Tuesday, June 23, 2009

Y! Alert: The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Yahoo! Blog Alert
Yahoo! Alerts
My Alerts

The latest from The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

CTA Service Cuts Possible Top
The Regional Transportation Authority board will be asked on Thursday to approve a new round of cuts totaling $61 million at the CTA, Metra and Pace to make up for deepening shortfalls in sales-tax collections to fund transit, officials said Tuesday.
 
Threat Of Budget Cuts Draws Thousands To Springfield, But No Progress On Tax Hike Talks Top
SPRINGFIELD (AP) -- Illinois lawmakers returned to the Capitol on Tuesday searching for some way to fill a $9.2 billion hole in the state budget. The date may be the only thing that has changed since they left town May 31. Gov. Pat Quinn still warns drastic budget cuts will be required without a tax increase. Democratic legislative leaders still say they want an increase but lack the votes to pass it. Republicans still oppose the idea. Along with legislators, thousands of protesters showed up at the Capitol to demand a tax increase that would prevent the worst of the budget cuts. Officials said the rally drew more than 5,000 people waving signs in support of services for women, children, senior citizens, disabled people and more. (Scroll down for video.) "It's gratifying to see so many people here at decision time," said Quinn, a Chicago Democrat. "It's really a powerful outpouring of grass-roots sentiment." Time is running out for officials to make a decision. The current budget expires June 30. After that, state government will face strict limits on spending money and soon could have to cut back on state services. The House and Senate met for a few minutes Tuesday afternoon, responding to Quinn's call for a special session. Neither took any action, but they're scheduled to return Wednesday. Officials don't have any good options. They could close the budget gap -- which already has been reduced from $11.6 billion or more -- with a combination of spending cuts and tax increases, but many legislators oppose raising taxes. They could close the deficit solely with spending cuts, but Quinn and many lawmakers consider that unacceptable because it would gut vital state services. "I am not going to preside over a dismantling of that fundamental safety net that we are proud of in Illinois," Quinn said. Officials also could postpone any real decision by extending the current budget for a month or two, or by sticking with the limited new budget they've approved and promising to come back in January to do more. -ASSOCIATED PRESS Gov. Quinn said last week that he wanted a vote on the income tax. The Sun-Times cast doubt on that deadline when it obtained a memo from House Speaker Michael Madigan that didn't include the vote on this week's planned agenda, and today Quinn said he expects a vote by the end of the month. Quinn may have helped his cause by softening his stance on the corporate income tax, the Tribune reports : Quinn is backing a temporary income tax increase that would raise the personal rate from 3 to 4.5 percent for two years. The proposal previously would have raised the corporate income tax rate from 4.8 percent to 7.2 percent, but Quinn said today he's willing to lower that number. He would not provide specifics. State Comptroller Dan Hynes threw some cold water on his fellow Democrat Tuesday, releasing a letter accusing Quinn of inconsistencies in his approach to the budget talks and inciting "fear and panic" about potential state service cuts. Capitol Fax has excellent coverage of the thousands-strong rally, which at one point closed down the Statehouse . Watch these videos for a taste of the rally: Gov. Quinn's speech: More from Captiol Fax here . More on Video
 
Arianna Huffington: Media Playground: Obama Calls on HuffPost, Michael Calderone Pouts, Ben Smith Calls Us Names, Dana Milbank Gets His Facts All Wrong Top
Lots of squawking going on in the media sandbox after President Obama called on HuffPost's Nico Pitney at today's press conference. Seems some of the boys can't seem to understand why the president would have the nerve to call on someone TPM (which obviously has an easier time playing with others) labeled "the U.S.'s leading blogger about Iran" to ask a question about... Iran. How dare he! Politico's Michael Calderone couldn't seem to get over the order in which Nico was called on. "It was a departure from White House protocol," he fumed (the DC equivalent of "I'm telling Mom!"). Dana Milbank went the conspiracy route , calling Nico "a planted questioner" and tossing snarky comments into the mix: "Pitney recognized his prompt", "Pitney asked his question, as arranged." In Milbank's melodrama, "reporters in the room looked at each other in amazement at the stagecraft they had just witnessed. White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel looked at the first row of TV correspondents and grinned." I'm certain if Emanuel had a mustache, Milbank would have portrayed him twirling it. But hyperbole wasn't Milbank's biggest sin. It was repeatedly getting his facts wrong. He claimed: "Pitney had sent what he called a 'solicitation' to the White House." Not true. Nico solicited his readers about questions they'd like to see the president asked about Iran. The White House then contacted him about asking a question at the presser. Milbank also says "Obama aides agreed to call on the Huffington Post writer with the understanding that he would ask a question from an Iranian." Wrong. They never agreed to call on Nico; they alerted him that he might be called on. (You can read what actually happened, as told by Nico and Bill Burton, here and here .) Nico has been liveblogging about events in Iran almost around the clock for over a week. So did Milbank really suppose that Nico would have chosen to ask the president about something else? Steroids in baseball, perhaps? Oh, right -- one of Milbank's co-workers already did that . Back at Politico, Ben Smith declared the calling on Nico "a nice case of symbiosis, not entirely unlike the Bush administration's close ties to Fox," branded HuffPost "left leaning" and part of "the new partisan media," and said that "what's good for the Huffington Post is good for the White House, and vice versa." Now, I know Ben is a busy guy -- and I love reading him. But before he decides to characterize a site he really should take the time to, y'know, read what's on the site. If he had, he'd have known that, unlike Fox and Bush, HuffPost regularly takes on the Obama administration. Indeed, we have been critical of many administration decisions. Take my posts on the administration's handling of the financial crisis and the bank bailout for starters. Was it "a nice case of symbiosis" when I called on Tim Geithner to resign , writing that "it was painful to watch Obama... go on Jay Leno and say that Geithner is doing an 'outstanding job,'" and that "Obama's assessment had more than a whiff of Bush telling Brownie he was 'doing a heck of a job'"? Was it an example of "the new partisan media" when I laid out chapter and verse on Larry Summer's toxic ideas ? Was it "good for the White House" when I disparaged Obama's desire to put the Bush administration's use of torture in his rear view mirror? How about when I chided the administration for capitulating on the cramdown provision in the bankruptcy bill? And these are just a few examples (see the links below for more). And these are just my posts. We regularly run stories by our reporters and posts by our bloggers that no one could ever describe as "good for the White House." Would Ben Smith say the same about Fox's coverage of Bush? Michael, Dana, and Ben: come in from recess. You guys clearly need a nap. And a better fact-checker. Mission Shrink: We've Gone From Saving Wall Street in Order to Save Main Street to Just Saving Wall Street Wall Street, DC, and the New Financial Euphoria The Stress Tests Fail The Smell Test Why Are Bankers Still Being Treated As Beltway Royalty? Obama's First 100 Days: The Good, the Bad, and the Geithner The Torture Moment The Obama Economic Team's Flawed Cosmology: Still Believing the Universe Revolves Around the Banks Larry Summers: Brilliant Mind, Toxic Ideas Take the Steering Wheel out of Geithner's Hands A Disturbing D.C. Whodunit [Update II] Why is Obama Reluctant to Kill the Zombie Banks Threatening Our Economy? Bipartisanship Fetishism vs. What's Best for America: Obama Needs to Choose Tim Geithner, CNBC, and the Second Coming of Known Unknowns It's Time to Treat America's Homeowners as Well as We've Been Treating Wall Street's Bankers More on Iranian Election
 
