Thursday, August 20, 2009

Y! Alert: The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Yahoo! Alerts
My Alerts

The latest from The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Irasema Garza: Code Red for Women and Girls Top
In terms of risk to women and girls, the country is at Code Red. In the midst of record job losses followed with months of paralyzing unemployment, we are reminded of a basic pattern regarding violence against women and girls : incidents of domestic violence tend to rise during periods of economic hardship. Tragically, it is precisely during such times that services for women are less likely to get funds they need to meet the demand. Right now, all around the country, funding for domestic violence shelters and services is shrinking just as the need for help is skyrocketing. Despite years of women's advancement in workplaces and educational institutions, we must acknowledge that we have not conquered the underlying attitudes that fuel gender-based violence. George Sodini's pointed attack on women at a gym in Pennsylvania, along with his blog postings outlining his anger at women in general , demonstrated an extreme and fatal strain of an attitude that courses through much of America's popular culture. Whether one wants to call these attitudes "misogyny" as Bob Herbert did in his insightful column on the incident , or a twisted sense of entitlement in relation to members of the opposite gender, the results are the same, and they are debilitating: women and girls are not individuals to be respected, but convenient and easy targets for frustration, blame and abuse. So, what does this mean amidst what some pundits are calling a "Mancession," a phrase that, in and of itself obscures the fact that, regardless of who is out of work, women and children share in the sacrifice?  For those at risk of violence on the home-front, a job loss and prolonged unemployment have darker repercussions than economic hardship: more threats, more incidents of abuse and escalating levels of injury. Between September 2007 and September 2008, the National Domestic Violence Hotline (NDVH) saw a striking 21 percent increase in calls for help , and that was before  the tidal wave of job losses rolled across the nation. NDVH also found that, in a five year study, women whose male partners experience two or more periods of unemployment are almost three times as likely to be victims of intimate partner violence as were women whose partners were in stable jobs. While the repercussions are most acute and dangerous for women and children, the negative impact extends onto the ledger sheets of companies and states, with some simply unable to sustain the cost. Just a few weeks ago, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, in an attempt to deal with California's crippling budget problems, summarily eliminated $20 million of funding that supported the state's domestic violence shelters , a massive blow to the more than 90 organizations that provide life-saving assistance to victims of violence.  We have come a long way from the days in which police and legal institutions treated violence against women as only a family or private matter.  Likewise, general public understanding of domestic abuse and sexual assault has improved, as advocates, educators and survivors have spent years explaining why “she was asking for it” couldn’t be farther from the truth. A major testament to this progress is the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), passed 15 years ago, which identified violence against women and girls as a national epidemic, requiring a national response. Under VAWA more than $9 billion has been appropriated thus far to improve services for survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking and teen dating violence and to educate law enforcement and members of the judiciary to improve prosecution of these crimes and the effectiveness of offender management. Still, this is only a fraction of the funds necessary to sustain these services for the millions of individuals and families in need. With the current state of the economy, the rising levels of frustration, and persistent attitudes that cast women as deserving targets, the reauthorization of VAWA , due for consideration in 2010, provides an important opportunity to look again at what continues to be a national crisis. While George Sodini’s actions were extreme, the sentiments he held are still disturbingly commonplace.  The increasing rates of violence against women, coupled with the relentless threat of sexual abuse and assault faced by women and girls, constitute a sharp wake-up call that illustrates just how far the United States has yet to go to protect the safety of one half of our population. While we can applaud how far we have come, it is imperative that policymakers and residents acknowledge that, for the more than 153 million women in the country, the threat is real, and escalating. More on Sexual Violence
 
Lesley Stern: How To Live On $0 A Day: What's A Poor Fashionista To Do? Top
Since you probably still have a small amount of pride left, you want to give off the same air of success in person that you've been cultivating on your Facebook and LinkedIn pages. Not so easy now that you've started referring to the $2.00 tee shirt you got at Walgreens as your "dress shirt." Fortunately, all the latest in designer names are still at your disposal for those rare occasions you have to get dressed and go somewhere. Free. Many happy returns! If you still have a valid credit card, your best bet is buying and returning (aka "bulimic shopping" to diagnosticians and "borrowing" to those who practice it.) A psychological lifesaver for fashion victims victimized by the economy, buying and returning allows you to binge on high end designer clothes and purge them once they're out of style (usually in a day or two). Sure, you'll have to keep the price tag on, but a little rectangle of cardboard digging into the fleshy part of your back is a small price to pay for the status of wearing the same dress Gwyneth was spotted in at the Ivy. Once you've worn the item, the thrill of ownership is gone and you realize that a $1,999 white silk dress just isn't practical for your impending employment at Denny's (if all goes well), simply bring it back for the full refund. To ensure a successful return, be very careful when wearing the article. Don't walk, eat, lean or sit. If you must drink, only consume clear fluids that don't stain. To be safe, you might want to slip a dry cleaning bag over it before going out (make sure to make a hole for your head to avoid suffocation). Check the refund policy or you may wind up paying for a one night stand in Stella McCartney for the rest of your life (or 30 years, whichever comes first). To learn more about refund policies from an expert, click here. Finally, never wear your borrowed clothes on a date in which you plan to get naked--nothing's more of a turn off than a woman (or man, for that matter) with drooping tags. Foot notes Unless you don't walk, returning shoes can present problems, as the soles can be dead giveaways come refund time. If you're the eccentric artistic type, you might be able to get away with wrapping those strappy Pradas in Baggies, but it does take away from their timeless, yet modern elegance. There's also the risk that logo watchers might think your shoes were designed by Ziploc. On the plus side, the Baggies can help camouflage the crappy pedicure you had to do yourself. As a rule, the only shoes that make sense to borrow are " f***- me" pumps, since your feet will be in the air most of the time anyways. Fashion straight off the runway One of the best places to pick up free, quality clothes is at airport baggage carousels. There's little danger of getting caught since security is much more concerned with apprehending dangerous tweezer and shampoo smugglers than luggage thieves. The only risk involved is not knowing exactly what's in the suitcase until you've already taken possession of it. But that's also what makes it exciting. Every bag you steal is like a gift...maybe that Dolce & Gabbana blazer you've been wishing for is in there. Or better yet, the original owner is an international jewelery smuggler! To increase your chances of getting something wearable, stick to carousels arriving from places that wealthy people travel and shop. Paris, Milan, Hong Kong and Dubai are always good bets. The first class baggage comes out of the chute first, so get there early. Avoid discount carrier carousels. Always grab designer luggage, since even if you can't use the contents, it'll get a good price on eBay. Become a GOP presidential hopeful Considered by some to be the ultimate in designer label whoredom, this method has proven very effective in keeping a wardrobe up to date. You don't need to be articulate, or knowledgeable to qualify for a role on the GOP ticket and an all expense paid designer shopping spree. Start practicing nonsensical statements that incorporate phrases like "death panels", "that's what Hitler did" and "where's his birth certificate?" and a free $150,000 designer wardrobe could be yours! It's not old, it's "vintage" If all else fails, do what Rachel Zoe does when she's in a pinch--wear that frayed, slightly stained, hopelessly out of fashion Chanel/Gaultier/Dior you've got in your closet, hold your head high and tell everyone it's vintage. Or just wear an old slip accessorized with a fur throw and a necklace fashioned out of something you've got lying around the house (a bottle opener or caper spoon, for example). Everyone will think you're a trendsetter instead of just a poor slob. More on Satire
 
Rep. John Conyers: Karl Rove, Rupert Murdoch and Media Bias Top
In today's Wall Street Journal, Karl Rove says that I - and others - owe him an apology for allegations that have been made about him during the course of the House Judiciary Committee's investigation into the dismissal of United States Attorneys and related issues about the politicization of the Department of Justice. Mr. Rove's self-serving assertions on this subject are simply inconsistent with the documents that the Judiciary Committee recently released and his claims have been discredited by the analysis of the documents and reporting on these matters by credible news outlets across the country. Anyone interested in the truth can read the documents for themselves ( here ) or the reporting on these matters from papers large -- Washington Post ( here ) and New York Times ( here ) - and small - Kansas City Star ( here ). Mr. Rove's points are largely a repeat of his prior discredited statements, and the purpose of this post is not to rehash Mr. Rove's rehash. What may be of broader interest is the apparent editorial decision of the Wall Street Journal to prominently feature Mr. Rove's self-serving assertions in its editorial pages, while burying and redacting the original story documenting the facts contained in these documents. On the day the documents were released, the Journal's print edition relegated the story to its "News in Brief" section, running an item of six sentences -- 193 words (by way of contrast, the next story in the same section about a college basketball coach impregnating a woman was eight paragraphs and 248 words). Nothing in the Journal's print coverage of the Committee's release quotes from any of the documents or from any Democrat or investigator about the specific evidence contained therein, even though the Journal used its apparently precious space to report that the Justice Department and White House declined to comment. (To be fair to the reporter, a longer piece appeared in the online edition). At the same time, the print piece helpfully includes Mr. Rove's full day-is-night quote asserting that the documents "show politics played no role in the Bush Administration's removal of U.S. attorneys" and other false assertions. And - in lieu of any quotes - it includes the assertion (also helpful to Mr. Rove) that "it remains far from certain whether the...documents released....contain information that would help prosecutors" without any further support or explanation, while omitting the reporter's online analysis of the numerous specific documents and facts that, in the reporter's words posted only online "appeared to bolster allegations that David Iglesias . . . was fired for partisan reasons." In contrast to the Journal's miserly allocation of column width for reporting on the document release, today's opinion piece by Mr. Rove is 13 paragraphs and 968 words long. It is featured in all formats of the paper. The point is not that I feel slighted. I have been a public official for more than 40 years and I have taken my fair share of shots from the media, and have seen worthy issues ignored before. The point is that the collective result of the Wall Street Journal's editorial decisions are that its readers are left unaware of the basic facts. So, for example, when Mr, Rove claims that all he did with complaints from New Mexico Republicans about United States Attorney Iglesias's unwillingness to prosecute Democrats for the purpose of providing an electoral advantage for Republicans was "pass them to the appropriate officials...to determine if they were accurate and weigh them appropriately," Journal readers are left unaware that testimony from White House Counsel Harriet Miers and emails from others contradict Mr. Rove. In the Committee documents, Ms. Miers describes an "agitated" Mr. Rove calling her from the road in new Mexico saying that something had to be done about Mr. Iglesias. Ms. Miers could not rule out that Mr. Rove expressly demanded that Mr. Iglesias should be fired. An email from a Rove deputy to Mr. Rove asked why Iglesias was "shy about doing his job on Madrid." Patsy Madrid was a Democratic Congressional candidate at the time. When Rupert Murdoch acquired the Journal, substantial concerns were raised about the number of media properties he owned and the right wing bias of his news ventures. Many questioned whether the Wall Street Journal would become just another New York Post or, worse, Fox News. While the Journal's editorial page had been conservative for some time, the news division had been largely balanced and thorough. (Indeed, the reporter's online piece is balanced and thorough.) Many wondered whether Murdoch would put his right wing slant on the news pages as well. The Journal's handling of this chapter of the USA scandal seems to bring that question to a head -- is it a sign that the editorial staff of the Journal's news division -- or at least its editing -- has taken on Murdoch's right-wing bias? It is certainly true that editorial judgments are made for many reasons and that mistakes are made in the crush of time and, for the sake, of the many accomplished journalists who work at the Journal, I hope that this was simply a mistake. But there is reason to worry. And with respect to the Journal's coverage and commentary on this particular matter, one thing at least is clear. If anyone is owed an apology, it is the Journal's readers who depend on the Journal for fair and accurate coverage of the news.
 
