Friday, September 11, 2009

Y! Alert: The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Yahoo! Alerts
My Alerts

The latest from The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com

Shawn Amos: Rock Star Fashion Designers Top
Yesterday marked the start of Fashion Week where designers show off their spring 2010 wares. I get my clothes from three sources: Target, thrift shops, and friends. It's simple and it's cheap. If I made rock star cash, I'd step up my game. In fact, if I were a rock star, I'd design my own clothes. I'd do it because that's the mark of a true rock star. Just ask Miley Cyrus. Nothing says rock like Miley and her Walmart clothing line. In fact, you're actually NOT a rock star unless you're designing clothes. You're probably not making any money either. We all know the record biz don't pay. All musicians have day jobs - no matter how big they are. As the celebrity fashionistas flock to New York for Fashion Week, here some recent musicians-turned-clothing designers who have made a killing (or at least gotten a lot of press). Look for them at a catwalk near you. Justin Timberlake Timberlake founded William Rast along with his childhood friend Trace Ayala in 2005. The name came from Timberlake's grandfather's first name and Ayala's grandfather's last name. No word if the old folks wear the signature William Rast jeans. Timberlake and Ayala turned "William Rast" into a fictitious character and star of a short film. Timberlake plays the starring role, of course. Timberlake also took to the catwalk at Fashion Week 2008 to sell his spring 2009 line. Calvin Klein models need not be worried. Liam Gallagher Noel's baby brother started Pretty Green to bring his mod sensibilities to the fashion world. Or to put it in his words, "I love clothes‚ if people like it cool. If they don't, they don't." I believe that's Pretty Green's official marketing line. Now that Oasis is no more, Liam better hope more people like than don't. He may need the extra cash. Sean Combs Puffy is the Grand Diddy of musician fashion designers. He started his Sean John line in 1998 and quickly gained the respect of fashion insiders. In 2004, Sean John won "Menswear Designer of the Year" from the Council of Fashion Designers of America, standing alongside other fashion heavyweights like Donna Karan and Coach. Now, if he'd make a good album. Gwen Stefani In 2004, Gwen Stefani went solo in a big way. She took a leave of absence from No Doubt to release her first album and clothing line, both called "Love. Angel. Music. Baby." (L.A.M.B.). The album sold over 4 million copies and the clothing line (inspired by Guatemalan, Japanese, Indian and Jamaican cultures) is sold in over 275 clothing stores. Stefani has since started a second line, Harajuku Lovers, inspired by (some say stereotypical) Japanese female references. Lily Allen The Grammy nominee collaborated with British clothing retailer New Look to launched her "Lily Loves" line of clothing in 2007. She's now following it up with a jewelry collection. Jewelry is where the money is. Plus, no one has "jewelry malfunctions" so no excuses for her flashing her third nipple again. More on Fashion Week
 
Matthew DeBord: U.S. Open Tennis: The American Tennis Boom Was a Fluke Top
No one tuning in to the U.S. Open men's and women's semifinals and finals this weekend is going to want to hear this, but I have bad news: the vaunted American "tennis boom" of the 1970s and '80s was a fluke. We were supposed to see tennis broken out of its country-club, upper-crusty enclaves and delivered to the masses. And for a while, it worked. The result, in fact, is the massive National Tennis Center complex, which annually hosts the U.S. Open. America took to tennis for a while. Public courts sprang up everywhere, young kids got racquets and took lessons, and a generation of marketable American stars--Chris Evert, Jimmy Connors, John McEnroe, even a naturalized Martina Navratilova--emerged. It inspired a mega-generation, which included Pete Sampras, Jim Courier, Andre Agassi, and the Williams sisters. But then the nation lost interest. Or more accurately, had its interest diverted, into Tiger Woods' brand of golf, a resurgent Major League Baseball, fantasy football, big time hoops, X-Games--the whole EPSN-ificated suite of competitive contests. Now the bottom has fallen out of American tennis. I live in Los Angeles, a one-time tennis hotbed, where on any given day, the city's vast supply of public tennis courts is...completely empty. A common lament at this year's U.S. Open is that we have no up-and-coming male pro players, and when the Williams sisters are finished, the situation looks grim for the ladies. Jimmy Connors, doing commentary for the Tennis Channel, said that the country is already a generation behind on junior development and unless something happens soon in terms of catching up, we'll fall two generations behind. Nothing is going to happen. It's important to remember that this is historically consistent. Tennis has always gone through boom and bust cycles in America. We had great champions in the 1920s and '30s, like Bill Tilden and Don Budge, but tennis became a second-tier sport again after World War II and didn't really pop back into Americans' consciousness until the '70s and '80s boom. This is evident in the caliber of world-class players we have today. Andy Roddick is the only American man in the top ten. James Blake, a class act, if never a serious threat as a Grand Slam champion, has fallen out of the top ten. The next few American men, guys like John Isner and Sam Querrey, are rising, but it's hard to see them challenging the raft of European and South American players who currently dominate the game. On the women's side, it's even worse. Melanie Oudin was a great story at this year's Open, but the top women are from the countries of the former USSR, Belgium, and France. We have Venus and Serena, but they're not going to be around forever. The experts who monitor the game can talk all they want about identifying juniors early and getting them into tennis, or adopting some of the passion, innovation, and sheer love for the game that we see if the likes of Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer. But it's not going to work because the broad public support for the game isn't there. Trying to force things back to the way they were in the 1980s is a futile undertaking. I hate to be pessimistic, but I take some solace my belief that the cycle will come back around in another 20-30 years and America will go tennis mad again. By then, this false debate over the future of American tennis will be long forgotten. We'll then be less likely at that time to see a manufactured, built-by-pros U.S. challenger to the world's tennis elite. These young men and women won't play because everyone wants them to--they'll play because they love the game and can't imagine doing anything else. Tennis is an individual sport. The most important motivation doesn't come from the group. It comes from within. And the sooner we confront the fact that the U.S. tennis boom was an anomaly rather than destiny or the norm, the sooner we'll solve the "problem" of American tennis. Oh, and by the time we stage our comeback, maybe we'll have a roof on the largest tennis stadium in the world, so our national tournament isn't stalled for days by rain in September.
 
Michael Williams, Delta Passenger, Caught Carrying Gun On 9/11 At LaGuardia Top
As New York remembered the 9/11 attacks, a man with a loaded handgun tried to board a Delta Airlines flight at LaGuardia Airport, authorities said. Transportation Security Administration Officer Raymond Rivera spotted the weapon in the man's carry-on bag and alerted Port Authority police who took him into custody.
 
Barcode On Your Broccoli: FDA To Approve Laser Labels For Vegetables Top
The FDA is expected to approve laser-etching of fruits and vegetables in the next month or so, paving the way for produce "tattooed" with product information to hit store shelves, an official with the USDA tells Slashfood. More on Food
 
Gahl Eden Sasson: Above & Below: The Health Care Debate Seen from Above Top
"To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the Sun" ---Ecclesiastes 3:1 Hippocrates, a.k.a. the father of western medicine and the originator of the doctors' oath, declared, "A doctor who does not understand astrology is a fool!" The fact that Hippocrates, Kepler, Newton, and Jung were all avid practitioners of astrology seems to be an embarrassment to many scientists, doctors, and psychologists. Despite the fact that astrology has been marginalized by the onset of the Age of Reason, her flame is still burning, waiting for humanity to eventually wean itself off the intoxicating prospects of the Industrial and Digital Revolutions. Astrology is patiently anticipating the smog and pollution to clear so that once again humanity can see the wisdom and glory of the stars. Health care reform has been in the limelight for a while. It started gaining momentum in the Democratic Primaries at the end of 2007. Both leading nominees made health care a pillar of their campaigns, arguing that it is time for a major reform. The debate regarding health care issues corresponds to the astrological transit of Saturn in Virgo, which began in September 2007 and will continue until November 2009. We can expect the debate to continue as long as Saturn is transiting in Virgo. In November 2009 Saturn transits into Libra, the sign of lawyers, contracts, and justice. This should the time when the health care bill will become a fair, just, and applicable plan. Kabbalah is an ancient mystical and philosophical system designed to understand the workings of the universe. It dubs Saturn the planet of Tikun , a Hebrew word meaning to mend or fix. Viewed in this manner, Saturn transiting in Virgo means that we are now experiencing the "fixing" of the Virgo archetype. Virgo is not only the sign associated with care, health, herbs, remedies, service, work, but also accounting. It is no wonder that the debate surrounds both the quality and affordability of health care. Virgo is the most humble of all archetypes, which means that the big, profit-ridden insurance companies will have to undergo a makeover designed to get them realigned with their true purpose: to serve and heal. Mother Teresa, born August 26, the epitome of Virgo, diligently and humbly created a health care system for the poor in Calcutta. Why can't we, the richest most powerful nation in history do the same? Another way of looking at Saturn is as a contractor. Like contractors, Saturn breaks walls, overcharges (Saturn is the Lord of time and we all know that time is money), runs past deadlines, and makes our lives challenging. Saturn is currently helping us remodel our health care system. Hopefully, when we are finished renovating, our nation will be better, healthier and happier. Saturn is not the only planet asking us to make changes. Pluto, recently demoted to a dwarf planet, moved into Capricorn in the fall of 2008. This is precisely when the market crashed. If you have not guessed, Pluto is associated with finance, death and transformation. Capricorn on the other hand, is the sign of structure, corporations, establishments, and institutions. It is no wonder that when Pluto (death and transformation) transited into Capricorn (tradition and conservatives), Republicans lost their grip over power. Last time Pluto was in Capricorn, the British lost their grip on the 13 colonies and America was born. We traded an oppressive monarchy for an enlightened democracy. If the last Plutonian transit gave birth to the Constitution, which promised equality for every American, perchance this current transit will provide health care for all. According to astrology, which was developed as a tool to understand the cycles of the seasons, now is the best time in 250 years to transform the health care institutions. On September 9th, as the Sun transited Virgo, President Obama gave his health care speech: Now is the season for action. Now is when we must bring the best ideas of both parties together, and show the American people that we can still do what we were sent here to do. Now is the time to deliver on health care. View a slide show I created that deals with the economic crisis. More on Health Care
 
Janet Murguía: Workers Pay the Price in an Era of Declining Job Quality Top
Barbecues, beaches, and backyard games have been the traditional markers of Labor Day, but in the midst of the worst recession since the Great Depression, loss has replaced celebration. Since December 2007, more than 6.7 million workers have lost their jobs, and countless others have lost their health insurance, retirement savings, and even their homes. As many Americans gathered around the grill to celebrate a day off, millions struggled to find a job to put food on the table and provide other basic necessities for their families. In these desperate times, many workers have had to enter the low-wage labor market where they endure substandard workplace conditions, risking their health, safety, and lives. While their time at these low-quality jobs may end when the recession is over, for many others this is a dangerous and permanent reality. In too many industries, workers are paying the price for the neglect and sometimes outright disregard of basic labor protections that most of us take for granted. The foundation that we built as a nation to ensure that workers are safe on the job and paid fairly for their work is badly fractured. A recent report from NCLR (National Council of La Raza), reveals that too often, when employers violate basic labor laws, workers pay the price--sometimes with their lives. The report, Fractures in the Foundation: The Latino Worker's Experience in an Era of Declining Job Quality , describes how Latinos, who are more likely to die from an injury on the job than any other group, sound the alarm for what millions of workers endure as a result of dangerous, low-quality jobs. The occupational fatality rate for Latinos has remained the highest in the nation for 15 years. In 2007, 937 Latinos were killed by an injury at work. The Latino death toll exposes the state of decay in American workplace health and safety standards; overall, 5,657 workers died on the job in 2007. When employers violate wage and occupational safety laws, they effectively devalue hard work and workers' lives. It is simply outrageous and unacceptable that a country like ours allows people to work to death. Declining job quality has other costs as well. On an economic level, our society pays huge, if often hidden, costs for labor law violations and workers' deaths in the form of skewed competition, lost productivity, and rising health care bills. And on a practical level, in a tough job market, an increasing number of workers will experience the effects of the decades-long deterioration of job quality that millions of workers have endured for too long. The strength of our economy depends on the strength of our workforce. Workers, employers, and government all play a part in rebuilding a solid foundation of job quality for a better economy. Latino workers help us tell the story of what is happening to basic standards in the American workplace. The daily reality of so many of our workers--low wages, no benefits, and dangerous working conditions--is a shameful testament to how far our nation has regressed from the laws we enacted to protect all workers. Congress and the U.S. Department of Labor must be held accountable for protecting workers through enforcement of existing labor laws, reform of outdated workplace standards, and investment in community-based organizations for worker outreach, education and empowerment. It is our duty to restore dignity to the American workplace through the protection of all hardworking Americans. More on Health Care
 
Rinku Sen: Post-9/11 Immigration Debate Needs Shift in Focus Top
Re-printed from TheGrio.com. For more on the term "illegal," watch the Word! video . Since September 11, 2001, immigration opponents have honed their "immigrant as criminal" narrative, knowing that the specter of the foreign terrorist works perfectly. Fifteen years ago, the nation's major newspapers refused to use "illegal" because it was dehumanizing and inaccurate. Today, the media employs the term in the context of an immigration debate in which immigrants themselves have little voice, and in which their full humanity appears to have little value. September 11th marked a shift in the politics of race and immigration that prevents us from adopting a plan for legalization, much less overhauling our very broken system to benefit either the United States or immigrants themselves. Currently, the Obama administration is following a purely enforcement approach to immigration, though they have promised investigation into racial profiling and human rights abuses in workplace raids and the 287(g) program that deputizes and trains local police departments in enforcing immigration law. Last week, 500 organizations wrote to President Obama urging him to end the controversial 287(g) program. But, despite the national outcry against local officials like Sheriff Joe Arpaio, the Arizona official accused of rounding up Latinos and checking papers later, Homeland Security czar Janet Napolitano has expanded the 287(g) program. While promoting our book about the organizing of New York City immigrant restaurant workers who lost their jobs at the World Trade Center on September 11th, my co-author and I met dozens of people who have suffered from the enforcement-only approach. There were the 18-year-olds brought to the country as children who cannot now work or study legally. There was the group in Minnesota working to keep open an affordable housing complex whose best leader and his wife were carted off at 5 o'clock in the morning, leaving their 4-year-old son behind. There was a young man desperately trying to find his friend who had been taken by ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) to an unspecified detention center. Immigrants do more than work. They raise families; they organize to improve life for the poor; they learn new skills and build communities. Yet, they are typically treated as expendably "illegal" even if they aren't. Comprehensive immigration reform would leave the enforcement approach in place, while changing the status of millions of undocumented people. But a little bit of legalization won't cancel out the negative effects of enforcement. Twenty years from now, the undocumented population will grow again, and we will again debate how much legalization to offer. The traditional pro-immigrant response to restrictionists has been to characterize immigrants as hard workers simply looking for a decent living. Though more benevolent, this narrative suggests that immigrants offer nothing more than a pair of hands available for picking, cleaning and writing computer code. The economic argument is not the only reason we need an entirely new system. The one we have is terribly broken, especially for the vast majority of poor immigrants and immigrants of color. We need a system that eases people's movement rather than restricts it (thereby equalizing the power of immigrants in relation to their employers), one that isn't fixated on preserving some outdated notion of America as simply a white, Christian country. Until such time as immigration reform heats up again in Congress, we must reclaim the debate and change our language. For instance, we should be challenging the criminalization of undocumented workers by labeling them "illegal." Beyond this, we need to stand up for full inclusion of immigrants in our educational, health and labor systems. The struggle includes all immigrants, including those who gave their lives at the World Trade Center on September 11th. This piece was co-authored with Fekkak Mamdouh. Rinku Sen and Fekkak Mamdouh co-authored The Accidental American: Immigration and Citizenship in the Age of Globalization (Berrett-Koehler 2008). Fekkak Mamdouh is the co-director of Restaurant Opportunities Center (ROC)-United. Mamdouh lost 73 friends on 9/11 alongside whom he worked at the World Trade Center. More on Immigration
 
