Tuesday, August 18, 2009

Y! Alert: The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Yahoo! Alerts
My Alerts

The latest from The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Phil Bronstein: Robert Novak, the Prince of Darkness for better or worse... Top
Criticizing the recently deceased is as rude as punking the Queen of England at an official event: it's bad form both in terms of timing and reasonable respect. As a journalist, I know I should revere Bob Novak, whose death from brain cancer was announced this morning, almost as much as the genuflecting and genuinely saddened colleagues are now doing on his alma mater, CNN. I doubt this mourning will reach Cronkite proportions, but Mr. Novak did have lots of influence over many years, was seemingly fearless in his views , straddled print and broadcast reporting successfully and made it nearly fashionable for TV guys to have combovers (see: David Gergen .) Someone noted in one of the black-bordered eulogy TV segments this morning that he was called " The Prince of Darkness ," not by his enemies but by his friends because of his contacts and his power to move the D.C. discussion. I remember once being at dinner in a capital steak house when Bob Novak came in. He had that invisible wake around him that surrounds celebrities, that sense that the molecules in the room bend when someone famous arrives. There was a line-up to shake his hand, adulation he accepted graciously but that seemed to make him grow larger and more luminescent with each fawning comment. But the Darkness thing reminds me of a very different Novak moment. I was covering the bloody conflict in El Salvador in the late '90s. I'm not an either/or person, generally, and I had good relations with colonels on the right and guerrillas on the left. As in most of real life, the situation was more complicated than slogans or sound bites. So I go to a disinterment of a couple of murder victims on the dusty outskirts of town. The grave re-diggers were, as they mostly were for these things, drunk, so it took a painfully long time. The few of us who were witnesses had to put some kind of cloth over our noses and mouths because there's nothing as horribly ripe as a decomposing human body. The two dead men had been buried hastily in a shallow grave. Their thumbs were tied together behind their backs and there were other infamous signatures of a Salvadoran death squad hit that are too gruesome to describe even for this blog. The fact that the victims were seen being hustled into a Cherokee Chief with smoked windows, the signature Death Squad vehicle of choice, and that they were leftist labor organizers made it clear what was up. (The guerrillas had their own killing apparatus, but it was mostly aimed at mayors in rural villages.) Once they were dug up and carted off for more examination, I left, the stench of the grim, hazy afternoon event still in my nostrils. I was sure it was also on my clothes and in my pores. How could such a vital and vile thing not be? I went to my rented house in the Escalon district of Salvador and slumped in a chair in front of an old TV set with rabbit ears. At certain times in the late afternoon, if the weather was just right and you fiddled with the antennae, we could get a few minutes of CNN. There was Robert Novak, screaming at someone -- probably Michael Kinsley on "Crossfire" -- like an enraged health care town hall meeting participant: "Death squads in El Salvador is a liberal MYTH!" I haven't been accused of being a liberal all that much, and, as Christiane Amanpour said so wonderfully in Iraq , "Wolf, I can only tell you what I can see," but I can tell you reliably that Salvadoran death squads were as real as Scooter Libby and Evans and Novak. At the time, I wanted to reach through the TV screen and strangle the guy into sensibility. Or have the two tragic dead guys delivered, without benefit of makeup, on his front lawn. It wasn't a liberal-conservative thing. It was a fact. Whatever else Bob Novak did well, even superbly in his professional life -- a great deal, I don't doubt -- at that moment he did a huge disservice to the truth and to the memory of thousands of people who died violently, painfully and without justification in El Salvador. Now, please let's return to our ritual of respectful remembrance. More on Robert Novak
 
Morris E. Chafetz: The 21-Year-Old Drinking Age: I Voted for It; It Doesn't Work Top
In 1982 I accepted appointment to the Presidential Commission on Drunk Driving and agreed to chair its Education and Prevention Committee. The Commission met over the next 18 months and ultimately advanced 39 recommendations to President Reagan, in December 1983. All 39 received unanimous Commission approval. The most conspicuous of those recommendations, and arguably the most controversial, called for raising the minimum legal drinking age to 21 nationwide. I will admit to having had serious reservations about this particular proposal. But in the interest of maintaining unanimity, I reluctantly voted yes. It is the single most regrettable decision of my entire professional career. Legal Age 21 has not worked. To be sure, drunk driving fatalities are lower now than they were in 1982. But they are lower in all age groups. And they have declined just as much in Canada, where the age is 18 or 19, as they have in the United States. It has been argued that "science" convincingly shows a cause-and-effect relationship between the law and the reduction in fatalities. Complicated mathematical formulas, which include subjective estimations (called "imputation") have been devised to demonstrate "proof." But correlation is not cause. We must neither confuse numbers with science nor interpret a lack of numbers as implying an absence of science. But even if we concede that the law has had some effect on our highways, we cannot overlook its collateral, off-road damage. The National Institute for Alcoholism and Alcohol Abuse, which I founded in 1970, estimates that 5,000 lives are lost to alcohol each year by those under 21. More than 3,000 of those fatalities occur off our roadways. If we are seriously to measure the effects of this law, we cannot limit our focus. And if we broaden our look, we see a serious problem of reckless, goal-oriented, drinking to get drunk. Those at whom the law is directed disobey it routinely. Enforcement is frustratingly difficult and usually forces the behavior deeper underground, into places where life and health are put at ever greater risk. The 600,000 assaults reported annually, the date rapes, the property damage, the emergency room calls do not in general occur in places visible to the public. They are the inevitable result of what happens when laws do not reflect social or cultural reality. The reality is that at age 18 in this country, one is a legal adult. Young people view 21 as utterly arbitrary -- which it is. And because the explanation given them is so condescending -- that they lack maturity and judgment, these same people who can serve on juries and sign contracts and who turned out in overwhelming numbers to elect our first black president -- well, they don't buy it. And neither do I. And neither should the American public. Whether we like it or not, alcohol is woven into the fabric of our world, most of which has determined that the legal drinking age should be 18 -- or lower. And so far as I can tell, there is no evidence of massive brain impairment, alcohol dependency, or underage alcohol abuse, which the "experts" tell us will be the inevitable result of lowering the age in the United States. It is time to liberate ourselves from the tyranny of "experts," who invoke "science" in order to advance a prohibitionist agenda. Prohibition does not work. It has never worked. It is not working among 18-20 year-olds now. The cult of expertise has made parents feel incapable of raising their children. In many states parents are disenfranchised from helping their sons or daughters learn about responsible alcohol consumption. But as a parent and psychiatrist I trust the instinct of parents more than I do the hubris of "experts." Despite what these latter-day prohibitionists may think, the problem is not the drink -- it is the drinker. There should be more emphasis on the person and the surroundings in which alcohol is consumed and less emphasis on alcohol itself. Personal and social responsibility, not the substance, is the real issue. But so long as the age remains a one-size-fits-all, federally-mandated 21, and so long as any state that may want to try something different, in hopes of reversing the dismal trend of binge-drinking that (maybe or maybe not coincidentally) has become more serious in the years since the drinking age was raised, forfeits 10% of its federal highway funds, nothing is likely to change for the better. I do not believe that any state should be forced to adjust its drinking age. But I do believe that the genius of federalism should be allowed to work its will unimpeded, and from that genius, not only better practices, but also safer environments and more responsible consumption, are likely to emerge. Dr. Morris E. Chafetz , a Doctor of Psychiatry, has played a pivotal role on important social issues including drugs and alcoholism. He founded the National Institute for Alcoholism and Alcohol Abuse in 1970. He gained national recognition as a member of the Presidential Commission on Drink Driving, and Director and Executive Member of the National Commission against Drink Driving. Finally he was the Presidential appointee at The White House Conference for a Drug-Free America. His career has culminated in the foundation of The Health Education Foundation in Washington.
 
David Ormsby: Democrat State Senate Candidate Jim Madigan Opted for GOP in 2000, Skips All Local Elections Since 1997 Top
Weighed down by a Republican voting history and skipped votes in local elections since 1997, first-time Democratic State Senate candidate Jim Madigan 's challenge to incumbent Sen. Heather Steans for the party's nomination in the overwhelmingly progressive north Chicago lakefront district becomes a heavier lift. A civil rights attorney and gay rights activist, Madigan, 35, is an Ohio native who arrived at the University of Chicago law school in 1997 and registered to vote in Chicago on January 23, 1997, according to Chicago Board of Elections records. Madigan cast his first Chicago vote in the Republican presidential primary battle between George W. Bush, John McCain, Alan Keyes, Gary Bauer and Steve Forbes in Illinois on March 21, 2000. Since that Republican primary, Madigan, the former executive director of Equality Illinois , a gay rights political group, has cast primary ballots only in the Democratic primary. Since Illinois has no formal partisan registration, primary voting habits determine party affiliation. While Madigan has also voted in every general election since 2000 -- he claims to have voted for Al Gore -- Madigan has, however, skipped every mayoral and aldermanic election in the City of Chicago since he registered in 1997. In response to questions from your Huffington Post blogger, Madigan said in a statement: "I pulled a Republican ballot in the Spring 2000 primary because the field had virulent anti-gay candidates: Bush, Keyes and Bauer. ... Bush was leading in the polls, and that scared me because he was the biggest threat to gay rights and womens' rights. I thought Forbes and McCain were more easily beatable, and neither seemed to be the types to blast gay people." Madigan neglected to mention exactly for whom he voted in the 2000 Republican presidential primary, but implies Forbes or McCain. Regarding municipal elections, Madigan ignored the question altogether. The impact of Madigan's voting history in his upcoming election against Steans divides local analysts. "Jim Madigan will not fly in this district," said Executive Vice President of the Cook County Democratic Party and Illinois House Deputy Majority Leader Lou Lang . "With his voting record, he has shown little, if any interest in local government, politics, or even voting. Additionally, his GOP background will not serve him well in a community that is overwhelmingly Democratic and progressive. "Senator Steans has been a terrific advocate for the district and will not be taken out by a candidate who cannot even take the time to vote in important elections." However, Thom Serafin, head of the communication consulting firm Serafin and Associates since 1987 and a local Fox TV News political analyst, has a different take. "It doesn't matter when he voted or for whom -- the good news is he voted," said Serafin. "We have had too many candidates too handcuffed by party politics and he needs to make that case. Progressives should appreciate that kind of independence." But Madigan ignored city elections. And Serafin deftly acknowledges that lack of local voting history presents more of a challenge. "As far as municipal elections, they are tough," Serafin said. "But he'll need to make the case that his interest now presents a new awakening." Professor Paul Green, director of the Institute for Politics at Roosevelt University and a Crain's Chicago Business political columnist, sums up the impact of Madigan's voting history more succinctly. "Jim Madigan has little chance," Green said. For her part, Steans offered the following observation: "7th District primary voters can decide for themselves if Jim Madigan's decision to pull a Republican ballot to vote for George Bush or John McCain is relevant to the representation they will receive from him in Springfield." Steans is right. The ultimate "experts" on the impact of Madigan's voting history will be the Democratic voters along Chicago's north lakefront. And they can be an unforgiving bunch.
 