Hynes Rips Quinn For Inciting 'Fear And Panic' Over Budget Top
SPRINGFIELD (AP) - Illinois Comptroller Dan Hynes has some harsh words for the governor's handling of the budget crisis. Hynes released an open letter to Gov. Pat Quinn on Tuesday. In it, Hynes says Quinn has been inconsistent about how large a tax increase is needed. He also questions whether Quinn has done a thorough review of state spending to see where it could be cut. Hynes accuses Quinn of inciting "fear and panic" by threatening cuts to vital state services. He tells Quinn to start over on the budget and its massive deficit by passing a temporary spending plan. He says that would give officials time to reassure the public that they're not rushing into a tax increase. Hynes and Quinn are both Democrats. -ASSOCIATED PRESS
 
HuffPost's Nico Pitney Asks Question About Iran At White House Press Conference (VIDEO) Top
President Obama fielded a question at his press conference Tuesday from Huffpost Senior News Editor Nico Pitney. Pitney's question, which was sent to him from Iran, was: "Under which conditions would you accept the election of Ahmadinejad, and if you do accept it without any significant changes in the conditions there isn't that a betrayal of what the demonstrators there are working for?" Watch the President's response: Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News , World News , and News about the Economy After the press conference, Pitney posted the following message on the Iran liveblog discussing how the question came about: I just returned from President Obama's press conference, where I was able to ask a question directly on behalf of an Iranian. I can't emphasize enough how grateful I am for all the submissions I received -- both from contacts I've been communicating with for several days, and from many others via email and Facebook and the Farsi-language social networking site Balatarin. As I tried to say at the press conference, all of the Iranians who are communicating online do so at great risk. It was very courageous of them and I hope the question I ended up choosing did them some justice. Also, apologies for the light posting today, which will probably continue through the evening. We'll be back at full speed tomorrow. A few words about how this came about for those who are curious: as readers know, I've spent a lot of time writing and debating about the President's reaction to the events in Iran. Last night, after emailing with a few people about Obama's press conference and what he might say, I decided to throw it open to our readers. I received a call from White House staff saying they had seen what I'd written and thought the President might be interested in receiving a question directly from an Iranian. The White House didn't guarantee that I would be able to ask a question. But I decided that if there was even a chance, I should try to reach out to as many Iranians as possible. With the invaluable help from some readers -- Chas, Chuck, and other Iranian Americans I wish I could name because they deserve the credit -- I was able to post a message in Farsi on Twitter and have my request for questions posted late last night on Balatarin. I ended up choosing the question I did because it was one of the consensus questions that many people had suggested. Thanks also to the White House staff. They were up front about not being able to assure that a question would be asked, they never asked what the question would be, and they helped me move through the very packed briefing room when I showed up a bit late (sorry to the many toes I stepped on getting through). More on Barack Obama
 
Video: GOP Congressman Says Obama's Hesitance On Iran Responsible For Violence Top
It was bound to happen. Representative Dana Rohrabacher, a senior member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, accused Barack Obama on Tuesday of allowing violence in Iran to get out of hand by not speaking out against the country's leadership earlier. The California Republican, appearing on MSNBC's The Ed Show, said that the president "ratcheted up the language a little bit" during his press conference on Tuesday. But, he added, "If [Obama] would have been talking even a little bit tougher a few days ago we might not have seen the violence and bloodshed of this repressive regime in Tehran in the last two days." The comments, by far the most personal attack on the Obama administration's handling of the situation in Iran, were far enough removed from perceptive analysis that even former Rep. Tom Tancredo - hardly a shrinking conservative voice - pushed back against them. "I take issue with my very good friend Dana Rohrabacher, believe it or not," the Colorado Republican told Schultz in the subsequent segment. "I actually think that the president was right in the way he was handling the issue. I don't think there was an awful lot he should have said. In a way I was disappointed that he seemed to cave into the pressure he was getting to actually speak more harshly about this in his press conference. I think he was on the right track." Indeed, even Rohrabacher - after being pressed for clarification - backtracked from accusing Obama of having blood on his hands. It was, he added, the "Mullahs" in Iran who were to blame for the violence. Obama "is responsible for his own actions." "[The President's] own actions and his lack of a tough statement early on gave them the impression that... emboldened the mullah dictatorship," Rohrabacher said. "It would be like Ronald Reagan going to the Berlin Wall and saying Mr. Gorbachev, that's your business over there." The video is worth a watch if, for nothing else, to see the outer limits of where the domestic debate of Iranian politics can go.
 
Sanford Twitter Account Active Even As He's Disappeared Top
Governor Mark Sanford may be missing in action. His wife may not know exactly where he is. And there could be some dispute as to whether the South Carolina Republican is hiking the Appalachian Trail or flying somewhere via the Atlanta airport. Through it all, however, his twitter account has kept active. An astute observer points out that there have been multiple posts on the twitter page of the possible 2012 Republican presidential contender even though Sanford himself has gone off the radar. On Thursday, the day the governor apparently 'disappeared,' Sanford's page had two tweets: first to trumpet his appearance the night before on Sean Hannity's show on Fox News, the next to tout the message sent by the famous tea party protests of government tax policies. tea parties were a tipping point in pushing back against Washington DC's financial recklessness - http://tinyurl.com/sanfordo... #liberty On Sunday, Sanford's twitter account had another post, declaring that the "stimulus discussion shows need for restructuring in SC." Finally on Monday, when news of his disappearance became a national story, the Governor's page had a tweet that South Carolina's government structure was "fundamentally flawed." Could it be that Sanford, a self-avowed active tweeter, was filing posts from his jaunt through the Appalachian Mountains? Was he staying abreast of current events as he was closing himself off from family, friends and colleagues? Actually, the answer is far more innocent. While the governor was gone his staff kept on working, with an aide tasked with keeping the twitter account up to date.
 
