Friday, August 28, 2009

Y! Alert: The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Yahoo! Alerts
My Alerts

The latest from The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Vatican Official: "Here In Rome, Ted Kennedy Is Nobody" Top
There was a poignant footnote to President Obama's historic July 10 meeting with Pope Benedict XVI at the Vatican. Behind closed doors in the papal library, Obama handed Benedict a letter that Senator Edward Kennedy had asked him to personally deliver to the Pontiff. [...] Back at headquarters, however, there is little room for nuance. "Here in Rome, Ted Kennedy is nobody. He's a legend with his own constituency," says the Vatican official. "If he had influence in the past, it was only with the Archdiocese of Boston, and that eventually disappeared too." Some say the final sunset on the Kennedy name within Catholic halls of power was the Vatican's decision in 2007 to overturn the annulment of the first marriage of former U.S. Representative Joe Kennedy, the eldest son of Robert Kennedy. The successful appeal by Joe Kennedy's ex-wife Sheila Rauch, an Episcopalian, was another blow to the Kennedy image in Catholic circles. More on Ted Kennedy
 
Jerry Chautin: Lending: Banks Worry about SBA's Guaranty Top
Borrowers Look to SBA for Help Marginal Applicants Need Not Apply "SBA and all the good things that you say about them are a lot of crap," Wendall Burton told me after reading my column about lending programs specifically targeted to veteran borrowers. "Maybe you should do a column on all the people that the SBA won't help." Burton is one of many struggling small-business owners that wonder if the U.S. Small Business Administration's rhetoric matches its deeds. After running a business in Southwest Florida for four years, he was denied a SBA Patriot Express loan. In part it is because the agency does not have control over the banks and other approved lenders that make SBA loans. Even though SBA could have guaranteed 90 percent of the loan against default, Burton says, "I seriously doubt any banks will have much to do with me." Here is the myth: SBA will slap a 90 percent guaranty on your loan and payoff if the borrower defaults. But in reality SBA would rather slither out of its guaranty and leave bewildered lenders holding the bag. Virginia Medici Wylly sues SBA when it wrongly refuses to honor its loan guaranty. She is a lawyer with Lamb and Barnosky in Melville, N.Y. "Right now, the Agency is under pressure to get the money out to the public," she says. "In subsequent years, it will be under pressure to recoup taxpayer dollars." Wylly was previously employed by SBA's inspector general's office. For those 20 years, her role was to find reasons for the agency to deny its guaranty on defaulted loans. "I examined the loans submitted for guarantee and did my best to be fair; but there were numerous repairs and several denials of liability," she says. "Even the most well-meaning lender could have trouble interpreting and applying the regulations." On April 30, the I.G.'s Debra S. Ritt authored a memorandum outlining how "To reduce the risks associated with the extraordinary level of Recovery Act funding" by increasing oversight of SBA lenders and recommending when to void or repair its guaranty. "Because the higher guaranties reduce lender risk, which may lead to poor underwriting, a greater potential will exist for losses and fraud," Ritt's memorandum says. Moreover, it beefed up its staff to do more audits. The result is that SBA's lenders make conventional quality loans and relegate weaker applications to the trash heap. Even the 100 percent guaranteed "ARC loans" meant to rescue small-business owners that are temporarily struggling, has been an abysmal failure. It provides up to $35,000 for small-business owners to reduce existing debt. SBA pays the interest and loan fees. Payments of principal begin 12 months hence. I am concerned that a business can belly-up during the 12-months prior to payments are made and before the lender becomes aware of problems. So I asked SBA's Mike Stamler if the agency will void its guaranty in such a case. "Jerry, you really have to be deliberately misunderstanding this," he answered. "Or are you just screwing with me? Or are you still trying to give cover to lenders who won't make these loans?" Apparently he did not like my question or my previous articles about ARC loans. Stamler would rather have me write that this poorly conceived program is working. In a more civil follow-up response, he explained that, "We require the lender to service the loan, and part of that is being aware of whether the business is still operating." To prevent SBA from voiding its guaranty, lawyer Wylly says, "If you can find a lender brave enough to make an ARC loan, I would recommend that the lender keep in touch with the borrower at least every 90 days. This may mean a field visit or request for interim financials." But SBA's Stamler says, "Failure to detect the closing of a business during the 12-month period won't impact the SBA's guarantee decision." Wylly retorts, "If the business goes out in the 12 months following an ARC loan, someone (at SBA) will say that the business was not viable when it received the ARC loan," she says. The guaranty could be in jeopardy if that happens. SBA's loan programs are less effective because lenders fear may find a reason not to honor its guaranty. "The guaranty became less of a guaranty and more of a contingent liability," Wylly says. Jerry Chautin is a volunteer SCORE business counselor, business columnist and SBA's 2006 national "Journalist of the Year" award winner, tenonline.org/sref/jc1bio.html. He is a former entrepreneur, commercial mortgage banker and business lender. More on Banks
 
Paul Slansky: This Preposterous Week In Review Top
Anderson, Pastor Steve • belief of that " every homosexual in the world is a deviant, is evil and is a predator" • prayers of for the death of President Obama • sermon entitled "Why I Hate Barack Obama" is delivered by so rabidly that one can imagine the spittle flying from the lips of Bachmann, Representative Michele • supporters of are urged by to defeat health-care reform by praying and fasting Barton, Mischa • evident assumption by that people are total imbeciles who'll believe anything Calley, William • 40-years-late apology is offered by Cheney, Dick • claims by that the release of CIA documents would prove that the Bush Administration's enhanced interrogation techniques worked are, unsurprisingly, not borne out by release of said documents • Obama is accused by of -- oh, this is sweet -- politicizing the Justice Department CIA • approved enhanced interrogation techniques of included "prolonged diapering" Dowd, Maureen • bloggers who post snarky things on the Internet without signing their names are scolded by Dunne, Dominick • death of at the age of 83 Ebert, Roger • 30 years of sobriety are chronicled by Greenwich, Ellie • death of at the age of 68 For much more, including John McCain spilling water on himself and more quitting by Sarah Palin, click here. More on Week In Review
 
The Day In Funny & Fabulous Photos: Choose Your Favorite! (SLIDESHOW, POLL) Top
More on Photo Galleries
 
Jeff Rivera: Filmmaker, Brent Leung Responds to Huffpo Blogger, Thomas DeLorenzo Top
Filmmaker, Brent Leung responds to Huffpo Blogger, Thomas DeLorenzo criticisms of his film, House of Numbers , when he says, "As director/producer of the film criticized in Thomas DeLorenzo's piece titled, "Since when Is the Expression of Fear and Ignorance a Basic American Right?", I'd like to take the opportunity to clarify a number of the piece's misguided points. DeLorenzo has written a dangerously misinformed piece on my film, House of Numbers , and has done so with no regard for the facts. He is expressing his opinions on a film he has never seen and refuses to see (an admission he made via phone with our Associate Producer on August 25). How interesting that he deems it acceptable to bash content with which he is not familiar, outside of personal spats with a former partner who may or may not have been accurately defending his cause. To juxtapose his comments with a critic for the LA Times who viewed the movie, "Leung manages to present a barrage of intriguing theories debunking our generally accepted beliefs and misperceptions about how HIV/AIDS is acquired, tested, diagnosed, defined and treated..." He goes on to write, "There's no denying, however, the value of exploring such game-changing topics as how HIV-infection numbers are cooked for monetary and political gain; how the effects of global poverty may have led to so many AIDS-related deaths; how such widely used AIDS drugs as AZT have, themselves, often proved fatal; and whether HIV really exists." Since Mr. DeLorenzo never requested an interview with me or did his due diligence I would like to clear the air on a few things and state some hard facts. 1. I am not a denialist. Posing questions is very different than denying something. Using that word and comparing it to holocaust denialists is nonsense -- pure ad hominem which serves to only polarize a reasonable debate. As presented in the film, I traveled the globe speaking with scientists, activists, clinicians, journalists and patients asking questions. My main goal? To educate myself and others, and to generate discussion on important questions that have not yet been answered. After completing my journey, I now have even more unanswered questions than I did when I started. 2. The film does not state HIV does not cause AIDS, as is claimed by DeLorenzo. It rather investigates whether the virus exists, as some claim, and if it leads to immune deficiency disease. These topics alone are not the focus, as the film also investigates HIV testing, accuracy of global WHO/UNAIDS statistics, the human element, past and current drug treatments and the search for a cure. The film also explores what exactly the word AIDS means and how it impacts us. 3. Mr. DeLorenzo writes, "Many prominent scientists were interviewed for this movie -- and quoted severely out of context." I would ask Mr. DeLorenzo to please state specifically for the record what was "severely taken out of context" -- especially since he has yet to view the film. A blogger published in a credible news outlet such as the Huffington Post should have a detailed list of examples when making accusations like this. I would also welcome any scientists (especially John P. Moore who continues to assert claims against me) in the film who makes such grievances to submit what specifically they believe to be out of context and why. More on HIV/AIDS
 
One For The Table: Teddy Kennedy's Favorite Lobster Salad Top
6 ears corn 4 lbs. lobster meat, cooked, cut into bite-size pieces 2 tomato, large, peeled and seeded 2 avocado, peeled, cubed 1 tablespoon mayonnaise 2 tablespoons milk (or light cream) 1/2 cup fresh dill, chopped salt and pepper Cook the corn and then scrape off the kernels over a bowl and set aside. Put the tomatoes, avocado and corn into a bowl and add the lobster meat and toss gently. In a small bowl, combine the mayonnaise, with the milk and mix until smooth. Sprinkle the lobster mixture with dill, salt and pepper, then add the mayonnaise mixture and stir briefly so the sauce barely holds the rest of the ingredients together. Cover and refrigerate for a few hours before serving. More on Ted Kennedy
 
Zuma Urges More Aid For Zimbabwe Top
HARARE (AFP) South African President Jacob Zuma on Friday urged donors to give more aid to Zimbabwe to revive the shattered economy, while telling the nation's feuding leaders to quickly mend their differences. More on Zimbabwe
 
Sales Tax Rollback Stands A Chance After Mell Reversal Top
It turns out there may yet be a new Cook County commissioner in time for a key vote next Tuesday on rolling back the sales tax increase supported by board President Todd Stroger.
 
Daniel Denvir: At Sestak Town Hall, Disability Activists Draw Their Own Red Line on Long-Term Care Funding Top
I scanned the aisles for mustachioed presidential portraits and Obamacare warning-signs at a health care town hall with Rep. Joe Sestak (D-PA) in Philadelphia. "Before we get started," intoned the understated moderator, "we know that these meetings here in the Commonwealth have been somewhat heated." Yesterday's meeting was hosted by Liberty Resources , an organization that promotes independent living for disabled people, and the Philadelphia chapter of ADAPT , a seriously militant disability rights organization. But the town hall with Sestak, who is challenging Republican-turned-Democrat Senator Arlen Specter in the party primary, went uninterrupted, the ground rules unchallenged. No teabaggers showed up. No screaming. No fearful questions about "death panels" or socialism, national or otherwise. Yet the nearly 200 disability rights activists that showed up were mad. For disability rights activists, the public option--which they do support--isn't the only red line that Democrats shouldn't cross. Activists say they will oppose any bill that fails to include the core provisions of the Community Choice Act , legislation that gives in-home long-term care the same funding priority as nursing home care. These people want to live independently--an option that, fiscal watchdogs be advised, turns out to be almost three times cheaper than institutional care. As I wrote in a piece this June about the situation in Pennsylvania : Federal and state Medicaid law requires that disabled people receive a state-granted waiver to get reimbursed for homecare, making the system highly biased toward placing people in institutions. This is the system's default setting, especially for the elderly disabled. The Community Choice Act would change what activists call the "institutional bias" in long-term care funding. This is the "rationing" that actually takes place under our current system. While the House legislation didn't include these long-term care provisions, activists are hopeful that Senate allies will come through and that a comprehensive bill will make it out of conference. In a debate dominated by crazed, gun-toting teabaggers and a series of incoherent Democratic proposals, disability rights activists present a different--and undercovered--angle on health care reform. The room full of people with chronic health care needs offered a poignant counterpoint to the crazies who have terrorized politicians over the past weeks, people more concerned with obscure and tenuous historical comparisons (circa 1933) than an everyday person's very real problems. ADAPT was out in full force in orange shirts emblazoned with their trademark logo of a person in a wheelchair breaking free of her chains. Indeed, ADAPT says they secured the meeting after they blockaded a Sestak town hall two weeks back (although I wasn't able to confirm this independently), protesting the fact that the event wasn't accessible. These are amazing political activists, people who excel in chaining their wheelchairs to things in order to get a point across. But Specter is also a cosponsor of the Community Choice Act, so Sestak--who claimed that he was the first congressman to put Braille on his business cards--had the big challenge to put some daylight between the two on disability rights issues. A few healthcare workers showed up, too, some members of AFSCME and SEIU locals. Henry Nicholas, President of the National Union of Hospital and Health Care Employees (AFSCME), was one of the first to speak. "I'm one-hundred percent committed to single-payer health care, its less complicated and its the way to go"--but, he said, he thought a public option was the second best scenario, and hoped that Sestak would support it. Sestak spoke out forcefully in favor of a pubic option, but refused to to vote against a bill that did not include it. An aide told me he didn't want to have his hands tied when a final bill came up. I ran into a friend from the Philadelphia Weekly on her way out of the event. She confessed that she had hoped to catch a bit of drama at the town hall--and I had to agree. The state of American politics is such that people painting Hitler mustaches on photos of our president get more attention than a grassroots movement to provide sensible, humane and cost-effective long-term care to people with disabilities. Sigh. More on Health Care
 
