Wednesday, June 10, 2009

Y! Alert: The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Yahoo! Alerts
My Alerts

The latest from The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

FDIC's Bair Pressures Citi: Get Your House In Order Top
Tough words from Washington arrived by phone on Tuesday at Citigroup headquarters in New York. On the line was Sheila C. Bair, the head of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation - and a powerful behind-the-scenes player at the giant bank. She was calling to press directors once again to put Citigroup's troubled house in order. More on Citibank
 
My Financial Adviser Was Just Charged With Fraud Top
About two months ago, I wrote a column about how Matthew Weitzman, our family's financial planner, was under investigation for reportedly siphoning money from clients' accounts.
 
Joseph A. Palermo: Glenn Beck Spins the Holocaust Museum Shooting Top
This afternoon Glenn Beck and two of his guests argued that Adolph Hitler and the Nazi Party were "leftwing"; that "political correctness" led the committed white supramacist, James Von Brunn, to shoot a security guard at the Holocaust Museum in Washington, DC; and that ultimately President Barack Obama is the one responsible for the violence because his "bailouts" and "Socialistic" policies are engendering widespread anger. Beck denounced those who claim he is "churning the pot" because, he says, "the pot is already boiling." Seeing this spectacle with subtitles at the gym today led me to wonder if there are any laws on the books against using the public airwaves to incite violence. Because that is clearly what Beck is doing. I only caught about ten minutes of the show (about all I can stand) and it was a white reactionary tour de force -- incendiary, stupid, and racist. In Beck's world President Obama brings "identity politics" and "political correctness" to the White House, and it's the "Left" that is "racist" because unlike conservatives, who judge people only on their individual merits and character (the three white men sitting at Beck's table nodding in agreement), all liberals see is people of different races and classes and genders, which "divides" America. And Obama's "socialistic" policies are leading people of dubious sanity to become unglued, and therefore the outbreak of right-wing violence is Obama's fault. Talk about spin! Only through a conscious and disingenuous effort could anyone link the shooting today at the Holocaust Museum to President Obama. Beck and his guests at the opening of his show today all agreed that the Nazis were not rightwing but a bunch of leftwingers (like Obama and Nancy Pelosi). That is pretty weird when you think about how that tidbit of agitprop must disappoint a lot of white supremacists. All those white guys who hail Hitler and the Nazis because they were so good at kicking the crap out of Socialists, labor unionists, Communists and Soviets, women who didn't know their place, and even "degenerate" Dadaists and surrealists, and don't forget the Jews. What self-respecting Neo-Nazi or Ku Klux Klansman (or good ol' boy at the Council of Conservative Citizens) wants to hear that Hitler was like Michael Moore and Al Franken? But it doesn't matter because Beck is not appealing to his viewers' brains but to their guts. And all those "isms" sound the same to 'em anyhow. And since this James Von Brunn guy targeted a museum where the murder of millions of Jews is memorialized Beck took the opportunity to run a short audio clip of an interview he had with Benjamin Netanyahu three years ago. He then segued into a riff on how our currently tough economic times will lead some people to scapegoat Jews and that means that Israel should bomb Iran right away. Somewhere behind Beck's talking points there is real thinking going on. No one should dismiss Beck as a hack or "entertainer." He is a propagandist. It's also clear that Beck and his fans just can't get over the fact that a black man is now their president. The television and radio producers behind Beck's shows are bright, highly educated Republican strategists at FOX News who are expert at calculating each talking point for the host to pull on the jingoistic heartstrings of his largely uneducated, working-class viewers. And it works. Beck's writers are creative people because they've found numerous ingenious ways to denounce Obama because he's black but in ways that don't sound racist. Beck's good at what he does. I'm sure his functionally illiterate white boy viewers get fired up during every show. He's also dangerous. He talks up a grand conspiracy of liberals and "Socialists" who are destroying everything that makes America great and constantly uses alarmist rhetoric as if the whole country is falling apart around us. He does so by emoting on command and with practiced histrionics. I urge you go to Netflix and put on your queue "The Goebbels Experiment." Watch the footage of the young Hitler doing his thing. Der Fuhrer plays on jingoism and white fear. He emotes on command and uses histrionics he practiced in front of a mirror for hours -- just like Glenn Beck. If Hitler had a teleprompter and the backing of a force of nature like FOX News the world would have been in even bigger trouble. More on Fox News
 
U.S. Chain Menus Could Soon Start Counting Calories Top
Large U.S. chain restaurants, criticized for their role in the country's obesity epidemic, agreed on Wednesday to support legislation that would require them to disclose calories on their menus.
 
Strip Clubs Trimming Upscale Offerings As Business Slumps Top
Two years ago, America's two publicly traded strip-club chains were thriving, reporting big sales gains, buying clubs on a nearly monthly basis and posting three- and four-fold stock-price gains.
 
