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/2008/03/13/AR2008031304159.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/13/AR2008031304159.html
|
Doomed by a Familiar Act
|
2008031519
|
In a very real sense, Maryland's 71-68 loss to Boston College in the first round of the ACC tournament Thursday night was the Terrapins' season played out in one 40-minute game.
For the first seven minutes the Terrapins were men playing against boys. BC was lucky to get the ball across midcourt much less get off a decent shot. James Gist and Bambale Osby were dominating the inside at both ends. The Eagles' Tyrese Rice couldn't take a step without seeing four long arms in his face -- two belonging to Greivis Vasquez, the other two belonging to one of Maryland's inside players who jumped out at him anytime he tried to turn a corner on Vasquez.
After seven minutes it was 20-5 and thoughts of Clemson and perhaps Duke on Saturday didn't seem to be unreasonable. Maybe this could be 2004, when the Terrapins put together a miraculous weekend and went from the NCAA tournament bubble to the ACC championship and a No. 4 seed.
"I thought we had a chance to put them away in the first half and we couldn't do it," Maryland Coach Gary Williams said. "We just couldn't get it done. We let them see light and let them believe they had a chance."
That has become a familiar script for this team. In fact, during Maryland's last six games, it was outscored in the second half by 265-204, including 46-37 Thursday night.
After six minutes of near-perfect basketball, the Terrapins reverted to the form they had shown in the second half against Clemson (blowing a 20-point lead) and Virginia (going from three down with six minutes left to a 15-point loss). Anyone who had followed this team knew the 20-5 burst wouldn't last. They knew the avalanche of turnovers was coming, that the Terrapins would start throwing the basketball around as if it were a hockey puck.
By halftime it was 31-25 even though Rice had just one field goal (on 1-of-7 shooting) and the Eagles had tossed up enough bricks to build yet another new arena in Charlotte.
But it was the start of the second half, the first two possessions, that doomed Maryland. On the first possession, with the shot clock running down, Gist had to shoot a three -- and it went in. On the next possession, feeling it, he fired a 17-footer -- it also went in.
When Maryland has played its best this season -- including at the start of this game -- it has been with Gist playing in the low post, using his wide body and his quick feet to get high-percentage shots that can't be stopped very often. When the Terrapins have gone down like a stone it has been when Gist starts thinking he's a jump shooter. After he had made those first two shots, Gist's next five shots were jumpers. None of them went in.
The entire tone of the game changed. BC, which hadn't been able to convert in transition, began doing just that. There's a very good reason why the Eagles had lost 12 of 13 games coming in here: Their big men are gravity-laden non-leapers -- slow non-leapers at that. Maryland didn't block 10 shots in the game because Gist and Osby became Bill Russell and Patrick Ewing, they blocked 10 shots because BC's inside players have trouble getting off the floor.
But when the Terrapins began turning the ball over faster than you can say N-I-T, the Eagles were able to get shots so easy they were virtually un-missable. The game was decided during a four-minute stretch that began after an Adrian Bowie drive put Maryland up 50-47 with 7:38 to go.
During that stretch, BC went on a 13-0 run that was greatly aided by the fact that Maryland had five turnovers in six possessions and the other possession produced another missed Gist jumper. Every basket during the run was a layup in transition except for a Rakim Sanders three-pointer from the corner.
Williams used all his remaining timeouts during the four-minute debacle trying to stem the tide and calm his team down. Exactly why a team with two seniors starting inside and a point guard who has had the ball in his hands for two full seasons would completely fall apart -- just as it did against Clemson in the game that turned this season in the wrong direction for good -- is a mystery that Williams will spend most of the spring trying to figure out.
Naturally, Maryland didn't quit. Williams-coached teams don't quit. The Terrapins began to press every time they scored and BC began turning the ball over. (The two teams combined for 36 turnovers, 21 by Maryland.) For a team without leapers, the Eagles have a strange approach to trying to get the ball inbounds against pressure: They throw the ball in the air and hope one of their players will catch it. That approach produced a quick 7-0 Maryland run that knocked the lead down to 60-57 with 2:37 left.
A basket by Josh Southern made it 62-57 and then came the final defining moment of the season: With Maryland absolutely needing to score, Gist took another three -- clanging it badly with 1:43 left. Maryland had to foul after that and, although BC wasn't great at the foul line, it was good enough to hang on to win a game that won't be showing up on any "Classic" replays anytime soon.
And so, for the third time in four years, it is back to the NIT for Maryland. Williams talked bravely about how helpful it will be for his six freshmen to play more games. That may be so. But it won't do Gist, Osby or Vazquez -- the three best players on this team -- any good. It certainly won't do Williams any good. He turned 63 nine days ago but looked about 100 when the game was over and he sat trying to explain what had happened. If he had real answers this wouldn't have happened yet again.
The Terrapins have now won one NCAA tournament game in four years. There was a moment not so long ago when it looked as if they were going back to the tournament after their disastrous start before New Year's. But there was something dysfunctional about this team on the court.
Vasquez was wildly inconsistent. On Thursday night he began the game in complete control of the offense and finished with nine assists. But he also had six turnovers (back-court partner Eric Hayes had four) and didn't make a field goal the first 28 minutes. Gist was brilliant and awful -- sometimes in the same half.
In short, the team's two best players were Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde and the switch could be almost instantaneous. At the end of the book, Dr. Jekyll is overcome by his dark side and can't return from being Mr. Hyde.
That was Maryland on Thursday night. That was Maryland this season. No one wants Mr. Hyde showing up at the Big Dance. Which is why the Terrapins won't be there -- again.
|
Get sports news,schedules,rosters for Washington Redskins,Wizards,Orioles,United,Mystics,Nationals. Features Washington DC,Virginia,Maryland high school/college teams,Wilbon and Kornheiser from The Washington Post.
| 33.238095 | 0.547619 | 0.642857 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/13/AR2008031304175.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/13/AR2008031304175.html
|
Ozone Rules Weakened at Bush's Behest
|
2008031519
|
EPA officials initially tried to set a lower seasonal limit on ozone to protect wildlife, parks and farmland, as required under the law. While their proposal was less restrictive than what the EPA's scientific advisers had proposed, Bush overruled EPA officials and on Tuesday ordered the agency to increase the limit, according to the documents.
"It is unprecedented and an unlawful act of political interference for the president personally to override a decision that the Clean Air Act leaves exclusively to EPA's expert scientific judgment," said John Walke, clean-air director for the Natural Resources Defense Council.
The president's order prompted a scramble by administration officials to rewrite the regulations to avoid a conflict with past EPA statements on the harm caused by ozone.
Solicitor General Paul D. Clement warned administration officials late Tuesday night that the rules contradicted the EPA's past submissions to the Supreme Court, according to sources familiar with the conversation. As a consequence, administration lawyers hustled to craft new legal justifications for the weakened standard.
The dispute involved one of two distinct parts of the EPA's ozone restrictions: the "public welfare" standard, which is designed to protect against long-term harm from high ozone levels. The other part is known as the "public health" standard, which sets a legal limit on how high ozone levels can be at any one time. The two standards were set at the same level Wednesday, but until Bush asked for a change, the EPA had planned to set the "public welfare" standard at a lower level.
The documents, which were released by the EPA late Wednesday night, provided insight into how White House officials helped shape the new air-quality rules that, by law, are supposed to be decided by the EPA administrator.
The White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) questioned in a March 6 memo to the EPA why the second standard was needed. EPA officials answered in a letter that high ozone concentrations can cause "adverse effects on agricultural crops, trees in managed and unmanaged forests, and vegetation species growing in natural settings."
The preamble to the new regulations alluded to this tug of war, stating there was a "robust discussion within the Administration of these same strengths and weaknesses" in setting the secondary standard. The preamble went on to say that the decision to make the two ozone limits identical "reflects the view of the Administration as to the most appropriate secondary standard."
The effort to rewrite the language -- on the day the agency faced a statutory deadline -- forced EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson to postpone at the last moment a scheduled news conference to announce the new rules. It finally took place at 6 p.m., five hours later than planned.
Under the Clean Air Act, the federal government must reexamine every five years whether its ozone standards are adequate, and the rules that the EPA issued Wednesday will help determine the nation's air quality for at least a decade.
Ozone, which is formed when pollutants such as nitrogen oxides and other chemical compounds released by industry and motor vehicles are exposed to sunlight, is linked to an array of heart and respiratory illnesses.
|
The Environmental Protection Agency weakened one part of its new limits on smog-forming ozone after an unusual last-minute intervention by President Bush, according to documents released by the EPA.
| 17.4 | 0.771429 | 1.285714 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/13/AR2008031302277.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/13/AR2008031302277.html
|
FBI Found to Misuse Security Letters
|
2008031519
|
The episode was outlined in a Justice Department report that concluded the FBI had abused its intelligence-gathering privileges by issuing inadequately documented "national security letters" from 2003 to 2006, after which changes were put in place that the report called sound.
A report a year ago by the Justice Department's inspector general disclosed that abuses involving national security letters had occurred from 2003 through 2005 and helped provoke the changes. But the report makes it clear that the abuses persisted in 2006 and disclosed that 60 percent of the nearly 50,000 security letters issued that year by the FBI targeted Americans.
Because U.S. citizens enjoy constitutional protections against unreasonable searches and seizures, judicial warrants are ordinarily required for government surveillance. But national security letters are approved only by FBI officials and are not subject to judicial approval; they routinely demand certain types of personal data, such as telephone, e-mail and financial records, while barring the recipient from disclosing that the information was requested or supplied.
According to the findings by Justice Department Inspector General Glenn A. Fine, the FBI tried to work around the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which oversees clandestine spying in the United States, after it twice rejected an FBI request in 2006 to obtain certain records. The court had concluded "the 'facts' were too thin" and the "request implicated the target's First Amendment rights," the report said.
But the FBI went ahead and got the records anyway by using a national security letter. The FBI's general counsel, Valerie E. Caproni, told investigators it was appropriate to issue the letters in such cases because she disagreed with the court's conclusions.
In total, Fine said, the FBI issued almost 200,000 national security letters from 2003 through 2006, and they were used in a third of all FBI national security and computer probes during that time. Fine said his investigators have identified hundreds of possible violations of laws or internal guidelines in the use of the letters, including cases in which FBI agents made improper requests, collected more data than they were allowed to, or did not have proper authorization to proceed with the case.
Fine also pointed to the FBI's "troubling" use of the letters to obtain vast quantities of telephone numbers or other records with a single request. Investigators identified 11 such cases, involving information related to about 4,000 phone numbers, that did not comply with USA Patriot Act requirements or that violated FBI guidelines.
The latest findings reignited long-standing criticism from Democrats and civil liberties groups, who said the FBI's repeated misuse of its information-gathering powers underscores the need for greater oversight by Congress and the courts.
"The fact that these are being used against U.S. citizens, and being used so aggressively, should call into question the claim that these powers are about terrorists and not just about collecting information on all kinds of people," said Jameel Jaffer, national security director at the American Civil Liberties Union. "They're basically using national security letters to evade legal requirements that would be enforced if there were judicial oversight."
Justice spokesman Dean Boyd said in a statement that Fine's report "should come as no surprise" because the survey ended in 2006, before the FBI introduced procedural changes to better control and keep track of requests for the security letters.
FBI Assistant Director John Miller said a new automated system will keep better tabs on the letters, and they are now reviewed by a lawyer before they are sent to a telephone company, Internet service provider or other target. "We are committed to using them in ways that maximize their national security value while providing the highest level of privacy and protection of the civil liberties of those we are sworn to protect," Miller said.
Fine said that FBI employees "self-reported" 84 possible violations of laws or guidelines in the use of the letters, in 2006, which "was significantly higher than the number of reported violations in prior years." But he noted that his office already had begun its initial investigation into the letters by then, which might have contributed to the increase.
About a quarter of the reported incidents were because of mistakes made by telephone or Internet providers, including some in which they provided either the wrong information or disclosed more than the FBI requested. But many of those cases should have been caught by the FBI earlier, Fine said.
|
The FBI has increasingly used administrative orders to obtain the personal records of U.S. citizens rather than foreigners implicated in terrorism or counterintelligence investigations, and at least once it relied on such orders to obtain records that a special intelligence-gathering court had de...
| 17.87234 | 0.659574 | 1.042553 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/13/AR2008031303792.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/13/AR2008031303792.html
|
Britain Halts Deportation Move Against Gay Iranian
|
2008031519
|
Mehdi Kazemi, 19, moved to Britain in 2005 to study and has said he then learned that his boyfriend in Iran had been hanged after being convicted of sodomy. Homosexuality is a severe crime under Iranian law, and Kazemi's case has drawn concern from gay rights groups around the world.
An initial appeal for asylum was turned down here. But Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, Britain's top law enforcement figure, said Thursday that "in light of new circumstances" Kazemi's appeal would be reconsidered, handing him a temporary reprieve that his supporters hope will ultimately lead to his being granted the right to stay in Britain.
When the government first rejected his appeal, Kazemi fled to the Netherlands, where lawmakers took up his cause. He remains there but is expected to return to Britain within days. A Dutch court this week refused to grant Kazemi asylum on the grounds that he had initiated proceedings in Britain and needed to return there to continue them.
In recent years, the British government has been under enormous public pressure to reduce the number of refugees and asylum seekers it admits. Critics say too many foreigners abuse the system.
Kazemi has said he did not arrive in Britain with the intention of staying, but then found out that Iranian officials would be looking for him if he returned.
Gay rights leaders in Britain said that Kazemi's partner was tortured into naming Kazemi before he was killed and that Kazemi has been suicidal over the whole ordeal. An uncle who lives in Britain was also quoted in a British newspaper as saying that if authorities didn't kill Kazemi, his father in Iran would.
Eighty members of Britain's upper house of Parliament signed a letter sent to Smith urging the government to "show compassion and allow Mr. Kazemi to have a safe haven in the United Kingdom."
"There is no doubt that he will be persecuted and possibly face state-sanctioned murder if he is forced to return," said Roger Roberts, a member of the House of Lords from the Liberal Democratic Party, who initiated the petition.
"It's cruel to even suggest sending him back," said David Allison, a spokesman for Outrage!, a gay rights group in Britain. "The history of gays in Iran has been horrific."
Human rights advocates have long deplored the treatment, including executions, of gay men in Iran. Last year while in New York City, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was asked about executions of homosexuals in his country, and he replied: "We don't have homosexuals like in your country. I don't know who told you that."
|
LONDON, March 13 -- Britain halted deportation proceedings Thursday against a gay Iranian teenager who has said he would probably be hanged because of his sexual orientation if he is returned to Iran.
| 14.428571 | 0.657143 | 1.114286 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/13/AR2008031302841.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/13/AR2008031302841.html
|
NRCC Says Ex-Treasurer Diverted Up to $1 Million
|
2008031519
|
The former treasurer for the National Republican Congressional Committee diverted hundreds of thousands of dollars -- and possibly as much as $1 million -- of the organization's funds into his personal accounts, GOP officials said yesterday, describing an alleged scheme that could become one of the largest political frauds in recent history.
For at least four years, Christopher J. Ward, who is under investigation by the FBI, allegedly used wire transfers to funnel money out of NRCC coffers and into other political committee accounts he controlled as treasurer, NRCC leaders and lawyers said in their first public statement since they turned the matter over to the FBI six weeks ago.
"The evidence we have today indicated we have been deceived and betrayed for a number of years by a highly respected and trusted individual," said Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), the NRCC chairman.
The committee also announced that it has submitted to banks five years' worth of audits and financial documents allegedly faked by Ward, some of which were used to secure multimillion-dollar loans. It is a violation of federal laws to obtain loans through false statements; the crime is punishable by up to $1 million in fines and 30 years in prison.
Before yesterday, the committee, which raised $49 million in 2007, had not acknowledged that any money was missing. It announced on Feb. 1 that it had discovered "irregularities" that might involve fraud, dismissed Ward and called in federal investigators.
Robert K. Kelner, a lawyer with Covington & Burling, which has been hired to oversee an internal forensic audit, told reporters he is certain only that Ward had made "several hundred thousand dollars" in unauthorized money transfers since 2004. However, he said, the year-end report filed with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) in 2006 overstated the NRCC's cash on hand by $990,000.
That may be the upper level of what Ward allegedly skimmed from NRCC coffers, Kelner said. But the total will not be known until forensic auditors finish "drilling down" to determine how much money might have been misappropriated and how much may be missing as a result of sloppy bookkeeping, he said.
Kelner said Ward was the only NRCC official empowered to use wire transfers to shift money into any account without a second approval. After transferring the money into accounts he controlled, often for dormant fundraising committees associated with the NRCC, Ward allegedly moved it into accounts for his political consulting business or his personal bank accounts, Kelner said.
Kelner said the NRCC has had no contact with Ward since he was fired on Jan. 28. Ronald Machen, Ward's attorney, declined to comment on the investigation yesterday, as did the FBI.
The Washington Post reported Thursday that Ward had served as treasurer for 83 GOP committees this decade. In the past five years, the committees took in more than $400 million in contributions.
Rep. Peter T. King (R-N.Y.) told The Post this week that Ward paid himself $6,000 from King's PAC in 2007 after the congressman thought he had closed down the committee.
Politico.com reported last night that Ward lent himself more than $4,200 from the political action committee of Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Tex.), an unusual expenditure for a campaign treasurer to make. Ward repaid the money early last month, after the FBI was called in to investigate his work at the NRCC, Politico.com reported.
|
The former treasurer for the National Republican Congressional Committee diverted hundreds of thousands of dollars -- and possibly as much as $1 million -- of the organization's funds into his personal accounts, GOP officials said yesterday, describing an alleged scheme that could become one of the...
| 12.960784 | 0.980392 | 49.019608 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/capitol-briefing/2008/03/nrcc_scandal_how_did_it_happen.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031519id_/http://blog.washingtonpost.com/capitol-briefing/2008/03/nrcc_scandal_how_did_it_happen.html
|
NRCC Scandal: How Did It Happen?
|
2008031519
|
Greg Walden had a problem.
The Oregon Republican lawmaker was serving as the head of the National Republican Congressional Committee's audit committee, and he had been badgering the NRCC's treasurer, Christopher Ward, to set up a meeting with the committee's accounting firm.
"I sought for several years to meet with the outside auditors," said Walden. "There was always some seemingly legitimate reason why that didn't happen."
Well, now we know the reason, and it appears to have been anything but legitimate.
Walden ran the audit committee for several years through 2006, during which time, the NRCC publicly disclosed Thursday, the campaign arm never actually had a real outside audit. Instead Ward -- who is now being investigated for allegedly transferring several hundred thousand dollars from the committee's coffers to his own accounts -- put together fake audits, complete with forged stationery from a real auditing firm.
For five years, Ward forged audits, and not a single member of Congress or any other NRCC staffer ever actually met with or talked to anyone from the outside firm that was supposedly reviewing the books. No one from the outside firm actually ever came to the NRCC offices to meet with anyone or pick up any papers. The NRCC never paid the outside firm a dime for its services supposedly rendered, and no one noticed that, either.
