Wednesday, September 2, 2009

Y! Alert: The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Yahoo! Alerts
My Alerts

The latest from The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Dr. Andrew Weil: Disease Mongering: Good for Big Pharma, Bad for You Top
In "Should You Get Your Drug Information From an Actor?" I discussed the pharmaceutical industry's egregious practice of using celebrity-driven, prime time television commercials to promote drugs directly to consumers. Illegal in most of the world - and legal in this country only since 1985 - this kind of advertising does much more harm than good and should be banned. But as bad as this practice is, at least the example that I cited, actor Sally Field's Boniva campaign, promotes a drug to treat a real disease: osteoporosis. Even worse is a growing trend to invert this process: to promote diseases to fit existing drugs. In a fascinating New York Review of Books piece, Marcia Angell, M.D., denounced the practice of "disease mongering." As she put it, "The strategy is to convince as many people as possible (along with their doctors, of course) that they have medical conditions that require long-term drug treatment." A British Medical Journal article said it more succinctly, "A lot of money can be made from healthy people who believe they are sick." A central disease-mongering tactic is to attach polysyllabic, clinical-sounding names to what used to be seen as trivial or transient conditions. In most cases, the new, formidable names come complete with acronyms, which add even more gravitas. Thus: Occasional heartburn becomes "gastro-esophageal reflux disease" or GERD. Impotence becomes "erectile dysfunction" or ED. Premenstrual tension becomes "premenstrual dysphoric disorder" or PMDD. Shyness becomes "social anxiety disorder" or SAD. Fidgeting legs becomes "restless leg syndrome" or RLS. Clearly, extreme, intractable versions of these conditions may indeed require vigorous treatment, but the pharmaceutical industry does little to draw a distinction between serious and mild manifestations. Minor gastric upset following a spicy meal is labeled "GERD," and butterflies before giving a speech is "SAD." And the proffered solution? "Off-label" use of existing drugs to expand their market share, though there may be little or no research that justifies such use. So what should be done? The nation is in the throes of a pitched debate about health care reform, and I'm a vigorous advocate for universal health care and many other political changes (as laid out in my book, Why Our Health Matters: A Vision of Medicine That Can Transform Our Future ). But as we push for a better medical system, we must also remember that not all of the changes we need can be left to politicians. As a culture, we should be suspicious whenever we hear of a new "disease," and ask whether it may just be a marketing ploy to exploit one of minor discomforts that come with being a human being - and a driver of the out-of-control costs of American health care. If it is, the best "medicine" may be low-tech, inexpensive and safe measures such as small modifications in diet or exercise patterns, or some simple stress-reduction techniques. Or - even more radical! - the answer may simply be to wait, give the body's own healing mechanisms a chance to find equilibrium, and get on with our lives. Andrew Weil, M.D., is the founder and director of the Arizona Center for Integrative Medicine and the editorial director of www.DrWeil.com . Become a fan on Facebook . More on Health Action Now!
 
Barth Anderson: Whole Foods and Michael Pollan: Wrong to the Core Top
Volatile tempers in the Whole Food smackdown got even hotter last Friday when the Omnivore himself, Michael Pollan, came out swinging on behalf of embattled Whole Foods CEO, John Mackey, in the face of a growing boycott against that company. Called in reaction to Mackey's August 11, 2009 Wall Street journal editorial, which took issue with a public option for health insurance reform, the Whole Foods Market (WFM) boycott is entering its third week -- and buzzing merrily along. Its Facebook page has almost 32,000 members, and the internet is still rocking with WFM-shopper furor, union opposition, and wide-ranging political punditry. Pollan's entrance to the debate isn't mere punditry, though. As the popular face of the locavore movement in the United States, Pollan's opinions shape and move the natural foods market in ways that even nationally read pundits can't. Just ask John Mackey who famously wrote an open letter to Pollan complaining about his company's treatment in Pollan's seminal book The Omnivore's Dilemma. He knows how important Pollan's opinion is. But while newsworthy, Pollan's weigh-in may not be enough to mollify the opposition. In fact, in his New Majority remarks on the boycott, Pollan stumbles by falling into hyperbole, fallacy, aand by misunderstanding what's actually happening in this particular food fight. Take this for example: Whole Foods is not perfect, however if they were to disappear, the cause of improving Americans' health by building an alternative food system, based on more fresh food, pastured and humanely raised meats and sustainable agriculture, would suffer... So Mackey is wrong on health care, but Whole Foods is often right about food, and their support for the farmers matters more to me than the political views of their founder. If Whole Foods were to "disappear"? Really? Is the boycott going so well that Whole Foods is about to vanish from the face of the planet? Better buy some 365 Fig Newtons before they go! To be fair, Mr. Pollan is simply drawing out what he says is a logical conclusion, that if the boycott has its way, Whole Foods will take a hit that it can't sustain. But, really, there's a big middle being eliminated here, namely, that this CEO would be fired long before Whole Foods ever took such a hit. Pollan may not agree with him politically, but, obviously, he can't imagine the future of Whole Foods or even the "alternative food system" without John Mackey. Which brings us to the biggest miscalculation in Pollan's comments. He's treating this boycott as if it's actually calling for some action like the destruction of Whole Foods or the removal of Mackey as CEO. This isn't actually the case. Indeed, this boycott isn't really a boycott at all. Boycotts are called to spur change or bring about an action. The boycott against Taco Bell, for example, was held to force the company to the bargaining table with the Coalition of Imokalee Workers, and it worked. Meanwhile, a quick glance at the boycott Facebook page or its accompanying blog and you'll see there is no stated call for action, no conditions under which the boycott would be called a success. So if this isn't a boycott, what is it? How should Pollan, and John Mackey for that matter, approach this webbluster? To get what's happening, Pollan and Mackey need to appreciate that this debate isn't a Punch and Judy fight between health care politicos. It's an uprising of trendsetting customers. Some shop talk. There are two key customers that drive the natural foods world, the "mid-level" and the "core" (as dubbed by noted natural foods market researchers, the Hartman Group). If you're mid-level, you're a sensory shopper. You shop for natural foods based on taste, sight, smell, and healthfulness. You're not a "true believer" in organic certification, you don't really read labels, and you'd rather have experts explain complex issues on the fly. Conventional wisdom has long said that future growth for natural foods is married to the mid-level, because you folks make up 56% of the natural foods market. Meanwhile, if you're core, you shop with big concepts in mind (sustainability, worker rights, environmental, and various political issues), and you want food label claims proven to you. You like research, you like information, and you like knowing how things work in the food world. But most importantly, you core shoppers are the "trendsetters" in natural foods, according to the Hartman Group, the hum at the center of the hive. And, as "shopping experts," you attract your buddy mid-level shoppers to the stores and products that you deem worthy. So the core is essential, and Mackey really put his foot in it, not by pissing off his liberal customers (though that dynamic is certainly at play), but by ignoring his core shoppers' reaction to his editorial. A bit more about the core from the Hartman Group's research: Core shoppers tend to value attributes such as the shopping experience and the authenticity of the retailer. [Emphasis mine] From LOHAS: The core consumer is more likely to choose to buy the product, then decide where to buy it. The "where" decision is based on a number of emotional factors, including which stores have a knowledgeable staff, which stores are perceived as having values similar to the shopper's, and which stores the shopper feels most comfortable in. [Emphasis mine] Because he's a professor, not a grocer, Michael Pollan can be forgiven for not understanding that the boycott is actually a "core" shopper revolt. But John Mackey? He helped build the natural foods market in the U.S. He's certainly read the Hartman Group research, and, until now, Whole Foods marketing has been definitively hip, pitching to both mid-level and core shoppers simultaneously for years: Whole Foods' health and wellness initiatives appeal to the midlevel, while their Whole Trade program is a perfect example of marketing to the core (Fair Trade is an almost exclusively "core" value). Mackey knows Whole Foods needs the core for street cred, and that the core demands authenticity and integrity from its chosen stores. Mackey's competitors know this, too. Wal-mart seeks cred from the core by claiming to be a sustainable business, and Dole, Starbucks and Procter & Gamble's Millstone coffee are all going after the core too (via Fair Trade certification with Transfair). There's been a fight to attract trendsetting customers for half a decade now, and Mackey just broke trust with his core in a big loud fashion. Worse, Mackey trying to explain it away, saying that Wall Street Journal headline writers betrayed him by using the term "Obamacare," won't do the trick. Neither will celebrity endorsements, even if they come from figures as respected by the core as Michael Pollan. It will be interesting to see if the "boycott" begins to lose steam, but I don't think Pollan's political cover is going to work. After all, this isn't any of his business -- literally. It's Mackey's to lose or regain, not Pollan's to defend. I'm afraid these "boycotting" shoppers are going to remain angry, skeptical, distrustful, and wary until Mackey addresses his editorial with an apology that doesn't insult the core's intelligence.
 
Tina Traster: The Great Divide: 90 Miles North Top
Four years ago my family and I left Manhattan and relocated to a Hudson River town. I have found that sweet spot of comfort. While I tread these familiar waters I take heart my gardener will arrive Wednesday, Didier will bake buttery croissants and Nyack's librarians will go out of their way to locate any book I ask for. I'm wearing the fuzzy bathrobe, walking in shoes that have molded around my feet. I know one day an irresistible itch will evict me from this geography. When that wind will blow in a new direction I don't know but I suspect it will blow me north. North, where farms roll endlessly to the horizon, mud kicks up around tires in April, split-rail fences lean leeward. It will lead me to a place where I'm no longer at such a safe distance to Manhattan that I can visit my dentist when a tooth chips. I will have to relinquish what last connective tissue I have to the city if I'm to live in a place where I can get lost in corn fields in July and lie under a sky so velvet black it feels like I'm hiding under a blanket. I've accumulated a treasure chest of rural memories. I recognize how September smells different from August in the Catskill Mountains. I know water from gurgling mountain streams is not safe to drink. The lines around my eyes slacken when I'm upstate. I breathe from my diaphragm. My daughter likes to be around the lady who jumps into the lake naked and swims to the other side. I've etched my experience over time, in summer and winter, living in rented tumble-down houses. For a week or two I play house, read the local paper, cook furiously, gather wild flowers to arrange in glass vases, browse library shelves. I drive as far as necessary to find a health food store or organic ice cream or the day's fresh fish catch. I figure out everything I need to know as if I were going to live in this place. With every country escape I try on something that may become permanent. At least that's what I presume I'm doing. I remember every time we took a family vacation when I was a child my parents were a magnet to some blood-sucking real estate agent who convinced them to spend an afternoon looking at houses or time-shares wherever we happened to be traveling. Mine is not a fantasy sport. My efforts are R&D for a future life. Ulster County, 90 miles north, is like a giant dressing room where I try on towns and villages for size. I love New Paltz's sunflower farms and the Gunks, Kingston's Rondout district, Rosendale's health-food restaurant. With each fragment of living up there, I stand in front of the "mirror," waiting for my reflection to tell me what feels right, what needs tailoring, what to discard. This summer I tossed a wild card into the parlor game. "Woodstock?" my husband said, when I told him I'd rented a house there for 10 days. "I thought we hate Woodstock?" The Woodstock we thought we knew is the town of tie-dyed hippie skirts and life-sized cutouts of Bob Dylan. It's a cliché on the map of '60s culture that has lived off its association with a concert that actually took place an hour away in Bethel New York. It's where photo-snapping day-trippers waddle down the streets and wild-eyed Vietnam veterans read poetry on the village green. I can't say what possessed me to choose Woodstock -- I presume I heard a faint wind whistling, pointing me to this town that crouches like a praying monk in the shadows of the majestic Catskill Mountains. We spent 10 days living in a rental house deep in the woods by a stream. Though it was late summer, a time when Woodstock is most susceptible to being a caricature, I found a different essence. I was more aware of the 40-something women who don't dye their flowing grey locks and children who eat tofu. I noticed advertisements for local farm dinners and book readings at The Golden Notebook. I watched a community going about its daily business, baking bread, selling its wares at Mower's market, carrying yoga mats. I saw myself gazing in the mirror, trying on Woodstock, and liking it.
 