Tom Brady FLIPS KAYAK, Is 'Rescued' In Charles River Top
Patriots quarterback Tom Brady had to be fished out of the Charles River after capsizing a rented kayak, according to a report on The Boston Herald's website, although the report only says the incident happened "the other day."
 
Andy Ostroy: The Holocaust Museum Shooting: Another Right-Wing Psycho Turns to Murder. Maybe Now Conservatives Will Listen to Janet Napolitano Top
On Wednesday, 88-year old WWII veteran, rabid anti-Semite and racist James von Brunn walked into the Holocaust Museum in Washington DC and opened fire, shooting to death a heroic 39-year-old security guard. Nine days earlier Abdulhakim Muhammad, a Muslim convert, fatally shot army recruiter Pvt. William Andrew Long, 23, in Little Rock, AR. The day before that, controversial abortion Dr. George Tiller was shot dead in his Wichita, KS clinic. And ten days prior to that the FBI arrested a four-man homegrown terror cell that planned to blow up two Bronx synagogues while simultaneously shooting down a commercial jet airliner. There's something crazy and violent in the air lately, with much of it rooted in an alarming increase in intense right-white hate. Back in April, the Department of Homeland Security issued a report citing right-wing extremism and warned that "White supremacist lone wolves pose the most significant domestic terrorist threat because of their low profile and autonomy -- separate from any formalized group -- which hampers warning efforts." The 9-page document erupted into a political shitstorm, and unleashed a torrent of harsh criticism of DHS Chief Janet Napolitano, who was vilified over her suggestion that returning war veterans in particular might be susceptible to these violent radical groups who could turn them into homegrown terrorists. Those piling on the Napolitano-bashing-wagon included leading conservatives such as House Minority Leader John Boehner, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and radio blowhard Rush Limbaugh. The attack on Napolitano was so vicious, so partisan and so premature but now she and DHS appear quite prescient, don't they? Funny how two months and back-to-back murders by right-wing wackjobs can shine a whole new light on things. Earlier in the day Wednesday I appeared on FoxNews' Strategy Room, where a lengthy panel discussion took place about the Little Rock army murder. This was hours before ethe D.C. shooting news broke. Some in the group asked "where's the (media) outrage," and were incredulous as to the lack of coverage of Pvt. Long's killing versus that of Dr. Tiller's. There was also great concern expressed that not enough attention was being placed on this type of violent crime by extremists. I reminded the panel of the April DHS report, but more importantly, of the beating Napolitano took over it. I suppose conservatives will be giving Napolitano and the security report another look after Wednesday's shooting death at the Holocaust Museum. So why the recent spate of deadly right-wing hate crimes? As Salon.com's Joan Walsh cited, it could be in no small part due to the incendiary rhetoric of talking heads like Bill O'Reilly and Limbaugh, who've been accused of fanning the flames of hate with their inciteful on-air rabble-rousing. O'Reilly relentlessly attacked Dr. Tiller for years, over two dozen times in fact, calling him a "Baby Killer" and accusing him of doing "Nazi stuff," while warning of "Judgement Day." Over on the radio, Limbaugh told his audience last week that President Obama is more harmful to America than our terrorist enemies. Said Walsh on MSNBC's Hardball Wednesday night: "When you say that our president is more dangerous than al Qaeda, you've gone off into crazy nutjobland. You are off the charts crazy, and you are whipping people up." Is it any wonder then that these right-wing lunatic freaks feel a sense of duty , of obligation , to 'right the wrongs' that these instigators in the media hammer into their psychotic heads day after day? Perhaps law enforcement authorities should begin investigating the role conservative commentators like O'Reilly and Limbaugh play in the death of innocent people. Maybe then these despicable hate-mongering loudmouths will shut up once and for all. More on Bill O'Reilly
 
