Tuesday, August 18, 2009

Y! Alert: The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Yahoo! Blog Alert
Yahoo! Alerts
My Alerts

The latest from The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Michael Bialas: Folk U (Day 1): Ten Best of the Fest Moments Top
The 19th Rocky Mountain Folks Festival began on Friday, August 14, in Lyons, Colorado, along the banks of the St. Vrain River. While kids frolicked in the calm but cool waters, a hardy group of folk enthusiasts were like transfixed students eager to soak up some musical knowledge. They were schooled in a wide variety of styles during an afternoon and evening of intense instruction. Here's a look at the day's final four, each 75-minute act practically running like clockwork. The Final Four • 4-5:15 p.m. -- Mary Gauthier • 5:30-6:45 p.m. -- Dougie MacLean • 7:15-8:30 p.m. -- Madeleine Peyroux • 9-10:30 p.m. -- Rufus Wainwright 1. Covers Girl Madeleine Peyroux has an album of new material, and had a hand in writing all 11 songs, but that didn't stop the silky smooth singer from going back to the basics and interpreting Serge Gainsbourg ("Here's a song by an old French guy," the former Parisian said before taking on "La Javanaise") to Bessie Smith ("Don't Cry Baby") to Bob Dylan ("Your Gonna Make Me Feel Lonesome When You're Gone") . Of course, several cuts from her March release, Bare Bones , were on the eclectic set list, including "Instead," which Peyroux referred to as "the happiest song I have." 2. If Loving You Is Wrong I Don't Want to be Wainwright Rufus Wainwright is a musical progeny, the openly gay son of Loudon Wainwright III and Kate McGarrigle. As the night's closing act, his set was more fun than fundamentally sound. His glorious voice kept the crowd enraptured and his off-the-cuff comments were hilarious as he moved from piano to acoustic guitar. Fighting off a swarm of bugs, he asked a stagehand to add some insect repellent to his hair. "It's a spray and a mousse," he declared. Then there was his "What-the-(Folk)-Was-That?" moment during a brief hiccup in the sound system. The show-must-go-on showman did stumble through a couple of numbers, though, and spent more than half his set at the piano set farther back on the stage, depriving the audience of seeing either him or his magic fingers. Don't hail him as the next Lyons King quite yet. 3. When It Rains, It Pours Mary Gauthier knows a thing or two about writing a sad song. Cue the tears or, in this case, the rain. If her set began promptly at 4, the downpour followed no later than 4:01. "I'm just gonna play one sad song after the other; it sort of suits the weather," Gauthier said a few songs into her set while the crowd was still scurrying for protection. She kept her promise, too. An acoustic guitar was her only accompaniment early on as she played a series of spare and sorrowful sagas highlighted by "Last of the Hobo Kings," her stirring tribute to "Steam Train" Maury Graham and Utah Phillips from her most recent album, Between Daylight and Dark . "This is about 'Steam Train' but it's for Utah. He's my king," Gauthier said wistfully. Good thing she was at least wearing rose-colored glasses. Also seemingly on cue, as soon as Gauthier's recent writing partner, Ed Romanoff, joined her onstage, the bright sunshine appeared. 4. Fan-Friendliest Dougie (pronounced Doogie, as in Howser) MacLean did his best to get the crowd going during the dinner hour, inviting them to join him for at least four sing-a-longs, including during "Broken Wings." The former fiddler who still lives in Scotland and played at the first Folks Festival here in 1995, smiled, joked and cajoled his less-than-enthusiastic audience into giving their best effort. "I've always said the people at the Lyons Folk Festival were the best singers in the world," he said in a thick but endearing Scottish brogue, before quickly adding, "Did that sound sincere?" 5. Big Band Theory Peyroux went against the grain by performing with a full band, all of whom looked as sharp as they played. Electric guitarist Pat Bergeson had a couple of opportunities to shine, especially on "River of Tears," and Peyroux had the entire group -- Gary Versace (keys), Barak Mori (upright bass) and Darren Beckett (drums) -- huddle around her for a couple of numbers, creating the setting of a classy jazz nightclub rather than the Wild West venue it is. 6. A Fine Rhine The husband-and-wife team of Over the Rhine made a guest appearance near the end of Gauthier's set, with Karin Bergquist providing exquisite harmonies while Linford Detweiler hid behind the grand piano on Gauthier's "Mercy Now," one of the highlights of the afternoon. Teaming the gritty Gauthier with the harmonious couple might have seemed like somebody's off-the-wall suggestion, but Detweiler has made it known he reveres the Louisiana lady, and they recently have been writing songs together. Let's hope Gauthier stays and returns the favor during Over the Rhine's Saturday set. 7. Hats Off Peyroux wins the day's best-dressed award, beginning the night with a bowler, then later on adding a stylish gray chapeau that matched her pressed slacks. Wainwright came in a close second, thanks to a scarf and a jacket with wide white pin stripes. 8. French Dip Wainwright (left) actually did Peyroux one better by singing two songs in French, including one from his opera Primma Donna . The opening of his three-song encore was "Les feux d'artifice t'appellent," which he said translates as "The fireworks are calling you," adding that the song comments on "how beautiful and how short they are. Like many things in life ... and life itself." 9. Altitude Adjustment Both MacLean and Wainwright had trouble handling the high-and-dry Colorado climate. "You guys don't have a lot of oxygen," a jet-lagged and waterlogged MacLean said after arriving from Scotland the night before. "They say to drink a lot of water," he added. "It's very dry up here, but I actually really don't like water. But you got to hand it to the guy who decided to put it in little bottles and sell it to you for lots of money. In Scotland, it actually falls down from the sky ... for free." Wainwright's reasoning was more succinct. "I'm not used to the mountains. It makes me nervous." 10. Political Animals Maclean (right) and Wainwright also didn't hide their disdain for the U.S. government. In introducing "Talking to My Father," Maclean worried that he's becoming more and more like his dad, who passed away last year. MacLean said his father didn't care who he offended as he neared the end of his life. "And politics, the words 'loose cannon' come to mind. Taking him to him a pub was a nightmare. I can't even begin to tell you the things he wanted to do to (George W.) Bush." Wainwright harped on the health care system in this country, mentioning his mother in Canada doesn't have to pay a dime for cancer treatment. In America, Wainwright concluded in his rant before beginning his set, "It's so stupid. I just had to say it." See more festival and concert photos at flickr.com .
 
Bill Mann: Here's How You Can Strike Back Against Right-Wing Cable, Radio Top
After the last few weeks of even-more-poisonous rhetoric than usual from right-wing cable and talk radio, we need to talk. More specifically, we should talk about pulling local radio-station licenses, plus other effective and practical measures of attacking the real problem -- the right-wing media malice machine. Writing your Congressperson and Senator and the White House supporting the public option is great. But there are other ways of attacking the underlying problem -- disinformation and outrageous lies in the media that influence such important policy decisions. And it's time to talk also about pressuring local cable licensees to consider pulling Fox News from their cable lineups as a condition of renewal. (See below) Obama's vast army of supporters can also play media hardball. Here are two more ways: One : By taking careful note of exactly who advertises on both right-wing radio and on Fox News - NOT just on race-baiter Glen Beck's carnival show, but on the whole network in all dayparts. These advertisers need to hear from you about their subsidizing outrageous lies, fearmongering and, of course, racism. Two: By pressuring the reconstituted FCC about bringing back the prudent and sane Fairness Doctrine , which required holders of broadcast licenses to present controversial issues of public importance -- and to do so in a manner that was (in the Commission's view) honest, equitable and balanced. This sounds reasonable, right? The rule, introduced in 1949, was upheld by the Supreme Court 20 years later. But an FCC majority appointed by - surprise! - Ronald Reagan -- unwisely (if predictably) dropped it in 1987 under the pretext of "deregulation." This opened the door for extreme right-wing radio, and allowed hatemongers like Michael "Weenie" Savage, Rush "Boss" Limbaugh, and Sean "Gumby" Hannity to spew poison and to motivate their hateful, fearful listeners to show up at town-hall meetings and disrupt them, among many other public indecencies. As mentioned at the top: The FCC used to pull radio-station licenses when a station was not operating in the public interest. You can still technically pursue this remedy and challenge a broadcast license in your area when it's up for renewal. Today, sadly, broadcast licenses are seen, thanks largely to the FCC's "benign neglect," by their holders as inviolable. When I once mentioned the still technically correct term "the public airwaves" to one radio and TV licensee in San Francisco, he laughed out loud. Bad reporter! MY license! Bad! Bad! Here's how the Fairness Doctrine used to work: I've covered radio and TV for decades for four major newspapers, and when I'd write an unfavorable column about a local radio personality -- which was often -- he'd sometimes go on the air, rant and say unflattering things - OK, slander - yours truly. It happened a lot. Then, not long after, I'd get a Fairness Doctrine notice from the radio station giving me the opportunity to rebut what was said about me. Sounds reasonable and fair, doesn't it? It was. (Note: In almost every case, I declined, knowing I'd be playing on the announcer's home turf). Did anyone else notice all the screaming by Boss Limbaugh and the right wing media that started almost immediately after Barack Obama was elected, warning us that the Fairness Doctrine would be repealed and it would ruin radio? Here's a little secret: The return of the Fairness Doctrine is right-wing hate radio's Achilles Heel. When the Obama administration then made assurances this wouldn't happen - an unwise move, to appease -- the screaming abated. Now, after what Reichstag Radio ("Sieg Heil on Your Dial") has done, again using its Fairness Doctrine immunity to spread poison and to knowingly promulgate outrageous lies about Obama and health care, it's time for Congressional Democrats and the Obama administration to fight back. It's long past time for the FCC to open hearings on bringing back the Fairness Doctrine - and to take testimony about exactly how it has been abused since being lifted - actually, even the idea of fairness has been openly mocked. Now to Fox Noise, which has openly encouraged liars and town-hall disrupters: You can contact your city officials and tell them when their cable provider's contract comes up for renewal, Fox News should not be in their lineup. Find out when that renewal is set to be considered by city council. A cable operator can choose to drop any satellite channel it wishes. The right will, of course, scream (as it always does) and call this censorship. I call it taking away privileges for bad, even reckless behavior. It's also a way to inspire some restraint and decency (and a civil tone) to the public airwaves. (The latter is another "socialist" idea adopted when the FCC was formed). We need to bring back the Fairness Doctrine almost as badly as we need serious campaign-finance reform. But, as I've laid out, there are other avenues to justice and sanity in the media by using your government to fight back.
 
Mike Lux: An Alternative to the Public Option I Could Live With Top
The folks who read my blog posts might be surprised to learn that there is an alternative to the public option I could live with (besides single-payer, of course, that being my preferred option from the beginning). I have been an advocate for a very hard line on the public option, as I discussed here yesterday. But there is one other alternative I would feel okay about, and Bob Creamer outlines it today in his great post, Three Reasons Why a Strong Public Option is Likely to Be Part of Health Insurance Reform . Here's the part of Bob's post I'm referring to: Once everyone is required to buy insurance, the companies can have a field day raising prices and profits using the government to guarantee they are paid - either through subsidies or the imposition of fines. You can see why, from an insurance company perspective, this would be a great deal. But from the point of view of the taxpayers - and the insurance ratepayers - it would be a disaster. It would be like giving the insurance companies a license to take your money - with no regulation - all enforced by government edict. This, of course, is basically what happened with the prescription drug benefit - Medicare Part D. But there is a big political difference. A huge percentage of the money used to pay the insurance and drug companies in Medicare Part D comes from the taxpayers (or deficits). Most of the money that will go to pay for health insurance in a new system will come from ratepayers - individuals and companies who will feel the sting of rate increases directly. What politician in his right mind would pass a law that requires individuals and businesses to buy products from companies who can then charge whatever the traffic will bear -- especially in an industry where premiums have increased three times faster than wages, and profits keep heading skyward even in the worst recession in 60 years? Once government requires you to purchase a product, it has to provide some means to assure that the price is fair. There are only two real practical solutions to this problem. On the one hand, you could set up a public health insurance option that does not have the same incentives to increase profit or CEO salaries and would compete against the private insurance companies and keep them honest. That is what President Obama has proposed. Or you could regulate health insurance rates. Now rate regulation is not a crazy idea. It's been done for years in segments of the insurance market at the state level. But if you think the private health insurance industry is fighting tooth and nail to stop a Public option - wait to see what they would do to stop rate regulation. So to my esteemed colleagues in the insurance industry, how's this for a compromise: we'll give up the public option but we will regulate health insurance rates instead. We will institute a system of strict price and rate controls, just like utilities have to live with where they weren't deregulated. That would do more to cut health care cost increases than any other thing we could do. So what do you think, guys? This is the amazing irony of this whole debate, as it was by the way of the last one (1993-94). Insurance companies are happy to support universal coverage, but they are dead set against anything that would either control their prices or provide them any real competition or accountability. This is why so many of us who know the health care issue are so determined to not give in on demanding a public option. Look, I am a pragmatist and an Obama loyalist. I want this President to be successful, and having fought a searingly painful fight in the Clinton health care war room a generation ago, I want health care form like I would want a drink of cold water in the middle of a hot desert. But without either a public option, or the kind of strong rate regulation Creamer is talking about, health care reform is a nightmare for the public and for the federal budget. It is not "the good" in the sentence "Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good," it is a plain and simple disaster. That is why I don't agree with another good friend and ally of mine, Paul Begala, in his op-ed comparing health care reform and Social Security. I respect the argument he is making, and if it were another issue less fundamental to whether the whole thing works, I might agree. But keeping the insurance companies honest, as Barack Obama likes to put it, is too central to everything. That's only possible with either tough rate regulation or a public plan, because this co-op thing is a jumbled mess that clearly is a non-starter. Health care is something everyone has to deal with in their and their families' lives and it is at the heart of our federal deficit problem. If the Democrats don't get it (at least mostly) right, we are done as a governing party in spite of all the other demographic and political advantages we have. It's time to face the music and tame the insurance industry dragon. On an action note, my good friends Howie Klein, Jane Hamsher, Darcy Burner and the Atkins brothers, along with DFA, have put together an action to thank progressive Democrats for standing firm on the public option. Thank them here , and donate to your favorite one or five here . As you can see below, many of our fellow activists who think this is critical have. <
 