Christopher Herbert and Victoria Kataoka Rebuffet: Foreign Affairs Round-Up Top
These Past Two Week's Top Stories in Foreign Affairs: New Prospects for Peace in the Middle East? SI Analysis: US Special Envoy George Mitchell held talks with Israeli PM Netanyahu in the most recent effort to halt the current stalemate to peace negotiations. Recent reports suggest that there is deal brewing , brokered by the US, that in exchange for a partial settlement freeze, Western powers would do more to pressure Iran over its nuclear program and Arab states would begin the process of normalization of relations with Israel. Most government officials from all sides have denied there is such a deal and it is unlikely that Arab States would acquiesce to such terms (despite a positive meeting between US President Obama and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak ). Also linking the Iranian nuclear issue to Middle East peace would be controversial and highly risky. In response to these reports, Palestinian PM Fayyad published a unilateral plan for Palestine statehood and said nothing short of a total settlement freeze would suffice to restart peace talks. However, there is reason to believe that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Netanyahu will speak on the sidelines of next month's UN General Assembly. Meanwhile, Israeli relations with Lebanon remain tense. The incumbent leadership vows to include Hezbollah in its coalition government , perhaps in response to Israeli posturing. Israel recently made allegations that Hezbollah has as many as 80,000 missiles in its arsenal along Israel's northern border. The likelihood of conflict remains low however in light of Hezbollah's increased political participation in Interior Lebanese politics. Meanwhile, a recent report suggests that Middle East arms spending on the rise >and it could reach $100 billion over the next five years. This is certainly in response to Iran's growing influence in the region and willingness from Russia, China and Western governments to boost arms sales to the region. New Prospects for Peace with Iran? SI Analysis: Just ahead of what was expected to be a scathing report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and a September deadline from US President Obama for progress on the Iranian nuclear program, Iran has granted greater access to nuclear inspectors of its facility in Natanz and its new beavy-water facility in Arak . This development gives further credence to the report that Iran's envoy to the IAEA, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, may have suggested that Iran is ready for "talks without preconditions." There is much speculation about whether Iranian overtures are genuine or whether they are just posturing for time, in light of the looming September deadline. Others suggest though that Iran is responding to the credible and growing threat of a preemptive Israeli attack as well as increased internal pressure on a faltering Iranian leadership. New Prospects for Peace with North Korea? SI Analysis: Following its release of two US journalists, a deal brokered by former US President Bill Clinton, as well its sending of a delegation to attend former South Korean President and Sunshine policy architect Kim Dae-jung's funeral , North Korea has now invited the US and South Korea , separately, to participate in nuclear negotiations. Reportedly US Special Envoy Stephen Bosworth has accepted the overtures and Seoul has already scheduled talks. The Red Cross too is holding meetings with Pyongyang and expect more people to join on this engagement offensive. While the US will try to continue six party talks, and showcase relations with South Korea, Japan, Russia and China ahead of a meeting with Pyongyang, it appears that US may be conceding to direct talks with North Korea, a stark change in policy. Growing Conflict in Yemen? SI Analysis: Fighting between government forces and a Shiite rebel group called al Houthi in the Yemeni Province of Saada is provoking a humanitarian crisis and fueling fears of sparking a potentially regional crisis . Fighting with the Houthis in the north and fighting with radical political foreign Sunni jihadists in the South (militants whom many believe are the next generation al Qaeda) prompts many to fear that conflict between standing governments and radical political Shia and Sunni groups will be encouraged in the region. In addition, the potential for direct sectarian conflict that could inflame the region has many analysts deeply concerned. War Reports: Afghanistan and Pakistan SI Analysis: August 20th elections in Afghanistan have yet to yield a winner, though both incumbent Hamid Karzai and opposition challenger Abdullah Abdullah both have claimed victory. Elections had mixed results in terms of turnout depending on the region, were marred by massive violence, over 400 attacks on election day, widespread accusations of fraud and a notable dearth of female participation. Still, Afghans and the world at large are awaiting the results eagerly to see if the fledgling democratic process can spur more hope in the development and state-building processes and the military campaign to ensure greater security. Meanwhile, Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) announced its new leader in Pakistan , following confirmation that Baitullah Mehsud was indeed killed at the beginning of the month: his hot-headed brother-in-arms Hakimullah Mehsud. Reports of rivalries and jostling for the top post continue to circulate and many speculate that it will take more than a simple title to command the kind of authority and effectively wage an effective insurgency as Baitullah had. Iraq SI Analysis: Following the most lethal attack in Baghdad in 18 months -- the two suicide attacks that killed over 100 people and targeted the Foreign and Finance Ministries -- Baghdad's Shia governor accuses Sunni MPs, Saudi Arabia, former Baathists and al Qaeda operatives for the attack . Both US and Iraqi officials were quick to allay fears that following the US withdrawal from Iraqi cities, insecurity and sectarian violence may be on the rise . The security and intelligence short-comings of the Iraqi forces came into quick focus; some blamed the US for a withdrawal seen as too rapid. Meanwhile, a division in the main Shia coalition makes current Iraqi PM Nuri al Maliki's prospects for re-election less likely . Former PM Ibrahim al Jaafari said that a new Shia Alliance called the Iraqi National Allianc e will include the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council (SIIC), supporters of Moqtadr al Sadr as well as Sunni factions from Anbar Province, but will not include al Maliki's Dawa Party. This briefing can be seen in the Huffington Post and on the Simple Intelligence site. More on Afghanistan
 
Thomas Lipscomb: Is Bernie Goldberg Right? Had Bush "In Fact Volunteered to Go to Vietnam?" Top
Former CBS News journalist Bernard Goldberg is making a major claim on his website and in his appearance as a Fox News consultant on The O'Reilly Factor this week. He claims to have found " A 'Lost' Fact in the Rathergate Mess ." According to Goldberg: "Until now, the controversy over the Rather/Mapes story has centered almost entirely on one issue: the legitimacy of the documents -- a very important issue, indeed. But it turns out that there was another very important issue, one that goes to the very heart of what the story was about -- and one that has gone virtually unnoticed. This is it: "Mary Mapes knew before she put the story on the air that George W. Bush, the alleged slacker, had in fact volunteered to go to Vietnam." [emphasis as in the original] Much of the Rathergate controversy depends upon questions about the factual basis for Dan Rather and Mary Mapes' assertions about George Bush, which were largely based upon bad forgeries that quickly fell apart as the provenance of the source material was questioned. Numerous investigators' work, including my own in the Chicago Sun-Times [Sept 10, 2004 "Critical Bush Memos on Guard Service Faked?"], concluded that the "Texas National Guard" papers being used could not have been produced on typewriters available in the 1970s. So much for any "facts" they may have contained. But what of Goldberg's "'Lost' Fact?" What is its factual basis, and why does it deserve our attention now? According to Goldberg: "Mapes had information prior to the airing of the September 8 [2004] Segment that President Bush, while in the TexANG [Texas Air National Guard] did volunteer for service in Vietnam but was turned down in favor of more experienced pilots. For example, a flight instructor who served in the TexANG with Lieutenant Bush advised Mapes in 1999 that Lieutenant Bush "did want to go to Vietnam but others went first." Similarly, several others advised Mapes in 1999, and again in 2004 before September 8, that Lieutenant Bush had in volunteered to go to Vietnam but did not have enough flight hours to qualify. This information, despite the fact that it has been available since the CBS report came out four years ago, has remained a secret to almost everybody both in and out of the media ... ." That is certainly potentially important "information," as Goldberg correctly terms it. But is it fact? Complaining to your buddies in the service about where you would RATHER be serving is perfectly normal. I did it myself as a young lieutenant. But that is not the same as actually filling out the paperwork for a transfer. Both the report Goldberg refers to and Goldberg's own statements seem to me to go farther than the existing evidence. From Goldberg's account it all appears to be oral testimony. That is a pretty thin basis for the flat statement Goldberg is making: "Bush... had in fact volunteered to go Viet Nam." Mapes shouldn't have ignored the oral statements, clearly. But neither do they have the force of documented fact. A transfer of duty assignment was the key plot device in two popular World War II era movies. In Mr. Roberts , Henry Fonda did a lot of complaining about his assignment too, and finally got a transfer from a transport to a warship, but he kept formally filling out the paperwork and applying until he got it. A unit commander has to pass on any application for transfer. In Twelve O'Clock High , commander Gregory Peck had to delay his pilots' filled out transfer applications procedurally long enough to build up the morale in his unit. My point is the popular culture already "knows" what a "request for transfer is," and it isn't bitching to military buddies about what one would prefer. Why doesn't an experienced journalist like Bernard Goldberg? Bush's, or anyone else's commanding officer can state his disapproval, but he has to eventually pass the paperwork on. So there would be a formal record in Bush's file which he already produced prior to the 2004 election. Remember, pilot training is cued to the "needs of the service." One only gets a limited choice of aircraft, if there is any choice at all, as a new pilot. And it costs a lot of money to train a pilot. The military doesn't want to retrain one on another aircraft, unless his retention in service makes it cost effective and the pilot stays on active duty long enough to amortize the additional cost. The training for an "interceptor" role Bush flew is vastly different than the "fighter bomber" missions Bush might have been trained for in Viet Nam, since presumably he wouldn't be interested in logistics flying of transports or refueling. His F 102 type aircraft was only used very briefly in Viet Nam in an operation called "Palace Alert" and was found inappropriate to the missions there as it could not drop bombs. Bush's assigned unit, the 111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron, had as its primary mission attacking slow Soviet bombers inbound on nuke missions to the US. The F-102 was a "widowmaker" with lots of crashes. The formal reports on his performance show Bush was an excellent pilot on a difficult plane. But that does not mean he was an ideal candidate for retention and retraining to become a hot jock over Vietnam as the war was winding down and there was already an excess of pilots. And nothing I have seen shows any interest on Bush's part to stay in the service longer than his service obligation at the time. The controversy over his taking the medical exams raised by Mapes and others was caused precisely because Bush didn't bother to take them, not because he was "AWOL" (Terry McCauliffe), but because he wanted to get out of the service and go to B school and could have cared less about losing his flight status. None of which the press (with zero military experience these days) understood anymore than they understood the holes in Kerry's "record" any veteran could see plain as day. Much of the problem with reporting this kind of thing these days is the lack of military experience of journalists. Bernie Goldberg overreacted to a valid discovery of some sourced opinion Mary Mapes should not have ignored, a journalistic irony if there ever was one. If Fox and Goldberg want to play this strong an angle they should directly ask Bush for a copy of any formal application he made to be transferred to Viet Nam (there is a DOD form for it... it is a normal enough occurrence in the service so that there is one pre-prepared for a request for transfer). If nothing is produced, the news story is quite a bit different than what they are running as I am sure they will agree. I am not for giving either Dan Rather or George Bush a free ride on anything based upon rumor and verbal scuttlebutt. Bernie knows the rules of hard reporting as well as anyone. Let him apply them to himself as well as others. He has the same challenge to meet Mapes and Rather failed. Show us valid paperwork. And in the case of any request for transfer to duty in Viet Nam by young George Bush, it should be easy to find, if in fact it exists. As of now it is still only a supposition. More on Vietnam
 
Poverty Rate Rises In Russia By A Third Top
MOSCOW: The number of people living below the poverty line in Russia rose by a third from 18.5 million in the last quarter of 2008 to 24.5 million in the first three months of 2009, official data showed on Friday. More on Russia
 
Steve Parker: Weekend radio shows - NASCAR's racism rears head ... again; Clunker program over Top
Join us LIVE Saturday and Sunday at 5pm Pacific time on www.TalkRadioOne.com for our exclusive LIVE motoring and motorsports talk shows! Steve Parker's The Car Nut Show Saturday starting at 5pm Pacific www.TalkRadioOne.com The Clunker Program is officially over some but local dealers are continuing the plan with their own rules --- Steve covers what you need to know about these new systems to save money! And when will the car-makers themselves start their own 'cash-for-guzzler' plans to keep sales strong? What happens to car sales now that 'clunkers' are just that once again --- clunkers? And Steve gives his "Sixty-Second Road Tests" of some of the many 2009 and 2010 cars he's driven recently. Plus all your calls! Be sure to join-in the conversation: The call-in number is: 213-341-4353. Steve Parker's World Racing Roundup Sunday starting at 5pm www.TalkRadioOne.com Wendell Scott, NASCAR's first well-known African-American racer, has been left-out of the first group of five 'NASCAR Legends' slated for inclusion in the NASCAR Hall of Fame due to open soon in Charlotte, NC. ... Does this only add to the perception that at heart NASCAR remains a racist, sexist sport? Richard Pryor played Scott in the 1977 feature film "Greased Lighting." Danica Patrick says she's staying in IndyCar and Formula 1 is truly offering some of the most competitive and exciting racing in the world. Award-winning radio and TV motorsports host and ex-IndyCar racer Kurt Hansen joins us as he does every month-or-so to talk racin'. Plus your calls and emails! The call-in number is: 213-341-4353. Podcasts of the shows are available one hour after the live shows' conclusions. That's this Saturday and Sunday at 5pm USA Pacific time on www.TalkRadioOne.com More on Cars
 