Lita Smith-Mines: There's a Kind of Hush Top
Ever since I established my own law practice, the words "back to school" caused my heart to race wildly and the blood to pound so loudly I barely heard myself whimpering and grousing. Why would an A-student with framed diplomas experience sweaty palms and cardiac palpitations if I so much as glimpsed an ad for backpacks or erasers? Because the majority of my real estate business for over 25 years was done after school wrapped up in June and before it resumed right after Labor Day. Those who went to contract in March, April or even May would usually see their deals close in July, smiling as they talked of enrolling their kids with time to spare before acquiring the new school's recommended crayons or preferred calculators. Those who didn't sign contracts until June, July or -- heaven forbid -- early August, or those whose deals experienced assorted snafus, started to hyperventilate as soon as they spotted July in the rear-view mirror. My phone would ring all August with clients seeking reassurance that I would move heaven and earth to guarantee every Sasha and Santos would start school the same day as other kids on their new blocks. No mortgage commitment yet? A glitch in the title search? Part of the roof blown off by a windstorm the day before the appraisal? Parents looking towards the Labor Day with laser-like focus just expected me to triumph over such trivialities. In 2007, things changed. There were enough transactions in March and April to close in the glorious months of June and July, but so few thereafter that the heat and humidity of August was not accompanied by my customary attorney sweat and insanity. Everyone that needed to close did so easily, without wailing, flailing, railing or hissy-fits. By 2008 there were very few contracts signed at all, let alone by those that fit the usual molds of first-time buyers with a kid ready for kindergarten or move-up purchasers with 2.7 kids. The only panic generated in my office that summer came from within my own under-utilized and insufficiently funded self, and I actually yearned for a phone call from a Dad demanding I set a closing by mid-August, or a Mom commanding me to compel her sellers to close in sufficient time for her family to settle in. Back to school closings are non-existent in my office this year. The few active buyers I have are looking for "investment" properties without any tie-ins to the school calendar, while the lingering-on-the-market home owners have either resigned themselves to leave empty houses behind while they relocate to new districts (and rent), or else their kids will start the year in schools they hope to vacate long before next June. While my heart and head are certainly enjoying the continuing sounds of real estate silence in August 2009, my wallet protests loudly each and every day. And based on retail sales reports, merchants in my area probably aren't moving many rulers, protractors or shiny pencil cases, or selling enough pairs of spiffy sneakers to boost their bottom lines. I'm sure all of us who used to dread the back to school madness of August would gladly trade our solitude for a bit of hysteria right about now. More on Real Estate
 
Zainab Salbi: Never Again: Rembering the Balkans Top
I spent my twenty-fourth birthday in the refugee camps in Split, Croatia. The camps were filled with Bosnian refugees from a war that lasted four years, killed a minimum of 250,000 people and led to the rape of between 20-50,000 women. I had recently founded my organization, Women for Women International, to help these women and communities broken by war to rebuild. Sixteen years later and on the eve of my fortieth birthday, I find myself back in Bosnia and Herzegovina, sitting in the old part of Sarajevo, observing the mountains that were once full of snipers who got paid by the age and gender of their victim (a young man was the highest price). The physical marks of war have faded, but everyone still feels fragile. I took this trip to Bosnia and Herzegovina wondering what can be done for a country the world forgot after its war ended some 15 years ago. Bosnia and Herzegovina, to say it more bluntly, is no longer sexy; it is no longer interesting to the news media, to donors, or to itself - there is not much popular interest in its future. I wonder how we have allowed ourselves to forget Bosnia and Herzegovina when it is still as fragile as an egg shell. Even in beautiful Sarajevo, with the funky cafes and nicely dressed people, the fragility and the pain of the country are self-evident. For me, Bosnia and Herzegovina is a beautiful, painted Easter egg. The beauty of the decorations does not change the fragility of the egg and how easy it is to break it. The landscape is breathtaking, the cities are old, quaint and full of history, and the people are always dressed with the latest European fashion, especially in the cities. Despite the beauty, the pain of the war is still very raw in people's hearts. You see, the enemy who took your father to a concentration camp was your neighbor, the rapist of your wife, daughter or mother was your colleague, and the sniper who killed your child was a relative. That's difficult to overcome; difficult to forget. The haunting memory of war surfaces constantly, as those who were victimized by the war are still feeling the emotional and financial aftershocks. Take the story of Senata and her husband. They told me how they had saved everything to build their dream home in their village. Six months after moving into their new house, the war erupted, destroying their home and leaving them to be displaced people within their own home village. Senata and her husband have struggled ever since to get their lives back in order. From a forest scattered with landmines, they collect herbs, which they sell to pharmaceutical factories or make homemade herbal treatments for sale in their village. The house they now live in they inherited after taking care of its disabled owner prior to his death. In exchange for their services and financial support, he left it to them. Like her country, Senata is both beautiful and fragile. Her memories are of war, destruction, her husband risking his life on the front lines trying to defend their home town, the loss of a home, the loss of jobs, safety, and security. But despite all these challenges, Senata has her dreams, dreams of creating her own small business in the cultivation and processing of medicinal herbs, enabling her to finally earn a better income and achieve stability in her life and the life of her family. Mansoura is another woman who must practically perform miracles to keep her daughter in school and fulfill her dreams of going to university. Her husband is handicapped after surviving for two years in a concentration camp. She and her husband lost their jobs and have no cash income whatsoever. Like Senata and her husband, they also survive by collecting herbs from a land-mined forest, knowing that they are taking a risk every time they go yet have no other options. Mansoura makes dresses occasionally and sells cakes to those who can afford birthday parties and weddings for their children. Despite all odds, she still managed to make a purple dress for her daughter's high school graduation. She is determined to see her daughter through college. Or take the story of Mirza, a physical therapist and Bosniak. "My wife and I never thought that our colleagues and neighbors could ever hurt us until the war took place and the Serbs took over our part of Sarajevo. With the help of one of my Serb clients, I managed to escape to the Bosniak-controlled part of Sarajevo." There are three constituent groups in Bosnia and Herzegovina: Bosniaks, who are Muslim; Croats, who are Catholic; and Serbs, who are Orthodox. One cannot elect or register as a "Bosnian" and people of mixed ethnicities find it difficult to choose one identity. These national identities fueled much of the conflict of the 1990s in Bosnia and Herzegovina. He continued, "But we had no home and my wife insisted on getting back to our apartment. Those five days that we returned were the most miserable part of my life. We didn't believe we could stay alive until we made it to the other side of the bridge with soldiers on both sides, pointing their guns at each other until a few families with kids in our hands crossed the bridge safely. When I arrived to the Bosniak side, I was asked to join the army. And though I was very much against what the Serbs were doing to us, I simply could not carry I gun. I am a physiotherapist, I kept on saying. I am not a fighter. I am a healer. They finally let me volunteer, clean, care for soldiers, do anything but carry or use a gun. I cried throughout the war. I still cry. How could this happen? How could human beings cause so much harm to each other? My mother was a Serb, my father, who died when I was a child, was a Bosniak, and my step father was a Croat. I had witnessed all their deaths and the different ceremonies for their deaths and now I was told to kill. How could I do that?" Mirza told me the story of the death of a Bosniak girl and her Serb boyfriend as they tried to meet on a bridge to run away from the war together. Snipers killed them as they were approaching each other and their bodies lay on the bridge for five days, during the hottest August heat. "We started smelling their bodies, but couldn't go out, because snipers were shooting anybody who approached. After five days we were allowed to go and bury them". After spending a few days with villagers, sharing their memories, stories and pain, I went out on Friday night to unwind over a drink with my colleagues. We were approached by a group of men, who started a conversation with us. What started as a simple Friday night flirtation quickly turned into a philosophical discussion of identity. The men asked my colleague where she was during the war. "I was 18 at the time and I was fighting in that mountain," he points. She answers, "I was 23 at the time and I was a volunteer for a humanitarian organization." It was almost like witnessing a right of passage between a man and a woman before they go any further in their conversation. Though neither one of them said it verbally, I felt their introduction to each other was, "Do you know my pain? Do you know what I have witnessed? Because if you don't, then this can't go anywhere." Bosnia and Herzegovina is a beautiful country, with beautiful mountains, rivers, art, history, beauty, and deep, deep pains that no one has been able to process yet. The painful memories of concentration camps, rape camps and international ambivalence intermix with present-day pains surrounding poverty, lingering instability and political uncertainty with no clear roadmap for a brighter future. Sixteen years ago, when I would visit Bosnia and Herzegovina during the war, I always left with a sense of determination from its people to survive. That determination continues to inspire me in all my work around the world to this day. Yet the world has forgotten what it learned from this country, this region, sixteen years ago. Today, I leave Bosnia and Herzegovina with the pain of seeing the fatigue of the people there. I am tired by the accounts of death and destruction and poverty, which wear on them everyday. The world is tired of talking about Bosnia and Herzegovina. The people here, forgotten by the rest of the world, are collectively tired, as individuals, as a country and as an economy. Yet as they have for generations after every conflict around the world, the women carry on, making do. When asked what she does for a living, one woman told me all women are "creative economists." She said, "I am an economist and what else do you expect from someone who lives on an impossible income?" At Women for Women International, we are still working with these women, these creative economists, providing them training and resources that they can use to leverage themselves and their families out of poverty. We have not forgotten the women of Bosnia and Herzegovina. May the world never again forget.
 