Rachel Strugatz: Rachel Zoe's Studio: See What's Inside (PHOTOS) Top
Already a major player in the fashion industry, the Rachel Zoe empire continues to grow. The mega-stylist became a household name several years ago after lending her finely tuned fashion eye to A-list stars who needed that extra edge both on and off the red carpet. She currently reigns as the most sought after celebrity stylist, boasting a roster of bold-faced names such as Cameron Diaz, Lindsay Lohan, Debra Messing, Keira Knightley, and Anne Hathaway. Rachel's jacket and shoes are Louis Vuitton, jeans are Seven For All Mankind, and jewelry is vintage. Zoe often styles her clients much like how she dresses herself: flowing clothes infused with Bohemian glamor, long wavy hair, and always heavy on the accessories. In addition to her own uniform, which includes anything bell-bottomed or wide-legged, Zoe is vocal about her perennial love for platform shoewear and an excess of vintage. In addition to being called upon regularly for her styling expertise, Zoe consults for Gap and Piperlime.com, published a New York Times bestselling book, stars in a hit Bravo reality show, has a new website, and is coming out with a line of accessories for QVC. See below for a look at Rachel's style icons, the items for fall that she can't live without, and her new website that she maintains daily. Season 2 of The Rachel Zoe Project premieres Monday August 24th at 10 p.m. EST on Bravo. Rachel Zoe's studio Rachel Strugatz: Describe your personal style. Rachel Zoe: My personal style is definitely grounded in 60s and 70s -- I can't seem to get out of it and it's what works best for me. I love the glam bohemian thing, the music from the 60s and the 70s, everything about the women in this era: Marianne Faithful, Bianca Jagger, Edie Sedgwick, Brigitte Bardot, Ali McGraw, the women of Halston and Yves Saint Laurent- there are so many. It's the whole time period that goes into Studio 54 -- it's glamor, sexy glamor. Edie Sedgwick Yves Saint Laurent, Betty Catroux, and Loulou de la Falais Brigitte Bardot RS: What is your go-to outfit? RZ: I would say a pair of bell bottom jeans- either wide leg or bell bottom that are high waisted too- with a t-shirt or tank from Alexander Wang or Phillip Lim, and usually a Chanel or Louis Vuitton jacket- vintage or new. And always platforms -- those are either Louis Vuitton, Brian Atwood , Lanvin, Azzedine Alaia, or Christian Louboutin. T By Alexander Wang Tank Tops The Brian Atwood Lola Platform Pumps that Rachel featured on her website RS: What are your must-have items this fall? RZ: A tuxedo jacket -- I love the one from Balmain. I also love the bags that Marc Jacobs did for Louis Vuitton for the fall- they are amazing. I am obsessed with leggings and I love the leather pair by Rag and Bone . When it comes to leggings I stick to black- black leather or black stretch leggings. Any leggings for fall are great. I love the jewelry that Karl Lagerfeld did for Chanel with all the jade and the onyx. He did this thing that goes around your fingers like rings but it's sort of a bracelet into a ring. I love the color combination. The neon pieces Marc Jacobs' pieces are incredible- the yellow wrap coat in particular. A look from Balmain's fall runway courtesy of Style.com A look from Chanel's fall runway courtesy of Style.com A look from Marc Jacobs' fall runway courtesy of Style.com RS: What inspires you? RZ: So many periods in fashion inspire me depending on the client I am working with. Primarily it's the designers and what they show on their runways that inspire me. That's why it's so important that I go to the shows because I leave with a ton of ideas- whether it's couture or ready to wear. That's what gets me excited to do the next project. When I see what designers are showing, it tells me what's happening now, this is what's going on now, this is what will work with that client, etc. Another view of Rachel Zoe's studio RS: How do you stay relevant? RZ: It's not ever an intention -- I keep working harder and harder at my job and diversifying in the kind of work I do. We just launched my website on August 4th- it crashed on the first day because we had too much traffic but everyone kept saying it was a good thing. I update my site everyday. I personally pick what goes onto the site, and it takes a lot of time- it's really important because I don't want to put something out there that I'm not excited about. From Monday to Friday there will be a key item and that will dictate a trend of an idea- and if it's an item that's super expensive, I'll always give an alternate that I call "parallel universe." You're in the same universe, you're just getting it for less money. What we're doing is the daily newsletter, and each day will be a different category: apparel, beauty, lifestyle, jewelry, etc. There's a section called "Ask Rachel" and because I'm very infatuated with twitter, people can ask me questions through my site and link to twitter. I always give advice and things like that as we move forward. Ultimately, I want to sell products on the site and have an e-commerce component- it will be a resource for everything. Everything I put on the site links to a place you can purchase. But baby steps first- I want to get it right and then the people that are looking at it will give their feedback. I'm also launching of collection on QVC. It's a line of bags, jewelry, hats, scarves outerwear, and sunglasses- so that's really exciting. It's a very accessible price point and everything is under $150. The jewelry is way under $100 and the bags are about $120 but almost everything is in that range. 5 Things About Rachel... 1. She loves to cook and bake. Her favorite thing to make is chocolate chip banana bread. 2. She's a good tennis player and a great skier. 3. She's obsessed with Warren Buffet. 4. She always has to watch Friends and Will and Grace before she goes to sleep. It's too hard for her to pick a favorite Friends character -- she loves them all. 5. The last book she read was The World of Coco Chanel: Friends, Fashion, Fame by Edmonde Charles-Roux. Rachel Zoe is wearing a Missoni caftan and vintage Yves Saint Laurent ring. Rachel Strugatz can be contacted at rachel.strugatz@gmail.com. More on Lindsay Lohan
 
Bloomberg Pushes Thompson On Pension Funds Top
Mayor Bloomberg and likely Democratic challenger Bill Thompson got into one of their roughest fights of the mayoral campaign yesterday after it was reported that the returns of the city's pension funds, which are overseen by Comptroller Thompson, trailed similar funds around the country. Howard Wolfson, the mayor's campaign spokesman, suggested that Thompson had hired fund managers based on their campaign contributions.
 
Queen Rania Lunches With The Sarkozys, Tweets Photos From Vacation (PHOTOS) Top
Jordan's Queen Rania has been tweeting updates from her family's travels around the Mediterranean. On Tuesday Her Majesty wrote that she had just seen President Sarkozy and his wife Carla Bruni. France's first couple is also vacationing at their villa in the South of France, where Bruni was snapped wearing a bikini . via QueenRania : Just had lovely casual lunch with President Sarkozy & Carla at their holiday retreat..Nice to see him so well and relaxed..10:19 AM Aug 18th from mobile web Then five minutes later: Such natural surroundings only infuse him with more passion & focus 4 advancement of his people. Carla of course, is gorgeous, inside & out.10:24 AM Aug 18th from mobile web Additionally, on August 16th, the Queen tweeted this charming photo of herself and her leather vest-wearing husband King Abdullah, writing "Ok, I am biased,but u gotta admit, my King is kinda cool, no?" She also posted this photo of herself eating a delicious-looking Mediterranean meal on August 14th: Follow HuffPost Style on Twitter and become a fan of HuffPost Style on Facebook !
 
Tara Lohan: Has Lays Gone Too Far in Claiming Their Chips Are "Local"? Top
A few weeks ago, Chicago commuters witnessed the unbelievable -- as busy subway travelers at the Jackson stop bustled between trains in a tunnel, many were shocked to see that the ceiling tiles had broken away above them to reveal the fat bulbs of potatoes growing out of clumps of soil. Or so it seemed. Sadly, invasive tubers taking over the transit system were merely just an ad stunt for Lay's Potato Chips . Accompanying posters in the hallway read, "Our potatoes are grown closer than you think." This was the latest in a massive campaign launched in May by Frito-Lay North America , the $12 billion "convenient foods business unit" of PepsiCo. Eager to cash in on a growing local-foods movement, the chip company has been hoping to convince consumers that buying Lays means buying local. They'll likely have a long way to go with that message. For most locavores, buying local usually means shopping at your independent Main Street retailer or farmers market, not buying processed foods from a multibillion-dollar enterprise. As the New York Times explained when the campaign was announced: Frito-Lay is one of several big companies that, along with some large-scale farming concerns, are embracing a broad interpretation of what eating locally means. This mission creep has the original locavores choking on their yerba mate. But food executives who measure marketing budgets in the millions say they are mining the concept because consumers care more than ever about where their food comes from. In the article, the Times quoted Bay Area food writer Jessica Prentice who had coined the "locavore" term: "The local foods movement is about an ethic of food that values reviving small-scale, ecological, place-based and relationship-based food systems," Ms. Prentice said. "Large corporations peddling junk food are the exact opposite of what this is about." So what is it all about? Well, money, of course. USA Today reported , "A national survey of restaurant chefs by the National Restaurant Association found 'locally grown' food to be the hottest industry trend for 2009." While money is big issue for the company, it has foodies and enviros ticked off -- and for good reason. To read more about the ads, the blowback, and the many other companies that are trying to pass off their products (from books to banks) as local, you can read the full article I've written for AlterNet . More on Local Food
 
Sol LeWitt Mural To Be Unveiled Columbus Circle Subway Station Top
At the 59th Street-Columbus Circle stop, long-suffering riders (gee, that sounds personal, doesn't it?) are now getting a sneak peek at the most important aesthetic dividend of the four-year renovation project: an enormous, joyously vibrant mural designed by the artist Sol LeWitt before his death in 2007.
 
Derrick Crowe: New Rethink Afghanistan Segment Shows Afghanistan War Undermines American Security Top
Brave New Foundation just released a new segment of Rethink Afghanistan . "Part Six: Security" includes ex-CIA field agents and station chiefs, along with journalists and regional experts who explain how U.S. policies in Afghanistan undermine American security. Take a look. Incidentally, this release coincides with the release of a new poll by ABC News/WAPO showing cratering public support for the Afghanistan war . Take note, Mr. President. (Derrick Crowe is the new Brave New Foundation/The Seminal Afghanistan blog fellow.) More on Afghanistan
 
Liskula Cohen Forgives "Skanks In NYC" Blogger Top
NEW YORK — A magazine model has finally confronted an anonymous female blogger who called her offensive names on a Google Web site. Liskula Cohen, who successfully sued Google to unmask the blogger, told "Good Morning America" Wednesday that she called her tormentor and said she forgives her. Cohen did not reveal the blogger's name but said she was an acquaintance whom Cohen saw at parties and restaurants. The Vogue cover girl says she has not ruled out suing the blogger. The anonymous remarks targeting Cohen's hygiene and sexual habits were posted on Google's Blogger.com. The blogger's lawyer, Anne Salisbury, had argued that although the comments may have been disgusting they were opinions and protected as free speech.
 
City Downplays Parking Meter Lawsuit: 'Wholly Without Merit' Top
In a brief written statement, the city says the lawsuit over its $1.15 billion parking meter privatization is "wholly without merit."
 
Dr. Hendrie Weisinger: Improve Your Likeability Quotient -- Nature's Way! Top
Likability -- it's a key predictor to success in all areas of life. From being the teacher's pet to party invitations to job promotions, likability can get you where you want to go. Likability pulls people toward you, so a good way to maximize your success is to develop attractiveness that increases your likability quotient. Mother Nature generously provides two key tips. The Sense of Humor . Your ancestors who had the keenest senses of seeing and hearing probably were at the top of the clan in hunting skills, but, all things being equal, those who developed sense of humor too become the chieftains. Two points explain why. The first is the mental and physical benefits of positive emotions. Laughing, for example, triggers the release of endorphins-hormones and enzymes that re natural painkillers for your body. When we laugh, we feel good, and when we feel good, we are more productive in our work, better partners, and more loving parents. Humor's evolutionary function is to make both ourselves and the people around us feel good. Now the second point. Studies-under the rubric of emotional contagion -indicate that nature has provided creatures the capacity to transmit modes to each other, no doubt for the purpose of communication. In humans, for example, emotional communication between mother and infant begins within days through facial expressions and range of sounds. You know by the tone of person's voice when she's irritable and by the smile on a person's face that he's in a good mood. Emotions are contagious. It is not a coincidence that many partners of depressed mates inevitably find themselves depressed too-they are catching the emotions of their partners just like a bad cold. Happily, humor is also contagious. This is why many television shows have laugh tracts-to mood infect you with positive feelings. Back on the Savannah, when things got tough, who would you want to be with-the clansman who turned gloomy or the one who made you laugh? Because your human nature is to want to feel good and because humor is contagious, you would gravitate to the caveman who transmitted positive emotions, and this would be the one with a good sense of humor. It is also fair to assume that this caveman's sense of humor would attract others, too, nd inevitably, he would go on to achieve status in the community. Hundreds of thousands of years later, I frequently her mangers and front line employees saying, "I love working for my boss. She has great sense of humor," but I m never told, "I love working for my boss because she's depressed and irritable." You can also make the assumption that those ancestors of yours who had a good sense of humor also attracted more than their share of desirable mates. Not only did the caveman have his status working for him, but also his sense of humor filled the air with positive emotions and pulled women toward him. Four decades of studies in the research of interpersonal attraction consistently support that among the top reasons women select their mate is for their sense of humor. To make yourself more likeable so you can pull people toward you, connect to your sense of humor. Here are some proven effective whys to do so: Candid Camera Glasses . People-watch 5 minutes a day with the goal being to tune in to the fact that we take ourselves too seriously. Instead of feeling road rage in traffic, look at the people in the car next to you, and you are sure to gain perspective. It is way to lighten up. Humor Breaks . Take a daily 5 minute break to think of things that make you laugh. You will feel enthused and feel your stress melt away. Formal Joke Sessions . You will have to get out of your comfort zone to start each team meeting with a team member sharing a joke, but numerous companies have told me it brings enthusiasm into the workplace. Listen Well . It's easy to see how natural selection favors those who listen well. Two cavemen out for a walk and you can bet the one who returned was the one who "heard" the leopard stalking them. Hundreds of thousands of years later, listening well still enhances your edge and likability. Listening is a fundamental survival tool. By listening you collect data to solve problems and innovate, and you strengthen interpersonal bonds. Good listeners are sought-after leaders. In every profession and interaction, parent, lover, therapist, doctor, lawyer, or Indian chief-listening well is elemental. It also bonds us to the person who respects us enough to listen to our ideas. Make yourself more attractive by listening to others. Some points to remember: Do not interrupt others; doing so indicates you are not listening. Respond to what people say rather than initiate a new topic. Validate your understanding by paraphrasing or summarizing what you think the person is communicating. When you are not sure you understand, gently probe for more information and ask for clarification. Remember the function of listening is to collect data so that you can help people enhance their lives. Having a sense of humor and listening to others are instinctual tools that nature has given us so that we can make ourselves more likeable and attractive to others and thereby enhance our lives in all of our arenas. Be sure to you both of them! www.drhankw.com More on Marriage
 
Obama's Organizing For America Forum: WATCH LIVE VIDEO Top
Organizing For America, the campaign arm of the White House, is hosting a live forum with President Obama this afternoon. According to an email to supporters from Obama's campaign manager David Plouffe, "the President will update us on the fight to pass real health insurance reform -- what's happening in D.C. and what's happening around the country. He'll lay out our strategy and message going forward and answer questions from supporters like you. And we'll unveil the next actions we'll organize together." In advance of the event, questions were taken at barackobama.com. WATCH LIVE HERE AT 2:30 PM EST: Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter! More on Video
 
Mark Miller: Why Health Care Reform Will Be Good for Medicare Recipients Top
Many of the protesters showing up at this month's town hall meetings on health care reform are old enough to be on Medicare--or they're pretty close. They're also old enough to know better; here we have beneficiaries of a gigantic, successful federal health insurance program screaming at their legislators to keep the government out of health care. Let's skip past the obvious irony and contradictions at the town halls, and instead focus on a substantive question: Would the health reform bill now taking shape really pose any kind of threat to Medicare recipients? Do seniors have a reason to feel threatened? Absolutely not. While we don't yet know what the final health reform bill will look like, the key components of importance to Medicare can be found in HR 3200, the bill passed by the House of Representatives. A dispassionate look at the bill suggests that health reform actually will be good for the Medicare program. On the surface, the bill may look somewhat threatening because it calls for $538.5 billion in Medicare spending reductions over a 10-year period to fund overall reform. But while it sounds like a big number, the cuts being proposed won't hurt beneficiaries. Get the full story at RetirementRevised.com More on Barack Obama
 
Stephenie Meyer, "Twilight" Author, Sued Over Alleged Vampire Novel Rip-Off Top
The author of the "Twilight" series is being sued by a woman who claims the 4th installment is a rip-off of her work. Jordan Scott claims in her lawsuit, filed today in federal court, that she began writing a novel "in the vampire genre" when she was just 15 -- back in 2003.
 