Terry Krepel: Keeping Up Appearances: Right-Wing Media Hides Facts in Tiller Shooting Top
The ConWeb is generally, and unsurprisingly, anti-abortion, so the May 31 killing of controversial late-term abortion doctor George Tiller was a subject of interest -- and spin. Upon his death, CNSNews.com and WorldNetDaily were quick to rush to press with denouncements by anti-abortion activists of Tiller's shooting and efforts to portray Tiller's alleged killer, Scott Roeder, as having no links to the mainstream anti-abortion movement: -- A May 31 WND article quoted several anti-abortion groups condemning the shooting. Another May 31 article , by Drew Zahn, stated that "Several pro-life groups ... immediately condemned the murder as counter to their cause." A June 1 article by Chelsea Schilling hyped a claim that Roeder "allegedly suffered from mental illness" and insisted that "Roeder was not associated with the mainstream pro-life movement." -- A June 1 CNS article began by asserting: "Pro-life groups say murder is incompatible with their beliefs, and they are condemning the shooting death of Kansas abortionist George Tiller." Conspicuous by their absence, however, were the words of one anti-abortion activist in particular: Randall Terry, the founder of Operation Rescue and a seminal figure in the movement. Terry issued the following statement after Tiller's death: "Dr. Tiller was a mass murderer. "I grieve for him that he did not have an opportunity to properly prepare his soul to face his Maker. Unless some miracle happened, he left this life with his hands drenched with the innocent blood of tens of thousands of babies that he murdered. Surely there will be a dreadful accounting for what he has done. "I believe George Tiller was one of the most evil men on the planet; every bit as vile as the Nazi war criminals who were hunted down, tried, and sentenced after they participated in the 'legal' murder of the Jews that fell into their hands. To this day, neither WND nor CNS have mentioned Terry's statement; among the major right-wing media, only Newsmax has reported Terry's remarks. It's all the more puzzling because both WND and CNS had no issue with reporting Terry's antics in protesting Notre Dame's invitation to President Obama to speak at its commencement. That WND and CNS would turn squeamish and spin-centric about reporting relevant facts about the anti-abortion movement is as unsurprising as their anti-abortion stance. Perhaps CNS felt it didn't need to after its leader, Media Research Center head Brent Bozell, engaged in some Terry-esque rhetoric in his June 2 column . Complaining that the anti-abortion movement was the victim of "liberal mudslinging" because of an "unhinged vigilante," Bozell attacked Keith Olbermann for calling Tiller's death an "assassination": "Olbermann insisted that the mere act of denouncing Tiller as a killer of babies - as if he were instead removing tumors - is an invitation to terrorism and murder." Bozell concluded: "George Tiller was a monster who personally murdered 60,000 babies. May God have mercy on his soul." That sentiment was echoed by Colleen Raezler, a writer for the MRC's Culture & Media Institute. In April, Raezler complained that the media allegedly failed to report the fact that the victims of a plane crash were an abortion doctor and his family; Raezler's repeated insistence that "loss of human life is a tragedy" was overshadowed by the overall tone of her piece, which made it clear that she believed the deaths of these people weren't a tragedy. In a June 2 CMI article co-authored with Sarah Knoploh and also posted at NewsBusters , Raezler went even farther, suggesting that Tiller deserved to be targeted: Loss of human life is a tragedy and should be reported as such, and premeditated murder is always wrong - something all the mainstream pro-life groups were quick to affirm in the wake of the killing. But in reporting this tragic story, the news media have much to say about a man who helped provide women with the "right" to end their pregnancies, but have little to say about lives he helped to end. In failing to highlight what Tiller's work actually entailed, reporters do nothing to help their audience understand why this man was targeted. By suggesting that Tiller was targeted for completely understandable reasons, she's also saying that it's completely understandable that someone would want to murder him, her disingenuous blather about how "loss of human life is a tragedy" notwithstanding. Further, as ConWebWatch has detailed , CNS itself has had a longtime labeling bias on the subject, preferring "pro-life" to "anti-abortion" and "pro-abortion" to "pro-choice." WND, meanwhile, has long been sympathetic to the extremist end of the anti-abortion movement, as I've previously detailed here . WND managing editor David Kupelian ttried to change the subject in a June 1 column , insisting that "anti-abortion violence is extremely rare and is utterly repudiated by every pro-life organization and leader." (No mention, of course, of Randall Terry's deviation from that supposed norm.) Kupelian went on to assert that the Obama administration will use Tiller's shooting like Hitler used the Reichstag fire -- yet another in the long line of Nazi smears of Obama at WND. But there's nary a word about WND's own anti-Tiller rhetoric, let alone any move by him to accept responsibility for it. Kupelian's Reichstag reference was shot down in surprising manner by none other than fellow right-wing activist David Horowitz in a June 2 FrontPageMag blog post : I continue to get emails comparing President Obama to Hitler, the most recent suggesting that the murder of an abortion doctor might be Obama's "Reichstag Fire" and would be used by Obama to take away our civil liberties and terminate our Republic as Hitler did the Weimar Republic in the 1930s. This is lunatic stuff. Obama is better compared to Neville Chamberlain than to Adolf Hitler if you like these kinds of comparisons. Americans are not Germans -- it's a very big difference as far as political cultures are concerned, and Obama is not Hitler. Obama is a machine politician and whatever dangers he represents (and as I see it there are many) are dangers because they reflect the heart and soul of today's Democratic Party not because he is a Manchurian candidate or a closet Islamist, as more than a few conservatives seem to think. Thus his appointment of a advocate of institutional racism to the Supreme Court is a predictable selection for any Democrat in the White House. His appeasement of Iran and the genocidal Palestinians, perhaps the most worrying of his foreign policy moves is the policy of his Secretary of State, his congressional leaders and his chief of staff. These facts add up to a worrisome prospect but a revival of the Third Reich is not one of them, and those who think it is and say so discredit only themselves. Randall Terry isn't the only significant aspect of Tiller's death the ConWeb has been ignoring, however. McClatchy reported on June 3 that after Roeder was captured following Tiller's shooting, authorities found in his car a note that read "Cheryl" and "Op Rescue" with a phone number. That appears to be Cheryl Sullenger, a senior policy adviser for Operation Rescue. Sullenger told McClatchy that Roeder had contacted her several times seeking information about court hearings involving Tiller, which she provided to him. Despite the fact that this appears to contradict the claim that Roeder was "not associated with the mainstream pro-life movement" -- not to mention Operation Rescue's own attempt to disassociate itself from Roeder -- neither WND nor CNS have reported this to their readers. Why would news outlets refuse to report news of interest to its audience? Because there's a storyline to maintain -- anti-abortion activists are never violent, and they don't associate with anyone who is. Anything that contradicts that storyline must be spun; if it can't be spun, it must be ignored. Is that the definition of a "news organization"? Most people who care about journalism would say no. (A version of this article appears at ConWebWatch .)
 