Dan Cantor: Landmark Green Jobs Bill Passes Senate 52 - 8 Top
New York may be on the verge of becoming a world leader in energy efficiency. Working late into the night, the State Senate passed the historic Green Jobs-Green New York bill yesterday after more than a year of hard work from the WFP and a broad coalition of environmentalists, businesses, community groups, labor unions and key Senators and members of the Assembly. The bill - which had already passed the Assembly unanimously and is supported by the Governor - would make energy efficiency upgrades to   one million   homes and businesses across the state over the next five years and create   tens of thousands   of badly needed jobs. Sen. Darrel Aubertine, the bill’s lead Senate sponsor and champion said: “This program will create jobs, save consumers on their energy bills and help get our economy back on track.  This bill encourages conservation, helps consumers with the cost of capital improvements to their homes and businesses, and creates jobs in the new economy. It’s a win-win for New York State, especially Upstate New York where a well-trained workforce will be in demand to keep the heat in and energy bills down every winter.” The key innovation in the bill is a revolving capital fund, which would leverage private investment in energy efficiency to massively increase the use of existing technology.  Here’s how it would work:  State certified contractors would perform free or low-cost energy audits for homeowners, looking for repairs and upgrades (like air sealing, insulation, new boilers) that can pay for themselves through the energy savings they create.  The work would be paid for by the fund–homeowners pay it back out of a portion of their energy savings (they pocket the rest, in addition to getting their homes repaired). Compare this to the current situation. A very knowledgeable homeowner has to proactively find a contractor they trust to perform an energy audit, pay for it themselves, and then pay the upfront costs of the repair. For a cold state like New York with lots of older homes, the number of existing residential and commercial buildings that can be upgraded is huge - 1 in 7 existing homes could be reached . It’s a great example of how market failure can be solved through progressive policy. Sen.  Thomas Morahan added,  ”About 40 percent of Rockland County’s owner-occupied units were built before 1970, making them big energy users. This program would serve “the missing middle” — owners who surpass the income ceiling for the Weatherization Assistance Program but cannot afford retrofits on their own. Heating an energy-inefficient home  may cost these owners between $3,000 and $4,000 per year.” The bill now heads to the Governor's desk.
 
Marc Garlasco: Human Rights Watch Investigator Accused Of Collecting Nazi Memorabilia Responds Top
By Marc Garlasco NEW YORK - I'm used to taking heat for my job as a military analyst for Human Rights Watch, because our findings that this government or that armed group has violated the laws of war frequently provoke accusations that we're biased or siding with the enemy. Now I've achieved some blogosphere fame, not for the hours I've spent sifting through the detritus of war, visiting hospitals, interviewing victims and witnesses and soldiers, but for my hobby (unusual and disturbing to some, I realize) of collecting Second World War memorabilia associated with my German grandfather and my American great-uncle. I'm a military geek, with an abiding interest not only in the medals I collect but in the weapons that I study and the shrapnel I analyze. I think this makes me a better investigator and analyst. And to suggest it shows Nazi tendencies is defamatory nonsense, spread maliciously by people with an interest in trying to undermine Human Rights Watch's reporting. I work to expose war crimes and the Nazis were the worst war criminals of all time. But I'm now in the bizarre and painful situation of having to deny accusations that I'm a Nazi. The Second World War turned my grandfather, who was conscripted and served on an anti-aircraft battery, into a staunch pacifist. He couldn't understand why I went to work at the Pentagon, where I was on 9/11, of learning from his experiences - the horrific stories he told me late in life of seeing the bodies he shot down fall out of the sky. It wasn't until he died that I really took his lessons to heart, and decided to use my military expertise to try to lessen the horrors of war. So I left my government career and joined Human Rights Watch to use my expertise in weapons systems and targeting to push soldiers to protect civilians, to uphold the laws born in the ashes of the Second World War. My first investigation took me to the bomb craters in Iraq and brought me face-to-face with the survivors and other victims of the strikes I helped plan. It was a traumatic experience and provoked much soul-searching. I thought often of my grandfather. As an American child, I learned that Germans were the bad guys; as I got to know my grandfather, I realized that not all Germans were Nazis. Because of him, and my great-uncle, a gunner on an American B-17 bomber, I developed an interest in German and American war memorabilia, and I wrote a long monograph, published last year, on German Second World War Air Force and anti-aircraft medals. I've never hidden my hobby, because there's nothing shameful in it, however weird it might seem to those who aren't fascinated by military history. Precisely because it's so obvious that the Nazis were evil, I never realized that other people, including friends and colleagues, might wonder why I care about these things. Thousands of military history buffs collect war paraphernalia because we want to learn from the past. But I should have realized that images of the Second World War German military are hurtful to many. I deeply regret causing pain and offense with a handful of juvenile and tasteless postings I made on two websites that study Second World War artifacts (including American, British, German, Japanese and Russian items). Other comments there might seem strange and even distasteful, but they reflect the enthusiasm of the collector, such as gloating about getting my hands on an American pilot's uniform. I told my daughters, as I wrote in my book, that "the war was horrible and cruel, that Germany lost and for that we should be thankful." I meant what I wrote. And because of the intense suffering during the Second World War and the genocidal campaign against the Jewish people, I spend my days doing what I can to ensure that such horrors are never allowed to happen again. More on Germany
 
Khamenei Issues Warning To Iranian Opposition Top
TORONTO �" Iran's Supreme Religious Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, warned opposition leaders of a "harsh response" Friday if they continued challenging the government, a move that analysts said opens the way for their possible arrest. More on Iran
 
Richard Zombeck: A pimple on the Ass of Progress Top
A pimple on the ass of progress. That's what a White House senior advisor called Joe Wilson . My father used to call me a pimple on the ass progress. But I was 10-years-old and running around at recess with a bunch of kids inappropriately calling other kids fags and retards. Wilson was probably one of those kids and apparently hasn't grown out of it as he's still prone to uncontrollable childlike outbursts. So really the comment by the staffer was pretty appropriate. Another thing my father used to say when those same kids called me names or just made stuff up was, "Just ignore them Richard." When Joe Wilson yelled, "You lie," in the middle of a speech on health care to a joint session of Congress, Obama ignored him. The rest of the world, unfortunately didn't. It was apparently the most important part of the evening. At least the most sensational part of the evening. Never mind the rest of the antics, like Shimkus walking out of the speech , or other members of the GOP waving papers during the speech. Not to mention that those three, that's right three, pieces of paper were nothing more than a summary focused on promoting individually owned insurance. We all know that Wilson made that comment in response to Obama's statement about illegal immigrants not being covered under the bill. The Bill. You know H.R. 3200 - America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009. The same bill you can read for yourself right here and beat Wilson and some of his friends to it. Where in that bill it clearly says, in all caps and plain English, easily understood by children prone to uncontrollable outbursts "H.R. 3200: Sec 246 NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS." Clear enough? Can we move on? Yeah, yeah, if this had happened during a speech by Bush the airways would be flooded by the likes of Limbaugh screaming for the guys head and Beck frothing at the mouth with anti-American accusations, not to mention the GOP would have hemorrhaged over anyone acting like that towards the President. The fact of the matter is, as Barney Frank said on Rachel Maddow , "It's a sign of how effective the President was." Frank gave it two minutes - exactly what it deserved. Can we start looking into what was said in the speech? Can we discuss how we're going insure 46 million Americans who aren't insured and help the millions of others who are under-insured? And give those of us that are insured but not covered for anything more serious than the sniffles an affordable alternative? The more attention and coverage we give people like Wilson the more he really does become a pimple on the ass of progress. Let's pop it and move on.
 
Iris Martin: Homeowners: The War Games Have Begun Top
Homeowners across the nation have locked and loaded and are launching their mortgage wars. Sales of my new book, Mortgage Wars: How to Fight Fraud and Reverse Foreclosure are thriving among homeowners and attorneys alike. We have even taken over the airways, advertising the book on Monday night football! The book was requested for sale at the annual conference of the California Bar Association. More attorneys are being trained up, and California attorney Walter Hackett is in the process of announcing an institute for lending practices to help attorneys gear up faster. Lenders are besieged with mortgage audits, qualified written requests and predatory lending complaints. As a result, many lenders are postponing foreclosure sales time and again, and some states, like Florida and Ohio have become virtually, no foreclosure zones. The war games have begun and now it's time for the predatory lenders, brokers and foreclosure consultants to sweat. The Fed is weeding out the predators who promise loan mods and can't deliver after devouring huge fees. The tide is turning, as it must, if the largest lenders, like Chase, Citibank, Wells Fargo and the like, are to transform their predatory schemes against innocent homeowners. There has been so much progress since my book has hit bookshelves. Just ask forensic expert Marie McDonnell, who is offering a full securitization analysis for $1,500 dollars. She maps every transaction in the securitization daisy chain and prepares an expert report to demonstrate to the judge how the lender has no legal standing to foreclose. She is also available as an expert witness at trial. Or ask California attorney, Walter Hackett, who challenges the sanctity of a deed of trust when there has been no trust in the mortgage transaction. Or California attorney, Jeff Schwartz, who incorporates a lack of fiduciary duty claim into some of his well deserving complaints. Or ask Ohio attorney Dan McGookey, who just reversed a foreclosure action due to the lender not owning the loan and note. His pleadings are becoming legendary. Rock on, Dan! I receive daily calls from homeowners confused about the mortgage war plan of attack, and many have been incredibly misinformed. Some have committed bankruptcy fraud and didn't know it, making themselves vulnerable to criminal charges. So here is the skinny on what to do and not do in your own mortgage war. The Dos: 1. Get a mortgage audit. For only $499.00, you can go to www.yourmortgagewar.com and order one. Our evidentiary audit has been designed by attorneys. It examines TILA and RESPA violations, fraud and illegal securitization. You will receive your report after two week upon collecting all the documents. 2. Second, if your audit warrants it, you can file a legal complaint. We can help you find a qualified attorney from our network, or from their networks. The good ones are always in contact with each other. 3. Your new best friend attorney will take the audit data and interview you at length. Based upon your responses, your attorney will prepare a legal complaint detailing the facts of your case and appropriate causes of action. You should not pay more than $2,500 for this service, including court filing fees. On that note, you should not pay more than $275 per hour for legal assistance, as that is the going national rate. 4. Your attorney will determine whether to file your complaint in state or federal court. TILA violations are heard in federal court, as are RESPA claims. However, many attorneys I chat with believe that predatory complaints involving other causes of action, such as fraud and lack of fiduciary duty, are best heard in state court. Your attorney can educate you on what's best for you in your state. 5. Your attorney will also determine whether to demand a jury trial. The attorneys I know are split on this one: some believe a jury would side with a fellow homeowner. However, some cities may have jurors who cannot follow the proceedings, particularly with regard to technicalities in the securitization process. Your attorney will determine which choice is right for you. 6. Once your complaint is filed and served, your attorney can begin discovery after only a few days. Discovery takes the form of written demands for information from your lender, including who owns your loan and note. If your lender refused to answer, it can be compelled to do so by the court. Your attorney will also depose representatives from your lender or brokerage, and other parties with knowledge. Not a bad idea to search for whistle blowers who worked for your lender in sunnier times. 7. You will also get a trial date at a hearing known as a case management conference. Your trial date most likely will be scheduled many months in the future. 8. Your attorney can also begin settlement discussions with your lender. These take the form of a reduction in interest rate and principal balance. Just ask Florida attorney, Dawn Rapoport how lenders are responding, now that the number of plaintiffs is dramatically increasing. 9. Your judge, by the way, may very likely order you to meet with a negotiator or mediator to settle your case. Most judges do not want their courtroom crowded by enraged homeowners engaging in mortgage war. This is also a time to get a better deal from your lender in exchange for dropping your lawsuit. In my opinion, this is the only way to get a decent loan modification. 10. If you live in a non-judicial state, and your lender attempts to foreclose before your trial, your attorney will have to obtain a TRO, or temporary restraining order from the judge. The judge will have to be convinced that you will be irreparably harmed by the foreclosure, and that you stand a good chance to win at trial. This is a very good time to have Marie McDonnell prepare a report for the judge regarding who owns your loan and note. You may find you already own your home free and clear and don't know it yet. 11. After obtaining the TRO, you will have to go back to court to obtain an injunction to stay the foreclosure pending outcome of your trial. The judge may demand that you post a bond to stop the bleeding for your lender. There is a new cottage industry sprouting in the bond business, and many companies are providing bonds using real estate as collateral. However, you cannot use the subject property as collateral. 12. You may receive several settlement offers pre-trial. Let your attorney determine which one is best for you. Or you may just roll the dice and take your war to the courtroom. 13. If you decide to go to court, your attorney may demand a portion of your settlement in exchange for litigating your case. This arrangement, called a contingency agreement, allows you to defer your considerable legal costs until the end of the trial. If you get nothin', your attorney gets nothin' as well. 14. If you don't like the outcome of your trial and there were process errors, you may decide to appeal. This may also require the posting of a bond. 15. Or you may prevail, and win your mortgage war. It's happening more and more every day. Here is my list of Don'ts when waging your mortgage war: 1. Don't go pro per. There is nothing wrong with having an attorney write, file and serve a pro per complaint. This may save you money on the front end. After the complaint is served, your defendants, which should include all parties you have a beef with, such as your appraiser, broker, lender, title agent, servicer, trustee and beneficiary, have thirty days to respond. They generally respond with a "demur" which is an attack on your complaint. 2. Don't go to court by yourself. You will need an attorney to oppose the demur in writing and at a hearing. Don't' play Perry Mason and think you can waltz into court and get the result that you want. Judges do not like pro per litigants, as they are ill-trained in courtroom procedure and etiquette. You may score a sympathetic judge, but sooner or later the lender's attorneys will eat your alive. Don't have a fool for a client, or go into battle without a loaded weapon. 3. Don't believe that bankruptcy is the answer to your mortgage hell. Lender's attorneys will request a lift of stay in a New York minute. They often get it, and you lose your home. File a predatory claim first. You can always succumb to filing bankruptcy. So don't believe predatory attorneys who tell you that your only hope is to file bankruptcy without interviewing skilled predatory lending litigators. 4. Don't play any tricks with having others take a piece of your home and then they declare bankruptcy. Whoever invented this illegal practice, ain't doing homeowners a world of good. Especially when those homeowners are facing bankruptcy themselves and have already defrauded the court. 5. Don't put your home in the hands of loan mod companies. I get calls every day from foreclosed homeowners who were told their loans were being modified and there was nothing to worry about. If this has happened to you, sue the loan mod company, or file a malpractice complaint against your loan modification attorney. The only thing that will stop your foreclosure is a signed settlement from your lender or an order signed by a judge. If you are one of the few that has gotten a loan modification on your own, make sure it is good for you. If not, sue the bastards. 6. Don't deny your mortgage hell. If you are in delinquency or default, it is time to get moving. God helps those who get help themselves. I get many calls from homeowners whose foreclosure sale is imminent, and there isn't much that can be done. Preparing and filing a legal complaint is required before you can seek a temporary restraining order. All this takes time. Good attorneys are swamped with clients. Plan in advance to save your home. 7. Don't attempt a loan modification on your own. Attorneys tell me war stories that set my hair on file. How the banksters use every trick in the book to trap the homeowner into an unaffordable profile. This gives the lender even more ammunition to foreclose, especially because it has "cooperated" with the Obama plan. 8. Don't drive your auditor and attorney crazy with all hours phone calls. Yes, you have every right to panic, and the threat of losing the roof over your head is a terrifying possibility. But you must control your anxiety so that your helpers can do their jobs. Constant demands for reassurance and advice only makes them want to avoid contact with you. 9. Don't prematurely give up and turn in keys for cash. If you have been told by a reputable attorney that you have a strong case, persevere and fight on. The bank is not your mother or father. If your lender has violated laws, there are legal remedies at your disposal. But only if you use them. 10. Don't rush or second guess the process. Every case is different, depending on a unique set of facts. Even attorneys disagree on various approaches to a complaint. It takes time and effort to research the law and what causes of action and motions are working. Mortgage war is a marathon, not a sprint. 11. Don't get discouraged. You will have good days and bad days. It helps to meditate instead of awfulize. You will sleep better at night when you are sure you are following the best plan of attack for saving your home and waging war against your predatory lender and broker. I hope this helps answer some of your questions. I do try to call everyone who contacts me through our website www.yourmortgagewar.com . I am truly blessed to have chatted with so many smart, and justifiably, enraged homeowners in the throes of their mortgage wars. If you have a reaction to the book or have a question, feel free to e mail me. And give yourselves kudos for pioneering this war. It is only when the courts are overwhelmed with predatory lending lawsuits that the state and federal government may follow the steps of Ohio and force arrogant predatory lenders to prove that they have standing before filing a foreclosure action. So, in the spirit of celebrity chef Bobby Flay, Ohio, keep doing what you're doin'. And the rest of America? Ask yourself this: Are you ready for a mortgage throw down? More on Banks
 