Paras Bhayani: Whose Fault is the CPS Budget Crisis? Top
Last week, Chicago Public Schools chief executive Ron Huberman announced that the school district, the nation's third-largest, wants to slightly increase property taxes to help cover a rising budget deficit for fiscal year 2010. But the real pain, as Huberman hastened to add, will come in 2011, when the red ink may reach $1 billion due to exploding pension costs. It should be clear by now why Mayor Daley chose a highly-regarded budget whiz with no education experience to succeed U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan. Huberman, with the help of the General Assembly, came to CPS straight from saving the Chicago Transit Authority from financial ruin. Chief among his accomplishments at the CTA was renegotiating employee pension benefits to bring them in line with the CTA's long-term budget. Huberman and Daley have already begun to test the waters on renegotiating teacher pensions. The response from the Chicago Teachers Union has been predictably apoplectic. Both Daley and the union have tried to shift some blame to the state. And taxpayers, who feel like they already taking it on the chin, are understandably fed up with both the union and politicians at all levels. Like a lot of issues in Chicago, though, nearly everyone shares the blame for creating this mess. Below, I've highlighted some facts that demonstrate how a dysfunctional administrative and political culture -- in CPS and the union, in Chicago and Springfield -- has brought us to where we are. 1.) The Chicago Public Schools underfunded pensions for a decade, from 1995 to 2005. One of the biggest reasons the teachers pension fund is so weak is that CPS underfunded it for 10 years. Are teachers wrong to ask why they should pay for the fact that the district's problem is one of its own making? The CTU certainly has its answer: "We're not the federal government, and we're not going to provide a bailout to CPS," said CTU spokeswoman Rose Genova. 2.) Part of the reason for the pension under-funding was that CPS increased teacher salaries without increasing classroom time. For years, CPS has bought labor peace by increasing salaries at a fast clip without asking for longer hours. In fact, CPS has one of the shortest school days and school years of any big city, meaning that teachers do quite well if an hourly wage is computed. According to Crain's Greg Hinz , the current pension plan lets teachers retire at age 55 (with a minimum of 34 years on the job) with 75 percent of average pay of the highest four of the previous 10 years. Benefits rise at 2.2 percent per year. The average pension today is $42,000 on a salary of $57,000. 3.) CPS teachers have no Social Security benefits , and so slashing their pension benefits or switching to a defined-contribution system is borderline cruel. Critics of the union argue that the private sector has all but abandoned traditional defined-benefit pensions. As an employee of a charter school, I receive a 503b (the non-profit equivalent of a 401k), not a pension. But I, like all private employees, will (in theory) also have Social Security as a guaranteed source of income. Since CPS teachers, like many Illinois governmental employees, do not pay Social Security taxes, they don't receive these guaranteed benefits. 4.) Chicago residents are being double taxed. As if Chicagoans weren't sick of paying for enough things that actually benefit the entire region (*cough* Olympics *cough*), Mayor Daley makes the valid point that the Illinois pension system is extraordinarily unfair to Chicago taxpayers. The state covers the pensions of all the teachers in Illinois who are outside of Chicago, while CPS must cover the pensions of its own employees. Given that Chicago taxpayers contribute tax dollars to the state like everyone else, the system double-taxes Chicagoans. And I'll leave aside that this is triple punishment for that subset of Chicago taxpayers known as Chicago teachers, who all must live within the city limits due to the CPS residency requirement . 5.) TIFs are diverting tons of money. Mayor Daley's beloved Tax-Increment Financing districts siphoned off over $275 million from the CPS last year. Granted, some TIF uses are legitimate, but even if we assume that just 15 percent is wasteful (a number that Ben Joravsky -- and many others -- would call laughably low), canceling these TIFs would provide more money for CPS than Huberman's newly-announced property tax hike. What does this all mean? Well, mostly that no one has seriously sat down and thought of wholesale reform to the way CPS pays for its obligations -- and that those who have likely found it impossible to cut through the warring interests and design a system that makes sense. The best solution, I think, is the one espoused by my good friend, the crusading labor lawyer Tom Geoghegan. As Tom argues , what we really need in the United States is a guaranteed public pension through the Social Security system: Compared to other developed countries, the United States is very miserly in what it spends on Social Security. Our rivals typically provide 60 percent or more of working income as part of the public pension while we pay under 40 percent. Far from "controlling the costs" of Social Security we should be increasing the pay out by lifting the payroll tax and moving to progressive income taxation. [W]orkers should contribute more for a meaningful retirement now that the private pension system has virtually collapsed. If the federal government provided a higher Social Security payout (i.e., a public pension) funded by higher payroll taxes, entities from the Chicago Public Schools to the old General Motors could actually devote their attention to their work rather than worrying about how to pay for their retirees' pensions.
 
Navi Pillay: Why tomorrow is the first World Humanitarian Day Top
August 19 is a date that is etched deep in the consciousness of the United Nations and the memories of those involved in humanitarian and human rights work around the world: the day in 2003 when 22 people, mostly UN staff, were killed in cold blood by a single bomb at the Canal Hotel in Baghdad. It was by no means the first time that humanitarian aid workers, human rights defenders, peacekeepers and others working to improve the lot of the disadvantaged had been deliberately targeted by ruthless forces determined to create instability or subvert the basic laws and norms on which civilized society depends. My own organization, Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, experienced its first loss of staff on 4 February 1997, when five members of the Human Rights Field Operations were killed in Rwanda. And sadly, since 19 August 2003, there have been numerous other assassinations of individuals and further bombs - most notably the one in Algiers on 11 December 2007 which took the lives of a further 17 UN staff members - targeting UN and NGO staff. And I have just learned that two more UN staff are among those killed on Tuesday by a suicide bomber in Kabul. I would like to offer my deepest condolences to their families and colleagues. In the case of the Baghdad and Algiers bombs, the perpetrators of these crimes were terrorist organizations. However, in other cases, the killers have sometimes acted on behalf of a government, or for organs meant to be under the control of governments. Killing those who are trying to help others is a particularly despicable crime, and one which all governments should join forces to prevent, and - when prevention fails - to punish. It is therefore appropriate - as a first step - that last December the global forum for all the world's governments, the UN General Assembly, agreed to designate 19 August as World Humanitarian Day. Humanitarian aid workers are on the frontline, trying to provide at least a minimum of material support and protection for the displaced, and for populations affected by conflict, chronic poverty, food shortages, natural disasters and other crises. Humanitarian work and human rights are inextricably entwined. It is very often abuse of human rights that causes humanitarian crises in the first place. And without humanitarian aid, the basic human rights of millions of people - including the right to seek asylum from persecution, the right to education, and, most fundamental of all, the right to life - would be denied. Similarly, if human rights are ignored during a humanitarian crisis, the crisis will often deepen. The Canal Hotel bombing rocked the UN system to its core. Among the dead was my predecessor as High Commissioner for Human Rights, Sergio Vieira de Mello. Several staff from the Office of the High Commissioner (OHCHR) had gone with him on secondment to help the effort to bring peace and stability to Iraq. Sergio was uniquely placed to provide the synthesis between humanitarian work, human rights, and political mediation. As High Commissioner for Human Rights, and as a former top official with the UN refugee agency and OCHA, he saw with sharp clarity the essential, mutually reinforcing, connections between humanitarian work, human rights and peace-building. The UN staff who were killed and injured alongside him in the Canal Hotel came from a variety of backgrounds. Some were experts in providing humanitarian aid, some were human rights specialists, others were experienced in peace-building and political negotiations. They were all working in the common belief that they could contribute to rebuilding Iraq after decades of massive human rights abuses by the regime of Saddam Hussein, and the destructive conflict that removed him but was threatening to plunge the country into prolonged chaos and anarchy. Would they have succeeded, if the August 19 bomb had not exploded? Would the ensuing years of horrendous inter-ethnic strife, killing, rape and other forms of abuse that plagued Iraq have been mitigated or largely avoided? We shall never know. But they, and all the aid workers like them around the world, past, present and future, most certainly deserve to have this day in the annual calendar devoted to their selfless, often unrewarding and sometimes dangerous efforts to improve the lives of others. More on United Nations
 