Hassan Nemazee: Schumer, Gillibrand Among New York Democrats Who Received Money From Alleged Fraudster Top
ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) -- Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, freshman U.S. Rep. Scott Murphy, and U.S. Sens. Charles Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand are among the many New York Democrats who accepted donations from a national Democratic fundraiser now charged with lying to get a $74 million business loan. Cuomo and state Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli each received $5,000 in campaign contributions from investment banker Hassan Nemazee. As attorney general, Cuomo investigates abuses in the financial markets and was critical of executives given bonuses by investment banks that received federal bailouts. DiNapoli, who returned the money to Nemazee, is the sole trustee of New York's massive pension fund for state workers. Many Democrats -- including Murphy, Schumer and Gillibrand -- are turning the donations over to charity. Cuomo's campaign said he will be donating the contribution to charity. Schumer is giving $4,800 he received in the past two years to a New York City foreclosure prevention program. Murphy gave his $1,000 donation to a camp that serves children with life threatening illnesses. Gillibrand hasn't decided what charity will get the $4,600 she received. Nemazee is under house arrest. Federal prosecutors charged him with giving Citibank "fraudulent and forged" documents showing he owned millions of dollars in collateral to secure the loan, which he has repaid. Nemazee has raised money for President Barack Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and others. Other politicians to receive donations from Nemazee include New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn. Her spokesman says the account for an earlier potential run for mayor is frozen and they can't do anything with the $1,000 contribution right now. City Council member David Yassky is donating the $500 he received while running for Congress in 2006 to a foreclosure and homeless prevention organization in Brooklyn. U.S. Reps. Anthony Weiner and Carolyn Maloney, both Democrats, are donating their contributions to charities. Many of the political action committees that received donations from Nemazee are now defunct. The chairman and chief executive of Manhattan-based Nemazee Capital Corp. served as national finance chairman for Clinton's presidential campaign in 2008. He raised money for Obama after her primary defeat. Nemazee was released under a $25 million bail package that requires him to pledge his Park Avenue apartment and a Katonah, N.Y., home worth $8 million as collateral within a week. He is also banned from using computers or the Internet or getting new cell phones or bank loans. He has not had to enter a plea because he has not been indicted. He faces up to 30 years in prison if he is convicted. More on Bill Clinton
 
2016 Olympics Tickets Could Cost As Much As $1,800 Top
A Chicago 2016 Summer Olympic Games would be led by a team of executives -- with annual salaries as high as $550,000 -- presiding over an army of 4,964 full- and part-time employees.
 
Lesley M. M. Blume: Karl Lagerfeld Called Me "Ugly" Top
In the September issue of Harper's Bazaar , the editors ran a cutesy feature titled 'What Would Coco Do?' . With the new film Coco Before Chanel due out this autumn, says the headline, " Bazaar wondered what the notoriously feisty Madame Chanel would say about the world after Chanel. So we asked [current Chanel designer] Karl Lagerfeld to channel the original fashion wit." One of these exchanges goes like so: Harper's Bazaar: Your clothing liberated women in the 1920s. Are you still a feminist? Lagerfeld-as-Chanel: I was never a feminist because I was never ugly enough for that. This quip rankled me on many levels: as a woman, as a fashion consumer, as a writer for both adult and young women. It is a spiteful, irrelevant observation: one's appearance has nothing to do with one's relationship to feminism. In my mind, a feminist is any woman who believes that women - like men - have the right to determine their own individual destinies, barred neither by law nor cultural convention from doing so. I am proud to count myself in that category. That Madame Chanel did not consider herself a feminist is well-documented, despite the fact that in some respects she could be considered a feminist icon: an impoverished-orphan-turned-female-business-mogul who redefined the attitudes of her generation and those to follow. Her self-created persona, aesthetics, and empire were premised on the defiance of the rigid social constructs of her youth. She could hardly be considered a creature of demure Victorian subservience. Whatever her reasons for declining to categorize herself as a feminist, her career provides much inspiration for ambitious women everywhere. That her successor chooses to mock a demographic of Chanel's consumers (not all of whom are buying his apparel with their husbands' Mastercards), and propagate this erroneous impression of feminism, is unfortunate and disenchanting. This "ugly feminist" would expect more from the ambassador of a brand supposedly devoted to elegance. More on Fashion Week
 
Police Send 40 Squad Cars To Break Up Northwest Side Gang Fight Top
Chicago police quelled a large gang fight on a busy Northwest Side street early this morning.
 
Jon Chattman: WWE Star MVP: "Love" to See Huffington vs. Coulter Top
WWE Superstar Montel Vontavius Porter AKA "MVP" has an idea for next year's WrestleMania: "I'd love to get Ann Coulter and Ariana Huffington in a WWE ring, put them in a steel cage and watch them go at it." Any takers? Someone get Vince McMahon on the phone. The former United State Champion and sometime "View" cohost Sherri Shepherd arm candy may be on to something (or not), but next year's event is a long ways off and the grappler's still focused on the aftermath of this year's contest, which took place in April at the Reliant Stadium in Houston. "WrestleMania is always an overwhelming experience. It's the Super Bowl of our industry if you will. You're talking about performing in your craft with the best of the best at the largest gathering of competitors and fans - there's nothing like it." For those of you interested in seeing the April slugfest, which was attended by more people than the Super Bowl by the way, NBC is airing a special this Saturday at 9 p.m. dubbed "The 25th Anniversary of WrestleMania." Essentially the telecast (a first for NBC and the WWE), takes the four-hour event and packs into an hour of highlights set to music from the likes of AC/DC and Korn. I chatted with MVP earlier, and here's what he had to say about life in the ring and out. What WrestleMania's did you grow up with? I remember when WrestleMania was brand new with Mr. T, Hulk Hogan, "Rowdy" Roddy Piper and Paul Orndorf...MTV being involved with Cyndi Lauper and Captain Lou. It was huge then and to watch what it's evolved into has been just unbelievable. Hulk Hogan slamming Andre...there are so many moments.. What's been your "moment" thus far in WWE? I grew up in Miami. I initially grew up watching Southern wrestling promotions and Ric Flair was "the man." I was able to wrestle him twice. First I defended my US Championship against him and I beat the dirtiest player in the game with a thumb to the eye. The biggest match was at Madison Square Garden. He was on his retirement tour if you will, and basically if he lost, he had to retire. My very first match at Madison Square Garden was his last at Madison Square Garden. I tapped out to his patented figure-four leglock. It's definitely a high point of my career. You and Flair walk the walk on the mic as well. You seem to be a natural at cutting promos... It is natural. People ask me all the time, and I tell them MVP is who I am but with the volume cranked way up. The neighborhood I grew up in, you couldn't come out of the house if you couldn't defend yourself. That's what we did all day - lifting weights and tossing the football around, and some people call it snapping - but we called it ranking. We just verbally abused each other for fun. My life growing up in the inner city and being around other tough kids [as well as] being around the Department of Corrections, you just learn how to have a little sporty talk. You've never ran away from your past jail time. You educated kids about it. Was that a conscious decision once you became a star? That was a process. While I was in prison, it was really difficult. I was a child of 16, 17 or 18. I became a man in prison. While there, I saw a number of teenagers with a lot of time and it was the circumstances of how they grew up. When you're brought up in the hood, and all you see is death and destruction-that's all you know. Forget doctors, high school or working a 9-5 job is unrealistic because you don't know anybody like that. When I got out, I wanted to thwart that. I was fortunate to have people in my life who knew I was no dummy. I was just misdirected. People took time to put me on the right path now I want to use my success to show others it can be done. I think it was Maya Angelou who said "you can't go through life with a catcher's mitt on both hands. You have to use one hand free so you can throw something back." Do you think wrestling still gets a bad rap - many die young and use drugs? There has to be a line drawn between the old guard and the new guard. A lot of guys dying young came from our profession in a different era. They came up in a time where contract were structured very differently. If you didn't work, you didn't get paid. If you didn't get paid, you couldn't feed your family. Guys worked through injuries taking pain medication and whatever other drugs so they could get through the schedule. It's different now. If we were injured, our medical is taken care of. We're still paid. Once upon a time you'd go into locker rooms, and you'd see guys drinking beer or getting high. Nowadays, you'd see guys drinking energy drinks or protein shakes. It's changed a lot. I think WWE and the McMahon family have made huge strides in making wrestling a more palatable product. I challenge you to find an 8-year-old kid who doesn't know who John Cena is or doesn't have action figures in their toy box. We've become so much more.
 
Natalie Holder-Winfield: Uh Oh, Here We Go Again with Ebonics 2.0 Top
Teacher U, a collaboration of teaching organizations -- including Teach for America -- made a frail attempt to exhume the 1990's Ebonics debacle by acknowledging African American English in their training curriculum. After having their teachers-in-training read the article, Phonological Features of Chile African American English, which appeared in a June 2003 use of American Speech-Language Hearing Association, they were assigned to "translate" the following sentences into their "African American English form:" 1. My aunt used to live in Baltimore with my three cousins but last year she moved to New York. 2. John doesn't mind being late for school because he doesn't like to go to Ms. Johnson's music class. 3. Deborah liked to play with the girl that sat next to her at school. And so on. (Unfortunately, I don't have access to the teacher's guide so your translation guesses are as good as mine.) Giving Teacher U the benefit of the doubt, they may have had good intentions. They may have been trying to make their next generation of teachers aware of inner-city culture. Sometimes, you have to know where someone is coming from before you can help them. For instance, years ago, I worked with an attorney from upper-middle San Francisco who had difficulty communicating with our African-American clients because she didn't understand that "having sugar" meant having diabetes. However, what is African American English? With the mainstream using terms such as "kickin' it old school" and "holla," African Americans lost any market share they had on urban slang a long time ago. Recognition of misspoken English will do nothing to help these children or Black people in general. The children cited in the study were just 4-6 years old. These children are at a crucial age where they are developing their vocabularies and rapidly gaining a better understanding of the English language. Like all children, the children in the article probably used a wrong verb tense or two. African-American children are not alone in mispronouncing words and having an occasional verb-noun disagreement. As any English as a second language learner will tell you, the English language is probably the most difficult. Although Teacher U teachers may be patient and willing to translate incorrect English, Corporate America is not. I cannot tell you how many discrimination cases I've come across where someone was fired for pronouncing "asked" as "axed." Sorry Teacher U, but this assignment gets an F.
 
Jared Gardner: Video Gamers at the End of History Top
Every year or so, the video game industry releases its latest demographics on its audience. And every year the big news is that the video game player is growing older (this year's result: 35). This is good news for the video game industry, which conveniently sponsors the study, eager for an older and richer consumer. However, the industry will be much less happy with the results of a recent study from the Center for Disease Control. It turns out that video gamers are not only growing older, but they are also, as MSNBC glossed the findings, "fat and bummed." U. S. News and World Report put it a bit more diplomatically: video game players "are 35-year-old adults, many of whom are overweight, socially introverted and possibly depressed." The findings, to be published in the October issue of the American Journal of Preventive Medicine but trumpeted widely to the media this month, were greeted with dismay by overweight, bummed-out video gamers across the country. As if these folks need any more reasons to lock themselves away with a family-size bag of Fritos and Ghost Busters: The Video Game . There are of course good reasons to question the study's findings. For one thing, the sample was exclusively drawn from western Washington state, where "fat" and "bummed" figure as key terms in many personal ads and promotional brochures. And, of course, the difference between the percentage of depressives and plus-sizers among the video game population in the study's pool doesn't exactly blow out of the water the numbers found in the general population. Still, unlike most of my fellow video gamers, I am inclined to accept the study's findings. Taking my own highly scientific survey of my immediate cluster of video gaming family members, I come up with an average age of 34.8, about 60% of whom are at least moderately overweight and 80% of whom are pretty well off their rockers (although scoring higher in the study's "neuroticism" and "psychoticism" demographics than we do with depression "depression"--but with .2 years still to go, there is still a chance we will make it). But I, for one, take a certain degree of pride in these findings. After all, there is a long tradition in this country of chubby, mentally-ill pioneers in narrative media extending back over two centuries, and I am delighted to learn that I am a part of that history. New narrative media have long posed an attraction for a certain type, it seems. A little more than two centuries ago, the new kid on the narrative media block was the novel, which had the disastrous capability of transporting its readers to far-off lands and inflaming imaginations with passionate thoughts. Almost immediately, the phenomenon sparked widespread concerns and studies of the "effects of novel reading" and especially for the growing number of addicts. These readers were prone to become disconnected from reality, isolated, and ultimately lonely old maids or tobacco-stained bachelors. A century later, when film was new and novels had gone legit, anxious scholars examined "the physiological and psychological effect of habitual attendance at the movies." Here's one from 1921: American movie fans are constantly stimulated artificially. Their tear ducts and adrenal glands are overtaxed. They are emotionally sapped night after night before unreal circumstances. This means that their capacity for reacting emotionally in real life is reduced. The tendency is toward emotional insanity, a complete inability to feel any emotion which is not artificially stimulated. And so, we fast-forward a century and discover that once again our addiction to the new narrative media of video games is making us physiologically and psychologically damaged goods, old toothless crones whose best hope is that when we die alone, as surely we must, the neighbors will find our body before the dogs. But once we are all gone--all the novel readers, film junkies, and compulsive gamers--once our gene pool has been scourged from the earth, who will be left? Given that we are clearly heading toward extinction, maybe it is time the CDC and others began studying the mental and physical health of those who have never been tempted to immerse themselves in "artificial" worlds, whose "tear ducts and adrenal glands" have remained blissfully dormant. Fit, trim, rational folks--presumably the kind of people who can see the world in a way the rest of us are too fat and bummed to see. Looking back in history for examples, we could point to Thomas Jefferson, whose dislike of novels helped him maintain the mental clarity necessary to enslave the mother of his children (and, of course, the children themselves) and to defend the French Revolution even after the Reign of Terror. Or in our own day, we could look to Senator Joseph Lieberman, who has made a career out of bemoaning the effects of video games on our society, even as he has demonstrated his "independent thinking" by being one of the Senate's most stalwart defenders of the invasion of Iraq as a meaningful and logical response to the attacks of 9/11. Like the authors of the CDC study I want to offer a caveat: I am not saying that the failure to play video games, read novels, or go to the movies will turn you into a self-justifying hypocrite, war monger or slave owner. Further research is obviously called for. However, to quote from the CDC study, "the data reveal important patterns ... for future research." In the meantime, I am off to fire up my X-Box. The thought of the world I will be leaving behind has left me bummed. And hungry. More on Health
 
