Thursday, June 18, 2009

Y! Alert: The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Yahoo! Alerts
My Alerts

The latest from The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Patricia Zohn: A Girl's Guide to Love and Opera: La Traviata Top
The story of La Traviata , the great Verdi opera, is classic 19th century female-disaster prone and turns on the love life of a woman with loose morals (see Madame Bovary , Anna Karenina , Nana et al) who has a change of heart. The original novel by Dumas, La Dame aux Camelias , has been the basis for many offspring including the Garbo film, Camille. Violetta Valery, our doomed heroine, becomes a reformed party girl, probably the very worst kind. Notorious for her prior relationships with a variety of men, Vi makes mincemeat out of the heart of Alfredo, the scion of a wealthy family -- and then compounds the debris by actually falling in love with him. Anna Netrebko (Violetta Valéry). Photo by Terrence McCarthy And where is it set? Why, Paris of course, home to all bad girls, sooner or later. The anti-heroines of 19th century literature and opera are beautiful, sexy, irresistible Carrie Bradshaws who get consumption instead of Manolos, all because of falling in love with the wrong Mr. Big. You know how some mothers remind you from birth you can just as easily fall in love with a rich man? Well Violetta has more or less been following this path. And what does she do to try to get over him? Why resort to the default naturally: go out and party more. Anna Netrebko (Violetta Valéry). Photo by Terrence McCarthy Last weekend, I saw the divine Anna Netrebko in San Francisco strut Violetta's stuff, rejiggered to the Flapper Era. Here was Violetta as Zelda Fitzgerald, a madcap heroine throwing herself onto overstuffed beds instead of into pools. The gorgeous music from La Traviata will be recognizable to even the most opera-adverse among you, so download it . If one of my sons can actually accompany me to the opera, the least you can do is this -- it will make you cry every time you hear it. Love songs, especially those that express longing and misery -- are often the way in which we survive relationships, especially when they are fraught with heartache. San Franciscan's have a chance to see Anna Netrebko , whose voice has only improved since motherhood (all of you who are complaining about multi-tasking, think what it would be like to be an opera diva, whose schedule is a bear, running all over the world, without the father of your baby, whom you haven't even had time to marry, having to be in perfect voice and working nights) a few more times. Charles Castronovo (Alfredo Germont) and Anna Netrebko (Violetta Valéry). Photo by Cory Weaver Angelenos are also in the midst of a lauded Traviata cycle and soon in Santa Fe you can catch Natalie Dessay, an actual French dynamo, sing it there. New Yorkers will have to wait until next season at the Met , when they do a Traviata of their own. It's the third most performed opera after Madame Butterfly and La Boheme -- two more operas with courtesan heroines. Don't feel sorry for the courtesans -- they mostly had it nailed: they had all the perks of hanging out with rich men and none of the tedious obligations of the wives. Watching these operas makes it seem like this might be something we have to bring back a little bit: making men aspire to having us even if they have to give up everything in order to do it. It's never too late to break a heart or two. Check out your local opera's summer schedule or Met's summer series of free concerts and HD presentations.
 
Allen Stanford To Surrender To Authorities After Warrant Issued For HIs Arrest Top
Texas billionaire Allen Stanford will surrender to U.S. authorities on Thursday night after a warrant was issued for his arrest, Stanford's lawyer said. Skip related content "A warrant has been issued for his arrest," Houston attorney Dick DeGuerin said, saying that he had spoken to Stanford by phone. "He will surrender."
 
Lloyd I. Sederer, MD: The FDA and Recommendations for Antipsychotic Medications in Children Top
Over a year and a half ago, the NYS Commissioner of Mental Health, Dr. Michael Hogan, and I wrote a state agency advisory entitled Bipolar Disorder in Children: Why Are The Rates Rising?( http://www.omh.state.ny.us/omhweb/news/bipolar.html). This week a panel convened by the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) recommended approval of three antipsychotic medications for the treatment of bipolar disorder (and schizophrenia) in children ages 10-17. Because the past 10 years has seen a forty (40!) fold increase in the diagnosis of bipolar disorder in children we are likely about to see dramatic increases in the use of antipsychotic medications in children, a practice that has its problems even though needed at times. A forty fold increase in a mental disorder in ten years cannot be explained by changes in our genes, or the environment that children live in, including their families. What is happening is that the diagnosis of bipolar disorder is being made far more liberally, perhaps finding a small number of children who had not been previously properly detected but also sweeping in many children whose behaviors are problematic though due to other causes -- and therefore need other approaches than antipsychotic medications. Among these other conditions are ADHD, depression (with agitation), alcohol and drug abuse, conduct disorder, trauma and other expressions of family distress and dysfunction. There are good and simple checklists that your doctor and you can use to help identify bipolar and other conditions more precisely, like the Young Mania Rating Scale (specific to bipolar disorder), the Conners (with parent and teacher rating forms) for hyperactivity and ADHD, the CRAFFT for drug and alcohol abuse, and the PHQ 9 for Adolescents for Depression. The FDA panel reviewed scientific literature about the safety and efficacy (which means does does it work -- under controlled research conditions) of quetiapine, olanzapine and ziprasidone, all so-called second generation antipsychotic medications to differentiate them from the "first" generation of antipsychotic medications that go back over forty years. The panel endorsed quetiapine above the other two where they raised safety and efficacy concerns. All three of these medications already have approval for use in adults. The FDA is not required to abide by the recommendations of its panel, but it typically does. Families, youth and doctors reading about the FDA recommendations should be concerned about the accuracy of the diagnosis of bipolar disorder. As a parent or loved one of a child who is identified as having a bipolar illness be sure to insist on a full and clear explanation of the diagnosis and seek a second opinion if you are unsure (as you would if your child had a serious physical illness); even if the diagnosis seems right make sure there is monitoring to see if the diagnosis is accurate over time because symptoms can change and more clearly reveal what is going on. Equally important is that treatment recommendations for your child, whatever the (correct) diagnosis might be, include education and support for you to more effectively parent, and talking therapy for your child where they learn the triggers of their distressed behaviors and how better to see them coming, avoid them when possible and better manage them when they cannot be eliminated. Effective psychological therapies exist, including cognitive behavioral therapy (where children learn to log their thoughts and consequent emotions) and interpersonal therapy (where they learn how everyday human transactions with family, friends, and others can help or disrupt how they feel); both forms of therapy enable youth to better manage their feelings and their lives. Is your child being helped in these ways or is a singular focus on medications all that is going on? The human brain is a marvelous organ that is continually changing. The brain of children and adolescents is actively developing and therefore more sensitive to all kinds of things, from medications to experience. There are surely times when medications are needed for an active mental illness; when this is the case, you want your child to have an accurate diagnosis and medication specific for that condition, in minimally effective doses, for only so long as necessary. Remember too, and stress this with your doctor, that well studied talking therapies are safe, effective and remarkably can change the brain too -- without weight gain, diabetes, effects on the heart, muscle tension or abnormal movements. That sounds like a good prescription to me. More on Wellness
 
Cop Accused Of Pulling Gun At McD's Because His Order Was Taking Too Long Top
A Denver police officer has been suspended after allegedly brandishing his gun at a McDonald's restaurant in Aurora after his order took too long to fill.
 