Rob Smart: Dear Julia Child, We Need You! Top
"The grand thing about cooking is you can eat your mistakes." -- Julia Child There was a time not so long ago that cooking shows resembled today's reality TV, where mistakes were made and corrected right before your very eyes. No second takes. No editing. Just the real thing. How times have changed. Consider Mark Bittman's column earlier this year, titled " TV Cooking v. Real Cooking ," that shone a bright light on the "charade" that is today's modern cooking shows. According to Bittman: A charade because it's all taped, and therefore not only doesn't take place in real time but doesn't even give a sense of what "real time" might be. And I'm not talking about braising time or the like but the actual work involved. A further charade because when it's taped, all sorts of egregious mistakes can be magically made to disappear. He goes on to say: Baffling and intimidating because nearly every ingredient is usually prepared in advance, and what isn't is selected so that the chef can show off his (almost never "her") knife skills, which are bound to intimidate nearly all of us who can never aspire (and why would we, really?) to chopping an onion with our eyes closed; his ability to make food fly in the air while cooking it; and/or his skill at presentation, which has absolutely nothing to do with taste. I wonder how the rising popularity of cooking networks and shows about cooking -- available 24 hours a day, seven days a week -- has contributed to the migration of eating away from the home, which is nearly on par with eating at home in terms of consumer food expenditures. Have we decided to live vicariously through TV's celebrity chefs? Are we truly baffled and intimidated by the process of cooking? Mr. Bittman's column, while entertaining to read, also points out a serious challenge for people interested in developing a more sustainable food system. We need confident and flexible home cooks in order to move away from highly processed, unsustainable foods. Consider a hypothetical case of a community-supported agriculture (CSA) program "newbie." Let's call him Bill. For those not familiar with CSA programs, they are characterized by a consumer's financial commitment before each growing season to purchase a share of what the farm produces. The consumer's return on his/her upfront investment comes in the form of a weekly food basket from the farm containing a mix of vegetables, fruit, flowers, etc. What is received depends on what the farmer grows and how well each crop produces. Now back to Bill. He has been buying his food from a major supermarket chain for years. He shops there three to four times a week, stopping in to pick up a couple things, but walking out with more than expected every time (another victim of impulse buys and sophisticated in-store marketing). He often opts for prepared foods or frozen entrees, which he eats while watching back-to-back cooking shows on The Food Network . At the urging of his friends, Bill joins a local CSA farm. He's excited about supporting a local organic farmer. He receives his first box, takes it home, unloads it on the counter, and scratches his head. What is all this? he wonders. More important, what am I supposed to do with it? He makes a great salad and stores the balance of the food in the fridge. The next night, he makes another great salad, but with less zeal, and considers making something with some of the radishes, beets and chard. No clue. Within a couple weeks, he has become discouraged and ends up throwing away (hopefully Bill composts) much of the food from the farm. Expensive compost. He tries to opt out, but his money was given up front and the farm can't afford to give him his money back. Bill does not renew, and becomes an outspoken critic of CSA programs. It wasn't supposed to be that way. He was supposed to "learn to eat seasonally" and to "enjoy experimenting with new foods." But, Bill was overwhelmed and The Food Network and its line up of celebrity chefs were of little help. This insecurity in being able to cook like Giada De Laurentiis , along with his "supermarket withdrawal" (common symptom associated with CSA newbies), caused Bill to yearn for the "any food, any time" offerings of the industrial food system. Another missed opportunity. It's time to awaken America's cooking instinct. The future of sustainable food may depend on doing so. More on Food
 
Walter Cronkite Memorial: President Obama Among Speakers Top
NEW YORK — The White House says President Barack Obama is among the dignitaries scheduled to speak at a memorial service for the late CBS News anchorman Walter Cronkite next month. The memorial is set for Sept. 9 at New York's Lincoln Center. A CBS executive – who spoke on condition of anonymity because the plans aren't finalized – says the public will be invited to attend, with ticket arrangements to be announced later. The anchorman once known as "the most trusted man in America" died at age 92 last month. The speakers list isn't complete, but the executive says Bill Clinton, Katie Couric, Andy Rooney, Buzz Aldrin, Bob Schieffer and Tom Brokaw are expected. Mickey Hart, Wynton Marsalis, Michael Feinstein, Jimmy Buffett and the U.S. Marine Corps band are anticipated performers. More on Barack Obama
 
'So You Think You Can Dance' Star Charged With Multiple Rapes Top
A former choreographer for "So You Think You Can Dance" was arrested again for allegedly sexually assaulting four women -- but this time he's actually being charged with a crime ... or eight, to be exact. Cops say Alex Da Silva was arrested this morning at his North Hollywood home, after the District Attorney filed an arrest warrant charging him with eight felony counts of assault.
 
Natalie Holder-Winfield: When Comedy Meets Workplace Diversity Top
Last week, as I was piecing together a diversity training presentation, I came across my "Two Wongs Don't Make a White" slide. This corny play on words was used as a t-shirt graphic by the clothing company Abercrombie & Fitch in the earlier part of this decade. Thank goodness those t-shirts didn't get much play and were dragged off of the market, along with Abercrombie's image as an equal opportunity employer. (The retailer has also faced failure to hire and promote discrimination lawsuits.) Although the retailer, today, is making an effort to redeem itself, I couldn't help but wonder what they were thinking when they exposed the market to those t-shirts. Have the lines of culturally insensitive jokes been so drastically moved that even a large retailer doesn't know the difference between wrong and right? With the advent of diversity and multi-culturalism, many of the invisible racial barriers in society are slowly fading away thanks, in part, to entertainment. With Justin Timberlake and Amy Winehouse producing some of the best R&B music, it's hard to have white radio stations and black radio stations. Reality television shows openly parade mixed race-couples, making them less of a taboo or head turner. Comedians, especially, have been the greatest catalysts for making other cultures less mysterious by lifting the lid off of what were once private inside jokes. You have Rex Navarrette openly joking about Filipino time (that is, being 20 minutes late to everything). George Lopez pokes fun at his Latino brothers and sisters on HBO specials and his network television show. Larry the Cable Guy gives Northern urbanites comedic insight to redneck life. What happens when people at work decide to re-tell a joke they heard from Navarrette, Lopez, or Larry? Is it ok to laugh at or make a joke about another race, culture, or religion? These were the questions underlying my reasons for not watching the Dave Chappelle show. Now, I never started a mass boycott against the show, but I was vocal about why I didn't tune in. While I never judged anyone for watching the show, I just couldn't support a show that profusely overuses the "N" word on national television. I felt that his show, which was written by a multi-racial staff, could be used to defend the use of the "N" word. I knew that some would argue that the word had evolved to the point where it was no longer an offensive racial epithet to denigrate black people and could be used by any and everyone. I was not ready for that level of evolution. Comedy is tricky. The same slurs, epithets, and offensive language that comics use to get laughs, can create disrespect in the workplace, school and in other social settings. I'm sure that some snarky designer at Abercrombie & Fitch probably thought he or she was appealing to the public's sense of humor about Asians with the hideous "Wong" t-shirts. As Abercrombie reminds us, context matters. Material that works in a nightclub often falls flat in the office.
 
'Family Guy' Mocks 'The Office' In Emmy Ad (VIDEO) Top
"Family Guy" is the first animated series in almost 50 years to earn an Emmy nomination for best comedy series , and it is not going to lose without a fight. The show, which is up against six other comedies ("Entourage," "The Office," "30 Rock," "Weeds," "How I Met Your Mother" and "Flight of the Conchords") has started a public ad campaign bashing its competitors. The first short in the series has baby Stewie attacking "The Office" and his friend Brian for defending it. "Indians and Hispanics don't live in Scranton!" He yells. Stewie, who was recently outed , may have stiffer competition in his future brawls when Karl Rove and Rush Limbaugh guest-star this season . WATCH: More on Family Guy
 
Andy Ostroy: I'll Say What Most Democrats Won't: Obama Needs to Grow Some Balls Quickly or his Administration Will Implode Top
There's a lot at stake for President Barack Obama in his battle to reform the health-care industry. In many ways, this very contentious debate is the House of Cards of his political legacy. Many believe that as goes health-care reform, so goes Obama. And they're right. Obama seems lost right now, and that's not a good thing for him, for Democrats or for the nation. Obama has shown a general unwillingness to put up an aggressive fight for what he says he believe in. He's appearing weak, indecisive and without conviction. The health-care initiative seems on the verge of imploding, and with it will go the president's stock. The latest sign of trouble is the speculation that the White House could soon be dropping its once-essential "public option" from its proposed health plan, now referring to it as "not the essential element," as Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said over the weekend. This is extremely disturbing, if true, for it shows that the president is bowing under pressure and compromising where he should not. Let's get straight to the point: Obama seems more concerned with peacemaking than reform-making. He seems more preoccupied with staying popular , despite his tanking approval ratings, than with pursuing an aggressive agenda of change ; change which he was elected to achieve. For an incredibly articulate and bright guy he seems woefully unprepared for the health-care debate. He still doesn't get it that mere talking-points and likability just won't cut it against (a) a massively misinformed electorate desperately in need of specifics and plan details; and (b) a Republican Party hellbent on destroying him with lies and misrepresentations. To be sure, he's no George W. Bush, with whom I disagreed on virtual every domestic and global issue, but who demonstrated certitude when carrying out his agenda. When he wanted to march us into war, he did. When he wanted to use illegal torture and spying techniques, he did. When he wanted to lower taxes for the richest Americans, he did. When he wanted to take down political enemies like former Ambassador Joe Wilson, he did. He didn't care what Congress, the Senate or Democrats thought, and he never paid attention to public opinion polls. He was resolute and his precision was laser-like. He got the job done . No doubt, Bush was dangerous, insecure and impulsive. A reckless cowboy whose irresponsible actions we're still paying for and will be for some time. But, he fought hard and relentlessly for what he believe in, which is an awful lot more than we can say about Obama in his initial seven months. There is no better time for Obama than the present. The power and the bully pulpit of the White House is his. He also has the benefit of an overwhelming majority in the House and a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. He still has the support of Americans, who elected him in a clear mandate for change. He's a brilliant politician and has the ability to rally people into his corner. There's still time for him to prove he can get the job done, but not much. With his rapidly dwindling popularity, and with voters growing increasingly frustrated by the minute, Obama needs to demonstrate and ability to lead and execute. He needs to be clear and concise with what he wants, and he must strong arm legislators--much as Bush did--to win their votes for his measures. He's got to grow some balls , for Pete's sake, and choose between being The Decider or The Waffler . More on Kathleen Sebelius
 