It was Walden's successor as audit committee chairman, Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Texas), a certified public accountant, who finally forced the issue in January when he similarly demanded a meeting with the auditors and then realized that the 2006 audit Ward had submitted was a fake.
But Walden had his concerns long before that. And he says he complained to other members of the NRCC's executive committee and the NRCC's chairman in 2006, Rep. Tom Reynolds (N.Y.), about his inability to get a meeting with the auditors. Those complaints filtered down to Ward himself, who told Walden, "I'm as mad as you are," and blamed the auditors themselves.
Walden said Ward always gave a reason for why the meeting couldn't happen: A different firm was doing the audit, we're waiting for the newest audit to be finished, the auditors are too busy, and so on.
"It frustrated me that I could not get it done," Walden said.
In the end, Walden felt that there was only so much he could do at a committee that he now believes was far too staff-driven. "It's always been that way," he said.
Current NRCC Chairman Tom Cole (Okla.), who took over the job after the 2006 election, says he is trying to change that culture, putting members more directly in charge of all aspects of the committee's operation.
"If you remember when I first got there, I was accused of being a micromanager," Cole said. "You don't hear that much anymore."
If there's a bright side to any of this, Cole said he at least takes pride that "our team found it, our team reported it and our team fixed it." And, Cole said, the committee has already spent upwards of $360,000 on legal and accounting fees to clean up the mess, a number that is sure to grow larger.
The NRCC is lucky that Conaway is a CPA. Though Walden had served before on the board of a bank, he was not a professional accountant. "I read the audit and it looked fine. There was no material issue," Walden recalled.
The NRCC has now put in stricter internal controls, not only requiring more member involvement but also ensuring that major financial transactions are not solely controlled by any one person. But even with tougher controls, members still must be able to trust their staff.
"You put your confidence and trust in the people you name as treasurer," said Rep. Steve LaTourette (R-Ohio). "I have a treasurer of my campaign, and if he tells me there's $300,000 in the bank, I believe there's $300,000 in the bank."
By Ben Pershing | March 14, 2008; 7:00 AM ET 2008 Campaign , Ethics and Rules , GOP Leaders Previous: Carson Becomes Second Muslim to Serve in Congress | Next: Cramer Move Gives GOP a Ray of Hope
It is nice to see Republican's enthusiastic about oversight and audits.
Posted by: Paul Silver | March 14, 2008 11:20 AM
maybe the republican should have oversight how you account of all the money going to Halliburton and the billion of dollars that vanished in Iraq . What a jerks!
Posted by: joseph | March 14, 2008 11:37 AM
Yes - if this fiscal responsibility had manifested itself 3 or 4 years sooner, they might still be in power.
Posted by: michael | March 14, 2008 11:43 AM
God-given rights are not thieveries.
Posted by: Kishor Gala | March 14, 2008 11:51 AM
Just like they promised. To run government like a business. Can there be a more corrupt and incompetent party? They steal from the tax payers, they even steal from each other. Too bad Walden didn't act sooner but, as he said: "It's always been that way".
Maybe Ward was paying for meth so his closeted gay evangelical pastor friends could perform with male prostitutes. I love the hypocracy of the "family values, business friendly (and don't forget strong on defense)Republicans.
May the Flying Spaghetti Monster save us!
Posted by: thebob.bob | March 14, 2008 12:19 PM
Just more proof that Republicans are an inherent failure.
Posted by: JustANibble | March 14, 2008 12:19 PM
At least they caught it and corrected it. Now let's get the "dream team" and A Boob with two Nuts>
Posted by: Bill in Santa Fe | March 14, 2008 12:35 PM
Once again we see the real reason Republicans say they are for smaller government, to keep the corruption hidden and the money and the power in the hands of a few Republicans and out of the hands of the people who elected them.
Posted by: Danney | March 14, 2008 12:47 PM
So exactly where are Hillary's tax returns? And why won't Bill release the details of the pardons? Neither party has the market on stupidity cornered!
Posted by: Marc | March 14, 2008 12:52 PM
I'm sure the money was sent to fund some covert aspect of the Global War on Terror that has saved American lives.
Posted by: aleks | March 14, 2008 01:00 PM
From Today's NY Times: 'Mr. Ward was named treasurer of the national Republican committee in 2003 after serving for several years as an assistant treasurer. He had also been a partner in a political consulting firm, Political Compliance Services, that worked in 2004 on behalf of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, the group behind advertisements attacking the military record of Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, the Democratic presidential nominee.'
This just gets better and better. Go GOP.Give us back the White House and more seats in Congress.
Posted by: PatrickNYC1 | March 14, 2008 01:15 PM
There is plenty of money to be stolen but not enough for so many wars,
Posted by: Audrey | March 14, 2008 01:23 PM
A BIG POLITICAL DISASTER AWAITS THE DEMOCRATS:
I am a young White Female who is very politically active. I am currently an independent voter but with the trend of things right now; I must make this very bold prediction. If the Democratic Party allows the Clintons to have their way and steal this party's Presidential nomination due to their dirty and gutter politics that they are famous for, not only will they loose the November Presidential Election to the Republicans by a very large margin, but they will also loose the Senate and a bunch of other Congressional seats.
Let me give you my very substantial reasons and analysis: 1- Hillary Clinton is a very Polarizing figure that only the hard core Democrats will vote for in a General Election. This will give John McCain enough room to sweep out the Independents, and Conservative Democrats who wants nothing to do with the Clintons, and also the Young Democrats brought in by the Obama Movement. 2- The Bill Clinton factor: Bill Clinton ended his last term in the most disgraceful manner. The first President in modern time to be impeached by the United States Congress for having sex with a young Intern by the name of MONICA LOWENSKI about the same age then as that currently of his daughter Chelsea in the Oval Office( the highest and most respectable office in the land). 3- The entire eight years of the Clinton Administration was dogged by countless scandals ranging from Jennifer Flowers to Paula Jones, from white-water to Monica. This was evidenced by the number of their friends and close associates, and supporters who have to serve jail time. 4- Hillary Clinton is yet to explain her role in death of Vince Foster (a major player in the white- water scandal) who allegedly committed suicide and the missing memos involved in the scandal mysteriously surfaced in the Office of the First Lady (Hillary Clinton). 5- Unlike all of the contestants in this Presidential race, Hillary Clinton is yet to release her INCOME TAX RETURNS. What is the secret behind this is this White- water deal or a dubious contributor behind the scene? 6- The Clintons are yet to release the names of their big time players and contributors to his Presidential Library. We all know that it contains the names of Foreign Governments and Individuals. If by any chance Hillary happens to get elected into the White House, we all know that Bill Clinton will play the role as FIRST VICE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF ADVISER. This gives direct access to influence a lot of the decisions involving his foreign Government Clients, and contributors. 7- The Clinton Foundation works directly with Foreign Governments especially in the areas of Financing, Health and Development. As the first Husband, First Vice-president and Adviser in Chief, he will have to pay back all of those favors, especially when it comes to decisions that will conflict with our U.S. Foreign Policies. This is a big set up for a compromise. We all know that when it comes to Reckless- Bill, it is like a kid in a candy store. 8- Never in the history of this nation where former Presidents sits quietly in their retirement homes and serve as Honorable Statesmen, have we seen a former President involved in dirty gutter politics fighting to return to the White House, the very scene of the crime. 9- Today as we all have seen, one of Hillary strongest supporters the now disgraced New York Governor Eliot Spitzer, has just taken a page from the Clintons play-book (SEX SCANDAL). As a disgrace to all women voters, just like Hillary his wife is standing by her man. At least she is not as delusional as Hillary to blame it on Republican Right Wing Conspiracy. You know that the Republicans are going to bring this up, and there goes the votes from Women and Strong Conservatives.
The Republicans are just waiting with trucks load of dirt on the Clintons that will make the Democrats to not only loose the November Presidential race but also major Congressional and Senate seats.
Is this not the Hillary Clinton who as First Lady had all of the opportunities in the world to have reformed the America's Health Care System when she was appointed by her Husband Bill, to head that project, but chose to play politics and started attacking Congressional Republicans. This became a big disaster, as the Republicans led by Newt Gingrich, swept both houses of Congress from under the Democrats. That was almost fifteen years ago, and the Democrats have since not been able to recover.
Here are the facts as to how much damage the Clintons have caused the Democratic Party. Not only did they go on to loose Congress to the Republicans, but it cost them heavily in two back to back winnable Presidential Elections. Just as Americans, especially the Democrats are about to get over the Clintons Disasters and fatigue as they now try to bring in new Political Talents to lead the Party and America into a new direction. In the wake of a new world order, and Globalized Economy, in order for America to continue to take its rightful stand as the World Super Power, the Clintons surfaced again for another Presidential run with the hope that Americans are still under amnesia.
To the Democratic Super Delegates, We realized that you were once given some responsible jobs in the Clinton Administration, and as such you have to pay back and prove your loyalty. Please understand that Hillary Clinton does not stand a chance in this world, when it comes to the Republican Propaganda Machine. If they could damage the credential of a highly decorated Vietnam War Veteran like Senator John Kerry, just imaging what they have ready for the Ever Controversial and Polarizing Hillary Clinton. Please in the interest of your Democratic Party; do throw this election away to the Republicans by sending Hillary Clinton as your Presidential Candidate. By so doing, you just kissed the energized youth votes in this country good bye.
To our Senior Americans, this is a direct appeal to you. You have had several opportunities to make decisions in order to influence the direction of this nation. Today things are a little different and we the young people see it this way. We are in the middle of a senseless war, and economic recession. We are the ones who are returning to you in body bags. Thanks to the like of Hillary Clinton, who as a U.S. Senator, did not read the intelligence memo, but yet voted to send us to die in a far away land. Our future since the history of this nation has never been so uncertain. We want to compete with the new emerging World Powers in areas such as economy, Technology, Health, and Education, and stay ahead, but we cannot do these if we continue the same old path. War is not and will never be the answer. The Clintons are from the past. In fact we want to thank both Bill and Hillary for their contributions to America, BUT WE HAVE TO MOVE FORWARD THROUGH CHANGE.
To the Press/Media: We are in the middle of a severe economic recession, fighting a senseless war, lack of basic health care for millions, increased unemployment, increase in the price of food, and gasoline, yet you are dwelling on these Democrats and their madness. If they cannot find a candidate and start addressing our serious issues, not only are we determine to reelect a Republican for President, but we will make then to loose all of the Congressional seats that they are seeking in this November Election. I am saying this to express how disappointed I am with the ABC Network who spent the entire week talking about Hillary and Obama's Pastors and supporters, and what they are saying about racism and hate.
Posted by: MONICA | March 14, 2008 01:31 PM
What, no honor among thieves?
Posted by: LiberalTarian | March 14, 2008 04:20 PM
Poor Monica, she drank the Kool-Aid.
Posted by: omgbob | March 14, 2008 04:44 PM
Drank it? She drowned in it.
Posted by: Stonhinged | March 14, 2008 05:28 PM
Is anyone asking what he did with the money? Were there dealings with congressional Republicans?
Posted by: Georgia | March 14, 2008 06:49 PM
I think the RNCC needs a Sarbannes Oxley (Auditing for the 21st Century) course.
Many of us knew how imperfect Repubs can be (Foley, Craig, DeLay, Hastert, etc.), now here is more proof. If you need more proof, send your comments to: 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, DC
No, Dem's aren't perfect though we do not profess to be nor to be of a better faith, a superior morality, and inherently correct 24/7/365.
Posted by: Marc Feldstein | March 14, 2008 10:00 PM
Posted by: KYJurisDoctor | March 15, 2008 01:11 PM
2008 Presidential Election Weekly Poll
New Vids! and New Polls Posted Weekly!
Give Us Ideas For Polls!
Posted by: votenic | March 17, 2008 10:57 PM
I am still waiting for the full disclosure of what happened with "White Water" & just how much money Cill & Illaryh Blinton got away with. A friend was one of the investigators on that case & was stonewalled.
Posted by: G.Wayne Hild | March 18, 2008 08:10 PM
Maybe Dr. Ron Paul appears as a better candidate who states up front what his intentions are. I think that we should give him a closer look with his libertarian leanings & his reputation as Dr. NO as a republican who is only tolerated by his party. Have a look at what he is all about at http://ronpaul.ning.com/ Maybe he is someone who deserves a chance at cleaning up the Washington mess. I do not believe any other candidate even comes close to what Paul wants to accomplish...
Posted by: G. Wayne Hild | March 18, 2008 08:31 PM
We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.
User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.
|
Read the latest news and scuttlebut about Congress.
| 382.222222 | 0.666667 | 1.111111 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/13/AR2008031303647.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/13/AR2008031303647.html
|
In Need of a Little Zip, CW Resurrects '90210'
|
2008031519
|
CW is developing an alleged "spinoff" to the soap which did so much to put on the map the then-struggling, newish Fox network -- now the most watched network in the country.
But, unlike most spinoffs, which have some direct line to the original, this one does not seem to be bothering. The original show's creator, Darren Star, will not be involved. Neither will the guy with the nearly flawless casting instincts who produced it, Aaron Spelling. He died in 2006.
And it's unclear whether the characters in the spin would be the children of the characters made famous on the original -- who can forget Brandon and Brenda, the annoyingly pretty Walsh twins -- or whether the original characters would simply be reincarnated for the new series. And no, you're not the first person to think how neo-ironic it would be to give the part of Donna, the Beautiful Virgin Blonde, to Jamie Lynn Spears. (In the original, Spelling gave the role to his daughter, Tori, which was ironic in its own way.)
Nope -- so far as we can tell from the people we talked to and the report in the Hollywood Reporter, the only surviving element is CAA, the talent agency that packaged the original "90210" and is credited by THR as being the "mastermind" behind the spinoff idea. Yes, in Hollywood, redoing "90210" passes for genius.
THR noted an earlier "Bev Hills, 90210" spinoff, "Melrose Place," did not feature any major characters from the mothership. Though, of course, it was also created by Darren Star. This "spinoff" thing is pretty tough to nail down these days.
On the other hand, "Beverly Hills, 90210: Do Over" presumably would be cheap for CW. Spelling's TV company was based at what's now called CBS Paramount Network TV and was actually absorbed by that division a few years ago. So CBS owns the library.
Instead of Starr, "Veronica Mars" creator Rob Thomas is in negotiations to write the pilot. Additionally, Mark Piznarski, who directed Thomas's "Veronica Mars" pilot and also shot the "Gossip Girl" pilot, is in talks to direct the "BH-90210" spinoff.
"Beverly Hills, 90210" lasted 10 seasons on Fox, and was finally canceled in early 2000 because its audience was down to 10 million viewers. Its final episode aired in May 2000, and was watched by 25 million.
And, speaking of stuck in the '90s and Rob Thomas, ABC has given thumbs-up to Thomas to resuscitate his '90s sitcom "Cupid," about a man who believes he has been sent to Earth by Zeus to help out the lovelorn.
The show got rave reviews when it debuted in the late '90s, starring Jeremy Piven as the irrepressible Trevor Hale, who thinks he's the god of love, which causes him to wind up in a mental hospital.
Grievously, it also starred Paula Marshall -- notorious show-killer -- as the uptight psychologist and "romance" expert who releases Trevor from the hospital, realizing that unless she did, there would be no second season. Sadly, there wasn't one anyway because, as we said, it starred Paula Marshall.
And, of course, it didn't help that ABC had scheduled it in the death-by-time-slot Saturday 10 p.m. hour. Back in those days, ABC was like that. These days, of course, ABC knows better than to put critically adored series on Saturday night. In fact, it doesn't put any original series programming on Saturday night. But neither do any of the other broadcast networks. Saturday night has been given over to Rerun Theatre.
This past fall, ABC told Thomas to get started on a possible revival of the series. Now, the network has given the go-ahead to shoot a pilot episode.
|
Ratings-starved, CBS-run CW network, casting about for a companion show for its rich-teens soap "Gossip Girl," has decided to give mouth-to-mouth to the '90s hit "Beverly Hills, 90210" and see if it can't get the cadaver breathing again.
| 13.084746 | 0.728814 | 1.474576 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/martin_marty/2008/03/emailblessing_or_curse.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031219id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/martin_marty/2008/03/emailblessing_or_curse.html
|
The Worries and Wonders of Technology
|
2008031219
|
The Question: E-mail: Blessing or Curse?
Our concern is with the soul: is E-mail a blessing or a curse, so far as the soul is concerned?
I will tell a story. Decades ago the Annenbergs endowed a new center at the University of Southern California, and invited Librarian of Congress and my former teacher Daniel Boorstin, technological visionary Buckminster Fuller and me to share a panel on the emergent technology called "the computer." The Annenbergs, generous philanthropists, whose interests included the Philadelphia Inquirer, Racing Form, TV Guide and other media-related companies, had been reading a then-in-vogue intellectual, Jean Gimpel, on the "decline of the West." We were urged to be declinists with him.
We all did our best to fill the bill, but "Bucky" Fuller could no be restrained in his enthusiasm, I was typically ambivalent ("blessing or curse") and Boorstin was characterisically pragmatic and realist. After a recess during which we were urged to be more pessimistic, Boorstin, having listened to woe-speakers from the floor, said, "These are whinings of the sort Americans heard 100 years ago at the Philadelphia Exposition, where Alexander Graham Bell's invention, the telephone, was being given a hearing. Was it fair?
We three agreed that every professor we knew, every writer of our acquaintance, and we ourselves, did not welcome the cursed telephoned interruptions.. Franz Kafka wrote that "for the writer the silence is never silent enough; the night is never night enough." It was devastating to the soul to have interruptions, sometimes trivial and sometimes troubling, which interrupted the creative flow.
But then, also from the floor and from us came other reminders of the blessing. There was testimony, for instance, of someone's mother who was confined to a senior citizens' home, which was limiting her freedom and thus her soul Then someone: a club president or a pastor would call her and ask her to make some phone calls to other members, and she did. She welcomed the chance to be in touch with other souls, over matters trivial or troubling. The technology of the telephone was then a blessing.
Virtually everyone everyone I know knows complains about the curse of E-mail which demands to be answered at once. A curse. But there are ways to organize the schedule so that this task does not overwhelm. (I am told.) Meanwhile, the blessing side is also there. I am a retired pastor who can continue in "the care of souls," as pastoral activity was officially called, across the miles and the decades. Recently a former student who teaches in Haifa linked up with a former colleague who teaches at Notre Dame to elicit and produce almost a hundred reports an greetings from my Ph.D. dissertation advisees scattered everywhere. In the only-snail-mail era I would perhaps have heard from a half dozen, while the rest would be lost or in my mental shadows.
I despise spam and the misuses of the internet in blogs which bring out the worst in the worst, but I celebrate the ways friends greet friends, the distant sustain relations, and the hopers spread hope to the disappointed.
