url
stringlengths 36
564
| archive
stringlengths 78
537
| title
stringlengths 0
1.04k
| date
stringlengths 10
14
| text
stringlengths 0
629k
| summary
stringlengths 1
35.4k
| compression
float64 0
106k
| coverage
float64 0
1
| density
float64 0
1.14k
| compression_bin
stringclasses 3
values | coverage_bin
stringclasses 3
values | density_bin
stringclasses 3
values |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/03/AR2008060303490.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/03/AR2008060303490.html
|
Lockheed Faulted for Failure to Control Costs
|
2008060419
|
Lockheed Martin, the biggest U.S. defense contractor, failed to follow military guidelines to track and manage costs on major weapons programs, according to an internal Pentagon document released yesterday by a government watchdog group.
The Bethesda company did not comply with 19 of 32 guidelines, which led to a lack of controls on the cost and schedule of multibillion-dollar programs including the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and the F-22 and F-16 fighter jets, the Defense Contract Management Agency said in a November 2007 report made public yesterday by the Project on Government Oversight.
John Young, the Pentagon's chief weapons buyer, said yesterday in a hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee that a corrective plan had been worked out between the Pentagon and Lockheed since the DCMA completed its report last fall. Young said that the Pentagon would withhold $10 million in payments from Lockheed if it missed any of 12 milestones established in the plan and that the DCMA was also meeting with Lockheed every two weeks to review its progress.
Tom Jurkowsky, a Lockheed Martin spokesman, said the company had "achieved three milestones that are part of the plan" and was working to train more of its managers and subcontractors on the guidelines.
"We're putting improvements in place that are going to be effective in keeping our programs on track with cost and schedule," he said.
The DCMA's report came as senators questioned government auditors and Pentagon officials about how 95 of the military's largest weapons programs are $295 billion over their original projected cost, bringing their total estimated cost to $1.6 trillion. The cost of the Joint Strike Fighter, for example, has risen from $203 billion in 2001 to $298.8 billion, according to a recent government report. Lockheed said part of the reason was an increase in the price of raw materials such as titanium, as well as changes in what the government wanted.
Another source of cost overruns, government auditors said, is that there has been a dramatic cut in the government's acquisition workforce over the past decade, leaving fewer people for oversight and management, while at the same time, the amount of work contracted out has doubled to $600 billion annually.
In its report, the DCMA said Lockheed was not "following, nor consistently applying" a set of Pentagon guidelines called the Earned Value Management System that flag cost overruns. The agency said Lockheed's attempt to follow the guidelines was "superficial at best."
"This undisciplined approach to program management and towards the maintenance of the EVMS, will ultimately jeopardize the long-term stability" of Lockheed's aeronautics program "and diminishes the purchasing power of the Department" of Defense, the report said.
The agency said that Lockheed had "vague and confusing" documentation on the management system and that it was altering some cost overruns and performance levels, which made the "accuracy and validity" of Lockheed's data "suspect" and hard for the Pentagon to figure out the costs and completion date of a program.
"This shows that the world's largest defense contractor can't spot cost problems before they get out of control," said Nick Schwellenbach, national security investigator for the Project on Government Oversight.
|
Lockheed Martin, the biggest U.S. defense contractor, failed to follow military guidelines to track and manage costs on major weapons programs, according to an internal Pentagon document released yesterday by a government watchdog group.
| 16.210526 | 1 | 38 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/03/AR2008060301714.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/03/AR2008060301714.html
|
In S. Korea, a Reversal on U.S. Beef Imports
|
2008060419
|
SEOUL, June 3 -- With his approval ratings hit hard by mass anxiety about American beef, South Korean President Lee Myung-bak backed away Tuesday from a wildly unpopular agreement to resume U.S. beef imports. He had personally approved the deal less than two months ago.
Lee's change of heart follows weeks of demonstrations by tens of thousands of South Koreans, many of them mothers with children in hand, angered that his government would expose them to the purported risks of mad cow disease.
"We have lost the public's confidence over this matter," Lee told his cabinet Tuesday, according to a spokesman.
Plunging poll numbers apparently also played a role in Lee's decision. In office just 100 days, he has seen his approval ratings sink below 20 percent, a historic low so early in a South Korean president's term.
His government asked the United States on Tuesday to refrain from shipping beef from animals that were more than 30 months old at the time of slaughter, which many people here believe raises the risk of mad cow infection.
Until the U.S. government complies, it appears that all beef imports will remain on hold.
"It is natural not to bring in meat from cattle 30 months of age and older as long as the people do not want it," said Lee, although he had agreed April 18 to allow U.S. beef imports regardless of age.
U.S. reaction was swift and negative.
"I can't deny that we're disappointed by this," said U.S. Ambassador Alexander Vershbow. "We think that the agreement that our two governments reached in April is a good agreement, that it's based on international science, and there's no scientific justification to postpone implementation."
Vershbow added that the United States did not "see any need for renegotiation of the agreement" because it provides "very effective safeguards to ensure the health of Korean consumers." He also said that U.S. beef over 30 months old has been confirmed safe in many scientific tests.
Several leading U.S. beef companies said Monday that they would voluntarily begin labeling shipments to South Korea to indicate the age of cattle at the time of slaughter. But it appeared that this would not be enough to satisfy the Seoul government.
The ban that has substantially closed South Korea's market to American beef producers began after the first case of mad cow was confirmed in Washington state in 2003. Before then, South Korea was the third-largest importer of U.S. beef.
|
World news headlines from the Washington Post,including international news and opinion from Africa,North/South America,Asia,Europe and Middle East. Features include world weather,news in Spanish,interactive maps,daily Yomiuri and Iraq coverage.
| 10.434783 | 0.413043 | 0.413043 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/03/AR2008060303245.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/03/AR2008060303245.html
|
Consumer Group Seeks Ban on Some Food Dyes
|
2008060419
|
Controlled studies over three decades have shown that children's behavior can be worsened by some dyes, said the Center for Science in the Public Interest. The group noted that the British government had successfully pressured manufacturers to switch to safer colorings.
Over the years, the FDA has consistently disputed the center's assertion. The agency's Web site says: "Although this hypothesis was popularized in the 1970s, well-controlled studies since then have produced no evidence that food additives cause hyperactivity or learning disabilities in children."
Julie Zawisza, an FDA spokeswoman, said that color additives undergo safety reviews before approval and that samples of each artificial coloring are tested. She said the agency reviewed one of the studies that the center cites in calling for a ban.
"[We] didn't find a reason to change our conclusions that the ingredients are safe for the general population," Zawisza said. "Also note that the European Food Safety Agency has a similar view as FDA's."
Dyes are in countless foods, sometimes to simulate the color of fruits or vegetables. They are particularly prevalent in cereals, candies, sodas and snacks pitched to kids.
"The purpose of these chemicals is often to mask the absence of real food, to increase the appeal of a low-nutrition product to children, or both," said the center's executive director, Michael F. Jacobson. "Who can tell the parents of kids with behavioral problems that this is truly worth the risk?"
The petition asks the FDA to require a warning label on foods with artificial dyes while it considers the group's request to ban the dyes. The colorings the center seeks to ban are: Yellow 5, Red 40, Blue 1, Blue 2, Green 3, Orange B, Red 3, and Yellow 6.
|
A consumer advocacy group called on the Food and Drug Administration yesterday to ban the use of eight artificial colorings in food, asserting that the additives may cause hyperactivity and behavior problems in some children.
| 9.486486 | 0.72973 | 1.108108 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/03/AR2008060303061.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/03/AR2008060303061.html
|
Case Against Sect May Not Be Over
|
2008060419
|
SAN ANGELO, Tex., June 3 -- The state of Texas's case against members of a polygamist sect is damaged but not dead, legal experts said -- even after a series of court defeats that ended with the return of hundreds of children who had been seized at the group's compound.
On Tuesday, as members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints continued to pick up their children from foster homes, some in Texas said that the court rulings proved the state had overreacted when it removed more than 400 children from their parents.
But child-protection authorities said their investigation will carry on. And legal experts said they might still have a good chance at proving abuse at the Yearning for Zion Ranch, using DNA tests and seized records to show that underage girls were married to and impregnated by older men.
"Simply returning the kids to the ranch . . . doesn't say there can never be any individual prosecutions" said Adam Gershowitz, a professor who teaches Texas criminal procedure at the South Texas College of Law in Houston. "If the evidence indicates that men have been having sexual relations with underage girls, that's still a crime."
The state's case began on April 3, when state authorities raided the group's compound near Eldorado, Tex. The state alleged that the group's beliefs, which allowed girls to become wives and mothers just after puberty, created a physical threat to some children and a threat of psychological corrosion for all.
But last week, the state Supreme Court rejected that logic and pressed the state to provide evidence of abuse or threats against individual children.
Following their direction, on Monday a lower court judge in San Angelo ordered all the children released. By Tuesday afternoon, 229 had already left.
One lawyer, however, pressed for an order exempting her client, a girl from the sect, from the order releasing the children. The lawyer declined to give details, beyond saying the girl would be in too much danger of abuse if she went back to the compound.
Seventy-two of the boys who are returning home had been living at Cal Farley's Boys Ranch, a group home outside Amarillo, Tex. Dan Adams, the home's president and chief executive, said that the staff had spent weeks trying to explain to the boys why they were there.
"They just wanted us to know that they were good people," Adams said in a phone interview. Not wanting to offer an opinions, Adams said, his staff said, " 'You seem to be good boys.' You know, we didn't try to get into explanations about why the state did what they did."
Some outside the sect also have questioned the state's actions. John Kight -- chairman of the board for a Kerrville, Tex., mental health center that treated some of them -- said the seizures had been painful and unnecessary.
"It was just traumatic on the little kids," said Kight, of the Hill Country Community Mental Health and Mental Retardation Center. The state, he said, "decided that the people were guilty, and they have to prove themselves innocent."
|
Get Washington DC,Virginia,Maryland and national news. Get the latest/breaking news,featuring national security,science and courts. Read news headlines from the nation and from The Washington Post. Visit www.washingtonpost.com/nation today.
| 14.738095 | 0.428571 | 0.52381 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/03/AR2008060303186.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/03/AR2008060303186.html
|
A Swing Through Golf History in New Jersey
|
2008060419
|
While scoping out the U.S. Golf Association's museum in Far Hills, N.J., on a recent morning, with all of its videos and photographs and memorabilia, I get a powerful urge to play some golf.
But outside it's raining sheets and blankets. So I take a deep breath and surrender to history.
This is, after all, the stomping grounds of the country's official amateur golf association. Whereas the pro tours are overseen by the Professional Golf Association, amateur championships and competitions are governed by the USGA. The USGA also oversees the rules and integrity of the game for all golfers in America.
If I want to learn about a game I love to play, this is the starting point. Founded in 1936 and the repository of more than 42,000 objects, 500,000 photos and thousands of hours of historical movies, it's the country's oldest sports museum, according to director Rand Jerris. Closed since 2005 for renovation, it had its grand reopening Tuesday.
Granted, it's a long drive from Washington, about four hours. But what golfer doesn't like a long drive?
Golf House, the USGA headquarters, sits on about 100 acres in the rolling New Jersey countryside less than an hour west of Manhattan, surrounded by horse farms and hilly estates. Large brick buildings house the group's corporate offices, an equipment test center and the museum. The grounds are immaculately kept, natch, and there are sweet little pitch-and-putt holes here and there. Outside Jerris's office window I can see a 16,000-square-foot putting green taking shape. Soon visitors will be able to putt there with replica clubs.
The heart of the exhibit space, which encompasses more than 33,000 square feet, is a renovated 1919 home designed by John Russell Pope, architect of several Washington buildings, including the National Archives, the Jefferson Memorial and the National Gallery of Art's West Wing. Workers gutted the structure and refurbished the inside to code. They repaired the exterior, patched the brickwork and walls and added climate-control devices to protect the collections. The total project cost nearly $20 million.
"The old museum told the story of golf through equipment," says Jerris, 38, who grew up nearby and began working at the museum 20 years ago while in college. He has been director since 2002. "Now it's a completely new museum. We decided to tell the story through people."
Sure enough, this is a celebration of champions and championship moments. On the walls hang photos of golfers pumping fists and raising their arms triumphantly. Video presentations of exultant victors hug walls. Trophies and medals are everywhere.
As much as possible, the various eras of golf in America are put into political context. "We wanted to bring intellectual rigor to the story," says Jerris, looking quite golfy in khakis and a blazer. "This is the story of 20th-century America told through golf."
The museum is divided into six galleries, built around classic moments: Francis Ouimet's victory in the 1913 U.S. Open; Bobby Jones winning the Grand Slam in 1930; the Great Depression and the democratization of the game in the 1930s; epic comebacks by Ben Hogan in the 1950 U.S. Open and Babe Didrikson Zaharias in the 1954 U.S. Women's Open; the rivalry between Arnold Palmer and Jack Nicklaus in the early 1960s; and the globalization of golf and the emergence of Tiger Woods, arguably the greatest golfer ever. Before turning professional, Woods competed in (and won, of course) USGA tournaments including the U.S. Junior Amateur and the U.S. Amateur.
|
The U.S. Golf Association's museum is repository of over 42,000 objects, 500,000 photos and thousands of hours of historical movies, it's also the country's oldest sports museum, says the director.
| 18.891892 | 0.972973 | 8.648649 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2008/06/02/BL2008060201318.html/
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2008/06/02/BL2008060201318.html/
|
Vindication for the Bush Critique
|
2008060319
|
As the response to former White House press secretary Scott McClellan's new book enters its second week, the focus has shifted to the messenger rather than his message.
McClellan is a flawed vessel for any serious communication. From behind the podium, he made a mockery of the press and the public's right to know, most notably by repeating non-responsive and sometimes ludicrous talking points. He has yet to persuasively explain his change of heart. And his insistence that self-deception rather than a conscious disregard for the truth was behind what he now describes as the White House's consistent lack of candor is spectacularly self-serving.
But the significance of McClellan's book is that his detailed recounting of what he saw from the inside vindicates pretty much all the central pillars of the Bush critique that have been chronicled here and elsewhere for many years now. Among them:
* That Bush and his top aides manipulated the country into embarking upon an unnecessary war on false pretenses;
* That Bush is an incurious man, happily protected from dissenting views inside the White House's bubble of self-delusion;
* That Karl Rove's huge influence on the Bush White House erased any distinction between policy and politics, so governing became about achieving partisan goals, not the common good;
* That Vice President Cheney manipulates the levers of power;
* That all those people who denied White House involvement in the leak of CIA agent Valerie Plame's identity were either lying or had been lied to;
* That the mainstream media were complicit enablers of the Bush White House and that its members didn't understand how badly they were being played.
By coming back again and again to the CIA leak story, McClellan also validates a key theme of the Bush critique: That the Plame case was a microcosm of much that was wrong with the way the Bush White House did business.
No one could have predicted that the Plame case would play such a central role in McClellan's personal conversion to Bush critic. But his eventual recognition that Rove and then-vice presidential chief of staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby had flatly lied to him when they denied any involvement in the leak, along with his sudden realization that Bush and Cheney declassified secrets when it was politically convenient, were evidently two major factors. (A third was his unceremonious firing by Chief of Staff Josh Bolten.)
McClellan's revelation that on Oct. 4, 2003, Bush and Cheney directed him to vouch for Libby's innocence once again raises the question of how the president and particularly the vice president have been able to avoid any kind of public accountability. McClellan even raises the possibility, repeatedly hinted at by special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, that Cheney directed Libby to disclose Plame's identity.
|
The importance of Scott McClellan's book is that it supports pretty much the entire Bush critique.
| 29.611111 | 0.833333 | 1.722222 |
medium
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/01/AR2008060101915.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/01/AR2008060101915.html
|
Parroting the Democrats
|
2008060319
|
Although the media response has dwelled on McClellan's criticism of Bush's road to war, the CIA leak case is the heart of this book. On July 14, 2003, one day before McClellan took a press secretary's job for which many colleagues felt he was unqualified, I wrote a column asserting that while at the CIA Plame had suggested her Democratic partisan husband, retired diplomat Joseph Wilson, for a sensitive intelligence mission. That story would make McClellan's three years at the briefing room podium a misery, leading to his dismissal and now his bitter retort.
In claiming he was misled about the Plame affair, McClellan mentions Armitage only twice. Armitage being the leaker undermines the Democratic theory, now accepted by McClellan, that Bush, Vice President Cheney and political adviser Karl Rove aimed to delegitimize Wilson as a war critic. The way that McClellan handles the leak leads former colleagues to suggest he could not have written this book by himself.
On Page 173, McClellan first mentions my Plame leak, but he does not identify Armitage as the leaker until Page 306 of the 323-page book -- and then only in passing. Armitage, who was antiwar and anti-Cheney, does not fit the conspiracy theory that McClellan now buys into. When, after two years, Armitage publicly admitted that he was my source, the life went out of Wilson's campaign. In "What Happened," McClellan dwells on Rove's alleged deceptions as if the real leaker were still unknown.
While at the White House podium, McClellan never knew the facts about the CIA leak, and his memoir reads as though he has tried to maintain his ignorance. He omits the fact that Armitage identified Mrs. Wilson to The Post's Bob Woodward weeks before he talked to me. He does not mention that Armitage turned himself in to the Justice Department even before Patrick Fitzgerald was named as special prosecutor.
McClellan writes that Rove told him the following about his conversation with me after I called him to check Armitage's leak: "He (Novak) said he'd heard that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA. I told him I couldn't confirm it because I didn't know." Rove told me last week that he never said that to McClellan. Under oath, Rove testified that he told me, "I heard that, too." Under oath, I testified that Rove said, "Oh, you know that, too."
As to whether the leaker -- he does not specify Armitage -- committed a felony, McClellan writes, "I don't know." He ignores the fact that Fitzgerald's long, expensive investigation found no violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, if only because Plame was not covered by it. Nevertheless, McClellan calls the leak "wrong and harmful to national security" -- ignoring questions of whether Plame really was engaged in undercover operations and whether her cover had been blown long below the leak.
A partisan Democratic mantra began earlier in the book. McClellan writes that George H.W. Bush's 1988 campaign "acquiesced to certain advisers, including Roger Ailes and the late Lee Atwater," who opposed Bush's "civility and decency." (McClellan, then 20 years old, played no part in that campaign.) He contends that thanks to Rove in 2002, "the first cracks appeared in the facade of bipartisan comity."
McClellan's fellow Bush aides do not remember him ever saying anything like that. At senior staff meetings discussing policy, they recall, he was silent. His robotic performances from the White House podium seemed only to disgorge what he had been told, and "What Happened" has the similar feel of someone else's hand.
The book so mimics the Democratic line that Ari Fleischer, McClellan's predecessor as press secretary, asked him last week whether he had a ghostwriter. "No," Fleischer told me McClellan replied, "but my editor tweaked it." (McClellan did not return my call.)
The bland book proposal that McClellan's agent unsuccessfully hawked to publishers early in 2007 is not the volume now in bookstores. How and why McClellan changed is a story so far untold.
© 2008 Creators Syndicate Inc.
|
How did McClellan's book go from boring proposal to the purported tell-all now in bookstores?
| 42.631579 | 0.684211 | 1.210526 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/01/AR2008060101922.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/01/AR2008060101922.html
|
Will the Real Scott Please Stand Up?
|
2008060319
|
Since you're not answering my e-mails anymore, I'm writing to pose a few questions that haven't been asked on your truth, honesty and candor tour:
· Was it the truth or a lie when you told me, during a series of personal discussions in your West Wing office in late 2005 and early 2006 (at the apex of what you now call your period of "disillusionment" and "dismay"), that you were happy in your job and proud to serve President Bush and that you had no intention of leaving soon? What about in April 2006, when rumors swirled about a change at the podium, and you again told me you wanted to stay?
· Was it the truth or a lie when you told me around Christmas that the excerpts released by your publisher were being "taken out of context" and that your book wasn't going to be a hatchet job?
· Was it the truth or a lie when you assured your former deputies that you wanted our "full participation" in the book?
· Was it the truth or a lie when, after countless briefings, you complained that the White House press corps was too tough, unfair, over the top and didn't get it?
· And, finally, you like Barack Obama's message and don't know if you're a Republican?
|
As your former deputy, I have to ask: Did you lie to me, too?
| 14.944444 | 0.833333 | 1.166667 |
low
|
medium
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/30/AR2008053002568.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/30/AR2008053002568.html
|
Villains in the Mortgage Mess? Start at Wall Street. Keep Going.
|
2008060319
|
But so far, the current mortgage meltdown hasn't featured the crasser displays of the 1980s savings and loan fiasco, when executives partied hearty -- one banker famously dressed up as a king and served lion meat to his guests -- as they created a mortgage industry mess that cost taxpayers more than $500 billion.
As a reporter for this newspaper, I covered the savings and loan debacle in depth and later wrote a book about it. Watching the current crisis unfold, I see much of the same behavior that led to the "S&L Hell" of two decades ago. Indeed, some of the fixes for the last problem led directly to this one. Once again, too many people had access to other people's money with too little oversight. Once again, the White House, Congress and federal bank regulators failed to police the financial services industry because they mistook deregulation for a system without any reasonable rules. And now as then, our saga is chock-a-block with people and institutions deserving special mention in the Suprime Hall of Slime.
But make no mistake: Today's crisis dwarfs the S&L fiasco. The eventual cost to taxpayers of this scandal is likely to make yesteryear's culprits look like pikers.
The short version of how we got here: Lenders, fat with money made cheap by the federal government, aggressively coaxed millions of borrowers to take out unaffordable mortgages. They lent this money without assessing whether borrowers could repay it. They assumed, in fact, that most wouldn't be able to and would have to refinance into new, equally unaffordable loans. This process would produce an endless cycle of fees for the lenders -- but only if home prices rose, fairy-tale-like, forever.
On what planet would that be an acceptable business plan?
Here's a longer version of how this happened, with a nod of recognition to the many actors who made it possible.
First and foremost: Wall Street. In the 1990s, after the S&L blowout -- and bailout -- an innovation called securitization took hold on Wall Street to spread risk among many investments and investors. The idea was to insulate mortgage lenders from the ravages of sharp interest-rate spikes that could catch them holding low-interest mortgages even as depositors demanded high-interest returns on savings -- the very thing that had sparked the savings and loan industry's turmoil.
By the end of the millennium, securitization in the housing market was a huge, well-greased mass production line. Mortgage finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- companies chartered by Congress to finance home lending -- bought home loans from banks, then bundled hundreds of them together to secure a bond, called a mortgage-backed security. Wall Street investment bankers bought the securities, which then traded freely in the bond market. For a fee, Fannie and Freddie guaranteed the mortgages behind every security against default, so they required lenders to assess each borrower's ability to repay a loan -- a prudent practice known as underwriting.
Fannie and Freddie's underwriting rules are the gold standard by which lenders evaluate the creditworthiness of "prime" borrowers, people whose strong credit histories make them a low risk and therefore eligible for the lowest borrowing charges.
Fannie and Freddie competed fiercely with each other to create these bonds at the best price, paying less and less for the loans they bought from banks. Securitization became so efficient that it shaved profits in the prime market paper-thin. In response, by 2000, a market had sprouted to lend to "subprime," or higher-risk, borrowers, who could be charged more for loans. Many of these individuals had been denied access to credit for decades because of their skin color or the neighborhoods they lived in -- a process known as redlining for the magic-marker boundaries lenders drew on maps to show which areas were off limits. (Subprime didn't turn out to be a boon to minority home ownership, however; many minority families have ended up as the biggest victims in this mortgage mess.)
Wall Street firms were also eyeing the subprime market. They began buying and bundling subprime mortgages into "private-label" mortgage-backed securities. But Wall Street didn't guarantee the loans it bought, so it had no financial stake in assessing borrowers' creditworthiness. Which meant that lenders didn't have to care, either.
|
Yes, the executives at Countrywide Financial Corp. planned a top-dollar shindig at a ski resort earlier this year, just after the bank's multibillion dollar losses on subprime mortgages required a shotgun marriage to Bank of America. (A Wall Street Journal story forced them to cancel the party.) And...
| 14.534483 | 0.586207 | 0.793103 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053101927.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053101927.html
|
The Iraqi Upturn
|
2008060319
|
THERE'S BEEN a relative lull in news coverage and debate about Iraq in recent weeks -- which is odd, because May could turn out to have been one of the most important months of the war. While Washington's attention has been fixed elsewhere, military analysts have watched with astonishment as the Iraqi government and army have gained control for the first time of the port city of Basra and the sprawling Baghdad neighborhood of Sadr City, routing the Shiite militias that have ruled them for years and sending key militants scurrying to Iran. At the same time, Iraqi and U.S. forces have pushed forward with a long-promised offensive in Mosul, the last urban refuge of al-Qaeda. So many of its leaders have now been captured or killed that U.S. Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker, renowned for his cautious assessments, said that the terrorists have "never been closer to defeat than they are now."
Iraq passed a turning point last fall when the U.S. counterinsurgency campaign launched in early 2007 produced a dramatic drop in violence and quelled the incipient sectarian war between Sunnis and Shiites. Now, another tipping point may be near, one that sees the Iraqi government and army restoring order in almost all of the country, dispersing both rival militias and the Iranian-trained "special groups" that have used them as cover to wage war against Americans. It is -- of course -- too early to celebrate; though now in disarray, the Mahdi Army of Moqtada al-Sadr could still regroup, and Iran will almost certainly seek to stir up new violence before the U.S. and Iraqi elections this fall. Still, the rapidly improving conditions should allow U.S. commanders to make some welcome adjustments -- and it ought to mandate an already-overdue rethinking by the "this-war-is-lost" caucus in Washington, including Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.).
Gen. David H. Petraeus signaled one adjustment in recent testimony to Congress, saying that he would probably recommend troop reductions in the fall going beyond the ongoing pullback of the five "surge" brigades deployed last year. Gen. Petraeus pointed out that attacks in Iraq hit a four-year low in mid-May and that Iraqi forces were finally taking the lead in combat and on multiple fronts at once -- something that was inconceivable a year ago. As a result the Iraqi government of Nouri al-Maliki now has "unparalleled" public support, as Gen. Petraeus put it, and U.S. casualties are dropping sharply. Eighteen American soldiers died in May, the lowest total of the war and an 86 percent drop from the 126 who died in May 2007.
If the positive trends continue, proponents of withdrawing most U.S. troops, such as Mr. Obama, might be able to responsibly carry out further pullouts next year. Still, the likely Democratic nominee needs a plan for Iraq based on sustaining an improving situation, rather than abandoning a failed enterprise. That will mean tying withdrawals to the evolution of the Iraqi army and government, rather than an arbitrary timetable; Iraq's 2009 elections will be crucial. It also should mean providing enough troops and air power to continue backing up Iraqi army operations such as those in Basra and Sadr City. When Mr. Obama floated his strategy for Iraq last year, the United States appeared doomed to defeat. Now he needs a plan for success.
|
THERE'S BEEN a relative lull in news coverage and debate about Iraq in recent weeks -- which is odd, because May could turn out to have been one of the most important months of the war. While Washington's attention has been fixed elsewhere, military analysts have watched with astonishment as the...
| 11.192982 | 0.982456 | 55.017544 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/30/AR2008053002627.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/30/AR2008053002627.html
|
They're No. 2! And Here's How They Got There.
|
2008060319
|
Richard V. Allen on tutoring Spiro Agnew as Richard Nixon's running mate in 1968: I had the joy of providing [Agnew] with his first foreign policy briefing, which was a hoot. . . . We sat in beach chairs out on the beach, with a map of the world on the ground and four stones holding the map down, and I with a pointer and Agnew in the chair wearing shorts, very casual.
Before I started the briefing, he said, "You know, I want to tell you something, Dick. I've never been out of the country before, except to go to Greece, and I came straight back."
And I said, "Well, that's going to complicate things a little bit, so I'm going to take you through the world, a tour d'horizon, and I'm going to tell you what our policy is in each area. . . ." I got down to South Africa, I had my pointer, I said, "Okay, now we come down here." He said, "Don't tell me. I think I know this one. . . . That's a black government, right?" Well, it surely wasn't a black government in 1968. And so we had to walk back from that one.
Martin Anderson on Gerald Ford contemplating Ronald Reagan as his running mate in 1976: A call came in from Ford's suite from Dick Cheney . . . chief of staff for Ford. And [John] Sears took the call, and basically Ford wanted to meet with Reagan. Sears tells Reagan . . . "The president wants to meet with you." Reagan says, "No . . . he wants to meet me, he's going to ask me to be vice president, and I don't want to be vice president. And I don't want to tell him no, so I'm not going to meet with him." So Sears got back on the phone, explains to Cheney. . . .
A little while later, Cheney called back and said, "Look, Ford promises he will not ask him to be vice president." So Sears tells Reagan, and Reagan said, "He promises? . . . Okay, I'll meet with him." . . . So then, the next night, Ford picked [Bob] Dole. . . .
I went up to Reagan. . . . I said, "Let me ask you a hypothetical. The other night, when you went in and sat down with Ford, what would have happened if, when you got in the room, the door shut, and there was just the two of you, and Ford had said, 'Now look, I don't give a damn what I promised, but what the polls are showing clearly is that if you go on the ticket with me, we beat Jimmy Carter. And if you don't go on the ticket, Jimmy Carter may win, and it's your damn fault.' "
Reagan said, "Well, I would have gone on the ticket."
Richard Moe on Walter Mondale's decision to become Jimmy Carter's running mate in 1976: One day Mondale, [former vice president Hubert] Humphrey and I had coffee in the Senate dining room, and Mondale asked Humphrey right out, "Is this something I really should be interested in? You've been through all this, and what do you think?"
And Humphrey, without hesitating, said, "Absolutely. The vice presidency is the greatest experience I've ever had in my life. For all the suffering that Lyndon Johnson put me through, and believe me there was a lot of it, and all the humiliation, this is the most rewarding experience you can have. You'll learn more about this country and about this world and you'll have a greater impact on public policy than you ever can in the United States Senate . . . ."
Mondale ultimately did it because he knew that, number one, it would be a great education for him, and, number two, that it gave him a potential opportunity to impact on public policy, which is what he really cares about.
Lyn Nofziger on Reagan's 1980 choice of George H.W. Bush: [Dick Wirthlin] had done some polling, and he said, "My polls show that there are three people who can help you: Gerald Ford, George Bush, Howard Baker."
|
How presidential nominees choose their running mates.
| 110.125 | 0.25 | 0.25 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/30/AR2008053002570.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/30/AR2008053002570.html
|
5 Myths About the Vice Presidency
|
2008060319
|
1. A vice presidential candidate should win his or her home state for the party.
It probably hasn't made much difference to the outcome since 1960, when Lyndon B. Johnson helped put Texas in John F. Kennedy's column. Nevertheless, when pundits review their short- lists, the first question they usually ask is whether the prospective veep comes from a winnable swing state. Long ago, when state parties had tightly run political machines, that logic made some sense, and even into the postwar era it governed many candidates' thinking. But not so much today. Edmund Muskie might have helped the Democrats win Maine in 1968 (en route, it should be noted, to losing to Richard M. Nixon), and Walter F. Mondale's presence at Jimmy Carter's side probably enabled them to hang onto Minnesota when Hurricane Reagan swept away 44 states in 1980. More often, though, the No. 2 either fails to carry his or her home state or simply isn't chosen with such hopes in mind in the first place. Of this year's Democratic contenders, only Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland promises to nab a battleground state for Sen. Barack Obama. On the Republican side, not even Tim Pawlenty, Minnesota's moderate but little-known governor, seems likely to shore up that swing state for the GOP.
2. Ideological and regional balance are vital to a ticket.
This assumption, too, was once valid but no longer holds. In the 19th century, the heyday of political machines, voters felt a strong allegiance to one party or the other, and a race's outcome was determined by how well the party operatives turned out their vote. Because these same operatives picked the nominees -- primaries didn't play a decisive role in nominations until 1972 -- conventions typically featured nasty dustups between a party's ideological wings or regional blocs. Ticket-balancing arose as a way to preserve peace at convention time. So the bosses would pair a Northeasterner with a Midwesterner -- and indeed, between 1864 and 1920, two-thirds of all national candidates came from New York, Indiana or Ohio.
But the once-powerful logic of balance has eroded as the parties have become more ideologically uniform: The Republicans are no longer fiercely divided between the Eastern Wall Street Establishment and the Midwestern Main Street wing, and the Democrats no longer have a sizable Southern conservative bloc deeply hostile to their Northern liberal base.
Moreover, voters today choose their candidates on the basis of image more than of party. And so although balancing efforts still sometimes occur -- Ronald Reagan's selection of George H.W. Bush in 1980, Michael Dukakis's choice of Lloyd Bentsen in 1988 -- nominees will more often use their moments in the spotlight to send signals about their own candidacies. They might wish to augment their own profiles, as Bill Clinton did in 1992 by choosing Al Gore -- another young Southern moderate -- or to seek a bounce from a bold, exciting pick, as Mondale did by tapping Geraldine Ferraro in 1984.
To the extent that ticket-balancing survives, it's in the form of signaling neglected constituent groups that they're not taken for granted. This year, Obama lacks strong support from enough key Democratic voting blocs -- Hispanics, Jews, women, gays, seniors and the white working class -- that he should be sensitive to their concerns in choosing a veep. John McCain, on the other hand, would do well to bolster his own reputation as a maverick by choosing someone like Colin Powell or Mike Huckabee.
3. Reaching across the aisle to form a bipartisan ticket would be smart politics.
Well, maybe, but it's not going to happen. Every four years, we hear titillating talk that one of the nominees will make a paradigm-shifting move by choosing an understudy from the opposite party. Favorite names served up this year are Sen. Joe Lieberman (who rumor has it used to be a Democrat) as a potential McCain lieutenant and Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel or New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg as possible Obama backstops. This isn't totally unthinkable; in 2004, John F. Kerry seriously considered putting McCain on his ticket. But the chances of that pairing's coming to fruition were always exceedingly slim, as are the prospects for this year's cross-party dream teams.
The reason is that, as weak as parties have become, the choice of a president and a vice president still defines a party. To turn to the rival institution in this basic act of self-definition would be an abdication -- a concession that the party is nothing but a vehicle for the ambitions of individual politicians, not a coherent body with a purpose.
Incidentally, the last president to choose a vice president from the opposite party was Abraham Lincoln, who selected Andrew Johnson in 1864 -- a pairing that didn't work out very well. (Lincoln was assassinated, Johnson impeached.)
|
Pundits love the veepstakes. But they're mostly wrong.
| 85.545455 | 0.636364 | 1 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/susan_brooks_thistlethwaite/2008/06/queen_esthers_dilemma.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060319id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/susan_brooks_thistlethwaite/2008/06/queen_esthers_dilemma.html
|
Hillary's Biblical Role Model
|
2008060319
|
At CNNâs Compassion Forum (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/04/07/cnn-to-air-exclusively-the-compassion-forum/) in April, both Democratic candidates for President were asked about their faith. At one point, Hillary Clinton was asked about her favorite Bible story. She said, "Ever since I was a little girl, [I have been] a great admirer of Esther ... There weren't too many models of women who had the opportunity to make a decision, to take a chance, a risk that was very courageous."
There are those who believe that this week Hillary Clinton will gracefully bow out of the Democratic race for President after the last primary, presuming Barack Obama will have locked up the majority of delegates. But I am not so sure. I have read the biblical story of Queen Esther many times and I donât see Queen Esther as someone who would gracefully concede defeat.
Now, it is fair to say that there are not a lot of Bible stories where women get to be brave, but nevertheless, Esther is very revealing as a role model for Senator Clinton, especially since she claims to have admired Esther since she was a little girl. This high regard for Esther reveals a good deal about this candidate.
Esther becomes the Queen of King Ahasuerus after he puts away his first wife for disobedience; Esther is Jewish, a fact of which the King is apparently unaware. One of the Kingâs henchmen plans to exterminate the Jews, and Mordecai, who had raised Esther, prevails upon her to try to save her people. Mordecai wonders if this is not even the hand of God, that Esther should be Queen at this particular historical moment. In a verse that may be on Senator Clinton's mind today, Mordecai says, "Perhaps you have come to royal dignity for just such a time as this." (Esther 4: 14)
Esther is brave, but she is also very shrewd. Through trickery and currying favor with the King, Esther saves the Jewish people. The story shows her to be quite bloodthirsty as well. Esther makes sure that not only is the Kingâs henchman hanged, but his ten sons as well!
Esther is apparently also popular with another woman in politics. In the new HBO movie Recount, Laura Dern gives a stunning performance as Katherine Harris, the Florida Secretary of State who certified that the Republican candidate, George W. Bush, had defeated the Democrat, Al Gore, in the popular vote of Florida. The Florida Supreme Court overturned her ruling on appeal, though this decision was then reversed by the U.S. Supreme Court. In the movie, the Katherine Harris character talks about her biblical role model. Again, Queen Esther.
Yes, perhaps itâs the bravery of Esther, but deception and ruthlessness are also much a part of Estherâs biblical resume.
So, this week, we may see why Queen Esther is Senator Hillary Clinton's role model and how she interpets this text. In Hillary's own Esther summary, she has âto make a decision, to take a chance, [to take] a risk thatâ¦[is] very courageous." It would be very courageous to decide to respect the rules and concede the race when Senator Obama secures the majority of delegates.
But donât forget Estherâs cunning and ruthlessness as well. That's the question that hangs over this week like the hanging chads in Florida. What does Queen Esther mean to Hillary Clinton? Is it the same view of courage as Katherine Harris, or something different?
|
On Faith is an innovative, provocative conversation on all aspects of religion with best selling author Jon Meacham of Newsweek and Sally Quinn of The Washington Post. Keep up-to-date on global religious developments with On Faith.
| 15.113636 | 0.431818 | 0.522727 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/religionfromtheheart/2008/06/mcclellan_the_bubble_made_me_d.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060319id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/religionfromtheheart/2008/06/mcclellan_the_bubble_made_me_d.html
|
McClellan: The Bubble Made Me Do It
|
2008060319
|
Scott McClellan has made the news circuit in recent days because of his shocking reflections on his tenure as the Presidentâs press secretary. I donât believe there is any comparable book where a former presidential press secretary has so completely disavowed the messages that he himself promulgated. Whether on war or crime or policy, McClellan has confessed to either being a source of error himself or of being deceived by the most senior people in the White House.
Itâs disturbing enough to see someone of his stature accuse the administration of willful deception. After all, he was the administration. He was the one standing before the cameras, he was the one spinning the message, he was the one who was on the record. If heâs claiming deceit, then thereâs no real debate: deceit it was. He was getting his talking points directly from the boss.
Whatâs even worse than feeling totally let down by oneâs government is having to endure the explanations of what went wrong. The Washington Postâs Dana Milbank captured McClellanâs repeated attempts to deflect responsibility in his Friday column. He was, in his words, âin the White House bubble.â âYou get caught up in theâ¦bubble.â He blamed âthe permanent campaign culture.â Now he is âdisappointed,â âdismayed and disillusioned.â
Why is it that those who find themselves at the center of mistakesâbig mistakesâfind it so difficult to say, âItâs my faultâ? Are we really to believe that Scott McClellan, in the ultimate center of power, was, somehow, powerlessâthat he was so overcome by his surroundings that he lost his will to tell the truth? Are we really to believe that the problem is Washington itselfâthat even good people are somehow broken and distorted by a headless force called âWashingtonâ? Once you're in that âbubble,â youâre done?
Come on. Washington is not the problem; Washington is a city. The White House is not the problem; itâs a building. The problem is peopleâpeople who lose their grip on truth, people who value their own power over the best interests of the nation, people who deceive others to protect an agenda. To modify a line from the NRA: Buildings don't tell lies; people tell lies.
Religions have long been clear on the issue of culpability: there may be 1,000 forces that impel someone to make a serious mistake, but ultimately, the error is personal. The term âsinâ is out of fashion these days, but the meaning shouldnât be. When any one of us finds ourselves crossing the lineâof truth, decency, or dare I say holinessâthen itâs time for some old-fashioned honesty: I did it. I made the mistake. I am responsible.
The stakes for the country are high in this blame deflection game. The danger of accepting McClellanâs spin is that we come to believe that our system is responsible for our problems, that no one can be trusted, that people of authority are hopelessly corrupt. Thatâs a ticket to cynicism and worse: hopelessness.
Americans are smart enough to reject this form of blame deflection. And more importantly, despite the many times in which our leaders have disappointed us, Americans are hopeful enough to take the leap and believe anew in the possibility of a better future. Other countries and cultures sometimes mock our idealism, but we treasure it because we know how powerful it is in making us who we are.
Despite McClellanâs excuses, weâre still ready to believe that there are leaders who can tell the truth at the center of power, who can resist the deceitful force of Washington. Both the likely nominees for President are where they are largely because they have convinced us that they will tell us the truth about ourselves and about where they want to take usâWhite House bubble or not. Weâre seeing turnout soar at the polls because people believe them. This race has been all about renewal, and Americans are ready for it.
As he makes the rounds of the talk shows, Scott McClellan would do a lot better to adopt their attitude. He should start by telling the truth. âI made the mistakeâ would be a refreshing way to start.
|
On Faith is an innovative, provocative conversation on all aspects of religion with best selling author Jon Meacham of Newsweek and Sally Quinn of The Washington Post. Keep up-to-date on global religious developments with On Faith.
| 17.772727 | 0.477273 | 0.522727 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/ibsen_martinez/2008/05/why_latin_americans_dont_make.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060319id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/ibsen_martinez/2008/05/why_latin_americans_dont_make.html
|
Why Latin Americans Donât Make the Cut
|
2008060319
|
The Current Discussion: The American magazine Foreign Policy and British magazine Prospect have published a joint list of the world's Top 100 Public Intellectuals. The list includes several PostGlobal panelists. Who's missing from the list? Who would you take off?
It is striking to me that Latin Americans and Spanish intellectuals are so scant on the Foreign Policy and Prospect list.
Only five out of a list of 100! Those five include Enrique Krauze and Alma Guillermoprieto (Mexico), Fernando Henrique Cardozo (Brazil), Marios Vargas Llosa (Peru) and Fernando Sabater (Spain).
Of course, I believe some names are missing and would drop others, but, even more striking, is that the list prompted so many disparate reactions among a short sample of Latin American and Spanish friends of mine. I thought sharing some of their comments would be in line.
The general sentiment of the comments I abundantly received was âOh, well, that list is an Anglo-American list, what did you expect?â
My best friend, a barrister and baseball fan, has a knack for pulling up instant statistics. This is what he told me: âLatin America, Spain, Portugalâ¦Together we don't make up 10 percent of the world's population. Of course, we should have sneaked at least 10 guys in that list. We got only five; it's OK with me. Sure we could be doing much better than that, but look at China! Only five Chinese sabios [Spanish for âwise menâ] were drafted.â
Even an American journalist who covered Latin America for a long time e-mailed me that the list was more evidence âof the centuries-old disregard for Latin America among the people who compile such lists â combined with their objective of trying to see that every part of the world was represented. They could have dropped some of the Anglo-American ones, though. Anne Applebaum â globally influential? ¡Por favor! [Gimme a break!].â
Still, I got a few thoughtful, somewhat elaborated answers that might shed light on the matter instead of shrugging it off.
Pepe Verdes Vallejo, for instance, who lives in Madrid and works as an executive in the global publishing business, wrote, âFine, it's an Anglo-American list and it reflects the backwardness of our countries, but let me hint at yet another answer: they [the Anglo-Americans] take issue and manage to compile lists, whereas in any of our countries you would be in a jam trying to gather a list of the top 100 influential intellectuals, be it Latin Americans or Spaniards, because no one would ever agree to appear in a list with another 99 guys who just cannot bestow the kind of influence that each one of them thinks he has.â All this brings to my mind what Mexican writer Gabriel Zaid has written about Latin American intellectuals and their lack of leverage when it comes to global affairs. Zaid's elegant prose and idiosyncratic judgment of both cultural and economic matters have earned him a unique place among Latin America's foremost writers. âHe is a jewel of Latin American letters, which is no small thing to be, read himâyou'll see,â writes Paul Berman, an American author and journalist, who is well-acquainted with many things Latin American.
The sad news for PostGlobal English-speaking readers is that although Zaid's poetry, essays, and social and cultural criticism have been widely published in Spanish, only one of his books has been translated into English so far. So Many Books: Reading and Publishing in the Age of Abundance (Paul Dry Books, Philadelphia, 2003), superbly translated by Natasha Wimmer, is just one of Zaid's illuminating forays into the uncharted territories that extend beyond globalization.
Though Latin American and Spanish fiction and non-fiction writers are increasingly being published in the U.S. and the U.K., the language barrier is still there and it solely might explain the scant presence of our men and women of ideas on the FP-Prospect list.
Zaid argues in one of his essays that, in Latin America, a public intellectual, if anything, âis someoneâa writer, an artist, a scientist â whose unsolicited opinions on matters of public interest are unwittingly conveyed with enough moral bearing as to force the elites to consider his views.â He also contends that such intellectuals rarely belong to academia, a stark departure from what you can see in the U.S. and Europe. Most of them are usually mavericks connected with the publishing and journalistic worlds, though often keep distance from their editor's views or interests. Zaid makes a distinction between being a public intellectual and belonging to the intelligentsia in Latin America. The intelligentsia, he thinks, dreams of attaining what he calls âplatonic sanctityâ while accumulating academic and bureaucratic capital. The intellectual dreams of attaining âSocratic sanctityâ while always showing off his accumulated public opinion capital.
âIntellectuals move from writing books to renown, the intelligentsia moves from writing books to flattering the powerful,â Zaid writes.
Thus, for most Latin American intellectuals, being influential is more of a domestic affair than a pursuit of global audiences.
How about Spain? Ana Nuño, a much-respected Venezuelan-born Spanish poet, essayist and editor, thinks that the absence of Spanish intellectuals on the FP-Prospect list is related to what she deems a centuries-old âholing-up complex.â Trying to alleviate the narcissistic wound inflicted by the ignorance or sheer contempt for Spanish realities shown by foreign dominant cultures, âSpaniards have put all their immense fund of intelligence to auscultate their own navels and they have ended up convincing themselves of the unyielding peculiarity of their local cultures and that's why they do not even try to place their analysis in a global context,â she says.
I agree with them all.
And, yes, I would drop more than one name from the list, but will settle for having Tomás Eloy MartÃnez (Argentina), Jorge Castañeda (Mexico), Patricio Navia (Chile) and Javier MarÃas (Spain) added to the âsmart bunch.â
Additionally, Mr. Eduardo Galeano, the brilliant leftist Uruguayan journalist, author of Open Veins of Latin America âthe bible of populist collectivism and anti-imperialistic explanations of Latin America's economic plight, a bestseller over the last three decadesâ should be placed in the upper echelon of the âWickedest Influential Writersâ list.
|
PostGlobal features David Ignatius and Fareed Zakaria and other international figures in debates on global news and politics. Stay on top of international news and join the conversation at PostGlobal.
| 36.969697 | 0.545455 | 0.545455 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/needtoknow/2008/05/in_egypt_youtube_trumps_facebo.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060319id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/needtoknow/2008/05/in_egypt_youtube_trumps_facebo.html
|
PostGlobal: PostGlobal on washingtonpost.com
|
2008060319
|
By Alaa Abd El Fattah
The Current Discussion: Egypt has detained a number of its citizens for using the social networking site Facebook to organize anti-government protests. What online sites are most effective in influencing politics -- and is the impact positive?
Until two years ago that would have been the Egyptian Blogs Aggregator (shameless plug here, since I created the Aggregator.)
It created a space where hundreds of Egyptians from different social and political backgrounds came together, fostered conversation and debate among bloggers and made it easier for activists and journalists to follow trends and news on blogs.
Through the aggregator, blogs were used to recruit for and engage with the pro-democracy movement Kefaya, to organize protests, strikes and sit-ins. The aggregator became a platform for various ambitious campaigns, from election monitoring to a broad anti-torture movement.
Although itâs still popular, today the aggregator is not as relevant. This is mainly due to the exponential rise in the number of Egyptian blogs; no one can keep up with them all anymore. But blogs are still at the heart of Egyptian cyber-activism, and citizen journalism through blogs remains the one consistently free source of information available.
Today the most effective political Web site would be YouTube. With the pervasiveness of mobile phone cameras, it is rare to hear of a human rights violation, a political event or a major incident that isn't accompanied with a mobile phone video published on YouTube.
Videos documenting police brutality in the streets and leaked videos of torture inside police stations published on YouTube were at the core of a strong anti-torture campaign and were effectively used as evidence in court. For the first time in Egyptian history, a powerful, well-connected police officer was sentenced for torturing a poor citizen. There are currently various similar cases, all centered around leaked video evidence. We now know that these videos had already reached several journalists, but they didn't dare broadcast them.
Most recently, when the industrial town of Mahalla was under press embargo as Egyptian security forces stormed town in an attempt to break an industrial strike and a political protest by force, killing at least three citizens and injuring dozens (not to mention the arrests), I counted over 60 videos of street violence in Mahalla published on YouTube. While some of the footage made it onto al-Jazeera and the BBC, the video of angry protesters tearing down a huge poster of president Mubarak can only be seen on YouTube.
But YouTube is not limited to mobile phone footage. Activists now regularly produce documentaries and interviews, and even art and humor, from the slick anti-Mubarak songs of Ahmad Sherif to funky satirical video ridiculing the governmentâs latest propaganda campaigns.
YouTube's effectiveness doesn't just lie in the easy ability to publish video but also the fact that it comes with its own enormous audience. Most people don't go around looking for police brutality videos, but with YouTube, they often stumble upon them.
Alaa Abd El Fattah is an Egyptian blogger, software developer, and democracy activist. Read his writings at manalaa.net.
|
Need to Know - PostGlobal on PostGlobal; blog of politics and current events on washingtonpost.com. Visit http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/needtoknow/
| 31.526316 | 0.578947 | 0.578947 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053100298.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053100298.html
|
Nine Lives, With the Bills to Match
|
2008060319
|
Susan Davis has three cats, two dogs, guinea pigs and a bearded dragon. She estimates that in the past five years, she has spent $10,000 on visits to the veterinarian and on medications. If you throw in vitamins, organic pet food and other items intended to promote a healthy lifestyle for her pets, she has probably spent twice that.
"I try not to look at my credit card bills very often," said the Takoma Park resident. "My strategy is denial. There's vacations I might have taken, but I thought, 'Wow, there's not so much money these days. I wonder where it's going.' "
Here's where some of it went: It cost more than $1,000 to have one dog's stomach pumped after it discovered, and quickly devoured, a pound and a half of raisins, which are toxic to dogs. It costs $400 each time her arthritic Labrador retriever sees a specialist in Pennsylvania. And it cost more than $1,500 to treat her son's bearded dragon for a mysterious ailment that required a hospital stay. "Oh, my gosh, I was horrified," she said.
Health-care expenses are rising, not only for humans but also for their pets. According to the 2007-08 National Pet Owners Survey, 63 percent of U.S. households -- 71.1 million homes -- include a pet. Many of the pet owners are baby boomers no longer burdened with the cost of raising children and are willing to use whatever disposable income they have to increase the quality of life of their furry -- or scaly -- companions. "As we become a more pet-friendly environment, people want to take care of their pets more," said Jerrold Boone, a veterinarian at Adams Morgan Animal Hospital.
Veterinarians and financial planners said that anyone thinking of buying or adopting a pet should consider the potential costs beforehand, especially if they want purebred dogs, which tend to have more health problems than mixed breeds.
"It's not unusual to have bills over $1,000, and that can have a major impact when people are not ready for that," said Anna Worth, a veterinarian in Vermont and president of the American Animal Hospital Association. "Not only do you need to feed and house and water this wonderful new pet in your family but you have to figure out how much it's going to cost to do preventative care each year, and what if something major happens?"
According to the American Pet Products Manufacturers Association, pet owners spent $10.1 billion on veterinary care and $9.8 billion on supplies and over-the-counter medicines last year. The American Veterinary Medical Association found that owners spent $24.5 billion on veterinary medicine in 2006, more than double what they paid 10 years earlier.
One reason for the higher costs is not altogether a bad one. It used to be that a seriously sick animal would have to be euthanized. Now, MRIs, ultrasounds and CAT scans are regularly used to detect illnesses in pets. Heart surgery, kidney transplants, laser surgery and even chemotherapy are among the many viable options. Alternative treatments such as acupuncture are also widely available. And there are more veterinary specialists to handle complicated conditions. With that expertise, however, comes a higher price tag.
"Certainly we have seen an increasing level of sophistication in the last five or 10 years. As we see the bond between pet owners and their pets grow, they are demanding more sophistication," said Ron DeHaven, an officer of the AVMA. "It rivals human medicine."
A pet's health can be as complicated as a human's. Consider this: According to the Association for Pet Obesity Prevention, 45 percent of U.S. pets are overweight or obese.
Pets also need more attention these days simply because they are living longer, a result of better preventative care, medicine, vitamins and food. In 1987, about 32 percent of the nation's dogs were over the age of 6. Now, 44 percent have passed that threshold, DeHaven said.
Longevity, however, breeds problems. As is the case with humans, pets' bodies wear out the older they get. And they're not just experiencing the typical aches and pains of old age. They are also developing chronic diseases, such as cancer and diabetes.
|
As medicine enables pets to live longer, costs add up.
| 70.166667 | 0.666667 | 0.833333 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/02/AR2008060200605.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/02/AR2008060200605.html
|
Kennedy to Undergo Surgery for Brain Tumor
|
2008060319
|
In a statement, the 76-year-old Democratic icon said he would fight the grim prognosis he was given in May through a combination of surgery, radiation and chemotherapy. The operation, which is being performed by neurosurgeon Allan H. Friedman of Duke University Medical Center, is scheduled to start at 9 a.m. and last about six hours.
Kennedy said in his statement that he expected to remain at Duke for about a week after the operation, and start radiation and chemotherapy at Massachusetts General Hospital shortly thereafter.
Kennedy was diagnosed in mid-May with a malignant glioma, a highly aggressive type of tumor that doctors say can never be completely destroyed. About half of the 10,000 people found to have such tumors in the United States each year die within 12 months; three-quarters of them are dead within two years.
The tumor was discovered after Kennedy suffered a seizure May 17 at his home in Hyannis Port, Mass., on Cape Cod. After undergoing a biopsy, he returned to Cape Cod on May 22. He and his wife Victoria have spent time sailing and enjoying the water over the last week, a spokesman said, in addition to consulting with doctors and loved ones about the senator's options going forward.
He was flown to Duke Medical Center over the weekend. Victoria Kennedy is at the hospital in Durham, along with the senator's son, Rep. Patrick J. Kennedy (D-R.I.) and his sister, Jean Kennedy Smith, a spokesman said. Other family are expected to arrive today or later in the week.
The type of surgery Kennedy will undergo is extremely risky, experts have said, especially if the tumor has penetrated deep into the brain. "If the tumor is located in very essential parts of the brains . . . trying to perform surgery could leave the patient devastated," George Washington University neurosurgeon Vivek Deshmikh told The Washington Post last month.
Kennedy's tumor is located in the left parietal lobe, which is responsible for a host of crucial bodily functions, including some aspects of speech and feeling and movement on the body's right side. Doctors have not yet said whether Kennedy's tumor is an anaplastic astrocytoma or the even more aggressive glioblastoma multiforme.
Kennedy's surgeon chairs the neurosurgery division at Duke and serves as deputy director of the Preston Robert Tisch Brain Tumor Center. He is responsible for more than 90 percent of all tumor resections and biopsies conducted at the hospital, according to biographical information posted on the Tisch website.
The website says Friedman is involved in clinical and laboratory trials to try and find better treatments for glioblastoma and ways to expand life expectancy for patients.
The younger brother of assassinated President John F. Kennedy and Sen. Robert F. Kennedy--and a deeply skilled legislator, dealmaker and orator in his own right--Kennedy is the best-known living member of a family that is the U.S. version of political royalty.
Kennedy is the second-longest-serving member of the Senate, a standard bearer for liberal Democrats who has forged deep bonds with politicians and government leaders across the political spectrum. He was elected in 1962, filling the seat vacated mid-term when his brother John was elected president.
|
Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) will undergo surgery this morning at Duke University to try and remove a highly lethal tumor that doctors discovered in his brain last month.
| 17.485714 | 0.8 | 1.885714 |
medium
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/01/AR2008060101689.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/01/AR2008060101689.html
|
Designer Dressed the Modern Woman
|
2008060319
|
Yves Saint Laurent, 71, the French clothing designer who was an emperor of world fashion and was credited with revolutionizing the way women looked and were looked upon, died yesterday at his home in Paris.
His ready-to-wear label had been sold years ago, and he had been retired for more than five years. A longtime friend said his death followed a long illness.
A hero in his country, a celebrity among the fashionable of the world, the bespectacled Saint Laurent made contributions to both couture and ready-to-wear that gave him the status of legend. The successor to Christian Dior, he was throughout the latter part of the 20th century a reigning eminence in his field -- trailblazer and trendsetter, iconoclast and icon.
Perhaps none of the celebrated designers of his time was more closely associated with the introduction and acceptance of trousers as business and formal attire for women.
He was closely associated with the introduction of the woman's tuxedo and the women's trouser suit.
Once considered mildly scandalous, pants for women have become commonplace at virtually all levels of contemporary life, from the office to the Oscars. Their symbolic meaning is inescapable, and much of it is traced directly to Saint Laurent.
"I wanted to put myself at women's disposal," he once said, "To serve them, to serve their bodies, their gestures, their life."
Working with pencil and paper, cloth, thread and scissors, Saint Laurent was credited with reflecting the social changes of his times in his clothing designs. At the same time that he depicted change, he also was described as helping to create it, with looks that suggested peasants and workers, ranchers and fishermen, beatniks and travelers who roamed the African veld.
His peacoats and safari jackets were widely known, followed over the years by such signature styles as trapeze dresses, with their narrow shoulders and wide hemline; the "chic beatnik" look, which featured turtlenecks; and cowboy-inspired jackets with squared shoulders and fringe.
For women who sought something more, he produced "le smoking," a feminine version of the tuxedo, as well as pinstripe suits, turbans, scarves, trench coats and the black leather jacket -- once seen as exclusive to men.
His costumes for Catherine Deneuve for the 1967 film "Belle de Jour" were regarded as landmarks.
After making a splash as a maverick and outsider, he grew increasingly conventional, fashion observers reported, and was a designer to the famous. He was favored, it was said, by such figures as Jacqueline Kennedy, Elizabeth Taylor and the former empress of Iran.
|
Yves Saint Laurent, 71, the French clothing designer who was an emperor of world fashion and was credited with revolutionizing the way women looked and were looked upon, died yesterday at his home in Paris.
| 13.153846 | 1 | 39 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/02/AR2008060200531.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/02/AR2008060200531.html
|
Syria to Meet With Weapons Inspectors About Site Bombed by Israel
|
2008060319
|
Syria will allow international access to the al-Kibar site on the Euphrates River, but has turned down the IAEA's request to go to at least three other facilities that U.S. intelligence says may be connected to a reactor and a clandestine nuclear weapons program, said Western diplomats familiar with the talks, which are scheduled for June 22-24. The other sites include possible reprocessing facilities, which are essential for production of fissile material.
"They will only go to the bombed site," said a diplomat close to the IAEA. "They did request to go to other places. It's the first visit. There will be other visits, to be sure, and you take one step at a time."
Syria's envoy to Washington criticized the Bush administration for allegations about additional sites.
"Why should they be going anywhere else? It's an endless story," said Ambassador Imad Moustapha. "Whenever Israel wants inspectors to go visit Syria, it only has to claim it's a nuclear site. Every analyst knows it's not a nuclear site. We're not going to become slaves to the whimsical desires of this administration and Israel. When the truth is known, this administration will be ashamed."
Diplomats in Vienna said the breakthrough appears in large part tied to the first photographic evidence of the alleged nuclear site, revealed in April during Bush administration briefings to the IAEA, Congress and the news media. "It was difficult for the IAEA to request access before it had been given any information, and only recently this information came out from the U.S.," said a diplomat in Vienna close to the IAEA. "The IAEA had earlier told Syria it would be in its interest to show this site, but it had no real grounds until recently."
IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei criticized the United States and Israel yesterday for a "deeply regrettable" delay in providing intelligence, and for Israel's use of force before the IAEA had an opportunity to "establish the facts."
Weapons proliferation experts question whether the brief visit will be sufficient to address the volume of issues surrounding the alleged site, which Israel attacked in a late- night airstrike on Sept. 6 but still refuses to discuss publicly. Subsequent satellite images indicate that Syria leveled what was left on the site and rebuilt a new facility that it says is for military use.
The IAEA inspectors "probably won't get much done," said David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security and a former U.N. weapons inspector.
"They'll want to use ground-penetrating radar to look for evidence of certain particles associated with this kind of reactor," he said. "They'll look at water pipes from the river. But it's not something you do in a couple hours. They will have to work it out with Syria, because it's not like Iraq, where [U.N. inspectors] showed up and could demand to see things. Syria has to agree to it. It could be that they just look around and have talks about what happens next."
The Bush administration called on Damascus to allow the IAEA inspection team to have access to all sites and any people who may have worked on the reactor, which Washington says was not configured to provide electricity.
|
Nine months after Israel bombed an alleged Syrian nuclear site, the government of President Bashar al-Assad has agreed to hold talks in Damascus with the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency about the remote desert compound, the International Atomic Energy Agency announced yesterday, ending a long deadlock...
| 12.470588 | 0.568627 | 0.764706 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/01/AR2008060101964.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/01/AR2008060101964.html
|
New Contracts Reflect Continued Presence in Iraq
|
2008060319
|
The depth of U.S. involvement in Iraq and the difficulty the next president will face in pulling personnel out of the country are illustrated by a handful of new contract proposals made public in May.
The contracts call for new spending, from supplying mentors to officials with Iraq's Defense and Interior ministries to establishing a U.S.-marshal-type system to protect Iraqi courts. Contractors would provide more than 100 linguists with secret clearances and deliver food to Iraqi detainees at a new, U.S.-run prison.
The proposals reflect multiyear commitments. The mentor contract notes that the U.S. military "desires for both Ministry of Interior and Ministry of Defense to become mostly self-sufficient within two years," a time outside some proposals for U.S. combat troop withdrawal. The mentors sought would "advise, train [and] assist . . . particular Iraqi officials" who work in the Ministry of Defense, which runs the Iraqi army, or the Ministry of Interior, which runs the police and other security units.
The mentors will assist an U.S. military group that previously began to implement what are described as "core processes and systems," such as procurement, contracting, force development, management and budgeting, and public affairs.
Mentors would have to make a one-year commitment, with options for two one-year contracts after that. As a reminder of what they are getting into, the mentors must supply their helmets, protective body armor and gas masks, according to the announcement.
The marshals service would be organized by the State Department's bureau responsible for developing rule of law programs in Iraq. It "has plans to create an Iraqi service to be known as the Judicial Protection Service (JPS), modeled to some degree after the U.S. Marshals Service, that will ensure the safe conduct of judicial proceedings and protect judges, witnesses, court staff, and court facilities," a notice published last month said.
State's plan is to hire a contractor as a judicial security program manager, who would work out details of how such a service could be put together for the Iraqis. That person or group would develop not only the mission, size and structure of an Iraqi JPS service, but also the personnel, budgeting and training materials necessary, plus "all other aspects of creating the new organization so that the project can be contracted out."
In short, State wants a contractor to put together all the elements so the department can contract the project to another contractor.
State also is looking to hire a contractor to provide "100 plus linguists" who would work for a year each, with as many as four one-year options to follow.
Arabic and Kurdish translators are sought. "Native or near native capability in the foreign language and an excellent command of the English language are required," according to the notice. They will work not only at State's Baghdad embassy, but also at regional offices and with Provincial Reconstruction Teams.
Another contract noticed last week previews the opening, apparently in September, of a U.S.-run prison, now labeled a Theater Internment Facility Reconciliation Center, which is to be located at Camp Taji, 12 miles north of Baghdad. The new contract calls for providing food for "up to 5,000 detainees" and will also cover 150 Iraqi nationals, who apparently will work at the facility. The contract is to run for one year, with an option year to follow.
The U.S. holds about 20,000 Iraqis at two facilities today, mostly in Camp Bucca in southern Iraq and the rest at Camp Cropper near Baghdad. Along with the facility at Camp Taji, which is expected to hold Iraqis detained in Baghdad, another new reconciliation center, mainly for Sunnis, is being built at Ramadi in Anbar province, where many of these detainees were captured.
In March, Marine Maj. Gen. Douglas Stone, who runs the detainee program, told reporters that, on average. Iraqi detainees remain in a U.S. facility for 11 months.
But that might not be the case for the roughly 9,000 Iraqis whom he described as having "a very rigorous view of an ideology that we would broadly categorize as al-Qaeda." They are headed to the new reconciliation centers for what could be longer stays.
National security and intelligence reporter Walter Pincus pores over the speeches, reports, transcripts and other documents that flood Washington and every week uncovers the fine print that rarely makes headlines -- but should. If you have any items that fit the bill, please send them to fineprint@washpost.com.
|
The depth of U.S. involvement in Iraq and the difficulty the next president will face in pulling personnel out of the country are illustrated by a handful of new contract proposals made public in May.
| 24.971429 | 1 | 35 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/01/AR2008060102499.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/01/AR2008060102499.html
|
Oyster-Saving Efforts a Wash In Chesapeake
|
2008060319
|
A vast government effort to bring oysters back to the Chesapeake Bay has turned out so dismally that it has the ring of a math-class riddle. How do you spend $58 million to get more of something and wind up with less of it?
Since 1994, state and federal authorities have poured these millions into rejuvenating the famous bivalves and the centuries-old industry that relies on them.
They have succeeded at neither.
Instead, official estimates show there are fewer oysters in the bay and fewer oystermen trying to catch them. If those estimates are accurate, the effort would be a failure of environmental policy that stands out for its scale, even on a bay where policymakers frequently promise big and deliver small.
Scientists and activists say the missteps of the save-the-oyster campaign will have consequences far beyond the half-shell bar. The whole Chesapeake will struggle, they say, missing a species that was as vital to its ecosystem as coral reefs are to theirs.
"You've got fewer oysters and fewer oystermen and fewer oyster-related businesses," when the goal was to help all three, said Robert Glenn of the Coastal Conservation Association of Maryland. "Clearly, your money was not well spent."
Officials who have led these programs defend their work, in part, by pointing to the factors arrayed against them. The bay's dirt chokes oysters. Diseases harmless to human diners kill them by the millions.
In spite of these factors, officials say, they have put millions of oysters in the bay that wouldn't have been there otherwise.
"I wouldn't use the word 'failure.' We obviously have not achieved the restoration response that we had hoped for," said Thomas O'Connell, director of the Maryland state fisheries service. "Every year we have learned to do it better. But there is no oyster restoration [instruction] book out there."
The oyster's plight has been overshadowed this year, with the Chesapeake's blue crab population plummeting. But the bivalve's story is as tragic as any, given that its protagonist just sits still and filters water.
When John Smith explored the Chesapeake in the early 1600s, oysters piled up in reefs that broke the bay's surface. Underneath, they teemed with life.
"There's a mud crab there, another anemone here, another anemone here," said Kennedy Paynter, a University of Maryland professor, watching video of an oyster bed that scientists had constructed in the Patuxent River. He was pointing out creatures that glommed onto or darted among the oysters, forming the vibrant foundation of a food chain that leads up to crabs and rockfish.
|
Science news from The Washington Post. Read about the latest breakthroughs in technology,medicine and communications.
| 25.95 | 0.35 | 0.35 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/02/AR2008060200545.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/02/AR2008060200545.html
|
Community College Transfer Mess
|
2008060319
|
Like many community college students, Josie Showers saw her classes at Jefferson Community and Technical College in Louisville as the first step toward a four-year degree. She was among the nearly half of American students who start college in two-year community schools. They are told if they work hard, their state's four-year colleges will be happy to accept them as transfers and cheer them on to graduation. But Showers, like many others, discovered those four-year schools are not as helpful as she had been led to believe.
After she transferred to the University of Louisville as a 27-year-old political science major, she was told she could not get her bachelor's degree until she had taken the university's pre-algebra class. That made no sense to her. She had already taken an algebra course, learning concepts more advanced than pre-algebra, at her community college. Sorry, she was told. Rules are rules. That kind of red tape cost her an extra semester and $4,000 before she could graduate.
This is only one of several revelations in an investigative report on the community college transfer system by Louisville Courier-Journal reporter Nancy C. Rodriguez, made possible by a fellowship from the Hechinger Institute on Education and the Media at Teachers College, Columbia University. I was Rodriguez's adviser on the project, but I did not contribute much. She is a first-class reporter who had already set up all the interviews and asked all the good questions before I got involved. All I can do is encourage others to read her groundbreaking work, and that of the other fellows and associates who participated in the "Covering America, Covering Community Colleges" project, available at this Web site.
Most education reporters, particularly myself, do a lousy job covering communities colleges. I knew I had missed many good stories, but I didn't know how good until I saw what Rodriguez and the other Hechinger participants produced. This is particularly shameful in my case because my parents both attended community colleges and my brother spent most of his career working at one.
Rodriguez came up with too many startling findings to mention them all, but here is one particularly galling section:
Transferring to a state public university seems simple enough: Fill out an application, submit an official transcript, and pay a fee -- usually less than $50.
But it can quickly get complicated.
The university checks to see if its academic requirements have been met -- for many, that means at least a 2.0 grade-point average.
It also decides which courses to count. While Kentucky requires public universities to accept up to 60 general-education credits for students who have earned an associate's degree, they don't have to be counted toward a particular prerequisite or major.
"Universities are just expert in playing this game that says, 'Well, sure, you completed English composition, but you didn't take my class,' and sort of cheating students out of transfer credits by insisting that they retake essentially the same classes," said Kay McClenney, a professor at the Community College Leadership Program at the University of Texas at Austin.
Rodriguez takes this system apart piece by piece, showing the bad rules and unexamined assumptions that deny students their dreams. She persuaded one admissions director to reveal there is little incentive for universities to seek great transfer students from community colleges because, unlike freshmen enrolling directly out of high school, the transfers don't count toward an institution's graduation rate, ACT or SAT average or retention rate -- important statistics that get their schools ranked in U.S. News & World Report or other college lists.
Rodriguez focuses on Kentucky, but that state's problems are similar to those in other states. During the 2006-07 academic year, she wrote, "roughly 3,500 community college students transferred to Kentucky's public universities -- 100 fewer than in 1997, when the legislature passed education reform" designed to open those door much wider to community college transfers. Why this failure? Rodriguez points to: "university requirements that make it difficult to exchange academic credits; not enough financial aid or advisers to help students make the jump to four-year schools; and a reluctance among some universities to aggressively recruit community college students."
A series by another Hechinger participant, Contra Costa Times reporter Matt Krupnick, shows similarly distressing failures in California. "In a 2007 study," he wrote, "Sacramento State researchers Nancy Shulock and Colleen Moore concluded that 60 percent of the state's incoming community college students in 1999 wanted to transfer or earn a degree or certificate. About a quarter of those 314,000 students had accomplished their goal six years later."
Many commentators have praised the American higher education system as the best in the world--challenging, accessible, forward-looking. These stories make it clear that at least in this important respect -- remember that community college students comprise 46 percent of all undergraduates -- that shining reputation is an illusion.
I would love to get data from other states confirming, or challenging, what Rodriguez found in Kentucky. The industrious students she interviewed were told they didn't have to be rich to graduate from college, and then discovered all these obstacles. Is this the best our colleges can do?
|
Like many community college students, Josie Showers saw her classes at Jefferson Community and Technical College in Louisville as the first step toward a four-year degree. She was among the nearly half of American students who start college in two-year community schools. They are told if they work...
| 18.214286 | 0.982143 | 54.017857 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/30/DI2008053002308.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/30/DI2008053002308.html
|
Critiquing the Press
|
2008060319
|
Somerdale, N.J.: Howie, yesterday on your show and today in your column, you inject the phrase "liberal media" into the discussion. I was wondering if you believe that the mainstream media is liberal. If you don't, then why perpetuate the myth?
Howard Kurtz: In both cases I was quoting Scott McClellan, who writes that "the liberal media didn't live up to its reputation" during the run-up to war (not that he was doing anything but spouting the administration line). I have observed that liberal commentators -- who hardly represent the entire media -- have embraced the McClellan book, while conservatives are trashing him, sometimes in very personal terms.
Washington: Howard, with all the talk about the recently concluded buyouts at The Post, an interesting question surfaced in my mind. If an employer announces buyout packages and then asks an employee specifically "what's going on?" can the employee say it's time for an increase and a promotion? Otherwise, the question sort of locks in the employee to his or her current functions at the non-buyout price, which may be to the employee's disadvantage. Thanks and I'll hang up and listen to your response.
Howard Kurtz: Reporters contemplating buyouts certainly can ask about future raises and promotions -- after all, they are contemplating a career-changing decision. When management doesn't want someone to take a buyout, there are ways of signaling that the person has a great future ahead, while a lukewarm response may convince a wavering journalist it's time to go. But nobody was pressured into taking early retirement at The Post.
Bethesda, Md.: One expects critics to forcefully attack and rebut McClellan's book. However, I was surprised by the mean spirited, personal and informal nature of Trent Duffy's letter on the Post op-ed page (including a special box and picture). Am I naive in assuming The Post would have certain standards of formality and professionalism for the submissions they choose to print? It seemed to me Duffy (and the Post) would have been better off if the personal snark and informality were removed from the letter prior to publication. After you wade through the vitriol, it seems Duffy is just really, really mad that McClellan told him he liked his job and misrepresented the book.
Howard Kurtz: I don't agree. It was the personal nature of the op-ed that gave it its force. Trent Duffy was a close colleague and personal friend of Scott McClellan. He feels betrayed and lied to. McClellan has been all over the airwaves and in several major papers, talking about his motivations, why he broke with Bush, how the book evolved and so on. Why shouldn't someone who knows him well get to have his say?
Bellingham, Wash.: Lately I've heard, from The Washington Post, New York Times, NPR and CNN to name a few, that Clinton is "backing off on her attacks on Obama," on words to that effect. But just this weekend we see her basically claiming the nomination after Puerto Rico and continuing her claim that Obama can't beat McCain, having Harold Ickes threatening to go nuclear at the convention, allowing her supporters to bus "protesters" both outside and inside the rules committee hearing this weekend, and encouraging the perception among her supporters that they somehow are being jobbed by Obama and the Democratic National Committee. That hardly seems to this Democrat like someone "backing off on her attacks."
Howard Kurtz: Plenty of political observers were surprised by the tenor of Ickes and the pro-Clinton forces at that endless DNC meeting on Saturday, but I would make a distinction between the Hillary team arguing about process (whether the delegates are being awarded unfairly) and the candidate herself challenging Obama's readiness to be president and his policy positions. We haven't seen much of that for several weeks.
Kettering, Ohio: G'afternoon Howard. I can't wait to get on my flight this afternoon so I can watch your podcast from yesterday. I am hoping you and your guests commented on the Chicago priest's rant on Hillary. His so-called apology is disingenuous, as how could he have not meant what he said in his bit? Either he is a fool, or he thinks the public is foolish enough to buy his "apology." Truth in commenting: I am an independent leaning toward McCain currently.
washingtonpost.com: Priest Again Apologizes For Remarks In Sermon (Post, June 2)
Howard Kurtz: It was at the top of the show. We also examined whether the media, led initially by Fox News, forced Obama's hand by replaying that cringe-inducing tape of Father Michael Pfleger over and over (as opposed to, say, some of the hateful statements of John Hagee, whose endorsement was belatedly rejected by McCain). Welcome all podcast fans.
Rolla, Mo.: Gallup has a new poll out that once again contradicts the "conventional wisdom" that meeting with our enemies is a bad idea. From my perspective, the media on balance seemed to think this was an opportunity for McCain. What sort of coverage do you think we'll see of this poll?
Howard Kurtz: In that poll, 67 percent say a president should meet with leaders of countries that are enemies of the U.S. But I think the debate has evolved beyond that to the question of whether there should be preconditions and extensive negotiation before such meetings take place. McCain is not saying he never would meet with hostile leaders, and Obama is not saying he immediately would meet with any hostile leader. The question is whether you hold off on such meetings until progress has been worked out in advance.
Cancun, Mexico: Thanks for these chats. I think today was the first time I saw that most of the media gave Sen. Clinton credit for a win without making comments that she could not win the nomination. Too bad this type of reporting was not done in the past.
Howard Kurtz: Yeah, but the only reason for that is media people now assume everyone knows that Sen. Clinton can't win the nomination. And I must have been reading and watching different outlets, because I've seen plenty of journalists say it. Today's Washington Post: "perhaps her last triumph in the race for a Democratic presidential nomination that increasingly appears to be out of her reach."
Stone Harbor, N.J.: Do you know where the videos that are turning up of the racist preachings at Obama's former church are coming from? Does the church actually tape this stuff, or is it someone in the pews?
Howard Kurtz: In the earlier round involving Jeremiah Wright, reporters simply bought the videos from the church. In retrospect, I was surprised they didn't surface months earlier.