Christine Pelosi: Healthcare Reformers: Dance With The Ones Who Brung Ya Top
How did we get to this moment in healthcare reform and where do we go from here? We are here in part because some in DC forgot an essential element of life and good manners: "dance with the one who brung ya." The American people who propelled many Democrats and some Republicans to power voted for campaigns that promised transformational change, including universal healthcare. Once the fight between transformers and incrementalists got underway, transformers felt left behind: first, the Wall Street bailouts left less money to help Main Street; then, single payer was off the table before the table was even set; then, word came of the secret deal to undermine the campaign pledge of renegotiating prescription drug prices to benefit more Americans; then, we heard waffling on public option - all this with no concessions so far from those who didn't bring Democrats to the dance. We are also here because America struggles with "The Big." We want greatness and yet when we label our enemies, they are Big ___ (fill in the blank) because we sense that they don't share the values of individuals like us. . For the past few years, people have expressed fear or loathing or skepticism to Big anything - and are ditching top-down institutions for local or bottom-up organizations. Ask anyone about Big anything ranging from Big Oil (hate it but like my local gas station attendants) to Big Government (hate it but support my own representatives) to Big Insurance (hate it but appreciate my local agent) to Big Business (hate it but revere small business) to the worst of all, Too Big To Fail. So when Big Change comes along, that's a threat. Any new bureaucracy at a time when we reject The Big brings a shudder to anyone who's ever dealt with a miscreant power tripper in the private sector or public service. Where to from here? It's not too late for reform - just dance with the ones who brung ya. We could simplify life with a public option that allows everyone the choice to buy in to Medicare at competitive rates (no new Big Agency needed); requires and where needed helps subsidize insurance; ends pre-existing conditions, lifetime caps, and dropped coverage; allows renegotiation of prescription drug prices; and, promotes wellness and prevention. While the dance of legislation can be painful to watch, I still like the Democrats' chances for healthcare reform better than Tom DeLay's on Dancing with the Stars. More on Wellness
 
Quentin Tarantino: Brad Pitt Exhausted By Fatherhood, Fell Asleep On Set (VIDEO) Top
'Inglourious Basterds' director Quentin Tarantino visited Letterman Monday night and said that his leading man, Brad Pitt, has been sleeping on the job. "We usually try to discourage sleeping on the set, but it can happen from time to time," he said. "Because Brad has a big family at home, sleeping on the set is the only time he gets to sleep." Pitt's six children may rob him of sleep, but that didn't stop him from signing onto a kids' project so they can see his work . 'Inglourious Basterds' opens Friday. WATCH: Get HuffPost Entertainment On Facebook and Twitter! More on David Letterman
 
Lee Camp: WATCH: Why Hitler's Unborn Child Would've Loved Obama's Health Care Plan Top
 
Chris Kennedy Not Running For Senate Or Governor In 2010 Top
Merchandise Mart mogul and political heir Chris Kennedy is telling supporters today he isn't running for the Democratic nomination for the U.S. Senate seat now held by Roland Burris. An aide said that the same holds true for a run for governor. More on Senate Races
 
Greg Mitchell: Robert Novak's Final Words on Plame Case: "The Hell With You!" Top
Ailing from his fourth battle with cancer last autumn, famed columnist Robert Novak -- who died today at 78 -- was interviewed at length for one of the final times by The Washingtonian 's Barbara Matusow. The magazine published on its web site the full Q & A, which concluded with perhaps Novak's final published assessment, or re-assessment, of his role in helping to out CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson. It shows that near the end he had reversed his partial feelings of regret and, angered by liberal critics, went back into attack mode. Here are the passages on the CIA leak case. Let's talk about the Valerie Plame affair, which caused you so much grief. If you had it to do over again, would you reveal who she was? If you read my book, you find a certain ambivalence there. Journalistically, I thought it was an important story because it explained why the CIA would send Joe Wilson--a former Clinton White House aide with no track record in intelligence and no experience in Niger--on a fact-finding mission to Africa. From a personal point of view, I said in the book I probably should have ignored what I'd been told about Mrs. Wilson. Now I'm much less ambivalent. I'd go full speed ahead because of the hateful and beastly way in which my left-wing critics in the press and Congress tried to make a political affair out of it and tried to ruin me. My response now is this: The hell with you. They didn't ruin me. I have my faith, my family, and a good life. A lot of people love me--or like me. So they failed. I would do the same thing over again because I don't think I hurt Valerie Plame whatsoever. You saw up close what it's like to be the subject of so many news stories. Has this changed the way you view the journalistic profession? I thought the journalistic community was terrible to me -- even members of the Gridiron Club, which is supposed to be a band of brothers and sisters. I thought one of the worst columns written on the Plame affair was by William Safire. He wrote a stupid column saying I should reveal the name of my source. He wanted to get his colleague at the New York Times, Judy Miller, off the hook with the prosecutors. He didn't know, as I knew, that my source, Richard Armitage, had long before identified himself to the FBI and the Justice Department. But my attorneys advised me to keep silent about the whole affair. Having thrown a lot of darts throughout your career and then being on the receiving end, did you ever stop to think how your columns might have made other people feel? No. [Laughs.] That's not my nature. Greg Mitchell's latest book is "Why Obama Won." He is editor of Editor & Publisher and ahs written widely about the Plame case. More on Robert Novak
 
Bill Maher: New Rule: Oys In The Attic Top
New Rule: Don't let the guy who wrote "Glengarry Glen Ross" remake "The Diary of Anne Frank"... Check out Real Time with Bill Maher live Fridays at 10PM ET/PT - Only On HBO. More on Bill Maher
 