Name a technological invention all the way back to camp- and cave-fire starters or the wheel, that does not a blessing AND a curse side, and I'll be astonished. I'd go on further, but I hear the "you've got mail" voice sounding off. So I will press the "Sent" key and go back to the darkness and night in which I was working.
|
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.
| 16.113636 | 0.5 | 0.545455 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/susan_jacoby/2008/03/its_a_tool_stupid.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031219id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/susan_jacoby/2008/03/its_a_tool_stupid.html
|
It's A Tool, Stupid!
|
2008031219
|
The Question: E-mail: Blessing or Curse?
Are eating utensils a blessing or a curse? They're a blessing if you want to eat food while keeping your hands clean (which people didn't seem to care about for most of the history of our species) and a curse if you want to feed yourself as quickly as possible. That's why we enjoy hands-on food like pizza and why pizza is rarely served at formal dinners. It's a great mistake to attribute a philosophical dimension to any tool--including email in particular and computers in general.
I have no idea what this question has to do with faith, except that everything involving computers has become a form of faith in our society. As it happens, I have a good deal to say in my new book, "The Age of American Unreason," about email as an enemy of conversation--both the spoken and written variety, once known as letters. I am traveling and filing this entry by email, and it's a great convenience. On the other hand, I had to wade through a dozen junk emails (offering a new form of "manhood enhancement" and a cut-rate trip to Costa Rica, among other goodies) before I even got to the "On Faith" question for the week. In the past, I would have simply filed my response by phone without ever having to think about enhancement of any kind.
Email is essentially an information-oriented form of communication, and (although there are exceptions) people rarely use email for the discursive, revelatory form of writing that used to be contained in letters from friends and lovers. A few years ago, I came across a cache of letters from 1968, when my fiance was stationed in Africa as the correspondent of The Washington Post and I was working as a reporter for the Post in Washington. These letters brought back a whole world of emotion and experience that time had blurred. They not only made me remember what it felt like to be young and in love but they offered a personal, often directly observed chronicle of the events of 1968, including the assassination of the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr.; the riots in Washington; the murder of Robert F. Kennedy, and the blood flowing in the streets of Chicago at the Democratic National Convention. Our letters covered both sides of the thin sheets of paper that used to be used for air mail and ran to dozens of pages a week. I'm sure if there had been email then, we would have been in daily communication--but I'm equally sure that the communications would not have been filled with the detail of our letters.
The end of letter-writing began with the dropping of long-distance phone rates in the late 1960s, and email has finished the job. I have no idea of how biographers will capture the true character of their subjects in the 21st century, because email (which can never really be considered private) has encouraged us all to stay in touch without truly communicating.
I have been accused of being a technophobe, but that's not the case. I simply think that all of us (myself included) need to take a close look at how much time we're devoting to digital exchanges instead of to messy, direct involvement with other human beings
|
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.
| 14.636364 | 0.568182 | 0.931818 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/deepak_chopra/2008/03/the_devil_is_in_the_emails.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031219id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/deepak_chopra/2008/03/the_devil_is_in_the_emails.html
|
The Devil is in the E-mails?
|
2008031219
|
The Question: E-mail: Blessing or Curse?
It would be glib to say that every blessing brings a hidden curse and every curse a hidden blessing. But I saw that since the beginning of the Iraq war, cell phones in that country skyrocketed from 850,000 to 1.6 million in a single year's time, 2004 to 2005. The real battle for the Middle East could be between the imams and the iPod. the hope being that exposure to technology will cause a new generation of moderate, progressive Muslims to evolve beyond ancient tribalism into expanded globalism. If that were to happen, e-mails would be a blessing indeed.
But what about the scourges associated with e-mails? Unlimited spam that promotes illicit pharmaceuticals, pornography, and solicitation of minors. What blessing can be found in that curse? Not to mention the sheer nuisance volume of Internet babble. Should the Lord's Prayer be amended, as one anonymous wit did, to read, "Forgive us our trespasses and deliver us fro e-mail"? The hidden blessing in this case is that all e-mails are reducible to one thing: human consciousness talking to itself. In the expansion of consciousness there is knowledge, insight, and power. Unheard voices suddenly learn to speak. When you hop into a taxi in midtown New York City or Washington D.C., the cabbie often has his ear glued to a cell phone and talks in a foreign language the entire ride. It relieves his boredom, but at another level his conversation is a link in a global network that breaks down boundaries and dissolves borders. Fearful of our own security, we may darkly imagine that the network is buzzing with hatred and envy of America (there was the case of a former Boston cab driver identified as an al-Qaida operative). But the network also buzzes with talk of the future, hopes for a better life, and more basic things -- gossip and daily details of life in a new country. The same goes for text messaging and e-mails. We may cringe to see how shabby, petty, furtive, and selfish our thoughts are when broadcast everywhere, but the alternative is self-enclosed isolation and provincial prejudice that never lets in a breath of air from the outside. Technology becomes a tool for assimilation. At the most mystical level, the Internet is God talking to himself through technology at the speed of light. Not every transmission is obviously divine, but it's not content that I am referring to. It's a process that involves bonding, free expression, and walls coming down. Spirituality may have a lot more to do with a cell phone photo taken on the spot of a tsunami or a terrorist attack than with homilies in church. That instantaneous transmission of another person's plight generates equally instantaneous compassion. Whatever God may ultimately be, her attributes are knowable only through human consciousness, and any expansion of consciousness carries us a step (or maybe only a tenth of an inch) closer to the mystery.
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.
| 13.954545 | 0.568182 | 0.704545 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/bill_emmott/2008/03/spitzer_must_resign.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031219id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/bill_emmott/2008/03/spitzer_must_resign.html
|
Spitzer, Hypocrite and Idiot, Must Resign
|
2008031219
|
The Current Discussion: New York State governor Eliot Spitzer admits he hired a prostitute. Should people care, and why?
Eliot Spitzer should resign, immediately. Although a person's sexual behavior should by rights be a private matter, and irrelevant to his fitness for public office, that presumption of privacy must be overruled when the officer concerned has been acting to attack the very thing that he has been doing, namely prostitution. We do not expect our politicians to be saints. But when they are shown to be rank hypocrites, they are finished. Their credibility is gone.
I keep saying "we". Does this apply everywhere in the world? Well, it would certainly apply in Britain. A person in an office as high as Spitzer's, with a background of attacking prostitution and of taking a generally self-righteous approach, would also be finished. Whenever we Brits have a sex scandal in politics, a certain chorus goes out that they do things differently in continental Europe and that neither French nor Italian leaders would suffer in the same way. I suspect that that is changing, in fact. But also I suspect that the charge of hypocrisy would also destroy a similar political career in France, in Germany, in Spain, though perhaps still not in Italy.
In the end, though, this story, like so many others before it, is not just a story about sex or a story about hypocrisy. It is a story about how power corrupts, or about how power destroys judgment. Powerful people like Spitzer seem to come to think of themselves as untouchable, as somehow entitled to indulge themselves in this way. What Spitzer is, though, is much simpler than that. He is an idiot.
Please e-mail PostGlobal if you'd like to receive an email notification when PostGlobal sends out a new question.
Email Me | 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.
| 11.090909 | 0.363636 | 0.363636 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/swaminathan_aiyar/2008/03/spitzers_behavior_shocking_but.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031219id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/swaminathan_aiyar/2008/03/spitzers_behavior_shocking_but.html
|
Spitzer's Behavior Shocking, But Personal
|
2008031219
|
The Current Discussion: New York State governor Eliot Spitzer admits he hired a prostitute. Should people care, and why?
In a free society, sex between consenting adults should be their business and theirs alone. On the other hand, in a free society people must also be free to advocate norms of behavior for those in public life. So, while I have no objection whatsoever to Spitzer's activities, I will not deny critics the right to be shocked.
Please e-mail PostGlobal if you'd like to receive an email notification when PostGlobal sends out a new question.
Email Me | 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.
| 3.69697 | 0.424242 | 0.424242 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/fareed_zakaria/2008/03/candidates_cant_have_trade_bot.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031219id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/fareed_zakaria/2008/03/candidates_cant_have_trade_bot.html
|
Candidates Can't Have Trade Both Ways
|
2008031219
|
Thumbs up to RLSRD, FARKDAWG, BILL JOHNSON, ANONYMOUS (as Posted March 10, 2008 5:43 PM, and March 10, 2008 2:07 PM), GRANDFATHER, EDMUND BURKE, BRENT MACK, JDLEBELL, WILL, JOHNK860, MIKE TROMBLEY, DISSENT, and WHITE HARE.
"Americans like optimists. They want leaders who look out at the world and see broad, sunlit uplands."
Forget about so-called 'optimistic leaders' looking out at the world and seeing whatever.
As a US citizen, I want an optimistic realist like Ron Paul, who can look at the US and see the recession, and the many reasons for it.
Best yet, I want a leader like Ron Paul who foresaw the recession, and the many reasons for it, for quite some time.
"If the candidates think they will charm the world while adopting protectionist policies, they are in for a surprise."
What is a US presidential election for? To charm the world? Or determine what is best for us in the US? Ooooo, there's that dirty, sticks-and-stones word, protectionism. I feel so ashamed of myself, for believing that a US presidential election is about doing what's best for us in the US.
If you want to 'charm' the world AND do what's best for us in the US, how about we not invade other countries without first having a Constitutional declaration of war?
We've been charming the living hell out of Iraq for the last five years, at $275 million per day.
"For a struggling farmer in Kenya, access to world markets is far more important than foreign aid or U.N. programs."
From what I've read in news stories for the past couple of months, that struggling farmer in Kenya has been more worried about getting chopped up or shot by another Kenyan, than so-called US 'protectionist' policies that limit his access to world markets.
"But both candidates surely know that no one is really paying attention to their policy papers on the topic."
I did. That's why I voted for Ron Paul in my state's primary, and will vote for him in the presidental election.
"What is said in Ohio is heard in Ghana and Bangladesh and Colombia as well."
To those in Ghana, Bangladesh, and Columbia: Google Ron Paul, assuming your country does not censor your Internet access.
I'm happy to be among the seeming few here who catches the flawed implication underlying all of Zakaria's 'free trade' nonsense, namely that the fate of everyone else in the world is determined primarily by the trade policies of the US.
Zakaria, as the ultimate 'Ugly American', suggests that Mexicans, Ghanans, Colombians, Kenyans, Indians, and everyone else don't have the primary -- and ultimate -- responsibility for the current quality of life and economic opportunities in their countries. And the underlying implication is that there's no one smart enough in those countries to figure out what they need to do domestically to improve their living conditions.
If Zakaria wants to IMMEDIATELY improve the lot of those in many parts of the world outside the US he would better address the excessive level of official corruption in those parts, rather than US trade policies.
We couldn't even send humanitarian food relief to Somalia in the early 90's without also sending in a military contingent to protect the relief aid from being swiped by the local warlords.
And what about those poor bastards in the Rwandan civil war, and in now Darfur? What about 'ethnic cleansing' in the Balkans? Was that all caused by US trade policies too? NO IT WASN'T. It was caused by long-standing strife over who gets LOCAL RESOURCES, not world trade.
The rest of the world has a lot of catching up to do with the US in terms of civil liberties and domestic problem-solving before they, and Zakaria, cry a river about US trade policies.
Posted March 11, 2008 10:51 PM
|
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.
| 23.969697 | 0.484848 | 0.484848 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031103125.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031103125.html
|
The Democrats, Wrestling To Negotiate An Endgame
|
2008031219
|
To make it plain: The Democrats are stuck in their own mud. They have no scripted ending to this titanic battle, no scenario ready for wide embrace. Or any embrace. Or even a handshake. On one level, the historic competition between Obama and Clinton has energized the party, boosted primary turnouts, spawned legions of new voters and campaign volunteers. But on the let's-get-real level, Democrats have problems even a blind man can see. Their primaries and caucuses have revealed labor splits, racial and ethnic splits, gender splits, age and class splits, and a rivalry that is getting nastier by the day.
"It's a train wreck," says John Edgell, a Democratic operative not involved in either campaign. "Either way, you're going to tick off half the base."
The judges waiting in the wings are 796 party insiders unaffectionately known as superdelegates. "There's no way that superdelegates will not decide it," says Edgell, who has been meticulously tracking superdelegate endorsements and compiling them on a spreadsheet. As of yesterday, his count was 269 for Clinton, 220 for Obama. [Overall, Obama leads Clinton in total delegates, 1,585 to 1,473, according to the Associated Press.]
We are now in the strange season of Democratic pretense -- pretend that everything will work out smoothly even though you suspect that everything won't. "The Democratic Party is going to have gum on its shoes that it can't get off," says Edgell, a former veteran congressional staffer. "There are going to be bruises that will last through November."
Clearly, it is also the season of rampant, mixed-use metaphor. If ever there was a moment to summon the analogies of struggle, dilemma, tactical warfare and careful negotiation, that moment is now. So it might be prudent to step back from politics and look for clues to a Democratic resolution elsewhere: in chess, magic, poker, mathematics, gang intervention, sports handicapping, Middle East peace negotiation, marriage. The list is endless.
As realms go, it's hard to beat boxing. Obama had the champ on the ropes after the first round in Iowa but couldn't finish her off in New Hampshire. Bloodied, Clinton fought back gamely and gained some momentum heading into Super Tuesday. Both candidates landed solid blows there. But then Obama pummeled the champ for 11 straight rounds, and it looked like she was just hanging on, ripe for a knockout. But just as the scribes were filing their stories of the champ's demise, she waged another comeback, winning three of four rounds on March 4. (Needless to say, this is a loooong fight). All of a sudden, the questions were: Does the challenger have a glass jaw? Does the champ have enough time to overcome the challenger's lead on points?
"This has got a heavyweight-fight tension," says Angelo Dundee, the great trainer of such world champions as Muhammad Ali and Sugar Ray Leonard. "The one with the toughest defense will win it," he predicts. "The other guy gets worn out. That's what Muhammad did against George Foreman in Zaire."
Campaigning in Ohio and Texas, Clinton became much more aggressive, relentlessly pressuring Obama. "Great fighters are able to change gears," says Dundee, "and that's been the history of boxing, being able to switch tempos." But he cautions -- and this would apply to Clinton's so-called kitchen-sink strategy: It's not how many punches you throw. "A guy can throw a thousand punches, but only half of them are effective."
To Obama, Dundee would say: "You fight your fight; you don't fight their fight."
"This situation is very interesting," he says. "Only in America, right?"
|
Now what? Barack Obama, as expected, won the Mississippi Democratic primary yesterday, his second straight victory in four days, his 29th overall, another tiny notch in his delegate lead over rival Hillary Clinton. But Mississippi clarified nothing. That's because the Democratic presidential race...
| 14.301887 | 0.603774 | 1.018868 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031102259.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031102259.html
|
Obama Is Victorious in Mississippi
|
2008031219
|
While voters were casting ballots in Mississippi, the campaigns clashed over comments from Geraldine A. Ferraro, a Clinton supporter and the only woman to be a major party vice presidential nominee, who suggested that Obama has taken the lead in delegates only because he is black. Obama, she said, "would not be in this position" if he were white or a woman.
Obama called the statement "patently absurd," while Clinton dismissed it as "regrettable," saying she thoroughly disagrees with Ferraro's sentiment. Despite their comments, the controversy continued as Obama's advisers demanded a more dramatic renunciation and as Clinton campaign manager Maggie Williams accused the Obama team of fanning the race issue.
Both candidates appeared yesterday in Pennsylvania, which will hold its primary April 22, but Obama began the day campaigning in Mississippi, eating a breakfast of eggs "scrambled hard" at a diner in a down-at-the-heels strip mall in Greenville.
In an appearance on CNN after the Mississippi results started to come in, Obama said he thinks he remains on a course to victory.
"What we tried to do is steadily make sure that in each state, we are making the case about the need for change in this country," he said. "Obviously, the people in Mississippi responded."
With the Democratic nomination still up for grabs after two months of voting, despite Obama's clear lead in delegates, the campaigns continued to debate the merits of holding do-over contests in Michigan and Florida. Their delegates are barred from the Democratic National Convention because their state parties violated rules governing the scheduling of their primaries. Florida's House Democratic caucus issued a statement last night that tried to shoot down the idea of a mail-in contest, saying that it is "opposed to a mail-in campaign or any redo of any kind."
Obama began the evening with 1,579 delegates to Clinton's 1,473; 2,025 are needed to secure the nomination. The Clinton campaign had said that Obama was expected to triumph in Mississippi, where African Americans were expected to make up more than half of the primary voters. Still, Clinton campaigned in the state late last week, and her husband, former president Bill Clinton, and daughter, Chelsea, traveled there in the final days before the primary.
The latest racially charged exchange between the two camps began when Ferraro, the Democratic vice presidential candidate in 1984 and a fundraiser for Clinton, said in an interview with the Daily Breeze of Torrance, Calif., that if Obama were "a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman, he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept."
Her comments sparked an immediate firestorm. Obama campaign officials and surrogates expressed outrage, describing the remarks as the most racially provocative of the competition.
In a conference call with reporters, Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), an Obama supporter, urged Clinton "to change the tone of her campaign." Axelrod accused the Clinton team of giving a "wink and nod at offensive statements" and called on it to cut ties with Ferraro.
"You're really telling your supporters that anything goes," he said, arguing that Ferraro was trying to "diminish Senator Obama's candidacy because of his race." Last week, it was an Obama adviser who caused controversy with a newspaper interview. Harvard professor Samantha Power, a key unpaid foreign policy adviser, resigned from his campaign and apologized after calling Clinton a "monster" who was "stooping to anything" to win the nomination. The Obama campaign condemned Power's comments while praising her previous service to the candidacy.
|
Sen. Barack Obama won the Mississippi Democratic presidential primary decisively last night, adding to his overall lead in delegates as he and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton plunged into a six-week battle ahead of a showdown in Pennsylvania.
| 17.878049 | 0.634146 | 0.97561 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/03/11/DI2008031101804.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/03/11/DI2008031101804.html
|
Trippi on Democratic Campaigns
|
2008031219
|
Trippi is a political analyst for CBS; earlier in the election cycle, he was a senior adviser to the John Edwards campaign. He's best known for managing Howard Dean's 2004 campaign and its innovative use of the Internet. You can read more about Trippi and his book, "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised," at his Web site.
Aldie, Va.: Do you foresee a brokered convention?
Joe Trippi: I don't see a brokered convention I think it will be clear after North Carolina if Clinton has a chance to open this up or not -- and if she cannot it will be over well before the convention
Germantown, Md.: I used to think the Democrats had a real advantage over the Republicans in the presidential election this year. I have changed my mind after the Florida/Michigan mistake, superdelegates and now a fight between two sides that hate each other that will last for months. Is this anyway to run a primary?
Joe Trippi: I think none of the Florida and Michigan stuff will matter. In the end McCain says we may need to keep our troops in Iraq for 100 years and that the economy is not his thing. If either Clinton or Obama can not defeat McCain with just those two facts -- then Democrats have a big big problem.
Sydney, Australia: If, for arguments sake, Obama won the most number of states, the popular vote and the most delegates, and the superdelegates then gave the nomination to Clinton, what would be the future of the Democratic Party after that? Would the damage be insurmountable?