Francesca Biller-Safran: Minorities and Healthcare- What's the Real Story? Top
Ironically, the most thunderous vitriol about healthcare being spewed at town hall meetings across the country is both raged and waged by those already gainfully insured who can't bare the thought of sharing the pot with the poor and uninsured. While healthcare is in need of radical reform for millions of Americans, minorities and especially Blacks have historically suffered disproportionately from poor or non-existent access to even the most primitive of medical care. Grave numbers show that although African-Americans make up only 13.5 percent of the population, when compared to White men, Black men are 2.4 times more likely to die from prostate cancer, 30% percent more likely to die from heart disease; twice as likely to be diagnosed with diabetes and 2.2 times more likely to die from the disease The data is just as grim and more so in some cases for African-American women when compared to white women with a 34% chance of dying from breast cancer although 10% less likely to be diagnosed as many have no access to healthcare; twice as likely to die from stomach cancer, and 22 times higher to be diagnosed with AIDS with a 20 % times higher rate of death. At one town hall meeting, a Caucasian woman's rankle involved attacking any aspect of universal healthcare as "downright un-American and socialist." She said she is "damned near sure" she won't be responsible for picking up the bill for anyone not willing to work hard enough. At another meeting, an older White male complained that his co-pays have gone up so high that his family had to cancel their annual summer vacation to Hawaii, something he has never been "forced to endure." Try telling that story to a Black, Hispanic, Native-American or other member of a minority class with more than 100 million suffering from otherwise treatable diseases and premature death. An African-American colleague laughs bitterly at the prospect that health care might be reformed to any substantive degree. Growing up, his family had no insurance and he remembers missing weeks of school at a time as he suffered from severe asthma they could not afford to treat. His mother and father died from diabetes and a heart attack in their fifties, respectively, and neither had seen a doctor in more than 20 years. "I'm pissed off that suddenly this is big news just because whites are now feeling the pain we have always felt," Carl said. "I guess it took a Black president in order to do something about an accepted part of our reality." And as any dream of a fair melting pot is being stirred with petulance as is healthcare reform, the democratic ideals of fairness and equality our country was founded on is being mocked with racism and classicism at its most grotesque and conspicuous. With obvious political and social transparency, those most desperate are scarcely heard from as the debate roars from the windy plains of Texas to the cool coasts of the West. This land that too uncommonly boasts a vista of the free of the brave has been landscaped with separate and unequal climates as the generationally uninsured have been disenfranchised and discriminated including a healthy and strong physical stature in society. While 46 million Americans have no insurance, one assurance that can't be denied is the shocking numbers of non-Whites who become ill and die untimely deaths from otherwise preventable and treatable diseases, costing the country more money in the long run as care becomes reactive rather than proactive. "These disparities determine how long we live and how healthy our life is," said Thomas A. LaVeist, Ph.D., author of 'Minority Populations and Health: An Introduction to Health Disparities in the United States. "Whites live an average of 5-7 years longer than Blacks. African-Americans are more likely than whites to be victims of homicide and HIV/AIDS. Infant mortality is double for Blacks. It's been that way since statistics have been kept," LaVeist said. Health statistics are similar for other minorities, although not as severe when compared in most instances to the Black population, especially insofar as death from AIDS and infant mortality rates. Those opposed to reform defy ignorance while ignoring that although the United States spends more on health care than any industrialized country; it ranks last in the quality of health among 191 member nations, according to The World Health Organization. When rating a country's overall quality of health care, one of the most significant indicators of the population's health is the infant mortality death rate, and numbers are particularly grave for minority infants in the U.S. For African-American babies, the death rate is 2.3 times that of white infants, with four times likely to die from low birth weight. The data is most severe for Native-Americans, with the infant mortality rate topping whites by 48 percent. A stark reality remains that because health insurance is largely employer-based in this country with minorities suffering most from unemployment, healthcare has perpetually been poor or nil. Sobering statistics reveal that although Blacks only make up only 13.5 percent of the civilian "non-institutionalized" population, (a relevant note as Blacks made up 41 percent of the nation's 2 million prison inmates) they are 60% more likely to die from a stroke than Whites, and if they survive, they are more likely to become disabled. With the death of Senator Ted Kennedy who called it his life's work to fight for equal and just healthcare as a right for all Americans, perhaps his passing will at the very least bring the true urgency to reform healthcare to the immediate front and center, with the actual passage of equitable healthcare a right for all Americans, rich or poor, healthy or sick, white or minority. President Obama said, "I suffer no illusions that this will be an easy process. It will be hard. But I also know that nearly a century after Teddy Roosevelt first called for reform, the cost of our health care has weighed down our economy and the conscience of our nation long enough. So let there be no doubt: health care reform cannot wait, it must not wait, and it will not wait another year." It is evident with the petulance prattled and screeched vociferously, loud and clear across the rural, urban and multicultural highways that many Americans want rapaciously to keep what they have above all humane decency and compassion, literally leaving the have-nots left out in the cold to fend for their right to the pursuit of happiness as stated in The Declaration of Independence. The document also includes the following declaration: "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Martin Luther King's words ring timeless and haunting when he said, "An individual has not started living until he can rise above the narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all humanity." Let's just hope that more individuals choose to truly start living as they help others to realize the dream of a healthy, just and humane life as well, as defined by a country of people whose lives literally hang in the balance of both power and political injustice. More on HIV/AIDS
 
Michael Roth: Pragmatist Hope for Health Care Top
Yesterday David Brooks opined in the New York Times that President Obama's slide in the polls stemmed from his embrace of the left wing of his party, thus losing the support of the political center supposedly more concerned with federal budget deficits than with the plight of the uninsured. Brooks's point is that it would be "suicidal" for Obama to push through health care reform without appealing to the real American values of the political center: "You can't pass the most important domestic reform in a generation when the majority of voters think you are on the wrong path. To do so would be a sign of unmitigated arrogance." As I held the morning paper in my hands, I realized that in the same space on the op-ed page about a week before Paul Krugman had made almost exactly the opposite argument. Krugman criticized the president for reaching out to a middle that wasn't there. In trying to achieve bi-partisan support, Krugman observed, Obama was losing the energy to achieve any substantial health care reform. On August 22 Krugman wrote: "It's hard to avoid the sense that Mr. Obama has wasted months trying to appease people who can't be appeased, and who take every concession as a sign that he can be rolled." The columnist urged Obama to forget about pleasing Republicans intent on preserving the status quo. Talk about getting it from all sides! Progressives (whom Brooks identifies as readers of the Huffington Post!) apparently are disillusioned with a president who looks weak because he continues to work with elected officials who seem intent on seeing him fail. Centrists apparently are disillusioned with a president who can't create a coalition of forces able to pass legislation that will initiate some reform, even if it doesn't pretend to solve all the problems we know are there. The president is accused of being weak and arrogant. These charges amount to saying what we already know: President Obama is a pragmatist, and he is an heir to the great tradition of the reformist progressives in the United States. This tradition, at its best, has found ways to mitigate the inequalities created by our economic system without sacrificing individual freedoms and the virtues of decentralized power. Those who approach politics with a more theoretical or absolutist bent tell you that the progressive tradition has failed to fulfill its potential, or that it is naïve in believing in incremental reform. But Obama, professorial as he may be from time to time, is no theorist. He has long known that the best is the enemy of the good, and he has been focused on getting something done now that we can build on in the future. Pragmatists don't start with a belief in the "Truth" that they then try to realize with action in the world. Instead, we begin with hope that our country can move along a path to realize its dreams of being a more just and compassionate community through collaborative effort. Spectators of politics have no difficulty mocking the reformist, pragmatist agenda. It's easy to wave your fundamentalist principles in the air and demand that the president fulfill what you know to be the Truth. Pragmatists, after all, always fall short of the targets established by absolutists on the Left or Right, because we don't believe those targets are anything more than motivators to help get something done in the short term. And through experience and the evaluation of our efforts, we pragmatists are willing to modify our hopes as we prepare for the next round. Our motivation comes from the stories of previous battles fought, and from wanting to add hopeful chapters to those narratives of progress. I am confident that Obama will stay focused on the moral and historical aspiration of providing health insurance for all Americans while controlling costs and maintaining the quality of care. As part of the great pragmatist tradition in American politics, he will lead efforts to pass legislation that will move us closer to realizing what has already become a shared belief among most Americans: that no one should be denied health care because of an inability to pay. In doing so, I don't expect he will satisfy those who are absolutely certain the government shouldn't get any bigger, or those who have no doubt that only the government can adequately address this basic need. But he will have made progress, and so will we. More on Health Care
 
Jeff Danziger: Spitzer Teaches Top
More on Eliot Spitzer
 
Dave Hill: Dear Hugh Jackman Top
Dear Hugh Jackman, You were in the hit movie "X-Men Origins: Wolverine" the popular film that- as hinted at in the title- chronicles the origins of your popular X-Men character Wolverine, which is awesome. They put you underwater in that movie and were total dicks about it, but you won in the end. According to my extensive and thorough research on you, Hugh Jackman, you are also going to be in the soon-to-be hit movie "Wolverine 2" (full title "X-Men Origins: Wolverine 2), which I am pretty sure is going to be just as awesome if not even more awesome than the first "Wolverine" movie (as if that is even possible). You were also in the films "Van Helsing" and "Making the Grade" and plus a lot of other movies besides those. I could go on, but I won't. I realize you already know all of the things in the first paragraph. You are not stupid. I mention these things only to demonstrate that this is the kind of Hugh Jackman knowledge I am able to break out on people- even you, Hugh Jackman- without even trying. This is because I am what I and a lot of other people consider to be the foremost authority in North America on all things Jackman. You might even say I have a serious case of Jackmania, which is a funny joke I made up about my enthusiasm for you, Hugh Jackman. Sometimes I will make this joke to friends and they will get a big kick out of it because they know how much I like Hugh Jackman (you). I suppose at this point you are assuming that this is just another Hugh Jackman fan letter from just another Hugh Jackman fan. However, you would be beyond wrong about this. I do not blame you for this though. You are Hugh Jackman. I'm sure you get letters from all sorts of nutjobs all the time (Ha! I can only imagine!). Anyway, I think it's pretty safe to say that we are both extremely relieved that I am not one of those quacks or "Jackquacks" (alternately "Jackoffs") as I like to call them in my Hugh Jackman newsgroup (slogan "Jackman is spoken here"). I will say, however, that I am without a doubt your greatest admirer and have been ever since I got Jacked® for the very first time after watching "X-Men Origins: Wolverine", the movie I was talking about earlier. As we are both extremely busy men, I will not waste any of your time today and get right down to brass tacks (or perhaps I should say "Jack-tacks"! There I go with the jokes again). Recently I formed and appointed myself president of an organization called the Jackmen, a non-profit organization devoted to raising awareness of you, Hugh Jackman, in North America (with the exception of the Canadian province of Alberta. Fuck them). Please do not be alarmed by the name- membership in the organization remains open to both men and women. We are not exclusive (which is not to say that we let just anyone into our group- it's just that we are not a pack of whackos like a lot of the other Jackman-based organizations out there today and I want to be clear on that. We don't need another Paramus on our hands). My question: would you be willing to donate any of your personal items to our organization for our upcoming fundraising auction? As you can probably imagine, running a group like ours is not cheap (far from it). Just the Wolverine jackets alone (required at official functions, optional but recommended at non-official functions) cost upwards of $300 (Yes, they make cheaper ones but we refuse to insult you by wearing those. Sorry, we're not assholes). Being a Jackman-based group and all- we feel that Jackman-based items will undoubtedly be of greater interest than non-Jackman-based items at our auction, which is why I come to you, Hugh Jackman, with this matter. Please let me know what you think of all this when you get a chance. Literally any of your personal items will do because you are Hugh Jackman. However, please keep in mind that we already have a lot of the kind of stuff that you have thrown out with your garbage and/or left behind in any number of the places you have been. In the interest of brevity, I will sign off for now. However, please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions. Your Hugh-gest admirer, Dave Hill P.S. Sometimes I stare at your name for so long it no longer makes any sense. Does that ever happen to you? Probably not, because you are Hugh Jackman.
 