Liev Schreiber, Naomi Watts And Sons Plant Trees In Israel (PHOTOS) Top
In the below photos provided by the Jewish National Fund (JNF), actor Liev Schreiber and his son Sacha are seen planting a tree as partner Naomi Watts reads a blessing as part of a reforestation project in Galilee earlier this week. The bundle on Naomi's chest is their younger son Samuel. The family has also been snapped in Tel Aviv. PHOTOS: More on Celebrity Kids
 
Wayne Besen: Gays to Obama: "We've Seen Enough" Top
A debate is raging on whether to have a national gay March on Washington in October. Most leaders I have spoken with are against the idea, preferring to keep scarce financial and human resources in the states. Others, such as myself, are largely ambivalent. A galvanizing force, however, is giving new life to this idea and his name is Barack Obama. The president is in serious danger of motivating a huge mass of gay people to stream into Washington for the simple joy of standing in front of the White House and giving him a piece of their minds. This frustration may lead to an embarrassing situation for the president, where former supporters mount the largest anti-Obama pep rally not fronted by Sarah Palin. Today, an array of LGBT leaders expressed their dismay with the president by pulling out of a Democratic National Committee fundraiser. The action is in protest of a noxious legal brief submitted by the Department of Justice. It implausibly defended the heinous Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) by using anti-gay arguments that likely drew a standing ovation from Rev. Pat Robertson. DOJ's paper included a comparison of gay relationships to incest and opposed same-sex relationships on the absurd basis that it would cost taxpayers money (Don't gay people pay taxes?). HRC also sent a pointed letter to Obama highlighting the betrayal felt by the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community. "I cannot overstate the pain that we feel as human beings and as families when we read an argument, presented in federal court, implying that our own marriages have no more constitutional standing than incestuous ones," wrote HRC's president, Joe Solmonese. The deteriorating situation is exacerbated by confusion about who will push for equality. The Obama administration claims to be awaiting congressional action on a number of issues, including ending employment discrimination, eliminating DOMA and repealing Don't Ask/Don't Tell. Meanwhile, Senate majority leader Harry Reid is waiting for Obama to act, as well as the House of Representatives. The LGBT community has become a hot potato that the Democrats do not seem to want to touch. Aggravating matters was John Berry, the highest-ranking gay official in the administration. In an interview with The Advocate , he said that Obama's timetable to enact his pro-gay campaign promises is "before the sun sets on this administration." So, now we have to wait 4-8 years, while watching him suck up to Rick Warren on Day 1? For what seemed like forever, Democrats told us that when the big bad Republicans went away, our lives would improve. Well, the Republican nightmare is over, so why do I still feel like I'm in the middle of a political Friday the 13th movie? The Democrats took our money, our votes and our volunteer hours and now they tell us to wait patiently, like good little gays. As far as I'm concerned, if the donkeys can't deliver now, they can kiss my ass. The Democrats run the show in Washington and if they will not act like a majority party, then they do not deserve to be one. This is not about making unreasonable policy demands, but about the Democrats recognizing the daily struggles faced by gay people. A new report by The National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs said, "Violence against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people increased 2% from 2007 to 2008, continuing the trend of a 24% total increase in 2007." Yesterday, I read about a lesbian who was barred from visiting her partner in a Fresno hospital, and as a result her partner received the wrong medication. Last week, I was in conservative Western Michigan where I spoke to young people who were nearly driven to suicide as a result of anti-gay attitudes. We need a president who recognizes these evils and demonstrates the courage and leadership to enact the change he so eloquently promised during his campaign. If Obama continues down the current path it will come at a steep price. When Bill Clinton settled for Don't Ask/Don't Tell, it solidified the growing perception that he was "Slick Willie." By turning his back on the gay community, Obama will play into the idea, stoked by Hillary Clinton and exploited by John McCain, that he is a man of beautiful, yet empty words. What Obama fails to understand is that when poetry does not translate into policy, and hope turns hollow, the American people will begin to tune him out. I'm still undecided about the wisdom of a march on Washington, but I am decidedly fed up with my political "friends" marching all over my dignity and taking my support for granted. If the majority party does not cough up the votes to protect our families, we should close down our generous coffers.
 
Eric Alterman: Think Again: Chiller, Socialist Theater Top
Crossposted with the Center for American Progress With Danielle Ivory A heated debate broke out last week over the degree to which incendiary talk by right-wing cable and radio hosts might be fueling a recent spate of murderous violence by disturbed individuals. We'd like to take a moment to focus on the just plain crazy. Have you noticed that in conservative world, this administration is leading a march on socialism? That's right, the one that refuses to nationalize the banks against the recommendations of Alan Greenspan, among others; the one that has offered gazillions of dollars to bail out private interests run into the ground by billionaires; the one that, on Wednesday, did not even take strong action to regulate the derivative market, which as much as anything helped cause this crisis. No, really... Just last week alone, Media Matters counted more than 143 mentions of the words "socialism," "socialist," and "socialistic" on the cable news shows -- and that's not including words like "communist" or "Marxist." The word socialist has virtually become an everyday talking point since the Obama administration moved in at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Lest you think we exaggerate: * Fox and Friends graded Obama's economic plan with an "S" for socialism. * Pat Robertson warned that, "before long, we'll have this gigantic socialist colossus." * Radio personality Michael Savage called Obama a "neo-Marxist fascist dictator in the making," and said that Obama "dreams of Maoist revolution" with "death camps." * Actor Jon Voight sat down Bill O'Reilly and accused Obama of "bringing us to chaos and socialism," and then suggested that he -- yes, we're still talking about the actor -- might do a better job negotiating with North Korea. * Glenn Beck called Obama a Marxist and said that we're on the road to socialism. Later, he noted that we are stepping beyond socialism and heading toward fascism. * Sean Hannity met with Sarah Palin in a wooded area for a heart-to-heart and suggested -- and she agreed -- that Obama was leading the country toward certain socialism. Hannity has in the past crowned Obama the "Commissar in Chief," renamed America the "United States of France," and claimed that, "America is moving from a free-market economy to a Socialist economy." On the eve of the infamous tea parties, he asked Newt Gingrich: "Is this now a battle between capitalism and socialism?" In case you were wondering, Newt didn't say no, but recently, Hannity answered his own question, declaring that "the Bolsheviks have finally arrived!" He also praised congressional Republicans for finally using "the S-word." Branding the United States of America as the newest socialist republic is not just a job for mentally unbalanced and/or drug-and-alcohol addicted cable "news" hosts. The Republican National Committee also held a special session recently to try and rebrand the Democratic party as the Democratic Socialist Party. (It was narrowly defeated.) What's more: * Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) called the president's policies "a new American socialist experiment." * Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-IA) -- both politician and madwoman combined -- said that "if you look at FDR, LBJ, and Barack Obama, this is really the final leap towards socialism." * Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) called Obama the "the world's best salesmen of socialism." * Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL) said he believes the Obama administration is taking the country down the road to socialism. * Newt Gingrich said Obama's agenda was the "boldest effort to create a European socialist model we have seen." Well, you get the point... The socialist scare tactic may appear to be just one more desperate grasp from a conservative opposition that -- let's face it -- hasn't got much going these days. But it is really a reprise of tried and true scare-tactics past. We saw a bit of it just a few years ago when conservatives were in the majority in Congress. Former House majority leader Dick Armey (R-TX) wrote that New Deal and the Great Society, on the one hand, and Soviet Russia's five-year plans and Communist China's Great Leap Forward, on the other, were created by "the same sort of person" separated only by differences of "power and nerve." Before that, Former House majority leader Tom DeLay (R-TX) compared "liberals" to "scoundrels like Hitler," who were also "much like communists." But we've been hearing this sort of thing for better part of three-quarters of a century now. Back in 1947, for example, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce accused the Truman administration of taking a "backroad to socialism" in the fast lane toward a "police state." Linguist Geoffrey Nunberg notes that the tactic has been "part of the Republican lexicon for years and years. Any time the Democrats proposed any legislation on child labor, social security, the [conservatives] immediately cried socialism -- to the point where in 1952 Harry Truman said that when you hear someone saying 'down with socialism,' they really mean 'down with progress.'" This is working to some degree. Lawrence O'Donnell has pointed out that only 6 percent of Americans used the word socialist to describe President Obama back in September 2008, but by April 2009 that number had grown to 20 percent. But like most everything -- particularly given the collapse of the Soviet Union and Chinese embrace of capitalism -- socialism as a scare tactic ain't what it used to be.... You can read the rest of Eric Alterman and Danielle Ivory's analysis in their recent article, " Think Again: Chiller, Socialist Theater ." Eric Alterman is a Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress and a Distinguished Professor of English at Brooklyn College. He is also a Nation columnist and a professor of journalism at the CUNY Graduate School of Journalism. His seventh book, Why We're Liberals: A Handbook for Restoring America's Most Important Ideals was recently published in paperback. He occasionally blogs at http://www.thenation.com/blogs/altercation . Danielle Ivory is a reporter and producer for the American News Project. She lives in Washington, D.C. This column was recently named as a finalist in the category of "Best Commentary -- Digital" for the Mirror Awards. More on Socialists
 