San Francisco: Howard, I have to admit that the whole Valerie Plame affair became so banal and mind-numbing to me that I tuned it out after a while, so please help me out here: In Novak's column today, he makes it sound as if Rove had little to do with the leak, essentially confirming what Novak had already heard. In your piece today re: McClellan you say "the book makes clear that McClellan felt badly burned after Karl Rove and Scooter Libby assured him they had no involvement in leaking the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame, leaving the spokesman to be pummeled by the press when that turned out to be untrue." Can you please give a quick recap of the fall-out from the Plame investigation? Who were the "primary" leakers and responsible parties, as determined by the court records and verdicts?
washingtonpost.com: Parroting the Democrats (Post, June 1)
Howard Kurtz: They're not mutually incompatible. McClellan personally asked Karl Rove and Scooter Libby whether they had any involvement in the (admittedly complicated) Valerie Plame leak, and based on their assurance, he told the press they had no involvement. That was not the case, and he felt badly burned when it came out both had discussed the matter with reporters on an unnamed basis. It later turned out that Richard Armitage (who worked at State, not the White House) had leaked the name first, to Novak (and Bob Woodward). That may or may not put the actions of Rove and Libby (who was, you'll recall, convicted of lying about this in a criminal trial) in a different light, but it doesn't change the fact that McClellan believes he was lied to and had his credibility tarnished in the process.
New York: While I understand the glee that many are having regarding the White House freak-out over McClellan's book, and while I wholly agree he is a jackass for having stood by and served of the mouthpiece for this administration while they lied and lied and lied, there is always the possibility that he did not realize how totally full of it this administration was until he was outside of Washington and had a chance to measure the difference between the rhetoric of the administration and the reality on the ground. In fact, I guess I could say the same thing about the Beltway media, if they weren't even now "disappearing" Scottie's allegations about media complicity in repeating the administration's lies without skepticism at every opportunity. What gives?
Howard Kurtz: McClellan is hardly the first to say the media were too passive in the run-up to war; I and others have written about the subject for years, as I do again this morning. Katie Couric last week called it "one of the most shameful chapters in American journalism." As to whether McClellan did or did not realize the administration was peddling what he now calls propaganda until he had resigned, that may or may not be true. But it is hard to grasp that even in private conversations with his White House colleagues, he never uttered any misgivings about the selling of the war or the mishandling of Katrina or any of the other issues for which he was the spokesman.
Baton Rouge, La.: But Obama most definitely did say that he would meet with any world leader "without precondition" at the YouTube debate, and in his stump speech, he constantly derides the Bush administration for making demands on Iran before any sit-down can take place -- unless he has backed off of those points, which of course would be a big story.
Howard Kurtz: He has qualified that a bit as the campaign has marched on.
Dunn Loring, Va.: Deb Riechmann of the AP wrote an article today on Scott McClellan that stated that a criminal investigation found that Scooter Libby and Karl Rove were responsible for the leak of Valerie Plame's identity. Why hasn't The Post reported on this investigation and made the reports available to the public? All The Post has written is that Richard Armitage was responsible for the leak and that an investigation indicated that Libby made a false statement to the FBI. One more example of The Post covering up for Bush.
washingtonpost.com: Full, Months-Long Coverage of the Plame Investigation and Libby Trial (washingtonpost.com)
Howard Kurtz: Excuse me, but the roles of Rove and Libby have been the subject of roughly 10,000 articles in The Washington Post, give or take a few, to the point that some people would emit screams when they saw another one. According to Nexis I wrote at least 40 myself. And there were times when I wanted to run screaming from the room.
Fairfax County, Va.: I'm posting ahead of time with a question of concern. What is the situation with Jim Lehrer and the PBS NewsHour? I believe he was last on air about a week before the Pennsylvania primary and has had some health concerns since then. How is the program functioning now without him -- who makes the editorial decisions, for example -- and how long will it be proceeding forward in this way? So far the show remains quite good, and from time to time there's even a little improv energy as they work through the unaccustomed situation, but it would be helpful to know a little more about what's happening.
Howard Kurtz: Jim Lehrer underwent successful heart-valve surgery, is reporting to be making a good recovery and is expected back on the air in the coming weeks.
Washington: Isn't it kind of disingenuous for McClellan to tut-tut the media for not looking deeply enough into Iraq issues when he didn't even know himself, despite likely having access to the intelligence?
Howard Kurtz: McClellan didn't have access to secret intelligence -- he was a spokesman, remember -- but he did have access to the president and all the other top officials as they formulated their plan to sell the war to the public. One of his disillusioning moments, he says, was when after months of denouncing leaks of classified information, Bush admitted to him that he had declassified a National Intelligence Estimate so Cheney could have Scooter leak favorable tidbits to selected reporters.
Crestwood, N.Y.: Here's something to ponder: If Scott McClellan had written a book that defended the Bush/Cheney regime right down the line, he'd take a seat next to Tony Snow and Rove on Fox as an "analyst." He didn't do that. Do you still expect to see him on cable, perhaps on MSNBC or CNN?
Howard Kurtz: I don't think there was any great demand for Scott as a talking head, otherwise he would have been snatched up before the book, as Tony Snow was (by CNN, not Fox) when he left the White House. Remember, McClellan was dumped two years ago.
Arlington, Va.: While many Republicans have criticized McClellan's book, none have been as scathing as Bob Dole ( see this Politico article), yet these comments by Dole were ignored by all three networks, the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, and both CNN and The Washington Post. Are you amazed by the pack mentality of leading journalists -- who now admire McClellan for his honesty -- in deliberately ignoring or discounting Dole's comments?
Howard Kurtz: It's a question of timing. I believe Dole called McClellan a "miserable creature" (and other choice phrases) on Friday, after the major papers and networks had already done a number of McClellan book stories. It was all over cable; Anderson Cooper read the blistering quotes to McClellan and asked for a response.
Philadelphia: Howard, you noted that Katie Couric admitted that the press did a bad job in the run-up to the war. Why didn't you note that in the same interview, Brian Williams and Charlie Gibson refused to admit any such malpractice?
Howard Kurtz: In Charlie's case, a question of space. I would have liked to include it. But Brian Williams didn't get a full chance to answer the question (all three anchors were interviewed on CBS's "Early Show"). He was told he had 10 seconds before the segment and talked about how the post-Sept. 11 climate was very different in that period. I know from interviewing Williams that he doesn't believe the media were at their finest during the run-up to war, in large measure because of that climate.
Chicago: Why isn't Fox News or Newsweek confronting Karl Rove with the same question Scott McClellan did? When/if he lies again, will they fire him? Why did Bush renege on his claim to fire anyone involved?
Howard Kurtz: Fox News has asked Rove about McClellan's book, on at least one prime-time show and possibly two. Haven't seen anything in Newsweek, where Rove is an occasional columnist.
Rockville, Md.: Hi Howard. Thanks for the chat! I always thought Scott retired. How do you know he was fired/dumped? Was that ever written, or is it speculation?
Howard Kurtz: It was written at the time because it was a period when Josh Bolten came in as the new chief of staff and forced a number of people out, including McClellan. Scott and the president maintained that he resigned, but it was just a polite fiction. McClellan acknowledges in the book that he was dumped, though he says he planned to leave in a few months anyway.
Anonymous: What exactly was the point of that "open letter" to McClellan? I was expecting an angle that hadn't been said. He constantly asked "were you lying when..." Hasn't he been making it perfectly clear that, yes, he was lying at the time?
Howard Kurtz: No. McClellan's position was that while he knew he was acting as a White House spinmeister, he did not deliver false information from the podium knowingly (and in the Plame case, that is true). Only after he left the "bubble" and reflected on his tenure -- and perhaps his future book sales -- did McClellan realize the administration had done all these terrible things and he had been part of it, he says now.
Teaneck, N.J.: In Saturday's Michigan/Florida vote by the DNC Rules Committee ... was it released who on the committee voted for the final resolution and who didn't?
Howard Kurtz: Well, they could be seen on TV holding up their hands, so I don't think their identities are secret.
Savannah, Ga.: In David Broder's Sunday column, he mentioned a Pew study on the media coverage of the presidential candidates. It said that only 7 percent of the coverage focused on policy and only 2 percent examined the candidates records. The vast majority of the coverage dealt with the horse-race, delegate counts and the like. Do these numbers seem reasonable to you? Do members of the media take criticism like this seriously? Will they adjust coverage accordingly?
washingtonpost.com: Reality vs. the Mythmakers (Post, June 1)
Howard Kurtz: No. The media have been criticized on these grounds for the past 20 years and the situation hasn't changed much. Keep in mind, though, that this is not a monolith and that newspapers, while addicted to the horse race, publish more substantive stories about policy differences than, say, are carried on TV. Plus, between Iowa and Ohio and Texas, it was a helluva horse race that never really slowed down, except for the lull before Pennsylvania.
Waldorf, Md.: Hi, Howard. You might also want to point out to Bethesda (who didn't like the snark and informality of Trent Duffy's op-ed) that just about the very last thing an op-ed page editor would want to do is reject a piece because it was "snarky" or "informal." How would it look to reject an otherwise "acceptable" piece (whether one agrees or not is irrelevant) on the flimsy grounds that it was "too informal"? What an uproar that would create.
Howard Kurtz: It was a very personal piece, no question about it. It was a piece by a man who feels betrayed by his former colleague and friend, as opposed to just another pundit piling on McClellan.
Princeton, N.J.: Friends of mine are saying Scottie should have quit earlier and made a fuss, but Richard Clarke did quit in 2003, wrote his book, and mainly was ignored by the media, and Bush was re-elected in 2004. Clarke has a new book called (approximately) "The Failure of Government," which also is being ignored by the media.
Howard Kurtz: Richard Clarke was mainly ignored by the media? Were you out of the solar system at the time? The man was on "60 Minutes." He was repeatedly on the front pages of such newspapers as The Washington Post. His book caused such a furor that the administration had to attack him with this argument: "Why, all of a sudden, if he had all these grave concerns, did he not raise these sooner? This is 1 1/2 years after he left the administration. ... He is bringing this up in the heat of a presidential campaign. He has written a book, and he certainly wants to go out there and promote that book."
The man who spoke those words was Scott McClellan.
Arlington, Va.: Bob Dole's e-mail also was discussed on "Meet the Press" this weekend, with Russert asking McClellan directly about his thoughts on Dole's comments. I swear, half your posters don't do any research prior to posting.
Howard Kurtz: Agreed. I thought Russert had used it but didn't have time to check.
Rockville, Md.: Does it hurt Tim Russert and Chris Matthews to be on air with Keith Olbermann? He is all opinion, and they try to stay on the facts. I think it detracts from their credibility, but don't know if there is a place to have a line.
Howard Kurtz: Well, Matthews is a pretty opinionated fellow too. As I mentioned in a story on MSNBC last week, they are on the air together only on primary nights, and the cable channel's boss says Chris and Keith wear different hats on those evenings and are not as opinionated as they are on their own programs. But there's clearly a blurring of the lines there, fueling the criticism that NBC's image is being affected by the liberal-leaning MSNBC.
Thanks for the chat, folks.
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
|
Join live discussions from the Washington Post. Feature topics include national, world and DC area news, politics, elections, campaigns, government policy, tech regulation, travel, entertainment, cars, and real estate.
| 102.585366 | 0.634146 | 1.02439 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053102447.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053102447.html
|
RamÃrez's 500th Keeps O's Below .500
|
2008060319
|
BALTIMORE, May 31 -- Arithmetic and history, for two nights, injected extra significance into each stroll Manny RamÃrez made from the visitor's dugout at Camden Yards to the right-handed batter's box. He had walloped 499 home runs in his career, and one more would further validate his place among the game's all-time great sluggers, would place him among a constellation with only 23 others.
The final outcome Saturday night -- a 6-3 victory by a World Series favorite over a Baltimore Orioles club playing more and more like the also-ran so many predicted it would be -- soon will be forgotten. What RamÃrez did in the seventh inning, in his fourth plate appearance of the evening and the 7,263rd at-bat of his career, will resonate in baseball's hallowed record books.
RamÃrez, long dreadlocks flowing out the back of his batting helmet, clobbered the first pitch Chad Bradford submarined toward him over the right-center field fence. There was no doubt about No. 500 from the moment it exploded off RamÃrez's bat. The eager and fortunate 48,281 fans rose immediately, and RamÃrez stood and admired his work. A neat symmetry had been created: No. 24 became No. 24 into the 500-homer club.
"As soon as I hit it, I knew it was gone," RamÃrez said. "It finally came, and I'm happy. I'm proud of myself, of all the things I've accomplished. Now I can go and have fun. I'm happy, you know, about everything I accomplished in life. Not everybody has the chance to go and get to 500."
Photo flashes flickered like so many fireflies during each pitch RamÃrez saw this weekend. Umpires attendant Ernie Tyler switched specially marked baseballs before each RamÃrez at-bat, which irked one manager. ("The pace of the game, I guess, doesn't mean anything when it comes to this," Dave Trembley said Friday.) Those snapping cameras, for two days, had captured fierce swings-and-misses or rockets falling just short. The wait -- all the fans at the team hotel asking, "Hey, when you gonna hit it?" -- began to weigh on RamÃrez.
Camden Yards buzzed again when RamÃrez strode toward the plate in the top of the seventh, Bradford having just been summoned from the Orioles' bullpen. Once Bradford released his first pitch, history unfolded in classic RamÃrez style -- mastery, panache and joy stirred together.
The homer traveled with the trajectory of a laser to the opposite field, a piece of batting artistry few aside from RamÃrez can match. "A filthy swing," former teammate Kevin Millar said. RamÃrez stared at the ball from the batter's box for more than a few moments after he twirled his bat, then ambled several slo-o-ow paces toward first base. As he rounded first, he exchanged a double high-five with first base coach Luis Alicea.
His teammates emerged on the dugout steps as RamÃrez trotted home and leapt on the plate. He found David Ortiz -- the man lore will link him with more than any other -- and embraced him. Julio Lugo joined them, and the three players hopped up and down. RamÃrez received a curtain call from the Camden Yards crowd, chocked with far more Boston supporters than Orioles fans. Later, RamÃrez posed for a picture with the kids who caught the ball.
"That's why they call it Red Sox Nation," RamÃrez said. "They follow us everywhere."
RamÃrez has developed his own following as his career arcs. His antics -- the Manny Being Manny act -- bothered observers, both in and out of baseball, for years. But what once was seen as boastfulness now is viewed as charm.
"He's got a uniqueness about him that makes him easy to like," Millar said. "He looks like a Brazilian rainforest guy. You take away the hair and the baggy uniform, he's just a guy that can hit."
While the Red Sox celebrated yet another milestone in their remarkable five-season stretch, the Orioles surveyed the fallout of another loss. The Orioles can -- and do -- feel better about themselves now than one year ago. The standings, though, in their detached black and white, offer only ambivalence: Through 54 games last year, they stood at 27-27. After Saturday night, the new-and-improved Orioles dropped their record to 26-28.
After the Orioles reached 27-27 last season, they lost 14 of their next 16 games; the final game of that stretch was Trembley's first as Orioles manager. That slump offers a grim lesson, one the Orioles can only hope they will not duplicate as their schedule portends a difficult test. Two more games with Boston await, followed by a nine-game road trip that concludes with three games at Fenway Park.
It is only May, but the Orioles seem headed for another forgotten season. At least, for one night, it included a brush with history.
|
Manny Ramirez's 500th career home run puts the Red Sox ahead for good as Boston drops Baltimore, 6-3, on Saturday night.
| 36.703704 | 0.740741 | 1.333333 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/01/AR2008060101309.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/01/AR2008060101309.html
|
Tangled Blame in Quake Deaths
|
2008060319
|
But for the parents, placing blame is a complex matter. Most of the dozens of schools that collapsed in the quake, killing an estimated 9,000 children, were built more than a decade ago, with multiple layers of government and private companies involved in their construction. And although government officials have announced investigations, they have emphasized the need to look for lessons learned, not the pursuit of wrongdoers.
Nearly three weeks after the tragedy, Xinjian parents say they are unaware of any official investigating team having visited the site to examine the rubble, still piled in a courtyard surrounded by other buildings, every one of which remains standing.
"Some of the parents have taken samples, but we know they don't have validity in legal proceedings," said a parent who identified himself only by his surname, Yan. "But the site itself is the best evidence. All that collapsed is the school classrooms."
Lawyers said they doubted there would be many criminal convictions, despite the emotions surrounding child deaths, especially in a country where families are generally limited to having only one.
"The legal proceeding could be a very long period without an end," said Pu Zhiqiang, a lawyer in Beijing. "To affix both criminal and civil compensation responsibilities is very complicated."
Xinjian was like many schools built in rural China in the late 1980s and 1990s, when local officials rushed to fulfill a central government mandate to provide nine years of compulsory education. There were not nearly enough buildings to house classrooms, and there wasn't nearly enough money to build them.
"On the one hand, the task to meet the [educational] standard was urgent," said Li Yunseng, the retired director of the Dujiangyan education bureau finance department. "On the other hand, we were short of funds all the time. So the school buildings sometimes do not meet the standard of quality control."
Local authorities scrambled to raise construction funds beyond the initial $4,000 to $7,500 per school building provided by the city government in Chengdu, the Sichuan provincial capital, about 35 miles from Dujiangyan. Sichuan still owes banks and developers nearly $590 million from that construction boom, according to an article in Southern Weekend, a Chinese newspaper known for its independent reports.
Parents and lawyers also allege that kickbacks were widespread, further limiting the amount of money available to build the schools according to safety standards that had been bolstered after a devastating earthquake in 1976 in the northeastern city of Tangshan killed at least 240,000.
Often added to the financial pressures was a lack of expertise in current earthquake-resistant designs. "Usually, the township government would give the contract to a local construction team," Li said.
Melvyn Green, a California-based engineering expert, said constructing an earthquake-resistant building might raise total costs between 2 and 10 percent. "But finding the engineering know-how when you get out of the major cities" could be difficult, Green said. "The quality control of construction is also a big issue. Are you getting in construction what the engineers had in mind?"
|
World news headlines from the Washington Post,including international news and opinion from Africa,North/South America,Asia,Europe and Middle East. Features include world weather,news in Spanish,interactive maps,daily Yomiuri and Iraq coverage.
| 13.086957 | 0.347826 | 0.347826 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/01/AR2008060102239.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/01/AR2008060102239.html
|
In Howard, the Fight Against Flab Includes Fun
|
2008060319
|
Emily Purnell and Victoria Korzec took a turn in the batting booth. They did exercises at a kiddie boot camp -- learning all about "goofy" jumping jacks and bike-pedaling stretches -- then wandered with Victoria's mom toward the food booths at Healthy Howard Day.
"I liked the green beans with Japanese mayonnaise," said Emily, an 11-year-old from Columbia, thinking over the half-dozen samples of new food she had tried. "And the apple chips," she added. "Those were good. They were very good."
It was all in a day of health consciousness-raising in Ellicott City, where government and community leaders created a festival of health-minded activities, as part of a local effort to respond to the nation's struggle against obesity.
Over six hours or so, hundreds of people milled around the Centennial Park gathering, where the games involved exercise, the food included fruit and vegetables, and everything was free. Fairgoers collected information about bike paths, yoga, sports camps, cancer awareness, energy drinks.
There was Pam Isabel, 55, of Woodstock who took part in the 5K run that preceded Healthy Howard Day, then found herself spontaneously joining a high-energy Zumba exercise class at the park. "I love it," she said, after 20 invigorating minutes of dance-based exercise, set to Latin music. "It's very aerobic, but it's not very hard."
For Kay Brady, 51, who came with her 4-year-old niece, Valerie, the day was a chance to take advantage of free health screenings. Brady is unemployed and has no health insurance. "This is vitally important to my health," she said.
The day's events, organized in large part by the nonprofit group We Promote Health, had started with comments by County Executive Ken Ulman and County Health Officer Peter Beilenson, who talked about Howard's larger effort to promote public health.
The county has recognized restaurants that meet its good-health guidelines and has created other health-minded initiatives for schools, housing, recreation programs and, soon, workplaces.
Beilenson pointed out that in spite of Howard's affluence -- reflected in most health indexes -- the county does less well on measures of healthy eating habits and its overweight adult population. On those issues, he said, Howard is "at or worse than the state average."
He suggested that one explanation may be Howard's large number of two-career couples who commute long distances to jobs and may have less time for exercise and meal planning.
Healthy living, he said, is "not rocket science" and primarily means eating nutritiously, wearing seat belts, exercising and not smoking cigarettes. "If you're doing those four things, you're doing as much as anyone needs to live a healthy life," he said.
These ideas took many forms on the park grounds, where Jason Kaplan and his three sons, Matthew, 11, and twins Jeremy and Aaron, who are 9, began the day with a one-mile fun run -- the boys' first organized race event.
Kaplan, 39, said that the family is conscientious about healthy eating but that the boys may need more physical activity. During his childhood, he said, he was outside all the time. "You form habits as a kid," he said.
His son Matthew was thinking more concretely. Impressed by the race, he set a new goal: running a 5K next time -- and besting his friend, who ran it yesterday.
Nearby, Kristin and Mark Murray of Oakland Mills watched two of their daughters, Brianna, 5, and Micaela, 4, enjoy a 10-minute exercise game. "It's free, and we're all about being healthy," said Kristin, 35, who said the family of six recently started jogging at a high school track together. "We just really want to instill in them how important it is."
|
Get Washington DC,Maryland,Virginia news. Includes news headlines from The Washington Post. Get info/values for Washington DC,Maryland,Virginia homes. Features schools,crime,government,traffic,lottery,religion,obituaries.
| 17 | 0.413043 | 0.456522 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/30/AR2008053002785.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/30/AR2008053002785.html
|
Armed Guards on 'Peace' Campuses Debated
|
2008060319
|
In the wake of those massacres, several colleges that previously relied on unarmed security staff -- Calvin College in Grand Rapids, Mich., is one -- have taken steps to allow armed guards on campus. Many colleges already do.
But at schools affiliated with the historic "peace churches" -- the Brethren, Mennonites and Quakers -- the question of guns on campus has prompted deep levels of soul-searching on how to simultaneously embrace nonviolence and keep students and staff safe.
Trustees at Juniata College in Huntingdon, Pa., which traces its roots to the Church of the Brethren, voted in April to authorize security to carry guns on the campus that's home to 1,460 students. It's the second Brethren-related school to adopt armed guards; five others have not.
"Obviously that [Brethren] legacy was in our minds, but we were certainly more cognizant of the needs of students and of parents who wanted to know if their children were going to be safe," said Juniata spokesman John Wall, a member of a review group that recommended arming school security.
The decision to employ armed guards was not an easy or swift one. Discussions were held with students and faculty. Juniata's Baker Institute for Peace and Conflict Studies, one of the oldest such programs in the country, asked college trustees to take more time to study the issue.
Andrew Murray, the center's outgoing director, said he and others felt it was important to offer an alternative philosophy of security that didn't rely on guns as a first response.
"I'm saddened by the decision because I think it's simply an assimilation to a culture which makes presumptions about guns and security which have no basis whatsoever in fact," he said.
The theological imperative to make peace was one of several factors considered in discussions on peace-church campuses. Some institutions looked closely at the nature of their relationship to the peace church. Did the church own the school? How did its values inform the culture of the school?
Fewer than 10 percent of the 2,700 students who attend Quaker-related Guilford College are members of the Religious Society of Friends, but "it's a huge part of our culture and identity," said Sara Butner, associate director of communications and marketing for the Greensboro, N.C., school.
Butner said the question of armed guards didn't come up because the school enjoys adequate local police support. "I don't see us getting to the point where we would have sworn officers," she said.
Other schools also cited reliance on local law enforcement. "We have a good working relationship with the local police department," said Richard Aguirre, director of public relations at Goshen College in Goshen, Ind., a Mennonite-owned campus of 1,000 students.
|
Shooting rampages at Virginia Tech and Northern Illinois University left almost 40 people dead and prompted intense discussion on college campuses nationwide on how best to protect students and staff.
| 17.387097 | 0.451613 | 0.709677 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/01/AR2008060102271.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/01/AR2008060102271.html
|
From Synetic, A 'Carmen' That's Lithe On Its Feet
|
2008060319
|
Don Jose may be eternally afflicted with love for a Gypsy siren, but in Synetic Theater's new adaptation of "Carmen," he's come down with something even more virulent: dance fever.
This highly contagious condition, in fact, spreads to everyone on the stage of the Kennedy Center's Family Theater, where the restlessly ambitious company is unveiling its movement-based version of the 19th-century novella, made famous, of course, as the Georges Bizet opera. Inside a circular, cagelike set by Anastasia Ryurikov Simes, 13 actors fly, flex, flounce and fling themselves wildly around, as if passion demanded propulsion.
In short, the dancing -- to Konstantine Lortkipanidze's vibrant original score -- is dynamite. The same cannot be said for the dialogue devised by director Paata Tsikurishvili and his co-adapter, Nathan Weinberger, which repeatedly threatens to stymie the evening's combustibility.
Still, the surefire physical thrills, particularly as executed by invigorating leads Ben Cunis, Philip Fletcher and, playing the tempestuous title character, Irina Tsikurishvili, overshadow the expository dead spots. The actors' grace and fervor are as useful measures as any of how watchable this "Carmen" manages to be.
The production concludes what must be recorded as one of Synetic's most artistically successful seasons ever. In addition to the lusty "Carmen," Synetic, over the last several months, has presented an eerily sensual riff on Edgar Allan Poe in "The Fall of the House of Usher" and, perhaps the most exciting in its continuing series of Shakespeares-without-words, an astonishingly lyrical "Romeo and Juliet." (Only in a perfunctory holiday offering of "A Christmas Carol" did the troupe fail to meet its own rising standards.)
This season will also go down as the pivotal one in which Synetic, so reliant on composers such as Lortkipanidze, who like the Tsikurishvilis hails from the former Soviet Republic of Georgia, made a transition from recorded compositions to live music. For this piece, the director deploys musicians even more dynamically than in "Romeo and Juliet": A violinist in costume, Rafael Javadov, is perched on a platform above the stage, a kind of Iberian fiddler on the roof.
"Carmen" allows the Tsikurishvilis -- Irina, as usual, serves as choreographer here -- to indulge their thematic predilections for passion and violence. Their custom is to construct explosive packages around these basic human impulses, via the plots and characters of classic plays and novels.
The ingredients of Prosper Mérimée's novella, concerning the jealousy that festers in the heart of the soldier Don Jose as he seeks full possession of earthy, elusive Carmen, serve the Tsikurishvilis especially well. As in their memorable "Macbeth" last season, the Tsikurishvilis play here with the discipline and drama of military culture: The gymnastic dance-off between their Macbeth and Macduff corresponds to a climactic confrontation here between Jose (Cunis) and the bullfighter (Fletcher) who conspires to steal Carmen's heart.
The adapters toss in, too, a la their "Macbeth," elements to suggest that we are no longer in a specific century, but in some indefinite Everytime: Carmen's Gypsy husband Garcia (Roger Payano) is depicted now as a drug dealer, conveying a white powder in plastic bags. This allows for some choreographic leeway as well, for the actors not only mimic some of the gestures and steps of traditional Spanish dance, but also such unlikely genres as martial arts combat. The evening's standout sequence showcases the irresistible Irina in a terrific fusion number, something that might be called flamenco hip-hop.
What compels much of the dancing in this tale of seduction and desire is, quite naturally, sex, or rather the promise of it. Cunis, who was the Tsikurishvilis' Romeo, makes a convincing embodiment of sexual obsession, and his acrobatic skill -- the set is his entertaining monkey bars -- provides an apt counterpoint for the more balletic and perfectly cast Fletcher.
Simes dresses all the characters with sex on the brain, allowing the men to show off taut torsos and women to bare toned midriffs. (This is Synetic's sexiest choreography since the kinky gyrations of "Faust.") No one's decked out more alluringly than Irina, who, it seems, puts on a new costume every 10 minutes and after every solo leaves us in a turbulent wake.
The midair sensation created by these portrayals suffers a sudden loss of altitude whenever dialogue scenes intrude. The conversations tend to be short and very flat: "Come with me and leave all this!" cries Don Jose. "Why should I?" asks Carmen. "Do you love me?" he replies. All at once, the characters go from ethereal to pedestrian.
The set, too, has a distracting minus: The downstage poles holding up what looks like the skeleton of a tent obscure the actors' faces at vital moments.
As is often the case with Synetic, however, the electricity in the music and movement compel us to overlook the bumps in the story. Like Carmen herself, the production wraps itself around an audience in ways that will not be denied.
Carmen, adapted by Nathan Weinberger and Paata Tsikurishvili, based on the novella by Prosper Mérimée. Directed by Paata Tsikurishvili. Choreography, Irina Tsikurishvili; lighting, Colin K. Bills; stage combat, Ben Cunis; sound, Konstantine Lortkipanidze; guitar, Serge Krichenko. With Salma Qarnain, Ryan Sellers, Scott Brown, JR Russ, Courtney Pauroso, Mary Werntz, Natalie Berk, Shannon Dorsey, Vato Tsikurishvili. About 90 minutes. Through June 15 at Kennedy Center. Call 202-467-4600 or visit http://www.kennedy-center.org.
|
Search Washington, DC area theater/dance events and venues from the Washington Post. Features DC, Virginia and Maryland entertainment listings for theater, dance, opera, musicals, and childrens theater.
| 30 | 0.540541 | 0.756757 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/30/AR2008053002567.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/30/AR2008053002567.html
|
Stars (and Stripes) in Their Eyes
|
2008060119
|
TEHRAN On a recent afternoon, while riding a rickety bus down Vali Asr Avenue, Tehran's main thoroughfare, I overheard two women discussing the grim state of Iranian politics. One of them had reached a rather desperate conclusion. "Let the Americans come," she said loudly. "Let them sort things out for us once and for all." Everyone in the women's section of the bus absorbed this casually, and her friend nodded in assent.
Although their leaders still call America the "Great Satan," ordinary Iranians' affection for the United States seems to be thriving these days, at least in the bustling capital. This rekindled regard is evident in people's conversations, their insatiable demand for U.S. products and culture, and their fascination with the U.S. presidential campaign. One can't do reliable polling about Iranians' views under their theocratic government, of course, but these shifts were still striking to me as a longtime visitor -- not least because liking the United States is also a way for Iranians to register their frustration with their own firebrand president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
It might startle some Americans to realize that Iran has one of the most pro-American populations in the Middle East. Iranians have adored America for nearly three decades, a sentiment rooted in nostalgia for Iran's golden days, before the worst of the shah's repression and the 1979 Islamic revolution. But today's affection is new, in a sense, or at least different.
Starting in about 2005, Iranians' historic esteem for the United States gave way to a deep ambivalence that is only now ending. President Bush's post-9/11 wars of liberation on both of Iran's borders -- in Iraq to the west and Afghanistan to the east -- rattled ordinary Iranians, and Washington's opposition to Iran's nuclear program -- a major source of national pride -- added to their resentment. In early 2006, when I lived in Iran as a journalist, I had only to step outdoors to hear the complaints. Standing in line for pastry, I heard indignant matrons suggesting a boycott of U.S. products. The pious bazaar merchant who lived across the street grumbled that America was trying to "boss Iran around." On the ski slopes outside Tehran, I heard liberal college kids in designer parkas lionize Ahmadinejad for "standing up to the U.S. like a man."
It was a time when Iranians of all ages and backgrounds united in their pique against the United States, turning their backs on its traditions and culture. A movement emerged to replace Valentine's Day (long celebrated here in satin-hearted American style) with Armaiti Day, a love festival in honor of an ancient Persian deity. DJs began playing homegrown Iranian rap at parties, instead of OutKast and Tupac Shakur. For the first time in years, millions sat at home in the evenings watching a domestic Iranian comedy, "Barareh Nights," rather than bootleg DVDs of American films.
But on a recent two-week trip to Iran, I found the shift in sentiment palpable. This year, restaurants were booked solid for Valentine's Day months in advance. Heart-shaped chocolates and flower arrangements sold briskly enough to annoy the authorities, who reportedly began confiscating them on the street. American-style fast-food chains such as Super Star, seemingly modeled after the West Coast burger franchise Carl's Jr., are drawing crowds again. Walking through my old neighborhood, I discovered people lining up at a grill joint called Chili's, bearing the same jalapeño logo as the U.S. chain. (The Iranian government shuns international trademark laws).
I used to hear similarly pro-American sentiments frequently back in 2001, when Iranians' romance with the United States was at its most ardent. A poll conducted that same year found that 74 percent of Iranians supported restoring ties with the United States (whereupon the pollster was tossed into prison). You couldn't attend a dinner party without hearing someone, envious of the recently liberated Afghans, ask, "When will the Americans come save us?"
The most interesting aspect of the revival of such warm feelings today is that the United States has done so little to earn them. Instead, Iranians' renewed pro-American sentiments reflect the depth of their alienation from their own rulers. As a family friend put it: "It's a matter of being drawn to the opposite of what you can't stand."
I lived in Iran until last summer and experienced all the reasons why Ahmadinejad has replaced the United States as Iranians' top object of vexation. Under his leadership, inflation has spiked at least 20 percent, according to nongovernment analysts -- thanks to Ahmadinejad's expansionary fiscal policies, which inject vast amounts of cash into the economy. My old babysitter, for example, says she can no longer afford to feed her family red meat once a week. When I recently picked up some groceries -- a sack of potatoes, some green plums, two cantaloupes and a few tomatoes -- the bill came to the equivalent of $40.
Inflation has hit the real estate market particularly hard. Housing prices have surged by nearly 150 percent, according to real estate agents. For most Iranians, previously manageable rents have become tremendous burdens. On one of my first evenings back in Iran, I watched Ahmadinejad on television as he addressed Iranians from the holy city of Qom. He blamed everyone -- the hostile West, a domestic "cigarette mafia" -- for the economic downturn, just as he had previously claimed that a "housing mafia" was driving up real estate prices. Many Iranians who initially believed this kind of conspiracy talk now admit that the president's policies and obstinacy are actually at fault. In a sign that even the regime is growing impatient, one of Ahmadinejad's chief rivals -- former top nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani -- was elected speaker of Iran's parliament last week by an overwhelming majority.
Another trend turning people against Ahmadinejad is the conspicuous affluence of wealthy Iranians. Instead of bringing the country's oil wealth to ordinary people's dinner tables, as promised, Ahmadinejad is presiding over an unprecedented rise in status display. New-model Mercedes-Benzes and BMW SUVs now whiz past the local clunker, the Iranian-produced Peykan, thanks to eased controls on car imports. Posh restaurants with menu items such as "risotto sushi shooters" are packed, while cartoons in newspapers bemoan the shrinking size of bread loaves. (The government controls bread prices but not loaf sizes, allowing for a de facto cost increase.)
This newly stark class polarization, together with the economic downturn of the past three years, is reinvigorating young Iranians' vision of America as a land of opportunity. "You can compete in the United States because it has a much fairer legal system than most countries," Ali Ghassemi, a struggling 34-year-old graphic designer, told me. He spoke proudly of the financial success of a cousin who emigrated to Orange County, Calif., while complaining that Iran reserved prosperity for the heirs of ayatollahs.
|
TEHRAN On a recent afternoon, while riding a rickety bus down Vali Asr Avenue, Tehran's main thoroughfare, I overheard two women discussing the grim state of Iranian politics. One of them had reached a rather desperate conclusion. "Let the Americans come," she said loudly. "Let them sort things out...
| 22.196721 | 0.983607 | 59.016393 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/30/AR2008053002561.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/30/AR2008053002561.html
|
Take Me Out to the Opera
|
2008060119
|
My best friend recently tried to sign me up for eHarmony.com. She even drafted a profile playing up my attractive qualities (Low drama! Not prone to jealousy!) and glossing over the less marketable ones, which will remain unstated here except to note that when she typed "loves the opera," she thought better of it, backspaced and wrote "into live music" instead.
A girl whose Mr. Right is Giuseppe Verdi isn't exactly a prime cut in the meat market of online dating sites. Nor do most 20-somethings head to the opera house when they're looking for a date. Certainly no one has asked for my number at intermission, and I tell myself there's a good reason why: A 2002 survey by the National Endowment for the Arts found that only 2 percent of 18- to 24-year-olds and 3 percent of 25- to 34-year-olds had been to an opera in the previous year. One third of opera-goers are 55 or older, giving opera one of the oldest audiences among all the performing arts.
So I wasn't surprised to discover that the people sitting near me at a recent performance of "Rigoletto" at the Kennedy Center were on an excursion organized by their retirement home. At the end of the evening, as I started choking up at the demise of the hunchbacked jester, I wished that I'd had the foresight of the woman in a wheelchair sitting to my right, who would never leave home without a Kleenex stuffed in her sleeve. That's when I realized: Like that lady's old-fashioned habits, opera, sadly, is not long for this world.
According to the NEA study, only 10 percent of American adults say -- or, rather, admit -- that they like opera, making it the second-least popular type of music in the United States. (The only bigger loser: the choral glee club.)
That would seem to make the elderly people at "Rigoletto" pretty outmoded, and not just in their taste in music. They have more in common with Verdi than with their own grandchildren. Like the composer, who was born in 1813, most of them don't use iTunes. The maestro knew a lot about harmony but nothing about eHarmony; like him, many of his modern-day fans have never heard of online dating, despite the fact that more than a few of their grandchildren are investing $20.95 per month in finding a mate (and that's the bargain rate, offered to the glass-half-empty singles who figure they'd better sign on for a full year upfront).
Oh, the cluelessness! How out of touch those old-timers are!
The funny thing is, kids with texting-induced arthritis in their thumbs aren't the only ones singing in that chorus. Old people who got their arthritis the old-fashioned way are joining in. My great-grandma, also an opera-lover, used to tell me how relieved she was to have grown up when she did -- before "life got so complicated." By "complicated," she meant a world where some of her great-grandchildren learned the term "oral sex" from White House reporters (the others were already familiar with the concept), where our parents would worry not just about real predators but also about virtual ones, and where we would all live in fear of terrorists smiting us without a moment's notice.
Yet my great-grandma had lived through some pretty tumultuous times herself. Her first memory was the celebration in her small Ohio town on the day of the Armistice, after millions died in the trenches of Europe during World War I. Having babies at the height of the Great Depression gave her an anxiety level that no one else in our family could relate to: She kept a half-used World War II-era ration booklet in her drawer until the late 1990s. (I guess she thought that, should our family fall on hard times, those 50-year-old coffee coupons might come in handy.) I tried to tell her that my life wasn't nearly as tough as hers had been -- I had enough money to go to the opera, didn't I? But she probably went to her grave convinced that a computer virus, the kind transferred from keyboard to fingertip to internal organ, would take me out before I'd had a chance to live as long as she did.
My great-grandma was one of the many old-timers -- that is, anyone over 35 -- who seem to be convinced that, in the brave new world of the 21st century, their relevance is fading, if not already gone. For the first time in history, teenagers can say to their parents, "You're, like, so lame," and deep down, the parents may wonder whether their kids are right; after all, lots of them don't know what it means to get "poked" on Facebook. And if parents are that out of touch, then what use is there for grandparents -- or anything that predates Windows 95? What could something as old and uncool as the opera possibly have to offer?
Opera houses everywhere are doing their best to attract younger audiences -- hawking discounted tickets and free lectures for newcomers, inviting audiences to dress down -- but they're fighting an uphill battle. The high notes are still too high, the costumes too stuffy and the plot lines a tad unconvincing (consider the moment in Verdi's "Don Carlo" when the mezzo-soprano curses her own beauty in an aria called "Oh fatal gift").
But if you strip away the frilly fashions and the showy displays by ambitious tenors, what's left is a bare bones look at life. I always walk out of the opera house with some surprisingly useful lessons: Think carefully before fighting something bigger than you because it's often a losing, if worthwhile, proposition; if you're in trouble, consider what you did to put yourself there; and don't bother trying to make someone love you if they don't, because it's not going to happen.
Come to think of it, 88 years of living taught my great-grandma much the same thing. And on more than one occasion in my post-9/11, Internet-age life, she and the opera have turned out to be right. "American Idol" and "Grey's Anatomy" have proven less helpful.
It's too bad that the bel canto composer Vincenzo Bellini didn't live long enough to see the rise of YouTube. He would have loved a certain user who goes by the name of HighNotesRenaissance. This person, who claims to be 25 years old and living in Italy, managed to look past the tenor's dishtowel-sized lace collar and posted the following comment on a recording of " A te, o cara," a love song from Bellini's 173-year-old opera "I Puritani": "A friend of mine told me that 'A te o cara' seems to have been written for him. And I AGREE, of course!"
HighNotesRenaissance, are you out there? We have so much to talk about -- like what Bill Clinton might have to say about Don Giovanni's lascivious pursuits, or what Donald Rumsfeld might think if he heard Norma pleading with a goddess to temper the warmongering Druids, or whether Ashley Alexandra "Kristen" Dupré believes that the courtesan Violetta could have cut it in Room 871 at the Mayflower Hotel.
But in life, as in opera, people aren't always who they say they are. HighNotesRenaissance could be a 75-year-old retired podiatrist named Dick who trolls YouTube for Lawrence Welk videos when he's not listening to the opera. Or maybe it's a woman. I don't know. But this much I know for sure: HighNotesRenaissance is on to something. Because certain things never get old.
Emily Langer, the Outlook section's editorial aide, recently purchased a season subscription to the opera.
|
A young opera lover laments its unpopularity. Hear and watch an
| 129.75 | 0.5 | 0.5 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/30/AR2008053002520.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/30/AR2008053002520.html
|
The Orthodoxy of Hope
|
2008060119
|
Journalists hate quoting journalists. It seems so déclassé. But a fellow scribe recently helped crystallize the biggest problem I have with Barack Obama's foreign policy ideas. So a tip of the hat to Fidel Castro of Havana's Granma newspaper.
The problem: Obama has offered a bold and penetrating diagnosis of the global mess the Bush administration will leave behind. But the candidate's prescriptions do not match his diagnosis in their scope or daring. Either Obama is, for vote-gathering purposes, holding back his true thoughts, or he is bluffing on how severe the need for fundamental change really is.
Castro spotlighted that dichotomy in his column last week. The semi-retired dictator praised Obama as "the most progressive candidate for the U.S. presidency," but he immediately balanced that potentially lethal compliment by attacking the Illinois senator's vow to continue the obsolete, counterproductive U.S. trade embargo against Cuba.
The modest, sensible easing of restrictions on travel and currency transfers that Obama did promise in an appearance before the Cuban American National Foundation in Miami this month would produce only "hunger for the nation, remittances as charitable handouts and visits to Cuba as propaganda for consumerism," Castro claimed.
As usual, Castro's point is overdrawn. But it does underline the widening gap between Obama's repeated attacks on "Washington's conventional thinking" as the root of all evil and his reliance on established consensus when he is questioned in detail on Middle East peace, Iran, the U.S. position in its own hemisphere and other key issues.
My point here is not to accuse Obama of more-than-standard political tailoring of positions or to urge him to commit hara-kiri by needlessly taking unpopular stands. The point is that he is largely right in arguing that new thinking is desperately needed in U.S. foreign policy -- but he is failing to show how an Obama presidency would produce and apply such thinking to the policy disasters he decries.
This means he is not using the campaign to gather public support for the specific steps that he will need to take if he is to be a "transformational" president.
The Cuba embargo is an obvious case in point. Is Obama, in what he describes as this "urgent and pivotal moment" in history, seeking a broad mandate for . . . incrementalism? Does he propose to dismantle the embargo invisibly, step by step? Or will he in his first 100 days introduce a bold new hemispheric approach that would help produce the kind of change in Cuba that is long overdue?
Here's one example of new thinking he should pursue: The United States should apply to relations with hemispheric neighbors many of the lessons of the European Union and its half-century of economic and political integration. A functioning American Union that pools sovereignty is a goal worth introducing now. But that quest cannot start by tearing down the North American Free Trade Agreement and other hemispheric trade accords. A President Obama has to be willing to sit down with the prime minister of Canada and the president of Mexico without preconditions, such as demands for treaty renegotiations.
On the Middle East, Obama puts Israel first and foremost in U.S. policy and encourages the Palestinians to adopt the two-state solution that was first officially proposed by, well, President Bush. He rules out all contact with Hamas as does, well, President Bush.
On Iran, Obama would let direct negotiations with President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's government begin without Tehran first suspending uranium enrichment. That would be a procedural change in U.S. policy, but probably not a productive one. In any event, the incentives and sanctions that Obama would use to get Iran to abandon nuclear power are largely the same ones now on offer by the Europeans and, well, President Bush.
The lack of new, specific and substantive foreign policy changes offered by either Obama or by John McCain -- the subject of a future column -- accounts for the two campaigns spinning their wheels so furiously over whether a president should talk directly to dictators. This is a duel of symbols, meant by Obama's supporters to show how stuck McCain is to Bush's "disdain for diplomacy" and by McCain's forces to show how naive Obama is, and details be damned.
Both candidates deserve better than this as a foreign policy "debate." After drawing sharply contrasting positions on Iraq, Obama and McCain have shaded the rest of the world in the hues of Washington orthodoxies. That may be a ticket to winning. But it is also a ticket to ineffective governance.
|
Journalists hate quoting journalists. It seems so déclassé. But a fellow scribe recently helped crystallize the biggest problem I have with Barack Obama's foreign policy ideas. So a tip of the hat to Fidel Castro of Havana's Granma newspaper.
| 18.25 | 1 | 48 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/prayingfields/2008/05/god_on_his_mind_and_chest.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060119id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/prayingfields/2008/05/god_on_his_mind_and_chest.html
|
God on His Mind and Chest
|
2008060119
|
Fred, the D.C. United midfielder, doesnât just wear his faith on his sleeve. He wears it around his neck, in his ear and on his chest. His necklace is a fish symbol with 'Jesus' inscribed inside the fish. His earring is a cross. And the Presbyterian soccer player wears a T-shirt underneath his game jersey that reads: Jesus Loves Me.
The 28-year-old Brazilian, who grew up in Belo Horizonte, the countryâs third largest city, joined D.C. United in February 2007. Previously, he had played for Melbourne Victory FC in Australia and three teams in Brazil. In the tradition of many Brazilian players, he is known simply as Fred rather than by his full name, Helbert Frederico Carreiro da Silva.
Fredâs faith has been important to him since he was a young child. When he moved to the D.C. area, the first thing he did after finding a place to live was find a church. His uncle who is a pastor in Brazil told him about a Baptist church in Wheaton, Md., that had Portuguese-speaking clergy. Fred and his wife Debora rarely miss a Sunday.
I spoke to Fred about his faith after a D.C. United practice. Christina Cruz, a communication coordinator for the team, served as an interpreter.
Have you always been pretty spiritual? Yes, from when I was very young my mother always taught me faith.
So your mother was the one who influenced your faith? Always
Was your faith always constant? Or was there something that happened to make you more spiritual? My faith has always been very strong just because my mother always instilled that in me.
How do you think your faith guides you in your daily life? When Iâm playing, when Iâm out on the field, I always think about my faith guiding me and [giving] protection for me and the other players, and thatâs always very strong when Iâm on the field every day. It gives me confidence because my faith is so strong.
Do you pray regularly? What do you pray about or for? Yes, every day, and I read the Bible every day. I always read the Bible and I pray because I feel like itâs important. We should do it every day. [I pray] to help my family, [to be] thankful for everything we have, for having food for my family. I pray for other people in need in other countries that maybe arenât as lucky as we are to have food every day.
Do you ever pray for anything sports related? Last year when we played Columbus it was my birthday and I prayed for a goal and I got it. I cried because it was such a great experience for me, a beautiful experience.
On Saturday, did you pray before the match? Yes, I prayed for a victory. [United beat Toronto FC, 3-2, snapping a four-game losing streak.]
Why was it important for you to find a Brazilian church here? Itâs a lot easier to understand rather than in English.
Your two uncles, your motherâs brothers, are both pastors. Your motherâs family must be very religious. Yes everyone is.
Tell me about the T-shirt you wear under your jersey. Iâve always had it, for 15 years. Every team Iâve been on, Iâve asked for a shirt that says that.
Why is having the T-shirt special for you? Itâs an important message for me to remember that God is always there for me, for my family. Itâs not really a comfort. Itâs just something to remember always.
Do you talk about religion in the D. C. United locker room? Do other players talk about their faith? Yeah, we definitely talk about it. Sometimes they ask questions of me and [fellow Brazilian] Luciano Emilio. Heâs also very religious. We will answer them or help them out.
In the other leagues that you played in, did the players talk about their faith? In Brazil, we used to get together as a group and read the Bible and pray. We all read a little bit and talked and asked questions.
Do you do Bible study here? No, itâs too difficult.
Do you have a favorite bible verse? Psalms 23:1. The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want.
Why do you like that one? Just because it says God is always there with you and Iâm never not going to have him there. Iâm never going to lack anything.
Do you ever worry that Heâs not there with you? Never, Heâs always there with me, with all of us.
You seem to want to have reminders that God is there: your necklace, your earring, your T-shirt. Do you feel youâre going to forget Him? Why so many reminders? Just because I like to wear them, but itâs always in my heart and in my thoughts.
Do you think God has a role in sports, soccer? A little, but not much.
What do you role does He have? Last game since I prayed for a win especially toward the end of the game when we got that game winning goal I think it helped us out a little bit.
So there are times God does have a role in sports, but in general He has other important things to worry about? Yeah, just the protection.
You ask Him to keep you free from injury? Me and the other team as well.
Before you go out onto the field do you ever say a prayer? Not as a team, but individually, yes, every time.
|
On Faith is an innovative, provocative conversation on all aspects of religion with best selling author Jon Meacham of Newsweek and Sally Quinn of The Washington Post. Keep up-to-date on global religious developments with On Faith.
| 25.113636 | 0.590909 | 0.727273 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053102355.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053102355.html
|
Fla., Mich. Delegates Each Get Half a Vote
|
2008060119
|
The compromises by the Democratic National Committee's Rules and Bylaws Committee called for both delegations, originally barred from the convention for violating party rules, to be seated in full in Denver but with each delegate casting only half a vote.
The actions by the committee were aimed at bringing the long and sometimes-bitter Democratic nomination battle between Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) and Clinton (N.Y.) to a close and to ensure party unity as the Democrats head into the general election. But the decisions prompted bitter and sometimes-tearful reactions from some members of the audience, who repeatedly shouted over the committee members as they voted.
Obama remains the heavy favorite to win the nomination, with his campaign hoping that he can secure enough delegates over the next week to do so. Puerto Rico's primary will be held today, and the last two states, Montana and South Dakota, will vote Tuesday. The committee's decisions represented a significant setback to Clinton, who had passionately called for seating both delegations with full votes.
The net result was a gain of 87 delegate votes for Clinton and 63 for Obama. Until yesterday's action, the magic number for winning the nomination was 2,026 delegates. Now the winner will need 2,118. According to a count by the Associated Press, as of last night, Obama controlled 2,052 delegates to Clinton's 1,877.
Obama campaign officials said they will redouble efforts to win over enough superdelegates to put their candidate over the top as quickly as possible, but Clinton hopes to emerge with more popular votes and continues to press the case that she would be a stronger general-election candidate than Obama.
"We're extremely gratified that the commission agreed on a fair solution that will allow Michigan and Florida to participate in the Convention. We appreciate their efforts, and those of the party leadership of both states, to bring this resolution about," said Obama campaign manager David Plouffe.
The Florida agreement included a provision calling for the delegates to be allocated on the basis of the state's Jan. 29 primary, a decision that would net Clinton 19 more delegates than Obama. Clinton's campaign had pushed for a proposal to seat the full delegation with full voting power, but when that failed, her supporters on the committee relented, and the compromise was approved without a dissenting vote, 27 to 0.
But it was the Michigan plan, approved by a 19 to 8 vote, that drew sharper opposition because of the way that state's delegates will be awarded. Under the plan, Clinton will be given 34.5 delegate votes in Denver to Obama's 29.5 delegate votes, a percentage distribution recommended by leaders of the Michigan Democratic Party but opposed by the Clinton campaign officials, who said it violates the results of Michigan's Jan. 15 primary.
"This motion will hijack -- hijack -- remove four delegates won by Hillary Clinton," said Harold Ickes, who oversees delegate operations for the Clinton campaign and is also a member of the Rules and Bylaws Committee. "This body of 30 individuals has decided that they're going to substitute their judgment for 600,000 voters."
Arguing that the Michigan compromise "is not a good way to start down the path of party unity," Ickes warned that Clinton had authorized him to note that she will "reserve her rights to take it to the credentials committee" later. Campaign spokesman Howard Wolfson later affirmed that Clinton will reserve her right to challenge the outcome.
Don Fowler, another Clinton supporter on the panel but not formally tied to the Clinton campaign, voted for the Michigan plan. "It does not represent the first choice of my candidate, Senator Hillary Clinton," he told the panel. "But I think [it is] in the best interest of the party."
|
After hours of emotional testimony and sometimes contentious debate, Democratic Party officials agreed yesterday on a pair of compromises to seat Florida's and Michigan's delegations to their national convention. But a part of the deal drew an angry reaction and the threat of a subsequent challenge...
| 14.235294 | 0.705882 | 1.019608 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053102238.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053102238.html
|
Obama Quits Longtime Church Over Inflammatory Comments
|
2008060119
|
The resignation came Friday in a letter Obama sent to the church's head pastor, the Rev. Otis Moss III.
"We make this decision with sadness. Trinity was where I found Christ, where we were married and where our children were baptized," the letter said. "But as you know, our relations with Trinity have been strained by the divisive statements of Reverend Wright, which sharply conflict with our own view."
Obama held a news conference last night during a campaign stop in Aberdeen, S.D., after news of the resignation began to spread.
The Democratic presidential candidate said he and his wife had been discussing leaving the church since his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., made a theatrical and controversial April 28 appearance at the National Press Club.
"We had consulted with a number of friends and family members who are also connected to the church, and so this is not a decision I came to lightly, and frankly it's one that I make with some sadness," Obama said.
Obama's split with Trinity, where he had been an active parishioner since 1992, came after his campaign was dogged by new questions about a guest sermon made last Sunday by a Roman Catholic clergyman, the Rev. Michael L. Pfleger.
During that speech, Pfleger said he intended to expose "white entitlement and supremacy wherever it raises its head," and he mimicked Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) weeping over "a black man stealing my show."
When the priest's videotaped comments hit YouTube, Obama immediately said he was "deeply disappointed in Father Pfleger's divisive, backward-looking rhetoric." Pfleger apologized, saying the "words are inconsistent with Senator Obama's life and message."
Obama said Pfleger's comments "just reinforced that view that we don't want to have to answer for everything that's stated in a church."
He also said his heightened profile was drawing unwelcome attention to the church. "It's also clear that Reverend Moss and the church have been suffering from all the attention my campaign has visited on them."
Obama acknowledged that joining another black church, where "there's a different religious tradition or a worshiping style" might be equally problematic as his membership in Trinity. He said he probably will not make a decision about a new church until January.
|
Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and his wife, Michelle, announced yesterday that they have left their longtime Chicago church, Trinity United Church of Christ, after racially charged comments by a visiting pastor last week dragged them into yet another controversy over religion and race.
| 8.660377 | 0.603774 | 0.943396 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053101432.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053101432.html
|
Gilmore Beats Marshall In Nomination Nail-Biter
|
2008060119
|
Gilmore defeated Del. Robert G. Marshall, a staunch opponent of abortion rights making his first bid for statewide office, by about 70 votes out of 10,378 cast. The margin was less than one percentage point.
Despite outspending his rival by more than 8 to 1, Gilmore was nearly upset by a coalition of antiabortion and anti-tax activists, libertarians and some moderate Republicans from Northern Virginia who backed Marshall (Prince William).
Many in that coalition banded together later in the day to help Del. Jeffrey M. Frederick (Prince William) oust former lieutenant governor John H. Hager as chairman of the state party. Frederick, 32, campaigned as a younger, more conservative alternative. Hager, 72, is Jenna Bush's father-in-law.
Gilmore is gearing up for a fall campaign against former governor Mark R. Warner, the likely Democratic nominee, in a contest that will draw national attention. The retirement of Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.), no relation to Mark Warner, has given Democrats a prime chance to expand their Senate majority.
After winning the GOP nomination, Gilmore called for party unity.
"Don't be worried about the fact that every now and then we get ourselves into a contentious convention," said Gilmore, also a former attorney general and former chairman of the Republican National Committee. "When we come down to the end, we will be unified."
In his campaign, Marshall had criticized Gilmore's support for abortion rights until the eighth week of pregnancy. After his loss, Marshall said it was important to defeat Warner but stopped short of endorsing the Republican nominee. Marshall told supporters that the "party needs to be united behind principled, pro-life, real pro-life [leaders] who respect the rights of all people, old and young."
Division at the convention underscored one of the challenges Gilmore faces as he prepares to take on Warner, who has raised more than $8 million for his campaign.
But a Gilmore-Warner matchup is expected to be a slugfest. Each has vastly different opinions of the other's record and competing views on how to change Washington.
Warner, who is expected to become the consensus Democratic nominee June 14 at the party's convention, announced he will run his first statewide television advertisement Monday.
The ad features testimonials from former state Senate president John H. Chichester, a Republican, and business and civic leaders who credit Warner for closing a budget shortfall that, they imply, Gilmore created in his term as governor from 1998 to 2002.
|
RICHMOND, May 31 -- By a paper-thin margin, former Virginia governor James S. Gilmore III captured the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate on Saturday at a state party convention here that exposed some GOP doubts about Gilmore and highlighted the influence of social conservatives.
| 10.142857 | 0.612245 | 0.734694 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053102354.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053102354.html
|
Democrats Come Together To Tear Their Party in Half
|
2008060119
|
Leave it to the Democrats to make a hash of democracy.
When the Democratic Party's Rules and Bylaws Committee met at the Marriott in Woodley Park yesterday to decide what to do with the contested primary results in Florida and Michigan, Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean kicked off the session by suggesting they avoid a "food fight."
"My mama always taught me to play by the rules."
And that was just from the members of the committee. The Floridians and Michiganders were equally unruly ("My state has already suffered enough!"), and the audience became a mob, answering the participants with boos, hisses, cheers and commentary: "Revote! . . . Answer! Answer! . . . Go, Donna! . . . Shut up!"
|
Leave it to the Democrats to make a hash of democracy.
| 12.75 | 1 | 12 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053102055.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053102055.html
|
U.S. Africa Command Trims Its Aspirations
|
2008060119
|
Africom, due to begin operations Oct. 1, will now be based for the foreseeable future in Stuttgart, Germany, with five smaller regional offices planned for the continent on hold while the military searches for places to put them.
Nonmilitary jobs, created within Africom to highlight new cooperation between the Pentagon and the State Department, have been hard to fill and will initially total fewer than 50 of 1,300 headquarters personnel. Plans to broaden the military's more traditional overseas training and liaison responsibilities to include development and relief tasks were curbed after U.S.-funded aid groups sharply objected to working alongside troops.
"I think in some respects we probably didn't do as good a job as we should have when we rolled out Africom," Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said recently, adding that "I wasn't there" when the command was conceived by his predecessor, Donald H. Rumsfeld, and approved by President Bush.
"I don't think we should push African governments to a place they don't really want to go in terms of relationships," Gates said.
Planning for Africom began in early 2006, when the Bush administration designated Africa an area of "strategic concern" and policymakers cited a number of "pre-conflict" situations there. Based on lessons learned in Iraq and Afghanistan, where the U.S. military is deeply involved in civil affairs and economic development efforts, Africom was fashioned as a template for a new interagency structure that would coordinate "hard" and "soft" U.S. power.
U.S. Agency for International Development personnel were assigned to Africom, and a senior State Department diplomat was named one of two command deputies under Army Gen. William E. "Kip" Ward. Not only would Africom help make Africa secure, Bush said when he unveiled it in February 2007, it would help promote "development, health, education, democracy and economic growth."
Africa has always been an orphan in the U.S. defense establishment, divvied up among the Pentagon's four regional "Unified Combatant Commands" -- European, Central, Southern and Pacific -- that manage U.S. military relationships and operations overseas. Of the four, only Eucom, established in post-World War II Germany, is based overseas. Pacom handles Asia from its headquarters in Hawaii; Southcom, responsible for Latin America, and Centcom, in charge of operations in the Middle East and Central Asia, are both in Florida.
Under Africom, one command will consolidate military responsibility for all of Africa, excluding Egypt. Although it encompasses the volatile Horn of Africa and the U.S. Navy's forward operating base in Djibouti and will take over training tasks on the continent, it has no other dedicated troop components. "There are very few scenarios which would create a U.S. military intervention" in Africa, said one Africom officer who was not authorized to speak on the record. "Arguably, there are no scenarios."
With its headquarters on the continent, liaison groups of 20 to 30 military personnel established in key countries and U.S. units brought in to help with development and relief tasks, the command was envisioned as an example to Africans of how their own armed forces and civilians could work together for the good of their nations.
The trouble was, no one consulted the Africans. "Very little was really known by the majority of people or countries in Africa who were supposed to know before such a move was made," said retired Kenyan army Lt. Gen. Daniel Opande. Worry swept the continent that the United States planned major new military installations in Africa.
"If you know the politics of Africa," said Opande, who has headed U.N. peacekeeping forces in Sierra Leone and Liberia, "you know there are certain very powerful countries who said, no, we are not interested in having a headquarters here." South Africa and Nigeria were among them, and their resistance helped persuade others.
Over the past seven years, the administration has more than tripled U.S. assistance to Africa, to about $9 billion annually, nearly half of which is spent on prevention and treatment for HIV-AIDS. U.S. military training for African forces has steadily expanded, and U.S. troops have undertaken humanitarian missions in several countries -- digging wells, building schools and providing medical care. Africom's budget request for 2009 is about $400 million.
But despite the promise of new development and security partnerships, many Africans concluded that Africom was primarily an extension of U.S. counterterrorism policy, intended to keep an eye on Africa's large Muslim population.
"I think everyone thought it would be widely greeted as something positive," the Africom officer said. "But you suddenly have wide publics that have no idea what we're talking about. . . . It was seen as a massive infusion of military might onto a continent that was quite proud of having removed foreign powers from its soil."
The United States "equates terrorism with Islam," senior Kenyan diplomat Bethuel Kiplagat said, and few African governments wanted to be seen as inviting U.S. surveillance on their own people.
Russell Feingold (D-Wis.), who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations African affairs subcommittee, thought Africom was "something that would show real respect for Africa." But there was no question, Feingold said, that the concept had "a neocolonialist feel to it."
The subject was at the top of African leaders' agendas when Bush visited in February. "The purpose of this is not to add military bases," he told reporters after meeting with Ghanian President John Kufuor. By Bush's own account, Kufuor confronted him, saying, "You're not going to build any bases in Ghana." Bush told reporters that the very idea of establishing such bases was "baloney. Or as we say in Texas, that's bull."
At home, major U.S. nongovernmental aid organizations protested that what might work in the Iraq war zone -- where government civilian-military "provincial reconstruction teams" operate together under heavy security to build local governing capacity and infrastructure -- was ill-suited for non-conflict zones. Not only would a military presence draw unwanted attention and increased risk for development workers, they argued, the military had neither the training nor the staying power for effective development.
"Is the face of America in Africa a baseball cap or a helmet?" asked Samuel A. Worthington, president of Interaction, the Washington-based umbrella for many development and relief organizations. "We told the military -- do what you're good at. Stay in your lane."
Since last year's announcement, senior U.S. officials have been trying to make up for what they acknowledge was a bad beginning. There has been a "retooling" of the mission, the Africom officer said, away from development and toward "peacekeeper training, military education, a counterterrorism element -- programs that have been going on for some time."
"I'll be candid with you: There was a misunderstanding of sorts," said Ward, Africom's commander. African governments he has visited since his confirmation last fall, he said, wanted to know "were we going to be establishing large bases, bringing in large formations of troops, naval bases and air squadrons? My answer was no."
To USAID and other U.S. government development partners, worried that the military's vast human and financial resources would overshadow them, Ward said he has explained that "we absolutely have no intention of being the leader in doing development on the continent of Africa. It is not our job, not our lane. We have no intention of taking over."
|
The U.S. Africa Command, designed to boost America's image and prevent terrorist inroads on the continent, has scaled back its ambitions after African governments refused to host it and aid groups protested plans to expand the military's role in economic development in the region.
| 29.938776 | 0.714286 | 1.326531 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053102471.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053102471.html
|
Climate Bill Underlines Obstacles to Capping Greenhouse Gases
|
2008060119
|
When the Senate takes up landmark climate legislation this week, its backers can be sure of just one thing: The obstacles they face show how hard it will be to enact a meaningful cap on greenhouse gases -- probably under the next administration.
The next administration, not this one, because even supporters of the complex, extensively negotiated 494-page bill say that there is little chance that it will win Senate approval, less chance that the House will agree on a similar measure and perhaps no chance that President Bush will sign it if it reaches his desk.
"In some ways, this is a dress rehearsal for next year, but I still think it will be a useful thing for the Senate and Congress, because at some point we have to deal with it," said Sen. Byron L. Dorgan (D-N.D.), who says he has yet to decide how he will vote.
For the moment, supporters of establishing a federal cap-and-trade system to curb emissions linked to global warming say they hope to put down a marker in the national debate over climate change. And lawmakers from both parties are eyeing how their votes might become fodder in this fall's presidential and senatorial elections.
The bill -- which would require that U.S. emissions be cut 18 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 and nearly 70 percent by mid-century -- has picked up support in recent weeks from 13 unions in the AFL-CIO's building and construction trades department, the U.S. Conference of Mayors and many faith groups. It is also backed by companies such as General Electric and Alcoa and utilities such as Exelon, PG&E, FPL Group and Public Service Enterprise Group.
But it has run into opposition from some energy titans who say they favor a cap-and-trade system for greenhouse gas emissions but argue that this version is the wrong one and will cost consumers too much.
"This is just a money grab," said James E. Rogers, the chief executive of Duke Energy. Rogers says he supports a cap-and-trade system but argues that this bill raises too much revenue from coal users while diverting too much of it to other purposes. "Only the mafia could create an organization that would skim money off the top the way this legislation would skim money off the top," he said. Duke, with customers in Ohio, Indiana and the Carolinas, relies heavily on coal-fired plants.
More than a dozen key senators -- including freshmen Democrats Sherrod Brown (Ohio), Claire McCaskill (Mo.) and Jon Tester (Mont.) -- have yet to endorse the bill. And Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), who supports the bill, is staying neutral rather than pushing recalcitrant members of his caucus to back it.
"Generally, I believe that global warming is a serious issue and that we need to address it," said Dorgan, whose state produces lignite coal as well as wind power. But he added that he is still "digesting" the complicated bill, which he fears would not do enough to spur technology that would enable the country to continue burning coal.
"We thought and hoped we'd be in a more serious place, but most people are using it as an opportunity to vet ideas and advance ideas for the debate to come in the next Congress," said Tim Profeta, who directs Duke University's Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions. "Not many people see this as a serious piece of legislation that will become law this year."
That doesn't mean a lot of work hasn't gone into the bill. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), who has led the fight for the bipartisan bill by Sens. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) and John W. Warner (R-Va.), said in a statement that it is understandable that she and her colleagues are encountering resistance.
"This is landmark legislation, and enacting landmark legislation is never an easy task," Boxer said. "There is always an excuse not to act -- but in this case, the longer we wait, the harder it gets to solve this problem. Time is our enemy, and every expert has told us we face dangerous consequences from unchecked global warming if we do not address this problem now."
|
Follow 2008 Elections & Campaigns at washingtonpost.com.
| 105.625 | 0.375 | 0.375 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053102122.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053102122.html
|
Bhutto Dealt Nuclear Secrets to N. Korea, Book Says
|
2008060119
|
The assertion is based on conversations that the author, Shyam Bhatia, had with Bhutto in 2003, in which she said she would tell him a secret "so significant that I had to promise never to reveal it, at least not during her lifetime," Bhatia writes in "Goodbye, Shahzadi," which was published in India last month.
Bhutto was slain in December while campaigning to win back the prime minister's post.
The account, if verified, could advance the timeline for North Korea's interest in uranium enrichment. David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security, a research organization on nuclear weapons programs, said the assertion "makes sense," because there were signs of "funny procurements" in the late 1980s by North Korea that suggested a nascent effort to assemble a uranium enrichment project.
Pakistan -- and, in particular, a nuclear smuggling ring run by Pakistani metallurgist Abdul Qadeer Khan, who was instrumental in developing a Pakistani nuclear bomb -- has long been suspected as a source of expertise for North Korea, but such high-level government involvement always has been denied.
In 2002, after observing a series of suspect North Korean purchases, the Bush administration accused Pyongyang of having a clandestine program to produce highly enriched uranium -- a charge that helped sink a Clinton-era deal that had frozen North Korea's plutonium-based reactor. North Korea insists that it had no such program, though it recently agreed to "acknowledge" U.S. concerns as part of an agreement to disable its nuclear reactor.
Nadeem Kiani, spokesman for the Pakistani Embassy, denounced Bhatia's account as "an absurd and baseless claim," adding, "It has no iota of truth and not even worth commenting."
Bhatia is a London-based investigative reporter who has written four other books, including one of the earliest accounts of India's nuclear program. Bhatia said he first met Bhutto at Oxford University in 1974 and kept contact with her until just weeks before she was killed.
George Perkovich, a nuclear expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, knows Bhatia and cited his book in Perkovich's own study of the Indian program. "He is very smart, a serious guy, and the work he did on the Indian nuclear program has held up really well," Perkovich said.
Selig S. Harrison, a specialist on South Asia and North Korea at the Center for International Policy who has read the book, said Bhatia "is credible on Bhutto. . . . He knew her very well and is a reputable Indian journalist."
In his book, Bhatia writes that Bhutto brought up the North Korea visit during a discussion in 2003 about her difficulties with Pakistan's military. "Let me tell you something," she declared, before telling Bhatia to turn off his tape recorder. "I have done more for my country than all the military chiefs of Pakistan combined."
At the time, Pakistan was in desperate need of new missile technology that would counter improvements in India's missiles. Bhutto said she was asked to carry "critical nuclear data" to hand over in Pyongyang as part of a barter deal.
"Before leaving Islamabad she shopped for an overcoat with the 'deepest possible pockets' into which she transferred CDs containing the scientific data about uranium enrichment that the North Koreans wanted," Bhatia writes. "She implied with a glint in her eye that she had acted as a two-way courier, bringing North Korea's missile information on CDs back with her on the return journey."
Bhatia said Bhutto did not tell him how many CDs she carried or who she gave them to in Pyongyang. His repeated efforts to persuade her to go on the record about the story were not successful.
Highly enriched uranium, a fuel for nuclear weapons, is produced by cascades of centrifuges that spin hot uranium gas. Albright, who has read Bhatia's account, said the CDs probably contained blueprints of the more than 100 centrifuge components as well as general assembly drawings. "It is tricky to assemble a centrifuge," he said.
Bhutto has always publicly said that Pakistan paid cash for the missile cooperation, though Albright has located one quote by Bhutto in 2004 making reference to computer disks being involved.
|
Former Pakistani prime minister Benazir Bhutto, on a state visit to North Korea in 1993, smuggled in critical data on uranium enrichment -- a route to making a nuclear weapon -- to help facilitate a missile deal with Pyongyang, according to a new book by a journalist who knew the slain politician...
| 14.767857 | 0.785714 | 0.964286 |
low
|
medium
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053100286.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053100286.html
|
A System That Needs to Be Retired
|
2008060119
|
Sure, you expect to retire someday.
But the pretty images on TV of sailing and golfing and traveling the world are colliding with a cold, hard truth: There's a good chance your retirement years could be accompanied by a drastic drop in your standard of living.
The reason: Traditional pensions largely have been replaced by retirement savings plans. As currently designed, the new plans will fail to provide adequate retirement security for many people, according to a growing number of economists, benefits specialists and policymakers.
Only about half of U.S. workers even participate in 401(k)s and other workplace savings plans. But even those who do face serious risks, including not saving enough and not investing wisely. Beyond those problems lurk the risks of retiring in a bear market and the temptation to take the money when you change jobs.
Of course, there are the risks of inflation and outliving your savings. And the chance that you may draw down your savings sooner than anticipated to cover staggering health-care costs or provide financial assistance to aging parents or your children.
Health-care costs scare me the most. Last year, Fidelity Investments calculated that a 65-year-old couple would need about $215,000 to cover medical costs in retirement, up 7.5 percent from the previous year. Medicare covers about 51 percent of medical costs, according to the Employee Benefits Research Institute. So that leaves a lot of bills for you to pay out of your retirement savings. And when it comes to how much is in those accounts, EBRI found at the end of 2006 that nearly three-quarters of participants had balances lower than $61,346, the size of the average account balance.
True, that number includes savers of all ages, some of whom have almost a lifetime ahead to save more. But given the rapid increases in health-care costs, lots of luck with that.
I don't offer this gloomy assessment to scare people into saving more (although it might be a good idea) as much as to suggest that the system needs a major change.
Brooks Hamilton, a benefits consultant and founder of Brooks Hamilton & Partners, offered a good history of how we got here in an interview with "Frontline" on PBS in 2006. He traced it back to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act and subsequent rulings that made defined-contribution plans appealing to employers. He also said that when ERISA went on the books in 1974, employers were contributing 89 percent of the funds in pension plans, but by 2000, the employers' share of contributions had dropped to 49 percent. At the same time, though, employers' costs for health care were soaring and may have offset the savings on retirement. "I don't think there's a bad guy," he said.
But there are some bad consequences from the growth of defined-contribution plans, and a lot of thought is going into the search for solutions. One effort underway is to make retirement savings plans, which is another name for defined-contribution plans, look more like traditional pensions.
Some steps in this direction include automatically enrolling workers in savings plans, rather than requiring them to opt in, and helping workers get better returns through portfolios either designed by financial experts, such as target date plans, or through third-party financial advice provided by employers. Another initiative is to offer plan participants new ways to put money in an annuity to provide income for life. All of these are improvements, but more may be needed.
Economist Teresa Ghilarducci, author of "When I'm Sixty-Four: The Plot Against Pensions and the Plan to Save Them," said creating a new plan is better than tinkering with a bad system to make it better.
|
Sure, you expect to retire someday. But the pretty images on TV of sailing and golfing and traveling the world are colliding with a cold, hard truth: There's a good chance your retirement years could be accompanied by a drastic drop in your standard of living. The reason: Traditional pensions lar...
| 12.288136 | 0.966102 | 34.322034 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053101997.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053101997.html
|
Indian Protesters Let Dead Decay
|
2008060119
|
Day and night, thousands of protesters from the Gujjar community stubbornly squatted on the tracks, wielding bamboo sticks and vowing not to cremate the bodies until their demands are met.
"Let the bodies smell and decay right here," said Devi Singh, pointing to the coffin holding his 25-year-old son. "I will not cremate my son until the government grants our Gujjar community the tribal status. I will not let my son's sacrifice go to waste."
The protesters' cause reflects an intricate web of identity politics that has pushed India to empower groups marginalized under a centuries-old caste system. To overcome the inequities, India's 1950 constitution strived to guarantee jobs and political set-asides for lower-caste groups, in the oldest and largest affirmative action program in the world.
But in a twist in the tale of competing claims, the Gujjars, traditionally a cattle-grazing caste, are agitating to be reclassified at least a couple of notches lower so that they can have greater access to benefits.
"Most of our people are illiterate and living in abject poverty. We want better opportunities," said Kirori Singh Bhainsla, 70, leader of the Gujjar movement and a retired army colonel. "For 12 years, I moved from pillar to post crying hoarse with the demands, but the government never listened. So we had to resort to direct action."
For the past eight days, Bhainsla has led tens of thousands of demonstrators who have uprooted tracks, blocked rail lines and roads, and burned buses and police vehicles in the western Indian state of Rajasthan. About 43 people have been killed in the violence, most shot by police. One policeman was killed by mobs throwing stones and wielding spears.
About 2,500 policemen and soldiers have surrounded the protest site, and the cellphone network has been jammed to prevent protesters from communicating.
On Thursday, thousands of Gujjar demonstrators besieged New Delhi, choking all entry points to the capital.
Under Indian law, Gujjars are listed as "other backward class," a category entitled to 27 percent of government job set-asides. But they want to be officially designated a tribe, one of the two lowest classifications in India's complex social hierarchy.
Protesters say their demand is dictated by simple arithmetic.
"As a backward class, we have to compete with 123 caste groups for 27 percent of government jobs. Our turn never comes," Singh said, as others around him nodded. "But as a tribe, we would fight only 15 other groups for about 7 percent of jobs. So it is more beneficial to be called a tribe, even if it is lower in status."
|
World news headlines from the Washington Post,including international news and opinion from Africa,North/South America,Asia,Europe and Middle East. Features include world weather,news in Spanish,interactive maps,daily Yomiuri and Iraq coverage.
| 11.326087 | 0.413043 | 0.456522 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053101699.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053101699.html
|
Pentagon Overseer Calls for Larger Staff
|
2008060119
|
While that spending increased by more than 50 percent between fiscal 2001 and fiscal 2007, Inspector General Claude M. Kicklighter's staff has remained relatively constant, according to a report his office sent to Congress on March 31 that was made public last week.
"The rapid growth of the DoD budget since FY 2000 leaves the Department increasingly more vulnerable to the fraud, waste, and, abuse that undermines the Department's mission," the report said.
In seeking an additional $25 million above the Bush administration request for next year's budget, the Kicklighter report said the funds are "directly linked to requests by Congress to increase both audit and investigative efforts regarding Southwest Asia and the Global War on Terror."
The Pentagon budget increased from slightly more than $400 billion in fiscal 2001 to more than $600 billion in fiscal 2007. Over the next seven years, the inspector general wants about a 25 percent increase in his staff, from about 1,500 at present to near 1,900 in 2013, to monitor the spending.