Mark Fowler: Iran: To Engage or Not to Engage Top
The Iranian Presidential elections are imminent. The main challenger, former Prime Minister Mir Hussein Mousavi, is increasingly seen as a candidate who could defeat incumbent Ahmadinejad. This would certainly result in a change in the tone and tenor, if not the substance, of the messages coming out of Tehran. That would be a good thing. Once concluded, however, regardless of who occupies the Presidential palace for the next four years, the regime - in affect the Supreme Leader - will once more have to seriously address the issue of whether or not to engage with the United States. And, it is by no means a given that he will decide that it is in the interests of Iran, and more importantly, the regime, to do so. But, make no mistake about it; this is an issue of the utmost importance to the Islamic Republic - more so even than to the United States - with the potential to significantly impact, if not define, the future course of the "79" revolution. As such, the internal discussion will be wide ranging, furious and at times bitter. Engagement with the U.S. is very frightening and potentially very threatening to the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and the regime writ large. In looking at the totality of risk versus gain, the Supreme Leader must balance the inevitable changes that will accompany opening Iran up to the West, and the US in particular, against the advantages of developing access to foreign capital, western goods and technology (although they seem to be doing pretty well on their own) and enhanced prestige and international stature. For the regime's many hangers on and supporters, they must consider the significant economic changes, many not to their advantage, that will surely follow. Notwithstanding a hesitancy to engage, based on a very real concern about the potential impact of America's awesome "soft" power on Iranian society and its potential to challenge the control of the ruling clerical elite, many Iranians seek to be at the forefront of ushering in the reestablishment relations with the United States when it finally does occur, primarily due to the significant political and financial benefits they would accrue. For many Iranians, this is the big prize. Scary - yes. Certain to bring change to Iran - most definitely. Full of promise or the beginning of the end - this very much depends on one's current position within the regime. Many attempts have been made over the last thirty years to bring the two sides together in some fashion, perhaps the most notable being that which preceded the spectacular blowup that came to be known in the U.S. as the Iran-Contra scandal. Most were backchannel efforts, some more "official" than others. None, however, enjoyed from the Iranian side sufficient support from the Supreme Leader required to insulate it from those who sought to sabotage it, which they did in each and every case. Liken it to a game of "King of the hill" where the goal is to ensure that if you are not the winner, then at least neither is anyone else. This has resulted in years of absolutely no progress. This could change should the Supreme Leader decide to authorize contact with the U.S. From the US side, in the minds of many, there are numerous reasons not to seriously engage with Iran. They are religious fanatics; they are irrational and can't be reasoned with; they are trying to take over the entire Middle East; they support Terrorism; they severely repress their own people, etc, etc, etc. The list is long and often times ugly. As someone who worked on the front lines of these issues for many years, I view working to mitigate these very issues as reason to move with speed to engage. And, for those that would make the case that diplomacy has been tried, and has failed, this is simply not the case. Yes, meetings have been held; discussions had; and issues debated, but, always under the looming shadow, whether implicit or explicit, of a U.S. policy of regime change. Other than on a very limited range of tactical issues, it is not hard to understand why Iran's leadership would be unwilling to seriously engage when they believe that our ultimate goal is simply to pull them into our embrace and whisper sweet nothings in the ear, all the while intent on choking the life out of the regime. The Supreme Leader initially addressed the issue of improved relations with the United States following President Obama's Nowruz address to the Iranian nation - the most important point being that, under the right circumstances, it is possible - and that should the US approach Iran with respect and sincerity, and a willingness to deal with its leadership in good faith, then Iran might/might just be amenable to discussions. It is also clear, however, that the Iranian leadership believes it occupies the high ground and is working from a position of strength in its dealings with the United States. As a result, they are content to sit back and wait for the US to come to them. This also allows them to drive a harder bargain up front as well as to refrain from revealing their own cards before they are ready. It is likely that, as the possibility of real dialogue approaches, their public positions will harden and their tone will sharpen. This will signal that the negotiations are truly on. For our part, we need to consider carefully what the Iranians appear to want from the United States. The signals coming out of Iran vis a vis engagement - before the issue was overtaken by the Presidential election - while certainly conflicting, were quite interesting. Many statements tended to be confrontational and at times harsh, primarily in response to what the Iranians viewed as continued confrontational statements and actions from the U.S. and its allies. A few, in fact, were mildly supportive, in a typically Iranian backhanded sort of way. Virtually no one, however, including the Supreme Leader voiced a definitive "no" to the possibility of either dialogue or improved relations with the U.S. Instead, the primary message, across the board - including from the reformist camp - emphasized the belief that neither the stated policies nor the actions of the Obama administration had yet matched its rhetoric of change. The Iranians appeared to be waiting for an indication that the US is ready for a strategic change in the relationship rather than simply engaging in what they fear is tactical maneuvering. It is unlikely that they will have changed their views in the interim. A key underlying Iranian message appears to be - as long as the overall strategic approach of the U.S. predicates success solely on the eventual capitulation of Iran to the demands of the west, they are not interested. A new paradigm, backed up by substantive and unequivocal actions, is required. While Iran's leadership does appear to recognize aspects of President Obama's approach to be an improvement from the previous administration, they are still quite skeptical over whether this will translate into real change in US policy towards the Islamic Republic. They are waiting for "proof', in the form of clearly articulated US end goals regarding Iran--including what role the US believes Iran should play in the region. In addition, Rafsanjani's reference to the fact that Iran did not cut diplomatic ties - he points out it was the U.S. - is a not so subtle reminder that America is in fact the supplicant here, thus they need to make the first move. In addition, in the absence to date of clearly communicated US objectives, they have taken the appointment of Dennis Ross and other so-called 'Zionists' to be an indication that the US will follow the same policies as both the Clinton and Bush administrations: containment, using carrots and sticks which - in the opinion of the Iranians - is a non-starter and will simply undermine the talks. Bottom line - without clearly articulated strategic US end goals, backed up by actions, the Iranians fear that there is no guarantee that tactical cooperation in places like Afghanistan will lead to true long-term change. If they are not provided these assurances it is far less likely they will choose to engage at all. And that would be an opportunity lost. More on Iran
 