Joe Trippi: If the scenario you paint actually happens -- I do not see how the super delegates give Clinton the nomination. If they do so after Obama has won all the categories you list -- I think the party would be in tatters and would be very difficult to be put back together in a way that wins the general election
Washington: Hi there. So what happened to your candidate? Hasn't he sort of rendered himself meaningless by not having acted on an endorsement?
Joe Trippi: John Edwards led on every single issue and pushed both Clinton and Obama on everything from the war in Iraq to Poverty. He has had an enormous impact on this election cycle and still will. I would caution that he may play a key role in bringing the party together by not endorsing -- that may not help him personally but it may be exactly what the party and the country needs
Naperville, Ill.: Good morning and thanks for chatting. What do you think is the optimal solution to the Florida and Michigan problems the Democrats have?
Joe Trippi: The real solution here may be to give each campaign something they want. The Clinton campaign wants a primary in Florida and will most likely win this state. The Obama campaign would win a caucus in Michigan. Voters do not get into the arcane party rules and who broke them. But Michigan and Florida voters will not understand why the Democratic Party does not seat their delegations. Democrats should do some kind of redo -- my advice a Primary (mail in or not) in Florida and a Firehouse Caucus in Michigan.
San Francisco: Are you in touch with your colleagues in the Clinton campaign? When will they shut down Geraldine Ferraro? This is getting embarrassing.
Joe Trippi: Uhmmmm, I have no connection to the Clinton campaign and have no idea when or if they are going to talk to Ferraro.
Harrisburg, Pa.: Yet another campaign staffer/volunteer/surrogate has made a remark that has provoked shock and anguish by the opposing side. Now it's a battle of "your" comments were worse than "our" comments, so we're not going to do anything. Shouldn't we be more concerned with what the actual candidates are saying? Frankly, I'm tired of both Democratic candidates trashing each other. It's going to be a long, long several weeks here in the Commonwealth.
Joe Trippi: As bad as this may seem -- this campaign has been much more positive than any I can remember (at least so far).
Washington: If we counted delegates the way electoral votes are counted (including number per state and winner-take-all), which Democratic candidate would be ahead thus far? If it is Sen. Clinton, shouldn't that be factored into what the superdelegates do? If she wins the states that likely will go for the Democratic nominee, shouldn't that count?
Joe Trippi: The rules are the rules -- there is no winner take all on the Democratic side and we so not pick our nominee through electoral votes. In all of the close fights on the Democratic side the Super delegates has always gone with the candidate who held the most pledged delegates prior to the convention. This was true in 1980 with Carter and with Walter Mondale in 1984.
Richmond, Va.: Are you going to advise Mark Warner on his Senate campaign?
Joe Trippi: Mark Warner is a good friend and he will make a great Senator. I will help him anyway I can, but I doubt he needs my help to win -- he has a great record as Governor and the people of Virginia are making him a formidable frontrunner
Salisbury, N.C.: I was an avid supporter of Howard Dean's quest for the presidency in 2004. Why were you fired by Dean?
Joe Trippi: I think if you ask Howard this question he will agree that I was not fired. He wanted me and another very good manager to run the campaign -- I thought two people holding onto the steering wheel would not work and I chose to get out of the way.
Waterville, Maine: Hi Joe. Do you have any indication of whether Edwards has decided whom to support? Any idea when an endorsement might happen? If not, which candidate would most seem to represent his priorities?
Joe Trippi: I really do not expect John Edwards to endorse at this point. Or I should say I would be surprised if he does. But then again he could surprise me. How is that for a run around answer to your question?
Re: the "superdelegates": Joe: Your response to what happens if Obama leads in states, delegates and total votes: "If the scenario you paint actually happens -- I do not see how the super delegates give Clinton the nomination." We're basically there now; why do we have to wait until after North Carolina? And what could happen to make it clear to the Clintons that they can't win?
Joe Trippi: In a democracy they get to run until someone has the votes on the floor of the convention to be declared the nominee. They could win North Carolina -- they could win Indiana -- and they could change the perceptions people have about the race and Obama. They have a right to make the case -- voters have the right to reject or accept that case
Helena, Mont.: I keep hearing that the superdelegates were given their role to have some adults in charge of the convention, but I remember that in one year -- could be 1972 -- there weren't a lot of elected officials who were delegates at the convention, depriving said elected officials of some free prime-time publicity, and that's why they became superdelegates. Or, to say it in less-convoluted terms, the Democrats wanted their elected officials to be at the convention in an official capacity and to be visible to the public.
Joe Trippi: No super delegates were put there to stop a candidacy that they deemed a mistake. So that no insurgent could get the nomination without the blessing of the party leaders. They have the final word. But too date they have never used that power to counter someone who took a pledged delegate lead into the convention. Interestingly in 1980 the Kennedy campaign wanted to release all delegates to become unpledged and vote their conscience. I was on Senator Kennedy's staff that year and was the floor manager for the Utah and Texas delegations. We lost that fight; 28 years later Kennedy is with the Obama campaign.
New York: Pardon a direct question, but isn't it gratingly insular for a white insider to proclaim this campaign the "cleanest" of recent time? Obama has been challenged either falsely or outrageously based on issues of race and religion, and he has been called a liar by a press corps that now refuses to concede Obama was telling the truth.
Joe Trippi: First -- there are few in the party who consider me an insider. Though I am white. It still doesn't change the fact that this has been among the cleanest primary fights I can remember. The fact that you think it is so dirty reflects more on how bad it has been in the past.
Jackson Heights, N.Y.: What will/can the Democratic nominee do to counter expected Republican onslaughts in the upcoming presidential campaign so that such unprincipled tactics as "Swift-Boating" effectively can be neutralized?
Joe Trippi: I think we have to say out loud that if you want the past -- and you want the politics of destruction then vote for the republicans -- if you want to leap into the future and change things then reject these tactics and vote for the future.
Ohio: I like John Edwards and wish he had been able to persevere. If our party does nominate the Senator from Illinois as our candidate, I feel we are in big trouble. He is being touted as a virtual "second coming" for no good reason. It is surprising, as well-informed as we Americans seem to be, that we can be duped. Hillary Clinton is being vilified mostly because she is a woman. People are looking past her intelligence because she is not a frilly female who acquiesces to the male-dominated political machine.
Joe Trippi: I wish Edwards were still in the race as well.
Roanoke, Va.: Is the infighting among Hillary's staff as bad as it was a few weeks ago? Does Barack's staff have more discipline and better morale?
Joe Trippi: I don't get the sense that there is much infighting if any going on in the Obama campaign. But if they were losing...who knows? Winning makes you a genius and losing makes you an unmitigated idiot. Trust me. I know
La Vale, Md.: Assuming that Clinton does not completely blow Obama out in Pennsylvania, how do you see this race resolving without the party splitting itself in half? Is a Hillary/Barack or Barack/Hillary ticket the only possible way for that to be avoided?
Joe Trippi: I think the super delegates who support the losing candidate will end this. In other words it will be the Charlie Rangel's and others who go to Clinton and say: "If you won't do the right thing ... we will. We are not going to let this go to the convention and risk the party." If Obama were to lose the rest of the states (something I do not see happening) then his super delegates will have a sit down with him. The time between no and Pennsylvania is an eternity in politics. Anything could happen. Spitzer may have impacted the Pennsylvania result -- we don't know yet. It certainly looks uphill and out of range for Clinton -- but Obama hasn't been handling these attacks very well -- I think after North Carolina we will know.
Austin, Texas: If the Democratic nominating contest goes all the way to the convention in August (as now seems likely) something like eight months will have passed since the early races in January and February. How much will this time lapse affect the perceptions of superdelegates? Can Clinton create the perception that she's the front-runner (or at least the most electable) if she sweeps late races like Puerto Rico and (now) Florida?
Joe Trippi: I think polls with have a big impact. If all the public polls going into the convention somehow show Clinton defeating McCain and Obama losing to McCain then the perceptions of not just the superdelegates could change.
Miami: Who do you think are the most vulnerable House candidates in this current electoral cycle? Here in South Florida we have three incumbent Republicans who seem to be pretty vulnerable, and yet two Democrats -- Meek and Wasserman Schultz -- have gone on record saying they will not support their Democratic challengers.
Joe Trippi: well this is crazy -- I think we can pick up these seats in Miami. I think Joe Garcia for example (someone I am helping) could win if he gets the support he needs, but we have good candidates who can win.
Alexandria, Va.: If we assume this race continues to the point where party "elders" and uncommitted superdelegates are going to have a role in deciding outcome, how much of a factor will the fabric of the Obama campaign come into play, specifically the structure highlighted in the most recent Rolling Stone article. Is that not a structure that is scalable more broadly to the party in general (vs. the more top-down nature of the Clinton campaign)?
washingtonpost.com: The Machinery of Hope (Rolling Stone, March 20)
Joe Trippi: Yes it is a better way. But the Clinton campaign has gotten very bottom up this past month So I think the Democrat is going to have a big advantage over the McCain in the general.
Washington: Two questions for you as someone with great familiarity on how campaigns work (I won't call you an "insider"): First, when we look back at the 2008 primary process, what will we say about the media's role in what has happened so far? Second, with regard to Ferraro's comments, do you think it is more likely she was going "off the reservation," or that she was taking a hit as part of a strategy to win Pennsylvania?
Joe Trippi: First off the media was preoccupied with Clinton an Obama from the get go. So nothing has really changed on that front and they will be seen in hindsight probably the same way Saturday Night Live has portrayed them. As for Ferraro -- I think someone as experienced as her, and a campaign that is experienced as the Clinton campaign -- they know that words matter, and it isn't an accident that these are the words that are being used.
Los Angeles: The conventional wisdom seems to be that Clinton will win the Pennsylvania primary. Is that a lock, or does Obama have a shot at the win?
Joe Trippi: I think it would be a big surprise if Obama won PA. And it would be exactly the kind of surprise that would slam the door shut on Clinton. He could pull it off -- but I doubt it. The state is too much like Ohio and Gov. Rendell is much stronger politically in PA than Gov. Strickland was in Ohio for Clinton.
Tempe, Ariz.: Hello Mr. Trippi! I worked for Dean in New Hampshire in 2003/2004, and am a huge admirer of yours. Though I am an Obama supporter, I greatly admired Edwards for flat-out saying (and I paraphrase) "if you're voting for me because you don't want to vote for a black candidate or a female candidate, don't vote for me." Clinton, on the other hand, seems to be silently courting the racist Democrat vote -- answering "not as far as I know" to the question of whether Obama is a Muslim, for example, and not condemning Ferraro for suggesting that all 13 million of Americans who've voted for Obama are "caught up" in his blackness. What are your thoughts on this? Thank you!
Joe Trippi: If this is indeed a strategy of theirs they have completely misread the mood of Democratic voters. Just the perception of this hurt them in South Carolina and really caused a shift towards Obama. I don't see how they think this helps them -- it clearly has not.
Austin, Texas: Can Clinton try to argue that super delegates should ignore (or give less weight to) the pledged delegate totals on the grounds that caucuses are biased? Could she say something like "caucuses undermine voters who can't afford to spend two hours sitting around voting (e.g. working parents)"?
Joe Trippi: I don't think so. As I have said before if the argument is that "hey its not fair only ten people vote" Then why the hell didn't you just get ten people there? Kind of a dumb argument
Re: but Obama hasn't been handling these attacks very well : How would you have advised him to handle them (I'm not being snarky -- I'm genuinely curious)? It seems to me that Obama is in a no-win situation: If he doesn't respond to the attacks of Clinton and her surrogates, there are opinion pieces and pundit comments on him being weak, too above it, holier than thou, won't get muddy, how can he fight the Republicans, etc. ... but when he does, it's all about how he is going against what he promised, tarnishing his image, etc.
Joe Trippi: If you are a new politics then be new politics. Give a major speech tomorrow that says: "The American people need to decide -- business as usual? Attack and Rip 'Em Up politics as usual? Or a new and different politics a break with the past. You need to decide once and for all which it is you want. Because I will give you that choice now and I will give it to you again in the general election if the Republican play the same game. It is not a game and I will not play -- the only question left is are you done with the game as well -- are you ready to get on with the serious work of saving this nation and our children's future -- because if you are -- lets get moving and leave the politics of the past in the rearview mirror."
Joe Trippi: I am sorry we can't go on like this for hours -- because it has been a lot of fun. I promise to come back and do it again -- but I have to get going today.
Thanks everyone -- great questions.
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.
|
Democratic strategist and CBS political analyst Joe Trippi discusses campaign tactics and online grassroots work by the Clinton and Obama campaigns.
| 163.318182 | 0.818182 | 1.454545 |
high
|
medium
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031102537.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031102537.html
|
Americans May Be Getting Enough Sleep After All, Report Says
|
2008031219
|
Americans are not as sleep-deprived as they think they are and, in fact, appear to be getting more Z's these days than they got a few years ago, according to an independent analysis of government statistics.
The new findings run counter to the widespread public perception that Americans are getting less and less sleep because of increasing workplace demands and the plethora of distractions available around the clock on the Internet and cable television.
"Many Americans work too much, but most do not seem to be cutting corners on their sleep to do so," said John P. Robinson, a sociologist at the University of Maryland, who led the analysis with faculty colleague Steven Martin.
Their report, "Not So Deprived: Sleep in America, 1965-2005," scheduled for release by the university today, finds that Americans on average got 59 hours of sleep per week in 2005, the latest year for which precise statistics are available. That is three hours more than in 2000.
The new numbers contrast significantly with the 2008 "Sleep in America" poll, the oft-quoted survey conducted annually by the Washington-based National Sleep Foundation, which advocates for better diagnosis and treatment of sleep problems.
Released last week, that survey concluded that Americans get an average of 48 hours of sleep per week.
The difference, experts said, reflects the two groups' methodologies. The Sleep Foundation survey asks Americans to estimate how much sleep they typically get. By contrast, the Maryland analysis draws upon detailed "time-use" data collected by the U.S. Census Bureau for the Department of Labor Statistics. In that approach, individuals must account for every minute of the previous day.
"This gives us a much better picture of where the time goes than when people just make an estimate," Robinson said.
The primary factor affecting the amount of sleep a person gets is whether he or she is employed, the new analysis shows. Apparent differences among men and women and people of varying ages and races effectively disappear when individuals' employment status is taken into account.
"Older people sleep more, but that's because they tend to be unemployed," Robinson said. "If you control for those differences, the differences in sleep disappear, too."
Most surprising are the hints in census data that sleep time may be increasing after many decades of virtually no change.
The new data show Americans getting an average of 8.5 hours per night in 2005, compared with eight hours in 2000. Most of the extra minutes of weekly sleep are coming on Saturday nights: 9.5 hours of which were spent slumbering in 2005, compared with 8.8 hours in 2000.
|
Americans are not as sleep-deprived as they think they are and, in fact, appear to be getting more Z's these days than they got a few years ago, according to an independent analysis of government statistics.
| 12.069767 | 1 | 43 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031103175.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031103175.html
|
A Dose of Desire
|
2008031219
|
Viagra turns 10 this month, and didn't time just fly? It seems like only yesterday we started guffawing at the Symbolism for Dummies ads on TV for the little blue pill and its "erectile dysfunction" rivals -- footballs tossed through tires, faucets erupting. The spots ended with a list of potential side effects that sounded like a satire of potential side effects. "More than four hours ?" we winced. "Ouch."
However discomfiting the commercials, the Food and Drug Administration's approval of Viagra -- on March 27, 1998 -- is a landmark day in the history of sex. It seemed at the time like a biomedical revolution was upon us all, and about five minutes after word of the magical med went global, the question first was asked: Where is the women's version of Viagra?
The short answer: They're still working on it. A bunch of companies have tried and failed to create "pink Viagra," as it's often called. Other companies have drugs in late stages of clinical testing, including a gel that recently began a make-or-break nationwide study with several thousand women. Give us five years, maybe less, say the most optimistic researchers and doctors. Though it's unclear exactly how many women would ask for a prescription, no one doubts that the first company that gets to market a remedy for female sexual dysfunction, as it's formally known, will earn a fortune.
But as this race reaches what could be its final lap, not all of the spectators are cheering. Some, in fact, are booing as loudly as they can.
A modest-size but fervent group of psychologists, academics and public health advocates contend that FSD isn't an authentic medical condition, or at least not the sort of problem that should be treated with drugs. These aren't the obtuse male physicians who for decades have been telling women distressed by their lack of libido that "it's all in your head." The anti-FSD crowd is mostly women, many of them self-described feminists. The most prominent is Leonore Tiefer, a psychotherapist and clinical associate professor at New York University, who has long decried what she calls "the medicalization of women's sexuality."
"Drug companies want to say to women, 'You don't need to know anything; you can have the satisfying sex life that you seek -- people dancing on TV, the whole bit -- without knowing anything. Just ask your doctor,' " she says. "I resent that, because there are specific harms that come from being ignorant and dependent in the world we live in. There may be lots of people who aren't interested in sex, but is there a medical reason for that, and do we diagnose that?"
Tiefer's critique centers, in part, on the way that pink Viagra is sure to be marketed -- with ads day and night, suggesting that women who aren't feeling frisky have a medical problem. She and her allies -- organized as the New View Campaign -- are also galled that so much money and media attention are heaped on the lust drug, even before it exists, when for many women the solution to their libido problems isn't that exotic. Maybe they have a partner who hasn't a clue about technique.Maybe they're stressed out. Maybe they can't possibly get in the mood because they're so busy raising children. Therapy, counseling, even free day care, says the New View Campaign, might do more for women's sex lives than any drug company ever could.
"People walk out of their doctors' offices with a prescription in hand 85 percent of the time," says Meika Loe, the author of "The Rise of Viagra" and a New View endorser. "But health insurers won't pay if you want to talk to a counselor or if you need advice about how to communicate your sexual desires. We've got a health-care system that is almost entirely focused on medical solutions."
On the other side of the FSD divide, allied with the pharmaceutical companies, is a group of physicians who are prescribing off-label treatments for women vexed by their sex lives. (Off-label means the drug hasn't been approved by the FDA for that specific treatment.) The highest-profile of the bunch is Irwin Goldstein, the director of sexual medicine at San Diego's Alvarado Hospital. He and Tiefer have debated the topic of FSD for a decade, but as far as he's concerned, there's really nothing to discuss. He's been using hormones to treat women, and he'll happily put you in touch with patients who will rhapsodize about the results.
Women like Virginia, a 60-year-old native of Britain and an artist who, for privacy reasons, asked that her last name be omitted. She'd spent years asking doctors for medical help to boost her sex drive, which had once been voracious. All of them, she says, "rolled their eyes and harrumphed and tried to change the subject."
"But when I was younger, a really strong libido was just part of who I was," she goes on. "Losing that was like losing a good friend."