Last week, an inspector general's report to a House committee showed that $1.4 billion in spending between 2001 and 2006 "lacked minimum supporting documentation." For example, it said, a $320 million cash payment by U.S. military officials to an Iraqi ministry had no backup material identifying the ministry or the employees paid.
The Senate Armed Services Committee, which ordered the report last year, has recommended adding $26 million for the inspector general's office in the fiscal 2009 defense authorization bill that is now before Congress.
The report says that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have "forced us to adjust priorities, resulting in gaps in coverage in important areas such as major weapon systems acquisition, wrongdoing by senior officials, whistleblower protection, health care fraud, product substitution and Defense intelligence agencies."
Even with the shifting of assets, the report said that the inspector general at present deploys only two investigative agents for six-month tours in Baghdad, Kuwait City and Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan. With additional personnel, Kicklighter could create a field office with a more permanent staff, the report said.
"The Pentagon's top cop is outgunned, and it's high noon," said Nick Swellenbach of the Project on Government Oversight, the nonprofit watchdog group that released the inspector general's report.
The report said Kicklighter's office is "not able to provide adequate audit coverage of DoD acquisition programs given the dollars expended by the department." It noted that for major weapons contracts that totaled $316 billion in fiscal 2007, resources allowed the auditing of just 58 programs valued at $164 billion.
As Pentagon contracting has increased, the number of auditors in the field has decreased, according to the report. In fiscal 2003, when the total value of Pentagon contracts was about $240 billion, the inspector general had about 180 auditors to review them. In fiscal 2007, when the contracts' value reached more than $300 billion, the number of auditors had dropped to about 150, according to the report.
"Oversight of DoD contracts needs to be strengthened," the report said.
In addition, the number of allegations of wrongdoing by senior Pentagon officials and reprisal complaints received from whistle-blowers has "greatly increased over the past years," the inspector general reported, while the staff in his office available to handle such complaints has "remained static or decreased."
Complaints of reprisals against military whistle-blowers have increased 68 percent in 10 years, from 315 to 528, but staffing to receive the complaints has decreased from 22 to 19, he said.
The report said that "18% of substantiated allegations against senior officials resulted in immediate removal from command, reprimands, reduction in rank and reimbursement to the government."
With 40 full-time employees in the intelligence field, the report said, "we have not been able to perform planned audits and evaluations in key intelligence disciplines." It cited intelligence satellites that gather imagery, electronic and other transmissions and cost billions of dollars to construct and operate.
|
The Defense Department's inspector general says he needs more staff and money to monitor sharply rising spending by the Pentagon on the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan and the broader fight against terrorism.
| 22.571429 | 0.8 | 1.428571 |
medium
|
medium
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053102023.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053102023.html
|
Officials Hesitate on Soccer Stadium
|
2008060119
|
D.C. officials said the difference between the soccer negotiations and the long fight over the Washington Nationals stadium is that at least the ballpark had a clear champion -- then-Mayor Anthony A. Williams (D). The soccer stadium proposal has been handed around the John A. Wilson Building like a baton at a relay race with no finish line.
Behind the scenes, Mayor Adrian M. Fenty (D), D.C. Council Chairman Vincent C. Gray (D) and several other key council members have been willing to move forward with a public financing package of at least $150 million. But, mindful of the political fallout from the baseball stadium, each has been reluctant to push hard publicly for soccer.
Now that contradiction appears to have torpedoed another attempt to get the stadium project, on hold for more than a year, moving again.
Last week, Gray and council members Jack Evans (D-Ward 2) and Marion Barry (D-Ward 8) were quietly drafting a bill to authorize the funding package. But after the plan was disclosed by the media, Gray backed away, council sources said. Without his support, the legislation, once scheduled to be introduced at Tuesday's legislative meeting, will be delayed at least a month, the sources predicted.
In an interview Friday, Gray said he supports building the stadium at Poplar Point along the Anacostia River as a way to stimulate development in the city's eastern half, where he lives. The stadium would be part of a larger, mixed-use development with housing, shops and offices. But Gray said the draft legislation on the stadium portion has not been properly vetted.
"I have no fear of taking the lead. I like having soccer in the city. It can be valuable for the city," he said. "The question is, what am I'm taking the lead on? I want to make sure, to the best of my ability, that we get the best deal we can."
Evans, the council's most ardent stadium supporter, would not comment last week. Only Barry spoke enthusiastically in public, calling the stadium an "economic generator" for jobs and revenue.
As the three council members took some heat -- e-mails from residents flooded their in-boxes, most of them opposed to the project -- Fenty tried to keep the controversy at a distance, even though his office has been closely involved all along.
For months, Deputy Mayor Neil O. Albert has been talking with United officials, negotiating the framework for a financial package that the administration is willing to support. Albert would not comment.
In a private meeting in February, Fenty told council members that the administration would be willing to contribute between $150 million and $190 million for the 27,000-seat stadium and adjoining hotel. More recently, city government sources said, the administration's figure has been fixed at about $165 million.
But Fenty, who as a council member voted against the baseball stadium, has consistently shied away from the soccer project in public, saying repeatedly that it is up to the council to take the lead.
With the mayor unwilling to push, it has fallen to Gray, Evans and Barry to enlist majority support among the 13-member council.
Complicating that effort, however, are council elections in the fall. Several members, including Evans, Yvette M. Alexander (D-Ward 7) and Kwame R. Brown (D-At Large), are running to maintain their seats; some are said to be fearful of a political backlash if they support the stadium. Although Alexander favors the project, Brown, who has become the focus of Gray, Evans and Barry, is hesitant.
Brown is chairman of the Committee on Economic Development, one of two committees that would have jurisdiction over the legislation. The other, the Committee on Finance and Revenue, is chaired by Evans.
In the fall, Brown held a public hearing in Ward 8, and most of the 80 residents who attended spoke in favor of the project. Afterward, Brown said he would support a stadium, but in private meetings with his colleagues, he has refused to commit to voting for it. Brown denied that his position is tied to election politics. Rather, he said, he has not seen a detailed financing proposal.
"I support a stadium, but I need to see what the details are of the legislation and financing," Brown said. "I haven't been presented anything."
The upshot was not encouraging to four D.C. United representatives who wandered forlornly through the halls of the city building Wednesday. They visited Gray, then Evans, then Barry and, finally, Albert.
But as the representatives departed, the stadium deal was no further along than it was when they arrived.
|
Although city leaders say they support building a soccer stadium for D.C. United in Southeast Washington, no one wants to take the lead.
| 37.2 | 0.84 | 1.88 |
high
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/30/AR2008053003238.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/30/AR2008053003238.html
|
National Cathedral In Fiscal Squeeze
|
2008060119
|
These are tough times at Washington National Cathedral.
Facing financial difficulties, the 100-year-old institution recently laid off 33 people, including clergy -- its first layoff in decades -- as it struggles to balance its budget. It is suspending programs, asking some remaining staffers to double up on duties and closing its popular greenhouse, a move that has stirred community anger.
"We're in a phase of significant tightening," said the Very Rev. Samuel Lloyd III, who took the helm of the Episcopal cathedral as dean in 2005. He said the severity of the budget shortfall caught leaders by surprise. "We didn't expect that we would have to do what we have done."
Soon-to-be former employees say they are devastated. "It came out of nowhere," said greenhouse employee Patricia Downey, her voice wobbly with emotion. "It's been hard."
The nationally known landmark, whose Gothic towers can be seen for miles from its site in Northwest Washington, is a popular destination that is expected to attract about 500,000 visitors this fiscal year. It also has been the site of high-profile memorial services and funerals, such as those for three presidents: Dwight Eisenhower, Ronald Reagan and Gerald Ford.
Cathedral leaders say an ambitious expansion launched by Lloyd to broaden the cathedral's mission, funded mostly by a $7 million bequest that runs out next year, is forcing them to make some tough choices.
Donations, though increasing, have not climbed enough to make up for the loss of the bequest money. At the same time, the cathedral's endowment is declining because of the struggling financial markets. The cathedral uses proceeds from the endowment -- which sources say stood at $70 million before declining recently -- to fund a portion of its budget.
Laid-off employees, who spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of jeopardizing their severance pay, are critical of the leadership of Lloyd and the cathedral's governing body. They say cathedral leaders ought to have seen the financial crunch coming.
"They should have seen the writing on the wall," said one former employee. "It's very disheartening to see some of the things happening."
But Lloyd defended his leadership, saying revenue did not climb as quickly as expected and the economic slowdown hurt the cathedral's investments.
"We knew that we were going to come off it," Lloyd said, referring to the bequest. "We had hoped that the economy would be doing robustly and we wouldn't have to have the kind of bump that we're having."
Under Lloyd's leadership, the cathedral's budget has increased 26 percent since 2006 to a projected $26 million for the current fiscal year, which ends June 30. Cathedral leaders say the increase was largely because of the bequest, which was spread out over three years. In the next fiscal year, however, the budget will drop to $24 million.
|
These are tough times at Washington National Cathedral.
| 63.666667 | 1 | 9 |
high
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/29/AR2008052903284.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008060119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/29/AR2008052903284.html
|
Girls, Meet Gotham
|
2008060119
|
The scene: Manhattan, where in a corner cafe a group of chic young women finish a lunch spent talking about their lives: their choices, their men, their dissatisfactions. The tone is jaunty, frank, but it plays out in a minor key, shot through with an undercurrent of longing and nagging self-doubt. As they compare their disparate paths, an unmistakable subtext emerges: No matter where life takes them, no matter how they choose to define themselves in this city of endless possibility, their friendship -- a source of consolation and solidarity despite different temperaments and lifestyles -- will survive.
It's not what you think. That sequence appears in "Three on a Match," an urban melodrama starring Bette Davis, Joan Blondell and Ann Dvorak that, when it opened in 1932, was just the latest iteration of one of Hollywood's most successful genres: the three-girls-in-the-city movie. The theme, a cinematic staple since the 1920s, has been an unusually enduring and lucrative one, exploiting each succeeding era's anxieties surrounding women's changing roles and helping define those eras' new ideas of modern life. In them, audiences can watch women negotiate and sometimes subvert the forces that limn and limit their choices. And each offers its mostly female audience the delectable cake-and-eat-it proposition of a morality tale served with plenty of vicarious vice -- and extravagant dollops of yummy fashion.
Most often, it came down to the same questions: To give in to lust or wait for love? To cash in on one's sexuality or remain pure? To marry or to pursue a career? (By Hollywood's rules, they're almost always mutually exclusive.)
The three-girls picture has gone in and out of fashion over the years. But with "Sex and the City," which opened Friday, it makes a splashy, spunky comeback, one that will test whether the genre still has legs -- even when teetering on Jimmy Choo heels. No one will accuse "Sex and the City" of revolutionizing the three-girls picture. But it still resuscitates a genre that, at its best, articulates something essential about womanhood, its unspoken contradictions and ambivalences, its double standards and hypocrisies, and the joys and sometimes life-or-death necessity of friendship among women.
An efficient way for the studios to package their up-and-coming ingenues, the three-girls formula began as early as 1925 with the silent picture "Sally, Irene and Mary." That film was remade in 1930 as "Our Blushing Brides," starring Joan Crawford. And on they came, three by three: "Ladies in Love." "Three Blind Mice." "Moon Over Miami." "A Letter to Three Wives." "Three Coins in a Fountain."
The canon reserves a special place for the three-girls movie in that most enticing and treacherous of cities, New York. In Manhattan, with its vertiginous skyline, its liberating streets, its steady supply of cads and clothes, its lures and snares of self-invention, what it meant to be a woman could be worked out -- in relationships with men, with work, and even with architecture, but mostly with friends. After "Three on a Match" came "Girls About Town." "How to Marry a Millionaire." "Woman's World." "The Best of Everything." "Valley of the Dolls."
It took television, with its tradition of female ensembles, to bring women back to New York. When "Sex and the City" made its debut on HBO in 1998, it seemed that, overnight, packs of young women were roaming the streets from Manhattan to Medicine Hat in shoes they couldn't afford, looking for the next cosmopolitan and shrieking "I'm so Carrie!"
They so weren't -- if only because Carrie Bradshaw, "Sex and the City's" smart, funny, shallow, self-absorbed heroine, isn't so Carrie herself. She's an amalgam of her three best friends, each of whom personifies an archetype of the three-girls vehicle: Miranda, the practical, self-sufficient career woman; Charlotte, the virginal innocent; Samantha, the older, sexually uninhibited temptress.
Once, each of these women would have represented a cherished, ultimately male-identified standard in Hollywood. Miranda would have been the independent, feisty good sport who would die unmarried and alone. Charlotte would be the virtuous girl who would marry for love and receive unexpected riches in return (okay, that story line hasn't changed). And incorrigible Samantha would be the girl who would plunge off a fire escape or penthouse balcony in punishment for her sexually wanton ways.
In "Three on a Match," Mervyn LeRoy's startlingly dark classic of the genre, the usual rites and rewards come served with a twist. Bette Davis's character, Ruth Wescott, stays true to form: a hardworking stenographer from modest circumstances, she's the Miranda of the threesome, offering sober support and sage advice to her friends but remaining romantically unentangled (and unrewarded). But the hard-partying good-time girl Mary Keaton (Joan Blondell) turns out to be the virtuous one in the end, while upper-crusty Vivian Revere (Ann Dvorak) leaves her family and becomes an alcoholic and cocaine addict, finally jumping out a window to save her child. It's as if Charlotte developed a crack habit and Samantha wound up marrying Harry.
As film historian Jeanine Basinger wrote in "A Woman's View," "In the end each girl gets her wish, but not without suffering."
Made before Hollywood succumbed to the morally censorious Production Code, "Three on a Match" today looks surprisingly racy, proving that long before Carrie and the girls were scandalizing TV viewers with frank talk about men and sex, women's films were occasionally able to tell truths of their own. More often, they lied: In 1953 Jean Negulesco made "How to Marry a Millionaire," starring Lauren Bacall, Betty Grable and a sublimely funny Marilyn Monroe as gold diggers who sublet a Sutton Place penthouse in order to attract Mr. Moneybags. As Bacall explains over cold cuts and champagne: "Where would you be more likely to meet rich man -- in a walk-up on Amsterdam Avenue or in a joint like this?" Unlike westerns or war pictures, where groups of men could be seen doing things like forming a posse or taking an enemy stronghold, the three-girls movie as epitomized by "How to Marry" featured groups of women simply being, existing in a passive state of attractive readiness to embark on her real career: meeting a man and getting married.
|
Search movie listings, reviews and locations from the Washington Post. Features national listings for movies and movie guide. Visit http://www.washingtonpost.com/movies today.
| 52.64 | 0.48 | 0.48 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052702553.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052702553.html
|
Clinton's Two-State Two-Step
|
2008052919
|
On Saturday, when the Rules Committee of the Democratic National Committee meets to determine the fate of Florida and Michigan's delegations to this summer's convention, it will have some company. A group of Hillary Clinton supporters has announced it will demonstrate outside.
That Clinton has impassioned supporters, many of whom link her candidacy to the feminist cause, hardly qualifies as news. And it's certainly true that along the campaign trail Clinton has encountered some outrageously sexist treatment, just as Barack Obama has been on the receiving end of bigoted treatment. (Obama has even been subjected to anti-Muslim bigotry despite the fact that he's not Muslim.) But somehow, a number of Clinton supporters have come to identify the seating of Michigan and Florida not merely with Clinton's prospects but with the causes of democracy and feminism -- an equation that makes a mockery of democracy and feminism.
Clinton herself is largely responsible for this absurdity. Over the past couple of weeks, she has equated the seating of the two delegations with African Americans' struggle for suffrage in the Jim Crow South, and with the efforts of the democratic forces in Zimbabwe to get a fair count of the votes in their presidential election.
Somehow, I doubt that the activists opposing Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe would appreciate this equation.
But the Clintonistas who have called Saturday's demonstration make it sound as if they'll be marching in Selma in support of a universal right to vote. The DNC, says one of their Web sites, "must honor our core democratic principles and enfranchise the people of Michigan and Florida."
Had Florida and Michigan conducted their primaries the way the other 48 states conducted their own primaries and caucuses -- that is, in accord with the very clear calendar laid down by the DNC well before the primaries began -- then Clinton's marchers would be utterly justified in their claims. But when the two states flouted those rules by moving their primaries outside the prescribed time frame, the DNC, which gave neither state a waiver to do so, decreed that their primaries would not count and enjoined all presidential candidates from campaigning in those states. Obama and John Edwards complied with the DNC's dictates by removing their names from the Michigan ballot. Clinton did not.
Seating Michigan in full would mean the party validates the kind of one-candidate election (well, 1.03, to give Dennis Kucinich, Chris Dodd and Mike Gravel, who also remained on the ballot, their due) that is more common in autocracies than democracies. It would mean rewarding the one serious candidate who didn't remove her name from the ballot when all her rivals, in deference to the national party rules, did just that.
What's particularly outrageous is that the Clinton campaign supported the calendar, and the sanctions against Michigan and Florida, until Clinton won those states and needed to have their delegations seated.
Last August, when the DNC Rules Committee voted to strip Florida (and Michigan, if it persisted in clinging to its date) of its delegates, the Clinton delegates on the committee backed those sanctions. All 12 Clinton supporters on the committee supported the penalties. (The only member of the committee to vote against them was an Obama supporter from Florida.) Harold Ickes, a committee member, leading Clinton strategist and acknowledged master of the political game, said, "This committee feels very strongly that the rules ought to be enforced." Patty Solis Doyle, then Clinton's campaign manager, further affirmed the decision. "We believe Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina play a unique and special role in the nominating process," she said, referring to the four states that the committee authorized to hold the first contests. "And we believe the DNC's rules and its calendar provide the necessary structure to respect and honor that role. Thus, we will be signing the pledge to adhere to the DNC-approved nominating calendar."
Not a single Clinton campaign official or DNC Rules Committee member, much less the candidate herself, said at the time that the sanctions imposed on Florida or Michigan were in any way a patriarchal plot or an affront to democratic values. The threat that these rules posed to our fundamental beliefs was discovered only ex post facto -- the facto in question being Clinton's current need to seat the delegations whose seatings she had opposed when she thought she'd cruise to the nomination.
Clinton's supporters have every right to demonstrate on Saturday, of course. But their larger cause is neither democracy nor feminism; it's situational ethics. To insist otherwise is to degrade democracy and turn feminism into the last refuge of scoundrels.
|
How Hillary's supporters are making a mockery of democracy and feminism both.
| 63.714286 | 0.714286 | 3 |
high
|
low
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052702663.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052702663.html
|
Real Intelligence Men Don't Cry
|
2008052919
|
Here's some advice for the next Director of National Intelligence: Don't whine to policymakers about the difficulty of your job. Don't make excuses for your failures. And definitely don't claim that the intelligence community can't do any better. In sum, don't heed Mark Lowenthal's advice in Sunday's Outlook section.
Lowenthal is a highly respected former senior intelligence official who knows the intelligence world to its core. In fact, he literally wrote the textbook on the intelligence community. That level of expertise makes all the more surprising his dubious conclusion that the intelligence community's greatest failure has been remaining "supine" and not explaining itself "adequately and comprehensibly" to the people who misunderstand or misrepresent it.
In articulating this "real intelligence failure," Lowenthal aptly highlights the destructive influence of partisan warfare. Too often, politicians on both sides of the aisle use the intelligence community as semi-opaque cover for their party's inability to advance their policy agenda. Unable to stop the implementation of "the surge," Democrats attacked the Director of National Intelligence for exaggerating the threat of al Qaeda in Iraq. Irate that Iran continues to develop a nuclear program, Republicans happily pin White House failures on the CIA. But while Lowenthal's diagnosis of the political environment is incisive, his prescription is toxic. Giving Doug Feith and John Bolton an intensive tutorial on the difficulties and limitations of intelligence gathering and analysis wouldn't stop them from scapegoating the CIA for their personal policy failures. Rather, it would provide fodder for their attacks. And it would further exacerbate the skepticism with which some policymakers view intelligence.
A better way to separate intelligence from politics would be to rebuild trust with Congress. Senators who learn about controversial intelligence programs from the front page of The Washington Post, as in the case of CIA interrogations and secret prisons, won't be willing to defend the intelligence community and may very likely lambast it. Key intelligence leaders should make more frequent trips to the Hill to keep the oversight committees "fully informed," per the requirements of the National Security Act of 1947. And if there's a time for the intelligence community to stand up, it's when the White House asks that Congress be kept in the dark. To their credit, both CIA Director Hayden and DNI McConnell have opened up on several key issues over the past two years ¿ and as a result, the Senate Intelligence Committee has provided them increased support. Unfortunately, the CIA is now allowing the White House to withhold access to intelligence about the Israeli bombing of an alleged Syrian nuclear facility. Don't be surprised if this leads to another round of intelligence bashing on Capitol Hill.
Lowenthal's assertion that intelligence hasn't improved in recent years -- largely because there wasn't much room to improve -- is also puzzling. The intelligence community today is arguably more proactive and capable than at any time since the Cold War. The newest generation of spies no longer waits for defectors to walk into their arms. They actively pursue new sources of information on hard targets, like Iran and al Qaeda. The most recent National Intelligence Estimate on Iran, for example, impressively contained information from almost 1,500 sources. Our intelligence operators now also eliminate top terrorist leaders on a regular basis. This powerful and effective capability stands in stark contrast to the days when Richard Clarke, then-White House counterterrorism czar, begged in vain for the CIA to do anything that would take terrorists off the streets.
Lowenthal's conclusion, that reports like the National Intelligence Estimates have little policy impact and therefore should be scrapped, underestimates the influential role such assessments play in debates on the Hill. He's wrong to say that the "slam dunk" NIE warning that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction didn't influence Congress in the run-up to war. Even senators who didn't read the entire document knew and considered its bottom line. And look at the latest NIE on the Iranian nuclear program. Nearly all foreign policy analysts believe that it dramatically lowered the probability of U.S. military action. The intelligence assessment process places the intelligence community in the middle of heated policy debates, which is exactly where the nation needs an objective and credible voice.
Intelligence officers and analysts know they have tough jobs. They know that scandals will make headlines and victories will stay classified. No amount of explaining will change that. But they're also dedicated to keeping the nation safe. And so they should strive for more than merely competing with CNN to keep, as Lowenthal suggests, "policymakers generally well-informed."
Eric Rosenbach is executive director of the Belfer Center for International Affairs at the Harvard Kennedy School. He previously served as a professional staff member on the Senate Intelligence Committee and as an army intelligence officer.
|
Intelligence officers and analysts have tough jobs. But they shouldn't complain about them.
| 57.3125 | 0.9375 | 2.5625 |
high
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/deepak_chopra/2008/05/greed_as_higher_morality_the_g.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052919id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/deepak_chopra/2008/05/greed_as_higher_morality_the_g.html
|
The Amorality of the Free Market
|
2008052919
|
Greed is a moral bad but a functional good. Greedy entrepreneurs have benefited the world with more than a few things without which we wouldn't want to live. It was greed, for example, that led investors in the 1980s to buy so-called junk bonds. Junk bonds combined high yield with high risk. They were roundly condemned at the time by gatekeepers of public morality (at least one national politician, Rudy Giuliani, used this as a springboard, loudly prosecuting Michael Milken, the one-man brain trust of junk bonds). Yet junk bonds allowed FedEx and MCI to get off the ground, two budding ventures scorned by established financial lenders. There's even an argument that junk bonds, had they not been vilified, could have financed enormous changes in the developing world, providing desperately needed funds that otherwise weren't available.
Good and bad are entangled in human life; that's a given. How, then, are we to weigh morals and expediency? For a certain segment of the population, the question is moot. Either they try for maximum return on the dollar without regard to conscience, or at the opposite end, they take Jesus literally when he says that a rich man has no more chance of getting into Heaven than a camel to pass through the eye of a needle. But most of us are caught up in confusion; we feel conflicted about what worldly pleasure -- and the money that buys gratification of all kinds -- might be doing to our souls. The gospel of greed was launched in the popular imagination by Gordon Gekko, the smug villain in the movie Wall Street, who pronounced one of the mantras of the go-go Eighties: "Greed is good." Gekko made this declaration during a shareholders meeting, one of those now-familiar contests over "green mail," by which ruthless takeover artists grabbed control of a corporation. Green mail is a naked appeal to greed, offering shareholders more for their stock than they could get on the open market. What matter if the takeover results in mass layoffs and the eventual collapse of the company? In the amorality of a free market, greed is the same as Adam Smith's invisible hand, and that hand is attached to God. "Wall Street" wasn't deep, but its central war mirrored the melodrama of Satan tempting the innocent, with Gekko as chief tempter. In reality, greed has prospered far beyond the scriptwriter's imagination. It doesn't take deep cynicism to explain both Gulf wars in terms of greedy corporations protecting the oil interests of America (and failing both times unless you are fortunate enough to be part of the oil industry or Haliburton). It's not so much that greed is immoral but something deeper: does morality even have a say? The entanglement of good and bad keeps shifting and changing. Is it immoral for the Saudis to profit from skyrocketing oil prices? Most Americans think so. Is it immoral for America to consume a third of the world's natural resources and in the bargain demand the lowest price for them? Most of the world thinks so. Yet nothing is cut and dried. As someone recently pointed out, the U.S. is the one country everyone else hates and everyone else wants to move to. In the end, there's a disconnect between public and private morality. What corporations and governments do (ruining people's retirement funds, killing an enemy en masse) is unthinkable for the individual. Few societies have successfully bridged this gap. The only answer I can come up with is that only consciousness can prevail. When you find yourself having to make a difficult moral choice, your choice comes intuitively. One person automatically resorts to violence, another automatically resists violence. In the larger scheme this doesn't mark the difference between good and bad. It marks the stages of evolution that consciousness has always gone through and will continue to.
Please e-mail On Faith if you'd like to receive an email notification when On Faith sends out a new question.
Email Me | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook
|
On Faith is an innovative, provocative conversation on all aspects of religion with best selling author Jon Meacham of Newsweek and Sally Quinn of The Washington Post. Keep up-to-date on global religious developments with On Faith.
| 17.772727 | 0.522727 | 0.659091 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/needtoknow/2008/05/the_other_arab_bloggers.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052919id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/needtoknow/2008/05/the_other_arab_bloggers.html
|
PostGlobal: PostGlobal on washingtonpost.com
|
2008052919
|
By Nicholas Noe & Maha Taki
Since 2005, both the Western and Arab press have written hundreds of articles about the democratizing effect that weblogs, Facebook, Youtube and other social networking sites can have in the Arab world.
This enthusiasm is a direct consequence of Arab worldâs general disgruntlement towards the state of the mainstream media since it continues to be state-controlled, censored and/or heavily divided amongst political ideologies.
The Internet, of course, is deemed to be democratizing (in sharp contrast to the Arab media) because it is a bottom-up form of communication where everyone's voice is heard, free from the gate- keeping process. Moreover, it can often escape the boundaries and ideologies of the dominant social, cultural and political milieus such that voices not often reported are brought to the fore - religious minorities, homosexuals, the 'opposition' etc.
However, while the Internet has certainly made a noticeable contribution to the organization of political campaigns in Egypt (recruiting youth through Facebook during the recent April 6th protests in Egypt, highlighting the case of assaults on young women in 2006 by bloggers who took pictures with their cell phone of the assaults, etc.), some core groups seem more "connected" than others at the moment - a crucial aspect to keep in mind.
Moreover, most Western (and to some degree Arab) media coverage of the Internet focuses on English language blogs that have a secular, liberal outlook, especially in Egypt. Some notable examples are:
⢠The blog of Alaa Abdel-Fattah and the Free Alaa campaign that followed after his imprisonment during a protest in Egypt. The Free Alaa banners that were circulated allegedly received 150,000 daily hits on U.S. sites per day.
⢠The blog of Abdul Kareem Nabeel Suleiman Amer who was sentenced to 4 years in prison for anti-religious rhetoric and insulting Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak was widely reported on BBC, the International Herlad Tribune, AP and elswhere in the English language media.
⢠Wael Abbas of the Egyptian Awareness blog has been interviewed by CNN, Reuters, Mail and Guardian, The State, the Washington Post and many more.
These bloggers are the type to which the Western media generally reaches out. Young, active, secular and opposing the authoritarian states of the Arab world, they fit well with the general rhetoric surrounding the use of the Internet for democratization.
While the very first Egyptian bloggers may have been from this spectrum of society - especially given that Internet activism began to be used by expats - these voices do not represent the range of political spectra available online today...and definitely not those in 'opposition' to the government.
The most substantial opposition movement today in Egypt is the Muslim Brotherhood. Its members are, of course, not secular, liberal, or strictly nationalist, and most of them write in Arabic. They are also, overwhelmingly, not Jihadists calling for violence either. They are young Egyptians and they are using the web to voice their concerns. And they are being imprisoned and arrested for expressing their opinions online. (For example, Abdel Moneim Mahmoud of the blog anaikhwan.net was arrested but not charged, and Ikwanweb.com has numerous articles on the arrests of Egyptian Brotherhood bloggers). Critically, they are also using blogs to contest issues within their organization, to be noticed by senior members of the Brotherhood and to improve their position within the Muslim Brotherhood (see Khalil al-Anani, Editor of Al-Siyassa Al-Dawliya article which can be found on Ikhwanweb.com).
In short, blogs, especially, are not just a tool to voice Western- media friendly or pro-liberal democracy positions. In Egypt, they are being used with increasing force and impact in the domestic political struggle, which is gaining steam as the possible end of Mubarak's reign approaches.
Of course, Jihadists also widely use the internet as a political tool - and do so in Egypt. They entice hatred, are violent and often are the first to publish al-Qaeda videos, generally calling for the killing of non-Muslims. However, this should not obscure the fact that there is a notable increase in the number of blogs with an Islamist outlook that are non-violent.
A final point: The Internet is not a 'public sphere' in Egypt. In fact, despite the rise of "opposition" bloggers among the Muslim Brotherhood, the community using the Internet still reflects precisely the 'digital divide' that exists between users and non-users. Indeed, Internet users in the Arab world are still overwhelmingly young urban elites. This is because, in part, in the majority of the Arab world, Internet use is hindered by high costs, slow connections and weak infrastructure. There is also a general lack of investment in the development of the technology coupled with a number of initiatives to hamper Internet penetration - the department for Confronting Computer and Internet Crime, a special unit within the Ministry of Interior, is but one recent example).
So one should remember when considering recent reports of "Facebook detentions" that there is both more and less to this than meets the eye. There's a long way to go, in other words, before politics and the Internet are able to synergize to tip the scales of power in Egypt.
And when that point comes, it will likely not be in the form of a "ready for CNN" color revolution.
Nicholas Noe is the editor in chief of the Beirut-based news translation service mideastwire.com. Maha Taki is a PhD candidate at London's Westminster University.
|
Need to Know - PostGlobal on PostGlobal; blog of politics and current events on washingtonpost.com. Visit http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/needtoknow/
| 56.526316 | 0.473684 | 0.684211 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/energywire/2008/05/the_battle_of_kansas_coal.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052919id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/energywire/2008/05/the_battle_of_kansas_coal.html
|
PostGlobal at washingtonpost.com
|
2008052919
|
Oil prices are dominating the headlines, but important developments are rattling other parts of the far-flung energy business, too â including a potential watershed moment for the coal industry. Last week, in a victory for Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, her foes in the state legislature abandoned efforts to overturn her veto of a bill that would have essentially forced her to accept the construction of two new coal-fired power plants in the western part of her state. Coal plant plans are drawn up and dropped all the time, but these were different.
Thatâs because last October, Kansas became the first state ever to reject an air permit for a new coal plant because of greenhouse gas emissions. The stateâs health and environment secretary rejected the permit, citing last yearâs Supreme Court decision, which said that carbon dioxide is a pollutant subject to regulation under the Clean Air Act. The federal Environmental Protection Agency has been dawdling about coming up with those regulations, but the Kansas decision raises the prospect that proposed new coal plants could run into licensing problems at the state level.
Bruce Nilles, a Sierra Club lawyer in Wisconsin, has been active in fighting against new coal plants throughout the Midwest. Last week he was ecstatic. âThis is a major epic heartland battle that has changed the thinking about new coal⦠If this is not a sign that there is a new day of clean energy coming, I donât know what is,â he said.
âThis is not one of those radical east coast states. This is Kansas.â Whatâs next? I asked him last week. âThere are 86 plants left,â he said. âOur work is far from done.â
Even for those less partisan in the fight against coal, the Kansas fight is important. Coal-fired plants provide half the electricity in the United States, but as a sense of urgency about climate change mounts, there will be more and more focus on the carbon dioxide emissions from those plants. Carbon capture and storage techniques at a commercial scale are probably at least a decade away, and environmentalists and climatologists want to rely on conservation and renewable energy for the time being and at least delay new coal plants until new technologies are tested.
The end of the Kansas fight also comes at an interesting political moment. Sebelius has been a strong supporter of presidential hopeful Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and sheâs usually mentioned as being among those Obama might consider as a running mate. If so, her performance in this fight will be seen as a key test of her political abilities.
|
A debate with Steve Mufson on how energy prices are moving money, nations, and lives.
| 27.166667 | 0.555556 | 0.777778 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/25/AR2008052502764.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/25/AR2008052502764.html
|
For Hybrid Drivers, Every Trip Is a Race for Fuel Efficiency
|
2008052919
|
Katie Sebastian accuses her friend Evan Hirsche of getting better mileage than she does because he lives in Bethesda and has flatter everyday trips than she encounters in hilly Takoma Park. She suspects the Hirsche family of taking frequent long drives out of town, which also helps them.
"They claim they haven't been out of town in a while," she said, "but I know they have."
Hirsche retorts: "It is well known that Katie is a lead-footer."
Their friendly rivalry stems from the Prius effect. Both drive a Prius, the Toyota hybrid with an elaborate dashboard monitor that constantly informs drivers how many miles per gallon they are getting and whether the engine is running on battery or gasoline power. That can change driving in startling ways, making drivers conscious of their driving habits, then adjusting them to compete for better mileage. (Sebastian has 41 mpg, Hirsche 43.)
The Prius, and other hybrids with similar displays, has triggered on-the-spot learning that has the potential to change energy-consumption habits. The implications go far beyond the family car, with new devices for the home offering ways to encourage significant change in energy use.
"Once you start making fuel consumption more visible, you have something that comes to the forefront of people's minds instead of lurking in the background," said Sarah Darby, a researcher who studies energy feedback technologies at the University of Oxford's Environmental Change Institute. The monitors "show the consequences of your actions," she says. "This gives you feedback that alters actions, and encourages you to try and improve things."
In the Prius and other hybrids with energy displays, drivers can see what specific actions mean for their mileage. In some ways, it is like children learning to color in between the lines, with the teacher standing over their shoulders. Aggressive acceleration after a stoplight -- that's bad. The monitor will show mpg going down. Suddenly slamming the brakes -- also bad. Coasting to a stop -- good. That tactic lets the engine shut down, saving gas. Hills -- oh, they are real bad.
Tom Igoe, a physical-computing researcher at New York University, said the Prius mpg display is one of the best examples of technology "where green meets information systems."
"For a long time," he said, "we have known that people will change their habits if they are exposed to feedback in real time."
Now companies are introducing products that do for the home what the monitor in the Prius has done for the car. The Kill a Watt plugs into a wall and accepts plug-ins from appliances, showing exactly how much energy is being consumed. Sebastian recently bought one at a store in the District. "We want to know where our electricity is going," she said.
The Wattson, a small console designed by a British company, wirelessly connects to a home's energy meter and displays numbers showing how many watts of electricity the house is using. If the console glows blue, less electricity than normal is being used. If it glows red, it's just the opposite.
Massachusetts company Ambient Devices, a spinoff of MIT's famed Media Lab, is testing, in connection with several large U.S. utilities, a device called the Orb. It is a small frosted-glass ball that changes color based on how much demand is on the electricity grid. You can put it anywhere in the house, like a piece of modern art. When demand is high, consumption costs more, and the Orb turns red. When it's low, the cost falls, and the Orb turns green. Homeowners can adjust their consumption accordingly, perhaps not washing the dishes when the energy grid is being taxed and the Orb is red.
|
Find Washington Post science, politics and opinion coverage of the growing threat from global warming.
| 43.705882 | 0.352941 | 0.470588 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/28/AR2008052802108.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/28/AR2008052802108.html
|
'Learning as We Go'
|
2008052919
|
COLORADO SPRINGS, May 28 -- President Bush acknowledged that his administration is "learning as we go" in building democracy in Iraq, as he used his final military academy commencement address on Wednesday to ruminate on some lessons from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Bush spoke to graduates of the Air Force Academy on a day when he was buffeted by criticism of his drive for war, this time by former aide Scott McClellan. Bush ignored the controversy, instead seeking parallels in past battles against fascism and communism and requesting patience.
"One challenge is that in the past, in Germany and Japan, the work of rebuilding took place in relative quiet," Bush told the thousand graduates and their families. "Today, we're helping emerging democracies rebuild under fire from terrorist networks and state sponsors of terror. This is a difficult and unprecedented task -- and we're learning as we go."
He noted that in Iraq "we learned from hard experience" that political and economic progress is hard without first establishing "some measure of security."
As a result, he said, the United States changed its strategy, sending more troops to help secure Baghdad and reduce sectarian violence.
Bush also noted that defining success is more complex than it was in World War II. "In the past, that was relatively easy to do," he said. "There were public surrenders, a signing ceremony on the deck of a battleship, victory parades in American cities. Today, when the war continues after the regime has fallen, the definition of success is more complicated."
Bush speaks every spring at one of the service academies. His address Wednesday, under a cold drizzle at the football stadium here, offered familiar rhetoric about the "war on terror," though with a nod to realities that have made the Iraq and Afghanistan wars more protracted than his administration had once expected. He described the effort as a "battle of wills" and said loss will come only "if we defeat ourselves."
|
COLORADO SPRINGS, May 28 -- President Bush acknowledged that his administration is "learning as we go" in building democracy in Iraq, as he used his final military academy commencement address on Wednesday to ruminate on some lessons from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
| 7.979592 | 1 | 49 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052703679.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052703679.html
|
Ex-Press Aide Writes That Bush Misled U.S. on Iraq
|
2008052919
|
McClellan includes the charges in a 341-page book, "What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington's Culture of Deception," that delivers a harsh look at the White House and the man he served for close to a decade. He describes Bush as demonstrating a "lack of inquisitiveness," says the White House operated in "permanent campaign" mode, and admits to having been deceived by some in the president's inner circle about the leak of a CIA operative's name.
The book, coming from a man who was a tight-lipped defender of administration aides and policy, is certain to give fuel to critics of the administration, and McClellan has harsh words for many of his past colleagues. He accuses former White House adviser Karl Rove of misleading him about his role in the CIA case. He describes Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice as being deft at deflecting blame, and he calls Vice President Cheney "the magic man" who steered policy behind the scenes while leaving no fingerprints.
McClellan stops short of saying that Bush purposely lied about his reasons for invading Iraq, writing that he and his subordinates were not "employing out-and-out deception" to make their case for war in 2002.
But in a chapter titled "Selling the War," he alleges that the administration repeatedly shaded the truth and that Bush "managed the crisis in a way that almost guaranteed that the use of force would become the only feasible option."
"Over that summer of 2002," he writes, "top Bush aides had outlined a strategy for carefully orchestrating the coming campaign to aggressively sell the war. . . . In the permanent campaign era, it was all about manipulating sources of public opinion to the president's advantage."
McClellan, once a staunch defender of the war from the podium, comes to a stark conclusion, writing, "What I do know is that war should only be waged when necessary, and the Iraq war was not necessary."
McClellan resigned from the White House on April 19, 2006, after nearly three years as Bush's press secretary. The departure was part of a shake-up engineered by new Chief of Staff Joshua B. Bolten that also resulted in Rove surrendering his policy-management duties.
A White House spokeswoman declined to comment on the book, some contents of which were first disclosed by Politico.com. The Washington Post acquired a copy of the book yesterday, in advance of its official release Monday.
Responding to a request for comment, McClellan wrote in an e-mail: "Like many Americans, I am concerned about the poisonous atmosphere in Washington. I wanted to take readers inside the White House and provide them an open and honest look at how things went off course and what can be learned from it. Hopefully in some small way it will contribute to changing Washington for the better and move us beyond the hyper-partisan environment that has permeated Washington over the past 15 years."
The criticism of Bush in the book is striking, given that it comes from a man who followed him to Washington from Texas.
Bush is depicted as an out-of-touch leader, operating in a political bubble, who has stubbornly refused to admit mistakes. McClellan defends the president's intellect -- "Bush is plenty smart enough to be president," he writes -- but casts him as unwilling or unable to be reflective about his job.
|
Former White House press secretary Scott McClellan writes in a new memoir that the Iraq war was sold to the American people with a sophisticated "political propaganda campaign" led by President Bush and aimed at "manipulating sources of public opinion" and "downplaying the major reason for going to...
| 12.296296 | 0.722222 | 1.5 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/05/28/rove_disputes_mcclellan_book.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052919id_/http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/05/28/rove_disputes_mcclellan_book.html
|
Rove, White House Dispute McClellan Book Tales
|
2008052919
|
President Bush (C) waves as he walks with his press secretary, Scott McClellan (R), and Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove (L) to the Oval Office at the White House April 19, 2006 in Washington. (Getty Images)
Updated 10:44 a.m. By Michael D. Shear and Michael Abramowitz Reaction has begun to the new tell-all book by former White House spokesman Scott McClellan.
Karl Rove, the subject of many of McClellan's charges, said on Fox's Hannity & Colmes last night that he disputes those charges and said McClellan sounded like a liberal blogger.
"First of all, this doesn't sound like Scott. It really doesn't," Rove said. "Not the Scott McClellan I've known for a long time. Second of all, it sounds like somebody else. It sounds like a left-wing blogger. Second of all, you're right. If he had these moral qualms, he should have spoken up about them."
Rove said that he did not recall McClellan being in many of the meetings on subjects that he criticized. He said McClellan's comment in the book that he was surprised to see Rove and Lewis "Scooter" Libby talking together is evidence of his absence from major meetings.
"Well, look, it goes to show how out of the loop he was, that he didn't think we spent much time together," Rove said. "I mean, over the course of the seven years or six years that we worked together, Scooter and I spent a lot of time first on the campaign and then when we were at the White House we were on several committees together."
The White House sloughed off the book this morning as the work of a disgruntled former staffer.
"Scott, we now know, is disgruntled about his experience at the White House," White House press secretary Dana Perino said in a statement for reporters traveling with Bush in Colorado today. "For those of us who fully supported him, before, during and after he was press secretary, we are puzzled. It is sad -- this is not the Scott we knew."
She added: "The book, as reported by the press, has been described to the president. I do not expect a comment from him on it -- he has more pressing matters than to spend time commenting on books by former staffers."
Posted at 10:37 AM ET on May 28, 2008 Share This: Technorati | Tag in Del.icio.us | Digg This Previous: Candidates Agree on Darfur | Next: Highlights from 'What Happened'
Add The Trail to Your Site
Just dropped by before doing some real work.
Most of you guys sound absolutely like idiots. Where in the hell did you get your education? and your morals, manners, etc. You are the type of people I do not want for neighbors or friends (or family). Go do some good work like volunteering instead of this stupid stuff you "write"
Posted by: Millie Burt | June 1, 2008 3:46 PM | Report abuse
I thought it was pretty good lick this morning when McClellan reminded everyone that President Bush lowered the bar for Rove when he discovered that Scooter and Rove had been involved in outing a CIA agent.
Posted by: the pendulumswings | June 1, 2008 2:22 PM | Report abuse
"Muddy sty", anotherwhitedude? For the love of my grandfather's hymn book, you leapt with such gleeful alacrity into a description of the places one would most likely be fellated that I highly suspected you of being an oral sex fiend yourself (until I recalled your unfortunate condition)! whitedude said nothing about Lakisha's race. Perhaps you need to take a nap. A black president in the White House would go far in healing this nation's wounds. But Obama is not that black man. As for "african americans taking back what is theres [sic]", yeah, no. Just no. What??
Posted by: George | May 29, 2008 5:35 PM | Report abuse
Bushie, rove, and the other enemies of the Union must indeed be perplexed...at how the 'conditioning' failed.
"This is not the Scott we programmed"
Posted by: theantibush | May 29, 2008 1:53 PM | Report abuse
Your ire has further addled your already impaired capacity for rational thought. So your own indulgence in "inane vitriol" was insincere, a mere provocation to see how I would react? I suppose you regard petitions to perform oral sex and references to impotence to be on a higher axiological and rhetorical plane than my reference to the authoress of your days (please pass along my regards, by the way). You are right, though: I have debased myself by rolling around in your muddy sty and indulging in the same sort of reprehensible name-calling to which you and "whitedude" resorted (without provocation, however).
Meanwhile, Lakisha's excellent point (made, to be sure, with the grammatical mistakes typical of this medium, which "whitedude" seized upon in a racist denigration of her education) has gone unaddressed: there will be no justice for African Americans until they wield political power.
Posted by: anotherwhitedude | May 29, 2008 1:44 PM | Report abuse
Why would you not be outraged at the continual lies that Bush et al have peddled? Even worse lies were told to justify Vietnam. Thank God you survived. But many soldiers didn't, and it wasn't until a short time ago (maybe within the last ten years) that Robert McNamara "came clean" in his tearful admissions. I would think that Vietnam vets would be more insenced than anyone about the president lying in order to justify a wrongheaded war.
Posted by: Mike in Philly | May 29, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse
anotherwhitedude, WD was attacking the idiocy of an idiot, and rightly so, be he hypocrite, jester or king. Regardless, I was only wondering how you would react to the sort of inane vitriol that comes so easily to you behind the shield of anonymity. I detect a quiver in your voice, so it's clear I've hit a nerve. I'm sorry. But the "Your Mother" retort is Classic. I once almost used it myself, but have now been vindicated in my conjecture that its use is - not even the abandonment of wit - but the natural province of the apes. Now go invent a legume, genius.
Posted by: George | May 29, 2008 1:10 PM | Report abuse
The problem I have is that all of you armchair quarterbacks are at it again!During Vietnam you gave the 58,260 soldiers names that are on the wall the bird and once again you,re doing it again.I have a cure for you!Why don't you go to Africa and see how your liberal policies are working.That's what's coming to America if you have your way.Sad to say when someone does not study history they're doomed to repeat it.
Posted by: Vietnam Vet Who's Sick Of Retreaters | May 29, 2008 1:03 PM | Report abuse
Bush et al are "puzzled" because they can't understand why McClellan would tell the truth!
Bush's "integrity" is like a bald man's combover. He's dishonest, he knows he's dishonest, he knows that everyone knows he's dishonest, yet he continues to pretend to be a paragon of virtue and honesty.
Those of us who recognized Bush as a fraud from day one are sitting back licking our chops saying I told you so. Unfortunately, given the disastrous state of affairs Bush's sell out of this country has put us in, there is no joy in being able to say that.
On the positive side, just nine more months and every American can delight in declaring TGGIG (Thank God George Is Gone)!
Posted by: Mike in Philly | May 29, 2008 12:01 PM | Report abuse
I think you missed the larger point here. "Whitedude" was hypocritically attacking another poster for the kinds of grammatical mistakes all of us make while writing on the Internet--not exactly a medium propitious for profound or elegant communication. I called him out.
As for erectile dysfunction (an ad hominem attack typical of those with no substantial arguments) I think you've confused me with "whitedude". Your mother can attest to the fact I suffer no such ailment. Tell her that as soon as she gets your DNA test back, I'll be happy to send child support.
Posted by: anotherwhitedude | May 29, 2008 11:30 AM | Report abuse
It is very interesting to see the so called world of America haters as the Dems claim. Take a look at the world and you see those that were once socialist are now becoming capitalist. The rest of the world is turning towards our way of thinking, yet we are turning towards the old socialist viewpoints.
Bush can do nothing without the congress, people here seem to forget that. The real power is in the congress, not the president. Congress by the way, has a lower poll rate than Bush.
I agree with some of the above, if the two parties thought of America first instead of their parties, we would already be out of Iraq with a victory. Fighting one hand behind our backs will always take longer than fighting full force. The so-called unbias media won't show victory of anykind in Irag, just take a look at past/current reports. This same un-biased press(90% admitted dems, you guys seem to fail to report that everytime you bash on Fox news) has no problem running pictures or reporting our deaths, but won't show the enemy deaths or reporting their failures. The press is more likely to believe everything the enemy says without checking out facts, but questions anything our side says. Remember when the Dems/Press ran to the mics and told us that Americans slaughtered women and children, reports giving to them by the enemy, ran it without a second thought........oh ya, untill the video came out showing the ambush by the enemy on those troops. Did the press/Dems run to the mics to clear those soldiers they smeared? No.. Why? Maybe we should help those who actually are putting their lives on the line and help them win. Support the troops not the mission is a joke, if you support the troops you need to support the mission to make sure they live through the mission. To many couch sitters here talking about things they have no clue about. Questions are welcomed, just make them equal to the other viewpoint, America first, not the Dem/Rep party first, to many of you are more interested in your party viewpoint rather than the success of the American public. "Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it." America's biggest problem is we are not united anymore under one idea. Too many people are interested in their piece of the puzzle and keeping it to themselves instead of helping each other put their pieces together to make the bigger picture. Socialism doesn't work, humans are to imperfect to make it work. The road to Hell is paved with good intentions. If things stay the same, selfish Dems/Rep thinking we are well on our way to Hell.
Posted by: Tim | May 29, 2008 11:26 AM | Report abuse
never trust someone who says "Second of all" in TWO sentences in a row.
It's ALMOST as bad as over-using the phrase, "if you will".
Posted by: zentrails | May 29, 2008 11:01 AM | Report abuse
Stop watching Fox news channel, which is notorious for inventing facts to suit their political agenda. When the entire state of Florida was finally recounted following the 2000 coup, Shrub did not win. Gore won. This is a well established and (excepting Fox) widely accepted fact.
As for everyone else, who uses the word "lib" like it is a dirty word, try this one... fascist republican. Yeah, take anyone of Bush's let's bomb 'em back to the stone age speeches during the lead up to war, lay it side by side with anyone of Adolph Hitler's speeches, blackout the names, dates and places and ask your friends to tell you which speech was delivered by whom. The similarities are frightfully astounding. Most people cannot distinguish the two apart from one another!
As for the economy, do a little more homework. You will learn that G.W. Shrub was CEO of three different business ventures prior to becoming the deadliest governor in Texas history. All three businesses failed and Shrub was forced to rely on his daddy's rich Arab friends to bail him out all three times! It was not until the infamous land grab deal for a stadium, in which Bush was recruited for his political ties to legally force the rightful owner of the land to relinquish his property rights, that Bush finally made his own fortune. The worst kind of thief is the one who steals with impunity!
Face it, Bush is and always has been a loser, born with a silver spoon up his nose. It is no accident that his legacy will be that of the worst president in U.S. history!
Posted by: Robert Langdon | May 29, 2008 10:24 AM | Report abuse
Americans love the truth and generally have more respect for someone who fesses up rather than continue to insist lies are reality. We all should put country before our party.
Posted by: long ranger | May 29, 2008 10:16 AM | Report abuse
How dare Karl Rove to say a tale about McClellan. Ever since Rove turned draft dodger he has never served his Union!
Posted by: Anonymous | May 29, 2008 10:00 AM | Report abuse
No denials of the accuracy of McClellan's (very late) admissions and criticisms, just, " doesn't sound like Scott. It really doesn't"....
Well, duh! stupid! _This_ time he's _not_ reading the scripts _you_ prepared!
Oh, yeah, you're soon up for sworn testimony before Congress, Rove. Bet you 'sound different' then, too.
Posted by: proximity1 | May 29, 2008 9:29 AM | Report abuse
Scott McClellan's book about Bush after his stint as White House spokesperson should not be all that surprising. We know Bush is the worst president ever from his approval ratings and his actions. The Bush-Cheney White House has always been extremely secretive and I expect a lot of political spin on this one. It is likely that the post-Bush era will see many more "insiders" tell of the horrors of this dreadful Administration.
And of course there will be the classic Republican claims of a "liberal media", even though this is McClellan's book. We shouldn't believe this is possible, even though we all suspect these evil and stupid deeds by Bush. Give it more time, the Bush error will continue to unravel after years of White House control of media contact.
Bush is an embarrassment to Americans and the world. We all will shout it from the hilltops after January 20, 2009.
Posted by: vballboy60 | May 29, 2008 6:40 AM | Report abuse
droppingknowledge wrote: "Will you libs quit with that BS? Is it too complicated to see that if she was in such mortal danger she wouldn't be in dozens of magazine articles and write a book? If you were a CIA "secret" agent would YOU write a book and pose in magazines etc etc etc? She sure mugs it up for the cameras for someone whose life is in danger. The fact is she has a publicist and agent."
LOL. All of the publicity occurred after she was outed by Rove et al
Posted by: sdr | May 29, 2008 5:39 AM | Report abuse
KAckermann wrote: "Rove denied he leaked the name of a CIA agent and put her life in jeopardy."
Will you libs quit with that BS? Is it too complicated to see that if she was in such mortal danger she wouldn't be in dozens of magazine articles and write a book? If you were a CIA "secret" agent would YOU write a book and pose in magazines etc etc etc? She sure mugs it up for the cameras for someone whose life is in danger. The fact is she has a publicist and agent.
Posted by: DroppinKnowledge | May 29, 2008 4:30 AM | Report abuse
You fools suddenly call McClellan's words pure truth? A couple of years ago he was talked about as Bush's propaganda minister! Every liberal here missed the obvious (what else is new)-McClellan is doing what his dad did. Barr McClellan wrote a book about "insider knowledge" about JFK's death at the hands of LBJ. Sr McClellan only came out with this knowledge AFTER he got run off-just like Scott. Libs need to learn history, we conservatives are tired of repeating it because of you morons.
Posted by: DroppinKnowledge | May 29, 2008 3:48 AM | Report abuse
Hey anotherwhitedude. Long-time listener, first-time caller. Big fan. Anyway, I was sorry to hear about your permanent and withering erectile dysfunction; that is, until I read your latest masterpiece. Now I nearly weep with joy at the fact that you will never be blessed with progeny upon whom to exert influence, as your example isn't worth a herring's right t*t. P.S. How's my English, Nancy?
Posted by: George | May 29, 2008 3:12 AM | Report abuse
Hey anotherwhitedude. Long-time listener, first-time caller. Big fan. Anyway, I was sorry to hear about your permanent and withering erectile dysfunction; that is, until I read your latest masterpiece. Now I nearly weep with joy at the fact that you will never be blessed with progeny upon whom to exert influence, as your example isn't worth a herring's right tit. P.S. How's my English, Nancy?
Posted by: George | May 29, 2008 3:12 AM | Report abuse
Did you mean to say "put in an apostrophe"? Why is it carelessness when you make a mistake, but deficient schooling when others do so? As for "blowing you": sorry, I'm not into that, but if you're really that hard up, I believe there are a variety of bathhouses, public restrooms, and Republican Senate offices to suit your needs. And if you keep up your pathetic, self-righteous comments, I've got some more recommendations.
Posted by: anotherwhitedude | May 29, 2008 2:16 AM | Report abuse
You are correct. I was careless in typing and put an apostrophe. You can still blow me. Do you have a clever reply to my point about Carver inventing the peanut?
Posted by: whitedude | May 29, 2008 1:58 AM | Report abuse
I don't know why people keep picking on Rove.
The FBI dropped their investigation of him in 1973 for... it doesn't matter; they dropped it.
The DA dismissed the charge of illegal voter registration when he listed the address of two cottages his wife owned as his residence. Just because those cottages were rented to other people doesn't mean he didn't live there.
Just because terror alerts were issued every single time Kerry got a bump in the polls doesn't mean it wasn't coincidence or that it was Rove.
Just because he held stock in Enron while sitting in on energy policy meetings that included Enron doesn't mean he let all that money influence him. Plus, Cheney had more.
Just because he had professional ties to the producers of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth... it doesn't mean anything.
Rove denied he leaked the name of a CIA agent and put her life in jeopardy.
As far as the whole US attorney thing: I don't want to get into it because the details conspire against him, but I will say this: where does it say that the Justice department cannot be used for political purposes?
Anyone can lose a few hundred thousand emails that coincided with critical dates. Also, as far as using outside servers not subjected to the Presidential Records act for official business - there are so many servers out there how could you not use the wrong one?
The Seigleman thing? He said he had nothing to do with it.
How much more proof do you want? He's done nothing!
Posted by: KAckermann | May 29, 2008 1:55 AM | Report abuse
You're absolutely right: when Obama is president, he should invest heavily in education--especially your school. It's "theirs", not "their's". No apostrophe is needed; "theirs" is already possessive. Wise up and get off your high horse.
Posted by: anotherwhitedude | May 29, 2008 1:41 AM | Report abuse
"white folks better wake up. because african americans are taking back what is theres. just like george washington carver said, the inventor of the peanut, black people will never be free until we can live in the white house."
The first think Obama needs to do when he becomes president is to work on our education system. It should "their's" not "theres" and George Washington Carver didn't "invent" the peanut. He certainly researched it fully, but he didn't "invent" it.
Posted by: whitedude | May 29, 2008 1:14 AM | Report abuse
Top GOP leaders should be charged with TREASON and impeached immediately. Republicans abandoned their principles, pissed on the Constitution and lied to take us to war. How UN-American. Traitors! Hope Bush & Co dont let the door hit them in the ass on their way out. Jan 2009 cant come quickly enough. I actually voted for them...and I feel so ashamed. Wont be fooled again...Obama = real change.
Posted by: ex republican | May 29, 2008 12:40 AM | Report abuse
I can only imagine what will be left for President G.W. Bush to write about when he leaves office on January 20, 2009. Come to think of it, Jan. 20, 09 is not that far away. Thank heaven. I am getting tired of "Bush, Clinton, Bush ......."
Posted by: richardcolonel | May 29, 2008 12:20 AM | Report abuse
I noticed that neither Rove nor Perino said McClellan's claims were false. Just the usual Rove spin.
Expect an epidemic of memory loss when these Bush bootlickers actually have to testify about how the Bush administration went seriously off the tracks.
Posted by: redbeard | May 29, 2008 12:16 AM | Report abuse
It is unfortunate, but true: Black people will never be free until they master the language of the oppressor. Anger is only an incentive. We need your thoughts, for sure, but, sadly, before America will respect them, you, you need to do the same homework that Obama has done.
Posted by: mark | May 28, 2008 11:49 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 11:04 PM | Report abuse
Who's the next person to write a book about the President or the White House?? This is really getting pathetic already.
Posted by: Lindy | May 28, 2008 10:37 PM | Report abuse
white folks better wake up. because african americans are taking back what is theres. just like george washington carver said, the inventor of the peanut, black people will never be free until we can live in the white house.
Posted by: Lakisha | May 28, 2008 10:30 PM | Report abuse
"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time." ~ Abraham Lincoln
"Fool me once, shame on -- shame on you. Fool me -- you can't get fooled again." ~ NOT Abraham Lincoln
Posted by: F&B | May 28, 2008 10:23 PM | Report abuse
"6. Two years ago when Congress was taken over by Denocrats, the economy was much better and not in a recession and gas prices were around $2.00 a gallon. Is that a coincidence?"
Posted by: Stephen Jeffries | May 28, 2008 9:47 PM
I love this argument! The Republicans had absolute control over the United States government; the controlled the White House and BOTH houses of Congress for SEVEN YEARS . During this period, almost everything they touched turned to crap, because they were much more interested in consolidating their power, starting unnecessary wars and politicizing every aspect of government than they were in providing good government for the American people.
The Democrats have only been in control of Congress for about 18 MONTHS, (NOT two years), barely have a majority in the Senate and don't control the White House. They're in a virtual standoff with the Repugs.
Under these circumstances, these pinhead Republicans expect America to blame the Dems for not cleaning up the mess in 18 months that the Republicans spent 7 years creating!
I've got news for you, my friend. This November is going to make November of 2006 look like child's play. Don't take my word for it. Ask the Repug congressmen who got voted out of heretofore blood red Michigan 14, Louisiana 6 and Mississsippi 1.
Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 10:13 PM | Report abuse
OMG-You people just don't have a Clue do you?
Bushie was ORDERED by CONGRESS(The same Sorry rotten barrel of crud you have decided to have all three current contenders come from-Idiots and Fools!), to Take out Saddam HUSSEIN!
However, It is the FLAGRANT DERELICTION of his Duties to ENFORCE the Constitution in PROTECTION of the American People(Read; NOT IRAQI OR MEXICAN), that he is CRIMINAL Guilty of!
He SWORE an OATH to do so! He has allowed an INVASION, Price Fixing by Big Oil, and Allowed American Business Ventures to be ROBBED by "People"(Used VERY Loosely) like Chavez!
These, NOT the War, are not only the Faults of Bush, but the same Garbage we WILL get from Elected P'sOS from the US Congress!
Face it you IDIOTS! ALL of THEM have been in POWER! What? I mean WHAT? Have Juan McAmnesty, Billary, or Obasama done;
to Justify being given MORE Power?
Go to mittromney.com, READ his "Issues".
Unlike Barack Insane O'Bomba-Nation, HE does NOT need YOUR Info FIRST!
THAT, in a Nut-Shell, should send ANYONE with a Brain, RUNNING as far from Barack as they can! :-(
Posted by: SAINT---The | May 28, 2008 10:13 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: joe | May 28, 2008 10:06 PM | Report abuse
Election update 2008: In a stunning upset of this year's Presidential election, the republican party has scored an overwhelming victory in the state of Denial !!!
Posted by: J. Adams | May 28, 2008 9:58 PM | Report abuse
TO BRAIN SHRUNK2 I AM NOT AFRAID OF ISLAM. IT WILL NEVER GAIN A FOOTHOLD IN THIS COUNTRY. IT IS A LONG TIME UNTIL ELECTIONBS. THAT CLOSET MUSLIM HUSSEN OBAMA WILL BE EXPOSED FOR WHAT HE REALLY IS. MY PREDICTION-IS HE WILL NEVER WIN. I AGRREE 150% WITH JAKE. NUFF SAID.
Posted by: BILLY SANDERS | May 28, 2008 9:53 PM | Report abuse
TO BRAIN SHRUNK2 I AM NOT AFRAID OF ISLAM. IT WILL NEVER GAIN A FOOTHOLD IN THIS COUNTRY. IT IS A LONG TIME UNTIL ELECTIONBS. THAT CLOSET MUSLIM HUSSEN OBAMA WILL BE EXPOSED FOR WHAT HE REALLY IS. MY PREDICTION-IS HE WILL NEVER WIN. I AGRREE 150% WITH JAKE. NUFF SAID.
Posted by: BILLY SANDERS | May 28, 2008 9:53 PM | Report abuse
"The Washington Post" about a year and a half ago or so, had opinion articles written by a few historians about where each thought Bush would be ranked among presidents to date. I think there is a possibility Bush may barely make the top forty list of presidents during the first two hundred twenty years of our history. Andrew Johnson, James Buchanan, Herbert Hoover and Warren Harding are strongly competing with Bush, among the likely bottom five presidents so far.
Posted by: Independent | May 28, 2008 9:52 PM | Report abuse
I find it amazing those who write such defaming rhetoric toward our leaders do not even have the nerve to actually sign their posts.
Let me say this to all of you:
1. President Bush did not steal an election in Florida. Every independant recount conducted, after the Supreme Court's ruling, proved Bush won the state of Florida.
2. President Bush did not lie to us about the war. He passed on bad information and may have not given due dilligence to that intelligence, but he did not willfully lie.
3. President Bush did not handle Hurricane Katrina correctly therefore many lives were lost. Period.
4. President Bush did not handle the War in Iraq very well therefore many lives were lost. However, since the troop surge there is progress.
5. Would there be any buzz or would there be as big of a payday if Scott McClellan wrote a book that glorified President Bush? I seriously doubt it. I am not going to judge McClellan's intentions, but I hope his conscious is clear at the end of the day.
6. Two years ago when Congress was taken over by Denocrats, the economy was much better and not in a recession and gas prices were around $2.00 a gallon. Is that a coincidence?
President Bush has made mistakes, but who was the last President who had to deal with an attack on our own soil; deal with a natural disaster that is considered one of the most devastating in history; fight tooth and nail against Congress to make sure the men and women serving our country abroad could get the food and supplies needed to live (let alone fight).
Posted by: Stephen Jeffries | May 28, 2008 9:47 PM | Report abuse
LENNY BEANS ISN'T THAT WHAT YOUR BRAINS ARE MADE OF------------OR IS IT BECAUSE TERE IS A GREAT VOID IN YOUR NOODLE.
Posted by: BILL SANDERS | May 28, 2008 9:47 PM | Report abuse
The information in Scott McClellan's book is no big revelation. It only confirms what many already knew and others have already said. I appreciate Scott coming forward and don't agree with those who criticize him for not speaking up back then. Exactly how would he have done that?? Let's see, he could have done an interview, written an editorial, held a press conference, requested a Senate hearing, or what? None of those methods would have been effective in getting his entire story out. He has a lot to tell. Besides, the media has a track record for either yawning or ignoring everything foul thing this administration has done. I suspect Scott must have been pretty disillusioned when he left that job. I'm sure he went into it believing in what they were doing and felt used in the worse possible way by the time he left. I'm also sure he had to process everyting and then decide if he really wanted to put his neck on the chopping block by going up against this ruthless administration, not to mention the media who haven't exactly been kind. Cut the guy some slack and be thankful he's coming out now. You know his mother is a Democrat. She probably talked him into doing the right and patriotic thing-country before Party and truth before deceit. The only way this country can heal is for the truth to come out and for these crooks to be held accountable. Scott McClellan is only validating what many others have said, but coming from a former insider and loyalist, it carries more weight.
Posted by: spicegal | May 28, 2008 9:37 PM | Report abuse
As usual, the liars are lying about who is lying.
If there hadn't been so much death and carnage, it would be amusing to watch them try to destroy each other.
Posted by: RAS | May 28, 2008 9:16 PM | Report abuse
Billy Sanders, you seem frightened.
But your President is a war criminal and a liar.
Posted by: shrink2 | May 28, 2008 9:14 PM | Report abuse
Now that the Bushies are in complete disarray and are busy spilling the beans about the last eight years, W's administration will stagger helplessly through the final months feebly denying what their ex shipmates (see pirate ship) are saying because only about 5% of the country believes anything anyone connected to W says, while they believe everything the tattletales relate.
Posted by: Lookinginfromoverseas | May 28, 2008 9:13 PM | Report abuse
Well, you bleeding heart liberal left wingers will vote you a "MESSIAH" in that will make a heaven for you to live in. You will be laying on a carpet looking toward Mecca to say your prayers.
Posted by: Billy Sanders | May 28, 2008 8:56 PM | Report abuse
How did The Fake News Corporation become the Bush "administration" propadanda outlet?
Posted by: shrink2 | May 28, 2008 8:38 PM | Report abuse
Even Katie Couric called BS on the way Rove, Bartlett,and Perino Dog Chow all parrotted the line, "This isn't the Scott we knew." WORD FOR WORD! Helen Thomas said it best a couple weeks ago regarding MSM: "Where were you guys?"
Posted by: braultrl | May 28, 2008 8:35 PM | Report abuse
You're all a bunch of left wing bloggers!
Posted by: One of the Bush 30% | May 28, 2008 8:13 PM | Report abuse
"i love the implications that mcclellen is, somehow, mentally deranged. "Not the scott we know," and so on.
pretty sad when the only defense is to say "he's nuts." and "he was out of the loop."
The guys not nuts...he was told that the best way to make a buck was to bash Bush and Co...so he wrote a book bashing Bush and Co. The lemmings on the Left will happily pay $25 - $30 a copy to validate everything they always believed was true.
Posted by: FH | May 28, 2008 8:10 PM | Report abuse
Hitler's Nazi's tried to create a new language, new truths, and new science. The Fascists of America have tried to do the same thing but it no longer works at all. Karl Rove, the former political adviser of thing Bush became the Goebbels of America by propagating the Big Lie,and repeating it over and over to make people believe it. r? The wrongies want us to still believe any lie they tell. We have stopped listening to their drivel and are forming opinions based in truth and most,if not all of the truth is coming from the progressive bloggers.
Posted by: ghostcommander | May 28, 2008 8:06 PM | Report abuse
Rove, a commentator on Fox was banished from the White House for pushing the envelope of Republican politics beyond lawful executive behaviour. He had involvement in the unproven Valerie Plame outing conspiracy put forth by Fitzgerald in the Libby case. His truth squad reported to Hastert's right hand information about a perverted FL congressman. Only when the Dems outed him was action taken. Did I mention this was Rove's truth squad reporting. How many Willie Horton and Swift Boat ads against parapeligic war heroes do you need to see before you stop letting them prey on your prejudice. Mr. Hannity should have a discussion with his pastor Peterson about his New Orleans views. 32 Republican office holders left because of indictment or sexual behaviour problems, with a drunk driving two wife congressman, soon to follow. Rove tried to run the country, like his campaigns, only problem is we are a country of laws.
Posted by: Jimbo | May 28, 2008 8:05 PM | Report abuse
Hitler's Nazi's tried to create a new language, new truths, and new science. The Fascists of America have tried to do the same thing but it no longer works at all. Karl Rove, the former political adviser of thing Bush became the Goebbels of America by propagating the Big Lie,and repeating it over and over to make people believe it. Since when is truth portrayed as a left wing blogger? The wrongies want us to still believe any lie they tell. We have stopped listening to their drivel and are forming opinions based in truth and most, if not all of the truth is coming from the progressive bloggers.
Posted by: ghostcommander | May 28, 2008 8:00 PM | Report abuse
I think everyone of you is crazy with hate and should be ashamed.
Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 7:55 PM | Report abuse
Karl Rove said, "First of all, this doesn't sound like Scott. It really doesn't."
It's true. Even Tucker Carlson said on MSNBC that McClellan is the only person in Washington who is less articulate than George Bush.
Who do you think Scotty's ghost writer was?
Posted by: Kevinole | May 28, 2008 6:05 PM
Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 7:51 PM | Report abuse
The President's press secretary is paid to lie. Kudos for nailing Wedgie, Scott.
Posted by: David | May 28, 2008 7:50 PM | Report abuse
Why does Rove even bother replying? It's patently obvious that McClellan is telling the truth (finally) and that no one believes a word Rove says. Rove and the President have no credability whatsoever.
Posted by: kurt hunt | May 28, 2008 7:48 PM | Report abuse
Scott McClellan is just a disgruntled liberal!
Posted by: Bush Supporter | May 28, 2008 7:44 PM | Report abuse
Karl Rove, Scooter Libby, and Vice President Cheney lied about their role in revealing the identity of Valerie Plame Wilson - actions easily amounting to obstruction of Justice.
Impeach Cheney fist then Bush. Recall weak-sister Pelosi. Jail Karl Rove for contempt of Congress.
Posted by: Roy | May 28, 2008 7:39 PM | Report abuse
Rove and kind still believe they can escape any debate and duck any charges just by saying "Liberal". They know you can fool some of the people all of the time. If Scott actually said that Cheney could care less for the average person, the rest of the book is probably true too.
Posted by: Stikman | May 28, 2008 7:39 PM | Report abuse
Scottie, I've always realized you were a liar protecting criminals. Always.
The whole neoconservative movement is a blight on the spiritual history of mankind, right up there with the Nazis.
I am positive this has never been the people's country in my lifetime.
Posted by: chauncykat | May 28, 2008 7:36 PM | Report abuse
Remember your outrage in November and vote Democrat!
If your candidate doesn't get nominated, it may hurt, but it won't hurt as badly as four to eight more years of incompetent, pig-headed and inexplicably arrogant neoconservative leadership.
Posted by: Kevinole | May 28, 2008 7:22 PM | Report abuse
Pursue Karl Rove until he is brought to justice.
Posted by: Get Karl | May 28, 2008 7:19 PM | Report abuse
The not-so-hidden story in this was in how the press was used as an accessory. From the glory days of Watergate to reprinting republican talking points. That in no way compares to the lives wasted in Iraq, but, if you consider that a free and independent and skeptical press is integral to our democracy, then each member of the media has to look into their souls and see the same immoral blackness that infected each member of the Bush disaster..
Posted by: Nick | May 28, 2008 7:08 PM | Report abuse
What's to discuss? Tell us something we don't already know.
Posted by: Troyce Key | May 28, 2008 7:07 PM | Report abuse
There some other jaw-dropping quotations from the book that have yet to be reported!:
* "George W. Bush wouldn't have gotten to where he is if he hadn't had a famous father." * "George W. was never a top-notch soldier." * "Dana Perino? Not the sharpest knife in the drawer." * "The well-being of the average American is not at the top of Dick Cheney's list of concerns." * "It's quite possible that George W. Bush will not ultimately rank as one of the our top thirty presidents." * "Despite what some people have said, President Bush did not want black people to die in New Orleans. However, he did hope they would not relocate to any areas of Texas that he likes to frequent."
More of the article here: http://www.236.com/news/2008/05/28/mcclellan_shocker_more_revelat_6791.php
Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 7:03 PM | Report abuse
"'First of all, this doesn't sound like Scott...' Rove said. 'Not the Scott I've known. Second of all, it sounds like somebody else... Second of all, you're right. If he had these moral qualms, he should have spoken up about them.'
Ninth of all, a press secretary DOES NOT keep his job by bringing up qualms, moral or otherwise [I hate to say it, but Rove is too smart to believe otherwise for a second]. He must have been caught completely flat-footed to be fumbling this badly; maybe it's all the subpoenas. Ninth of all, I hope Rove and all the rest of these mendacious eels cry themselves to sleep each night because they can never wash off all of the blood.
Posted by: mobedda | May 28, 2008 6:56 PM | Report abuse
Seriously... WHO, in their right mind, would believe Anything ROVE says?
I know he's got a brilliant political mind...and he's very smart. But he's also a pathological liar.
If ROVE says one thing, that's pretty good evidence that the truth is something else.
I'd list all of the examples...but I don't have that many bytes.
WHY you would quote him is puzzling.
Posted by: Aynsley | May 28, 2008 6:44 PM | Report abuse
I can't wait to read it! I think this is absolutely hilarious! Look at Rove, once described "Architect" and visionary of a permanent conservative majority, now reduced to a whiny, constantly-defensive FOX pundit. Why anyone STILL would take him seriously is beyond reasonable thought at this point. Or more likely, points to ego-insecurity issues.
Some points for the "loyal Bushies":
1. The war and its rationale failed, 2. The economy is in complete and very scary disarray, 3. Islamic jihadism shows no sign of decreasing 4. Oil prices are rising 5. Even the Pentagon now is integrating global warming models into their own. 6. And now we have the former press secretary explaining how deceitful, oblivious, arrogant, and frankly moronic our Republican leaders truly are.
Posted by: erik | May 28, 2008 6:39 PM | Report abuse
I am very tired of hearing from government officials who suddenly gain courage,integrity,and religion after they have been willing participants in major debacles and cover up activity. This is really outrageous when you consider that over 4,000 young men and women died because these people lacked the will to do the right thing when it counted. If they thought it was so wrong, why not just disengage from the process? More importantly, anyone who was a participant in the Iraq policy who is now writing a tell all book about the deception should be criminally prosecuted.
Posted by: R.Parrish | May 28, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse
You people keep forgeting that this is America! We do what our bosses tells us to do or we're out of a job. This is true for Scott, Bush, the press and everybody else in America. What it comes down to is this: If you own, you make the decisions. You're the boss. The more you own, the bigger the decisions you make. The wealthiest people are making the biggest decisions. Not the prez. Not congress. And certainly not you!
Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 6:36 PM | Report abuse
These Born Again Coward Killers are learning while putting other people's lives on the line and wasting Trillions of taxpayers funds fighting illegal wars. Someone needs to have some courage and Indict these War Criminal Killers.
Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 6:35 PM | Report abuse
Yeah, this whole administration can come clean now, and point at everyone else.
Fact is, they're all lying criminals.
THIS is why I didn't care if Clinton got blown in the White House. Because, there is serious stuff to be lying about... including war.
McClellan should have busted the administration long ago, but was probably under contract to lie.
Still, could have saved us a LOT of money, lives (both Iraqi and American), credibility, and maybe even the Republican Brand, which is now closely tied to liars and bullies.
So, in the whole of Federal Government, no one had the guts, nor the love of Country, to call their boss on this BS.
Shameful. And the Parroting media, too.
Posted by: John F_cking Doe | May 28, 2008 6:32 PM | Report abuse
Indict the War Criminals!!! Send the White House Killers to face the International Criminal Court for War Crimes! Oil prices will drop once these Big Oil Morons are out of DC. http://untreaty.un.org/cod/icc/statute/romefra.htm Put Big Oil and the Lobbyists in Charge and the American Public will pay for it. Don't allow the BORN AGAIN HYPOCRITE IDIOT FRAUDS vote ever again. Why is the VP of Torture is hiding behind Executive Privilege regarding the Secret 2001 Energy Task Force Talks with Big Oil??? What are they hiding from the American People? It certainly has done wonders for Big Oil since those Secret Talks.