Michael Winship: Tom DeLay and the Woodstock Nation Top
Tom DeLay and the Woodstock Nation Michael Winship A sorry state of affairs. If it wasn't for all the 40th anniversary celebrations of Woodstock, the primary cultural contribution of the month would be the announcement that former Republican House Majority Leader Tom DeLay of Texas will be a contestant in the next round of "Dancing with the Stars." Still, better to see DeLay trotting the boards of ABC's hit "reality" show than back marauding the halls of Congress - or roaming faraway Saipan with now imprisoned lobbyist Jack Abramoff, praising the US possession's sweatshops as "a perfect Petri dish of capitalism." ("It's like my Galapagos Island," DeLay enthused.) When he makes his debut on "Dancing with the Stars," you have to wonder if Tom will specialize in that favorite Lone Star dance, The Cotton Eye Joe, or more appropriately, some variation of The Sidestep, immortalized in Broadway's "The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas." The corrupt governor in the show sings, "Ooh, I love to dance a little sidestep, now they see me now they don't. I've come and gone and, ooh I love to sweep around the wide step, cut a little swathe and lead the people on." No doubt there will be a lifting groundswell of GOP voting that will keep DeLay light on his feet through at least the first rounds of the competition. But as far as leading people on, the ex-congressman would do well to remember what happened the last time he tried to jury tamper with the scorekeeping on "Dancing with the Stars." You see, this is not The Hammer's first time at the rodeo. Three years ago, several weeks after his resignation from Congress, he sent a letter to his fan base urging them to vote for country singer Sara Evans, a "Dancing with the Stars" contestant. "Sara Evans has been a strong supporter of the Republican Party and represents good American values in the media," DeLay wrote. "From singing at the 2004 Republican Convention to appearing with candidates in the last several election cycles, we have always been able to count on Sara for her support of the things we all believe in... One of her opponents on the show is ultra liberal talk show host Jerry Springer. We need to send a message to Hollywood and the media that smut has no place on television by supporting good people like Sara Evans." Jerry Springer wound up outlasting Evans, who dropped out of "Dancing with the Stars" in the midst of a messy divorce during which she accused her husband of serial adultery. He made similar charges against her. So it goes when bad things happen to good people. Now if DeLay equated the comparatively harmless Springer with smut on TV, goodness knows what he would have made of Woodstock, the peace-love-music, free-for-all celebration that in 1969 churned upstate New York dairy farmer Max Yasgur's pastures into mud. DeLay was 22 back then, perhaps just a hair past prime for the Woodstock generation, but still in his pre-probity days. He might have enjoyed himself (remember that while in the Texas state legislature his nickname was "Hot Tub Tom"). At the time, he was working on his final credits toward a bachelor's degree from the University of Houston. He majored in biology, which before he went into politics led to a career not, surprise, in evolutionary science but insect extermination. Me, during the summer of Woodstock I was getting ready to go away for my freshman year of college. I saw one of the first ads for the festival in the Sunday edition of The New York Times and enlisted one of my high school English teachers and her husband to go with me -- they even had the requisite Volkswagen microbus. And the concert site was only a four hour drive away, tops. Alas, my plan fell through for that most rudimental of reasons: my mother said no. Several months later, at the end of my freshman year, some friends and I hitchhiked to a midnight showing of Michael Wadleigh's extraordinary Woodstock documentary. Hard to imagine that four decades later anyone would have the creative courage - or chutzpah - to try to recapture the experience. But two sets of filmmakers have done just that and the results are terrific. "Taking Woodstock," a feature film directed by Ang Lee and written and produced by my friend James Schamus, is a funny, touching look at the festival from the periphery. The performances are on pitch and the movie captures the period and the event perfectly, without once slipping into caricature or retrospective smugness - not a whiff of contemporary filmmakers betraying their subject matter with a "weren't they adorable and feckless back then" attitude. (In fact, Schamus told me the only thing people who were there in 1969 think "Taking Woodstock" lacks for atmosphere is the stink created by acres of muck and half a million people.) So, too, with "Woodstock: Now and Then," directed by the great documentary filmmaker Barbara Kopple. Using footage from the original Wadleigh documentary, combined with a wealth of other archival material and new interviews with many of the participants, Kopple tells the story of the concert from its inception through the bitter financial wrangling that tore its promoters apart from the moment the music was over. In his New York Times review, critic Mike Hale wrote, "In one way her film is probably truer to the actual experience of the average Woodstock attendee than Mr. Wadleigh's was. She focuses less on the music, which for some portion of the half-million people in attendance was merely a rumor." There is a fearful, ironic symmetry in the Times' praise of Kopple's documentary, for one of the most interesting points of her film is how that paper, as well as other publications at the time, initially tried to shape their coverage to match a prejudiced preconception. It was a "Nightmare in the Catskills," the Times editorialized. "What kind of culture is it that can produce so colossal a mess?.... Surely the parents, the teachers and indeed all the adults who helped create the society against which these young people are so feverishly rebelling must bear a share of the responsibility for this outrageous episode." New York Times reporter Barnard Collier, who was covering the actual concert, pushed back. Interviewed in Kopple's film he recalled, "When the stuff started getting back to New York, the editors there said, this is not what we want. We want a story about what a mess this is. They wanted me to write a story that said Woodstock was a catastrophe about to happen. I said I wouldn't write it. They said, you gotta write it. I said, I refuse to write it, unless it gets in [my] way. I said, and you gotta read it to me before it goes in, so that I know somebody hasn't penciled it, you know, taken it apart. "Finally, I got to [Times executive editor] Scottie Reston, and Scottie Reston said, okay, we'll go with it the way you see it." In this time of dying newspapers and the domination of television news by cable networks featuring bombastic opinion and little else, it's wistful to remember a time when a reporter could persuade an editor to do the right thing. Wistful as well to reflect on a Woodstock Nation that never really materialized, its moment of rhythm and harmony trumped by the heavy-footed dance stylings of men like Tom DeLay. ("Taking Woodstock" opens at theaters in New York and Los Angeles August 26 and nationwide on August 28. "Woodstock: Now and Then" already has premiered on the VH-1 and The History Channel cable networks. Keep your eyes open for repeats. ) ######### Michael Winship is senior writer of the weekly public affairs program Bill Moyers Journal, which airs Friday night on PBS. Check local airtimes or comment at The Moyers Blog at www.pbs.org/moyers.
 
Greg Mitchell: At Sen. DeMint's Town Hall: Lies, Damn Lies -- and "Jewish Spokesman" Ben Stein Top
Today I managed to attend one of the town halls sponsored by a key critic of the Democrats' health care reform, Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina. Well, I wasn't there in person, only in spirit - thanks to a live web broadcast starting at noon via WSPA-TV. They covered his second town hall of the day, as he stood on a platform outside the Beacon Restaurant in Spartanburg. The crowd was almost universally supportive, even worshipful, with one attendee hailing him for being considered the most conservative senator of all. The lies and misinformation that came both from the crowd and the stage probably exceeded what many might have imagined. And DeMint denounced the one person who pressed him with a tough question, saying she had come "fully" loaded with "Democratic talking points." Don't expect him to be criticized on Fox, a la Barney Frank, for "putting down" an attendee. Here are some of the highlights. --DeMint said that if the Democrats' plan goes through "hundreds of millions will lose Medicare" coverage. --One guy said insurance companies are NOT making big profits--only like 6% --and Obama was telling lies about it. DeMint agreed that profits not excessive. -- DeMint said "non-partisan" analysts agree "a hundred million" will lose insurance at their jobs under Obama plan. -- A woman quoted "Jewish spokesman" Ben Stein as tracing the decline of America to taking prayer out of school. She declared that America was a "Christian" nation. DeMint said, "I can't add anything to that." -- Another woman said she had a relative in London "who is dead because of national health care." And willing to document it. -- When a questioner said that the Democrats wanted to cover illegals, DeMint said it sure looked that way and would no doubt happen if not checked. -- A man said he wanted an ethics probe of David Axelrod, but did not say why. DeMint said a real concern but didn't want to get into it because "I am not partisan." -- Finally, a woman stood up and politely asked why he continually put down government programs while also backing insurance companies. He quickly accused her of coming "loaded" with "Democratic talking points" as the crowd hooted. DeMint closed by thanking the attendees for showing that they backed "taking back the government" -- and that he would try to help them get it back. * Greg Mitchell's latest book is "Why Obama Won." He is editor of Editor & Publisher.
 
John David Lewis: Imagine a 'Right' to Car Insurance Top
The major impetus behind health care reform is not economic--it is moral. The claim that health care is a moral right has motivated enormous government coercions against the medical industry. But this moral claim has blinded people to the fact that huge price increases have necessarily followed the growth of the coercions. To understand why, it is instructive to consider what would happen if car insurance were considered to be a "right." After the purchase of a home and the ordeal of major surgery, a car is most people's biggest financial risk. One mistake--or one bad driver--can harm dozens of people. We need insurance, so why should it not be considered a right? Car insurance is provided by companies that manage their investments in order to absorb financial losses. If insurance is considered to be a "right," then someone must be force to provide it: either the companies, or the citizens through coercive taxation. Either way, the new "right" will be mandated through physical force, wielded by the state against those who are bound, by law, to provide it. To enforce this new "right," the government must take money from some people and give it to others, without regard for the actual risk they pose. As huge amounts of money are pumped into insurance markets, demand increases, and prices rise. Government officials blame the companies, so they pass more controls, thus squeezing the supply. Prices rise further--the law of supply and demand cannot be thwarted. People demand to be protected from greedy repair shops and auto manufacturers. So the companies undergo a ten-year approval process costing millions of dollars for new products. As lawsuits mount, courts enforce claims of strict liability against the companies--who pass the costs on. Price rises accelerate. As people get used to a "right" to car insurance, they demand more coverage. Oil changes, brake jobs, torn seats and new tires become insurance matters. If insurance is a "right," then no one should be deprived of these goods because he cannot pay for them. Every visit to the repair shop--big or small, routine or emergency--now involves an insurance claim. Prices escalate. Male drivers under 25 pay more because they are statistically higher risks--but they resent this inequality. So they assert their "right" to insurance at the same price as older, wiser drivers. Companies spread the costs out across the board--and as good drivers face higher premiums, they demand more coverage. Prices shoot up further. By this point, no one asks what a repair job will actually cost--they ask only about their "co-pay." Customers have little incentive to keep costs down. Why bother to change the oil, if the insurance will give you a new engine? As regulations increase, critics castigate companies who are unwilling to cover pre-existing conditions, such as a fender dented before the car was insured. As paperwork increases, repair shops that once had four mechanics and one secretary now have five secretaries, who spend their days filing claims. Prices rise further--until car insurance becomes a crushing burden. By this point, the very idea that insurance should be used for catastrophic losses--not routine maintenance--has been lost. A chorus of calls for "reform" demands more government coercion to enforce the "right." Anyone who suggests reducing the controls is shouted down by those who blame the "free market" for rising costs. By this point, most people have forgotten what a free market is--or that they had no "right" to insurance before someone else produced it--or that there was a time when insurance was not so costly. This is fiction, of course--but it directly mirrors what has happened in health care. After World War II, companies began to offer employee health insurance because government controls forbid them from paying higher wages. Twenty years later, the "Great Society" lavished billions on programs--and as prices rose, regulation against the producers multiplied. HMOs and a host of other schemes were tried. Now, bucking under the weight of economic distortions and regulations, the law of supply and demand is wreaking vengeance on those least able to pay. Medicare and Social Security are approaching insolvency, insurance companies are forbidden from selling across state lines or from offering innovative health savings accounts, and the solution offered is--even more programs, with a price tag so large that it that cannot be grasped by the human mind. To expand government programs is not "reform." It is an extension of sixty years of government interventions. The government now controls nearly fifty percent of all health care dollars--paid for by skyrocketing prices, taxes and borrowing. The correlation with history, and with the law of supply and demand, is precise and inescapable. The primary cause of medical price increases is the government coercions. But the cause of the coercions is the idea that health care is a right. Until we understand that nothing is a "right" if others must be forced to provide it, we will continue to swallow the same poison, and we will reap even worse consequences in the future.
 