Sen. Bernie Sanders: Economic Crisis: One Year Later Top
Americans have suffered for a year through the worst economic decline since the Great Depression. Millions of people have lost their jobs. We're seeing people with very long-term unemployment. We are seeing older people who have lost their life's savings and are now worried about how they are going to retire with dignity. We have seen people lose their homes, and we've seen people lose their pensions. We've seen, in many ways, the collapse of the American middle class . What's going on in Congress? I and some others have fought for an investigation to ask some simple questions: How did a handful of CEOs of major corporations precipitate this economic crisis? Who is accountable ? Who should be going to jail? How do we make sure what happened in terms of the recklessness and irresponsibility on Wall Street doesn't happen again? I wish that I could tell you that Congress is now doing that investigation. It is not. We have got to understand what caused the problem in order to make the necessary reforms. Here are three ideas I'm working on: Cap Interest Rates First, if there is anything we learned from the credit card disaster , where millions of Americans were paying 25 percent or 30 percent interest rates on their credit cards, it is that we have got to have a cap on interest rates in this country. We've got legislation to enact a national usury law . The maximum amount that credit card companies could charge would be 15 percent. Return of the Trust Busters Second, we need to deal with this phenomenon of business that are considered "too big to fail" so we don't have to ever again spend millions of dollars bailing out financial institutions. Teddy Roosevelt had a good idea a century ago. Let's start breaking them up again today. We should require the Treasury Department to provide a public list of every institution in this country that is "too big to fail" and make recommendations to Congress on how we should break up those companies one by one so that they no longer impose a systemic risk to the entire economy. Federal Reserve Secrecy We also need to also take a very hard look at the Federal Reserve. I've teamed up with Congressman Ron Paul, a guy whose politics are very different then mine, and I think we're going to succeed in getting an audit of the Federal Reserve. Among other things we're going to demand an accounting for trillions of dollars at zero interest loans. Who received that money, which financial institutions benefited from that and what were the terms of agreements. The Senate voted 59 to 39 in favor of an amendment I offered to the Budget Resolution calling on the Fed to tell the American people who they loaned $2.2 trillion to and how much each bank received. It still hasn't happened There is a lot more to be done, but the bottom line is that a handful of people plunged this country into a huge economic disaster. We need to know who they are and we need to make sure this never happens again. More on Economy
 
Joe Peyronnin: The Din of Democracy Top
It is hard to believe that it has already been eight years since terrorists attacked our nation. It was a most unimaginable and horrific tragedy that killed thousands of innocent people and has left a gaping scar in our hearts. But on that day, at that moment, our nation instantly came together as one people to mourn our dead and take action. We rose above partisan differences and geographical divides to unite in defense of our country and heal our wounds. Today our nation remembers that day, that act, the victims and their families. But at the same time many of our leaders and pundits have retreated to their respective corners. They resort to mindless shouting; mudslinging, distortions and lies all for short term political or financial gain. They choose to divide America by attacking their opponents, after all "It's my way or the highway." They do not see good will in those with differing opinions, only malice and a lack of patriotism. They spout irresponsible and preposterous claims of "Eugenics!" and "He's a Nazi!" They play to biases, prejudices and fears. They stoke the flames of hatred. They include those who called former President George Bush an "idiot" and a "drug dealer," as well as those who say President Barack Obama is a "liar" and charge he is not even a natural born American. The recent furor by some on the right over President Obama's address to students was just as silly as similar protests two decades ago coming from the left directed at a speech to students by the first President George Bush. For goodness sakes, it's the President of the United States. Washington has become one big schoolyard filled with silly taunts and screams, like "The president is trying to control our children!" Or, "They did it to us first, so there!" For sure we are blessed to live in a country where free speech is a founding principle. But one has to wonder just how appealing the din of American democracy is when heard from across the ocean. Rather than a "Beacon of Hope" it may seem more like a third rate "Battle of the Bands." In an effort to get noticed, bloggers, cable pundits and talk show hosts magnify the already disruptive cacophony of criticism and discordant voices coming from the far right and left. Certainly the clamor and chaos of politics has been very much a part of our democracy since its founding. Divisions have run deep in our nation before, such as leading up to and during the Civil War, the anti-war movement and civil rights era in the sixties and seventies, and during Watergate, to name a few. But our ship of state has always weathered the storm intact and often even stronger. That is my hope today. Yes we are involved in two wars, we face a health crisis, unemployment is increasing and the deficits are overwhelming. Already our children will inherit an enormous national debt, which most every recent president has contributed to. Despite all the bitter backbiting I am sure that President Obama will sign some health care legislation by the end of the year. And no matter what that legislation calls for the American people will have a say. The beauty of our system of government is that every two years there is a mid-term election, and every four there is a presidential election. Nonetheless, it is my hope that our elected officials and pundits lower their voices; that they treat fellow citizens with civility and decency; that they carefully listen to each other. Most of all, that their first priority be what is best for all of the American people.
 
Michael Winship: Marine's Photo Reminds Us of War that Will Not End Top
There was a certain ironic and painful symmetry at work last month. As one iconic image of war was called into doubt, another was being created, a new photograph of combat's grim reality that already has generated controversy and anger. When it was first published in 1936, during the Spanish Civil War, Robert Capa's photo was captioned "Loyalist Militiaman at the Moment of Death." Better known today as "The Falling Soldier," the picture purportedly captures the gunning down of a Republican anarchist named Federico Borrell Garcia who was fighting against the forces of General Francisco Franco. Dressed in what look like civilian clothes, wearing a cartridge belt, he is thrown backwards in an almost balletic swoon, his rifle falling from his right hand. The picture quickly came to symbolize the merciless and random snuffing out of life in wartime -- that murder committed in the name of God or country can strike unexpectedly, from a distance, like lightning from a cloudless sky. Last month, the veracity of Capa's most famous picture was cast in doubt when Jose Manuel Susperregui, a Spanish academic, published a book in which he alleges that the photo was not taken where Capa claimed, but 35 miles away at a location where no fighting had yet taken place; that the picture was posed, a fake. Others disagree, but his evidence is compelling. Just as that controversy was being reported in the news, in Afghanistan another man lay dying, another victim of war. His photo created a sensation, too. But no one is questioning its veracity. In this case, the image is all too real. During an ambush on August 14th, Marine Lance Corporal Joshua Bernard was hit by a rocket-propelled grenade in Afghanistan's Helmand province, where the Marines have been engaged in a major offensive, fighting to take territory back from the Taliban. Associated Press photojournalist Julie Jacobson took a picture of comrades trying to save his life. But it was too late. Over the objections of Bernard's family and Defense Secretary Robert Gates, the AP published the photo as part of a series of articles and photographs about Bernard's platoon. Gates protested to AP that the wire service's "lack of compassion and common sense... is appalling..." AP replied that it had made a tough decision to "make public an image that conveys the grimness of war and the sacrifice of young men and women fighting it." At Bill Moyers Journal , our production team wrestled with the dilemma over whether to show the photo on this week's PBS broadcast. We finally decided to do so, but carefully placed it within the context of other pictures AP's Jacobson took earlier that day of Lance Corporal Bernard and his fellow Marines on patrol. However your own conscience comes down on this issue, there can be no denying the story the photo tells. It forces us to confront through a young man's violent death the ugly, bloody reality of a war that America has been fighting longer than we fought in the First and Second World Wars combined. August was the deadliest month for our troops in Afghanistan since we first invaded the country shortly after 9/11. It has been a gruesome summer -- fifty-one Americans died in August; 45 in July. And to what end? The Taliban is resurgent. Almost two-thirds of the country is deemed too dangerous for aid agencies to deliver much needed help. Civilian casualties this year have reached more than a thousand, including the victims of suicide bombings and so-called collateral damage from American air strikes. The credibility of recent so-called "free" elections has been shattered with charges of widespread fraud and corruption. As The Economist magazine noted last month, resentment against the Karzai government, NATO forces and Westerners in general is growing. "It seems clear," the magazine reported, "that the international effort to bring stability to Afghanistan, in which a strong somewhat liberal and democratic state can take root, is failing." And yet, consider this open letter to President Obama from some of the very same neo-cons who used falsehoods, propaganda and manipulation to throw us into Iraq - arguing for invasion of that country even before the 9/11 attacks occurred. "We remain convinced that the fight against the Taliban is winnable," they write, "and it is in the vital national security interest of the United States to win it." he letter lands just as several European countries have called for a conference to assess the current situation and the commander of our forces in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, delivers a review to the White House, a report many believe sets the stage for an even greater expansion of the war. But on Monday, the McClatchy news service reported that some top Pentagon officials worry without a clear definition of our mission there, further escalation may be useless. According to the article, "Some even fear that deploying more U.S. troops, especially in the wake of a U.S. airstrike last week that killed and wounded scores of Afghan civilians, would convince more Afghans that the Americans are occupiers rather than allies and relieve the pressure on the Afghan government to improve its own security forces." One of that story's reporters, McClatchy's chief Pentagon correspondent Nancy Youssef, recently returned from Afghanistan and was interviewed by my colleague Bill Moyers for this week's Journal. Youssef said, "I can't tell you how many Afghans said to me, 'I don't want the Americans. I don't want the Taliban. I just want to be left alone.'" Nonetheless, "Either the United States commits to this and really commits to it, or it walks away. But this middle ground of sort of holding on isn't going to work anymore... "We're at least coming to that decision point... And to me, that's good news, because at least it gives everybody involved some sense of where this is going. I think that's something worth looking forward to. Because what's been going on up until now is unacceptable." What no one understands for sure yet, she said, is President Obama's position: "That's the big mystery in Washington... Because it will ultimately be his decision." We should have a better idea of where he stands on September 24th, when the White House is supposed to present a list of metrics by which progress in Afghanistan will be measured, a condition that was set by Congress for the approval of further war funding. In addition to the theories of generals and diplomats, the President and Congress may wish to pay careful attention to the words of an Afghan villager named Ghafoor. He told a correspondent for The Economist, "We need security. But the Americans are just making trouble for us. They cannot bring peace, not if they stay for 50 years." Not a pretty picture. ######### Michael Winship is senior writer of the weekly public affairs program Bill Moyers Journal, which airs Friday night on PBS. Check local airtimes or comment at The Moyers Blog at www.pbs.org/moyers. More on Afghanistan
 
Jason Rosenbaum: Your World in Charts: How Health Care Reform Will Work Top
To borrow a phrase from Ezra Klein, here's a simple, easy to understand chart of how health care would work if health care reform is passed. It's really not that hard to understand, and it's certainly much more specific than the Republican plan . For your consideration ( click for bigger version and fact sheet, pdf warning ): (also posted at the NOW! blog ) I'm proud to work for Health Care for America Now More on Health Care
 