Leonce Gaiter: Note to O'Reilly: Women Deserve Protections -- Not Fetuses Top
It's been difficult to watch fetal rights trump women's rights in the abortion debate. Back in the day, there were chants of "my body, my choice." Now, we argue at which month the fetus has the right to destroy a woman's health, sanity, family, and even her life, thereby accepting the right-wing frame that the fetus is an entity somehow divorced from and equal to the woman who carries it. Bill O'Reilly preened when asking Joan Walsh if late term fetuses deserve any form of legal protection. He preened because he dared her to provide the rational answer in this age of faux sentiment and thoughtless self-righteousness -- be they of the Oprah or O'Reilly schools. It's time to call the bluff and take back this debate. The answer is a resounding "NO." Women deserve legal protection, and as long as a fetus is part of a woman's body, it has protections through her. No outside person has the right to harm the fetus any more than he/she has the right to harm the woman. No entity has the right to deny her the fruits of what's inside her body any more than they have the right to deny her the use of her liver. What O'Reilly and his ilk want is to protect the fetus from the woman who carries it, when in fact, the woman is the only qualified arbiter of what is best for her and her body in the context of life and loved ones in which they exist. I utterly reject the argument that fetus' are special because they will be born and thus transform into infants. I will not argue about a fetus' future state. Its current nature as a fetus means that it lives inside the body of an existing human being. That independent living being's needs and trump those of what lives inside its body and the disposition of what lives inside its body is in that being's sole discretion. Period. The argument that fetuses may live to become infants and therefore deserve protection is also ad absurdum. A cell can be cloned and can grow into an infant. Should the pulling out of hair be outlawed? As science matures, artificial means of keeping cells and cell groups alive will doubtless evolve. What amount to petri dish blobs will be "viable" outside the womb -- with enough help. This is the ultimate argument of anti-abortion crusaders. They desperately want to outlaw abortion and even contraception. To to them, a la Monty Python, "every sperm is sacred." A woman is simply the subservient, relatively insignificant vessel for something more valuable than she -- a fetus. It's rights trump hers. Barack Obama said that he rejected the pro-choice argument that there was no societal moral question involved in abortion. He was right on the substance; he was wrong on the particulars. It is grossly immoral for a society to so devalue a segment of its population that it reserves the right to force them under law to use their own bodies in ways that are harmful to themselves. The abortion debate needs to be brought home to the rights of women -- not the rights of fetuses. Let's face it: To the anti-abortion crowd, it has been all along. They have simply couched it in the cuddly swaddling clothes of romantic infancy to win the point: "Who do you want to protect," they ask? "This sweet, cooing child, or this selfish bitch who refuses to do what my God says is her biological duty?" As long as a fetus remains a fetus, it gains the same rights and protections as the woman who carries it. The fate of what exists inside a woman's body... that is hers alone to decide. You may think abortion is wrong. I think it's wrong to raise your child as a Nazi. What harm can a woman who has an abortion do you? At best it harms your delicate sensibilities in the abstract. A child raised as a neo-Nazi will grow up with the will and perhaps the means to do a great many people a lot of physical and emotional harm. If I don't have the right to stop people from raising their children as they see fit -- regardless of the potentially negative impact on my life and well being -- you don't have the right to stop a woman from doing what she thinks best for her life and loved ones, especially since the only possible damage is to your delicate sensibilities. We're both offended. On both counts: Tough shit. Man up. It's none of your fucking business. The woman's rights/pro-choice crowd needs to stop accepting the right-wing frame for this debate. When asked if fetuses deserve rights, the answer is: Women deserve rights -- including protection from people who would force them to use their bodies in ways they know to be harmful to their well being, their loved ones, and their lives. More on Women's Rights
 
Dr. Steve Rosenberg: How to Keep Your Feet Happy When Traveling... Top
Summer is upon us and it is time to take those long awaited vacations you dreamed about all winter. Depending on where your travels take you, the walking surfaces will vary. It could be cobblestone streets, dirt paths or good old concrete pavements. So whether you wear sandals, flats, heels, or athletic shoes here are some shoe and foot tips to keep you walking comfortably during your travels. First rule: Do Not buy a pair of new shoes and take them with you on your trip unless they are fully broken in! That means they should be at least a few months old and have had enough wear that they are like an old friend. Just because the new pair of shoes may go with one of your outfits does not mean you should throw caution to the wind and wear them without breaking them in first. That brings me to the second rule: plan ahead so you do not have to worry about the first rule! Often times, a new pair of shoes can be stiff and uncomfortable, and can cause blisters on the tops of your toes, in your arches or on the back of your heels when you are walking in them all day long. This is also true when you go dining and dancing in the evening. When buying shoes, look for soft leather, it is always a better bet. Make sure that the toe box of the shoe is wide and deep enough to allow for your toes to move freely. This can prevent blisters on the top of your toes and toenail problems. Shoes can also irritate an already existing foot or leg problem, such as bunions, hammertoes, heel spurs, plantar fasciitis, arch cramping, shin splints and tendonitis. Wearing old worn out walking or athletic shoes can also cause your feet to have some problems too. This is because the three most important parts of the shoe -- the inner sole, midsole and outer sole -- have probably started to break down. That means the shoe has lost some or most of its cushioning and support. The inner sole is made of a dense foam material and is usually removable in athletic and walking shoes. It can be replaced when it wears down and becomes less supportive in the shoe. For more comfort and cushion you can replace it with a thicker insole found at running or sporting good stores. Another part of the shoe that can break down through extensive wear is the midsole of the shoe. The midsole can be found between the inner sole and outer sole and absorbs the impact of the shock the foot encounters during walking. It is the thickest part of the shoe and is made from a variety of foam materials such as ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA), polyethylenes or polyurethanes. These materials expand and contract during foot impact but eventually lose some of their shock-absorbing quality over time. This can eventually cause foot fatigue. The outer sole also aids in reducing shock when walking and is the thin material present on the bottom of the shoe. It makes the initial contact with the walking surface. It is composed of high-density rubber compounds and has varied tread designs for traction and flexibility. It must be flexible enough at the ball of the foot to allow the metatarsal and small toe joints of the foot to flex freely when walking. If this material wears out and exposes some of the mid-sole material, it becomes an indicator that the shoe needs to be replaced. The shoe has begun to lose the cushion, shock absorption and support mechanisms used to properly provide comfort to your feet. Shoes can also be supported by wearing custom made orthotics or over the counter arch supports such as Instant Arches. Buying a soft supportive inner sole that you can place in your shoe after removing the old one can also make your shoes more comfortable. If you are using custom made orthotics, always remove the arch system that is currently in the shoe and then place the orthotic in your shoe. If you want to make the orthotic more comfortable place a soft flat insole on top to provide extra cushion. The bottom line is you want to be comfortable and supported for those long days of sightseeing. Wearing sandals or flip flops is not recommended if you are walking for long periods of time because of the lack of support they provide. It is an easy way to develop blisters and arch cramps. However, if you intend to wear them the product Instant Arches can be placed in your sandals and flip-flops to provide that extra support you may need. So travel in comfortable shoes, make smart choices and you will not have to run to the foot doctor when you come back from your trip...! More on Wellness
 