Meredith Lopez: Keep It To Yourself Top
The other day I received an email from one of my mom friends on vacation: "Exactly as I expected we got some funny comments from the uninitiated childless friends -- my personal fave is that my friend's husband is going to be the type of dad who just carries a diaper in his pocket b/c that is all you really need! Yeah, try using that diaper when your kid has an explosive poop, which travels all the way up her back and stains everything she is wearing. Maybe you can wipe her off with your own underwear and dress her in your socks as she lies on your T-shirt. Then you can walk home in just your pants while she screams her face off because you have no bottle, binky or toys to entertain her!" We mommies and daddies get a lot of "back-seat parenting" from non-parents. Suggestions, advice, and snarky comments on how they would or will do things better . I guess from the outside parenting looks...easy? Like we're all making our own lives, and the lives of our children, unnecessarily complicated with all our fancy-shmancy "diaper bags" and "wipes" and "toys" and whatnot. When my own Juban Princeling was going through a particularly fussy phase early in his infancy, one of my husband's co-workers brilliantly suggested we give him a pacifier. As if all this time the answer to our dilemma was so obvious, right under our noses, and why hadn't we thought of that? With an apartment full of ten bajillion pacifiers lying around, why didn't we think to pick one up and stick it in the Princeling's mouth? You mean, there's a plug for his noise hole? Another mom friend of mine, whose beautiful little girl happens to be bald, constantly gets asked when the baby is going to grow some hair. Answer: my friend is waiting for the day when a messenger from God comes down from Heaven and gives her the go-ahead to press the "hair" button on her baby. "Dammit, I knew I forgot something. I forgot to teach her how to grow hair!" One of the moms in my weekly mommy get-together was asked by her own father, on the day she brought her baby home from the hospital, why she didn't just give him a bottle of formula because breastfeeding seemed "like such a hassle." Because if there's one thing we women, especially brand-new mothers, enjoy hearing, especially from men and especially from our fathers, is that breastfeeding "seems like a hassle." But the best comments always come in the form of people thinking they know better than we do what is best for our babies. Another mommy in my weekly group says people ask her whether the sling or baby-carrier she uses is safe. You know, I bet she hadn't even thought of that! Who cares about safety when I can so comfortably strap my baby to my chest and schlep her around that way, because the last trimester of pregnancy was so much fun that we are all dying to relive it? My friend says they even ask her if the baby can breathe. Her response? "No, I like carrying a non-breathing baby around." While she was visibly pregnant, my friend Hey, Jude went to a coffee shop and ordered a latte. A complete stranger said to her, "So, I guess you're just leaving this one up to fate, eh? You're not supposed to have caffeine," to which Hey, Jude responded, "So, I guess you're a Nosy Nellie who should keep her mouth shut. You're not my midwife." (For those of you clutching your pearls and reaching for your smelling salts right now, the March of Dimes recommends that pregnant women only limit their caffeine intake to less than 200 milligrams per day, or about one cup of coffee.) Speaking of pregnancy, during my friend the Ex-Pat's pregnancy, her own boss -- a woman -- walked by her desk and asked her if she felt like she was getting fat. In what universe is it ever acceptable to ask anyone that, ever? The fact is, no one knows exactly what they will do or how they will handle situations until you are there in the thick of it. While Hey, Jude was pregnant a friend asked her if she was going to be one of those "hippie weirdoes" who co-sleeps with her baby. That friend of hers is now due in October, and Hey, Jude says she can't wait to see how the sleeping arrangements end up for her. Even the Princeling, who is so independent that a week after he was born he would gladly have moved into his own apartment had he not needed us for things like food, diaper changes, and transportation, once spent a night in our bed because he just would not sleep otherwise. While I was pregnant, my brother-in-law's partner asked if we were going to be those crazy "Baby Mozart type" parents. Well, maybe, maybe not. We want to do what's right by our baby, and if that means playing some Mozart now and then for him, we think that's fine. (FYI, we also play Green Day, Princess Superstar , Jay-Z, and Northern State for him. We want him to be well-rounded.) In fact, despite what the American Academy of Pediatrics says , I do let the Princeling watch a little TV every day. It's less than an hour per day, and with him awake for several hours at a time now I could not get anything done if I spent every one of his waking minutes keeping him entertained myself. Since I'm not using the TV as a babysitter all day long, I don't feel guilty about this. Baby Einstein and Noggin keep him distracted long enough for me to do fun stuff like the dishes and laundry. Because even my baby, who has enough toys and books to fill Santa's workshop ten times over, sometimes gets sick of crawling around and playing and just wants to veg out to a little " Yo Gabba Gabba " before his evening bottle and bath. And you know what? That works for us.
 
Linda Bergthold: I Want My Country Back! The Country That Elected Barack Obama Top
Listening to the people at the Town Halls shouting about getting their country back, made me realize that I want my country back too . The country that put aside racial bias and fear and elected our first African-American President, Barack Obama. But what I want more than anything is the calm and organized Barack Obama and the campaign that kept its eye on the prize -- winning the Presidency. Now I need Obama to keep us focused on the new prize -- health reform for all. In the past few weeks, everyone has been freaking out about health reform. The right has suddenly realized that they lost the election, and the Town Halls have given them the opportunity to vent their frustration. Is the hostility we are seeing new? No, I think it was always there, but it went underground and simmered until a "respectable" way surfaced for them to go out and scream and shout and hold up offensive and inaccurate signs about health reform . But the left is freaking out too. Every word uttered by Obama or his surrogates is analyzed and dissected to prove that he is backing off the public option or health reform. How the public option became the key deal breaker is an issue for another blog, but several folks have attempted to explain this phenomenon. The public option "could" be an important brake on costs, but since we have never tried to do this on the scale being proposed, we don't know that for sure. We "hope" and "think" that the public option will do what is being proposed, but no one knows what might happen in a reformed marketplace. The CBO has "scored" the public option as having the potential to bring down costs, but it it still somewhat of a theoretical issue. What is NOT theoretical is the need for insurance reform . And for that purpose, there is actually some bipartisan support , not to mention huge support from the American public . If we could only pass insurance reform, I know dozens of people who would benefit from that, and I am sure you do too. There are some strange ways of characterizing health reform, but one of the most amusing is the "What would Jesus do about health reform "? I would ask Obama supporters to ask a similar question -- "What would Obama do?" WWOD -- It's kind of what he's doing now. Staying calm, focusing on the goal, rolling out his strategy (and this is being written even before his nation wide strategy call Thursday), and having some faith that the process will result in a good outcome for all of us. I want my country back. I want the focused, goal-oriented, real grass-roots supported, campaign mode for health reform. Remember when you checked out www.538.com twice a day to be sure that the delegate count was really holding up? And whle we all freaked out about this and that issue or state election, as long as we kept our eye on the prize -- number of delegates to nominate -- or number of states to elect -- we could feel a sense of confidence about what would happen. I think health reform is very similar to the campaign. We are at about Mile 15 of a marathon -- there are a lot more miles to go. There are bills to pass in the House and the Senate. There is the Conference Committee. There are final votes in both Houses. There is reconciliation or filibuster. I truly believe we will pass health reform that is meaningful this year. But I want the Democratic party to have a little patience and a focus on the final product. How about you?
 
Rabbi Shmuley Boteach: Kaddafi, My Neighbor Top
My friends tell me that I'm the Jewish Forrest Gump, a man who unexpectedly finds himself in strange and surprising situations. But the place I find myself in now surprises even me. I've just discovered that Muammar Kaddafi is going to be my neighbor. Quite literally. In about a month. In New Jersey. I knew when I moved into our home ten years ago that the property adjoining ours was the residence of the Libyan Ambassador to the United Nations. But for many years the large estate was derelict and neglected. Overgrown with grass and shrubbery, it was difficult to even stroll past it on the sidewalk. I endeavored to walk next door and greet my Muslim brothers who purportedly lived there, but we almost never saw any people. It seemed as if the property had been virtually abandoned. I had also heard from city officials that the property was millions of dollars in arrears in property taxes, with the Libyan government claiming immunity from local taxation, even though the same claim was being made on a property in New York and an exemption is provided for only one residence. Then about three months ago the property suddenly sprung to life with a massive construction project featuring a small army of workers laboring at a frenzied pace. I guessed that such a huge investment of millions of dollars into what had been a hovel could only mean one thing: a visit by Kaddafi. He had just appeared at the G8 summit in L'Aquila, Italy, was greeted by President Obama, and there was speculation that he would appear at the opening of the new United Nations session in September. Then, I awoke one morning to discover that my fence which separates the two properties, as well as many of the trees on the property boundary, had been cut down and removed. I walked next door and complained both to the city officials who were present as well as the Arab contractor in charge that if trees were being removed for security purposes, with the resulting intrusion into the privacy of my residence, I deserved to know. The contractor turned out to be a well-mannered gentleman. We talked some about the Middle East and established a rapport. I was assured that the damage would be fixed, the trees replanted. Then, an article in Newsweek appeared confirming that Kaddafi, being courted by the Obama Administration, would be traveling to New York to address the UN General Assembly. "The arrival of Kaddafi is already creating problems for New York security officials," the article said. "He travels with a massive, heated Bedouin tent." The Libyans had applied to have the tent pitched in Central Park but had been turned down and Kaddafi would, in all probability therefore, being pitching his tent at his "New Jersey property." So there it was, Kaddafi as my neighbor, the Libyan leader moving into one of America's premiere modern-orthodox communities, a community with strong political and philanthropic influence. How would he be received? On the one hand, the Libyan dictator deserves considerable credit for dismantling his WMD program, which included apparatus for building nuclear weapons. Whether this was due to a fear of the Bush administration in the wake of the invasion of Iraq or an effort to normalize relations with the West makes little difference to the important outcome. It was also significant that Kaddafi agreed to pay $2.7 billion in restitution to the families of the savage Pan Am 103 Terror Attack of December 21, 1988, a day forever etched in my memory since my wife and I left that day to spend many years in Oxford, England. It was also significant that Kaddafi penned an Op-ed in The New York Times in January of 2009 suggesting that Israelis and Palestinians move beyond their conflict and look to a unified future. In all these measure Kaddafi appeared to be an Arab leader making serious overtures to America and the West. But there is another side. Kaddafi continues to be a autocrat who has ruled his people for four decades. Amid his payment of restitution to the families of Pan Am 103, the Times of London just reported that Kaddafi was sending his personal Airbus 340 to transfer Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi, the terrorist who planted the bomb and who was being released due a terminal illness, back to Libya. As far as his Op-ed is concerned, Kaddafi was arguing for a single state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict which would effectively mean the end of the Jewish State of Israel. In light of this extremely mixed legacy, it behooves the Obama Administration to insist on certain parameters before Kaddafi is welcomed into the United States. First, Kaddafi should agree to meet with the families of Pan Am 103 whose lives were so brutally disrupted and offer them a personal and public apology. Next, the Libyan leader should be called upon to make a public declaration of friendship to the Jewish people in general and the State of Israel in particular. Should he do so, I would be very happy to invite him next door to our home and offer him warm, Jewish hospitality. While I cannot extend anything as exotic as might be found in a Bedouin tent, or even a shot of fine, single malt whiskey, out of respect for his Islamic faith, I can certainly offer him traditional middle eastern cooking, a legacy of my father's Iranian roots. I believe that my local Jewish community should keep an open mind about Kaddafi. If he truly regrets his terror-financing past, then it will show in his actions. Orthodox Jews account for a very large percentage of Englewood's tax revenue, and since Kaddafi's embassy refuses to pay a dime in taxation, it is our community which in no small measure finances the basic services of his mansion. Perhaps he will therefore see fit to extend the hospitality for which Arabs are justly famous and invite the local Jewish leadership to directly voice our continued reservations about his past and his need to go beyond words and sign a peace treaty with Israel. Prime Minister Netanyahu will be just across the river and a meeting can be easily arranged. Judaism believes in repentance. But it says that a true penitent expresses himself in not only correcting the damage he has done but by committing to righteous action in the future. Words are not enough. Rabbi Shmuley Boteach's upcoming book, The Blessing of Enough, will be released on September 8th. He is the founder of This World: The Values Network. www.shmuley.com
 
Michael Wolff: I'm Proud to Kill the News Top
The Guardian in London ran a piece Tuesday by my friend Ed Pilkington, the paper's correspondent in New York, about the financial woes of the photographer Annie Leibovitz. The piece was an efficient summary of this week's article in New York magazine about Leibovitz's spendthrift ways. While Pilkington is an accomplished reporter, he does not appear to have picked up the phone to have confirmed any details in the piece or to have added to it in any way. He just summarized. I mention this because Dan Kennedy, a Guardian writer and a commentator about the media who lives in Boston, had a post on the Guardian's website Tuesday excoriating Newser for...well...summarizing news. Newser is, he declared, "the most egregious example of abusive aggregation." There's a label I can wear proudly. Continue reading on newser.com
 
Mike Lux: The Heart of the Matter Top
The DC establishment is in full attack mode, as usual with mostly anonymous quotes , trying to defeat a central part of the President's health care plan, the public option. These inside-the-Beltway conventional wisdom worshipers of both parties don't like the idea of big change or taking on scary powerful special interests, and they hope they can intimidate people pushing for real change. As one of the left-of-the-leftists (is that what LOL stands for?) being attacked, let me cut to the chase and go to the heart of the matter, because there are apparently some folks in the government with great insurance plans who are still puzzled why the whole "keeping the insurance companies honest" part of President Obama's plan matters. The tens of thousands of organizational staffers, bloggers, and grassroots activists who are fighting our hearts out on behalf of the President's plan got into this fight because of the dysfunction of the insurance industry in terms of our lives. Like President Obama, we have seen family members having to fight with insurance companies while they are sick and dying. Personally, I have a friend with diabetes die because he couldn't get insurance coverage, and didn't have the money to take care of himself the way a diabetic should. I have family members with pre-existing conditions stuck in jobs they don't like for fear of not being able to get insurance should they switch. As a diabetic myself, there isn't a month that goes by where I'm not hassling with an insurance company bureaucrat over something, and as a small businessperson, I feel the financial pain of insurers raising my rates through the roof. When the President talks about needing to keep the insurance companies honest, we know he is right because we see it, up close and personal, in our own lives. When the President and other Democrats take on the insurance industry, we cheer them on because we know of what they speak. This is what drives us. We are not putting everything we have into this fight because of our thrill at the possibility that the deficit might go down, or that doctors might order fewer test results patients don't need. That's all good, but it's not what is making us give money to Organizing for America, Health Care for America Now, Democracy for America, and the other groups fighting this fight, it's not what is motivating us to show up in bigger numbers than the right-wingers at town halls ; it's not what is getting unions, MoveOn, DFA, USAction, nurses and so many other groups to organize lobbying visits to keep the President's plan alive; it's not what caused so many of us to give $160,000 in 24 hours to reward those members of congress who say they are going to hold the line on the public option. This isn't symbolic for us, something we are doing just because the right-wing attacked the public option. We want real accountability, real competition, a real check on the insurance industry. So to all you insiders who find yourselves utterly mystified about why we care about a public plan, this is it: we want a check on insurance industry power, pure and simple. We want, as President Obama does, something to keep them honest. Tell us, if not a public option, what will accomplish that? How are you going to make that promise happen? I can think of some ways that would help. Rate regulation, for one, as Bob Creamer and I suggested the other day . Repealing McCarran-Ferguson , the law exempting insurance companies from anti-trust laws, would help. Making it easier and faster to file class-action consumer lawsuits against insurance companies, that would also be a powerful check on insurers. But you know what the funny thing is: these insiders panicking because they don't currently have the votes in the Senate, and attacking the very people who have kept the President's plan in the game all these months, they aren't talking about any ideas that would actually accomplish the President's goal of keeping the insurance companies honest. Maybe I would feel a little better about the co-op proposal if I'd seen any actual details on it, but not even the leading advocate for it in the Senate, Kent Conrad, has spelled out anything that would make analysts think it could remotely provide the check we are looking for on the insurance industry. So Mr. President, us left-of-the-leftists have your back. We share your goal, so essential to health care reform, of providing something to keep the insurance companies honest. If the people attacking us for supporting your plan (some of them anonymous staffers in your own White House) want to show us an alternative that actually accomplishes your goal, we will listen respectfully. In the meantime, we will keep fighting our hearts out for your plan regardless of who attacks us.
 