Rabbi Michael Lerner: Building on the Hopeful Aspects of Obama's Health Care Speech and Helping Him Get Beyond His Internal Contradictions Top
Media analyses of President Obama's health care speech were divided on whether he had indicated serious support for a public option or had, instead, cleverly tossed a bone of "recognition" to the progressives while simultaneously demanding that they drop their insistence that the health care reform undercut insurance company profits. The confusion, for once, is not with the media but with the incoherence of a centrist politics. Obama wishes to relieve the suffering of Americans, but he does not wish to challenge the profit-uber-alles old "Bottom Line" of the competitive marketplace. Unfortunately for him and for most Americans, he can't have it both ways. FDR recognized that -- and so was willing to stand up to the vested interests of the class from which he emerged, not only rhetorically, as Obama is willing to do at some rare moments like his health care speech, but in the actual policies he promoted. Goodness knows, Obama has tried. He understands the suffering caused by the military-industrial complex's insistence that American security can only come through economic, military and diplomatic domination of the world, and would like to alleviate it. He would prefer a world of peace. But he can't get that without challenging the fundamental equation of security with domination and presenting an alternative, e.g. that security might best be achieved through generosity and genuine caring about the well-being of others around the world, manifested in the kind of G-8 funded Global Marshall Plan that has been introduced into Congress by Keith Ellison (D,Minn). So, instead, he has escalated the war in Afghanistan. Obama is aware that unless we can get down to not more than 350 particles per million of carbon emissions that life on the planet is finished. Standing up to the corporate interests that have resisted this and managed to eviscerate his environmental program into a corporate-giveaway called "cap and trade" would require championing a carbon tax that he fears would make him unpopular with the corporate polluters and with the public whose consciousness these polluter are able to shape through the media. Obama knows that a single-payer program -- extending Medicare to everyone -- is far more rational than what he has proposed to Congress, but he also believes that eliminating the insurance companies, hospital chains, and other medical profiteers would require a battle beyond his current capacities. To address any of these problems fully would require a fundamental challenge to the old Bottom Line. Obama would have to call for a New Bottom Line -- to advocate for defining governmental and private corporate policies as "rational," "productive" or "efficient" not only to the extent that they maximize money and power, but also to the extent that they maximize love and caring, kindness and generosity, ethical and ecological sensitivity, enhance our capacities to respond to other human beings as embodiments of the sacred and our capacities to respond to the universe with awe, wonder and radical amazement at the grandeur mystery of the universe. He actually reached in that direction momentarily at the end of his Health Care speech to Congress by seeming to endorse Senator Ted Kennedy's "large-heartedness: a concern and regard for the plight of others" which he defined as "our ability to stand in other people's shoes; a recognition that we are all in this together, and when fortune turns against one of us, others are there to lend a helping hand." Yet over and over again in the details of his plan it was not this large-heartedness that he championed, but a belief in the positive outcomes of the competitive marketplace. What Obama omitted from mention is that the ethos of that marketplace, which rewards selfishness and materialism and "looking out for number one," as the "common sense" that guides individual as well as governmental behavior, is a product of the fear that we cannot count on others, that there will be no one there to take care of us, and that we must therefore maximize our own advantage lest someone else do so for themselves in ways that will permanently hurt or undermine us. Obama can't help us overcome that fear until he does so himself. He has to allow himself to know, and then help Americans to understand, that most people actually do want to help each other, get delight in being caring and loving, feel fulfilled when they are able to improve the well-being of others. Most people already know this about themselves, but are unsure whether it's true of their neighbors or others. Obama's most important contribution would be to fight for policies based on this understanding and to challenge those who believe the world is filled with people who are primarily self-seeking and aggressive. Unfortunately, he can't do that while remaining loyal to the centrist ideology and its insistence that the aggressiveness manifested in the current competitive marketplace, is what will produce the greatest good for the greatest number. Imagine, for instance, if Obama had started his speech with the idea of "We are all in this together" that he ended it with, and then applied that to each specific part of his program. Sadly, that was impossible precisely because his actual program is in conflict with this at several points. He won't support health care reform that raises the deficit. How can that be justified by a President who raised the deficit to help bail out the people who caused the banks and investment companies to fail all of us! He promises not to give any benefits to immigrants -- but then "we" are not "all in it together!" He is willing to use government to coerce people into his plan those who would not voluntarily join, but not to force insurance companies to lower the prices (for example, by regulating their prices at the expense of lowering their profit rates or simply by creating Medicare for All. He tries to make a public option plausible by comparing it to public community and state colleges, but also assures the insurance companies that they have nothing to worry about from his plan because "the public insurance option would have to be self-sufficient and rely on the premiums it collects." Yet the public option will not be open to those of us who already have private health care insurance. These limitations guarantee that the public option will not achieve the goal of lowering prices or obscene levels of profits. Public universities and community colleges have never been able to sustain themselves on the tuitions of those who use them. If that had been the requirement from the start, tens of millions of Americans would never have obtained the benefits of a public education that enabled them to get better jobs and go on to make valuable contributions to society in turn. If the principle had been that these colleges could not contribute to state or federal deficits, they would long ago have folded. So where is the "we" who are "all in it together" when crippling the only part of his plan that really makes an attempt at a universal solidarity? There are two views about Obama that are at odds in the liberal and progressive world. One holds that Obama really shares all this same perspective with us but has lost his own moorings because he is surrounded by the kind of Inside-the-Beltway realists and pragmatists. On this view, our task is to do what the Network of Spiritual Progressives' conference June 11-14 2010 is aimed to do--"Support Obama to BE the Obama we Voted For--not the Inside-the-Beltway pragmatist and realist whose compromises have disempowered his followers and led many people to become cynical who were previously his supporters." The other view is that he actually does really believe in the capitalist marketplace not only as "the best that can be achieved at the moment" but as an embodiment of his ideals. In that case, our task is to respectfully support him to live up to his own ideals as much as possible, since in so doing he will both push to the limits what can be accomplished in the current system and eventually be forced to acknowledge that a truly humane system is incompatible with the Old Bottom Line and that we actually need a whole new society based on the New Bottom Line. Actually, that's another focus for our NSP conference next June as well -- to bring together the forces that actually want to build a very different kind of reality, know that it is needed now, and want to define the contours of that new society. Ultimately, people in this perspective know that what we need is a spiritual progressive political party. But a first step now is to bring such people together to begin to cooperate (difficult enough, given the degree to which the capitalist marketplace has forced most of these groups to compete with each other for scarce financial support and public recognition). The need for such a party will become increasingly clear as Obama's centrism yields policies that do not eliminate but actually perpetuate human suffering. But we'll be praying that we are wrong about this, and that in the short term at least Obama A) gets vindicated and B) succeeds in reducing suffering. Only, deep down, in our most rational moments, we know that if the system remains largely in place, and only its worst and most humanly and environmentally destructive parts are partially constrained, in the not-too-long-run the suffering will increase. And it is this recognition, not disrespect for Obama that demands of us that we not simply be satisfied with being the left-wing of an Obama cheerleading squad, but lovingly respectful critics of his direction. How to do this in a way that does not immediately marginalize us among the many spiritual progressives whose loyalty to Obama would make them angry at us for even raising these questions is something that keeps us up at nights, not only because those Obama loyalists are part of our spiritual progressive project, but because we ourselves genuinely admire Obama's decency, morality, and intelligence. Liberals and progressives who feel that they have already compromised too much by giving up on "Medicare For All" and embracing a watered-down Public Option are right to resist Obama's pressure to drop that public option -- not because no good could possibly be achieved without it, but because the ideas underlying the dropping of a public option are the same ideas that inevitably lead us to the militarist/domination worldview, to environmental irresponsibility, and to a health care system that will continue to privilege profits over human needs. And that is why Centrist politics appears so incoherent and self-contradictory and unable to relieve the suffering moderates like Obama genuinely desire to heal. More on Barack Obama
 
Stroger Rebuffed As Democrats Don't Endorse For County Board President Top
In a major disappointment for Cook County Board President Todd Stroger, the county's Democratic leaders today have declined to endorse him for re-election, sources said.
 
What To Drink At New York Craft Beer Week Top
New York Craft Beer Week, a ten-day celebration of the city's surging beer culture, begins today at 83 bars across the five boroughs. To help navigate the more than 160 tap and cask offerings, we asked three of the city's leading beer experts -- Josh Schaffner (NY Craft Beer Week's founder and director), Justin Philips (owner of the Park Slope craft-brew temple Beer Table), and Jon Lundbom (New York Division Manager for the rare beer importer B United International) -- to pick the most notable small-batch standouts.
 
Joe Wilson Voted To Provide Taxpayer Money For Illegal Immigrants' Healthcare Top
On Wednesday night, Rep. Joe Wilson [R, SC-2], shouted "You lie!" at President Obama when he said that the healthcare bill would not cover illegal immigrants. "The supporters of the government takeover of healthcare and liberals who want to give healthcare to illegals are using my opposition as an excuse to distract from the critical questions being raised about this poorly conceived plan," Wilson said the next day in a campaign fundraising video. However, in 2003, Wilson voted to provide federal funds for illegal immigrants' healthcare. The vote came on the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003, which contained Sec. 1011 authorizing $250,000 annually between 2003 and 2008 for government reimbursements to hospitals who provide treatment for uninsured illegal immigrants. The program has been extended through 2009 and there is currently a bipartisan bill in Congress to make it permanent.
 
Pat Tillman Thought Iraq "Was A Mistake... Was Going To Be A Disaster" Top
On the football field, Pat Tillman was known for his fierce tackles and unbridled spirit. "Pat, as a football player, loved the roar of the crowd," best-selling author Jon Krakauer told Bob Woodruff in an exclusive interview earlier this month with ABC News. "He was a gregarious guy."
 
Fashion's Night Out Street Style (PHOTOS) Top
While serious Fashion's Night Out shoppers flocked to Bloomie's and Barneys uptown, fun-loving fashionistas held their own parties in smaller boutiques downtown. From Oak and Bellhaus to Opening Ceremony and Topshop, people were dressed to impress. Here's a roundup of our favorite looks we caught on the sidewalk or in the stores. Photos and interviews by Hilary Moss. Follow HuffPost Style on Twitter and become a fan of HuffPost Style on Facebook ! Read our Fashion Week Big News page. More on Fashion Week
 
DEA And NYPD Storm Wrong Apartment In Washington Heights Top
They came hellbent on finding drugs and a gang boss - but it was the wrong apartment, a shaken Washington Heights family said on Thursday. Authorities stormed in looking for drugs, laughed at photos of them in bikinis and left when they realized they had made a mistake, a mother and her daughter told the Daily News.
 
Number Of Uninsured New Yorkers Soars Top
The proportion of uninsured New Yorkers skyrocketed by 2 percentage points in 2008, according to census figures released Friday. A total of 2.72 million New Yorkers were uninsured last year, which means that 14.1% of the state's population had no insurance at some point during the year. Based on the new U.S. Census Bureau data released Thursday, the percentage of uninsured adults aged 19-64 rose t0 19% from 17.2% in the previous year.
 
Mark Olmsted: A Job Nobody Wants: In Defense of (Gasp!) Drug Dealers Top
Twice in my life, in separate decades, I lived off the proceeds of dispensing the elements of temporary physical euphoria. Consenting adults came to me and I gave them a drug for which they handed me money. When I was a bartender, the drug was in legal, liquid form. I paid taxes on what I earned and could tell my mother was I did for a living. Even though most of my regulars were alcoholics, I earned none of society's contempt for getting them drunk, many on a daily basis. When my own addictive choice changed from alcohol to crystal meth, I went from bartending to drug dealing. It started with getting a little extra for my using buddies, to responding to the requests of their friends. At first my only payoff was in my own drugs being free, then I was suddenly turning a profit. It was its own addictive rush. I was fairly atypical as far as most drug dealers go. I answered the phone on the first ring, I was friendly and my apartment was clean. Word-of-mouth was all the marketing I needed. I never in a million years would have wanted or needed to "recruit" any new customers, and the ones I had were mostly weekend warriors. I was about as far as you could imagine from the stereotype of the unshaven sleazebag who lounges near grammar school playgrounds, trying to "turn" kids into addicts, yet what I did qualified me for membership in one of the most vilified minorities in America. Let me be clear. This is not an apologia. Meth is a nasty and addictive drug. I do not advocate its use, have not touched it in 5 years, and the most important thing I do is help others stay clean off of it. But just as meth is a symptom of the disease of drug addiction, so are its purveyors. Every dealer I knew was an addict. And if any of you have ever obtained some mushrooms for Burning Man, done a few bumps of coke at a party, or procured Oxycontin from your maid, you have had a direct or indirect relationship of some kind with a drug dealer. There are even many of you who at some point of your life considered one a friend -- probably in direct proportion to his generosity. As for the harm done by drugs, some interesting statistics. There are an estimated 443,000 deaths a year in this country due to lung cancer , and at least 100,000 alcohol-related deaths . But according to the CDC, there were just under 38,400 drug-related deaths in 2006 , less than a tenth than can be attributed to the thoroughly legal drug of cigarettes. And yet the man at the gas station who hands over the 2 packs of Marlboro Lights is never called the scum of the earth, and the manager at Trader Joe's can recommend Grey Goose or a nice bottle of Chardonnay without being compared to a child molester. The makers of Oxycontin, Valium, and Vicodin -- the biggest drug dealers in the word -- spend no time in prison cells. I promised an entry on preventing recidivism, but when I went through my list of suggestions, they were subsumed by much larger issues of income inequality, improving education, fixing the juvenile justice system and abolishing parole. In the midst of a political battle in which a liberal President with a Congressional majority has immense difficulty getting the extremely popular idea of health care reform passed, writing up proposals for prison reform seemed a quixotic and hopeless task, done far more competently in any case by Senator Jim Webb , or the heroes over at CURE . What I'm proposing -- or asking, really -- is perhaps even more elusive than the abolition of poverty, but it has the merit of originality. It's a change in perception. I'm not suggesting we idealize drug dealers as some kind of victims, nor is any glamorization a la " Weeds " required. But we need to examine the wholesale dehumanization of drug dealers or those accused of it. (Are you a dealer because you get the 4 hits of X for yourself and 3 friends to go dancing? If you get caught, the law says you are.) In Afghanistan and Iraq, a civilian in the wrong place at the wrong time can go from "bystander" to "insurgent" with the pointing of a bayonet. Once so labeled, the presumption is always of guilt, and the altered perception of human beings as "terrorists," i.e, not quite human, is directly linked to a willingness to torture them. By the same token, once someone is labeled a "drug dealer," -- whether or not they are--they join the "homeless" and "terrorists" in the sense of being "other." The orange jumpsuit distances us further -- when we see the prisoner taken in handcuffs from the courtroom, we don't want to think his experience behind those closed doors is like ours would be. We tell ourselves they must be guilty, they're used to it, whatever we need to not empathize, to not imagine how grim and frightening and grey it is back there. We pass the exits to "State Correctional Facility" on the highway and if we think of it at all, it's mostly to shudder in thanks that we're not there. I remember how many of my fellow inmates never even received one piece of mail. The sense that you've been forgotten is a soul-killing despair. This willingness to throw away and forget men behind walls is the end of a long process of dehumanization that starts with a series of labels. The adjectives may be perfectly accurate, but they also diminish our capacity to remember there's a human being involved, not just a "gang member," a "defendant," a "drug dealer." So change your thinking. Take a moment to question the meanings you attach to certain words, how you allow them to create a sense that what makes us different in the eyes of the law is somehow more important than what makes us similar as human beings. And when you pass one of those busses going down to county jail full of handcuffed men, wave. The man who sees you may need to be reminded that he is still seen. More on Poverty
 