Three years ago, she heard Goldstein interviewed on National Public Radio. Within weeks she flew to Boston, the site of his practice at the time, and she soon was taking several hormones. There was tinkering with the combination and the dosage, but a few weeks later she suddenly felt "perky" -- more confident about herself as a sexual being and more attractive. She also started having better sex.
|
Viagra turns 10 this month, and didn't time just fly? It seems like only yesterday we started guffawing at the Symbolism for Dummies ads on TV for the little blue pill and its "erectile dysfunction" rivals -- footballs tossed through tires, faucets erupting. The spots ended with a list of potential...
| 18.694915 | 0.983051 | 57.016949 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031102801.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031102801.html
|
Relief for Phone Firms Proposed
|
2008031219
|
House Democratic leaders announced yesterday their support for providing some relief to phone companies that have been sued for assisting the Bush administration's warrantless surveillance program but reaffirmed their opposition to the legal immunity sought by the administration. The proposal would allow the companies, which face nearly 40 civil lawsuits in a federal court in San Francisco, to defend themselves in secret, in front of a judge but without the plaintiffs. Leaders intend to organize a floor vote on it tomorrow.
Allowing such "ex parte" review of classified evidence is meant to defuse the administration's argument that the companies cannot respond to the lawsuits now without disclosing classified information that would harm national security, and that the companies should, therefore, be immunized.
The decision not to budge on the immunity issue reflects an apparent calculation by the Democrats that they can continue to defy the White House on a security concern in an election year.
"The Democrats always risk getting beaten up," said House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) at a news briefing yesterday. "But . . . our citizens expect us to protect their private records while at the same time expecting us to facilitate the work of the intelligence community. I think that's what we've done."
"We are not going to cave in to a retroactive immunity situation," Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.) said. Democratic leaders said that they think they could pass the bill with support from the moderate-to-conservative Blue Dog Democrats. "I'm feeling very confident," Majority Whip James E. Clyburn (S.C.) said.
The measure is part of a revised House bill that would update the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The administration contends that the act has been overtaken by technological advances and, especially in the case of e-mails, requires new provisions to allow intelligence agents to eavesdrop on communications involving foreign targets.
White House press secretary Dana Perino said the House Democrats' bill is "dead on arrival" for several reasons, including its failure to provide the liability protection that is in the Senate bill. "It is clear that House Democratic leaders have once again bowed to the demands of class-action trial lawyers, MoveOn.org, and Code Pink and put their ideological interests ahead of the national interest," Perino said in a statement. She criticized the provision calling for the creation of a bipartisan commission to examine the administration's warrantless surveillance activities. "We can only draw one conclusion from this -- House leaders are more interested in playing politics with past efforts to protect the country than they are in preventing terrorist attacks in the future."
The House yesterday defeated a Republican motion to approve the Senate-passed alternative, which the White House supports, making the existence of a standoff clear.
Privacy advocate Kevin Bankston, a senior staff lawyer at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said that having a secret court review is the only true compromise. "It allows the plaintiffs to have their day in court," he said. "It allows phone companies to put up their defense. It allows the process to proceed fairly and securely." But lawyer Michael Sussmann, a partner at Perkins Coie in Washington who represents communications providers, said the proposal "still exposes carriers to huge losses" and does not address their concerns about protracted litigation.
Conyers said the bill is not a product of a conference committee but an effort "to try to push this difficult ball down the road a little further." A Democratic aide described it as a move to take "the state-secrets handcuff" off the companies.
Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid yesterday called the House Democrats' proposal "a tremendous step forward," but an aide said the Nevada Democrat is not planning to take it to the floor soon. "Since Republicans have refused to participate in the negotiations that led to this bill, it seems unlikely to achieve 60 votes in the Senate," Reid spokesman Jim Manley said. "Republicans should stop playing games on this important issue."
|
House Democratic leaders announced yesterday their support for providing some relief to phone companies that have been sued for assisting the Bush administration's warrantless surveillance program but reaffirmed their opposition to the legal immunity sought by the administration. The proposal wou...
| 17.886364 | 0.954545 | 40.090909 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/12/AR2008031202216.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/12/AR2008031202216.html
|
Gates Calls on Congress For Science Education, Visas
|
2008031219
|
In his last scheduled testimony to Congress before he retires, Gates said those provisions are necessary for the United States to maintain a competitive edge in technology innovation. He said some of the most talented graduates in math, science and engineering are temporary residents and cannot get the visas they need to take jobs with U.S. companies.
"U.S. innovation has always been based in part on foreign-born scientists and researchers," Gates told the House Committee on Science and Technology. "The fact that [other countries'] smartest people have wanted to come here has been a huge advantage to us, and in a sense, we're kind of throwing that away."
The committee held the hearing to mark its 50th anniversary; it was founded after the Soviet Union's Sputnik satellite was launched in 1957. Most members of the panel congratulated Gates on his achievements at Microsoft, which he founded in 1975 after dropping out of Harvard, as well as the contributions his philanthropic foundation, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, has made to educational causes.
Gates, 52, smiled throughout the two-hour hearing, sipping from a can of Diet Coke and occasionally jotting notes with a pencil. He tapped his feet underneath the table as he talked, sometimes in sync with the rhythm of his voice.
When asked about taxes, Gates jokingly pointed out that he has written checks to the federal government for billions of dollars. "I don't begrudge it at all," he said. "I'm glad you're all working hard to see it's well spent."
Much of the discussion surrounded Gates's call to raise the annual maximum of 65,000 H-1B visas, which allow employers to hire foreigners with specific skills. Last year, Gates said, Microsoft was not able to get visas for about one-third of the foreign-born people it wanted to hire.
Some lawmakers have sponsored bills to allow more visas, but others have said the H1-B program takes jobs from Americans and pushes down wages.
Rep. Steven R. Rothman (D-N.J.) asked Gates if he thought there should be any limit on the number of visas issued, and facetiously asked if IQ tests should be administered to determine who is worthy of earning permanent-resident status.
After reiterating that "immigration has been a great thing for this country," Gates acknowledged some limits were probably appropriate.
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) told Gates he was too focused on opportunities for top students. He said the goal is not to replace "B and C students with the A students from India."
Gates replied that more jobs are created around top engineers, and the continued demand for skilled workers will keep wages from decreasing.
|
Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates paid a visit to Capitol Hill yesterday with a familiar wish list: more money for math and science education, more funds for research and more visas for skilled foreign workers.
| 14.324324 | 0.621622 | 0.783784 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/12/AR2008031201377.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/12/AR2008031201377.html
|
Taiwan Referendum Faces Boycott
|
2008031219
|
TAIPEI, Taiwan, March 12 -- Taiwan's main opposition group, the Nationalist Party, called on its supporters Wednesday to boycott a government-sponsored referendum asking whether the island should apply for U.N. membership under the name Taiwan.
The appeal reduced chances that the referendum measure would succeed, news likely to be greeted with relief in Beijing and Washington. China and the United States have denounced the referendum as a needlessly provocative maneuver, designed by President Chen Shui-bian and his Democratic Progressive Party to emphasize the self-ruled island's claim to formal independence from China.
The referendum will be held in tandem with Taiwan's March 22 presidential contest between Ma Ying-jeou of the Nationalist Party and Frank Hsieh of the Democratic Progressive Party. The vote is largely symbolic, as the United Nations is unlikely to admit Taiwan as a member, experts say.
On Wednesday, Nationalist Party Chairman Wu Po-hsiung denounced the addition of the referendum measure as an attempt by Chen to drum up support for his party by waving the independence flag.
"This would create immeasurable damage to the situation in the Taiwan Strait," Wu warned. "It has aroused strong opposition in the international community, which views it as a serious provocation involving changing the nation's name and status quo. This would make Taiwan even more isolated and marginalized internationally, impacting the security and interests of our 23 million compatriots."
Wu said the Nationalist Party would continue to support the holding of a separate referendum on U.N. membership. That measure, also on the March 22 ballot, will ask whether Taiwan should seek admission to the United Nations under its official name, the Republic of China, or any other name deemed suitable.
The second referendum was proposed several months ago by the Nationalist Party in a bid to thwart Chen's effort. Hoping to avoid being branded as anti-nationalist, the party has since decided not to press voters to boycott both referendums, as it had considered doing.
Philip Yang, a political scientist at National Taiwan University, said the Nationalist Party's boycott call means Chen's referendum measure faces an uphill battle. More than half of registered voters must support a referendum measure for it to pass, he noted, and polls show that Nationalist supporters outnumber Chen's.
The Nationalists' proposal is equally unlikely to pass, but it is considered less inflammatory since it sticks with the island's official name and thus is not considered an indirect attempt to move toward independence.
|
Complete coverage of the 2006 midterm elections, congressional campaigns and governors races. Political news and analysis from The Washington Post and washingtonpost.com.
| 19.08 | 0.52 | 0.6 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/03/11/DI2008031101265.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/03/11/DI2008031101265.html
|
Pearlstein: Credit Turmoil
|
2008031219
|
About Pearlstein: Steven Pearlstein writes about business and the economy for The Washington Post. His journalism career includes editing roles at The Post and Inc. magazine. He was founding publisher and editor of The Boston Observer, a monthly journal of liberal opinion. He got his start in journalism reporting for two New Hampshire newspapers -- the Concord Monitor and the Foster's Daily Democrat. Pearlstein has also worked as a television news reporter and a congressional staffer.
Vienna, Va.: How does the Federal government account for the credit risk that it assumes when it swaps Treasury instruments for mortgage-backed securities? The prices for the latter are falling for a reason. AAA ratings are meaningless, as reported by Bloomberg yesterday.
Steven Pearlstein: The Fed does not have to mark to market since, for one reason, it has no quarterly reporting requirement. Also, it does these swaps for 28 days at a time (although perhaps we'll discover they can be renewed). So you are right in that the purpose of this is to make it possible for the broker dealers to exchange something that they would have to mark down, in the current environment, for something they wouldn't. But the real purpose here is to find a way so the broker dealer doesn't have to sell the mortgage-backed security, dump it on the market, and thereby drive the price even lower and grigger even more margin calls and more forced selling.
Cincinnati, Ohio: Steve -- as usual, I enjoyed your column today. My question: In general (historically), are you bearish or bullish? I ask because, although forecasts are all over the map lately, yours seems a bit on the bearish side. If I'm making an accurate observation, what is it that you see differently than other forecasters?
Steven Pearlstein: The difference is that I'm going totally by my gut. I have no computer. I have no technical analysis. I have no inside market information. I just have history and feel. And there is no indication I see that the financial sector is even halfway through with repricing assets and taking losses that will run to $1 trillion. It is definitely going to take another 6 months or so, and during that time, there is no way that financial markets can avoid being in a down-drift. After that, there will be a period of bouncing along the bottom and then financial assets will probably take off fairly briskly, as they usually do after such a washout. And that will come precisely when the real economy has hit bottom. When that will occur, its hard to say, but its unlikely to be before next spring, in my opinion.
Is that bearish or bullish? I'll let you decide.
Rocky Mount, N.C.: Good morning. The Fed has been doing these maneuvers like accepting more risky collateral and lowering interest rates although I myself can't benefit from them, and one step goes farther than the last to try and make things all better. What's left for them to do beyond this point? I can realistically see them taking interest rates down to 1 percent again and they're already accepting the garbage collateral from the big Wall Street firms, such as Bear Stearns as you state in your article. I'm skeptical on whether said moves will work, but what else do you think they will try?
Steven Pearlstein: As I suggested in my tongue in cheek lead today, they will simply make their balance sheet available in more creative ways, whether it is lending against more stuff, or swapping it or, in the most extreme case, actually buying paper -- either Fannie, Freddie and other agency paper, or even non-government-related paper. We are about to discover, in fact, how powerful the Fed can be as a printer of money and buyer of last resort. And this is different than their other power, the power to set the Federal Funds rate, which is rather crimped right now because the channels through which it works are rather clogged because of this credit and liquidity crunch.
Ashburn, Va.: When do you think we will hit bottom on the real estate market?
What factors will be positive signals that we are on the right tract to recovery?
Steven Pearlstein: The first thing that needs to happen in real estate is that the rate on 30 and 15 year fixed mortgages has to come down to the point that lots of people can, and do, refinance. That's the first goal, and once it is achieved, it will begin to put the floor under prices of existing homes. then it will be one of those situations where it will take some time for sellers to accept the fact that their homes aren't worth what they used to be and agree to sell at the lower prices. That capitulation will represent the bottom.
On new homes, its a market by market situation but I think it will be a while in many markets before demand returns. That is more a reflection of the economic cycle and we're just entering into the downturn now.
Takoma Park, Md.: Hi Steve:
Enjoyed your analysis - spooky as it is. But isn't there another dynamic at work here, with the Fed pushing on a string when it continues to lower rates and no one's ready to borrow any more? With the dollar falling in value as a result, and commodity prices - especially oil - rising, inflation rears its ugly head which in turn causes businesses to raise prices and layoff workers. As a result, businesses don't want to borrow at the new higher rates, and so we have a downward spiral. Care to comment?
Steven Pearlstein: Yes, there is the usual pushing on a string problem that happens in every recession. But in addition, the Fed believes that the credit market turmoil creates even additional problems for monetary policy in that its hard for lowering the cost of borrowing to have a positive effect when the financial system is in the midst of a lassive deleveraging. Its like swimming up stream with a heavy, heavy current running against you.
Vienna, Va.: Is it fair to postulate that the war in Iraq has played a major role in the demise of the dollar, and the current mess we have in our economy?
Steven Pearlstein: No, that's probably not a big factor.
I'll take your word for it that we all needed the bailout as I watch my own portfolio tank - even though the need for it was created by Wall St. going to the casinos the past several years. Here's my question: I worked in a hospital, where, when we harmed a patient, we went through a formal process of "root cause analysis" to ensure it never happened again. What, in your opinion, is the root cause, and I mean the VERY root, of the current situation? I hear the same old thing about the Fed keeping interest rates low for too long, but the Fed didn't invent SIV's and CDO's. Is this bubble economy doomed to keep repeating itself in different sectors forever and ever, or how can it be prevented?
Steven Pearlstein: The fundamental problem is that we allowed a huge, unregulated alternative credit-creation machine to develop outside the regulated banking system. Broadly speaking, its called the credit market and it involves hedge funds and derivatives markets and swaps markets and asset-based securities market, etc. etc. And this got very big, trillions of dollars, all of it essentially unregulated but, more significantly, all of it with no capital cushion. In fact, it was the ability to have very high leverage with no equity or capital cushion that gave this market its advantage over the banking system in terms of being the lower-cost and more "efficient" intermediary. But it was this lack of capital that also has now caused the fix we are in, because there was no financial shock-absorber when things started to go bad. And THAT is the basic problem.
At an even more abstract level, of course, the problem was that the US economy was running on too much cheap, borrowed money and we were living beyond our means.
Silver Spring, Md.: Thanks for taking my question. It's my understanding that financial institutions are using "bad debts" as collateral for the infusion of cash from the Fed. Am I missing something, or is this as bizarre as it sounds? How can "bad debt" be redeemed should the financial institutions be unable to meet their own obligations?
Steven Pearlstein: You are right and wrong. Right in the sense that they are being able to trade securities that are now selling at distressed prices for securities that are not. But they aren't necessary securities backed by bad debts -- in fact, in the case of Fannie, Freddie and Ginni Mae securities, they are mortgage-based securities with either an explicit or implicit government guarantee. So there is, effectively, no credit risk (i.e. risk of non-repayment to investors). Or put another way, the market is at the moement irrationally pricing these securities because there are suddenly lots of sellers and very few buyers. Sellers are selling because they are subject to margin calls, not because they think the long-term prospects of getting repaid are bad. And the buyers are on strike because nnobody likes to try to catch a falling knife -- that is, nobody wants to buy when prices are falling, figuring that if they just wait, the price will be lower an hour or a day or a week from now. So everyone is acting rationally, it is just that when everyone acts rationally in these instances, you get a very irrational outcome, which is to drive down the prices of these mortgage-backed securities even lower than the likely default rates would suggest.
The Mall Was Busy: My husband and I relocated to a small town for his job a couple of years ago. This past weekend we drove almost two hours to go to one of the two nicest, most "upscale" malls in the southeast. The mall is in Atlanta and we go up there several times a year to get fashionable clothing and shoes. It was PACKED. My husband joked that you'd never guess that our country is in a recession. Seriously, are they all using credit cards? I did not make a purchase in one store as there were about twenty people in line.
Steven Pearlstein: Let's remember what a recession is: it is the lack of economic growth. That means the growth rate could be zero, or slightly negative. Which means that everyone is buying what they bought last year, but no more. Well, last year, they bought quite a lot, so if the economy is in recession, it may mean that most people will still have jobs, most of those people who have jobs will have incomes that are equal or nearly equal to what they earned last year, and they will spend as much or nearly as much as they spent last year. That's still a lot of spending. In fact, I'm not sure you would, with a naked eye, be able to tell the difference between last year's sales volume and 95 percent of last year's sales volume. And yet if sales of all retail stores fall by 5 percent, that would be a recession.
Baltimore, Md.: Steven: In today's column, you wrote that: "Then yesterday, the Fed announced that it would swap $200 billion worth of Treasury bills for $200 billion worth of mortgage-backed securities held by the major investment banks that are members of its 'prime broker' network on Wall Street." In reality, isn't this just trading good money (the T-bills) for potentially worthless IOUs, as no one really knows the value of these mortgage-backed securities? And by printing this money,is the Fed revving up the inflation engine, which is running pretty hot already due to the ever-increasing cost of fuel? Thanks.
Steven Pearlstein: Well, as I just explained, that IOUs are not worthless in an economic sense, that is, when valued against the income stream they are currently producing and they are likely to produce in the future. The market is deeply discounting them now, too deeply, but that is because of what is a temporary liquidity shortgage, or the reluctance of anyone to buy at the moment. And that is precisely the moment when you need a central bank to be the buyer of last resort, which was the original reason for creating central banks in the first place.
Washington, D.C.: Steve, you mentioned in your article: "For it is only when bank lending and credit markets have returned to more normal operations, say Fed officials, that the beneficial impact of their interest rate cuts can be transmitted to the economy." Assuming this is true, does this mean rates on consumer loans will go down significantly from here? I am contemplating taking out a large (over $1 million) mortgage on a commercial property to do renovations, but i keep having this feeling that rates should be much lower given all the recent fed cuts. Thanks
Steven Pearlstein: I can't speak to the timing. This action by the Fed might bring the credit markets back into a normal state so that lower Fed Fund rates translates into lower rates up and down the yield curve. Or it may take more time. It is just not possible to know. It may be that 30 year fixed mortgage rates never go below 6 percent again if one result of all this pump priming is that inflation expectations rise. So it is a delicate line the Fed has to walk here, and there are risks in both directions.
All of which is to say I can't offer you any useful advice for your particular situation.
Potomac, Md.: Will the Fed's policies drive us to 7-10% inflation in six months?
Steven Pearlstein: Let's just say it won't dampen inflation. As I've said many times before, we are in for a period of staglation over the next two years, of that I'm pretty certain. How much stag, how much 'flation, I can't say. There are some tradeoffs to be made there. My colleague Bob Samuelson says that unless the inflation last for many years, it's not really stagflation. Maybe he's right. So I'll call it two years of negative growth or growth below potential, accompanied by headline inflation rates of 3 percent or more. How's that for precision?