Tom Conway: Media Fails to Probe Multi-National's Refusal to Buy American Top
Swiss-Russian owned Duferco Farrell Corp. refuses to comply with the Buy American requirements in the $787 billion stimulus package. One consequence of that decision is the Duferco rolling mill located in Farrell, Pa., north of Pittsburgh, lost a major customer -- Wheatland Tube Co., situated a few hundred yards down the street in Farrell. Another is that Duferco, which opposes buying American, milked that loss for more tons of false publicity than an overloaded truck of steel coils at a weigh station. Duferco Farrell made itself out to be a victim of Buy American, claiming the provision cost it a customer, and the Washington Post and New York Times swallowed that whale whole, without making any effort to dissect it. Here's what really happened: Wheatland Tube, a pipe maker, stopped buying rolled steel from its Farrell neighbor because Duferco gets steel slabs from Russia and has refused to buy from domestic producers. Wheatland is sensitive to the issue of imports, having been burned by unfair competition from China. It is among the plaintiffs in trade cases alleging unfair competition. But, more immediately, Wheatland officials feel that under the Buy American provisions, its products must be produced with American-made steel, or they can't be bought with stimulus funds. Bill Kerins, president of Wheatland, said he backs Buy American because it provides opportunities for American workers. It is, essentially, American tax dollars dedicated to providing jobs for American workers. And, polls show, a large majority of Americans support it. They oppose anyone spending their tax dollars to create jobs in foreign countries. He has said that more and more of Wheatland's customers are demanding that it meet the requirements of Buy American. Kerins made it clear to the Sharon Herald , the local newspaper for the town of Farrell, that he's perfectly willing to buy rolled steel from Duferco again, if the company obtains slabs from domestic producers. Here's what he said: "We're prepared to do business with Duferco Farrell when they're able to be in compliance with the Buy American provision, and we hope they're able to work that out." That would leave you with the sense that Duferco could work something out, right? Well, not if you read the Washington Post or the New York Times . Neither bothered to quote Kerins or the United Steelworkers. Both limited themselves to quoting Duferco - a one-sided story. They failed to adequately question. As a result, both provide a completely false impression. The Washington Post , in a May 15 story , says, "The new buy American provisions, the company said, are being so broadly interpreted that Duferco Farrell is on the verge of shutting down." The Post story also says, without citing a source, that Duferco "manufactures its coils at its Pennsylvania plant using imported steel slabs that are generally not sold commercially in the United States." Finally it quotes Duferco executive vice president Bob Miller saying, "I've got 600 United Steel Workers [sic] out there who are going to lose their jobs because of this. And you tell me this is good for America?" The New York Times followed, on June 3, with an editorial slamming Buy American and citing the Duferco case. The editorial gives Duferco and one other example as the reason Buy American is 'perilous," saying Duferco "has cut 600 jobs in Pennsylvania after it lost orders from its biggest customer because some of its goods are partly produced abroad." That's just not true. And if the New York Times or the Washington Post had done an ounce of reporting work, they'd have known it. Look up the Sharon Herald clips - available on line. Duferco began furloughing hundreds of workers last fall - long before Wheatland stopped buying from them. When the USW local there signed its labor agreement in November, Duferco already had laid off more than half of the mill's unionized workers. Manufacturing workers across American began losing their jobs last fall as a result of the downturn in the economy - not Buy American provisions. In addition, there are other serious problems with the Post story. It says Duferco uses steel slabs not generally sold commercially in the U.S. If the Post had spent a minute listening to Kerins from Wheatland or to the USW, it would have gotten a different story. Kerins' quote - saying Wheatland is prepared to do business with Duferco when it complies with Buy American - clearly suggests he knows there's a way for Duferco to do that. In fact, there is. Two domestic steel companies have offered to supply Duferco with the 10-inch steel slabs it prefers, at the specifications it says it requires, at a market-based price. Both firms have informed Duferco of those offers. Duferco mostly imports its 10-inch slabs now from OJSC Novolipetsk Iron & Steel Works (NLMK) of Russia, which is the Russian part owner of Duferco. NLMK also owns a mill in Portage, Indiana, called Beta Steel Corp. Like most U.S. mills, its work force has been cut back, so orders for its 8-inch slabs would give its American workers paychecks again. Wheatland has informed Duferco that it is willing to modify its specifications so that NLMK 8-inch slab produced in Indiana may be used. Duferco's response: shipping slabs from NLMK facilities in Portage, Ind. to Farrell, Pa., a distance of 375 miles, is prohibitively expensive, as is the cost of shipping the 10-inch slabs from the Maryland or Alabama mills to Pennsylvania. So Duferco must continue sending steel the thousands of miles from NLMK facilities in Lipetsk, Russia to Farrell, Pa. Really? Somehow that doesn't smack of the truth. In fact, it sounds like Duferco is making every effort to avoid buying American, while its customers, its workers and even potential suppliers are all scrambling to help it buy American and re-employ its workforce. What is really going on here is Duferco perverted this situation in an attempt to smear the Buy American provision. The Washington Post and the New York Times made no serious attempt to check out the multi-national's lame allegations. Not much more could be expected from a Swiss-Russian-owned corporation. That multi-national has no allegiance to America. It just wants to use this country to generate profits. If Duferco can get its hands on American tax dollars to profit in Lipetsk, it will be all the happier. But for the Washington Post and the New York Times to support that is, really, un-American.
 