Mark Kennedy Shriver and Julianne Moore: The Disaster Decade: Lessons Unlearned Top
Yesterday morning at the Edward C. Mazique child care center in D.C., Save the Children's U.S. Programs released a new report revealing the state of our nation's preparedness to protect children during a manmade or natural disaster. The findings are not encouraging. After ten years of unrelenting and unprecedented disasters -- what will be remembered as The Disaster Decade -- only seven states meet Save the Children's four minimum safety standards to care for the 67 million kids who are in child care or school on any given day. Throughout this Disaster Decade, children watched or experienced skyscrapers collapsing, cities flooded, neighborhoods burning to the ground and bedrock economic institutions collapsing, forcing families from their homes. The report and state-by-state scorecard shows how state governments have responded to the Disaster Decade and examines existing disaster preparedness requirements for child care facilities in each state, including their plans for evacuation, for family unification and for special needs kids. We also looked at whether K-12 schools have multi-hazard disaster plans. Simply put, the most vulnerable Americans in the most vulnerable setting are made more vulnerable because government isn't doing its job to protect them. We also looked at the economic disaster. Indeed, through a child's eyes, if his or her family is kicked out of their home because of twelve feet of water or twelve feet of debt, it's still traumatic. While there's anecdotal evidence of increased demand for food aid and a rise in child abuse, there is no comprehensive study of the recession's effect on children. So we're advocating for change. The Disaster Decade report includes a five-point plan for positive change. First, we want the federal government to find a way to tie federal child care and education dollars to the four basic criteria in the report, giving states an economic incentive to protect their children. Second, we want a new Office of Children's Advocacy -- or a Kid's Desk -- at FEMA. Right now, FEMA has only one person handling what are called "special needs" -- which means that the needs of the 25 percent of the population that are kids get lumped with the needs of other groups. Third, following a major event, child care centers have taken a backseat to other recovery efforts, making it harder for parents to get back to work and back on track with their lives. We want to make child care centers eligible for federal disaster aid for the first time ever. Fourth, so that we better understand how the economic disaster is affecting kids, a White House Commission on the Effects of the Economy on Children could begin to reveal the effects of the recession on kids so that we can provide them with the support they need and deserve. Finally, most families are unaware of the unique needs of children during disasters. So a Public Service Announcement campaign would go a long way toward making families more aware of what we need to do to help kids. After our visit to the child care center we went to Capitol Hill to lobby for enactment of our plan and we already got a very positive response from the Obama Administration. These steps are low-cost, common sense measures. And their enactment will help ensure that when disaster strikes -- and they will -- the effects on our children don't become a disaster in their own right. You can help us be a voice for change by signing this petition asking Congress and the Obama Administration to adopt our five-point plan for change. With your help we can ensure a safer reality for America's children.
 
Obama Compares His Critics To Robots: "Can't Do It. System Overload. Circuits Breaking Down" Top
As he looks to expand Democratic majorities in Congress, President Obama on Thursday night also used a fundraiser for his congressional allies to target his critics.
 