Scott Mendelson: The second trailer for The Twilight Saga: New Moon (with helpful narration) Top
This trailer was embedded from The Movie-List . I love the fact that someone in the studio chain thought that Taylor Lautner had to literally explain the character arcs of this second picture. I'd wager that 90% of the audience that watches this trailer has either read the book or knows enough about the general mythology to know precisely what the plot of this one is. And I'd hope that the casual fans are not so stupid as to need a tour guide for a 105-second trailer. If anything, this approach almost resembles the trailers of the 50s and 60s , where an over-the-top narrator robustly explained the entire movie as the respective moments played out on screen. Of course, this trailer has a secondary purpose as well. Since Robert Pattinson has very little screentime in this second picture, this preview needs to get the hardcore 'Edward-philes' used to a movie that basically stars Lautner's Jacob, so we have lots of shots of the insanely ripped, shirtless Lautner jumping here and there, occasionally turning into a werewolf. We also have a token look at Rome, where we get bigger-budget crowd scenes, underwater adventure, and a first glance at the most interesting casting coup of this sequel, Dakota Fanning as a high-ranking member of the vampire equivalent of the MI5 (Graham Greene's appearance is also a welcome addition). Ironically, despite this attempt at showing off their new budget and bigger scope, the trailer still closes out on that much-mocked shot of Jacob turning into a werewolf mid-air. I enjoyed that shot for its cheesy, 'why-the-hell-not?' nature, but I was obviously in the minority. For more trailer reviews , go to Mendelson's Memos . Scott Mendelson
 
Patrick Kane Likely To Cop Plea, Avoid Jail: Report Top
Hockey star Patrick Kane and his cousin are expected to avoid criminal charges in a plea deal being hammered out, after both men are expected to be indicted this week on misdemeanor criminal charges, law enforcement sources said Monday. More on Sports
 
David Dean Bottrell: State of the Union Top
My adrenaline spiked a little when I spotted the pale green envelope in my mailbox. "Money!" I thought. It was a logical assumption since the Writer's Guild of America always sends out their residual checks in these lovely wintergreen envelopes. I was slightly disappointed to discover that instead of a check, it was a little missive from my other union, the Screen Actors Guild containing a ballot and a form letter recommending that I vote to approve our new and long-delayed TV and film contract. As I checked the "yes" box, I couldn't help but reflect on the 18-month circus that had finally led to this small slip of paper in my hand. If the events hadn't been so damaging, they would have been hilarious. In case you haven't been following the saga, here are just a few of the highlights: Our story opens with a bizarre open letter from SAG's former National Executive Director, Doug Allen, attacking sister union AFTRA just months before we were supposed to start joint negotiations with them. The pissed-off AFTRA leadership then broke ranks and (much to the studios' delight) negotiated a wonderfully lame contract of their own. When the more moderate faction of the SAG board (AKA "Unite for Strength") then tried to fire Mr. Allen, SAG President Alan Rosenberg and his hard-line "Membership First" cronies all but declared civil war. This led to Mr. Rosenberg's now famous 28-hour, boardroom filibuster to block the firing. His opponents, however, found a constitutional loophole, stormed the executive offices and fired Mr. Allen anyway - not once, but twice. The following morning, Mr. Rosenberg felt moved to write a folk song about the incident and posted it on YouTube. As if that wasn't punishment enough, he then joined forces with SAG's 1st Vice President, Anne-Marie Johnson and a few other fire-breathing cohorts and together filed a lawsuit against their own union to reinstate Mr. Allen. This being an organization run by actors, none of the participants was particularly shy about issuing statements to the press, which quickly turned SAG's internal strife into a big, embarrassing and very public soap opera. At the peak of this shit-slinging contest, I attended one of the "informational meetings" held at the Harmony Gold Theatre in Hollywood. Mr. Rosenberg opened the meeting by stating that although we might be "walking in here as a union divided, we were going to walk out of this auditorium in complete solidarity." That wasn't exactly what happened. Instead, some none-too-subtle pressure was applied for us to approve a strike authorization which would have effectively handed the equivalent of a small nuclear bomb to a bunch of extremely pissed-off people. To hear our leadership tell it, the AMPTP was now being run by Darth Vader and if we didn't act now, the entire empire would be lost. As a veteran of the recent WGA strike, I wondered why SAG thought they were going to prevail in obtaining a superior contract when all of their sister unions had failed. As various rabid strike enthusiasts took the microphone to rant against the forces of darkness, the whole event began to take on the feeling of a "McCain-Palin" rally (i.e. a lost cause covered in a thick, sugary coating of nostalgia for the good old days). All of this hysteria was, of course, being fueled by that sign of the apocalypse, "New Media." It's no secret that the coming of New Media has already started altering the economics of the industry. The question on the table is (and will always be) the future of residuals. The original template for paying residuals came about in the late 1950's and early 60's when ideas like Cable TV, DVR's, Blu-Ray and the Internet sounded like something from "The Jetsons." There were exactly three TV networks to choose from and every night, every American sat down and dutifully watched at least three full hours of whatever was on. This huge captive audience was an advertising gold mine and the networks were raking it in. To their credit, the unions realized it was the perfect time to step up and demand a piece of that gargantuan pie. Not wanting to interrupt the torrential cash flow, the networks and studios saw the wisdom of cutting them a slice. Those were also the Golden Days when entertainment companies were actually entertainment companies -- as opposed to now, when most of the studios and networks are just divisions of much larger conglomerates who view their broadcasting or movie-making divisions as just one small asset out of many. As I sat in the Harmony Gold, I wondered if SAG was keeping up with the times. In truth, labor unions all over the country are finding their effectiveness eroding. Public sentiment, once largely on the side of labor, has cooled. When I was walking the picket line in the WGA strike, I got used to the occasional "Fuck you" being hurled at us by passing cars. Apparently, there are a few folks out there who now view unions as a bunch spoiled brats who, having long ago won a choice corner of the sandbox, don't want to share an inch of it with anybody. Lest we forget, unions have, over the last 70 years, played a major role in creating this country's huge middle-class. They have stabilized lives and given workers opportunities to help their children achieve a stronger economic and educational foothold. Unions provide much needed medical insurance, create safe working conditions and can also raise a big stink (when a big stink is needed). Unfortunately, while the SAG leadership was busy pantsing each other for the last 18 months, the economy tanked and the membership got stuck working under our old contract (with no pay raises). By some estimates, this delay may ultimately have cost SAG members upwards of 80 million dollars. Rumor has it that the guild is now operating at a substantial deficit and has had to lay off 8% of its staff. Plus, out of the 70 new pilots produced this season, 66 went to AFTRA. Soon SAG will be electing new leadership. Membership First, in a effort to retake the castle, has lined up a slate that includes high-profile board candidates like Ed Harris, Martin Sheen and former SAG president, Ed Asner. "Unite for Strength" is running a slightly less well-known crew including Clark Gregg, Hill Harper and Michael O'Keefe. In a good year, approximately 30% of the membership ever votes and it's a sad reality that well-known actors tend to get elected. Oddly, there is some kind of assumption that fame equals wisdom; that a star's on-screen persona will work miracles at the bargaining table. With our current contract due to expire in 2011, I hope my fellow SAG members will keep in mind that negotiation sessions are not scripted. The good guys don't always win. Sometimes they don't even show up. And in my opinion, if the new SAG leadership doesn't rapidly start taking all the painful, but necessary steps to merge with AFTRA, we are fucked. I suspect that SAG, in addition to working hard to protect its members, will continue provide us with some lively entertainment. We are after all, a union made of people who are naturally predisposed to conflict and drama. I do hope that whoever takes the reins in the next election will keep in mind that (for now) it appears that broadcast TV, cable and movies are far from dead. New Media is already so in love with itself that I have no doubt it will keep us well-informed when it starts achieving its financial zenith. And when that day comes, I'll be totally happy to lace up my Nikes, grab my picket sign and walk the line for as long as it takes to win the fair compensation required to allow us to keep doing the work we are meant to do: Entertaining people. Copyright 2009 Quitcher-Bitchyn Entertainment, Inc. David Dean Bottrell is an actor ("Boston Legal") and screenwriter ("Kingdom Come") who writes a weekly blog about being strangely middle-class in Hollywood at www.partsandlabor.tv
 
James M. Gentile: Young Science USA Top
A reform movement that arose in 19th-century England provides a metaphor for what is now needed by our institutions of 21st-century American science. In 1840s England an initially somewhat inchoate longing for national betterment arose among the sons of aristocrats attending Eton and Cambridge. Eventually known as the Young England Movement, its proponents, although essentially conservative, called for reform of the nation's sturdy institutions of feudalism in light of Victorian-era advancements. What's needed today might be called the Young Science USA movement. Its proponents would maintain that America must reform how our government funds scientific research, specifically with an eye to encouraging and supporting our early career researchers in academia. Young scientists are the people to whom we look for the sometimes startling paradigm shifts and scientific breakthroughs essential to national security and prosperity. Albert Einstein, the 20th-century's poster boy for scientific insight, was only 26, for example, during his annus mirabilis , the "year of wonders" during which he came out with his Theory of General Relativity and several other important papers. It's a fact - in most fields of human endeavor, well-educated, bright, young people simply have the most innovative ideas. But for too many years now we have been neglecting this key demographic. Astonishingly, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), a major funding source for critically important biomedical research, define an early career, or young, scientist as "age 42 and below." The average age of a researcher winning a first NIH grant in 1970 was 35.2 years, while it currently hovers around 42.9, with the average age of all NIH grant recipients now at 51.7 years, versus 40.9 in 1970. The chance of a young researcher today being successful in NIH grant competitions is a remarkably low 4 percent. The Chronicle of Higher Education reports that in physics in recent years almost 70 percent of new Ph.D.s are shunted off into temporary (and low-paying) postdoctoral jobs, compared to 43 percent in 2000. This trend may be helpful to older established researchers in need of lab help, and to universities looking for a cheap source of instructors, but it does little to liberate our finest, most creative, young minds to pursue fresh theories and explore new insights. The Young Englanders passed the Climbing Boys Act - legislation that attempted to temper life's harshness for the nation's chimney sweeps; Young Science USA should be working to improve the plight of our nation's woefully underpaid, often intensely overworked, postdoctoral researchers, many of whom become discouraged and leave the sciences. Fortunately, Young Science USA may have its own political champion - much as the Young England Movement relied on Benjamin Disraeli, twice Prime Minister, for leadership. His name is Barack Obama, and he made a point of mentioning the plight of early career researchers during his presidential campaign. In the past month, under the leadership of the U.S. Secretary of Energy, Dr. Steven Chu, the Department of Energy designated $85 million in stimulus funds as grants to be awarded to 50 young scientists, defined as those within 10 years of having earned their Ph.D.s. This is great news, and a good start - but $85 million, out of a total DOE budget of $27 billion, amounts to little more than the expression of good intentions. Much more must be done. At stake is America's national security and economic competitiveness in an era when India, China and the rising Asian tigers are making great strides to improve their science and technology sectors. As a result, observers predict, the United States will lose the supremacy in science and technology that it has enjoyed for the past half-century. That's not necessarily bad news - a better-educated, more advanced Third World is important for humankind. But U.S. science is now in danger of falling behind these rising powers, and that will mean that we could slip economically as well. The last 60 years have established beyond all doubt that scientific and technologic prowess is essential to a modern nation. We have a sacred duty to future generations of Americans to maintain the most advanced scientific programs imaginable. And meeting this responsibility is more complicated than ever: Today's complex advanced science frequently requires teams of researchers to cross the boundaries of physics, chemistry, biology and other disciplines to solve problems that would have seemed wildly impossible only decades ago. At Research Corporation for Science Advancement, the nearly 100-year-old private foundation that I head, we take this daunting challenge seriously. Next year we will fund a new program called Scialog. Like the Department of Energy program previously discussed, Scialog will support young researchers to tackle complex science questions that address the broad context of global climate change. We will fund and bring together academic researchers who have just received tenure - the most creative cohort in American science - and assist them in forming teams to find new ways to increase the efficiency of processes to convert sunshine directly into electricity. If they succeed, we have a chance at a new age; if they fail, we will still have learned a great deal of new science that will take us in unexpected directions. A prime ingredient of advanced scientific research is the willingness to take a chance on a new and interesting idea - something that large, federal, funding agencies admit they haven't been good at in the recent past. Under President Obama, they appear to be taking modest strides at taking such risks. The Young England movement eventually petered out; Young Science USA must never be allowed to do so. If the future of our nation is not continually renewed by young Americans well supported in their advanced scientific research, we likely will have a very dim future indeed. James M. Gentile is President & CEO of Research Corporation for Science Advancement, America's first foundation dedicated solely to science, founded in 1912. More on Barack Obama
 
Mihal Freinquel: The Thing About Leopard Print... Top
Recently I wrote about my adoration for (obsession with) leopard print. I put panels of leopard print silk on my walls and printed it on my business cards... I'm truly falling hard. But to really delve into my innermost feelings about it, I find it necessary to tell you a bit about my past. My relationship with the pattern began when I was about 3 or 4 years old and lasted until I was about 11. I had a brief leopard print (which shall henceforth be referred to as LP) hiatus in middle school... then the flame re-ignited somewhere around junior or senior year of high school. During those first 7 or 8 years, my LP wardrobe took on various forms. Sometimes it was in the form of an actual leopard costume (a spandex ensemble replete with a tail and a hood with ears), sometimes it was a shirt, and sometimes it was leggings... or shorts... which were actually just the cut up leggings once they got holes in the knees. In my high school years the LP took the form of mini skirts and bell bottoms (yeah you read that right). This leads me to now. I have the panels on the wall, I have the business cards, but my feelings have changed about LP in the wardrobe. I recently visited my family at home in Oregon and partook in some major vintage shopping. I'm sure you can imagine the leopard print treasures I found -- fur coats, blazers, flowy skirts, blouses -- picture it in your head and it was there. At first it was exciting because recently I've been thinking about (obsessing over) this print more than usual. But as I picked each item up, held it in front of me and analyzed, I couldn't picture myself wearing it for the life of me! It looked trashy and awkward and cheap and... animal like. Like, not human... like, I was actually a leopard. My distaste for the LP shocked me at first and kind of made me upset. I'm sorry if it's making you upset too. You'll get over it. Because I have. Once I stopped trying to make sense of it, I started feeling more okay about it. I love leopard print as a design concept... as a theme... as a mood and an inspiration. As a blazer? As a leotard? Pass. Ohbutwait . I'm still very okay with leopard print on shoes: I can't explain that either. Shoe leopard print remains fierce regardless of time or trend. Kinda like black leather. It's sexy, it's tough, it's animal. Rawr . How does everybody else feel about leopard print? Have you found a way to make it work in your wardrobe? Do tell.
 