Saad Khan: Growing Extremism in Pakistan Top
In yet another episode of violence against religious minorities in Pakistan - that has become a regular affair in this country - Muslims in a Punjab village burned down a church and forced a mass exodus of Christians from that area. The apparent reason behind this carnage was the same accusation of blasphemy that has marred the image of the Muslim world. Pakistani Muslims, in specific, have become the driving force behind this blasphemy drama. People still have bloody memories of the carnage that ensued after the publication of caricatures in European newspapers in 2006. At the time, the anger was driven against European products and financial institutions. Now, it is poor Christians who have always lived under the fears of exploitation and death at the hands of their Muslim neighbors. Violence against religious minorities is not new in Pakistan although it has never reached the magnanimous proportions that one can see in its neighbor ; the lack of major bloodshed, however, is 'compensated for' by regular attacks on religious minorities and the desecration of their religious and personal assets. Last month, there was a major attack on Christians in Gojra, another town of the Punjab province, that resulted in the loss of life and property. (Punjab hosts the majority of Pakistan's 3 million impoverished Christians.) Many of the affected people are still living in camps as they are afraid to return back to their homes and face another backlash from the Muslims. Another religious minority that is badly affected by the violence is the Ahmedi sect (they also mostly live in Punjab). They have been stripped of their Muslim status through a 1974 law and are now considered a religious minority. Although they have a sizable presence in the civil and military bureaucracy, they still face many troubles in their real lives. This is particularly true for common Ahmedi who live alongside Muslims in villages and small towns. Those living in cities also face religious discrimination and are often barred from institutions of professional learning . Religious intolerance has become a part of the social fabric in these areas. The typical ploy to instigate violence against Ahmedis is to level an accusation of blasphemy; the rest of the work is done by the frenzied mob that is charged up by the inflammatory hate speeches of the mosque leaders. Unfortunately, there is no legal protection for these poor souls. The Pakistani constitution does allow for a complete freedom of expression and religion for minorities but it is hardly implemented. Although minorities enjoy relative freedom in major metropolitan areas, they do not in small towns and villages. Those who've lived in small towns for decades are now considering packing up their belongings and moving to bigger cities. The tyrannical blasphemy laws are the major reason behind the growing violence against religious minorities. These laws, promulgated during the dictatorial rule of General Zia, stripped minorities of their basic rights. Simply put, the punishment for any blasphemous action against Islamic figures is death by hanging. There are no means of ascertaining the actual, blasphemous offense, and people are regularly rounded up on charges of speaking against any Islamic figure or desecrating the Holy Quran. These laws have provided an easy excuse to instigate violence against minorities. Interestingly, many Muslims have also become victims of these laws, as anyone can exploit them for personal gains. The only solution to this problem is an immediate repeal of these draconian laws and an increased vigilance by the international human rights organizations. Pakistanis love to extract dollars from American and European aid agencies but they should also prove that there is a rule of law and equal opportunities for every Pakistani. A repeal of laws and international scrutiny will bring at least some sigh of relief for the religious minorities in Pakistan. More on Pakistan
 
Rick Smith: 9/11/09: How Has Your Perspective Changed? Top
The greatness of our potential is created in our minds. The limits, the obstacles that prevent us from achieving our potential are created in the same place. Eight years ago, my perspective was changed dramatically as a result of the horrific events that unfolded that day. I wrote down my thoughts, my scribblings hit the internet, and ever since I have become more and more active as a writer. Today, we are recovering from an economic disruption not seen in most of our lifetimes. How have these tough times changed your perspective? How can your current circumstances trigger a great leap in your life? a two-by-four from GOD september 12, 2001 All the world is a stage, and we are merely players. With the horrific and all-consuming events of the last few days, it has never been more undeniably evident that as players, we do all indeed share the same stage. I am not a professional writer or commentator. These words are merely the offering of a minor player on this grand stage. I was one of more than a million passengers in the air when tragedy struck, landing in Washington DC just as a plane attacked the Pentagon. Chaos ensued, the airport became a military camp, a few frightened people ran past me - in the direction of anywhere. For me, that morning began a three day pilgrimage from Washington back to my family and home. There was time to reach out to loved ones, to rage, to mourn and to reflect. There seemed no shortage of time. Along the way, I came upon a lonely stretch of road in the Blueridge mountains. On the radio was a suburban housewife from Ohio, who had decided to postpone the purchase of a new European automobile. "It just doesn't seem as important now. Our family just wants to go home." Perhaps it was her tone, the inflection in her voice, but it was evident that this woman was not merely a consumer concerned about the economy, exercising fiscal restraint. She seemed to be, for perhaps the first time in her adult life, content. A bit unsettled, I couldn't help but sense I had experienced this feeling before. Early in my career, I enjoyed many successes. But with greater responsibility and financial rewards came an increasing conflict between my career and family. My travel schedule had expanded to five, sometimes even six days a week. Then one day I had an epiphany, thanks to my two-year old daughter. I had returned late on a Friday night from yet another week of travel, too late to put my kids to bed. Saturday morning, my daughter woke up and ran to me in the kitchen, exclaiming "Daddy, Daddy, thanks for coming to visit!" My wife and I sat there dumbfounded, saying nothing. I called my employer that weekend and resigned. Reflecting on this incident, I often refer to it as "a two-by-four from GOD," a moment so startling it was as if the hand of God himself reached down and smacked me on the head. Life has a way of settling into the incremental. We are rarely faced with life altering choices, but rather minor decisions to move slightly to the left, to the right, or perhaps more often to simply just plow ahead. That Saturday morning with my daughter, I realized I had just been given a great gift. The opportunity to stand back from all the elements that made up my everyday life, and ask myself - is this what I really want? Now, with three beautiful children and a fulfilling marriage, I could not be more grateful for the choices that resulted from the powerful, innocent wisdom of a child. Today, America by many measures is the leading nation in the world, and yet we, too seem lost. With critical reflection, it is utterly amazing that as citizens we have perhaps the greatest opportunity of any people on earth to achieve self-actualization. Food, shelter and safety are enjoyed in the US at levels unimaginable to 90% of the world. But, with the opportunity to lead truly meaningful lives within our grasp, we instead become trapped in an endless loop of material one-ups-manship. On September 11, 2001 America was horrified beyond words. Violated were our beliefs, our safety, the fundamentals of our way of life. And yet, in what is slowly becoming the aftermath of these dreadful events, I cannot help but feel that within the ashes of this destruction are hidden two extraordinary gifts. The first is the gift of perspective. So disorienting were these events that each of us now must rethink our lives, our decisions and our direction. The lady in Ohio who suddenly realized the futility in her endless pursuit of material things. A newfound understanding that life is indeed a journey, not a destination. That family is important, and working more to afford luxuries for our children may have a price much higher than simply being there. That work is important, for it provides an excellent opportunity to contribute, to challenge ourselves and exercise our capacity to learn. That charitable endeavors are not just the right thing to do, but are requisites to our inclusion within a community. That significance is more meaningful than success. The second gift is the chance to rebuild. When all the rubble is lifted, the citizens of New York have the unique opportunity to rebuild in any way they choose. A memorial, parks, mixed use housing, perhaps even a more dramatic symbol of freedom and commerce than was originally built. No matter the outcome, the slate is clean. So too is the foundation of all of our lives. The world, each of our world's, will never be the same. How will we rebuild? In what ways will we change the very direction of our lives? On September 11, an evil outside of our control destroyed a part of us. Today, an opportunity within our control exists to rebuild our lives as we see fit. The thousands who have died should be honored and remembered. But within our reach is the opportunity for tens of millions more to be reborn into more fulfilling and meaningful lives. Out of the loss of innocence and the forced realization that we are but a small part of global world, may come an appreciation of our great fortunes. Out of the haunting images, a chance for a new perspective. Out of the rubble, the chance to rebuild on a stronger foundation. And out of death, the chance for all of us as players in this sometimes woeful, yet wondrous theater, the opportunity to no longer merely survive... but to live. This post was originally published at RickSmith.me Subscribe to Rick's Blog Friend Rick Smith on Facebook >
 
Newt Gingrich Gives Award to Pornographer Top
Newt Gingrich knows from stimulus. American Solutions for Winning the Future, Gingrich's DC-based PAC, has named a porn purveyor its "Entrepreneur of the Year" for 2009, according to representatives of the pornographer.
 
How To Advocate For The Homeless Top
This article was originally written by Karen Murphy and posted on Causecast.org It's estimated that approximately 3.5 million people in the United States, 1.35 million of them children (nearly 40%), are likely to experience homelessness this year . In addition, incidence of homelessness has increased dramatically (by a factor of two to three) over the past 20 years, and these numbers are only going to get larger as time goes on when economic pressure, job loss, and the rising cost of living are factored in. People experiencing homelessness need a voice. That voice is us. KNOW THE ISSUES Educate yourself about the basics (you'd be surprised how much there is to know), like the following: • Why people become homeless •Facts about homeless veterans , who make up an estimated 23% of the homeless population, and 33% of homeless men nationwide. •Put a face on homelessness: spend time in shelters talking with people experiencing homelessness first-hand. Read books like Breakfast at Sally's by Richard Lemieux or Rachel and Her Children by Jonathan Kozol. CONNECT WITH A LOCAL COALITION There is power in numbers. The National Coalition for the Homeless has directories of local advocacy and service coalitions in every state as well as a national directory. Offer to serve on advocacy boards and participate in your local coalition. FIND OUT WHAT ADVOCATES ARE DOING IN OTHER CITIES You can get great ideas from seeing what works in other cities. Some examples: • Eric Sheptock is an advocate for the homeless who is himself without a home. He blogs , keeps a Facebook page and a Twitter account to stay connected and keep others informed. Sheptock is fighting the closure of Washington D.C. shelters. • Cathy ten Broeke , Coordinator to End Homelessness for Hennepin County (Minneapolis), is gathering funds from a variety of sources to create and maintain permanent homes for the city's homeless population, allowing city shelters to function as they were designed--as temporary, emergency shelter for people in transition. • Randle Loeb is a Denver advocate who suffers from bi-polar disorder and was homeless for six years. CREATE A PLAN Once you know what's going on in your community and you've spent time talking to those who know (both people experiencing homelessness and service providers and other experts in the field), you can determine the needs in your community. Enlist the aid of your local coalition and other local homeless advocates in creating your plan of action. ENGAGE YOUR LOCAL ELECTED OFFICIALS Most of the funding for homeless programs comes from federal "block grants" that are administered by the states. Local governments then ultimately decide how that money is spent. By bringing awareness to your local leaders, you can help influence where this money goes. •Testify at local planning and budget hearings. •Attend neighborhood and public meetings and speak up in favor of low-income housing, group homes, shelters, and homelessness prevention programs. •Solicit the support of local care providers, the faith community, and civic and veterans groups. •Follow up with continuing correspondence and personal meetings with the local decision-makers. PERSONALLY MEETING WITH YOUR LEGISLATOR The personal touch is crucial, and brings a face to your issues as well as provides education where it's needed. •If meeting as a group, bring no more than 4-5 people. Any more feels like a mob. •Be respectful, not antagonistic. Educate yourself beforehand about your legislator's previous actions or statements on homelessness. •Stay focused on your issue. •Be specific about what action you are asking for. •Leave a position paper or fact sheet for later reference. •Follow up with a written thank you, even if there was no agreement reached in your meeting. INVOLVE THE MEDIA Media attention can have a huge positive impact in creating awareness and promoting your cause. •Be clear about who you are and what you are trying to accomplish. •Call or write local newspapers, TV and radio stations. •Write and submit editorials when important issues related to homelessness arise in your community. •When media groups do express an interest, make sure they know it is appreciated and offer them the resources and support they need to cover your campaign well. GET INVOLVED WITH A LOCAL STREET NEWSPAPER Street newspapers educate the general public about homelessness while providing people experiencing homelessness with an empowering, creative outlet to have their articles, photos, artwork, and poetry published. Street newspapers also post employment opportunities and create a much-needed sense of community. Find out about your local street newspaper or how to start one in your area. REGISTER PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS TO VOTE You don't need a home in order to have a voice in local and national affairs, and there has been a variety of legislation over the past 20 years helping bring voice and empowerment to people experiencing homelessness. To obtain the voting rights registration manual and poster, contact Michael Stoops at (202) 462-4822 or mstoops@nationalhomeless.org. ENCOURAGE ADVOCACY WHERE IT COUNTS Who better to help advocate than those most directly involved: people experiencing homelessness, and the people who work to assist them? •Take advantage of high-participation events like holiday meals at shelters to encourage advocacy; provide paper, pens, stamped envelopes, and sample messages at every meeting and event. •Have a "Call In Day." Offer several cellular phones at shelters or meal programs to get people experiencing homelessness, volunteers, and staff to call the Governor (Mayor, Council Member...) asking them to stop future cuts in essential services or to help provide essential services. •"Reverse Panhandle." Get people experiencing homelessness and other volunteers to hand out quarters and ask people to call their legislators. OTHER RESOURCES There are a variety of resources available to assist you with your advocacy program. Here are a few. • National Coalition for the Homeless • National Coalition for Homeless Veterans Remember, even the smallest action has an impact. Be the change. More on Poverty
 
Lehman's Failure: Why We Bailout Banks And Not Families Top
A year ago, century-old Lehman Brothers lapsed into bankruptcy, completely spooking the oligarchy that runs our nation's financial sector. The oligarchs had fully expected to see Lehman bailed out by the federal government that serves them, especially after the government had dutifully bailed out Bear Stearns earlier in the year. When Lehman was not so served, panic set in, unleashing global economic turmoil and pain. More on Banks
 
Vladimir Putin Signals Plan To Reclaim Old Job As Russian President Top
Vladimir Putin today gave his strongest indication so far that he is planning to get his old job back as president, hinting that he is considering a return in 2012. Speaking to a group of scholars and international journalists, Putin said that he and his successor, Dmitry Medvedev, would take a joint decision over which one of them would hold the post next. Putin stepped down as president in 2008, becoming Russia's prime minister, installing Medvedev in his place. More on Russia
 