Karen Ocamb: Will Gays Divorce the Democrats? Top
There's a fierce debate in the LGBT community over Barack Obama's signing the Presidential Memorandum on Federal Benefits and Non-Discrimination Wednesday. Some think the signing was "historic" and a sincere symbol of Obama's true commitment to equal rights for lesbian and gay Americans. Others think that's bull and are angrier than ever at the man they believed in, worked hard to elect and now feel betrayed by. Once again, the fundamental equality promised as a birthright to all American citizens -- except those who happen to be lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender -- has been kicked down the road for some promised future consideration. Even Obama -- a constitutional scholar and former community organizer -- noted at the end of the four-minute signing ceremony that LGBT Americans are official second- class citizens: "It's a day that marks a historic step towards the changes we seek, but I think we all have to acknowledge this is only one step. Among the steps we have not yet taken is to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. I believe it's discriminatory, I think it interferes with states' rights, and we will work with Congress to overturn it. We've got more work to do to ensure that government treats all its citizens equally; to fight injustice and intolerance in all its forms; and to bring about that more perfect union. I'm committed to these efforts, and I pledge to work tirelessly on behalf of these issues in the months and years to come." According to some legal scholars, Obama was constrained by the Defense of Marriage Act -- DOMA -- to provide only limited benefits to LGBT federal employees, which did not include health care benefits. However, there is some confusion, considering, for instance, what the New York Times wrote : "In California, two federal appeals court judges said that employees of their court were entitled to health benefits for their same-sex partners under the program that insures millions of federal workers. But the federal Office of Personnel Management has instructed insurers not to provide the benefits ordered by the judges, citing a 1996 law, the Defense of Marriage Act." It's true that the signing was "historic" -- having a bunch of gay people allowed in the Oval Office -- much less having a president "pledge to work tirelessly on behalf of these issues [discrimination against LGBT people] in the months and years to come." Two problems: 1) after the Department of Justice filed a brief supporting DOMA, LGBT people are having a very hard time believing Barack Obama anymore. His flip flop from full support for marriage equality as a candidate in 1996 to his opposition in 2008 doesn't help; and 2) Obama kicked us over to Congress, which is still cowed by threats from right wing Republicans. A new CBS News poll, for instance, finds that 63% of Americans support some form of legal recognition for same sex couples -- but about one third oppose such recognition. Guess which percentage wins in Congress. We remain an easily dismissed "social issue" to be dealt with at some more convenient time -- rather than real flesh and blood human beings whose very inequality is a blight on the promise of America. And now the president says the only way for LGBT people to secure the everyday rights granted to heterosexuals is through Congress. We're screwed. The Democratically-controlled Congress talks a good game to get LGBT votes and money -- but they don't have much to show for LGBT loyalty. Consider, for instance, all the back and forth on "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." The Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN) reports that 255 gay and lesbian servicemembers have been discharged under Obama and the 111th Congress. And, according to a June 5 Gallup Poll, 69% of Americans support lesbians and gay men serving opening in the military -- with a major shift in the attitudes of conservatives and weekly churchgoers. And the U.S. Conference of Mayors just passed a resolution Monday calling for full equality of LGBT Americans, including a repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." But Obama failed to mention that the memorandum he signed does not cover lesbian and gay service members, which SLDN pointed out. "Obama said he wants to 'retain the best talent' to serve our country. Yet he won't speak out publicly against DADT, the law that fires the best and brightest from the military because they're gay or lesbian. We urge him to break his continued silence on DADT and endorse repeal legislation in the House, or send up his own language to Capitol Hill," SLDN said in a statement . And while a bill to repeal DADT languishes in the House, at a news conference Monday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said he has no plans to introduce a bill to repeal "don't ask, don't tell" in the Senate, according to Think Progress . "I haven't identified any sponsors," he said. "My hope is that it can be done administratively." Obama says it needs Congressional action. Reid's office clarified his statement with this: "While we do not have a Don't Ask Don't Tell bill introduced in the Senate yet, a number of Senators are working on an approach to get it repealed. We would welcome a legislative proposal from the White House on repeal so as to provide clear guidance on what the President would like to see and when. Working together, I believe we can find the time to get repeal done in this Congress." Oh, and Reid added, "If the House moves on this, I would be happy to take it up." Screwed. Well, maybe not totally. New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand just wrote on Huffington Post that: "I am firmly committed to repealing Don't Ask Don't Tell. To that end, I am working closely with Congressman Murphy and Senator Kennedy's offices to develop support for repeal legislation and will be among the original co-sponsors of the bill when it's introduced. In the weeks and months ahead, I plan to work with Lt. Choi to repair the damage that has been done to his career and spare thousands of innocent, brave men and women, from the same injustice." So where are we? A few years ago, then DNC chair Howard Dean told me that LGBT Democrats were second only in size and loyalty to African Americans. And now LGBTs are sick and tired of waiting and riled over the pittance their time, money and loyalty has earned them. Now even the checkbook activists are pissed. Longtime politico David Mixner and Marty Rouse of the Human Rights Campaign pulled out of next week's LGBT fundraiser for the Democratic National Committee over the DOMA brief. And rich and prominent gay businessman Bruce Bastian told the Washington Blade that he is not only pulling out of the fundraising -- starring Vice President Joe Biden -- but he's no longer donating to the DNC. "I will continue to support certain congressmen, congresswomen and senators whom I believe will continue to fight for our rights, but I don't think blanket donations to the Democratic Party right now are justified, at least not in my book," Bastian said. "The LGBT community raised a lot of money in support for Obama, and, I think he has to have the courage -- well, not just him -- but, I think the Democratic Party now has to have the courage to fight back, and when they do, they'll have my support." Wealthy investor David Bohnett, who made a large DNC contribution earlier this year, told me something similar: "For several years we have made significant investments in individual US Senate and House races, along with state level candidates who support same sex marriage and family equality. We are also eager to continue our substantial commitment to the DNC when we see tangible commitments with timelines to repeal DOMA, Don't Ask Don't Tell, and support marriage equality at the federal level. We must hold President Obama accountable to all of his campaign promises for change, including the repeal of DOMA and Don't Ask Don't Tell," Bohnett said. "We hold everyone accountable to support full LGBT equality, but more so those who, like President Obama, have made specific promises on our issues." On Tuesday, celebrating the one year anniversary of her legal marriage to Diane Olson in California, Robin Tyler announced she's had enough and she's "divorcing" the Democratic Party. Tyler says: "The LGBT community is like a battered wife. We constantly get beaten, degraded and raped by the Democratic Party. Then, once every 2 years, when they need us, they promise us everything and treat us like human beings. So we mutter the mantra, 'but if we don't support them, the Republicans will get in because of us.' If we stop supporting the Democratic Party, the Republicans will get in because of the Democratic Party and their abusive relationship with us. So when are we going to stop being the victims of the Democratic Party, step out, and act not just like survivors, but begin to really fight back? All the marches in the world and all the protests will not count until we are able to let go and step out. This is the advice given to people who are in an abusive relationship. This is what we must do. Or the echo of our crying and our pain and our rage will only be heard by us -- until we have the courage and the wisdom to Divorce the Democrats in the next national election." Tyler co-founded the successful online campaign StopDrLaura.com and the national "Day of Decision" hub where protesters could post actions around the California Supreme Court ruling on Prop 8. She is developing a new website called DivorcetheDemocrats.org where she is mounting an online pledge to take money that LGBTs and allies might have given to the DNC and re-distribute it to LGBT and HIV/AIDS organizations that need help, as well as efforts in California and Maine to deal with marriage ballot initiatives. The site would also call for a "comprehensive" LGBT civil rights bill, instead of the incremental pieces of legislation for which the LGBT community has had to beg and wait until it is deemed convenient for consideration. What does this mean for 2010? Who knows. But the sheen is off the Dream Machine known as Barack Obama. And Congress and the DNC -- well, Tim Kaine is no Howard Dean -- he's made no real effort to reach out to LGBTs outside the Beltway. And that Obama for America online money pitch for the DNC may also dry up. And watch for challenges to conservative or do-nothing Democrats such as Peter Mathews' challenge to Laura Richardson in California's 37th District, which includes heavily gay-populated Long Beach. The statewide LGBT lobbying group Equality California has raised the bar -- money and endorsements only for candidates who support marriage equality. And all those politicians, including those who twice signed the state marriage bill, have been re-elected. Equality California Executive Director Geoff Kors told me: "EQCA has had a longstanding policy not to endorse candidates - Democrats or Republicans - who do not support true equality. That includes marriage. That includes transgender equality. It is really simple -- either a candidate supports true equality for LGBT Americans or they don't. There is no such thing as partial equality. EQCA didn't endorse Obama because he was out there saying he opposed our right to civil marriage. Until our community stops endorsing, giving money to and voting for Democrats who do not support our equality, they will continue to pander to us and then not deliver. It is time to call the question." Will gays divorce the Democrats? Will they stay home and withhold funds or actively get involved with a local progressive for whom equality is as essential as breathing instead of a social issue about which they must be "educated?" One thing is certain: gay people want our voice and our vote to count. Otherwise, the democracy this republic espouses is just as much a sham as those rigged elections we decry in other countries. More on Barack Obama
 
Roseanne Colletti: Frugal Fun Top
A vacation is supposed to be fun, but if you have to worry about every penny you spend, it's not worth a cent. On the other hand, with current economic uncertainties in mind, it's just plain foolish to come home from your vacation in debt. There are some practical ways to avoid that and even have fun doing it. Keep in mind your biggest expenses will be your transportation, lodging, food and entertainment. Some families and singles would also add in clothes and would not dream of packing a bag without new undies and socks for the kids, sundresses and shorts and a little something or two to wear to dinner. Don't Vacation Shop Just say "No" to this temptation. If you're traveling by air, Homeland Security agents are not going to care that you packed socks your son already wore to school or that you still fit into last year's sundress, slacks or swimsuit. If you're driving no one but you is going to look into your bags. Unless someone actually needs something or has outgrown what he or she has, don't vacation shop. You'll save money before you even leave home. Drive or Fly? Unless you find an amazing airfare and hotel package, you will almost always be better off driving if you have a family of four. It may not always be the best things for your nerves, but even with gas, motel, and wear and tear on your car you will spend less. The key here is to make it a drive you can do in one day so you don't have to stay on the road overnight. Therefore, look for a vacation spot closer to home. These are frequently the best because you don't have to spend so much time traveling. Lodging or Luxury? Spending your money on a beautiful hotel if probably money well spent if you are going to be at the hotel a lot. If you are going to be out everyday touring or otherwise enjoying yourself all day, you may not need luxury as much as you require comfort. Find a moderately priced new hotel with an acceptable level of service and amenities. Many of the chains now offer free breakfasts and the newness of the building and rooms compensate for the absence of more luxurious accommodations. Spending Look for discount entertainment coupons online before you ever leave home. Ask about similar offerings when you check in art your hotel. If you're traveling with children ask which restaurants feed the kids for free or have lesser-priced children's menus. Remember the people who work hotels have families too and they probably know some of the better local deals. Drop by a supermarket and pick up a cooler with ice and load it with drinks and snacks and stuff for lunch. Eliminating at least one restaurant meal a day can add up to a significant savings over the course of a week. Put a dollar limit on souvenirs for each family member. This is the time to remind the kids they have birthday or holiday money they can spend if they want to exceed the limit. Try to pay for most things with cash. To accomplish this have a pre-set amount for spending each day. Only put the big things you can control in advance on your credit card: airfare, gasoline, hotel, and car rental. You should know before you leave home how much these will cost. Have fun. You've earned it after all this planning. (If you want to seemore of my stories go to www.nbcnewyork.com ) More on Travel
 