Thomas Kochan: Learning from Down Under: Where Labor Policy is Center Stage Top
Those of us from the U.S. who attended the just concluded World Congress of the International Industrial Relations Association in Sydney, Australia experienced a rare treat and learned firsthand how out of sync are America's efforts to modernize labor and employment policies with what is happening here and around the world. We visited a country in which the last federal election turned on labor policy, where work and employment issues are viewed as a central part of economic policy, and where the newly elected government enacted a major reform and modernization of labor and employment policy within a year of taking office. Just imagine the following scene from the opening session of the World Congress. Deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard (the number two official in the government) not only came to give a warm welcome to the 900 delegates. She gave a highly substantive speech reviewing the new legislation that she personally had help shape and negotiate through Parliament. The new law called the "Fair Work Act" is impressive for its comprehensiveness and for its focus. While the centerpiece provisions establish procedures supporting collective bargaining (including new procedures governing union recognition and good faith bargaining), it also covers minimum employment standards, work and family leave, the right to request flexibility to care for young children, and provides options for negotiating and enforcing individual employment contracts that exceed the standards negotiated in collective agreements. As the name of the bill implies, the focus is on restoring fairness in employment relations after the previous government had undone essentially all labor standards and used individual employment agreements to undermine provisions negotiated collectively. The new policy also supports the flexibility needed in modern employment practice and seeks to reestablish the historic connection between increasing productivity and increasing standards of living. But Ms. Gillard did more than just review the contents of the new policy. She delivered a clear message to the business and labor leaders attending the Congress and others who would read about her speech: the legislation is only the first step. Now its time for business, labor, and government leaders to get to work on building the workplace culture and relationships needed to make this legislative framework pay off for workers, employers, and the economy by finding "new ways to train, reward, consult and work cooperatively together." So what lessons do we take away for the U.S.? First, rather than treat labor policy as simply "special interest" politics best kept separate from economic policy making, integrate it with other policy initiatives aimed at forging a sustainable economic recovery. Rather than leave labor law reform to closed door back room horse trading among Senators to get the votes needed to pass a new law, lead a public debate over how to restore fairness in workplace and employment relations. This is the mandate of Vice President Biden's Middle Class Task Force. Put it to this task. Second, rather than separate reforms over labor law from other efforts to strengthen and modernize employment standards, treat these as they are in the modern workplace, namely part of an integrated system. While the U.S. policy process tends to take up issues one at a time, positioning the current labor law debate as one part of a broader updating of wage and hour, safety and health, work and family, and labor market policies would signal that the Administration understands the close interconnections across these issues and would give business, labor, women's and community groups a broader shared agenda to work on together. Third, recognize that to make any new workplace legislation realize its objectives, business and labor do need to work together with government leaders to rebuild a culture of mutual respect and engagement of front-line employees and managers. The evidence is clear - front-line, knowledge-driven workplaces are both more productive and better places to work. So make mutual respect and workforce engagement a central part of the objectives of any piece of labor and employment legislation. Give the Secretary of Labor the responsibility and resources needed to get labor and management working together for the common good. Finally, it did not go unnoticed that the Deputy Prime Minister, the president of the major labor union federation, and the chief executive of the most influential business group in Australia are all women. Maybe that has something to do with the level of civility, substantive dialogue, and mutual respect that was apparent when leaders from these different groups discussed their interests and views on policy and practice in the sessions and informal gatherings. Our friends down under have set a benchmark for the U.S. to meet. We don't usually look beyond our boarders for lessons on domestic policy, but Australia has recognized and addressed employment relations as central to economic vitality. Other nations as diverse as France, Brazil, Denmark, and Korea are following Australia's lead in modernizing key aspects of their employment relations systems through debates that build widespread public awareness of the connection between employment relations and economic vitality. We can and must adapt this central lesson to the U.S. if we are to achieve a sustainable economic recovery and build an employment relations system attuned to the needs of the 21st century workforce and economy. The American Delegation Henry and Sue Bass, Merrimack Films Janice Bellace, University of Pennsylvania Peter Berg, Michigan State University Richard Block, Michigan State University John Budd, University of Minnesota Bonnie and Robert Castrey, Arbitrators Paul Clark, Penn State University Alex Colvin, Cornell University Joel Cutcher Gershenfeld, University of Illinois Matthew Finkin, University of Illinois Lonnie Golden, Penn State University Raphael Gomez, University of Toronto Harry Katz, Cornell University Bruce Kaufman, Georgia State University Thomas Kochan, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Anil Verma, University of Toronto Hoyt Wheeler, University of South Carolina More on Australia
 
Peter Clothier: Solidarity (PO/PO) Top
Some good folks have only half-way understood my PO/PO initiative ( see prior entry ) to be a letter-writing campaign. That's only a part of it. (Do these senators read letters anyway, I wonder?) The more important part, as I envisioned it, was about community action, demonstration, solidarity... Remember "Solidarity"--the movement that led to the liberation of Poland from Soviet domination? So I'm asking the more than 70 percent of us who say we believe in significant health care reform to be "solid" with our friends, our neighbors, our families, ourselves--and yes, our online contacts. I'm looking for access to bigger platforms, more active support... Facebook (follow link to the group that's already formed), Twitter, big circulation blogs and political sites. Can you do this? AND I want us all to show up at our local Post Office, letters or cards in hand, at HIGH NOON ON 09/01/09. Will you help me? Will you broadcast this? Will you be there? Will you shake my hand? More on Health Care
 
GOP Under Fire For Hinting Dems Would Deny Republicans Health Care Top
WASHINGTON — The national Republican Party has mailed a fundraising appeal suggesting Democrats might use an overhaul of the health care system to deny medical treatment to Republicans. A questionnaire accompanying the appeal says the government could check voting registration records, "prompting fears that GOP voters might be discriminated against for medical treatment in a Democrat-imposed health care rationing system." It asks, "Does this possibility concern you?" Katie Wright, a spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee, said the question was "inartfully worded." But she said people should worry because government officials would have access to personal financial and medical data. "The RNC doesn't try to scare people," said Wright. "We're just trying to get the facts out on health care. And that's what we do every day." Jon Vogel, executive director of the Democratic House campaign organization, called the GOP letter "shameless fear-mongering." In a fundraising e-mail of his own seeking to raise $100,000 by Aug. 31, Vogel wrote the Republican accusation was "just a preview of the falsehoods, fabrications and outright lies Republicans will be pushing when Congress returns in September." The allegation is the latest instance in which some critics of the health care effort have made inflammatory unfounded claims – such as conservatives who claimed the legislation would create "death panels" that they said could lead to euthanizing elderly people. The suggestion that Republicans might not receive care is included in a "Future of American Health Care Survey" containing 13 questions, most of which are critical of the Democratic health care effort. The technique, referred to as a "push poll," is used often in political campaigns by both parties and is designed to spread negative information, not to sample public opinion. Another question asks, "Do you believe it is justified to ration health care regardless of whether an individual has contributed to the cost of the treatment?" The survey is accompanied by a two-page letter signed by Michael Steele, chairman of the national Republican party. The letter accuses Democrats of "moving swiftly to bring European-style socialized medicine here," but makes no mention of the possibility that Republicans might be denied coverage. Wright said she did not know who had crafted the wording of the survey questions, and which GOP officials had signed off on it. She also said she did not initially know how many of the surveys were mailed or to whom. House Democratic legislation would give officials access to limited information about the earnings of people who apply for federal insurance subsidies to see if they qualify, said Matthew Beck, Democratic spokesman for the House Ways and Means Committee. The question suggesting possible denial of care for Republicans was first reported by The Columbian newspaper of Vancouver, Wash.
 
George Mitrovich: Senator Ted Kennedy: American Patriot Top
The death of Senator Edward Moore Kennedy marked the end of a remarkable era in the life of our country. Camelot, a time of hope, grows distant, its memories receding. The brothers are gone - John, Bobby, and Ted. If America lasts 1,000 years we shall never again see their equals. Ted Kennedy served in the United States Senate for 46 years, having been elected by the people of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts nine times. Only two senators in history served longer (Strom Thurmond and Robert Byrd). He was known as the "Lion of the Senate." He was that - and infinitely more. Senator Kennedy was responsible for more than 300 major pieces of legislation, including the Immigration and Nationality Act, the National Cancer Act, the Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments, the COBRA Act, the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Ryan White AIDS Care Act, the Civil Rights Act, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, the Mental Health Parity Act, the State Children's Health Insurance Program, the No Child Left Behind Act, and the Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act. Senator Kennedy opposed the Vietnam War, led the Congressional fight to impose sanctions against South Africa over apartheid, succeeded in banning arm sales to Chile's dictator Augusto Pinochet, helped greatly in the long effort to bring peace to Northern Ireland, and was ever vigilant in behalf of the poor on issues of social and economic justice, which his Meals on Wheels program for senior citizens dramatically underscores. But in all of those years, in all the causes he embraced, he called his vote against the resolution to sanction the Iraq War, the "best vote" he ever cast. With an ascendant conservatism and Ronald Reagan's election in 1980, Senator Kennedy became the liberal conscience of American politics. While others retreated publicly from liberal policies and shamefully denied their "liberalism", Senator Kennedy, unbowed and without apology, stood fast for progressive ideals and values. In a time marked by the politics of fear and loathing, he demonstrated admirable grace and courage - and for that we owe him our eternal gratitude. Among the most remarkable of Senator Kennedy's many attributes was his ability to work across the political aisle, working with Republican senators like John McCain, Nancy Kassenbaum, Alan Simpson, and Orrin Hatch. Mr. Hatch, the conservative Republican from Utah, considered Senator Kennedy his best friend in the Senate. Senator Robert Dole, the Republican leader of the Senate, and Senator Simpson, shared for a time a daily radio show with Mr. Kennedy, one both serious and fun, which was no surprise, since all three senators greatly enjoyed a good laugh. But perhaps his greatest bipartisan moment was the "No Child Left Behind Act", the results of his partnership with President George W. Bush. Senator Kennedy's life was a triumph of determination and courage over unbelievable burdens and tragedies: the World War II death of his brother Joe, Jr., who perished when his bomb-laden B-24 Liberator exploded over a small English village; his sister, Rosemary, who lived her life with severe disabilities; the stroke suffered by his father, Joseph P. Kennedy, that denied the ambassador his voice; the 1964 plane crash in Massachusetts when Senator Kennedy nearly died and was left with back problems that shadowed him for the rest of his life; the breakup of his story book-marriage to Joan Bennett Kennedy; a son, Edward, who at age 12 lost his leg to bone cancer; another son, Congressman Patrick Kennedy of Rhode Island, whose youth was traumatized repeatedly by life-threatening Asthma attacks; the diagnosis of his daughter, Kara, with lung cancer (which she defeated); the death of his brother-in-law Stephen Smith, a key family advisor, who died at age 62; the death of his nephew John F. Kennedy Jr., and his wife, Carolyn, and her sister, in a small plane crash off Martha's Vineyard; the death of nephews Michael and David Kennedy; the death of his mother, Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy, and sisters, Patricia Kennedy Lawford and Eunice Kennedy Shriver; and the assassination of brothers John and Bobby, deaths that shattered our nation - and from which we have never recovered. It is an astonishing list of misfortune that imposed upon anyone else might have crushed their spirits and killed their souls. But against this history Senator Ted Kennedy never wavered from his profound commitment to public service, of his consuming desire to serve America and the public interest. It is a marvel that the senator, judged against everything that happened in his life, was still ambulatory, much less a vital, even indispensable member of the body politic (as President Obama is discovering in his efforts to establish national health care without Senator Kennedy at his side). But as surely as his life was haunted by unspeakable tragedies, so too were there personal failings, from which his biography can never be separated - and from which some shall judge him harshly and, in the shriveled state of their souls, deny him forgiveness. Senator Kennedy's failings as judged by others, provide his despisers a certain latitude of legitimacy in rejecting his standing as the greatest of all United States senators. Senator Kennedy's life recalls what Theodore Roosevelt said in a speech on citizenship at the Sorbonne in Paris in 1923: It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat. In Senator Kennedy's passing we have lost a great public servant, one whose life at its best and noblest embodied the highest ideals of American patriotism. Our nation owes an incalculable debt to the senator and to all within this amazing family, the greatest of all American political families, for their service to the country we love. May the peace of God be with the spirit of Edward Moore Kennedy. He shall be greatly missed. George Mitrovich, a San Diego civic leader, was an aide to Senator Robert F. Kennedy in the presidential campaign of 1968. More on Ted Kennedy
 