Spanish Investigators Push Justice Department On Torture Role; How Will Holder Answer? Top
By Scott Horton Special to the Huffington Post Two investigating judges from the Spanish national security court, the Audiencia Nacional, are asking the U.S. Justice Department for details about the role played by Bush Administration lawyers in the development and approval of torture practices that were apparently applied to a number of Spanish subjects held in Guantanamo. The judges have asked for responses by the end of October, setting up another major test for Attorney General Eric Holder. This time, the question is whether Holder will choose to oblige or stymie international criminal investigations of Bush officials for torture, in the absence of any domestic efforts in that direction. Holder has thus far threaded the needle between torture critics and torture apologists by launching a narrowly tailored preliminary inquiry into a small group of incidents that exceeded Justice Department guidances in place at the time. Had he launched a more wide-ranging investigation, the Spaniards would almost certainly have abandoned theirs, which is based on the principle of universal jurisdiction when it comes to such things as war crimes. The Spanish authorities are deciding whether to continue with a criminal investigation targeting the so-called Gonzales Six -- former attorney general Alberto Gonzales; former Justice Department officials Jay Bybee (now a judge on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals) and John Yoo (now a law professor in Berkeley, California); David Addington, the former chief of staff to vice president Cheney; former undersecretary of Defense for Planning Douglas Feith, and former defense department general counsel William J. Haynes II (now a lawyer with Chevron). The two separate cases involve Judges Eloy Velasco and Baltasar Garzon and arise out of related facts -- one coming of out of a complaint brought by a Spanish human rights organization on behalf of abused Spanish nationals held at Guantanamo, the other stemming from a failed effort by Judge Garzon to prosecute those same prisoners. A conviction initially secured by Judge Garzon was overturned in a later decision of the Spanish Supreme Court, which found substantial evidence that the prisoners had been tortured. The Spanish Supreme Court labeled Guantanamo a "legal black hole," forbade Spanish prosecutors to rely on evidence secured by American interrogators there and directed a more detailed investigation into the prisoner's claims that they had been tortured. In the course of the last week, I interviewed a number of figures involved in these two cases in Madrid, including lawyers practicing before the Audiencia Nacional and court investigators, in order to get a sense of their likely trajectory. I learned that the two judges were closely monitoring developments in the United States, and particularly Holder's decision to appoint career prosecutor John Durham to conduct a preliminary inquiry into a group of ten or more incidents in which the CIA's inspector general concluded that the conduct of CIA interrogators exceeded the guidelines they were given by the Justice Department. Under Spanish law, the opening of a criminal investigation covering the same matters by the United States would probably lead to the termination or suspension of a case in Spain grounded on universal jurisdiction. However, the Spanish authorities tentatively concluded that suspension of their cases was not warranted at this point because Holder had placed so many limitations on Durham's work and because it does not appear that Durham is being asked to examine the cases involving the Spanish subjects who were held at Guantanamo. Judges Garzon and Velasco are also clearly focusing their inquiries on the roles played by the Gonzales Six, whereas Holder appears to have structured the Durham probe to limit any investigation into the role that Justice Department lawyers and others played in the matter. The Spanish authorities will probably reassess if the Durham preliminary review leads to a more formal criminal investigation. If they conclude that Durham is also examining the potential culpability of the Gonzales Six, that would likely lead to a suspension of the Spanish proceedings. The Spanish investigators are now hoping for detailed responses to the questions they sent the U.S. Justice Department in the form of "letters rogatory" -- the customary method of obtaining judicial assistance from abroad in the absence of a treaty or executive agreement. The questions focus on the treatment of the Spanish subjects held at Guantanamo and the specific authority and approval for that treatment. They also probe in more detail into the role played by Gonzales, Bybee and Yoo in the process, reflecting a view that the U.S. Justice Department was itself the locus of much of the criminal conduct connected to introduction of a system of torture and cruel treatment of Spanish subjects, in violation of the Spanish criminal code using its universal jurisdiction arm. The government of Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Zapatero, which has held confidential discussions with the Obama Administration, has strongly opposed the inquiries. Spanish Attorney General Candido Conde-Pumpido, a member of Zapatero's cabinet, instructed his representatives attached to the Audiencia Nacional to seek their termination. On April 17, Conde-Pumpido gave a press conference at which he ridiculed suggestions that attorneys could face any liability for torture, saying that only those who were present in the room when the torture occurred faced liability. However, in Spain, unlike the United States, criminal investigations are pursued not by the attorney general and his staff, but by judges who are independent of political structures. Neither of the two judges has, so far, agreed with Conde-Pumpido's position. Moreover, his analysis of potential liability for torture was squarely rejected in one interim decision of the court, which concluded that legal culpability for torture rested principally with the "intellectual authors" of the program, rather than those who administered the program. The Zapatero government, with support from its political opposition, recently steered legislation through the Spanish parliament modifying Spain's universal jurisdiction statute to limit the sorts of foreign cases that the Audiencia Nacional could handle. The legislative change does not, however, affect the proceedings involving the Gonzales Six, since cases in which Spanish subjects are victims of torture remain within the core competence of the court, regardless of where the acts of torture occurred or whatever other governments may have been involved. On Saturday, the Spanish newspaper El Publico reported that Judge Garzon had agreed to expand his case by admitting a number of human rights organizations and a political party as parties who would have a right of participation in any trial. Huffington Post blogger Andy Worthington offered a summary of the Publico piece with some updates. It is unclear how the Holder Justice Department will react to the Spanish court's request. Lawyers attached to the Audiencia Nacional state that during the Bush years, the U.S. Justice Department was not forthcoming in answering requests for information, even with respect to counterterrorism prosecutions the Spanish undertook with U.S. prompting. Holder, noting that this concern was broadly expressed by European law enforcement authorities, has pledged in several appearances in Europe to introduce a new spirit of cooperation with the European on counterterrorism matters. However, the case of the Gonzales Six presents an unusual challenge since former personnel from the Justice Department are clearly in the prosecutorial cross-hairs. Spanish authorities expressed particular puzzlement over Holder's decision not to release a study prepared by the Department's Office of Professional Responsibility that looks into the conduct of Yoo, Bybee and their successor, Steven G. Bradbury. This report has been five-years in the making. "This report probably contains a good deal of the information that is being sought in the interrogatories," one court investigator told me. British law professor Philippe Sands, whose expert testimony was a key factor in the Audiencia Nacional's initial decision to accept the case involving the Gonzales Six, takes the view that the Spanish cases will now go forward. Sands told me: The effect of Mr Holder's important first decision to appoint a special prosecutor on a limited number of cases involving the CIA means that there will not be, for the time being at least, any sort of investigation (as required by the Torture Convention), of the real authors of the abuse, including the lawyers. Ironically, the decision means that those who made implicit threats with drills that were never used may be investigated, whereas those who authorized, ordered or carried out waterboarding, sexual humiliation, stress positions and the use of dogs will not be. Hardly a logical approach, and not exactly consistent with the scheme under the Convention. That's a bright green light for continued foreign investigations. I have no doubt that the DoJ will, in due course, do the right thing and respond to the letters rogatory. What the response might contain, however, is a matter of some interest. For the moment, however, the attention is focused on the U.S. Justice Department. Will it treat the Spanish criminal investigation seriously? Or will it continue the Bush Administration's practice of turning a cold shoulder to any such queries? It is, yet again, a question of change versus continuity. About Scott Horton Scott Horton is a contributing editor at Harper's Magazine, where he writes on law and national security issues, an adjunct professor at Columbia Law School, where he teaches international private law and the law of armed conflict, and a frequent contributor to the Huffington Post . A life-long human rights advocate, Scott served as counsel to Andrei Sakharov and Elena Bonner, among other activists in the former Soviet Union. He is a co-founder of the American University in Central Asia, where he currently serves as a trustee. Scott recently led a number of studies of issues associated with the conduct of the war on terror, including the introduction of highly coercive interrogation techniques and the program of extraordinary renditions for the New York City Bar Association, where he has chaired several committees, including, most recently, the Committee on International Law. He is also an associate of the Harriman Institute at Columbia University, a member of the board of the National Institute of Military Justice, Center on Law and Security of NYU Law School, the EurasiaGroup and the American Branch of the International Law Association and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. He co-authored a recent study on legal accountability for private military contractors, Private Security Contractors at War. He appeared at an expert witness for the House Judiciary Committee three times in the past two years testifying on the legal status of private military contractors and the program of extraordinary renditions and also testified as an expert on renditions issue before an investigatory commission of the European Parliament. Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter! More on Guantánamo Bay
 
Nicholas Carlson: The Google Brain Drain Goes On Top
From rock star engineers like Mark Lucovsky to whiz entrepreneurs like Dick Costolo , Google (GOOG) seems to lose a top tier employee every week. Why are so many talented people fleeing such a successful company? After speaking with a few of former Googlers, we can say it basically boils down to four reasons. Google doesn't feel as entrepreneurial as it used to. It wasn't so long ago that Google was a startup and it took every employee's full resources to keep the thing thriving. Now Google is a company that knows what it's good at -- search advertising -- and is focused on making that business more efficient. For a lot of employees who joined Google at the beginning or through acquisitions -- among others, we're thinking of early Googler Tim Armstrong and former DoubleClick CEO David Rosenblatt here -- solving a big company's problems of efficiency is kind of boring. There are only so many top spots at Google. Through its own recruiting and through the acquisition of hot startups, Google hires only the best -- lots and lots of "type-a" achievement-focused people. But there's only so many top jobs at any company. Talented people like Dick Costolo, the former CEO of FeedBurner, who came over when Google bought his company, sometimes have to leave to get a title that suits their ambitions. Dick is now Twitter's chief operating officer. He wasn't going to get that job at Google. Other companies try really hard to hire Googlers , so they offer them lots of money and great titles. Former VP of ad sales Tim Armstrong had a great, comfortable gig at Google. But then Time Warner CEO Jeff Bewkes asked him to become CEO of AOL, and offered up to $50 million in stock options. He had to jump at it. Google is a huge company now , so turnover could be very light percentage-wise, but it will still look like a lot of people are quitting. Once a tiny startup, Google now has almost 30,000 employees. The company with smallest turnover in Fortune's "100 best companies to work for" loses 2% of its employees every year. At Google, that would be almost 600 people a year -- about the same size as Facebook's entire headcount at the end of 2008. Still, it's always shocking to hear that a company so successful and so famously pleasant to work for has lost top-tier employees like the following 17 that quit over the past few years: Kai-Fu Lee, President of Google Inc.'s China operations Michael Rubenstein, General Manager of Google Ad Exchange Dick Costolo, CEO of Google-acquired FeedBurner Mark Lucovsky, Engineering director Alexander Macgillivray, Deputy general counsel Jeff Levick, Vice president of sales Erin Clift, Director of agency relations Greg Badros, Senior Director of Engineering David Rosenblatt, President of display advertising Tim Armstrong, VP of ad sales Larry Brilliant, Director of Google.org Suhkinder Singh Cassidy, President for Asia-Pacific & Latin America operations Steve Horowitz, Engineering Director, Android Elliot Schrage, VP, global communications and public affairs Sheryl Sandberg, Vice president, Global Online Sales and Operations Gonzalo Alonso, Latin America director Doug Merrill, Chief information officer, VP of engineering   Click here to scroll through the Google Brain Drain → More on Technology
 
Amb. Marc Ginsberg: Keep Al Qaeda in Our Crosshairs Top
Today's 8th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks should refocus our sites to the unfinished business against Al Qaeda. As victims' names are read one by one and the sad, rain soaked faces of families who lost loved ones peer into Ground Zero, this most essential of national purposes warrants revisiting. Eight years after blasting apart the Taliban government in Kabul we are perilously distant from breaking the back of Al Qaeda and breaking the necks of its leaders. Admittedly, Al Qaeda is no longer what it used to be before 9/11. And even if we captured Bin Laden, et al tomorrow, self-directed terrorists around the world have bought into his ideology and need no command ordering them to commit terrorism against us. There is no reason to think that Al Qaeda cannot reconstitute itself if accorded the opportunity to do so. Which brings me to U.S. goals in Afghanistan, of which there are essentially two: Denying Al Qaeda a safe haven in Afghanistan if the U.S. withdraws. Preventing Afghanistan from collapsing into the hands of the Taliban which would likely destabilize nuclear-armed Pakistan. Anyone professionally knowledgeable about the Afghan situation knows we are not fighting Al Qaeda in Afghanistan -- their leadership is not there but likely across the border in Pakistan or in Yemen, Somalia or wherever terrorists safely find refuge. But the two goals are inexorably linked -- really two sides of the same coin. In reality, our strategy in Afghanistan is focused on achieving Goal #2 as a precondition to achieving Goal#1 -- a task more difficult to sell to war-weary Americans, and far more challenging and costly to achieve because of what President Obama inherited from his predecessor. Some critics of the Afghan campaign use Al Qaeda's absence in Afghanistan as an all-too-convenient rationale to urge a withdrawal from Afghanistan and acknowledge its historical destiny -- a nation forever ruled by warlords trafficking in opium. Oh how so tantalizing for armchair generals to assert the two goals can be de-linked. But the reality of the situation in South Asia provides us no easy way out. There are simply no shortcuts around the necessity of preventing Afghanistan from falling into Taliban hands if we are to prevent Al Qaeda from destabilizing Pakistan. Thank you (again) President Bush for putting us in this terrible situation. Recall that President Obama inherited a deteriorating mess in Afghanistan that from the Bush administration's perspective was, for over 5 years, little more than a side show while it focused on Iraq. Conveniently subcontracting the future of Afghanistan to a weak and corrupt leader in the form of Hamid Karzai, and withdrawing the necessary military and intelligence assets and diverting them to Iraq, rather than maintainining the pressure on the Taliban is the pitiful legacy of the Bush administration's Afghan policy, which is why the worst vestiges of the extremist Taliban who are now resurgent. There is a rising chorus of critics who have developed a collective case of amnesia about what happened in Afghanistan under Bush between 2003 and 2008. They have gone wobbly and want us to wage a war against Al Qaeda in South Asia by remote control. From the right bunker, armchair General George Will has peered through his reading glasses and concluded that Al Qaeda and its Taliban sympathizers can be better fought from the confines of the military equivalent of a Sony Play Station lobbing Tomahawk and drone missiles willy-nilly into the FATA regions of Pakistan and bordering Afghanistan. From the left bunker, futon Field Commander and Nation publisher Katrina Vanden Heuvel insists the U.S. should vacate and let Afghanis deal with Afghanistan. Better to focus on Pakistan where Al Qaeda really resides. Let me play the devil's advocate and give Obama's critics their due. Both ideological flanks are raising important concerns. After all, the U.S. could find itself bogged down in Afghanistan for another five years, yet suffer a terror attack hatched and launched from, say Yemen, Somalia or Iraq by self-directed terrorists. Moreover, why should Americans support a regime led by Hamid Karzai, who by every reasonable account outdid Ayatollah Khamenei in rigging an election? These are valid points. So what to do? A few days ago, the White House released "The United States Government Integrated Civilian-Military Campaign Plan for Support to Afghanistan." The Report constitutes a sanitized version of a classified document that essentially reflects General Stanley McChrystal's recommendation that the U.S. substantially increase its troop levels above 68,000 while the Afghan army and police reach sustainable levels to prevent further erosion in the security situation throughout the country. President Obama has a very tough decision to make whether or not to accept the troop level increase recommendation from his field commanders under mounting pressure from some prominent Congressional Democrats to reject it. Increasing troop levels alone will not guarantee any outcome without a substantial injection of civilian resources to help establish the infrastructure of security necessary to generate anti-Taliban support. Working with a corrupt Karzai has taken on a very malodorous quality and perhaps a UN-sponsored recount may award the election to Abdullah Abdullah. But the stakes are too high to forfeit the chance to stabilize Afghanistan because of Karzai's antics, so an American troop increase appears vital in the absence of NATO taking more of a role. President Obama would do well to devote more diplomatic effort to bring NATO's membership along into a more convincing burden-sharing role -- something many of NATO's members have so far resisted. He will also need to find better ways to choke off the Taliban's capacity to wage war against NATO troops by convincing Pakistan to play a more assertive role interdicting their arms smuggling across the border from Pakistan. Most importantly, he is going to have to more effectively convince a skeptical American public that terrorism cannot be fought by remote controlled drones alone, and that Al Qaeda's future potential, not merely its past atrocities, must remain in our cross hairs. More on Afghanistan
 