Aaron Belkin: Is Hazing a Form of Torture? Top
Here they go again. As reported by Huffington Post and other media outlets, we now have yet another scandal involving our security forces, this time involving guards at the U.S. Embassy Kabul who have engaged in extreme forms of violence. If you have the stomach for it, you can see photographs here According to the Project on Government Oversight, these episodes, which include simulated anal sex, are a form of "deviant hazing [that] has created a climate of fear and coercion, with those who declined to participate often ridiculed, humiliated, demoted, or even fired." The participants in Kabul were contractors, not service members. But in the wake of Tailhook, the rape scandal at the U.S. Air Force Academy, and a long-term pattern of violence among members of our armed forces, we should get a few things straight about what's going on. First, in no way do these incidents represent "bad apples" or isolated cases. As Youth Radio is about to report on the basis of an in-depth investigation, there are units in the U.S. military where such patterns of abuse are the norm, lasting for years at a time. In the story that Youth Radio will break, the Navy promoted the supervisor who oversaw the abuse even though it knew what had happened. One of my doctoral students just completed her dissertation on military training, a project for which she actually went through boot camp as a part of her research. I begged her not to go to boot camp to do her research because i believed she could get assaulted. Sure enough, every single woman in her training was sexually harassed, including one woman who was raped. Second, these cases are not hazing, they are torture. The Youth Radio investigation sex workers who our sailors beat to a pulp and female sailors handcuffed to a bed and forced to simulate lesbian sex while on video. By referring to torture as "hazing," or "homosocial behavior" we make the violence seem like it is OK, just boys being boys. In fact, the victims of such treatment often develop PTSD and have suicidal ideation. Third, the pattern of violence is not an accident, but reflects official policy including the "don't ask, don't tell" law which makes it almost impossible for gay victims to report abuse. And even though the military does have policies in place to deter violence against women, these policies often produce contradictory results. For example, I am aware of a rape case that was not reported because the base commander had announced a "zero-tolerance" policy for assault, which the troops took to mean (accurately according to people I interviewed) that he did not want to hear about an incidents. Today's news should be a reminder that war is a violent business, and the people who we train to conduct it often direct that violence at one another. Whether we're talking about private contractors or military service members, our collective national stereotypes about the purity of the uniform leave a lot unspoken.
 
Curt Schilling Considering Run For Ted Kennedy's Senate Seat (VIDEO) Top
Former Boston Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling is among the names being tossed around to fill Ted Kennedy's vacant sSnate seat. "I have been contacted," said Schilling in an interview on Boston's NECN. "I would have to make a decision pretty quickly." The 2001 World Series MVP did not rule out the option, but he insisted that he has "a lot on [his] plate." Schilling, a Republican who supported John McCain, views the available seat as an opportunity for the GOP in what was a Democratic stronghold. "I think for the first time in a long time, it will take the right candidate," he said. Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter! More on GOP
 
What Britney Spears Can Reveal About Alzheimer's Disease Top
Researchers at the Cleveland Clinic report that they may have found a way to identify those most at risk of developing the neurological disorder long before symptoms develop - simply by asking them whether they recognize celebrities such as Britney Spears and Johnny Carson. More on Health
 
Helene Pavlov: Eat Now, Pay Later. But Who Is Paying and for What? Police the Potato Chips! Top
A few weeks ago I was leisurely sitting on the beach with my husband and daughter. A family of 5 was sitting nearby. They organized their beach chairs, got out the kids' shovels and pails, arranged their umbrella and then the mom distributed a bag of chips to each family member. Not the small bags that you get when ordering a sandwich, but the big, full size family bags. Immediately, they each sat down and started chomping away. The Father, Mother and what I perceived to be an Aunt or close family friend and their two little girls, approximately 2 and 6 years old were all obese, not overweight, but morbidly obese. It took all my restraint not to tell the parents that they were setting a very unhealthy example and starting their children on a life of avoidable health consequences. Why, in a time when all we hear is news about the trouble with obesity, are these people NOT eating healthy? The issue was discussed in a recent article in The New York Times . The article reported that "parents are working longer, and takeout meals have become a default dinner. Gym classes have been cut. The real price of soda has fallen 33 percent over the last three decades. The price of fruit and vegetables has risen more than 40 percent." Our society promotes overeating and obesity and the low price of salty, fatty foods encourages eating unhealthy. As a physician, I see obese patients and as a radiologist, I am aware of the special issues an obese patient requires for an imaging examination. Larger patients are more difficult to position for their image; there are weight restrictions on x-ray, CT and MR tables limiting certain examinations that may be indicated. The image quality may be compromised during an interventional radiology procedure for the overweight patient and larger needles and advanced imaging may be required. These factors make an otherwise simple examination more difficult, longer and more costly. My concern is less with the adults who choose to eat like there is no tomorrow but with those that overeat and sit around devouring bags of chips both setting a bad example and actually training their youngsters that this behavior is normal and okay. These children may not recognize other eating options until long after poor eating habits are firmly established. A recent study in the Journal of Health Affairs reported that medical spending on obesity- related conditions is estimated to have reached $147 billion a year in 2008. The Times articles claimed that obese Americans spend about $1,429, 42% more on health care each year than the roughly $3,400 spent on normal-weight Americans. Better education and a mechanism for enforcement is needed. There is a sales tax on cigarettes and smokers pay higher life insurance premiums, liquor is taxed, luxury vehicles are taxed, all of things that are considered excessive cost consumers more money. Perhaps higher insurance premiums should be required for people who choose to be overweight to offset the high cost of healthcare. Maybe the government should consider subsidizing healthy food so unhealthy food could be more expensive than fruits and vegetables. Similar to the "going green" campaign, maybe we can further encourage the "going healthy" campaign and reinforce the health hazard of fats, salts and sugar along with the importance of portion control to our younger generation. "Food for Thought." No Calories. HHS.edu
 
Leslie Pratch, Ph.D.: Job Fit: Introduction to Stratified Systems Theory Top
"To fit" means to be the same size as something else, and size is about something that can be measured. Organizations talk a lot about job fit. Can we measure a human being, measure a job, and then say whether they are the same size? Let's look at what ought to have been two success stories. (1) Jim had performed well as a plant manager. He always met his quotas. Accidents in his plant were rare and customer satisfaction, high. When top management said to cut costs 10 percent, Jim did -- without harming quality, delivery, or safety. Senior management appreciated Jim and found the perfect way to show it. When his boss, the head of North American operations, retired, Jim was given his job. He now oversaw 12 plants in five states. Jim knew how to work hard and he knew he'd have the help of his team. But somehow running the whole division wasn't like running a factory. Policies that had worked at the plant just caused trouble when he applied them to the division. Furthermore, his team's help didn't seem to help. Plant managers kept feeding him information, bringing him problems, contradicting each other, and making him more confused than ever. What went wrong? Why couldn't Jim handle the job? (2) When the company's ownership changed hands, top management decided to cut fat -- and not a moment too soon. The company was practically paralyzed by too many layers of middle management. The promising lower-level managers who had been kept on were now given great projects -- opportunities they would have had to wait years for otherwise. But not all rose to the challenge. Some fumbled. Their superiors tried to help, but ended up having to walk their subordinates through much of the work. Why couldn't some of these promising young managers grab the ball that was thrown to them? Why was their bosses' help of no avail? To explain what went wrong in these cases, I'm going to introduce a set of ideas developed by social scientist Elliott Jaques. When I assess an executive, I utilize Jaques' theory to determine whether that individual has the cognitive capacity to perform the work of the role. Jaques spent 40 years investigating the nature of work and human capability. The result is his Stratified Systems Theory. He discovered that the level of responsibility in any organizational role -- whether a manager's or an individual contributor's -- can be objectively measured in terms of the target completion time of the longest task, project, or program assigned to that role. The more distant the target completion date of the longest task or program, the heavier the weight of responsibility is felt to be. Jaques found that tasks fall into discrete categories, each characterized by the maximum amount of time the person is expected to carry on without direct supervision (the task's time span) and the degree to which the task requires the person to process a variety of information and come to conclusions about it (the task's complexity). Measuring the Job: Time Span Organizational roles then fall into discrete levels, each defined by the longest time span and the highest task complexity required to carry out that role. Jaques calls these levels "strata." The time-span measure of a role corresponds to the length of the longest task or assignment, from point of inception to targeted completion date. This measure provides information pertaining to the level-of-work complexity for the role. For example, a supervisor whose principal job is to plan tomorrow's production assignments and next week's work schedule but who also has ongoing responsibility for uninterrupted production supplies for the month ahead has a responsibility time span of one month. A foreman who spends most of his time riding herd on this week's production quotas but who must also develop a program to deal with the labor requirements of next year's retooling has a time span of a year or a little more. The advertising vice president who stays late every night working on next week's layouts but who also has to begin making contingency plans for the expected launch of two new local advertising media campaigns three years hence has a time span of three years. Jacques also found that the boundaries between successive managerial layers occur at certain specific time-span increments, just as ice changes to water and water to steam at certain specific temperatures. In more than 100 studies in different organizations in different countries over 35 years Jacques consistently found such discontinuities. That everyone saw the boundaries in the same places suggests that they reflect some truths about human capability for work. Real managerial and hierarchical boundaries occur at time spans of three months, one year, two years, five years, 10 years, and 20 years. These natural discontinuities in our perception of the time span create hierarchical strata that workers in different companies, countries, and circumstances all seem to regard as genuine and acceptable. The existence of such boundaries has important implications in nearly every sphere of management. One of these is performance appraisal. Another is the capacity of managers to add value to the work of their subordinates. According to Jaques, effective value-adding managerial leadership of subordinates can only come from an individual one category higher in cognitive capacity, working one category higher in problem complexity. By contrast, wherever managers and subordinates are in the same layer -- separated only by differential compensation -- subordinates see the boss as too close, breathing down their necks, and they identify their "real" boss as the next manager at a genuinely higher level of cognitive and task complexity. Jaques discovered seven work strata, ranging from assembly line to corporate CEO. The time spans and task complexities for these strata progress at predictable intervals. These strata will be the subject of my next post.
 
Youth Radio -- Youth Media International: Fall Back, Chris Brown, Fall Back! Top
Originally published on Youthradio.org , the premier source for youth generated news throughout the globe. By: Brandon McFarland Chris Brown's first interview since he beat up Rihanna, will air this Wednesday night on Larry King Live. America is eager to hear from the R&B stars mouth exactly three things: "W! T! F!" Judging from a preview of the interview with the 20-year old Brown sandwiched between his mother Joyce Hawkins and lawyer Mark Geragos, it looks like he's not going to offer up any real explanation. We will get to hear exactly what type of emotional trauma from his childhood (which his mother should expound upon) led up to what his loved ones call "strange behavior". But, honestly, who cares about that? The real question at hand is: can he come back from this devastating blow to his "good boy" image and maintain a career as an entertainer? Pop culture history gives us some examples to look at here. In the midst of child pornography charges R. Kelly made " Tapped in the Closet ". A comical R&B opera series that became one of his most popular works since " I Believe I Can Fly ". The only difference is unlike Brown, Kells didn't plead guilty to his charge (even though many of us still believe he did it) and was pronounced innocent. The King of Pop, rest in peace, faced charges of molestation and kiddie-porn. Yet on a whim he could sell out an arena anywhere in the world because he is The King Of Pop . Well, he pleaded not guilty and won too. So. There is something to be said about the whole "not guilty" verdict that helps with public perception. Or does it? Rapper/Actor Tupac Shakur was a convicted sex offender who spent almost a year in prison. While incarcerated sales of his album " Me Against The World " flourished, making 2Pac the only artist ever to have an album at number one on the Billboard charts while serving a prison sentence. After he was released from prison he made some of his most celebrated and often remixed Death Row recordings . This is the reality Chris is going to have to face. He can woo the girls but he can't write hits like R. Kelly, He can dance his ass off but he doesn't have the adoration of a king (not even a prince). And, yes, he has some amount of a hard edge but his voice and music isn't as heart wrenchingly powerful as Tupac's was. This is not to say that he can never achieve some of those goals if he wants. But I'm not sure how loyal his primary fan base of teenyboppers will be after a scandal like this. I mean think about the media darling Rihanna is! She was groomed for pop icon status by Jay-Z himself while Brown has yet to have a #1 song on the pop charts. Quick history lesson again. Whitney Houston and Bobby Brown. Extremely famous female singer falls in love with R&B star, everything's good . Then the world sees their domestic issues. Mary J Blige and K-Ci is another example. Rihanna simply learned much faster than her predecessor Whitney Houston who after a dysfunctional relationship, drug abuse, and a reality TV stint, FINALLY calls it quits with Bobby Brown and is clawing her way back into the spotlight she once commanded. Rihanna's next record is going to be a woman scorn survivor pop sensation and it is bound to only increase her fan base. So Chris if you’re reading this, take my advise; FALL BACK! You already have lots of money (or should). Enjoy the rest of your youth. Go to school. Just don't keep making autotune drenched "I'm sorry" songs because unless she takes you back, you kind of look like a crazy ex-boyfriend. FALL BACK…a little more… right next to Lil Romeo and Sammie . There you go. Perfect. More Chris Brown/Rihanna posts at Youth Radio: Chris Brown Pleads Guilty New View On Chris Brown [Commentary] Teens Still Support Chris Brown More on CNN
 