Robert Novak Storms Off CNN Set (VIDEO) Top
Robert Novak died early Tuesday morning in his home after a year-long battle with brain cancer. One of his more legendary moments in recent memory came in 2005, when he said "Bullshit!" on the air on CNN and stormed off the set after a comment by James Carville. From the transcript : NOVAK: Just let me finish what I'm going to say, James. Please, I know you hate to hear me, but you have... CARVILLE: He's got to show these right-ingers that he's got backbone. Show them you're tough. NOVAK: Well, I think that's bullshit. And I hate that. Just let it go. (Novak leaves set.) A young Ed Henry, who had been moderating the Carville-Novak discussion, later said, "I'm sorry as well that Bob Novak obviously left the set a little early. I had told him in advance that we were going to ask him about the CIA leak case. He was not here for me to be able to ask him about that. Hopefully we'll be able to ask him about that in the future." Watch: More on CNN
 
NATO Convoy Attack Outside Kabul Kills 8 Top
KABUL — A Taliban suicide bomber attacked a NATO convoy outside Kabul, killing at least eight people Tuesday, hours after mortar rounds struck near the presidential palace, as militants made good on their promise to sow mayhem in the run-up to Afghanistan's presidential election. Two U.S. soldiers were killed and three wounded in a separate blast in the country's east, the U.S. command said. Despite the uptick in violence, NATO announced Tuesday that its forces would refrain from offensive military operations on election day and would undertake missions only if they were "deemed necessary to protect the population." Two Afghans working for the United Nations were among the dead and another was wounded in the suicide attack, the U.N. office in Kabul announced. One U.N. staffer was among the 50 people that the Interior Ministry said were wounded. The suicide bomber used a car to strike the convoy as it traveled along a road near a British military base in the eastern edge of the city. The ministry said seven people were killed. NATO said one of its troops was also killed and two others were wounded. Zabiullah Mujahid, a Taliban spokesman, claimed responsibility for the blast in a telephone conversation with The Associated Press. The group has denounced the election and warned people to stay away from the polls. British troops were guarding the site of the suicide attack as rescuers rushed the wounded to hospitals. An AP reporter at the scene saw British soldiers collecting what appeared to be body parts from the roof of an Afghan home. He also reported shouting matches between the British troops and Afghan security personnel at the blast site. About a dozen private vehicles were destroyed near the road where the attack happened. People used their hands to dig through the rubble of damaged buildings. Families carried the wounded away from the scene. U.S., NATO and Afghan security forces are on high alert this week because of the Thursday vote. President Hamid Karzai is favored to win but faces a stiff challenge from former Foreign Minister Abdullah Abdullah. About three dozen candidates are in the race. The attack against U.S. troops occurred in eastern Afghanistan, the U.S. military said in a statement. It said two were killed and three were wounded when their vehicle struck a bomb but gave no further details. Those deaths brought to 26 the number of U.S. service members killed in Afghanistan this month, according to an AP count. Elsewhere, a suicide bomber struck the gates of an Afghan army base in the southern province of Uruzgan, killing three Afghan soldiers and two civilians, provincial police chief Juma Gul Himat said. U.S. military spokeswoman Capt. Elizabeth Mathias had no details of damage or casualties from the attack on the presidential compound. Neither Karzai or anyone else was wounded in the attack, said deputy presidential spokesman Hamid Elmi. He said the rounds probably hit "somewhere around the compound," but he had no further details. Attacks in Afghanistan have risen steadily the last three years. In a speech Monday in Phoenix, President Barack Obama said U.S. troops would help secure polling places so that the elections can go forward and Afghans can choose their own future. Obama said peace in Afghanistan "will not be quick" and "will not be easy." He added that the United States still has a deep interest in the long-term outcome. "This is not only a war worth fighting. This is fundamental to the defense of our people," Obama said. __ Associated Press reporter Amir Shah in Kabul contributed to this report. More on Afghanistan
 
Senate Guru: Chuck Grassley Exhibits Symptoms of Frontotemporal Dementia Top
{ Originally posted at my blog Senate Guru . } First thing's first. I'm not a doctor. I'm not suggesting that Republican Chuck Grassley has any particular illness. Simply, I have noticed that Chuck Grassley, over the last many months, has been making increasingly bizarre, aggressive, explicit, and violent remarks - and that such comments coincidentally happen to be early symptoms of dementia, particularly frontotemporal dementia. It stands out to me because, as a political junkie, I have long considered Grassley to be among the most mild-mannered denizens of the Capitol. 2009 has apparently become the year that the 75-year-old Grassley (he turns 76 next month) has shed his mild-mannered image, perhaps by choice, perhaps not. In response to the story this Spring about AIG executives receiving exorbitant bonuses after the company was rescued by a massive infusion of public dollars, Grassley said on March 16, 2009 : "I suggest, you know, obviously maybe they ought to be removed, but I would suggest that the first thing that would make me feel a little bit better towards them [is] if they would follow the Japanese example and come before the American people and take that deep bow and say I'm sorry and then either do one of two things: resign or go commit suicide." Grassley added, "In the case of the Japanese, they usually commit suicide before they make any apology." The comment was rude, racist, and extremely aggressive, even violent. The next day, still critical of AIG executives, but in an attempt to tone down the violent "suicide" comment from the previous day, Grassley went the more sexually explicit route : "From my standpoint, it's irresponsible for corporations to give bonuses at this time when they're sucking the tit of the taxpayer," Grassley explained. When talking about government spending, "sucking on the teat" is not in and of itself bizarre rhetoric, but that Grassley used the more sexually explicit "tit" instead of "teat." In fact, such a nuanced difference might have flown under the radar entirely if not for a sexually explicit comment Grassley made at a budget hearing toward the end of the same month as his earlier comments, on March 26, 2009 : But yesterday he [Grassley] regained his bounce on the Senate floor, livening up an otherwise dull budget hearing with a joke about banging another senator's wife. His opening came after he pressed Budget Committee chairman Kent Conrad to include an amendment of his to a budget resolution by bringing up the fact that Conrad owed him a favor. "Oh, you are good," Conrad responded. To which Grassley replied: "Well, your wife said the same thing." Sure, this comment, in a vacuum, could be one Senator good-naturedly ribbing a colleague. But a joke intimating sex with a colleague's wife, told, again, at a budget hearing , seems like bizarre behavior. Further, when you add up these comments, what you have is a pattern of behavior. Last week, Grassley's pattern of behavior was reinforced by his take on health care reform : We should not have a government program that determines if you're going to pull the plug on grandma. In fairness, this one comment has become a sick talking point of many Republicans shilling for corporate interests. Nevertheless, it particularly stands out for Grassley given that, when he is not flying off the cuff, he is one of the GOP's key negotiators on health care reform. He should have had the self-control to avoid such aggressive rhetoric. But that's been Grassley's pattern lately. So what we have seen from Grassley in 2009 - and this is just in public; no telling what his comments and actions are in private - is a pattern of bizarre, rude, physically aggressive, sexually explicit, and even violent remarks. Such a pattern even led The Iowa Independent to the headline: " Grassley: Strategic or just eccentric? " Eccentric may be putting it mildly. Grassley is not the first Republican Senator in recent years to have his mental health questioned. During his 2004 re-election bid, the Kentucky media began openly questioning Jim Bunning's mental health after a similar pattern of bizarre comments and actions. Also, in 2006-2007, Pete Domenici's mental health was questioned after a pattern of erratic behavior including reportedly walking around the Capitol in his pajamas . Subsequently, in late 2007, Domenici revealed that he had a degenerative brain disease and opted against a 2008 re-election bid. Domenici was 75-years-old at the time of his 2007 diagnosis, the same age Grassley is now. Now for the coincidental symptoms. If you hop over to WebMD.com, best friend of the armchair hypochondriac, you can find a page that lists symptoms of dementia . Such symptoms include "having trouble finding the right words to express thoughts," "having trouble exercising judgment," and "having difficulty controlling moods or behaviors" while noting that "agitation or aggression may occur." What especially caught my eye was the following passage: The first symptoms of frontotemporal dementia may be personality changes or unusual behavior. People with this condition may not express any caring for others, or they may say rude things, expose themselves, or make sexually explicit comments. Agitation or aggression? Check. Personality changes or unusual behavior? Check. Saying rude things? Check. Making sexually explicit comments (again, at a budget hearing !)? Check. Lack of inhibition? Check. Again, I'm not suggesting that the 75-year-old Chuck Grassley has frontotemporal dementia. I am, however, noting that Grassley's pattern of behavior over the last six months coincidentally happens to match the early symptoms of frontotemporal dementia. With Grassley turning 77-years-old before Election Day 2010, it would not be unfair or unwise for Iowans to get a clean bill of health from Grassley before signing him up for another six-year term (at the end of which he will be 83-years-old).
 
Carol Smaldino: Interrupting Unfriendly Persuasion Top
The following blog is a response to the New York Times front page story, " 2 U.S. Architects of Harsh Tactics in 9/11's Wake ," by Scott Shane published this past Wednesday, August 12. It also provides support for the American Psychology Association's recent adoption of a zero-tolerance policy on torture . A part of any psychology involves the use of persuasion. Using a variety of methods, we persuade our children to behave a certain way, to go to sleep on time and to eat good food. Even those of us who believe in using our empathy and knowledge of developmental needs cultivate our own boundaries and model them, persuading our children through some kind of teaching or modeling. However, when persuasion is used without regard for the other person, when it becomes sadistic and reckless endangerment, it is what we have come to know as torture. When psychologists assist in "enabling" interrogation and coaching military personnel in the cruelest of methods of coercion, they and the public have also been persuaded that torturing brings actual information (proven false) and that all ends are worth whatever the means. In the struggle to clarify the role of psychologists in the "enhanced interrogations" during the George W. Bush administration, there has been the argument that psychologists were part of the anxiety about terrorism that pervaded America since 9/11. They were doing their job, and some have continually tried to make the case for the presence of psychologists making interrogations less harsh and more based on manipulation through the soft touch. We know that many psychologists have taken part in the harsher kind of interrogations, and those who didn't know this can look at the New York Times' August 12, 2009 front page story, "2 U.S. Architects of Harsh Tactics in 9/11's Wake" by Scott Shane. On the matter of torture or "enhanced interrogation," we stand in judgment, for the most part, based on the values that we have already been persuaded and convinced. Our perceptions slant to one vision and often ignore the other sides or stories. We are blinded by our prejudices and often fail to hear other people talk. And in all of this we are still afraid to publicize the stories from the point of view of some of our own troops -- young men and women persuaded that the violence and pleasures of torture is a secret that cannot be shared with anyone. We have been given testimony by some victims of torture, but it seems there has been little outlet for those who have committed these acts. To date, there has even been little to no psychological examination of the states of mind of the "interrogators," in light of legal implications of any direct testimony. I admit that I would like to have the power to persuade the many readers who won't enter more progressive websites that I feel offer the fullest information and coverage of the torture issue. I know it would take time and empathy even for the rest of us to wonder at the depth of the passions and fears of conservatives without simply judging them with too much ease. I know hate leads to hate and that it becomes seductive and pressing. I remember hating the American soldiers in Vietnam who killed babies, and I now see myself as having been arrogant and cold and shallow. I don't want to hate the American soldiers who have tortured, though it is easy to hate those who persuaded them to do so, and even more to hate those who are making profit in cold chalets of luxury made of the blood and guts of us all. I want to stay curious about the culture of persuasion that took these soldiers and made them feel torture was the only way. If we don't maintain this interest and act on it, we will have little to offer to the present and future generations of soldiers. If we don't have an interest in learning the culture that germinates these kinds of seeds, we will be failing all of our people. We will be stuck in the fog of war, limiting our action to only judging and punishing. In the cautionary and apt documentary The Fog of War ," former Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara described in depth the dangers of committing errors in judgment when a country is on a solo mission without the broad support of allies to balance and aid critical thinking. He exposed our susceptibility. We failed to heed his cautions. Yet, I recognized that it is so hard to practice what we/I preach. It is hard to say and mean it -- as I will try -- that I will get to the core of my own hate, shame, fear, tendency to hide in rationalization. One way of looking at psychology is as a road to potential awareness and as a way of looking for emotional reactions that can sustain us and be sustainable. In a beautifully written and painfully read novel The Vagrants , by Yiyun Li about China's Cultural Revolution, one of the main characters is a saddened old man who writes in a love letter, "We become prisoners of our own beliefs, with no one free to escape such a fate, and this, my dearest friend, is the only democracy offered up by the world". I would like to think we have a choice, and that at least those of us willing to examine our actions might stop in our tracks and examine a policy or those assumptions which the fog of war (or the fog of torture) make unclear. We need to make a practice of examining the stories told to us and told by us to each other until those stories are repeated enough to be believed. Stories, true stories of feelings and perspectives, have a way of breaking down barriers between people. I know many Vietnam veterans were traumatized not only by battle scars but by the fact that nobody wanted to listen, to be witness to the tragedies of their wounds and of their commission of atrocities, of their having been lost in unstoppable fear and rage. Again, I think we have a choice here. And as someone who can be both submissive and oppositional, I feel like using the psychology of challenge to wonder out loud how many of us can be open to asking someone who is different from us, not to say an opinion, but to tell us the story of how they got that way. Opening up the persuasion pores and loosening the chains of our prejudices for a few moments at a time, might be a start. Tell me a story. Let's just start, okay? More on Vietnam
 
iTunes Dominates Music Sales; Apple Sells One Out Of Every Four Songs Sold In U.S. Top
The iTunes Store can claim 25 percent of all music sold in the U.S., according to the NPD Group, up from 21 percent in 2008 and 14 percent in 2007. Walmart is number two with 14 percent, combined with their downloads, sales through their Web site and in their retail stores. More on Apple
 