Paula Crossfield: Oklahoma Attorney General Takes on Big Poultry, Highlighting Unsustainability of Industrial Agriculture Top
It's not often that I get to write about a positive food policy story coming out of my home state, but it turns out that Oklahoma Attorney General (and Democratic candidate for governor in 2010 ) Drew Edmondson is suing the more lenient Arkansas poultry industry for its waste, which is polluting the Illinois River on the states' shared border. This case brings the spotlight to a huge, oft-ignored issue that many legislators in other states should take note of, too: agricultural pollution. From AP : In the lawsuit, Edmondson claims runoff from land that has been spread with chicken waste for decades has contaminated the watershed. He is suing a dozen Arkansas poultry companies that buy birds from the 1,800 poultry houses that dot the watershed in Oklahoma and Arkansas. The defendants include Tyson Foods Inc., the world's largest meat producer. Here's hoping that Edmondson gets heard on this issue. I needn't remind you that not a single Oklahoma county went for Barack Obama in the 2008 election, and that it is a stronghold for climate change deniers like Republican Senator Jim Inhofe. So, not surprisingly, Edmondson faces an uphill battle in this fight, where poultry groups are pitting workers, who they've told will lose their jobs, against him. But Oklahoma could be poised to redeem itself, taking on the unsustainablity of industrial agriculture. Unfortunately runoff is not just a problem in this one river on the border of Oklahoma and Arkansas. It is a huge issue that we've seen increase worldwide since the industrialization of agriculture and the proliferation of animal confinement operations, which took off at an unprecedented rate in the 1970s. Factory farms raising animals had to answer the question of what to do with all that excess waste ( photo: liquid manure being applied to fields ), which was being produced in quantities that rival the waste of small cities without a sewage system. These are medieval conditions that could also be stoking disease outbreaks like the resistant bacteria MRSA , the salmonella and e coli that has been contaminating meat so often these days, and even possibly a cause of the swine flu . This potential for disease originating in concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) is precisely why these animals are currently given up to 70% of the antibiotics taken in the United States, and by extension, why antibiotic resistance is a topic of such great importance for Congress . Manure makes for good fertility in reasonable quantities (and hopefully without the antibiotics, which plants have proven able to take up ) -- but when spread in the massive quantities operations like these are forced to distribute, excess waste washes away from fields and goes down river, where it assists, along with over-used chemical-based fertilizers, in creating dead zones : water over-enriched with nutrients, creating an oxygen-free environment where only algae can survive. In 2003, there were 146 dead zones worldwide in our oceans (the clearinghouse for all the world's rivers and streams) and the largest measured 70,000 square kilometers. A new study in 2008 found 405 dead zones . Algae is not just gross to look at or swim in, either. The French have recently taken increased notice of the problem of agricultural runoff, after decomposing sea lettuce, which creates a noxious gas, killed a horse on a beach on the coast of Brittany. Here at home, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) might consider regulating chemical fertilizer application . The woman in charge of the dead zone issue at the EPA is Suzanne Schwartz, and you can get in touch with her to let her know how you feel about industrial agriculture runoff at: Schwartz.Suzanne@epamail.epa.gov Here is what I had to say to her in a recent email: I am very concerned with the effects large amounts of runoff from industrial agriculture are having on our rivers and streams, and by extension, our health as a nation. As you know, a report in 2008 revealed that we now have 405 dead zones worldwide, and life in those parts of the oceans cannot be supported. These areas are near the coasts, so they also affect the air we breathe, the water we drink, tourist and recreational usage, our food supply and more. Industrial agriculture is taking a huge toll on our collective landscape, and the corporations that cause the pollution are profiting handsomely on its demise. Please support Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson's attempt to take on this issue in the Illinois River on the Oklahoma border with Arkansas, where pollution is at its worst in that river's history. And please take a serious stand against synthetic fertilizer and confined animal feeding operation waste runoff -- these have proven in the last decades to be an unsustainable way to produce food. With your help, we can begin to shift to a new paradigm of food production. In the United States, our largest dead zone forms every year in the Gulf of Mexico. If you'd like to better understand the process of dead zone formation, check out this excellent visualization by the National Environmental Satellite, Data and Information Service of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration:
 
James Hoggan: Congress Should Expose or Outlaw Astroturfers Top
The venerable New York Times has reported the discovery of “ More Fake Letters To Congress ” by Bonner & Associates , the Astroturf specialists hired by Americans for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCE) to interfere with the vote on the Waxman-Markey bill. As much as Bonner has tried to deny its involvement, the agency was clearly the source of forged letters, purporting to come from charitable organizations opposed to the climate bill. But then, Bonner’s record is well-recorded. As William Greider described in his book, Who Will Tell the People , Bonner has operated a "boiler room" that featured "300 phone lines and a sophisticated computer system, resembling the phone banks employed in election campaigns. Articulate young people sit in little booths every day, dialing around America on a variety of public issues, searching for 'white hat' citizens who can be persuaded to endorse the political objectives of Mobil Oil , Dow Chemical , Citicorp , Ohio Bell , Miller Brewing , US Tobacco , the Chemical Manufacturers Association , the Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association and dozens of other clients.” If Bonner’s clients are that desperate to have a voice on Capitol Hill, Congress should call a hearing, inquiring into just how much influence is being peddled through phony organizations and faked letters. The U.S. badly needs legislation that requires organizations like Bonner to be more transparent and accountable, to disclose their funding and to declare their purpose on every occasion. Any such legislation will also have to come with significant penalties. It doesn’t seem that Bonner is bothered by whether this activity might already violate the standards of political integrity that are critical in a law-abiding democracy.   More on Climate Change
 
Mike McCready: Jon Stewart Exposes Fox News as the New Liberals Top
Jon Stewart exposes Fox News for their hypocrisy, their double standards and their casual relationship with the facts. If you grew up during the cold war like I did, you probably remember being told how lucky we were to not live in the Soviet Union because their media was biased and misinformed and misled the population. I'm just sayin'... The Daily Show With Jon Stewart Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c Fox News: The New Liberals www.thedailyshow.com Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Healthcare Protests More on Glenn Beck
 
Peter Clothier: Healthcare: Don't Scapegoat Obama Top
It is now clear that we stand on the brink, ready to shred the last tatters of the great American experiment in democracy. We know from the polls that a huge majority favors serious health care reform, at least one poll suggesting as many as 85 percent. And yet a relative handful of nay-sayers have come dangerously close to denying us the reform we seek. These nay-sayers include a half dozen "Democratic" lawmakers whose livelihood depends on the good graces of insurance companies that stand to reap huge profits or suffer great losses from the kind of reform bill that eventually gets passed; and a minority of voters who choose to remain inexcusably but steadfastly ignorant of the issues even as they scream their opposition, and whose opinions are manipulated by the lies and fear-mongering promulgated by those same corporate interests. It is a sad spectacle to watch as the man we elected to bring about change on any number of issues that face us as a nation is constrained by political necessity to modify his vision of significant and lasting change. I say "constrained" because I see President Obama as a pragmatist, whose political antennae are precisely sensitive to the line where what can be done crosses over into what cannot be done; and eventually as one who settles for the former. A realistic understanding of what simply cannot be achieved, given the socio-political system we have allowed to take over our country in the past half-century, may be anathema to those who long for radical change. I count myself amongst them. It is, though, sadly, a good deal better than no change at all. The deplorable fact of the matter is that we have allowed the oligarchs to win. President Eisenhower famously warned us already in the 1950s--and with subsequently validated prescience--of the looming menace of the military-industrial complex. It seems from this perspective, in the first decade of the 21st century, that we "people" have surrendered our power largely to the corporate interests that currently have our government in their stranglehold. We have done this because we were willingly blinded to our long-term interests by the apparently irresistible appeal to our short-term gain. In allowing ourselves to be sold on the seductive--and clearly, in retrospect, deceptive--notion of "small government," we have handed the reins of our government to those who benefit most from its actions or inaction. In refusing to provide our government its lifeblood in the form of honestly paid taxes, we have foolishly ended up delivering that same money, de facto, into the insatiable hands of those who turn it to their profit. They profit from our health care and from our social services; they make money on our security, our military, even on our prisons. They make money on our money. The "privatization" of so many of the normal functions of government has resulted in fewer, more expensive, and less efficient services in virtually every area that affects our lives. The obsessive and irrational fear of "socialism" that has gripped this country for so many decades has been manipulated by these same people. No question, socialism has produced some sickening, unconscionable excesses. But capitalism has produced no fewer. No political philosophy is immune from exploitation by those whose greed for power and economic gain exceeds their concern for the improvement of the lives of others. In this country, we have shamefully squandered a magnificent opportunity to demonstrate to the world that democracy can work, and have replaced that dream with a squalid oligarchy whose corruption is disguised by our embrace of a shabby illusion of freedom that comes in the form of material well-being. So let's not scape-goat Obama. It's too easy for the rest of us to whine about the President's failure to persuade antagonists of what so many of us agree we need. He has done, is doing what can be done. But it's disingenuous to expect him to do it by himself. It's too big a job. Those of us who elected this man must recognize that we owe it to him now to do everything within our power to support him in his vision -- or sacrifice the right to sit back and complain. I heard one pundit say last night that we did not elect him to be a good President, but to be a great one. In order for that to happen, as it did with FDR, we must find the greatness within ourselves. Friends, as the French say: aux barricades ! Time to man (and woman) the barricades! More on Health Care
 
Centuries-Old Gotmar Stoning Festival Banned In India Top
A centuries-old festival in which residents from rival Indian villages throw stones at each other �" often leaving people dead or injured �" has been banned, an official said on Thursday. More on India
 
Jayson Blair Now Working As Life Coach Top
McLEAN, Va. — Jayson Blair knows his new profession – life coach – smacks some people in the face like a bad punchline. "People say, 'Wait a minute. You're a life coach?' That makes no sense,'" says Blair, the ex-journalist best known for foisting plagiarism and fabrications into the pages of The New York Times. "Then they think about my life experiences and what I've been through and they say 'Wait a minute. It does make sense.'" Blair, 33, resigned from the Times in 2003, leaving a journalistic scandal in his wake. The resulting furor led the paper's top two newsroom executives to resign. Blair wrote a book, then mostly disappeared from view. For the past two years, he has been quietly working as a certified life coach for one of the most respected mental health practices in northern Virginia. "He can relate to patients just beautifully," said Michael Oberschneider, the psychologist who hired Blair and urged him to become a life coach. "Sometimes you just meet people in life who have these electric personalities. Well, Jayson is now using his talents for good." Oberschneider, director of Ashburn Psychological Services, took an interest in Blair after seeing him lead a support group for people with bipolar disorder that Blair founded in his hometown of Centreville after being diagnosed himself. Oberschneider said he took a long, hard look at Blair before hiring him, in large part because of his past, which included substance abuse. But he was impressed at the rapport Blair had established with members of the support group. "Very few people can go through what he did and come back," Oberschneider said. "He really is a success story." Blair says his empathy for his clients is his biggest asset. "They know I've been in their shoes," he said. "I think it can feel a little more authentic." Blair said clients rarely know his history at first, but it inevitably comes up within a session or two as Blair relates his own experiences. Never has a client refused to work with him because of his past. "I am open about all the details of my problems and that allows people to know who they are listening to," Blair said. The job itself can be varied. Blair might have 25 or so clients at any given time. Some might be seeking career counseling, including corporate executives from the Dulles technology corridor seeking advancement – a natural for Blair, who schmoozed his way through newsroom politics to land a premier reporting gig in his mid-20s without a college degree. Others might have substance abuse problems, and some might simply have motivational issues. Blair said he has thought about going to school for a psychology degree, but isn't sure if it would be the best fit for him. "I don't really think too much about the long term," he said. "I like the idea that I can help people avoid some of the mistakes I made." ___ On the Web: http://www.jayson-blair.com
 
Jennifer Aniston Feels 'Screwed Over' By Bradley Cooper Top
Jennifer Aniston feels rejected and upset after Bradley Cooper ditched her for Renee Zellweger, reports the new issue of Us Weekly, on stands now. "She wanted to turn her date with Cooper into something...she honestly feels screwed over," a pal tells Us of Aniston, who dined at NYC eatery Il Cantinori on June 18 with her He's Just Not That Into You costar -- a few weeks before he began dating Zellweger. More on Jennifer Aniston
 
Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, Lockerbie Bomber, Freed By Scotland On Compassionate Grounds (SLIDESHOW) Top
EDINBURGH, Scotland (AP) — Scotland freed the terminally ill Lockerbie bomber on compassionate grounds Thursday, letting the Libyan go home to die despite American pleas to show no mercy for the man responsible for the 1988 attack that killed 270 people. The White House declared it "deeply" regretted the Scottish decision as Abdel Baset al-Megrahi left Greenock Prison and flew to Libya on an Airbus dispatched to Glasgow Airport, still insisting he was innocent. Scotland's justice secretary said freeing the bomber was an expression of the Scottish people's humanity but U.S. family members of Lockerbie victims expressed outrage. "I think it's appalling, disgusting and so sickening I can hardly find words to describe it," said Susan Cohen, of Cape May Court House, New Jersey, whose 20-year-old daughter, Theodora, died in the attack. "This isn't about compassionate release. This is part of give-Gadhafi-what-he-wants-so-we-can-have-the-oil." Some men outside the prison made obscene gestures as al-Megrahi's prison van drove by toward the airport. Al-Megrahi, who had served only eight years of his life sentence, was recently given only months to live after being diagnosed with advanced prostate cancer. Scottish Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill said although al-Megrahi had not shown compassion to his victims – many of whom were American college students flying home to New York for Christmas – MacAskill was motivated by Scottish values to show mercy. "Some hurts can never heal, some scars can never fade," MacAskill said. "Those who have been bereaved cannot be expected to forget, let alone forgive ... However, Mr. al-Megrahi now faces a sentence imposed by a higher power." Al-Megrahi, 57, was convicted in 2001 of taking part in the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 on Dec. 21, 1988. He was sentenced to life in prison. The airliner exploded over Scotland and all 259 people aboard and 11 on the ground died when it crashed into the town of Lockerbie. The former Libyan intelligence officer was sentenced to serve a minimum of 27 years in a Scottish prison for Britain's deadliest terrorist attack. But a 2007 review of his case found grounds for an appeal of his conviction, and many in Britain believe he is innocent. In a statement following his release, al-Megrahi insisted he was wrongfully convicted. "I say in the clearest possible terms, which I hope every person in every land will hear – all of this I have had to endure for something that I did not do," he said. White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Thursday the United States disagreed with the decision to free al-Megrahi. "We continue to believe that Megrahi should serve out his sentence in Scotland," Gibbs said. "On this day, we extend our deepest sympathies to the families who live every day with the loss of their loved ones." "I don't understand how the Scots can show compassion. It's an utter insult and utterly disgusting," said Kara Weipz, of Mount Laurel, New Jersey, whose 20-year-old brother Richard Monetti was on board Pan Am Flight 103. "It's horrible. I don't show compassion for someone who showed no remorse." In his statement, al-Megrahi said he believed the truth behind the Lockerbie bombing may now never be known. "I had most to gain and nothing to lose about the whole truth coming out – until my diagnosis of cancer," he said, referring to an appeal against his conviction that he dropped in order to be freed. "To those victims' relatives who can bear to hear me say this, they continue to have my sincere sympathy for the unimaginable loss that they have suffered." MacAskill said he stood by al-Megrahi's conviction and the sentence for "the worst terrorist atrocity ever committed on U.K. soil." He said he ruled out sending the bomber back to Libya under a prisoner-transfer agreement, saying the U.S. victims had been given assurances that al-Megrahi would serve out his sentence in Scotland. But he said that as a prisoner given less than three months to live by doctors, al-Megrahi was eligible for compassionate release. Compassionate release is an established feature of the Scottish judicial system when a prisoner is near death. According to officials, there have been 30 requests for release on compassionate grounds in Scotland over the last decade, 23 of which were approved. Scotland, which is part of Britain, has a separate legal system. Al-Megrahi's return will be a landmark event in Libya and a cause for celebration. His countrymen see him as an innocent victim scapegoated by the West in a campaign to turn their country into an international pariah. Many will also view his release as a moral victory for their country. Al-Megrahi will arrive Thursday night at Meetiga military airport on the outskirts of Tripoli, the Libyan capital. A few hundred Libyan youths prepared to greet him, while a military band warmed up. Some were dressed in T-shirts bearing al-Megrahi's picture and carried Libyan flags or placards with his image. It was not immediately clear whether he would be taken to meet Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi or go directly to a hospital for medical care. A letter published Thursday showed that Libya had invoked human rights concerns in appealing to Scotland for al-Megrahi's release. Abdulati Alobidi, Libya's Secretary of European Affairs, said under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights – a U.N. treaty – all those deprived of liberty must be "treated with humanity and respect for the inherent dignity of the human person." Gadhafi engineered a rapprochement with his former critics following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. He renounced terrorism, dismantled Libya's secret nuclear program, accepted his government's responsibility for the Lockerbie bombing and paid compensation to the victims' families. Western energy companies – including Britain's BP PLC – have moved into Libya in an effort to tap the country's vast oil and gas wealth. Gadhafi lobbied hard for the return of al-Megrahi, an issue which took on an added sense of urgency when al-Megrahi was diagnosed with cancer last year. Al-Megrahi was a well-known figure in the Scottish community near his prison, receiving regular treatment at the hospital and visited often by his wife and children, who lived in Scotland for several years. Briton Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora died on Flight 103, welcomed the Libyan's release, saying many questions remained about what led to the bomb that exploded in the cargo hold. "I think he should be able to go straight home to his family and spend his last days there," Swire told the BBC. "I don't believe for a moment this man was involved in the way he was found to be involved." Among the Lockerbie victims was John Mulroy, the AP's director of international communication, who died along with five members of his family. ____ Associated Press Writers Tarek El-Tablawy in Tripoli, Libya, Geoff Mulvihill in Mount Laurel, New Jersey, Shawn Marsh in Trenton, New Jersey, Meera Selva in London, Matthew Lee in Washington, Jessica M. Pasko in Albany, New York, and Jim Hannah in Dayton, Ohio, contributed to this report. More on Photo Galleries
 
David Fiderer: Karl Rove's Non-denials About the Siegelman Case Segue Into Lies in The Wall Street Journal Top
Karl Rove can't help himself. The more he talks the more he suggests that he's guilty as sin. His throw-crap-against-the-wall-and-hope-it-sticks piece in The Wall Street Journal constitutes his latest non-denial about corrupt dealings with the Justice Department. Rove gives himself away in his nonsensical lies regarding the inquiry into the prosecution of former Alabama governor Don Siegelman. The allegation that Rove took action to influence the prosecution is pretty straightforward. Alabama attorney Jill Simpson, a former Republican operative, testified about a conversation she had in early 2005 with Rob Riley, the son of current Alabama governor Bob Riley. Rob Riley told Simpson that Karl Rove had contacted the head of the Justice Department's Public Integrity Section, to make sure that Gov. Siegelman would be indicted for political corruption. The alleged motivation was to take Siegelman, a popular Democrat, out of the running for the 2006 governor's race. Rove either contacted the head of the Public Integrity Section - at that time it was Noel Hillman, who was later appointed to the Federal bench by Bush - or he didn't. Rove either contacted someone else in the Justice Department regarding the prosecution of Gov. Siegelman or he didn't. Rove either directed someone else to discuss the matter with the Justice Department or he didn't. Rove is not a lawyer, but he's not stupid either. He, like any lawyer, would know that a political figure contacting the Justice Department to get someone prosecuted is a really big deal, and for any lawyer it would set off all kinds of ethical bells and whistles. Even if you're a really busy and important guy like Rove, it's not the sort of thing you would just forget. After Simpson gave her sworn testimony for the House Judiciary Committee in September 2007, Rove had plenty of time for jog his memory and confer with his lawyer, Bob Luskin. Rove gave a lot of deliberation on the matter prior to submitting a written statement , offered as a stalling tactic to avoid direct questioning, to Rep. Lamar Smith, (R-Tex.) in July 2008. At that time, Rove's denial was categorical. But when Rove finally sat down for direct questioning by the House Judiciary Committee , he acted like he just fell of the cabbage truck. Q Have you ever had any conversations with Noel Hillman in the public -- then in the public integrity section of the Department of Justice? A I'm familiar with the name but I -- and I had -- I may have had some -- I can't remember whether this was an issue regarding the appointment of Noel Hillman -- is Hillman a potential - Q For the record, he has later become nominated for and approved as a Federal judge, if that helps you. A Right. Yeah. I think that is the context in which I recognize the name. Q Do you recall ever having any communications with him while he was at the Department of Justice? A Not that I recall, no. Among other things, Noel Hillman oversaw the Justice Department investigation into the Jack Abramoff scandal, in which Rove and his allies were deeply implicated . That's why Rove's, "I'm familiar with the name..." routine is so transparent. What would you think if someone asked Hillary Clinton, "Have you had any conversations with Kenneth Starr?" and she prefaced her answer with, "I'm familiar with the name..." before saying, "Not that I recall,"? Rove's "Not that I recall..." phrasing is a standard disclaimer used to inoculate against perjury charges. Go to the reporting by Roger Shuler , TPM and Locust Fork Journal for cogent analyses. Those nondenials segued into his rant on the editorial pages of the Journal , where Rove can lie with impunity. Judiciary Democrats didn't get testimony from either Mr. Siegelman or Dana Jill Simpson, the eccentric Alabama lawyer who drew attention by publicly supporting the allegations. Committee staff confided to me that they considered her an unreliable witness. I also understand that Mr. Siegelman and Ms. Simpson refused to cooperate with the Justice Department's review of his claim of political persecution, while I willingly gave sworn testimony. Rove's lies could not be more blatant. Simpson gave sworn testimony for the House Judiciary Committee, with questioning by Democratic staffers, on September 14, 2007. Gov. Siegelman was never called to testify by any agency or committee. Rove never testified for a Justice Department review of the Siegelman case. In fact, there's no indication that the Justice Department has considered the prima facie evidence of lying , concealment of evidence and witness intimidation by federal prosecutors. For a good, lawyerly analysis of the latest problems with the case, check out Andrew Kreig's pieces on Huffington Post here and here . More on Wall Street Journal
 
Kevin Grandia: Astroturfing Oil Company Picnics - all the intel you need Top
Note: the times, dates and locations of all the upcoming American Petroleum Institute "Energy Citizen rallies" are at the end of this post. As regular readers will recall, I was the first blogger to report on an API memo obtained by Greenpeace outlining a series of "energy citizens" rallies that would rely heavily on local oil companies busing in their employees to create the appearance of a grassroots uprising against the Waxman-Markey clean energy bill. Since then, I have received a lot of emails from oil company employees who know these fake rallies are wrong. Members of the Texas Public Citizen group attended the rally, and as they rightly report these were more of  a company picnic than a spontaneous uprising of citizens. If you've received an invitation to one of these energy citizen rallies, send me an email: desmogblog@gmail.com or call me at 778-240-6343 and let me know the details so we can continue to send folks out to report on these company picnics. Here's a list of upcoming astroturf events: 8/18 (11:30 AM). Houston, TX. Verizon Wireless Center. 8/20 (11.30 AM) Roswell, NM. Eastern New Mexico State Fairgrounds, Arts and Crafts Building 8/20 5.30 PM Greensboro, NC. Greensboro Coliseum. 8/21 (11:30 AM). Lima, OH Veterans' Memorial and Civic Center. 8/21 (11:30 AM) Farmington, NM. Convention Center at McGee Park 8/22 (11:30 AM). Atlanta, GA. Marriott Century Center. 8/25 (11.30 AM) Nashville, TN. Wild Horse Saloon. 8/25 (11:00 AM). Elkhart, IN. RV Hall of Fame. 8/25 (TBD) Greeley, CO. Island Grove Regional Park, Exhibit Hall 8/27 (11:30 AM). St. Louis, MO Hilton at the Ballpark. 8/27 (5.:00 PM) Tampa FL, Tampa Convention Center 8/27 (TBD). Bismarck, ND National Center of Energy Excellence at Bismarck State College, 4th Floor 8/31 (TBD). Anchorage, AK Anchorage Convention Center 8/31 (5:00 PM). Greenville, SC. Carolina First Center. 9/1 Springfield IL Time TBD Venue TBD 9/3 (Time TBD) Detroit MI Burton Manor Banquet and Conference Center. 9/3 (4:30 PM). Philadelphia, PA. Venue TBD. 9/3 Richmond, VA. TBD. 9/5 (2:30 PM). Lincoln, NE. Embassy Suites Lincoln. 9/7 (1:15 3 2:15 PM). Huron, SD. Freedom Stage, South Dakota State Fair I will report out anymore details I can get so you can show up with your video cameras and ask questions, like: "Do you know why you're here today," or "Are you here because your boss made you come?". If media are at the event, be sure to urge them to report these events as fake astroturf events organized by oil companies. Maybe you'll get some footage like this:
 
Jim Cramer Thinks Food, Inc. Could Inflame The Justice Dept To Take On Monsanto (VIDEO) Top
Last week, Jim Cramer did a fascinating segment on the seed giant and Roundup herbicide producer, Monsanto. He posits that Monsanto could be a prime target for a Justice Department antitrust action for their monopoly on seeds. Tom Brennan writes on Cramer's segment: A series of competition-crushing acquisitions made this biotech disguised as an agriculture outfit the market leader in genetically modified US corn, soybean and cotton seeds. And Monsanto maintains strict agreements with its farmer clients that leave them virtually no choice but to feed at the corporate trough. Plus, the company plans to push through a 42% price increase on its new seeds, and there's nothing these farmers can do about it. Cramer states he thinks "the government is worried about about the family farmer being destroyed by Monsanto's practices" and Monsanto's action of raising seed prices is "begging the Justice Department to go after them [.....] They are tempting the wrath of Obama." WATCH: Cramer also says, Monsanto "better hope the guys at [The] Justice [Department] don't go to the movies" and see the documentary Food, Inc. which takes on Monsanto's practices, along with many other aspects of our industrialized food system. If you haven't seen Food, Inc. yet, watch a trailer here: On Monsanto's website , the company calls the film "one-sided [and] biased." Get HuffPost Green On Facebook and Twitter! More on Food Politics
 
