his lovely newsletter have come to expect? Banished, along with the Classic Glenn Beck Persona, for the time being, because if that creature reared its head here, who would buy Beck's shiny book ? Beck, to his credit, is a man of fundamental priorities! So, I'm afraid that the best we get is a broad comparison of our own political system to Iran and a warning that America will destroy itself from within before it can be done in by outside forces: Do you really believe that the USA is facing destruction? Glenn Beck: Yeah, I said on Sept. 11 that we should fear no outside force, the only that would destroy America is us, from the inside. I look at what's happening in Iran, and they are arguing on who is going to be a better leader in their theocracy. Both candidates were picked by the mullahs, neither candidate can do anything without the mullahs telling them it's okay. I think we're in the same situation here. Bill Mahr [sic] said this weekend that Barack Obama was George Bush Lite. What are we fighting over? What is the difference between these two parties? There are reasons to speak out, but tearing ourselves apart over these scraps of freedom is odd. We've stopped melting together. Our strength was that we were a melting pot. No, the analogy doesn't make any sense. There are fundamental differences between the two parties, I'm afraid. And I wonder who Beck thinks stands in for the candidate-picking mullahs in our society. The voters? Grey aliens? Sasquatch? Who knows? I hope Sasquatch because Sasquatch is cool. Anyway, we need to "stop the world" and "melt with you," to save America, at Senior Prom, or something. Beck also rather tepidly addressed right-wing extremism, suggesting that he himself gets hate mail from the right fringe and that his "webmaster" contacts the Secret Service when they receive hate mail (two things I'd dearly love to verify, by the way!). Washington, D.C.: We have seen several domestic terrorist attacks already this year (Pittsburgh cop killings, Wichita abortion doctor murder, Holocaust Museum shooting) and Shephard Smith has acknowledged an increase in vitriolic hate-filled emails to Fox News. How do you balance providing your viewpoint with making sure not to push fringe groups over the edge towards violence? Glenn Beck: Anybody who thinks that I'm pushing fringe groups to violence should read my e-mail. The fringe groups hate my guts. The fringe groups think I'm a government stooge. What people need to keep in mind is that some people in the fringe groups are CRAZY. If you want to target Fox News, feel free, but it's misguided. Actually this part is pretty great: Bluffton, SC: What specific alternatives to Obama's policies do you propose? Glenn Beck: I've already given my thoughts on the bailouts. America is built on failure -- we build our success on failure. I don't understand why so many on the left who believe in Darwinism don't let it apply to a business standpoint. Let the banks' lose their tails, they need to. It's harsh and painful, but I don't think any animal lover would be walking around trying to staple tails back on monkeys as they became humans. But wait! Have any animal lovers tried to do this ? I'd be a much better blogger if I had an awesome prehensile tail ! [Would you like to follow me on Twitter ? Because why not? Also, please send tips to tv@huffingtonpost.com -- learn more about our media monitoring project here .] More on Wash Post
 

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)