David Axelrod Discusses Obama's Iran Response, Health Care Reform, Fox News Reporter On "Hardball" (VIDEO) Top
David Axelrod, senior adviser to President Obama, appeared on "Hardball" tonight to discuss Obama's press conference earlier this afternoon. Two core issues which Axelrod addressed are the ongoing turbulence in Iran and the push to get substantial health care reform passed in Congress. On Iran, Axelrod reiterated that Obama is choosing his words carefully so as to not hand the regime a propaganda tool and an external reason to crack down further on the demonstrators. The situation in the beginning, Axelrod said, in which you had a disputed election, has changed over the the past week to one in which there are people "dead in the streets," which is why the President felt the need to respond further. However, he stated that, as the president, Obama must be more circumspect with his remarks than those GOP senators criticizing him for not using more forceful rhetoric: Presidents have to think long. When they're doing their job they have to think long. They can't react to the provocation of the moment in ways that might really disastrous impacts down the line. I think this President is very sensitive to that and therefore very considered about what he says and when he says it. He said that the situation in Iran is one that is an internal struggle not involving outsiders, although he noted that that the President condemned violence against protesters. During the presser Obama called the brutal video showing the murder of the of the now-iconic young Iranian woman Neda "heartbreaking." Axelrod, while noting to a certain extent that you must always look at the bigger picture, separated the election turmoil from the issue of Iran's nuclear program, explaining: That's a different issue than the nuclear issue, which continues. It's the same today as it was yesterday. As you know, it's the Supreme Leader who dictates foreign and defense policies there, so the situation is pretty much the same as it's been, and we're going to pursue every avenue we can to try and forestall Iran developing a nuclear weapon. Regarding health care, Matthews asked him if "it's better to get some bill on health care this year than none." Axelrod demurred: I wouldn't say that because I think, as the President made clear, if we don't have a health care reform that genuinely cuts cost, that preserves choice for people, and that insures the tens of millions working Americans who don't have health insurance, or gives them a chance to buy affordable health insurance, then that will have been a failure. I think under that umbrella there are many permutations we're willing to consider. Matthews also asked Axelrod if he noticed "a little towel snap towards the president" in Fox News reporter Major Garrett's questioning of the president's public stance on Iran: "What took you so long?" Axelrod dryly replied, "Well, I don't think it was a warm embrace. I'll concede that." Watch the interview below. Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News , World News , and News about the Economy More on Barack Obama
 
Suzette Standring: Winning Wallets of Christian Consumers Top
Christian buying power can change business for the better. Integrity, excellent products and wholesome advertising beget loyalty from a demographic that spends $1.5 trillion annually. For shortsighted companies that dismiss the Christian market, there will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth.

 Nationally, 231 million Americans (77 percent) describe themselves as Christians, of which 140 million (44 percent) are weekly churchgoers.

 "That's about one-third more than the most watched Super Bowl game in history, the New York Giants vs. The New England Patriots, which had 95 million viewers," said Greg Stielstra.
 
He and Bob Hutchins co-authored a new book, "Faith-Based Marketing: The Guide To Reaching 140 Million Christian Customers" (Wiley and Sons Publishers 2009). The book's stated goal "is to bridge the gap between Christians and the business community that may not exactly be at odds with each other, but clearly don't understand each other."

 Hutchins led the online campaigns for Mel Gibson's "The Passion Of The Christ" and "The Chronicles of Narnia." Stielstra was the marketing director at Thomas Nelson for "The Purpose-Driven Life" by Rick Warren, the bestselling hardcover book in American history.

 Yet Christians remain a largely overlooked (if not downright dismissed) demographic in mainstream advertising. The authors make their marketing case based on 30 years of combined experience, independent surveys and extensive market research.

 Superficially, one might suspect that "Faith Based Marketing" is a sales guide to exploit or commercialize Christianity. But the primer on promotion holds a number of surprises.

 First, the commercial power of Christian customers is an eye-opener. For example, "The Purpose-Driven Life" by Rick Warren sold 30 million copies in its first three years driven by a church-based campaign. It sold faster than any Harry Potter book in the U.S.

 Likewise, when Mel Gibson couldn't get any Hollywood studio to promote "The Passion of The Christ," he invited pastors nationally to private screenings. In turn, congregations were enthusiastically encouraged to see the movie, which grossed $551 million in its first nine weeks.

 Secondly, the book offers marketing strategies by first debunking Christian stereotypes -- prudish, inflexible, uneducated and out of step with the times. Judge not lest ye lose big business. And it's not about selling religious products. Christian consumers have the same needs as everyone else -- food, clothing, education, fun and travel.

 But the big difference is how they respond to advertising. Biblical scriptures discourage lust, adultery, greed, vulgar language and envy. So people of faith are repelled by ads using materialistic and sex-driven images. Christians want their beliefs respected as well as receiving excellent goods and services. Simply adding a cross to the packaging will not cause sales to skyrocket.

 "Faith Based Marketing" turns the tables on businesses greedy to be part of the $1.5 trillion annually spent by people of faith. It's not about slick campaigns into Christian territory. It's a command for interested companies to clean house. And making money is the carrot to corporate donkeys to take the higher road in offering worthy products, integrity, service and wholesome advertising. 

Nowadays, technology has changed the advertising landscape. In the beginning, there was only one voice, the brand. And its monologue was about what customers wanted. Then mass media created a dialogue between the brand and buyers about product needs.

 "Thanks to the Internet we now have a 'trialogue.' The audience can speak to brands. Brands can speak to the audience and the audience can speak to each other," said Stielstra.

 This three-way exchange has created an "Age of Affinity" where consumers of like interests band together helping each other to find the best products and services. Christians now number 2.3 billion (one out of every three) people worldwide.

 "We're the largest affinity group in this country and in the world, those who call Jesus Christ our savior," he said.

 Affinity power was in evidence in November 2007 when Lowe's, the home improvement chain, advertised holiday "family trees." The backlash of 100,000 e-mails from Christians expressing outrage forced an apology and a return to the original label of Christmas trees.

 "This can be an effective way to change behavior, but a boycott is always reactive and negative," Stielstra said.

 Instead he advised Christian consumers to embrace faith-based marketing to their own benefit. Forge relationships with businesses. Teach them who you are and what matters to you. Then pledge your business and support when they honor and respect you. 

"Businesses want to please their customers. They will advertise where they think their customers are and on the types of programs they think Christians are watching, which in turn, will fund content Christians prefer and deprive the programs they avoid," Stielstra said.
 