Viral Ad Battle Vol. 2: Brad Pitt, Alice Cooper And Interns (VIDEOS, VOTE) Top
In our second installment Viral Ad Battle we've got Brad Pitt feeding a sumo wrestler, Alice Cooper discussing TV warranties, and more musically talented interns . In the first installment , Nike's "Good Day" spot featuring Ice Cube and Robert Rodriguez was the clear favorite of HuffPost readers. Which brand will win this round? Check out our VIDEOS and pick your favorite below. And, as always, if you've got some other great candidates, let us know in the comments section. Get HuffPost Business On Facebook and Twitter ! More on Brad Pitt
 
Sanford Lashes Out At The Media Top
South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford lashed out at the media on Friday, admonishing reporters at a press conference for their coverage of the multiple investigations into his travel expenses. "One of the frankly disappointing things I've seen in several instances here over the last 60 days of my life since I've been through this thing is that in some cases it's not been about objective journalism, its been about advocacy journalism with an agenda," he said. More on Mark Sanford
 
Adam Isacson: Tensions Flare in South America Over U.S. Troops in Colombia Top
South America's presidents are meeting today in the ski resort of Bariloche, Argentina. Despite the tranquil setting, things could be tense. Their agenda will be dominated by revelations that the United States and Colombia have quietly been discussing a deal to allow the U.S. military to operate from at least seven military bases inside Colombia. The base-deal negotiations - which only became known through leaks to the Colombian media - have created alarm throughout South America, as they involve, in the words of Argentina's most-circulated newspaper, Clarín , "The military presence in South America of the most powerful army on Earth." Nearly every government on the continent has voiced concerns about the likely U.S. presence (except Peru, whose center-right government supports the deal). But there are varying degrees of opposition. "Winds of war" Venezuela, Colombia's neighbor sharing a 1,375-mile border, has been by far the most vocal opponent. Far-left President Hugo Chávez argues that the U.S. presence will seek to destabilize his government. He has announced plans to retaliate by cutting all diplomatic ties with Colombia, bringing the two countries' $7 billion of trade down to zero within a year, and buying tanks and other weapons from Russia. "These seven Yankee bases are a declaration of war against the Bolivarian Revolution [Chávez's term for his government]," he said Tuesday, building on earlier rhetoric about "winds of war" sweeping through the continent. Few observers see much possibility of actual war between Colombia and Venezuela anytime soon. It is clear, though, that the base deal has given Chávez a huge political opportunity. The Bush administration's deep unpopularity had made it easy for the Venezuelan leader to portray the United States as an enemy bent on removing him from power. That argument became much less credible during the first months of the Obama administration, when the new U.S. president offered an "outstretched hand" to adversaries. It was difficult for Chávez to portray Barack Obama as an imperialist enemy. But the U.S. and Colombian governments' ham-handed, secretive rollout of the base deal played right into Chávez's hands, giving the Venezuelan leader just what he needed to reignite his rhetoric about the "empire" on the march. (The lack of transparency about the deal, in fact, stirred up old resentments against the United States in almost every country. Would the United States have kept the deal secret from neighboring countries if the continent in question was Europe? Is a double-standard in effect?) Chávez has taken full advantage, dominating the debate. Colombia has responded with new accusations about weapons from Venezuela's arsenal ending up in the hands of the FARC, a bloodstained, drug-funded insurgent group that continues to fight Colombia's government 45 years after its founding. Colombia's government also filed a formal complaint at the OAS this week demanding that Venezuela's government stop meddling in Colombian internal politics. For Colombian President Álvaro Uribe, the crisis with Venezuela brings distinct domestic political advantages. The right-wing president is in the midst of a knock-down, drag-out battle to convince Colombia's Congress to schedule a referendum on a constitutional change allowing Uribe to run for a third straight 4-year term. Every time Chávez uses threatening language against Uribe or Colombia, Uribe gets a boost in public opinion polls, and a third term becomes more of a certainty. The base deal has further worsened relations between Colombia and its neighbor to the south, Ecuador. These relations could hardly be worse already, as neither country has had an ambassador in the other's capital since March 2008, when Colombia's army launched a raid 1 mile inside Ecuadorian territory that killed a top leader of the FARC. Ecuador's pro-government-majority legislature approved a resolution on Tuesday contending that the Colombia base deal would undermine peace in the region. Ecuador's foreign minister said Wednesday that his government's problems with Colombia "would not be resolved with a simple handshake at Bariloche." In Bolivia, leftist President Evo Morales has said that any leader who invites foreign troops onto his soil is a "traitor" to Latin America. At the Bariloche meeting, Morales will call for a multi-country referendum to approve or reject the U.S. presence in Colombia, something that Colombia will most likely reject out of hand. Perhaps most significantly, Brazil, Argentina and Chile, the continent's wealthiest countries with its best-equipped militaries (after Colombia), all three led by left-of-center presidents, have voiced strong discomfort with the U.S. presence in Colombia. Despite earlier declarations of opposition, at least Brazil and Chile have indicated that they will accept the base deal as long as Colombia offers assurances, in the form of a written diplomatic note, that U.S. personnel will never support operations beyond Colombia's borders. How we got here This story really began a decade ago, in 1999, when the last U.S. soldier left bases in Panama that dated back to Teddy Roosevelt's time. The base closures, in compliance with a treaty Jimmy Carter had negotiated in 1977, left the U.S. military without a runway from which to conduct counter-drug surveillance flights. In order to fill that gap, the Clinton administration negotiated 10-year agreements with El Salvador, Ecuador and the Netherlands (Aruba and Curaçao). From these so-called "Forward Operating Locations," U.S. aircraft - piloted and maintained by military personnel and contractors - sought to identify planes and boats suspected of carrying cocaine to the United States. The agreement with Ecuador allowed U.S. personnel to use a base in Manta, on the Pacific Coast, and strictly limited them to counter-drug missions. The agreement caused an outcry among Ecuador's leftist opposition, which was voted into office with the election of President Rafael Correa in 2006. Correa swore that he would "cut off his arm" before allowing the Manta base agreement to be renewed in 2009, when the 10-year arrangement ended. As a result, starting in 2008 the Bush administration quietly set out to find a new site from which to launch its counter-drug missions. Talks with Peru didn't get very far, but Colombia proved quite willing to host the U.S. assets. When the United States requested a presence at one base, Colombia offered five, then seven. (Many of these bases already had a semi-permanent U.S. military presence anyway, as Colombia has received more than $5 billion in U.S. military and police aid so far this decade.) Secrecy - and real concerns These negotiations occurred in total secrecy, however. Apparently, even Colombia's friendlier neighbors weren't briefed about what was going on. When details about the agreement found their way into Colombia's media in early July, the response was - and continues to be - explosive. Critics of the deal are concerned about what appears to be a greatly expanded mission for the U.S. personnel at the Colombian facilities: instead of simply monitoring suspect drug-trafficking as they did in Manta, the U.S. assets will also be used to help Colombia fight its long, bloody war of attrition against the FARC. There are concerns about the size of the U.S. footprint. A congressionally mandated "troop cap" - an attempt to discourage "mission creep" - currently limits the U.S. presence in Colombia to 800 military personnel and 600 U.S. citizen contractors. The "cap" has been increased before (in 2004), and there is reason for concern that, once the new U.S. presences are established, the Pentagon will go back to Congress asking for a bigger presence. Despite U.S. and Colombian assurances that this will not happen, neighboring countries are concerned that the U.S. presence will be used to carry out operations beyond Colombia's borders. Human rights advocates worry about the United States entering further into a marriage of convenience with the most abusive military in the Americas, accused of well over 1,000 extrajudicial executions since 2002. The continent's leaders are now in Bariloche (the United States is not attending), and the meeting could be contentious. We must hope that it is not. A day of hostilities between Colombia and Venezuela could make tensions far worse than if the meeting had not taken place at all. The two countries have hardened their positions in advance of the meeting. Colombian Foreign Minister Jaime Bermúdez is saying that "we are not going to Bariloche to consult about anything," and that the basing deal is all but signed. For his part, President Chávez published an open letter to the other presidents in an Argentine newspaper Thursday warning of a "counter-offensive from the North American empire." Brazil's role, and South America's moment Much will be up to Brazil, the Americas' largest country, which under center-left President Luis Inacio Lula da Silva has been playing a greater leadership role in regional politics. As the main regional military power in South America, Brazil is genuinely worried about having a significant U.S. presence nearby. Though it may sound odd to us, the Brazilian military for decades has operated under the threat hypothesis that the United States wishes to control the Amazon basin. The under-the-radar base negotiations with Colombia unhelpfully play into that hypothesis. Nonetheless, Lula has indicated that he will not oppose the base arrangement if he is given written assurances that the U.S. personnel will never leave Colombian territory and airspace. In its regional leadership role, Brazil wants to calm tensions . Lula spoke on the phone for half an hour with Chávez on Thursday and is breakfasting with him before the Bariloche meetings, in an attempt to get him to tone down the rhetoric. The Bariloche meeting could, years from now, be seen as a crucial turning point for South America's political stability and security. This is so because Latin America, as a whole, is suddenly in bad shape. Drug-related violence is killing nearly 5,000 people per year in Mexico, and the power of organized crime is growing almost everywhere. The June 28 military coup in Honduras has yet to be reversed. The tensions between right and left-wing governments in South America are like nothing we've ever seen, even during the Cold War. And militaries throughout the continent are seeing their budgets and arsenals increase dramatically, spurring fears of an arms race . Will today's meeting be seen as the moment when the continent got together, independently of the United States, to reduce tensions and increase cooperation to solve common problems? Or will it be viewed as the moment when things really began to unravel, as the U.S. basing deal in Colombia - and the Obama administration's failure to explain it - became the catalyst for years of acrimony and instability? More on Argentina
 