Magda Abu-Fadil: Arabia Felix 103: Despite Crippling Travails, Yemen Draws Eager Tourists Top
Don't judge a book by its cover, particularly if its title includes words like "war," "terrorism," "separatists," "poverty," "illiteracy," and "kidnappings." Reports from Yemen point to separatists tugging at its south (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/magda-abufadil/arabia-felix-101-yemen-in_b_261457.html), Al Qaeda using it as a base of activities, northern Houthi rebels fighting a sixth war against government troops (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/magda-abufadil/arabia-felix-102-yemeni-g_b_266387.html ), a corruption-saddled economy, poverty, foreign refugees (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/magda-abufadil/yemen-hosts-african-refug_b_170732.html ), dwindling oil revenues, and a largely illiterate population. Yemen (mapsofworld.com) But the country is quite a draw for visitors, travails notwithstanding. All is not bleak in the land historically known as Arabia Felix, or "Al Yaman Al Saeed" (happy Yemen in Arabic), where thrill-seekers have ventured since time immemorial. Sana'a literally takes first-timers' breath away at an altitude of 2,200 meters (7,217 feet) above sea level. The capital's dry, dusty, polluted air - except for occasional flash floods - requires constant drinking to avoid dehydration. Gate to Old Sana'a (Abu-Fadil) A visit to Sana'a's old district through a once fortified gate is a throwback in time. Traditional mud brick buildings therein are no threat to taller structures (maximum 20 floors) a few blocks away. More dangerous are pedestrians competing with cyclists, occasional cars, wheelbarrows loaded with merchandise, animals and vendors in narrow labyrinthine alleys. Tourist negotiating janbiyya price (Abu-Fadil) Fabric shops, spices, perfumes, incense, jewelry, antiques, food (cooked, dry or questionable), traditional "janbiyyas" (curved daggers), handicrafts and the ubiquitous qat to which almost everyone is addicted (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/magda-abufadil/qat-increasingly-turns-on_b_164905.html), jostle for space in the old souk. According to a guide for novices, don't ask a man to show you his janbiyya [unsheathe it], because Yemeni chivalry permits it only to be drawn for use. Yemeni 'aqeeq (agate) is a must-buy for semi-precious stone lovers. Needless to say, bargaining is de rigeur and it's advisable to have a native alongside, even for Arabic-speaking tourists. Women's dress shop in old Sana'a (Abu-Fadil) In another part of the capital stands the majestic Al Saleh mosque, named after Yemeni President Ali Abdallah Saleh, with its six towering minarets and 44,000-worshipper capacity. The edifice inaugurated last fall houses a Koranic and Islamic Sciences college that can accommodate 600 students. President's mosque in Sana'a (Abu-Fadil) According to Yemen Today magazine, the mosque cost $60 million dollars -- an outrage to critics, given the country's reputation as the poorest in the Arab world. After a hard day's sightseeing, visitors flock to the popular Al Beik Shibani restaurant and bakery for a traditional meal of freshly baked flat, round "roushoush" bread, spicy dishes and charbroiled fish or meat. Fresh-baked "roushoush" bread at Al Beik Shibani restaurant (Rice) There's no booze and tablecloths are rolls of plastic wrap changed with every customer, but the food is good, the atmosphere friendly, and according to an Arab journalist: "If you haven't eaten at Shibani's, you haven't visited Yemen." A drive up unpaved roads to rocky hills overlooking Sana'a leads to Bait Baws, where even poorer Yemenis live, and where gays are said to rendezvous away from the preening eyes of their very conservative compatriots. The weathered structures carved over the centuries by Mother Nature include houses precariously perched atop gnarled boulders etched by sand, water and a ruthless sun. Bait Baws (Abu-Fadil) Students of El Greco's chiaroscuro would appreciate the landscape's colors against a backdrop of spiritual clouds, akin to the painter's representation of Toledo. In fact, amazing rock formations seem a staple of many parts of Yemen - a country noted for deserts, valleys, mountains and coastal areas. Unfortunately, Yemen's infrastructure is woefully underserviced, and roads to what could be exotic spots require sturdy four-wheel drives, indestructible tires and even sturdier staminas to withstand the rough rides. Amazing rock formations in Yemen (Abu-Fadil) Another seemingly endless bumpy but memorable trek meandering through valleys and riverbeds is the must-see castle and museum called Dar Al Hajar (Rock House) built on hard limestone jutting out of the ground. Dar El Hajar (Abu-Fadil) Situated a mere 10 kilometers (6 miles) from Sana'a, Dar Al Hajar is an architectural marvel reportedly erected in the 18th Century A.D. It served as a summer residence of past Yemeni rulers before being turned into a museum. Writing in the January/February 1965 issue of the oil company magazine Aramco World , G. Lankester Harding said Arabia Felix (Fortunate Arabia) was the name chosen by the Romans for the lands on the southern fringe of the Arabian Peninsula. "At the time there were many reasons for the Romans to believe that South Arabia was a blessed land," he said, adding that neither they, nor anyone else, knew enough about that mysterious and unexplored region to refute or dispute the legends about Arabia Felix. Those legends, going back many years prior to the rise of Roman power, held that it was out of the South Arabian kingdoms that the Queen of Sheba emerged in all her glory to confront King Solomon in all of his, Harding wrote. Danger-dead end sign at picnic and kidnapping site in Yemeni wilderness (Abu-Fadil) The legends also said inhabitants of Sheba had amassed vast treasures--stores of alabaster, spices, perfumes, ivory, tortoise shell, precious woods, pearls and silks--which they occasionally brought forth in great quantities to exchange for gold and silver, Harding noted. The inhospitable terrain, weather and occasional kidnapping of foreigners may keep the faint-hearted at bay, but itinerant archeologists, scholars and adventure seekers still flock to Arabia Felix. More on Yemen
 
Dan Hynes Enters Gubernatorial Race With 'Progressive' Tax Hike Plan For Wealthy Top
The Democratic primary race for governor got off to a fiery start today, as Illinois Comptroller Dan Hynes formally announced his candidacy with a proposal to change the state's income tax from a flat 3 percent to a "progressive" tax that would top out at 7.5 percent for millionaires.
 
Imaging Sheds Light On How Acupuncture Works Top
Traditional Chinese acupuncture, increasingly popular in the West for a variety of ills, eases pain by regulating key receptors in the brain, according to a new study. More on Wellness
 
Kip Kirkpatrick Drops Out Of State Treasurer's Race Top
Political newcomer Kip Kirkpatrick, the co-founder of a private health-care equity firm, pulled the plug on his nascent bid for the Democratic nomination for state treasurer today.
 
James Traficant, Ex-Congressman, Released From Prison: Should Someone Call The Fashion Police? (PHOTOS, POLL) Top
Former Ohio representative James A. Traficant Jr. was released from prison on Wednesday after serving seven years for bribery, racketeering and fraud. We hope Jimbo used that time to think about his misdoings, but also to think about his style crimes. Take a look at the evidence below and tell us if you think the fashion police need to be called. Follow HuffPost Style on Twitter and become a fan of HuffPost Style on Facebook ! More on Photo Galleries
 
John Petro: Does Bloomberg Really Want to Save Mass Transit? Top
In August, Mayor Bloomberg released his crowd-pleasing plan to "reform mass transit" as part of his third-term election push. The plan is full of good ideas that just about every New Yorker can support. Things like express train service to Coney Island, free cross-town buses, and countdown clocks in the subway would improve the commutes of millions of daily transit riders. The only problem? The Mayor doesn't control any of that. What the Mayor does control is the city's capital budget . The capital budget is huge--$60 billion dollars over ten years. It includes a wide range of different city capital needs, like school construction and rehabilitation, expansion and repair of the sewer and water systems, and housing preservation and development. It also includes money for mass transit, but not nearly enough. The Mayor's capital budget allocates a measly $60 million a year toward mass transit. This equals about one percent of the MTA's capital budget , which is much less than the city has allocated to the MTA in the past. Historically, the city's contributions equaled about ten percent of the MTA's capital budget. The MTA has said that it needs about $100 million every year from the city to support the transit system's program of rehabilitation and expansion. Why is the Mayor shortchanging the city's mass transit system? If the Mayor is keen to improve mass transit in New York City, he should begin by making a larger commitment from the city's huge capital budget. From 2005-2009 , the city was contributing much more to the MTA. But that money went towards the #7 line extension , a project that will be a huge boon for real estate developer Related Companies . The #7 line will be extended to the Hudson Yards on Manhattan's far west side, where Related Companies has plans to build office and condo towers. (This is the same Related Companies that refuses to pay living wages at the Kingsbridge Armory redevelopment in the Bronx). Meanwhile, communities in the outer boroughs continue to deal with rapid population increases and inadequate levels of service. I've argued before that Albany and the federal government need to step up to the plate to fund long-term investments in the city's mass transit system. For New York City to meet its full potential, we need to expand and improve our current levels of mass transit service. The federal government has prioritized highway and road projects over transit projects, and the Mayor, as well as the state's Congressional delegation, need to lobby Congress for a more significant contribution to New York City's mass transit system. After all, New York is the center of the largest metropolitan economy in the country and mass transit is the backbone of that economy. But the Mayor also needs to get his priorities in order. The city will be devoting $8.9 billion to roads and bridges over the next ten years, but less than one-tenth that amount to transit. In a city where most people don't drive, these priorities seem out of whack. We need a larger commitment from all levels of government for mass transit in New York City. There is only so much Mayor Bloomberg can do about Albany and DC. The city's capital budget, however, is under his direct control.
 
New Web Show Combines Geek Speak & Hot Chicks (VIDEO) Top
A new series hit the Web recently combining T&A and a little tech humor. "The IT Chicks" is written by "National Lampoon" alums and chronicles the work lives of two women trying to fend off sexual advances while keeping their company online. WATCH: For more, go here.
 