Iranian Nuke Proposal Falls Short Of Western Demands Top
VIENNA — Iran's new offer for talks with six world powers ignores their key demand of a freeze of Tehran's uranium enrichment program, according to a copy obtained Friday by The Associated Press, and instead amounts to a manifesto calling for a new international order. The five-page proposal, formally submitted Wednesday to the six nations trying to entice Iran to make nuclear concessions, says Tehran stands ready to "embark on comprehensive, all-encompassing and constructive negotiations." But because it sidesteps the request from the U.S., Russia, China, France, Britain and Germany for an enrichment freeze, the vaguely worded document – essentially a grandiose call to revamp the global landscape – is unlikely to be accepted by those six nations as the sole basis for a start to talks. "The difficult era characterized by the domination of empires, (and) predominance of military powers ... is coming to an end," the Iranian document says. If there are no new talks, the U.S. and its Western allies will likely push for a fourth set of U.N. Security Council sanctions on Tehran for defying council demands that it suspend enrichment and heed other calls meant to reduce suspicions it is trying to make nuclear arms. But permanent council members Russia and China are leery of new sanctions – Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin restated his opposition Friday. So Washington and key EU countries are already working on imposing additional penalties of their own, should the council remain divided. Along with further tightening banking and other economic restrictions on Iranian entities, the West is considering embargoes on gasoline sales on Iran, whose creaky refinery network cannot produce enough for domestic consumption – even at the risk of provoking a ban by Tehran on oil sales to the West. In making a renewed offer to talk with Iran last year, the six offered a range of enticements, "as long as Iran verifiably suspends its enrichment-related and reprocessing activities." These included help in developing a peaceful nuclear program, improved political and trade ties and a "reaffirmation ... to refrain ... from the threat or use of force" against any country – essentially a veiled security assurance meant to ease Iranian fears of possible a U.S. military attack. Instead of a direct response to that offer, the Iranian paper, shared with the AP by a member nation of the International Atomic Energy Agency, suggests that the superpower era is fading, in an indirect slap at the U.S. "These mechanisms ... are the direct products of retaliations based on brute power and domination, while our world today needs mechanisms that come from divine and godly thinking and an approach based on human values and compassion," the document says. From Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei down, senior officials consistently rule out freezing enrichment and dismiss international concerns that the activity is meant to give the country the means of making the material for nuclear warheads. Instead, they say it is geared strictly toward creating nuclear fuel. On Monday, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said his country will neither halt uranium enrichment nor negotiate over its nuclear rights but is ready to sit and talk with world powers over "global challenges." Asked about the substance of the document, a senior official from one of the six countries called it "an outrage." Still, he cautioned against completely ruling out at least preliminary talks. Speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to comment publicly on the issue, he said representatives of the six would be probing Tehran to see if there is any readiness to compromise on enrichment, even if the topic is avoided in the written offer. If Iran agrees to a suspension as a condition to talks on its proposals, then at least preliminary talks may be held to see if the two sides can move closer from clearly diverging positions on what should be discussed, he told the AP. In a rehash of previous Iranian visions outlined by Ahmadinejad and others, the Iranian offer links any talks with a discussion of Middle East tensions "to help the people of Palestine achieve all-embracing peace." It calls for a a "reform" of the U.N. Security Council – shorthand for curbing the authority of the U.S. and the four other permanent council members. And in the only link to the arms issue it couples "preventing development and proliferation of nuclear ... weapons" to disarmament by the world nuclear powers. Senior officials from the six nations spoke by conference call on Wednesday about Iran's proposal and were to hold a second round of talks Friday. While the six have yet to make a formal reply to the offer, the U.S. has already expressed its disappointment, with State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley saying "it's not really responsive" to the June 14, 2008 initiative from the six. U.S. President Barack Obama and European allies have given Iran until the end of September to take up an offer of nuclear talks with six world powers and trade incentives should it suspend uranium enrichment activities. U.S. officials say the administration would like to have a consensus by the time the foreign ministers of the six countries meet in New York on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly in the third week of September, when Obama is also slated to chair a meeting of the Security Council on nuclear nonproliferation. But council unity is unlikely. Putin, Russia's prime minister, warned Friday against using force or new sanctions against Iran for its defiance, saying Moscow has no evidence that Tehran is seeking nuclear arms. Still, Iran already appears to be bracing for new penalties. Iranian state TV reported earlier this month that Tehran has signed a deal with Venezuela for the export of 20,000 barrels per day of gasoline to Iran. The agreement was signed during a visit by Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who pledged to deepen ties with Iran and stand together against what he called the imperialist powers of the world. Iran is vulnerable in its dependence on fuel imports. Despite its substantial oil resources, it lacks the refinery capacity to meet its own demand and must buy vast quantities of commercial-ready fuel on the open market. More on Iran
 
Stephen Elliott: Notes on Book Publishing in a Socially Networked World Top
About That Lending Library: A few months ago, sitting on a bunch of advance copies of my new book, The Adderall Diaries , copies that were supposed to go to well placed media outlets, I decided to start The Adderall Diaries Lending Library . My plan was to allow anyone who wanted to read an advance copy of the book the opportunity to do so, provided they forwarded the book within a week to the next reader. I didn't realize it at the time, but what I was doing played right into the new publishing environment, an environment that is still uncharted and mysterious. A brave new democratic book world where everyone is a potential reviewer. Since then a lot of authors (and book publicists) have asked about the program, wondering if it's a good or bad thing to let anyone who wants to read an advance copy of your book for free. Here's some answers for those interested in planning their own lending library. What is it a success? Absolutely. 400 people signed up for advance copies. It enabled me to interact directly with people who read The Adderall Diaries , which is incredibly fulfilling for an author. One reader started a facebook group called " I Read an Advance Copy of The Adderall Diaries ." The Lending Library itself got written up in a bunch of publications, which was surprising because I wasn't doing it as a marketing stunt. I was doing it because I wanted people to read my book. But maybe that's the same thing. I think of "marketing" as something you do for someone else. Wanting to share your art is something that predates the term and probably goes back to cave drawings. I ended up doing a lot of interviews and people wrote reviews of the book before the book was available. HTMLGIANT even hosted a conversation about the book . Some people told me this was a bad idea. I was getting too much press at a point when people couldn't yet purchase the book. I think the jury is still out on that. But it seemed OK to me. I was glad people were reviewing the book in advance. I figure when a book comes out people talk about it for a month, but you have four months before that happens to initiate a conversation. When I was told I should do a large book tour, rather than going from bookstore to bookstore I sent a note to the 400 advance readers of the book. Now I'm doing a cross-country tour of readings and events primarily in people's homes. It's a lot less lonely, I think, to have someone responsible for your event in each town. And I'll probably sleep on their couches (there's no budget for hotel rooms). These are mostly people I haven't met who liked the book enough to invite me into their homes. Hopefully none of them are crazy. They're probably thinking the same thing about me. Of course, I want to support local independent bookstores so often I'll try to get the local store involved in the event. Book People, for example, is selling books at the Austin House Party September 22. Was it worth it? That depends on what you hope to get out of it. For me it was worth it. But it's expensive and it takes a huge amount of time. My publisher picked up the shipping costs, which came to about $800. The way the lending library was setup we paid the initial postage. But the real cost was in time. It took a lot of time to do this. I had to make a giant spread sheet (actually, a word document with a huge table). It turns out most people won't forward the book to the next person without a gentle nudge. I didn't realize that at first. I thought I could just send books, send addresses, and let the library run itself. But it doesn't work that way. Still, compared to the traditional route of sending galley copies to "opinion makers" it was very efficient. Instead of getting one read for every five books you send out I was getting five reads for every one book. Still... you would think that if people agreed to read the book and forward it within a week that most of them would do that. Not true. Not even remotely true. I had to keep track of where the book was in the chain, notice when someone didn't receive the book, contact members and remind them how easy it was to purchase postage online. The most common excuses for not sending the book on time were, "I'm in the process of moving" and "I've been out of town." My favorite was the person who requested a book and then volunteered for a three month stint with the forest service. But hey, nobody's perfect. I once robbed a comic book store. Ultimately, the thing you really have to ask is if you have the time to deal with this. It's basically a customer service job. You have to field notes from people asking where the book is, then go figure it out and respond to them. It can take ten hours a week. I wouldn't have done it if I didn't believe in the book. I feel certain The Adderall Diaries is the best book I've ever written. Part true crime, part memoir. It's at once the tale of Hans Reiser, a brilliant computer programmer accused of killing his wife, an investigation into a murder my father confessed to in his own unpublished memoir, and a journey into the meaning of identity. It's filled with false confessions and thoughts on what is and isn't knowable. But more than anything it's a book about being a writer. One thing to remember: If you don't write the right book nothing will work. The reader has to connect with the work. I would advise against putting significant time and resources into a work you don't really believe in. Got any advice? Why yes, yes I do. If you want to do a lending library tell everyone they have to forward the book using priority mail. I didn't realize this until after two months. This will result in far fewer lost books. It's $4.95 as opposed to $3.07, depending on the size of the book. But it can reduce shipping time from ten days to two. Figure the average time with a book to be closer to seventeen days, including shipping. Organize based on city and state. People should send the book to people that live close to them. Often this enables people just to hand off the book, rather than using the mail. Send everyone an email every Friday asking if they've received the book and forwarded it to the next person. Once someone says they've forwarded the book, take them off the list. Don't spam people. Just because they signed up to read an advance copy of your book doesn't mean they want to hear from you every time you update your tour or get a review. It's not cool to add people to your mailing list. I think it's OK to send everybody in the group one email when your book becomes available and also if you're doing a reading in their town. That's exactly two non-lending library emails. That's just my opinion. In those emails you could also ask them to join your mailing list, if you have one. After that you should really leave the nice people alone. What are you doing with the galleys now that it's over? Asking the last person with the book to mail it to someone with an income of less than $25,000 who can't afford to buy a hardcover. When I said that I would do this almost all the copies were requested right away, but I'm still collecting addresses in case anyone wants to donate a copy of the book to someone who can't afford their own. Would you do it again? In a heartbeat. But I'd have to write another book first. More on Books
 
Federal Deficit Hits $1.38 Trillion Through August Top
However, Republican critics contend the administration does not have a credible plan to address future deficits. Private economists worry the country could face the grim prospect of seeing interest rates soar in future years and the dollar weaken as foreigners dump their U.S. holdings. The Treasury Department said Friday that last month's deficit was $111.4 billion, below the $152 billion that economists expected. Still, the imbalance added to a flood of red ink already accumulated through the recession and massive spending needed to stabilize the banking system. The Obama administration last month trimmed its forecast for this year's deficit to $1.58 trillion, from an earlier $1.84 trillion. The recovery of the banking system led to the reduced estimate as it meant the administration did not need to get an additional $250 billion in bailout support for banks. The $1.58 trillion estimate for the full budget year signals that that administration expects the imbalance in September to be around $200 billion. That would be a sharp deterioration from September 2008 when the government closed out that budget year with a $45.7 billion surplus. Many private economists have slightly smaller deficit estimates for the full year but all agree that 2009 will be a record-holder by a large margin. The previous record deficit in dollar terms was $454.8 billion last year. The administration's revised budget forecasts issued last month also underscored how much the government's fiscal picture has deteriorated. It is now projecting the deficit over the next decade will total $9 trillion, $2 trillion more than its estimates from a few months ago. The deterioration partly reflects the country's deep recession, the worst since the 1930s. That downturn has cut into government receipts and pushed up spending in such areas as unemployment benefits and food stamps, along with the cost of fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In addition, the government is using a $787 billion economic stimulus program passed by Congress last February to jump-start growth and is spending massive amounts from the $700 billion financial bailout package passed in October 2008 to stabilize the financial system. The Treasury Department budget report for August showed the government collected $145.5 billion in revenues, a drop of 7.3 percent from August 2008. It marked the 16th consecutive month that revenues have been lower than the previous year, a string that reflects how much the recession, which began in December 2007, has cut into personal income and corporate taxes. Spending in August totaled $256.9 billion, down 4.5 percent from the year before. However, that comparison was misleading because the deficit last month was lowered by timing shifts which saw some payments shifted into July because Aug. 1 fell on a Saturday. Primarily because of the timing shifts, last month's deficit was 0.5 percent lower than in August 2008. For the first 11 months of the budget year, spending totals $3.26 trillion, up 18.7 percent from a year ago, while tax receipts fell 16.1 percent to $1.89 trillion. The spending increases include the administration's estimate that $174.2 billion has been tapped from the financial bailout fund and another $84.9 billion went toward propping up mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. In addition, federal spending on unemployment benefits totaled $104.7 billion through August, up from $41.4 billion in the year-ago period. More on The Recession
 
Behemoth Blogs Taking Over The Web Top
Almost everyone weighing in agreed that blogging has become more corporate, more ossified, and increasingly indistinguishable from the mainstream media. Ezra Klein (formerly of The American Prospect, now of The Washington Post) noted, "The place has professionalized."
 