Michele Kayal: A Blight On Summer: Where Have All the Tomatoes Gone? Top
As a food writer you're occasionally asked to pass your theoretically professional judgment on all manner of foods/restaurants/chefs/drinks. Probably the most bizarre thing I've ever been asked to judge is....wait for it....water. Which sounds nuts, but believe it or not there is a whole industry dedicated to dissecting the nuances of different mineral waters. And truth be told, I interviewed a California vintner whose palate is so refined he can tell the difference between municipal waters from all over the state. Okay, but that's another story. This weekend I was asked to pass judgment on tomatoes. Which is far better than water because a) they have an actual taste, and b) good tomatoes are so hard to come by. This summer you might find them even more difficult to score because of a pernicious blight that has wiped out fields and gardens across the country. When Nature Sweet Tomatoes brought its Homegrown Tomato Challenge to Northern Virginia this weekend only 20 growers showed up with backyard booty. But the winning tomatoes -- a humble cherry and an heirloom of unknown provenance -- were indeed delicious. If you are lucky enough to find good tomatoes -- and are willing to pay for them ($4 a pound is the going rate around DC) -- don't waste the opportunity. Here's a guide to picking great tomatoes: "A Locally Grown Tomato Is As Good As It Gets" "Tomatoes: What to Know" More on Food
 
The Whole Foods Fight Over Health Care Top
Of all the sideshows to the Great 2009 Health Care Debate, the Whole Foods boycott may take the prize as the most unexpected. Last Wednesday, John Mackey, the chief executive of Whole Foods, took to the pages of The Wall Street Journal to opine that "we clearly need health care reform," but arguing against the solutions being put forward by the administration: "The last thing our country needs is a massive new health care entitlement that will create hundreds of billions of dollars of new unfunded deficits and move us much closer to a government takeover of our health care system." More on Health Care
 
Josh Silver: Saving Journalism: Howard Kurtz Is Wrong, Dan Rather Is Right Top
On Monday, Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post and CNN criticized veteran newsman Dan Rather for his recent call for a White House commission on the future of journalism and public media. It was a misguided criticism of Mr. Rather, who has called for the commission as a way to bring attention to the crisis facing American newsrooms (20,000 newspaper jobs lost in the past 18 months alone), and to create the political will necessary to get our elected leaders to address the problem. If you don't think we have a news crisis, just look at the absurd coverage of the health care town halls by the cable channels, and how they have skewed public opinion against the public interest. Kurtz's argument can be summed up by the last lines of his article: "Journalists got themselves into this mess by clinging to the past as technology threatened to pass them by. They'll have to get themselves out of it without any assistance from the Oval Office." Kurtz asserts that the journalism crisis is not a political issue, but the result of economic and technological forces alone. If only that were true. The biggest media companies like General Electric, News Corp., Viacom and Disney spend millions to shape government policies, like allowing consolidation of ownership, eliminating important public interest obligations, and blocking competition, to name a few. Kurtz's call for government to stay out of efforts to save journalism is a denial of policy's central role in creating - and its ability to fix - the media's problems. Indeed, the only ones who would benefit from Kurtz's hands-off approach are the media bosses for whom he works. Investigative, in-depth, adversarial journalism is increasingly rare in commercial radio, television, and even newspapers. And the sort of commission that Dan Rather recommends may be the only way to get a distracted Congress and White House to pay attention - and commit to finding solutions. Kurtz is also off-base in calling commissions a "classic bureaucratic substitute for doing something." It was a commission , backed by the White House and Congress, that created our public broadcasting system in 1969. The 9/11 Commission's investigation, hearing and report dramatically altered the debate about that tragedy and has helped guide homeland security policy to this day. Just as our leaders have created national plans to address crises in health care, energy independence and education, it is time to craft a national strategy to renew journalism and public media in America. And that's not going to happen if we ask our nation's leader to sit it out. While Kurtz's piece reveals a lack of understanding of the role of media policy in shaping and fostering robust journalistic institutions - and the steps required to protect the fourth estate. I have been to a number of the forums that Kurtz refers to. I was on the panel he moderated along with Rather, and I agree that we need to move from panels toward tangible solutions. Instead of just another Blue Ribbon panel of elite experts, the commission Rather recommends must focus on concrete policies and business models. And it should be a 21st-century "Citizen's Commission" that fosters a new kind of conversation with the American people. It should be made up of diverse voices and viewpoints and designed to gather input from everyday people and experts alike. It should leverage the on- and offline tools that Obama used so well in his campaign, and be truly inclusive and participatory - and funded by private foundations. But in the end, it will need leadership and attention from the White House and Congress to make a real impact. Journalism is in crisis, and we must be proactive in identifying and advancing solutions. We must re-imagine the structures and policies needed for quality journalism and public media to thrive in the digital age, and our leaders must help ensure that our media meet the demands of an informed society. Our democracy simply cannot wait. I'll return to this space in the coming weeks with more ideas about what this commission might look like - and how to stay informed . More on Dan Rather
 
'Total Eclipse Of The Heart' Flowchart Top
Via Koufukuron comes a flowchart that explains the song "Total Eclipse of the Heart." It's incredibly useful, but not quite as awesome as the literal video version . LOOK:
 
Michael Hais and Morley Winograd: Have Patience: Republicans Are Working Their Way Through the Five Stages of Grieving Top
In 1969, Dr. Elisabeth Kubler-Ross published a groundbreaking book On Death and Dying , suggesting that people facing death went through five emotional stages before they could accept their fate. While never proven by subsequent studies, the five stages of grief have entered the realm of conventional wisdom and are often cited to explain the behavior of groups, as well as individuals, facing a life-threatening crisis. The actions of Republicans, and their conservative supporters, in attempting to disrupt Town Hall discussions of President Obama's health care reform proposal suggests that the concept is alive and kicking in politics as well. According to Kubler-Ross, the first stage in dealing with impending doom is to deny it's happening. We witnessed this behavior in the immediate aftermath of the Democrats' overwhelming victory last November. Republicans reacted almost identically to the way Democrats did after Ronald Reagan's victory in 1980. The election results were attributed to poor campaign tactics by the loser, or the failure to develop a winning message by the campaign's media strategists, or a plot by reporters to ensure the victory of the winning candidate, if for no other reason than to give them something new to write about. In the classic words of death deniers throughout history, Republican leaders continued to insist well into January 2009 that they "felt fine" and the results had "nothing to do with me" -- the Republican party and its message. The only thing that was about to die, we heard GOP leaders like Rush Limbaugh and Michael Steele assert, was the muddled attempt at moderation by Senator John McCain and the failure of their party to adhere to its most conservative principles. The second stage of grief according to On Death and Dying is anger, and this summer the Republican Party and its minions have clearly moved beyond denial to anger. Enraged mobs of extraordinarily well informed "average" citizens have descended on Democratic Town Hall meetings to demand that their Representative not follow Speaker Nancy Pelosi's party line and instead vote against specific provisions of health care legislation that would, for instance, incent the writing of living wills, or substitute the judgment of health insurers for that of objective government entities on what treatments would be allowed based on their cost effectiveness. Above all the evil of government involvement in the health care system is to be labeled for what it is -- the work of the devil, who is clearly a socialist, through his agents in the U.S. Congress. The fact that many of those most vociferous in their opposition to government supported health care are carrying their sacred Medicare card in their wallet is only ironic if you ignore the degree to which anger and denial are related emotions. In fact, Kubler-Ross points out that people often oscillate between those stages before moving on. This makes the denial of Barack Obama's Hawaiian birth by many of these same angry protesters understandable, if not any more credible. So what can the country expect once the Republican Party moves on to the next stage of dealing with the demise of its former electoral dominance? According to Kubler-Ross, the third stage of grief is "bargaining." Here the individual or group hopes that it can at least postpone or delay death by promising to reform or turn over a new leaf. There are already early signs in the writings of Peggy Noonan, President Reagan's speechwriter, that this next stage is coming to the fore. She suggests that if only President Obama would rethink the broad scope of his proposals and join in true bipartisan negotiations, Republicans in Congress would support a bill that leaves most of today's health care system in place but without the nasty practices of denying health coverage to those with pre-existing conditions or canceling people's insurance at the first sign that they might actually need medical treatment. The country can expect to hear more such offers from Republicans this fall when Congress returns and the real bargaining over the scope of health care reform takes place. But the party's past misdeeds in building a majority coalition based on the racist premise of its Southern Strategy or its failure to appeal to the civic beliefs and attitudes of the emerging Millennial Generation or its most recent decision to sacrifice its future among Hispanics by voting against the nomination of Justice Sonia Sotomayor, make any such offer a fool's bargain. The demise of GOP dominance is inevitable and Democrats should take no part in postponing the inevitable. If congressional Democrats have the courage to use their majority to pass health care legislation and then go to the voters with an economy on the mend, the 2010 elections should serve to move Republicans to the fourth stage of grief: depression. Suffering from a series of unexpected and unexplainable defeats, Republicans are likely to go off on a prolonged period of silence, punctuated by bouts of crying over just how unfair politics has become. Kubler-Ross suggests that it is important not to try and cheer up the person in this stage of grief, but to let the individual work his or her way through the inevitable depression on their own. That way, her book says, the dying can finally come to the final stage of grief-acceptance. This stage represents the end of the struggle and a willingness to accept one's fate: the Republican Party as we have known it since 1968 will die for lack of political support. It may not accept that fate until after President Obama's re-election, by a landslide, in 2012 just as the Democratic Party's New Deal liberals did not accept their fate until after Ronald Reagan's complete demolition of Walter Mondale's candidacy in 1984. Still, the end is inevitable, as many of today's leading thinkers in the GOP are beginning to realize. But Republicans can take heart in what Democrats were able to do after reaching the clarity of mind that comes with accepting one's fate. By recognizing the death of its old ideas and rethinking their approach to the electorate after their landslide defeat in 1984, the Democrats eventually found a new road to victory-tentatively in 1992 with Bill Clinton and then more confidently with Obama's victory in 2008. At that rate the GOP only has to wait until 2020 to have its next real shot at winning the presidency. If Republicans want to get to that goal sooner, psychologists might suggest that they move quickly out if their "summer of anger" phase, don't bargain or obstruct too much over health care or anything else when Congress returns, and get ready for a good cry in 2010. Even better, such a course of therapy will improve the rest of the country's mental health as well. More on Health Care
 
Mark Bazer: Rick Bayless on The Interview Show Top
Rick Bayless, celebrity chef, contestant on Top Chef Masters , and owner of Frontera Grill, stopped by The Interview Show , a live talk show hosted by Mark Bazer, at The Hideout in Chicago, to discuss his career and his new restaurant, XOCO. Clips below. (The next Interview Show is Friday, Sept. 4, at The Hideout , from 6:30 p.m. to 8 p.m. Guests include novelist Claire Zulkey and Hot Doug's owner Doug Sohn.) PART ONE: PART TWO: More on Food
 
Quinn To Union: Take Furloughs Or Face Layoffs Top
Illinois Governor Pat Quinn wants state employed union workers to take furlough days to help balance the state's budget. He says about 2,600 American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees face layoffs if a deal isn't reached.
 
Old Fire Towers Repurposed Into Modern Mountain Homes Top
If location, location and location are what drive your visions of a dream tree house design or luxury hillside wood home then look no further: fire towers that once served vital protective services to natural forests are becoming increasingly used for new purposes including mountaintop homes with incredible views. More on Green Living
 
Robert Novak Dead At 78 Top
Columnist Robert Novak died early Tuesday after a battle with brain cancer. The Chicago Sun-Times' Lynn Sweet reports that Novak died at home early Tuesday . "He was someone who loved being a journalist, love journalism and loved his country and loved his family," Novak's wife, Geraldine, told the Sun-Times . Novak announced last summer that he had a brain tumor , and said that he did not expect to survive it . He described his treatment in a column in September and said then, "I have lost not only left peripheral vision but nearly all my left vision, probably permanently." Conservative publication Human Events has rolled out an obituary by former Reader's Digest Editor-in-Chief Kenneth Tomlinson and a remembrance of Novak by Timothy Carney , a former reporter for Novak and the editor of the Evans-Novak Political Report since Novak's retirement last year.
 
Dennis Whittle: Innovation improves quality of life even when incomes lag Top
Global improvements in quality of life have been fostered by the spread of technology and ideas. Very cheap health technologies that can dramatically reduce mortality have spread rapidly across the world. The proportion of the world's infants vaccinated against diphtheria, pertussis and tetanus -the DPT shot--climbed from one fifth to nearly four fifths between 1970 and 2006. And ideas that save lives -wash your hands, don't defecate in the fields you eat from--are increasingly accepted. That is from the summary of a forthcoming book by Charles Kenny. Charles argues that the standard of living in developing countries has increased much faster than growth in income because of innovation, which has driven down the cost of goods and services that contribute to quality of life. There is plenty of bad news about development, including the sharp divergence in incomes across the world, yet there is also much progress: The book argues that ideas and technologies are the driving forces behind progress. And it suggests what the success of development and the importance of innovation to that success mean for policies in and policies towards the developing world. The other good news is that innovation can be much less expensive than massive aid projects. Yet official and other large aid agencies struggle to find ways to support innovation because catalyzing innovation requires a different mindset and different tools. I strongly recommend reading Charles's summary (it is only one page) if you want to get a quick overview of what we know about development. And thanks to Bill Easterly for the tip - see his blog post on it here . [GlobalGiving]
 
Best And Worst Cities To Find A Job: Indeed.com's Rankings Top
Though the Obama Administration has warned that unemployment will reach 10 percent this year, job markets across the country may not be uniformly bad. According to a new report by the search engine Indeed , the best city to find a job is Washington, D.C., where there are six job postings for every unemployed person. The list ranks the 50 most populous U.S. cities by the ratio of job postings to unemployed citizens. Though D.C.'s surplus of jobs is reassuring, Washington, D.C. and Jacksonville, Florida are the only cities on the list in which job postings actually outnumber the unemployed. Here's of the top 10 - and each city's respective ratio: 1. Washington, DC (6:1) 2. Jacksonville, FL (3:1) 3. Baltimore, MD (1:1) 4. Salt Lake City, UT (1:2) 5. New York, NY (1:2) 6. San Jose, CA (1:2) 7. Hartford, CT (1:2) 8. Oklahoma City, OK (1:3) 9. Austin, TX (1:3) 10. Boston, MA (1:3) As you might imagine, Detroit is the lowest ranked city, with 18 job postings per each unemployed resident. Also near the bottom are Miami, Florida and the foreclosure-ravaged Riverside, California, which have job posting-to-unemployed ratios of 1:9 and 1:10 respectively. It's also more than a little worrisome that enormous cities like Chicago and Los Angeles rank near the bottom of the list. Here's the rest of the bottom ten cities: 41. Buffalo, NY (1:6) 42. Orlando, FL (1:6) 43. Sacramento, CA (1:6) 44. Rochester, NY (1:6) 45. Chicago, IL (1:7) 46. Portland, OR (1:7) 47. Los Angeles, CA (1:8) 48. Riverside, CA (1:9) 49. Miami, FL (1:10) 50. Detroit, MI (1:18) Read the entire rankings at Indeed . Get HuffPost Business On Facebook and Twitter !
 