Georges Ugeux: Heathcare: why the world intensely watches the US debate...with amazement. Top
The rest of the world is watching the U.S. debate over healthcare reform and is flabbergasted at the country's opposition to the obvious answers. They think every one should have access to healthcare and cannot understand why anyone would oppose Obama's plan. With the worldwide perception that the opposition is staged by the industrial lobbies from pharmaceuticals companies and insurance companies, the world views the U.S debate like this: For decades, the largest economy in the world has tolerated the absence of healthcare for tens of millions of its population (currently 45.7 million), including 20 million children. The U.S. has not only tolerated, but even fundamentally accepted this failure that more socially responsible nations refuse to tolerate. Most countries around the world, including Japan, China, India and every country in Europe, believe that healthcare is a basic human right and that no one can be refused access to healthcare. . Most of these countries, summed the political will and public and private financing to establish nationwide programs. Even the poorest countries that cannot afford universal healthcare, see it as a priority. Furthermore, the U.S. spends three times the percentage of its GDP on healthcare, compared to other developed countries. This means that the U.S. manages to provide healthcare to 80% of its population at the most astronomic cost in the world. The U.S. allows its pharmaceutical industry to sell drugs to Americans at twice the price at which they are available across our border, in Canada When Americans began crossing the border to save on prescriptions, industry groups fought to close this loophole The United States prides itself in having the best healthcare in the world. It is the world's leader in advanced surgery and drug development. With the largest number of Nobel prizes in Medicine, U.S. practitioners perform surgeries and other medical feats that could not be performed elsewhere. As someone who has personally experienced the marvels of advanced surgery, this extraordinary level of excellence that is the strength of the U.S. medical system. However, recognition of the quality of U.S. care seems to be lost in the debate. Barack Obama, says conventional wisdom, is losing ground in the debate about healthcare. I think I echo the sentiments of many around the world when I say -- Congratulations Mr. President: without you, we would not even have the debate. You tackled this most difficult discussion in the midst of an already challenging environment and have committed to do things that your predecessors were unwilling or unable to do. History has demonstrated how difficult this discussion could be and how vested interests will do anything to silence this debate and keep America from doing the right thing for its citizens. Those who oppose your plan are becoming desperate and are waging a most despicable campaign. These campaigns are well executed and financed by deep pocketed lobbies to disrupt meaningful dialog. For those of us who watch this closely, we see healthcare opponents demonstrating the worst part of American democracy -- The power for industries to undermine the public good for their own profits with deep pocketed campaigns that do nothing but play on America's most irrational fears. "It should be an honest debate, not one dominated by willful misrepresentations and outright distortions, spread by the very folks who would benefit the most by keeping things exactly as they are" stated the President. I hope we will embrace the cause of caring about our entire population. And if this is to be liberal, I am proud to be a liberal. Writing this post while watching the intensely moving service for Senator Ted Kennedy gives a urgent call and spiritual dimension to assist the poorest in our society. After all, isn't it our moral duty? The world is watching intensely -- let's surprise it positively.
 
Brendan DeMelle: Is Controversial Coal Lobby Front Group ACCCE On The Verge of Implosion? Top
Duke Energy announced today that it has left the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCCE), the dirty coal front group lobbying against Congressional action on climate change.  Will other corporate members of the U.S. Climate Action Partnership soon follow in Duke’s footsteps by leaving ACCCE? According to a report in the National Journal today , Duke Energy "left the American Coalition for Clean Coal Energy on Tuesday over differences with "influential member companies who will not support passing climate change legislation in 2009 or 2010." Duke did the right thing. The company realized that its membership in ACCCE did not square with its role with the U.S. Climate Action Partnership (USCAP) , a coalition of industry and environmental groups working together to support federal action on climate change.  Duke also recently quit the National Association of Manufacturers in part because of that group’s work opposing climate legislation. When will all the other companies belonging to USCAP - which supports (and crafted the basis for) the Waxman-Markey climate and energy legislation passed by the House in June - but who are also members of ACCCE, the American Petroleum Institute and/or the National Association of Manufacturers - which have all lobbied against climate action - finally realize the disconnect between these two positions? The National Journal sums up some of the contradictory memberships: General Electric, Alstom Power and Caterpillar are members of both the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity and the U.S. Climate Action Partnership. The former is a pro-coal group that opposed the recent House energy legislation, and the latter is an industry-environmentalist coalition whose recommendations provided much of the basis for the that bill, which passed the House by a vote of 219-212 in June. On a similar note, ConocoPhillips, Siemens and BP America are members of both the American Petroleum Institute (which opposed the bill) and USCAP. Now that Duke Energy has taken a stand against ACCCE's failed tactics, this chink in the armor might lead ACCCE down the same road as the Global Climate Coalition , a climate change denier group that Duke also belonged to back in the 1990s. The Global Climate Coalition imploded in the late 1990s after similar disagreements between its member companies about climate change science.  BP was the first to quit the GCC , citing the fact that “the link between greenhouse gases and climate change is conclusively proven,” and it no longer made sense to belong to a group which denied the science.  American Electric Power, Dow, Dupont, Royal Dutch Shell, Ford, Daimler Chrysler, Southern Company, Texaco and General Motors all left soon after, and the Global Climate Coalition closed shop in 2002. It seems likely the same could happen with ACCCE, and not soon enough.  New industry front groups like ACCCE pop up periodically, using the same old, tired tactics recycled by polluting industries ( which they learned from Big Tobacco ) to fight against public health and environmental protections.  But these front groups almost always implode under the weight of their own lies and extremism. ACCCE appears to be following this pattern, embroiled in controversy over forged letters sent to Congress by one of ACCCE’s public relations subcontractors, Bonner & Associates . Bravo to Duke Energy for taking a stand and abandoning ACCCE’s sinking ship. Who's next? Here is a corporate membership list for the U.S. Climate Action Partnership (with ACCCE / API / NAM BoD membership status): AES Alcoa Alstom Power (ACCCE member) Boston Scientific BP America (API member) Caterpillar (ACCCE member, NAM member/ sits on Board of Directors) Chrysler (NAM member/ sits on Board of Directors) ConocoPhillips (API member, NAM member/ sits on Board of Directors) Dow (API member, NAM member/ sits on Board of Directors) Duke Energy DuPont Exelon Ford (NAM member/ sits on Board of Directors) FPL Group General Electric (ACCCE member, API member, NAM member/Board of Directors) General Motors John Deere Johnson & Johnson NRG Energy PepsiCo PG&E PNM Resources Rio Tinto Shell (API member) Siemens (API member)
 
Ritter Plans To Cut Funding For DUI Enforcement Top
Gov. Bill Ritter, struggling to close a budget gap estimated at $318 million, plans to divert more than $1.3 million intended to fight drunken driving to help fill the shortfall. The money, raised by a surcharge imposed on everyone convicted of an alcohol-related traffic offense in Colorado, has been used to pay overtime for cops working the "Heat Is On" crackdowns on long holiday weekends.
 
ABC: Obama To Address Joint Session Of Congress September 9 Top
President Obama will address a joint session of Congress on Sept 9. More on Health Care
 
Sean Lennon And Nude Model Recreate John And Yoko (NSFW PHOTO) Top
Sean Lennon and a naked Kemp Muhl (a model and his girlfriend) have recreated the iconic Rolling Stone cover of Lennon's parents, Yoko Ono and John Lennon, taken by Annie Leibovitz. The below pic, snapped by Terry Richardson, was taken for the fall issue of Purple magazine. Sean stays clothed, in the Yoko role, while Muhl is nude and curled up against his side. Unlike John Lennon, she even shows some nipple. PHOTO: Get HuffPost Entertainment On Facebook and Twitter!
 
David Dayen: George Steph Offers "How To Lose The Presidency In Four Years" Top
Here's George Steph on how to properly punch hippies and lose the base: Here are the five key sets of questions (the Obama staffers) have to confront, both in the Roosevelt Room and in their consultations with Congress: 1. What is "death with dignity" for the public option? Is it better for the president to sacrifice it himself? Or convince Democratic leaders behind closed doors to come to him? Some will argue for taking the public option issue to the floor, passing it through the House and sacrificing it in conference -- but once you've gone that far, it may be impossible for House Democrats to back down. So, giving it up on the front end in some fashion is likely the preferred option. 2. How do you get the price tag down, likely to about $700 billion? At that cost the most unpopular tax increases will not be necessary. And moderates in both the House and Senate have already signaled that they can live with it at that level. Which leads to question 3: 3. Can you still make a convincing case that the country is on a path to universal coverage? What mix of phase-ins and triggers are necessary to make that case? I can't take it. (If you're interested, 4 asks if any Republican votes other than Olympia Snowe can be gathered - even the White House knows that answer is no - and 5 queries how to do the speech, possibly with a joint session to Congress.) Stephanopoulos is very plugged in, and so this could very well be the discussion at the White House. Who apparently have yet to figure out that forcing millions of Americans into buying crappy insurance that can only come from private industry will be so massively unpopular that, if Republicans don't repeal it , Democrats will be forced to themselves. That would be the quickest and easiest way possible to squander the majority, which at times I think is the Washington Democratic establishment's metier. But number two on Steph's list is arguably scarier. And with all of the talk of the public option, this is something that doesn't get discussed as much in liberal circles, though it's quite important. Practically all of the money spent in this health care bill goes to two things - expanding Medicaid and subsidies for individuals to buy insurance. That's it. And it's incredibly important. You're talking about the vast majority of the 47 million insured, people who cannot afford health insurance, being able to get coverage for the first time. The coverage that would be subsidized by the government would be subject to strict regulations - insurers would have to take all comers, couldn't deny a claim after the fact, would have to offer a similar price to everyone in a community regardless of medical history, and would have to offer a baseline of care. In addition, they would have to use a certain percentage of their premium revenue on actual health care. This would create a workable individual market that would at least move us toward the goal of universal coverage, albeit in a jury-rigged fashion. Reducing the cost of the bill either keeps more people off Medicaid or reduces the subsidies, making forced insurance under an individual mandate unaffordable. You would have to pull back from subsidies at 400% of the federal poverty level to something like 200%, and probably not expand Medicaid at all (the House bills call for expansion to 133% FPL, the Senate HELP bill ups it to 150%). There's this notion that bloggers and progressive groups don't care about the poor , but we're not writing the bill, and kowtowing to the lunatic moderates who put a price tag above morality except when talking about war. I have understood from the start that the coverage expansion elements of the bill were crucially important, and the same thinking that artificially lowered the stimulus cost to the detriment of state budgets and public investment would doom the coverage expansion elements. Furthermore, insurance companies have sought to reduce the percentage of premiums they would have to spend on health care, and how much of that cost they would push off to customers (Insurers would have to pick up at least 76% of care in the House bills, but 65% in the Senate Finance draft, according to reports). While the public option remains crucial, these coverage expansion policies and insurance regulation also must be demanded as the minimum requirement for liberal support of the bill. After all that, after assuring us that the wise course would be to ditch a public insurance option that would only exist to cut costs, and reducing the coverage expansion funds and subsequently putting the burden of universal coverage on the backs of poor people, Stephanopoulos asks, basically, "How can we lie about this to the public?" I find it hard to believe that the White House would be so stupid as to think that making the least popular choices to the majority of Americans making under $60,000/year would be just the ticket to increase the President's popularity.
 
Natalie Portman Buys A 'Rustic Castle-Like' Hollywood Estate (PHOTO) Top
Natalie Portman bought a charming Hollywood estate, In Touch Weekly reports. Just last fall she sold her West Village NY apartment . From In Touch: There is nothing better than lying on your sofa and doing absolutely nothing," says Natalie Portman, who just purchased this "rustic castle-like" historic estate in an exclusive, secluded enclave of LA. "Natalie wanted a property that had character and integrity, something that was special," says Richard Stanley, a Coldwell Banker real estate agent in LA who specializes in architectural and historic properties. "This house is perfect for her," he says of the gorgeous 1930s-era home that the actress paid more than $3 million for. "It's a beautiful home and truly is something special. It's the trophy home of the neighborhood." The restored house is located in the same neighborhood where Hollywood legends like Cecil B. DeMille, W.C. Fields, Charlie Chaplin and Carole Lombard once lived -- and where numerous Hollywood celebs now live today. But it's not the Hollywood label that convinced Natalie that this was the perfect home for her. It has four bedrooms and a private courtyard. It also includes two guest houses, perfect for visiting friends from back East, as well as her parents -- her father, Avner, a fertility doctor, and her mother (and former agent), Shelley, to whom she credits much of her success. "If my career stops, if I do badly in a role or if one of my movies is a total failure, I know I'll still have my parents. It helps me not to be afraid and to take risks," Natalie says. For more exclusive photos of Natalie's new home, check out this week's issue of In Touch, on newsstands now! Get HuffPost Entertainment On Facebook and Twitter! More on Real Estate
 
Eva Mendes' Shiny Black Headband: Love It Or Leave It? (PHOTOS, POLL) Top
It may not be as big of a statement as animal ears , but Eva Mendes's shiny, black headband competed for the spotlight with her red leopard dress at the Venice Film Festival on Wednesday. PHOTOS: Get HuffPost Entertainment On Facebook and Twitter!
 