Danny Schechter: Searching for the Crisis and Finding It Top
Economic Stress Is Hidden, But It's There in a Recovery That Isn't. Last week I was telling a visiting filmmaker from overseas about the financial crisis and how it was getting worse. He looked at me askance. The market had just gone up, he said, and the White House was talking about an emerging recovery. "I have been in New York before," he said, "and it looks the same." A lot of the pain is hidden, I told him, hidden behind the deceptive spin in our media or buried in the denial and delusions of many people on the streets who have not taken the trouble to try to understand the nature of the calamity they are living through. On the elevator, we pass the offices of City Harvest, a charity that collects excess food from restaurants and distributes it to shelters and programs for the hungry. An employee explains that with the restaurant business way off, they have less to donate. What about the demand by the hungry, I ask? With a shrug, he tells me the need is way up. (AP is reporting, "The nation's food banks, struggling to meet demand in hard times, are turning to prison inmates for free labor to help feed the hungry.") Out in the street, you soon notice fewer cabs and town cars. More people are walking or using public transportation, even though, the fares recently went up. Even that is deceptive because there are still a lot of tourists in Midtown to complicate the picture. New Yorkers have other things on their minds. There are retail vacancies on every block. Other stores are discounting everything. The fast food places have their specials going for $2-5 dollars. Many of the clothing stories look like good will shops. When a JC Penny opened a store in Midtown, 15,000 people applied for 500 jobs. As we walked downtown, we passed nearly empty bars and restaurants, a sign that the most customers are staying away. Media reports are now confirming what I saw. The Wall Street Journal reports, "Major retailers reported that American consumers are continuing to hunker down, casting a cloud over the durability of the U.S. recovery and underscoring the importance of overseas demand in restoring the world economy to health. Retailers across the spectrum provided foreboding reports." Down where I live, you also pass new buildings with empty stores and unsold apartments. The foreclosure crisis is already hitting New York's condos and co-ops. You just can't see it from the street the way you can in a suburban tract. When you read the auction noticies, you realize its real. A new wave of foreclosures is expected and not just in poor homes. The middle class and commercial real estate is affected. Almost every block on 8th Avenue in Chelsea has a new bank branch. It's like ATM heaven except most are not crowded. There was a report last week that banking industry opened 10,000 branches over the last five years. Most were based in shopping areas or concentrated in affluent neighborhoods. Only a small number are in poorer communities, especially those victimized by predatory subprime lending. The New York Times reported this week that 91,100 NY households hide their savings in closets, in pillows -- even in brown paper lunch bags, just not at a bank Meanwhile, every week, more banks are going bust and being taken over and sold by the FDIC. There are reports that the FDIC itself is insolvent. And as for the markets, cooler heads prevailed when the wisemen realized that consumer demand has fallen up as defaults and delinquencies rise Inequality is mounting in social and racial terms. Recent statistics: =cited in a Times study: From the first quarter in 2008 to the first quarter in 2009, the national unemployment rates for blacks rose from 8.9 percent to 13.6 percent, compared to a rise for whites of 4.8 percent to 8.2 percent. In NYC, it was even worse: from 5.7 percent to 14.7 percent, compared to 3.0 percent to 3.7 percent for whites." Remember these statistics notoriously under-count those not looking for jobs that are not there. Unless you are following the trajectory of this crisis you might not know that economist Nouriel Roubini, who was among the first to predict it, sill sees it as far more serious that most of us realize: "This is the worst US and global recession in 60 years. If the US recession were -- as is most likely--to be over at the end of the year, it will have been three times as long and about fives times as deep--in terms of the cumulative decline in output -- as the previous two." Notice he is not quite predicting its end, using the "If" word to mask his own uncertainty. The Financial Times cautions against optimism taking refuge in the term "caution." Here in the Big Apple, The City's top money man, Controller Bill Thompson says, "108,000 jobs evaporating citywide between August, 2008 and May, 2009. Typically, unemployment continues to climb even after the economy bottoms out and begins to recover. I expect the number of unemployed in New York City to reach 400,000 in 2010, for the first time in decades." Still invisible are the impact of cutbacks on city services and the educational system. Income disparities are growing, according to a new study but how do I show that to my visitor since people with credit cards can still charge it even as credit limits are being cut back and interest rates rise. At the same time, A Bank of America-Merrill study shows the middle class is being hit hardest. The LA Times reports, "The consumer debt problem in the economy really is a debt problem for the middle class. The need to work off a chunk of that debt will sap middle-class family spending power for perhaps years to come. By contrast, the upper 10% of income earners face a much smaller debt burden relative to income and net worth. Those people should have ample spending power to help fuel an economic recovery." And don't think the end of the recession will bring back many of the jobs that are gone. Economists are now getting us used to a new term: "jobless recovery." Already employers are introducing compulsory furloughs, as the Christian Science Monitor reveals: "For millions of Americans, this might be the year of the furlough. Over the course of a month or so, workers - both white-collar and blue - may have to take several days off whether they want to or not. Call it a temporary pay cut - an action that is sold by management as a way to help save some jobs." Another new study finds, "Income inequality in the United States is at an all-time high, surpassing even levels seen during the Great Depression, according to a recently updated paper by University of California, Berkeley Professor Emmanuel Saez. The paper, which covers data through 2007, points to a staggering, unprecedented disparity in American incomes. On his blog, Nobel prize-winning economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman called the numbers "truly amazing." Its all amazing, all devastating to our lives and futures, and yet you can't necessarily see it if you don't look, or know what to look for. No one is talking about our economic pain -- not the right or the left, perhaps because it is not an "event" that you can cover live at a town hall. It's there but, for many, it's invisible and seen as a personal problem, not a social issue. This crisis didn't just happen; it was caused. Will those responsible ever be held accountable? Out of sight is out of mind. The hope is that if we ignore it, it will go away. If you think that, think again. Mediahannel.org News Dissector Danny Schechter is finishing a book and film on the financial crisis as a crime story. Comments to dissector@mediachannel.org. More on The Recession
 
The Media Consortium: Weekly Immigration Wire: Silence Strengthens Opposition Top
By Nezua, TMC Mediawire Blogger President Obama is citing the Healthcare debate as a reason for postponing immigration reform until 2010. But in the interim, the White House is laying the groundwork for an enforcement agenda by expanding programs such as 287(g) , Secure Communities and e-Verify , amidst a growing matrix of detention centers . Anti-immigration factions are taking advantage of the lull in legislative action to push their own agenda. The Progressive takes the unequivocal stand that " President Obama is wrong to postpone immigration reform ." Author Ed Morales makes it clear that while healthcare and economic issues are "understandably urgent," the choice to delay reform "de-prioritizes" people who have paid their taxes but have not been given a path to citizenship. The problem is, immigration reform and healthcare reform are inextricably connected. WireTap cites a central tenant of healthcare reform's " artificially amplified 'public' opposition " to immigration, as reported by the Los Angeles Times : It's "the notion that 'Congress would give illegal immigrants health insurance at taxpayer expense.'" Is the racially charged core of this "chameleon colored outrage" being purposefully left out of the general dialogue? The ugly facts are that a "third of all 'Hispanics' in the U.S., almost half of the undocumented, and a fifth of African Americans" lack health insurance today. And yet, only "one in eight whites" lack health care. After all, " Not all immigrants are alike ." New America Media's David Hayes-Bautista compares the experiences of two immigrants named Jean-Claude and Juan Carlos. Hayes-Bautista effectively illustrates the Good Immigrant/Bad Immigrant paradigm and asks "Why do some immigrants move quickly and swiftly up the educational and professional ladder, while others appear to remain stymied at the bottom?" Ultimately, "both segments of immigrants deserve to be included in the future healthcare system that their presence will help to fund." But some clearly don't think with such a progressive bent , as the New Mexico Independent reports. Instead of trying to bring greater truth to the entire discussion, anti-immigrant factions are " using [healthcare reform] to whip up fear and anger toward immigrants ," unsurprisingly claiming that they are "a costly and burdensome drain on any taxpayer-supported U.S. health care system." At a Portsmouth, New Hampshire town hall where the crowd awaited the President's arrival, one "white-bearded protestor" suggested murder as a solution for "illegals." ( Video via the Young Turks). Judging from the agitated protestor's words, he, like others, views immigration through a fearful zero sum scarcity model in which one person's well-being equals another person's loss. There are better ways to approach this issue. New America Media reports on a more enlightened approach being employed in New Mexico . The Las Cruces-based Colonias Development Council (CDC), along with other community groups, recently held a series of meetings that discussed "living and working conditions in underdeveloped border-area communities," but filtered the conversation "through the lens of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations back in 1948." Such a lens introduces not just political concerns, but concerns related to the "guarantees of healthcare, education, employment, and housing" as human rights. Migrants, like those of the CDC, are exploring the truly progressive ideas that proclaim all humans deserving of certain rights. And when the White House takes immigration reform off the radar with one hand and clamps down punitively with the other, it sends a signal to companies like Yum! brands, which are implementing illegal policies. In These Times ' Robin Peterson tells the story of a very unhappy KFC workforce where "No Match" letters have resulted in many lost jobs. No Match letters were introduced by the Bush administration. The idea is that your employer sends your Social Security number to a database, which returns a "match" that indicates valid citizenship. "No match" equals no citizenship, and usually, no job. However, a judge ruled shortly after the legislation's introduction, that it was illegal to fire a person over an "unmatched" return. " Time's up ," writes Michelle Chen of RaceWire . While the President has made some "overtures" toward immigration reform, the White House has "generally adhered to the status quo set by the Bush administration." Not all involved are feeling so patient: "Faced with the news that immigration reform may have to wait until 2010, some organizations say their patience has run out." The Mexican American Political Association , for one, has called for direct action to make clear the urgent necessity for leadership on this issue: We are taking the brunt of the attacks and suffering the immediate consequences of this misguided policy, therefore, our call is urgent to take to the streets on September 5th, the Labor Day weekend, and October 12th, not to ask but demand that President Obama stop the attacks on immigrants and that he fulfill his promise of immigration reform, that which we heard during the presidential campaign, but has recently been forgotten. Increasingly, the White House appears to be backing away from its promises to important constituencies. The administration's inaction plays out with very real results on the ground, including increased tension, anxiety, and violence against immigrant communities. As we are a nation of immigrants, the effects of ignoring this pressing issue are widespread and will only grow worse in time. This post features links to the best independent, progressive reporting about immigration and is free to reprint. Visit Immigration.newsladder.net for a complete list of articles on immigration, or follow us on Twitter . For the best progressive reporting on the Economy, and Healthcare, check out Economy.Newsladder.net and Healthcare.Newsladder.net . This is a project of The Media Consortium , a network of 50 leading independent media outlets, and created by NewsLadder . More on Immigration
 
William Stillman: Children with Special Needs, Credibility, and the Lone Billings Murder Witness Top
Breaking national news on August 18, 2009, reports that the ten-year-old adopted son of Beulah, Floridians, Byrd and Melanie Billings, was with the couple in their room when they were attacked during a home invasion and brutally slain, execution-style, on July 9. According to documents made publicly accessible by prosecutors, nine of the Billings' thirteen children were home at the time of the assault but only one of them actually saw the murder of his parents who were shot multiple times by several intruders. Children as eyewitnesses have historically been precarious territory, ripe for defense attorneys to minimize or dismiss their testimony as tenuous, unreliable or inaccurate. Upon cross-examination, others may become forgetful, confused, or contradictory (as a precaution, some are interviewed separately or videotaped). Add "special needs" to the mix and circumstances become exponentially more complicated. But perhaps this bias only reflects of our culture's discriminatory attitudes toward people with differences who may be perceived as possessing sub-par intellect and treated accordingly. The Billings murder witness -- one of the couple's young sons -- has been varyingly reported as having either autism or Down syndrome; that he might experience both is, indeed, entirely possible. Nevertheless, his value to the investigation is paramount in reconstructing details of the events as they unfolded, and should be handled as such. As a longtime advocate for those with unique ways of being, and myself an adult on the autism spectrum, I am hopeful that the boy's statement will be given due diligence. Thus far I have been gratified to learn that a "nurse who works with special-needs children" interviewed the boy who, in addition to his diagnoses, is also alleged to have language delays. Despite these seemingly irrefutable factors, the boy provided the nurse with cogent information about the assault such as a description of the attackers, the sequence of events, words exchanged, and other nuances. In debating whether the boy's accounting can be trustworthy, please consider the manner in which those with autism and other purported disabilities oftentimes think, learn, process, and retain information best: visually. That is, many of us literally think in pictures--images and "movies" that, with proper allowances, can be called up with the clarity of watching a home video or flipping through the pages of a family album; a veritable photographic memory for life experiences, if you will. This ability, alone, could prove invaluable to the Billings investigation. Additionally, because so many of those on the autism spectrum, and beyond, think in ways that are very literal and concrete, we are usually poor fabricators and transparent liars -- if ever the concept of telling untruths were to even cross our minds. As such, I suspect that the young boy's testimony will not morph into something that becomes outlandishly embellished to the point of being unusable but will, instead, remain consistent. Given that his speech is often irretrievable, the boy may benefit from standard child therapy practices such as drawing (angry scribbling using black and red crayons = unresolved conflict) or reenacting with puppets or dolls, which may also yield additional information. Of course, of greatest urgency under these circumstances is providing the Billings' son with compassionate assurances that will enable him to regain a sense of safety and begin a process of healing from his terrible trauma (he reportedly heard his father being told, "You're going to die!"). Contradicting clinical mythology, people with autism and Down syndrome are possessed of intense sensitivity and abundant empathy for others. They often absorb their most compelling recollections linked in memory and associated with strong personal emotion much in the same manner as anyone one of us can recall details about where we were and what we were doing the morning of September 11, 2001. Sometimes the most traumatizing of such memories replay without conscious volition. Knowing his inability to communicate as effectively as he would wish, caregivers should monitor him closely for other forms of "communication" that, to those less attuned, could be misinterpreted as stereotypical behaviors. This may include self-injury, aggression towards others, daytime urine and bowel incontinence, nightmares, bed-wetting, and increased apathy or distractibility (lending to the "he's in his own little world" misperception). These are potential symptoms of depression and post-traumatic stress disorder in children. However, I am optimistic that, with the proper emotional supports, the Billings' son will not only be embraced by the loving, healing circle of his family and friends, he'll also be believed. More on Autism
 
Are Your Candles Making You Sick? Top
(HealthDay News) -- Paraffin wax candles, used mainly for romantic ambiance, fragrance and light, may also contribute to air pollution inside your home. The candles, which are made from petroleum, are a source of known human carcinogens and indoor pollution, researchers said in a study to be presented Wednesday at the American Chemical Society's national meeting in Washington, D.C. In the study, R. Massoudi and Amid Hamidi found that candles made from beeswax or soy, although more expensive, apparently are safer because they do not release potentially harmful pollutants. More on Health
 