Misson Accomplished campaigned against Nation Building, then the Killer destroys a couple of nations and will spend Trillions to rebuild them better than anything in our own America. The Born Again Idiot Frauds that put this Murderer in office should never be allowed to vote again. Friday, February 29, 2008 Economist: War to cost $3.5 trillion Nobel economist tells Congress about impact of war that White House said would cost $60B. Bob Deans / Cox News Service WASHINGTON -- The Iraq war will cost Americans between $3 trillion and $5 trillion, including military spending, broader economic costs and decades of benefits and medical care for combat veterans, a Nobel prize-winning economist told the Joint Economic Committee on Thursday. The upper end of the estimate is nearly double what the same economist, Joseph Stiglitz, projected two years ago. He attributed the dramatic increase to the continuing intensity of the war, which began five years ago next month, and the likelihood that operations there would continue for at least another year. The war's gravest toll has been paid in blood. Fighting in Iraq has so far taken the lives of 3,973 U.S. troops and left nearly 29,300 wounded. Its staggering expense, however, has dwarfed the 2003 White House war estimate of $60 billion, and the price is rising. "America is a rich country," said Stiglitz, a Columbia University professor and former World Bank chief economist. "The question is not whether we can afford to squander $3 trillion or $5 trillion," he told committee members. "We can. But our strength will be sapped. ... There is no such thing as a free war." Taxpayers have spent $607 billion to pay for the war through September, according to the staff of the Joint Economic Committee, made up of Republicans and Democrats from both houses of Congress. The true cost to date, though, is $1.3 trillion, the committee staff estimates, when taking into account the costs of caring for wounded soldiers, replacing equipment lost or destroyed, the economic impact of disrupted oil markets and lost work time for reservists and other expenses. In a report published last November, the committee estimated that the war would cost Americans between $3.5 trillion and $4.5 trillion by 2017.
50 million+ Ignorant Idiots put this Born Again Killer Moron in Charge. The Born Again Idiots should not be allowed to vote again. $4-a-gallon gas? Predictions surprise Bush Exxon Mobil posts $40.6 billion profit, Oil giant breaks record for largest annual profit by a U.S. company
Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 6:31 PM | Report abuse
'Coming out' with this perspective while still in the admin would have been much more useful and obviously, heroic. Now, there is a profit motive in 'speaking the truth'; to be honest, I'd have more respect for the guy if he had just played out the role of team player and stayed mum.
Besides, tell us something we didn't already know about the President.
Posted by: heywally | May 28, 2008 6:25 PM | Report abuse
I was struck by the reaction of Bush aides. Their words ("... this doesn't sound like Scott." -- Karl Rove; "It is sad -- this is not the Scott we knew." -- Dana Perino) reminded me of folks describing a quiet neighbor -- after that neighbor has committed some heinous crime. Are they suggesting McClellan should seek the insanity defense? From Read Street http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/entertainment/books/blog/
Posted by: Dave | May 28, 2008 6:24 PM | Report abuse
Gary Woodward and Bob Denton authored a classic college textbook called Persuasion & Influence in American Life. I think it's in its fifth or sixth edition now. You can buy it on amazon.com, I expect. Explains -everything- in nifty detail. Nothing Ray-Gun, Slick Willie, Konsiderable Karl or any of the rest of them say or do would be any mystery to anyone after reading Woodward and Denton.
Posted by: SighKoBlahGrr | May 28, 2008 6:20 PM | Report abuse
Karl Rove said, "First of all, this doesn't sound like Scott. It really doesn't."
It's true. Even Tucker Carlson said on MSNBC that McClellan is the only person in Washington who is less articulate than George Bush.
Who do you think Scotty's ghost writer was?
Posted by: Kevinole | May 28, 2008 6:05 PM | Report abuse
Dear George and Karl, We don't care what you think. Signed, 67% of the American people.
Posted by: Bob22003 | May 28, 2008 5:58 PM | Report abuse
What a farce. Scotty-boy gets religion just in time to cash in at the peak of the market for political scandal books.
The Bush administration disputes the book's contents? I did not realize anyone in the administration could read.
Posted by: Jackson | May 28, 2008 5:50 PM | Report abuse
"First of all, this doesn't sound like Scott. It really doesn't," Rove said. "Not the Scott McClellan I've known for a long time. Second of all, it sounds like somebody else. It sounds like a left-wing blogger." -------------------------------------- Mr. Rove,
Do you think that anyone who thinks you're tearing apart our country is somehow brainwashed? Haven't you noticed that the American public and even prominent GOP Congressmen and NRCC advisors are sounding the alarm regarding your catastrophic policies and the devious ways you have sold them?
The way things are going, the whole country will be comprised of
* you and whoever is left of the White House political team on one side, and * millions upon millions of "left-wing bloggers" on the other.
Posted by: Scott in NC | May 28, 2008 5:45 PM | Report abuse
Those people who say, well, at least we haven't had another attack on American soil killing 3,000 people since the first one that Bush ignored all warning signs about are truly amusing. What do they think Osama bin Laden is? The man must have pondered why he escaped so easily from Tora Bora, as though he were being invited to. And, after all, it might have made our Saudi allies so sad if we killed one of their best and brightest. So we didn't. And, after a couple of months went by, OBL could see very clearly what the tacit deal was. He got to be the bogeyman for Bush, as long as he didn't try attacking on the American soil again. Thus, he could attack in Morocco, Spain, Bali or London, and it was like Bush n Obl synergy - Bush got his scared moron crowd, and OBL got his rep strengthened for what he did - defeat the Americans. And defeat them he has - how much is it, two trillion dollars now to try to defeat a guy who is spending, max, 10 million per year? To get into this situation, the morons had to elect their ideal moron, a man who exemplified the stupidity, laziness and incompetence that is so honored in GOP circles. Bush was perfect for the part. The tough talk, the hollow action, the blaming of others, and most of all, leaving a shambles and debts for the next decade behind him. And of course I imagine OBL is going to be setting up camp in Afghanistan after Bush is gone, since the Bushies, pulling out troops for the criminal war in Iraq, basically left Afghanistan to the mercies of the Taliban and our other "ally", Pakistan, which set up the Taliban in the first place. I'd like to see detente and peace in the Middle East, but if I didn't, I'd be appalled at the criminal negligence of this president. That is, if I were a sensible hawk. But being a hawk nowadays means being among the self-lobotomized. It is like a ghost dance cult, where you just believe something hard enough and it will magically protect you. Didn't work for the desperate Sioux nation, and it certainly isn't going to work for the nation of morons in Bush's America.
Posted by: roger | May 28, 2008 5:40 PM | Report abuse
Cindi LaFontaine wrote: "...Everyone who gets fired from a fast food place tries to claim their boss spits in the hamburgers and urinates in the ice tea."
Yeah, but what if they really do?
Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 5:36 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: JakeD | May 28, 2008 5:32 PM | Report abuse
How convenient to discover one's morality after you leave the White House. It's time for all the false Patriots to drink the Kool-Aid. Morality in not something you find laying about your desk while writing your memoir! Cowardly would be a more fitting description for those who hold loyalty to the "leader" above their country! It's time to JAIL some people for TREASON.
Posted by: dana fox | May 28, 2008 5:17 PM | Report abuse
When a problem is ignored long enough it becomes a crisis. Wake up y'all.
Posted by: Your neighbor, your brother | May 28, 2008 5:15 PM | Report abuse
I know, Scott and all these retired Generals should just keep their mouths shut and let this country go down like the Roman Empire! Speaking as a current active duty member (17 plus years) who has served two tours in Iraq and will more than likely go back there again before I can finally retire, it is nice to see someone speak the truth. You are going to see a lot more people do the same in another year or so....
Posted by: Bobby | May 28, 2008 5:12 PM | Report abuse
If he would have voiced his concerns during his tenure, he'd never been heard from again. Not only is the monkey face "W" (and Chaney), a moron, crook, idiot, and liar, but he'd stop at nada to force his opinions, his propaganda, and policies on us all. I served under the first Bush, but if this one would have asked me to go to the Gulf, I'd rather wizz on the front steps of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Posted by: USMC Vet | May 28, 2008 5:11 PM | Report abuse
Do we need to get your clown suit for the next photo shoot with the rest of the band? (ICP) Insane Clown Posse !
What an idiot you are ! So do you still beleive the WMD's are real? Getta Clue you moron and think for yourself!
Posted by: tuthwilltell | May 28, 2008 5:11 PM | Report abuse
This is the real (ICP) Insane Clown Posse ! only the band has better common sense.
We need a revolution !
Posted by: truthwilltell | May 28, 2008 5:06 PM | Report abuse
We should admire only one person Gen. POWELL
Posted by: Wyoming | May 28, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse
Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 4:56 PM | Report abuse
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." -Arthur Schopenhauer
I suggest that Mr. Rove and Mrs. Perino both read Power Failure: The Inside Story of the Collapse of Enron to find answers as to why McClellan didn't speak out in the face of pressure from the White House Mafia. It's called blind loyalty and group think.
So, because he didn't resign at the time invalidates the truth? Here is one American hoping that other brave souls speak out. General Powell? Anyone?
Posted by: Truth | May 28, 2008 4:55 PM | Report abuse
Now all that's missing is the clown suit.
Posted by: pgibson1 | May 28, 2008 4:46 PM | Report abuse
A disgruntled ex-employee makes up lies about the former boss who fired him...why is this garbage even being discussed. Everyone who gets fired from a fast food place tries to claim their boss spits in the hamburgers and urinates in the ice tea.
Posted by: Cindi LaFontaine | May 28, 2008 4:44 PM | Report abuse
You were only following orders and "didn't know" they were false?
This is what Republicans do with the taxes we pay. Make a complete mockery of our government, our country, our selves to the world.
Posted by: tony the pitiful copywriter | May 28, 2008 4:43 PM | Report abuse
We don't need books by Clarke and McClellan to tell us about the den of liars that have been in Washington the past eight years! (That goes especially for the ones who slinked out the back door after the War in Iraq started)
Posted by: Jim | May 28, 2008 4:43 PM | Report abuse
And this is supposed to be news? The great majority know now what was quite obvious soon after 9/11. The funny part is Rove still thinks he can author any "truth" he wants, and thinks it will be believed. What an embarrasing 8 years!
Posted by: Ron | May 28, 2008 4:31 PM | Report abuse
The Justice Department IS, in fact, part of the Executive Branch. It is headed by the Attorney General and runs the FBI and other agencies.
The Judicial Branch is our court system. The Supreme Court tops the food chain there.
Posted by: Kevinole | May 28, 2008 4:31 PM | Report abuse
It's all making sense now, how Dana Perino sleeps at night. She's 'out of the loop'.
Posted by: shhhhh | May 28, 2008 4:25 PM | Report abuse
Sorry, forgot to put my name on the post to Lenny Beans
Posted by: robsmarq | May 28, 2008 4:24 PM | Report abuse
Lenny Beans, your play on words only serves to illustrate how ignorant you yourself must be; for example, it isn't just white killing blacks automatically equals racism, it's that whites killing blacks while ranting how he/she hates ni*%as and scrawling "KKK" at the scene just might have a hint of racism. Your rantings illustrate your "poor me" mentality that seems to be catching like a disease among white males who fear that the day is coming when they no longer have carte blanche to do as they will, when they like, to whomever they like. Sorry for you....
Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 4:23 PM | Report abuse
They never said the Executive branch wasn't involved -- FYI: the Dept. of Justice is PART OF the Executive branch -- seriously, if you have something "on topic" let me know.
Posted by: JakeD | May 28, 2008 2:16 PM
Uh, Jake .... last time I checked the Constitution, the JUSTICE DEPARTMENT (a/k/a JUDICIARY) is a SEPARATE BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT.
No wonder you're confused. By the way, my dad fought in Korea too. He used to be a staunch conservative. He came around too. There may be hope for you yet.
Posted by: Rika | May 28, 2008 4:17 PM | Report abuse
Rickey, You may be on to something. Perhaps McClellan knows a day of reckoning is coming, and his book is his way of trying to avoid jailtime.
Posted by: Steve | May 28, 2008 4:15 PM | Report abuse
War is Peace. Slavery is Freedom. Ignorance is Strength.
Posted by: JakeD | May 28, 2008 4:14 PM | Report abuse
Rove is claiming that McClellan was "out of the loop"?
He was the PRESS SECRETARY. His JOB was to know what was going on so he could answer reporters' questions.
Rove is saying that Bush kept his OWN PRESS SECRETARY "out of the loop"?
That sort of proves McClellan's claims - doesn't it?
Posted by: Iggy | May 28, 2008 4:09 PM | Report abuse
McClellan was out of the loop???? LOL Right....the presidents spokesperson was left in the dark on the issues he took EVERY DAY to the press.
Sorry Karl. You are a criminal who conspired with Libby to deceive a grand jury in a case that constituted treason. The only real question left is why are FOX and Newsweek employing a traitor? Why aren't you in prison already?
Posted by: Kevin Morgan | May 28, 2008 4:08 PM | Report abuse
My fondest wish in life is to have a larry Craig bobblefoot doll on the back of my toilet.
Posted by: JakeD | May 28, 2008 4:05 PM | Report abuse
I don't know if I'm alone thinking this, but McClellan does sound like someone trying to make sen
|
Karl Rove said Scott McClellan's tell-all book made him sound like a liberal blogger and the White House described him as "disgruntled." --Michael D. Shear and Michael Abramowitz
| 365.764706 | 0.970588 | 2.676471 |
high
|
high
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/28/AR2008052802499.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/28/AR2008052802499.html
|
Obama Staffer's Lobbying Work Runs Counter to Candidate's Guidelines, Ethics Watchdogs Say
|
2008052919
|
Ethics watchdogs said that the high-profile role of Francisco J. PavÃa appears to contradict the Obama campaign's ethics guidelines, which forbid federal lobbyists from working on staff. But Obama spokesman Bill Burton said PavÃa is an "active volunteer" -- not a paid staffer -- and can hold the job without running afoul of the campaign's rules.
Obama and Arizona Sen. John McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, have been trying to outdo each other in their repudiation of lobbyists and the "special interests" they represent.
Obama has criticized McCain for enlisting "some of the biggest lobbyists in Washington" to run his presidential campaign. McCain has instituted tough new rules against lobbyists working for his campaign, which recently led to the resignation of five senior McCain advisers, including his top fundraiser, Tom Loeffler.
Obama also has tried to impose high ethical standards by refusing to take contributions from federal lobbyists and by not allowing lobbyists on his payroll.
But Obama's rules also have been somewhat ambiguous. Some of his campaign's volunteer policy advisers are lobbyists. And at least one lobbyist said he was asked to take a leave of absence from his firm before he volunteered for the campaign.
Moses Mercado, a lobbyist for Ogilvy Government Relations in Washington, said in an interview that he was told by the Obama campaign that he must take an unpaid leave from his firm before working as a get-out-the-vote volunteer earlier this year.
"It was pretty clear," Mercado said. "It was so clear that I made sure I wrote a letter to our office manager saying that on these days I'm taking a leave of absence."
Later, after he said he received a call from Burton, Mercado said he had not been asked to take a leave.
PavÃa is not on leave from his law firm, Winston & Strawn, according to the managing partner of its Washington office, Thomas L. Mills.
But he has been an important part of the Obama campaign in Puerto Rico, which holds its Democratic primary Sunday. Obama wrote to Puerto Rico's State Elections Commission in March to designate PavÃa and Andres Lopez as "our local representatives" to the commission. In May, PavÃa and Lopez signed a posting on Obama's campaign Web site that identified them as co-directors of the Puerto Rico effort and solicited volunteers.
PavÃa has been a registered lobbyist for various arms of the Puerto Rican government since 2001, according to disclosure reports filed with the U.S. Senate. His firm's total compensation for lobbying for the commonwealth over that period was more than $3 million.
For the first three months of this year alone, Winston & Strawn was paid $110,000 by the Puerto Rico Federal Affairs Administration, which is the government's primary lobbying entity in Washington. PavÃa is listed as the firm's primary contact.
PavÃa did not respond to repeated requests for comment.
"It sounds like a conflict with Obama's policy," said Melanie Sloan of the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. "They need to provide an explanation."
Burton said that PavÃa's role with the campaign was permissible but that the rules were not airtight. "This is not a perfect solution to the influence of special interests in Washington," he said. "But it is a symbol of the effort that Senator Obama is going to make to decrease the influence that the special interests do have."
Research editor Alice Crites contributed to this report.
|
The co-director of Barack Obama's presidential campaign in Puerto Rico is a Washington-based federal lobbyist for the government of Puerto Rico.
| 25.037037 | 0.888889 | 1.62963 |
medium
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/28/AR2008052801440.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/28/AR2008052801440.html
|
Nepal Votes to Abolish Its Monarchy
|
2008052919
|
KATHMANDU, Nepal, May 28 -- The world's last Hindu kingdom became its newest secular republic Wednesday as Nepal's lawmakers, led by former communist insurgents, abolished the monarchy that had reigned over this Himalayan land for 239 years.
Throughout the day, thousands of people marched, danced and sang in the streets of Kathmandu in anticipation of the vote, waving red hammer-and-sickle flags as King Gyanendra awaited his fate in the pink concrete palace that dominates the city's center.
Late in the day, as expected, the newly elected Constituent Assembly declared the country a republic and abolished the monarchy by a vote of 560 to 4. The assembly's 37 other members were not present.
"We have entered a new era today," said Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala, calling Nepal's rebirth as a republic "the dream of the whole nation."
There was no immediate reaction from the 60-year-old king, who has remained silent recently as it became apparent that his days on the throne were numbered.
He now has 15 days to quit the 1970s-era palace and move to his large private residence in the city -- or face the possibility of being removed by force.
As word of the republic's declaration spread through Kathmandu, groups of young men yelled in the streets and set off firecrackers.
"The people in Nepal have defeated the autocrat Gyanendra," said Gopal Thapa, a 23-year-old supporter of the Maoists, the former rebels. "Nepal is now the people's republic."
Not since the shah of Iran was deposed in the bloody 1979 Islamic revolution has one of the world's monarchs been forced from his throne.
While the end of Nepal's royal dynasty may have come in a peaceful vote, the stage for the monarchy's demise was set by a communist insurgency that bled Nepal for a decade, and by a 2001 palace massacre in which a gunman, allegedly the crown prince, assassinated King Birendra and much of the royal family before killing himself.
The killings helped pierce the mystique surrounding a line of kings who had once been revered as reincarnations of the Hindu god Vishnu, and Gyanendra was dogged by rumors that he was somehow involved in the palace massacre.
|
KATHMANDU, Nepal, May 28 -- The world's last Hindu kingdom became its newest secular republic Wednesday as Nepal's lawmakers, led by former communist insurgents, abolished the monarchy that had reigned over this Himalayan land for 239 years.
| 9.863636 | 1 | 44 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/28/AR2008052800432.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/28/AR2008052800432.html
|
Israel's Olmert Pressured to Step Down
|
2008052919
|
JERUSALEM, May 28 -- Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's chances of hanging on to power amid a burgeoning corruption probe diminished Wednesday after the leader of his main coalition partner demanded he either step aside or face new elections.
The call by Ehud Barak, Israel's defense minister and head of the Labor Party, is an ominous sign for Olmert as he attempts to weather allegations that he took cash-filled envelopes from an American businessman and used some of the money on fancy trips, luxury hotels and fine cigars.
The scandal, which sprang up less than a month ago, could end Olmert's beleaguered tenure as prime minister just over halfway through his four-year term. His premature departure could also short-circuit the Bush administration's stated goal of forging peace between Israel and the Palestinians by the end of the year.
Barak has the power to topple Olmert's fragile coalition government because without Labor's support, Olmert does not have a majority in the 120-seat Knesset, Israel's parliament. The result of Labor's withdrawal could be early elections.
Citing security threats from Iran and the armed Islamist movements Hamas and Hezbollah, Barak indicated that Olmert's legal problems had become a distraction from his duty to safeguard the country.
"I do not think that the prime minister can simultaneously manage the government and handle his personal issues," Barak said at a hastily convened news conference. "Therefore, out of consideration for the best interests of the country, and the accepted norms, I believe that the prime minister must detach himself from the day-to-day leadership of the government."
Barak, a former prime minister who aspires to return to the job, said Olmert could step aside temporarily or permanently. He called on Olmert's centrist Kadima party to "do some soul-searching," the implication being that it should try to force the prime minister's hand.
If Kadima failed to act "as soon as possible," he said, Labor would pull its support. Barak did not set a specific deadline. The next general elections in Israel are scheduled for 2010.
Barak's announcement came just a day after the American businessman, Morris Talansky, told an Israeli court that he gave Olmert $150,000 over a nearly 15-year period. Talansky said he did not receive anything in return for the donations. While much of the money was intended for political purposes, Talansky said he suspected some had gone to fund Olmert's lavish tastes.
Olmert, 62, did not comment Wednesday on Barak's demand, nor has he spoken publicly about Talansky's testimony. The prime minister has denied any wrongdoing, though he has said he would resign if indicted.
Olmert, elected in 2006 after Ariel Sharon was incapacitated by a stroke, has endured calls for his ouster in the past, particularly in the aftermath of the Second Lebanon War. At the time, Barak was among those urging Olmert to go.
"The prime minister is still the prime minister. Let's give him time, without any pressure, to give his version of events," said Yoel Hasson, a member of parliament from Olmert's Kadima party.
|
JERUSALEM, May 28 -- Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's chances of hanging on to power amid a burgeoning corruption probe diminished Wednesday after the leader of his main coalition partner demanded he either step aside or face new elections.
| 14.52381 | 1 | 42 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052702546.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052702546.html
|
New Town Springing Up in Quake-Hit Province
|
2008052919
|
It is doing so in places like this mountain plain in Sichuan province, where workers are erecting a new town of blue-roofed homes for 20,000 people. Construction got underway here late last week, less than three miles from Beichuan, a town wiped out in the 7.9-magnitude quake.
Fields of wheat and corn have been overrun with earth-moving equipment as construction crews assemble long rows of cookie-cutter houses with walls of Styrofoam sandwiched between two pieces of sheet metal. Builders vow the new homes will be ready by the end of June.
Would-be residents began arriving over the weekend. Originally from nearly two dozen villages scattered around Beichuan county, the people were bused here from an emergency shelter at a sports stadium in nearby Mianyang city. Among the first earthquake survivors to be moved to what is expected to be a permanent relocation site, they are living for now in a sea of government-provided tents next to the construction zone.
Beichuan, nestled in a sliver of valley surrounded by mountains, will not be rebuilt because authorities deem the area too hazardous. Nearby Leigu, however, is situated along a broad, fertile expanse farther down the valley. Before the earthquake, it was a farming town of 18,000 residents. Most of the homes here, as in Beichuan, collapsed in the earthquake, and 1,000 people died. But the fields provide space to build, and now Leigu's survivors will have to make room for new neighbors.
The one-room dwellings are being built in caterpillar-like lines of 14, each 65-square-foot home attached to the ones next to it. There will be electricity and running water, but current plans call for every two homes to share a tap. Every 50 homes will share a bath house and a kitchen. The floors will be hard-packed dirt covered by plastic.
"It's not realistic to have concrete, attached floors at this point," said Wang Di Sheng, a government official from Jinan, the capital of Shandong province, which provided the materials and is supervising the construction of 7,000 houses for the local authority. The dwellings are supposed to last up to three years while the government constructs a permanent community here.
Though spartan, these portable homes are a step up from the tents and tarps that have been the main shelters for millions of people displaced by the quake. China's top leaders have urged manufacturers and construction crews to rush production of the homes, as the rainy season begins and threatens to turn hundreds of tent cities into swamps.
Construction is quick. It took about 24 hours this week for a 10-person crew to put up one row of homes. First they erected a metal frame. Then they slid the walls and windows into pre-fabricated grooves, tightened screws and reinforcement rods. Then they fastened down the metal roof parts. Wiring and plumbing come later.
Chen Yan, 16, can watch the neighborhood going up from the edge of her tent city on the hill above the construction zone. She lives in tent No. 185, an 86-square-foot shelter that sleeps 10. She and her family are among the 384 people from Yuanxing village who survived the quake and are now registered to live here.
"This is better than in Mianyang," Chen said, referring to the stadium where the family stayed until coming here four days ago. At one point, the stadium housed 30,000 people but the government began relocating them in earnest in the past few days. Today the stadium population is about 7,000, an official there said.
Chen said she is settling into daily life in the Leigu camp, where the government provides food for three meals a day, plus cooking pots and staples. Electric lights are strung above most walkways, and there is a line of taps with running water along one side of the camp. There is a charging point for cellphones. Chen volunteers to distribute food each day and helps her mother, who is still shaky from the shock of the earthquake.
|
LEIGU, China, May 27 -- With as many as 14 million earthquake survivors in urgent need of housing, China is beginning to rebuild from scratch.
| 26.689655 | 0.62069 | 0.758621 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052702636.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052702636.html
|
When Suicide Conflicts With Japan's Polite Society
|
2008052919
|
Still, three more young people were found dead over one week earlier this month, part of the latest fad in Japanese suicide -- painless death by stinky detergent fumes. A recent headline in the Weekly Asahi, a respected newsmagazine, noted that "The Remains Turn Green Like Aliens."
About 300 people -- most of them in their 20s and 30s -- have died in Japan in the past year by mixing common cleaning agents and inhaling the resulting hydrogen sulfide. The number has soared this spring, with about 50 deaths in April. The trend's epicenter is central Tokyo, where since January at least 34 young people have taken the fumes.
Suicide by hydrogen sulfide does more than turn bodies green. As the Japanese press has exhaustively explained, it can sicken people nearby.
The colorless gas, which smells like rotten eggs, is heavier than air. When it escapes a room where someone wants to die, it tends not to dissipate. At near-lethal concentrations, it can drift into nearby apartments in this crowded country. When a junior high school girl killed herself in April, more than 100 neighbors were evacuated and 14 were hospitalized.
Culturally, Japan has a high threshold of suicide tolerance.
Ritual self-disembowelment with a sword was an admired way of maintaining one's honor in feudal times and through World War II. Using tidier, less painful techniques, suicide survives as an escape hatch for modern Japanese unwilling to endure shame or failure. The minister of agriculture hanged himself last year before he was due to answer questions about bookkeeping fraud.
Unlike Christianity, which proscribes suicide as a sin, major religions here, Buddhism and Shintoism, are neutral on the matter. More than 30,000 Japanese kill themselves annually. Among industrialized democracies, Japan, South Korea, Hungary and Finland are perennial leaders in suicide per capita. Japan's rate is almost double that of the United States.
Death by detergent fumes, however, appears to have exceeded Japanese tolerance levels, primarily because most of the dead are gloomy young people.
They find the recipe online. Then they gather in small groups to mix up a batch and die together in apartments or cars. To head them off, Internet providers have followed police instructions and removed at least 56 references to the recipe recently.
The hydrogen-sulfide fad is part of a persistent trend in Internet-assisted suicide that police in Japan began tracking in 2003.
That's when would-be suicides using anonymous screen names began hooking up online with like-minded strangers. They arranged dates at which they would overdose on sleeping pills. Alternatively, they would pack into a car and kill themselves with carbon monoxide. There were 61 such cases, with 180 deaths, between 2003 and 2005, according to press accounts.
Last summer -- after the agriculture minister hanged himself -- the government allocated $220 million for suicide prevention, including counseling and screening of Web sites.
"We have to create a society that gives people a second chance if they fail," Sanae Takaichi, a cabinet minister, said at the time. The government wants to cut the suicide rate by 20 percent by 2016.
Japan, though, remains a country where bullying in schools and torment at work are commonplace. And since the economic swoon of the 1990s, about 30 percent of all jobs are part time. These low-status jobs depress incomes and, apparently, spirits. About half of those who commit suicide are unemployed.
As a suicide method, hydrogen sulfide has a cultural drawback in Japan. It is impolite to those who are not interested in dying.
Suicide advocates on the Web instructed readers to first put up warning signs. In late April, a 31-year-old man who died in his car of hydrogen sulfide poisoning taped this note to his windshield: "Don't come near -- poisonous gas."
|
World news headlines from the Washington Post,including international news and opinion from Africa,North/South America,Asia,Europe and Middle East. Features include world weather,news in Spanish,interactive maps,daily Yomiuri and Iraq coverage.
| 16.282609 | 0.391304 | 0.434783 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/23/DI2008052301851.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/23/DI2008052301851.html
|
'Sex and the City' Movie Premieres Friday
|
2008052919
|
Only hours to go until the premiere of "Sex and the City: The Movie" - can you wait?
Style section staff writer Jennifer Frey was online Thursday, May 29 to talk about Cosmos, Manolos, cupcakes, boyfriends, girlfriends... and just why it is so many of us are so excited to see Carrie, Miranda, Samantha and Charlotte again, four years after the HBO series signed off the air.
Jennifer Frey: Hi, all! Sorry I'm a few minutes late. Hopefully you all saw my colleague Ann Hornaday's review of the film this morning! I saw it as well, at the media screening, but will do my best to avoid all spoilers. Now, looking forward to your questions.
Baltimore, Md.: I'm a middle aged woman who faithfully watched the TV show, but always felt a little guilty doing so. Kind of like reading "Cosmopolitan" magazine. I didn't want my kids to see it.
Jennifer Frey: No guilt! No guilt! Carrie et al. would hate the guilt. That said, definitely don't take the kids to see the film!
Washington, D.C.: Is this movie a date movie? I say no.
Jennifer Frey: This is a girlfriend movie, not a date movie. Then again, there are some guys out there who wouldn't complain about watching sexy women for 2-plus hours. But you'll wish you were with your girlfriends.
Carrie in Training (I wish!!): Please... I am searching for a movie theater that serves cocktails so my girlfriends and I can sip Manhattans while living vicariously through our "girlfriends" on screen. Does one exist in this area??
washingtonpost.com: I know the AMC at Mazza Gallerie has a "club cinema" with a bar, may be others around...
Jennifer Frey: Yes, Mazza Gallerie is right. As long as it's showing on one of the two club cinema screens, and I believe it is--I believe it's showing on two screens there.
Elizabeth City, N.J.: Is there sufficient nudity to entice a male to go and watch this movie? I want him to go with me, but he won't if there's no nudity.
Jennifer Frey: Hmmm. Getting a few of these do-i-get-to-see-skin? questions from the men. Yes, there is skin. (Oh, and ladies, there is naked man skin, too).
Alexandria, Va.: When you ask a woman which SaTC character is she is, why is the answer -always- Carrie?
Jennifer Frey: Because Charlotte is too goody-goody, Samantha too much of a, well, you know....and Miranda gets portrayed as witchier and witchier. Carrie is the safe bet.
I've never watched one episode of SATC and just recently got interested in the movie only because the commercials make everything look so pretty and I like Jennifer Hudson. Should I go see or will I be lost unless I watch the show? (In which case I won't because I don't have the time or desire).
Jennifer Frey: There's a little recap upfront to help understand who the characters are and where they are at in their lives, but there will be a lot of references back to SATC the series that will fly over your head. But I say go anyway, if only for the clothes and the shoes.
Minneapolis, Minn.: Watching SATC is my guilty pleasure and will most likely see the movie. That being said, I watched the trailer for the movie and it was 98% Carrie (read Sarah J Parker). Will this movie be a vanity project with her? Can we expect even stories on the other three?
Jennifer Frey: Without spoiling plot lines, my own major complaint with the film was that it was too Carrie-centric. I wanted more Samantha, more Miranda....but the all do have their own stories and the interaction among the four is, as it always was, very entertaining.
Your readers might be interested to know that Sex and the City fans have a chance to see Cynthia Nixon (Miranda) here in the Nation's Capital, next week! As a breast cancer survivor and advocate, and celebrity ambassador for Susan G. Komen for the Cure, Nixon will be in town for the 2008 National Race for the Cure Eve of Race party at the Newseum on June 6, and will help lead more than 3,500 breast cancer survivors in the Parade of Pink during the pre-Race ceremony on June 7. Get your cameras ready!
washingtonpost.com: National Race for the Cure
Jennifer Frey: Thanks for letting us know, Washington!
Silver Spring, Md.: As I have grown older (now a mom with 3 kids) and watch SATC on TBS, I have grown increasingly irritated with Carrie. I often turn the channel to HGTV, but I digress. Carrie is so self involved and downright spoiled. I like her independent thinking but that's about it. Will the movie continue down Carrie "Self Involved" Bradshaw lane or will I be happily surprised at a new and improved Carrie?
And, um, I am dying to know, does Carrie marry Big and they live happily ever after??
(ha - threw that in just in case you were having a weak moment)
Jennifer Frey: Carrie is always going to have a lot of self-involvement. That's just who she is. And now she's making enough money to hire an assistant! (That's not a spoiler, given that Jennifer Hudson's addition to the cast in that capacity has been pretty well known). The question is, can YOU stand it for 2-plus hours in order to find out if Carrie and Big get married? Because I'm not going to tell you......
Laurel, Md.: I love this show! My husband won't go with me, so we found a showing of Indiana Jones at the same time as Sex and the City so we both get the best of our movie seeing tastes.
Jennifer Frey: I applaud that kind of flexibility. Now, can you arrange to sneak a girlfriend there to meet you as well?
Washington, D.C.: My girlfriend and I cannot wait for Friday night! Here's my question - do you know of any "fun" smaller theaters in D.C. or Md. where this is playing? I generally avoid the megaplexes but is that the only option for SATC?
washingtonpost.com: Check out The Avalon in Chevy Chase, D.C.
Jennifer Frey: And there's your answer. It's on Connecticut.
U Street: Will this chat include spoilers? I watched a promo on E! this weekend and it basically gave away the movie (grr!).
And as an fyi -- my favorite SATC episode is when Carrie and Aidan call off their engagement (so moving... aww).
Jennifer Frey: Like I said, doing my best to avoid spoilers. Shame on E!
My favorite episode, sad though it is, is the one where the writers manage to compact Miranda's engagement/wedding into the same show where Samantha finds out she has cancer. And you don't feel overwhelmed. It had everything.
Embarrassed to ask: I'm kind of embarrassed to ask this, as I must be one of the few people who really does want to know what happens first. Is there a review of SATC that does contain a lot of spoilers?
washingtonpost.com: Just Google "sex and the city spoilers." I didn't click on any links because I don't want to know!
Jennifer Frey: Now that the movie has been screened in the U.S., spoilers will abound on the internet. Get googling!
"You'll wish you were with your girlfriends": Now that makes me sad - none of my girlfriends watch the show (which probably means I need new girlfriends, but I digress). I am taking my husband, who has seen every episode at least twice courtesy of my box set and gets every random reference I make to the show. He likes it too.
Is this as pathetic as it sounds to me?
Jennifer Frey: This is not pathetic. A man who can quote the show and knows all the references is lovely. Think of him as your own Stanford Blatch. Okay, maybe not. That might be pushing hubby a little too far.
Washington, D.C.: I haven't even seen the movie yet, so I know this question is ridiculous, but I'm so excited, I can't help but wonder:
Will there be a sequel?
Jennifer Frey: It took so much effort to get all four of the women together to make this film, four YEARS after the fact, that I think it's highly unlikely. Kim Cattrall didn't even want to make this one. Then again, never say never in Hollywood. If this movie does box office gold, there will certainly be discussions.
SA, TC: Hey! Are there any premiere parties in D.C. tomorrow night, especially in bars near the theaters where it's showing? I'm thinking Chinatown, Mazza... Thanks!
washingtonpost.com: Going Out Guru Jen is working on a list of places that would be great for a pre- or post-show cocktail... stay tuned. If it's ready by the time the chat ends I'll put a link up, otherwise just check the site later.
New York, N.Y.: Does Mr. Big have a major part in the film?
Jennifer Frey: As always, all the "major" screentime goes to the ladies, especially Carrie. But Big does play a significant role. He definitely gets lots more screen time than poor Harry (Charlotte's husband).
Burbank, Calif.: No spoilers, but I saw the movie at a company screening and just wanted to let everyone know that it was clear that the filmmakers have a great respect for the fans. I felt like it was a gift to us.(So many times, big screen adaptations of favorite shows get off track.)
Jennifer Frey: And my esteemed colleague, Ann Hornaday, would appear to be in agreement with you.
D.C.: C'mon, who cares about these shallow, insecure, middle-aged hags?
Jennifer Frey: I'll tell you after I see the box office numbers. And I suspect the answer will be LOTS of people. And watch it without that "hag" comment! Sure, they do insecure and some people--*some* people--may think that a fixation on Manolos is shallow. But hags? I think not!
All four characters are in seemingly stable relationships at the beginning of the movie and I assume they end the movie in those relationships as well.
Does this undermine the show's theme that women can be happily single? Or was the show not really about that?
I enjoy watching Grey's Anatomy with my wife but still struggle to enjoy this show.
Any ideas why there is such a gender gap?
My thesis - most men don't identify with Big and no other male on the story was safe. I always assumed that Steve would get the "Aidan treatment" -I think that is his character's name - the carpenter guy from Northern Exposure.
Really, thank God for Steve. I watched the show because my wife loved it but without Steve, it would have been much, much tougher.
Jennifer Frey: I think a lot of the show was about women being happily single, as long as they had each other. The writers took a calculated risk at the end of the series by pairing off all four women with a man--especially in having Carrie wind up with Big, a controversial choice. But what I found back then, when talking to readers/viewers, is that while a fierce part of us wanted them to remain fiercely single, most simply wanted to see them all happy. And if Big made Carrie happy, then they wanted Carrie with big.
As for men identifying with the male characters, I can see your point. Certainly, there are more prototypes to choose from on Grey's Anatomy. How many men out there can identify with Jason Lewis?
Suitland, Md.: Can't wait! Bought tickets last week! I think we all just want more of a good thing, but I must say, I felt this was a high-dollar white take on Queen Latifah's show "Living Single" at first. I think if she had the financial backing that "Sex In the City" enjoyed, that 4 black women and their male interactions was just as exciting to watch if not more. Big Producers. Bigger bucks. However, after I watched "Sex in The City," I realized it really was a woman thing and not a race thing. Curious to know what you think. Ultimately, it was a great show with characters I want to see more of, so that is why I am paying for a movie ticket.
Jennifer Frey: I confess I didn't watch "Living Single" with the devotion I watched Sex, but I did see some episodes. And I, too, think it's a woman thing. There was a similar dynamic in "Waiting to Exhale" and I think we saw that droves of white women went to that film as a chick-bonding experience as well.
N.Y. (no, not that N.Y.): Vicarious much? It would seem that it should bother people that instead of aspiring to and becoming their own ideal selves, they find it easier to live through fictitious characters (and yes, lovable fictitious characters - I like Miranda and Samantha - both are more ambitious and courageous than the others, and, less whiny? Less "permanent girlhood"?).
It just seems to be an empty, pointless exercise. "Average" women going to this movie and then coming home only to lament how their lives aren't like in this movie.
The things that these characters have are achievable - get a good job, keep your finances in good shop, and be selective in your tastes. All of these you can get training and education for. If you disagree, then you haven't been paying attention. Look at the successful women in your community - women who've risen to powerful positions, whose face-to-the-world is admired by others, who have healthy, happy personal lives, who look good regardless of their age - they do exist, if rare. And they don't need a makeup crew, stylists or writers to create their lives. Speaking as a Manolo girl myself.
Jennifer Frey: Hmmm. Pretty harsh. I'm not so sure women watched this show or will go to this movie because they want to *be* these women. It's living vicariously, sure, but living vicariously for that one half-hour a week or that one Saturday night out. And drooling over great shoes and great clothes--all that eye candy--is escapist entertainment, and what's wrong with that? I'm not sure I know any women who would argue they "admire" Samantha or Miranda more than the strong women they see in public. It's apples and oranges.
McLean, Va.: Was there a special showing of the movie anywhere last night?
washingtonpost.com: Here's a report from today's paper about a sneak-peek screening in Friendship Heights yesterday: Dressing the Part: Fans Champion Their Right to Choos (Washington Post, May 29)
Jennifer Frey: Yes. And tonight there are a bunch of theaters, I believe, showing the film at 12:01 a.m.
Jennifer Hudson...Why?: I didn't understand the point of her character, it seemed like it was a last minute thing for the sole purposes of making St. Louis jokes, which is where I am by the way.
Jennifer Frey: Without giving the plot away, I didn't really understand the point of Jennifer Hudson's character either, other than that she's lovely. And to underscore a basic premise of the SATC concept--that there are women everywhere who romanticize NYC and its single, fashion-centric lifestyle.
D.C.: You mentioned that you wished there was more storyline about the other three girls. Which of the minor characters do you wish the movie gave more screen or script time to?
I'm disappointed to hear that Harry is so minor - I really liked his character and watching him interact with Charlotte.
Jennifer Frey: Ann H. gives Samantha credit for scene-stealing, and I wish she just had more screen time. Ditto for Miranda. In the series finale, sure, it was all about whether Carrie would end up with Big or not, but the precursor was an episode that really went pretty deep with Samantha, Miranda, Charlotte and their loves. I loved that episode too. The movie is, as I said, back in Carrie-centric land.
Also, I wanted more of Stanford!
N.Y., N.Y.: Not to be a killjoy but isn't all this flashy fashion we see in the SATC movie just way out of touch? I mean isn't the look a lot more subtle today? Does anyone dress like this anymore?
In these economic times it's outrageous to be proud of wearing shoes that cost $1500. when most people wonder how they can keep food on the table.
washingtonpost.com: Robin Givhan recently interviewed SATC stylist Patricia Field: Sex, the City and Patricia Field (Washington Post, May 25)
Jennifer Frey: I defer to Robin and all her fashion wisdom, but at least for me, a part of it is seeing people who actually WEAR those clothes we see coming down the runway during Fashion Week and in the pages of Vogue. I don't know anyone who wears birds on her head like Carrie does, but, hey, it's fun to see.
And, again, it's about escapism. Maybe Carrie should give up a pair of shoes and work in a soup kitchen. (Or maybe that's Charlotte's role?). But I believe there is always a place for entertainment in our society. It does have its values.
D.C.: There's always so much criticism of how unrealistic the show is about the clothing, shoes, apartments and how - Carrie especially - these women could afford the lifestyle. I'd love to see these social critics pick on the fact that all four women ended up in nice, normal, successful relationships by the end of the show. Now that is impossible in NYC! The dating and mating scene up there is just crazy.
Jennifer Frey: Ha! As someone who was single and living in NYC in my mid-20s, I definitely hear you on that.
Sticking up for females: Why does liking SATC turn off so many people? Why is it an indictment of women? How many men turn into superheroes with special powers and save the world? And yet we get these movies every summer and almost no angst-ridden articles about what this means about the male psyche, the progression of male enlightenment and whether or not it means that males are unhappy with lives or are just shallow or are dim-witted to begin with...you get the idea. Why do women always always always have to defend themselves for every little thing?
Jennifer Frey: Because we're about shoes, and they are about saving the world? No, seriously, I hear your point. A whole lotta movies about blowing things up and driving really fast and smashing down buildings get a free pass when it comes to the analysis of its internal psychological meaning, etc., etc. But SATC became a cultural touchstone, like it or not. Now, if only the armchair analysts would focus on the impact of women's friendships on their interior lives, rather than the secret meaning of their shoes.
D.C.: As a newly single girl, will I be emotionally devastated after seeing this movie, or would it be an appropriate post-breakup chick flick?
I don't want to be SOBBING at the end, and have everyone staring at me like I'm some sort of freak...
Jennifer Frey: I think you'll be okay. SATC has always had a strong component of believing that you can be okay on your own, as long as you have your girls. And that hasn't gone out the window, even if all of them did pair up at the end of the series. And who says that everyone has to wind up paired off at the end of the film? Not telling, just sayin'
D.C.: Have you seen the movie yet? What is your take on it? Do you have any thoughts about how long it took to make the movie -- too much time has passed and the excitement has waned, or not enough time to make the movie more than just a second series finale?
It doesn't seem as if SATC has been off the air for 4 years. Between the constant re-runs and the fact that the shows don't seem all that outdated (yet), I never felt like the show left.
Jennifer Frey: I agree that it actually does NOT feel like four years have passed. I still get the same enthusiastic feedback when I mention the subject that I did when I wrote about the end of the series--and I was shocked to realize how long ago that was. I think the one thing that is a wee bit hurt by the long gap is the Big-Carrie relationship.
Pennsylvania: I just moved across the country and so I can't go see this movie with my friends because I don't really have any in my new town. Sigh...
My husband is very bemused with my attraction to this show. He finds the characters unappealing (both visually and morally) and says they're the most immature group of women he's ever seen. (He's got high standards...) Yet he's always on the couch with me watching the show.
I am unable to explain my own fascination with this show--I've never had any desire to live in New York and dress fashionably or be single and searching for love.
I've come to the conclusion that I admire these women they never apologize for being their true selves. They never say their sorry for wanting what they want--they are almost masculine in that way. My favorite character is Samantha, because she seems to embody this the most, and yet she has a tender, vulnerable side that makes her very poignant.
Sorry for the essay -- I bet a lot of ink has been spilled over this series!
Jennifer Frey: There is something to the fact that these women are unapologetic for being exactly who they are, which is refreshing, IMHO. And Samantha is terrific in that way--which you see again, in spades, in the movie.
Greenbelt, Md.: SATC also starts tomorrow at the Old Greenbelt Theatre in, duh, Greenbelt. And its bargain matinees are very affordable and so are the popcorn and drinks -- best deal in the area.
Jennifer Frey: And some more info for those seeking to avoid the multiplex.
D.C.: I'd say that N.Y., N.Y. has not watched any of the "Real Housewives" shows... Yes, there are people who dress this way and really have the expensive clothes. Yes, there are people who have not been affected by the economic downturn. In fact, some people are seeing their incomes rise! Granted, it's not many, but I don't think that Jimmy Choo, Manolo Blahnik, or Neiman's will be going out of business anytime soon.
Jennifer Frey: True, true. There is quite a gap between the haves and the have-nots, but the last time I stopped in at Mazza Gallerie for a film, Neiman's seemed to be doing plenty of business.
I remember when Pat Field was known for dressing drag queens! She was the place to go for size 12 heels.
Jennifer Frey: Never underestimate the value of a size 12 heel!
Washington, D.C.: I loved the TV show because it dealt with relationships from the female POV and, really, if those 4 well-bred, well-dressed, sexy, wealthy babes had trouble finding a mate, well, no wonder it was hard for me, too! BUT -- the fact none of them ever has to worry about money is hard to relate to, dontcha think? - And the utter disinterest in any moral component to what their boyfriends or each other do for a living was stunning -- What sort of law was Miranda practicing? Did Big offer mixed-income housing, or throw old folks into the street in order to build luxury buildings where their rent-controlled apartments were?
Or am I just bitter that when I was single in NYC, I didn't know enough to hang out in bars frequented by wealthy doctors and stockbrokers? Or 'cause my bartender b.f. didn't become a bar owner and the actors I dated never became super-stars?
(When Carrie needs $30 thou to buy her apartment, she borrows it from Charlotte via Charlotte's engagement ring, then flies off to Paris for a year without a word about repaying Charlotte, while the Russian offers to pay her mortgage for the whole year.)
Jennifer Frey: The episode where Carrie finds out she's spent her life savings on shoes and can't afford her own apartment is Painful. To. Watch. Which is why, I think, it was a rarity: viewers don't want to see these women worry about money. There's enough time already spent relating to our own bank accounts.
I, however, totally agree that I always wanted to know more about Miranda's job.
SATC souvenir: Am I wrong to covet a nameplate necklace?
washingtonpost.com: My sister just bought one for our soon-to-be-born baby niece!
Jennifer Frey: It depends on the name.
Seriously, what's wrong with that? And it's my understanding they are trendy these days. At least, that's what my 9-year-old tells me.
Capitol Hill, D.C.: do the 2 1/2 hours go by fast? (I'm a fan.)
Jennifer Frey: Fast enough. I would have trimmed down by about 10-15 minutes. Then again, I was watching with a bunch of film reviewers and not with my friends (or even anyone I could whisper to), so that diluted the experience a bit.
Aidan Fan: Does Aidan - John Whatshisname - make an appearance in the movie by any chance? It would be horrible to leave out such an important character if Carrie is to settle down.
Jennifer Frey: Alas, I have no memory of seeing Aidan in the movie. A real cameo appearance would have been fabulous.
Columbia, Md.: Isn't "Living Single" simply an update of "The Facts of Life" with some "In Living Color" flavor?
And isn't "The Facts of Life" an update of "Little Women" for the 80's?
Everything old is new again. It's all been done before.
Jennifer Frey: Ah, but if it's good, why not do it again?
Jennifer Frey: Looks like my time is up. Thanks for all the great questions. Now, go put on your favorite shoes this weekend and have a good time.
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
|
Join live discussions from the Washington Post. Feature topics include national, world and DC area news, politics, elections, campaigns, government policy, tech regulation, travel, entertainment, cars, and real estate.
| 132.756098 | 0.634146 | 0.829268 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/26/DI2008052601813.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/26/DI2008052601813.html
|
Post Politics Hour - washingtonpost.com
|
2008052919
|
Don't want to miss out on the latest in politics? Start each day with The Post Politics Hour. Join in each weekday morning at 11 a.m. as a member of The Washington Post's team of White House and Congressional reporters answers questions about the latest in buzz in Washington and The Post's coverage of political news.
Washington Post congressional reporter Paul Kane was online Thursday, May 29 at 11 a.m. ET to discuss the latest in political news.
Get the latest campaign news live on washingtonpost.com's The Trail, or subscribe to the daily Post Politics Podcast.
Archive: Post Politics Hour discussion transcripts
Paul Kane: Good morning, folks. Sorry if there was some confusion as to who was leading this chat, Shailagh Murray or myself. There was some misunderstanding as to whether or not I was still on vacation in the Emerald Isle, but I'm here, I'm back in Washington after a long, great weekend in Dublin. (The Guinness is better, or at least it seemed that way, and, more importantly, Bruce Springsteen's just as good if not better in Ireland!)
Interestingly, did any of you hear about the political party that has had a long hold on power but is now floundering amid campaign debt, infighting over who should lead the political party committee, and the dramatic loss of a special election that was considered incredibly safe territory for the party in power? No, not Republicans, I'm talking about the Labour Party of Gordon Brown in the U.K. Pretty funny parallels to what's going on in the States as to what Brown is suffering from in London.
Okay, on to the questions.
Salinas, Calif.: Other than the sheer enjoyment (or horror, depending on your perspective) of watching the current Scott McClellan imbroglio unfold before us, do you think his revelations will offer any further impetus in putting Karl Rove in a chair (and under oath) before Henry Waxman's House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform?
washingtonpost.com: 'Disillusioned' McClellan Defends Memoir (Post, May 29)
Paul Kane: Lots of McClellan questions today, I'll do my best to answer them, but it's hard for me to do so on some levels because I've never been a White House correspondent.
As for Waxman, I don't think this book is any more or less likely to land Rove in the testifying role before the Oversight committee. The chairman already had Rove in his cross-hairs before the book came out, as did House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers. This is going to be a protracted negotiation, so we'll see how it ends.
Northfield, Ill.: Good morning. In rebuking McClellan's assertions in his book, the Bush people have been scathing in their denunciations of him, but have any of them said he lied?
Paul Kane: I've yet to see any instances in which a current or former Bush official contradicted facts in the book. I think they disagree with his interpretations of how events unfolded. But no one has said, Scott lied because this meeting or that meeting never happened, or he wasn't actually in that meeting.
Belfast, Maine: In the coming weeks there will be many days when there's little real political news about the Republicans or Democrats to report. Any chance that one of The Post's political staff might do a piece on what the Green Party, for example, is up to? (I've asked this question during six earlier Post political chats and have gotten no response, a fact I find interesting in itself.)
Paul Kane: I'll happily answer this one, and I'll be brutally honest. We don't have enough resources to cover your party. it's that simple, and if that infuriates you, I'm sorry. But that's life. The Green Party and Nader got plenty of coverage in '00 when, at the least, he had the chance to play a decisive role in some states. So far, there's little indication that the Greens will have any major impact on the '08 election. Until you can demonstrate that there is some level of support for your party, our paper isn't going to spend precious resources reporting on whatever it is you're doing. I'm sorry, but we're a business, and lots of my colleagues are walking out the door under volunteer buyouts. We don't have the resources to cover you guys.
St. Paul, Minn.: Hi Paul -- thank you for taking my question and for chatting today. I'd be interested in your overall take on the impact of the McClellan controversy on both of the president campaigns. Does it help the Democrats by putting the attention on something other than their inability to come to a conclusion about whom the nominee will be? Does it hurt McCain because it reminds voters that he's a member of the party in power, or does it give him an opportunity to separate himself from the very unpopular president? How might he go about doing that, if he can?
Paul Kane: Any time over the next 5-6 months that the focus of the national debate centers on the Iraq war, it's probably a good thing for Obama and congressional Democrats. Despite a somewhat militarily successful surge, the war itself is still not popular with voters.
Any time over the next 5-6 months the focus of debate centers on a former inner circle Bush adviser accusing the administration of tricking Americans into supporting the way, it's a very good thing for Obama and congressional Democrats.
Washington: Looking at the most recent Rasmussen daily polls, I see that Hillary manages a tie today against McCain, but Barack is down by five points to McCain. What piqued my interest was that while Hillary had a "highly unfavorable" rating of 32 percent (i.e., as I see it, people who never will vote for her) Barack was at 35 percent. On Jan. 30, as we entered primary season's main show, Barack's "highly unfavorables" were 20 percent and Clinton's were 35 percent. Is this something superdelegates may be watching?
Paul Kane: I've spent the past several months talking to as many super-delegates as any reporter in America, I'd guess, since I cover on a day-to-day basis about 280 of them here on Capitol Hill.
I hate saying this, because all the Clinton people are going to flip out and say, You're biased, you're biased, you're biased. So go ahead and flip out if you want, but the simple basic truth is that the super-delegates stopped paying attention to the Clinton-Obama race about a couple days after the Indiana and North Carolina primaries.
They've stopped paying attention to the primary, and instead they're focused on an Obama-McCain matchup in November. That's the basic, simple, definitive reality that has happened in this race. The "undecided" super-delegates at this moment are not going to "decide" any time soon, because to them the race is over, they're just waiting for Clinton to drop out.
Washington: I am decidedly not a fan of the Bush administration, but does anyone find it disingenuous that Scott McClellan is blaming the media for not digging deeper on Iraq? I mean, he didn't even know it was all a ruse, and he actually had access to the intelligence. I haven't read the book, so I may be missing his larger point, but yeesh -- pot, meet kettle.
Paul Kane: I love any questioner who wants to actually defend the media!
It is a good question, though, and one that will play out over the next few days, but ultimately, I think this will be a temporary tempest in a teapot. McClellan is giving voice to what roughly 60-65% of the country already believes is the truth. Yes, it's important because it's coming from a former Bush insider, but ultimately, he's saying just what a large percentage of voters already believe to be the truth. So I don't see this being a major, long lasting "scandal".
U.S.: Paul, will Congress be taking any action on immigration this year? I'm actually really happy to see the INS has been taking the issue of illegals using false documentation as seriously as it should, but doesn't it give the GOP the higher ground on this hot-button issue?
Paul Kane: The desire on Capitol Hill to take up such a hot-button issue as immigration is slim to none, and slim left town a few months back. At this stage, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid both believe they are going to have significantly larger majorities in January.
In the worst-case scenario, under Pelosi and Reid's thinking, they'll have a President McCain who also supports their preferred style of immigration reform, and McCain is just easier for them to deal with than Bush. In the best case scenario, the Democrats have huge majorities and a President Obama.
So, in that case, they could write a bill themselves practically with minimum input from Republicans.
Centreville, Va.: I was surprised and disappointed that The Post did not seem to address the Gallup poll yesterday which seemed to say Hillary Clinton had somewhat of an advantage over Barack Obama in the so-called swing states. The news of that poll was bandied about all day on the political blogs, and I have to say the Obama supporters seemed to be getting the worst of it. (Or is it "worse" with only two candidates in the poll?)
washingtonpost.com: Hillary Clinton's Swing-State Advantage (Gallup, May 28)
Paul Kane: Again, don't yell at me because I'm only the messenger here. But the super-delegates have moved on, they're no longer looking at how Hillary Clinton fares in battleground states against McCain. This is very hard for Clinton supporters to hear, I'm sorry, but the super-delegates are not paying attention to your candidate anymore. These head-to-head matchup polls (Clinton v. McCain, Obama v. McCain) are not having the impact on people's thinking anymore.
"We don't have the resources to cover you guys.": Paul: With all due respect, do you really expect us to believe that? I'm not a Green Party member and in fact hate Ralph Nader for helping elect George Bush in 2000, but the Post will have more than one person covering both of the major campaigns. They certainly can find someone to do some reporting on the Green Party. Tip: How about interns?
Paul Kane: Nope, sorry, not happening. It simply doesn't make financial sense to dedicate very slim resources to a party that's getting less than one half of 1 percent in polls. There's a whole World Wide Web out there, and for now minor party candidates are going to have use the Web to push their agenda.
Roseland, N.J.: John McCain's suggestion that both he and Barack Obama visit war-strewn Iraq together: Can you think of an idea the Secret Service would veto faster?
Paul Kane: Yeah, that idea did make me chuckle. No way Secret Service allows such a thing.
Remember that market visit McCain did in Baghdad in early '07? He had a battalion of guys protecting him, not to mention choppers flying overhead. Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) described it as like any "Indiana market". Um, no, not really.
Anonymous: Is Gordon Brown actually suffering the wrath the Brits feel about Tony Blair following the Bush war machine propaganda in such lockstep, or is he just not charismatic enough for our cousins overseas? I mean, he's a natty dresser and all, but he's no Maggie Thatcher if you know what I mean.
Paul Kane: I read the Irish and British press takes on this, and it seems that Brown is suffering from both of these fates. Clearly, there is some Iraq hangover over there, and that's clearly Tony Blair's decision. But also Brown seems to just not have the same level of charisma. The headline in the Irish Independent one day was: The Problem Is Nobody Likes Him.
Baltimore: As the number of former Bushites continues to "defect," and with increasing past proximity to the president, how can the public really accept their credibility? Although I think what McClellan writes is a lot closer to the truth than what he used to spout as press secretary, I can't help but think he's taking full advantage of political winds to drive up exposure and ostensibly profits. In short, how extensive will the damage of all these negative stories regarding Bush and the Republicans be? Is a Democratic victory in November assured?
Paul Kane: I can't say for certain the Democrats are assured of victory in November in the presidential race,but it's getting close to that in terms of the House and Senate races. There, the Democratic advantages are so substantial, so structural, the Republicans are now just hoping for only modest Democratic gains in the House and Senate.
Arlington, Va.: I wouldn't vote for him, but in line with Green question, would The Post give some coverage to Bob Barr and the Libertarians, or at least some analysis of the impacts the Libertarians and Greens have on the candidates?
Paul Kane: You know what was amazing about the Bob Barr nomination to the Libertarian ticket? It took him six rounds of balloting at the party's nominating convention to secure the nomination. Here's a guy who was once considered an important player in congressional politics, helped lead Bill Clinton's impeachment, and yet here he is now, so politically down and out, that the only way he could secure the Libertarian nomination was by offering his veep slot to the guy who lost out on the fifth round of balloting. I find that amazing.
Chicago: Hi Paul. Is Geraldine Ferraro acting on her own or is she being encouraged by the Clinton camp? They don't seem to be restraining her at all. She is absolutely livid about the tremendous benefits Obama derives from being black and the tremendous burden of being a white former first lady. Is she crazy?
Paul Kane: I really can't speak for what motivates Ferraro, but I can assure you that the passions are very high among Clinton supporters about this nomination fight. They're very, very angry, this was an incredibly close race, and they want their candidate to win. Faced with a party establishment that has decided that the nomination fight is now over and that Obama will be the party standard bearer, Clinton's people are lashing out. It's fairly understandable.
Kansas City, Mo.: Regarding McClellan and the press not asking enough questions on the war, some did -- at least Bill Moyer on PBS pointed out the work by Knight-Ridder (McClatchy) and The Post's Walter Pincus. The problem was that too few people saw those reports -- Pincus's were buried and McClatchy doesn't have a wide presence. If Woodward and Bernstein's reports were as buried, Watergate would have been a minor story. Not sure why the rah-rah stories got more exposure.
Paul Kane: Journalism has done a horrible job of explaining itself to its consumers. It's hard to explain how decisions are made, sometimes it's pure chaos, on the fly, seat of the pants stuff. Sometimes, it's very thought out, planned, which stories are on A1, which are deep in the paper.
But, pretty much all the time, with a Republican or a Democratic administration, the way editors make their calls on what gets more prominent display is the prominence of the people saying something. Because Cheney would go on "Meet the Press" and say these things, it got more prominent coverage than lower level CIA, State Dept folks questioning it, particularly those that were doing so on background anonymously.
Washington: "Paul Kane: I can't say for certain that the Democrats are assured of victory in November in the presidential race, but it's getting close to that in terms of the House and Senate races. There, the Democrats' advantages are so substantial, so structural, that the Republicans are just hoping for only modest Democratic gains." How does this synch with the fact that Congress's approval ratings make Bush look beloved?
Paul Kane: Because Congress has two parties in it, and in every single poll I've seen for the past two years, the congressional Republicans always fare very, very poorly, much more so than congressional Democrats.
Plus, a lot of the anger at Democrats is basically angry liberal base voters that are upset that Pelosi and Reid haven't impeached Bush and Cheney. Those are voters who are not going to be voting for House and Senate GOP candidates any time soon.
No, the Pelosi-Reid Democrats are not popular, but congressional Republicans are way, way, way more unpopular right now.
Atlanta: Bob Barr! Cynthia McKinney! Hooray for Georgia!
Paul Kane: Ladies and gentlemen, these are our readers at washingtonpost.com.
Helena, Mont.: Kind of hard to think that Montana is now a "battleground" state. Ads are being run for both candidates. Obama has been here twice and is coming a third time. Hillary has been here once, Bill twice, and Hillary is coming a second time. Good times!
Paul Kane: Well, Montana had its spot in the political sunlight two years ago with the Burns-Tester race, so this isn't completely new territory for you folks. although, I guess having the high profile people there campaigning is a new twist. I still can't believe Jon Tester stayed out of this endorsement game.
Lashing out?: Why? I know that there are many out there who vastly prefer Sen. Clinton to Sen. Obama. I know they think that she's more qualified and better-equipped to beat John McCain in the general election. I know they think that Clinton has been unfairly treated by the media and that the primary system is all screwed up. I've heard all their arguments. And I don't doubt that they genuinely believe all of these things. My question, though, is this: What realistic outcome are they still holding out for?
Paul Kane: They want their candidate to win. I'm not sure they know how that outcome would occur, but they want Clinton to win, it's that simple. If Obama was losing this campaign by just as narrow a margin, his supporters would be just as upset. It's important for Obama supporters to realize just how narrow a victory he appears to have pulled off, rather than running around the country acting like they blew out Clinton. If she had been semi-competitive in the post-Super Tuesday states in February -- rather than losing them all 60-40 or worse -- it's highly possible she would be the nominee.
Washington: Regarding the increasingly limited reporting resources of The Post, I find myself in a bit of a quandary: I subscribe to the print edition of The Post even though I don't read it because I know you need the revenue, but it won't be worth the money if the amount of unique, non-wire-service, content decreases too much. Are the buyouts coupled with a strategy to make The Post sustainable as a news-gathering organization, or not?
Paul Kane: Look, the Post won six Pulitzer prizes for 2007. Yes, these buyouts stink because really good people are leaving, but this is a phenomenal news organization that is building something different for the future. I personally think that you have to understand that newspapers no longer exist -- we're all media organizations. And, to the extent of that's the wave of the future, I think the Post and washingtonpost.com are way ahead of their competitors in understanding that and building toward the future.
Learning from History?: In private communication in 1966, Nixon said the Vietnam War couldn't be won, and yet he spent the next seven years red-baiting anybody who said so, and -- once in office -- let literally millions of people be killed rather than lose the wedge it made between Democratic voters, lying the entire time. Based on the latest McClellan "revelations," do you see any parallels to the situation we find ourselves in today?
Paul Kane: I would be stunned to learn 10 to 15 years from now of any self doubt in President Bush, in the Iraq war or in his approach to diplomacy writ large. This has been a supremely confident president. Rightly or wrongly, it seems pretty clear that he believes victory is achievable. To his critics and opponents of the war, I'm not sure what would be worse to learn: that Bush never wavered in his belief that the war was a good effort, or that he really did privately have doubts about things and knew the war wasn't going to be successful?
Paul Kane: Okay everyone, time for me to run. Unlike Springsteen -- who played seven encores Sunday night -- I can't go on forever. Gotta get back to work.
It's been a great chat, and remember, Congress will be back in session next week, with the Senate taking up a housing bill. Fun times.
washingtonpost.com: Upcoming Discussion: Slate's Weisberg on McCain (washingtonpost.com, today at 1 p.m.)
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
|
Washington Post congressional reporter Paul Kane discusses the latest buzz in Washington and The Post's coverage of political news.
| 202.571429 | 0.952381 | 8.761905 |
high
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/28/DI2008052802470.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/28/DI2008052802470.html
|
Slate: McCain at Rock Bottom
|
2008052919
|
McCain at Rock Bottom (Slate, May 27)
This article is adapted from Jacob Weisberg's introduction to "McCain's Promise: Aboard the Straight Talk Express With John McCain and a Whole Bunch of Actual Reporters, Thinking About Hope" by David Foster Wallace, published by Back Bay Books.
Weisberg is editor of Slate and author of "The Bush Tragedy." He covered the 2000 McCain campaign for Slate.
Jacob Weisberg: Hello, and thanks for joining me for a lunch break.
Fourth Estate: Look, I'm doing everything I can to help voters understand this campaign. I've ignored John's mix-up of "Sunni" vs. "Shiite" -- it really doesn't matter. I attended John's BBQ at his ranch and picked up all the talking points to use this Fall. I've written extensively about every smear against Obama I've seen in the e-mails, because they're out there, and I have a journalistic responsibility to discuss them. I regularly write out Obama's full name, including his middle name of "Hussein." Yet Obama seems to be strengthening. What else can I do?
Jacob Weisberg: The question of press bias has gotten really tedious. With McCain and Obama, I think we have two nominees (nearly) who are widely liked and admired by reporters. Both are sure to cry foul when it suits their purposes, but I don't see any meaningful media slant in a race between them.
Harrisburg, Pa.: Jacob, I actually am reading the news from my studio in Paris (which I have leased for the month of May). I have read your articles in the past, but my question is perhaps more of a comment. I found your last paragraph "flat." It took away from the earlier part of it. The piece certainly convinces a reader that you know your way around the D.C. circuit, but it just sort of hangs there ... at the end. Was there a reason for doing that in this article? I am a writer, also. Just had my first book published: a novel, "The Widow's Web."
Jacob Weisberg: Sorry about that. It ends abruptly because it's an excerpt to a longer introduction to David Foster Wallace's book "McCain's Promise." In printed form, my piece goes on to consider Wallace's view of McCain and the paradox of a candidate who succeeds politically by acting as if he's not that political.
Anonymous: If McCain is at his best when he is losing, then I am certain Democrats would love to make him great. Why does he seem to be more outspoken and more of a maverick when he is not comfortably ahead?
Jacob Weisberg: Obvious, isn't it? The stakes get higher in proximity to victory. Last August, McCain probably thought he didn't have much to lose.
Savory Goodness: As a fun Wednesday afternoon exercise, read the entire Slate article then review the associated posts. Many learned Frayers post all of the usual "four more years" blather, while this Slate piece is one of many which give evidence to the contrary. Further evidence can be derived from Sen. McCain's record in the Senate, and in the conservative media's reactions to him.
John McCain -- whatever else one might think of him -- is nobody's lapdog; not Bush's, nor Limbaugh's, nor Fox News's, nor the religious right's, nor the lobbyists', nor even the GOP's. We are unquestionably, finally going to have palpable change in Washington after this election, no matter which side wins. 'Bout damn time.
Jacob Weisberg: I agree that McCain is driven to an unusual degree by his own conscience. He never has been a good team player, and Republican party-liners are right to mistrust. I don't think he has any real respect or affection for George W. Bush (or vice-versa), though their views on Iraq happen to be closely aligned at the moment.
Reading, Pa.: If Sen. McCain had a "senior moment" on the trail and said something truly ridiculous or out of touch, would it be fair to report that, or do you think the media would look the other way? Would you report it?
Jacob Weisberg: Are you kidding? The press will be all over any gaffe or slip of any kind, by either candidate. But "senior moment" implies that he's gone foggy in some way that his campaign is trying to conceal, and I don't think that's true. My sense is that he's as energetic and on the ball as he was eight years ago.
Hope, Ark.: Jacob, do you think the town-hall-type debates McCain has proposed to Obama actually will happen? Given that both candidates weren't really such great debaters, who do you think it would benefit more?
Jacob Weisberg: I'd love to see a more open-ended type of debate between McCain and Obama, and I think there's a decent chance of it happening. As you say, neither has been terribly impressive in debates so far.
San Francisco: Sen. McCain has sold out most of the principled stands that earned him the maverick reputation in the 2000 campaign. (Embracing Jerry Falwell after calling him an agent of intolerance and supporting Bush after the Bush campaign's despicable slurs against his family in South Carolina, for example.) Is his popularity likely to fall as people realize that McCain 2008 is not the same as McCain 2000?
Jacob Weisberg: McCain is certainly challenging his side less than he did in 2000, but probably more than Obama ever has challenged his own side. McCain still comes into conflict with most Republicans on immigration and campaign finance reform. The maverick streak is still there, but without the self-immolating dimension.
Eastern Shore Conservatives: In private, how much does McCain hate conservatives like me?
Jacob Weisberg: I don't think he hates you all, but I remain skeptical that he's really one of you. McCain is genuinely hawkish, but he doesn't think like a natural conservative about social or economic policy. In fact, he doesn't seem to think much about social and economic policy at all, so he can tilt in a conservative direction as easily as in a liberal one. His economic plan looks equally shameful from a liberal or conservative perspective.
Charleston, S.C.: Jacob, how do perceive McCain's temperament in comparison to other past presidents or candidates? About the same, or worse?
Jacob Weisberg: His temperament does worry me. McCain can be a loner, and can be extreme in adherence to his principles. This is a guy, remember, who chose to remain a POW in Vietnam for five years rather than violate his code. I worry that in certain confrontational situations, McCain might be inclined to escalate where it would make more sense to compromise or back down. I wouldn't have wanted him making the calls in the Cuban Missile Crisis, for instance.
Anonymous: I have to disagree about McCain not liking or respecting President Bush. I could see by the way he made sure Bush got on his plane after that fundraiser the other night that McCain was concerned that the president keep to his busy schedule, even though I'm sure he would have liked to schmooze a bit longer.
Jacob Weisberg: Well, I think he wants Bush to raise as much money for him as possible -- and to help with the conservative base. But I've never detected any personal affinity.
McCain/"The Wire": Isn't it as simple as one of "The Wire's" themes? A man cannot succeed within the context of the institution without prostituting himself and his beliefs.
Jacob Weisberg: I think the idea that politics entails compromise with one's beliefs may go back a bit farther than "The Wire."
New York: My wife, who is from Arizona, says that she is amazed that McCain is doing so well because he is, in her words, "a crook." She then cited all sorts of scandals from the '80s and '90s that I never had heard of. Is this past relevant? Did McCain used to be a more divisive figure?
Jacob Weisberg: The most famous controversy was the Keating Five scandal, when McCain helped out a big contributor in an inappropriate way, and was scolded by a Senate investigator. There have been other instances in which he has been criticized for favoring Arizona contributors. He is surrounded by the worst hired-gun lobbyists on the Republican side. But crook is much, much too strong a term for any of that, even if you believe that the worst accusations are true.
EarlyBird: McCain is best when he's behind rather than leading the pack, just like conservatism is best as a countermovement rather than a movement. The whole point of conservatism is to conserve what is, to be skeptical of change and giving government power to work grand schemes in the name of its constituents. It is at its best as an insurgency when, as William F. Buckley, Jr. dedicated National Review to doing, it "stands athwart history and yells 'Stop!' " It certainly is not given to interventionism abroad, either.
Goldwater launched the modern conservative movement, Reagan made its values mainstream, and since then it has decayed like any successful movement into politics for politics sake. Ultimately, successful political movements become decadent. Compare the idealist Goldwater, to the corrupted Bush and his veep, who rot at the end of the long 40-plus year movement.
McCain is best when he's behind, having to call bull on the latest "Government as Santa Claus" scheme, because he is a conservative. He's not by nature a builder, but a fighter. He is, at the end of an amazing run of conservative success, now as out of ideas as the conservative movement is. It's why he, along with the Republicans, need to be swept away this year for a long winter, so they can get back to basics, weed out the neocons and Bible-based coercers, and rededicate themselves to core conservative values. Because we will need them healthy and principled and ready to fight that fight again in another eight years.
Jacob Weisberg: I very much agree with the point about conservatism losing track of its principles and being corrupted by power. What's more, most conservatives I know agree with it. Losing control of Congress has begun to provoke some serious rethinking on their side. I agree that losing the White House would help to promote it further.
Anonymous: Do you think we'll see an attempt to play out the whole Vietnam War thing before this is all said and done? Aren't McCain's service and prisoner of war ordeal really the only things he has to run on ?
Jacob Weisberg: McCain is 71. Obama is 47. If McCain's campaign focuses too heavily on Vietnam, I think it risks turning the race into a past-vs-future content. In that scenario, the past loses. Remember Bob Dole?
Huh?:"McCain is surrounded by the worst hired-gun lobbyist in the biz." And all this time I thought he was on a crusade against that kind of influence-peddling.
Jacob Weisberg: My point precisely. McCain is a total hypocrite on this issue. Or perhaps more precisely, he thinks he is so pure on the issue of political reform that he won't be tainted by having lobbyists all around him.
Minneapolis: It seems to me this campaign has revealed a pretty major flaw in McCain's governing style: Though he certainly has core convictions (like reducing the influence of lobbyists, or campaign finance reform), he's clueless about how to actually achieve meaningful results. I mean, after he was worried about the "perception" of lobbyists in his campaign, he rashly created a policy that caused much confusion among his staff, and really didn't do anything to fix the perception problem. The same thing seems to be wrong with the way McCain/Feingold has been almost completely ineffective in reigning in campaign spending. Do you see his potential governing style becoming an issue in the campaign, or is it too abstract an issue for voters to really latch onto?
Jacob Weisberg: It's a very valid issue. McCain never has managed anything significant. He's not detail-oriented. He's interested in policy only selectively. He's not someone is going to delve deeply into the operations of government. As we've seen with George W. Bush, these liabilities can be catastrophic. But I agree, this issue is a bit subtle and abstract to be aired in a presidential campaign. Also, Obama -- while somewhat more hands-on -- doesn't have real executive experience either.
Fighting Back: Great to see the Democrats and Obama loosening the GOP's eight-year lock on their twin trump cards of terrorism and patriotism. It's amazing to me to read Obama's recent retort to McCain, where he said McCain "should explain to the American people why almost every single promise and prediction that he has made about Iraq has turned out to be catastrophically wrong, including his support for a surge that was supposed to achieve political reconciliation." I for one second that emotion! It's about time somebody asked McCain these kinds of questions, as reporters apparently won't.
Jacob Weisberg: I'm not sure McCain's position on the war is as much of a liability as you think it is. For one thing, he was a shrewd critic of the Bush-Rumsfeld strategy from very early on, arguing that the U.S. needed to move to a counter-insurgency strategy. And since Bush finally moved to McCain's preferred strategy in early 2007, levels of violence in Iraq have decreased and the situation has improved somewhat. So while I agree that the invasion of Iraq was a catostrophic blunder, I think there's an argument to be made that McCain's military instincts have been pretty good.
Again, the charge of press bias -- which echoes through many of the questions I haven't had time to answer is wrong-headed and really, really tedious.
Black's Ops?: John McCain has repeatedly said to judge him by the company he keeps. Okay -- in the past week, six lobbyists have resigned from the McCain campaign under questions about their ties to foreign regimes and corporate interests. Still working for McCain is Senior Political Advisor Charlie Black, whose client list is a who's who of evil men, including Ahmed Chalabi, Ferdinand Marcos, Somali dictator Mohamed Siad Barre, Angolan rebel leader Jonas Savimbi and Nigerian Dictator Ibrahim Babangida. Why do you think Black still is working for John McCain?
Jacob Weisberg: See my early answer. I agree -- Charlie Black is a greedy sleaze with a terrible history. And McCain's a hypocrite to keep him on board.
Jacob Weisberg: I think time is up. Thanks for joining me today, and please check out all the great campaign coverage on Slate!
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
|
Join live discussions from the Washington Post. Feature topics include national, world and DC area news, politics, elections, campaigns, government policy, tech regulation, travel, entertainment, cars, and real estate.
| 72.829268 | 0.634146 | 0.731707 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/23/DI2008052303436.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/23/DI2008052303436.html
|
Washington Sketch
|
2008052919
|
Dana Milbank: So let's see where things stand:
Dan Bartlett is "puzzled" by Scott McClellan.
Dana Perino is "puzzled" by Scott McClellan.
President Bush, Perino says, is also "puzzled" by McClellan.
What puzzles you, dear reader?
Ocala, Fla.: So, I'm puzzled -- was McClellan under a spell when he was press secretary, or did he become possessed by the evil liberal New York media after he left the protective magic of Dick Cheney?
I find it amusing that he is dismissed as "disgruntled." I must say I'd be disgruntled if my superiors lied to me, I unwittingly repeated those lies to the public, and then -- when my credibility was shot -- I was pushed out the door.
I don't think there's anything "liberal" about Scott's critique -- just well justified anger.
Silver Spring, Md.: Wasn't the McClellan book subject to pre-publication review by the White House? If it was, then the White House is lying about being surprised about its contents. (That would not surprising.)
Dana Milbank: I am shocked -- shocked! -- that you would believe a lie has come out of the White House.
Yes, it was reviewed by the White House, and most likely by Steve Hadley or his national security council.