Gabriel Rotello: Saving Mount Wilson Top
A couple of years ago I was hired to write a screenplay about Edwin Hubble and his assistant Milton Humanson, who between them revolutionized humankind's view of the universe. Working from the Mt Wilson observatory that looms in the distance over Los Angeles, they discovered that the blurry patches of light called nebulae were not mere gas clouds within the Milky Way, as long supposed, but galaxies in their own right. That discovery vastly increased the size of the known universe, but Hubble and Humason didn't stop there. They went on to discover that these new-found galaxies were moving away from each other, and that the further away they were, the faster they were moving. That surprise shocked the world and smashed Einstein's 'great mistake,' the idea of a steady-state universe. Hubble and Humason proved instead that the universe was expanding, giving rise to the Big Bang theory that now dominates astronomy. After I took the screenplay job I began driving up to Mt Wilson to soak up the atmosphere. And I fell in love. The observatory complex was virtually unchanged since Hubble and Humason's time, a shady mountaintop grove affording sweeping views of southern California, dominated by towering coulter pines and interspersed with various observatory buildings that once represented the peak of human innovation. Long eclipsed by newer, bigger instruments elsewhere, they were still working, still quietly gathering information on the great unknown around us. Since astronomers sleep by day, there was rarely anyone around except for the stray hiker or tourist. In a part of California where massive development has decimated the past, Mt. Wilson is the past. I could hold up photographs of Hubble, Humason and Einstein in a particular spot, then gaze at that spot and nothing had changed at all. Perhaps the trees were a bit taller, a legacy of the fact that Mt Wilson had never burned. But all that was threatened this week. The massive wildfire looming over Los Angeles finally inched its way up to Mt Wilson, and for a while yesterday the mountain was so obscured by smoke that news helicopters could not even see the complex. Many feared the worst. But as I watched a live feed from the news helicopters, something miraculous happened. The smoke over the mountain suddenly cleared and an enormous plane, a Martin Mars Flying Boat, swooped down and let loose 7,500 gallons of flame-retardant gel. The Martin Mars is itself a relic of the past, a WWII-era behemoth whose oversized construction and sturdiness echoes the ambitions of the men who built Mt Wilson. It was as though the past were reaching out to save the past. But of course there were people flying that plane, risking their lives. And it turned out they were not alone. Although firefighters had been pulled from the mountain on Monday, they had since returned. As the flames approached there were 150 people up there, setting backfires, clearing brush and repairing the pumps on the observatory's 750,000 gallon water tanks. Talk about risky business. Mt Wilson stands at the very peak of the San Gabriels, surrounded by sheer cliffs, a place with no exits. The bravery of people who would place themselves up there boggles the mind. As it stands today, that bravery paid off. LA County Deputy Fire Chief Jim Powers is confident Mt Wilson will be saved, and told observatory director Hal McAlister that saving the complex is his highest priority and that the firefighters are "not going anywhere. They are very hard working and talented people who will get the job done." Southern California is generally not kind to its past. We tear down our landmarks with abandon, pave paradise, obliterate history. So its heartening to see that in the case of Mt Wilson, people were willing to put their lives on the line to save this bucolic piece of living history, where folks like Hubble and Humason brought the fires of the universe down to earth.
 
Jonathan Horowitz: Bagram Prison Threatens Success in Afghanistan Top
The U.S. military finally seems to have learned that dropping bombs on civilians isn't the way to win the hearts and minds of Afghans. But neither is grabbing people out of their houses and throwing them in jail indefinitely with no rights. For seven years, U.S. detention policy has undermined our military and political interests in Afghanistan, and it continues to do so to this day. The U.S. is currently in the process of rolling out a new counterinsurgency strategy in Afghanistan. It prioritizes protecting civilians and winning back the support of Afghans confronted with a resurgent Taliban. General Stanley McChrystal's July tactical directive describes the war in Afghanistan as "different from conventional combat" and instructs soldiers to "avoid the trap of winning tactical victories -- but suffering strategic defeats-by causing civilian casualties or excessive damage and thus alienating the people." But many Afghans rank U.S. detention policy as their biggest complaint against foreign forces -- second only to civilian casualties. President Karzai and other leading candidates in the recent election blasted U.S. detention policy during their campaigns. And the Taliban uses the Bagram detention center -- the U.S.'s central prison -- as a rallying cry to recruit Afghans. Countless Afghans welcomed American soldiers with open arms in 2001. Many, especially ethnic Pashtuns, now see the U.S. soldier as a boogie man. "We have but one fear of Allah, but we are also scared of the U.S. When they pass through we think they will grab us and take us away," one man told me. Another man from the violent Kurangal Valley explained, "When I'm home I'm afraid they will come and arrest me. As soon as I see Americans I have fear and run away... But if I run they will think I'm doing something wrong and shoot me." These are the people the U.S. is supposed to be courting. Bagram, which human rights and civil liberties groups have called President Obama's Guantanamo Bay, has largely moved past its darkest days of torture -- although physical abuse upon capture remains a serious problem. The growing anger of Afghans comes largely from people being detained and then trapped in an arbitrary, unfair system that fails to accurately distinguish between ordinary people and dangerous enemies. Detainees aren't told why they are held, and lack access to a lawyer. A U.S. District Court judge in April called the Bagram detention regime "less sophisticated and more error-prone" than Guantanamo. In a series of interviews, Afghans have frequently described how U.S. forces raid family compounds in the middle of the night, blast down doors, and destroy property. Young and old men are hooded and handcuffed, and flown off in helicopters. A former detainee told me, "Some of my children still wake up at night shouting and screaming because of the raid." Another man mentioned that his brother was captured in March and "it was about two months after his detainment that the ICRC finally informed us that he was at Bagram. We didn't know where he was before this." The Obama administration is becoming more aware of these problems. In June, U.S. Major General Douglas M. Stone traveled to Afghanistan to review U.S. detention policy. While his report is not yet public, among the snippets that have made it into the media is his recommendation to release 400 of 600 detainees and significantly reduce the U.S.'s detention role over the next 12 to 18 months. Stone seems to understand the volatile relationship between McChrystal's new war strategy and U.S. detention policy. He also knows how bungled U.S. detention policy has been to date, telling National Public Radio, "Now you've got a bunch of moderates who really shouldn't be in [detention] in the first place. And I can hold them forever but eventually they're going to say, 'Why are you holding me? What's the fairness in this?' And eventually they'll say something about America we don't want to hear. They'll say, 'You're not here to better the population. You're here to conquer us and you're taking me hostage.'" Some Afghans already think this way. One month before Stone's NPR interview, I spoke with a former Bagram detainee who said: "I think the Americans have come to occupy our country and to take our land from us. This isn't what I thought about Americans seven years ago. I thought the U.S. had come to build our country.... Why are people being arrested for no reason? This is why my opinions have changed about the Americans." The Stone report may be a breath of fresh air. But with the report and other planned reforms still under wraps, it remains to be seen if all the right and necessary recommendations to generate change are being made. More importantly, all eyes will be on the administration and Congress to see how they respond. More on Afghanistan
 
Lee C. Bollinger: New York: Media Capital 2.0 Top
There is a troubling virus that is spreading among New York's business and intellectual communities. It is the assumption that the virtual world of the internet can assume the role that a great city like New York has always filled in attracting ingenious people who generate new ideas and new businesses. The truth is, this is a viral myth. Information technology has certainly changed a lot about our society and our economy. But most creative people want to live and work together in a real community of other interesting people. That's the great strength of university campuses and of cities themselves. The question is whether New York City can use its historic position as an innovative leader to take advantage of new technology and provide the next generation with the long-term jobs and entrepreneurial opportunities they need. New York City area colleges and universities are central to achieving that goal. The area's institutions of higher learning generate 65,000 jobs and have an estimated economic impact of $18.5 billion each year. That's why it was a wise decision to include Columbia and several other universities on Mayor Bloomberg's multi-sector MediaNYC 2020 task force, the goal of which is to create roughly 8,000 media-sector jobs while strengthening New York's position as the media capital of the world. Currently, the city's media industry employs more than 300,000 people and accounts for $30 billion in annual revenue. But, like Wall Street, many of our traditional media companies are shedding jobs while the new media and technology sector - which includes global mobile entertainment, internet gaming, social networking and user-generated content - is growing ... unfortunately, mostly outside of New York City. The Mayor's MediaNYC 2020 initiative aims to address that gap in part by increasing collaboration between the media industry and New York City's universities to foster innovation and entrepreneurship. As part of this initiative, the city plans to develop the NYC Media Lab, modeled after highly successful media labs at Stanford and MIT. The Lab will serve as an exchange center connecting companies looking to advance new media technologies with institutions, like Columbia, that have the research capabilities to bring them to life. In fact, universities like Columbia have long played a central role in nurturing some of the world's most influential writers, artists, filmmakers, and publishers who were drawn to the media capital of the world. What is less well known about Columbia -- and our local peer institutions -- is the extent to which our scientists, engineers, and biomedical researchers have produced essential research and breakthrough discoveries. These discoveries are the source of entrepreneurial ideas and commercial technologies, leading to local investment, jobs, and taxes. New York City's academic research centers - Columbia, NYU, Rockefeller, Mt. Sinai, Sloan Kettering, Einstein, and Cornell - receive nearly $2 billion in combined research funding and generate 650 inventions, 200 new licenses and options, 20 new start-up companies and over $500 million in licensing revenue annually. Technology from Columbia alone is responsible for an average of 10 to 12 new companies each year. Our research breakthroughs have led to the creation of over 100 new companies to-date, many of which got their start right here in the City. And the City's leadership is not just in the life sciences. While Silicon Valley may be more well known for leveraging the enormous research capacities of its major universities into new local industries, the fact is that many great ideas have been developed right here. For example, Columbia researchers have had a hand in media and communications breakthroughs, including FM radio, lasers, VOIP, compression algorithms behind DVDs and HDTV, X-ray photography, and a new laser-based method that makes possible, among other things, sharper display screens found in many high-end smart phones. What the Mayor's initiative can do is help make sure that more of the entrepreneurial businesses that rely on such local breakthroughs not only start in New York City, but also stay and grow here. New York City remains a global center for knowledge and culture, media and communications precisely because creative people thrive by living and working together in a vibrant city. Our research universities continue to attract great minds and generate new intellectual capital by bringing together scholars and practitioners in diverse fields - from journalism and business to engineering and computer science. With that kind of talent, New York can be a place where new technology doesn't threaten our leadership, but instead provides yet another opportunity for this city to chart its own future. More on Financial Crisis
 
Fistfight Breaks Out Over Healthcare Reform At Nelson Event Top
A 65-year-old man rallying in favor of healthcare reform was knocked to the ground by a man who disagreed with the call for a government-run health plan outside of a Greater Miami Chamber of Commerce meeting headlined by Sen. Bill Nelson. More on Health Care
 
Patricia Handschiegel: The New Power Girls: Women Entrepreneurs On How To Deliver Your Company's Message, Plus Enter to Win Contest Top
It's just a little after 10am on a weekday morning when I join a top TV executive for a coffee meeting under the looming backdrop of the Sony studios in Culver City, CA. We grab two cups from the busy counter where other executives mull about and talk quietly with friends. I duck behind one of the small tables on the cramped outdoor patio. We find a spot in the back corner of the patio and both pitch in clear dishes before taking a seat. As we get settled, I give an update on my latest start-up, 9, which creates transmedia franchise projects, several of which have received significant industry attention. While entertainment executives are familiar with the transmedia concept, the mass business audience is only just starting to talk about it. "It was a bit of a challenge to explain what we did," I say as I sip an Americano. "But now more people are starting to hear about transmedia, so it's getting easier." It's a scenario I've been in before. In 2005, it took great pains to explain "community" to reporters when talking about my then-startup, Stylediary. It wasn't until MySpace coined the term "social networking" that this became easier. Today, as platforms to deliver your company's message expand, it's even more important to have a tight focus on what you want to say, to who and where. "Messages should be meaningful, provide value to the end user, and they should always be tailored and targeted," said fellow Power Girl Deirdre Breakenridge, co-author of < em> Putting the Public Back in Public Relations , President of PFW Marketwyse and blogger at PR 2.0 Strategies . Deirdre's one of the top consultants in how to take a message out in today's fragmented market. "Through social media, we have the opportunity to tell a customized story to many different influencers and stakeholders, including our customers." Power Girls get it. Today's women entrepreneurs and executives are mixing old school messaging strategies with new ways to deliver it. Most of all, they see the value in every aspect. "When I take on the prescribed, but often postponed tasks of business definition," added Anne Giles Clelland, founder of Handshake Media . "I discover that I understand my own company's message more deeply. That in turn, deepens my ability to deliver that message. See what Meghan and I have to say about this week's topic here Enter to win a copy of Putting the Public Back in Public Relations here
 