In tapping into the huge Christian market, one strategy lies at the heart of faith-based marketing: Serve, don't sell.
 http://www.patriotledger.com/business/x931198244/SPIRITUAL-LIFE-Winning-wallets-of-Christian-consumers Contact Suzette Standring: suzmar@comcast.net She is syndicated with GateHouse News Service and is the award winning author of The Art of Column Writing: Insider Secrets from Art Buchwald, Dave Barry, Arianna Huffington, Pete Hamill and Other Great Columnists. Visit www.readsuzette.com More on Christianity
 
John Feffer: North Korea Attacking Hawaii? Top
The war in Afghanistan is ugly. The conflict in Iraq is still seething. The prospect of Pakistan's collapse is terrifying. But the real nightmare scenario, or so the media headlines suggest, involves North Korea. Its leader is wacko. It's adding to its nuclear arsenal. It's making preparations for a missile launch aimed at Hawaii. The Japanese attacked us 68 years ago. The Pentagon is bracing for Pearl Harbor, part II. This is serious stuff. The Taliban might be crazy, but they don't have nukes and we don't expect them to bomb Waikiki any time soon. Never fear: the Obama administration has crafted a robust response to North Korea. We pushed through a UN resolution, with Chinese and Russian support, that ups the sanctions against Pyongyang and authorizes the naval interdiction of North Korean vessels suspected of delivering weapons or other suspicious materials. We sat down with South Korean leader Lee Myung-bak and reaffirmed our willingness to retaliate with nuclear weapons if the South is attacked. We've beefed up our defenses in Hawaii. We're currently tailing a North Korean ship as it heads toward Burma. In his eagerness to show that he has the strength of will to confront a nuclear bully, President Barack Obama hopes to dispel any illusions -- among conservatives here, among the leadership in North Korea -- that he's a "cut-and-run" kind of guy. He can multitask. He can talk and prepare for war at the same time. This guy can take care of pesky flies like North Korea. I'm not sure who's giving the president his advice on North Korea. But it's all wrong. His show of "resolve" has only made matters worse. Myth 1: North Korea is about to attack Hawaii: North Korea has two long-range missiles, the Taepodong-1 and the Taepodong-2. The first, likely used only for satellite launches, can maybe go 2,500 miles. But it's never been successfully tested. The Taepondong-2 maybe could go about 3,700 miles . But it too has failed in its two tests: a quick fizzle in 2006 and a failure in the third stage this last April. Even if Pyongyang gets everything right for a possible July 4 test, it's 4,500 miles between Pyongyang and Honolulu. As for putting a nuclear warhead on the top of it, North Korea has shown no evidence that it has the necessary miniaturization technology. Myth #2: North Korea is a military threat: North Korea has a lot of people in uniform, and its artillery can cause horrific damage to Seoul. But North Korea spends about half a billion dollars a year on its military. South Korea alone spends 40 times that amount. And the United States spends 1,000 times more. Neither China nor Russia would support any North Korean military action. Militarily speaking, North Korea is a kamikaze country. It can inflict damage, but only in a suicide attack and only close to home. Myth 3: We really showed them at the UN: The Security Council statement in April and the resolution in June certainly communicated international anger at North Korea's rocket and nuclear tests. But we overreacted to the April launch. We should have treated it as a satellite launch and pressed forward with negotiations. Instead, North Korea responded to our fierce words by upping the ante and conducting a second nuclear test. The UN statement was as satisfying as hitting a problem with a baseball bat -- except that the problem in this case was a hornet's nest. The more recent resolution, meanwhile, represents a dangerous escalation: a confrontation at sea might trigger a much larger conflict. Myth 4: Kim Jong Il is crazy, and North Korea is an unpredictable rogue state: Actually, North Korean reactions have been quite predictable and, at least within the North Korean context, rational. Pyongyang was unhappy with the course of negotiations and its relative lack of priority on Obama's to-do list. Rocket launches and nuclear tests have yielded both attention and concessions in the past, so they went with what works. And they telegraphed their moves well in advance. The leader of North Korea runs a brutal state and a mind-numbing personality cult. And North Korea's official statements often sound like the scripts from bad horror movies. But Kim Jong Il worked out shrewd deals in the past -- with the Clinton and Bush administrations, with the Kim Dae-Jung and Roh-Moo Hyun governments in South Korea, and even with Junichiro Koizumi in Japan back in 2002. If he's mad, there's a method in his madness. We are retracing the same steps as 1993-1994, a path of escalation that nearly led to war. As I write in The Obama-Lee Summit: Dangerous Consensus? , "North Korea, with so little to lose, is the master of brinkmanship. It is not wise to enter into a tit-for-tat match with such a country. At this point, more important than finding common ground between the United States and South Korea is establishing common ground between North Korea and the rest of the world. By all means, Washington and Seoul should coordinate policy. But they should also keep their eyes on the prize: resolving the current crisis with North Korea without resorting to force." The United States should focus on nuclear nonproliferation, urges Foreign Policy In Focus contributor Wade Huntley, and make sure North Korea doesn't cross that red line. In the meantime, Washington should continue taking steps toward nuclear abolition. "Complete nuclear abolition need not be fully achieved in order to realize the constitution of a global security order that eliminates all threats of nuclear conflict," he writes in Dealing with North Korea's Tests . "And as the rest of this community becomes warmer, it will become increasingly tempting for North Korea to come in out of the cold." It's definitely frustrating to negotiate with North Korea. And many respected analysts have serious doubts as to whether Pyongyang will ever give up its nuclear weapons. But when we were talking seriously with North Korea, it kept its plutonium program frozen (Clinton) or began dismantling it (Bush), and its long-range missile program was still rudimentary. That beats war every time. In 1994, former President Jimmy Carter helped avert confrontation by visiting Pyongyang and working out a compromise. Maybe the Man from Plains can get on the plane again. The escalation must stop: It's time to talk. Crossposted from Foreign Policy In Focus , where you can read the full post. To subscribe to FPIF's e-zine World Beat, click here . More on North Korea
 
Quiz: How Forgiving Are You? Top
You'd like to think you're the type that doesn't hold a grudge. But when push comes to shove and the person being shoved is you, can you forgive and forget? More on The Inner Life
 