St. Petersburg, Fla.: With a severe housing correction, a credit crunch, and heightened pressures on household budgets due to record oil prices, what hope is there for the economy? That is, what could prevent this from becoming a severe downturn and what will help the economy recover?
Steven Pearlstein: There will be a downturn, although how severe I'm not sure. For all the troubles out there, businesses are still in good shape financially and that should allow them to weather a slowdown in sales without having to take the kind of extreme measures that begin to feed on themselves and cause a vicious downward cycle in terms of the overall economy. So it could well be a shallow recession if that reality continues to hold. On the other hand, it could get worse if the financial crisis really begins to threaten the flow of credit even to businesses that deserve it, or if household wealth (value of homes, stocks, etc) gets so low that consumers really pull back on their spending and start saving a lot more or paying off their credit card debts. Again, we're not there yet but you can't rule it out as a possibility.
Anonymous: Good morning Steve. What do you think of the current standing of the Feds who keep pumping money into the economy--increasing the monetary base--in a situation where the internal deficit is already so high? And where is the imported inflation (because of the devaluation of the dollar) going to be felt most severely? Further, do you see a 10-20% inflation within the year , as in the times of Reaganomics?
Steven Pearlstein: No, those inflation estimates are way too high, thank God. And its also not clear that monetary aggregates are increasing, since lots of credit is now being withdrawn from the market by the credit markets. Also, these swaps actually do not represent an increase in money supply, in a technical sense.
Washington, D.C.: Thanks for today's column. As you say, the timing of market meltdowns and Fed rescues is impossible to predict--though you expect things to slide downward untill fall or so. For someone in mid-career who took 401K money out of stock funds when they were 10% higher, would it be sensible to get back into stocks in regular installments (dollar-cost-averaging for new money) in a mix of stock index funds? Or hang tight until the crunch is clearly over and the indexes are rising?
Steven Pearlstein: I don't think you'll miss upside if you hold off and wait for a while. I know that's only half-helpful, since I'm not saying when. But you'll probably have a good idea when that is.
Arlington, Va.: So who are the winners and losers of these two bailouts? I have a vague feeling of rage, and I don't know why.
Steven Pearlstein: You should feel rage at Wall Street, but the rage should be the lousy judgment they showed in getting themselves and the rest of us into this mess. And if you want to be mad at the Fed, be mad at its failures as a regulator during the last decade, not for what it's doing now.
Danvers, Mass.: Some have pointed out that non-financial companies are piling up cash at a rapid rate, are buying back shares, and have seemingly boundless credit at low prices. Yet the structured arena is bound up. To what extent is this crunch related to questionable lending practices and would we be better (or worse) off without these practices?
Steven Pearlstein: The world would be better off without some of these structured products, or at the speculative use that has been made of them that has driven their growth.
Bethesda, Md.: I already sent an email directly to Steve, but was so impressed with this morning's piece that i wanted to repeat myself. It was a tremendous synthesis of the crisis and how it affects all of us, not just Wall Street. I have been a professional investor for 21 years and have been quoted in the Post quite a few times, so I am no novice and have seen a lot come and go. Friday morning I sat down with my wife and explained to her why this would be the worst economic period in our adulthood. The entire mortgage securities market had essentially locked up. By the end of Monday, there were probably hundreds of financial institutions that were technically insolvent. While the Fed cannot solve the problem, they have bought critical time. As we have seen over the past year, there is no predicting the next crevice that this would leak into. After all, who would have thought that a sub-prime mortgage debacle could have such profound effects on the municipal finance market? And yet it has. In my opinion, predicting what is next is futile, save that it won't be good.
Steven Pearlstein: Thank you. And amen.
Washington, D.C.: Could the moral hazard effect of the Fed's actions be worsening in the long run, rather than it not being so "creative?"
Steven Pearlstein: Yes, there is a moral hazard, but the "cost" of the increase in moral hazard is less than the "benefit" of avoiding a market meltdown. Moreover, the Fed and SEC can reduce the moral hazard through their regulatory and enforcement powers going forward, creating even more disincentive for reckless risk taking by top executives and traders in the future.
Minneapolis, Minn.: Thanks for doing these chats. Have you seen the new book by Charles R. Morris: "The Trillion Dollar Meltdown"? If so, what do you think of it?
Steven Pearlstein: Sorry, haven't seen it yet.
Lynch Station, Va.: Steve, if the GDP does not rise to the estimated 1-1.5% level for this year how do you estimate that the debt will begin to effect the mandatory funding portion of future budgets submitted? In your opinion, will the debt requirements begin to scare off foreign funding, especially since the world cash excess may take a hit with the present financial crisis? Thanks.
Steven Pearlstein: The recent fall in the dollar and the refusal of interest rates to fall despite cuts in the federal funds rate are both indications that it will be harder (i.e. more expensive) to finance our current account deficit going forward. Which is one reason the deficit will come down, albeit with real consequences to our standard of living.
it will take some time for sellers to accept the fact that their homes aren't worth what they used to be and agree to sell at the lower prices. : Aren't sellers already realizing their homes aren't worth as much? I've been house hunting the past month, and I keep seeing sellers who have dropped their prices by large amounts. Maybe what I'm seeing is sellers who were expecting a huge profit and are now just lowering so they'd get a small profit. Are you talking about sellers will realize they actually need to take a big loss when they sell?
Steven Pearlstein: Not sure you can frame the question quite that way, but I do think it true that sellers who were expecting huge gains may now have to settle for so-so gains or even no gains, depending on when they bought. Here's a rule of thumb: You shouldn't be surprised, as a seller, to have to give up the price appreciation of the two previous years. And remember that in some places, that could amount to 30 percent.
The Hague, Netherlands: Thanks again for an interesting piece that summarizes the situation and accents the important points. You noted in your article that come fall we can expect more ugly action. What is driving that? Reset schedules for subprime seem to peak in the spring of 2008. Is this the lag between resets and defaults or are you talking about a different problem? On a different note, the problem with auction rate securities is amplified by the current crisis, but relying on short term yields to finance long term projects seems like a recipe for disaster. When long term rates are low, why not lock in? It's a bit like getting an ARM to save an extra 1/4%. That only works until rates climb. Shouldn't bond issuers know better?
Steven Pearlstein: Borrowing short to spend or lend long has a long tradition in finance, I'm afraid. In fact, many of the muni and non-profit issuers of auction rate bonds always have the option of refinancing long, which is what many are now doing. The only problem comes when they all go to do it at the same time, it has the effect of temporarily driving up rates.
Laguna Beach, Calif.: Is the latest fed move likely to improve the residential home sale and refinance markets?
Arlington, Va.: The longer the Fed keeps injecting money and lowering the rate, the longer this recession and problem they created will last. The best medicine is hard medicine. Raise the rate, teach people a lesson--especially Wall Street and its billion dollar leaders that are putting companies under--and let the dollar and inflation get under control. Inflation is the real danger everyone seems to be missing.PS: You can't make banks lend money no matter how much you put up for auction and if you continue to insist, you will have another housing/credit problem.
Steven Pearlstein: Look, you're right that we need to work through this quickly, take our losses and let the market clear at lower prices. No question. But please don't be cavalier about what happens during a market meltdown. Lots of irrational things and there is lots of collateral damage to people and businesses and institutions that bear very little responsibility for creating or even participating in the credit bubble. From my conversations with people at the Fed, I think they understand the need not to get into Japan-like denial. But they also understand the need not to get into the kind of tough, Calvanistic monetary policies that lead to the Great Depression. You got to strike a balance here.
Arlington, Va.: Looking back, were there signs that this was going to happen that we just ignored? Also, with gas/oil prices continuing to go up, jobs being lost and the value of the dollar declining, what can be done to prevent a loss of confidence in the American economy? I can't imagine anybody around the world thinking that this is the economy of the world's super-power.
Steven Pearlstein: We have lots of strong companies and a good economic system here, perhaps the best in the world. And investors around the world still know that. We have had some huge financial excesses that need to get worked off, but let's keep this in perspective. The world isn't ending but there is going to be a period of pain and adjustment ahead of us for the next couple of years. And it will go faster if Wall Street types can stop their incessant marketing and cheerleading about how a bottom has been reached. It hasn't. Moreover, those people right now have no credibility. None. Nada.
Richmon, Va.: Where did the Fed get the $200 billion? We're broke. Did they borrow it from China or some other country? Do the banks have to pay it back?
Steven Pearlstein: I love this question because the answer is so deliciously simple:
New York, N.Y.: Steve, I've got a comment and a question. If the Fed decides that certain short term moves are necessary to preserve order in the financial systems, I can't really argue against them, even if these moves help out investment banks. I'm just bothered by what seems to be the kabuki routine every couple of years when the investment banks take stupid and inordinate risks and expect everyone to bail them out.On a separate note, I can't help but think that the vast discrepancies in pay between what one can earn on Wall Street and what one earns in practically every other field is setting us up for bad things down the road. It's totally absurd that a college kid starting out at Goldman Sachs earns $100,000+, while someone graduating medical or engineering school would be lucky to earn half of that. It's true that market forces have created this absurdity, but I can't help but think that investment bankers don't really add much to our society. Thanks!!!!
Steven Pearlstein: Indeed, I wrote that column about a month ago and it is still getting lots of pass-around, according to the folks at washingtonpost.com. There is something wrong with our labor markets when that compensation is so out of whack and we need to figure out what that is and how to fix it.
Crossville, Tenn.:"In the face of what is turning into the most serious financial market crisis since the Great Depression, the Fed has been more aggressive and more creative in using its limitless balance sheet--in effect, its ability to print money--than at any time in history." I was intrigued by your characterization of the present financial crisis as the 'most serious financial market crisis since the Great Depression" because as an old U.S. history student and teacher that had been my impression, only I had not heard anyone else describe it that way.
Steven Pearlstein: First off, we haven't had too many real financial crises since the Great Depression, so maybe that isn't as dramatic a statment as you might think. But second, this is bad. We're talking about $1 trillion in losses for financial institutions. That's a lot of money and it will wipe out a few before its all over.
Fort Washington, Md.: A simple (minded?) question from a non-economist, physics major (from many years ago): 'Where was that $400 billion last week?'
Steven Pearlstein: half of it was in Treasury bills that, figuratively, were being stored in the Fed's vault. The rest was fresly printed.
Great Falls: I'd agree with your root cause analysis in an earlier question/answer, but I'd take it back one step further. The various financial entities felt free to create these massive overhangs of debt only when they got the sense that the Fed would do anything to prevent an economic collapse. I think you have to trace the root cause back to the Greenspan Fed (or should I say the Greenspan put?), with plenty of secondary blame to the financial institutions (using that term broadly.)
Steven Pearlstein: As I've said before, there is plenty of blame to be handed out to the Greenspan Fed, but that is mostly in the area of bank and market regulation, where, because of Greenspan's ideological blinders, the agency fell down on the job.
Dallas, Texas: I work at a big investment bank in the mortgage warehousing division. We lend to mortgage lenders, with their loans as collateral. We have 40% of the number of clients as we did a year ago, due to the industry problems. The question: should I stay in this industry or move on? Clearly, there is a continued need for mortgage loans. However, production is a fraction of what it was a year ago. What is your outlook for this industry a year from now?
Steven Pearlstein: Probably better than today, if you can hold on till then.
Housing prices: Don't housing prices need to fall before the market can rebound? It seems that housing prices outstripped income growth for the past 5 years (yes, even in income rich D.C.). Prices need to come back in line with income before sellers enter the market. Regardless of what rates are, if you have to put 20% down now that takes a lot of people out the market who don't have the money necessary to secure financing. If the Fed encourages easy money again it might halt the slide but won't it just encourage more reckless borrowing?
Steven Pearlstein: Not necessarily. It is simply to provide the liquidity so that non-reckless lending can continue.
Richmond, Va.: If you look out your window at high noon today, you'll see Bernake's helicopter flying over D.C. heading to New York City to drop billions of dollars off to bail out banks and investment firms that knew what they were doing when they accepted the risky sub-prime mortgages as collateral. Give Bernake credit for knowing how to print tons of money we don't have.
Steven Pearlstein: Bernanke will never be able to shake the monitor of Helicopter Ben. And in a crude sense, that is what he's doing, although I think it is a bit more nuanced than that: so far, he's lending this money, not giving it away.
Gaithersburg, Md.: I am one of those "no money down" teaser rate mortgagors. But the reality is with D.C. housing prices it was the only way I could afford my first place. I think only one of two things can revive housing: either prices come down considerably to allow more people in and incomes rise significantly to catch up with the increase, or banks will have to return to no-money-down mortgages.
Steven Pearlstein: You got that right.
Tallahassee, Fla.: Brad DeLong said one way out of the sub-prime dilemma is to inflate--this cuts the value of the fixed mortgage-backed securities and makes investment in real assets (like real estate) more attractive. A dirty pool but likely effective.
Steven Pearlstein: A tried and true technique, however. And remember, this is an old debate, going back to William Jennings Bryant Cross of Gold speech and Andrew Jackson's crusade to close the national bank.
Annapolis, Md.: Just wondering: we had the internet bubble, then the housing bubble, do you think we will enter another bubble or will common sense come back?
Steven Pearlstein: There will always be bubbles, alas. But there is no reason regulators have to let them grow as large as they have recently. None.
Steven Pearlstein: That's all the time we have today, folks. "See" you 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.
| 157.512195 | 0.682927 | 1.02439 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/03/07/DI2008030702462.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/03/07/DI2008030702462.html
|
Washington Nationals Spring Training
|
2008031219
|
Barry Svrluga: Greetings from Dodgertown, folks. Lots to talk about as we get ready for Chad Billingsley vs. Mike O'Connor. This is the Nationals' last-ever appearance at Dodgertown, so there's a bit of nostalgia in the air.
Anyone notice what Joel Hanrahan did last night? My goodness, the buzz of the clubhouse.
Capitol Hill: I was slightly stunned to read that Dmitri Young showed up at camp weighing just under 300 pounds. Given (a) his new contract, (b)his 2007 promise to be in shape for spring training and (c) his diabetes, how disappointed is management? And at that weight, can Young do anything to help the Nats other than pinch hit and make sure nobody steals the bench from the dugout?
Barry Svrluga: This is a central point in this spring training camp. The club, and Young, say that they are having a tough time getting a handle on his diabetes, and that has contributed to his inability to lose weight. He admits, though, that he did not pick up a bat in the offseason.
Young is adamant that, because he is a veteran, he knows how to prepare himself. I think the Nationals would be much more disappointed in Young if Nick Johnson didn't look healthy. Young, who will likely play in a Grapefruit League game over the weekend, vows to lose weight by Opening Night and be ready to go. That's only 2-1/2 weeks away. We'll see how it goes.
Arlington, Va.: It appears that Nick Johnson will be the starter at first base. Do you agree? How about second? Do you think Belliard or will Lopez will get the nod.
Barry Svrluga: Following up the last question, I'd go with Johnson, with very little doubt, at this point.
The other question is more difficult. Lopez hasn't been tremendous offensively this spring, but he is playing hard. He drilled a ball to the left-center gap last night against the Braves and absolutely motored around the bases, trying to stretch a double into a triple. Only a perfect play by the Braves got him out. He seems more at ease and more focused.
That said, Belliard is a total pro, and he's swinging the bat really well. One school of thought is that they'll have to start Lopez, because if they don't, they risk losing him mentally. Belliard can handle being assigned to the bench. But again, this one needs to play itself out.
Harrisburg, Pa.: If the Yankees can sign Billy Crystal, could the Nationals, say, sign Madonna for a game? She supposedly can hit some too, from her baseball movie, and she would certainly be a draw. Of course, when will this all stop? Paris Hilton playing shortstop for the Cubs?
Barry Svrluga: Nats are in serious discussions with the agent for Don Rickles, I am told by sources. Not sure what other teams are in pursuit, but will work on it over the course of the day.
(Guzman pops to short to start this one.)
Washington, D.C.: I have noticed that Lastings Milledge has had a very strong spring and seems to be picking up multiple hit games. Is it not out of the question for Milledge to possibly lead off for the Nats in '08? Also, just speak about what you think his progress has been like and the possibilities for him this year
Barry Svrluga: I have been very impressed with Milledge. He hits the ball hard, has a good plan in batting practice (going the other way) and has some speed (though he needs to be careful about when and where to steal bases).
As for leading off, I do not believe that is in the plans. Milledge looks set to bat second, with, for right now, Guzman leading off. Milledge in the two-hole might give Ryan Zimmerman more RBI opportunities than he had last year.
(Milledge at the plate right now, by the way.)
Fairfax, Va.: How concerned should Nats fans be that Ryan Zimmerman has not agreed to a long-term deal? It seems like there was this implicit assumption that Zimmerman was going to be the Nats' Cal Ripken in that he would be the face of the franchise and play his entire career in D.C. But is Zimmerman holding out until he sees the team contend or something? Is the front office concerned about his health in the long-term?
Barry Svrluga: (Milledge goes down swinging.)
This is a tough question to answer. Would it be nice -- for both the club and for Zimmerman -- to have him locked up now? Absolutely. But is it absolutely necessary? No, considering that regardless of what happens, he is Nationals' property through 2011.
My contention has long been, however, that Zimmerman's case is a bit different. He is clearly the one player the Nats can build around. They are trying to solidify their place in a market that is still getting a feel for baseball. The prices for players, too, doesn't appear to be going down anytime soon.
This is an important situation to watch over the next year-18 months, because by that point Zimmerman will be in the arbitration system and will get a significant raise whether he signs a long-term deal or not. If he produces this season -- even something like a .290/25 HR/100 RBI season, which wouldn't shock a lot of people -- he will get paid upward of $4 million, and would get significant raises through arbitration the next two years.
Will the Lerners be comfortable signing a player to a deal that could include somewhere between $55-$65 million in guaranteed money? We'll have to see. But I wouldn't freak out yet.
NOVA: Any good trade gossip?
Barry Svrluga: The consensus is the Nationals will be in good position to trade a middle infielder, particularly if Bret Boone continues playing this well. The problem is that their most tradable commodity in that regard is likely their best player up the middle, Belliard. He makes just $1.6 million this year and $1.9 million next season. Guzman ($4.2 million) and Lopez ($4.9 million) are both free agents at the end of the season -- so they're more expensive, the club has control of them for less time, and they might not be as productive.
One other bit of buzz: The Nats have definitely expressed interest in Jeff Weaver, the free agent right-hander. But, from what I'm told, there are divergent opinions on the guy within the Nats management structure. Some think he's worth taking a chance on, others think he might be a bad person to have in a clubhouse that might be delicate anyway.
If they do sign Weaver, you can be sure of one thing: It'll be for a discount price. And Scott Boras, Weaver's agent, doesn't often give discounts.
(O'Connor: Walks Pierre, stolen base, and then as Pierre steals third, he walks Furcal.)
Arlington, Va.: Where can I find information about the game-day tickets being held for the home opener? Will they sell these online or at the park?