Jonathan Morgenstein: Not Building the Afghan State, Protecting the United States Top
President Hamid Karzai is the favorite in this Thursday's Afghan elections, but his reelection is no sure thing. It is quite possible that Karzai's main challenger, the former Foreign Minister Abdullah Abdullah, will force a run-off and even pull off an upset victory. No matter who wins, the imperative of America's military remaining in Afghanistan will not change. This is not a mission of charity and it is not a mission to build the Afghan state; this is a mission to defend the people of the United States. While democratic elections are a wonderful achievement, our mission remains the same as it was eight years ago -- to eliminate the Taliban and al Qaeda as deadly threats to us and our allies. The Afghanistan conflict has long played second fiddle to the Iraq war in American politics, but it is, in reality, America's top national security concern. If America pulls back from Afghanistan, there is nothing to stop al Qaeda from regaining a safe haven in Afghanistan -- and al Qaeda has big plans for Afghanistan that would directly impact us. Al Qaeda-aligned forces would become far more lethal if they gained free reign within Afghanistan. Imagine the threat to our country if the very same people who attacked us on 9-11 gained control of Pakistani nuclear weapons -- the threat of a nuclear Iran pales in comparison. Osama bin Laden' allies in the Taliban have already threatened and destabilized a teetering Pakistan and have even launched three attacks on Pakistan's nuclear facilities in the past two years. Al Qaeda and its networks have managed to kill and wound over 11,000 civilians in the last 12 years. Much of this achieved by a diminished al Qaeda on the run. If allowed to operate freely in Afghanistan once again, we can be assured they will strike us and our allies at home, just like they did when they roamed unfettered in Afghanistan eight years ago. Regardless of the merits or drawbacks of Hamid Karzai or Abdullah Abdullah as presidents of their country, the ultimate goal of our endstate strategy in Afghanistan remains the same: neutralizing Al Qaida and the Taliban so they can no longer wage war or terrorist attacks against us, Afghanistan, Pakistan, or our other allies. Clearly, we would prefer the Afghan government take on this mission, but until they can do so themselves, in order to prevent more American civilian deaths, we must do it ourselves. This of course means that we must help the Afghan government build its ability to destroy al Qaeda and the Taliban itself. The Obama administration is very interested in the Afghan elections but has wisely refrained from becoming involved in the outcome. Special envoy Ambassador Richard Holbrooke clearly stated , "Our goal is to support and encourage a free and fair election whose outcome reflects the views and desires of the Afghan people." The US is being very careful not to be seen meddling in who is chosen next, so as to maintain a constructive working relationship with the next government in Kabul. Hopefully, whoever wins the Afghan presidency will launch a renewed effort to defeat the Taliban and lead his people into a more stable, prosperous future. However, regardless of whomever that leader is, in order to defend our own security and those of our allies, we must remain focused on our mission. We must be prepared to prevent the very real threat of al Qaeda and the Taliban re-conquering Afghanistan and seizing Pakistani nukes. These very same people have attacked us before and will try to attack us again. This is not a mission of charity and it is not a mission to build the Afghan state; this is a mission to defend the people of the United States. Jonathan Morgenstein is a senior national security adviser at Third Way , a nonpartisan, nonprofit think tank. More on Afghanistan
 
Avital Binshtock: America's Greenest Colleges: Did Your School Make the Grade? Top
Today, we at Sierra , the magazine of the Sierra Club , released our third annual list of the greenest U.S. universities . And while the good folks at U.S. News and World Report ascribe certain measurements of prestige to their college rankings, we rated schools based on what matters most to us, and what two-thirds of college applicants say matters to them too: how green a campus is. The honors go to . . . 1. University of Colorado at Boulder (Boulder, Colorado) 2. University of Washington at Seattle (Seattle, Washington) 3. Middlebury College (Middlebury, Vermont) 4. University of Vermont (Burlington, Vermont) 5. College of the Atlantic (Bar Harbor, Maine) 6. Evergreen State College (Olympia, Washington) 7. University of California at Santa Cruz (Santa Cruz, California) 8. University of California at Berkeley (Berkeley, California) 9. University of California at Los Angeles (Los Angeles, California) 10. Oberlin College (Oberlin, Ohio) For the rest of the list (we ranked 135), click here . To determine the nation's most planet-preserving colleges and universities , we e-mailed a 10-page questionnaire to sustainability experts at hundreds of schools and combed through their responses. The survey covered eight categories: efficiency, energy, food, academics, purchasing, transportation, waste management, and administration. Schools could earn up to 10 points in each category, and up to 5 bonus points if they had additional or unique green initiatives. Then we normalized the scores to create an out-of-100 rating system. After we selected the winning schools, we asked student journalists to write about what their campuses are doing right; click here to read those accounts . We also called out three that fail , highlighted those that got extra credit , discussed what athletics departments are (or aren't) doing to be responsible on game day, noted green efforts at community colleges , addressed the green-jobs situation for recent grads, and examined the suspension of coal on campus. Eager to learn more? I explain things further during this interview on Sierra Club Radio . More on Sports
 
Comparison Of Global Purchasing Power Finds Oslo, Copenhagen, Zurich, Geneva Most Expensive Cities Top
UBS's "Prices and Earnings" study has dubbed Oslo, Zurich, Copenhagen, Geneva, Tokyo and New York as the world's most expensive cities based on a standardized basket of 122 goods and services. When rent prices are factored into the equation, New York, Oslo, Geneva and Tokyo emerge as especially pricey places to live. The basket costs the least in Kuala Lumpur, Manila, Delhi and Mumbai. The study was based on data collected in 73 cities around the world between March and April of this year.
 
Vanessa Richmond: Breasts Shrink with Economy? Top
The latest consumer item to be downsized this recession is breasts. It's not just that fewer women are shelling out ten grand for a pair of silicone cups, but that some women are going under the knife to have large implants turned into smaller ones. The Daily Beast has a gallery of celebs who've remodeled their busts, called "A-List B-Cups," with the most high profile case being that of Victoria Beckham . Most people agree she has had three surgeries (though she denies it), and her most recent change was from a 34DD to a 'more manageable' 34B. Tabloids report that everyone from Lindsay Lohan to Drew Barrymore to Jennifer Connelly is diminishing her dimensions. There are a few theories as to why women are going down to get a leg up. The first is specific to A-list circles -- many celebs are migrating to the fashion industry and appeasing the 'size zero demands' of its fickle and demanding god. As the UK-based Sun wrote, when Beckham first appeared with her new, smaller orbs, "Posh, 35, felt her mega chest didn't fit in with her new role as an upmarket fashion designer. A source said, "Victoria has wanted her implants taken out for a while. She felt that was part of her old 'WAG' image -- the big hair, big boobs, fake tan -- and that she has moved on since those days." In the article 'Is downsizing one's boobs the new Hollywood upgrade?' the Frisky blog says, "We're not sure which is worse -- women feeling the pressure to get implants, or feeling like weirdos if they're not an A- or B-cup? Could this have anything to do with all the celebs that are moonlighting in the stick-figure-dominated fashion biz?" But I know several non-celeb women who're also contemplating getting reductions, and have heard even more people, of late, discussing how ridiculous oversized implants are. So this isn't just about a few irrelevant Hollywood starlets flirting with fashion. A friend of mine has a theory. Her three friends with implants are all miserable, because each ended up with bigger implants than they wanted. All asked for B- or C-cups, but the surgeons, supposedly wanting them to feel sufficiently transformed, (and feel like they got their money's worth) pushed them into getting D-cups. Now all three feel like they have porn boobs, are self-conscious, and want reductions. My friend suggested implants have been around long enough that the initial thrill of them is over. And that because enough women have complained to their friends about being pressured into a 'one (oversized) size fits all' approach, women are now starting to demand what they actually want, or are getting them changed into what they wanted in the first place. A male friend had another theory. He suggested that people are finally catching on to the fact that the implant craze was entirely manufactured. That most men like natural boobs, regardless of size. And that the silicone is leaking out of cosmetic surgery's once successful advertising campaign promoting 'bigger and better'. Like most men I know (is this abnormal?) he says he prefers small, uneven, or even slightly saggy natural ones to perfect fake ones. And let's just say the long description he gave me of his wife's small, imperfect, post-breastfeeding breasts, was convincing. All of that makes sense, but perhaps another deflationary pressure is the fact that conspicuous consumption of all kinds is getting the cut, be it DD boobs or brand-name outfits. Large implants have always looked like, well, implants, and that kind of 'bling' is as outdated as the word itself. For the moment, modesty, not excess, is in vogue, and some women are changing their bodies to suit. Women have always starved and fed and exercised their bodies into different forms, according to the demands of culture. From making ourselves Rubenesque several centuries ago, to pear-shaped in the flapper days, to voluptuous like Marilyn Monroe and the fictional Joan Holloway of Mad Men , to rail thin in the heroin-chic model heyday, our bodies have been seen as clay, and many of us have agreed to sculpt ourselves. Anyone who criticizes women for it -- even for getting implants -- doesn't understand how powerful culture is. But if the ideal is now for women to surgically change their bodies every few years to conform to the whims of fashion, I'm pretty sure that's part of the dictionary definition of escalation. I heard someone the other day talking about how disgusting he found the disfiguring and painful trend of Japanese foot binding. Um, how is this different? Feeling sexy is fun; feeling beautiful and attractive is pretty awesome. But knowing that women feel the pressure of going under the knife, at great pain and expense, on a regular basis to experience those things? That's a joy killer. Where have we landed? Economists used to muse that the confident mood of the nation's consumers rose and fell with hem lines. Are we in an age of such artificial adjustments to the body that someone can gauge where society is headed by the breast size adjustments most commonly pushed by plastic surgeons? This post first appeared on The Tyee .
 
5 Things To Do Before You Diet Top
Later this week, we'll be launching our brand new Reach Your Goal 2009 program here on Self.com and in the September issue of the magazine. It's an awesome plan that lets you choose a specific body-success-objective and then maps out a simple, effective plan to help you achieve it. The diet portion of the plan features our 20 Superfoods for Weight Loss and the meals are designed to help increase your energy and help your body burn more fat. But there are a few steps you should take before you start a weight loss program that will help you succeed down the line. I thought of a few tasks to cross off of your list before you begin your new diet (and one common pitfall to avoid). Tackle these, then sign up for Goals and get losing! More on Health
 
Dems Who Backed Obama Tripping Up Reform Top
As the Obama administration tries to maneuver its health care agenda through Congress, its objective has been complicated by a bit of political irony. Two of the main senators pushing against the president's preferred public option for insurance coverage are also some of the earliest supporters of then-Sen. Obama's presidential campaign. Sens. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) and Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) endorsed Obama on December 29, 2007, and January 12, 2008, respectively. When Conrad offered his support, Obama had yet to win the Iowa Caucus and was still regarded as something of a long shot candidate. Nelson's endorsement, meanwhile, came after Obama lost New Hampshire to Sen. Hillary Clinton -- a critical moment during the campaign when it seemed as if the gains in Iowa had been lost. A year and a half later, Nelson and Conrad are playing a decidedly different role. Nelson is one of a handful of Democratic senators who remains opposed to a public health care plan. Conrad, meanwhile, has grown increasingly vocal in his advocacy for a co-operative approach to health insurance, insisting that a public option doesn't have the votes for passage . Obama, so far, has refused to dismiss these arguments outright or insist that a public option be included in insurance coverage. He has also been critical of progressive groups for running ads against recalcitrant Democrats on the matter. Nelson has been among the most targeted. All of which raises the question: How much are the endorsements Obama received during the heat of the campaign affecting his approach to the equally feverish health care debate? "This president survived the longest and toughest primary in modern American history," said longtime strategist Paul Begala. "You never forget the people who came early, but especially in this case. I still remember the same people who signed up with Bill Clinton in 1991 when we were carrying our bags on Delta." "It works the other way though," Begala added. "People tend to support the things they helped create. These senators want to see Obama succeed. That's why they endorsed him." Other political veterans agreed with Begala. It's impossible to simply dismiss an endorsement's significance, said Steve Elmendorf, a long time political practitioner and head of Elmendorf Strategies. At the very least, he said, it grants the senators a more favorable audience in the White House: "Politicians are people too. They remember these things." But an endorsement entails more than a simple quid-pro-quo. It also symbolizes a personal closeness and something of a shared political ethos. "It is a sign of the relationship the two of them have," Elmendorf said. "Conrad developed a relationship where he liked him enough to endorse him. The endorsement came early and at a critical time, so Obama is going to listen to him." The administration has given hints that it still values these endorsements. When Conrad declared this past week that co-ops were the only way to go forward in the Senate, the White House trod carefully in its response, even thanking him for his earlier support. "I'm not familiar with the interview that Senator Conrad did," Deputy Press Secretary Bill Burton told MSNBC. "Obviously, we have a lot of respect for him. He was one of first guys on board in the presidential campaign and we certainly appreciated his support back then, but the president is committed to finding all the ideas that are out there that can help to bend the cost curve because if we don't -- right now, thousands and thousands of Americans, every single day are losing their health care." To be sure, some Democrats who have soured on the public option either didn't endorse Obama during the campaign or offered their support very late. And the White House has been hesitant to push these lawmakers too hard as well. Moreover, had Conrad not endorsed Obama so early in the campaign, it stands to reason that Obama would still be taking a friendly and cautious approach. Conrad chairs the influential budget committee while sitting on the equally important finance committee. But the endorsement, even for those who downgrade its significance, clearly has brought a bit of baggage. "All of those relationships matter," said Norm Ornstein, a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. "But what matters as much as anything is Obama having been in the Senate and [Joe] Biden having been in the Senate. They have an appreciation for Conrad's savvy and respect him. Even if he had been a Hillary Clinton supporter or a Chris Dodd supporter, I'm not sure it would change much." Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter! More on Health Care
 

CREATE MORE ALERTS:

Auctions - Find out when new auctions are posted

Horoscopes - Receive your daily horoscope

Music - Get the newest Album Releases, Playlists and more

News - Only the news you want, delivered!

Stocks - Stay connected to the market with price quotes and more

Weather - Get today's weather conditions




You received this email because you subscribed to Yahoo! Alerts. Use this link to unsubscribe from this alert. To change your communications preferences for other Yahoo! business lines, please visit your Marketing Preferences. To learn more about Yahoo!'s use of personal information, including the use of web beacons in HTML-based email, please read our Privacy Policy. Yahoo! is located at 701 First Avenue, Sunnyvale, CA 94089.
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)