Johann Hari: The Uprising In the Amazon Is More Urgent Than Iran's: It Will Determine the Future of the Planet Top
While the world nervously watches the uprising in Iran, an even more important uprising has been passing unnoticed -- yet its outcome will shape your fate, and mine. In the depths of the Amazon rainforest, the poorest people in the world have taken on the richest people in the world to defend a part of the ecosystem none of us can live without. They had nothing but wooden spears and moral force to defeat the oil companies -- and, for today, they have won. Here's the story of how it happened -- and how we all need to pick up this fight. Earlier this year, Peru's President, Alan Garcia, sold the rights to explore, log and drill 70 percent of his country's swathe of the Amazon to a slew of international oil companies. Garcia seems to see rainforest as a waste of good resources, saying of the Amazon's trees: "There are millions of hectares of timber there lying idle." There was only one pesky flaw in Garcia's plan: the indigenous people who live in the Amazon. They are the first people of the Americas, subject to wave after wave of genocide since the arrival of the Conquistadors. They are weak. They have no guns. They barely have electricity. The government didn't bother to consult them: what are a bunch of Indians going to do anyway? But the indigenous people have seen what has happened elsewhere in the Amazon when the oil companies arrive. Occidental Petroleum are currently facing charges in US courts of dumping an estimated nine billion barrels of toxic waste in the regions of the Amazon where they operated from 1972 to 2000. Andres Sandi Mucushua, the spiritual leader of the area known to the oil companies as Block 1AB, said in 2007: "My people are sick and dying because of Oxy. The water in our streams is not fit to drink and we can no longer eat the fish in our rivers or the animals in our forests." The company denies liability, saying they are "aware of no credible data of negative community health impacts". In the Ecuadorian Amazon, according to an independent report, toxic waste allegedly dumped after Chevron-Texaco's drilling has been blamed by an independent scientific investigation for 1,401 deaths , mostly of children from cancer. When the BBC investigator Greg Palast put these charges to Chevron's lawyer, he replied: "And it's the only case of cancer in the world? How many cases of children with cancer do you have in the States?... They have to prove it's our crude, [which] is absolutely impossible." The people of the Amazon do not want to see their forests felled and their lands poisoned. And here, the need of the indigenous peoples to preserve their habitat has collided with your need to preserve your habitat. The rainforests inhale massive amounts of warming gases and keep them stored away from the atmosphere. Already, we are chopping them down so fast that it is causing 25 percent of man-made carbon emissions every year -- more than planes, trains and automobiles combined. But it is doubly destructive to cut them down to get to fossil fuels, which then cook the planet yet more . Garcia's plan was to turn the Amazon from the planet's air con into its fireplace. Why is he doing this? He was responding to intense pressure from the US, whose new Free Trade Pact requires this "opening up", and from the International Monetary Fund, paid for by our taxes. In Peru, it has also been alleged that the ruling party, APRA, is motivated by oil-bribes. Some of Garcia's associates have been caught on tape talking about how to sell off the Amazon to their cronies. The head of the parliamentary committee investigating the affair, Rep. Daniel Abugattas, says: "The government has been giving away our natural resources to the lowest bidders. This has not benefited Peru, but the administration's friends." So the indigenous peoples acted in their own self-defense, and ours. Using their own bodies and weapons made from wood, they blockaded the rivers and roads to stop the oil companies getting anything in or out. They captured two valves of Peru's sole pipeline between the country's gas field and the coast, which could have led to fuel rationing. Their leaders issued a statement explaining: "We will fight together with our parents and children to take care of the forest, to save the life of the equator and the entire world." Garcia responded by sending in the military. He declared a "state of emergency" in the Amazon, suspending almost all constitutional rights. Army helicopters opened fire on the protesters with live ammunition and stun-grenades. Over a dozen protesters were killed. But the indigenous peoples did not run away. Even though they were risking their lives, they stood their ground. One of their leaders, Davi Yanomami, said simply: "The earth has no price. It cannot be bought, or sold or exchanged. It is very important that white people, black people and indigenous peoples fight together to save the life of the forest and the earth. If we don't fight together what will our future be?" And then something extraordinary happened. The indigenous peoples won. The Peruvian Congress repealed the laws that allowed oil company drilling, by a margin of 82 votes to 12. Garcia was forced to apologize for his "serious errors and exaggerations". The protesters have celebrated and returned to their homes deep in the Amazon. Of course, the oil companies will regroup and return -- but this is an inspirational victory for the forces of sanity that will be hard to reverse. Human beings need to make far more decisions like this: to leave fossil fuels in the ground, and to leave rainforests standing. In microcosm, this rumble in the jungle is the fight we all face now. Will we allow a small number of rich people to make a short-term profit from seizing and burning resources, at the expense of our collective ability to survive? If this sounds like hyperbole, listen to Professor Jim Hansen, the world's leading climatologist, whose predictions have consistently turned out to be correct. He says: "Clearly, if we burn all fossil fuels, we will destroy the planet we know. We would set the planet on a course to the ice-free state, with a sea level 75 meters higher. Coastal disasters would occur continually. The only uncertainty is the time it would take for complete ice sheet disintegration." Of course, fossil fools will argue that the only alternative to burning up our remaining oil and gas supplies is for us all to live like the indigenous peoples in the Amazon. But next door to Peru, you can see a very different, environmentally sane model to lift up the poor emerging -- if only we will grasp it. Ecuador is a poor country with large oil resources underneath its rainforests -- but its president, Rafael Correa, is offering us the opposite of Garcia's plan. He has announced he is willing to leave his country's largest oil reserve, the Ishpingo Tmabococha Tiputini field, under the soil, if the rest of the world will match the $9.2bn in revenues it would provide. If we don't start reaching for these alternatives, we will render this month's victory in the Amazon meaningless. The Hadley Center in Britain, one of the most sophisticated scientific centers for studying the impacts of global warming, has warned that if we carry on belching out greenhouse gases at the current rate, the humid Amazon will dry up and burn down -- and soon. Their study earlier this year explained : The Amazonian rainforest is likely to suffer catastrophic damage even with the lowest temperature rises forecast under climate change. Up to 40 percent of the rainforest will be lost if temperature rises are restricted to 2C, which most climatologists regard as the least that can be expected by 2050. A 3C rise is likely to result in 75 percent of the forest disappearing while a 4C rise, regarded as the most likely increase this century unless greenhouse gas emissions are slashed, will kill off 85 perfect of the forest. That would send gigatons of carbon into the atmosphere -- making the world even more inhabitable. There is something thrilling about the fight in the Amazon, yet also something shaming. These people had nothing, but they stood up to the oil companies. We have everything, yet too many of us sit limp and passive, filling up our tanks with stolen oil without a thought for tomorrow. The people of the Amazon have shown they are up for the fight to save our ecosystem. Are we? Johann Hari is a writer for the Independent. To read more of his articles, click here or for an archive of his writings about environmental issues, click here . You can email him at johann -at- johannhari.com
 
Suspected U.S. Strike Kills At Least 60 In Pakistan Top
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan -- A suspected United States drone strike killed at least 60 people at a funeral gathering in South Waziristan on Tuesday, residents of the area and local news reports said. More on Pakistan
 
GOP Women's Group In MD: 'Obama and Hitler have a great deal in common.' Top
Godwin's Law proves itself again! This time from a reportedly prominent GOP group in Maryland, the Republican Women of Anne Arundel County (h/t ThinkProgress ). On their website, they've published a letter from their president addressing Obama's alleged Health Care agenda, and equating the President with Hitler. The Letter begins: Dear Friends: Obama and Hitler have a great deal in common in my view. Obama and Hitler use the "blitzkrieg" method to overwhelm their enemies. FAST, CARPET BOMBING intent on destruction. Hitler's blitzkrieg bombing destroyed many European cities - quickly and effectively. Obama is systematically destroying the American economy and with it AMERICA. First the banking/investment industry, next private enterprise (GM and Chrysler) and now HEALTH CARE. We too CAN fight back. Contact everyone you know. Start a blitzkrieg of our own. Shut down the Capitol switchboards and the White House switchboards! Say NO to the Obamination of Obama Care!
 