Eva Paterson: Glenn Beck's Attack On Van Jones: Fantasies & Falsehoods Top
After smearing White House special advisor Van Jones for days on his show, Glenn Beck said on August 27, 2009: "I want to point out the silence; no one has challenged these facts -- they just attack me personally." Well, the White House is wise to stay above the fray but someone has to set the record straight. And as the person who first hired Van Jones, initially as a legal intern and later as a legal fellow, I am in a unique position to know the truth. And the truth is: Beck is fabricating his facts. For instance: several times on his show, Beck has said or implied that Van went to prison for taking part in the Rodney King riots. No Criminal Convictions Van has never served time in any prison. He has never been convicted of any crime. And just to be clear: Van was not even in Los Angeles during those tumultuous days. I know because he was working for me -- in San Francisco -- when the four Los Angeles police officers were acquitted in the beating of Rodney King. I was the Executive Director of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area when Van was an intern. The verdicts came down on April 29, 1992. I remember Van (who was then a legal intern working with me from Yale Law School) coming into my office in San Francisco. Many of us, including Van, sat there together, listening to the news and weeping. We were all in a state of shock. That night, TV showed the tragic images of LA burning. The next day, when an initially peaceful march in downtown San Francisco devolved into chaos, Van left the area in tears. He was not involved in any destructive activity. He even penned an essay despairing of the violence and the state of the country. So how can Beck make such unsubstantiated claims? The True Story (From Someone Who Was There) This is what really happened. On May 8, 1992, the week AFTER the Rodney King disturbances, I sent a staff attorney and Van out to be legal monitors at a peaceful march in San Francisco. The local police, perhaps understandably nervous, stopped the march and arrested hundreds of people -- including all the legal monitors. The matter was quickly sorted out; Van and my staff attorney were released within a few hours. All charges against them were dropped. Van was part of a successful class action lawsuit later; the City of San Francisco ultimately compensated him financially for his unjust arrest (a rare outcome). So the unwarranted arrest at a peaceful march -- for which the charges were dropped and for which Van was financially compensated -- is the sole basis for the smear that he is some kind of dangerous criminal. Van has spoken often about that difficult period 17 years ago -- and its impact on him, as a young law student. But to imply that he was somehow a rioter who went to prison is absurd. Beck also bizarrely claims that Van was arrested in the Seattle WTO protests. That is just a flat-out falsehood. You don't have to take my word for it. Arrests and convictions are all a matter of public record. Beck is at best relying on Internet rumors or even inventing claims to boost his ratings. Beck is no more accurate with present facts than he is with past ones. Not a Mysterious 'Czar" Beck has said repeatedly that Van is some kind of a mysterious "czar," accountable to no one but the President. A simple Internet search shows that this claim is false. A March 10, 2009, press release announced that Van was hired by the Chair of the White House Council on Environmental Quality - to work on her staff as a "special advisor." In other words, Van is within the normal White House chain of command, reporting to an office confirmed by the United States Senate, just like most White House staffers. Media outlets sometimes use the "czar" shorthand. But the facts show that Van has no mysterious role or extra-constitutional powers. Beck has implied on two occasions that Van Jones and other Obama appointees were not vetted by the FBI. False. I was interviewed in my own office by an FBI agent, dutifully vetting Van. Yet another fabrication on the part of Mr. Beck. Beck also claims that Van has somehow gained control over $500 million in Green Jobs Act funding and can hand out millions of dollars at his whim. Again, that is patently ridiculous. No Authority to Hand out Billions The law is clear that the Department of Labor has authority over the program, with normal rules governing the funds. Anybody who thinks that a lone government official can pass out money, arbitrarily and without oversight, knows nothing about our legal system. A blizzard of lawsuits would stop any such scheme in its tracks, if one were ever put in place. Perhaps more importantly: final authority at the Department of Labor lies with the Secretary of Labor. Anyone who thinks that a Senate-confirmed, Cabinet-level Secretary would cede control of a $500 million program to some mid-level White House staffer knows nothing about our political system. It is ridiculous. Promoting Business-Based Solutions But I have to take on the worst one: Beck repeatedly and mistakenly asserts that Van is presently a communist. Once again, this charge is easily refuted - most obviously by the pro-business, market-based ideas Van has promoted for years, including in his best-selling book, The Green Collar Economy . Van's book is a veritable song of praise to capitalism, especially the socially responsible and eco-friendly kind. Yes, for a while, Van and his student-aged friends ran around spouting 1960s rhetoric and romanticizing revolutionary icons. But that was years ago. Way back then, I counseled him to rethink his tactics and to work for change in wiser ways. In time, he jettisoned his youthful notions and moved on to seek more effective and attainable solutions. Fortunately for all of us, it looks like he has found some. Over the past several years, Van has emerged as the perhaps the nation's chief proponent of using business-based solutions to create jobs and clean up the environment. In his book and his speeches, he highlights the key role of entrepreneurship in solving our nation's problems. The 'Green' Jack Kemp? Van believes in government clearing the way for private-sector innovation. In a YouTube clip, he said recently that progressives and conservatives should work together to find common ground and create a clean energy economy. Van said: "We are not promoting welfare. We are promoting work. ... We are not expanding entitlements. We are expanding enterprise and investment. ... We are not trying to redistribute existing wealth. We are trying to reinvent an existing sector, so that we can create NEW wealth - by unleashing innovation and entrepreneurship. This should be common ground." He has been preaching that gospel, in various forms, for years and years. Van Jones is the nation's "Green" Jack Kemp -- using business-based solutions to attack poverty. I found it interesting that Bill O'Reilly in his interview repeatedly asked Glenn Beck whether Van Jones' youthful views had changed over time. Beck never answers those inquiries and instead keeps insisting that Van has championed these ideas recently. Again, that is simply not true. Quotes Taken Out of Context Upon investigation, it turns out that Beck is quoting (out of context) an article that in fact makes the OPPOSITE point. The 2005 profile that Beck is flogging actually makes it crystal clear -- even in the headline -- that Jones has "renounced" his earlier views, matured and moved on. Van's transformation is the entire point of the piece, and it is impossible that Beck does not know this. Fortunately, O'Reilly seemed to sense the truth. I remember seeing O'Reilly interview Van Jones some time ago and was struck by how much respect O'Reilly showed for Jones. Perhaps O'Reilly's knowing queries were prompted by that encounter. When Van worked for me, he did exhibit that "know it all" quality that so many of us - myself included -- have when we are young. Over the years, I have enjoyed watching him grow and blossom into a loving father and husband -- and a creative, effective leader. Van Jones: A True Patriot Mr. Beck's unfounded attacks are misleading and false. All of us who know Van are so very proud of him and the work he is doing to improve the lives of ALL Americans. He has touched and improved thousands of lives in the course of his career. Now he is in a position to help millions. He will do well because Van is a true patriot, who loves his country. He has dedicated his life to trying to make it better -- especially trying to uplift the poor, the left-out and the left-behind. In his book, Van draws a distinction between "cheap patriotism" and "deep patriotism." I highly recommend that chapter to Mr. Beck. I do hope Van is keeping his head up, walking tall and continuing to fight for green businesses and green jobs. Our country needs more of them - and more people like Van. More on Glenn Beck
 
Tom D'Antoni: The Democrats' Problem: There's No Health Care Plan to SELL. Top
People have been precocupied with the preposterous lies that the Republicans have perpetrated on health insurance reform. At the same time, pundits repeat the conventional inside-the-beltway line that the Democrats are "off-message." The reality is that Democrats don't have a message to be off of. Yesterday, Roger Hickey from Campaign for America's Future and one of the leading experts on the public insurance option was a guest on the show that fellow Huffingtonpost blogger Art Levine and I do on blogtalkradio.com. I asked him what exactly is the public health insurance option at this point. He couldn't give me a full answer. Not because he is uniformed on the subject, no one is more informed, but because there are several bills in Congress, all of them different. There isn't a fully formed public option. You can listen to the full interview here. There are several versions of it, as he explained. Maybe they'll just put everybody under Medicare? Maybe they'll set up a parallel system with all of the same features as Medicare? Will there be mandatory insurance? Who pays? How much? What about small busniesses? He knew what each bill had to say but he couldn't say for certain what will be in the final proposal because there isn't a unified bill. So how are Democrats supposed to convince the public that their plan is a good one when there isn't a plan? They can't. And they haven't. This has given the big "health" corporations and their Republican elves the opportunity to throw out any charge they like. All the Democrats can say is, "There's nothing like that in the bill." What bill? That's why words like "public option" have little meaning to those not on the inside of the issue and to those outside the beltway. "Public option" represents an amorphous concept that has yet to be spelled out. Perhaps Obama has been playing rope-a-dope. It certainly worked for him during the election. When many of us were crying for him to strike back, he stayed on the ropes and struck at the right time. Maybe he has been allowing Congress to make a mess and the Republicans punch themselves out so that he can walk in with a coherent plan when Congress re-convenes. Or not. Meanwhile, progressives have pushed back nicely and the fear-mongers have not progressed much past the 20% base they had in November. It shouldn't be too hard to convince most Americans of a good public option..... if they knew what it was. The time has come for Democrats to bring one bill forward so that independants and the more conservative wing of the party can have a real plan to judge.
 
Will Durst: Cash For Clunkers: The Sequel! Top
Got to give the President a big bowl of props for interrupting Obama Rama on Martha's Vineyard with his valiant effort to paint a big old smiling happy face on the side of the economy. Although in the future, he might want to come up with something a bit more reassuring than "we're losing jobs at a much slower pace." Hey everybody, did you catch that? The economy is doing less badly. Alright! Its not getting worse as rapidly as it previously was. Woo hoo! The brakes are on the slide. About as encouraging as a squad of septuagenarian cheerleaders waving black pom- poms after a loss in the rain at night. Typically, economists are unsure whether the parachute has or hasn't opened to slow the free fall of our recession. Or why. That's because they're economists. You know that phrase: "couldn't tell his ass from yellow paint?" Next time you see an economist on one of those cable talk shows, check under his fingernails. You got it. Chips of yellow paint. Look up equivocating in the dictionary, there's a picture of an accountant hiding from an economist. It could be seasonal. Perhaps summer barbecue grill tongs sales peaked above expectations, or back- to- school notebooks flew off the shelf or there's been an early run on Cool Whip in anticipation of massive pumpkin pie production. Could be just the natural way of things. You know, part of that whole good, bad, boom, bust, excellent, sucky cycle. Then again, it might have been the much- vaunted economic stimulus package kicking in. Hard to tell. Although, a lot of folks still maintain the only thing the stimulus package aroused was their suspicion. Cash for Clunkers might have had a hand in it. The rebate program ended its run with about 700,000 new cars sold, and initial estimates are that 3 or 4 of them were made in America. I got to be honest, when I first heard the phrase Cash for Clunkers, I thought they were talking about raising the per diem for the Senate. Or it was a recurring entry on a lobbyist's expense report. It hasn't been all roses and sunshine and bubble baths. Some dealers are still whining about government delays in rebate reimbursement. Yeah. You read that right. Auto dealers are complaining someone is slow holding up their end of a bargain. Should have signed up for the undercoating. Now the feds are rolling out a sequel to Cash for Clunkers whereby consumers earn rebates by trading in large appliances for energy efficient replacements. The old two- birds- with- one- coin strategy. The problem is there's no cute alliterative name for the program. I'm sorry, Cash for Stackable Washer/ Dryer Combos doesn't quite cut it. Cash for Upright Freezers with Manual Defrost lacks a certain je ne sais quoi. What we need is a series of programs to recapture the public's fancy and open wide their wallets. People eat, don't they? Why not seduce them into consuming domestic donuts? Cash for Dunkers. Or how about our brave American rotisserie chicken establishments? Cash for Cluckers. Maybe a stimulus program for disaffected banjo players... Cash for Pluckers. Oyster restaurants could use assistance: Cash for Shuckers. Let's throw a bone to our indigenous cave explorers. Cash for Spelunkers. And finally, I'm personally hoping to hook into a research grant for exposing fake psychics: You know, Cash for Debunkers. Will Durst is a San Francisco based political comic who writes sometimes. This is one of them. Please catch his new one man show "The Lieutenant Governor from the State of Confusion," when it appears near you. More on Barack Obama
 
John David Lewis: Listen to Mr. David Walker Top
A person who is in the pay of the government is not always free to speak publicly about the most pressing issues he confronts. Administrators who are appointed to perform specific tasks are generally not free to contradict or even to challenge policies. They often cannot advocate for specific proposals, even if they think that such proposals will be needed to prevent catastrophe. When Dr. Alan Carlin, a federal Environmental Protection Agency official, wrote a report in March, 2009 that criticized the EPA's process of formulating regulations, the report was squashed. Emails from EPA officials state that "a very negative impact on our office" made use of the report impossible. To protect the bureaucracy, Dr. Carlin was told to cease such criticisms. Such officials must often make a choice: to remain silent and keep their jobs, or to resign and speak the truth. Faced with this dilemma, on March 12, 2008, David Walker chose to resign. David Walker is the former Controller General of the United States, and former head of the Government Accountability Office. As the nation's chief accountant he was appointed by President Clinton, and resigned near the end of George W. Bush's second term. He had no authority to decide how a single penny of government funds should be collected or distributed. His job was to count those funds. Mr. Walker's enormous range of mind reaches far beyond a single budget year. His is a long-range perspective, which allows him to project fiscal trends decades into the future, and to assess, through simulations, the impacts of policy decisions beyond their immediate effects. He truly understands the economic maxim, promoted by Henry Hazlett, to look beyond the visible effects of any given policy, and to consider its unseen effects. When Walker plotted these trends and considered demographics among many other factors, what he found was "chilling." If fundamental reforms are not begun now, he concluded, the United States will experience a financial and political collapse comparable to the fall of Rome. In a presentation to the National Press Foundation, January 17, 2008, Mr. Walker brought forth the following facts and projections: 1. From 1966 to 2006, the percentage of federal funds spent on Medicare rose from 1% to 19%. This trend will grow exponentially as millions of "baby boomers" enter the entitlement pool. 2. For the same period, spending for mandated government commitments rose from 26% to 53% of the total budget. The budget is increasingly out of the control of government officials. 3. As of 2007, Medicare is running in arrears. In 2017 Social Security will be in deficit. By the year 2040, Medicare and Social Security alone will be running annual deficits of nearly 900 billion dollars. 4. Medicare spending from now until 2032 will be 235% of economic growth. By 2040, Medicare will be spending about 10% of the nation's Gross Domestic Product annually, and the annual deficits of the United States will total some 20% of the total Gross Domestic Product. The bottom line is this: the largest mandated fiscal exposures now, projected into the future, are over 52,000 billion dollars. That will amount to 90% of all household wealth in the U.S., and will place a burden of over 450 thousand dollars on every household in the land. This is almost ten times the present median household income level. Such spending will lead to national bankruptcy. Mr. Walker concludes that "We face large and growing structural deficits largely due to known demographic trends and rising health care costs." Further, "GAO's simulations show that balancing the budget in 2040 could require actions as large as cutting total federal spending by 60 percent, or raising federal taxes to two times today's level." To close the revenue gap through growth, the United States economy would need to expand in the double-digit range for the next seventy-five years. During the boom years of the 1990s, the economy grew at an average rate of 3.2%. Walker concludes, succinctly: "we cannot simply grow our way out of this problem." Of course Mr. Walker's analysis is far more complex than this. Health care is certainly not all of it--but health care entitlements constitute by far the largest single piece. Those who think that creating thousands of billions of dollars in new government entitlements--in a health care bill that adds tens of millions of Americans to government programs--will do anything except hasten the coming bankruptcy bear the burden of showing why. Mr. Walker has taken his show on the road, in an attempt to educate Americans about the nature of the financial disaster they are creating. He was accompanied by both the Brookings Institute on the left, and the Heritage Foundation on the right. He stresses that this coming financial meltdown is known by everyone in Washington--but no one wants to acknowledge it. A Rasmussen poll shows that almost twice as many Americans think that cutting the deficit, rather than health care reform, should be the president's top priority. Twice as many think that the legislation will drive up health care costs than think it will lower costs. Perhaps these Americans grasp Mr. Walker's point better than their elected representatives do. Sources: Dr. Alan Carlin: http://www.openmarket.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/Carlin-Final-Report.pdf EPA emails: http://cei.org/cei_files/fm/active/0/Endangerment%20Comments%206-23-09.pdf David Walker's Presentation: http://www.gao.gov/cghome/d08446cg.pdf Health Care Polls: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/budget_priorities http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/july_2009/just_23_believe_health_care_costs_will_go_down_if_reform_passes_congress More on Bankruptcy
 