Desiree Rogers On Cover Of Michigan Avenue, Minus Fashion Credits Top
Desiree Rogers's new Michigan Avenue magazine cover features the White House Social Secretary looking cool in a cream-colored jacket, but some sartorial details were left on the cutting room floor: her clothing credits. According to WWD , this act of fashion negligence comes months after Rogers's Capitol File photoshoot, in which she wore a $3,370 Louis Vuitton coat and $7,900 freshwater pearl and diamond earrings by Jorge Adeler. Insiders think Michigan Avenue omission is intended to tone down her glamor girl image, which could be considered inappropriate for White House employee during a recession. A spokeswoman for Niche Media, which publishes Michigan Avenue told WWD, "The magazine did not focus on the credits as it was a personality-driven story about Desiree and her efforts and her connection to Chicago." Rogers seems to have a personal interest in style, once even sitting next to Anna Wintour at a few fashion shows. The Michigan Avenue profile calls her "ultimate 'It' woman about town" and a "stand-out guest on the gala circuit." She's chaired and attended hundreds of parties and has brought that spirit, along with the spirit of service, to the White House. THE COVER: Follow HuffPost Style on Twitter and become a fan of HuffPost Style on Facebook !
 
Maria Rodale: Reading For Pleasure: My Top 5 Favorite Authors Top
By now, most people know I'm a lover of romance novels. I've been trying for years to break down some of the stigma and erase the shame. The truth is, I need romance novels to survive, and if they didn't exist, I would have to invent them. The very reasons I need them all year round is what makes them so great for summer vacation beach reading: They take you away from your daily reality, they erase whatever little niggling annoyances are bouncing around your brain, and in the end they give you a shot of something strong (perhaps dopamine?) and empowering to send you back into the fray, recharged and ready to take on whatever challenge is before you. So here are my top 5 favorite romance authors. Another truth: I don't care what the title of the book is, I just care who wrote it...because the author has created the world I am entering, and after reading a few of her books, I know her world. I recognize many of the characters and look forward to whatever adventures and scandals lie between the pages. I'm not putting my daughter Maya on this list (it wouldn't seem fair), but she does have a new book coming out this fall! From Avon! And her first two books were delightful as well. Suffice it to say she is my most favorite romance author of all. 1. Eloisa James--Right now she's on the best-seller list with A Duke of Her Own , the story of Villiers--which we have all been breathlessly awaiting. It's one of many books that are part of her latest series. The point is, books by Eloisa James (by day, Mary Bly, Shakespearean professor), are funny, poignant, sexy, and filled with surprises. 2. Julia Quinn--She's funny, sparkling, and delightful. Her newest book What Happens in London is not my all-time favorite of hers, but honestly, who cares. They are all really great. 3. Loretta Chase--I will never be able to hear the term "privy counselor" again without laughing (at least to myself). And her book Lord of Scoundrels is often hailed as one of the all-time greats. 4. Gaelen Foley--I haven't read her latest, My Wicked Marquess --but it's on my reading pile, right after I finish with a new author (who I won't recommend until I'm done reading). When you read more than 40 romances a year, as I do, you need new authors in the lineup all the time. Gaelen Foley is someone I might not run to, but when I finally do read her, I am always really glad I did. 5. Susan Elizabeth Phillips--If you'd told me a few years ago that I would wait, with bated breath and longing, for contemporary romances about football heroes, I would have scoffed, laughed, and rolled my eyes. But she makes it all so over-the-top funny, and somehow interesting, that I can't help but love her stories. My personal theory is that The New York Times separated its paperback bestseller list into two separate lists so serious literary fiction wouldn't have to get polluted by popular romance fiction (and other good stuff). And then they wonder why everyone is depressed all the time! My recommendation: Avoid pills, read a book with a happy ending instead. And they're available without a prescription right in your local supermarket! More on Books
 
Co-Op Health Care Plan Has Major Drawbacks: NYT Top
WASHINGTON -- The White House has indicated that it could accept a nonprofit health care cooperative as an alternative to a new government insurance plan, originally favored by President Obama. But the co-op idea is so ill defined that no one knows exactly what it would look like or how effectively it would compete with commercial insurers. More on Nancy Pelosi
 
Michael Jackson's Burial Announced; Site Is Private Great Mausoleum At Forest Lawn Memorial Park Top
The spokesman for the Jackson family says Michael Jackson will be laid to rest at Holly Terrace in the Great Mausoleum at Glendale Forest Lawn Memorial Park on Saturday, August 29 at 10 AM. That would have been Michael's 51st birthday. More on Michael Jackson
 
Andy Plesser: Video: TIME.com Has New Online Video Look and Focus Top
NEW YORK, NY -- TIME.com relaunched its video pages today, with a larger/HD player, integration with social media and video sorting under "most popular," "this week," and other categories. To get an overview on the new video functionality, we visited TIME.com managing editor Josh Tryangiel for this overview on the redesign. The site is powered by Brightcove, with much of the public interface created in-house at TIME.com This video was originally published on Beet.TV.
 
Lanny Davis: The Dangerous Joining of the Far Right and Far Left Top
Has there ever been a better example, at least in recent years, proving that the extreme left and extreme right share more in common than those on their own side of the ideological divide when it comes to the issue of health care? On the far right: the shouters shouting down other people who wish to speak at town meetings, whacko "birthers," and liars inventing "death panels" and obscenely and recklessly mentioning Adolph Hitler and Nazi symbols to scare people; irresponsible radio and TV talkers who use hate words and name-calling as a substitute for debating the issues civilly; and On the far left: including the most vicious posters on the so-called liberal blogosphere, threatening businesses with one or more executives who offer personal ideas for achieving national health care reform different from the Administration's or Democratic congressional leaders' versions (full disclosure: I support all of President Obama's core principles for national health care legislation, though I still have many unanswered questions); hateful e-mails, phone calls, blogs, and personal attacks, distorting alternative ideas different from the Administration's approach and attacking the motives of those airing them; and intolerance for anyone who disagrees, including personal invective and demonization of those with different views. When the far left and the far right join in the Politics of Hate and Demonization, it is time for the vast center-left and center-right of this country to speak up and call them out equally. It is time for responsible liberal and conservative political leaders and talk show hosts to denounce these extremist haters who stand in direct opposition to President Obama's call for respectful discourse and debate and who threaten our democratic traditions and institutions. Silence is no longer acceptable by responsible liberals towards the reckless far left or by responsible conservatives towards the reckless far right. Silence is complicity. Mr. Davis was former Special Counsel to President Clinton, 1996-98, and served on President Bush's Privacy and Civil Liberties Board, 2005-2006. He writes regular weekly columns for The Washington Times and The Hill newspapers.
 
Amitai Etzioni: Liberals: take the gloves off Top
The looming defeat of a progressive health care bill is a much greater disaster than meets the eye. The right wing will learn, as they already surmised from previous skirmishes, that they can blow the Democrats out of the water. They will use the same smear tactics, emotional lies, and talk radio campaigns to defeat whatever other progressive moves of any significance are left on the diluted and impoverished Obama agenda. And they will further water down whatever laws have been passed, the weak cap and trade bill for instance. Moreover, the right wing will use the same tactics during the forthcoming mid-term elections, as a dry run for 2012. By that time they will have convinced the masses that Obama was born on Mars, is a Soviet agent, and will take away the people's right to shoot each other. The liberals in response have been lame beyond belief. They have set up web pages that clarify the facts and provide corrections to misinformation--as if this was some kind of scholarly debate and the right and its followers will yield to the kind of corrections editors of scientific publications are prone to make. Liberals have called for a "stable, quality care" system, a phrase which has less appeal than last week's dish water. They favor "evidence based policies," a term that may excite a handful of policy wonks in a handful of think tanks. And they have been "negotiating": making grand concessions to the other side without getting anything in return, just to show how conciliatory, bipartisan, and reasonable liberals can be. The time has come for liberals to take off their gloves. A good place to start is to conduct hearings (Henry Waxman, where are you when we need you?) and town hall meetings fully dedicated to the ill doings of the private, profit-making sector. Lets hear about the sick who were denied care by insurance companies using one technicality or another; about private hospitals and clinics that pay recruiters to bring in patients from across the country in order to subject them to surgeries they do not need; about the health care dollars that are pocked by high salaried executives, their mistresses and sons-in-law, and back room backers; about elders allowed to wallow in their own waste to increase profits at nursing homes, and about other senior citizens who were refused treatments in order to hasten their deaths after they paid the assisted living facility's high entrance fees. In short, liberals need to show that the private, profit-making sector is riddled with abuse, corruption, and malpractice. Only then will a public option shine. If you feel at this point that such accusations are unfair, that one cannot generalize, that there are good people in the private sector, that public institutions have also some failings - then you should look in the mirror and see one reason the right wing is winning. This is not a theoretical debate which can be settled by checking the decimal points. At issue are overarching conclusions and basic sensibilities: is the profit-making sector a more trustworthy provider of health care than the public one? Should it at least face some public competition? The debate has to focus on this level and employ a language most people can be effected by--or we may as well wave another white liberal flag and not bother to join the fight. And a fight it is, with much more than the future of health care at stake. Amitai Etzioni is a University Professor at The George Washington University, and the author of The Moral Dimension: Toward a New Economics. He can be reached at icps@gwu.edu. More on Health Care
 
Robert J. Elisberg: The GOP's Risky Bet Top
There's a whimsical irony in the Republican Party's effort to defeat healthcare reform by focusing on the non-existent claim that it will Kill Grandma. It's that in their efforts to defeat reforming a disastrous healthcare system where 47 million Americans are without any insurance - Republicans will end up doing a far more effective job in actually Killing Grandma than their most fevered fake nightmares. Creating a problem worse than what one is complaining about is a Really Bad Idea - especially when it's worse beyond any comparison, since the "Death Panel" problem doesn't exist. But let's go further. Those 47 million Americans without health insurance, that's about one-sixth of the nation. How many do we think will be looking forward to voting for the party that blocked them getting health coverage? (Hint: if you're given a bet with an "over/under" - take the under.) So, simply on pure politics, this is a Really Bad Idea. But let's go still. Because the GOP is on record as being against healthcare reform. I mean, honestly, "We're the party against healthcare!" look lousy on your resume That's like being the party against Social Security. Or the party against Medicare. Or the party against Civil Rights. All of which were opposed by the GOP. The Holy Trinity of social issues. How did that work out for them? (Hint: there aren't enough shovels to dig them out of that hole.) Adding "we're against yet another social issue that will forever be beloved by Americans" to the list is a Really Bad Idea on the historical level. But let's go even further still. Because, you see, healthcare reform will pass. Really. Most Republicans in Congress understand there is a problem with the healthcare system, and it's related to the economy, and it has to be fixed, no matter their public stances lying about Death Panels or them trying to "get" President Obama. They know. But that's not the main reason it will pass. It will pass because Democrats have the votes to pass it. In both the House and Senate. The 60 Vote Issue is meaningless. This is the important part: They Don't Need 60 Votes. If the 60 Democrats can't get enough Republican bipartisan support, how many believe that President Obama and the Democratic leadership will throw up their hands in defeat - rather than use "reconciliation," where they need only 50 votes to pass what they want? Democrats aren't going to let healthcare reform not pass. It's too important to the country's health, too important to the country's economy...and too important to the Democratic Party. If the worst happens, and Democrats can't get enough - or any - Republican support in the Senate, President Barack Obama will go on television and say, "We tried to be bipartisan. We gave in on issue after issue Republicans insisted on, even though it weakened healthcare for you all, because we wanted to be bipartisan. But the Republican Party only wanted to block healthcare reform. But that isn't an option for America. America simply needs healthcare reform or our nation's economy and 47 million lives are at risk. And so, because Republicans refuse to support healthcare reform, despite all our bipartisan efforts, we will use "reconciliation" and Democrats will pass healthcare reform. And we all will benefit. If Republicans want to turn their backs on you, the Democratic Party won't. Just like we didn't turn our backs on you with Social Security, Medicare and Civil Rights." And not only with healthcare reform pass, it will pass with many of the issues back in the bill that Republicans wanted out. Because there will be no reason to compromise. So, trying to block health care reform is a Really Bad Idea on the pure reality of it. But we can go even further than that. Because even if all this is wrong, and healthcare reform doesn't pass, who do you think will get the blame for that? (Hint: "We Blocked Your Healthcare!" is a Really Bad PR slogan.) Make no mistake, Barack Obama will be hurt if healthcare reform doesn't pass. No question. After all, Bill Clinton was hurt by not passing it. But here's the thing: how did that work out for him? Oh, yeah, right. He got re-elected, and ended up with over a 60-percent approval rating. So, either healthcare passes, and Republicans are the party against healthcare - or healthcare fails to pass, and Republicans are the party that blocked healthcare. It's a lose-lose situation. So, it's a really bad on idea on the pure logic level. But ultimately, it goes even further. Because when healthcare reform passes, even if Republicans weaken it, weak healthcare reform is like the old joke, "What do they call the guy who finishes last in medical school? They call him 'doctor.'" Here's where it helps understanding history: The first Civil Rights Bill of 1957 was weak, only about voting rights. But it got people accepting it. And in 1964, a landmark Civil Rights Bill improved things. And then the Civil Rights Bill of 1968 fixed even that. And by 2008...Barack Obama was elected president. Even weak healthcare reform is still healthcare reform, and the floodgates will be open. And it will be a mark forever for the Democratic Party. And a body blow for the GOP -- the party forever on record against Social Security, Medicare, Civil Rights and healthcare for Americans. And next probably, puppies.
 