Sunil Chacko: The US-India Business Council Comes of Age Top
Overview The overflow crowd at the US-India Business Council's "Synergies Summit" annual conference in Washington, DC June 16-17, 2009 emphasized how positively different the Council has become from even a dozen years ago. Now seen as the main venue for networking on Indian business, there is a palpable enthusiasm for further enhancing relations on all fronts between the clichéd "largest [India] and oldest [US] democracies." To standing ovations, four cabinet members from the US and India described US-India cooperation at an all-time high, despite the looming threat of protectionist measures in this recessionary time. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, ever popular among Indian-Americans, and who also writes in the Huffington Post , spoke of diplomacy and development, and bilateral US-India trade being about $43 billion. India, she said, is an anchor for regional security, alluding to India's large army, navy and air force that today have many collaborative programs with the US defense department, and India has committed $1.2 billion for Afghanistan's development. There are 90,000 Indian students in the US building bridges between the two nations. She also included in her speech the serious issue of the rise of chronic diseases in both countries, and called for lower cost solutions that could be implemented in both countries. By mentioning the rise of chronic diseases as one area to work on, Hillary helps to eliminate the neglect of those diseases that are the major killers, indeed 60% of all deaths today are due to chronic diseases worldwide and they devastate families and communities. USIBC Chair Indra K. Nooyi spoke of India's globally competitive talent, and the growing two-way trade, and at the same time emphasized that an estimated 40-60% of Indian children are undernourished, necessitating urgent action. Resumption of the WTO's "Doha Round" of Trade Negotiations Onstage, there was tremendous bonhomie between Indian Commerce Minister Anand Sharma, US Commerce Secretary Gary Locke and US Trade Representative Ron Kirk, all holding Cabinet rank on commerce and trade, and much goodwill expressed about "resumption" of the World Trade Organization's Doha Round of trade negotiations that began in November 2001 and were abandoned in 2008. Incidentally, the calamitous and ill-fated Seattle World Trade Organization (WTO) conference in 1999 where massive demonstrations and pitched street battles paralyzed the city may have significantly damaged the WTO and prospects for an agreement. Ironically, Gary Locke was the Governor of the State of Washington when that WTO Conference took place in the State's major port city, Seattle. Minister Anand Sharma is a former President of the youth wing of the ruling Congress Party, and worked closely with the late Prime Minster Rajiv Gandhi who was earlier the party's General Secretary just as it is currently the role of his son Rahul. Thus his long association with the Gandhi family gives him a certain voice -- but the previous Commerce Minister Kamal Nath had that special relationship too. Thus, Ministers will speak pleasantly but at this time it is hard to imagine how the Doha Round can be concluded successfully. The negotiating positions prepared by the permanent staff of Commerce or Trade Ministries in India, Brazil, China, South Africa and other larger countries of the global South are entirely dependent on the US, Canada, Europe and Japan removing their massive agricultural subsidies to then discuss market access. Nothing short of a political earthquake will occur in all those Northern countries if those subsidies were eliminated. In Japan, it is likely that any government would fall -- and currently, there are other issues that appear irreversible such as the Japanese import ban on foreign rice because Japanese rice farmers are a major force in domestic, rural politics. Japan is the only country in the world where biriyani cannot be made with basmati rice. Such is the power of the domestic agricultural lobbies -- it exceeds anything that negotiators at the WTO can perhaps contemplate. Only longer term value generation in agriculture can alleviate the need for subsidies. It is here that functional food and its effectiveness may play a role. If soy peptides can be scientifically documented to cut cholesterol risk, and bonito fish peptides can take care of hypertension - then value will accrue to the agriculture field beyond its current commodities focus. But there is little attention being paid to those wide-ranging steps that can wean nations away from subsidies that have been in place for generations. Nonetheless, eliminating subsidies is also the interest of fiscally-strapped Northern governments but they know that it is currently politically untenable. Hence, one need not hold one's breath expecting a speedy conclusion of the Doha Round. But the talks will restart, and there will indeed be an uptick in business for restaurants in Geneva, Switzerland where WTO is headquartered. Pharmaceutical Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Issues David Simmons, President of the Established Products Division of Pfizer, Raj Gandesha, Counsel with the US global law firm White and Case LLP who was the principal author of the Report on incremental pharmaceutical innovation, and Greg Kalbaugh, USIBC Counsel, addressed a press conference to release the Report . India's Dua Consulting also contributed, as did the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA). Simmons, Gandesha and Kalbaugh discussed the regulatory and intellectual property bottlenecks in imposing an expensive clinical trial requirement for demonstrating significantly enhanced efficacy of the active substance as a basis for any additional patent protection. This 3(d) section of the Indian Patents Act was written keeping in mind the prevailing concern that IPR for incremental innovation is tantamount to "evergreening," in effect the attempt to overcome patent expiration on a drug by claiming additional patent protection for sometimes minor modifications in the active substance. The counterpoint is that unless there is IPR protection, no one will readily invest shareholder capital on R&D in incremental innovation, some of which is indeed medically substantial, leaving over-20-year old generics and on-patent drugs on the market. Because patent infringement can only be proven in-country, and as long as Section 3(d) remains in the Indian Patents Act, patented incremental innovation on a generic anywhere in the world can be rapidly reverse-engineered & incorporated into production and such medicines distributed in the galloping Indian medicines market by the plethora of Indian companies with no fear of patent infringement. That is a legitimate fear of global multinationals because India is the only country in the world having the section 3(d) provision in the Patents Act. But is that fear entirely justified? Those of us who have practiced medicine in India have always used the brand names of quality producers like Pfizer, a company that has been in India since 1950, as the sole guarantor of reliability and safety. Injecting local anaesthetic lignocaine for minor surgery and seeing no effect, for instance, even when the producer was a State pharma company, was sufficient reason to insist on a product from a reliable manufacturer. And that is a bond of trust that is not easy to replicate by most companies. Therefore, it is not solely an IPR route that makes sense but also a brand management and marketing strategy. Irrespective of the merits of the arguments, greater domestic Indian support to eliminate the Section 3(d) of the Indian Patents Act is likely to be possible only when IPR issues are treated in conjunction with enhanced access (see here and here ) through rationalizing procurement, volume discounts, virtual aggregation of demand and indeed increased investment in R&D , quality manufacturing and supply chain technologies that I have advocated for over a decade, even with the encouragement of the then-US Treasury Deputy Assistant Secretary. Indians, in general, do not care whether an "Indian" multinational mostly owned these days by an individual family plus many foreign institutional investors, or a global multinational benefits from revenue for a particular medicine - but they would like it to be price sensitive and of superior quality. And that is possible given that total revenue for the successful company is potentially stratospheric, as of course revenue = unit price multiplied by volume of sales to patients within the burgeoning Indian population. 34th USIBC "Synergies Summit" in a Nutshell The tightly-orchestrated and efficiently organized USIBC Summit started off with a witty speech by Vikas Swarup, the Indian diplomat on whose book Q&A the Oscar-winning film Slumdog Millionaire is based, and a musical recital by Aashish, Pranesh and Sahir Khan. USIBC President Ron Somers highlighted shared prosperity. Minister Anand Sharma said that Indian industry has invested $106 billion in the US and has created more than 300,000 jobs in the US between 2004 and 2007. He announced that 450 million people had cast ballots in the recent parliamentary election. He repeated the call from Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh for $500 billion in infrastructure investment. Indian Ambassador Meera Shankar recalled how far India has come from the time of Indian independence when the life expectancy for women was under 30. She stressed the importance of the agricultural and food processing sectors and infrastructure. Billionaire Azim Premji, Chair of WIPRO and the Azim Premji Foundation, described how he was in the right industry at the right time and with the right profile and that IT is repositioning business worldwide, including the growing popularity of telecommuting. He predicted sharp decline in business travel as teleconferencing facilities become vivid. He described how 50% of the growth of US business is coming from revenue growth outside the US, a major change from the past, and how demography is shaping that trend. David Mulford, now back in Credit Suisse after his stint as US Ambassador to India, described the exciting changes transforming the Indian rural economy. He also estimated that the civilian nuclear deal would create a $100 billion industry. US Trade Representative Ron Kirk said that 97 percent of all US exporters are small- to medium-sized businesses with 500 or fewer employees and that is a good story for trade. In Conclusion For his enthusiastic and tireless efforts over many years, especially when US-India relations were deeply impacted by the 1998 nuclear tests that brought matters to a virtual standstill, and for her years of behind-the-scenes efforts on US-India, both USIBC President Ron Somers, and Chair Indra K. Nooyi, the Chair and CEO of Pepsico, deserve high national recognition in the US and India. In India, at present Presidential honors such as the Padma Shri and Padma Bhushan are reserved for Indian citizens. However, for such individuals, those artificial restrictions should be relaxed. The US-India Business Council has done a remarkable job of always reliable advocacy and of helping to tap into both communities to take the partnership to a new high, something that indeed people in both countries had for long wanted.
 