Washington: Thanks for "bringing to life" Stephen Hadley today. What would you consider his most important asset? My vote is loyalty. He strikes me as someone unlikely to leave office and write a book like Scott McClellan.
washingtonpost.com: The Man Who Wasn't There, Still Here (Post, May 29)
Dana Milbank: Well, Scott McClellan seemed someone unlikely to leave office and write a book like Scott McClellan.
Hadley has strong loyalty, but also strong fealty to whatever the president's view is. He's often described as less ideologue than apparatchik.
Mt. Lebanon, Pa.: From Paul Kane's session this morning: "I'm sorry, but we're a business, and lots of my colleagues are walking out the door under volunteer buyouts. We don't have the resources to cover you guys" (re: Nader, Greens, anyone else who isn't Democratic or Republican). Then you might as well fold The Washington Post. If you don't have the resources and the desire to report "all the news that's fit to print," your company isn't fit for the news business. (Yes, I know the quote is attributed to the New York Times) Your take? Please no sob stories about layoffs, buyouts, and how no one understands your business model. We all have problems. Thanks much.
Surely my colleague Kane jests. I have already written about Nader and Barr in this very cycle. The Sketch would be nowhere without the crazies, er, third parties.
Washington: I appreciate your pick-up of the attempt to over-use "puzzling." It reminds me of when Tony Snow (hope he's okay) used to say "that's interesting" or "I find it interesting that..." or "interesting question." He used to do that all the time.
There was a wire report yesterday saying Tony had to cancel a speech in Ohio because of illness. We're all praying for his health.
Protest at the rules meeting: Two-four-six-eight, we want extra delegates! What do we want? New goalposts! When do we want them? Now!
Dana Milbank: And your Washington Sketchwriter will be there at the Marriott Wardman Park to cover it, for a special-edition Sunday Sketch.
The RFK line: I watched Olbermann's outraged comment on it. I read Eugene Robinson's column on it. I see where she royally put her foot in it, but I also see that it's just one ridiculous thing she's said in months of campaigning. Dana, in your opinion, why is this one statement the misstep that kills her campaign (which should've ended weeks ago)?
washingtonpost.com: Clinton's Grim Scenario (Post, May 27)
Dana Milbank: Franco: Still Dead.
It was outrageous but, as you note, you can't kill a campaign that's already dead.
Baltimore: Were you in the White House press pool at the same time that Scottie was press secretary? Did he look tortured and conflicted back then, or is that just his usual constipated look?
Dana Milbank: Yes, I was, and no, it isn't constipation. He had that look before because Karl Rove's foot was in his behind. They are similar looks, though, so I can see why you would be puzzled.
Washington: Hi, Dana. One of my favorite Dana Milbank items was one you wrote when you were actually still a reporter at The Post. About four years ago you published a front-page piece called something like "For Bush, Facts Are Malleable." It was very well done. So that leads me to ask: How puzzled are you about this whole Scott McClellan thing?
Dana Milbank: It is my policy to reply to every question today that begins with "one of my favorite Dana Milbank items..."
That piece ran back in the fall of 2002, actually, and it raised some of those doubts about the war that the media is always be faulted for missing. I can still feel the refreshing droplets of saliva hitting my cheeks as Ari Fleischer screamed in my face.
He was very puzzled that day.
Seattle: I think we should make sure the NY Times Puzzlemaster Will Shortz has an alibi! I also notice that they all say "that's not the Scott we knew." Perhaps there was a cloning vat involved ... or a blast fax.
Dana Milbank: "Not the Scott I knew" is, indeed, another of the talking points. It reminds me of those testimonial videos the Clinton campaign rolled out just before the Iowa caucuses, called "The Hillary I Know." Puzzling why that didn't work for her.
What puzzles me?: That anyone still believes anything coming out of the White House. At this point, I'm waiting for the pets to have their tell-alls ghost-written for them. Barney and Miss Beazley probably have better access than the press secretary. Will they come concur with the view that the president's vision was narrow, or will they point out that he does after all see in color, and therefore is better-suited as he can see more. India (the cat) remains steadfastly non-aligned, while Ofelia the cow chews over how she'll respond to McClellan at the next Texas game.
Dana Milbank: Raised this very point on David Gregory's show last night. I think attention will inevitably focus on the untimely death in February, 2004, of the Bush family's English springer spaniel, Spot Fetcher. On closer inspection, the dog didn't die of natural causes but was "put to sleep."
Echoes of Vince Foster? Perhaps Spot knew too much.
You can't kill a campaign that's already dead: Oh no, puzzled, elitist pundit. The people will be appalled that all Florida and Michigan delegates aren't seated, and protests of this ruling will draw this campaign out to the convention. A campaign soon to be on hiatus is not dead.
Dana Milbank: Sorry, sorry. I did it again. It is because I don't need a president.
Count every vote! Cast every ballot! She's in it to win it!
Peaks Island, Maine: To what extent do you think that Scott McClellan's editors put words into his mouth, as implied (in some cases not subtly) by purveyors of the White House response.
Dana Milbank: I wondered about that, but when I saw him on the "Today" show this morning, repeating his talking point about the "permanent campaign" over and over again, I no longer was puzzled. That was the Scott I knew.
Richmond, Va.: I had to comment on the "Franco: Still Dead" line. Loved it! The younger set (no offense) may not get it but it made me laugh out loud. It captured the campaign exactly. Keep it up!
washingtonpost.com: Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead (Wikipedia)
Dana Milbank: Thank you, and please give my best to all the other Post readers at your nursing home. You are our core readership.
Re: McClellan's book: Richard Clarke was courageous for publishing a book about the lies Bush told near the height of the president's popularity. McClellan was the point-man on making Clarke seem like a disgruntled traitor. Now that Bush is in the tank worse than Nixon, McClellan "finds" the courage to join the bandwagon? Give me a break. I'd rather the front page be about Lindsay Lohan than giving McClellan his due.
Dana Milbank: The bookshelf is groaning under the kiss-and-tells from former Bush staffers. Here's a partial list I found on the Internets:
George Tenet. Richard Clarke. Rand Beers. Paul O'Neill. David Kuo. John Dilulio. Eric Schaeffer. Bill Harlow. Christy Todd-Whitman. Eric Shinseki. David Iglesias. David Kay. Anthony Zinni. Lawrence Wilkerson. Matthew Dowd. Greg Thielmann. Jay Garner. John Brady Kiesling. Tom Ridge. John Brown. Charles Duelfer. Roger Cressey. Sibel Edmonds. Ken Mehlman. Karen Kwiatkowski. Joe Wilson. Thomas White. John Batiste. Paul Eaton. Tom Maertens. Coleen Rowley. Paul Bremer. John Danforth. Andrew Wilkie. Ann Wright. Mike Brown. Ken Adleman
Pittsburgh: Does anyone really take the White House insult "disgruntled former employee" seriously? Shoot, I'd wear it as a badge of honor!
Dana Milbank: It does make it sound as if he was passed over for promotion to foreman on the bottling line. Puzzling.
Vienna, Va.: What Monty Python scene will you steal next for Washington Notebook?
Dana Milbank: How about McClellan as Cardinal Ximenez, surprising Bush in "Nobody Expects the Spanish Inquisition"?
Re: Spot: I can see it now PETA picketing the White House with banners reading, "Justice for Spot!" Arlen Specter will have to convene yet another committee to review Spot's medical record. Freedom of Information Act requests will be made for Spot's personal diary which, it will be found, was "inadvertently" cremated by Karl Rove along with the body.
Dana Milbank: Puzzling that you know so much. Except that the way things are going for the GOP, it'll be a long time before Specter convenes any hearings on anything.
San Diego: Do you think Scott McClellan has awakened to find a horse head in his bed yet? If not, how soon will it be before he does?
Dana Milbank: It appears this chat has taken an unfortunate turn toward dead animals. This is a puzzling development, and it is not the Washington Sketch I knew.
Washington: Hey, Dana. I hate to say it, but it looks like McClellan's book will outsell yours. In retrospect, don't you wish you had taken a job in the Bush administration so you could have written a tell-all?
Dana Milbank: I think "will outsell" can safely be replaced with "already has outsold." I look with envy on the kiss-and-tell authors, but while I am good at the telling part I am not so good at the kissing. Plus, if I worked in the White House, I would have had to rely on Scooter and Karl to discredit me. In journalism I can do that on my own.
Anonymous: Dear elitist pundit: I don't think Gens. Shinseki or Garner wrote books.
Dana Milbank: Hey, I found it on the Internets while using the Google. It must be true.
Anonymous: On your Washington Sketch video on the price of oil hearings, you appear not to have a neck. I'm puzzled. Do you actually have a neck?
Dana Milbank: Size 17, but I try not to stick my neck out too far.
Kensington, Md,: I don't know whether you were counting Rumsfeld's ex-aides in your memoirs list, but if you were, you forgot one of your old favorites, Douglas Feith.
Dana Milbank: The Internets do not update themselves as quickly as one would like. This is because it is not a truck, it is a series of tubes.
Washington: If disgruntled White House employees sell books, what about the gruntled ones? Do they ever get book contracts?
Dana Milbank: No but I hear Bartlett is getting $50,000 a speech. That's enough to gruntle anybody.
Anonymous: Hillary was seen in Puerto Rico sans pants suit. I'm puzzled. This isn't the Hillary I know. How will we know it's over if the lady singing is not wearing a pants suit?
Dana Milbank: See? I told my editor he should have sent me on the Puerto Rico trip. I had no idea Clinton wasn't wearing pants.
"Desiccated prose": You keep inventing terms like that and no one will be puzzled when you're awarded one of those Pulitzer things.
Dana Milbank: I also pledge to post all questions recommending me for awards.
Reading, Pa.: Have you read the book, or do you intend to read the entire thing or just the juicy parts?
Dana Milbank: I have given it the Washington read: I have thoroughly scoured the index. Now I've got to end this chat so I can look at the pictures. Many thanks for allowing me to piece the puzzle together with you today.
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
|
Join live discussions from the Washington Post. Feature topics include national, world and DC area news, politics, elections, campaigns, government policy, tech regulation, travel, entertainment, cars, and real estate.
| 67.707317 | 0.560976 | 0.902439 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/28/DI2008052801564.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/28/DI2008052801564.html
|
Personal Tech
|
2008052919
|
Read transcripts of Rob's past tech discussions here.
Rob Pegoraro: Good afternoon! How are you ... wait, did you say something? Sorry, the connection's fading out... what?... I've only got one bar, that's why... huh? Oh, hell, I'm going to have to call you back.
Yes, it's that time of the year when I spend too many hours poring over wireless price plans and "terms and conditions" documents. The results of that labor appeared in this morning's paper and online, but you're also seeing them right here.
So ask away--about wireless service or any other tech topics you've got in mind this fine afternoon.
Carrboro, N.C.: Regarding mobile phone pricing--your dismissal of price as a factor in service choice assumes that users are at the level where the comparable $100/unlimited plans offer the best deal. As someone who still has a land line and uses relatively few mobile minutes (and VERY few daytime minutes) I note there are still price differences at the low-minutes end of the scale.
Checking my local plans and prices, I see that Sprint's minimum plan is about $35 for 200 minutes, while Verizon and AT&T have minimum plans at about $45 for 450 minutes. So if you're in the low-usage category, Sprint is noticeably the cheapest option (as it has been for years).
From where I sit--having not had a cell phone bill over $40 in years--the $100/unlimited plans are not particularly useful.
Rob Pegoraro: That's a good point. Everytime I do this story--which is probably (ulp) every year for the last decade--I have to think about how much readers are likely to use their cell phones.
On one hand, I never want to tell people to buy too few minutes a month; the overage charges will destroy you in that case. On the other hand, who wants to pad out a wireless carrier's profit margin?
Usually, I assume something like 300 or 350 minutes of use, based largely on statistics about Americans' wireless use (for instance, the numbers gathered by CTIA, the cell-phone industry's trade association).
Here's a somewhat disturbing fact from their research: last year, Americans spent 2.1 trillion minutes on cell phones.
New York, N.Y.: A friend of mine is selling her iPhone and I would like to buy it. What do you think the procedure is for getting a used iPhone activated, if I would like to port my number from Verizon?
Rob Pegoraro: Apparently, the trick is to use iTunes to restore the phone to its factory settings, then activate it as if it's new. See this thread on Apple's tech-support site:
BTW, in case anybody is wondering: No, I don't know when the 3G iPhone will be arriving in stores.
Washington, D.C.: Hi Rob! Perfectly timed question for today's cell-carrier comparison. I have a $50 credit towards a new Verizon cell (provided I renew the 2yr contract, of course...). I was considering their Motorola z6c World, as I'm in the midst of a job search that might put me abroad for an extended period of time in the somewhat-near future, so a GSM-capable phone's making sense. Your article mentions the US GSM carriers unlocking their phones at request, but do you know about the other way around? Would Verizon unlock my phone so that I could just replace the smart chip with a European carrier's plan, if I end up abroad? What about if it involved me cancelling the Verizon 2yr contract and paying the penalty?
Rob Pegoraro: Good question! I'd ask Verizon, but if they say no you might also be able to pay somebody else to unlock it--this is a service various outside vendors can provide for you at extra cost. (Can anybody recommend a nearby shop that will do the job?)
Your other option would be to rent a phone when you are overseas, or to buy the cheapest GSM phone you can find and get a prepaid SIM for that. It all depends on whether you need to be reachable by your U.S. number, or if you just need a cell phone, period, overseas.
Capitol Hill: Rob, I'm starting grad school this fall and the school has a contract with Lenovo. I've only ever had Dell laptops (do not want another) and don't know a lot about this brand. I was thinking about going the Mac route, but this huge public research university literally has only 10 Macs on campus.
Rob Pegoraro: Non-phone questions are fair game here also!
Lenovo is a Chinese company that bought IBM's personal-computer business. From what I've heard, they've continued to do a good job with ThinkPad laptops; Lenovo has also begun to branch out into the consumer market--something IBM never seemed to get the hang of--with a new IdeaPad line of laptops.
I'd give them serious consideration.
I wouldn't let the lack of Macs scare you away from buying a Mac if that's what you want, BTW. The only thing that ought to throw up a stop sign would be the school requiring you to use some Windows-only software (though even then you could run it inside Parallels or VMWare Fusion).
Kemosabe: A footnote to today's column re: D.C. Metrorail cell service. Metro's board is looking into ending Verizon's exclusive contract and allowing other carriers to provide platform and tunnel service. They're also talking about making WiFi available down there, too. Of course, this is all going to happen at the same time flat panel displays are installed on platforms and real-time bus schedules will be appear. In other words, it could be a very long time coming.
Rob Pegoraro: Indeed! I remember how long it took Verizon to upgrade from analog to digital service underground--it was something like six months for the signal to make its way down the Orange Line from McPherson Square to Court House.
The basic problem is that you've got maybe two hours a night in which you can string cables and transmitters through the tunnels without getting pancaked by a train. So, yeah, could be a while.
Here's the story we did on this in March:
Brookline, Mass.: Yesterday, two months after I signed up for an Internet/Phone/TV bundle from RCN, they encrypted essentially all their digital programming (HD and SD), including local channels. Customers were given no notice, and will have to rent a box for each TV to receive any service (at $12.95/month each).
As far as I can tell, there are no alternatives to renting a box - CableCard TVs are no longer made, and the cheap external decoders promised by the FCC remain a myth.
Do you know of any device (other than Tivo) currently available that will prevent my Samsung HDTV from becoming a paperweight, or any legislation to require Clear QAM for non-premium channels? I know about tru2way", but I predict the cable companies will sabotage that, just as they did CableCard.
Rob Pegoraro: I hadn't heard about this--it's kind of disturbing, if you've been following this issue. You don't have a whole lot of options here.
If you only have that one TV, your best option might be to buy a TiVo HD, which does have CableCard slots--by paying for a year or two of TiVo service in advance, you'll bring its monthly cost well below that extortionate $12.95 (!) fee.
(Seriously, if you're not getting a DVR for that kind of monthly fee, you should write out a complaint to the state A.G.)
You could also dump RCN for Comcast or Fios or satellite.
Falls Church, Va.: So the rumor is that Apple will announce a new 3G iphone next month. I am interested, but I am concerned about battery life, both between charges and the amount of time it will last before it needs to be replaced. How much does 3G shorten battery life?
Will Apple come out with better batteries or self replacable batteries?
Rob Pegoraro: Apple said that it left 3G out of the first iPhone precisely because of its effect on battery life. But in the year that's passed since then, there have been some improvements in 3G hardware; I'm pretty sure that Apple is not going to ship a new iPhone with worse battery life than the old one--just about every new iPod runs for longer on a charge than its predecessor.
Washington, D.C.: Hi Rob. Why does the AVG Free say that it program will no longer be available after May 31st? Is it a ploy for me to upgrade to a pay version? If so, do you recommend any other similar (free) anti-virus programs? Thanks.
Rob Pegoraro: No, AVG will still be free. I've already put AVG 8 Free on one or two PCs, and you can download a copy yourself at http://free.grisoft.com/ww.download-avg-anti-virus-free-edition
In case anybody doing PR for the company reads this, please note: I had to write a Help File item a year ago when AVG had a bunch of users thinking that it was going to stop making its anti-virus scanner free for personal use. If I have do that again, I will send that company a bill--and they should be aware that my "correct your dumb advertising" service does not come cheap.
Re: No, I don't know when the 3G iPhone will be arriving in stores.: But it's soon enough to wait, right?
Rob Pegoraro: I would say that. But you're talking to somebody with a long history of postponing technology upgrades because something better is "not far away." That's why I'm banging out these notes on a TRS-80!
Old Bethpage, N.Y.: I just downloaded AVG 8.0 internet edition. After downloading it, I was unable to print items from my laptop and another networked computer in my home. When I disabled the AVG firewall, then I could print. How can I have a firewall and continue to be able to print from a networked printer?
Rob Pegoraro: Use the firewall built into Windows. It provides the exact same level of protection against inbound threats, but it's a lot smarter about not stepping all over legitimate network activity.
Arlington, Va.: What can you tell me about DVD recorders? I have checked what Consumer Reports recommends but then when I look at the models online they all get bad reviews.
Rob Pegoraro: I just looked on Amazon, and just about all the DVD recorders listed there get 3.5 or 4-star reviews.
FWIW, I tested LG and Panasonic DVD recorders last spring, and both worked fine. They were a little clumsy about editing and titling recordings, and both could have used an electronic program guide--but for the basic job of recording digital TV, I didn't have any real complaints.
Can any DVD-recorder owners in the room share their own experiences?
Arlington, Va.: To your prepaid plan discussion I would also add TracFone. I have used their service for several years now. Costs about $100 for 1 year. The minutes that you don't use carry over without expiration. I have something like 1500 minutes sitting on mine because I use it so infrequently. They have lots of double minute bonus offers and other special deals. True the phones aren't the newest technology but who cares if you only use it once in a while?
Rob Pegoraro: Thanks for the suggestion!
Comcast Phone: No fan of the Philly Behemoth am I, but I just got off the phone after deciding to add phone service to my cable and internet (it's actually going to be a lot less than having a land line, which we thought about dropping altogether).
Please just tell me we didn't make a huge error in choosing to feed the beast even more.
Rob Pegoraro: In general, I have to think it's a mistake to give more money to any company you regard as a "beast" or a "behemoth."
In this case, you could drop landline phone service altogether, or you could cut your Verizon landline plan down to a "metered-rate" calling plan that only provides a set number of calls. They've got one plan that offers 40 or 50 outbound calls a month (10 cents/each afterwards) that's only $20 with taxes included.
Baltimore: I'm sure you've answered this before, but when my VCR becomes useless, is there a DVR that doesn't require a monthly subscription fee? I just want to record the occasional TV show when I'm not home.
Rob Pegoraro: That's why you'll want a DVD recorder--*with* a digital tuner. (I'm glad to see that Amazon labels those without tuners in the clearest manner possible: "tunerless." Some stores classify them as "line-in input," which is a lot sneakier.)
Washington, D.C.: My PowerBook G4 was stolen a few weeks ago and I've just now received the insurance check to buy a replacement. I'm leaning toward a MacBook Pro but have held off from purchasing it because I have heard rumors that a new design will be out this summer. Something about a new keyboard and/or screen similar to that on the Air. Have you heard anything in that regard? If need be, I could wait until July or August to make the purchase.
Rob Pegoraro: Sorry to hear about your loss. People who steal computers hate America!
I'd go ahead and buy an MBP now--it was last updated only three months or so ago.
Question about the Vista backup utility in Home Premium. It doesn't seem to understand that I want to have -two- sets of backups on two different external hard drives, each of which gets an incremental backup every other week. Am I missing something? After creating the two backup sets (call them A and B), if I try to do an incremental of A (having last used the utility to create B), Vista looks for B and gives up when it can't find it. Seems like a major oversight by MS, IMHO.
Rob Pegoraro: Well, yeah--and so is the fact that this backup program doesn't let you do any kind of custom backup. It's only useful for the most basic type of use.
What beginner-friendly, cheap-or-free third-party backup software do we like in Vista these days?
Bonifay, Fla.: The thought of Windows 7 scares me. While I'm sure a 3GB computer will accomodate both 7 and some programs - Notepad and possibly Wordpad, what is the chance of any of these happening (1) Office for the MAC to include ACCESS, (2) a MAC rdb equivalent to and somewhat compatable with ACCESS (perhaps through at least comma and quote delimited files), or (3) a new series of PCs whose registeres will accomodate larger addreesses, allowing use of 8 or more GB of RAM (4 for Windows 7, 4 for my applications.)
2) I don't know squat about databases, but have you looked at FileMaker Pro?
3) 64-bit processors are supposed to do that--although in Windows, 64-bit support comes at a huge price in software and hardware-driver compatibility.
Chantilly, Va.: I thought about buying a TRS-80, but decided to wait. That's why I do my computing on an Altair 8800.
Type your reply slowly so I have time to translate the text from the blinking lights.
Rob Pegoraro: [insert punchcard joke here]
Arlington, Va.: With regard to the low usage of phone minutes that was brought up. For those of us who don't use our cell phones much at all (I don't make/receive calls more than a couple of times a week and generally use 10-20 minutes per week), a pre-paid phone is the best deal I could find. After buying a phone from T-Mobile and loading it with $100 (this gives you 1000 minutes) in September, I've still got 200 minutes. The average cost per month is good. Awful deal if you're a chatterbox though.
Carrboro, N.C.: Basic question here: what would a "3G" iPhone do that the current one doesn't? Thanks!
Rob Pegoraro: Download Web pages and e-mail much faster than the current model--easily 2 or 3x the speed. The 3G broadband connection would, however, still be slower than the iPhone's WiFi.
Apple is also rolling out a major software update with a lot of new features, plus support for third-party programs, but this 2.0 upgrade will be free to all iPhones.
Rockville, Md.: My 3 year old Sony DVD recorder does it job fine in a WYSIWYG way. Just like using the VCR. The only negatives are that you can't change the default menu it creates and that giving titles a name are a pain with just a remote.
Rob Pegoraro: I didn't like "typing" with a remote either on the LG and Panasonic models. Ugh.
London: I will be travelling to the U.S. soon. I know my mobile/plan work there, as I've phoned other people on past trips, but I was wondering: since we don't have to pay to receive mobile calls over here (the U.K.) and you do over there (the U.S.), while I'm in the U.S., who pays for the calls I receive?
Rob Pegoraro: I do. And I'm getting tired of subsidizing you like this, damnit!
Uh, I don't know. There is no "calling party pays" standard here. I'd guess that your carrier eats that cost, or that it's covered by roaming fees.
Washington, D.C.: Personally, I think the monthly fee plans for wireless are over-rated. I have used a pay-as-you-go plan for more than 2 years, and I am definitely ahead of the game. Yes, the phones don't have many features, but you get exactly what you pay for. And it does help you stay off the phone for completely useless calls.
Rob Pegoraro: OK, every time I do a chat about wireless phone service I get quite a few posts along this line. Thing is, there are far fewer prepaid than "postpaid" users (for instance, only a quarter of T-Mobile's customers use pre-pay, and Sprint has 39.7 post-paid and 4.4 million prepaid). So why does nobody seem to want to say "you know, postpaid works for me." Is it because prepaid gives you a feeling of being in control, while postpaid is just another bill? I'm thinking this may be more psychology than economics.
Your suggestions, please: I clumsily spilled a cup of room-temperature tea on top of my closed iBook (G4) while it was in sleep mode and even though I removed the battery and waited a week for everything to dry, I'm getting no response at all when I re-insert the battery and plug -- No whirring sound of the motor coming on, much less any screen activity.
Some folks say I need to let it dry for another week. Does that sound right to you?
Immediately after the accident, it seemed ok, with the desktop files visible. But after I powered it down to clean it and then tried to reboot it, I got only a tiny, center-screen file icon with a question mark on it that alternated with a tiny, blank file icon. And when I rebooted again, all I got was jagged stripes across the whole screen. At which point I finally realized I should shut it off and take out the battery.
I love this computer. Do you think it's worth however many hundreds it might cost to fix my more-than-6-year-old G4 iBook, if it can be fixed? (It wasn't eligible for
Applecare insurance at its age.) Or to buy the same model used from Craigslist, if that's even safe? Or is it a better investment to pay hundreds more to move to a G5, a Powerbook, whatever? I can't afford $1600-2,000-plus for a new machine, and have some qualms about buying from Craigslist, where prices are much below those of the refurbished machines sold by Apple.
I'm hooked on Mac (mostly 'cause I got so many viruses on PCs but also 'cause it's just so much nicer) and on laptop convenience but suppose you could convince me to be more practical.
What do you suggest? Thanks!
Rob Pegoraro: If the laptop is six years old, it's not worth repairing; for one thing, a new MacBook will cost $1,100, not $1,600.
I write that even though I have a hard time imagining that spilled tea would kill the thing outright, and that I hate giving up on old hardware myself. It seems like it ought to be a fixable issue, no?
So what I'd do would be to take it to a local Mac repair shop (years ago, I had good results with MacUpgrades in Bethesda) and see if they can fix it cheaply, or at least extract the hard drive and copy your data off that--which you'll want to do before getting a new machine anyway.
ARRRGHHH!!!!: Can you please post a notice:
If you're talking about the computer, it's Mac (short for Macintosh, although when was the last time they wrote the whole name out? 1993?)
If you're talking about the hardware network identifier, it's MAC.
Every Mac might have a MAC, but not every MAC is found on a Mac.
Rob Pegoraro: Thank you. This is one of my pet peeves.
VCR graveyard?: I hadn't heard before that my VCR will stop working once TVs convert to hidef. Is that only for recording new tapes? Or will I also be unable to watch old tapes?
Rob Pegoraro: Yeah, the FCC is going to power up the VCR death ray it's built at its secret lunar base and use that to reduce every VCR in the land to a pile of dust. What, you didn't get the letter about that?
Kidding! No, the only part of a VCR that will stop working as of 2/17/09 is its analog TV tuner. Every other item on it will work as it did before.
The Boonies: Are there any options for internet service on the horizon for those of us who live beyond the reach of cable/DLL? Wild Blue satellite is providing more reliable service than Hughes did, but has a bandwidth limit that we seem to keep exceeding...
Rob Pegoraro: You're a victim of physics and geography. The bandwidth and latency of satellite Internet isn't going to get better anytime soon--the latency never will, since you're bound by the speed of light--and it will take major upgrades in wireless capability for other forms of broadband to reach you.
The WiMax service Sprint is working on might do the trick, but don't get your hopes up too high. Remember, it was supposed to be commercially available in D.C. now--and it seems we're going to have to wait another year for that to happen.
I have been using Eudora email for years now. Eudora 7.1.09 pro(paid mode)is on my computer. As you are aware, Qualcomm no longer provides updates.
My question: Is Eudora secure and can I continue to use it? Or should I use another email program and what's your suggestion?
Thanks for all your good advice in the past...
Rob Pegoraro: It's secure--secure in its obsolescence, certainly, but I'm also not aware of any attacks being made against it.
Your best upgrade option is called Eudora, but it's not the program you know--Qualcomm has turned the Eudora code base and developers over to the people working on the Mozilla Thunderbird mail program. But what's available right now is basically a FrankenProgram--bits of Eudora and Tbird stitched together, and not quite ready to replace either application: http://wiki.mozilla.org/Penelope
A warning about SP3 for Windows XP, from recent personal experience. I was about to install some new software on my three-year-old HP desktop, so I created a restore point and checked the Microsoft site to be sure I was current with updates, even though my system is set to get them automatically. I just reinstalled Windows in February - not by choice - and I've been extra cautious since then. The site recommended I download and install Service Pack 3, so I did.
On the restart, the computer never finished booting but restarted itself, giving me the safe mode/last known good configuration/etc screen. No problem, I thought, I'll go back to the restore point I just made. Nope - the system cannot be restored to that date. I tried going going back to restore points days, weeks, and finally months old. No luck. Thanks to Microsoft, I get to spend the weekend recreating my computer for the second time in four months.
So everyone, when Rob tells you to back up your data, he means it. My backup drive is the only thing keeping me sane, but how I wish I had Apple's Time Machine. My next computer will be an Apple, no question.
Rob Pegoraro: Sorry to hear of your story. FWIW, Service Pack 3 has been fine in my experience. But that's the problem with Windows--success on one computer does not seem to guarantee anything on a second person's machine. The entire OS can just seem fundamentally ungovernable in cases like this.
Who rebooted you?: You seem particularly feisty & sarcastic today, Rob! Just giddy to have that wireless plan roundup article behind you?
Rob Pegoraro: Wait until it's a month to go before the analog-TV shutoff and I'm answering DTV questions for the 2 millionth time :)
Pre- vs Post-paid Cell: Just my personal experience with the Prepaid Debate... When I lived in France my junior year of college, I adored my prepaid cell. It was more widespread there, and it suited my needs of a ten-month solution for varying use. However, when I got back to the States, prepaid plans were just starting to become available. But without having a landline, my cell is my primary phone - and the prepaid rates tend to favor minimal usage.
Madison, Wisc.: Hi Rob, what's your take on this agreement between the major cable companies and Sony? Do you think this will really hasten the end of the set top cable box? My take is I'll believe it when I see it, and I don't think it's likely I will.
Rob Pegoraro: I am skeptical as well. For one thing, Panasonic trumpeted a deal much like this several years ago; last I checked, owners of Panny HDTVs still had to put up with cable boxes like everybody else. For another, this agreement is confined to one company; any other firms will have to negotiate their own deals.
I just don't get this. Oh cable companies, why do you think anybody likes their cable boxes? We don't. Please get this through your heads at long last: YOU ARE IN THE SERVICE BUSINESS, NOT THE HARDWARE BUSINESS. Leave the hardware to people who are actually good at it, mmkay?
Rob... Love the chats (and the TRS-80 conversation - I had a Model I!)
My wife, son and I all have a Verizon family plan with varying end dates to our service plan. My wife and I each covet the iPhone.
Do we wait the years until IPhone is not exclusive to ATT, or... do we bite the bullet and pay off the cancellation penalties?
Rob Pegoraro: I would sit tight. Paying multiple cancellation penalties--that's gonna hurt. OTOH, you will be waiting a long time for a non-AT&T iPhone to appear; I'm pretty sure that company has a five-year exclusive on the thing.
You may instead want to wait for phones running Google's Android software, which aren't exclusive to any one carrier. They're supposed to arrive by the end of this year.
Columbia Heights, D.C.: Do you know of any good quality earbuds that have a retractable cord? I HATE winding up the cord in between use of my MP3. I bought one that lasted 2 months before the sound went out in one of the earbuds.
Rob Pegoraro: Can't think of any. Can any of y'all?
Tampa, Fla.: Re databases: OpenOffice Base is a free data base program. I haven't tried it, but if works as well as the rest of the Open Office suite, it should be a good program.
Rob Pegoraro: Forgot about that--thanks, Tampa!
Franconia, Va.: Anything important for buying a new HDTV aside from LCD versus plasma?
Rob Pegoraro: LCD and plasma is the most important decision, but there are also issues like screen size (well, duh :), resolution, response time and connectivity. Here's the story I did on HDTV shopping (among other tech topics) last winter:
One thing I'd add to that--a lot of LCD sets now offer "120 Hz," which is a fancy way of saying they redraw the image on the screen twice as fast as normal to reduce blurring effects. It's becoming a standard feature on mid-level TVs a lot faster than I though it would six months ago.
Arlington: Hi, I'm a pretty devoted Mac user and currently have a T-mobile phone. Would love, love an iPhone but enjoy the T-mobile service. Do you know if/when Apple will share the iPhone with other cell providers? Thanks!
Rob Pegoraro: You could buy an unlocked phone or "jailbreak" it yourself--but you're on your own in that case, with no warranty and no recourse if the phone dies.
So I think you've gotta dump T-Mobile if you want the iPhone badly enough.
RE: Every Mac might have a MAC, but not every MAC is found on a Mac.: This is good to know. Are there more common techno-malapropisms I can intentionally use to drive my IT guy nuts?
Rob Pegoraro: Hmmm... I'll see if I can think of any. Maybe you could keep calling the Internet "AOL." That oughta drive them bonkers!
Alexandria: Re the conversion of TV broadcasting to all-digital: we are among the frugal who get our HD TV over the air, by antenna. Love it. I also dearly love my Panasonic DVR, which we use constantly to record one program while we watch another. So as I understand it, we won't need a converter box for the TV, since it's already "digital ready." But what about the recorder? Will that still work? Do we have to get a converter box for it? Or will we have to buy a new recorder? We paid about $600 for the recorder we have now, so hope we can still use it. And I note that the new Panasonic digital DVD recorders will record the program you're watching, which seems pointless to me - I want to record the one I'm NOT watching, so I can watch it later. Help!
Rob Pegoraro: If your DVR has an ATSC tuner, you're set. If not, you're hosed, in basically the manner you describe. (Although with a DVD recorder and an HDTV, each with a DTV tuner, you could record one program on the recorder and use the TV's tuner to watch another.)
New York: Hi Rob, any recommendations for a personal camcorder to shoot video for a blog? I'm looking for something under $500 with a good amount of zoom. Thanks!
Rob Pegoraro: Use the video feature on your digital camera--that should offer more than enough resolution for blog posting. (I shot all the video you saw from my CES trip in January on my own, year-old cheap digicam.)
If you tell my boss I'm sending this, I'll deny it, but the security settings on my work PC are driving me crazy. They just installed a new version of McAfee VirusScan Enterprise on my computer, and it seems to think that every cookie on every website is a security threat. I get a pop-up window every time a website tries to put a cookie on my computer--I never realized how often that happens. Do you know how I can adjust this without opening up my computer to every virus out there? I asked our IT people about it and they couldn't figure it out. Their solution was to wait until a new version gets released--very helpful.
Rob Pegoraro: You could download a copy of Portable Firefox, put that on a USB keychain and run that copy... well, assuming McAfee only policies cookies in IE. If it does that in Firefox as well, I would imagine that it would control a USB copy of the browser as well as one installed on the C: drive.
In which case you might have to do actual work at work. That's just awful...
Annapolis, Md.: Any suggestions on networking computers to a printer?
My parents use Verizon Fios (finally....). Both are using land-line links to the central router. Dad's machine (basement) has an attached printer. Mom's (2nd floor) does not. Any suggestions on a way to network Mom's PC in with Dad's to use the printer? I know the printer allows it, but I'm wondering if I'd need an extra router/hub on the inside of the Verizon unit to accomplish it? Or would I just need to connect the router to the Verizon unit to make it addressable to all?
Rob Pegoraro: You should have enough hardware on hand for this; you'd need to enable file and printer sharing on your dad's computer, then leave that machine on full-time to keep the printer accessible.
Some routers have USB ports that let you share a printer off them--for instance, Apple's AirPort routers--but I don't know that the standard Fios model does.
You could also buy a printer that has WiFi included, but those are still pretty rare in the market.
Rob asks "Oh cable companies, why do you think anybody likes their cable boxes?":$11 a month rental per box, that's why. That deal won't mean anything until that revenue can be replaced.
Rob Pegoraro: Sad but true.
Leopard Upgrade: I have a Intel Core2Duo MacBook, now that Leopard has a couple of point updates under it's belt, is it worth the upgrade? Will I see a performance hit? I'm used to every Windows OS upgrade slowing my computer significantly? Does Mac have the same issue?
Rob Pegoraro: No, Apple's new OS X releases typically run a little faster, as the company finds ways to optimize more of what is still a relatively young operating system.
I would go ahead with the upgrade. When I sit down in front of a Mac that's not running Leopard, I find it almost obnoxious that I can't, for instance, view any document with Quick Look, make a Dashboard Web clip of any Web page right in Safari, or add an iCal appointment from within Mail.
Farragut North/West, D.C.: Do tri-mode cell phones still have any tech value? I still have one because...well, it still seems to work fine. But there's that huge discount for renewing a contract, and many new all-digital phones are really cool, and there's that gadget-loving element of the Y chromosome...
Rob Pegoraro: If by "tri-mode" you mean phones with analog capability, they have *zero* value--analog service is being shut off pretty quickly around the country. Carriers stopped being required to offer analog back in February, so any analog transmitter in a cell phone is now just about worthless.
Minneapolis, Minn.: I'm so glad you're doing a chat today because I have a question that I'm dying to know the answer to, and that will help me decide where I spend my economic stimulus rebate.
I have a 42" 1080P LCD TV that I use to watch HD that comes from over the air (no cable or dish). From what I understand, this means there is no compression, and therefore Zero data loss in the transmission, therefore the best possible picture as of now. (Whether the compression used by cable/dish results in a picture worse than OTA, I don't know, don't care.)
Now, when ABC plays a movie like Harry Potter in HD, and I watch it in the setup described above, is that basically the same as watching it on Bluray? I have an upconverting (to 1080P) DVD player and I have to say that I can't see the difference in picture quality between that and the movies that are shown on broadcast television in HD.
I was told by one person that the difference between DVD and Bluray is even more stunning than the difference between VHS and DVD. I just have a hard time believing that. If watching OTA HD is about the same as watching Bluray, then I'm just tickled pink to stick with DVD and upconvert it. It's hard to get a side-by-side comparison in any of the stores (Best Buy etc) to really see the difference, hence my comparison to HD transmissions. What do you think?
Rob Pegoraro: Yes, over-the-air DTV is as good as HD can get. So if you find that you can't see a big difference between an OTA high-def movie and an upconverted DVD, you should save your money and skip a Blu-ray purchase.
BTW, was the person who told you that "the difference between DVD and Bluray is even more stunning than the difference between VHS and DVD" under the influence of any hallucinogenic substances? Because not even the PR types flacking Blu-ray have tried to make that argument to me.
Bethesda, Md.: If I wanted to use a generic internet address i.e. one that is portable and not dependent on the the ISP provider being used, which one would you recommend? Isn't gmail still in beta testing? How about yahoo or hotmail?
Rob Pegoraro: I'd go with Gmail, as long as you don't mind the ads on the side. Hotmail and Yahoo don't let you download your messages to any other mail program unless you pay extra for the privilege.
Here's a digital converter question: I must buy a digital converter box for my TV tonight -- the government coupon expires today! Give me a name of the digital converter I should buy. Please?
Rob Pegoraro: This is why I told people not to rush out and order those coupons back in February :)
All I can tell you is that I've only tried two of the things, a Magnavox and a Zenith, and that the Zenith was better but not by a huge margin.
Arlington, Va.: Have you had a chance to check out Canon's new SD SDcard camcorders? They are tiny and very lightweight since it's all solid state. Battery life should be pretty good too since there's no motor to drive. I have my eye on the FS100 but no one seems to really have them in stock. I saw one at Penn Camera and they didn't even have it on display. The guy behind the counter had to track it down hidden in their cabinet. These models were supposed to be out in March, then April, then May, and here we are at June and they seem to be very hard to find.
Rob Pegoraro: Thanks for the suggestion--I'll have to look into this. FWIW, I think SD memory-card storage is the future for camcorders in general, when you see how its capacity keeps going up while its costs keep going down.
Arlington, Va.: After constant clamoring from the grandparents for more pics of their grandson (my son), my husband and I got the idea to buy each family a webcam and software to allow for videoteleconferences. I know of Skype but have never used it - would you recommend that or another service? Any recs on the cameras themselves? Our parents are older and not very tech-savvy, so I'm looking for the simplest solution out-of-box (otherwise they'll wait to set it up until we visit, defeating the purpose.)
Rob Pegoraro: Go with Skype. The software's pretty simple to set up, and you also get dirt-cheap international calling in the bargain.
Summerville, S.C.: Rob - Most of the SP3 problems seem to be centered on HP machines with AMD processors. Seems HP used an install script that references a dll that only applies to Intel processors. It runs ok on initial installs because they left out the actually dll! When SP3 installs it sees the reference to the Intel dll and installs it on the machine. AMD processor tries to run Intel dll, now HP machine no workie. See details here: http://msinfluentials.com/blogs/jesper/
Rob Pegoraro: Interesting--gotta check that out.
Almost done here; just a few other questions that I want to get to (in case my producer is wondering when she can take a break already!)
Madison, Wisc.: Rob, on 4/17, you had this exchange:
Los Angeles: If most XP users don't bother with a limited-user account and it's an enormous pain why is your collegue Brian Krebbs so hooked and adament about it?
Rob Pegoraro: I agree with Brian about a lot of things, but I think in this respect he underestimates the amount of time most home users will put into that kind of task. My general rule in those cases is not to give advice that a large chunk of readers will either ignore or quickly give up on.
Put it this way, I have enough trouble convincing people to stop using IE 6, and there you only need to install one program to fix your problem!
Here's what I tell the folks I help; I think most users can follow this. Use the limited account for internet and the administrator account for stuff done locally. Internet means web browser, email and IM. Local includes installing applications, games and office applications other than email.
I also install Firefox and tell users not to use IE. I suppose IE should be used for Windows Update, but most can just have auto updates do that for them.
The driveby download, email and IM pathways for dropping malware on Windows machines have become much too common. I'm sick of cleaning malware off machines, so at least for those I help, internet under limited user is absolutely necessary.
Rob Pegoraro: Thanks for this. The approach you suggest works because you're there to set it up. What I struggle with is giving advice that people can follow when you or I aren't there to help out.
i see this far too often:"Are there more common techno-malapropisms I can intentionally use to drive my IT guy nuts?"
Just say, "It's not working" without providing any details about what "it" is.
Rob Pegoraro: Yes, that's a classic!
Rob Pegoraro: And on that note--I need to get back to the day job, starting with writing up something for Help File. Thanks for all the questions! I'll talk to you again in a couple of weeks.
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
|
Join live discussions from the Washington Post. Feature topics include national, world and DC area news, politics, elections, campaigns, government policy, tech regulation, travel, entertainment, cars, and real estate.
| 213.804878 | 0.658537 | 0.756098 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052702993.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052702993.html
|
In the Midst of History
|
2008052919
|
Squinting under the cloudless sky, they carried equipment bags slung over their shoulders, decked in mesh shorts and T-shirts. Once inside their dugout, they quickly slipped on cleats, hung bags on the chain-link fence and walked out to the diamond, whirling their arms in circles, dipping down and grabbing their shins. Like most days, the Broad Run coaching staff was taking its time inside the Ashburn school.
"Where is Kaitlyn?" two-time All-Met pitcher Caitlyn Delahaba asked, referring to the Spartans' starting right fielder, Kaitlyn Tiplady.
"All right," Delahaba said, scanning the diamond. "I guess we're not missing anybody. Let's start."
It was just another day for Broad Run, which is in the midst of a three-year stretch in which it has become one of the most dominant high school softball teams ever in the Washington area. While some of their classmates filtered into their cars in the adjacent parking lot, discussing plans for the holiday weekend ahead, the players took off in a jog around the softball facility before stopping in the outfield to stretch. In succinct rhythm, they tugged at their arms, legs and back, a routine they have followed so closely it has become second nature.
The previous night, the top-ranked Spartans won their third straight Virginia AA Dulles District tournament title, stretching their winning streak to 52 games. Veteran coach Ed Steele and assistant Dave Morris, who joined the team more than 15 minutes after practice started, gave the players the weekend off because they won't have a game until today, when they host Fluvanna at 7 p.m. in a Region II semifinal game.
But like the players normally do when given a day off, they still congregated on their own over the weekend to condition, work on fielding and smack hundreds of balls in a batting cage. Whether in season or out, Broad Run's players spend long days and nights dedicated to getting better, a shared work ethic that has built this team into a national name.
Over the past 15 years, as the population boomed in Loudoun County, it has developed into the most talent-rich area for softball in the region. Since 1997, 10 Loudoun teams have played for state championships; during the past eight years, three schools in the county have won a combined five state titles.
Perhaps no team, though, has been as dominant as Broad Run, which has compiled a 78-1 record since the start of the 2006 season. After going 29-0 last season on their way to winning the state title, the Spartans have shut out 22 of 23 opponents this year, turning historically balanced rivalries against Park View, Loudoun County and Stone Bridge into one-sided contests.
"This is something that hopefully all these kids understand how special it is," said Huntingtown Coach Mike Johnson, who has coached for 21 years in Maryland and won seven state titles. "They're not only making history, they're setting standards that are going to be out there for a long time for a lot of kids to look up to and strive for. They have to be one of the top three or four teams I've ever seen."
The last team before Broad Run to complete an undefeated season in The Post's coverage area was Thomas Stone, which finished 22-0 in 2000. This year, Broad Run is aiming to become only the second Virginia team since the Virginia High School League began using a softball tournament format in 1978 to compile consecutive undefeated seasons; Madison, in 1988 and '89, is the only team to finish unbeaten two seasons in a row.
|
Whether in season or out, Broad Run's players spend long days and nights dedicated to getting better, a shared work ethic that has made them one of the most dominant high school softball teams ever in the Washington area amidst a 52 game winning streak.
| 14.612245 | 0.938776 | 17.959184 |
low
|
medium
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052702275.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052702275.html
|
Woods Is On Course For Open
|
2008052919
|
Tiger Woods said yesterday the rehabilitation on his injured left knee is "right on pace" and that he plans to return in time to play in the U.S. Open at Torrey Pines in La Jolla, Calif., eight weeks after arthroscopic surgery to repair torn cartilage.
Woods was at Congressional Country Club in Bethesda to help promote his second AT&T National tournament July 3-6. During a 45-minute news conference, the No. 1-ranked player in the world also admitted that he was not pain free but that he has started playing again and is able to use every club in his bag, including his driver.
"The knee is doing better; the rehab is working," said Woods, 32, the winner of 13 major championships. "It gets really old riding that bike, man. But everything is on schedule. I'm just trying to get this thing organized for the Open. Basically, it's been right on pace. It's cautious, it's been slow, it's been boring, but the leg is starting to gain some strength.
"It's hard to be patient. You know I'm not a patient kind of guy. I always want to go all out. Sometimes it's hard for me not to do that, but you have to be smart about it. And I've done that."
Woods said the decision to have the surgery, which was performed two days after he finished second in the Masters, was made several weeks before the tournament. It was the third surgery on the same knee since 1994. He indicated there never was any doubt that he would go through with the procedure, even after finishing runner-up to Trevor Immelman, mostly due to putting problems rather than an inability to swing the club.
"I was going to have it done, I couldn't function anymore with what I was doing," he said. "It was not a fun way to play, moving around. I could get by."
Woods was off to another quick start, winning his first three tournaments, including the World Match Play Championship in Tucson, and finishing fifth at Doral and second at Augusta in his other two events. He still leads the PGA Tour's money list by more than $600,000 despite nearly two months away from the game, and he will return to competition at a Torrey Pines course where he's won six tour events, including the last four years.
In December 2002, after having fluid drained and benign cysts removed from the same knee, Woods returned after a six-week layoff and won the Buick Invitational at Torrey Pines in his first start of the 2003 season. He went on to win five times that year and earned player of the year honors for the fifth time.
"It's not like I haven't been down this road before," Woods said. "I know what it takes to win tournaments after coming back off having a procedure done. It's just a matter of being prepared, getting all the practice time. You don't really know until you get under tournament heat what your misses are going to do."
Asked about his current daily practice routine, Woods was somewhat evasive.
"I'm hitting the driver," he said. "I'm playing. If it is a feel thing, I shut it down when I feel it's time to shut it down. It's a day-to-day deal. Some days [practice] is not very long. Some days it's all day."
Woods had hoped to be back this week at the Memorial tournament in Dublin, Ohio, Jack Nicklaus's annual invitational event. But Woods decided last week that his game was not sharp enough. He also said he had no intention of playing in Memphis the week before the Open because the golf course style and setup would be of little help in preparing him for the shots he'd face in San Diego.
"I wasn't ready," Woods said of his decision to skip Nicklaus's tournament. "I started my practice basically just recently. So going to Memorial that rusty, it wouldn't have made any sense. I wasn't sharp enough. No sense in going there not quite ready. The whole idea is to be ready for the U.S. Open."
Woods and tournament director Greg McLaughlin also were not ready to disclose where the AT&T National will be played in 2010 and 2011, when Congressional will not be available because of continuing preparations to host the 2011 U.S. Open. The tournament has been scouting potential locations in and out of the Washington area, including Aronomink in Philadelphia and courses near Baltimore.
The former TPC at Avenel, newly named this week as TPC Potomac at Avenel Farms, is about a mile from Congressional and was the Washington area home for some PGA Tour events since 1987. The facility, owned and operated by the tour, is undergoing a $25 million course and clubhouse renovation, and the golf course is scheduled to open for play in November.
Woods said he was not planning to visit Avenel yesterday, but also indicated he was amenable to seeing the venue when he returns to Washington for his own tournament in July.
"I'll take it a look at it when I'm here playing the tournament," he said. "As far as other venues, we're looking at anything and everything right now. We know Congressional is not an option [in 2010 and 2011]. We have to explore every option, whether it's here or another area. We would love to come back [to Congressional] if the membership would have us."
|
While promoting his second AT&T National tournament, Tiger Woods admits his knee is not pain free but he is on target to return in time to play in the U.S. Open.
| 33.30303 | 0.878788 | 4.757576 |
medium
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052702637.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052702637.html
|
Grand Jury Probes Blackwater Shootings
|
2008052919
|
At least three Iraqis appeared yesterday before a federal grand jury hearing evidence in the September shootings in Baghdad by Blackwater Worldwide security guards that left 17 Iraqis dead.
After an FBI investigation last year, federal prosecutors have been seeking to determine whether the contractors, who are immune from Iraqi law under a 2003 U.S. occupation decree, can be charged with any crime in the United States. The Iraqi government alleged that the Sept. 16 shootings in Baghdad's Nissor Square were an unprovoked attack on civilians.
Virginia-based Blackwater, whose personnel said they were responding to a threat against a U.S. diplomatic convoy, insisted they had acted in self-defense after being fired upon. A preliminary U.S. military inquiry shortly after the incident concluded that only the contractors had fired.
The Iraqis testifying yesterday did not respond to reporters' questions as they entered the grand jury room at the U.S. District Court building in Washington. When they left three hours later, they were escorted by two prosecutors and trailed for blocks by a platoon of television cameramen and photographers. One of the witnesses clutched what appeared to be a family photograph.
The witnesses were flanked by federal prosecutors Kenneth Kohl and Stephen Ponticiello, who also declined to comment. Kohl carried a large rolled-up street map.
An Iraqi police major told the Associated Press in Baghdad that two of his officers were flown to the United States several days ago to testify and would remain here for two weeks. The grand jury has also heard testimony from Blackwater personnel and U.S. officials.
The Sept. 16 shootings caused a rift between the U.S. and Iraqi governments and exposed Pentagon dissatisfaction with civilian security guards under contract with the State Department. U.S. military officials said that the contractors were "cowboys" whose actions put others at risk and interfered with ongoing military operations. State Department officials responded that the contractors were necessary because the military did not have the resources to protect U.S. civilian officials in Iraq.
Nevertheless, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice imposed new rules on the contractors after the incident, placing video cameras in their vehicles and ordering that State Department Diplomatic Security Service agents accompany all contractor security convoys. State and the Defense Department negotiated a memorandum of understanding requiring civilian contractors to coordinate their activities with the military and firming up regulations on the use of force.
Blackwater is one of three private U.S. security companies under contract with the State Department in Iraq. The other two are Triple Canopy and DynCorp. The five-year contract for the three firms, signed in 2006, is rolled over on an annual basis and was renewed for a third year early this month. Officials said at the time that there had been no significant problems with the contractors since the September shootings, and that there was no reason not to renew the contract in the absence of any charges in the case.
|
Get Washington DC,Virginia,Maryland and national news. Get the latest/breaking news,featuring national security,science and courts. Read news headlines from the nation and from The Washington Post. Visit www.washingtonpost.com/nation today.
| 12.833333 | 0.47619 | 0.47619 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052702641.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052702641.html
|
Late in the Term, an Exodus of Senior Officials
|
2008052919
|
More than 200 pending nominations are languishing on Capitol Hill, bogged down in political fights between Democrats and the White House.
At the same time, agencies have begun preparing for a new administration, including plans to temporarily install career employees in senior positions at the Department of Homeland Security during the transition. The White House also has taken the unusual step of ordering federal agencies to stop proposing regulations after Sunday -- meaning that new rules on issues including greenhouse gases and air-traveler protection are unlikely to be finalized before Bush leaves office.
In many ways, the work slowdown and higher appointee turnover is typical of any changing of the political guard in Washington. But the process now occurs over years rather than months, and experts say it threatens to hamper the important work of agencies, whether it be improving public health, promoting affordable housing, fighting crime or providing for the nation's security.
"You've got almost two years of pure chaos," said Paul C. Light, an expert on the federal bureaucracy at New York University's Wagner School of Public Service. "The civil servants don't know who they're supposed to be talking to. They're receiving no direction. Congress isn't being talked to. The president isn't really doing anything. It's really a highly vulnerable time for running a government."
Many experts say it is an especially bad time for vacancies, with two wars being waged abroad and a housing crisis and slumping economy at home. David E. Lewis, an assistant professor at Princeton University who has just written a book on presidential appointments, noted that the botched response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005 was exacerbated by high turnover and vacancies at the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
"If you told people on Wall Street that every four years or eight years, you were going to lop off the top of a Fortune 500 company and say the company would operate normally, you'd be called crazy," Lewis said. "There is no question that it matters. Turnover and vacancies in politically appointed positions hurts performance."
Scandal has thinned the administration's ranks, as well. Dozens of appointee jobs have become vacant since ethical crises at the General Services Administration, the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Justice Department, to name a few.
White House officials say some departures are expected during any president's final year. But they accuse Democrats of making the problem worse by failing to approve nominations. The conflict came to a head last week when Senate leaders and the White House blamed each other for the collapse of a deal Thursday to approve 80 political and career appointees, including the new housing secretary.
"In the last year of an administration, it's reasonable that people would seek jobs outside the federal government," said White House spokeswoman Emily Lawrimore. "We work to fill these vacancies, but Congress has not moved on them in a timely manner."
Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), said the White House has been slow to nominate replacements and has proved incapable of locking up the support of Senate Republicans for deals to bring packages of nominees up for a vote. He said last week's deal collapsed when a Republican senator balked.
"I have always thought, in my dealings around here, when we work something out, that is the agreement," Reid said on the Senate floor Thursday night. "But at the last minute, somebody steps in and says, 'That isn't quite good enough.' . . . That is not the way we should be doing business."
|
With eight months left in President Bush's term, scores of senior officials already are heading for the exits, leaving nearly half the administration's top political positions vacant or filled by temporary appointees, federal statistics show.
| 17.097561 | 0.682927 | 0.926829 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052701987.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052701987.html
|
Guantanamo Critics Reiterate Protests as Their Trial Opens
|
2008052919
|
Thirty-five people accused of staging an illegal demonstration at the Supreme Court went on trial yesterday and used the proceedings to renew their complaints about conditions at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Many of the 22 men and 13 women wore orange jumpsuits to show solidarity with detainees. They were arrested Jan. 11, accused of illegally protesting on the grounds of the Supreme Court, a misdemeanor that carries up to 60 days in jail.
The demonstration occurred on the sixth anniversary of the opening of the detention facility, which was set up to house terrorism suspects. Yesterday, the defendants continued to make political statements about the treatment of detainees as their trial began in D.C. Superior Court.
As a clerk for Judge Wendell P. Gardner Jr. took attendance, each defendant stood up, gave his or her name and spoke the name of someone they described as a Guantanamo detainee. Some of the prisoners mentioned died at the prison. The gesture was meant to give the detainees a voice in court.
Matthew Daloisio, 31, of New York said he was speaking on behalf of Yasser al-Zahrani, who died in 2006 in what the Defense Department called a coordinated suicide with two other detainees. As Daloisio spoke, several co-defendants said, "God forgive us."
Because the charges are misdemeanors punishable by less than six months in jail, the case is being heard by a judge instead of a jury.
In opening statements, prosecutors said that the case was not about freedom of speech but about disobeying police orders regarding assembly. Assistant U.S. Attorney Magdalena Acevedo said the group left the sidewalk, where demonstrations are legal, and, despite warnings, moved to the plaza of the Supreme Court, where such activities are barred by law.
"If they had stayed in the permissible area, they could have spoken as much as they wanted to," she said.
About 150 people gathered on the sidewalk during the demonstration, but only about 35 or so went to the plaza. They carried signs that said "Shut down Guantanamo" and knelt on the steps of the Supreme Court.
The protesters are a part of a group called Witness Against Torture, which has held demonstrations across the country condemning the prison. They range in age from their 20s to 70s. The group's leaders said the defendants include a hog farmer from Grinnell, Iowa, a social worker from Saratoga Springs, New York, and a legal secretary from Baltimore.
Before the trial, the group's members -- wearing the orange jumpsuits and black hoods -- marched from the Supreme Court to D.C. Superior Court.
In court, the defendants filled the jury box and the left side of the room. Their supporters filled the other side, and some in the crowd had to wait in the hallway.
The demonstrators are representing themselves, with help from lawyer Mark Goldstone, a First Amendment specialist who is acting as an adviser.
They scored a first-day victory when the judge dismissed the case against protester David Barrows of the District. Gardner said that a police officer who testified failed to identify Barrows while reviewing a police videotape of the protest. The dismissal drew cheers from the audience and a call for quiet from the judge.
The trial is expected to last two to three days.
|
Continuing coverage of the Supreme Court nomination and confirmation process from The Washington Post.
| 42.466667 | 0.533333 | 1.466667 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052700715.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052700715.html
|
Damascus Couple Dies in Car Crash
|
2008052919
|
Two of the woman's four children were in the car but were not seriously injured, police said. The driver of the other vehicle was listed in serious but stable condition yesterday at Maryland Shock Trauma Center in Baltimore.
Police said Lisa M. Barnes, 40, of the 25700 block of Valley Park Terrace, was driving her 2004 Chrysler Sebring north on Woodfield Road with her boyfriend, Lindsey Shannon Jr., 46, in the back seat, when her car collided with a southbound 2005 Lincoln Town Car driven by Lassina Barro, 43, of the 500 block of Sunny Brook Terrace in Gaithersburg.
Shannon died in the car. Barnes was flown to Maryland Shock Trauma Center, where she died from her injuries, police said. Barro, who was not wearing a seat belt, was taken to Suburban Hospital in Bethesda and transferred about 4:30 a.m. yesterday to Maryland Shock Trauma Center, which handles more serious injuries, a Suburban spokeswoman said. Barro's family could not be reached yesterday.
Barnes's 7-year-old daughter, Samyah, who was in the front passenger seat, was flown to Children's National Medical Center with injuries that were not life-threatening, police said. Her aunt, Sylvia Barnes, said the child was not seriously injured, but doctors wanted to keep her a second night for observation.
Lisa Barnes's 17-year-old son, Antonio T. Abney Jr., who was sitting in the back seat with Shannon, was flown to Washington Hospital Center for injuries that were not life-threatening. He was released yesterday and went to be with his younger sister at Children's Hospital, their aunt said.
Montgomery police said they are investigating the collision, which occurred about 11:15 p.m. on Woodfield Road (Route 124), just north of Churchill Downs Road. That stretch of Woodfield Road is hilly and has no shoulders, many turns and a 40 mph speed limit, police spokeswoman Lucille Baur said. Investigators are seeking witnesses, she said.
Sylvia Barnes said her younger sister worked in sales at a Rockville tire store to support her four children, ages 7 to 20. She said her sister and Shannon had been dating for about three years and had lived together in Damascus for the past two years. The group was returning home from Clinton, Md., where Barnes's brother had hosted a holiday cookout, when the collision occurred, Sylvia Barnes said.
She said her sister had brought her children closer after a fifth child, 11-year-old Saquan Abney, died from leukemia four years ago.
"She was very family-oriented and dedicated to her kids," said Sylvia Barnes, who lives in Burtonsville. "She made sure they got the education they well-deserved. She worked hard to accomplish what she had."
She said her sister met Shannon, who went by the nickname Hassim, in Atlantic City, where his father and sister live.
Richard Shannon, owner of Horace & Dickies Seafood Carryout on 12th Street NE, said his nephew was disabled from a back injury but sometimes worked the cash register. He said his nephew grew up in Atlantic City and had a 19-year-old son who lives there.
"He was a good kid, a very kind person," Richard Shannon said.
Police asked anyone who witnessed the accident to call investigators at 301-840-2488.
Staff researcher Karl Evanzz contributed to this report.
|
A Montgomery County woman and her boyfriend died late Monday night in a head-on collision on a narrow, winding road in Damascus while driving home from a Memorial Day family picnic, Montgomery police and the woman's family said yesterday.
| 14.6 | 0.777778 | 1.133333 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052702997.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052702997.html
|
State Superintendent Finds Limits to Power
|
2008052919
|
In February, the D.C. Office of the State Superintendent of Education was ready with a 17-page rubric to approve or reject Chancellor Michelle A. Rhee's plan overhaul 26 academically troubled schools.
But about a month later, State Superintendent of Education Deborah A. Gist had to do an about-face when she learned she did not have the power she thought she had. Her lawyers told her she could review the plan but had no authority over it.
Now, some elected State Board of Education members, who serve as advisers to Gist, are seeking to elevate her role in scrutinizing Rhee.
The debate over who has power to approve Rhee's plan reflects a larger tug of war between state and local education officials across the country over implementation of federal No Child Left Behind guidelines. In the District, the state superintendent's office and school board perform many functions of state education departments but generally have less power than their counterparts over local schools.
Board members say they have had preliminary conversations with D.C. Council members about introducing legislation that would allow Gist to sever ties with Mayor Adrian M. Fenty (D), having her report to the council or operate independently of both. Last week, the school board agreed to study the authority state education chiefs have over academically troubled schools.
"I think [Gist] should be more independent," school board President Robert C. Bobb said. "The whole issue of reforming education in the District is not one hand clapping; the state superintendent plays a significant role in that. In my perspective, she has to be an equal partner."
Council Chairman Vincent C. Gray (D) agreed. "I've raised [the issue] at more than one oversight hearing. You go next door to Maryland, and their superintendent, Nancy Grasmick, exercises the type of authority Deborah never had. . . . There continues to be a concern among [council] members about whether we got it right with the state component."
Gist declined to comment on the issue of independence.
States "don't have say in a school-level plan. That's not the state's role," Rhee said. "The state's role is to only monitor the plans once they're actually created and they're being implemented."
School board members attribute the conflict to the new governance that put Fenty in charge of schools last year. Rhee reports directly to Fenty, and Gist answers to him through a deputy mayor. School board members say it is an awkward arrangement that potentially could put Gist at odds with the mayor if she criticized a school system initiative. Rhee has said repeatedly that Fenty has given her unprecedented backing, warning all agency heads that they risk being fired if they say no to her.
Traditionally, states took a hands-off role regarding schools because of local control. But that has been changing with No Child Left Behind, which requires students to achieve academic benchmarks, or adequate yearly progress, on state exams. The law does not say who has final authority over its implementation.
Under a process called restructuring, districts are required to develop comprehensive plans to improve schools that fail to meet the targets for five or more years. The law gives districts five options for improving the schools: convert them to charter schools; replace principals or teachers; hire private education management firms to run them; turn them over to the state; or devise an alternate plan.
|
In February, the D.C. Office of the State Superintendent of Education was ready with a 17-page rubric to approve or reject Chancellor Michelle A. Rhee's plan overhaul 26 academically troubled schools.
| 19.5 | 1 | 34 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052702930.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052702930.html
|
Believing In God's Harvest
|
2008052919
|
Down on Tangier Island, Va., some people say it's in Ezekiel: "There will be large numbers of fish, because this water flows there and makes the salt water fresh." Never mind that Ezekiel was written about the ancient Middle East; that half-salty sea sure sounds like the bay. And "large numbers of fish" could certainly mean blue crabs.
Here on Maryland's Smith Island -- at the heart of a waterman's culture still on fire from an 1800s revival -- they turn to John. That gospel tells how the disciples once fished all night but pulled their nets up empty.
"He said to them, 'Cast the net on the right side of the boat, and you will find some,' " waterman Morris Goodman Marsh read during a recent church service. "And they cast their net, and they were not able to haul it in, because it was so full of fish."
"Are we ready to cast our nets on the other side?" speaker Dwight "Duke" Marshall Jr. asked afterward, making the story a parable about faith for modern-day fishermen. "To give full trust in the Lord and what he has in store for us?"
Around the Chesapeake Bay, this will be a crab season to try men's souls. In a year that promises high gas prices and new limits on their catches, many watermen say they have been steadied by their inherited brand of fervent Protestantism. But still they worry: What does He have in store? And will they be ready for it?
"I describe it like you've got a hurricane coming. And you've got that dread hanging over you, where you don't know what's going to be left when it's past," said James "Ooker" Eskridge, a waterman and mayor of Tangier Island in the lower Chesapeake. "These are the times that test your faith."
The blue crab population in the Chesapeake has fallen about 70 percent since the early 1990s, due to warmer waters, pollution from cities and farms and heavy fishing. This spring, Virginia and Maryland officials pledged to cut the harvest of female crabs by 34 percent.
They insist that they're not trying to save crabs by ruining the men who catch them.
"Those that would say that we're going to need less crabbers are the same [people] saying that the bay is condemned to perpetual decline," Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley (D) said this month after he requested federal disaster relief for watermen this season. "I don't accept that."
|
TYLERTON, Md. Where in the Bible does it say God will save the Chesapeake crabber? Down on Tangier Island, Va., some people say it's in Ezekiel: "There will be large numbers of fish, because this water flows there and makes the salt water fresh." Never mind that Ezekiel was written about the anci...
| 7.921875 | 0.890625 | 31.890625 |
low
|
medium
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/20/DI2008052001583.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/20/DI2008052001583.html
|
PBS Frontline/World: 'Crimes at the Border'
|
2008052819
|
" Crimes at the Border" aired Tuesday, May 27 at 9 p.m. on PBS (check local listings for repeat presentations, or watch the show online).
Oriana Zill de Granados: Hello everyone, I am Oriana Zill de Granados, producer of "Crimes at the Border" for PBS Frontline/World.
Detroit: Were you surprised by anything when making this story?
Oriana Zill de Granados: I have to say that many things surprised me about this story. I had spent a lot of time in Tijuana reporting about the war on drugs, but I had not done a story about human smuggling before.
I was shocked that migrants now fly to Tijuana on airplanes because it is often cheaper than taking the bus.
I was surprised by the migrants themselves. It is easy to group people together and think of them as a mass, but these are human beings, driven by the same desires and goals that we all have. It was good to get to know some of them and hear their side of the story.
I was especially surprised that so many people still get across despite the growing fence and border build-up. People who work and live along the border know this, but I don't think the rest of the country really does.
Philadelphia: About how much of the smuggling is drugs, how much is human traffic, and what are some of the other things being smuggled across the border?
Oriana Zill de Granados: We were very surprised to learn that the U.S. government does not have estimates or research studies about how many people or drugs are actually being smuggled across the border. The University of California -- San Diego study we referred to in the piece estimates that slightly less than 50 percent of the people who cross get apprehended and there were about 800,000 people apprehended last year along the southern border.
In terms of drugs, there is no way to know how much is getting across, but it's a large amount.
Guns are one thing that are actually smuggled from the U.S. into Mexico because it is illegal to sell guns in Mexico. Money (from drugs) is also smuggled back the other way from U.S. into Mexico.
Philadelphia, Pa.: The introduction states that the smuggling has a corrupting influence on guards. Yet, are these payoffs creating the corruption, or might some of these guards have been corrupt to begin with and perhaps that is why some sought to become guards?
Oriana Zill de Granados: We learned that some smuggling organizations are actively trying to recruit guards. And some use tactics like offers of sex and money to do that.
Obviously, if a guard takes the bait, he is corrupt, but what we found interesting was that in the old days, the smuggling business did not have enough money to really tempt these guards to throw away their careers. Now, the money is plentiful and it presents a temptation that some people find hard to resist.
Most border agents are not corrupt and do not succumb to that temptation.
Washington: A lot of Chinese have taken this route via snakeheads and Mexican gangs to get into this country. If you visit New York's Chinatown, almost all of the people there are illegal immigrants from the Fujian Province in China. Why isn't there any legislation like in Prince William County, Virginia to crack down on this blatant situation? These illegals are a huge burden for government services.
If you note flights back to China from New York, there are a lot of newborns being sent back to China as U.S. citizens because their illegal parents are staying in the U.S. to work. People actually are being paid to take flights to escort these babies back because they can always return. Many babies on flights to China, no babies on flights back to the U.S.
Oriana Zill de Granados: We did find that many Chinese people go through Mexico, especially through Mexicali, which has a large resident Chinese population. Chinese people will pay as much as $25,000 to $40,000 to be smuggled all the way from China to the U.S.
The smugglers and other immigration experts told us that Chinese people are called the "invisible" pollos (a word for the people being smuggled) because they are rarely seen out in public. I think they must be smuggling the Chinese through tunnels or other such hidden method because they rarely are caught.
Miami: Do you believe "good" law enforcement is doing their part to stop the "bad" law enforcement who take bribes?
Oriana Zill de Granados: We found that there are many agencies in the US government that are striving to fight corruption along the border. The problem is not being ignored.
We did find complaints from various law enforcement officials about the structure of the agencies, that there was an alphabet soup of different agencies fighting corruption and it was hard to know exactly who was in charge. This leads to some confusion. Some of this was inadvertently created by the reorganization after Sept. 11...
Winslow, Ariz.: Do you think guys like Gilliland find that it pays to be corrupt? Five years in prison?
Oriana Zill de Granados: What surprised me the most about the Gilliland case was that no one knows exactly how much money he really made. He is a smart person and probably found ways to hide the money. But there is no way to know for sure.
The penalties for corruption by guards are light compared to drugs, but similar to many other white-collar crimes, which tend to have lesser sentences. Many law enforcement officials complained about this to us.
Cupertino, Calif.: What can we do to wake up the American people, to the fact that corruption on the Mexico side of border, in regard to drug, and human smuggling, is mirrored by an equal, if not greater, amount of graft and corruption, on the American side.
Most Americans seem to feel that these are Mexico's problems, when nothing could be further from the truth.
Americans need to realize that it is all about the money, and organizations, such as the Texas Border Coalition, fighting against the construction of the legislated border fence, are indirectly tied to the tens of millions of dollars in illicit trade that take place every day along the border with Mexico.
Oriana Zill de Granados: Corruption is a major problem for Mexico, one that many Mexican officials are devoting their lives and careers to try to stop.
When I did the reporting eight years ago about drugs, I realized that Mexican corruption is really endemic and difficult to stop. Plata o plomo, (silver or lead) is a difficult thing to fight.
But American officials also have problems with corruption and the more money available to corrupt people, the larger the problem will grow. We need to be aware of this and work to stop it as well.
Richmond, Va.: I read "The Devil's Highway" by Luis Urrea and was struck by the harsh environment. Many die making the trip.
Oriana Zill de Granados: Yes, it is a harsh environment and many more people have died trying to cross in the last ten years than previously.
This is one of the reasons that more people are now trying to cross in cars, because there is less chance of dying.
It is a sad situation and I hope the debate around this issue will come up with solutions so that less people will die.
San Diego: If I know a Border Patrol officer who is corrupt, whom should I report it to?
Oriana Zill de Granados: The FBI in San Diego has a border corruption task force that takes these tips.
Seattle: So, the better fix to the problems would be better screening as opposed to better pay/promotions? How do you screen for a willingness to take bribes?
Oriana Zill de Granados: Many law enforcement agencies use lie detector tests and regular financial screening to weed out corruption.
According to the New York Times story yesterday, the Department of Homeland Security may implement some of these methods in the future.
But with all the rapid hiring, it is expensive to implement these screening methods.
Escondido, Calif.: That birthday phone call in the story was hilarious! Sounded like they were best friends! Was that really a smuggler calling a border agent?
Oriana Zill de Granados: Yes, that was an actual phone call (from a tapped phone) of a smuggler calling a border agent, Michael Gilliland. We also heard other calls between the two that were more graphic, but we felt it was inappropriate to publish those.
GOP Land: When a President McCain gets an amnesty bill passed and we have open borders, will all this criminal activity end at the border?
Oriana Zill de Granados: I don't think that it is likely that anyone will pass a bill to create open borders. There will always be restrictions on the border.
The experts we talked to suggested that one of the only ways to stop people from crossing is to create good jobs inside Mexico. And to crack down on employers here in the U.S. who hire people who do not have legal papers.
It is difficult to do this, because illegal migrants are important to many industries in the U.S., such as the picking of our lettuce, our strawberries, our tomatoes, our grapes, etc....
If the U.S. cracked down, these items would become much more expensive to the average consumer.
Ames, Iowa: Your video ended on a "down" note and implied that securing the border is futile. Do you really believe this?
Oriana Zill de Granados: Our intention was to show people the debate, and to educate people about the various points of view on this issue.
If you travel to the border regions and talk to the people who live and work there, many do feel it is incredibly difficult to truly secure the border. People who want to get across will eventually get across, we were told by most of the folks we interviewed, including U.S. officials.
Dallas: Your show sounds very interesting, but apparently I will have to catch it online. My local PBS station preempted this Frontline episode for a repeat of another show. Do you know why a major city in a state that would seem to be directly affected by the subject of your show would refuse to show it? Sadly, I only knew it even existed because of this chat on washingtonpost.com.
washingtonpost.com: The show and other online extras are available at the Frontline Web site.
Oriana Zill de Granados: Please watch the show online and let us know what you thought!
PBS stations are independent and sometimes do not show the national series at the same time. They will likely run it another time in the near future.
San Diego: Okay, okay. I get it. The first act in your story ... the players are presented (smugglers, corrupt guy, good law enforcement). Now you need a second act ... the good guys win and Mike G. is deported. Will there be a part II?
Oriana Zill de Granados: This was a difficult story to tell in 25 minutes because there are so many interesting and important aspects to this debate. I think it is critical for the American people to understand this issue and be educated about the various players.
Immigration was and always will be a part of the American story.
Austin, Texas: FBI agents are hot! What's that guy's phone number?
Oriana Zill de Granados: I'll tell him you said so....
Tempe, Ariz.: Oriana, what's your personal point of view about this situation? Do you believe we should let everyone into the country and that U.S. law enforcement is just as corrupt as Mexico's? Kinda get the impression you do!
Oriana Zill de Granados: I believe that this is a complicated and interesting dilemma.
We strive to show people all the sides of any problem and let them decide for themselves.
Albuquerque, N.M.: It's sad that someone could betray our country the way the officer in your story portrays. A former Marine!!!!!! I am sick. Why did he do this?
Oriana Zill de Granados: He did it for money, I assume.
Richmond: I talk to a lot of people in the construction industry. They're long time good ole boys, pretty conservative, but are forced to admit they can't get their projects done without the hard working illegal immigrants. Most say they can't find many hard workers who are American. (Not a converse statement. American construction workers are hard workers, but they're so rare, they're already working. The ones looking for work whine at any hard work. The Mexicans do not, they hunker down and do the work, grateful for the job.)
So we also won't stop illegal immigration until we provide some industries with hard-working staff to fill the jobs.
Oriana Zill de Granados: Some suggest that a possible solution is to have a guest worker program where Mexican workers could travel to the U.S. legally to work for a limited period of time and then return to Mexico when they are done.
I am sure both American and Mexican workers are hard workers, but Mexicans will generally work for less money because they come from a place where you make $5 a day versus $5 an hour. It is really an issue about economics.
Richmond, Va.: I'll make the bold statement that illegal immigration is a boon to our economy. I'm more worried about jobs crossing our border in the opposite direction. Outsourcing jobs will devastate our economy. Now it's not just customer service, but engineering, medical (reading X-rays), even animation!
Oriana Zill de Granados: Globalization is changing many things...
Los Angeles: You missed the point, Oriana! These people are not just strawberry pickers! As you reported, many are criminals. This is a problem! Don't you see it that way?
Oriana Zill de Granados: Our reporting found that most illegal immigrants are simply looking for jobs. As in any society, a small percentage are criminals.
Cleveland: Thanks for your story. I had no idea this stuff goes on! Very interesting. I hope that officer is the exception, not the rule.
Oriana Zill de Granados: He is the exception, not the rule. Still, our reporting found that the problem has increased in recent years.
Wokingham, U.K.: Could there be idealistic as well as mercenary reasons for immigration officials to enter into financial relationships with people smugglers? That they are in their own way, seeing that the policy of total exclusion is manifestly failing, issuing licenses to smugglers who act more responsibly, with some care for the safety of the people trafficked and with less interest in drugs and guns?
Oriana Zill de Granados: Many people who work as border guards are frustrated by their job, our reporting found. But we also found that money was the most powerful motivator for corruption.