Iran Election Live-Blogging (Thursday June 18) Top
This is the archive of my Iran election live-blogging from Sunday, June 14. For the latest updates, click here . 8:59 PM ET -- Huge news. Google launching Farsi/English translation service tomorrow morning. 8:45 PM ET -- They beat and kick helpless women. The caption on this video, via an Iranian-American friend, says it was taken in Rasht, a city in northern Iran by the Caspian Sea. The date is unclear but it was uploaded today. In the middle of the screen, you'll see a young woman pushed, then punched and kicked, by plainclothes Basiji paramilitaries. The fear this kind of violence creates is immediately clear, as even the person filming the video -- who's in a building several stories above -- backs away from the window and gets lower to the ground so as not to be seen. 8:13 PM ET -- Tomorrow's events. I think I have a better handle on what's going on. It seems as if a) the supposed Mousavi "request" for people not to attend prayers is a hoax, but b) Mousavi has decided to delay a planned Friday rally until Saturday. 8:10 PM ET -- Solidarity. A surprisingly large candlelight vigil, apparently in Montreal. 8:05 PM ET -- Obama's comparison of Ahmadinejad and Mousavi, reconsidered. Reader Chas: "When Obama said Mousavi and Ahmadinejad were mostly the same, I think he was gaming everybody. What better way to distance yourself than that." A reader of Andrew's feels the same way . "From Mousavi's perspective, being mildly put down by Obama shows that he's not a secret puppet of the US government. It lets him show his nationalist credentials. This defuses Supreme Leader Khamenei's main attack on the Islamist reformers." 7:53 PM ET -- Dems to join Republicans in pushing Iran resolution tomorrow. A friend sends over the congressional resolution that was introduced in the House today. No surprise, it is co-sponsored by Republican Rep. Mike Pence, who has been repeatedly attacking President Obama's approach to the crisis. But now we learn that Rep. Howard Berman, a relatively hawkish Democrat who heads the House Foreign Affairs Committee, is also on board, ensuring its passage. Here's an email Berman's office sent out tonight: Chairman Berman wants all Democratic Members of the Committee to be aware that a resolution he introduced this afternoon with Rep. Pence expressing support for all Iranian citizens who embrace the values of freedom, human rights, civil liberties and rule of law will be considered on the House floor tomorrow. The text of the resolution is attached. Please let me know if your Member is interested in speaking on the resolution. Here's the resolution: Expressing support for all Iranian citizens who embrace the values of freedom, human rights, civil liberties, and rule of law, and for other purposes. Resolved, That the House of Representatives-- (1) expresses its support for all Iranian citizens who embrace the values of freedom, human rights, civil liberties, and rule of law; (2) condemns the ongoing violence against demonstrators by the Government of Iran and pro-government militias, as well as the ongoing government suppression of independent electronic communication through interference with the Internet and cellphones; and (3) affirms the universality of individual rights and the importance of democratic and fair elections. Put aside what you feel about President Obama speaking out more forcefully on this matter. The White House is a focused entity. The Congress is anything but, and includes people who like to sing "bomb, bomb Iran." No one who I've heard from thinks it will help things for Congress to try and throw itself into this issue right now, good intentions or not. 6:44 PM ET -- Video surfaces of apparent attack on students. We've heard for several days now of the wave of violence that swept over Tehran University earlier in the week. There has been some video posted of the results of the attacks -- dorm rooms and computers destroyed, students sporting large bruises and cuts. But now, some footage of the actual moment of an attack -- pure thuggery: 6:20 PM ET -- Mousavi spokesman on Obama. Via reader Heather, Foreign Policy speaks with Mousavi's external spokesman in Paris Mohsen Makhmalbaf: FP: There has been growing criticism here in Washington that U.S. President Barack Obama hasn't said or done enough to support those demonstrating in the streets of Iran. Do you think Obama is being too careful? Or even that he is helping Ahmadinejad by being cautious? MM: Obama has said that there is no difference between Ahmadinejad and Mousavi. Does he like it himself [when someone is] saying that there is no difference between Obama and [George W.] Bush? Ahmadinejad is the Bush of Iran. And Mousavi is the Obama of Iran. FP: Would Mousavi pursue a different foreign policy than Ahmadinejad? MM: As you may know, former President Mohammad Khatami, who is supporting Mousavi at the moment, was in favor of dialogue between the civilizations, but Ahmadinejad talks about the war of the civilizations. Is there not any difference between the two? We [Iranians] are a bit unfortunate. When we had our Obama [meaning President Khatami], that was the time of President Bush in the United States. Now that [the United States] has Obama, we have our Bush here [in Iran]. In order to resolve the problems between the two countries, we should have two Obamas on the two sides. It doesn't mean that everything depends on these two people, but this is one of the main factors. 6:10 PM ET -- Solidarity. Mario Solis Marich, a Colorado-based radio host with a great Hispanic following, writes in, "We are asking our Denver listeners to wear green tomorrow, so far we have a strong response." And David Abromowitz of the Center for American Progress makes an important point about the relevance of international actions. "Last year when the Pakistani judiciary was under attack, bar associations around the country in short order organized rallies in support among lawyers in dozens of cities. It was noticed in Pakistan by the lawyers protesting in their country." What you do from the United States and elsewhere can make a difference to Iranians on the other side of the world. 5:58 PM ET -- Fishy. This was just posted on Mousavi's official Twitter account. "Mousavi & Karoubi ask supporters NOT to attend Friday prayers (which is being delivered by supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei)." This seems quite unlikely to me, trying to get to the bottom of it. Update: Patrick Disney from the NIAC says this message was also posted on Mousavi's Facebook page and then removed a little later. Seems like someone outside is trying to cause trouble. 4:50 PM ET -- Shirin Ebadi blogs for HuffPost. It's a real honor. Her post: Iranian Authorities Must Void Elections to Restore Peace on Streets . 3:40 PM ET -- Allah o Akbar! It's just past 11PM in Iran right now, so one can imagine the chorus of chanting that's being sent through the night air. Take a listen, and then read the email I received last night from reader Nicholas. I cannot in any way claim to know what people are thinking or meaning on the ground, but for centuries, 'Allahu Akbar' has been in the Muslim world a battlefield of meaning and ultimately of political legitimacy. They are five syllables pregnant in meaning, mutability and richness, not simply a ritualistic or fundamentalist dogmatic trope. Nor is 'Allahu Akbar' simply a prayer. In fact, despite all its negative, violent connotations in the West, 'Allahu Akbar' has been uttered by Muslims throughout history as a cry against oppression, against kings and monarchs, against tyrannical and despotic rule, reminding people that in the end, the disposer of affairs and ultimate holder of legitimacy is not any man, not any king or queen, not even any supreme leader, but ultimately a divine force out and above directing, caring and fighting for a more peaceful, rule-based, just and free world for people to live in. God is the one who is greatest, above each and every mortal human being whose station it is to pass away. The fact that 'Allahu Akbar' is echoing through the Iranian night is not only an indication of the longing of people there to find a peaceful and just solution to this crisis. It also points to how deep the erosion of legitimacy is in whosoever acts against the will of the people, in whosoever claims to act on God's behalf to oppress his fellow human, including in this case some of the 'supreme' Islamic jurists themselves. This all goes to show that Islam, far from being merely an abode of repression and retrogression, has the capacity of being a fundamentally restorative and democratic force in human affairs. In the end, so it seems, at least in the Iranian context, 'Allahu Akbar', God is greatest, is a most profoundly democratic of political slogans. So deep is this call, that what is determined out of this liminal moment may very well set the terms for (or against) a lived, democratic Islamic reality for decades to come. 3:25 PM ET -- Solidarity. In Austin, Texas, from reader Anlo. 3:17 PM ET -- What is going on with Iran's state media? Reader Daryl observes: I've been following the (semi-official) PressTV website , and it's absolutely fascinating. In the past 24 hours, they have posted several articles that are surprisingly candid, and, one could argue, supportive of Mousavi, such as: "US values 'free and fair' election in Iran" -- in which it is acknowledged that "Mousavi, who according to the ministry has lost to Ahmadinejad even in the East-Azerbaijan province where he hails from, cried foul and described the election as a 'charade' - an allegation denied by the president and his interior minister, who was in charge of holding the election." "President slammed for denigrating rivals" -- "A vocal supporter of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has hit out at him for referring those questioning Friday's election results as "flotsam and jetsam." "In Israel, Mossad head talks about Iran election" In which an amazing statement is made: "Head of Mossad Meir Dagan says that a Mousavi win in Iran's presidential election would have spelled bigger problems for Israel. " "Iran clerics schedule pro-Mousavi rally" 3:02 PM ET -- Can Obama separate Iran policy from the human rights question? Spencer Ackerman : "I've just conducted a phone interview with Akbar Ganji, one of the leading Iranian dissidents and most prominent voices in the international community for a more liberal Iran. He knows its brutality in a deeply personal way: the regime imprisoned Ganji for five years after he wrote a series of articles exposing its human rights abuses." It's a very interesting interview, worth reading in full . Most interesting to me is that Ganji's thoughts on President Obama come down right in the middle of a debate that's been waging among Iranians/Iranian-Americans since this all started: "From my perspective, Obama has so far said he won't meddle in Iran's internal situation, and that's a good, good approach," Ganji said, but he added, "He cannot stay silent on human rights issues." Clearly, Ganji thinks the Obama administration isn't striking the right balance between non-intervention and humanitarian concerns. Since Sunday, I've been writing about the split between those who want Obama to be prudent and cautious in his statements, and those who want him to use his unique moral authority to speak out on human rights. Ganji's position indicates that perhaps those two views are not in conflict. Incidentally, on this topic, two examples from today. Lipstick Jihad author Azadeh Moaveni writes a column, " Iranians to Obama: Hush ." But the reformist-leaning Farsi site Gooya runs this comic: 2:57 PM ET -- ABC's Jim Sciutto's Twitter Account 'Hijacked.' By " pro Iranian messengers ." 2:50 PM ET -- A flood...of email. You folks are pretty incredible. Within 20 minutes of asking for Farsi speakers to contact me with their IM info, I've received almost 100 offers. Amazing. Thank you. 2:44 PM ET -- Not just in Tehran. BBC : The day of mourning was also observed outside Tehran. One protester, Ali, took part in a silent sit-in at a shrine in Shiraz, south-western Iran, to remember those killed. He told the BBC: "There are about
 