Eric Margolis: Chasing Mirages in Afghanistan Top
While scourging Iran over its recent questionable election, the United States is about to shamelessly stage-manage presidential elections in Afghanistan. This week's Afghan vote will be an elaborate piece of political theater designed to show increasingly uneasy Western voters that progress is being made in the war-torn nation after seven years of US-led occupation. Westerners may be gulled, but most Afghans already believe they know who will win the vote: the candidate chosen by the United States and its NATO allies. Voting will mostly be held in urban areas, under the guns of US and NATO troops. The countryside, ruled by Taliban, who are often local farmers moonlighting as fighters, is too dangerous for this electoral charade. Over half of Afghanistan is under Taliban influence by day, more by night. The entire election and vote-counting election commission are financed and run by the US. So are leading candidates. Ten thousand Afghan mercenaries hired by the US will police the polls and intimidate voters. US-financed Afghan media are busy promoting Washington's candidates. Bribes and fake ballots are being lavishly dispensed, as the BBC reports. It is a serious violation of US law for any foreign nations to contribute money to candidates or campaigns in American elections. But the US has spent hundreds of millions influencing political campaigns and votes in Iraq, Ukraine, Georgia, Iran, the West Bank, and now Afghanistan. The Pashtun Taliban, a fiercely anti-Communist, religious movement, is banned from the election. Pashtun tribesmen form over half of Afghanistan's population but have been largely excluded from power by the US-led occupation. When the US invaded Afghanistan in 2001, it backed the pro-Russian Tajiks of the north who were blood enemies of the Pashtun-dominated Taliban. A Russian general led the Tajik-Uzbek Northern Alliance into Kabul. The US quickly became the ally of the Afghan Communists. Today, Tajiks and their Uzbek allies continue to be the real power behind Karzai's wobbly throne and dominate the drug trade. Taliban vows to fight the sham election, which it calls a tool of foreign occupation. Other nationalist and tribal groups battling Western occupation, notably Gulbadin Hekmatyar's Hisbi Islami and forces of Jalaladin Hakkani, are also excluded from the election. In fact, all parties are banned; only individuals are allowed to run. This is a favorite tactic of non-democratic regimes, particularly the US-backed dictatorships of the Arab world. Real power is held by the US-installed Afghan leader, Hamid Karzai, whose administration is being undermine by charges of egregious corruption and involvement in drug dealing. Behind Karzai are two powerful warlords: former Communist secret police chief Mohammed Fahim, a Tajik, and the recently returned from exile Uzbek warlord, Rashid Dostam. These two pillars of the old Afghan Communist regime were arch henchmen of the former Soviet occupiers and notorious war criminals. President Hamid Karzai's main `rival,' Abdullah Abdullah, fronts for the Russian and Iranian-backed Tajik Northern Alliance. Abdullah was an aide to the late Tajik warlord, Ahmad Shah Massoud, who is lionized in the West. It has been revealed that Massoud, who was assassinated just before 9/11, was a long-time `asset' of the Soviet KGB who secretly collaborated with Moscow against the Afghan mujahidin. Technocrat Ashraf Gani is another supposedly leading candidate. Both Gani and Abdullah are expected to get high positions in any new government formed by Karzai. Their primary role is to give the impression of a genuine electoral contest. The northern Tajiks and Uzbeks, traditional foes of the majority Pashtun, are in deeply cahoots with Russia, Iran and India, all of whom have designs on Afghanistan. One fact is inescapable: there will never be peace in Afghanistan until the majority Pashtun are enfranchised and allowed to share power and money - and that means Taliban and its allies. The US, having foolishly allied itself with Afghanistan's minorities instead of its majority, now faces the consequences of this strategic blunder. When the Soviets occupied Afghanistan from 1979-1989, they held fairer elections than the two US-run votes. Of course, the Soviet's man, Najibullah, won, but at least dissention was voiced and opposition parties were allowed a voice. In Washington's stage-managed Afghan votes, real opposition is excluded. The US used the same trick in Iraq's rigged elections. When the Soviets installed their yes-men in power, we called them `puppets' and `Communist stooges.' When the West does it, our Quislings are hailed as `statesmen' and `democrats fighting for stability.' The UN, which, in the words of a senior American diplomat, has become `a leading tool of US foreign policy,' is being used to validate the US-run election. The feeble current UN chief, Ban-Ki moon, was put into his job by Washington. Meanwhile, the party-line North American media keeps lauding the vote. It has long-term memory loss. In 1967, the `New York Times,' a vocal supporter of the war in Afghanistan, wrote of US-supervised elections in war-torn Vietnam, `83% of voters cast ballots...in a remarkably successful election...the keystone of President Johnson's policy of encouraging the growth of the constitutional process in Vietnam.' The vote may be close, since so many Afghans dislike Karzai, forcing a runoff. Washington may impose a CIA-World Bank approved `CEO' on poor Karzai, making him a double figurehead. Whoever wins, President Barack Obama will end up the real power of Afghanistan. Ravaged Afghanistan needs genuine, honest elections, and patient national reconciliation, free of foreign manipulation. That's the only true road to peace and stability. America has a great deal to teach Afghanistan about how to run clean elections and build the essential institutions of democracy. As I underline in my latest book, `American Raj,' democracy and good government are what America should be exporting to the Muslim World, not dictators, B-1 bombers, and Predators. Running phony elections is unworthy of the United States and demeans its values and traditions. It makes a mockery of everything we preach around the globe. Our arrant double standards is a leading cause of anti-Americanism. One example: while claiming to be fighting to bring democracy to Afghanistan, the US strongly backed the military dictatorship in Pakistan that facilitated the American war effort. The way to real peace and stability in Afghanistan can only be through a national consensus and negotiated settlement that includes Taliban and its allies. But President Obama is desperate for some sort of victory, though he cannot even properly define the term. Senior US generals warn of defeat in Afghanistan if the US garrison is not doubled. The conflict continues to spread into neighboring Pakistan. Americans are being prepared for a widening of the war `to defend Afghan democracy.' The US and NATO watch in horror as their casualties sharply mount and they have nothing to show voters for the latest Afghan imperial misadventure but body bags and tantalizing mirages of Central Asia's fabled oil and gas.
 
Stephen C. Rose: How Obama's Enemies Right and Left Will Help Him Win The Public Option Top
So much smoke is coming out of both sides of the health care debate that we might simply say that the opposition to Obama is thoroughly bipartisan. The funny thing is that both the antics of Keith Olbermann and Ed on MSNBC (bloviating on the left) and the usual FOX suspects on the right is taking on the character of what the President has aptly called silliness and drama. At the end of the day, there is one thing going for the President that none of these characters seem to credit. That would be the American people. Not all the American people, just the 70 percent or so who think what comes out of the mouths of left and right has nothing to do with achieving the ends they affirm. The ends affirmed by this majority include the public option, a move to fiscal responsibility in the face of runaway government expense and a health care program that does not take away from those who are already OK with it. To the extent that the President can effectively stand for these things, he wins and the people win. All the bloviating I have mentioned seems to center down on the independents and their attitude to the town hall processes underway. It becomes cause for Olbermann apoplexy if independents think it is OK to raise hell with politicians. What, pray tell, was the Obama campaign all about? Merely because independents are OK with some conflict does not mean they will not ultimately favor a solution that fundamentally extends the benefits of medicare to all. Olbermann and Hannity will agree that the President has feet of clay, will ask if he is becoming another Carter, will essentially deny his power to fight effectively. Of course their job is to fill up time. If I was filling up time I would tell folk what's in the bills. That is actually what I do , but few read it. Instead, they ask the same people time after time to make the same statements time after time so we can be misinformed about the actual future time after time. The election of Obama was a case in point. Everyone, including even Paul Krugman and Bob Herbert (not to mention all of HC's supporters), threw him under the bus every other day. On the other days, they speculated that all was not lost. A perfect storm of ambivalence. We should watch the daily drama for silliness. For consistent snideness. For bombast -- that would be Ed in particular. When all is said and done, if we have to go to reconciliation, we will do so to get the public option. But then people will have a very good idea why. And they will reward the perps who try to defeat it accordingly. In 2010 the laws of the past may well change. The voters will reward those who hung in with the man they elected in 2008. The only way the public option will be defeated is if the majority of Americans do not want it. That is democracy in action. It's a logic even congress can understand. I think the majority for the public option will hold. A positive bill with the public option in place will leave the media rubbing their collective heads, just as they did when Obama won Iowa, the nomination and the election. And for all the liars can do to fake out the voters, the media manage to do in the silliness and drama departments, Everyone will finally help the President to prevail. So bloviate on Keith, Ed, Sean and all you others. You are all helping the cause. Read my blog here and my online novel Panflick here . More on Health Care
 
Obama, Mubarak Meet To Repair Relations After Bush Top
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama says he is encouraged by progress in U.S. efforts to bring Israel and the Palestinians back to the negotiating table and thanked his Egyptian counterpart for his help in working for a breakthrough. The president was responding to a question about reports that Israel had stopped granting permission for new settlements in the West Bank, even though projects in progress were continuing. Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak said, "we are moving in the right direction," and that Arab states were ready to help if the Israelis and the Palestinians returned to peace talks. THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below. WASHINGTON (AP) – President Barack Obama is trying to restore Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak as the U.S. ace-in-the-hole in its decades-long effort to forge an elusive peace among Israel and the Arabs. After a serious falling out over Bush administration pressure on human rights and democracy in Egypt, Mubarak is back in the U.S. capital for the first time in more than five years to meet with Obama on Tuesday. The relationship is far from healed, despite Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton having eased back on those touchy issues and Egypt showing greater willingness to help with the peace effort. Adding to the delicacy of the talks are U.S. concerns about Egypt's future under the aging and increasingly frail Mubarak, who is 81 and has ruled Egypt for 28 years. He leads a country with an exploding population, ravaged by widespread poverty and high unemployment. He is believed to be grooming his son Gamal as successor. Mubarak had been a regular visitor to Washington during the Clinton administration. Then he stayed away to protest the U.S. invasion of Iraq and President George W. Bush's intensified pressure to open the Egyptian political system and moderate its human rights policies. White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Monday that the Obama-Mubarak meeting should be seen as "continuing our outreach in the Middle East." Mubarak has kept a lid on Egypt's explosive social and religious pressures through heavy repression of much of the political opposition in Egypt, especially the Islamic fundamentalist Muslim Brotherhood, the most organized group challenging his rule. Central to the talks between Obama and Mubarak will be the U.S. administration's demand that Israel freeze the expansion of Jewish settlements in the West Bank, land on which the Palestinians want to create a state. Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are openly at odds over the American demand, a rare public dispute between the traditionally close allies. Mubarak was widely expected to tell Obama that Israel must act first, that Netanyahu must accede to the U.S. insistence on a settlement freeze before the Arab world acts on its standing offer of better relations with Israel. Even then, the consummation of a larger peace deal still would depend on Israel meeting Arab demands that it withdraw to its borders as they were drawn before the 1967 war. Without specifying which countries or entities he was talking about, Gibbs said: "Each country in the region on either side of this issue has certain responsibilities to uphold as we make progress toward a lasting peace in the Middle East. And without a recognition of those responsibilities it's going to be hard to move forward." While Egypt and Israel made peace more than 30 years ago, their accord has never reached stated goals of a warm relationship that would overcome historic distrust between the Jewish state and the most populous Arab country. And the hardline Netanyahu has shown little willingness to give ground, regardless of Mubarak's moves against weapons and money smuggling through tunnels under Egypt's border with Gaza, the Mediterranean strip of territory controlled by Hamas. Despite the crackdown, Mubarak has failed to persuade the radical Palestinian faction to moderate and reconcile with the mainstream Palestinian leadership in the West Bank. On another pressing U.S. policy issue, Mubarak is seen as ready to join the United States in its bid to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. Mubarak, like Obama, the Israeli leadership and many Arab countries, sees a nuclear-armed Iran as a "game-changing" possibility that could thoroughly upend the balance of power in the Middle East. "He will want to know from Obama what is Plan B if U.S. diplomatic outreach efforts to Iran are not successful," said David Makovsky, an author and Middle East expert at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Obama has sought to establish a dialogue with the Iranians on the nuclear issue, but he has set a September deadline for it to respond. A next U.S. step would center on efforts to enforce tougher U.N. sanctions aimed at punishing Iran economically and further isolating the Islamic regime, which claims it is developing the technology for nuclear generation of electricity, not a bomb. Israel has spoken openly of a military attack on Iran's nuclear facilities but is widely believed to have agreed to stand down to give the U.S. policy time to work. Leading up to Tuesday's meeting, Vice President Joe Biden spoke with Mubarak by telephone Monday morning. The vice president's office said the men had a "good conversation" but would provide no details. Biden plans to join Tuesday's expanded talks after Obama and Mubarak meet one on one. Later Monday, Mubarak sat down with Clinton. State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said they discussed efforts to restart negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. More on Egypt
 