Black Eyed Peas' Oprah Ad: The Oprah Feelin' Remix (VIDEO) Top
The Black Eyed Peas have remixed their hit song "I Gotta Feeling" for an Oprah promo "Oprah Feelin'," for which she tweeted her thanks on Friday, writing: "thank you will.i.am and black eyed peas. I love you." The first lady of talk has been in repeats all summer, and is finally coming back - says the ad - on September 14th with new episodes. WATCH: Get HuffPost Entertainment On Facebook and Twitter! More on Video
 
Craig and Marc Kielburger: Without Freedom of Expression Top
Suwicha Thakor is a family man. The 37-year-old shares a crowded home in Nakhon Phanom in north-eastern Thailand with his wife, three children and dependant father. An engineer by trade, Thakor sent his oldest child, a boy of 16 named Kanchai, to a bilingual school in Bangkok. The boy wants to study computer engineering at university. Although Kanchai is far from home, the family agrees his schooling is worth it. Unfortunately, Thakor will be away from his children longer than expected. Kanchai recent returned to Nakhon Phanom and the local school with his brother and sister. His mother Thitima couldn't keep up with her son's school payments. Money has been tight for the past few months. It might still be for the next 10 years. That's the length of the sentence Thakor received in April for posting two comments on a website deemed insulting to Thailand's monarchy. "Most of my friends don't know about this. Some people who got wind of it came to ask if I was related to the man who got arrested," Thakor's 14-year-old daughter Kanyawat told a Thai newspaper. "But there's one person who knew I was my father's daughter, and he deliberately asked me aloud right in front of my school." As Thakor endured the first few months of his prison sentence, a similar story unfolded in North Korea. There, two American journalists were sentenced to 12 years of hard labour for entering the country without a visa. This, unlike Thakor's story, rightly caught the attention of politicians, the media and the public. Earlier this month, former President Bill Clinton even travelled to Pyongyang to ensure their pardon and bring the women home. Their release was an important victory for freedom of press worldwide. But, Thakor's story is a setback. In Thailand, the crime of lese-majeste (or defaming, insulting or threatening the King and the monarchy) carries a harsh penalty. In January, authorities matched the IP address on Thakor's computer to two such comments. He was arrested at a friend's home and denied bail twice. Even though his sentence was cut in half because he pled guilty, the procedure for seeking a royal pardon was suspended. Thakor's crime is something that millions of us in North America do every day. Our press writes articles and readers are encouraged to express their views in comment sections. There, you can share your views. But, unlike Thakor, you probably won't spend the next 10 years in jail for doing so. Thakor is not a journalist. He has no American passport or friendship with someone from the mainstream press. That means, besides a petition campaign from Reporters Without Borders, his story hasn't garnered the political response of the American journalists. In Australia, a group of human rights activists campaigned to name a newborn elephant in his honour while the Doha Centre for Media Freedom has been helping his family financially. Still, Thitima has been forced to sell many of Thakor's hard-earned possessions. While Kanchai is closer to home, dealing with the stress of having his father in jail has had repercussions on the bright student's grades. "I have not been able to concentrate much because I've been thinking about my father," Kanchai told the media. Thakor may not be a journalist. But, as the internet changes how news is disseminated, so to does it change the definition of the practice. Thakor was contributing to the debate media is supposed to elicit. Having true freedom of press and freedom of speech means we need to remember the hundreds of others around the world who have been jailed for expressing their opinions. Thakor is a family man, not a criminal. He deserves to go back home, too. More on Thailand
 
Jill Schlesinger: Cash for Clunker Sequel: Dump the Pump Top
Given the success of "Cash for Clunkers," the government will introduce a sequel that one observer called " Dollars for Dishwashers ". That's not really the name, but it's better than "Clunkers, Part Deux". It's reported that Uncle Sam will fund a $300 million program via the stimulus plan that will allow you to swap energy-sucking appliances for new ones that carry that " Energy Star " seal of approval. If car dealers thought that getting paid was hard, the sequel plans to allow each state to get in on the act. In other words, while in NY, your air conditioner might fetch a $200 rebate, in Wyoming, it may only get you $150. The Department of Energy wants to focus on ten categories of appliances, but states could petition for an expansion of that list. The rebates are likely to be $50-$200 per appliance. After hearing about this and then the Toys-R-Us "Cash for Kiddie Clunkers," I started to feel left out. How about a program for women who need new, more efficient shoes for the fall season? Under the "Dump the Pump" program, we'll trade in our beat up, bull market Manolo Blahniks for more sensible, recession-style flats. For every pair of shoes that we trade, I'm thinking we should get a $50 rebate. The struggling retailers will love it and we would be helping to reduce the cost of podiatry care. It's just a thought... Image by Flickr User Scalleja , CC 2.0
 
Newly Goat-Free, a Galapagos Island Awaits a Finch Renaissance Top
When Charles Darwin first came upon the Galapagos Islands, he wasn't as impressed with the diversity of bird life he found there as is widely believed. It was later, at home, that his observations of the beaks of finches led him toward his revolutionary theory of evolution. Still, the finches of the Galapagos have an unparalleled place in the minds of conservationists. Now, on the island of Santiago, the fourth largest in the Galapagos Archipelago, a bird resurgence is poised to begin. And it's all because of goats. More accurately, it was the decline in local finches resulted from the feral goats released on the island in the 1920s. In their first 70 years, they chewed through every bit of brush on the 226-square-mile island (that's about the size of Manhattan and Galveston islands combined). In their wake: grass ... and fewer birds. The story of the Galapagos is that similar species developed unique adaptations to living on different islands, each with different habitats. For instance, the woodpecker finch, on Santiago Island, learned to use a twig, stick, or cactus spine as a tool to dislodge grubs and insects from trees. ( Woodpecker finch photo by Sonia Kleindorfer, courtesy of American Bird Conservancy .) The island was declared goat-free in February, after the largest "invasive mammal eradication" effort ever completed, according to the American Bird Conservancy. Now, the birds are free to return, following the island's shrubs and trees. You Too Can Help the Birds. Here's How: 25 bird conservation tips from the National Audubon Society Citizen science project that benefits birds or other wildlife . 21 organic lawn care tips from a real expert Start an organic garden in 9 easy steps 11 volunteer vacations that benefit the environment
 
Edward Murray: Make Your Own Summer Blockbuster Trailer! Top
In today’s economy, it can be difficult putting together a $100 million budget to shoot your own summer blockbuster...not to mention finding a decent dumpster to eat out of! So why not forego the sustenance altogether and put your last bit of energy towards making your very own summer blockbuster trailer?!   Here I’ve outlined the keys to creating a successful trailer. Good luck…just remember: We’re all against you.   The establishing shot is arguably the most important part of the summer blockbuster trailer. I’ll argue right now that it’s NOT the most important part of the trailer in case no one else has got the cojones fuegos to step up. No takers? I thought not…   To open up, go ahead and show us which summer blockbuster locale your trailer takes place in; the future, a remote location known only to heads of state and peasant gypsies, or the coast of a sleepy New England drinking village with a condo problem.   Introduce your villain with a shot of him declaring that he wants to launch the warheads, disseminate the virus, or lick the bowl.   Now, it’s time for your first explosion! Since you don’t want to blow your CGI wad too quickly, I recommend blowing something up for real.   Perhaps you could trick Chuck Norris into walking into a shed of dynamite while smoking a cigar? Just tell him, “Chuck, there’s an internet meme in there waiting for you to kick its ass.” When he asks “What’s a ‘meme’?” Tell him that it’s a part of Obama’s health care policy... Then offer him a light.   When dealing with explosions in your trailer, it’s important to maximize the dramatic build so as not to insult your typical, erudite movie-goer. Ask yourself if YOUR audience would see “Transformers 9: Metal Genitals.” If the answer is ‘yes,’ then be sure to lead up to your first explosion utilizing proper dramatic structure as outlined by Plato’s “The Pluto Nashes.” If the answer to this question is ‘no,’ then the person you asked is a f**king liar, because everyone would see “Transformers 9: Metal Genitals,” you hear me?! Everyone! Gimmie my shotgun back and stay off my lawn!   Here’s a broad overview of my own 5-act trailer structure here:   Act I : Show your nuclear warhead/virus/baked goods. Act II : Show breasts. Act III : Show your villain smiling. Act IV : Show breasts again; jiggling, ½ cup. Act V :  Show a global landmark being destroyed by exploding schnauzer/poodle mixes.   Now, those are the first 5 acts of the first act. If this is confusing, don’t worry about it…you don’t get it, and you should be watching movie trailers rather than making them.   Next, show a crack-squad of African-American ops that will defeat your villain (or you may choose a rag-tag motley crew of kids at the ‘poor’ summer camp who may or may not covertly assassinate that jerky leader of the rich kids’ camp: Brad Snettler!)   Show some members of the crack squad not getting along. Show some members of the crack squad smoking crack. Show a piece of technology that only the Vatican possesses. (Ex: “Behold… The Deus Ex God-ina!”) Show the villain struggling to detonate more dogs.   Get quiet, we’re building up to what is known in dramatic circles as The Mid-Act Trans-Universal.   Suggest that time travel is possible and how truly messed up that would be. But leave the issue unresolved. (Sequel, hellooo!!)   Close-up on your protagonist slowly taking off a pair of aviator sunglasses… no, slower… yeah, that’s right… now do it again.   Bullets. Explosions. Emoticons.   Close-up on Dan Aykroyd mugging quizzically…but knowingly…   Wow! Did you see how far that SUV flew through the air? That went farther than the SUV in LAST summer’s blockbuster!   Ok, now, get realllll quiet.   This is the when you show Silent Intensity; freefalls, incoming warheads from a distance, shaved hyenas stampeding in slow-motion, or a nice synchronized swimming piece (a truly under-utilized tool in today’s filmmaking worlds. NYU students, take note!)   Now bring up the noise with a round of full-on explosive explosions, all to the tune of your favorite Billy Joel tune! An urban cityscape blowing up to the climax of “Miami 2017: Seen the Lights Go Out on Broadway (Live)” plays would be sweet, sweet genius.   Ok, now, we’re coming into the home stretch of your trailer, now get big! Bigger! Here we go…   NOW!! Show the TITLE OF YOUR MOVIE !   (A quick silent second to let the audience catch their breath, pick their slack jaws up off the floor, and wipe up their drool.)   Now, do a quick smash cut to your protagonist giving an immortal one-liner that everyone will remember! Something a la:   “I’ll be back.” “Later, Gator.” “I don’t think that particular Senor Frog’s is open anymore, but we can try it.”   Blackout.   Flash toys. Flash breasts.   Blackout.   Congratulations on your first summer blockbuster movie trailer! Next time, we’ll show you how to design the cover for your first novel! Just kidding! Nobody reads anymore…not even you.
 