Irene Rubaum-Keller: Is Sugar Addictive? Top
We think it is. We have enough scientific evidence now to tell us that we can train ourselves to crave, to build tolerance and to experience withdrawal when we ingest a lot of refined sugar. These are the hallmarks of addiction. Craving, tolerance and withdrawal. Dr. Serge Ahmed, of Bordeaux, France, has been working with rats and giving them the choice between cocaine and sugar. Guess what wins, time and again? That's right, sugar. The sweet taste of sugar is more rewarding than the high of cocaine. Some people know they are sugar addicts and cannot handle it at all. They know because they can't stop eating it once they start. They crave sugary foods and they need more and more to feel satisfied. They also experience withdrawal if they stop eating sugar. We believe this is because of the effect sugar has on the brain. Sugar, like drugs of abuse, produces dopamine in the brain. The body's own happy, feel good, chemical. For some true sugar addicts, they need this to feel OK. When they eat sugar, they feel good. When it wears off, they need more. If they stop sugar for a period of time, their brains will begin to produce dopamine on their own. This takes some time, however. The problem lies in the fact that much of our default food is high in refined sugar and carbohydrates. Trying to avoid it, is very difficult. That combined with the discomfort of withdrawal, keeps many sugar addicts trapped in their addiction. We are still learning about the science of this. Meanwhile, I'd like to show you some pictures (thanks to my friends at Sugar Stacks) that illustrate how much sugar is in the foods we eat. These are very graphic images, so be warned. Alarmed by what you have just seen? You should be. Refined sugar is relatively new in our diets. Compared to what our genes are prepared to handle, this is above and beyond what is biologically good for us. This one last image is how many carrots you would need to eat to equal the refined sugar in this product: I hope this has been educational for you. Be healthy!!! If you'd like to participate in the research for Irene's new book about the process of weight loss, please visit http://www.eatingdisordertherapist.com/index.htm and take the survey. More on Wellness
 
Walter Cronkite Gravely Ill, Say CBS News Sources Top
Legendary CBS anchorman Walter Cronkite, 92, long known as the "Most Trusted Man in America," is gravely ill, according to multiple CBS News sources
 
Maria Bello: "Starving" for Darfur Top
Today I begin my fast for Darfur. The Fast for Darfur began with Mia Farrow's 12 day hunger strike protesting the president of Sudan's decision to throw out of his country the NGO's who were the main suppliers of food to the Darfurian refugees. Mia ended her fast on doctor's orders and Sir Richard Branson decided to take the baton and fast for three days. Since then, hundreds of people have joined the fast to stand in solidarity with the people of Darfur. My friend Blake Mycoskie passed the baton to me, so here I am. Fasting. I have done fasts in the past -- (mainly to shrink my ass or enlarge my spirit!) but have never done one in solidarity and protest. Never drank only water for three days without some kind of selfish motivation to see me through. Now, here I am outside of Boston, Mass. doing one of the funniest movies I have ever been in and I am choosing to start this fast today. I have been so happy lately, which is somewhat rare for me. Laughs a minute with Adam Sandler and Kevin James and the crew. I live at the beach and have the day off today to just kick around. I should be eating lobster at Lobsta Land. But NOOOOO, instead I am trying to mix things up by drinking very hot, warm, lukewarm or cold water throughout the day, hoping that my body functions that are usually awakened with caffeine will be woken up. And why? Because people are dying. Hundreds of thousands of men, women and children in Darfur have been systematically murdered in Omar al-Bashir's campaign of genocide and millions have been left homeless. Now, after years of continuing suffering, these courageous people have to face starvation on top of murder, mutilation, displacement and rape. So I am fasting in solidarity with my friend, Niemat Ahmadi whose family and friends are hungry and displaced in the camps in Darfur. I am fasting for the 40 young girls (as young as 4) who were brutally raped by the Janjaweed militia as reported in Halima Bashir's incredible book, Tears of the Desert: A Memoir of Survival in Darfur . I am fasting because I am a mother and a human being, and because I know that if I am not apart of the solution I am apart of the problem. After 18 hours of not eating, I am now staring at the bag of sourdough pretzels on my kitchen counter. I am salivating. I am "starving." (Like I will ever really know what starving is really like.) I don't know how much this fast will accomplish. Maybe a person or two will feel moved to go to the website and find out what they can do to help to stop the genocide and with enough of our voices we can finally put an end to it. Or maybe it will simply wake me up out of the haze of being a working mother, who is constantly worried about being able to support her son in this economy and if the new lines on my lips mean my career is over. Either way, today the people of Dafur stand clearly and strongly in my mind and I just want them to know they are not alone. To learn more about the fast and what you can do for the people of Darfur, go to fastdarfur.org . More on Darfur
 