Immigration was and always will be a part of the American story.: What a good point. I'm descended from immigrants, as are most of my friends, neighbors and co-workers, much less most of the people who complain about immigration. The only folks who aren't descended from immigrants are Native Americans and African Americans (who were forced here, not immigrated). I wonder why so many people think their family had the right to immigrate, but no others should.
Oriana Zill de Granados: I think people worry about the loss of jobs to them and their families. Its a difficult issue in areas where jobs are already evaporating.
Seattle: o basically, the government underpays its employees to stop millions to billions of dollars of contraband from entering the country, and the government is then surprised when some of them take bribes?
Oriana Zill de Granados: Being a border agent is a very difficult job.
Oriana Zill de Granados: I have to sign off now, thanks very much for all the questions. Please check our Web site to continue to comment and get more information about the story.
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
|
Join live discussions from the Washington Post. Feature topics include national, world and DC area news, politics, elections, campaigns, government policy, tech regulation, travel, entertainment, cars, and real estate.
| 78.170732 | 0.609756 | 0.707317 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/23/DI2008052303302.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/23/DI2008052303302.html
|
Federal Diary Live
|
2008052819
|
Archive: Federal Diary Live transcripts
Stephen Barr: Thank you for joining this discussion today. Looking forward to a free-for-all today. We've new rules on pay-for-performance at the Defense Department and talk of bringing back retirees to mentor and work on short-term projects, plus other odds and ends. Let's go to your questions and comments.
Columbia, Md.: I'm in the CSRS and contemplating retiring next year with 29 years of federal service. I also have my 40 quarters in Social Security because of prior employment. Any realistic chance Congress will eliminate the so-called windfall elimination provision that would cut my Social Security benefit significantly? They've been talking about this issue for years but still no action ... sigh.
Stephen Barr: Difficult to believe that Congress will take any action on the windfall provision. For those of you who are not familiar with it, the windfall reduces the Social Security benefits of those who also draw an annuity from a system that does not include Social Security, such as CSRS.
As you note, proposals have been circulating for years to either repeal or modify the windfall provision. But the cost appears to great for Congress to shoulder.
Silver Spring, Md.: Is there any news of the passing of the sick leave bill for FERS employees? When can we expect a decision from Congress? There will still be abuse in the system if payment is made only over 500 hours.
Is there any news of the Windfall elimination bill which is on the floor of Congress, or is it a dead issue?
Stephen Barr: The House held a hearing on the proposal, which seeks to provide an incentive so that FERS employees don't burn up all their sick leave as they near retirement. Cost is an issue with this proposal, sponsored by Rep. Jim Moran. And I believe it is still pending before a House subcommittee.
Without quick action at the committee level, it is unlikely that this bill will make it through Congress this year.
Fredericksburg, Va.: With gas prices rocketing skyward, will we see an increased emphasis on the possibilities of telework for government employees?
Stephen Barr: Not in the short term. Commuting costs are borne by the employee, not the agency, so there is no budget and spending issue for the government.
But many agencies are starting to promote telework, and higher gasoline prices and congested mass transit may inspire more federal employees to raise their hands and volunteer to work at home, at least one or two days a week. Shifting to telework as a regular order of business will require significant management changes in some offices, and I suspect the decisions will be reached on a case-by-case basis.
Rockville, Md.: Regarding your "not in the short term" response about telework, what about the Telework Enhancement Act of 2007 currently in Congress? S1000 and HR4106
Stephen Barr: I'm confident those bills will make it through Congress, either as standalones or folded into a larger piece of legislation. They create the presumption that all eligible employees should have a chance to telework, and they require agencies to create a telework officer and policies. All that is for the good, but I believe that establishing real telework programs is a long slog at many agencies, in part because they have not really analyzed costs and benefits.
Washington: I'm covered under my wife's FEHBP, I'll be 65 in December. Where can I get info on what I should do about Medicare?
Stephen Barr: The Office of Personnel Management publishes a guide to Medicare; you can find it at this link.
That will give you a sense of how benefits are coordinated. The Medicare program also operates a Web site with lots of information you'll find useful. That's at www.medicare.gov.
You might also check services provided by employee organizations, such as the National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association, which keep up to date on benefits and changes to benefits.
Enjoy the transition to 65!
Arlington, Va.: In today's column you discuss Reps. Davis and Waxman's concern over duplicative retiree drug coverage. I understood that it was a choice between either the Medicare Part D program or the FEHB drug coverage program of your choice. I am rather confused by their concern about duplicative costs.
Stephen Barr: Not exactly. When you are in FEHBP, you get drug coverage as part of your medical insurance premium. Part D is an optional program, with a separate premium. FEHBP drug coverage is generally considered superior to what Part D provides, so ordinarily there is no reason to take the Medicare Part D if you are in FEHBP.
Frankly, I was a bit surprised to learn 200,000 retirees (who are 65 and older) had signed up for both.
Re: Windfall: Just a comment about this... my husband just retired from private sector and has more than 40 quarters. I (the Fed and not yet retired) have about 10 quarters so I won't get any of Social Security benefits. I called the Social Security Administration to see if I would be entitled to any of my husband's Social Security benefits and they said (and I quote) "Well you are pretty lucky to be getting that nice government pension and the money your husband paid into SSA will just benefit someone else."
Ahhhh! They really said that!
So of course my husband is livid because he paid all this money into SSA and will have no beneficiaries if he dies before I do or before he can start receiving it. So I advised him to start tapping into it at age the earliest age possible and hopefully he'll recoup some of the more than more than $100,000 that he put into it.
Stephen Barr: Thanks for that vivid example!
Actually, I think you may be falling into the Government Pension Offset trap. GPO is a cousin of the Windfall Elimination Provision. GPO reduces spousal or survivor Social Security benefits that you would get from a spouse's Social Security-covered employment if you also get an annuity from CSRS.
If it is any consolation, a similar offset applies to private-sector employees. They get the higher of their own earned benefit or a spousal or survivor benefit, but not both.
Still, critics call the GPO a blunt instrument that disproportionately affects low-income women. There has been serious consideration, most recently by Sen. John Kerry, to modifying the offset formula, but no action has been taken. Any change would increase outlays from Social Security, which lawmakers are wary of doing.
Centreville, Va.: RE: Social Security for CSRS. I had 40 credits last year, but this year's letter from SSA says I am not. Can you explain what's going on?
Second question: I thought the checks from SSA would be lot less if you get checks from CSRS even though the law allows.
Stephen Barr: Sounds like you need to visit a Social Security field office and clarify your status.
The Windfall Elimination Provision reduces but does not eliminate the Social Security benefit. The maximum reduction runs about $300 a month. I also would ask the field office representative to walk you through that formula, because it defies quick description.
FERS Sick Leave Whiners: I'm getting sick and tired of FERS employees whining about their sick leave and threatening to abuse it when near retirement. Congress did away with crediting sick leave toward retirement over 20 years ago when they realized that they were offering a benefit to federal workers that wasn't followed in the private sector. Since that time, most private sector employers have completely done away with defined benefit pensions altogether, so crediting sick leave toward retirement is even more of a moot issue now. FERS employees should be grateful that they will be getting a FERS annuity that is indexed to inflation in addition to their 401(k)-type TSP. Most people would kill for that.
And as for the threat to abuse sick leave toward the end of their careers, I would hope that their supervisors would act on that and suspend the employees without pay for doing so. Even better, if one or two FERS employees were fired for such abuse just before becoming eligible to retire, I think that would put everyone else on notice and put an end to that practice rather quickly.
Stephen Barr: Thanks for that reality check! Folks, any comments on this perspective?
Washington: I'm in FERS and if I leave before my minimum retirement age, do I have to defer getting the money until I am 56? Yuck.
Stephen Barr: You need to check in with your retirement counselor on this. My understanding is that if you take deferred retirement benefits, they don't begin until age 62. But this is a tricky area, and others considerations could be in play.
Re: Telework and Higher Gas: You stated that "shifting to telework as a regular order of business will require significant management changes in some offices, and I suspect the decisions will be reached on a case-by-case basis."
I can't agree more. In my office where most of us had teleworked for 10-plus years, that benefit (not right) was taken away when a new manager was hired. She does not like her employees to be unavailable when she calls. She wants face-to-face meetings, not phone calls or e-mails. Even though telework was going strong here and worked out great for all employees, a new manager on the scene can change everything ... and it did. (By the way -- an employee mentioned the commute, gas prices, etc., and the response was "move closer to work.")
Stephen Barr: Please tell me that this manager is a young political appointee and not a career manager...
Seriously, these sort of conflicts are bound to pop up, so hopefully the pending bills, if approved, will force agencies to think like a Harvard Business School analyst and figure out the business case for telework.
I find your manager's views amusing, in part, because with technology today, an office telephone can be put on forwarding so that all your calls come right into your cell phone. Then there are PDAs that let you track your e-mail without being in the office. Communication should not be an issue for the modern-day manager, in my humble view.
Re: Medicare Part D: You stated: "Frankly, I was a bit surprised to learn 200,000 retirees (who are 65 and older) had signed up for both."
I am not surprised, Stephen, because many employees do not understand Medicare Parts A & B much less Part D and how it works, compared to what the FEHB coverage provides. From a benefits officer standpoint, I can't tell you how many times I've tried to educate my employees; providing them with information (e-mails, pamphlets, meetings, etc.) but most don't take the time to understand it all. When preparing for retirement and usually in that last year, that's when all the questions come in ... employees should prepare well in advance of their retirement date.
Stephen Barr: Well said. People should learn about benefit options and do a better job of planning for retirement. But it is human nature to focus on the task at hand, the day's work, and put off study of long-term matters. Keep up the good fight!
Vienna, Va.: I agree with Sick Leave Whiners comment above. As someone who does not, and will not, abuse the system, I would also like to see abuse of sick leave cracked down on more regularly since not doing so effectively rewards those people with extra vacation time above what honest people get!
FERS sick leave "abuse": Let's face it, it would take a lot of work to document that a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission employee who calls in "sick" on multiple Fridays when he/she nears retirement is abusing sick leave. Most agencies require a doctor's note for at least three successive days, and there would be tremendous uproar if you had to go the doctor if you were out just one day. Why should everyone suffer because of a few abusers? And firing somebody just a few months short of retirement? I'd like to see the supervisor with the guts to do that! That would be front-page story in this very newspaper about abusive federal managers who are cheating long-time civil servants of their retirement. Not much chance of that happening!
Stephen Barr: Excellent point. This is one reason that this issue seems so intractable. I hear from some managers who find FERS sick leaves make them reconsider whether a person can be reliable or counted on as much as they once were, but I also don't see any real way to try to police abuse. When people are sick, they should stay home and not spread germs. One possible approach is to do more training -- be more explicit about the dos and don'ts of sick leave, and hope people do the right thing.
Maryland: I have sympathy for the individual with the new boss who took away telework. While we did not have the option to telework, we got a new boss this past year who immediately decided we all needed to work 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. This totally disrupted people's family lives, carpools, and other commitments, just to satisfy this person's ego. While I know that new managers need to be able to set a tone, I don't think setting a tone for the office this way makes any friends. In fact, it probably alienates the employees more to the new boss.
Stephen Barr: Thanks, Maryland. Yes, flexitime is emerging as an issue, too. Perhaps more than telework, this is an issue where managers should provide considerable leeway, given the traffic congestion and the mass transit breakdowns that slow commutes, usually on an unpredictable basis.
And my goodness, what is wrong with 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.?
Arlington, Va.: I'm a brand new Army civilian employee converted from an onsite contractor just this Monday. I'm told "my papers won't be in the system" for at least a week. Seems to me I'm out health care coverage until then. Any ideas on how I can avoid going without coverage until then?
Stephen Barr: Sounds like you need to talk with the former employer and your new employer. Some companies provide health insurance on a month-to-month basis, so you might be covered by your older employer under that insurance policy. If not, seems like your old employer should give you a chance to buy at least a month's worth of Cobra, so you have continuation of coverage. And, if you have joined the Army and signed up for FEHBP, you might be covered already even though you don't have the paperwork or an insurance card.
Health coverage is critical, as we all know. So don't hesitate to check it out.
Washington: Mr Barr -- I saw that you took the buyout. Thank you so much for your wonderful coverage of the federal workforce. Your column has long been the first thing I read in the paper. Good luck to you!
Stephen Barr: Thank you! I have really enjoyed covering the federal community for The Post, and my bosses are big supporters of the Federal Diary and are in the process of recruiting a new author. Please treat that person as kindly as you have treated me!
Stephen Barr: With that, we'll call it a wrap for this week. See you back here at noon next Wednesday!
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
|
Join live discussions from the Washington Post. Feature topics include national, world and DC area news, politics, elections, campaigns, government policy, tech regulation, travel, entertainment, cars, and real estate.
| 75.780488 | 0.658537 | 0.707317 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/23/AR2008052302455.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com//wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/23/AR2008052302455.html
|
Why Didn't We Listen to Their War Stories?
|
2008052719
|
The last known surviving U.S. veteran of what was once called the Great War, Cpl. Frank Buckles of Charles Town, W.Va., recently toured the World War I memorial in Washington. Accompanied by his daughter and an aide, the wheelchair-bound 107-year-old rolled around the small, temple-like structure, stopping occasionally to acknowledge the applause of the small crowd that had gathered to watch. He did not comment upon the memorial's unkempt appearance -- it has been neglected for three decades -- but noticed that it honored only veterans from the city. "I can read here," he said in a soft, barely audible mumble, "that it was started to include the names of those who were local."
No one, apparently, had told him that the United States has no national World War I memorial. Buckles later modestly accepted tributes from President Bush and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates at ceremonies at the White House and the Pentagon, asking only that all of the recently deceased U.S. veterans of World War I be honored alongside him. It was little enough to ask, after nine decades of neglect.
As we observe Memorial Day, a hard truth remains: Americans haven't forgotten about the doughboys. We just didn't want to hear about them in the first place. The war's last and greatest battle involving U.S. soldiers, fought in the Meuse-Argonne region of eastern France during the autumn of 1918, sucked in more than 1 million U.S. troops and hundreds of airplanes and tanks. Artillery batteries commanded by men such as the young Harry S. Truman fired more than 4 million shells -- more than the Union Army fired during the entire Civil War. More than 26,000 doughboys were killed and almost 100,000 wounded, making the clash probably the bloodiest single battle in U.S. history. But as far as the American public was concerned, it might as well never have taken place. "Veterans said to me in their speeches and in private that the American people did not know anything about the Meuse-Argonne battle," Brig. Gen. Dennis Nolan wrote years later. "I have never understood why."
Back then, civilians justified their indifference by claiming that the veterans refused to share their stories. In reality, the ignorance was self-imposed. "The boys would talk if the questioners would listen," said one embittered ex-doughboy. "But the questioners do not. They at once interrupt with, 'It's all too dreadful,' or, 'Doesn't it seem like a terrible dream?' or, 'How can you think of it?' or, 'I can't imagine such things.' It shuts the boys up." Far from remaining silent, U.S. veterans wrote hundreds of memoirs, diaries and novels of their experiences. In Europe, Canada and Australia, such books were big business. In the United States, they went mostly unread.
World War I never made its way into U.S. popular culture. Movies, documentaries and miniseries about the Civil War, World War II and Vietnam are common, and trade publishers are always ready for new histories of Gettysburg or the Battle of the Bulge. But what about World War I? "Hollywood has not turned its gaze in this direction for decades," noted Gates. Since "The Big Parade" (1925) and "All Quiet on the Western Front" (1930), no significant movie has appeared about the U.S. experience in World War I. ("Sergeant York," from 1941, is a propaganda piece, and 2006's "Flyboys" is a silly excuse for special-effects wizardry.) Television offers similarly little, aside from the atrocious 2001 A&E movie "The Lost Battalion" and the 1996 PBS series "The Great War and the Shaping of the 20th Century," which gave only passing mention to the U.S. role.
Nowhere is our neglect of the doughboys more noticeable than on the battlefields themselves. Although memorials to the Revolutionary War, the Civil War and World War II are often swamped with visitors, the battlefields of the Meuse-Argonne remain unvisited and largely unmarked. They have changed little since 1918. The French churches and houses are pocked with bullet holes, and bunkers, trenches and rifle pits surrounded by rusty barbed wire, old equipment, shell fragments and unexploded ordnance are visible almost everywhere you look. During a recent visit to the wooded ridge in the Argonne Forest where the "Lost Battalion" fought German troops in October 1918, I kicked aside some leaves and discovered a spent rifle cartridge and a piece of a flare gun -- not something one would expect to happen at Gettysburg or Antietam.
Memorials erected in the 1920s by veterans' organizations are scattered around the battlefield, but many have fallen into decay. Others are carefully maintained by the American Battle Monuments Commission but receive few visitors. Romagne, the largest U.S. military cemetery in Europe, contains the graves of more than 14,000 doughboys. Located on the site of an old German stronghold in the Meuse-Argonne, it centers around a Romanesque chapel, overlooking rows of crosses and Stars of David on a gently sloping hillside. No U.S. military memorial is more welcoming to visitors; the site enfolds you with a feeling of reverence and peace. The superintendent, Joseph P. Rivers, gladly takes visitors -- he says he gets about 25,000 every year -- on a tour of the cemetery, pointing out individual graves and telling stories of the soldiers buried there.
But on a typical summer day, when the gravestones at World War II's Omaha Beach echo with the squeals of busloads of teenagers shipped in from Paris, Romagne remains deserted. For the most part, the only visitors are British, French, Belgian and German; and it is they, not Americans, who lay flowers on the graves. (So much for French ingratitude.) Gordon Morse, a freelance journalist from Virginia visited the cemetery on Armistice Day in 2006 and was asked to read the presidential proclamation. "I got the job by default," he said. "There were no other American visitors available."
I recently asked the hosts of a Charlottesville radio talk show on war and remembrance why Americans seemed so uninterested in World War I. It all boiled down to circumstances, they answered. The United States wasn't in the fight for long and suffered relatively few casualties. Then the Great Depression intervened, followed by World War II, and people naturally forgot old sorrows. There must be more to it than that, I protested. World War I was hardly a forgettable conflict; during six months in 1918, 53,513 Americans were killed in action -- almost as many as in Vietnam, and over a much shorter period of time. Perhaps, I suggested, Americans simply found trench warfare too depressing. Annoyed, the hosts cut me off with a flippant remark. As the receiver clicked, I could not help feeling that they had helped prove my point.
Historian David McCullough has said that all teachers of history should be trained storytellers. But there are some stories that Americans would rather not hear. If war tales aren't thrilling, readers and armchair Napoleons aren't interested. The Civil War and World War II seem to lend themselves to good storytelling, as long as one avoids the ugly, depressing bits. They appear to have clear beginnings and endings, with dramatic heroes and villains. They move. World War I, by contrast, with its images of trench warfare and mustard gas, is not so easy to manipulate in a marketable manner. Popular historians consequently avoid it. As one trade publisher recently told me, World War I has "poor entertainment value." Attempts to discuss it, even with avid students of military history, often end with the same comments that veterans heard back in 1919: "It's all too dreadful," and so on. So powerful is this perception that even genuinely exciting stories -- those of Medal of Honor winners Charles W. Whittlesey, Alvin C. York, John L. Barkley and Freddie Stowers -- are ignored.
We should step back and think for a moment about what this says about Americans as people. Do we honor our veterans for all their sacrifices, or do we care only if they can tell us a good story? And who, then, is guilty of ingratitude?
Edward G. Lengel is an associate professor at the University of Virginia and the author, most recently, of "To Conquer Hell: The Meuse-Argonne, 1918."
|
On Memorial Day, let's honor even those soldiers whose stories we don't want to hear.
| 86.157895 | 0.894737 | 1.842105 |
high
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/25/AR2008052502283.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/25/AR2008052502283.html
|
William Troy - Funeral Duty - washingtonpost.com
|
2008052719
|
Throughout this war, the Army has maintained the practice of assigning a general officer to attend the funeral of every soldier who falls in service to our country. I've had this duty many times. The intensity of each funeral leaves me struggling to understand the enormousness of the sacrifice to which I have been a witness.
My first funeral is as clear in my mind as scenes from a familiar movie. Pfc. Christopher Kilpatrick died on June 20, 2005. I think everyone in town knew him. The residents of Columbus, Tex., filled every chair at the Knights of Columbus hall, and well-wishers lined the walls. His two sisters made a memorial video set to music. It was a moving tribute to the baby brother they fussed over; the toddler in cowboy boots; the youngster growing up hunting and fishing; the Eagle Scout; the basketball player letting a three-point shot fly; the kid with a big smile and the obligatory pickup truck.
I had to speak after that video, and I wasn't sure the words would come out. I blocked out the rest of the hall and tried to address his parents and sisters. I hope I did Christopher justice. We laid him to rest just outside of town. When I tried to tell my wife about it later, through my tears all I could say was, "Today was supposed to be his 19th birthday."
Every funeral is different. Each family copes in their own way. Our job is to oversee the military aspects of the services -- taps, the firing of three rifle volleys, the folding and presentation of the flag. You comfort where you can and bear witness to the loss that the family, friends and community have suffered.
I have attended 23 funerals in many different states and, to my surprise, have never encountered an angry parent -- only heartbroken ones who are intensely proud of their son or daughter. Grief is the crushing load these parents and spouses bear. Yet far more often than not they treat the military in attendance as family. They invite us to the receptions after the services, where they show us scrapbooks and introduce us to friends. They hug us and wish us a safe return to our units and families. They smile through their tears. I often get the feeling their sense of duty wills them through. I suspect that when the crowds have left and they are allowed to be alone, they collapse in grief and exhaustion.
During funerals, we typically read the tributes offered at the services conducted in theater. Nothing speaks to the families like the words of buddies and commanders. These people knew him or lived with her; fought beside and loved them. When a tank commander writes about the loss of his driver, you realize that a tank crew is a single entity -- a living, breathing organism. It, too, has lost an integral piece that made it whole. Voices from deployed units transcend the miles and speak with an eloquence I could never approach. I never try. I simply read what they wrote.
Though I haven't counted, I have not come across more than a handful of parents who were still together. Usually the separated parents support and comfort one another, but not always. I have shared a couple of funerals where the father left early in his son's life and returned only upon his death. At my second funeral, I was told that such an absent father was rumored to be around. We learned that the father had gone to the funeral home after visitation, but no one knew if he was going to show for the services. Because the awards and folded flag are presented to the next of kin, the military party had to know if he would be present. As we walked with the family to the service, I was told he was not present. Yet as I took my seat, there he was at the end of the family pew. He had slipped in at the last moment. When I presented the awards to him, he murmured a quiet thanks. At the grave site, as I watched him from a respectful distance, my heart broke for him as much as for the soldier's mother. He was saying his silent goodbye, and he was utterly alone.
My funeral duty has taught me a lot. The cynicism with which some people view politicians doesn't square with what I've seen. Oregon Gov. Ted Kulongoski and Mike Gregoire, husband of the governor of Washington, attended just about every funeral I went to in their states. Absent the media or official entourages, they personally expressed condolences to grieving families. I've learned that the Patriot Guard Riders motorcycle club may seem unconventional, but its members' patriotism and sincerity are undeniable.
And I've learned that war most often claims the lives of young kids who go out on patrol day after day, night after night. They go because they are good soldiers led by good sergeants. They go with a singular purpose: to not let their buddies down. Each soldier we lay to rest shared that goal. They kept faith with their comrades, even in the face of danger and death. That is the most humbling lesson of all.
Maj. Gen. William Troy is vice director for force structure, resources and assessment in the Joint Staff. In 2006-07 he served as deputy commanding general of I Corps at Fort Lewis, Wash. In 2005-06, he was DCG (Support) of 1st Cavalry Division at Fort Hood, Tex.
|
What I have learned by bearing official witness to those who have made the ultimate sacrifice for our nation.
| 53.45 | 0.8 | 1 |
high
|
medium
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/23/AR2008052302455.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/23/AR2008052302455.html
|
Why Didn't We Listen to Their War Stories?
|
2008052719
|
The last known surviving U.S. veteran of what was once called the Great War, Cpl. Frank Buckles of Charles Town, W.Va., recently toured the World War I memorial in Washington. Accompanied by his daughter and an aide, the wheelchair-bound 107-year-old rolled around the small, temple-like structure, stopping occasionally to acknowledge the applause of the small crowd that had gathered to watch. He did not comment upon the memorial's unkempt appearance -- it has been neglected for three decades -- but noticed that it honored only veterans from the city. "I can read here," he said in a soft, barely audible mumble, "that it was started to include the names of those who were local."
No one, apparently, had told him that the United States has no national World War I memorial. Buckles later modestly accepted tributes from President Bush and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates at ceremonies at the White House and the Pentagon, asking only that all of the recently deceased U.S. veterans of World War I be honored alongside him. It was little enough to ask, after nine decades of neglect.
As we observe Memorial Day, a hard truth remains: Americans haven't forgotten about the doughboys. We just didn't want to hear about them in the first place. The war's last and greatest battle involving U.S. soldiers, fought in the Meuse-Argonne region of eastern France during the autumn of 1918, sucked in more than 1 million U.S. troops and hundreds of airplanes and tanks. Artillery batteries commanded by men such as the young Harry S. Truman fired more than 4 million shells -- more than the Union Army fired during the entire Civil War. More than 26,000 doughboys were killed and almost 100,000 wounded, making the clash probably the bloodiest single battle in U.S. history. But as far as the American public was concerned, it might as well never have taken place. "Veterans said to me in their speeches and in private that the American people did not know anything about the Meuse-Argonne battle," Brig. Gen. Dennis Nolan wrote years later. "I have never understood why."
Back then, civilians justified their indifference by claiming that the veterans refused to share their stories. In reality, the ignorance was self-imposed. "The boys would talk if the questioners would listen," said one embittered ex-doughboy. "But the questioners do not. They at once interrupt with, 'It's all too dreadful,' or, 'Doesn't it seem like a terrible dream?' or, 'How can you think of it?' or, 'I can't imagine such things.' It shuts the boys up." Far from remaining silent, U.S. veterans wrote hundreds of memoirs, diaries and novels of their experiences. In Europe, Canada and Australia, such books were big business. In the United States, they went mostly unread.
World War I never made its way into U.S. popular culture. Movies, documentaries and miniseries about the Civil War, World War II and Vietnam are common, and trade publishers are always ready for new histories of Gettysburg or the Battle of the Bulge. But what about World War I? "Hollywood has not turned its gaze in this direction for decades," noted Gates. Since "The Big Parade" (1925) and "All Quiet on the Western Front" (1930), no significant movie has appeared about the U.S. experience in World War I. ("Sergeant York," from 1941, is a propaganda piece, and 2006's "Flyboys" is a silly excuse for special-effects wizardry.) Television offers similarly little, aside from the atrocious 2001 A&E movie "The Lost Battalion" and the 1996 PBS series "The Great War and the Shaping of the 20th Century," which gave only passing mention to the U.S. role.
Nowhere is our neglect of the doughboys more noticeable than on the battlefields themselves. Although memorials to the Revolutionary War, the Civil War and World War II are often swamped with visitors, the battlefields of the Meuse-Argonne remain unvisited and largely unmarked. They have changed little since 1918. The French churches and houses are pocked with bullet holes, and bunkers, trenches and rifle pits surrounded by rusty barbed wire, old equipment, shell fragments and unexploded ordnance are visible almost everywhere you look. During a recent visit to the wooded ridge in the Argonne Forest where the "Lost Battalion" fought German troops in October 1918, I kicked aside some leaves and discovered a spent rifle cartridge and a piece of a flare gun -- not something one would expect to happen at Gettysburg or Antietam.
Memorials erected in the 1920s by veterans' organizations are scattered around the battlefield, but many have fallen into decay. Others are carefully maintained by the American Battle Monuments Commission but receive few visitors. Romagne, the largest U.S. military cemetery in Europe, contains the graves of more than 14,000 doughboys. Located on the site of an old German stronghold in the Meuse-Argonne, it centers around a Romanesque chapel, overlooking rows of crosses and Stars of David on a gently sloping hillside. No U.S. military memorial is more welcoming to visitors; the site enfolds you with a feeling of reverence and peace. The superintendent, Joseph P. Rivers, gladly takes visitors -- he says he gets about 25,000 every year -- on a tour of the cemetery, pointing out individual graves and telling stories of the soldiers buried there.
But on a typical summer day, when the gravestones at World War II's Omaha Beach echo with the squeals of busloads of teenagers shipped in from Paris, Romagne remains deserted. For the most part, the only visitors are British, French, Belgian and German; and it is they, not Americans, who lay flowers on the graves. (So much for French ingratitude.) Gordon Morse, a freelance journalist from Virginia visited the cemetery on Armistice Day in 2006 and was asked to read the presidential proclamation. "I got the job by default," he said. "There were no other American visitors available."
I recently asked the hosts of a Charlottesville radio talk show on war and remembrance why Americans seemed so uninterested in World War I. It all boiled down to circumstances, they answered. The United States wasn't in the fight for long and suffered relatively few casualties. Then the Great Depression intervened, followed by World War II, and people naturally forgot old sorrows. There must be more to it than that, I protested. World War I was hardly a forgettable conflict; during six months in 1918, 53,513 Americans were killed in action -- almost as many as in Vietnam, and over a much shorter period of time. Perhaps, I suggested, Americans simply found trench warfare too depressing. Annoyed, the hosts cut me off with a flippant remark. As the receiver clicked, I could not help feeling that they had helped prove my point.
Historian David McCullough has said that all teachers of history should be trained storytellers. But there are some stories that Americans would rather not hear. If war tales aren't thrilling, readers and armchair Napoleons aren't interested. The Civil War and World War II seem to lend themselves to good storytelling, as long as one avoids the ugly, depressing bits. They appear to have clear beginnings and endings, with dramatic heroes and villains. They move. World War I, by contrast, with its images of trench warfare and mustard gas, is not so easy to manipulate in a marketable manner. Popular historians consequently avoid it. As one trade publisher recently told me, World War I has "poor entertainment value." Attempts to discuss it, even with avid students of military history, often end with the same comments that veterans heard back in 1919: "It's all too dreadful," and so on. So powerful is this perception that even genuinely exciting stories -- those of Medal of Honor winners Charles W. Whittlesey, Alvin C. York, John L. Barkley and Freddie Stowers -- are ignored.
We should step back and think for a moment about what this says about Americans as people. Do we honor our veterans for all their sacrifices, or do we care only if they can tell us a good story? And who, then, is guilty of ingratitude?
Edward G. Lengel is an associate professor at the University of Virginia and the author, most recently, of "To Conquer Hell: The Meuse-Argonne, 1918."
|
On Memorial Day, let's honor even those soldiers whose stories we don't want to hear.
| 86.157895 | 0.894737 | 1.842105 |
high
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/25/AR2008052502275.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/25/AR2008052502275.html
|
A Pro-Choicer's Dream Veep
|
2008052719
|
Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann, whose Roman Catholic archdiocese covers northeast Kansas, on May 9 called on Gov. Kathleen Sebelius to stop taking Communion until she disowns her support for the "serious moral evil" of abortion. That put the church in conflict with a rising star of the Democratic Party who is often described as a "moderate" and is perhaps the leading prospect to become Barack Obama's running mate.
Naumann also took Sebelius to task for her veto April 21 of a bill, passed by 2 to 1 margins in both houses of the Kansas Legislature, that would strengthen the state's ban on late-term abortions by authorizing private lawsuits against providers. Last year, she vetoed a bill requiring explicit medical reasons for a late abortion, and she vetoed other abortion legislation in 2006, 2005 and 2003.
Those positions are necessary for Democratic politicians to pass their party's pro-choice litmus test, but Sebelius's connection with abortion is more intimate. She is allied with the aggressive Kansas branch of Planned Parenthood in a bitter struggle with antiabortion activist District Attorney Phill Kline. There is substantial evidence she has been involved in what pro-life advocates term "laundering" abortion industry money for distribution to Kansas Democrats. Kansas is the fiercest state battleground in the abortion wars, making Kathleen Sebelius the national pro-choice poster girl.
The Almanac of American Politics talks of a "moderate image" for Sebelius, daughter of former Ohio governor John Gilligan. She picked up substantial Republican support in an easy win in the 2002 governor's race and, after naming a former GOP state chairman as her running mate, was reelected in 2006 in a landslide. Chosen this year to deliver the Democratic response to President Bush's State of the Union address, she told the nation, "In this time normally reserved for the partisan response, I hope to offer you something more: an American response." She gave the impression of reaching out across party lines in what was widely regarded as an audition for vice president as a Democrat able to carry a red state.
Behind that facade, Sebelius sits at the apex of a complicated Kansas financing system involving the famous abortion provider George Tiller of Wichita. She controls Bluestem Fund PAC, which distributed money to Kansas Democratic candidates. Tiller, one of the few U.S. doctors still performing late-term abortions, contributed $120,000 in 2006 to the Democratic Governors Association, which has given $200,000 to Bluestem.
In 2006, Sebelius recruited Paul Morrison, then the Republican district attorney in Johnson County, to run as a Democrat against Republican Kline, who was seeking reelection as attorney general. Morrison, financed by Tiller's ProKanDo PAC, outspent Kline and swamped him at the polls. But Kline then replaced Morrison as district attorney in Johnson County and promptly filed 107 charges against Planned Parenthood, including allegations of "unlawful late-term abortions."
That triggered a ferocious legal battle during which Sebelius appointees, both judicial and executive, have sabotaged Kline's efforts, with the Kansas Supreme Court barring a key witness from testifying. The confrontation continues even though Morrison resigned after the revelation in December of a two-year affair. District Judge Stephen Six, whom Sebelius appointed attorney general, has joined the legal action against Kline that had been led by Morrison.
In her 2006 abortion veto statement, Sebelius declared: "My Catholic faith teaches me that life is sacred. Personally, I believe abortion is wrong." Yet, a year later, Sebelius invited Tiller and his staff to a party at the governor's mansion. She thanked Tiller for his generosity in helping to finance her election and Morrison's. Last May, Sebelius was featured at a Planned Parenthood fundraiser in Kansas City.
Obama, while asserting that "nobody is pro-abortion," has said that if his two daughters "make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby." Would Sebelius, an avowed Catholic, change her running mate's view that a baby is a punishment? When Naumann told the Kansas City Star this month that Sebelius must confess "scandalous behavior that has misled people into dangerous behavior," the governor's spokeswoman responded that "receiving Communion has not been a problem in the past for her." An answer came last week from Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver, in his online column, reproving "verbal gymnastics, good alibis and pious talk about 'personal opposition' to killing unborn children."
© 2008 Creators Syndicate Inc.
|
With her position on abortion, Kathleen Sebelius could create problems as Obama's running mate.
| 50.823529 | 0.764706 | 2.176471 |
high
|
low
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/25/AR2008052502277.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/25/AR2008052502277.html
|
The Belligerent vs. the Naif?
|
2008052719
|
On one level, the Obama-McCain smackdown over talking to dictators seems overblown.
John McCain knows that as president he would at times engage with adversaries. Barack Obama has now made clear that he would meet with dictators such as Raúl Castro only after "careful preparation" and with a "clear agenda" and "at a time and place of my choosing" and "only when we have an opportunity to advance the interests of the United States." So what's the big deal?
In fact, this argument is something of a teacup in a much larger tempest. It's a proxy, and it won't be the last, that allows the candidates to imply much bigger differences in worldview that they can't always state directly.
If Democratic foreign policy advisers were to speak honestly about McCain, they would call him bellicose and uncompromising, by philosophy and nature. His unwillingness to engage with Castro or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, they would say, bespeaks an inflexibility unsuited to a complex world. His proposed League of Democracies proves he doesn't believe in the United Nations or other existing international institutions, insists on playing on his field and by his rules, and can't come to terms with regimes he does not like or with the transnational threats of the 21st century. His strong moralistic streak, they might say, blinded him to the risks of invading Iraq and will get the country in trouble again. His age, his record and his party all make it impossible for him to give the United States the fresh start in the world that it so desperately needs.
Republican advisers, by contrast, would call Obama naive and overconfident, a dangerous combination in international affairs. With his initial insouciance about talking with dictators, they might say, he overvalued his own charm and the power of reason and undervalued economic and military might and other forms of leverage. His insistence that Afghanistan is more vital than Iraq, a large, oil-rich Arab nation at the heart of the Middle East, reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of national interest. And, they might say, he emerged from Hyde Park and academe with a sense that the United States on balance has done more harm than good in the world -- and that international laws and organizations that constrain American power therefore should be welcomed.
These are caricatures, of course. McCain is no warmonger, and Obama would not renounce American supremacy. Moreover, despite real differences, the imperatives and constraints of leadership would push them toward converging policies. It's striking that after seven years of trying to repudiate the foreign policy of the past, President Bush finds himself echoing President Bill Clinton's final year in so many ways: straining to bring the Israelis and Palestinians together; imploring the evil North Korean regime to honor a nuclear deal; regretting an unchecked genocide in Africa, this time in Darfur, not Rwanda; knowingly tolerating al-Qaeda redoubts that directly threaten the West -- only this time in Pakistan, not Afghanistan.
Even campaigning, the candidates have reasons to move toward common ground. McCain will emphasize the importance of alliances and Obama will not be outflanked on his support for a strong military because Americans want both diplomacy and strength. Both will talk about promoting democracy and human rights because Americans want that, too. Neither candidate may deem it in his interest to focus on Iraq, which once looked certain to be the central issue of this campaign, since McCain supported a war that has taken more than 4,000 American lives and is now seen by most Americans as a terrible mistake, while Obama was wrong about the surge and is now committed to withdrawing troops just as they may be succeeding. Neither has a convincing formula for keeping Iran from going nuclear, but it would not be politically wise for either to talk about post-nuclear containment. So, at least for now, it may be difficult for them to engage on the big questions.
Moreover, the differences, real and caricatured, are also about instinct, character and experience, about how a president will react in a crisis, about the way he will come down on the closest calls. These are hard to debate, too. But voters, having watched a president evolve from a campaign pledge of humility in foreign affairs to a second inaugural promise to end tyranny on the planet, may have a sense of how vital those instincts are, as well as how difficult to predict.
So each candidate will keep looking for the slips he believes reveal his rival's true face behind the mask of consensus -- McCain's 100-years-in-Iraq comment, Obama's promise to meet with Ahmadinejad -- and will mine them for all they are worth, and then some.
|
The differences between McCain and Obama may be more about instinct than policy.
| 64.5 | 0.928571 | 1.5 |
high
|
medium
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/25/AR2008052502282.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/25/AR2008052502282.html
|
A Race Straight Out of a 'West Wing' Rerun
|
2008052719
|
How's this for a political plot: Good-looking congressman in his mid-40s, married with two young children, known for his inspirational speeches, comes from far behind to clinch the Democratic nomination and face an older, more experienced centrist Republican. If he wins, he's America's first non-Caucasian president.
It's a drama that plays out each day in the papers and through nonstop cable-TV coverage. But some are beginning to notice that it's a rerun. The whole thing was broadcast a few years back on NBC's "The West Wing."
As one who believes Aaron Sorkin's program belongs on a short list of television's finest dramas, I've been fascinated by similarities between the show's Democratic candidate, Matthew Santos, and the party's apparent real-life counterpart, Barack Obama. With Obama's nomination becoming more certain, "West Wing" references have intensified among bloggers and in the British press.
Apparently even Obama's staff is taking note of the degree to which life is imitating art. (They especially like the ending in which Santos, played by Jimmy Smits, narrowly defeats Alan Alda's character, Arnold Vinick, who bears more than a little resemblance to John McCain.)
Here's Santos on the campaign trail: "In a time of global chaos and instability, where our faiths collide as often as our weapons, hope is real . . . I am sure I will have my share of false starts. But there is no such thing as false hope. There is only hope."
How is this happening? Is politics so predictable, even in what some call the most unpredictable campaign ever? Or were the writers of "The West Wing" just that insightful? Turns out, it's a little of both.
The Santos character was created by Eli Attie, currently co-executive producer of Fox's "House M.D.," who spent four years as head speechwriter for Al Gore during the Clinton administration. Gore's 2000 concession speech was Attie's final task before seeking a career in television. He joined the "West Wing" writing staff during the third season.
As Attie explained it to me, the Santos-Vinick campaign was invented in mid-2004, about the time Barack Obama gave his acclaimed speech at the Democratic convention. David Axelrod, Attie's friend and now Obama's chief strategist, suggested that Obama was a "rock star" politician whose profile was perfect for Attie's needs. Since NBC had already signed Smits to play the part, the character became Hispanic.
"We were trying to look at what was happening in the country and around the world," recalls Attie. "Things are more multicultural, more diverse. We tried to look ahead of the curve, and it seemed inevitable that a successful Latino or black candidate would emerge."
Even though Obama had not yet won his Senate seat, Axelrod was promoting him as "handsome, appealing, articulate" -- a politician who could find new paths to solve old problems; a minority candidate who could show pride in his race without allowing it to define him. That's what Matt Santos became.
Alan Alda's character, although in many ways eerily similar to McCain, did not have a real-life model. Most of the Vinick episodes were written by Lawrence O'Donnell, professional pundit and onetime adviser to Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Attie notes that Vinick, a Republican senator from California, was crafted with wisdom O'Donnell collected from the maverick New York Democrat (branded with the term "straight talk").
Attie doesn't care to comment much about the real-life campaign. But as a TV writer he provides this perspective: "Ultimately, the characters are not defined by who they are. They're defined by what they want."
On "The West Wing," Santos battles a White House insider, Vice President Bob Russell, played in real life by Hillary Clinton. A deadlocked Democratic convention finally nominates Santos, who selects an older, experienced Washington pro, Leo McGarry, as his running mate (Joe Biden?). Vinick, the GOP candidate, chooses the young West Virginia governor Ray Sullivan, who is a favorite of evangelicals (Mike Huckabee?).
Santos and Vinick depart from the conventional debate format and question each other without ground rules (Obama has advocated this). In the end, after winning by the narrowest of margins, Santos demonstrates his willingness to cross party lines by naming Vinick secretary of state (both Obama and McCain have pledged to include members of the opposing party in their administrations).
David Axelrod exchanged e-mails for a year with Attie as the Santos character was developed and written. Santos was Attie's project, but Obama was Axelrod's project. So, to what degree did "The West Wing" create a test market for a minority candidate? By campaigning to have his guy portrayed in a network hit, did Axelrod soften up millions of Americans for the task of electing the first minority president?
Attie says his latest e-mail from Axelrod includes the good news: "We're living your script." If the ending holds up, it may be Axelrod who deserves an Emmy.
Peter Funt, a writer, hosted the television show "Candid Camera."
|
Did the final season of 'The West Wing' predict what will happen in the 2008 campaign?
| 54.368421 | 0.736842 | 1.157895 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/david_saperstein/2008/05/hagees_jewish_endorsers.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052719id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/david_saperstein/2008/05/hagees_jewish_endorsers.html
|
Hagee's Jewish Endorsers
|
2008052719
|
Fundamentalist religious leaders who believe not only that God controls everything that happens but that they are able to see Godâs explicit plans within the context of their own political and cultural views should raise alarm bells for those who would ally with them. Senator John McCain faced this dilemma starkly yesterday, and ended up, rightly, repudiating Pastor John Hageeâs assertions that Hitler was foretold in a verse in Jeremiah and that Hitler and the Holocaust were part of Godâs plan to force the Jewish people back to Israel.
Jews can empathize with Sen. McCain because we have faced the same dilemma with Rev. Hagee. No fundamentalist Christian is more overtly supportive of Israel, raised more money for Israel, nor used his religious and political clout to more energetically mobilize support in America for Israel. Further, he was an evangelical who made clear that his relations with Jews over Israel would not be used to try to convert us. Yet, his fundamentalist views had led to reprehensible statements about gays, Catholics, and even the victims of Hurricane Katrina.
And his particular understanding of the Bible led him to use his political clout in efforts to undermine support for the Israel- Palestinian peace process and a two-state solution. Nonetheless, it had become common to find Jewish leaders joining in Pastor Hageeâs âSalute to Israelâ events around the country and paying public tribute and homage to the pastor for his efforts. Two months ago, Rabbi Eric Yoffie, president of the Union for Reform Judaism, challenged Reform Jewish rabbis with the contradictions of participating in such events with someone who held views that were anathema to our commitment to tolerance, pluralism and intergroup respect. While I hope that Rev. Hagee continues his support for Israel, which I assume he gives for its own sake, we should refrain from allying with him in any manner that gives our stamp of approval to him generally or to the deeply troubling views he has expressed. Sen. McCain faced a similar dilemma and decision. Since Rabbi Yoffieâs speech and the coverage it received, Rev. Hagee has apologized or retracted some of his statements. But now comes the revelation of this most distressing sermon given in the late 1990s and reiterated in several books since then. I donât believe that Rev. Hagee is anti-Semitic but the words he used are. Blaming Jews for anti-Semitism or the Holocaust is a classic form of anti-Semitic argumentation. If only the Jews had listened to Herzl and gone to Israel, the Holocaust would not have been necessary!
I do not share Rev. Hageeâs belief that God controls every action here on Earth nor that God wishes for every Jew to move to Israel right now. But even if Rev. Hagee does so believe, that his God is one who could only accomplish that by killing 6 million innocent Jewish men, women and children, and 5 million innocent others is mind boggling. Ironically there are some anti-Zionist theological extremists in our community who argued exactly the opposite: that the Holocaust was Godâs punishment for the Zionist movement. Both views are equally repugnant theologically, morally and politically. They deserve to be condemned by religious, civic, and political leaders in general, but most particularly by those who have chosen to align themselves with Rev. Hagee.
Senator John McCain, to his credit, did so yesterday, (and raised similar qualms about the troubling views of another fundamentalist supporter Rev. Rod Parsley). We can only hope that Rev. Hageeâs remarks will be similarly condemned by other political, civic and religious leaders.
|
On Faith is an innovative, provocative conversation on all aspects of religion with best selling author Jon Meacham of Newsweek and Sally Quinn of The Washington Post. Keep up-to-date on global religious developments with On Faith.
| 15.045455 | 0.477273 | 0.522727 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/mona_eltahawy/2008/05/arab_bloggers_keep_watch_over.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052719id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/mona_eltahawy/2008/05/arab_bloggers_keep_watch_over.html
|
Arab Bloggers Keep Watch Over Government â And Each Other
|
2008052719
|
The Current Discussion: Egypt has detained a number of its citizens for using the social networking site Facebook to organize anti-government protests. What online sites are most effective in influencing politics -- and is the impact positive?
President Hosni Mubarak, who recently turned 80, has ruled Egypt for 26 years. What compels his regime to arrest and bully young people - who have known no other leader â simply for creating Facebook groups to call for a general strike in support of the poor and to protest spiraling food prices?
The Saudi Arabian royal family is firmly in charge of its kingdom and oil wealth. What compels it to detain a blogger without charge for four months because he defended the rights of dissidents?
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, once hailed as Mr. Technology for his keenness to get Syria online and connected, is also firmly in control in Syria. So what compels his regime to block Syrians from accessing Facebook and to arrest and bully the same young people who took him at his earlier word and went online and got connected by blogging?
A desire to express themselves and a determination to use blogs and social networking sites like Facebook and Myspace to circumvent censorship has created a thrilling equation in the Arab world: one man/woman + internet = very angry dictator.
Not only are they worrying regimes, but bloggers have also set the media agenda in quite a few big stories. When Egyptian security officials denied that a gang of young men had gone on a sexual assault rampage against women in downtown Cairo during a religious festival in 2006, bloggers posted photographs of the assaults, testimonials from victims and eyewitness accounts, forcing the attacks onto headlines.
In Egypt, a young blogger is in jail after his conviction last year of âinsulting Islam and the president.â But two Egyptian police officers were sent to jail later that same year after another blogger â Wael Abbas - posted a video clip of them sodomizing a man with a stick. The presiding judge in the officersâ trial had a laptop open to Abbasâ YouTube account to view the clip. Abbasâ blog gets at least a million hits a day.
Long marginalized from state-owned media, young people and especially women are using the internet to reach those who had been most tone-deaf to them - both officials and the media. Blogger/activists have learned to be inventive online.
In Saudi Arabia, which fuels most of the worldâs cars but bars half of its population from driving, womenâs rights activists used Facebook and emails to collect petitions against the driving ban which they then sent to the king. One of the activists, Wajeha al-Huwaider, further protested the ban by getting behind the wheel as her sister-in-law filmed her, and posted the video on YouTube on International Womenâs Day as an open letter to the Saudi interior minister, urging him to lift the ban.
With some blogging, the personal is very much the political â as when gays and lesbians in the Arab world blog, telling a region that too often denies their existence, âWe are hereâ.
That desire to take on both the regime and the old guard of their movement compels young Muslim Brotherhood members in Egypt â men and women â to blog. One of them, Abdel-Moneim Mahmoud Ibrahim, told me he started his blog âAna Ikhwanâ (I am a Muslim Brother) âso that I can show my true self.â
His mentor, Khaled Hamza, was jailed for several weeks earlier this year, in what appeared to be frustration that the site he runs is too effective. Hamza is editor-in-chief of the outlawed Islamist movementâs English-language website, Ikhwanweb, which was launched to get the Muslim Brotherhoodâs news and views out to the international media.
And for effectiveness, how about this story: At a discussion I led at the American University in Cairo last year on how girls and women in Egypt use cyberspace to express themselves, blogger Shahinaz Abdel-Salam told us she would take the train from her hometown of Alexandria to Cairo to march in street protests against Mubarak and then she would blog about it.
During one demonstration, a young man asked her if she was âWahda Masreyaâ (the name of her blog which translates as âAn Egyptian Everywomanâ). When she confirmed it was indeed her, he told her he was at the demonstration because of her. âI figured if a girl can take the train all the way from Alexandria to protest, the least I could do was protest, tooâ.
Egyptian Prime Minister Ahmed Nazif got into a verbal altercation over the internet recently that sweetly captures the generational struggle at hand.
When Nazif gave a speech at Cairo University urging Egyptian youth to go online to express themselves, Bilal Diab, a 20-year-old student interrupted the older man to remind Nazif that there were several young Egyptians in jail for doing exactly what the premier was calling for. Egyptian police had rounded up bloggers and Facebook activists for calling for strikes. Police promptly whisked Bilal himself off for several hours, which turned him into a hero for the independent media. The state-owned media did their best to ignore him.
My family in Cairo gleefully told me during our weekly conversations â which are free thanks to the internet site Skype - that when Bilal was interviewed on a satellite television talk show, the host asked him what he wanted to be when he grew up.
âPresident of Egypt,â Bilal quickly replied.
One Egyptian arrested and beaten for starting a Facebook group calling for those strikes was Ahmed Maher. Police beat Maher for hours, demanding to know the password for his Facebook group, even though thereâs no such thing. The blogger Wael Abbas posted photographs of Maherâs bruised back; frustrated that Egyptian media was ignoring Maher, Abbas decided to interview the Facebook activist on Misrdigital.
Thatâs the beauty of blogs and those who run them in the Arab world. They have each otherâs backs, and theyâre determined to stay on the back of their respective regimes.
|
PostGlobal features David Ignatius and Fareed Zakaria and other international figures in debates on global news and politics. Stay on top of international news and join the conversation at PostGlobal.
| 34.939394 | 0.575758 | 0.757576 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/mustafa_domanic/2008/05/internet_alone_wont_change_pol.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052719id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/mustafa_domanic/2008/05/internet_alone_wont_change_pol.html
|
Internet Alone Won't Change Politics
|
2008052719
|
The Current Discussion: Egypt has detained a number of its citizens for using the social networking site Facebook to organize anti-government protests. What online sites are most effective in influencing politics -- and is the impact positive?
When I first read Jack Fairweather's report on "Egypt's Facebook Revolution" a few days ago, I was immediately reminded of what happened in Turkey back in 2007. Around a million Turks had just joined the Facebook craze and it was the only subject heard in the streets besides, of course, politics. Obviously, it wasn't long before the two subjects inevitably merged.
In a very short time, Facebook was flooded with political groups of all sorts trying to attract like-minded users. The supporters of Turkey's two main secularist opposition parties were quick to create groups with thousands of members which enabled them to organize some of the largest public demonstrations seen in modern Turkish history. Yet in the end, both the rallies and the massive online groups proved useless when the opposition bitterly lost all the elections and parliamentary votes that their enthusiastic web supporters had campaigned for. What I learned from the vain activism of the Turkish secularists was this: Without grass-roots action on the field, online political activism is useless.
Of course, the internet has enhanced freedom of speech in most countries in unprecedented ways, by breaking government monopolies on information, communications and the media. We can say that even the sheer range of political opinions available to the public online has improved the quality of democracies around the world. Yet if we wish to start a revolution, we cannot do it from our beds with our laptops. If we want change, we have to go out and knock on the doors of those who are not our friends on Facebook and those who never used a computer.
Take Barack Obama's campaign for example; what he did was to use the internet to organize his supporters and raise millions of dollars, but what brought him success was his ability to combine this with a grass-roots campaign which tirelessly knocked on doors. America was craving for change after eight lousy years of the Bush administration, just as Egypt and Turkey now crave change after decades of failed governments. If utilizing the power of internet paid off for Obama, then it could also pay off for our agents of change â provided that they show some real leadership and the capability to combine it with some real politics.
Please e-mail PostGlobal if you'd like to receive an email notification when PostGlobal sends out a new question.
Email the Author | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook
|
PostGlobal features David Ignatius and Fareed Zakaria and other international figures in debates on global news and politics. Stay on top of international news and join the conversation at PostGlobal.
| 15.181818 | 0.424242 | 0.484848 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/eboo_patel/2008/05/queen_rania_and_inspiring_the.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052719id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/eboo_patel/2008/05/queen_rania_and_inspiring_the.html
|
Interfaith Work Fit for a Queen
|
2008052719
|
I first met Her Majesty Queen Rania of Jordan three years ago at the Clinton Global Initiative, where we served on a panel together. My wife could not stop commenting on her radiant beauty. But what I found most striking about her was her intelligence. She used her few minutes on that panel to speak about three things in particular.
1) She cautioned people against using the term âMuslim extremistâ. There are Muslims, she said, and then there are extremists. Muslims are guided by their tradition to be a people in the middle, a people of moderation. The extremists are violating that central principle. Do not give them the honor of the title, âMuslimâ.
2) She spoke about the youth bulge in the Arab world, and the importance of seeing those young people as assets who can contribute energy and new ideas to the region and the world, rather than viewing them as liabilities or âproblems to be solvedâ.
3) She spoke of the importance of young people forming identities that are open to the rest of the world, and suggested a massive expansion of cross-cultural encounter programs to accomplish that.
I followed Queen Rania in the speaking order and basically said, âI agree with everything Her Majesty just said. In fact, I started an organization to those principles precisely - the Interfaith Youth Core.â
During the break between sessions, somebody whispered in my ear, âHer Majesty would like to see you.â I was whisked through a set of dark hallways into a little room and brought before the Queen.
She said, âTell me more about your organization.â After listening to the details of our program about bringing young people from different faiths together to do service projects, she said, âI want you to come work with some of our remarkable young people in Jordan.â
A week later I got a letter with her Royal Seal, stating that she enjoyed our conversation and was working on the follow-up. Three months later, I was on a Royal Jordanian flight to Amman. A year after that, a group of about twenty religiously diverse young Americans went to Jordan to do interfaith service projects with a similar interfaith youth organization in Jordan called Interfaith in Action, led by the visionary Jordanian youth leader Anas Abadi. The Jordanians came to Chicago the following summer.
Queen Rania was right: this experience changed the lives of the participants, and as young leaders they will go on to change the lives of many more. A case in point is Shawn, a young African-American Christian from the South Side of Chicago who started the experience believing that âall Muslims are Osama bin Ladenâ and ended by counting some of the Jordanian Muslims he met as his best friends.
Queen Rania encouraged us to tell these stories far and wide, to counter the negative dominant narrative about young people being violent and intolerant. So we a created a set of videos about the experiences of the young people in the InterAction Exchange Program - check out the piece about Shawn here.
Now Her Majesty is embarking on an even more ambitious project: to create a set of YouTube videos that address negative stereotypes, directed at young people all over the world who have the opportunity to create the story of pluralism rather than accept a bit part in the narrative of conflict.
If these pieces don't inspire you, check your pulse:
Here's the introductory video on the danger of stereotypes: Here is a video on women in the Arab world.
And an excellent segment on Islam and Muslims.
|
On Faith is an innovative, provocative conversation on all aspects of religion with best selling author Jon Meacham of Newsweek and Sally Quinn of The Washington Post. Keep up-to-date on global religious developments with On Faith.
| 15.272727 | 0.545455 | 0.590909 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/24/AR2008052400002.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/24/AR2008052400002.html
|
How Thinking Costs You
|
2008052719
|
The company, like most of the big Wall Street banks then staring down the subprime meltdown, was limping along. The headlines were bad. The chatter on CNBC was pessimistic. I saw a bargain. I saw a company whose credit card bills and offers show up in millions of mailboxes every day. Just as soon as the banks got their write-offs out of the way, optimism would return to the sector. There would be more buyers of the stock than sellers. I would profit.
Now here I am today: My investment is down 22 percent. And I'm still holding on to the stock. Am I, as my wife and closest friends sometimes insist, the dumbest man walking the Earth?
"You are human," said Russell Fuller, chief investment officer of Fuller & Thaler Asset Management in San Mateo, Calif. His firm uses behavioral economic theories of Nobel Prize winners and university economists to profit from the mistakes made by everyday investors and the pros on Wall Street. Humans, no matter how hard we try, act in ways that cause us to make the wrong investment decisions almost all the time.
We are -- as I was four months ago when I logged on to my Schwab account -- absurdly overconfident about what we think we know. We are -- as I am now -- reluctant to part with our losers, even though the tax code rewards us for doing so. We sell winners too soon, then we buy stocks that perform worse than the ones we sold. We get anchored on certain opinions about stocks and react too slowly to information that should change those beliefs. We believe things will happen based on how easily we can think of recent examples. (A hurricane just hit. Another one will come soon.)
The world of the behavioral economics, which melds psychology, finance and emotion, seeks to explain and sometimes exploit why we do what we do when it comes to investing. It is a field that has become more accepted lately, particularly since 2002, when Princeton University psychologist Daniel Kahneman was awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics for, as the Swedes put it, integrating "insights from psychology into economics, thereby laying the foundation for a new field of research."
Kahneman is a director at Fuller & Thaler, a firm whose other namesake is Richard Thaler, a prominent University of Chicago behavioral economist and a frequent collaborator with Kahneman. Two of the funds the firm manages that use behavioral methods have beaten Russell benchmarks from their inception through the first quarter of this year. Not surprisingly, Fuller & Thaler is not the only firm using such techniques. Firms ranging from J.P. Morgan to AllianceBernstein say they seek to capitalize on the faulty investor mind.
For instance, Fuller & Thaler likes to pay close attention to analysts who may be anchored on a stock, not raising their earnings-per-share estimates enough even though positive information has come out about the company. Fuller & Thaler's investment team pounces before the analysts realize they were wrong. As Kahneman said in an interview, "I think that betting on mistakes of people is a pretty safe bet."
Good for them. My interest in talking to the likes of Kahneman, Thaler and other behavioral economists and personal finance advisers -- besides confirming that I am not dumb -- was to understand these mistakes and what there is to do about them. "I don't think you can fix what's in your head," Thaler said. "What you can do is train yourself to say, 'This is a risky situation, and this is the kind of situation where I get fooled.' "
I asked Kahneman what fools us most frequently. That was simple, he said: overconfidence. "It's the idea that you know better than the market, which is a very strange idea," he said. "Individual investors have no business at all thinking they can do better."
Why do we? "It's because we have no way of thinking properly about what we don't know," Kahneman said. "What we do is we give weight to what we know and then we add a margin of uncertainty. You act on what you think will happen." That's what I did by buying Citigroup. But Kahneman added, "In fact, in most situations what you don't know is so overwhelmingly more important than what you do know that you have no business acting on what you know." Oops.
Barbara Warner, a financial planner with Warner Financial in Bethesda, said she sees a lot of overconfidence among two groups of people: relatively new investors to the market (me), particularly recent business school graduates (not me), and retirees (never, with my investment sense). The latter group can be exceptionally frustrating. "Now they have entirely too much time on their hands to devote to CNBC and Money magazine," she said. "People suddenly think they are smarter than they used to be because they have more time to pay attention to it."
|
Four months ago, judging myself to be the next Warren Buffett, I logged on to my Charles Schwab account and did something that in hindsight was astonishingly stupid, even for my own very long roster of financial screw-ups. I clicked over to the trading page and bought shares of Citigroup.
| 17.157895 | 0.631579 | 1.298246 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/26/AR2008052601136.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/26/AR2008052601136.html
|
Iran Withholds Key Nuclear Documents
|
2008052719
|
PARIS, May 26 -- A new report by the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency said Monday that Iran continues to thwart efforts to obtain crucial documents that could shed light on the past activities of its nuclear program, but said inspectors have found no evidence that Tehran is currently attempting to divert its nuclear program to military uses.
The report by the International Atomic Energy Agency also said Iran's civilian nuclear program has made only incremental progress in recent months, despite claims by Iranian leaders that the program is making significantly larger strides.
The European Union's foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, said Monday that he was prepared to offer Iran a new package of incentives to persuade it to abide by U.N. demands that it stop uranium enrichment in its nuclear program.
Solana declined to provide details of the new proposals, a revision of an offer rejected by Tehran in 2006. That plan would have allowed another country to enrich uranium for power stations in exchange for Iran halting its own enrichment efforts. The United States and some European countries have accused Iran of using its civilian nuclear program as a cover for developing a nuclear weapons program, an allegation Tehran denies.
The report delivered Monday to the IAEA's 35-member Board of Governors said allegations that Iran conducted research on high explosives and missile warheads in the 1990s "remain a matter of serious concern."
IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei wrote, "Clarification of these is critical to an assessment of the nature of Iran's past and present nuclear program." He said the IAEA's "overall assessment of the nature of Iran's nuclear program also requires clarifications by Iran concerning some procurement activities of military related institutions."
The report continued, "It should be emphasized, however, that the agency has not detected the actual use of nuclear material in connection with the alleged studies."
Iran has criticized the IAEA for failing to provide it with copies of some of the documents accusing it of conducting research for nuclear weapons. Some U.S. agencies have refused to allow the IAEA to show the original documents to Iran, according to sources familiar with the investigations.
U.S. intelligence agencies concluded last year that Iran stopped weapons research in 2003; Iran has denied it ever conducted such research.
ElBaradei said IAEA investigators have made 14 unannounced inspections in the last 13 months, noting, "The agency has been able to continue to verify" that Iran has not diverted any of its declared nuclear material to military uses.
The IAEA reported that Iran had 3,500 uranium-enrichment centrifuges operating at its Natanz underground nuclear facility, slightly more than the number reported earlier this year, but about half of what Iranian officials claimed they planned to have operational.
|
PARIS, May 26 -- A new report by the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency said Monday that Iran continues to thwart efforts to obtain crucial documents that could shed light on the past activities of its nuclear program, but said inspectors have found no evidence that Tehran is currently attempting to...
| 9.698113 | 0.981132 | 51.018868 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/25/AR2008052502289.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/25/AR2008052502289.html
|
Mars Craft Succeeds in Soft Landing
|
2008052719
|
The spacecraft Phoenix landed safely on Mars yesterday, making a hazardous soft landing on the planet's far north with all its scientific systems apparently intact and ready to begin an intensive new search for life beyond Earth.
After counting down the last stage of the descent by hundreds and then tens of nerve-racking meters, officials at Mission Control in Pasadena, Calif., announced that "Phoenix has landed," setting off a joyous celebration by the mission team.
"It could not have gone better, not in my dreams," said Barry Goldstein, NASA's project manager at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena.
The touchdown, at about 8 p.m. Eastern time, was the first successful soft landing on the Red Planet -- using a parachute and thrusters rather than protective air bags -- since the twin Viking missions in 1976. In all, six of 11 similar attempts by the United States, Russia and England ended in failure, so the Phoenix team awaited with enormous apprehension the outcome of the spacecraft's approach and landing.
Phoenix plunged into the thin Martian atmosphere traveling at more than 12,000 mph. Over the next seven minutes, friction -- which raised the temperature on the heat shield to 2,600 degrees Fahrenheit -- slowed it enough to deploy the parachute.
About half a mile from the surface, and with only seconds remaining before touching down, 12 small rocket thrusters fired to slow the lander's descent speed to 5 mph. Before it landed, however, Phoenix had to orient itself toward the sun to ensure that its solar panels could pick up enough light to generate the power it will need on the surface.
Peter Smith of the University of Arizona, lead investigator for the mission, said earlier that the entry would amount to "seven minutes of terror" for the scientists.
Like the Viking landers, Phoenix is designed to look for organic material and other signs that life has existed on Mars, or could exist on the planet. Unlike the two rovers that have been exploring the Martian surface for nearly five years, Phoenix is built to stay in one place and use its robotic arm to dig into the soil and ice. The vehicle is equipped with several miniature chemistry labs to analyze the material it digs up.
The lander touched down further north on Mars than any previous lander. NASA scientists think the frozen water on or near the surface may tell them whether the minerals and organic compounds needed for life as we know it exist, or have ever existed, on the planet.
Throughout the descent and landing, NASA engineers at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory were receiving data on the spacecraft's progress 15 minutes after events occurred -- helpless to intervene if anything went wrong. Transmissions were sent from Phoenix to the orbiting Mars Odyssey spacecraft, then relayed back to Earth at the speed of light over the 171 million miles between the planets.
Phoenix, named for the mythological bird reborn from its ashes, was assembled largely from parts manufactured for other spacecraft. After two Mars mission failures in 1999, the space agency scrapped a lander mission planned for 2000 and recycled some of the hardware.
One of those failures was the last time NASA tried a soft landing on Mars. The Mars Polar Lander was angling for the south pole when it prematurely shut off its engine and crashed to the surface below. The other failure involved a spacecraft that was supposed to go into orbit around Mars; NASA lost contact with it during the approach, and its fate is unknown.
|
Science news from The Washington Post. Read about the latest breakthroughs in technology,medicine and communications.
| 33.45 | 0.45 | 0.55 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/25/AR2008052502805.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/25/AR2008052502805.html
|
Mid-Level Official Steered U.S. Shift On North Korea
|
2008052719
|
"If you just let me go to Pyongyang, I'll get you a deal," the career Foreign Service officer said, prompting others to roll their eyes and move on.
In the twilight of the Bush presidency, the nuclear agreement that Hill has tirelessly pursued over the past three years has emerged as Bush's best hope for a lasting foreign policy success. In the process, Hill has become the public face of an extraordinary 180-degree policy shift on North Korea, from confrontation to accommodation.
With crucial support from Rice, Hill has often triumphed over his bureaucratic rivals, making him a lightning rod for conservative critics. They caustically call him "Kim Jong Hill" -- a play on the name of North Korean leader Kim Jong Il -- and assert that he made concession after concession in a desperate effort to keep the talks from collapsing.
No assistant secretary of state can so dramatically change policy without the full backing of the secretary or the president. But for a mid-level official, Hill has had unusual access to the president, often joining breakfast meetings that include Rice, Vice President Cheney and national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley. He has even had an occasional one-on-one chat with Bush.
Through deft use of public appearances and the news media, Hill also has become an international figure in his own right. U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon last year hailed him as a "diplomat par excellence" whose "persistence and skillful negotiation have brought us close, I believe, to resolving this last legacy of the Cold War." Along with German Chancellor Angela Merkel and the Aga Khan, Hill is even a finalist for Britain's prestigious Chatham House Prize -- given to the statesman who has had the greatest impact on international relations -- for keeping the North Korean "talks alive and viable, against seemingly impossible odds," including the "complex internal politics of Washington."
Under the agreements Hill has reached, Pyongyang has shut down its nuclear reactor, disabled key facilities and provided thousands of pages of records meant to verify the size of its stockpile of weapons-grade plutonium. Hill is traveling to Asia this week to prod North Korea to fully declare its nuclear programs. But the United States has backed off an earlier demand for detailed information about North Korean uranium enrichment or assistance to a clandestine Syrian reactor -- and is poised to remove key sanctions against North Korea.
The most important test is still to come: whether North Korea will ultimately agree to give up its plutonium stockpile and forswear using it to make additional nuclear weapons.
One of the biggest guessing games in diplomatic circles today is how long Hill can keep up his balancing act of pleasing his bosses, negotiating with North Korea and fending off conservatives eager to see him fail. Even now, he and his tactics are viewed with suspicion by many top administration officials, who have clipped his wings at times.
Hill, for instance, was largely responsible for arranging the unprecedented visit to Pyongyang this year by the New York Philharmonic, even lobbying reluctant musicians to make the trip over a pizza lunch in the chorus rehearsal room last fall. "It was a spectacular thing to witness. He was direct and honest, and . . . changed a lot of minds that day," said Eric Latzky, spokesman for the orchestra.
But Rice ordered him not to attend the news conference announcing the trip after administration officials realized he would share the stage with a North Korean envoy.
"On the one hand, he is an effective negotiator," said Victor Cha, a former director of Asian affairs at the National Security Council, who was Hill's deputy at the nuclear talks in 2006. "But you can also view him as a media hog trying to be a hero."
|
Early in President Bush's second term, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice convened a series of strategy sessions on how to persuade North Korea to surrender its nuclear weapons programs. One key official, Assistant Secretary of State Christopher R. Hill, remained largely silent, four participant...
| 14.313725 | 0.666667 | 1.333333 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/25/AR2008052501779.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/25/AR2008052501779.html
|
Social Networks' Sway May Be Underestimated
|
2008052719
|
Facebook, MySpace and other Web sites have unleashed a potent new phenomenon of social networking in cyberspace. But at the same time, a growing body of evidence is suggesting that traditional social networks play a surprisingly powerful and underrecognized role in influencing how people behave.
The latest research comes from Nicholas A. Christakis, a medical sociologist at the Harvard Medical School, and James H. Fowler, a political scientist at the University of California at San Diego. The pair reported last summer that obesity appeared to spread from one person to another through social networks, almost like a virus or a fad.
In a follow-up to that provocative research, the team has produced similar findings about another major health issue: smoking. In a study published last week in the New England Journal of Medicine, the team found that a person's decision to kick the habit is strongly affected by whether other people in their social network quit -- even people they do not know. And, surprisingly, entire networks of smokers appear to quit virtually simultaneously.
Taken together, these studies and others are fueling a growing recognition that many behaviors are swayed by social networks in ways that have not been fully understood. And it may be possible, the researchers say, to harness the power of these networks for many purposes, such as encouraging safe sex, getting more people to exercise or even fighting crime.
"What all these studies do is force us to start to kind of rethink our mental model of how we behave," said Duncan Watts, a Columbia University sociologist. "Public policy in general treats people as if they are sort of atomized individuals and puts policies in place to try to get them to stop smoking, eat right, start exercising or make better decisions about retirement, et cetera. What we see in this research is that we are missing a lot of what is happening if we think only that way."
For both of their studies, Christakis and Fowler took advantage of detailed records kept between 1971 and 2003 about 5,124 people who participated in the landmark Framingham Heart Study. Because many of the subjects had ties to the Boston suburb of Framingham, Mass., many of the participants were connected somehow -- through spouses, neighbors, friends, co-workers -- enabling the researchers to study a network that totaled 12,067 people.
When researchers analyzed the patterns of those who managed to quit smoking over the 32-year period, they found that the decision appeared to be highly influenced by whether someone close to them stopped. A person whose spouse quit was 67 percent more likely to kick the habit. If a friend gave it up, a person was 36 percent more likely to do so. If a sibling quit, the chances increased by 25 percent.
A co-worker had an influence -- 34 percent -- only if the smoker worked at a small firm. The effects were stronger among the more educated and among those who were casual or moderate smokers. Neighbors did not appear to influence each other, but friends did even if they lived far away.
"You appear to have to have a close relationship with the person for it to be influential," Fowler said.
But the influence of a single person quitting nevertheless appeared to cascade through three degrees of separation, boosting the chance of quitting by nearly a third for people two degrees removed from one another.
"It could be your co-worker's spouse's friend or your brother's spouse's co-worker or a friend of a friend of a friend. The point is, your behavior depends on people you don't even know," Christakis said. "Your actions are partially affected by the actions of people who are beyond your social horizon" -- but in the broader network.
In addition, the researchers found that the size of smokers' own networks did not change over time, even though the overall number of smokers plummeted, from 45 percent to 21 percent of the population during that time. The researchers realized that what happened was that entire networks of smokers would quit almost simultaneously.
|
Get Washington DC,Virginia,Maryland and national news. Get the latest/breaking news,featuring national security,science and courts. Read news headlines from the nation and from The Washington Post. Visit www.washingtonpost.com/nation today.
| 18.642857 | 0.452381 | 0.5 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/26/AR2008052600568.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/26/AR2008052600568.html
|
U.N. Says Russia Downed Drone
|
2008052719
|
Russia, which denies involvement in the incident and says the drone was shot down by Abkhaz forces, maintains a peacekeeping force in Abkhazia to enforce a 1994 cease-fire agreement. The region remains a part of Georgia but has enjoyed de facto independence since routing Georgian forces in the early 1990s.
Assembled from radar records, witness statements and video footage from the drone, the U.N. report found that the fighter jet was either a MiG-29 Fulcrum or a Su-27 Flanker, neither of which Abkhazia possesses. The report also said that, after downing the drone, the fighter jet turned north and headed into Russian airspace.
"Absent compelling evidence to the contrary, this leads to the conclusion that the aircraft belonged to the Russian air force," according to the report, which was posted on the Web site of the U.N. Observer Mission in Georgia, at http://www.unomig.org. "From a strict peacekeeping perspective, therefore, the Mission considers that enforcement action by third-parties -- in this case the Russian Federation -- in the zone of conflict . . . undercuts the ceasefire and separation of forces regime."
The report also criticized Georgia for operating the drone and noted that U.N. officials had warned the government about such flights. Abkhazia's leadership had complained about a drone flying over the region in March.
The United Nations said it "informed the Georgian Ministry of Defense that it considered that a reconnaissance mission by a military aircraft, whether manned or unmanned, constituted 'military action' and therefore contravened the Moscow Agreement," as the 1994 cease-fire is formally known.
Georgian officials have said they need to conduct reconnaissance of Abkhaz military formations and movements. But the United Nations warned in its report that "however legitimate this purpose may seem to the Georgian side, it stands to reason that this kind of military intelligence-gathering is bound to be interpreted by the Abkhaz side as a precursor to a military operation, particularly in a period of tense relations between the sides."
Georgia and Abkhazia have repeatedly teetered on the brink of renewed conflict, which could lead to a wider war between Russia and Georgia. Russia accused Georgia last month of building up its forces on the border with Abkhazia, and Moscow moved troops and armor into the breakaway region in response.
The renewed tension followed a decision by Russia to step up its economic ties with Abkhazia and South Ossetia, another separatist region of Georgia. The Georgian government threatened to block Russia's membership in the World Trade Organization in retaliation.
The two countries have also been at odds over Georgia's desire to join the NATO alliance.
Russian officials Monday rejected the U.N. finding. "Any breach of Georgian airspace, let alone the destruction of an unmanned reconnaissance aircraft, is out of the question," a Defense Ministry spokesman, Col. Alexander Drobyshevsky, told the Russian news agency Interfax.
But Georgian officials seized on the report to reiterate their assertions that Russia is not a neutral party to the conflict over Abkhazia.
"This happens to be the first time when an international organization, especially the United Nations, has, without any doubt, blamed the Russian Federation for aggression against Georgia," Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili told reporters.
|
MOSCOW, May 26 -- U.N. investigators concluded in a report released Monday that a Russian fighter jet almost certainly shot down a Georgian reconnaissance drone over the separatist region of Abkhazia last month. The finding supports Georgian assertions that Russia is providing military backing to...
| 12.8125 | 0.791667 | 1.458333 |
low
|
medium
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/25/AR2008052501135.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/25/AR2008052501135.html
|
General Takes Office As President Of Lebanon
|
2008052719
|
The vote for Suleiman was virtually uncontested, already agreed to in a deal negotiated in Qatar last week that ended an 18-month confrontation between forces allied with the government and the opposition led by the Shiite Muslim movement Hezbollah. Postponed 19 times, the election marked the first step in reconstituting what had looked more and more like a failed state in past months: an unfilled presidency, a cabinet deemed illegitimate by the opposition and a parliament that had not met since 2006.
After Suleiman's election, by 118 votes of 127 possible, a flag-waving crowd that had gathered in his home town of Amchit erupted in cheers. Fireworks detonated over Beirut, cars blared their horns and church bells tolled. Staccato bursts of celebratory gunfire rattled across a capital that, less than two weeks ago, witnessed pitched gun battles redolent of civil war.
"I call upon all of you, politicians and citizens, to begin a new stage that is called Lebanon and the Lebanese," Suleiman, who forewent his military uniform for the civilian suit of a politician, told parliament. To repeated rounds of applause, he said the country had paid dearly for what he called national unity. "Let us preserve it hand in hand."
The deal that brought Suleiman to power represented another setback in the region for the United States, which has long sought to isolate Hezbollah, a group backed by Syria and Iran. Under the agreement, Hezbollah and its allies will have veto power in the coming cabinet -- the group's demand since the crisis began after a war with Israel in 2006 -- demonstrating its clear role today as the single most powerful force in Lebanon.