Vineyard Boutique Owners Offer Michelle Preppy Style Advice (VIDEO) Top
The most obvious question surrounding the Obamas' vacation in Martha's Vineyard is what will Michelle Obama wear? Should she step into the island's preppy fashion tradition? Will she don the ubiquitous Lilly Pulitzer prints? Plum TV 's Guinevere Cramer gathers ideas from the island's boutique owners. Tell us what you think of them below in comments. See more Obama Martha's Vineyard coverage on Plum TV . WATCH: Follow HuffPost Style on Twitter and become a fan of HuffPost Style on Facebook ! More on Michelle Obama Style
 
Diane Francis: Venezuela's Moscow maneuvers Top
All enlightened governments, including Canada's which just signed an investment agreement, should deem Venezuela a "no-go" zone. This is because the country, under Hugo Chavez, has descended into a kleptocracy. Industries, like coffee and rice, have just been nationalized and confiscations without compensation are underway. Two Canadian mining companies are victims, as are Venezuelan business interests, and there are gross human rights abuses, says Canadian lawyer, activist Robert Amsterdam. In his white paper entitled "The Erosion of Judicial Autonomy under Hugo Chavez", Amsterdam and his Venezuelan legal colleagues recite a case involving Eligio Cedeno who has been jailed without charges for two years because he opposes the Chavez regime. Here is their executive summary: "The rule of law and liberal democracy in Venezuela are crumbling under the leadership of President Hugo Chavez. Chavez has subverted the fundamental institutions of government converting theminto tools for maintaining and consolidating personal power," they wrote. "He and his supporters harass those who do not align themselves politically and ideologically with the Bolivarian Revolution. They use various means to persecute their opponents, including assaults in the media, violence, censorship and false criminal charges. Chavez has gained complete control of the criminal justice system. A growing class of political prisoners has emerged, including businessman Eligio Cedeno." "Intervention by the international community is both necessary and appropriate in order to preserve the rights of Venezuelan citizens." Official theft So where is the Canadian and other governments when it comes to preserving the rights of foreign firms and individuals. Take the case of the two embattled Canadian mining companies - Crystallex International Corporation and Gold Reserve Inc. They have spent years exploring and millions obtaining rights to develop two world-class ore bodies in Venezuela only to have them confiscated, de facto, through illegal means. Both trade for pennies as a result. Crystallex's statement in its 2009 Second Quarter was: "The Company's principal asset is its interest in the Las Cristinas gold project located in Bolivar State, Venezuela. The Company's interests in the Las Cristinas concessions are derived from a Mine Operating Contract (the "MOC") with the Corporacion Venezolana de Guayana (the "CVG") which grants Crystallex exclusive rights to develop and mine the gold deposits on the Las Cristinas property." "The Company has not received a response from the Minister of Environment and Natural Resources ("MinAmb") to its June 16, 2008 appeal of the Director General of the Administrative Office of Permits at MinAmb denying its request for the Permit for the Las Cristinas project." "On March 2, 2009, the CVG confirmed that the Company was in compliance with the MOC. This corroborates the Company's position that is not in default of the MOC and there is no change in control under the terms of the MOC. The Company plans to remain compliant with the MOC in order to protect the option of proceeding to international arbitration." That's theft through government obstruction and stone-walling. The other case involves a combination of Venezuelan tactics to obstruct and reduce the value of Gold Reserve Inc. combined with a hostile takeover bid this winter by Rusoro Mining Inc., a Moscow favorite. The bid failed because it was declared illegal by the Ontario Superior Court because a financial intermediary was collecting fees from both parties without disclosing this to Gold Reserve. Canada bye bye unless you bear arms Lest anyone discount this as just the usual maneuverings in the world of mining, the secret intentions to steal from the Canadians were published last fall in a blog out of China. "Venezuela said it will offer a joint venture to Russian-owned miner Rusoro to operate the Las Cristinas and Brisas gold projects, currently under contract to two Canadian companies, Mining minister Rodolfo Sanz on Thursday. He told a Russian delegation that a memorandum of understanding would soon be signed with Rusoro. It appeared that Sanz intends to replace the Canadian companies who operate the projects that contain some of Latin America's largest gold deposits, with Rusoro, but he did not mention their names." Why would this be happening, given the fact that the Canadian companies had signed a deal and invested millions in good faith already? "What's happening in Venezuela is not understood by Canadians," said Amsterdam in a recent interview. "Chavez has political prisoners, he is killing opposition without due process.I have a client who is victim to phony charges, no trial and has been in jail for two years. there are two million people on Chavez's black list who are denied decent jobs. In the meantime, he is causing problems with neighboring countries and has bought US$10 billion worth of arms from Russia. We just don't get the danger." Lloyds of London does. In June, it withdrew maritime "war risk" policy cover for Venezuela, "the first such exclusion of a Latin American country for 20 years. the move is the latest sign of Venezuela's deteriorating business environment," wrote Oil and Gas Insight in June. More on Venezuela
 
Sox' Peavy Won't Face Cubs Top
Chicago White Sox general manager Ken Williams said on Monday that Jake Peavy will not pitch against the Chicago Cubs on Sept. 3 due to the fact he's afraid of the starter re-injuring his ankle in a game with National League rules. More on Sports
 
Patrick Hayward Beat, Shot Special Olympian: Police Top
OWEGO, N.Y. (AP) -- Police say a 6-foot-2, 220-pound upstate New York man has been charged with using a BB gun, golf club, tire iron and glass bottle during attacks against a developmentally disabled man Police in the Southern Tier village of Owego (oh-WEE'-goh) say the charges against 22-year-old Patrick Hayward include assault, menacing and endangering the welfare of a mentally incompetent person. Police say Hayward shot the man in the upper body with a BB gun. Authorities say the 31-year-old victim reported the incident last Friday after being attacked over several days. Police say the man, a Special Olympics competitor, wasn't seriously injured. Hayward was being held Tuesday morning in Tioga (tye-OH'-gah) County Jail on $25,000 cash bail. Police and jail officials said they didn't know if he had a lawyer.
 
Thom Hartmann: Dear President Obama: A Modest Medicare Proposal Top
Dear President Obama, I understand you're thinking of dumping your "public option" because of all the demagoguery by Sarah Palin and Dick Armey and Newt Gingrich and their crowd on right-wing radio and Fox. Fine. Good idea, in fact. Instead, let's make it simple. Please let us buy into Medicare. It would be so easy. You don't have to reinvent the wheel with this so-called "public option" that's a whole new program from the ground up. Medicare already exists. It works. Some people will like it, others won't -- just like the Post Office versus FedEx analogy you're so comfortable with. Just pass a simple bill -- it could probably be just a few lines, like when Medicare was expanded to include disabled people -- that says that any American citizen can buy into the program at a rate to be set by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) which reflects the actual cost for us to buy into it. So it's revenue neutral! To make it available to people of low income, raise the rates slightly for all currently non-eligible people (like me -- under 65) to cover the cost of below-200%-of-poverty people. Revenue neutral again. Most of us will do damn near anything to get out from under the thumbs of the multi-millionaire CEOs who are running our current insurance programs. Sign me up! This lets you blow up all the rumors about death panels and grandma and everything else: everybody knows what Medicare is. Those who scorn it can go with Blue Cross. Those who like it can buy into it. Simplicity itself. Of course, we'd like a few fixes, like letting Medicare negotiate drug prices and filling some of the holes Republicans and AARP and the big insurance lobbyists have drilled into Medicare so people have to buy "supplemental" insurance, but that can wait for the second round. Let's get this done first. Simple stuff. Medicare for anybody who wants it. Private health insurance for those who don't. Easy message. Even Max Baucus and Chuck Grassley can understand it. Sarah Palin can buy into it, or ignore it. No death panels, no granny plugs, nothing. Just a few sentences. Replace the "you must be disabled or 65" with "here's what it'll cost if you want to buy in, and here's the sliding scale of subsidies we'll give you if you're poor, paid for by everybody else who's buying in." (You could roll back the Reagan tax cuts and make it all free, but that's another rant.) We elected you because we expected you to have the courage of your convictions. Here's how. Not the "single payer Medicare for all" that many of us would prefer, but a simple, "Medicare for anybody who wants to buy in." Respectfully, Thom Hartmann Thom Hartmann can be heard daily on his radio show 12pm-3pm ET. Visit www.thomhartmann.com to stream live or find a station near you. More on Sarah Palin
 
Rep. Joe Sestak: More than a Date to the Prom Top
This past weekend at Netroots Nation was a blast. I got a chance to shake hands, walk around with and sit down with so many bloggers, community members and netroots activists from across the country -- Fire Dog Lake , AmericaBlog , DailyKos , Huffington Post , Democracy for America , and so many others. They care so deeply about the future of our country and help give progressive voice to the national debate. Susie Madrak and Ari Melber moderated a great forum. As a 31-year Navy Veteran myself, I was so glad to get the chance to speak out for all the men and women who have served our country in uniform, but are being forced out of our military because of their sexual orientation. It's time to stop asking and start telling Washington that "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" must end. You can catch the clip on YouTube . I also hosted a breakout session and, not surprisingly, the hottest topic was health care. I actually held the first "town hall" on health care after the Congressional recess as part of my Working Families Summit. Today, I held another one at the Philadelphia Veterans Multi-Service and Education Center. There was another one last week, too, hosted by Broad Street Ministry in Philadelphia. The place was packed - almost 1,000 people turned out - with a line around the block. I said I'd stay to address all the questions at 6:30 that night and the conversation continued through midnight. We have taken the lead on health care and the feedback has been tremendous. I'd also like to thank all of the bloggers who supported me in the straw poll , and, by the way, nice Sestak shirts -- they read "Loyal to Change. Loyal to PA." It was great to see so many progressive Veterans from VoteVets at Netroots Nation. I'm proud to have their support and I'm proud of my record supporting them. Our veterans deserve more folks in Washington who are looking out for them. That's why I will be hosting two Veterans forums, back to back in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, this Monday. Susie Madrak also highlighted the importance of making sure that the progressive netroots have more than just a date to the prom, but a partner after elections are over. Too many politicians get to Washington and turn their backs on those who got them there for the sake of pandering to the political establishment. I'm looking for more than just a date to the prom. I'm looking for a progressive partner in the blogosphere both during and after the campaign. When I faced a strong Republican opponent in a heavily Republican district, I ran on the progressive values that I believe in - and won. And now I'm running against another long-time Republican who has turned to the political establishment for support. I'm turning to you. It's going to take all the progressive voices in the online community to speak out about the issues. Challenge us on our records. And ask the tough questions. And after the election that's when our work will begin. Here's some ways you can help: Sign up for updates on my website . Become a supporter on my facebook page . Follow me on Twitter . Post a blog And ask your friends to do the same. More on Arlen Specter
 