Car Hits Crowd In Philly, Killing 3 Children: Police Top
PHILADELPHIA — A car fleeing a robbery scene and being chased by police Wednesday night jumped a curb and crashed into a crowd, killing three young children in front of their home and gravely injuring a woman, authorities said. "It's a tragedy," police Commissioner Charles Ramsey said. The incident in Feltonville, a neighborhood of row houses in North Philadelphia, began with two men stealing a motorcycle at gunpoint, Ramsey said. One man fled on the motorcycle, and the other sped away in a car, he said. Police spotted the car a few minutes after receiving a report of the motorcycle theft and pursued it for about a mile. The car jumped the curb with such force it badly damaged the concrete steps of one of the row houses, where the children lived. It became wedged between a house and a pole. The woman it hit is the mother of at least one of the dead children, all of whom were under age 10, authorities said. "It's horrifying to think about what happened," Mayor Michael Nutter said at the scene. "It's a horrific scene." The car's driver was injured and was arrested at the scene, and a gun was found in the car, police said. The motorcycle rider was arrested at his nearby home, where several weapons were found, police said. Officers were attacked by a dog at the motorcycle rider's home and had to shoot it but didn't kill it, said police, who recovered two shotguns, two handguns and a rifle there. Police towed away the mangled car, whose back passenger side and roof were caved in. They didn't immediately release the names of the victims or those arrested. Neighborhood resident Robert Martinez, who lives in the house directly behind the crash scene, said the sound of the crash "was like a bomb blew up." Martinez, who knew the victims, said he hustled to the scene and heard the children's grandmother, who lived with them, calling out for them. "It could have been my three nieces," he said, "could have happened on this block." (This version CORRECTS children lived in house in front of where they died sted a block away, steps badly damaged sted crushed, grandmother calling out for kids but not by name; UPDATES with gun found in car, rifle found in suspect's home)
 
Los Angeles Is Losing Share Of TV Pilot Production Top
As if L.A. needed any more reminders of just how much production is leaving town, along comes fresh data to document the grim trend.
 