Alex The Parrot: The Smartest Parrot Ever? (VIDEO) Top
Here at HuffPost Green, we've seen some pretty amazing videos of brilliant animals, like crows that can use tools and a llama that can pick out colors . However, this video of Alex The Parrot definitely takes the cake. Alex The Parrot gained international recognition for his use of language and emotional capabilities: his trainer reported that he had the intelligence level of a 5 year-old human. Alex died suddenly and unexpectedly almost two years ago, on September 6th 2007. Since we are approaching the 2 year anniversary of his death, we thought we'd honor Alex's tremendous achievements by posting this amazing video of him. In this video, he can understand questions that it hasn't been trained to answer, including being able to count and tell the difference between colors, shapes and sizes. You have to watch this. Get HuffPost Green On Facebook and Twitter! More on Video
 
Gadi Ben-Yehuda: The Polity of G21 and Why Gov 2.0 Matters Top
In last week's post, I talked about the technology of G21 . This week, I want to talk about the other side of the government-citizen relationship -- the citizens. What do they want from government? And how can government meet these needs? Also: what happens when governments do not fulfill (or even understand) their new responsibilities? (Answer: calamity; I'll get to that shortly.) And finally, what are the ultimate goals of G21/Gov 2.0? Information/power moves from government to citizenry The technology to record, store, transmit, and present data decentralized many of the powers that were the sole province of governments in previous ages. This led to two seemingly contradictory developments. First, that societies would become ever more physically and technologically complex and intertwined, and so require further governmental regulation. Second, that extra- and non-governmental organizations would attain enough power to supplant -- or disrupt -- governmental activities. I'll fully examine negative aspects of the technology in other posts. Suffice it to say that many of the spectacular failures of the Bush Administration -- notably, its inability to imagine and thus defend against the attacks of 9/11, and its inadequate response to Hurricane Katrina -- can be read as a government stuck in a 20th-century mindset trying to cope with a 21st-century polity. In the case of 9/11, because the Administration was fixated on state-actors (Iraq) rather than non-state actors (Al Qaeda), the Bush Administration downplayed Al Qaeda and played up Iraq. In the case of Katrina, because the Administration did not realize the complexity of disaster response required to save an entire city and its population, New Orleans has yet to be made whole, even to this day. Still, I would contend that far more people use information and power for good than for ill. Likewise, it is easier for governments to foster good behavior than to block bad behavior. The US polity increasingly realizes the power of data and finds new ways to manipulate and present it. The explosion of mash-ups that rely on Google Maps, the financial tracking and analysis tools available to citizen investors, and the growing use of open-source software all point to a polity at home with technology and versed in its use. Data Utilization: Self-Reinforcing Cycle Moreover, the proliferation of citizen-created software that relies on government data (cf. Apps for Democracy ) points to a polity that utilizes data, incorporating information into their daily practices, tying themselves to their government (who provides the data) and to their fellow citizens (who help them understand data and with whom they now occupy the same information-space). The fundamentals of G21 become self-reinforcing. Civil life is complex and is most easily navigated and understood through careful inclusion of data analysis tools (GPS devices to help us drive from one city to another, or travel web sites to help us find the best deals on airline travel). By simplifying our daily lives, data-analysis tools help us make way for yet more complexity, which makes the tools indispensable -- it is no longer a luxury, for example, to have a cell phone, but a near-necessity; who makes plans far in advance? We now make vague plans to meet and narrow down the time and place close to the event. Further, and more ominously, people expect to be able to contact anyone at any time and they expect a prompt response. Even voice mail is proving too time-consuming as many prefer to spend 15 seconds composing an SMS rather than a minute and fifteen seconds leaving a message. The lives of professionals in every field are now so complex that they are functionally unmanageable without the aid of advanced data technologies. Citizen-Government Relationship The citizen-government relationship is different now than in previous ages, and its fundamentals get only stronger as they express themselves. The government, as primary recorder of and custodian of data, has more power than ever to monitor its citizens and shape their understanding of the world (citizen's power over their government is also a part of G21, and I'll discuss that in a future post). Only its citizens' ability to access the full range of government data -- including the index of the data itself -- prevents the government from veering into repression or manipulation of the governed. Again, the failures of the Bush Administration can be seen as manifestations of its commitment to 20th century practices in the 21st. In its borderline-pathological secrecy, the administration sought to keep as much of its activities from the public as it could. Yet, does anyone doubt that the full record of that Administration's activities will be known -- likely before most of the principals are dead? Successful governments -- federal, state, municipal -- will rely on their citizens to manipulate, analyze, and share data even as citizens rely on their government to record, store, and transmit that data G21 Methods and Goals A movement is defined by two things: its goals and its methods. I have already outlined the methods: capture and store data, and craft a regulatory framework favorable to all citizens' acquiring access (and, where necessary, subsidize or create both the infrastructure and the superstructure). But what are the goals? I believe there is one direct goal which will help achieve three complimentary ends. The achievable goal of G21 policies and practices is to shift information (and thus power) from governments, corporations, and groups, to individuals. That's it. Transparency, accountability, efficiency, effectiveness, innovation -- they all serve the single goal of shifting information and power away from centralized government, away from moneyed corporations and well-connected organizations, and to the American people. The ends, in increasing levels of importance are: 1. spurring innovations in private sector; 2. enabling America to regain and retain economic, cultural, technological preeminence; 3. helping Americans realize the renewing promise of individual liberty. That's a lot to place on a new generation of government workers, but I believe that has been the ultimate goal of the American government since it took shape and through its two centuries' evolution. It's just our turn to make sure our democracy keeps pace with our technology.
 
Waylon Lewis: Is Larry David Right? Can Dogs be "Racist"? This is a Job for Cesar Millan Top
While my best friend "Redford" is a happy-go-lucky, super-social, tail-wagging, progressive-minded, equal-opportunity pooch, he's deathly afraid of security guards and has taken an unexpected nip or two at the outstretched, friendly hands of homeless people. And he almost always growls at them. How does he even know they're "bums," who are generally just nice gents who want to pet him? And why doesn't he like them? It's embarrassing, and, if he were ever to bite one, dangerous. Then, there's the common urban myth -- or truth? -- about dogs and African-Americans. Some say that dogs can't see darker faces as well, and so act nervous or hostile . In any case, search "racist dog" on YouTube, as I just did, so as to find the Curb Your Enthusiasm episode below that my friend Lindsey and I watched last night (and that sparked the posting of this question), and you'll find hundreds of videos. So something's going on here. My question is, what ? And how do we teach our confused furry pals that security guards, homeless gentlemen or African-Americans aren't anything to be afraid of? This is a (strange) job for Cesar Millan , my idol. Bonus: Cesar Millan, in action.
 
Peter Yarrow: The Role of Song in Advancing Health Care Reform Top
A physician-activist, Dr. Rick Lippin, knowing my deeply held belief that songs that touch peoples' hearts can bring them together to advance causes such as social justice and societal equity, posed a question to me about which songs might appropriately be applied to advance the health care reform movement in America. Dr. Lippin, a leader of national, significant, dialogue correctly cited "We Shall Overcome " as the signature song of the Civil Rights Movement. Peter, Paul & Mary and many others sang this song on behalf of that historic effort during the 1960s, a movement that culminated in landmark legislation and a sea change in what Americans came to realize might be accomplished through grassroots activism which, in those days, was inevitably accompanied by song. Here was my response to Dr. Lippin just a few days ago. Dear Rick, First, congratulations on leading the most important kind of discussion that one can have in a democracy, one that we have seen falter in recent years, only to be resurrected by the "miracle" of the last presidential election. It was proved, then, that the hearts of Americans have, on balance, lost neither their essential decency nor their ability to think. ("On balance" is the active qualifier here.) The question you pose as to what songs we might sing at this point as we address the reform of medical care in our country, is an important one. In my opinion, corresponding to your own, we are at a point at which the arc of history might be bent -- but only if we do not falter now and if we seize this most propitious moment. To my mind, the most important focus that we, those of long determination and commitment to a just and equitable society, need to maintain in song and in spirit, is an observance of our gratitude for what is good and is so exciting that is re-emerging in our country. Pete Seeger's choice of song in the context of President Obama's inauguration, "This Land Is Your Land", was exactly right, in my opinion. Equally so, was the choice of the songs that spontaneously arose from the throats of hundreds of congressional staff people who were honoring the passing of a great, great, American, Senator Ted Kennedy, a champion of all that is decent and good in our country and society. Songs from the mouths and hearts of the long "loyal opposition" such as "My Country Tis of Thee" and "America the Beautiful" might resonate most powerfully now, in these times. They proclaim us to be patriots, as indeed we are, we who believe that patriotism is embodied in the ceaseless asking of questions and engaging in the dialogue of ideas and differing perspectives, both of which are essential to the successful functioning of a democracy. These songs of gratitude to our country and democracy proclaim us to be joyous our nation's choices support the common good, as opposed to the "good" of the haves over the good of the powerless and those in need. Conversely, singing these songs affirms our commitment to justice and equity, and to our belief that it is our patriotic duty to challenge the policies of our country and rightness of our national path when they do not reflect justice, fairness and equity. In song and in our hearts, we can now celebrate a time which promises at least the beginning of our country's capacity to engage in self-reflection upon, not only the things of which of we can be proud, but upon what we need to view as our long-unexamined failures to ourselves and our promise to guarantee "liberty and justice for all" and also peoples of other lands with whom we engage, in friendship or, alas, with hostilities. Therefore, this is the time to sing songs together that affirm our gratitude for what has recently occurred in our country with the election of a person of color to the presidency, one who in former times might well have been the target of segregationist fury, or even a lynch mob, rather than the leader of our nation. In song and in spirit, in these times, we who hold the above perspective need to identify ourselves to each other and to others with whom we may not agree, as the citizens of America that are carrying the banner of faithfulness to the spirit of our nation that is once again, on balance, making us proud. Let us sing together so that we can begin to heal our nation's bruised heart by choosing a course that affirms the dignities and rights of all our citizens to enjoy the basic human right of affordable, good, medical treatment, regardless of their good fortune to have or, conversely, to not have, the means to pay for it. When we are sick we are most vulnerable and, in truth, a nation's decency is most truthfully revealed in the ways it treats its most vulnerable and needy. We are the only nation that fought in the second World War (WWII) that does not yet have universal health care (except for the elderly through Medicare). Now is the time for America to join with other nations in this humane and just perspective, not only for our good citizens, but also to show the world that we are not so mean-spirited as to withhold treatment from those who cannot afford it. Through Medicare we who are older get the care we need, no matter what. Should we not extend this fundamental right to all? To children, to the poor, and to all who need it? Let us sing "This Land" and other such songs that express our gratitude for our country, not to confront or protest the absence of an equitable health care system, rather to affirm our commitment to allowing all Americans the right of affordable medical care. "This Land Is Your Land"- by Woody Guthrie Nobody living can ever stop me As I go walking down freedom's highway Nobody living, can make me turn back This land was made for you and me Let us keep the faith and move forward, my friends, and let your songs reveal the strength of your gratitude for the opportunity to reveal your heart's determination. In Solidarity with all peoples of our country and the world, Peter Dr. Lippin especially resonated to my suggestion about focusing on Guthrie's "This Land is Your Land" (a song I have also sung publicly on many occasions) and wrote back saying: Singing now together Guthrie's "This Land is Your Land" as a means to express our gratitude for history being made last November and the story continuing to unfold to include health care is a good one. You and Pete Seeger and others leading us in "This Land.." would be a remarkable event if a venue should arise on the health care issue either before or after a passage of health care bill. Dr. Lippin correctly pointed out that a healthy land, after all, in a very literal sense and "land" as comprised of our fellow citizens and the ideals upon which our great nation was founded provides us very literally with sustenance and health. So let up use the power song and singing together to help our new young president bring health care to all of our fellow citizens. More on Health Care
 