Barry Svrluga: The club will certainly make an announcement about the remaining Opening Day tickets. The background: They sold season-ticket packages (somewhere between 17,000-18,000), then released 4,000 tickets for Opening Night to be sold individually, but because they're still trying to sell season ticket packages that include the opener, they're holding the rest of them.
I'm sure we'll hear something soon, and I'll pass it on in Nationals Journal and in the $.35/$50-edition.
Re: Milledge: Can you let us know how is his fielding? I have no idea. Thanks.
Barry Svrluga: Haven't been as impressed, but it's a small sample size. I'll let you know more when I get a better feel. He can run, but I'm not sure he always takes the best routes to the ball.
Barry Svrluga: O'Connor: Quite shaky. He just allowed a run on a wild pitch, and he has three stolen bases against him. No outs, one run in, man on third, James Loney at the plate.
(Oh, but Loney just struck out looking at a breaking ball.)
(This is, by the way, the definition of multi-tasking.)
Northern Virginia: Any word on Slick Nick's new lightning bolt hairdo? Is it a go?
Barry Svrluga: Somehow I haven't been able to check in with Nick about that yet. It was the clear winner in an online poll at Nationals Journal the other day, and Austin Kearns claims he'll do it. I'll let you know in the Journal ASAP. (Nick's not on the trip today, so I'd guess I'll check with him tomorrow.)
Lopez, Fla.: Seems as if there is some tension between Orioles ownership and the Nats, but it also appears that the O's could use a veteran short stop, while the Nats have a surplus there. Any chance the two clubs could help each other out?
Barry Svrluga: Yeah that will be interesting to watch. Also worth watching: The Nats' second basemen if and when the Orioles trade Brian Roberts.
O'Connor finally gets out of the first striking out Jason Repko. After one, Dodgers 2, Nationals 0.
Washington, D.C.: How do other teams view the Nats re-building strategy of taking in misfits from around the league? Do they respect the moves being made by "second-chance" Jim Bowden, or do they see it as a high-risk gambit by a team unwilling to spend what it takes to be a legitimate contender?
Barry Svrluga: A little of both, I think. Scouts I've talked to in the last week definitely believe the Nats have more pop and potential this year -- but you don't have to be a scout to know that.
I would be careful, though, about lumping someone like Milledge in with someone like Dukes. One has basically been immature -- and cutting that sexist rap song was ill-advised, no doubt. The other, though, has a serious criminal history. I've seen a lot of people kind of lump all the Nats' misfits together, and I don't think that's fair to any of them.
One thing that's consistent with the Nats' moves on these guys: They are almost all no- or low-risk. Dukes cost a Class A pitcher, though a talented one. Milledge drew raves during his entire career and is a clear talent, and Schneider and Church were unlikely to be a part of an actual winning team in D.C. Dmitri Young came in on a minor league contract. Etc.
How likely is it that the Nats pick up another starter, especially with the health of Hill in doubt? You mentioned Weaver, but have you heard any other names discussed? Kyle Lohse? John Thomson? Rodrigo Lopez?
Also, have any young hitters, minor league guys, particularly impressed you at spring training?
Thanks as always for the field work.
Barry Svrluga: There could always be a trade for a pitcher, and there is, even, Ramon Ortiz out there. But for now, the only name I've heard is Weaver. Lohse, it would still seem even at this late date, is going to get more in years and dollars than the Nats would be willing to spend.
Manny Acta was asked before today's game if he was okay with the starters he has, and he said he was. They feel they've got seven guys -- Hill, Patterson, Bergmann, Chico, Lannan, Redding, Perez -- that are good enough to give them a usable rotation, even if only five are healthy.
That said, there has to be a time in this club's future when they will be willing to spend what it takes to get quality players in here. Right now, the quality of those pitchers -- even Lohse -- doesn't match the asking price. And the fact that they're not signed (Weaver and Lohse, for instance) means that the Nats aren't the only ones thinking that way. All of baseball is thinking that way.
Fairfax, Va.:"Will the Lerners be comfortable signing a player to a deal that could include somewhere between $55-$65 million in guaranteed money?" ... Why does this question even need to be asked? The Lerners purchased a major league baseball team. The prices for good players are high, and their contracts don't tend to turn over year after year. I can definitely see waiting on signing Zimmerman long-term, but this team is already flush with money and will be more so in a very short time. Some fans are convinced the Lerners are "cheap." I don't buy that, but why is there a question that they would fret about guaranteed money to important players? Maybe they're not sold on Zimmerman yet, but at some point they will be giving out $55-65M on someone. They almost have to, as MLB owners.
Barry Svrluga: This is an excellent point. Whether it's Zimmerman or the next would-be stud, the Lerners will have to spend that much money on someone at some point. Zimmerman is a special case because he's not a free agent they're trying to lure. He's a guy who's here, who they're putting out there as a draw (take a look at who was on the ad on the front of The Post sports section the day single-game tickets went on sale), and as someone who does good work in the community.
Again, there's plenty of time to get a deal worked out with him. It'll just be interesting to see how it all goes down.
Section 114, Row E: Bar,
Not trying to kick you out the door -- but do you have an update regarding the incoming Nats Beat Writer?
Barry Svrluga: Hey man, just getting comfortable here. Come on.
Thanks for your concern, though. Yes, I think we're headed in a good direction in that regard, but nothing's official yet. I hate to be coy, but you'll have me to kick around for the next little while at least. I'll get you an official update when I have it.
Section 114, Row E: Barry! I've read the rumors that the Nats are interested in Jeff Weaver? Please tell me that Bowden fell off his pimped out Segway and bumped his head. This cannot be true - this is not part of the "plan."
Barry Svrluga: That's what some people are saying, even in the organization. But the way this would work as part of The Plan is if he came in for very little money.
In discussing these guys a couple of weeks ago, Jim Bowden had some interesting things to say. He said you might not want to sign another free agent because you don't want to get in the way of a young guy developing. But the flip side is: You might not want to rush a young guy, so you go and sign a free agent or two. The Nats' feelings about guys like Lannan and Chico play into all this.
But again, most important: The price.
Rockville, Md..: Regardless of the outfield issues of Milledge running down pop ups, he has to be better than Nook! Where is Nook by the way?
Barry Svrluga: Funny you ask. Nook Logan is in the Dodgers' minor league camp, which is an odd place to be considering this team has Andruw Jones and Juan Pierre. Not a lot of takers for the Nookster this offseason.
Opening Day Pitcher: It it too late to trade for Livo?
Barry Svrluga: Have you seen Livan Hernandez's spring stats thus far for the Twins? That would be 3 starts, 9 IP, 8 ER, 2 BB, 3 K, 2 HR.
I love Livo. But I think he may be done.
Considering the surplus of highly paid middle infielders that the Nats have, are they really considering keeping Brett Boone with the team, or is this an audition opportunity so that he can be traded for a prospect?
Also, how is Alex Escobar looking and do you feel that he has a chance to be squeezed onto the 25-man?
Barry Svrluga: Boone: If not trading him, then trading one of the others and using him as insurance. I can assure you of one thing, though, and that's that Boone will not be going to the minors. He still considers himself a major league player even after almost two years off.
Escobar: I was just thinking this morning about how I haven't written about him this spring. He looks in excellent physical condition, though he always does. He can still hit the ball hard. But I feel nervous even writing all that about him, because he could break down in the next five minutes.
I'll let you know if that happens.
Barry Svrluga: Game update: Nats don't yet have a hit against Billingsley through their first two at-bats, though Escobar did walk and Aaron Boone was hit by a pitch.
O'Connor seems to have settled down here in the second, getting the first two guys to ground out. Oh, and DeJesus just grounded out to end the inning on a 3-2 curveball.
Herndon, Va.: Mr. S: Not to look too far ahead, but who is most likely to play the Nats in the World Series?
Barry Svrluga: A fascinating question. Let me offer you this.
I'm not sayin'. I'm just sayin'.
Washington, D.C.: Okay, I'll ask the obligatory stadium question. Who will get the moniker "Official Beer of the Nationals?"
Barry Svrluga: Whichever one I'm drinkin' in Section 219 when I get off the beat.
(Truthfully, they have contracts with both Anheuser-Busch and Miller, and they'll have microbrews as well. Getting a beer at Nationals Park, as I understand it, is not going to be a problem.)
Anchorage, Alaska: Hey there Barry...
From the perspective of a casual observer, it seems like at least a couple of the storylines that have hung over this year's camp are starting to gel: Guzman has picked up right where he left off last summer after injuring his thumb, and Belliard seems to be having a good spring, too... while Lopez... who seems better than last year, isn't really setting the world afire (though I suppose there might have been an attempt to manage some people's perceptions yesterday by trying to stretch the double into a triple... If he makes it his stock goes up, but of course, he was thrown out at third). And over at first, the New, Improved, More Fuel-Efficient Nick Johnson seems to have answered at least most of the questions, while Dmitri struggles with his health.
Is the situation as basic and as cut-and-dried as that, or is there more to it?
Barry Svrluga: Yeah, I think that's the crux of it. But with the middle infield situation, I think there's still plenty of time to get some more clarity. At first base, I think Young is in a deep hole and would have to really turn it around in the next two weeks to be considered a starting candidate.
Wilmington, N.C.: With question marks still on Lo Duca and Estrada and the Nats wanting Flores to start in the minors for some seasoning, who do you think would be a better fit for back-up catcher: Wil Nieves or Humberto Cota?
Barry Svrluga: Funny this just popped in. Cota just singled through the hole in left.
Thus far, I have liked Nieves. He's a good catch-and-throw guy, knows what it means to be a backup, has a good demeanor, etc. Others around here, though, like Cota a bit better. (Interesting that the guy the Nats cut loose the other day, Chad Moeller, immediately caught on with the Yankees.)
Lo Duca is on target to play over the weekend. Estrada, though he has been playing catch, is further away. This will be another theme to watch over the next two weeks. If Flores is on the major league club, it will not be as a true backup.
Washington, D.C.: Headed down to spring training on Friday to follow the Nats for a week. Any recommendations of what to do/eat/drink around the Space Coast before/after Monday's game?
Barry Svrluga: I'm going to do a Nats Journal post about this in the very near future because I get the feeling lots of DC-types are coming down this weekend. I will reveal here, however, a new place I found (Boz and I had a lovely meal there a couple weeks ago) called The Fat Snook. It's on Route A1A in Cocoa Beach, just a small place with very good fish. I had duck one night, too. Solid.
Check out the Journal -- probably tomorrow morning -- for a more complete guide.
Burke, Va.: The Nat's recent acquisitions are "low-risk"? That's a kind way of putting it. Another way to put it would be "players no one else wants."
Have you been taking lessons in Jimbo-speak?
Barry Svrluga: Also a way to look at it. But I guess the reason I say that is I've seen Dukes hit in person, seen Milledge play in person, and watched that -- let's be honest -- pathetic offense from a year ago (fewest runs in baseball). There's just so much more pop around this year, I get why they made the moves they did.
Jimbo-speak, though, has a way of washing over you.
Re: Beer: So how much is one of these supposed beers going to run me?
Barry Svrluga: Somewhere between $6-$20, I suppose.
Anonymous: I thought Patterson looked outstanding last night. How's he feeling today?
Barry Svrluga: Didn't talk to John this morning when I swung by Space Coast Stadium. I'd be cautious about what you saw in that performance, though. His fastball is not yet up to where he wants it, though he threw a couple nice curveballs for strikes. The club, and Patterson, are trying not to obsess about his velocity, saying it will come as he gains arm strength. The key, if that's the case, is that Patterson learn to pitch without his best stuff for maybe a month or so. He did not do that at all last year early in the season. It would be a huge step for his maturity if he, in facts, pitches and wins with a fastball that's 88 mph early in the season. Then, if and when it returned to 92 mph as he built arm strength, he'd be that much more confident.
Patterson looked pretty bad last night -- which you hinted at in your article today. What is the deal with this guy? A couple weeks ago he says that he has his fastball back; clearly he doesn't and now he says he "needs time." Why do we keep giving this guy the benefit of the doubt?
Barry Svrluga: And here, then, is the opposite view.
I do feel strange -- given how much I harped on Patterson's velocity last year -- allowing him to say he still needs to build arm strength. But there are other pitchers here doing the same. (Joel Hanrahan, by the way, does not appear to be one of them.) Patterson is, indeed, his own creature. I think the reason he is given slack is that this team, as currently constructed, needs him. There is still hope that he can recapture the form of 2005, when he was pretty darn good.
Don't let me down, Dodgertown: Barry,
did you mean the last trip to Vero as "Dodgertown," since I was under the impression Dem O's were moving to Vero next year?
Barry Svrluga: Yeah, I meant to say that. The Orioles are rumored to be moving here, though that's not done by any stretch. Currently, there is no tenant for the facility at Vero Beach next spring.
That would be horrible for the Nationals, considering this is the shortest trip for them all spring (about 45 minutes door-to-door).
Blacksburg, Va.: Whose the first to make it to the big leagues this season, Mock, Balester, Detwiler?
Barry Svrluga: Great question. I go with Balester. I was impressed with Mock's stuff, but I think Balester is just a hair more polished. Balester pitched at Class AAA last year; Mock has never been above Class AA.
Detwiler likely needs to pitch a full season in the minors, though a September call-up is probable.
Croton-on-Hudson, N.Y.: With as injury prone as the Nats' starting pitchers are, why would they even begin to consider throwing two of them on short rest in cold weather in the opening week of the season?
Barry Svrluga: The key to that potential plan -- and I wrote about it in the paper this morning -- is WHO would be chosen to come back on short rest. It certainly wouldn't be Patterson. My guess is it'd be someone like Bergmann and Redding, who are both fairly resilient.
That is, by the way, just one option. I think it happens to be the leader in the clubhouse, but there's lots of time between now and then.
(The plan, by the way, is to use two off days the Nats have early in the season to just bring four starters north, have two of them go once on short rest, and feather Shawn Hill into the rotation on April 13. We'll see.)
Manassas, Va.: Nobody wanted these guys at one time.
Sometimes it pays not to be wanted.
Have you talked to Manny about his approach to the game regarding strategy? He seems to have imbibed the anti-bunt/steal philosophy of the sabermetric gurus. (That's a good thing, by the way.)
Barry Svrluga: Yes, have talked much to him about this, and last week he lent me a copy of the book "Mind Games" by the Baseball Prospectus staff on the 2004 Red Sox. It's a fascinating combination of stats-stuff and anecdotes, and he loves it. He simply will not bunt in early innings, and he wants guys to have a 70 percent success rate on steals in order to keep the "green light." He also does not believe that any team has ever won a game because its manager got ejected, etc.
I think all this is worthy of a story soon. It got a little overlooked during the personality pieces I wrote on Acta last spring, when we were introducing him to the fan base.
You are going to cover the Redskins so you can spend more time with your family?! Have you seen how much La Canfora has worked this offseason? I worry you are making a bad decision. Why don't you give me season tickets to both teams and some Sam Adams so we can talk about your decision?
Barry Svrluga: Oh, there's no doubt, the 'Skins beat is demanding, a whole different animal. I don't envy Mr. La Canfora's last several months.
The one difference: Even as you're working yourself in oblivion, you're sleeping in your own bed. If you're going to go insane, you might as well be familiar with the pillow.
Rockville, Md.: Who do you see Manny using at the main set up guys in the bullpen for the 7th and 8th innings before they give the ball to Cordero?
Barry Svrluga: Um, let me introduce you to Jon Rauch -- who has led the majors in appearances the past two years -- Luis Ayala and Saul Rivera.
Manny Acta like to cite stats for the reason he doesn't bunt or steal bases.
If that's the case, why would he consider batting Guzman and his terrible OBP leadoff?
Does he have any thoughts on the Cardinals' and Brewers' plans to bat the pitcher 8th and their feeling that it would lead to more runs being scored over the course of a season?
Barry Svrluga: Good question on Guzman. This is, simply, what the Nationals have right now, and it's far from ideal. But Acta is hopeful that Guzman's solid play from last year -- in which he had a .380 OBP in 46 games -- can carry over. He definitely reserves the right to mix it up if Guzman starts slowly (and he hasn't even named Guzman the leadoff guy officially yet).
I haven't asked him about the pitcher hitting eighth.
Blacksburg, Va.: Dukes has been hitting pretty well this spring even though he has been cold his past couple of games. He's also behaved as well as anyone could have hoped, even showing a lighter side in the Post's golf video. If he can continue to mature and hit to his potential this season and someone else struggles is there a good chance of him stealing a job from Kearns or Pena?
Barry Svrluga: I will say this about Dukes: He plays hard. I mean, HARD. And he's been fine in casual conversation, etc. So far, so good.
Barry Svrluga: Folks, can't get to all the questions today, but thanks for starting off the spring nicely. We'll go every Wednesday from now through the season. Should be fun.
O'Connor settled down in the second and third, and actually hasn't allowed a hit. Still Dodgers 2, Nationals 0 going to the fourth.
Have a great week, and if you're headed down here for the weekend, check out Nationals Journal for some restaurant information.
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.
| 147.04878 | 0.536585 | 0.634146 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031102794.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031102794.html
|
Hollywood Tests Tolerance For Ads With Online Video
|
2008031219
|
Watching video online has typically entailed viewing short snippets of celebrity news, music videos and homemade clips. But as streaming video becomes more popular, Hollywood is trying to figure out how to make its old business translate better online.
Hulu, a joint venture of NBC Universal and Fox, debuts on the Web today with a large library of advertising-supported television shows, movies and other video.
Hulu requires viewers to sit through two minutes of advertisements for a typical half-hour episode, or roughly 75 percent less commercial time than the typical prime-time TV show. Users of digital video recorders can skip commercials, but there's no fast-forwarding through Hulu.
Hulu, like other online video companies, is testing viewers' tolerance for ads. Having gained a following among about 5 million users during its test phase, Hulu plans its broader launch today. It is also planning to announce deals with Warner Bros. Television Group and Lionsgate to make popular shows like "Dawson's Creek" and movies like "Terminator 2" available on the site.
Hulu's library doesn't cover everything. ABC and CBS, for example, are not part of its roster of about 50 studios and networks. But Hulu chief executive Jason Kilar said the company has quadrupled the number of titles in its catalog since starting private testing in October.
The early popularity of Hulu and the growing audiences for other premium video content suggests that online viewers are interested in watching more than just the amateur videos that catapulted YouTube to success, said David Hallerman, senior analyst at eMarketer, a market-research firm.
Advertisers may be more willing to associate their brands with professional content, rather than user-generated videos that might be considered off-color or inappropriate, he said.
"A trusted environment would draw more of this money," Hallerman said. He noted that YouTube has struggled to translate its popularity in advertising revenue.
Jayant Kadambi, chief executive of YuMe, a Redwood, Calif.-based advertising network that lets publishers pair ads with videos, said tolerance for advertising is low for the amateur snippets.
"With user-generated content, people don't want to see the ads," he said. "But if you're desperate to watch something specific you'll put up with more ads to see it."
Nissan is working with Hulu, sponsoring such shows as NBC's "Heroes."