The Media Consortium: Weekly Audit: Depression-Era Inequality, Only Worse Top
By Zach Carter, TMC MediaWire blogger A new study by Economist Emmanuel Saez revealed this week that income inequality in the U.S. is more severe today than at any time since World War I, and the current recession is taking its heaviest toll on the worst-off members of our society. As our government rebuilds the financial sector using taxpayers' money, it's important to remember that both financiers and the government are responsible to our communities, not just bank shareholders. If we want to strengthen our country's economic foundation, we need to demand better wages for workers and an end to all kinds of predatory lending. Saez's new data on income inequality is, as Paul Krugman put it, " truly amazing ." Saez, who teaches at the University of California at Berkeley, found that the top 0.01% of U.S. earners had 6% of total U.S. wages, more than double the level in 2000. Earners in the top 10%, meanwhile, took home an astonishing 49.7% of all wages. That gap is larger now than during the Great Depression or the Gilded Age of the Roaring '20s. "We're seeing Depression-era inequality again--only now it's slightly worse," writes Steve Benen for The Washington Monthly. Benen also notes that this level of inequality is not an inevitable consequence of a market economy: It's an extreme historical aberration. In the U.S., prosperity for much of the 20th Century was shared. But in 2007, at the economic bubble's peak, the wealthy simply got wealthier. In that context, it is beyond absurd that the government is allowing 8-figure bonuses to be doled out by bailed out banks. Writing for Salon, Robert Reich dissects the policy implications of Citigroup's plans to pay its top executives an average of $10 million this year and award over $100 million to its top trader, a man who literally owns a castle in Germany. Citigroup was one of the most reckless U.S. banks during the housing bubble, a major subprime offender that received $45 billion in direct bailout money, as well as hundreds of billions in federal guarantees. How much is $45 billion? With the median U.S. home price at $174,100 , that's the full market price of over 258,000 foreclosed homes. The company says that $10 million a head is necessary to attract and maintain top "talent," which Reich notes is a somewhat misleading term, given recent history. The problem is not just that Citigroup and other Wall Street firms are paying tons of money to a few people, it's that these people are being rewarded for the same kind of activities that got us into this mess to begin with: Risky, highly leveraged securities trading. "Over the last several years Wall Street has exhibited a truly astonishing lack of talent," Reich says, noting that, "The Street is back to the same, relentlessly untalented tactics that made it lots of money before the meltdown--which also forced taxpayers to bail it out, caused the world economy to melt down, and tens of millions of people to lose big chunks of their life savings." In truth, Reich argues, most large financial firms in the U.S. are much more like public utility companies than private-sector businesses. Even in good times, they depend on government guarantees and other support systems to function. In bad times, we bail them out. Instead of paying financiers tens of millions of dollars to reinforce a flawed system, Reich argues that we should impose rules that result in salaries similar to the public utilities sector, where top earners are generally restricted to 6-figure incomes. The American Prospect features two pieces emphasizing problems in the current financial sector. Under a law known as the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), enacted in 1977 we require banks to make loans in communities where they collect deposits. The loans have to be to dependable borrowers and they have to be relatively inexpensive. The law works very well--institutions covered by it made only a tiny fraction of the high-interest subprime loans that brought down the financial sector, as National Community Reinvestment Coalition President John Taylor notes for the Prospect . But CRA only applies to actual banks. You know, the places where you deposit your paychecks. CRA does not apply to subcompanies owned by the same corporation, and it does not apply to giant Wall Street securities firms like Bear Stearns and Goldman Sachs. Taylor says we need to expand CRA to cover these other big players in the financial world. Why? As Alyssa Katz details in a piece for the Prospect funded by The Nation Institute , many Wall Street firms are bidding on foreclosed properties and selling them at rip-off rates to low-income borrowers. But as Mary Kane notes for The Washington Independent, banks have also devised several methods of making money without making a loan. By charging tremendous fees on borrowers for minor infractions, banks generate billions of dollars without producing anything of social value. One of the worst forms of abuse, Kane writes, comes in the form of overdraft fees. When you withdraw too much money from your bank account, the bank fronts you the money, and then charges you a fee for this "protection." The trick is, banks almost never tell you that this has occurred, and often play around with the timing of your charges and deposits to maximize the fees they collect. Banks are on track to collect $38.5 billion in such fees this year alone. The worst part is, the fees come from the poorest customers--rich people don't overdraw their bank accounts, because they have tons of money. In the case of credit cards, banks routinely slap borrowers with outrageous fees and interest rate hikes when the borrowers are making payments on time. Over the years, banks have targeted younger and younger credit card customers, as Adam Waxman notes for WireTap. After years of declining wages for all but the wealthiest citizens, consumers have been turning to pricey plastic to finance basic necessities. Sadly, corporate America does not seem very focused on helping workers establish their financial independence. The Real News talks with Richard Wolff, an economist with the New School who emphasizes that, while worker productivity has jumped in recent months, wages have not made the corresponding increases. Quarterly productivity numbers tend to jump around a lot, but the trend of not compensating workers for improved efficiency has been around for years. In a consumer-driven economy, major problems can't be fixed by giving lots of money to a few people, especially if those few people are already rich. To support broad, meaningful economic growth, we need to tailor our policies that empower those on the lower rungs of the economic ladder. And when we bail out giant corporations with taxpayer money, we need to make sure those companies arrange their business to improve the lot of taxpayers. This post features links to the best independent, progressive reporting about the economy and is free to reprint. Visit StimulusPlan.NewsLadder.net and Economy.NewsLadder.net for complete lists of articles on the economy, or follow us on Twitter . And for the best progressive reporting on critical health and immigration issues, check out Healthcare.NewsLadder.net and Immigration.NewsLadder.net . This is a project of The Media Consortium , a network of 50 leading independent media outlets, and was created by NewsLadder . More on Citibank
 
Quadriplegic's Family Sues St. Ignatius Prep Over Hazing Injury Top
The family of a St. Ignatius College Prep water polo player who was hazed by teammates and became a quadriplegic in 2007 after colliding with the bottom of a pool sued the school Monday for negligence.
 
Pamela Newton: New York Neighbors Are Wonderful! (Never Install An Air Conditioner in the Middle of the Night) Top
Last night I was hot. I had done a 30-mile bike ride in the afternoon, and I was exhausted, but I was just too damn hot to sleep. At 1 AM, after two hours of lying awake in a pool of my own sweat, I was in a groggy, insomniac haze. And I had a very bad idea: get the air conditioner out of my roommate's room and put it in mine. (He's out of town, and it's actually my air conditioner, which I had generously lent him at the beginning of the summer.) I figured he had done a shoddy installation, and I planned to do the same in my room -- just enough to get me through the night. In his room, I found that he had done no installation at all and the A/C was only held in place by the closed window. So, naturally, I opened the window. Yikes. I grabbed at the A/C as it flew out the window, but the piece I grabbed came off in my hand. With some kind of high-speed adrenaline-fueled gesture, I managed to catch the cord, which was still plugged into the wall. Amazingly, the thing stopped falling. But pull as I might -- with all the strength in my little frame -- I could not lift the air conditioner even an inch. It was just like one of those scenes in a movie where the good guy is holding the bad guy (or the reverse) with one sweaty palm as the bad guy/good guy teeters over the edge of a cliff on the Mediterranean or a New York skyscraper. But it was me and a large metal appliance. And I wasn't Bruce Willis. I was horrified by what was about to happen. It was inevitable: the A/C was going to win. In another moment, I would have to let go, and it would slip from my fourth floor window, probably hitting other windows on its way down, possibly hurting someone, crashing with a deafening noise that would wake up the neighborhood, and shattering into pieces on the concrete below. In a sudden act of bravado -- after peering over the windowsill to make sure there was no one the A/C was going to kill if it fell -- I let go and swiftly pulled the window shut on the cord. It slipped another few inches, but didn't fall. Now what? Who do you call at 1 in the morning when you are dangling an air conditioner from your 4th floor window? Then came the knock on the door. I opened it and there stood a calm and composed woman -- in her pajamas -- who smiled and asked me, "Do you know about your air conditioner?" It was her bedroom the thing was dangling outside of. It was also her first night in the building. Her name was Arielle. We brainstormed. Neither of us had the number for the super or building owner. I tried calling my roommate. I don't know why. Perhaps I thought he had some special knowledge of how to retrieve large, heavy objects hanging out of his bedroom window. He didn't answer. Arielle and I decided she would go back to her bedroom, stand on a chair, and try to push it up toward me while I pulled. It didn't work. She couldn't even reach it. She came back and we braced ourselves for the fall and the damage it would incur. We both kept saying, "It's going to be awful." Suddenly Arielle asked, "What if we both pulled? Do you think that would work?" We opened the window and began a hand-over-hand joint effort, and... the A/C began to move! We pulled and pulled together -- me shouting, "Arielle, you are my fucking hero!" into the night -- and that giant apparatus crawled back toward my roommate's bedroom window. Right at the moment of truth, it got stuck. There was some kind of molding just below the windowsill. Arielle held the cord and I tried to reach out and maneuver it over the molding, but my muscles were shaking with the effort, my arms were digging painfully into the windowsill, and I just knew I didn't have it in me. So I asked Arielle if we could switch. I took the cord and she took the beast. I held on with all my might while I watched her -- this stranger who is even more petite than I am -- lean out the window and lift the A/C over the molding and into the room. It was absolutely glorious. For a moment we stood there, marveling at the size of our catch. Then I thanked her profusely, we shook hands, and she disappeared. You can consider this little tale a warning about improperly installed air conditioners, midnight flights of fancy, or heat-induced imbecility. But, most important, it is a shout-out to kind and helpful New York neighbors everywhere, and especially to Arielle, the angel of Park Slope.
 
Todd Kashdan: A Few Thoughts on Mindfulness, Lobsters, and Serial Killers Top
As a parent of twin two-year olds, I rarely get to eat at restaurants. Let me correct that statement. I miss dining at restaurants where I am greeted by someone other than a grown adult dressed like a rodent or a 15-year old handing out balloons. Thus, when I dine, I feast. There is no guilt when I choose the most expensive entree on the menu. This usually means that I'm ordering lobster. The creme de le creme. Ambrosia of the sea. I'm on a budget so for me, lobster is a treat. People who eat lobster regularly are different from most of us. Members of posh country clubs. Parents that name their kids Muffy or Biff. But what is it about lobster that makes it so damn expensive? Don't get me wrong, a soft, buttery lobster tail is downright delicious. But why is lobster given such exalted status? You might be surprised to know that it wasn't always this way. When Europeans settled in New England in the 1600s lobster was only eaten by the poor and helpless. In some colonies, there was even a rule that prisoners could only be fed lobsters once per week. Anything more was considered "cruel and unusual punishment." I'm serious. The ocean shores of Massachusetts were littered with lobsters. Anybody could run down to the shore and grab one. Richer colonists didn't want to eat like the minions, they wanted something rare and difficult to find. Lobsters were cheap. People who ate lobsters were cheap. I envision the downtrodden at that time. Lying in the gutter, a drunken man in tattered clothes slowly clenches his dirty fingers around a lobster tail. Cringing with disgust, he bites down. As if things weren't bad enough, this crustacean was all he could find to eat. If only there was a more satisfying meal such as a can of spam or sardines... So what changed? After all, lobsters are lobsters. What changed was people's perspective. As lobsters became scarce, people began to view them as more valuable. Only the mightiest, richest people were eating lobster. Everybody wanted to be like them and lobster was in style. But this isn't just about lobsters. It's about how things change depending on our perspective. For instance, we often equate intelligence with getting good grades and doing well on national achievement tests. Well, what about the illiterate 8-year boy in Brazil who runs a jewelry store, handling money transactions and complex negotiations on a daily basis? How can anyone say he's less intelligent? It depends on the context. Then there is the manager of a textile factory searching for new employees to cut fabrics into curtains by hand or machine. Two people apply for the job with the same skills and qualifications. Now one of them happens to be deaf. Who should they hire? Forget morality, forget affirmative action, who should they hire? If what the manager is interested in is someone who can sit for hours at a time at a machine without being distracted by other people, wouldn't the applicant who is deaf be at an advantage? In this situation, their disability becomes an advantage. In a similar vein, if I was playing pin-the-tail-on-the-donkey, it would make more sense to choose blind people to be on my team than sighted people. In certain situations, strengths become weaknesses and weaknesses become strengths. But if we're narrowly focused, if we are rigid in our thinking, we forget to pay attention to the broader picture. When we are open and curious, we recognize that situations are rarely black-and-white and we are better equipped to handle the uncertain, ambiguous, gray zone between. If we rely on categories, labels, rules, and what other people say and do, we will miss out on the rich complexity of life. We will make less optimal decisions. We will be less creative and less productive, and feel less autonomous. Who says lobster is the best dish on the menu? Why should I listen to them? Peel back the curtains of why things are the way they are. When we do, we increase our flexibility and in turn, our opportunities for pleasure and meaning. Sometimes we prefer a corn dog, sometimes we crave lobster. Who cares about what society values, it's arbitrary. Being curious liberates us. Dr. Todd B. Kashdan is a clinical psychologist and professor of psychology at George Mason University. He is the author of Curious? Discover the Missing Ingredient to a Fulfilling Life . For more about his book and research, go to www.toddkashdan.com . More on Food
 
Sarah Silverman And Ed Helms Talk Horrible New York Apartments, Fighting Rats At UCB (VIDEO) Top
Sarah Silverman made a surprise appearance at UCB Theatre on Saturday night, appearing as the special guest for Seth & Ed's Puppet Talk Show at the venue's Del Close Marathon. Silverman and host Ed Helms, star of The Office , swapped apartment horror stories about fighting rats, neighbors with bullets, and padlocked bathrooms. WATCH: More on Sarah Silverman
 
Ken Levine: Woodstock from Someone Who Wasn't There Top
This is the 40th anniversary of Woodstock. 500,000 long-haired stoned members of my generation attended this three-day open air music festival. I was not one of them. But at least I admit it. For every person who attended there was another thousand who said they attended but really spent that weekend doing chores for mom. And while half a million rain soaked, bathroom deprived hippies grooved on three days of love and understanding, I was in LA bombarded by news updates on the Charles Manson murders. I did see the movie Woodstock that came out the next year. Jesus, did that scene look crowded! And uncomfortable! Yeah, Hendrix and Janis were great, but good God, I'd have to go three days without a toilet! I always thought the tagline for the film should have been, "Great Music! Stereophonic Sound! Clean Rest Rooms!" But like I said, anyone who was east of the Mississippi in the summer of '69 says they attended Woodstock. In fairness, some who didn't were probably so loaded they thought they were there. When their favorite Woodstock act was Lady Gaga that's a clue. But one friend of mine claimed he was there and I believe him. Why? Because this is what he said, "Most of the time the music was really bad." Everyone remembers the headliners -- Crosby, Stills, & Nash, the Who, Joe Cocker -- but there were a lot of no-name bands that screeched through endless sets. Again, I wasn't there so I didn't hear for myself, but there's probably a reason the movie didn't include Quill (doing a 40 minute set consisting of four songs), the Keef Hartley Band, the Grease Band, and six or seven other headliners that died on the editing room floor. He said at times it was also hard to hear and impossible to see. There'd be hippies staggering around completely lost. Babies screaming, people talking through the music. Another person I know was there was Grace Slick, lead singer of Jefferson Airplane. As luck would have it, I met her Friday night at the radio station. What a cool lady. She said the groups were housed at a nearby motel and airlifted by helicopter to a field behind the stage. So for most of the festival she watched bored musicians shoot pool. She and the "plane" arrived on the scene at 9 pm, but the program was running just a tad long. They didn't get on stage until 6 am. Not the best time, I would imagine, to perform rock n' roll. But she thought it was an incredible experience and seeing 500,000 people from the air was a sight she'll never forget. Amazingly, there were only two deaths. One from an overdose (duh!) and the other was run-over by a tractor. But considering the number of people, in such close quarters, with precious little food and shelter, the fact that there weren't riots and chaos and new Scientology chapters says a lot about my ge-ge-generation. Woodstock was a statement of peace (I think it was made just before the Sha-na-na set). And a declaration of unity. Whether we were there or not I'm sure we'd all like to go there now -- to recapture those old feelings, to feel a sense of shared purpose, to buy a summer home we could escape to on the weekends.
 
Michael Wolff: Why Health Care Hurts the President Top
It's not about health care. It's about the president. All Democratic presidents have to offer meaningful health care legislation. And all Democratic presidents are hugely vulnerable on the subject. Really, it has become a nearly institutional stumbling block and character flaw. It's a trap the Democrats always walk right into. Why should this be? Because health care reform is so bureaucratic sounding -- not just sounding, it is bureaucratic. It's the Democrats at their worst -- every word an offense against clarity. They sound at best like plaintive dweebs and, often, like unyielding, small-time civil servants. And because the taint of socialism, even after all these years, still runs deep. "Socialized medicine," however meaningless, still means something aberrant and dirty. And because the Democrats really never know what they are talking about--they are incapable of ever keeping it simple. Continue reading on newser.com More on Health Care
 
The New Anti-War Movement: Obama Faces Growing Backlash Over Afghanistan Top
As President Obama's generals consider asking for more troops in Afghanistan, the White House is finding itself confronted with a new problem: lefty war critics. They aren't fringe figures, either. The latest eminences to ask tough questions about the dramatic shift in Afghanistan policy include Rory Stewart, the best-selling author; filmmaker Robert Greenwald; even Obama's own advisor Lee Hamilton, the former vice-chairman of the 9/11 Commission. While not a coordinated movement, these early rumblings of skepticism could gain momentum over time, providing yet another headache for Obama.
 