Brian Williams: Charlie Gibson "A Pro," Diane Sawyer "Legendary" Top
"NBC Nightly News" anchor Brian Williams, who stands firmly atop the evening news ratings race, released a statement on the news that Diane Sawyer will be replacing Charlie Gibson when Gibson retires later this year. Williams praised both Gibson and Sawyer and said, "the competition has never been more robust among the three network evenings newscasts." His full statement: "I would love to say that ABC's loss is NBC's gain, but then they went and appointed Diane Sawyer to replace Charlie Gibson. That doesn't lessen the competition one bit. Charlie is a pro, and he's been the most able competition anyone could ask for. Diane is no different -- a legendary name in our business for decades -- and now we'll have to work every bit as hard every day to put on the best newscast possible. This is more evidence that the competition has never been more robust among the three network evening newscasts, and it keeps us all sharp, aggressive and on our toes. Congratulations to Charlie, congratulations to Diane, and Katie and I will continue to work hard every day. " READ KATIE COURIC'S STATEMENT HERE More on Diane Sawyer
 
SEC Mishandled Multiple Madoff Probes, Report Finds Top
WASHINGTON — The watchdog of the Securities and Exchange Commission has found the agency consistently mishandled its five investigations of Bernard Madoff's business, despite ample complaints over 16 years about the multibillion-dollar fraud. But SEC inspector general David Kotz's report found no evidence of any improper ties between agency officials and Madoff. Despite speculation that senior SEC officials may have tried to influence the probes, a summary of Kotz's 450-page report released Wednesday also found no evidence of that. The SEC enforcement staff, conducting investigations of Madoff's business, "almost immediately caught (him) in lies and misrepresentations, but failed to follow up on inconsistencies" and rejected whistleblowers' offers to provide additional evidence, the report says. Revelations in December of the agency's failure to uncover Madoff's massive Ponzi scheme over more than a decade touched off one of the most painful scandals in the agency's 75-year history. Kotz's exhaustive inquiry was intended as an investigation into the SEC's conduct in the Madoff affair and doesn't make recommendations for actions the agency should take. SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro, appointed by President Barack Obama, has brought changes since taking the helm in January. Enforcement efforts have been strengthened and the agency has started a number of initiatives meant to protect investors in the wake of the financial crisis, officials say. Three of the five high-ranking SEC officials who were lambasted over the Madoff affair at a congressional hearing in February – including the enforcement director and the head of the inspections office – have left the agency. Kotz's report "makes clear that the agency missed numerous opportunities to discover the fraud," Schapiro said in a statement. "It is a failure that we continue to regret, and one that has led us to reform in many ways how we regulate markets and protect investors." Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, said that panel has scheduled a hearing for Sept. 10 on Kotz's report, at which the inspector general is expected to testify. The testimony will "guide us as we continue our work on a bill to modernize financial regulations," Dodd said in a statement. Between June 1992 and last December, when Madoff confessed, the SEC received six "substantive complaints that raised significant red flags" regarding Madoff's operations. But "a thorough and competent investigation or examination was never performed," the report says. Many of the SEC staff who conducted the three inspections and two investigations were "inexperienced," according to the report. It cites examinations of Madoff's business done in 2004 and 2005 by the agency's inspections office. In both exams, the staff "made the surprising discovery" that Madoff's mysterious investment business was making far more money than his well-known wholesale brokerage operation. "However, no one identified this revelation as a cause for concern," the report says. Even more surprising, the two exams were being conducted at the same time in different SEC offices without either location being aware of the other's action. It was Madoff himself who told one of the inspection teams that he'd already given the information they sought to the other team, according to the report. Madoff pleaded guilty in March. He is serving 150 years in federal prison in North Carolina for a pyramid scheme that destroyed thousands of people's life savings, wrecked charities and gave already-rattled confidence in the financial system another jolt. The legions of investors who lost money included ordinary people, Hollywood celebrities and scores of famous names in business and sports – as well as big hedge funds, international banks and charitable foundations worldwide. Madoff himself, who was once chairman of the Nasdaq Stock Market and had sat on SEC advisory committees, had boasted of his ties to the agency. The inspector general's investigation found no evidence, though, that any SEC staff who worked on the exams or investigations of Madoff's business had financial or other improper connections with him that influenced the probes. Kotz's inquiry did not find that the relationship between a former SEC attorney and assistant inspections director, Eric Swanson, and Madoff's niece, Shana, who married in 2007, influenced the conduct of the agency exams. Swanson was part of a team that examined Madoff's securities brokerage operation in 1999 and 2004. Neither review resulted in any action against Madoff. The SEC's inspections office has said it has strict rules prohibiting employees from participating in cases involving firms where they have a personal interest. In addition, the IG's inquiry did not find that SEC senior officials "directly attempted to influence" exams or investigations of Madoff or his firm, "nor was there evidence any senior SEC official interfered with the staff's ability to perform its work." The disclosure in December of the agency's failure in the Madoff affair, coming after the financial crisis struck last fall, buttressed the mounting criticism from lawmakers and investor advocates that Wall Street and regulators in Washington had grown too close. Christopher Cox, then the SEC chairman, responded by delivering a stunning rebuke to his own career staff, blaming them for the decade-long failure to investigate Madoff. Cox's critics said targeting the staff was his attempt to salvage his own reputation, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., suggested that Cox bore at least some of the responsibility for what went wrong. "The SEC's utter failure to follow up aggressively on detailed and specific information about Madoff's fraud is further evidence of a culture of deference toward the Wall Street elite at the SEC," Republican Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa, a senior member of the Senate Finance and Judiciary committees and a longtime agency critic, said in a statement Wednesday. "Until that culture is transformed, the SEC will not be the tough cop-on-the-beat that the public needs." More on Bernard Madoff
 
AFL-CIO Official Implies He Can Live Without Card Check Top
AFL-CIO Secretary-Treasurer Richard Trumka offered a hint that, just maybe, the labor movement is willing compromise on the so-called card-check provision in the Employee Free Choice Act.
 
Natale Zimmer: Age Rating in Health Reform Will Cost Everyone More Top
We at OWL - The Voice of Midlife and Older Women are happy to see that the issue of age rating, which would allow for-profit health insurance companies to charge patients different premiums solely based on their age, is being highlighted in the press (both by the Huffington Post as well as USA Today ). However, there are significant components of this issue that have not been addressed, and the pieces to this puzzle that have been left out are critical to understanding how age rating and discrimination will harm health reform efforts. While there is much to be gained through passage of current health reform proposals from the House and the Senate HELP Committee, Congress' best intentions will be overshadowed if age discrimination is written into federal law. If we are to achieve true reform, age rating must be eliminated from private health insurance. Age rating will cost everyone more. We are naïve to think that age rating will only cost older Americans more, and that it will keep prices low for twenty-somethings. Private insurance companies focus on maximizing profits, and we should expect that if age rating is allowed, a small segment of the insured pool will pay the lowest premium, while premiums rise sharply to whatever level is allowed by Congress for everyone else. Age rating is nothing more than a loophole for the for-profit insurance industry to make up some of the money they say they will lose by eliminating gender, health status and pre-existing conditions rating. Congress should not be offering this loophole to line shareholders' pockets on the backs of older Americans. Community rating works. The insurance lobby is trying to create fear among younger workers that they will be burdened by the cost of health care for older Americans, and playing into ageism, a sad reality in our society. The fact is that if everyone pays the same, as in true community rating, risk is fairly spread, and for those who are healthy now, at whatever age, they have the comfort of knowing that when they are sick, whether it be at 28 or 58, they will not have to worry about losing coverage because of cost or being dropped. Insurers already use community pooling for large group, employer-sponsored insurance, under which most Americans with private insurance are covered. If this would put them out of business when they add an additional 47 million customers, then surely they are already in trouble. Age rating means more of your tax dollars will go to private insurance companies. All of the current proposals for reform rely on subsidies to ensure that health insurance is affordable based on income. A private home health care worker in her 50s isn't making any more than one in her 20s, but with an insurance premium that costs two to five times more, the federal government will have to use more taxpayer dollars to provide a bigger subsidy to the older worker. Age rating will really translate into higher costs to tax payers because the federal government will have to shell out more in subsidies to cover the higher premiums. Congress can do the right thing. Congress has said that it's not ok to charge people different premiums because of pre-existing conditions (like having had children, or an ovarian cyst removed a few years back, or having been treated for depression), health status (like diabetes, heart disease or pregnancy), or gender. All of this is good; Congress has gotten this part right. But going that far and then giving the go-ahead on age discrimination is not just unwise, it is wrong. In the end, it has the same punitive effect as the ratings Congress is trying to get rid of - charging people more because of their history. Worse, explicitly allowing age rating is writing discrimination into federal law. There's much to be gained in health care reform, but it's important that those gains don't come at the expense of equality, honesty, and progress. President Obama has said his Administration is committed to ending discrimination in health care. Let's see if Congress can match that standard. More on Health Care
 
Sabine Heller: A Glimpse Of Designer Maria Cornejo-- A Michelle Obama Favorite Top
For Maria Cornejo--headstrong, fiercely independent, brilliant, beautiful-- not belonging has made her stronger. "It gave me energy, and liberated me from preconceived ideas of the way things should be," she says deliberately. Her words are fitting given that she has been an outsider for as long as she can remember. An 11 year-old girl exiled from Pinochet's Chile, Maria was sent to Peru to squat in a church with other refugees before seeking political asylum in Manchester, England, where her mother died two years after they were relocated. The harshness of her early life forced her to scrounge in bins for clothes and endure almost complete alienation because she didn't speak English. "I drew strength from these experiences," she recalls. "Being an outsider gives you your conviction and your identity. I didn't want to be like everybody else." And she certainly isn't. As soon as Maria was old enough she escaped to a punk-crazed London. Suddenly noticed for her exotic beauty, she started hanging out in gay clubs and in creative circles, where she met her mentor and lover, the designer John Richmond, who introduced her into the prestigious Ravensbourne College of Design. "It was a time when anything felt possible," she remembers excitedly. Maria and John enjoyed near insta-success when they formed Richmond Cornejo, a line that had massive cult appeal among the eighties club kids. She moved on to develop her signature collection, "Maria Cornejo" and assumed the helm of the French label Tehen before launching Zero + Maria Cornejo in 1998. Maria didn't fully embrace her point of difference until she came to live in New York, a city that is largely comprised of foreigners and "is about being independent and finding one's way." By then she had married the eccentric photographer and poet Mark Borthwick with whom she created a four-story Brooklyn townhouse sanctuary for musicians, artists, and other creative types who gladly occupy the fringes of society. "There are always so many people at our house, lots of music and chaos. We live life in a very colorful way." In the ten years since Maria launched Zero + Maria Cornejo, she won the Smithsonian Cooper- Hewitt National Design Award, opened three stops in New York, and expanded her line to stores all over the world. She counts fashion icons as genuine fans, including Michelle Obama, Tilda Swinton and Sofia Coppola--people who mirror Maria's commitment to authenticity. These are "brainy, strong women, not arm candy," insists Maria. "They buy my clothes to wear in real life, not just when they are getting photographed." Despite her success, Maria feels that she "is just beginning to scratch the surface of things." In the future, she will continue with the simple geometric and organic shapes--the circle, cube, triangle, butterfly--that are seminal to her aesthetic. She will also return to the concept behind Zero, which neither adds nor subtracts; but rather acts, as a point of departure. More on Michelle Obama Style
 
Wheelchair-Bound Woman Shouted Down At New Jersey Health Care Town Hall (VIDEO) Top
Congressman Frank Pallone (D-NJ), the man who recently " let it be known " that he'd step in should Gov. Corzine drop out of the New Jersey gubernatorial race, had his hands full at a town hall meeting in Red Bank last week. More than 1,500 people showed up to talk health care, but things quickly turned ugly. Much like the unruly town hall meetings that have been going on across the country, the angry crowd held up bizarre and nonsensical posters of protest while hurling insults at Rep. Pallone, and each other. A new low for these meetings may have been set when the crowd shouted down a wheelchair-bound woman with "two incurable auto-immune diseases" who had the gall to ask a question. NJ.com has video (footage of the incident with the wheelchair-bound woman begins at 2:08): More on Video
 

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)