The vote represented a rare moment of consensus across the political, social and ideological divide that still fractures Lebanon -- from the country's posture toward Israel to which foreign patron will play the greatest role in Lebanese politics, long vulnerable to regional crises. The foreign ministers of Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and France attended the parliamentary session, as did the emir of Qatar, who was seated at the podium of parliament in recognition of his government's role in the negotiations, which nearly collapsed twice. In a telling sign, the United States was represented only by a congressional delegation.
"This last crisis ended with a winner and a vanquished," said the emir, Sheik Hamad Bin Khalifa al-Thani. "The winner is Lebanon, and the vanquished is the feud, and this needs to be clear to all -- today, tomorrow and forever."
Streets in the capital and elsewhere Sunday were awash in Lebanese flags and posters celebrating Suleiman's presidency. "The leader, the president," one read. "Congratulations, Lebanon," said another. Weary of almost continuous crises that have beset Lebanon since former prime minister Rafiq al-Hariri was assassinated in a 2005 car bombing in Beirut, many residents, regardless of their stance on the crisis, have greeted the agreement and election of Suleiman with relief that the country averted civil war, consolation perhaps muted by frustration that the confrontation lasted as long as it did.
Reservations have surged at hotels here, the stock market has rebounded and life has returned to a downtown paralyzed by an 18-month opposition sit-in.
Often heard in Lebanon, though, is the idea that the country has embarked on a truce, and no more. The question of Hezbollah's arsenal remains pressing for government supporters, who tried to address the issue in the Qatar talks. Suleiman is expected to lead a dialogue over the issue with rival leaders.
The cabinet will remain in power through next summer, when parliamentary elections are expected to again enshrine in power the same leaders, some of them veterans of the civil war with almost-feudal influence over their followers.
Suleiman, 59, was appointed army commander in 1998, when Syria still exercised tutelage over Lebanon. He rose through the ranks of an army that, particularly in the 1990s, worked closely with Syria and Hezbollah, which fought a guerrilla war against Israel in southern Lebanon until its withdrawal in 2000. He emerged as a candidate of the opposition, then drew on the backing of government supporters to fill a post vacant since the term of Emile Lahoud, a Syrian ally and former general, ended in November.
Both sides had their grievances with Suleiman: The opposition was critical of the military for shooting on protesters in January; government supporters were angry at what they saw as the military's acquiescence in allowing fighters of Hezbollah and its allies to enter predominantly Muslim West Beirut this month, where they routed government-backed militiamen in hours, forcing the government into the eventual compromise.
"The gun should only be pointed against the enemy," Suleiman said. "We will not allow it another direction."
|
BEIRUT, May 25 -- Lebanon's parliament elected the army commander, Gen. Michel Suleiman, as president Sunday, filling a post vacant for six months and bringing a symbolic if tenuous end to the country's worst crisis since the 15-year civil war ended in 1990.
| 18.4 | 0.7 | 1.18 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/19/DI2008051901481.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/19/DI2008051901481.html
|
The Indiana Jones Phenomenon
|
2008052719
|
As the world prepares for the opening of "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" on Thursday, join Stuever to discuss his thoughts on Indy.
Hank Stuever: Hello everyone. It's Indy Eve. Thanks for joining the chat today, or at least toggling between this room and the probably far more jittery-in-a-good-way "American Idol" chat going on with Lisa D next door.
We're here to talk about all things Indiana. I wrote a piece Sunday's Style & Arts section -- "Indiana Jones and the Meaningless Void" -- that can serve as a conversation starter (and for some, I can serve as your personal pinata, since you did NOT like it, think I'm a pseudo-intellectual turd, etc. It's all in my job description; I am here to serve you, the very important and elusive and time-strapped and discerning customer)
ANYWAY, Indiana Jones! Does he stand for anything? Is it a great thing to just represent FUN, THRILL, MOVIEMAKING?
Do you have things to say about Lucas, Spielberg?
Have you SEEEEEEEN it yet? (There was a press screening on Sunday night in DC, but no other advance peeks that I know of, unless you're at Cannes, and if you are, cannes you write in and tell us what you thought?) I have NOT seen the movie. That's a big caveat to this chat. But I've read tons of spoilers (hey, I don't care) and I'll be posting spoiler alerts throughout to warn you off. Don't look if you can't take it. I'll also be sharing some of the feedback my piece got on the nasty comments board, AND I'll be sharing some of the reviews I've seen online. (I got a peek at Steve Hunter's review tomorrow, but I can't share that yet, not safely. Steve's a gun nut, you know.)
Let's get our Indy on.
New York, N.Y.: Let me ask you this: What do you like about the Indiana Jones movies? Did you enjoy them as kid?
Hank Stuever: Yes. I also want to hear from people today who have great memories of when they first saw it ... though I don't hear as many stories about "waiting for Indy" the way you hear about, for example, people camping out for Star Wars, etc.
(Has anybody driven by the Uptown on Connecticut today? Are there campers?)
Anyway, to answer your question, New York, YES, I do like these movies. WHAT do I like about them? Well, for one thing, one of the best memories I have of my dad (who died last October, and to make a long story short, he and I were quite estranged) is when he, my mother and I went to see Raiders of the Lost Ark, on a July night in 1981. My dad, a huge John Wayne fan and one of those guys who imagined himself quite larger than life, got the biggest kick out of Raiders. Laughed his head off when Indy shoots the swordsman in the Cairo market. Pure, pure joy, and I felt it too, and I never forgot it. I even remember the theater -- NorthPark 4, Oklahoma City. A good memory, thanks to Spielberg, et al.
Anonymous: I really do not want to see it. A remake of films last done 20 years ago. "Hero" over 60 now (sure, stunts will make him look young -- but just imagine him accepting a leading lady his age, which would really show his age). When asked why they made this film, Spielberg and others mention the desire of fans and the thrill of getting together with old friends -- all valid enough -- but no one, I mean no one, mentions money (it's okay folks, you're in the movie biz to make money). And the new star (LeBeouf?) was on David Letterman recently, and he came across as a real egotistical jerk.
Hank Stuever: They will miss your $10.50.
Chicago, Ill.: Whatever interest I had in Indy 4 dissipated once I read that George Lucas pushed to give it a 50's B-movie sci-fi influence. What is with that guy's obsession with dumb old serials? Can he ruin anything else?
Hank Stuever: People have a real lack of faith in George Lucas, after the Star Wars prequels. I think they HAD to push the story into the 1950s, because there's no getting around the fact that their star is AARP-plus. I like the idea of moving it to the Cold War. My initial thought was that he should pursue Nazis who are hiding in South America, maybe even Hitler himself? Too much.
My friend Mike Schaffer had a brilliant idea: His nemesis now would be Short Round, a Maoist baddie in Cultural Revolution China!!
Baltimore, Md.: Why the fuss over Jungle Jim serials?: As someone old enough to remember the tail end of the movie serial era, I am amazed that people look for larger meanings in the Indiana Jones films (or "Star Wars," for that matter). Lucas and Spielberg, for both franchises, seized upon a simple premise: what if you remade the old Saturday matinee movie serials as big budget extravaganzas? So they did, and the results were mildly diverting -- especially to those who remember the originals -- but to invest them with anything beyond pop entertainment value is a bit like asking my cats to discuss Wittgenstein; i.e. pointless.
Hank Stuever: Your cats have lots to say about Weingarten, but you just aren't hearing them.
I think, to get to your question (why the fuss) is that these movies are more than serials simply for their economic heft. They cost a lot to make and have reaped billions and do wind up meaning a lot to the people who grew up with them and overthought their impact. Also, blockbusters are THE American export now. Not grain, not cars but CGI, icons, entertainment. Blockbusters are our pyramids, our mythology a little bit -- the largest expression of what we were as a society, what we revered, so someone might be deeply interested a couple thousand years from now. It's a theory.
What does it mean?: Don't forget the whole good vs. evil thing -- not "good wins," just reaffirming that there actually is a "good." How many folks nowadays really believe in the stories of the Bible, really believe that God not only exists, but that He will go so far as to create a big, giant box o'smiting just in case He happens to be distracted at a bad time? Or that Jesus not only came and died for our sins, but that he was so magic that his mere touch transformed this little cup into an eternal life-giver? And, oh, yeah, that THAT's the guy who's looking out for little old me?
Sure we enjoy fun and adventures, but we want it all to be FOR something. We want life to mean something, but we're afraid that it doesn't -- that this is all there is. Just pure adventure is a nice distraction, but then you walk out of the theater realizing that, yes, you're still going to die, and that's all she wrote.
Hot macho/tender guy, rollicking adventures, race against time to defeat the big bad -- that's your basic Clive Cussler: a nice fling, but nothing lasting. But sprinkle in references to things that we recognize/want but don't really believe, and then have the big denouement confirm that it's all true, in the best of all possible ways -- now THAT resonates (well, as long as it's "our" mythos, and not, say, Indy 2). That's when you move into the realm of hero story and cultural icon.
Plus, you know, there's the hat.
Hank Stuever: Brilliant, thank you.
As a 22-year-old female, I enjoy Indiana Jones' adventures for one reason: They make me happy. The movies are just plain old fun. From the first time I saw them as a little girl, I keep coming back for more. The movies never tried to be more than just a good ole adventure/serial.
Hank Stuever: Nice, thank you. I disagree with one part of your comment -- they were only meant to be good ole adventure serials. Good ole adventure serials were made much more cheaply, and more frequently. "Lost" is a good ole adventure serial. Indy is a major, major production that took three years, then three years, then five years, then 16 years to make ... four episodes in a serial. (Of course, you can throw in the TV show, "Young Indy" if you want...)
Brookland, Washington, D.C.: Couldn't Indiana Jones be seen as a derivative of U.S. heroes like Lewis and Clark, or the Old West cowboys or lawmen?
Hank Stuever: Indy can be derivative of a lot, but that's a good start. In fact, it's ALL derivative. That irritated critics, until they gave in. All the original reviews of Star Wars were like, hello, Flash Gordon? (And everything else!) By "Raiders," in 1981, critics got the memo: Derivative, good. We likey. We want to ride again and again.
Washington, D.C.: I understand your premise, but you're trying to make a case that doesn't need to be made, and an arguement that really doesn't have much basis.
Why DOES a film like Indiana Jones need a deeper meaning? Can't a film exist for pure entertainment, wonder, amazement, awe, or just pure enjoyment? The Indiana Jones saga (one that extends FAR beyond the soon-to-be four theatrical releases in the form of comics and the Young Indiana Jones Chronicles television show) is about a nerdy hero; a guy who goes out and has a lot of fun doing his job, and finds ways to get himself into and out of serious troubles. The character is an icon, as much as Michael Corleone, Hannibal Lecter, Moses, or Batman.
I wonder if you really understand the movies and television show, or if you're just trying to draw attention to yourself by taking a devil's advocate position. Regardless, you fail to make a convincing argument.
Hank Stuever: I think my argument gets better (a widdle bit) if you check out the sidebar. (Can we link to it?) "What We Talk About When Talk About ..." Star Wars, Star Trek, the Matrix, Harry Potter etc.
My premise, and I stand by it: For movies that are so expensive to make, reaped so much box office, Indy movies seem to have never created a large community of further talk. (I'm excluding "fan fiction" and self-made fan films, etc., though that's an important angle, and I included it in the piece.) Whereas so many other big franchises are built around (arguably) big ideas, the biggest idea here is Wheeeee. I didn't answer it, because the answer is Shut Up Hank.
re: Short Round LOL: ShortRound: "Indy! Why you leave me with crazy woman in India? You dead to me."
As someone of Indian descent, I appreciated that they brought some of India into the series. I just wish it hadn't been done so ham-handedly or inappropriately. (No Indian I know has ever eaten monkey brains. Thanks to Hanuman that would be considered a major no-no.) Having said that, I love the Indiana Jones franchise even up to reading all the books, including the one on which the current release is based. It's been decades though and I don't know how it will translate to film. So, I'm keeping my expectations low and hoping for a pleasant surprise.
Hank Stuever: There's a two-hour chat to be had where some of raise all the hamhanded stereotyping issues and the rest of us shout "get a life it's only a movie" ... so I sympathize. The first two movies especially have a real vibe of "all brown people are alike, and most importantly, they are Not Indy." Lucas says all his MacGuffins (the ark, the Sankara stones, the crystal skull) are rooted in real lore. But yeah, not the monkey brains.
St. Mary's City, Md.: The franchise is devoid of meaning because its goal is simply action and special effects for their own sake. Except for the third movie's relationship between Jones and his father, there was little character development. As much as I enjoy the films, I recognize that they are cinematic fast food. I hear from many younger moviegoers who rate movies based on the CGI, like they're comparing thrill rides at Kings Dominion. Can you think of franchises that emphasize special effects while still telling stories about people? There is some of that in "Star Wars" and "Harry Potter," but the character development seems somewhat shallow.
Hank Stuever: You said it, St. Mary's City.
washingtonpost.com: Here is that mythology sidebar Hank mentioned: What We Talk About When We Talk About Box Office Icons
Boston, Mass.: I find it interesting that, when making your case for the void in Indiana Jones, you contrast it with "Star Wars." I always found "Star Wars" thematically empty, even more so when the second trilogy came out. To me, the scene that summed up Lucas's approach to movie-making was when the droids walk past the giant sandworm skeleton. It's Lucas saying, "Oh, look, there's something interesting from someone else's world. Let's grab it and throw it into the pot." Lucas's world is a mishmash of icons and symbols from other places and other times, stripped of their meaning. He creates the skeleton of a mythology, just the way Joseph Campbell told him to, without any content. Episode 1 reeked of racism, not, I think, because Lucas is a racist, but because when he stole iconography from World War II movies he also brought along some of the anti-Japanese propaganda and unconscious assumptions of his sources.
The copying of form without the addition of substance goes all the way back to "THX-1138," where one of the new embryos being developed is numbered 666, in what feels like an attempt at Twilight-Zone-level spookiness. It carries over into the Indiana Jones franchise as well, which are masterful grab bags of old movie tropes.
Hank Stuever: Great post, Boston, thanks.
Plus, I would like to point out again, Lucas, who drafts all his mishmash imagery on yellow legal pads with pencils, draws circles for the dots of his i's. Who besides 12-year-old girls does that? Am I alone in being skeeved out by that? I encountered it in a total geeking-out moment when I read the reproudctions of his legal pads pencil scratches for "The Star Wars" in the early '70s. Has anybody ever really read those? Oh my gaw, you would not recognize SW. What a mess it started out as. Here's to legal pads and Number 4 pencils -- and ERASERS.
Alexandria, Va.: So what if Indy is derivative ... Name me one thing original in Hollywood!
Filmmakers are given WAY too much money to take chances on original ideas or concepts, so of course studios are only willing to bet on proven concepts. As human beings we look for familiarity, and that's what sequels offer.
Hank Stuever: That's a good challenge. People, name one thing original in Hollywood, recently.
Silver Spring, Md.: I read that article and realized you were right: its about FUN and ENTERTAINMENT, and not some deeper meaning. And after steaming about it for, oh, 30 seconds, I remembered that's why I love "Raiders." My favorite movie-going experience, without a doubt, was spending an afternoon at the AFI Silver a couple of summers ago when they showed it on the big screen. Two hours of delightfully fun summer entertainment that I wouldn't trade for anything.
Of course, sharing it with a theater full of people all whispering "Snakes! Why did it have to be snakes?" didn't hurt!
Hank Stuever: Plus, don't forget: Popcorn, air-conditioning.
I have a funny "snakes why'd it have to be snakes" thing to share from our comments board:
Why did it have to be Stuever with a thesaurus?
Alexandria, Va.: My dad took me (and my brother, for the third) to see all three movies. We both loved them - just total entertainment. Considering that he's never forgiven me for being forced to watch "The Dark Crystal," I love the fact that the Jones series is entertaining. Great lines, great action, just a fun time.
Hank Stuever: After the divorce, my dad and I had a regular night out, and we went to practically every movie made between about 1982 and 1985. Every drama, every blockbuster, every teen comedy. We saw it. All the Indy movies, and probably the Dark Crystal. (I get it confused with Labyrinth...)
We saw Flashdance three times! THREE times. With entirely different appreciations for it.
Washington, D.C.: Okay, so this isn't about Indiana Jones, but you were GREAT as the President Race announcer on Sunday. If I had realized who it was I would have asked for an autograph.
Hank Stuever: Thanks! (This is referring to my bit part at the Post Hunt, which was a blast.) Glad you were there. It was not easy to get those presidents to finish in the "correct" order every time. We had a great crew at that site. I love my big heads! (Waiting for Guffman ref.)
1. Care to comment on Shia LaBeouf's hair?
2. Do you think River Phoenix would have taken Ford's place, had he not OD'd?
Hank Stuever:1. Not ducktail-y enough?
2. No. I don't think so. I'm not sure what River Phoenix would be doing now. I think about it and I don't get any clear pictures. He might be on television, in something like "Lost" or "Grey's Anatomy." ...
Arlington, Va.: See, I would make the counter-argument to your original premise -- i.e., that "Star Wars" and "Harry Potter" both LACK a solid mythology.
Some may call me blasphemous to include "Star Wars," but let's face it -- George Lucas is his own (and his fans') worst enemy. And for many Harry Potter purists, the big-screen adaptations don't hold up anywhere to the depth captured in the books.
Hank Stuever: Harry Potter fans are tough critics. Imagine how hard it is to decided to cut 50 pp. or so of novel and realize you've only saved 5 minutes of screen time.
Speaking of Harry, another Harry ...
We called the dog Indiana: I hadn't thought about it until you mentioned it, but it's interesting that Indy never gets the treasure he goes after. He gives the Shankara stone back to the village. He loses the Ark to the bureaucratic storage. He leaves the Holy Grail behind in the cave. So we need to look at what he does get instead. He gets to bring life and children back to the village, and gets the girl. He gets to put a crimp in Hitler's world domination plan, defeat the evil archaeologist, and gets the girl. He gets to rekindle his relationship with his father (no girl, this time, but she was a Nazi anyway).
I'll need time to develop this thesis further, but I'm thinking of something along the lines of giving up the shiny bobble for a greater moral good.
Hank Stuever: Yes, let me know what you come with -- you have another 25 minutes or so. Or we all die!! Save us, Indy!
Washington, D.C.: One thing original in Hollywood: Okay, it's within the last 10 years, so I nominate "Being John Malkovich." Can anyone possibly tell me that was derivative of anything?
Hank Stuever: I was thinking of Charlie Kaufman too. ("Adaptation" as well, although that's a movie about derivativeness!)
WDC: I found your article interesting in that you seem to want to have some kind of deeper meaning attached to the Indiana Jones franchise. I think with this character, the point is not to say something, but to simply show how fun movies can be. I recall reading somewhere Spielberg or Lucas saying the film was a tribute to the old adventure movies. We need to look at them through that lens, and not try to psychoanalyze it. There's nothing wrong with just sitting back and enjoying the ride. "Star Wars" has plenty of mythology, if that's your sort of thing.
Hank Stuever: Well, how come if the filmmakers say "don't overanalyze it" that means we can't? Lucas falls back on this when he gets miffed at Star Wars fans: "They're thinking about it too much." But he is only too happy to stage traveling museum exhibits on the Meaning of Star Wars, etc., and sell his fans more and more written material on the Significance etc.
I still maintain that Indy has made way too much money to get a bye on cultural analysis. But there isn't any. He's not interesting enough to analyze; our reactions to him are ... lacking.
Dotting i's with circles: It could be worse - imagine if Lucas used smiles, hearts, or daisies.
Hank Stuever: Maybe the dots are planets.
Jacksonville, Fla.:"...the Indy films lack a solid mythology."
Oh good grief, lighten up. The Indy films are fun. Have you forgotten about fun or has your life really gotten that boring?!
Hank Stuever: If you knew me, you would not be telling me to lighten up. I'm pretty dang light.
Raiders Fan:"Raiders of the Lost Ark" was a great action movie. In this age of "let CGI do the acting" and "how many rear speakers again?", it's refreshing to see Indy back on the screen. Let's hope there isn't too much computerized special effects...
Hank Stuever: Yes, and my fedora's off to Spielberg for insisting (I'm told) on a minimum of CGI in this new one. I long for a return to old-school in these big movies. "Aliens" was on the other night (the James Cameron sequel, 1986) and I once again marvelled at how well it hold up, especially Mama Alien. She was a puppet! A giant, slimy puppet. What craftsmanship.
Bethesda, Md.: Bah, I can't buy any of the good-vs-evil stuff -- God stepping in. Yeah, God sleeps through the holocaust -- what's a few million people dying?-- but open his special box and there's hell to pay.
Hank Stuever: Harry Knowles of Aint It Cool News has answered What Does Indy Mean in his review of the new movie... Here he is:
"I also believe that each of the Indiana Jones films are about different things at their core. Raiders is about BELIEVING. Temple Of Doom is about TRUST. Last Crusade is about abandoning obsessions and choosing to live. And that leads us to The Crystal Skulls What is it about? Well, that I'm literally just 40 minutes from having seen it at this point - I'm going to say I feel the film is about letting go of the past and choosing a happy future. It's LIFE."
Whaddya think? He's the ultimate fanboy. He saw a sneak preview and then the next day went in for gastric lapband surgery. (He divulges that he got up to 417 lbs, and a size 62 waist. That's a lotta fanboy.)
First encounter with Indy: I saw the first Indy movie when I was living in Brussels, Belgium when I was about twelve. My friend Claire (who was British) went with me. The movie was shown in this tiny movie theater. Claire practically took my hand off during Indy's escape from the rolling stone, but we both loved the movie. Our favorite character was Marian because she was spunky and didn't scream unnecessarily (unlike the blonde bimbo in the second movie).
I think the movies do a good job of portraying what we think certain countries were like at a certain period of time (if that makes sense). Beyond that, I'm not sure they represent much more than really good entertainment.
Hank Stuever: I think you're right: The Indy movies' foray into stereotypes of All Brown People and Their Funny Foods and Languages can actually be forgiven if you view through a prism of ... retroactive irony? As in, THIS is how people thought back in the 30s? I wonder how the brown people fare in the new one -- 1957 isn't much more enlightened.
It's all sort of a moot argument. There were never protests, and these films are beloved worldwide.
RE:Yeah, God sleeps through the holocaust -- what's a few million people dying?-- but open his special box and there's hell to pay.: OK. But remember, in the movie we - the U-S-of-A - we got the box full of God in 1935, and stored it in a warehouse....
Hank Stuever: Beisdes the big rolling ball, this seems to be the defining image, the only cultural reference, that everyone gleaned from Raiders: the damn bureaucrats stored away the Ark beneath layers of red tape. You see references to this all the time. It's sort of a Hollywood metaphor as a FOIA request. The government knows, they just won't tell us, X-Files, etc. Always a deep well to return to for screenwriters.
Princeton, N.J.: A long time ago I went out on a date to see Kurosawa's "Kagemusha" (did I spell it right?). After the movie, my date started talking about Kurosawa's brilliant use of the "crucifixion image", about how Kurosawa was trying to be deliberately avant garde, yada, yada. 23 years have passed, and I have no idea what happened to that girl. But I still wonder what the heck she was talking about. I enjoyed the movie for its brilliant use of color. The visuals were spectacular. Beyond that I didn't need any more analysis. And every time I see someone forcing deeper meaning onto movies (or TV shows) I think of that girl. Guys, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. (By the way, if anyone out there knows what the heck she was talking about, I would appreciate a little enlightenment).
Hank Stuever: A cigar is just a cigar, but what is a big rolling rock? Just ONE big rolling rock. Were they trying to tell us that Indy is missing a testicle?
Indians Eating Monkey Brains and snakes ...: That scene and a few stereotypes resulted in the movie being banned in India.
Hank Stuever: Really? DO you have a reference, a news clip? I'll post...
Washington: Don't you think it's a postmodern kind of thing, to expect your entertainment to come with "meaning" these days? You mentioned your dad and John Wayne (great story, by the way). Do you think people of your dad's generation expected there to be deeper meaning behind their John Wayne films? Or did they just enjoy the films? That's what I love about Indy -- I don't WANT to look for any deeper meaning.
Are we all just too smart and overly analytical for our own damn good these days?
Hank Stuever: You're onto something. I remember sitting there looking over and seeing pure joy in my father during Raiders. It probably should have been the other way around. We of a certain media-saturated generation, with liberal arts degrees and quickly typing figners, are certainly caught up in our post-modern selves.
The 80s: Maybe the movies are a reflection of their era, 1980s America, when a B-movie actor was president, Greed was Good, and it was Morning in America. It was all about Michelob Light and arbitrageurs driving Beemers. Shiny, bubbling, vacuous. Feel good. Don't think hard.
Hank Stuever: Sure, sounds right.
Washington, D.C.: I believe that Spielberg and to a greater extent, George Lucas, have gotten a free ride for some very poorly written films. I found the first Indy film and the first "Star Wars" films to be amazing, but the other five "Star Wars" films had terrible dialogue, and the other two Indy films were borderline racist and made me uncomfortable as a kid. Spielberg's string of flops have started to expose the man behind the curtain, but not soon enough for me. I mean, watch "Jaws" again, the dialogue is terrible.
The Importance of Being Harrison Ford: I also think these movies would not have been nearly as successful without Harrison Ford. The guy has a sort of "aw, shucks" quality to him which is really appealing, what with the broken nose, the scar on his chin, and that lop-sided smile. He's just endearing.
Hank Stuever: And what about sexy? An editor here now wonders what she was thinking back then ...
I did come across some excellent writing about how women fare in Indy's world. It's nice to see Marion back, but I hear she's not as tough this time out, a tad more damsely... I can't know til I see it.
Alexandria: The rolling rock was a metaphor for alcohol, and its deletrious effects on those who did not conform to an accepted standard of God-fearing manhood. This is further confirmed by the use of alcohol later in the film to destroy a traditional native habitat.
Pseudo-intellectual literary criticism is fun!
Hank Stuever: And you're so good at it.
I haven't graded all the papers yet.
Alexandria, Va.: Indy films fall in with H. Rider Haggard, Tarzan, Lost Horizon, and Terry and the Pirates. They are entirely self-contained with their setting in the actual world (which Harry Potter and Star Wars both don't have). Plus, almost all of the characters are real. The foes are Nazis and cult members, not five-mouthed beasts, and they shoot machine guns, not beams of light. It's not even a comic-book universe - Indy has no special powers.
Sagas like this reduce the ability of fanboys, since you aren't doing the Millenium Falcon but rather a zeppelin, which has been built and has plans that can be copied.
And as for a mythos, what about just good versus evil? Bad guys die at the end, good guys win.
Hank Stuever: This is brilliant too.
Wow all the good stuff is coming in with only seven minutes to spare.
I've missed you, Mr. S: Are you responsible for the great headline that went with your great article?
Hank Stuever: I did write it.
Silver Spring, MD: Actually I lost all interest, respect, whatever, in Lucas after "Revenge/Return of the Jedi" --the movie, or he, lost all the courage of his convictions, starting with the early change of title from "Revenge.." to "Return..." "ooh, revenge is tooo negative" --please. Partly, I suppose, it was that "The Empire Strikes Back" was so brilliant -- and I suspect that was mostly Irvin Kershner's work. But Lucas has no sense of visual style -- when things should be obscured, everything is too well lit and in-focus -- and you can only realize that you're looking at chunks of plastic. And don't even get me started on the prequels!
Couldn't Lucas have invested a few of his millions in someone to write some reasonable dialogue? Honestly Carrie Fisher has written better stuff when she was drug-impaired.
Hank Stuever: What I sense about Lucas is that very few people around him will tell him no when it comes to his writing. Spielberg would be the only one powerful enough to veto him, and it sounds like they argue a lot, which is nice to hear. One of the reasons Indy 4 took so long (Lucas and others have said in interviews) is that the story never got off the ground. Many a screenwriter had a whack at different concepts. Lucas won out on the Crystal Skull plot (including B-movie type aliens from outer space references...)
Original Hollywood: The most original thing I can think of that came out of Hollywood recently was "Sin City." It had its own look, and the pervasive sense of menace really left me wondering about whether the characters were going to make it to the end or not.
Boulder, Col.: I agree with Washington in that nowadays we can't enjoy watching something for the sake of enjoyment and have to over-analyze every single frame. For example, I love the TV show "Lost" but some of the theories about the show's meaning, etc., make my poor little head hurt.
Why do I love the Indy franchise? Harrison Ford. He's hot. He used to be in my top 5 but got kicked off when he pierced his ear and started dating Calista Flockhart.
Hank Stuever: I don't see how you can watch "Lost" and not need a little post-mortem discussion at minimum. It seems built around that idea that there is always MORE than met the eye.
Who's your top five now?
Rockville, Md.: Hank. You are so full of beans - you must be a perfect fit for the other Style writers. Don't let me slow you down.
Hank Stuever: The musical fruit, the more you eat, the better you feel, full of beans at every meal...
I'm good vs. evil girl, again: Ok, I think Bethesda actually just made my point. The Holocaust is reality -- my husband's family lost a lot of aunts and uncles, so you're preaching to the choir. Heck, every day we see horrible stuff that happens to innocent, vulnerable people, and think, there just can't be a God -- or worse, maybe there is and He just doesn't care.
But, see, I WANT, more than anything else, to be wrong -- for that whole "God works in mysterious ways" thing to be true instead of just a line when there's no possible other way to explain something horrible. That's what Indy offers. It's, quite literally, suspension of disbelief.
Think about it: why are we so fixated on vampires, werewolves, etc.? We want evil to exist -- because if supernatural evil exists, then supernatural good must, too.
Re: Alexandria: Just want to tip my hat to Alexandria for referencing H. Rider Haggard. For anyone not familiar, his stories, including "King Solomon's Mine" (repeatedly turned into film), and "She", were the literary forerunners of Indiana Jones, and are well worth the effort of finding them. They are of a time and written from the perspective of a European, but are still fun.
Here's one thing the movies gave us: I think it's a patented Spielberg move. It's where the camera zooms in on someone's face as they turn, look over their right shoulder, and realize "Something's Coming!" I hope there's one of those in the new movie.
Hank Stuever: Probably more like 10 in the movie.
Okay, everyone, guess what? Our time is up. Thank you for an enlightening chat about a meaningless void. I enjoyed it. Enjoy the popcorn, enjoy the bigness, enjoy the freezing air-conditioning. It's summer and Indy is almost here.
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
|
Join live discussions from the Washington Post. Feature topics include national, world and DC area news, politics, elections, campaigns, government policy, tech regulation, travel, entertainment, cars, and real estate.
| 177.878049 | 0.707317 | 0.853659 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/23/DI2008052302069.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/23/DI2008052302069.html
|
Critiquing the Press - washingtonpost.com
|
2008052719
|
He was online Tuesday, May 27 at noon ET to take your questions and comments.
Baltimore MD: Howard: Glad you didn't take the buyout! But in reading your column about the Post's retrenchment, I was once again puzzled by something. Why did newspapers such as the Post and the NY Times rush headlong into putting their product on the Web before knowing how they could make it pay? The result has been to create a new generation of readers who won't shell out a measly 50 cents a day to buy the paper because they can get it free online. I know you have said the Web extends the Post's reach nationally, but frankly, what good does that do if the flagship product keeps losing readers and advertising? Thanks.
Howard Kurtz: Well, the truth is they had no choice. The Web is the future, and newspapers (along with networks, magazines and other Old Media folks) had to get in on the action. Among other things, the Web enables us to constantly update stories and post video, which you can't do in a once-a-day print edition.
At the same time, you are giving away your product for free (except for what revenue you can wring from banner ads). I had once thought that people would be more than happy to pay pennies a day for the privilege of reading washingtonpost.com or nytimes.com or other quality sites, but experiments with charging, even for premium content, have mostly been a flop. So newspapers like The Post remain trapped in this dilemma.
Winnipeg, Canada: Thanks for a poignant and thought-provoking article about staff reductions at the Post. I subscribe to my local daily, although it doesn't have much to recommend it; the book section editor is literate only in the same sense as Kevin Kline's character in "A Fish Named Wanda" was literate, and the paper's political writers didn't see a logical connection between a local PM losing his post as the federal minister of justice and his facing charges for election fraud. Still, I find that I get something from the printed word that I do not get from either the radio news or the television news, which I also tune into daily.
I also feel guilty about staff reductions to your paper, because I read it only online. I started reading it in 2002 when it seemed that your country was losing its collective mind in the war of terror, and I wanted some way to tune into the national psyche. I found some truly magnificent writers, Eugene Robinson the chief among them, but many others from all points of the political spectrum. It's too bad that a model does not exist that would allow both the print and the electronic versions of a "paper" to thrive, since I truly believe that both are vital.
Howard Kurtz: No reason to feel guilty -- we are putting it out there for free. And the fact that washingtonpost.com has 9.4 million unique monthly users does enable the Web site to recoup some money from advertisers, and has made The Post a global brand as opposed to a locally sold newspaper.
The Post is still fortunate, in the sense that a staff of roughly 700 is still larger than most American newspapers. But the shrinkage, as I wrote, is painful, and some of those departing are close to irreplaceable.
Richmond, Va.: What was the idea behind McCain giving only a few media outlets three hours to go over his records. What was he afraid of?
Howard Kurtz: Clearly he was trying to minimize coverage of his medical records, as underscored by the fact that the limited access was provided on the Friday before Memorial Day weekend.
Ann Arbor, Mich.: You weren't tempted by the buyout offer at all? Didn't Woodward take it this time?
Howard Kurtz: When a corporation offers that much in money and benefits, you have to think about it. But I like what I do, have a lot of freedom to do it and feel considerable loyalty to The Post (even though my job includes criticizing the paper). So it wasn't a hard call for me. I've been able to do other things, such as TV and writing books, while still working here. Bob Woodward's situation is different -- he long ago became primarily an author who does not work out of the office and whose connection to The Post is more infrequent.
Arlington, Va.: Hi, Howie. In your story on the emotional costs of The Post's buyouts, I found one name missing: Howie Kurtz. This isn't just a snide comment, but a reflection of what I find is so terribly wrong with old-fashioned dead-tree journalism. Uncurious reporters just concentrate on the bad news (those laid off) while ignoring the other key elements of the story (those who were offered, but didn't take the buyout). So why didn't Howie Kurtz take the buyout? Did those who decided to stay have faith in the future stability and financial success of The Washington Post, or were there some other reasons? As a 40-year Washington Post reader, I'm not asking for a "good news" story, just a couple of paragraphs that would give relief from breathless hype and unrelenting misery deposited on my doorstep each day: i.e. balance.
Howard Kurtz: I thought I had explained my reasoning. I'm an ink-in-the-veins newspaper guy, I believe in newspapers and in The Washington Post. That doesn't mean that those who took the offer don't believe in the paper. Some were closer to retirement age than I am. Others want to move on to a different phase of their lives -- in academia, perhaps. Maybe others could not turn down the money because of their family situations. I don't blame anyone for accepting a very generous offer that may not come around again. I just made a different call for myself. And the torrent of e-mail I've gotten has persuaded me that there are people out there who want to keep reading what I write.
Shelton, Wash.: Okay, I am probably showing my profound ignorance of what newspaper readers actually read, but surely there is a way to save money without cutting the news division? The A section (minus the op-ed pieces) is essential for its investigative reporting. Metro (minus the columnists) is essential for people in Washington for the same reason. But the world would be a better place if someone put a match to the editorial pages of The Post, the Sports section simply cannot compete with the blogs for local teams -- contrast the high quality analytical baseball blogs with the Post's coverage -- and Sports Illustrated and ESPN for national sports news, and the Style section is just froth. So if the Post is going to make cuts, why not cut those sections?
Howard Kurtz: I think a lot of people buy newspapers for the sportswriters. That would be a sure-fire way of losing plenty of readers. One of the great things about newspapers is that they are a smorgasbord. One person might passionately want to read the likes of Michael Wilbon and Tom Boswell, another might pay no attention to sports but care deeply about reports from foreign correspondents, and a third might be totally focused on arts and entertainment. We get flooded with complaints when we cut a single comic strip. So it's safe to assume that everything in the paper has a constituency.
Journalism and Objective Reality: From a media-process standpoint, if you ask a newspaper reporter why they don't say X (where "X" disproves some political lie or falsehood), they'll point you to an article saying X from two months ago. But that article has been forgotten. My question is why reporters don't remind voters of X every time candidates say not-X. Testing politician's statements against objective reality should not be an occasional feature, should it?
Howard Kurtz: It all depends on the X.
The Post does have a regular Fact-Checker column, by the way.
Jewish Voters and the Media: My prediction: Hundreds (if not thousands) of articles will be written between now and November about how Jewish voters have a problem with Obama, and then they will go to the polls and overwhelmingly vote for him. Despite this, no articles will be written about how Jewish voters have a problem with McCain. How come?
Howard Kurtz: Jewish voters traditionally have leaned Democratic, so if Obama is below the level of support of past Democratic nominees, it's fair to report on that. If polls showed that McCain was drawing a smaller proportion of Jewish voters than Bush did, that would also be a story.
Europe: Will Richard Quest be on the air again at CNN? Also, I only read the online version of The Post. I live overseas and The Post is not to be found here. (Unfortunately.) However, some family members now live in Washington and from my sending them various articles from the Web site, they are now Post subscribers because they found they liked the paper so much. And if I lived in the D.C. area, I would subscribe to the dead-tree version!
Howard Kurtz: Thanks for spreading the word. I don't know about the fate of Richard Quest in the wake of his arrest.
Washington: Re: "the Web is the future." I wonder if that is really true Howard? After all, back in the tech boom, there were dozens and dozens of dozens of companies that went into retailing online and found it a graveyard. (Pets.com, anyone?) My belief is that newspapers jumped on the Web train without thinking what they were really doing. If The Post pulled down its site tomorrow and became print only again, I am betting that newsstand sales and subscriptions would increase. The only thing missing would be a venue for thousands of splenetic individuals to post outraged comments about op-ed pieces.
Howard Kurtz: Specific Web sites might thrive or collapse at any given time, but I think it's beyond debate that the future of news is online. Not exclusively -- the Internet hasn't done away with television, and television didn't do away with radio -- but significantly. If The Post took down its Web site tomorrow, it might boost circulation slightly in the Washington-Maryland-Virginia area. But since 85 percent of the 9.4 million online readers live outside the area and can't physically buy the paper, it makes no sense to cut off their access to Post journalism while we all try to figure out how to make money on the Web.
College Park, Md.: Thanks, Howie, for not taking the buyout. I'd like your opinion about one criticism of dead-tree newspapers: the articles are too long. My hunch is that it's not really the length of individual articles that's excessive and off-putting to younglings. Rather, it's huge amount of text in any day's newspaper. People don't have time in a day to read both the news in A1 and any of The Post's mammoth investigative pieces.
Howard Kurtz: I think that's a factor -- maybe a guilt factor -- in some people's perception of the paper, which is why there's a perpetual push for shorter articles. I do think it's a problem if all the articles are longer than they need to be, which is another way of saying they don't hold people's interest. But I've never quite understood why it's a problem if some investigative and in-depth front-page stories are long. If folks aren't interested, just skip 'em! Sometimes narrative journalism requires the space to breathe.
Reston, Va.: Howard: From Sunday's Post, from Anne Kornblut and Dan Balz who should know better: "Trailing in delegates while her debt continues to grow, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is aggressively campaigning in the final three contests of the primary season in the hope of seizing a victory in the overall popular vote from Sen. Barack Obama.
The effect of such a victory -- and the question of whether Clinton hopes to leverage it into the No. 2 spot on the Democratic ticket or simply leave it as a historical marker -- is less clear."
This is ridiculous. There is no such thing as a "popular vote victory." Four states never tabulated an official popular vote count because they held caucuses, Obama wasn't on the ballot in Michigan in accordance with party wishes so he has no popular vote total there, and none of the candidates campaigned in Florida so that total is suspect. There are other caucus states where voter turnout is obviously much lower than primary states, so there's no way to accurately weigh the results of a caucus state with a primary state.
This is all a bogus argument raised by the Clinton campaign in a desperate bid to stay in the race and whenever reporters like your colleagues at The Post play up the popular vote story without explaining its worthlessness, what are they doing other than helping the Clinton campaign?
Howard Kurtz: I think the paper has explained it numerous times. And while the popular vote is, in and of itself, meaningless, it would be a potent talking point for Hillary Clinton if she could claim to have won more Democratic votes than Barack Obama. The problem for now is that her argument rests on Florida and Michigan (Obama wasn't even on the ballot in the latter state), the caucus contests and so on.
Kensington, Md.: Howie, I'm glad you're staying, but some of those names on the buyout list were just brutal to read about, Tom Ricks and Robin Wright in particular. How on Earth do you replace that combination of experience and insight? Ricks may be the best Pentagon correspondent in history, and I'm old enough to remember giants like George Wilson and Hanson Baldwin when I say that.
Seems to me that the Internet is proving to be like Homer Simpson's alcohol: The cause of, and the solution to all our problems. But it seems that newspapers are suffering from a deadly combination of cheapskates and ideologues who only want read that which they agree with, and who trash everything else. I've criticized The Post millions of times in my long life, but as far as I'm concerned, anyone in the D.C. area who refuses to shell out for the print edition is little more than what us poolroom bums call a mooch.
Howard Kurtz: There are many more names on that list that I didn't get in--science reporter extraordinaire Rick Weiss, tough-guy, Pulitzer-winning film critic Stephen Hunter, longtime political editor Maralee Schwartz and many others.
The Internet is only part of the problem. Revenue and circulation are declining in part because people have a million choices about how to spend their time. People often tell pollsters they don't have "time" to read a newspaper, which is another way of saying it's not compelling or valuable enough to make a priority. I think some of these wounds are self-inflicted. During the 1980s and 1990s, when the picture was brighter, too many papers avoided controversy, delivered a bland product, and lost touch with their readers. We're now paying the price for that.
Santa Cruz, Calif.: I'm curious about your comment that experiments with charging for online access to news(papers?) hasn't worked. I would certainly pay, say, $50 a year for access to washingtonpost.com. The only experiment I'm aware of is the New York Times one, where one would pay to get access to certain columns. That was dumb -- especially since I could read columns like Tom Friedman's syndicated the next day in my local paper! What other experiments in charging are you aware of?
Howard Kurtz: Slate and Salon both have gone through periods of charging for access and suffered as a result. Time magazine also went through a period of putting much of its content behind a wall. The only general news site that has successfully charged for subscriptions is the Wall Street Journal, and it obviously has an unusually affluent audience.
Chicago: I disagree with Washington about the future of online newspapers. Here in Chicago I can only read The Post online. And I also read four or five other newspapers every day online, including the Times and the Tribunes (both Los Angeles and Chicago). If The Post -- or any of those papers -- went dead tree-only tomorrow, I wouldn't start subscribing to the paper version, I'd just stop reading that outlet and spend more time on other sites. Printed newspapers are nice to read on the plane or something, but on a day to day basis they're obsolete because they're almost always out of date. Plus they're a huge waste of paper.
I agree, the only trick now is figuring out how to make the most money off the Web version, because that's where the readership will be.
Howard Kurtz: I wouldn't say print editions are "obsolete" -- they still contain news columnists, sports columnists, TV and movie reviews, health stories, investigative pieces and profiles that you can't get anywhere else. But overall I agree with you. Why jettison the one part of our business that is growing?
Why not a subscription model?: I'd bet that of the 9 million online readers, a healthy percentage of us would pay a little, say a buck per month, to read the Post.
If, say, a third did, that's $36 million a year gross for a product with no physical costs like paper, ink, or delivery. Not a bad business.
Howard Kurtz: The question is, what percentage? And I don't think The Post wants to take the gamble of finding out what that figure is. Plus, let's be optimistic and say that one-third of the current online readers would subscribe. That would mean kissing 6 million readers goodbye, which would make the Web site far less attractive to advertisers.
San Francisco: So, what, no Media Notes today?
Howard Kurtz: I was off yesterday. National holiday and all that.
"Breaking News": Howard, do you think the term "breaking news" is overused in the media? I find it is over used when news is either not breaking, broke several hours ago with no new developments, the story is not such a big thing that it deserves a breaking status. Your thoughts?
Howard Kurtz: It's way overused on cable TV. It's a way of making you look up and say, something must be happening here! I dare not change the channel!
Columbia, Md.: A previous questioner suggested dumping the entire editorial page as a way to cut costs.
I love reading the Washington Post news articles and do enjoy the sports columnists as well. But I made a decision long ago that I could not in good conscience give money to a newspaper that includes a liberal editorial page (I think I read that The Post has not endorsed a Republican for President since the 1950s and my guess is the endorsement of Obama is already written) and will not pay for a Washington Post. So instead, I pay for the other newspaper in town for a hard copy and read the Washington Post online for free.
With the explosion of online opinion blogs, hasn't the concept of and reason for an editorial page in a newspaper disappeared in this day and age? I say dump the editorial page and give more money to reporters to report the news....
Howard Kurtz: First of all, I read lots of newspapers whose editorial pages I disagree with. I don't quite understand the moral imperative of refusing to subscribe as a result. But beyond that, the costs of maintaining editorial and op-ed pages are just not that great. The staffs are relatively small. Major expenses for The Post include not just personnel but the costs of maintaining foreign and domestic bureaus, of covering Iraq, of constantly traveling with the presidential candidates.
Hartford, Conn.: My thought always has been that the pajama-wearing bloggers only pull off what they do because of massive fact-gathering (among other things) operations like The Post. With even The Post scaling back, the readers eventually will be left with only opinion -- and ideology-driven commentary and left on their own to sort it out. By that time, it will be too late to reverse course.
Howard Kurtz: I love bloggers, but I have often wondered what they would have to argue about if the mainstream media disappeared.
Silver Spring, Md.: How did you feel about Eugene Robinson making a big deal about Hillary's RFK comment after your friends at the Politico and at Slate explained its insignificance?
You mentioned the success of Politico in your column. I find their "politics as sports" coverage banal and rebarbative. What hope can there be when the top people in the country don't appreciate the difference between war and football?
Howard Kurtz: Gene is an opinion columnist. He's paid for his views. Whether what Hillary said about RFK is important or not -- and my feeling is it was way overplayed -- is not a cut-and-dried fact. So it's hardly surprising that people who write for Slate, Politico, The Post and a thousand other places have different takes and make different arguments. I like having that kind of journalistic diversity.
Portland, Ore.: Howard, do you feel the apology from the Fox news reporter/anchor, whatever she is, is sufficient? It is so outrageous on so many levels -- first, to continue the Osama/Obama mix-up; second to blatantly admit that they (the network) are anti-Obama by suggesting taking them both (Osama and Obama) out is desirable; thirdly to gleefully suggest the assassination of a Presidential candidate. Is FOX just so beyond the pale so much of the time that people simply don't get outraged any more?
Howard Kurtz: Liz Trotta is a Fox News contributor and former Washington Times staffer. Her joke, if that's what it was, was in spectacularly bad taste. I'll leave it to viewers to judge whether her apology was adequate.
Arlington, Va.: Mr. Kurtz, thank you for your article on the Post's buyouts. It's good some people there realize the news is moving digital. The Post has adapted better than any other daily newspaper. The question is whether there is an economic model that will allow investigative reporting to continue. I think the Post will survive because of it's national focus. But do you think that smaller cities and towns will be the ones truly hurt in the new media age because their papers wont be able to do local investigative reporting?
Howard Kurtz: It depends on how good their Web sites are. The one thing that newspapers in Orlando and Kansas City and Phoenix and Philly and hundreds of other cities can offer, in print and online, is in-depth reporting on local issues. Local television stations, with their much smaller staffs, don't really provide much competition in this arena. So there's no reason that the local paper (in most cases a monopoly) shouldn't be able to dominate the online market for local news.
Baltimore: Howard, I was very disappointed with the panel you assembled Sunday to discuss Hillary's candidacy. All three women dismissed as ridiculous your question whether Hillary's gender might also be a benefit to her. Surveys have shown consistently that to many women, Hillary's gender is a primary qualification. Someone should have been there to question the ridiculous response from Carol Costello et al.
Howard Kurtz: I disagreed with that assessment. Of course Hillary's gender is an advantage to her in many ways, as well as a disadvantage.
New York: Wasn't McCain's "release" of his medical records rather bizarre? In fact, he's not "releasing" them at all. Like some kind of supermarket game show where you get 5 minutes to stuff as many groceries in your basket before the time runs out, McCain gave a select group of reporters only 3 hours to peruse through what are probably hundreds of pages of documents, then when the buzzer rings, it's over, no more documents. What does McCain think this is, some kind of game? Even the most experienced reporter isn't entirely equipped to make judgments on medical reports based on three hours of browsing through records without discussing them with doctors or experts, are they?
Howard Kurtz: Well, McCain did make one of his doctors available. Fortunately for him it was a one-day story because he appears to be in good health. The campaign also gave access to the records first to the AP, hoping for a positive story that would set the tone for everyone else in the media.
Thanks for the chat, folks. I plan to keep doing them.
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
|
Post media columnist Howard Kurtz discusses the press.
| 547.555556 | 0.777778 | 1 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/20/DI2008052001351.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/20/DI2008052001351.html
|
Chatological Humor: Hey USA-ers, No Updates This Week
|
2008052719
|
At one time or another, Below the Beltway has managed to offend persons of both sexes as well as individuals belonging to every religious, ethnic, regional, political and socioeconomic group. If you know of a group we have missed, please write in and the situation will be promptly rectified. "Rectified" is a funny word.
On Tuesdays at noon, Weingarten is online to take your questions and abuse. He will chat about anything. Although this chat is updated regularly throughout the week, it is not and never will be a "blog," even though many persons keep making that mistake. One reason for the confusion is the Underpants Paradox: Blogs, like underpants, contain "threads," whereas this chat contains no "threads" but, like underpants, does sometimes get funky and inexcusable.
This Week's Poll: Door 1: MEN | Door 2: WOMEN
Not chat day? Visit the Gene Pool.
Important, secret note to readers: The management of The Washington Post apparently does not know this chat exists, or it would have been shut down long ago. Please do not tell them. Thank you.
Weingarten is also the author of "The Hypochondriac's Guide to Life. And Death" and co-author of "I'm with Stupid," with feminist scholar Gina Barreca.
New to Chatological Humor? Read the FAQ.
P.S. If composing your questions in Microsoft Word please turn off the Smart Quotes functionality. I haven't the time to edit them out. -- Liz
Jef Mallett, creator of Frazz, e-mailed me yesterday after he returned from The National Cartoonists Conference in New Orleans. During the conference, he said, a whole bunch of cartoonists went off to help build a house in the city, as part of a Habitat for Humanity project. I asked him to draw a cartoon of what a house would look like if it was built by cartoonists. Here is Jeff's drawing, along with his commentary.
What I learned from this experience:
1. Cartoonists cannot hold hammers. You've never seen so many people choke up so high on a hammer.
2. What's black and white and red all over? A Scottish-Norwegian cartoonist messing with tar paper shingles all day in the sun. Heehaw. Trust me on this one.
3. When cartoonists hammer their thumbs, what they say isn't really spelled "##%!!*."
4. Whatever you think you know about the devastation down there, you don't have a clue. And it's almost three years.
What I learned from drawing the two cartoon characters in this picture:
1. Rosie the Riveter seems to be giving us all the "up yours" gesture. I never quite noticed that.
2. I am apparently one shopping trip to Williams-Sonoma away from being as gay as a Mardi Gras float. This, too, was a big surprise.
One of the posts for this week's chat raises an interesting issue: Why do we in the U.S. call ourselves "Americans," and expect exclusivity, when Canadians and South Americans have an equal right to do so? How arrogant is that? Should we not come up with another term? The poster proposes "United Statesian," which parallels the term in Spanish, "estadounidense." The problem with this, as is or should be quite obvious, is that unlike the Spanish equivalent, which rolls right off the tongue, "United Statesian" is most unlovely. It'll never catch on.
To me, the difference between "America" and "United States" parallels the difference between faith and secularism. The first term is filled with emotion and illogic. The second term is logical if stiff.
So, does anyone have any ideas better than "United Statesian"? I propose "Yankee."
Yeah, I know. Sue me.
I have retrieved from my CLOD hopper this morning this here clip, which is one of the greatest CLODs in the history of CLODdom, from Mr. Show, one of the best sketch comedy shows ever. It is David Cross doing a "pre-taped call in show." The nuances of this, the complexity of the humor, is breathtaking. I had to watch it twice to fully get it.
You may recall that we reached an impasse last week over whether, in the Hunt video, Tom the Butcher had mispronounced Teddy Roosevelt's name. Tom pronounced it "Ruse-e-velt," and a reader made fun of him. I, of course, piled on, always happy to humiliate Tom. Then two readers independently suggested that while FDR pronounced his name ROSE-velt, Teddy had, indeed, pronounced it as Tom had. A discussion ensued. No satisfactory resolution was had. It seemed as though this was likely to be debated forever, unresolved and and unresolvable.
But a poster has resolved it! Indisputably, as contained in this here campaign pin for Mr. Teddy Rose-velt.
Please take today's quickie poll: Door 1: MEN | Door 2: WOMEN
The Comic Pick of the week is Sunday's Opus. First Runner Up is Friday's Brewster Rockit. Honorables: Sunday's Orange, Sunday's Pickles, Saturday's Frazz, Friday's Brevity.
Poll: What the hell is "one-sheeted" bedding?
Gene Weingarten: Mattress, sheet, blanket and/or comforter and/or beadspread. Favored by many men, including me. Rib puts two sheets down, I sleep upon the top one.
Gene Weingarten: She sleeps between em.
New York, N.Y.: The Gene Pool is not funny because you're posters are not funny. They don't understand irony, and thus your questions are just an excuse to post political rantings (both libs and neocons).
Now, I know that you may already be aware of this. But, I suspect that you are ignoring this hoping we don't notice and thus allow the Gene Pool to continue. Quit it. We can see it's not as good as the stuff a Pulitzer prize-winning humor writer can turn out. Oh, wait... maybe you want us to see that...
Gene Weingarten: Wrong. The Gene Pool is more anarchic that Chat Humor, because there is no editing. Some posts are, indeed, mirthless political rants that don't get the point. But throughout are gems of comedy. For example, the current challenge is to come up with ironically apt comeuppances for well-known people. One person suggests that I be lobotomized in a rare bumper-tap car explosion. Another, that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad publicly correct George Bush on the pronunciation of "nuclear." And: In early 2009, many members of the Bush administration find that their names are now on the No Fly list, interfering with their new jobs lobbying for the Mideast oil companies. How terribly inconvenient for them! Nothing an extra body cavity search or three won't clear up. And: realizes that he is being followed everywhere by a faintly glowing, unearthly being with massive wings. No one else can see this being. No matter what Christopher Hitchens does or where he goes, he cannot escape its serene and unyielding gaze. Finally Hitchens snaps, grabs a gun, and blasts away at his follower, screaming, "There are no such things as angels!!" The bullets, of course, pass right through the angel, and strike a human being -- Osama bin Laden, who was en route to blowing up the Golden Gate Bridge and raping the entire Mormon Tabernacle Choir. Hitchens is hailed as a great American hero, but he cannot explain what happened. And whenever anyone says "it was the will of God!," he lets out a soft, painful whimper. And: Danica Patrick keeps losing race after race, until the only sponsors she can attract are feminine products. Her car ends up being plastered with large, bold letters saying TAMPAX and VAGISIL and MASSENGILL DOUCHES.
Buyout and Invitational: Holy Cow! That offer would be very difficult to turn down. I thank you, and take it as a personal favor, that you did not accept. Hope it never comes back to bite you.
The possible/impending demise of the Invitational is just one more shove into the maelstrom of innocuous homogeneity -- no wonder newspapers lose readers -- the basic info is on TV ad nauseam -- takes something special to keep us coming back.
Throughout my working career, I worked for printers (not publishers) of magazines. In my early years, I was involved in the printing of New York Magazine where I discovered the Competition and Mary Ann Madden. Many years later when The Post started SI, it was like finding an old friend. In recent years when Ms. Madden announced her retirement, I knew my days were also numbered and now this -- may positively polish me off.
FWIW -- I am 71 and I too, heart you.
Gene Weingarten: Several people have expressed similar thoughts about the Invitational, and asked whom to express them to. I think in this moment of turmoil, the best person is Deborah Howell, the ombudslady: Ombudsman@washpost.com. She is good about sharing grass-roots groundswells with the powers that bee.
Dilem, MA : We have a dog problem. Or maybe it's a neighbor problem....
When we bought our house our neighbor had one dog a medium sized black thing of indeterminate genetic origin. People would walk past the house and he'd come over, one quick "woof" and that would be it.
Then the neighbor got a second rescue dog, some kind of terrier -- it barked a lot, but we thought he would calm down in a few weeks or a couple of months. This has gone on for 18 months now. We call every time his barking wakes us, or is so loud my wife can't work. This dog has never been trained, scares the local children and is outside a lot. The neighbor is a nice lady, but completely useless at dog control -- she bought a muzzle for the dog, which to my way of thinking is fixing the symptom not the problem.
We're putting in a patio in our back yard and this dog's barking will be a major pain if we're using it. So we're thinking of getting a couple of the ultrasonic dog barking controllers. They emit a high frequency sound only dogs can hear when the dogs bark. The idea being that the sounds is uncomfortable for them and they learn associate the discomfort with barking and stop.
My question: is this ethical? Our neighbor has done nothing about the barking, and it effects not only use, but everyone who walks past the house (it's right next to a path).
Gene Weingarten: Boy, this is interesting. You are asking if it is your right to cause your neighbor's dog discomfort/pain. Probably, if your neighbor is causing a nuisance and doing nothing about it. I would talk to him first. I would say you are thinking about doing that, and wanted to alert him and discuss it.
T-shirt winner?: Anybody, or was everybody too banal?
Gene Weingarten: This is re: the Gene Pool. I am going to give it a week, and decide tomorrow.
Southern, ER: Instead of Yankee, why not "Confederate" to honor the Articles of Confederation. That way you'll only p!ss off the northeastern liberal elite (who won't care) instead of the entire backwoods, hay-chewin', conservative south.
Gene Weingarten: When we sang "The Yanks are comin" in "Over There," we were not referring only to northerners.
Columbia, S.C.: We call ourselves Americans because we have "America" in our name. Canada, Mexico, and every other country in the Americas does not. How is it "arrogant" to call ourselves that when it is a distinction that has been made in the English language for centuries?
Gene Weingarten: This doesn't seem dispositive to me, at all.
Chicago, Ill.: After I went through the women's door I was curious to see what was the opposite sex equivalent of hairy/hairless, so I snuck through the men's door. I found out that my preferences coincide with the men's almost exactly, which shouldn't be that big a surprise since I do physics and have much in common with male nerds. But even in the little things I find I am a man! Red wine? A newish house? Is this a coincidence or do you have some gender hypothesis you are following?
Also, going back to the male preference about women I don't understand why they would prefer small-bosomed to large. I am that and always felt a little inadequate. What are the advantages of it, even? Is the feeling common?
Gene Weingarten: Speaking only for myself, when I look appreciatevely 'pun the body of a woman, I am (perversely) thinking long-term, as though this is the person I want to live with forever and ever and ever and make babies with and thus such. It is simply an inextricable if illogical part of the Dawrwinist impulse. So I think 20 years hence. Even if this is a woman on the metro whom I will never see again. I am not saying that I find the long-term effects of gravity on mega-breasts to be at ALL unattractive. It's plenty attractive. It's just LESS attractive than the opposite of long-term effects of gravity upon smaller breasts. I believe I am speaking for all men who choose "smaller." I think the guys are with me here.
Here is a question you are very qualified to answer. As evidenced by recent chats, you have shown an interest in the subject matter.
To wit: Who was the first MILF?
By this, I don't necessarily mean an actual person, but more of an archetype, a woman that put into our collective consciousness that a woman could be married and have a child, and still be hot. Also, the term MILF doesn't go back that far, but the concept must have been planted before the term became widely known. And, one more thing to consider -- a woman of 40 or 50 years old today is equivalent to a woman of 20 or 30 years old back in the '50s or '60s. June Cleaver may have only been in her mid-30s, but she was done. She had the house and the kids were growing up, and that was going to be it for her until the grandkids came along. So if we go back far enough, a MILF would be far younger than one today.
So, I thought about it some. To be an archetype, she would have to be someone famous enough (i.e. be seen often enough) to let the entire country know her. I first thought about actual women. Looking back, there were not that many women who might be well known enough, and none of them qualified. For example, Jackie Kennedy was well known, had kids, and was beautiful, but she was hardly a MILF. Beautiful, but not hot. More like a Hummel figurine, really.
So that left TV and movie actresses. However, the studios were careful to keep the roles and the actors separate, so except for some staged publicity shots, we rarely saw hot actresses with their kids. (Possible exception -- Jayne Mansfield).
Eliminating all the real women left me with fictional characters. Again, most movie roles were not seen often enough to plant the concept in the collective, and I couldn't think of any iconic "hot woman with a kid" roles. Maybe you can.
So that leaves television. Most of the early TV mom roles showed them with kids, but never hot. Let's face it. Most men would not consider Lucy, or June Cleaver hot. Even if there was a character you might consider to be hot (Donna Reed, maybe) they would never be shown performing anything more sexual than a quick kiss.
But, there was one exception. In the '60s, there was one role which showed a woman who was beautiful, had a child, and was allowed to be sexy. So, I propose to you that the first MILF was Laura Petrie.
Gene Weingarten: Laura Petri is an excellent example. But she was not the first. The first Milf was Frances Folsom, the first wife of Grover Cleveland. Frances was a child when Cleveland first met her -- daughter of his law partner -- and he married her when he was an old walrus president of 49 and she was 22. She was an uncommon beauty of her times, considered the loveliest first lady ever to that date, and officially became a Milf at the age of 27, with the birth of the couple's Baby Ruth.
Gene Weingarten: Er, first and ONLY wife of Cleveland.
One-sheet bedding: I still don't get it about the one-sheet bedding. Does The Rib put down a fitted sheet and then TWO regular sheets on top of it? I've never heard of that.
Gene Weingarten: Nope, fitted, and then one sheet. she sleeps between the two sheets. I sleep atop the top sheet. Yeah, its weird.
Daily Dose of ScarJo: I just had to share this with you, Gene, because I love you best of all.
washingtonpost.com: No, no -- this one is much better.
Gene Weingarten: Nice c-block, c-woman. Gad.
Calgary, Alberta, Canada: I was the third guy to take the poll. It was a fun poll, but I would like to voice my displeasure that hockey was not an option for the sports question.
Currently foreplay is rated "Good" by 100 percent of responders. Be interesting to see if that one gets below even 90 percent.
Also, high five on the small boobs! Although frankly I think boobs are just fantastic in general.
The only other really important issue I think is the dog question, and it is my opinion that if your dog is not at least big enough to take on a jackrabbit and able to withstand a hearty side-slap from you without flying across the room, you should reassess your priorities in life.
Uh, hopefully everybody knows what I mean by the side slap thing. I think Dave Barry wrote a column on this once.
Gene Weingarten: It's not a slap, its a round, resonant thump, and I know EXACTLY what you mean. One of my greater moments was watching a British band named The Bevis Frond play their own music in the living room of Tom Rapp, a lawyer who used to be the front man and songwriter for the 60s band Pearls Before Swine. The Frond had no drum with them so they had to improvise on the big ol family dog. It worked great. I still have that tape recording somewhere. The dog drum works delightfully. Liz, can you find The Lawyer's Song? About 1998?
washingtonpost.com: The Lawyer's Song, (Post, May 17, 1998)
What to call, US: I once worked with a bunch of anthropologists, which is whole story unto itself. During every meeting, one of them would loudly correct the others whenever they used "Americans" to "U.S. Americans", but never managed to get it to catch on. If you can't get the anthros, who love new terminology, to use your catch phrase there's no way you're getting anyone else to use it.
Gene Weingarten: U.S.Americans is what that idiot beauty contest winner kept saying in that viral video of her brain meltdown.
PSA: To the 73 women who don't like foreplay: um, I think you must be doing it wrong.
Gene Weingarten: I would ask them to speak up. Dis, I don't get, as Jackie Mason would say.
Gene Weingarten: Actually, I misquote Jackie: "Dis, I never hoid."
Extra, IN: Is it possible for a pitcher from the home team to record a save in a game that goes into extra innings?
Gene Weingarten: I see no way. He either wins or loses. Am I wrong?
So, what exactly is wrong with Berkeley Breathed, if anything? The past two strips have talked about how much pain he's in. How can he even work? Is someone else inking his strips?
washingtonpost.com: Opus: May 18 | May 25
Gene Weingarten: Berkeley is suffering from spastic torticollis, which is narsty, though not life threatening.
I'm actually double-screening with you and Mr. Kurtz today. What'd I'd like to know is you can get 10 responses in the time it takes Mr. Kurtz to do one. Is your real name Clark Kent?
Gene Weingarten: I answer a LOT in advance and spread them through the chat. No one is faster than Kurtz at anything. Unfortunately for Mrs. Kurtz. Hahaha. A little Kurtz humor, there.
Baltimore, Md.: Dear Gene --
It's your old friend and colleague Tim Page offering distant congratulations for your accomplishment last week.
You have come up with the essential metaphor for Washington 2008 -- it's the city where everybody who is anybody waits, wonders and debates whether or not Tim Russert did or did not break wind on television.
You are the Henry Adams of our time!
Gene Weingarten: Indeed. Thank you. Those who disparage The Gene Pool missed out on this splendid affair last week? Liz, can we link to the did-he or did-he debate?
washingtonpost.com: Urgent Breaking (Wind) News, (The Gene Pool)
Washington, D.C.: Gene -- I know you are done talking about the Hunt, but I wanted to address a problem with the President Race question. My team came up with the answer of 101, which was incorrect but was listed as an option on the clue page (leading us to believe we were correct.)
Here's how we got it: we saw the Buck won the race. Thinking in change, a dollar is one hundred cents....so, "one hundred WON." Which is the same as 101. We got the other clues correct, and had we not been thrown off by the wrong answer on this one would have been the winners of the race, I'm sure.
Gene Weingarten: Your problem is that you ignored Hank's final line every single time: "Finishing IN THE MONEY are the buck, Linc, and Wash." We did that specifically so you couldn't think as you did.
Anthropologi, ST: I am an anthropologist. On the Anthro-L listserve we use USAian.
Gene Weingarten: USAer would be more millifluous, no?
Victomless Cri, ME: I understand that people can be very sensitive on the drunk driving crime, but comparing it to shooting a gun in a crowd? Come on. People, driving while drunk is one way to not concentrate on the task at hand. So is texting, talking on your cell phone, rummaging around the glove compartment, and driving while you know you are exhausted. I'm not advocating getting rid of drunk driving laws - actually, I think sentences for REPEAT offenders should be even stricter (these people found out what their tolerance level is, and are ignoring it). But really, you have to look at intent here. A person shooting into a crowd is intending to scare people, and possibly kill someone. A person driving drunk is intending to drive home.
Gene Weingarten: To me, within reason, intent is everything.
Gene Weingarten: My point was, and continues to be, that people have different tolerances for alcohol. I'm for DUI laws; you need to establish some tolerances and enforce them. But they are arbitrary. I can drive safely with some alcohol in me. I am well aware that any time I choose to do so, I am accepting a grave responsibility.
Mens Wear Dept, Tysons Corner: This is a question for Liz:
Taking into account their gender differences, who has a nicer chest: ScarJo or Daniel Craig? And don't you need to post a Daniel Craig picture so that people can compare and see for themselves?
washingtonpost.com: Well, they're both kind of perfect examples of the best of each gender, no?
Gene Weingarten: I think we need examples, Liz.
Secrets of the poll questi, ON: Okay, the secret question has to be bedding. "Two-sheeted"? You mean a fitted sheet and a flat sheet, right? Or a top and a bottom sheet, anyway, not two top sheets IN ADDITION TO a bottom sheet, which would just be crazy. A "one-sheeter" surely sleeps wrapped in the sheet, not unlike a human taco or burrito, and not directly on the mattress (eww!), right? RIGHT?
(Sorry for the hysteria. Blame it on post-Hunt stress disorder.)
Gene Weingarten: No, a one sheeter, like me, sleeps between a sheet and whatever is above the sheet -- comforter, blanket, etc. The fact that there are one-sheeters seems to be surprising a lot of people.
Washington, D.C.: Gene - FWIW, I couldn't answer several of the poll questions. I don't like EITHER the Beatles or the Stones; I don't eat ice cream and wouldn't choose either choco chip or mint choco chip if I did; my hair is wavy -- neither curly nor straight; etc.
Gene Weingarten: I warned you people not to whine. But: As to the curly wavy thing, please note that like all of these poll questions, you were being asked not to describe your current circumstances, but to describe your personal preference. I don't care if your hair is wavy. What kind of hair do you like in others, or on yourself?
Washington, D.C.: On the topic of curly hair: I was rather dismayed although not entirely surprised to see the overwhelming number of men who prefer straight hair. Although as a woman I answered that question based on the kind of hair I have (not what my preference is), I assume the men answered based on what they prefer on women.
I have naturally curly hair (think Juliana Margulies) that I have been straightening for the past eight years or so. I generally prefer the way I look with straight hair, I have always gotten more attention from men when I have straight hair, but I am sick of the upkeep and the denial of my real self, so I have recently decided to go back to curly. My friends all ooh and ahh over the curls, but the cold hard truth (which is confirmed by your survey) is that men do not like curly hair. And while it's not all about them, I would like to be attractive to the opposite sex. I have no question, I guess. It just makes me sad.
Gene Weingarten: I like nice-smelling hair. I am indifferent to the topology. The Rib's is hair is entirely parallel lines. I really like it. Pat the Perfect's hair is kinky, almost African. I really like it.
Chicago, Ill.: I will concede that, at the height and weight you have divulged, you are not fat.
However, YOU must concede that the way you dress and the way you carry yourself give off the impression of a "fat slob."
The fact that so many people think/thought you were fat is telling. I have never seen you in person. But the image of you in my head (based on pictures and Post.com videos) has always been that of a schlumpy, overweight man. I suspect this is the case for many others.
The solution? Let Liz take you shopping one day. She seems to have a good grasp on men's fashions of today. Of course, I don't expect you to change your ways, as you have stated more than once that you are more than OK with your appearance. But just buy one new outfit, take a pic, and let us judge.
Gene Weingarten: Okay. We'll start with pleated pants.
Washington, DC: Gene--your new position on pregnant interviewees is a total cop-out. You've basically said tell when the interview has no choice to let the information affect the decision. This allows the interviewee to pretend she did the ethical thing. Either the information is important enough that the interviewer should have it before hiring or it's not important enough for the interviewee to reveal prior to hiring. You can't have it both ways. I speak as a woman who has been pregnant and who has a chronic, disabling, expensive auto-immune disease and always reveals this information before a job offer.
Gene Weingarten: First, I think your chronic, expensive condition presents a whole different ethical test than pregnancy does. Also, you are mischaracterizing my position. I am saying the woman should inform her prospective employer of her pregnancy after thejob offer is made and before she accepts. It opens a dialogue after which both persons are better informed, though, legally, she has the right to accept and he doesn't have the right to withdraw. But it gives two reasonable people the opportunity to be reasonable with each other.
washingtonpost.com: Daniel Craig | Scarlett Johannson
Unco,LA: I just took this week's survey and I am the first and so far only to prefer 7-Up to Coke (21-1). What gives? Coke is overly sweet, fattening, leaves a nasty aftertaste and has chemicals galore. 7-up, while not exactly mother's milk, is without caffeine, has fewer calories, has a lighter taste and just tastes better. What am I missing?
For background, I'm one of the guys who chose "carbonated beverages" for the think I could not give up - I'm a sodaholic. I'm probably as close to a connoisseur of soft drinks as exists. And I haven't been able to drink Coke for the better part of a decade.
Otherwise, I seem more or less like a normal guy. I'm thrilled that my penchant for small boobs is shared by more than I'd have expected.
Gene Weingarten: By me, too. And I'm with you on the sodas as well. My taste in sodas and my taste in ice cream have similarly migrated over the years. I was safely a coke man and a chocolate man until my mid thirties, when I moved inexorably blanders. I now love a good vanilla and 7-Up. Cream soda. Mint chococlate chip. Cannot explain it.
Oversensitive: The Oversensitive post in your update really hit home for me. Without going into the entire back story (but it is a good one) my brother is this kind of person. But he knows it. He understands that emotion runs his life. He understands that he feels everything more than anyone else. He also understands that it is the very reason he owns nothing, does not have a home or a girlfriend or a job and is a (in his own words) 'career criminal'. He has alienated everyone in the family by taking small things that shouldn't even be upsetting and making them 'shut out of my life' offenses. He knows that he is different from everyone else. Every time I speak with him I have to watch what I say so that, as the lone member of the family allowed to continue speaking with him, that he doesn't lose me as well.
I've long believed that this is a chemical imbalance, not a personality trait. Though there is no way of proving that or fixing it. But I do wish I had advice for the poster. I also wish they had advice for me. Anyone else out there with sage words?
Gene Weingarten: And the hell of it is, it's self-fulfilling. The more he becomes like this, the more times he gets insulted because of preposterously thin skin, the more disagreeable he comes, ergo more worthy of genuine insults. I'd love to write a story about such people.
Near Rethymno, Crete: Why weren't there choices for "none of the above?" For example, baseball vs. football -- I couldn't care less about either one, but I like hockey. Also, pro sports vs. amateur. Pro - meh; amateur (e.g., youth), OK.
Also, Coke vs. Pepsi is a definite "neither" for me, but I wasn't given that choice. I feel slighted.
And what about stick vs. automatic for cars?
Gene Weingarten: I know the answer to the last one. You are auto addicts. As for the others, you wanted fast. Black. White. Either. Or. I. promised. staccato. speed. Stop whining.
Quiz suprised: Crisp veggies and foreplay for the win!
Stavanger, Norway: Is this the most depressing news story you've ever heard?
washingtonpost.com: Hmm, here's an article that says barefoot is the way to go.
Gene Weingarten: I discount entirely the first story because it perpetuates the myth that tetanus is connected to rust.
Fred from New Orleans: Gene,
What are you going to do about the Gene Pool? Looking at yesterday's offerings, it is obvious that the plurality of posters believe that irony means abusive personal attacks implying or promoting "termination with extreme prejudice." There were a few good ones such as Willie Nelson and the corn crops, Jet Blue toilet seats and you being reincarnated as a car bumper. The butterfly ballot one was pretty good also. As much as I like some of the topics you present, the dreck attached to them is...uh... dreck!
BTW, It is ironic that you spelled dessert as desert! I sort of think that you did this on purpose!
Gene Weingarten: Well, you have just stated the POINT, Fred. You have to read it selectively, and you will find excellence. Are you ready for this last bit, Fred? You won't like it. The correct expression IS "Just Deserts." A "desert" is something one "deserves." Sometimes one deserves dessert, but that is a whole nother matter.
Amightywi, ND: So did anybody hear from Russert? Did he defend himself?
Gene Weingarten: I have not heard from Russert. Ergo, he dealt it. Of course he dealt it. There really is no argument. The hilarious nature of this whole thing is the way people in Washington loved to debate it. I also love that the website labels it's scoop EXCLUSIVE.
Bronx, N.Y,: We're all Yankees. Sounds good to me.
Jake E. Poo, MO: Yeah for the hairless men, I knew I couldn't be the only one that prefers a smooth chest, not to mention the lack of hair burn.
Anti-Apto,NM: We all know what aptonyms are. So what's the word for someone who's name and job are at odds? The vegetarian named Butcher, or the skinhead named Friend, or the boxer named Love?
Ironynyms doesn't roll off the tongue.
Large and small dogs: What do you consider the cutoff point between small and large? What about a beagle? They're mediumish.
Gene Weingarten: A beagle is a small dog!!! Gad. Biggish starts at 50 pounds.
As a hypochondriac....: You'll enjoy this. 8 Medical Terms Your Doctor Uses to Insult You.
Gene Weingarten: These are great. I knew many of them. Alert: Some dirty words are printed here. Might not be safe for work.
Columbia, S.C.: Me again. OK, so why is it arrogant? I have never met a Canadian or South American who has had a problem with the use of "American" in English as designating a person from the United States of America. In Spanish, "americano" can have a wider meaning, but even my Spanish-speaking friends use "americano" instead of the "estadounidense" construction. By the way, living in the South, I never use "Yankee" because I usually hear it used pejoratively down here. As a Bronx Bomber fan, I'm sure you'd love for Americans to all be known as Yankees, but it ain't happening. "America" is in the name of our country, so it is entirely appropriate to call ourselves "Americans."
Gene Weingarten: It is arrogant because it allows me to raise a provocative question in a chat, and to suggest that Yankees is a better name.
Aw, Sheet: Gene Weingarten: Mattress, sheet, blanket and/or comforter and/or beadspread. Favored by many men, including me. Rib puts two sheets down, I sleep upon the top one.
Gene Weingarten: She sleeps between em.
That is a fantastic method of birth control!!!
Gene Weingarten: Yeah, if the positions were immutable.
Ergo, he dealt it.: What evidence do we have that he smelt it?
Gene Weingarten: Our main evidence that he dealt it is that what he is saying makes no sense. He is completely discombobulated. The effort to hold it in closed down his brain.
New York, N.Y.: I noticed that the bosom size question in the men's poll is replaced by a male body hair question in the women's poll.
I know this isn't a 1-1 comparison but was there any consideration for a penis size question? Or is that just a stupid question to ask? Do any women actually PREFER a small penis? Are we even allowed to talk about this?
I know breast size and body hair are aesthetic while penis size is a physical thing. I'm not trying to make an equal comparison between the questions, I'm just putting the penis question on the table, so to speak.