Sandip Roy: Bollywood Superstar's American Crash Landing Top
Bollywood's biggest star was detained for over an hour, maybe two, over the weekend at Newark International Airport. He says it's because his name is Khan. The officials say its because his baggage didn't arrive. India is outraged. American flags are burning. Indian minister Ambika Soni suggested all Americans coming to India should be frisked. This level of ruckus didn't happen when former Indian president Abdul Kalam was delayed at an American airport. What America doesn't understand is that Shah Rukh Khan is no ordinary Khan. He is "King Khan."
He is not just an actor. He was the host of the Indian version of Who Wants to be a Millionaire. He's been the face of Pepsi and Tag Heuer and Hyundai. He is the star of India, Inc. As film critic Anupama Chopra, who wrote a biography of Shah Rukh Khan, said, "Shah Rukh Khan is part of our daily lives, on television constantly, plugging 20 products. He's an omnipresent brand." Brand India showed up at Newark airport. And America didn't wave it in. America didn't even know who he was. That is the real indignity. Bill Clinton was India's special friend. George W. Bush made relations with India his special priority. Barack Obama sent Hillary Clinton there. India got a special "for you only" nuclear deal. Its mangos now come to America. But how special is this relationship if America can't tell its good Khans from the bad ones? Even in this post-Slumdog Millionaire world, the Indian multimillionaire is just a TSA-official removed from being a mere slumdog. Indians had better wise up. American airports have always been a dangerous place in these days of color-coded security alerts. Indian Canadian writer Rohinton Mistry canceled his U.S. book tour in 2002, worn out, he said, by "the 100 percent frequency of the so-called random checks at the airports." When Maher Arar, a telecommunications engineer with Candian citizenship, was mistaken for an al Qaeda operative while in transit at JFK Airport en route to Canada he was whisked off to Syria and detained for over a year and tortured. Shah Rukh Khan was two hours late for his concert in Atlantic City. He showed up in ripped jeans because his bags still hadn't arrived. He created a fuss and the Indian consulate intervened. Mardin Amin, a 29-year-old Iraqi man, tried to downplay being pulled aside at Chicago's O'Hare airport. He was traveling with his mother and two small children and was a little embarrassed when the immigration official pulled out a penis pump from his luggage. "Pump," he apparently whispered to the official. The guard heard, "Bomb." Amin was threatened with three years jail on felony disorderly conduct. Most people who show up at American borders and trip over the machinery of Homeland Security don't have the full weight of their home country's cabinet and a billion fans behind them. As Deepa Iyer, executive director of SAALT points out in her blog, "Mr. Khan's incident might be gaining international attention because he is a celebrity, but the truth is that ordinary American citizens and immigrants here in the United States grapple with racial and religious profiling routinely at airports." What Shah Rukh Khan, who is used to traveling first class, didn't realize is that there are many reasons you can get stopped at airports and thrown off airplanes. You could be wearing a Meet the Fockers t-shirt with the faces of George W. Bush, Condoleezza Rice and Dick Cheney. You could be an imam praying at an airport terminal. Or you could be a royal princess of Qatar and not want to sit next to a strange man. Shah Rukh Khan just got a taste of the cattle-class world that ordinary people live in, the minefields they go through every time they try to cross borders. He got to be one of the ordinary blokes he routinely portrays on the big screen. In fact, his new film is called My Name is Khan, and it's about a Muslim man in post 9-11 America. The problem is America expects to be treated like a star at other country's airports. "What do you mean this flight is delayed and you don't know when the next flight is?" I heard an irate tourist harangue the counter clerk at New Delhi airport. "I will write a letter about this to the New York Times." Now Americans are surprised at the Indian reaction. If Americans overdid their security processes at the airport as Indian home minister P. Chidambaram suggested , surely India overreacted? Possibly. But this storm in a teacup is assuming tempest proportions. King Khan has been stopped by the Joker in a TSA uniform. There is only solution now. America must play its ace. President Obama, another White House meeting might be in order. Shah Rukh Khan and the Newark airport official and you. Except this time instead of beer, you might want to serve some chai.
 
Eric Boehlert: Health Care Mobs = Swift Boat Vets. And The Press Plays Dumb, Again Top
Here we go again. During August's summer daze, right-wing mini-mobs (egged on by corporate interests) have run wild at town hall meetings, propagating all kinds of smears and misinformation in an effort to derail an important Democratic campaign. Yet the mini-mob members have been treated as deeply important newsmakers by the press during a slow summer news month. Sound familiar? Recall August 2004, when the right-wing Swift Boat Veterans for Truth (egged on by corporate interests) stole a month's worth of campaign headlines by propagating all kinds of smears and misinformation in an attempt to derail an important Democratic campaign. Yet they were treated as deeply important newsmakers by the press during a slow summer news month. Fringe players on the right are making wild accusations that cannot be backed up by fact. The mainstream media response? We must cover the phenomenon daily, even hourly! So, day after August day, these vacuous health care "debates" are aired on cable television, just as news consumers suffered through night after night of vacuous Swift Boat "debates" five summers ago. In both cases, the press for the most part handed in its referee's whistle and focused its attention on simply reporting the fact-free claims and then getting the Democratic response. (i.e. he said/she said.) It turns out journalists are petrified of calling out right-wing activists as liars, and the other side knows it. Read the full Media Matters column here . More on CNN
 
Yvette Kantrow: BusinessWeek: 'Don't Worry, Be Happy' Top
Back in June, BusinessWeek announced that it would put out a special issue on " The Case for Optimism " this August, explaining that's it just as rational to see the economic glass as half-full as it is to view it as half-empty, so why not embrace the positive and enthuse our way to a recovery? I can't imagine that the magazine's editors still feel quite so upbeat, given that in July, BusinessWeek parent McGraw-Hill Cos. (NYSE:MHP) put the pub up for sale and bankers immediately predicted that it would fetch about $1 . Still, the magazine must go on, and BusinessWeek's long-awaited feel-good issue hit newsstands this week, as planned. It's done little to brighten my mood. The problem (aside from imagining how dreadful it must have been for BusinessWeek staffers to work on an issue whose cover line could've easily been "Don't Worry, Be Happy" as their magazine languished on the auction block) is that it really doesn't make a case for optimism at all. There's not much here in the way of positive news or economic indicators or any other factors that point to a recovery taking hold anytime soon; instead we're simply admonished to be optimistic because it feels good and it's a good thing to do. "Prudence demands that you prepare yourself for all possible outcomes, including some highly positive ones," the issue's main article instructs. It then provides us with a few examples of people who have embraced the downturn, including Mary Pruitt, a laid-off project manager who sunk her entire severance payment and 401(k) into a company that's working to reduce cancer-causing particulates in emissions from diesel engines. "We're not advising people to pour their life savings into automotive gadgets," the article explains. Well, that's a relief. But BusinessWeek does want us to keep in mind that risk-takers like Pruitt "are responsible for a fair share of scientific and technological advances." Other stars of the piece include two former Walt Disney Co. (NYSE:DIS) execs who left their jobs to launch a company that measures the effectiveness of Internet advertising "at the height of the financial crisis." Instead of changing their plans, "they stuck it out" and are now "just about ready for prime time." Go optimism! We're also reminded that Bill Gates dropped out of Harvard to co-found Microsoft Corp. (NASDAQ:MSFT) while the nation was "still mired in the recession of 1973-75." And then there's Lawrence Brilliant, who worked in the 1970s on a successful effort to eradicate smallpox, a disease that had killed hundreds of millions. "After that, how could you not be an optimist?" it quotes Brilliant as asking. I understand Brilliant's optimism, but what exactly does it mean for people suffering through the recession? Hey, poor reader, you might have lost your job, your savings or your home, but cheer up: Smallpox has been cured. As for the story's other examples -- Pruitt, the Disney guys, Gates -- there are always going to be people who profit from or innovate during bad times, and that's great. But the media's propensity to offer this group up as some sort of silver lining to our economic crisis is getting pretty tiresome, like that other media-fueled recession myth about how we're all better people now that we have to make do with less. Really, it's enough to turn an optimist into a pessimist. - Yvette Kantrow Yvette Kantrow is executive editor for The Deal LLC. More on Financial Crisis
 
Poll: New York State Government Broken Top
A Quinnipiac Poll released today reveals that a large majority of New Yorkers believe that the state government is the worst or among the worst in the nation. Voters say 77% to 19% that the New York State Senate is dysfunctional. 49% of those polled believe that almost everyone in the State Senate should be thrown out. Director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute, Maruice Carroll explains: "While voters tend to like their own legislators, almost half of New Yorkers are ready to throw out their own state senator in a general house-cleaning. "Voters would like to see a Constitutional Convention to straighten out Albany. Memo to Dick Ravitch: They'd like to see it come up with a system to replace a lieutenant governor when that person is promoted to Governor or resigns or otherwise leaves office." Read more of the astonishing findings here . Get HuffPost New York On Facebook and Twitter!
 
Derrick Crowe: Afghan Warlords, Narco-State Government Not Worth Another Drop of U.S. Blood Top
An overnight development shows why the Kabul regime is not worth another drop of American blood, and why the elections later this week will be far from the democratic triumph presented by U.S. officials. Drug kingpin and war criminal General Abdul Rashid Dostum is back in Afghanistan, working to help re-elect President Hamid Karzai . KABUL -- A notorious Afghan warlord accused of allowing the murder of hundreds, if not thousands, of prisoners and then destroying the evidence returned to Afghanistan Sunday night as part of what appears to be a political deal brokered with President Hamid Karzai. Gen. Abdul Rashid Dostum arrived from Turkey just four days before the Afghan presidential elections, in which his support could be key to Karzai's chances of securing more than 50 percent of the vote -- the threshold for avoiding a second round of elections. Karzai has come under criticism for consolidating his position by striking deals with warlords like Dostum and those suspected of connections to the country's opium trade. Dostum, you may recall, is responsible for a 2001 massacre in which he and his men stuffed thousands of prisoners into metal containers, suffocating most and then shooting at close range those who survived. Physicians for Human Rights uncovered the massacre and Dostum's attempt to cover it up, a cover-up aided by the U.S. government (Dostum was a CIA asset at the time). He is the worst sort of war criminal, and an opium kingpin at that. And yet, he's held senior positions in the government on whose behalf U.S. troops are killing and dying, and he's only one example of a wide swath of the Afghan government populated by warlords and drug traffickers. The general's return raises the question of why we haven't (and possibly won't ever) touch him for the war crime he committed in 2001. Two reasons present themselves: Karzai is relying on him to "deliver" (buy? coerce?) a million votes to avoid a runoff vote. Dostum was a CIA asset at the time of the 2001 massacre. Dostum's return to a warm embrace by the U.S.-backed government in Kabul shows us that: The U.S. is not fighting to support a pro-human-rights regime in Afghanistan. Dostum is a war criminal and warlord, and he exemplifies the rot at the heart of the Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan (GoIRA). The U.S. is backing a narco-state in Afghanistan. Dostum is only one of many drug kingpins and their bought-and-paid-for puppets in the GoIRA. By backing this government comprised in large part of drug traffickers (including Karzai's brother), we're confirming what many have warned about for some time now: the U.S. is picking and choosing winners in the global opium trade by eliminating Taliban-connected opium traders while helping to shore up the political power of opium traders in the Afghan government. Here's a very short video on the rise of warlords and drug kingpins into senior positions in the Kabul regime , using clips from Rethink Afghanistan : The Afghan government is not worth one more drop of American blood. The Bush-era idea that terrorism is a problem to be dealt with through invasion and occupation of foreign lands has led us down a path that ends with our morally culpability for the behavior of a narco-state flush with cash from the opium trade and U.S. taxpayer dollars. The Beltway debate about whether to add more troops is akin to the WW-II Japanese generals asking "Should we attack Pearl Harbor on November 13 or December 1?" The real question was whether they should have attacked at all. Similarly, the question is not whether we need more troops in Afghanistan. The question is whether we should have invaded and occupied Afghanistan in response to 9/11 and whether that occupation and military action should continue. The answer is no, and we should get our troops out of there, now. More on Afghanistan
 
Tests Begin on Drugs That May Slow Aging Top
It may be the ultimate free lunch -- how to reap all the advantages of a calorically restricted diet, including freedom from disease and an extended healthy life span, without eating one fewer calorie. Just take a drug that tricks the body into thinking it's on such a diet. It sounds too good to be true, and maybe it is. Yet such drugs are now in clinical trials.
 
Man Masturbates On Subway, Steals Cell Phone Top
A man believed to be in his late teens or early 20s was seen masturbating on a southbound D train on the morning of July 30th, cops say. The New York Daily News reports that the same man "snatched a cell phone out of a woman's hand while riding an F train in Brooklyn" about six hours later. This is the second hunt for a subway flasher in as many weeks. Anyone with information is asked to call the NYPD's Crime Stoppers Hotline at 800-577-TIPS. The public can also submit their tips by logging onto the Crime Stoppers Website at www.NYPDCRIMESTOPPERS.com or texting their tips to 274637(CRIMES) then enter TIP577.
 

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

1 comment:

  1. AnonymousMarch 15, 2014 at 1:09 AM

    The RC Private Security Group has a proven track record of professionally keeping order in most nightclubs in Sacramento and elsewhere in California, thereby making all its customers want to come back and enjoy safe night clubbing. In spots where our services are hired, we dispatch professional security guards fully dressed as our company prescribed to make them visible all over the place. Armed or unarmed, the presence of our security officers has gone quite an extra mile for the order and nightclub security sacramento ca.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)