Howie Klein: Saying Thanks To The Democrats Who Won't Give Up On Hope Top
Last night Rachel Maddow kicked off her show with a talk about the collapse of ambition-- the Obama Administration and corporate Democrats throwing in the towel on health care reform. The video-- after the first minute or so-- is incredibly compelling and I recommend you watch it if you didn't see it yet. This morning several bloggers have kicked off an effort to thank the House Democrats who have drawn a line in the sand and say they will stand up against the corporate shills in the Senate and the Administration are defeat any bogus health care bill that doesn't include-- at the minimum-- a robust public option. You may remember that a few days ago I included all the names and phone numbers in a post and I want to encourage all DWT readers to call up congressmembers on the list and thank them. Thereisnospoon at Daily Kos explained the thinking behind whole campaign this morning. And Blue America is hosting an ActBlue page for people who would like to give any of the congressmembers who are standing up for the public option a dollar or two. Is your congressmember on the list? Is your favorite member of Congress? Take a look-- and make your voice heard-- with a dollar . Washington is paying attention. The top story at Politico today is Liberals Revolt Over Public Option . "A bill without a public option won't pass the House," said Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.), a member of Energy & Commerce Health subcommittee. "Not only are they weakening their proposal, but they are also weakening their hand. This is legislative subtraction by subtraction." Privately, the leaders of the Congressional Progressive Caucus and Congressional Black Caucus sent the same message to Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, who said Sunday that a public plan is "not the essential element" of comprehensive reform. "To take the public option off the table would be a grave error; passage in the House of Representatives depends upon inclusion of it," wrote Reps. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.), Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.) and Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) in a letter to Sebelius Monday. Along with their sharply worded letter, the three House members sent an attachment listing the "60 Members of Congress who are firm in their position that any legislation that moves forward through both chambers, and into a final proposal for the president's signature, MUST contain a public option." Even if top aides didn't intend to do it, the White House got a glimpse of what may well happen-- a Democratic civil war-- if President Barack Obama does indeed give up on the public option. ...Democracy for America honed in on the 60 House members who have pledged not to vote for a bill without the public option, and asked supporters to remind them to hold firm. Health Care for America Now urged its network to contact senators. And the Progressive Change Campaign Committee promised a new round of TV ads targeting undecided senators and highlighting their contributions from health and insurance interests. "There is zero retreat on the grassroots level for the public option. We are all in, and we're staying all in, because the public option is the compromise," said Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change committee, one of the most aggressive defenders of the public option. "If Kathleen Sebelius, Rahm Emanuel, or anyone else thinks the grassroots will rally behind anything short of a strong public option, that would be a serious miscalculation," Green said. Although all the congressmembers have been getting contributions from appreciative blog readers, the dozen who had benefited most when I woke up this morning were Sheila Jackson Lee (TX), Earl Blumenauer (OR), Lloyd Doggett (TX), Emanuel Cleaver (MO), Carolyn Maloney (NY), Barbara Lee (CA), Bill Delahunt (MA), Andre Carson (IN), Luis Gutierrez (IL), Donna Edwards (MD), Michael Capuano (MA), and Pete DeFazio (OR). Please make your voice heard too. More on Rachel Maddow
 
Jon Soltz: Remembering an Amazing Marine, Candidate, and Man Top
This week brought tragic news that particularly hit hard for the VoteVets.org family. Among the painful and heartbreaking losses of those Killed in Action was Bill Cahir, a Marine Sergeant, killed in Afghanistan. Bill epitomized what is so great about so many who serve our nation in uniform. At the age of 34, he enlisted, motivated by the September 11th attacks. But, his first action wasn't taking on al Qaeda in Afghanistan. He was deployed twice to Iraq, from 2004-2005, and again from 2007-2008. If Bill, a political progressive, thought Iraq wasn't the war we should be in at the time, his willingness and readiness to go and stand by his men sure took precedence over his personal feelings. Then, this May, he was sent to Afghanistan, serving in the Helmand Province, which is one of the most violent areas in the region that very few Americans know about. Between his time in Iraq and his service in Afghanistan, Bill ran for Congress. It would have been incredibly easy - and everyone would have said advisable - to come back and rest after two tours in Iraq. But Bill, whose line of work was journalism, saw that Capitol Hill needed more leadership. His own comfort took a backseat to his sense of responsibility. The seriousness with which he took that responsibility is why VoteVets.org PAC endorsed him in his primary race, which he ultimately lost. And though he will never be able to make a run for office again, we at VoteVets.org are not done talking about him, or the people like him all over America who are still alive, and mix patriotism, progressivism, and sense of duty. Continuing to remember Bill and what he stood for, and standing up for the people like him, is the best way to honor his memory. It's essential that everyone know about people like Bill Cahir, whose overriding purpose in life was to help and defend others. That's why we were heartened to see Chris Matthews devoted a segment to Bill's memory on Hardball the other day. We're hopeful that other news shows took notice, and remember that as we debate health care or energy or stimulus funds (all of which ostensibly are meant to improve America) there are real American lives being risked every day in Iraq and Afghanistan. They want to make America better, too. It doesn't take much for the news to put a talking heads segment aside for the day (including any that I might be called to do) to tell amazing stories like Bill's. Note: Bill left unborn twin daughters and a wife. A memorial fund has been established to help provide an education to the daughters who will never be able to meet their amazing father. You can help by making checks payable to the "Bill Cahir Memorial Fund" and sending them to: Burk and Herbert Bank, c/o Mark Ragland, P.O. Box 268, Alexandria, Va., 22313. Crossposted at VetVoice.com More on Afghanistan
 
Ritter's Budget Director: Cuts Significantly Smaller Than Feared Top
Gov. Bill Ritter plans to eliminate 267 state positions to balance the budget, but it's not clear how many people will lose their jobs because some posts are vacant. The governor's budget director, Todd Saliman, said today the cuts are not as deep as originally feared because the shortfall, once estimated at $384 million, turned out to be $318 million.
 
Alexander Dresner: The Problem With Cable News Top
When Rachel Maddow plowed her pick-up truck into the gates of the predominantly white and male country club that is cable news this time last year, it was a reminder of the growing need to encourage on-air diversity. Over the course of the next few years, with the blogosphere serving as an outlet for every conceivable opinion, consumers of news will increasingly turn away from the stale sameness emanating from the cable networks unless they begin to hear perspectives that take them beyond what is already available in the mainstream. MSNBC's Maddow move has been instructive. Cast as it is against a backdrop of declining ratings, her meteoric rise has reflected both the scale of the crisis and one possible solution to it. Giving Maddow a platform was a step in the right direction as it helped revive a medium that has been teetering on the edge for some time. Cable news networks naturally want to guard against this slide in ratings, and they would be well served by dedicating more attention to finding and cultivating on-air talent that reflects their diverse viewer base. The first change in programming should mirror the increasing political engagement of the MTV generation. Experience provides valuable insights, of course, and a host such as Chris Matthews - with his years as a Washington power broker- has his place. But while experience offers its own vantage points, it cannot trump the importance of relating to your audience, and with the networks packed with middle-aged hosts, there is an absence of youth perspectives. For young Americans, no debate on death panels or end-of-life counseling will ever triumph over discussion of student loans and the market for entry-level jobs. There is no shortage of young, intelligent twenty-somethings -- journalists, think-tank wonks, political consultants -- whose critical faculties are well-honed and who would be capable of directing debate for an hour on one of the networks. Already a presence on the cable news circuit, a potential candidate for this job could be Matthew Continetti of the Weekly Standard. At just 25-years of age, his intelligence, wit and charm always seem to eclipse the other guests he appears alongside with, and is proof that he could hold his own as a host. For those concerned by Continetti's conservative bonafides, he could be counter-balanced in a way that Bob Novak and Tucker Carlson were on CNN's Crossfire. A possible option could be Sam Stein of the Huffington Post, who really established himself as an on-air option during his questioning of President Obama at a White House presser back in February. That this should be an easy sell to cable news network executives is beyond doubt; young people will buy just about anything - as the Trucker Hat fad showed - and advertisers will pay big money to speak to them. Cable news executives need not be motivated by the public good, but they will certainly serve this if they follow their wallets. The second change should address the need for ethnic diversity. According to the 2006 U.S. census, there are more than 100 million non-white Americans - roughly 30% of the national population. If we take CNN as a test case, weekly prime-time programming has zero minority hosts. Fareed Zakaria has had own show on the network for over a year now, but it only airs on Sundays. In the wake of Obama's election, there have been increasingly vocal calls for greater African-American representation on cable news shows. Such calls should not go unheard. Yet, the debate need not remain fixed to the binary distinction between black and white. Where are the Hispanics? Or the Arabs? Or the Asians? The President is a Kenyan-American, with a past stretching to Indonesia; America's cable news rosters reflect diversity only in political identity. More on Chris Matthews
 