Venezuela Bans Coke Zero, Cites "Danger To Health" Top
The Venezuelan government of U.S.-critic President Hugo Chavez on Wednesday ordered Coca-Cola Co to withdraw its Coke Zero beverage from the South American nation, citing unspecified dangers to health. More on Venezuela
 
Clarcon Skin Products Warning: FDA Warns Consumers Not To Use Top
The FDA has warned consumers not to use Clarcon skin products. From the release : Risk of bacterial contamination has led the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to warn consumers to not use any products made by Clarcon Biological Chemistry Laboratory Inc. The Roy, Utah, firm voluntarily recalled some skin sanitizers and skin protectants sold under a variety of brand names after a recent FDA inspection found that the products contained high levels of disease-causing bacteria. What products are consumers being warned not to use? Consumers should not use any Clarcon products. Examples of these products include • Citrushield Lotion • Dermasentials DermaBarrier • Dermassentials by Clarcon Antimicrobial Hand Sanitizer • Iron Fist Barrier Hand Treatment • Skin Shield Restaurant • Skin Shield Industrial • Skin Shield Beauty Salon Lotion • Total Skin Care Beauty • Total Skin Care Work What should consumers do with these products if the have them? Stop using them immediately and throw them away in household refuse.
 
Chris Weigant: My Third Anniversary Blogging Top
This column apparently shares a birthday with none other than Donald Duck, who turned 75 years old yesterday. Who knew? Yes, my column turned three years old yesterday, since my first foray into blogging happened on Huffington Post on June 9, 2006 . Since I don't follow horoscopes, I have no idea what the metaphysical significance is of this column sharing the date with a duck who doesn't wear pants, so I will leave that for wiser minds to decide. Because it's time for an annual feed-the-ego column (actually, I wrote about my first anniversary , but the second seems to have slipped my mind last year...). If a column full of patting myself on the back with links to my other columns doesn't appeal to you, then I would advise you to stop reading right now. Fair warning! One year ago, Hillary Clinton had just been finally defeated numerically for the Democratic nomination for president. There was a lot of bad feeling in the air over this, and Democrats everywhere were wondering how many "PUMAs" (for "Party Unity, My Ass!") there really were, and what they would mean to the Democrats' chances in the fall. This led me to rewrite the labor anthem "Which Side Are You On?" for the occasion. As it turned out, by the time of the convention, the PUMAs were an endangered (if not extinct) species, and the convention was a shining display of unity behind Barack Obama. Much to the dismay of the media, who were really hoping for some fireworks on the floor (which has indeed happened before, but it's been a while). This past year has been an interesting one to blog, I have to admit. From Mrs. Chris Weigant guest-blogging on "Why I Decided To Become An American" to hitting 2,500 Diggs ( "End The Media's Pro-McCain Bias Now!" ) to our (sometimes) resident ChrisWeigant.com cartoonist C.W. Cunningham being honored by the Jefferson Center for Protection of Free Expression, it's been quite a year. I got the chance to interview Al Franken , and may (if he ever gets seated in the Senate) be able to line up a second interview, so that's something to look forward to. Of course, I've had to pay attention to Republicans during the year, so it hasn't all been roses. My favorite quote from a Republican all year: "[The Republican Party is a] dead, rotting carcass with a few decrepit old leaders stumbling around like zombies in a horror version of Weekend at Bernie's, handcuffed to a corpse." This has also meant dealing with Republicans who badmouth you, dear reader, which I wrote about in "Oh, The Humanity! Godless Huffington Post Commenters Wickedly Destroying Conservatism." Of course, the election was the biggest story of this time period, and led to thinking the unthinkable (a 269-269 tie in the Electoral College), as well as things that used to be unthinkable (a 60-seat majority in the Senate), which is now within reach (as soon as Al Franken is seated). But the biggest election story was the presidential race, of course. I did a series of articles (which began rather modestly , and then added charts , and tracked Obama's chances from low point to landslide ) on the electoral math and polling, which ended with a final column just before the election. Watching Obama's acceptance speech at the convention was probably the high point of the whole time period. The guest column I ran during the election ( "Why Obama's Election Should Be Considered Historic" ) was probably the best one I've ever run, which was also a high point. Of course, there was McCain and Palin on the other side, who provided lots of material -- from telling the media to ask McCain how many houses he had (weeks before they actually did ) to telling Sarah Palin she was full of moose poop . I did, at one point, feel so sorry for Palin that I wrote a column titled "In Defense Of Sarah Palin" because I thought everyone wasn't even giving what she said an honest assessment. But in general, Palin was the gift that kept on giving (in terms of column material, at any rate). While I tried to be funny at times (like Hallowe'en ), I was so impressed with professional funnyman Craig Ferguson's rant "If you don't vote, you're a moron" that I had to transcribe the whole thing for posterity. The most memorable event of the year, however, was Inauguration Day, which I traveled to Washington to personally witness (and, of course, blog about ). I will forever be proud to say "I was there" whenever Obama's historic swearing-in is spoken of. I began commenting about Obama's term with a lesson I had learned during the campaign -- "Barack Obama Is Smarter Than Us" -- and a warning that Obama was going to, at some point, enrage the left . Since he's been in office, I've started another series "Obama Poll Watch" which will -- soon after the first of every month -- plot his approval numbers for his term in office. It's not as exciting as the Electoral Math series, but it's still fun to create lots of graphs for people. There were two recent columns which I thought deserved more attention (which is why I'm closing on this note) -- the concept of a "National Security Blanket," and a court decision on anonymous political emails ( "Anonymity Of 'Obama Is A Muslim' Emails Constitutionally Protected?" ). So, looking ahead to another interesting year, the big fight (at least at the beginning) is going to be countering the Frank Luntz Republican playbook on healthcare reform, which should take up a lot of time in the next few months. And taking one final look back, the most amusing contest I ran was a photo caption for a classic shot of President Bush preparing to spank a female beach volleyball player at the Olympics (which I picked winners for later ). All in all, it's been a good third year, and it's looking like my fourth year blogging will certainly be interesting (if perhaps not as exciting as a presidential election year), as we continue to watch Democrats attempt to govern, now that they've run the tables in two branches of our federal government. To my readers (both the faithful and the occasional), thanks for reading, thanks for commenting, and thanks (as always) for getting to the end of yet another lengthy post. I couldn't have done it without you.   Chris Weigant blogs at: ChrisWeigant.com  
 