Travis McCoy: My Trip to South Africa for MTV's Staying Alive Campaign Top
Today I woke up to a flight attendant tapping me ever so gently. "Mr. McCoy, Mr. McCoy," she said with a sweet tone. "We've arrived." We had landed in Bombay, India. The final stop on my trip for MTV's Staying Alive campaign, an HIV and AIDS awareness campaign that gives grants to young people to help empower youth to make better decisions regarding safe sex, which I am the ambassador of. As I gathered my things, half awake and very confused, I heard her ask one of my traveling companions, "Why is he so tired?" Perhaps it was the fact that this was the 7th flight in the past 6 days, or from scrambling to get through security and customs, meeting with journalist after journalist, visiting 2 continents and 3 countries all in the matter of a little over of a week. Should I explain this to her? NOPE! Too tired. Must keep moving. "Thanks for the wake up call," I said before departing the plane and entering a country I'd never set foot on before. It seems like months ago that I packed my bags and left my condo in Midtown Manhattan to start this trip. Nervous, anxious, excited and not knowing what to expect, I boarded the plane at NYC's JFK airport with an open mind and an iPod full of easy listening 80's tunes. Nothing like the sweet voice of Daryl Hall to help with take-off when flying is one of your least favorite past times. NYC to Johannesburg, South Africa -- roughly 15 hours. Jo'Burg to Capetown -- a quick 2. My first time in the "Motherland." I was there to meet a young filmmaker named Bulelani Mvotho, a Staying Alive Grantee. My hotel was a harsh and striking contrast to Bulelani's township of Khayelitsha, a short 15 minute drive by van. Tiny pastel-colored makeshift shacks huddled together like tetris blocks. Over 6 million South Africans impoverished and at high risk for HIV infection, among many other diseases that come with the conditions they're forced to live in. I met Bulelani at a youth center in Khayelitsha, which means "New Home." We hugged, shook hands and he greeted me with "Welcome home." Welcome home, I thought to myself. This sense of warmth and understanding raced from my feet to the tips of my ears, and I was indeed "home." A large group of kids of all ages as well as elders from the community gathered in a small room to watch the premiere of Bulelani's newest short film Get Real . It dealt with youth and getting them to be more open about discussing safer ways to prevent from contracting STDs and HIV. I was amazed at how attentive everyone was. Absorbing all the commentary, sharing a laugh here and there when humor ensued. Bulelani blushed a little when I referred to him as a community leader and a role model. He says he's just "playing his role." Such an inspiring, humble and determined individual, Bulelani has made a huge impression on me whether he knows it or not. After a tour around Khayelitsha, we talked about many things. When we made a stop at his office and had a real heart-to-heart, he explained to me that a young woman of 24 worked with him on his films had recently passed from HIV. I nearly crumbled. When I was a young lad, I lost a very close loved one to the disease, which sparked my interest in Staying Alive. I shared this with Bulelani and he comforted me by saying "We mustn't cry, we must keep moving and educating so we don't have to feel like this anymore." I had a moment to reflect on a hill over looking Khayelitsha before I left for my next stop. I thought of Bulelani. I thought of my loss, his loss, the loss that is far too common among the people of Khayelitsha. I thought of the hordes of children that followed us as we walked around learning from one another and the smiles on their faces despite the adversity they were faced with everyday. I wrote in my notebook, I wrote until the words stopped feeling natural. Then, it was off to the Philippines to meet another grantee. While on yet another plane, I couldn't stop thinking about Bulelani. I found myself wondering: Among all the kids that were watching his film, was there another young Bulelani in that room? Were there more than one? His influence on them was as broad as day. I smiled knowing that not only had I made a new friend for life, but one who has forever changed the way I see things. A friend who has sparked a fire in the hearts of the future role models and community leaders of a township crying for change. More on HIV/AIDS
 