P.S. If I were a woman I'd want to vote for something between hairy and hairless, but I guess the point of the poll is to force a decision.
Gene Weingarten: That is the point of the poll, yes. Liz and I considered penis size, but though that the nature of this poll would skew the answers -- that if the answers were Large and Small, or Largish and Smallish, very few women would opt for the latters. You'd need a broader continuum, with greater extremes, to begin to see a revolt against size.
Mint? Bah!: The only place mint belongs is in Greek food and mojitos.
Not even in toothpaste and certainly NOT in ice cream.
Gene Weingarten: Anybody with me in my revulsion agains the taste of a mojito? It's a craze to satisfy the tastes of people who former, as children, liked rum and coke.
Washington, D.C.: I am absolutely amazed at the huge preference for straight hair! I am a woman. My hair is totally straight, with no curl and no body whatsoever. I have always considered that a bad thing, as it really limits the styles I can wear. Yet apparently this is what everyone wants! I guess the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence.
Gene Weingarten: I think the person I know with the best hair is my daughter. It's a reddish brunette, very lush, with a strong natural wave. I have no idea why men in particular are lusting for straight hair.
Than, KS: Thank you for NOT taking the buyout. But with all those empty desks at The Post now, isn't there room for Terry Shine?
Gene Weingarten: This man can write.
Gene Weingarten: Reminder: He is chatting about this piece right after this chat ends.
Re-Save: The Hometeam pitcher cannot get a save in extra innings, but the visiting pitcher can.
Gene Weingarten: Right. As I said.
Washington, D.C.: Using only a fitted sheet is wrong. Sheet sets, which set the standard, include both fitted and flat.
If that weren't reason enough, do you wash your blanket every week, the way you do your sheets? The top sheet keeps the blanket from coming into contact with your body, so it needs to be washed much less often. It's simple hygiene, Gene!
Gene Weingarten: It does require more washing of the comforter.
Atlanta, Ga.: What kinda poll questions are those? I'm black, so neither curly nor straight hair is even an option, how about kinky? I'm an environmentalist, so paper and plastic is like asking whether I prefer to step in dog or cat crap. Can a green sistah get some canvas? Despite living in Atlanta, I don't drink soft drinks (sorry local cola manufacturer, but I think you're doing OK without my dime). Oh, and wine gives me a massive headache (Tannins? Sulfites?) the pleasure to pain ratio is off the charts, so that's out. Lastly, while I have and do enjoy men of a variety of colors, shapes and sizes, I generally prefer them to fall somewhere BETWEEN Sasquatch and alopecia, so I was not thrilled with either of the options you presented (although given the two I did choose hairless).
I do like the quick and dirty (poll, get your mind out of the gutter), but really didn't have a preference on some of those questions, and there was no undoing a pick once picked.
That is all. Still throwing virtual panties at you, Bigfoot.
Gene Weingarten: I consider kinky hair to be a derivative of curly, and I like it. Noted, on the paper or plastic. Surely,you could choose between wine and sodas even if you haven't had any in a long time. Much as I did about foreplay. (Hahaha.)
Gene: You are a lot taller in person than I had thought.
Gene Weingarten: Yeeks. I am only five ten. What did you think?
Poll: I'm sorry, but I can't let this stand. Any man who prefers mint chocolate chip to chocolate chip (or nearly any other flavor of ice cream) is no man at all. As of 8:45 a.m., more than 48 percent are opting for mint chocolate chip, which is, in a word, disgusting -- both the ice cream and the poll result. Can I get you guys a wine cooler to help wash that ice cream down? Or maybe stop by the video store and pick up the latest Matthew McConaughey/Kate Hudson romantic comedy? Yech.
Gene Weingarten: I go for mint chip. Kindly explain your position; use colorful analogies, please.
JFk/Mad cover: According to a Mad cover site, the January 1964 cover was of a seal, not of JFK dreaming of a Playboy bunny. Sorry.
Gene Weingarten: Apparently the Kennedy illustration was inside the magazine, not on the cover. I am still seeking it.
Bellwether County, Ohio: What's your take on Hillary's statement about RFK in June?
Gene Weingarten: I am pretty sick of Hillary Clinton. I think she will do anything, absolutely anything. I think her evocation of "hard working people, white people" was as revolting as anything that's come out of this campaign. But I think with the RFK thing, it was over-reacted to. I don't think she was referencing Obama, though it sure seemed as though she was.
Mt. Rainier, Md.: Have you heard the adage that patrons shouldn't tip the proprietor of an establishment? I was in a local restaurant recently and the owner served me (he was behind the bar). I tipped anyway -- I thought stiffing him was just a jerky thing to do. Upon reflection, I thought that maybe I was somehow insulting him by leaving him a tip. Whaddya think?
Gene Weingarten: I think you are never insulting anyone by leaving at tip. At a restaurant, that is. I wouldn't leave a tip for my dentist.
Burbank, CA: Gene: I work in HR for a major entertainment company in Burbank and let me just say, often we hire for a position that will require specific functions, like traveling internationally for training purposes, or heading up a project and many times, we have been screwed because the new hire announces that she is pregnant and will be unable to do all that the job requires. Clearly, we are not able to terminate said employee and do not have the budget to hire someone else to do the work at hand. Sorry, but that stinks.
Gene Weingarten: If the job requires extensive travel, and if she is hiding a pregnancy that will prevent her from all travel -- i.e., she knows that as a young mother she will REFUSE travel for years -- she is defrauding you. Ethically. That's different. If that happened to me as a manager I would call the legal department and see what my options are.
Manitowoc, Wis.: The Poll neglects people who take their own canvas bags to the store; prefer some other sport than football or baseball (or none at all); like mildly hairy men (legs and arms); use a Kindle for reading their newspapers; are so in love with Cornish clotted cream ice cream that they have stopped eating ice cream unless they are in Cornwall; drink no soda at all; and have cats.
Gene Weingarten: Indeed. We will have a poll just for those people next week. I will mail it to you. Take your time answering.
Rats Ate My Bas, IL: Hi Gene, I know you have dealt with the problem of rats in your community plot, but I can't remember how. This year the rats are showing a preference for my basil plants; last year it was the mint. (Although minty-fresh rats are kind of funny.) I am 100 percent sure it is rats, not squirrels or other vermin. Help.
Gene Weingarten: Sorry, but I think the solution is too late. We poisoned before the growing season.
Mojitos: I like the taste of mojitos -- what I don't like is getting green weeds in my teeth from a drink. I'd prefer to have mine strained at least. Do they do that? Probably -- they probably just put it into a martini glass and call it a mojitini.
washingtonpost.com: It's called "mint" and what gives the Mojito its distinctive taste.
Gene Weingarten: "Distinctive" is a good word for it. Mint also ruins perfectly good bourbon, when it's made into a julep.
high frequency barking controller: Dogs are not the only animals that hear high frequencies. The high-frequency generator will create noise pollution for other local fauna, too. Of course if you are talking city life then it's rats, feathered rats (pigeons) and the occasional raccoon. Fair enough. But out in the burbs? Come on, have respect for the animals to let them lead a happy, unpolluted life.
Gene Weingarten: What are these other animals?
Gene's Height: I don't know, I thought you'd be stout - like 5'-6"
Maybe it's your column cartoon!
Gene Weingarten: I can see the confusion. I'm only about an inch and a half tall there.
You're Right: There ARE great bits of insight and humor in the Gene Pool. There are also great pieces of literature being churned out by the infinite number of monkeys in my basement. Alas, I'm too lazy to sort through either too find the wheat among the chaff.
Gene Weingarten: Understood. You shouldn't read it! That's sort of the magic of the web.
Laugh, IN: R.I.P., Dick Martin.
You bet your sweet bippy!
Gene Weingarten: Aw. He was good.
College Park, MD: I find the discussion about disclosing pregnancy to a prospective employer very interesting, particularly in light of something someone said: if you had a serious illness and you had to miss work for treatment, would you disclose that?
When I applied and interviewed for my current job, my daughter was undergoing treatment for a brain tumor. I was completely upfront about the situation, alerting my prospective employer that what my daughter had was dangerous and deadly, and that trips to the hospital for her would not be out of the question. They hired me anyway, and did not bat an eye when, less than three months later, I had to take an extended leave when she died.
The moral of my story is this: you don't have to do anything you aren't legally obligated to do. But if someone really wants to hire you, they will do so regardless of your circumstances. Like you said, it's a matter of personal ethics on the part of the applicant, but if you're talented and the employer recognizes that, you should have nothing to fear by being honest.
And if the reason that they didn't hire me is because I was spending too much time with my critically ill daughter, then I'd rather not be a part of that organization.
DUUUUUUUUUUUUUDE: I had no idea you were a Pearls Before Swine (band, not strip) fan. Excellent. Also, do you think you were the first WaPo writer to get the f-word in print in all its naughty glory, thanks to that story?
Gene Weingarten: I loved that band. Well, I didn't EXACTLY get it printed. But I was glad I got it printed in code. I always liked this story, and when it was published, PBS fans came out of the woodworks. I think Rapp was/is an unusually gifted songwriter.
Jim Beam: Anyone who uses good bourbon to make a mint julep probably likes their men hairless.
Gene Weingarten: And mixes Stoli with stuff. With ANYTHING.
Small Breasts, D.C.: When I was in my late teens to early 20's, I felt inadequate because of my small breasts (and my first husband even suggested I get a boob job). He is now an ex-husband.
Now I am 50+. My breasts are still small BUT VERY PERKY. I am constantly admiring them. Just sayin...
Hillary: I really liked Eugene Robinson's article today on the whole thing. Not whether or not she meant to imply that Obama could easily be assassinated, but that she is now lost in "I might still be able to win" land.
What happens if Obama WAS assassinated? At this point, I wouldn't take her as a VP, just in case she got any ideas. (Just kidding.)(Sort of.)
washingtonpost.com: Clinton's Grim Scenario, (Post, May 27)
Gene Weingarten: Yeah. I do think that she has lost her bearings. And I think we're gonna see the superdelegate slide become a landslide. People are starting to really dislike her. I mean people who didn't particularly dislike her before. Me, for example. I want her to go away.
Washington, D.C.: Wow - what does that say about the U.S. auto industry? Those results made me sad, even though I voted "foreign," own a foreign car and would pretty much only consider buying foreign in the future. Sad state for American automobiles...
Gene Weingarten: It has been this way for 40 years. Actually, American cars are more competitive now, but buying habits last a lifetime.
New York, N.Y.: A few thoughts on the preliminary results of the poll:
I'm way in the minority on curly hair. I like it, I think it's often more interesting. As a guy I would like to have curly hair. Frankly, at 29 years old, I'd like to have more of any kind of hair. On girls I like really, really short hair best, which is usually straight. I just think curly hair provides more to visually process, which is nice. But fine, if people like straight hair, I can see that.
There are two other questions where I'm in the minority and I cannot understand where everyone else is coming from. One of them is just logical: the toothbrush. Listen, I know most of you people don't HAVE an electric toothbrush, but why would you not WANT an electric toothbrush? Other than cost, what are the possible advantages of a manual toothbrush? Electrics simply clean better and faster. It's not like manuals have the old school kitsch of a straight razor yet. You can't use one to be cool or flaunt a particular skill. I think in this one people were voting for what they use, not what they prefer.
The other preference I don't relate to is small breasted women. To be clear, I've been with small breasted women and they are beautiful and hot and sexy and their breasts are extremely attractive. I love talented, smart, funny women of all shapes and sizes. But given the choice? Come on. I totally understand LOVING small breasted women. I just don't understand PREFERRING them. Explain yourselves. Gene, I know you're one of them.
Gene Weingarten: I believe I already have. But you are SO SO right on the toothbrush, I forgive your confusion on breasts.
Eh on Foreplay: And I'm a lady. I don't know how to explain this in a chat-acceptable way. Uh. Being on the receiving end of third base doesn't really do it for me, is I guess the main thing, and I don't think it's because I've never had a good triple. I've read that, for a lot of women, they don't really get into it until it is getting into, if you catch my drift. This is the case with me. Good day.
Gene Weingarten: Thank you. You are a courageous woman. But a triple, traditionally speaking, involves the hands. Traditionally speaking. And that's not what we're talking about here.
Stylingprodu, CT: Gene--Having seen you many times in person, I know that you're one of those men who aren't into "products" for your hair, so I think you may be exactly the person to ask this fashion emergency. I'm a gay man whose long-term partner has decided to grow his hair out a bit. The problem is, he's determined that Brylcreem, Vitalis, or Wildroot are his only choices to help control it. I suddenly feel like I'm sleeping with some unholy mutation of Ward Cleaver and mid-80s Michael Keaton. Can this relationship survive?
Gene Weingarten: Wow! This is a horrible problem! You need to put your foot down. Grease is bad. There is never an excuse for grease. Make it an environmental argument! Make something up. I'm with you, man.
Bark control: It only works when the animals is barking. No sound, no high freq. noise. So unless the lambs aren't silent, other animals will be fine.
Gene Weingarten: Right, but I think the poster's point is that until the dog learns not to bark, every time he barks, some squirrel is gonna go, ow.
Maternity leave question: Hi Gene,
I was a little surprised by your comment "Woman A gets an important job and, in the next 15 years, proceeds to have 12 children. She is not at work longer than she is at work."
How much maternity leave does the Post or an average job give? Mine, unfortunately, would give 3 months of unpaid leave per birth, or 3 years in your example. A lot of time off, but not even close to what she would spend working.
Gene Weingarten: Federal law allows you to extend that without pay, I believe for up to a year. The Rib took four months for Molly and two months for Dan. As I recall.
Gene Weingarten: Hm. That "federal law" thing is probably not right. Many employers will let you take reasonable amounts of unpaid leave.
Foreign versus American cars: Many people who were so unfortunate as to own Detroit-made cars during the 1970s swore that it would be a cold day in hell before they'd buy another one.
Gene Weingarten: Me, for example. 1973 Chevy Nova. Last American car I will ever own.
Hairy vs hairless: Gay guy here. Hairy is fine, although I'd rather not need a machete. Hairless is fine (though even the least hairy of us should have hair in certain areas). But stubble? No. All this chest shaving has gotta stop.
Gene Weingarten: Chest shaving is madness.
Rat Solution, Washington, D.C.: Go to a pet store and ask if one of their rat snakes has recently shed a skin that you can have. Get it, put it in the yard or, if in the house, near the problem area. Rats can smell the skins a mile away and it will be enough incentive to send them packing as they would prefer not to be someone's dinner. I have done this. It works.
Gene Weingarten: Wow. I hope this is right.
Americ, AN: On a backpacking trip around the world in 1995-96, I met PLENTY of people who were vastly offended that we had usurped the rights of other North Americans and all South Americans to be called "Americans," (and have people know whom they were talking. "Oh! You're American! How are things in your capital of Quito?"). I eventually concluded that they were basically ticked off that we called it first.
Gene Weingarten: Yeah, this seems to fall into that annoying oversentive category. I wonder: Did the founding fathers call themselves "Americans"? Probably, right?
Washington, D.C.: For the greasy hair problem: Send your boyfriend to a hair stylist. There are a lot of non-greasy products out there to tame men's hair. My boyfriend uses pomade.
Gene Weingarten: Pomade is awful! Product is awful! You have to look like me. Awful.
But how else can Hillary's assasination remarks be taken? As Eugene Robinson pointed out, the years she cited had much shorter primary seasons. Even if that were not so, she could have stopped at citing her husband's nomination. It really did seem like she was subtly wishing Barack would be assassinated so she'd get the nomination. Remember, Barack has already had death threats. Everyone should watch Keith Olbermann's special comment about this.
Gene Weingarten: Honestly, I THINK she was saying, "we all remember it was June when RFK was assassinated, so clearly the campaign was still going on." Her dishonesty about what it MEANT that it was June is something else again. Hey, I was rereading about the 68 election. I had forgotten: RFK was a real long shot to win it! Only a few states (12?) even had primaries then. Humphrey was way ahead in delegates, in June.
Arlington, Va.: The United States of America opened for business on July 4, 1776, and its residents referred to themselves as "Americans" from the beginning as a sort of special identity (even de Toqueville used the term). By comparison, Canada remained entangled in the British Empire -- that is, legally tied to the Crown -- until being set free in 1982. Were we citizens of the US of A supposed to stop using the the word "American" in 1982 out of some sort of misguided respect for the Canadians' belated autonomy?
Gene Weingarten: Good. I think we can sort of accept, at the end of the chat, that this is something of a bogus issue. Okay, we're done! I am traveling in the next coupla days, so will not be updating this week. Hey, go visit Terrry Shine on his chat. He's brilliant.
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
|
Join live discussions from the Washington Post. Feature topics include national, world and DC area news, politics, elections, campaigns, government policy, tech regulation, travel, entertainment, cars, and real estate.
| 291.292683 | 0.756098 | 1 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/22/DI2008052202122.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/22/DI2008052202122.html
|
Post Magazine: Terminated
|
2008052719
|
He was online Tuesday, May 27 to rant about, reflect on and commiserate over joining the ranks of the unemployed.
Submit your questions and comments before or during the live discussion.
T.M. Shine: Hey, thanks for stopping by. Between WP comments, personal e-mails and tmshine.blogspot.com posts (check out the deleted scene) the response to the unemployment story has been overwhelming, even a bit emotional. After this session feel free to e-mail me anytime or stop by the blog. Or if you need someone to hold your hand during a 20-minute teeth whitening at the mall, give me a call. I'll be around. - TMS
Bethesda: How can they not let you back to your desk? What about your personal stuff? What did they think you would do? I thought it was funny how people took their stuff out to their car when they noticed what was going on.
T.M. Shine: that was such a crazy scene. in my old building we had security so security would escort people to their desks and there was a special box you got to put your stuff in. there was one great moment where the boss had to go get jana's pocketbook and walk through the building with it.
Burke, Va.: Are you really Dave Barry?
You are a successful author with several books published. Isn't there a way to make freelance writing a means to earn a living?
I have a couple of friends who support their families this way?
Your piece in the WP Mag says you have no education past high school. Surely that is a gross exaggeration.
I don't think I have ever laughed before reading about someone's plight of unemployment. I read every word, because I may soon be unemployed myself.
Your style is light and an easy read. Thank you for your insights.
T.M. Shine: i have 68 days of community college. for accounting.
Kensington, Md.: Very interesting article, and quite a reflection of our contemporary work culture, but it would have had a lot more punch if you'd named the company in question. Having always been self-employed I don't know much about those papers you have to sign in order to retain your termination benefits, but once those benefits run out, are you then free to start naming names?
If I had to guess, I'd say you probably worked for some subsidiary of one of those faceless corporations whose names crop up on sports arenas, who spend a million dollars in advertising to tell us about every ten thousand dollar donation they've made to some highly visible charity. Am I being too cynical here?
T.M. Shine: i worked for a small publication that is part of a large media corp. as far as those termination papers go i couldn't imagine them caring less about what former employees do once they leave the building.
Washington, D.C.: Sounds like the day of your layoff wasn't handled very smoothly by your employer. Given that layoffs do occur, I'm wondering if you were the boss overseeing HOW and WHEN people are notified, what would you do differently?
T.M. Shine: i kind of like the new chaotic way of doing things. cause i'd love to see people get rowdy or a fight break out. when you think about it, when bob was in the parking lot and the boss came yelling outside someone might have just lost it there. coulda been , 'no, you come outside, you s.o.b.' let's have a real talk.' once things reach the parking lot anything can happen. you know that.
Kudos: This piece was the perfect blend of Office Space and Then We Came to the End. It puts into print things we all feel about working and makes us chuckle, and hopefully, think a little bit.
T.M. Shine: yeah, i used to write a column called timeline that detailed all the crazy stuff that went on every day at the office so i was tuned to always observing all the 'office space' stuff.
Brookville, Pa.: Hey, Terry, Barb here. I didn't know you took my Amelie card. I'm totally free of journalism. Spending the summer in Maine cooking at a camp, then I'm going to do my internship in Germany. I always wanted to be a European-trained chef. I don't miss journalism at all, and particularly not those morale-destroying editors. There is life after journalism, but I'm so glad you exposed those heartless creeps and the way they treated us after many years of hard work. Your honesty is greatly appreciated.
T.M. Shine: barb is the movie critic who was let go just before me. i stole her amelie postcard before she could get someone to pick up her stuff. i think pretty soon there will be only one movie critic in the nation and they will be syndicated in every paper. that's where we're headed - one opinion.
It's spelled S-H-I-F-T: Are you conducting this discussion on a Blackberry, or do you just not believe in capitals? If the latter, I'm beginning to get an inkling of why you were let go...
Did you find out what "the secret" is? I Googled it and was directed to a movie/book cultish thing. It was glorified optimism. Is that what that woman was talking about?
T.M. Shine: i love the idea of a 'secret' but you just know you don't want to know what it is. i really don't like hearing positive advice from people who make a living being positive. like, it's annoying to have a career coach when you have no career.
So...: How's that Rosalynn Carter Fellowship working out?
T.M. Shine: i just need two more letters of recommendation if anyone out there has time.
Beautiful Silver Spring, Md.: Yo, that was a good article. Do you get kind of P.O.'ed when people tell you that you have to get a "special" job, one that reflects your inimitable take on life (or something like that)? I mean, sometimes you just want the bread, and you don't care about the wrapper in which they serve it.
T.M. Shine: i do wish sometimes i could just do like jackhammer work. you put your head down. drill the hole, get decent union pay and go home.
Washington, D.C.: I love your article. One might think there was a bit of hyperbole to it, but I had a boss that was even worse than yours. Although I wasn't laid off; I retired a few months ago. My supervisor was so "verbally constipated" (as you so aptly put it), not to mention socially challenged, that he couldn't even bring himself to say "don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out." After 35 years he not only left early on my last day so he wouldn't have to confront me; he managed to not be around for the two retirement parties my co-workers and volunteers held for me. He even tried to put a few obstacles in front of my co-workers who were trying to put the party together. By the way, I worked at the National Zoo (civil service) which is not know for being a hotbed of managerial excellence - this guy, however, takes the cake. You're probably wondering - "so?, it's the government, isn't it? What were you thinking?"
T.M. Shine: and i thought it would be so much fun to work at a zoo. i always wanted to be one of the people who walks around with a strange animal on their hip and everyone says, 'hey what the hell is that?' and then i would tell them.
but now i'm taking that off my list.
Alexandria, Va.: It is funny, one of the reasons I went into accounting is that I was so afraid of a situation like the one you described. The looming and not unlikely idea of spending months on unemployment (possibly to the max) and ruining my financial life is a nightmare that I lived through with my father as a child and I never want to go through again. So I didn't do what your colleagues hope for you, I didn't go for something I have a passion for, but I know I will always be employed, at least as a bookkeeper if nothing else (I am a controller now). How do you deal with the crushing pressure of finances when job prospects seem so bleak right now? How do you look for the right fit rather than what you know will pay the bills?
T.M. Shine: i have a cushion at the moment with the severance. but once the money runs out it will only be about paying the bills. i will do whatever it takes.
Bethesda, Md.: I gather that the publication you worked for no longer exists. If it does, did they retain any of their former employees? If not, did they at least try to place them in other publications?
T.M. Shine: they still exist. running with a skeleton crew. every business you enter these days it seems like you're walking into a late night restaurant. there are no bodies around. the one waitress and the cook are having sex in the back. i don't know how anything is getting done in america. or even india.
I was that guy for a while: I had to lay off about 30 people a few years ago before taking a package and getting out too.
The main reason HR is in the room is so that the boss won't make any statements or promises to the laid-off.
So if HR isn't in there, you should try crying, or anything else, to get the boss to say anything to make you feel better. You can always claim your reward later.
T.M. Shine: yeah, i think you have to have a witness when you're fired and the boss is that witness. but i've heard you can ask for a different witness. you can say, i don't want the boss as my witness. i want carl the security guard. and they have to oblige.
i wish i had demanded a different witness. maybe a temp.
Good times: The company I used to work for went completely belly-up; everyone left on the last day was let go at the same time. We all knew it was coming and had spent the last 2 weeks finding new jobs. We still had to wait for our managers to go through the severance packets with us (which amounted to whatever we were getting paid for the rest of that day). I had my meeting at 9:30 and waited around playing Boggle with my co-workers while everyone else had their meetings. Then we all went and had Mexican food and Margaritas. What a great memory.
T.M. Shine: man, i do like the idea of having a group party. i love that image - 'playing boggle while waiting to be fired.' can i steal that?
Be prepared: I'm a firm believer in always keeping a box of exit stuff close at hand for the time I hear that phrase "(the boss) would like to speak to you". My box contains the various vendor coffee mugs (although who can afford coffee after being 'laid off'...) a ball made of rubber bands, highlighters of each color (yellow, blue, green, pink), a paper-clip chain and a candy bar. What would be in your exit box?
T.M. Shine: i'm not big on the personal items. i want supplies. i really wish i had taken more stuff from the stock closet. i had no idea how expensive post-its are.
been there, Md.: Enjoyed the article - When I went through a similar experience I did the "between jobs" facial hair experiment phase. You too?
T.M. Shine: i already have facial hair so i'm thinking of shaving it off.
Woodbridge, Va.: Just wanted to say I really, REALLY enjoyed the article and would like to read more of his work. Where to find it? MUST HAVE MORE...
T.M. Shine: i've published a couple of books. i saw one on amazon for 1 cent. it might still be there.
you know, what i'll do is print some excerpts on the blog for people (everybody) who aren't familiar with my work.
Somewhere in the South: I really relate. The "20 years in the same job"? That's me. Then, suddenly, WHAM. Gone. It's coming up on 18 months now. Yes, the time when health insurance is gone.
I read through the whole thing, waiting for the happy ending. Only it didn't come. Did you ever find the perfect job? Give me some hope here, man.
T.M. Shine: no happy ending. i purposely started writing it as soon as i was terminated to capture those first weeks.
Not for nothing...: but few laid off writers -- or working writers -- have two published books and can land a piece in the WaPo mag.
T.M. Shine: published books are like souvenirs for writers like me. 'oh, this is nice. all bound up and whatnot. i can show this to my uncle.' i've never made any 'marley and me' money off them.
Davie, Fla.: I told my mom to read your story, and she said, "It's so sad!" But I don't see it that way. Sure, it has sad elements, but ... What do you think?
T.M. Shine: on the whole, it's sad that the entire country is in this state but, you know, we use humor to survive. the best cracks come out at funerals. and hope always comes with the laughs. that's what is important to me.
the humor in this story is really just honesty, isn't it?
Coconut Creek, Fla.: What is the significance of the number 4700?
T.M. Shine: i think that's how many flexi-straws come in a box.
funny, i now use 4700 as my password on the unemployment web site.
Indianapolis: Terrific article. I'm sorry your misery had to be our entertainment.
If I'd been in your shoes, I would have been listening to Fred Jones Part 2 by Ben Folds over and over again.
T.M. Shine: for the first time in awhile i've been wanting to lay in the dark and listen to music like when i was in high school. i don't know if that's good or bad but i have trouble getting my room dark in the day time. they say tin foil works.
try some nick cave. 'the boatman's call.'
the last day: Once when I left a job voluntarily, I had to see the dentist for an emergency situation on my last day. When my boss asked me to be sure to return to the office after the appointment, I thought "Hey! He's going to throw some kind of 'good luck' party" Not so. He just wanted to make sure I worked to the very end of my last day.
T.M. Shine: yeah, it used to be the bosses would wait until a particularly big project was done before letting people go. but they don't even care about that anymore. they know their projects are going to suck any way now.
Warrenton, Va.: How 'bout getting a gig with a gov't contractor. They can always use Tech Writers.
T.M. Shine: after obviously reading my work several people have mentioned tech writing to me. i assume that means it really doesn't involve anything technical.
Rockville, Md.:"but once the money runs out it will only be about paying the bills. i will do whatever it takes. "
As long as it's legal and honest, right?
T.M. Shine: i go by the belief that no one is really paying any attention to what i'm doing - illegal or otherwise. i sometimes wish i was under surveillance. i could use the attention.
Gaithersburg, Md.: I, too, am a journalist who is facing the prospect of losing my position at a small publication after 10+ years of employment and having just turned 48. Are you finding any suitable openings in terms of pay and status that are comparable to your former job? Or is the publishing industry, as I suspect, becoming more stingy and demanding of writers/reporters than it already is? I fear what awaits me when my job terminates on December 31 since I haven't done anything so far about finding another.
T.M. Shine: like i said in the story, i started looking for writing jobs based on locations that sounded fun or adventurous. some sounded great. they all paid $25,000.
D.C.: Hey, Terry. Weingarten here. That was one hell of a story. I just wanted to share with readers that Tom Shroder has always been your editor; you are a brilliant, creative writer, so Tom's job usually comes down to adding a few words here and there for transition; to cover the rare but occasional synaptic disconnect,etc. These are minor but important little bits he adds to TM Shine pieces. We've always had a word for this added stuff: Shinola.
Davie, Fla.: Not to be morbid, but speaking of funerals, what would you want your tombstone to read? I'm thinking you're a hard guy to sum up.
Chambersburg, Pa.: I loved your piece. About two months the exact same thing happened to me. Including the 4:45 phone call, "would you please join me in my office?", the fear that runs though the office the next day, and then ultimately, "the shun." I think I'll take the summer off and and try to figure out what's next. It is not like a vacation though, there is always this nagging thought that unemployment has an end.
T.M. Shine: when i get uptight about it my brother says, 'geeze, at least take the summer off and enjoy yourself.' but you're right, there's always that nagging worry in the distance. you can't truly enjoy yourself.
Arlington: If you could do it all over again, what would you do? Thank you very much for the story. Sorry that you're in a tough time now.
T.M. Shine: i had a wonderful opportunity to write 'with benefits,' which is a great thing. so many creative people never get the chance. as a journalist you meet so many interesting characters but it races so I am enjoying reflecting on that and would not give it up.
you have to realize too that i also, thanks to people like tom shroder, get a venue to write about these personal things. there are few venues for honesty these days. i have been lucky to find a few.
Been There: A couple of things you might want to know:
The lying-down-listening-to-music thing? It's a sign of clinical depression. Seriously. And depression is as natural a reaction to this situation as anything else.
I was "bought out" about five years ago and am still struggling a little. The main regret I have is that I didn't do anything fun and foolish when I still had severance coming in.
T.M. Shine: i don't know about fun but i'm still capable of doing a lot of foolish things. thank god.
is it still clinical depression if i don't use the tin foil? because i kept seeing my shiny reflection in it anyway. sometimes i look like a cool knight but other times it's just creepy.
Washington, D.C.: Things could be worse. You could be trying to sell real estate right now.
T.M. Shine: my house is for sale.
Loved your story: I read your home-maintenance story in the Washington Post Sunday magazine in April and enjoyed that, too. Do you have anything else in the works?
washingtonpost.com: I Am the Wayward Neighbor (Washington Post Magazine, April 20)
T.M. Shine: just a shower nozzle i have to fix.
Deep in the Heart of D.C.: I read Mary Higgins Clark's autobiography - she, too, was laid off and wasn't allowed back to her desk to collect her personal items. The security guard was sitting at her desk after the 'minute talk' - she said she lost photos of her kids and personal items that she'd kept at her desk for years. One day (for years) you are fantastic, great! and the next you are a security threat? And now it's rampant in our country - I applaud your sense of humor and riveting writing style.
T.M. Shine: it is so weird when suddenly you're the enemy in an office where you've all known each other for ten years. one employee didn't flee to the pizza place because she had so many family photos she was worried about. the scene turns into an unemployment fire sale.
Out West: This happened to me last summer. I was lucky enough, however, to find out ahead of time I was getting fired. The morons I worked for locked me out of our online HR system by changing my pswd so I asked a guy in IT to fix it. That's when I saw there was an extra paystub I was getting in 2 days for "severance". I found this out on a Weds and they were going to make me work until Fri afternoon and then can me. So I called in sick the next day. ha! At least this gave me time to clean out my desk and get all of my personal files and cookies off my computer. I did have the last laugh, though, because I had a new job offer w/in 2 days and was able to take a month off in between. I still can't shake the bitterness sometimes though - are you still bitter?
T.M. Shine: i'm not so much bitter about being terminated. sign of the times, right? but i am bitter about how i saw good employees- the best of us- treated badly as business went downhill. if we're all going down, fine. but let's respect one another as we slide down the deck into the icy waters.
8 months: Have now been unemployed for 8 months. What I find most interesting is that people now DEMAND to know what you do all day. Like it's an affront to them that you don't have a job. I usually start reciting my day -- get up, log onto monster.com and start searching for jobs, watch the news, eat a tuna sandwich, walk the dog, run through careerbuilder.com, eat an orange, shower (like around 1pm), etc. Eventually they stop listening...
T.M. Shine: yeah, someone told me 'being unemployed is a full time job.' no it's not. unless king of queens reruns, teaching the cats how to dust with their tails and unraveling 250 ft. of tin foil are part of the job too.
D.C.: Your article made me cry. Maybe it's because I'm not funny myself, but I guess I couldn't see the humor in it.
Not to be a total debbie downer; we all have our fair share of burdens. I wish you and Jana and Bob the best.
Also, can we hear from some HR person? How horrible is this situation, or should I pack my box too?
T.M. Shine: i think we should have drills at work now like the old air raid drills, only now you see how many seconds it takes to throw all your photos, snow globes and holiday tequila into a box.
Been There: I was fired from a job when we lost a big client. I was told the Monday before Thanksgiving, but they gave me 2 weeks to help them "wrap everything up".
Hello? Did I really want to be there those 2 weeks? It was jut weird. I ended up not working most of that first week, as I went home early on Monday and had already planned to take off Wednesday. I slogged through the second week, but it was like being a walking ghost. Sometimes the fast yank departure may be better.
T.M. Shine: the fast yank is definitely better.
Boston, Mass.: My giant non-profit employer has used the following tactics for layoffs:
shut off employee access badges without warning, so they have had to call for help to get into the building. Once in, they were asked to come to a conference room -- en masse. One room held retained employees, the other, those being let go. Same organization cut off computer access so that employees were calling the IT help desk when their bosses eventually peeked over their cubicles to ask them to come for a 15 minute meeting and "please bring your purse". The latter is now used all through the company --"I've got a meeting with HR, and they want me to bring my purse". Your article has made it to the women's room mirror, a place of honor. Great writing. Thanks!
T.M. Shine: i've never written much sports so i was always jealous when i saw the sports pages over urinals in bars. so to have a story in the ladies room is about as glorious as it gets. maybe we should end this discussion right now while i have something to celebrate!
p.s. can you send me a photo of it? your reflection optional.
D.C.: Clamato and Bud gets a bad rap in your story. I find the combo delicious. Please explain your inflammatory comment.
T.M. Shine: maybe it was just my mood that day.
check my blog for a deleted scene that has more on the chelada...
Del Boca Vista, Fla.: Before you sell your house, I think you should do a "Shine reality tour" a la Kramer. I know several people who would pay to see your pantry full of tuna kits.
T.M. Shine: you know, i've stopped even putting the tuna kits together. it just got too complicated.
Freising, Germany: I'd once heard the story of a guy, who after over thirty years at his company, was given the "Golden Handshake" by the boss. Then the boss asked him to leave quietly without telling any of his employees so as not to disrupt them, and that he could clean out his desk on the weekend when no one was around. Oh yes, the boss also thanked him for his help and cooperation over the years.
In Germany, work relationships are often considered to be Zweckgemeinschaften (partnerships of convenience), but its still despicable to tell employees not to talk to a recently fired employee or tell a recently fired manager not to talk to his former colleagues and employees, don't you think?
T.M. Shine: lets end with a "golden handshake." thanks everybody. the flexi-straws are in the mail. be sure to e-mail me any questions i haven't answered. peace, tms
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
|
Join live discussions from the Washington Post. Feature topics include national, world and DC area news, politics, elections, campaigns, government policy, tech regulation, travel, entertainment, cars, and real estate.
| 132.682927 | 0.682927 | 0.926829 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/13/DI2008051301908.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/13/DI2008051301908.html
|
K Street - washingtonpost.com
|
2008052719
|
A list of Birnbaum's columns can be found here.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Hello everyone. Thank you for reading and for writing in. It looks like we have a bunch of questions to start. That's great, but please feel free to interrupt as we go along. We could always use more. So, let's get started.
1220 L Street: If you and others only knew how unsuccessful "big oil" is and has been.
Elected officials and others consider oil lobbyists to be like nuclear waste -- don't come near us.
If "big oil" was so powerful and successful do you think both coasts would be off limits to drilling (moratoria from the 70s and 80s), ANWR would be closed (80s), the RFS would have passed, etc.??
If you look at the record, "big oil" has historically fared better under D than R presidents.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Interesting theory. Especially coming from someone at 1220 L Street, which I assume is NW and I also assume is the headquarters building of the American Petroluem Institute, the main lobby for the oil and gas industry. If you are excited about a Democratic president, then that would be news and you might also get your wish. Care to say more?
Alexandria, Va.: Will Grassley's Physician Payments Sunshine Act (S.2029), in its latest form, be attached to the Medicare reimbursement fix that must be passed by July 1?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: I honestly don't know. Could you write back with a short explanation of the Act and what its merits (or demerits) are?
Trenton, N.J.: John McCain has a tough new policy on lobbyists in his campaign. What possessed him to crack down like that in a way that makes him look so bad?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: No doubt McCain wants to run as the purer candidate, or at least the as-pure candidate -- compared to Obama. But to do so requires that he separate himself from a lot of the people who have been with his campaign even in the darkest days. Dumping a handful of those people, because of their lobbying connections, gave McCain a black eye. Then again, maybe he wants to take those lumps now so that he can be rid of those problems later -- when it counts. That's the best scenario I can come up with. No doubt, though, his main problem is that he surrounded himself with so many lobbyists to begin with, while at the same time claiming to be the chief opponent of special interests. That's a problem that will be hard to shake, no matter what his new policies are.
Washington, D.C.: I'm in my early 20's and have been a lobbyist for two years now. My question for you is if I should pack it in and get out of dodge since I'm a Republican and it looks as though Democrats will run the show here for quite some time. Are Republicans really unemployable (and vice versa) when we're not in power? Your piece in the Post today was very good but also has added to my fears about the future. Is this just how the lobbying business is? I'm outgrowing my current position and was going to begin a new job search, but not I'm not so sure I should be searching in Washington. Thank you.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Thank you for writing in, and for reading. Do not be discouraged. That's my advice, for what it's worth. And it is worth what you are paying for it, please keep in mind. Washington is run by both parties. Sometimes one is more powerful and more prevalent than the other. But still, there are two of them. You might think about broadening your experience by going into government, probably with a Republican lawmaker, for a while. When you get out, there will probably be more opportunties -- no matter who's in charge in Congress and the White House. Lobbying is a growing business, which is a good thing for you, so I wouldn't quickly turn my back on it if I were you. There aren't many businesses that are growing lately. Hope this helps.
Los Angeles: Can Obama really win in November or would Hillary Clinton really be the right choice, just as she says?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: That question is one that I cannot answer. And will not. National polls now show Clinton/Obama vs. McCain as very close contests. That's pretty amazing in my view, given the sad state of the economy and continuing woes in Iraq (though things are improving there). What I do know is that it would be wrong to assume very much based on the polls today. It is very early, at least in the general election fight, to draw too many conclusions.
New York: The Post ran a front-page story on "inexplicable" high oil prices without once mentioning the Iraq War. Is there any firewall remaining between the Post's editorial page and its newsroom?
washingtonpost.com: Skyrocketing Oil Prices Stump Experts
Jeffrey Birnbaum: There is a clear separation between the news and editorial departments here.
New York: Re: McCain, why do you want to give him any benefit fo the doubt. It was about to come out that Charlie Black was a whore for the Burmese dictators (the blogs were all over it), so he suddenly resigns from the campaign.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: I may have missed it, but I do not think that Charlie Black worked for the Burmese government.
Washington, D.C.: Will the Washington Monthly be able to continue now that the deal with Common Cause has fallen through?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Paul Glastris, the editor of the Monthly, told me he has other deals cooking. I wish him well. But I worry that unless things change the future of the Washington Monthly as we now know it could be limited.
Washington, D.C.: Will the banks be disappointed after hiring all these "D's" if more Republicans end up winning elections?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Yes, they will. Then what they'll do is hire more R's. Right?
Baltimore: Aren't there good lobbyists too? I keep hearing about candidates who want to get rid of lobbyists. What about the good guys out there, are are there none?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: There are plenty. Lobbyists is just a bad word these days, and maybe for a long time. At least when it's used by people who know nothing and care less about Washington.
Wilmington, Del.: Why did McCain shoot himself in the foot over lobbyists? I wish he had left well enough alone.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: I think McCain had to distance himself from the many lobbyists who have been around him. It was going to be a campaign issue, certainly if Obama was the Democratic nominee, so he acted early and decisively. Damage was done, but maybe it would have been worse if the changes were made closer to the November elections.
Old Town, Va.: If Obama doesn't allow lobbyists into his White House, won't that hurt him because he'll lack Washington experience in his top ranks?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: I don't believe that Obama would ban lobbyists from his White House. They just cannot work on issues they lobbied on. But you are correct. If Obama shuns lobbyists, he could well be losing some much-needed Washington experience. Lobbyists are, after all, the people who live here and the folk ways of the town are important for any newcomer to the White House.
Chicago: I keep reading about McCain and lobbyists. Waht about Obama and lobbyists? I'm sure he has as many on the payroll.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Don't know about on the payroll, but yes, Obama has Washington consultants and lobbyists giving him advice. I'm sure we'll see plenty of stories about that in the weeks to come.
Washington, D.C.: Who's right in the fight between food and fuel--the fight between the grocery manufacturers and ethanol companies?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Don't think I want to take sides. I will say only that it is a big dispute that will be costly for both sides. What's hard to understand is what chance the food processors think they have in the battle. They want to prevent the government from implementing ethanol standards passed by Congress and signed by the president. Why they are bothering, I can't see. Can anyone explain that to me?
New York: Do poor people have any lobbyists directly committed to their predicaments? I'm fascinated by some of the memes out there - paying a white farmer in Kansas to sit on his butt and not plant any crops is called a "subsidy" while paying a young black mother to work hard by raising her kids at home is called "welfare" and I can't help but believe lobbying influences these memes.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: There are plenty of lobbyists for good-at-heart causes. And they have a lot of influence. But I don't think those are the kinds of lobbyists that the candidates are complaining about.
Frederick, Md.: Why are only Democrats being hired on K 'street. Aren't there Republican in Washington anymore?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: There are LOTS of Republicans in Washington. And always will be. The new hires lately have mostly been Democrats, reflecting the outlook for Democratic gains in Congress next year. But there are plenty of Republicans being hired too, just not at the same pace.
Washington, D.C.: When will Hillary get out? I guess that's the question of the day.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: That's the question of the day and the answer is, any day now. At least that's what the experts say. Some time after the primary season. That's early June. One important hurdle comes this weekend when the rules committee begins discussions, and may decide, the fate of the Florida and Michigan delegations. If those delegations are seated in a way that satisfies the Clinton camp, the end could be near. If not, the end could be far.
Washington, D.C.: Will there be more -- or less -- partying at the national conventions with the tough new rules in place?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Less, in all probablility. But partying there will still be. That's mostly what the events are for -- other than getting free air time for the nominees.
McLean, Va.: So what is going to happen with the Washington Monthly?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: As I said before, I don't know. Unless there is a financial backer in the picture, the outlook cannot be all that rosy.
Washington, D.C.: What are you projecting on the outcome of the election in November. How many Ds will gain seats in the House and the Senate?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: This is a very rough guess. The Democrats could pick up 20 or so seats in the House and a half dozen or so seats in the Senate. But that's just a guess.
Washington: Bush has said he would veto the housing bill, but do you think he will or is that just talk?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: My guess is that the compromise between Dodd and Shelby in the Senate will help get the president off his veto threat. The problem is bad enough that he would like to himself and his party on the side of a bill that will help. Watch for a few more compromises and the president signing the legislation in the end.
Philadelphia: Why is the farm lobby so powerful and why the big giveaway this year at their request?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Farmers are very well organized and elect people to Congress. That's the heart of their power. They also were careful this year to impose some new limits on government payments and to make sure that urban lawmakers got a lot out of the farm bill, in the form of nutrition programs. That combination has foiled President Bush's effort to rein in farm programs even more.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Thanks everyone for writing in. Let's do it again soon. All best!
You earlier offered career advice to a D.C. lobbyist. Isn't that a bit like offering sage marketing wisdom on how a tobacco company should addict the next generation of children or how al Qaeda ought to next target Americans? Lobbyists are the bitter enemy of all Americans and beholden only to their offshore bank accounts and those of their bosses.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Maybe. But lobbying is protected by the first amendment. If someone wants to be a lobbyist, they can be, and should be. I think.
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
|
Join live discussions from the Washington Post. Feature topics include national, world and DC area news, politics, elections, campaigns, government policy, tech regulation, travel, entertainment, cars, and real estate.
| 61.609756 | 0.609756 | 0.707317 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/22/DI2008052203544.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/22/DI2008052203544.html
|
Station Break
|
2008052719
|
If it's on the dial, over the air, on the cable, or just plain Out There, it's fair game for 'Station Break with Paul Farhi.' Bring your comments to the conversation on America's Fastest Growing Pop Culture Chat.
Farhi was online Tuesday, June 3, at 1 p.m. ET.
Farhi is a reporter in The Post's Style section, writing about media and popular culture. He's been watching TV and listening to the radio since "The Monkees" were in first run and Adam West was a star. Born in Brooklyn and raised in Los Angeles, Farhi had brief stints in the movie business (as an usher at the Picwood Theater), and in the auto industry (rental car lot guy) before devoting himself full-time to word processing. His car has 15 radio pre-sets and his cable system has 500 channels. He vows to use all of them for good instead of evil.
Paul Farhi: Greetings, all, and welcome back. Now, where were we before we were so rudely interrupted? Let's see.... Oh, yes: Scott McClellan wrote a tell-all book. (did you see Jon Stewart's takedown of the very flummoxed McClell last night on the Daily Show?) Plus, this: Harvey Korman, RIP; Dick Martin, RIP; TV theme writers Earle "Andy Griffith Show" Hagen and Alexander "Star Trek" Courage, RIP; Bo Diddley, RIP. And as long as we're at it, you, too, fashion maven Yves "Why is My First Name Spelled that Way?" Saint Laurent, RIP.In local news, Dan Snyder is closing in on another radio-station deal (a pack of local AM'ers--WTEM, WWRC, WTNT) that would give him control of the radio sports talk field. Very clever, no?
All right, let's go to the phones...
Missed You Last Week: Whew--we thought maybe you took a last-second buyout!
Paul Farhi: I'm in it till they pry my cold, dead fingers from the keyboard (or my daughter gets through college, whichever comes through first). Bigtime sad day around here last Friday, what with all the people leaving (sigh)....
Centreville, Va.: Hi Paul. In regard to a recent Washington Post article about May sweeps, most of the highly-rated shows are on CBS or FOX (American Idol)and Ch. 4 is being adversely affected by NBC's primetime dismal ratings That being the case, shouldn't Ch. 9 vs. Ch. 7 have seen a ratings boost like Ch. 5 did? Any thoughts why Ch. 7 is gaining market share?
washingtonpost.com: Top Shows' Ratings Hit Low Points For 'Sweeps' Week (Post, May 7)
Paul Farhi: It's a logical question. But: Both Chans. 9 and 7 were actually down in viewers in primetime during the May rating period. Not nearly as dramatically as the very-hurting NBC/Chan. 4, but still down. ABC/Chan. 7 was the only one of the Big Four (or, these days, the Moderately Larger than Cable Networks Four) to see growth in its primetime shows. So: Channel 7's news benefitted from the bigger "lead in" audience. In any case, 7 has been gaining, gaining, gaining. Watch for them to overtake Chan. 4 sometime soon.
Alexandria, Va.: Many of the hosts now on WTEM regularly deride Dan Snyder. They call him "The Danny", and not in a nice way. So, if Snyder buys WTEM, will we have the equivalent of Soviet style radio and suddenly the talk show hosts will talk of "Mr Snyder"?
washingtonpost.com: Redskins' Snyder Seeks to Buy WTEM, Two Other Stations (Post, May 30)
Paul Farhi: Now, now...John Riggins (on the Snyder-owned stations) has gone after the team at times, so I don't think it's quite fair to say criticism will end. In any case, I don't know what a Snyder-owned WTEM would sound like. As a general observation? I think it's naturally easier for people to criticize someone (or something) when they have no personal or financial ties to that someone or something.
re: "The last great TV theme, argues Burlingame, was 'I'll Be There for You,' a song written for 'Friends'" : NO NO NO!!! I hate that theme song. I enjoyed watching the show, but I had to mute the TV during the theme song. And close my eyes so I wouldn't have to see the horrible dancing.
washingtonpost.com: A Requiem: Songs That Made the Hit Parade . . . (Post, June 1)
Paul Farhi: Well, I think Jon--who wrote the book on TV themes--was really referring to that song as "the last TV theme that a whole lot of people can remember," or some such. I didn't get the impression he was making a value judgment. Me? I kinda like that song...
Golden Ghetto, Calif.: Paul: Its me again. What do you think the chances are that the Runaways (the greatest all girl band of all time of course) can get back together for a tour? Have Joan Jett and Cheri Curry spoken in the last 30 years? Did you ever see them while in L.A. in the 70's? Thanks. Bray
Paul Farhi: Closet Runaways fans unite! And in answer to your question: Seems like no chance, but who besides the Runaways, knows? I just noticed that Joan Jett (former Runaway) is touring with her group, the Blackhearts. They're playing locally, with a whole bunch of other semi-nostalgic acts.
The real question: Who gets a reunion first -- The Runaways or the Go-Gos?
Chantilly, Va.: Paul: I'd like to get your latest thoughts on the "True Oldies Channel," 105.9.Scott Shannon may indeed sound like an "angry drunk" (your term) but I sense a real appreciation, if not love for the music they play. Their playlist is pretty broad and Scottzo's interludes are pretty short. That's a winning combo, I think. Also, they dig back farther into the rock era than does BIG. There's room for both in this market.
Paul Farhi: I totally agree with you. It's actually a very good oldies station. I keep hearing stuff on there that I never hear on WBIG (mainly because BIG has abandoned most of the '60s stuff). I had really low hopes for "True Oldies" (a name that kinda works a little too hard, don't you think?), but have been pleasantly surprised.
"In any case, I don't know what a Snyder-owned WTEM would sound like.": What do the other Red Zebra stations sound like? THEY SOUND THE SAME. WTEM would start airing the same stuff as the other stations. Think about it. It's cheaper programming wise and it'll give them leverage with advertisers seeking that demographic.
Paul Farhi: Not sure you're right. There are several possibilities here. Poss. No. 1: Snyder sells the three "Triple X" stations. Poss. No. 2: He keeps all SIX stations and all formats stay as they are now. Poss. No. 3: One (or two) of the Triple X'ers become Spanish-language sports (ESPN Deportes), and one carries trimulcast (with WTEM and, say, WTNT) programming (Riggins, Czaban, et al). There are undoubtedly Possibilities No. 4, 5 and 6-plus, but those are the ones that come most easily to mind.
Hey, I'm just spitballing here....
Rancho Santa Margarita, Calif.: Paul: When did you decide to take "Square Wake Up Hour" national? And shouldn't your UCLA rommate get a cut?
Paul Farhi: Ladies and gentlemen: the Bard of Newport Beach is in the building (virtually)! Okay, it's old home week and college roommate reunion time here. Everybody ignore us...
Somewhat related to t.v. themes...: I was watching "The Rockford Files" on DVD and was reminded that action shows used to begin with a "This week on..." montage of action sequences that one would see if one just stuck around.
I wish TV shows still did that, but I don't know why.
Paul Farhi: I think TV producers figure that you already know the show, so you don't need summaries or re-introductions of self-contained series (though a number of serial shows, like "24" and "Lost," do the "Previously on..." clip summaries). Also, themes and credit segments take time that can be devoted to more commercials.
Too Late: The Go-Go's have already reunited -- back in 1999 they toured, then put out an album of new material in 2001. They toured a little during the early 2000's, but seem to be working on solo stuff now.
(and blame my 40-something wife for my possession of this uselss knowledge...)
Paul Farhi: Thanks for the infotainment, but quit blaming your wife, Mr. Belinda Carlyle-worshipper...
Richmond, Va.: Watch the Runaways documentary. Great interviews with all the band members (except Joan Jett, who I always lionized). I think she'd like to keep that part of her life behind her.
Paul Farhi: Really? Why would she want to do that? The Runaways were ridiculously good fun. And would she be whatever it is she became without the Runaways? Doubtful...
Fairfax, Va.: I'm increasingly annoyed with the fear, uncertainty and doubt (FUD) being injected into local and national newscasts. There's now a whole lot of conjecture creeping in - words like could, would, may, should, might, possibly, etc. that allow almost anything to be dropped in as hard news. Also, there is more use of 8 second talking heads that are either unidentified or identified to unknown organizations (which discourages viewer assessment). And local weather reporting? I'm fully expecting a station to open their "Apocalypse Now Weather Center" any day now. Is there any room in the media for news reporting based on actual factual information and not conjecture or FUD?
Paul Farhi: Well, fear's a big theme on the news (or maybe IN the news). Dennis Miller once observed that the real value of local TV news is to remind you how good your life is, that you're not facing the horrific things that some guy across town is dealing with. Pretty good paradigm, I think.
Arlington, Va.: I have finally been able to log some time with the new Mike O'Meara show on WJFK and I really liked it. I was worried it would fail without Don Jeronimo, but Mike is just great, there is more from the very talented "news guy" Buzz and producer Beth Ann McBride is back. It is a better rounded show. Why do I feel guilty thinking that?
Paul Farhi: Because Don was a radio god for about 20 years around here? Because "Don & Mike" was just altogether entertaining for so long? And as I've said before, I like the new show, but it has a very different "feel" to it. And I still miss the old show.
Sec 114 Row E: Is there any chance that we'll ever have a balanced sports talker in this town? I don't mind the Redskins chatter when there's something to talk about, but during the off season its nonsense when there's so much else going on....
Paul Farhi: Well, this IS a Redskins town, no matter how well the Wizards, Caps, Nats, Terps, Mystics, DC United or whatevers are doing. My beef, generally: We need some truly well-rounded sports talkers, not specialists in a particular sport (basketball, football, whatever). I mean, I remember when you could throw a question about any sport to the local radio guys in L.A. and they'd RUN with it. Not so here.
Scoreboard Scotty: Paul -- I hated "Big O and Dukes" for years and years (beginning with their introduction -- through the Sports Junkies -- as intern/gopher/idiots). I didn't like their nighttime show, and frequently wanted to climb into the radio to punch them and get them to shut up.
Their daytime show is the best, freshest radio I've heard in a long time. They're settling into some kind of semi-honest schtick/identity stuff that I really like, and even though they're twenty years younger than I am, I like the show a lot. Daytime radio I don't understand. What say you?
Paul Farhi: Agree. Good chemistry. And they're doing exactly what the Junkies before them did--just tell us what the world looks like to them, a couple of late 20-ish/early 30-ish dudes. As I've said, I'm not in their main demographic group, but I like hearing their perspective (though I could do with less of Chad's comic-book fanboy talk).
Bowie, Md.: On the Snyder/WTEM situation: I'm more interested to see how the ESPN Radio and FOX Sports Radio contracts with WTEM and Red Zebra are resolved. I'd love to have ESPN radio back on the better signal at WTEM.Many local radio hosts (and newspaper reporters) attack Snyder like he has personally kicked their dog and insulted their wife/husband/SO. Less of that would be fine with me.
Paul Farhi: That's a big question, yes. Maybe this is obvious (and maybe not) but you can't run a sports-talk station profitably any longer without the free (yes, it's free) programming provided by the syndicators. So, the ESPN stuff is important. You may remember that Snyder lured ESPN radio away from WTEM not long after he bought the Triple X stations. So, it wouldn't be a surprise for him to restore it to 980 AM when and/of if he buys the station.
Herndon, Va.: Mr. F: With the weather so beautiful, I hope you're allowing the Station Break dancers and Bo Diddley tribute band to be outside your studio today. As to Snyders' proposed purchase: would this mean some of the local programming on WTEM and Snyder's current "network" would be cut - whichever Snyder and crew decides is the weakest?
Paul Farhi: Great idea! We'll do a free show on the plaza outside Station Break HQ right after the chat! (I'm hoping we can get go-go dancers in miniskirts to dance in "cages" around the plaza).
As for programming, I dunno. The man hasn't even signed the deal yet. Hard to make a really informed guess.
Washington, D.C.: Can we all agree that the AT&T Wireless commercial with the dad trying to track down his wayward daughter is, at the very least, stupid and, at worst, highly offensive?
Notwithstanding that the purported reason he can't get reception is because he's ALREADY knocking on car doors looking for her at the secluded lover's lane, can't we all agree that his reaction to being out of contact with his daughter is so over the top that it's pretty clear that her dillweed of a father is going to engage in some other controlling borderline-abusive behaviour before her high school days are over?
Succinctly, honey, daddy's bad cell phone reception is the least of your problems.
Paul Farhi: Stupid? Check. Highly offensive? Naw. As the father of a 15-year-old daughter, I'd be prowling lover's lane if I thought she was up there. With a shotgun. In which case, I bet you wouldn't refer to me as a "dillweed."
Fear in news: Actually, I thought that the most interesting part of "Bowling for Columbine" (whatever you think of Michael Moore, he at least raises interesting questions and connections) was about how local news thrives on feeding a constant level of anxiety/neurosis in the populace, way beyond what would be justified by reality. I don't think the effect is nearly as benign as Dennis Miller's joke about it suggests.
Paul Farhi: Actually, I thought that was one of the great weaknesses of that film. One of Moore's theses is the effect of TV on actual violence. He also contrasts the violent U.S. with the relatively more peaceful Canada. But he leaves the obvious out of the picture: Canada gets most of the same TV shows we do, and its TV news is no more high-minded than our own. So it can't be TV that's causing all our violence, can it?
Fairfax, Va.: Paul,I see the Greaseman is back on DC 101. I think it's a blast. Did they need him for ratings ?
Paul Farhi: Maybe, but only in the most limited way. Grease is on on Saturdays, and stations don't care all that much about their weekend ratings, especially the Saturday morning kind.
Re: Runaways documentary: Joan Jett was so against the Runaways documentary, she would authorize any of their songs for it, so the only footage of the Runaways is early film of them doing covers -- no Runaways songs. That's how much Jett wants to be disassociated with her old bandmates.
Paul Farhi: Sheesh. What's her beef? The Runaways gave a lot of people--mostly adolescent boys, I think--a lot of pleasure back in the day.
Richmond, Va.: My problem with that ad of the Dad looking for his daughter at lovers' lane, is that they imply leaving a message saying, "Dad I'm spending the night at Jane's!" would be sufficient. Wouldn't a kid have to actually talk to a parent and get permission to spend the night at a friend's?
Paul Farhi: I dunno. Kids can be pretty sneaky and irresponsible. But parents can be pretty lazy and even more irresponsible. Doesn't strike me as implausible...
Washington, D.C.: I liked Don Geronimo as well, but I'd be lying if I said I missed him. Last Friday, Big O & Dukes sat in with (and got drunk with) Mike during his show, and they all ended up going three hours long just for the hell of it. There's no way something like that would have happened if Don were still in the picture. I hate to say it, but his leaving is the best thing that ever happened to WJFK.
Paul Farhi: That sells Don short, I'm afraid. "Don & Mike" could be very creative, sharp and funny. There was even an Oprah-esque element (for guys): Stuff like Mike's divorce(s), Don's chats with Bart and Freda, etc. Lot of humanity and just plain ol' fun. Mike is in the process of trying to redefine and re-create that now...
"Canada gets most of the same TV shows we do, and its TV news is no more high-minded than our own. So it can't be TV that's causing all our violence, can it?": Bacon deficiency makes you violent. Or is that just me?
Laurel, Md.: Oh, well. The D.C. area has no jazz stations left. What's a girl to do?
Paul Farhi: Well, WPFW-FM (89.3) still broadcasts some jazz, so we're not totally bereft. And true jazz fans had a continuing beef with "Smooth Jazz" WJZW-FM, so maybe its demise is less of a disaster to purists than it would seem...
Runaways: Without the late Lita Ford, would it really be a true reunion anyway?
Paul Farhi: I'm sure they could find a bottle blond of a certain age to step in for her. Happens all the time with these aging nostalgia acts. True anecdote: We were up in Philly the other day and saw a billboard for Chicago's upcoming show at, I think, Dover Downs. My wife said, "I bet that would be a fun show." I agreed, but said I didn't think more than two original members of Chicago were still in the group. My wife pointed to the billboard, with six graybeards depicted, and said, "I dunno. They all look as old as you'd expect."
What's her beef?: I THINK there are some bad memories of the old Runaways touring days, from backstabbing band-mates to Svengali manager (rumored to have taken advantage of some of the girls on tour). I don't think JJ wants people speculating on the young teen girl sleeping with her manager for the lead position in the band...
Paul Farhi: Um, wasn't being (or posing as) bad girls the entire Runaways shtick? And if those things were true, would anyone hold them against Joan? Doubtful...
Smooth Jazz: Didn't they switch that to the HD channel? Did they change it again? It was canned anyway, or so I thought, so I never listened.
Paul Farhi: Yes, it's on 105.9's second HD channel. Which is like saying, it's on the surface of Nepture. Does anyone own an HD radio? One of the bigger over-hyped failures of the mid-to late-2000s.
Cherry Bomb!: Did you see the Runaways live? I did, and I'll pass on the reunion, thanks.
Paul Farhi: No! But I am sure I would cherish the memory. Or perhaps I wouldn't.
Pittsburgh, Pa.: For "The D.C. area has no jazz stations left." I have fond memories of listening to Felix Grant on WMAL when we were living in the DC area.Check out the Internet jazz radio broadcast on WDUQ's Web site.
Paul Farhi: Thanks for posting that. Very helpful!
Washington, D.C.: Hi Paul. Where is Joe Scarborough? The Joe of "Morning Joe" has been missing for maybe a month now, any word on where he is? Is he leaving MSNBC?
Paul Farhi: Joe was on MSNBC or so ago, commenting on the presidential race. Unaware of any problems...
Paul Farhi: Folks, I'm gonna go back to my dorm room, crank up the turntable and put on some Runaways vinyl. Feel free to join me. Or better yet, let's do this again in a couple of weeks (Promise: We will be completely Runaways free by then). In the meantime, it's been an honor and a pleasure. Catch you next time. Regards to all...Paul.
Lita, OK:: I think Carmelita Ford, Lita for short, would be surprised to hear she's dead. She's playing in Oklahoma next month, I think.
washingtonpost.com: Yeah...July 11 according to this concert schedule.
Paul Farhi: Oh, wait! This just in!!!
Paul Farhi: And on that note--Long live Lita!--we bid you adieu...
Glen Burnie, Md.: They've said on the show Joe Scarborough is on paternity leave awaiting the birth of his child.
Paul Farhi: Okay. THIS note (thanks, Glen Burnie).
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
|
Join live discussions from the Washington Post. Feature topics include national, world and DC area news, politics, elections, campaigns, government policy, tech regulation, travel, entertainment, cars, and real estate.
| 114.390244 | 0.658537 | 0.902439 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/11/DI2008051101851.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/05/11/DI2008051101851.html
|
Opinion Focus
|
2008052719
|
Discussion Group: Mr. Robinson's Neighborhood
Archive: Eugene Robinson discussion transcripts
Eugene Robinson: Hi, everyone, and welcome. I'll be here for the next hour to talk about anything and everything. Today's column, for reference, was about Hillary Clinton's remarks Friday citing the RFK assassination in June 1968 as a reason for her to stay in the race. I didn't much like these remarks and thought they reflected poorly on Clinton's state of mind. To put it mildly. Okay, I did say that this argument was "ungenuine, unprincipled and insane." I suspect that some of you agree and some don't.
Silver Spring, Md.: Eugene, upon reviewing the video (I assume you have), don't you think it's entirely plausible that Clinton was just pointing out that everyone remembers that Kennedy died in June, and that her point was he died campaigning. In other words, it seems to me, based on her delivery, she's not mentioning the assassination to indulge in fear mongering but to spur people's memories. Was it a smart, sensitive comment? Probably not, but I don't think you can listen to her and think she's trying to conjure a boogeyman.
The multitude of knee-jerk reactions pundits have to benign-but-clumsy comments like this make it harder for some (like me) to take the legitimate Clinton criticisms seriously. Shrugging off the numerous specious critiques can leave you numb when the real deal shows up. By the time of her (horrible) Bosnia gaffe, I already had trained myself to ignore most of Clinton's critics because so few of their critiques seemed legitimate. It gets harder to register the appropriate amount of outrage when you expend so much energy correcting course on the coverage. There's sort of a "kitchen sink" approach, if you will, to her coverage: Throw enough stuff at the wall and see what sticks. Finally, I'd like to add that while I have tended to see Clinton as the pragmatic choice for a Democratic candidate and had no need to hold my nose when I voted for her in the Maryland primary, I gladly will vote for Obama.
Eugene Robinson: As I wrote, I thought what Clinton said reflected some kind of "magical thinking" about how the stars might yet align for her candidacy. Her argument about the calendar doesn't hold water for me, since the caucuses and primaries started so early this year. And in any event, why mention the RFK assassination at all, if what she meant was to come up with an example of a campaign that went into June? Would that example have occurred to you?
Washington: There have been a number of stories about open and public race-based hostility towards Obama on the main streets of America, the kinds of things that have been more behind closed doors in recent years. Bill Clinton's remarks in South Carolina trying to marginalize Obama as "the black candidate" and Hillary's self-coronation as the hope of "hard-working white Americans" seem to have legitimized these reactions and made them "okay" to say and do in public again. Will trying to destroy 40 years of race relations progress for personal political gain be the real Clinton legacy?
Eugene Robinson: I'm pretty optimistic -- at least in the long run. We've come far in this country in terms of race relations, but we still have issues. In the long run, better to get them out and deal with them.
Buying into the Meta-Narratives: One thing that drives me nuts about the mainstream media is their tendency to construct meta-narratives that then bias every subsequent piece of information and yet not acknowledge that fact. One example is McCain and maverick, another is Clinton and ambitious. Her RFK statement wasn't some ambitious, power-hungry bigot hinting that Obama might get assassinated, but a statement that stuff happens (Gary Hart, anyone?).
Eugene Robinson: She could have used Gary Hart or a number of other examples, rather than the RFK assassination. But really, hanging around and waiting for a bolt out of the blue doesn't qualify as a plan.
Ocala, Fla.: I am curious why Hillary Clinton has been allowed to refer to her comment as a misstep and the comment be recognized by the media and pundits as a result of fatigue whereas Barack Obama's bitter comment received harsh criticism and night and day coverage? I am tired of hearing that the media loves Barack. Furthermore, I am tired of Barack being held to a different standard.
Eugene Robinson: Since we're talking about Clinton's comment right now, I can't agree that she's been given a pass on this one.
Washington: Mr. Robinson: How much significance will the pundits attach to the outcome of Puerto Rico's primary on Sunday, given that Puerto Ricans are not allowed to participate in the general election? Thanks.
Eugene Robinson: A good question. The main significance is that Puerto Rican Democrats do send delegates to the convention. In my view, the delegate numbers are the ones to watch. The Clinton campaign will likely seek to include the Puerto Rico vote totals in the unofficial "popular vote" count -- despite the fact that, as you point out, none of these voters can participate in the general election.
Washington: Will the Clintons truly work tirelessly to get Obama a win in November? Or will they attempt a half-hearted effort, secretly hoping for an Obama loss, which would position her for a 2012 bid?
Eugene Robinson: Call me naive, but I don't believe the Clintons are following some kind of subtle strategy to get Hillary Clinton elected in 2012. I think they're focused solely on winning the presidency right now, which means winning the nomination right now, which means doing and saying whatever they need to do or say. I think that if she loses the nomination, the Clintons will still want to have power and influence in the Democratic Party. The only way to assure that will be to campaign for Obama in a manner that at least looks tireless and enthusiastic.
Arlington, Va.: Hi Eugene: I must say that I am thrilled at this Presidential race. Not for the obvious, possibly history making implications, but for finally opening dialogue regarding the factions that continue to divide our society, mainly racism, sexism, classicism and entitlement. These factions have always existed and though we, as a society, have tried to act as though they were no longer prevalent, this race has proven that the issues still exist! There is still discomfort that Barack is African American, there are still men who refuse to believe a woman is more qualified for a position than a man is on the basis of gender, there are still people who have gotten rich off of special interest lobbyists and still people who feel that since they have been in Congress since Reagan, that they are entitled to the presidency. I am excited that these issues are finally being brought out of the back of the closet and discussed at the dining room table. It is only by acknowledging that these issues divide and conquer us that we learn the techniques needed to get rid of them, once and for all.
Eugene Robinson: I agree. Progress is often messy and uncomfortable. We all say we want an "honest dialog" about race and gender, but we really don't -- it's hard, it makes people uneasy. ... This campaign is making dialog unavoidable.
Berlin, N.J.: I was so glad to read in your op-ed today your observation that Clinton's real gaffe in her most unfortunate remarks to the Argus Leader editorial board may have been in what it revealed about I believe was the underlying strategy (or lack thereof) driving her entire "campaign". It was not a campaign -- rather it was an ascendancy of her (and Bill's) vision of an entitled, inevitable outcome -- her nomination.
I believe that Friday's remarks -- and others in the past few weeks -- merely reveal what her battle-fatigue can no longer hide in her carefully orchestrated sound-bytes -- she just never bargained for even the most remote possibility that another qualified candidate could challenge her rightful assumption of the nomination.
In her every message all you can really hear is that there is no one who could possibly come close to solving our nation's challenges besides her.
If this isn't elitism, I don't know what is. This time her true colors were simply "worn on her sleeve" for hopefully all of us to see.
Eugene Robinson: Since "day one," to quote a certain candidate, I've gotten the clear sense from Clinton and her campaign that they expected to win the nomination fairly easily and did not have a Plan B. When that didn't happen, you could see the obvious frustration -- most evident from Bill Clinton. This has been the First Family of the Democratic Party for well over a decade, and what they encountered this year must have been a real shock.
Philadelphia: Do you think Clinton's RFK comments will have any impact on a possible Obama/Clinton ticket?
Eugene Robinson: Yes, a negative impact. I never thought an Obama-Clinton ticket was likely, and I think it's less likely now.
Holly Springs, N.C.: One caller in NPR made a perfect point about the current Obama-Clinton primary voting. He suggested that those who voted for Hillary because she a woman practiced sexism. Those who voted for Obama because he is an African-American practiced racism. However, who voted either of the candidates because of their own logical arguments practiced true democracy. Please comment.
Eugene Robinson: I guess that means anyone who votes for John McCain in the fall because he's a white man will also be guilty of either racism or sexism. We don't have a "motivations test" for voting, so we have to hope that people have the interests of the nation at heart.
New York: Re: Puerto Rico, the only thing I find positive about Clinton staying in the race is the truly remarkable fact the upcoming Puerto Rico primary truly matters. This is a great day for democracy in the Democratic Party.
Eugene Robinson: I didn't mean to diss Puerto Rico. It's an injustice that Puerto Ricans are disenfranchised. I was just stating the fact.
Bethesda, Md.: Why did you use sexist language -- "maybe some strapping woodsman will come along and save me" -- in an otherwise fine and thoughtful piece?
I am not one of Hillary's admirers but find it hard to believe that you would ever use such Little Red Riding Hood imagery to describe the supposed internal dialogue of a male candidate. A 32-year old Black American woman, I am in the minority who believes that Clinton is not the best candidate (I initially supported John Edwards) and that she has been a target of sexism throughout the campaign.
Eugene Robinson: I said Clinton was guilty of "magical thinking" of the kind found in myths and fairy tales. I then gave two examples. One, about a sudden storm scattering the enemy's ships, came vaguely from Homer, to illustrate myth. The other, about the woodsman, came from the fairy tale you cite. I think it was legit.
Knoxville, Tenn.: Good afternoon. It seems that Obama has developed an efficient national 'on the ground' campaign presence in a relatively short period of time. How has he managed this? I compare this to the "Clinton Machine" which has been almost left for dead on the side of the road.
What does this say about the prospects of a national campaign for Obama vs. the GOP and McCain campaign?
Eugene Robinson: One of the most underreported stories of the whole campaign, in my view, is the Obama campaign organization. He and his people put together a revolutionary fundraising machine and a hugely effective on-the-ground presence in such short order that no one saw it coming. Whether he wins or loses, this will be the subject of Ph.D theses in years to come. If you talk to Republicans, they'll tell you that they are worried at the prospect of taking on this new machine in the fall. They're worried about either Democrat, though.
Washington: Eugene said "I didn't mean to diss Puerto Rico. It's an injustice that Puerto Ricans are disenfranchised. I was just stating the fact."
Disenfranchised? They pay no taxes but they should have the right to vote? That doesn't make sense now, does it Gene?
Eugene Robinson: I really, really didn't mean to diss Washington -- where, yes, residents can vote for president, but still have no voting representation in Congress.
Bowie, Md.: It seems 2008 is shaping up to be a year in which Democrats gain seats in both the House and Senate, and after eight years of GOP control, also win the White House. Do you think America is finally ready for its first black president, who happens to be a Democrat? And if Obama is defeated in the general election, will that destroy the notion of black voting power? I think your answer to these questions may expose any personal bias you have...
Eugene Robinson: My biases are always showing -- it comes with the real estate. I've always said the question of whether the country is "ready" for its first black or woman president is unanswerable. "Firsts" happen when they happen, and by definition they've never happened before. What "notion of black voting power" are you talking about? African Americans are about 13 percent of the population. Somewhat short of a hegemonic majority.
Re: Campaign Hysteria: One thing that amuses me (and reinforces my dismal impression of MSM) is the "it's destroying the party" line that keeps being said before primary. Afterwards, it turns out that more people voted for Obama and Hilary than voted for Kerry in the general election and that both campaigns signed up hundreds and thousands of new voters. Now, unless thousands of Republicans who support McCain are showing up to vote against a candidate, how is this destroying the party? Won't the real destruction occur if Sen. Clinton decides to run as a third-party or some equally-implausible occurrence happens?
Eugene Robinson: Very good points. This is why I said the Republicans are fundamentally worried about running against either Democrat, and even more worried about losses they might suffer in the House and Senate. From the GOP point of view, this could get ugly.
Lexington, Mass.: I always enjoy your comments and insights when I happen to see you on MSNBC. My question is about Bill Clinton. He has been shooting off all sorts of nonsense and inaccurate statements in South Dakota. recently, after his earlier campaigning problems. Do you think he will be able to resume the speaking engagement circuit and foundation work without any problem after the campaign is over?
Eugene Robinson: Don't doubt it for a moment. He's the Comeback Kid.
My time is up, everybody. Thanks for participating, and I'll see you again next week.
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
|
Join live discussions from the Washington Post. Feature topics include national, world and DC area news, politics, elections, campaigns, government policy, tech regulation, travel, entertainment, cars, and real estate.
| 73.609756 | 0.560976 | 0.804878 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/25/AR2008052501703.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008052719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/25/AR2008052501703.html
|
Offering Direction as 13,000 Crystal City Jobs Migrate
|
2008052719
|
The BRAC Transition Center is tucked in a corner of the Crystal City underground, and the staff uses a nearby popular steakhouse as a landmark to guide visitors to the center's entrance.
The center's location in a mall may seem odd. But Crystal City is one of the hardest-hit communities under the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure decisions. It stands to lose 13,000 federal jobs by 2011, as ordered by the BRAC Commission.
While the federal jobs are leaving, it's less clear how many federal employees will leave. The best estimate is that 35 percent of the employees will follow their jobs to military bases in Alabama, Kentucky, Texas, Indiana, Ohio and around the Capital Beltway. That means substantial numbers of Defense Department civilians will be hunting for jobs in other federal agencies and in the private sector.
And human nature being what it is, many will wait until the last minute.
"One of the things that we want the workers to know is that, yes, 2011 may be a few years away; however, let's start the planning process now, let's start the conversations, whether you know what you are going to do definitively or not," said Andrea Morris, the BRAC coordinator for Arlington County.
Even though the BRAC process is underway, Morris said her office continues to gather data about the move of Defense employees from leased offices in Arlington County to military bases that more easily meet the Pentagon's stringent security standards enacted after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
She is monitoring timelines for moving federal jobs, the pace of construction activity at the bases where jobs are being shifted and how that affects Crystal City, where a third of the commercial space will be in play.
"It's a shock, that is certainly true, but we think it is a manageable shock," Morris said.
Arlington's BRAC center, which opened last year, has geared up to provide numerous services to Defense employees, contractors, retailers and businesses. Employees, for instance, can ask for help with career planning, job matching and placement, interview preparation and résumé writing.
Since mid-January, 136 employees have come to the center for assistance, and about 30 are receiving one-on-one counseling. Employees especially want help with their KSAs, the dreaded requirement to detail their "knowledge, skills and abilities" for federal job applications.
The KSAs "are the bulk of a lot of the nervousness," Morris said. "They are not fun."
Defense employees, in careers that support the military, do not always appreciate the depth of their experience and their expertise, she said.
|
The BRAC Transition Center is tucked in a corner of the Crystal City underground, and the staff uses a nearby popular steakhouse as a landmark to guide visitors to the center's entrance.
| 14.971429 | 1 | 35 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.