Pelosi, Cantor, Top Congressmen Invested In Bailed-Out Firms Top
Top House lawmakers had considerable holdings in major financial institutions that took billions of dollars in taxpayer bailouts at the end of last year, according to annual financial disclosure reports released yesterday. More on Nancy Pelosi
 
Stephen C. Rose: The Problem With The GM Gamble Top
By Stephen C. Rose The problem with the GM Gamble is not that the government is involved. There is every indication that government involvement is not that bad. Medicare and the notion of public guarantees of medical care are not noxious. And the President has, in the case of GM, said he will leave the nuts and bolts up to those who know about business. I know that is a weak assurance but it shows that in the Obama world, government involvement is not going to be the problem. The problem is the car. There are times when I think Obama is playing a game which is utterly necessary, given the obtuseness of our media and the knee-jerk capacity of the populace to take umbrage if an idol comes close to toppling. The game is not the change Obama will bring. It is the change that is coming willy nilly that no one wants to see. Take the current "recession" which is really a readjustment and a signal to the market. What few want to see is that the readjustment is in the direction of the public over the private, the reclamation of public space over private space, the creation of public options over private ones. We are being thrown together whether we like it or not. What Obama cannot say, though he has in fact talked all around it, is that we will no longer be a privatized commuter society where driving a private car and living in a detached house is the norm. What Obama cannot say, though it is implicit, is that the design of our schools, of our hospitals, of our human settlements is a problem, because it is all predicated on the car and cars are going to be less and less the norm. What will become the norm is seamless transit within communities and new modes of transit between them. Michael Moore has a good piece from which I will draw the salient statements with which I profoundly agree: 3. Announce that we will have bullet trains criss-crossing this country in the next five years. Japan is celebrating the 45th anniversary of its first bullet train this year. Now they have dozens of them. Average speed: 165 mph. Average time a train is late: under 30 seconds. They have had these high speed trains for nearly five decades -- and we don't even have one! The fact that the technology already exists for us to go from New York to L.A. in 17 hours by train, and that we haven't used it, is criminal. Let's hire the unemployed to build the new high speed lines all over the country. Chicago to Detroit in less than two hours. Miami to DC in under 7 hours. Denver to Dallas in five and a half. This can be done and done now. 4. Initiate a program to put light rail mass transit lines in all our large and medium-sized cities. Build those trains in the GM factories. And hire local people everywhere to install and run this system. 5. For people in rural areas not served by the train lines, have the GM plants produce energy efficient clean buses. 6. For the time being, have some factories build hybrid or all-electric cars (and batteries). It will take a few years for people to get used to the new ways to transport ourselves, so if we're going to have automobiles, let's have kinder, gentler ones. We can be building these next month (do not believe anyone who tells you it will take years to retool the factories -- that simply isn't true). 7. Transform some of the empty GM factories to facilities that build windmills, solar panels and other means of alternate forms of energy. We need tens of millions of solar panels right now. And there is an eager and skilled workforce who can build them. 8. Provide tax incentives for those who travel by hybrid car or bus or train. Also, credits for those who convert their home to alternative energy. READ THE WHOLE MICHAEL MOORE GM PIECE The car was and remains the central chip in the game. Cheney and Company cannot see beyond a world where Oil and The Car are objects of worship and cause for war. The American people are not ready yet to be told that the private car is the idol that needs to be shattered. Obama is left with the need to temporize. And I suppose the real question is whether he sees the new road beyond the spaghetti bowl world of today. I believe the answer has to be yes, because it remains true that we are at the beginning of a new stage where the world is creating a new option for living. The nation that understands that will prosper. The nation that believes the answer lies in selling enough private cars to turn a profit is whistling in the wind. More on Moving America
 

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)