"Black Watch Regiment," Scots Soldiers, Filmed Carrying Out Huge Helicopter Attack On Taliban In Afghanistan (VIDEO) Top
Coalition troops in Afghanistan carried out a massive assault against a Taliban stronghold in Helmand Province in southern Afghanistan. According to CNN, about 500 soldiers were involved in the operation and it was aircraft heavy: "This has been a major air assault operation with a large number of helicopters by the both U.K. and U.S. The Black Watch met some resistance but we were able to establish a firm foothold in the area," said Lt. Col. Stephen Cartwright, Commanding Officer of The Black Watch, a Scottish fighting regiment involved in the operation. Read more from CNN here. -OR- "The Black Watch" regiment, part of the regular British Army, was filmed as they took part in this massive assault. Watch a clip below. More on Afghanistan
 
Jose Antonio Vargas: Tiananmen + Web = Tehran Top
In the past week or so, a meme has circulated on the Web: "Tiananmen + Twitter = Tehran." But it's not just about the so-called "Twitter Revolution." That's a nifty catch-phrase -- the YouTube election, the Facebook effect, etc. -- for many in the mainstream media who are still trying to understand how people live their lives in this social networking age. In this world, a tweet from Canada leads to a Facebook fan page created in the United States, which then leads to a YouTube video from Iran. But these platforms are merely tools that allow people to connect over ideas. A more accurate equation, said Ho, who teaches information technology at Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI), is "Tiananmen + Web = Tehran." More on Twitter
 
Born With HIV/AIDS, Defying All Odds Top
Babies who were born with HIV/AIDS in the 1980s have defied initial expectations. More on HIV/AIDS
 
Dick Cheney Memoir Planned For 2011: "I Want My Grandkids...To Be Able To Read It And Understand What I Did" Top
NEW YORK — Former Vice President Dick Cheney has signed a book deal with a conservative imprint of Simon & Schuster and said he hopes readers of all ideologies will be interested in his story. The memoir by Cheney, widely considered the most powerful vice president in history, is expected to be published in Spring 2011, a few months after President George W. Bush's book comes out. Cheney's work is currently untitled and will cover his long career in government, from chief of staff under President Ford to vice president under Bush, from Vietnam and Watergate to the first Gulf War and the Sept. 11 attacks. In a telephone interview Tuesday with The Associated Press, the 68-year-old Cheney noted that he had never written a book about his years in government, which dates back to the 1960s. "I'm persuaded there are a lot of interesting stories that ought to be told," Cheney said. "I want my grandkids, 20 or 30 years from now, to be able to read it and understand what I did, and why I did it." Financial terms were not disclosed. A publishing official with knowledge of the negotiations, but not authorized to publicly discuss, said the deal was likely worth at least $2 million. Cheney's literary representative, Washington attorney Robert Barnett, declined comment. Known for his secrecy while in the Bush administration, Cheney has made it clear since leaving office that he was planning a memoir. He is working on the book _ in longhand and on computer _ at his home outside of Washington, D.C., and in collaboration with his daughter, Liz Cheney. Books by former vice presidents rarely attract a lot of interest unless the author is likely to run for president (Richard Nixon had a best seller in the early 1960s with "Six Crises"), or claims an expertise outside of electoral politics (Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth," released in 2006 and the companion to the Academy Award-winning documentary about global warming). But Cheney's influence is like no other vice president's and his side of the story should at least catch the attention of the general public, including the many who don't like him. An architect and aggressive defender of Bush administration policies, from the Iraq War to the treatment of suspected terrorists, Cheney has consistently had low approval ratings, sometimes under 30 percent, but he is deeply admired by those that stand by him. "He appeals very strongly to the conservative side of the political spectrum. That's absolutely true," said Simon & Schuster CEO Carolyn Reidy. "But what also fascinates me is the sheer breadth of his experience." The book will be published by Simon & Schuster's Threshold Editions imprint, founded in 2005 and headed by a longtime Cheney friend and former aide: Republican strategist Mary Matalin. Threshold has become an unofficial publishing home to the Cheney family, releasing memoirs by Cheney's wife Lynne Cheney and by daughter Mary Cheney. Matalin has not only reaffirmed her Washington connections, but tapped into _ like few others _ the current conservative market. She has published one of the most popular works of 2009, Mark Levin's "Liberty and Tyranny," and recently released "Glenn Beck's Common Sense," which on Tuesday ranked No. 1 on Amazon.com. "A lot of those kinds of books were selling well before, but they've certainly been enhanced by this environment, where conservatives feel a certain urgency; the future of the party feels uncertain," Matalin said. "Cheney's book may play into that _ it can't not, I think. But it will also be about the policies that played out under that philosophy of government, over almost half a century." Cheney said his book will reflect his conservative outlook, but that he has no plans to write "a screed" and sees no reason why liberals shouldn't want to read it, "because it covers some of very interesting and important events in our recent history. "I would hope it has an appeal to anyone who has an interest in these developments," Cheney said. Interest in Cheney can be measured by how many books have been written about him. It is a vast, diverse and mostly unflattering library, from parodies such as "Dick Cheney's Diary" and "Duck! The Dick Cheney Survival Bible" to Barton Gellman's investigative "Angler," in which Cheney is portrayed as a virtual law unto himself in the Bush administration. Cheney said Tuesday that he was aware "there have been quite a few (books) about me as vice president," and added, "A couple of them I have looked at," mentioning Stephen Hayes' sympathetic "Cheney: The Untold Story of America's Most Powerful and Controversial Vice President," a 2007 release written with his cooperation. Cheney said that he has a "stack of books" by his bedside, accumulated while he was vice president, and "wanted to read at least some of them." Asked if he might have a look at the Gellman book, or another critical take, Cheney said, "I expect I would." He has made sharp comments over the past few months, not just about the Obama administration, but about former Secretary of State Colin Powell, who often differed with Cheney when they served under George W. Bush. But when discussing his book Tuesday, Cheney said, "In terms of carrying grudges or trying to settle grudges, that's not my purpose. If it had been, I wouldn't have lasted very long in politics." "He knows he's called Darth Vader," said Simon & Schuster's Carolyn Reidy. "He's aware of how he's been portrayed. But I didn't feel any defensiveness when I met with him. I remember thinking, `I can see why four presidents gave him very responsible jobs in their administrations.'" More on Dick Cheney
 

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)