Greg Palast: Economic Hit Men and the Next Drowning of New Orleans Top
Hurricane Bush Four Years Later: Part 2     This week only, our readers  can download, free of charge , Greg Palast's film, "Big Easy to Big Empty: The Untold Story of the Drowning of New Orleans."  Or donate and get a signed DVD . Watch the 1-minute trailer ...   Who Put Out the Hit on van Heerden?   Ivor van Heerden is the professor at Louisiana State University's Hurricane Center who warned the levees of New Orleans were ready to blow — months and years before Katrina did the job.  For being right, van Heerden was rewarded with... getting fired. (See  Katrina, Four Years Later: Expert Fired Who Warned Levees Would Burst )  But I've been in this investigating game long enough to know that van Heerden's job didn't die of natural causes or academic issues. This was a hit. Some very powerful folks wanted him disappeared and silenced — for good.  So who done it?  Here are the facts.  Dr. van Heerden has lots of friends, mostly the people of New Orleans, those who survived and cheered his fight to save their city. But he also has enemies, many of them, and they are powerful.  First, there is Big Oil. More than a decade ago, van Heerden pointed the finger at oil drilling as a culprit in threatening New Orleans and the Gulf Coast with flooding.  "Certainly he was critical of what the oil companies did to the coast," Louisiana engineer HJ Bosworth told me. "Seeing what kind of bad citizens they were. Dozens and dozens of pipeline canals just carved the living daylights out of the coast just to find some oil."  Well, we need oil, don't we?  True, but Bosworth, who advises Levees.org, a non-profit group that birddogs hurricane safety work, explained the connection between flooding New Orleans and oil drilling quantified by van Heerden's research. "Takes a million years to build (the protective coastal marsh); once you carve it up, it's just like bleeding a wild animal, hang it up, carve some holes in it, and the juice just drains out of it. Saltwater and tide invade. You make [the state] susceptible to flooding from coastal and tidal surges."  So I was amazed to learn that, shortly after van Heerden, wetlands protector, was given the heave-ho by LSU, a group calling itself "America's Wetland" gave the university a fat check for $300,000. After a little digging, I found that it wasn't really "America's Wetland," the group with the oh-so-green name and love-Mother-Nature website, that provided the money. One-hundred percent of the loot, in fact, came from Chevron Oil Corporation. Chevron had merely "green-washed" the money through "Wetlands."  Was this Big Oil's "thank you" to LSU for canning van Heerden? The University refuses to talk to me about van Heerden's firing ("It's a confidential personnel matter").  Bosworth notes such a grant to the University "doesn't come without strings attached." And this "Wetland" grant appears to have some tangled threads. LSU will monitor the coast's environment, guided by a committee of what the school's PR office describes as "experts" in coastal infrastructure and hurricane research. But the school is pointedly excluding its own expert, van Heerden. Instead of van Heerden, LSU announced it will rely on representatives from Chevron — and Shell Oil.  You can't challenge Shell's expertise on coastal erosion. The Gulf Restoration Network has calculated that the oil giant, "has dredged 8.8 million cubic yards material while laying pipelines since 1983 causing the loss of 22,624 acres."  Shell too is a sponsor of "America's Wetland."  Bad Behavior   Van Heerden and his team of hurricane experts at LSU have other enemies, notably Big Oil's little sisters: The Army Corp of Engineers and its contractors. One internal University memo that has come to light is a complaint from the Army Corp of Engineers' Washington office to an LSU official demanding to know why van Heerden's "irresponsible behavior is tolerated."  By van Heerden's bad "behavior," they seem to be referring to the professor's computer model of the Gulf which predicted, years before Katrina hit, that the levees built by the Army Corp were too short. The Army Corp, van Heerden asserts, compounded the danger to New Orleans by going shovel-crazy, with massive dredging and channel-cutting sought by shipping interests.  Following the complaint from Washington, the University took away van Heerden's computer (no kidding). But they couldn't take away his voice. He began to speak out. University officials do not deny they told him to shut up, to stop speaking to the press about his concerns. They were worried, they told van Heerden, that his statements jeopardized their government funding.  Van Heerden's revelations were, indeed, damning. He revealed that the Bush White House knew, the night Katrina came ashore, that the levees were breaking up, but withheld this crucial information from the state's emergency response center. As a result, the state slowed evacuation and stranded residents were left to drown. [See  Big Easy to Big Empty .]  A class action lawsuit has been filed against the Army Corp of Engineers on behalf of all the people of the city who lost homes and loved ones because the Corp-designed levees had failed. Anyone with a TV and two eyes could see that. But the Bush Administration flat out denied it knew its system was flawed and refused any responsibility for the disaster.  Van Heerden, who had warned Washington, long before the flood, that the levees were 18 inches too short, would have been a devastating expert witness for the public. But the university ordered him not to testify, a relief for the Corps. (A verdict is expected soon in the non-jury case.)  The Army Corp and its contractors can feel safer now that van Heerden has been booted. His Hurricane Center will be downsized and instead, the University will expand its "Wetland" program, with Chevron's checkbook.  Joining Chevron and Shell on the LSU board of "wetland" experts will be the Shaw Group, a huge Army Corp contractor.  If you've read John Perkins' book, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man , you would know about Shaw Group, or at least the subsidiary for whom Perkins did his dirty work: an engineering outfit that used flim-flam, intimidation and fraud to turn a buck. (I once directed a government racketeering investigation of one of their projects before Shaw bought them up. In the 1988 case, a jury found the company was co-conspirator in a multi-billion-dollar fraud, charges the company settled with a civil payment.)  Shaw Group is also a sponsor of "America's Wetland." So is electricity giant Entergy Corporation. That's the company that shut off the power in New Orleans during the flood, then sold the loose juice elsewhere, pocketing a multi-million-dollar windfall.  Yes, America's Wetland does have a green cover, Environmental Defense, exposed in the Guardian UK in 1999 for its icky habit of licking the sugar off corporate candy canes. We caught them trying to set up a lucrative financial operation with the very polluters they were supposed to be challenging. [See  Fill your lungs it's only borrowed grime ]  I spoke with the Chairman of American Wetland, King Milling. Milling's just a local good ol' boy, a sincere guy, not a front for Big Oil. But he naively let his group be used to buy the debate over the environment and ice out un-bought experts like van Heerden. Flood Warning   With LSU deep in the pocket of the corporate powers and under Army Corp pressure, van Heerden didn't stand a chance. For doing nothing more than trying to save a few thousand lives, he has paid quite a price. As he told me this week from his home, "No good turn goes unpunished."  That's van Heerden's fate. But what about the city's? Is New Orleans ready for another Katrina?  His answer is not comforting: "No, definitely not. If anything, it's worse than when Katrina hit. We've lost a lot of wetlands protection. It's not very safe... A section of the flood wall itself has sunk about 9 inches, a result of [Hurricane] Gustav."  Is anyone listening?  "The [Army] Corp won't talk to me," says van Heerden. "Like everybody else, they are crossing their fingers and hoping we don't have a storm."  Well, don't say we didn't warn you.    Greg Palast's film for Democracy Now! " Big Easy to Big Empty: The Untold Story of the Drowning of New Orleans " i s available as a no-cost download  this week.  Or make a donation  to the investigative reporting fund and receive a gift of the DVD of the film, with Amy Goodman, signed by the reporter. For more information, go to  www.GregPalast.com .   Subscribe to Palast's  podcast  and follow Palast on  Twitter .   More on George Bush
 
Wall Street Leverage Rising At Fastest Pace Since '07 Top
Aug. 28 (Bloomberg) -- Banks are increasing lending to buyers of high-yield company loans and mortgage bonds at what may be the fastest pace since the credit-market debacle began in 2007. More on Banks
 
William Fisher: Closing GITMO: Is This the DOJ's Detention Model? Top
As the planned closing of the U.S. military's detention center at Guantanamo Bay draws nearer, human rights activists are raising questions about the treatment of detainees who will be transferred to the U.S. for trial. But, while the media has focused virtually all its attention on these foreign prisoners held abroad, the government is already imprisoning in the U.S. American citizens awaiting trial on terror-related charges - and under what their supporters describe as draconian conditions. These people are being held under a Department of Justice rule known as Special Administrative Measures (SAMs), a rule dating from the Bill Clinton era and strengthened during the administration of George W. Bush. SAMs are designed to keep dangerous inmates in custody from communicating with other terror suspects on the outside, and to prevent them from ordering violence or harming other inmates. The measures were expanded after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, extending the limit to one year from 120 days and permitting the monitoring of communications between the inmates and their lawyers in certain circumstances. The DOJ and its Bureau of Prisons say six people - four charged with terror-related crimes -- are currently being held under the SAMs rule. But one case appears to be attracting increasing attention. This is the case of Syed Hashmi, a 29-year-old Pakistani immigrant and U.S. citizen who grew up in Queens, New York, and who has been held in solitary confinement in a federal prison in New York City for more than two years while he awaits trial on charges of providing material support to Al Qaeda. Hashmi, a Muslim, is on a 23-hour solitary-confinement lockdown and 24-hour surveillance including when he showers and goes to the bathroom. He was not allowed family visits for months. Now, he can see one person for an hour and a half, every other week. He is permitted to write one letter a week to a single member of his family, but he cannot use more than three pieces of paper per letter. Within his own cell, he is restricted in his movements and he is not allowed to try to talk guards or other inmates. Hashmi is forbidden any contact -- directly or through his attorneys -- with the news media. He can read newspapers, but only those portions approved by his jailers -- and not until 30 days after publication. He is forbidden to listen to news radio stations or to watch television news channels. He is also under 24-hour electronic monitoring inside and outside of his cell. He is allowed one hour of recreation every day -- which is periodically denied -- and not given fresh air but must exercise alone inside a cage. One of Hashmi's Brooklyn College professors, Jeanne Theoharis, who has attended the hearings in his case, told us that Hashmi's "mental health appears to be deteriorating." His attorneys are concerned that his extreme isolation "will cause lasting psychological, emotional, and physical damage" to their client. Theoharis, an associate professor of political science at the City University of New York's Brooklyn College, was instrumental in organizing a campaign to draw attention to the civil liberties and human rights concerns of Hashmi's case that enlisted more than 550 signatories to petition the Justice Department protesting the conditions of Hashmi's confinement and undermining his right to a fair trial. Among them were Henry Louis Gates Jr. and Duncan Kennedy of Harvard; Seyla Benhabib of Yale; and Eric Foner and Saskia Sassen of Columbia. Prosecutors have said that Hashmi's friend, Junaid Babar, stayed at his London apartment for two weeks, while Hashmi was studying for a Master's degree in the U.K. Babar stored luggage containing raincoats, ponchos, and waterproof socks in the apartment. Babar later delivered them to the third-ranking member of Al Qaeda in Pakistan. When, later in New York, a Grand Jury charged Hashmi with "conspiracy to provide material support or resources to a foreign terrorist organization," the socks, ponchos, and raincoats became "military gear." The government also charges that Hashmi let Babar use his cell phone "to call other conspirators." Hashmi says he had no idea whom Babar was calling. Hashmi has denied that he was part of conspiracies to help Al Qaeda, or that he ever gave support to anybody to pass on materials to the terrorist group. He was initially arrested in London in 2006 as he prepared to board a flight to Pakistan and was then extradited to the U.S. He has been held in New York since the Memorial Day weekend, 2007. Hashmi has no criminal record and no history of committing acts of violence. In court in January 2009, Hashmi's lawyers called the restrictions on Hashmi too severe and asked a federal judge to lift some of them, perhaps allowing Hashmi to have a cellmate or to exercise in fresh air. But the judge denied a motion to consider the psychological impact of solitary confinement and ease the conditions of his detention. Hashmi's trial is set for November 30, 2009. Hashmi's friend Babar has pleaded guilty to five counts of material support of Al Qaeda and has agreed to serve as a government witness in terrorism trials in Britain, Canada, and at Hashmi's trial. The Justice Department says Babar is the "centerpiece" of its case against Hashmi. In return, under a plea bargain, Babar will likely get a reduced sentence. If Hashmi is convicted, he may be sentenced to 70 years behind bars. Much of the evidence against Hashmi is classified. His lawyers have received CIA-level clearance to view it but may not discuss it with Hashmi or with other uncleared experts. Sean Maher, one of his attorneys, has told the media that he is under "severe limitations on what I can and can't say." Civil rights lawyer Lynne Stewart was convicted in 2005 for providing material support to a terrorist conspiracy for releasing a statement by imprisoned Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman to his followers in the outlaw Islamic Group. She is now appealing her conviction. Hashmi's lawyer is under the same restrictions. Maher also raised the issue of secrecy in federal court. "One of the paramount issues that this case brings up, without talking about any specifics in this case, is the use of secrecy in modern courtrooms. And in our Article III court, which we're all trying to get people in Guantanamo to, what is the role of secrecy? And what will secrecy's role play in these cases that President Obama says he might bring into these courts? " As U.S. trials of GITMO detainees move closer to reality, these questions are likely to attract far wider interest. As Prof. Corey Robin, another of Hashmi's teachers at Brooklyn College, told us, "The conditions of his confinement have not been changed since President Obama took office. As the nation looks backward to the Bush Administration, it is imperative that we draw attention to abuses - particularly those within our federal prisons and courts - that continue under the Obama Administration." I have no idea about Hashmi's guilt or innocence. That's not what this is about. It's about getting our Department of Justice to dial back the Bush years and return to a tradition of humane treatment -- even for prisoners.
 
Brendan DeMelle: Bonner & Associates Spin Machine in Full Gear To Defend Sullied Brand Top
Usually PR firms like to be behind the news, not in the headlines themselves.  But Bonner & Associates – the D.C. Astroturf shop busted for mailing forged letters to Congress attacking the Waxman-Markey climate and energy bill on behalf of the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity – finds itself under the spotlight trying to save its tarnished brand.  The Wall Street Journal reports that Bonner continues to blame a rogue temporary employee for the forgeries, resurrecting an age-old PR maneuver - when caught with your pants down, blame the button maker.  “It was a setup!” of course.  No systemic pattern of shady behavior to see here! Bonner has lawyered up, hiring veteran Akin Gump attorney Steven R. Ross, in another classic defensive posture often used to convolute the matter and issue veiled threats of countersuits to dissuade investigators from looking deeper into the muck.  Attorney Ross claims that Bonner & Associates were victims in the scheme, overwhelmed by “being short-staffed and given the incredibly short time frame of this [two-week] project," and therefore, according to Ross , "some letters were transmitted to Capitol Hill before they could be thoroughly reviewed." The Wall Street Journal reports that a spokesman for Bonner & Associates says the firm's lawyers told the U.S. Attorney's Office earlier this month in a letter that "if there was an investigation, it should probably focus on" the firm's former temporary employee "because this individual perpetrated the fraud." Josh Nelson over at EnviroKnow.com sums up this charade well : “Now we are supposed to believe that this whole thing is some sort of nefarious plot by a temp employee to sully their ( already completely sullied ) reputation? … It is far easier to deflect responsibility for mistakes and shady business practices when you can blame everything on a temp, right?” Jack Bonner and his ‘Associates’ are well known for specializing in Astroturf tactics – creating the appearance of grassroots support when in fact a corporate client often pays the firm to generate such ‘citizen outrage’ from the cubicles of D.C. area P.R. flacks.  Temporary employees and interns are paid low wages to crank out phone calls and letters to Congress on behalf of a corporate client who cannot drum up enough genuine support for their Big Business agenda.  Jack Bonner reportedly refers to his own firm as a “ white collar sweatshop .” B&A claims it was duped by this rogue temporary employee who answered an ad in the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call, and that the firm terminated the John Doe after only seven days on the job after he was ‘caught’ sending the fraudulent letters to Congress on behalf of elderly, women’s, black and Hispanic organizations (many of whom are outraged by the offensive tactic and urging an investigation ). So who is that masked man?  Where is the rogue temporary employee to defend himself and shed light on the way Bonner’s shop operates?  You need to get your side of the story out, if in fact you do exist.  If you are this elusive John Doe, or know of him, please drop us an email at desmogblog@gmail.com and we will help tell the other side of this saga.
 

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)