'Survivor' Richard Hatch: I Was Imprisoned Because I'm Gay Top
NEWPORT, R.I. — "Survivor" winner Richard Hatch said in an interview broadcast Tuesday that he believes he was sent to prison because he's gay, a claim the prosecutors in the case call baseless and delusional. Hatch, speaking publicly for the first time since being released from prison to home confinement, told NBC's "Today" show that he believes the judge in his tax evasion case discriminated against him. He also accused a prosecutor of misconduct. "I know without question that there are personal issues involved for the prosecutor. I don't know why. The prosecutorial misconduct has been egregious," he said. When asked whether he believes that if he was heterosexual, he would not have gone to prison, Hatch replied, "I do believe that." In court papers filed earlier this year, Hatch complained of widespread prejudice in the justice system against gay people. A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's office said Hatch's claims are baseless, and in a court filing in May, prosecutors pointed out that Hatch offered no evidence to support a claim that he was prosecuted because he is gay. Former U.S. Attorney Robert Clark Corrente – whose office oversaw the case – told WPRO-AM that Hatch is "delusional." The judge in the case is now retired and could not immediately be reached for comment. Hatch was convicted in 2006 of failing to pay taxes on his $1 million prize for the first season of the CBS reality show. He was given extra prison time for lying on the stand. Hatch, 48, is due to be released from home confinement on Oct. 7, but has asked a judge to release him immediately for a variety of reasons, including because he was represented by ineffective lawyers. He told the "Today" show that he has been financially devastated by his tax case.
 
Harry Shearer: Health Care: Two Countries, Two Stories Top
NEW ORLEANS--Viewed from this city, which lost its main hospital for the indigent and working poor (so-called Big Charity) in the aftermath of the flooding and which is just now beginning to start a neighborhood-clinic approach to the problem, the national debate on health care reform has been less than enlightening. The money that both sides are spending on television ads -- the pro-reform side (if you include Harry and Louise) outspending the anti-reform side, to this point -- insures that most of what most people "know" about the subject boils down to simplistic slogans and fear-based half-truths. And I don't know any more. But I do have two family members, one in America and one in England, each of whom has had a recent experience with the local health system. I offer their experiences for your consideration, and leave any conclusions up to what George W. Bush might have described as "the concluder". Anna (not her real name) complained for years of chronic pain following a hip procedure. She belonged to a prominent California HMO, one which spends millions advertising on television its devotion to patient wellness with the zen-like slogan, "Thrive". In reality, doctors who saw Anna -- a bewildering series of entry-level doctors, necessary for referral to specialists, and specialists -- seemed to be practicing medicine by the clock. The appointments were brief, and each round of appointments had the same result: a prescription for increasingly strong pain medication. By the time I intervened, and started taking her to a couple of private doctors for second opinions, she was hooked on oxycontin -- a dose that, one private doctor said, was appropriate only for terminal cancer patients. Ultimately, during one weekend in which she was hospitalized in a private facility, a stroke of good fortune brought a talented neurologist to her bed as the doctor on rounds that afternoon. He talked to her for 20 minutes, reported she had no clinical cause of the pain, and suggested it was psychological. He recommended some counseling, along with a program of weaning her off the drug. In six months, she was oxycontin-free and pain-free. Donald (not his real name) lives in Britain. He recently began complaining of pain and stiffness, interfering with his active life. Though initially reluctant to seek medical attention, he finally made an appointment with a National Health specialist, and two weeks later, he was seen and diagnosed with a form of myalgia (Google it, I did). He was prescribed a medication which almost immediately relieved his symptoms. All the rest is commentary. PS: I have the best health insurance available, thanks to my show-business union. More on Health Care
 
Wall Street's Advice From Last March Missed Biggest Rally In 70 Years Top
Aug. 18 (Bloomberg) -- Anyone who did what Wall Street analysts advised last March has only losses after the biggest stock market rally in seven decades. More on Financial Crisis
 
Sebelius Pushes Back: We Still Support The Public Option Top
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius took the opportunity to clarify her comments from ABC's "This Week" in a speech to Medicare fraud prevention advocates this morning. Sebelius' comments Sunday that a public option of the health-care reform proposal was "not essential" was interpreted by some as a shift by the White House. "All I can tell you is that Sunday must have been a very slow news day, because here's the bottom line: absolutely nothing has changed," she said. "We continue to support the public option that will help lower costs, give American consumers more choice and keep private insurers honest." More on Kathleen Sebelius
 
Salam Al Marayati: Rifqa and the Reverend Top
Fathima Rifqa Bary, who goes by Rifqa, is a 17-year-old from Columbus, Ohio who ran away from home -- not an uncommon occurrence for 17-year-olds. But the circumstances surrounding her story have opened a host of legal, cultural and theological issues. Her Muslim parents moved the family to the U.S. from Sri Lanka in 2000, seeking medical attention for Rifqa, who had lost her right eye playing with a toy. Rifqa, who the Columbus Dispatch reports was a cheerleader at her high school, joined a Bible study group on Facebook earlier this year and was baptized at a local church. See the story here. Last month, she hopped on a bus to Orlando to meet with Rev. Blake Lorenz, who she met through a Facebook prayer group for the couple's non-denominational Global Revolution Church. Her parents reported their daughter missing and local news covered her disappearance for a full two weeks before police were able to trace her to Lorenz's Orlando church. Here's what happened when Rifqa was found: Lorenz decides to remain silent and displays Rifqa to a local television news station. She launches into an emotional plea to save her life from Islam. She claims that her parents "love God more than me" and therefore have to perform an honor killing on her. She argues "it's in the Quran". No it's not, sweet little Rifqa. It's not in the Quran. Whoever told you that is either ignorant or a liar. You should look it up yourself before claiming it's in the Quran. Rev. Lorenz is then quoted in a local television station report saying that if a Muslim leaves his religion and does not return to Islam in a couple of days, then he must be killed. He claims that someone showed him the verse. There is no such verse, Rev. Lorenz. In every faith, apostasy is shunned but ultimate judgment is left to God, not people. Religious conflicts occur in some countries where there are volatile and tense relations between faith groups, particularly where war and ethnic conflicts occur (the Balkans, the Middle East, South Asia). The United States of America is different. Let's preserve the tradition of American religious pluralism and not fall into religious or cultural warfare. The issue of apostasy is actually addressed in a controversial and oft-misunderstood law. Centuries ago, the apostasy law was actually a treason law, created to address what should happen when a soldier in a Muslim army converts to the other side and then fights against a Muslim country. That's the equivalent of an American working for the Soviet Union during the Cold War, or for the Nazis in World War II. Under U.S. law, treason is punishable by death. Now, state authorities in Florida and Ohio will have to clear up the mess and determine Rifqa's residence. Her father, Mohamed Bary, has a strong endorsement by Sgt. Jerry Cupp of the Columbus Police Department. Cupp told the Associated Press that Bary "comes across to me as a loving, caring, worried father about the whereabouts and the health of his daughter." For his part, Bary told the Associated Press : "We love her, we want her back, she is free to practice her religion, whatever she believes in, that's OK. What these people are trying to do is not right -- I don't think any religion will teach to separate the kids from their parents." Mohamed Bary allowed his daughter to become a cheerleader and says she can practice any faith she wants -- clearly, he is not a fundamentalist. He is a concerned father who believes his daughter was brainwashed and kidnapped. Let's see how this story unfolds.
 
Jared Polis Does Beer Bong With Stephen Colbert (VIDEO) Top
On Monday night, Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo.) appeared in a segment of "The Colbert Report." Stephen Colbert paid the openly gay freshman congressman a visit on Capitol Hill to discuss, among other things, his sexual orientation and an article where he described Congress as "like going back to college." When asked about this comparison, the Congressman replies with a smirk, "yes." What follows is an engagement that leads Congressman Polis to "doing a beer bong" with comedian Colbert. As Colbert whips out a six-pack of Coors Light, the Congressman laughs, "Oh good, from Colorado." Is Congress really "like college"? Probably not, but at bare minimum this comical segment allows us to better imagine what it would look like if our congressmen were actually doing beer bongs on the House floor. The Colbert Report Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c Even Better-er Know a District - Colorado's 2nd - Jared Polis www.colbertnation.com Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor Health Care Protests More on Stephen Colbert
 
Ritter's Budget Director Announces 320 Million Dollars In Cuts Top
Gov. Bill Ritter plans to eliminate 267 state positions to balance the budget, but it's not clear how many people will lose their jobs because some posts are vacant. The governor's budget director, Todd Saliman, said today the cuts are not as deep as originally feared because the shortfall, once estimated at $384 million, turned out to be $318 million.
 
Chinese Gang Crackdown Sees Nearly 500 Suspects Flee Top
Almost 500 Chinese suspects are on the run following a major crackdown on gang crime in western China, the People's Daily reports. About 3,000 police have been involved in the investigations and arrests since the operation began two months ago. The People's Daily reports that over 1,540 people have been detained on suspicion of gang activity, while $224m worth of assets have been frozen or confiscated. Among those arrested so far in the strings are a senior police chief, three multi-millionaires and 19 triad gang leaders, reports The Times . The arrests were made in the western Chinese city of Chongqing and the police chief's arrest has been seen as highly important in removing a protector of the gangs who operate in the city. The triad gangs have allegedly been involved in illegal casinos, money-lending and extortion, and had been operating with increasing openness around the city. The BBC cites one official as saying loans could account for up to one third of the city's revenue. Get HuffPost World On Facebook and Twitter! More on China
 

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)