Mark Weisbrot: Morgenthau's Axis Debunked Top
From my colleague Jake Johnston: below is the text of Manhattan D.A. Robert Morgenthau's September 9 Wall Street Journal op-ed, " The Emerging Axis of Iran and Venezuela ," with rebuttals for 21 statements in the text. Points number 9, 11, 15, 20, and 8, and 4 are worth noting because they all deal with allegations made by Morgenthau that are either complete fabrications or without evidence. Others are grossly misleading statements; most important are numbers 1, 3, 15, 18, and 19. One other point worth emphasizing: Brazil is on the same page with Venezuela regarding Iran, as is most of the world. Brazil's foreign minister went to Iran last December, where he publicly defended Iran's right to enrich uranium, and announced that expanding commercial and other ties to Iran were "a foreign policy priority" for Brazil. And President Lula himself also defended Iran. Below are two articles quoting Lula that show his opposition to U.S. (and European) bullying, sanctions, etc. against Iran - from just the last week. ________________________________ OPINION * SEPTEMBER 9, 2009 The Emerging Axis of Iran and Venezuela ROBERT M. MORGENTHAU The diplomatic ties between Iran and Venezuela go back almost 50 years and until recently amounted to little more than the routine exchange of diplomats. With the election of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in 2005, the relationship dramatically changed. [1) In fact, the relationship deepened before this, during the Presidency of Mohammad Khatami. A meeting with Khatami and Chávez in 2004 saw the agreement for both the development bank, as well as the tractor production . With the election of Ahmadinejad, Chávez was worried the agreements might be threatened .] Today Mr. Ahmadinejad and Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez have created a cozy financial, political and military partnership rooted in a shared anti-American animus [2) This is just rhetoric, the vast majority of the agreements are economic in nature. Two large oil producers are natural allies.]. Now is the time to develop policies in this country to ensure this partnership produces no poisonous fruit. Signs of the evolving partnership began to emerge in 2006, when Venezuela joined Cuba and Syria as the only nations to vote against a U.N. Atomic Energy Agency resolution to report Iran to the Security Council over its failures to abide U.N. sanctions to curtail its nuclear program. [3) This is very misleading: this was a vote of only the Board of the UN Atomic Energy Agency. The vote was 27-3, with 5 abstentions. Most importantly, if this were a UN vote, the vast majority of the United Nations today would vote with Venezuela, Cuba, and Syria on this point. Morgenthau makes it look as if Venezuela is isolated on this issue; in fact it is in the large majority.] A year later, during a visit by Mr. Chávez to Tehran, the two nations declared an "axis of unity" against the U.S. and Ecuador [4) Ecuador? This must be a typo, or else this is the strongest evidence that Morgenthau doesn't know what he is talking about. This doesn't say much for the WSJ editors, however, that they missed this]. And in June of this year, while protesters lined the streets of Tehran following the substantial allegations of fraud in the re-election of Mr. Ahmadinejad, Mr. Chávez publicly offered him support [5)As did others, notably President Lula da Silva of Brazil] . As the regime cracked down on political dissent, jailing, torturing and killing protesters, Venezuela stood with the Iranian hard-liners [6) This is misleading, Chávez recognized the elections - for which no credible evidence has been provided demonstrating that they were stolen - but never said he supported jailing or torturing or killing protesters] . Meanwhile, Iranian investments in Venezuela have been rising. The two countries have signed various Memoranda of Understanding on technology development, cooperation on banking and finance, and oil and gas exploration and refining [7) Even the State Department acknowledges that each country has a sovereign right to have relations with any country it chooses] . In April 2008, the two countries also signed a Memorandum of Understanding pledging full military support and cooperation. United Press International reported in August that Iranian military advisers have been embedded with Venezuelan troops. [8) The UPI article is very similar to this one. UPI, like the Washington Times , is now owned by the Reverend Sun Myung Moon's Unification Church and sometimes prints unsubstantiated allegations. This is not a reliable source.] According to a report published by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in December of last year, Venezuela has an estimated 50,000 tons of unmined uranium. There is speculation in the Carnegie report that Venezuela could be mining uranium for Iran. [9) These are complete fabrications, with absolutely no evidence presented.] The Iranians have also opened International Development Bank in Caracas under the Spanish name Banco Internacional de Desarrollo C.A., an independent subsidiary of Export Development Bank of Iran. [10) This was agreed to before Ahmadinejad became President] Last October the U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control imposed economic sanctions against both of these Iranian banks for providing or attempting to provide financial services to Iran's Ministry of Defense and its Armed Forces Logistics--the two Iranian military entities tasked with advancing Iran's nuclear ambitions. My office has been told that that over the past three years a number of Iranian-owned and controlled factories have sprung up in remote and undeveloped parts of Venezuela--ideal locations for the illicit production of weapons [11) No evidence has been presented that such plants are being used for anything other than what they are supposed to be used for] . Evidence of the type of activity conducted inside the factories is limited. But we should be concerned, especially in light of an incident in December 2008. Turkish authorities detained an Iranian vessel bound for Venezuela after discovering lab equipment capable of producing explosives packed inside 22 containers marked "tractor parts." The containers also allegedly contained barrels labeled with "danger" signs [12) Many chemicals are dangerous, so this is not proof of anything. Note also he uses the word "allegedly," making this an even further stretch. ] . I think it is safe to assume that this was a lucky catch--and that most often shipments of this kind reach their destination in Venezuela. A recent U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) study reported a high level of corruption within the Venezuelan government, military and law enforcement that has allowed that country to become a major transshipment route for trafficking cocaine out of Colombia. [13) There is no news here. Venezuela sits between the largest cocaine-producing nation in the world, Colombia, with which it shares a 1300-mile-long border, and the largest cocaine-consuming nation, the U.S. Venezuela long has been, and invariably long will be, a major transshipment route for cocaine simply due to geographic proximity.] Intelligence gathered by my office strongly supports the conclusion that Hezbollah supporters in South America are engaged in the trafficking of narcotics [14) The largest narcotic traffickers in Latin America are based in Mexico and Colombia. Note also the non sequitur here: what does this have to do with Venezuela?] . The GAO study also confirms allegations of Venezuelan support for FARC, the Colombian terrorist insurgency group that finances its operations through narcotics trafficking, extortion and kidnapping. [15) The GAO report does not confirm any allegations - it merely presents allegations. To date, the U.S. government has presented no evidence that Venezuela has provided any material aid to the FARC. Since the State Department has repeatedly demonstrated that they are no fans of Hugo Chávez, we have to assume that they would present evidence if they had any.] In a raid on a FARC training camp this July, Colombian military operatives recovered Swedish-made anti-tank rocket launchers sold to Venezuela in the 1980s. Sweden believes this demonstrates a violation of the end-user agreement by Venezuela, as the Swedish manufacturer was never authorized to sell arms to Colombia. [16) Chávez addressed this directly : the weapons had been stationed at a military outpost that was raided in 1995, whatever was there was stolen. For the last 40 years, guerrillas in Colombia have stolen weapons inside Venezuela. There is no evidence that this has increased under Chávez.] Venezuelan Interior Minister Tareck El Aissami, a Venezuelan of Syrian origin, lamely called the allegations a "media show," and "part of a campaign against our people, our government and our institutions." [17) It is racist for Morgenthau to mention El Aissami's heritage. What if someone wrote, "Morgenthau, an American of Jewish origin, has written a diatribe against Iran and Venezuela?" That would rightfully be considered anti-Semitic.] In the past several years Iranian entities have employed a pervasive system of deceitful and fraudulent practices to move money all over the world without detection. The regime has done this, I believe, to pay for materials necessary to develop nuclear weapons, long-range missiles, and road-side bombs. Venezuela has an established financial system that Iran, with the help of Mr. Chávez's government, can exploit to avoid economic sanctions. [18) Morgenthau does not distinguish between UN sanctions, which target the Iranian nuclear program, and U.S. sanctions, which are broader. Venezuela is under absolutely no obligation to abide by U.S. sanctions.] Consider, for example, the United Kingdom bank Lloyds TSB. From 2001 to 2004, on behalf of Iranian banks and their customers, the bank admitted in a statement of facts to my office that it intentionally altered wire transfer information to hide the identity of its clients. This allowed the illegal transfer of more than $300 million of Iranian cash despite economic sanctions prohibiting Iranian access to the U.S. financial system. In January, Lloyds entered into deferred prosecution agreements with my office and the Justice Department to resolve the investigation. In April, we also announced the indictment of a company called Limmt, and its manager, Li Fang Wei. The U.S. government had banned Limmt from engaging in transactions with or through the U.S. financial system because of its role in the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction to Iran. But our investigation revealed that Li Fang Wei and Limmt used aliases and shell companies to deceive banks into processing payments related to the shipment of banned missile, nuclear and so-called dual use materials to subsidiary organizations of the Iranian Defense Industries Organization. (Limmt, through the international press, has denied the allegations in the indictment.) The tactics used in these cases should send a strong signal to law enforcement, intelligence agencies, and military commands throughout the world about the style and level of deception the Iranians' employ. Based on information developed by my office, we believe that the Iranians, with the help of Venezuela, are now engaged in similar sanctions-busting schemes. Why is Hugo Chávez willing to open up his country to a foreign nation with little shared history or culture? I believe it is because his regime is bent on becoming a regional power, and is fanatical in its approach to dealing with the U.S. The diplomatic overture of President Barack Obama in shaking Mr. Chávez's hand in April at the Summit of the Americas in Trinidad and Tobago is no reason to assume the threat has diminished. In fact, with the groundwork laid years ago, we are entering a period where the fruits of the Iran-Venezuela bond will begin to ripen. That means two of the world's most dangerous regimes [19) Good luck finding any knowledgeable foreign policy expert, even in Washington, that would call Venezuela one of the most dangerous regimes in the world] , the self-described "axis of unity," will be acting together in our backyard on the development of nuclear and missile technology. [20) This is ridiculous - no evidence has been presented that this will happen.] And it seems that terrorist groups have found the perfect operating ground for training and planning, and financing their activities through narco-trafficking. [21) What about Mexico, where drug cartels are running large parts of the country and is directly south of the U.S.? Or Colombia, a narco-paramilitary state, with drug-dealers high up in the government?] The Iranian nuclear and long-range missile threats, and creeping Iranian influence in the Western Hemisphere, cannot be overlooked. My office and other law-enforcement agencies can help ensure that money laundering, terror financing, and sanctions violations are not ignored, and that criminals and the banks that aid Iran will be discovered and prosecuted. But U.S. law enforcement alone is not enough to counter the threat. The public needs to be aware of Iran's growing presence in Latin America. Moreover, the U.S. and the international community must strongly consider ways to monitor and sanction Venezuela's banking system. Failure to act will leave open a window susceptible to money laundering by the Iranian government, the narcotics organizations with ties to corrupt elements in the Venezuelan government, and the terrorist organizations that Iran supports openly. --Mr. Morgenthau is the Manhattan district attorney. This op-ed is adapted from a speech yesterday at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C. ____________________________________________ 'Big power' Brazil stands by Iran, Venezuela: Lula Marc Burleigh, AFP, September 3, 2009 Brasilia - Brazil is poised to become one of the 21st century's great powers, President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva told AFP, as he fended off international criticism of its role as a "conciliator" in dealings with Iran and Venezuela. [...] And with those ambitions comes a flexing of muscles in the international arena said Lula, 63, one of the principal opponents to the West's increasing pressure on Iran over that country's nuclear program. Soon, probably this month, he is to host Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the latter's first overseas trip since being declared the winner of disputed June 12 elections. Lula slammed a renewed push by the United States and European countries for sanctions against Iran over fears its nuclear program was hiding the development of atomic weapon. "We need to convince them politically. They can't be backed into a wall," he said. "This policy of 'all or nothing' doesn't exist." Iran had a right to peaceful nuclear energy, he insisted, adding that he believed the US-led criticism of its arch-foe in the Middle East was reminiscent of Washington's fallacious justification for the
 
Nancy Snow: Joe Wilson, You're No Joe Nye Top
I got a lot of razzing yesterday about Joe Wilson from my Syracuse University students. We were talking about persuasion and influence, what to do and what not to do and how my fellow South Carolinian was in the "not to do" category. I shared that I have mingled with Congressmen Joe Wilson at family gatherings over Thanksgiving in the Palmetto state. Let's just say he's sort of "kin" through marriage. So "say it ain't so Joe" isn't enough today. But apparently people are saying too much because when I just checked, Joe Wilson's Web site was down with this message: Due to exceptionally high traffic, this site is temporarily unavailable. Please come back shortly. Will do, Congressman. Don't you know that finger wagging is as ineffective a form of communication as shoe-throwing? It may be spontaneous but it's just not wise. It may make you an instant YouTube sensation, but that's not always a resume-builder with the likes of water-skiing squirrels and Diet Coke and Mentos igniters. While Joe Wilson quickly apologized to President Obama for his irrational mind hiccup -- which Obama graciously accepted -- it still left a bitter taste in my mouth. Remember, this is a congressman from South Carolina. I've got a South Carolina accent. I earned my undergraduate degree from Clemson University (Go Tigers!) And my Tigers lost last night to Georgia Tech. Do I need to remind anyone about one South Carolina governor who said he was going hiking, or about a man and a horse named Sugar? It's been one long, hot and bothered summer in South Carolina and we just don't need this piling on. We don't need public spectacles. We need public diplomats. On this, the eighth anniversary of 9/11, we need to become soft power high rollers, the way Joe Nye implores us. We've come a long way from October 2001 and that rhetorical inward-looking phrase: Why do they hate us? Joseph Nye and I served on a BBC Panel four years ago that asked the question, "Does the US rule the world?" A lot of good vibrations have come our way since then. But we still need our daily affirmations. Here's the bumper sticker moment. Soft is the new smart. Guernica magazine describes Joe Nye like a Benjamin Franklin of our time: Tall, thin, rarely seen without a suit or a smart, brightly striped tie, Nye has a handsome face with warm, creased eyes. Balding on top, he wears his hair short on the sides and looks much younger than his sunny seventy-one years. After listening carefully to a question, he speaks in perfectly measured sentences that reveal a mind at peace with its own work, as well as someone accustomed to repeating an idea for new audiences or listeners. Colleagues at Harvard, where he still teaches, have called him "elegant," "patrician, " and "wise," and see a practical and hugely influential application of his work. Harsh is dumb. Soft power is this century's fuel efficiency for the global mind. Inspired by Joe Nye, who will be on our campus next weekend, Syracuse University Chancellor Nancy Cantor called on our students to think about their roles as influential agents of change for the public good. It will require that you look outward, connect to others here and everywhere, as your wired generation can do so well. You have to be the world's best public diplomats, and you need to start right away. You need to prepare for the world in the world. It's not too early---in fact, it's the right time---to start bending things in the service of a better day -- building long term relationships at every level that open the doors to communication, problem-solving and change. Public diplomats, that's what you need to be. But to do that, you will need to listen as well as talk, interact across chasms, and make yourselves vulnerable, letting the tables turn on who is the expert and who is the novice, playing many roles beyond the familiar student and teacher. How do you start the conversations, large and small, weighty and trivial, that constitute good public diplomacy? Imagine if that other Joe had thought about starting his "conversation" with the president that way?! I promise you this: If I see Joe Wilson this Thanksgiving, I'll make sure not to shout out or finger point as I reach for the pecan pie. Dr. Nancy Snow is Associate Professor of Public Diplomacy in the Newhouse School at Syracuse University. She is the author/editor of six books, including The Arrogance of American Power , Information War , and Propaganda, Inc.
 

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)