Peter Schwartz: The Hedgehog and the Fox Top
British political philosopher Isaiah Berlin immortalized the distinction in politics and literature between the hedgehog and the fox. The hedgehog knows one thing, and is bold, direct, and uncompromising. The fox knows many things, and is crafty, subtle, and nuanced. Joe Nocera and others have criticized President Obama for timidity and even confusion in the patchwork program for financial regulatory reform delivered yesterday to the nation and to Congress. Nocera refers, by contrast, to Roosevelt's construction of an entirely new financial regulatory regime in the 1930s, one that functioned well for more than six decades. Roosevelt succeeded, Nocera implies, because he was a hedgehog with a big idea, a hedgehog not afraid to kick some big banker ass. However, another interpretation - which fits with Obama's judicious, careful temperament and his WWLD (What would Lincoln do?) instinct - is that Obama is displaying foxiness. Obama was not elected to be an ass-kicker. He is not trying to accomplish one thing - mitigation of all financial risk - with a sweeping reform plan that imposes a single discipline on the financial system. Instead, his plan seeks to accomplish many smaller things, each with a more targeted risk-mitigation goal: the reduction of systemic risk, the management of rating agency interest conflicts, protections for consumers of financial products, and regulation of financially engineered securities. Those who criticize the plan for its pragmatism and narrowness of aspiration are correct in their characterizations, but wrong to be critical. Obama will push forward this plan at two levels. He will wrap the plan in uplifting rhetoric that challenges our institutions to act on the basis of values, not naked greed. At the same time, Obama believes we will be best served by a proposal that can fly politically and that can be effective in many small ways rather than one large way. By parcelizing regulatory risk, Obama has adopted hedging (not hedgehogging) principles that suit his personality and give us a reasonable chance to restore the nation's financial system. More on Barack Obama
 
Stuart Appelbaum: Being Gay: It's Who I Am Top
The most common criticism of the gay movement by straight people has been that it makes a public issue out of something that ought to remain private. "I don't have any problem with gays," the refrain goes, "but why do they have to be so, well, in your face about it?" Of course, in an ideal world, sexuality would be a private matter. But it can't be so long as any of us are denied our rights because of our sexual orientation. That's what led me, a middle-aged, Jewish labor leader to decide to come out. Coming to grips with my sexuality has been a difficult journey. Like anyone else born in the years before Stonewall, I grew up at a time when being gay was regarded as a sickness, a deviance, an aberration, and even a crime -- something of which to be ashamed. I was convinced, like others, that if I wanted to get ahead in my professional life, I felt I couldn't afford to acknowledge my sexuality. It's a choice I made as a young lawyer in a large Hartford, Connecticut firm in the 1970s. I was convinced that the firm's partners would tell me that they didn't have a problem with my orientation, but that they didn't think their clients would feel comfortable with my being gay -- "not that there's anything wrong with it." Like millions of other gay men and lesbians, I learned to compartmentalize my life and built a firewall separating who I was at work from who I was. It came at a staggering cost, not only to me, but also to others. Because I didn't let many in on the secret that I'm gay, there are people I've known all my life who have never really gotten to know me. More than that, though, it also robbed them of the opportunity to discover what I already knew: that gay people are everywhere, including the labor movement. So why come out now? A lot it has to do with the battle in Albany to win Marriage Equality legislation. Assuring that gays and lesbians have the same opportunity to marry as other New Yorkers do is a fundamental question of civil rights. It's about whether we're going to be a state whose laws protect only some of us, or a state whose laws are written for all of us. It's shocking that, in 2009, this should even be an issue at all. Though I could have continued to privately support the campaign for marriage equality by writing checks to Empire State Pride Agenda, I'm convinced that the most important contribution I can make is to remind legislators that gay and lesbian New Yorkers are in every walk of life and, yes, some of us are even labor leaders. I have always believed that the only way to challenge injustice is by organizing people for change. That's why I first became involved in the labor movement. But change also requires being honest with each other and ourselves. For me, that means recognizing that the time has long passed for me to step forward and say: "yes, I'm gay." I'm sure to some that may seem "in your face." To me, though, it's being who I am. Stuart Appelbaum is president of the 100,000 - member Retail, Wholesale, Department Store Union (RWDSU). In addition to that he also currently serves as a vice president of the New York State AFL-CIO and the New York City Central Labor Council. More on Gay Marriage
 
Daley Agrees To Discuss Olympics Financing Reversal With City Council Top
After initially questioning the need, Mayor Richard Daley has decided to discuss the controversy over Chicago's Olympic bid contract with aldermen in a public forum, his spokeswoman said today. More on Olympics
 
Lying About Voting For Obama Top
Even as Americans grow skeptical of various Democratic policies, President Obama's approval rating hovers at a robust 63 percent. People like him so much, in fact, that many say they voted for him--even when they didn't.
 
Treasury Department Admits Challenging Independence Of TARP Inspector General Top
Officials of the Treasury Department admitted late Thursday that they have asked the Justice Department to weigh in on how much power they have over the Special Inspector General for the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program, known as SIGTARP.
 
Arianna Honored At LA Press Club Southern California Journalism Awards Top
Arianna Huffington received the 2009 President's Award at the 51st Annual Southern California Journalism Awards hosted by the LA Press Club last Sunday. "Arianna Huffington has emerged as a leader toward a new kind of journalism," said Chris Woodyard, president of the Los Angeles Press Club. "She's both a thinker and a doer. She's one of the leading voices on public policy today." In the video below, Arianna thanked the LA Press Club and said "The award is about impact on the media but I think much more important is how can we journalists have a bigger impact on the world?" Watch:
 
Lee Stranahan: WATCH: My Personal David vs. Goliath Fight for Affordable Health Care Top
I am admittedly crazy. It's just one of my preexisting conditions, probably. (Diabetes is the big one, though.) A couple of months ago, I left my safe, steady job to get out of California before it imploded, moved to New Mexico and devoted myself to teaching and filmmaking. I am free. Broke, uninsured...but free! I set my own agenda. I can make films about anything I want. Based on my own life experience and on stories like my friend Bob Cesca is telling, the biggest thing I do right now is to take on the huge moneyed interests that are going to fight tooth and nail against reforming health care in any meaningful way. So I'm starting a personal project making 30 second spots about health care. I have this crazy idea that my voice can help hold back millions of dollars in lies. Not just mine, of course; if we win this, it's going to take all citizens acting like citizens and once and for all beating the insurance and drug company lobbies. Please spread the word. Actually call congress and the White House. Talk to your friends or make your own video. If you want to help fund me on this project please visit LeeStranahan.com . You can donate or hire me for a video project of your own or something. This is our fight. More on Health
 

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)