Robert D'Asaro, U.S. director of digital strategic alliances at ad agency OMD, said his company's studies have shown that Hulu users tend to be more engaged with what's on the screen than the average television viewer, in part because they usually sit closer to the screen and have fewer distractions. As a result, he said, users tend to come away from watching Hulu with more of an impression of the commercials than do television viewers.
"It's the two-foot experience as opposed to the 10-foot experience," he said.
Melissa Adams, senior manager of Nissan North America's media and brand integration, said the company's marketing is simply following the viewers.
"There's been so much fragmentation in media consumption," she said. "We have to go where consumers are going."
Kilar, who worked at Amazon.com for nine years, took over Hulu a year ago with the goal of hosting all the premium content on the Web.
Hulu's advertising strategy is to be both targeted and minimal. Each show has a single sponsor. It is experimenting with allowing users to choose which ads to view, and with showing movie trailers upfront in exchange for shows without commercial breaks. But unlike other sites -- such as NBC and Fox's independent sites -- it doesn't try to keep users captive; if users search for television shows or movies that aren't available on Hulu, they are directed to other sites. Users can also embed snippets of content from Hulu in their blogs or online profiles.
Allowing users to chose ads is innovative, some analysts said.
"It's one of the more aggressive moves we've seen," said Bobby Tulsiani, an analyst with Jupiter Research. "It's much more targeted than what you see on TV, where its hard to say if an ad actually got watched."
While Hulu keeps track of what users watch, it does not yet target ads based on their TV-viewing preferences. But the company said it is investing in more sophisticated technology to target ads based on viewers' habits.
Hulu has plenty of company among start-ups eager to make video advertising more lucrative and targeted.
YouTube has partnerships with about 1,000 premium content producers, including National Geographic, CBS and Sundance, but videos are no longer than 10 minutes. In August, YouTube started superimposing transparent ads at the bottom of videos that appear for only 10 seconds, which the site said turns fewer viewers away than 30-second ads before videos start.
Video-search company Blinkx embeds ads that are relevant to a video's content. Using voice-recognition software, Blinkx shows ads related to keywords mentioned in videos. Most of Blinkx's users also prefer professional content over amateur video, according to chief executive Suranga Chandratillake.
|
Washington,DC,Virginia,Maryland business headlines,stock portfolio,markets,economy,mutual funds,personal finance,Dow Jones,S&P 500,NASDAQ quotes,company research tools. Federal Reserve,Bernanke,Securities and Exchange Commission.
| 22.909091 | 0.454545 | 0.454545 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031103028.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031103028.html
|
Signing Off at XM
|
2008031219
|
Ten years ago, Lee Abrams helped revolutionize radio. Now, he's hoping to do the same to journalism.
Abrams, the creative heart and soul of XM Satellite Radio since its 1998 founding in Washington, is leaving to help retool the struggling Tribune Co.
He will be the chief innovation officer for Tribune, based in his hometown of Chicago, the company said yesterday. In the newly created job, Abrams will attempt to develop strategies and business plans for the company's newspapers, television stations and online properties.
In an interview yesterday, Abrams said he has been thinking about the news industry as analogous to American music in 1955, just before rock-and-roll exploded.
"Over the past couple of years, I've been fascinated with the concept of news and information as being the new rock-and-roll," Abrams said. "There had always been music, but rock-and-roll took it to a whole new level, broke the rules, wrote a whole new playbook."
Abrams, 55, said news and information can undergo a similar revolution with creative leadership. Abrams has a long history as a radio and music innovator but has no experience in journalism. He did not offer any hints yesterday of ideas he has for Tribune's newspaper, television and Internet properties.
Abrams was hired at Tribune by longtime friend and radio veteran Randy Michaels, a former Clear Channel executive, putting two radio lifers near the top of a sprawling media company that owns only one radio station.
In addition to WGN radio, Tribune owns the Chicago Tribune, the Los Angeles Times, the Baltimore Sun, Newsday and other papers, as well as 23 television stations, a television studio and the Chicago Cubs. (Abrams is a fan of the Cubs' South Side rivals, the White Sox.) Last year, a boardroom revolt forced the company onto the sales block. Tribune ended up going private in an employee-ownership plan devised by commercial real estate billionaire Sam Zell, who is now Tribune's chief executive and chairman.
"Lee is the most formidable creative thinker in the media business today," Michaels said in a statement.
Tribune is laboring under $13 billion of debt incurred in Zell's takeover plan and battling declining advertising revenue, which is cutting into the cash flow needed to pay down the debt. Zell has been visiting his business units and addressing employees in his blunt, often profane, style.
Abrams, by comparison, is a genial legend in the radio industry, credited with inventing the "album-oriented rock" format on FM. At XM, he dreamed up more than 100 of the music channels. Outsize and spontaneous, he urged deejays and programmers to create a smart, fresh sound for the commercial-free channels and to resist hoary FM tropes, such as "two-for Tuesdays."
Former XM operations manager Dave Logan once said of Abrams: "Lee decides we need to land the plane backwards at Reagan National while the sky turns green. It's my job to make it happen."
|
Ten years ago, Lee Abrams helped revolutionize radio. Now, he's hoping to do the same to journalism.
| 27.227273 | 1 | 22 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031101805.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031101805.html
|
Top U.S. Officer in Mideast Resigns
|
2008031219
|
Adm. William J. "Fox" Fallon became head of U.S. Central Command last March, putting him ostensibly in charge of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. But he clashed frequently with Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, over strategy and troop levels, Pentagon officials said. Though technically Fallon's subordinate, Petraeus has more experience in Iraq and has forged a strong connection with President Bush.
Fallon, 63, had made several comments reflecting disagreement with the administration's stance on Iran, most recently in an Esquire magazine article last week that portrayed him as the only person who might stop Bush from going to war with the Islamic republic.
"Recent press reports suggesting a disconnect between my views and the president's policy objectives have become a distraction at a critical time," Fallon said in a statement. Though he denied that any discrepancies exist, he said "it would be best to step aside and allow" Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates "and our military leaders to move beyond this distraction."
Fallon is expected to step down at the end of the month, after barely a year in his position, and just eight days before Petraeus is scheduled to testify before Congress about conditions in Iraq. Military officers said it appeared that it was made clear to Fallon that nobody would object if he stepped down.
"Admiral Fallon reached this difficult decision entirely on his own," Gates said yesterday in an unscheduled news conference. He added: "I believe it was the right thing to do, even though I do not believe there are, in fact, significant differences between his views and administration policy."
The defense secretary also praised Fallon's abilities as a strategist, even though it was the admiral's strategic views that seemed to trouble the administration. "He is enormously talented and very experienced, and he does have a strategic vision that is rare," Gates said.
The Esquire article, written by Thomas P.M. Barnett, a former Naval War College professor, asserted that if Fallon left his job anytime soon, it could signal that Bush intends to go to war with Iran. Asked about that yesterday, Gates called it "just ridiculous."
Several Democrats were quick to accuse the administration of not tolerating dissent. "It's distressing that Admiral Fallon feels he had to step down," said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (Mass.). "President Bush's oft-repeated claim that he follows the advice of his commanders on the ground rings hollow if our commanders don't feel free to disagree with the president." Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) asked whether Fallon's resignation is a reflection that the administration is hostile to "the frank, open airing of experts' views."
A likely successor to Fallon is Petraeus, some defense experts said. The general could be promoted to the Centcom post and replaced in Baghdad by Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, who until last month was Petraeus's deputy in Iraq. Odierno, who has been nominated to become Army vice chief of staff, developed a strong working relationship with Petraeus.
Another possible successor mentioned yesterday is Lt. Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the head of Special Operations in Iraq. McChrystal recently was nominated to be director of the staff of the Joint Chiefs, a key Pentagon position.
On Iraq, Fallon butted heads with Petraeus over the past year, arguing for a more rapid drawdown of U.S. troops and a swifter transition to Iraqi security forces. Fallon even carried out his own review of the conduct of the war -- a move that surprised many Pentagon officials, in part because Odierno and Petraeus had already revamped U.S. strategy in Iraq and, with Bush's approval, had implemented a buildup of about 30,000 additional troops, moving them off big bases and deploying them among the Iraqi population.
In the Esquire article, Fallon contends that Iraq was consuming excessive U.S. attention. In a part of the world with "five or six pots boiling over," he is quoted as saying, "our nation can't afford to be mesmerized by one problem."
The article was "definitely the straw that broke the camel's back," a retired general said, especially because of its "extraordinarily flip, damning and insulting" tone. He noted that since it appeared last week, it has been the talk of military circles, where it was expected that Fallon would be disciplined.
Fallon, one of the last Vietnam veterans in the U.S. military, was the first Navy officer selected to lead Centcom, a role traditionally granted to Army and Marine generals such as H. Norman Schwarzkopf, Tommy R. Franks and Anthony C. Zinni. One reason he was chosen to replace Army Gen. John P. Abizaid was because the administration -- dealing with wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as a diplomatic crisis over Iran's nuclear program -- wanted a seasoned officer who could step into the job quickly, without having to learn the ropes of top command, according to a person involved in his selection.
As a veteran of Pacific Command, where he focused on dealing with the rise of China, Fallon was seen as someone who would be comfortable operating at the highest levels of diplomacy and politics. He had told colleagues that he viewed Iran as a problem similar to China -- one that mainly required steady engagement rather than aggressive confrontation. That stance put him at odds with Iran hawks both inside and outside the administration.
Peter D. Feaver, a former staff member of Bush's National Security Council, said that the public nature of Fallon's remarks made it necessary for the admiral to step down. "There is ample room for military leaders to debate administration policy behind closed doors," said Feaver, a political scientist at Duke University. "However, taking such arguments into the media would violate basic democratic norms of civil-military relations."
But Richard Danzig, who served as Navy secretary from 1998 to 2001 and has known Fallon for 15 years, said Fallon's departure will leave a significant hole in a critical region. "Any turnover in Centcom has real costs, because this is an arena in the world, more than others, that depends a lot on relationships and extensive periods of conversation and mutual understanding," he said.
That might prove especially true in Pakistan. Fallon had become a point man for crucial military relations there as the Pentagon implements a stepped-up program to help Pakistani forces deal with Islamic extremism along the border with Afghanistan. In visits to Islamabad in November and January, he cemented ties with Gen. Ashfaq Kiyani, the new armed forces chief of staff. The administration hopes that Kiyani will keep the military out of Pakistani politics while showing new aggression toward al-Qaeda and Taliban forces along the Afghan border.
Fallon's departure also reflects Gates's management style. During his 15 months at the Pentagon, the defense secretary has shown a willingness to move decisively in cases of internal conflict. A career intelligence officer, he demanded the resignation of Army Secretary Francis J. Harvey last year because of the way he handled the fallout from reports about substandard care at Walter Reed Army Medical Center. Gates also declined to nominate Gen. Peter Pace, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, for a second two-year term, amid concerns that a Democratic-controlled Congress would grill Pace on Iraq.
Yesterday, Gates said the perception that Fallon disagreed with the administration's policies was enough to concern Fallon that he may no longer be effective in the region. Gates quoted Fallon as saying that the situation was "embarrassing."
Staff writers Josh White, Karen DeYoung and Peter Baker contributed to this report.
|
The top U.S. commander in the Middle East, whose views on strategy in the region have put him at odds with the Bush administration, abruptly announced his resignation yesterday, calling reports of such disagreements an untenable "distraction."
| 34.348837 | 0.813953 | 2.023256 |
medium
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031102800.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031102800.html
|
HUD E-Mails Refer to Retaliation
|
2008031219
|
"Would you like me to make his life less happy? If so, how?" Orlando J. Cabrera, then-assistant secretary at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, wrote about Philadelphia housing director Carl R. Greene.
"Take away all of his Federal dollars?" responded Kim Kendrick, an assistant secretary who oversaw accessible housing. She typed symbols for a smiley-face, ":-D," at the end of her January 2007 note.
Cabrera wrote back a few minutes later: "Let me look into that possibility."
The e-mails, obtained by The Washington Post, came to light as a result of a lawsuit provoked by HUD's decision last September to strip the Philadelphia Housing Authority of as much as $50 million in federal funds. In December, it declared the agency in violation of rules that underpin its ability to decide precisely how it will spend federal housing funds. Kendrick was the official who formally notified the authority that she had found it in violation.
HUD has argued publicly that this decision was not related to the demands by HUD Secretary Alphonso Jackson that Greene turn over a $2 million vacant city lot to Kenny Gamble, a friend of Jackson's. HUD officials have said that Greene was not punished for his defiance.
But Greene and the Philadelphia authority have accused HUD and Jackson in a lawsuit of fabricating problems in the authority's performance as a way to retaliate against Greene.
The e-mails suggest that HUD leadership sought to punish Greene by threatening the authority's funding. What is not explicitly said in the e-mails is why.
On the date these e-mails were sent, HUD notified the housing authority that it had been found in violation of rules requiring that 5 percent of housing be accessible to disabled residents. The department later argued that because the authority refused to acknowledge it was in violation and to agree to a specific remedy, it was in violation of a broader agreement that put $50 million in federal funding in jeopardy.
This week, Greene sent copies of the e-mails to Sens. Arlen Specter (R) and Robert P. Casey Jr. (D) of Pennsylvania. Greene called the e-mails evidence of HUD's retribution for his refusal to give public property to Gamble. He urged the senators to demand that Jackson and his deputies explain their motives. Jackson is set to testify about HUD matters today before the Senate Banking Committee.
Casey said that he has "serious questions" about the e-mails and that "80,00 low-income Philadelphians deserve answers."
"This is the kind of stuff you read about in novels, not what you expect from government officials," Greene said in an interview. "It would appear they would carry out a vendetta against me even if it means damage to an entire city."
|
After Philadelphia's housing director refused a demand by President Bush's housing secretary to transfer a piece of city property to a business friend, two top political appointees at the department exchanged e-mails discussing the pain they could cause the Philadelphia director.
| 11.765957 | 0.680851 | 0.978723 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031102735.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031102735.html
|
GOP Leaders Back Gilmore Senate Run
|
2008031219
|
The rollout of endorsements from Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling, Attorney General Robert F. McDonnell and other Republicans signaled that Gilmore is paying increasing attention to Del. Robert G. Marshall's bid for the GOP nomination.
"This shows the Republican leaders in the state trust and believe Jim Gilmore is the better candidate to beat Mark Warner and has the best chance to keep this U.S. Senate seat," said Ana Gamonal, a Gilmore spokeswoman.
So far, Gilmore has mainly sought to ignore Marshall and focus on the likely Democratic nominee, former governor Mark R. Warner, in the fall contest to replace Sen. John W. Warner, who is retiring. But Gilmore's burst of endorsements shows he is working to shore up conservative support.
Marshall (Prince William), a leader in Virginia's antiabortion and antitax movements, is showing some strength among activists, who will convene in May to pick a candidate.
County committees have begun electing delegates to the convention. The deadline to register as a Loudoun County delegate passed last week, and Marshall said he expects to receive two-thirds of those delegates. Loudoun GOP sources confirmed that Marshall has significant support in the county, noting that his legislative district includes part of southern Loudoun.
Marshall scored a political victory Feb. 29 when the state Supreme Court ruled that taxing power delegated to regional transportation authorities in Hampton Roads and Northern Virginia was unconstitutional. Marshall was a plaintiff in that lawsuit.
"I saved billions of dollars from being taxed unconstitutionally for Virginia citizens," Marshall said. "I was the only elected official in Virginia that stood up for citizens. Jim Gilmore sat on his hands."
In a letter to Republican activists Tuesday, 23 conservatives called on the party to unify behind Gilmore.
"There is so much at stake in this election. Too much at stake not to unite -- and unite now -- behind the one conservative candidate with both a proven record and a chance to win," the letter stated. It included signatures from several Virginia lawmakers.
McDonnell and Bolling, likely rivals for the GOP gubernatorial nomination next year, joined in support of Gilmore.
Bolling called Gilmore, who was governor from 1998 to 2002, one of "the most consistent and principled conservative leaders" he has known.
"Jim Gilmore knows what he believes in, and he fights for it, when it's easy and when it's not," Bolling said. "That's the kind of leader we need representing us in the United States Senate."
McDonnell, an Army veteran, cited Gilmore's leadership after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attack on the Pentagon. "Jim Gilmore stands alone in this race in his understanding of national security issues," McDonnell said.
|
RICHMOND, March 11 -- Former governor James S. Gilmore III announced endorsements Tuesday from two of the Republican Party's statewide officeholders and nearly two dozen other prominent conservatives, seeking to solidify the GOP establishment around his U.S. Senate candidacy as he faces a...
| 11.255319 | 0.617021 | 0.787234 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031102746.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031102746.html
|
Protection For Banks Advances In Senate
|
2008031219
|
The proposal has become the focus of a battle between the banks and the law firm of Baltimore Orioles owner Peter G. Angelos, and so far the banks are winning.
The issue involves penalties imposed by the banks on borrowers who pay off home equity loans or lines of credit on their mortgages early. The banks waived the borrowers' closing costs on the loans, but hit them with fees if they paid off loans before two or three years.
The Maryland Court of Appeals ruled in December that the fees were illegal in the case of an Angelos firm client, a Baltimore man suing Provident Bank. The ruling opens the way for a class-action suit against the bank and others.
The bill being considered by the Senate would reinstate the banks' authority to charge such fees but would not tinker with the court's ruling that banks give refunds to homeowners who paid penalties. However, those homeowners would be unable to seek damages from the banks, which the court said they are entitled to.
The bill passed the House unanimously last week. A final Senate vote is expected this week.
Lawmakers supporting the state-chartered banks argued that if they cannot charge the fees, it will be harder to compete with federal banks that can.
"We ought to change the law so this good product will [continue to] be made available to the public," Sen. Thomas M. Middleton (D-Charles), Finance Committee chairman and a lead sponsor of the bill, told his colleagues. He called the 50 state-chartered banks "your and my community banks."
But opponents said the bill amounts to a bailout for a powerful industry and objected to a key provision, that homeowners who were charged early-payment fees could not seek damages.
"It goes against my grain philosophically," said Sen. George W. Della Jr. (D-Baltimore). "We change the rules of the game because the big bankers in town don't like what the law is and they got caught."
The court ruling was the first in the country to declare penalties on early loan payments illegal, industry experts said. Gov. Martin O'Malley (D), a longtime Angelos foe, is siding with the banks, saying they would increase costs to consumers if the bill is not passed.
Angelos supporters and other opponents of the bill said consumers would lose out if the banks are allowed to charge early-payment fees. But the banks say their promise to continue waiving closing costs is more consumer-friendly.
"We all know there are closing costs involved in borrowing money," said Sen. Rona E. Kramer (D-Montgomery), who supports the bill. "This bill says the lender is going to eat them for us in certain circumstances."
|
A bill to save Maryland's state-chartered banks from paying hundreds of millions of dollars in potential damages to homeowners won preliminary approval yesterday from the Maryland Senate.
| 17.387097 | 0.677419 | 1.193548 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031102754.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031102754.html
|
Taxis' Switch to Meters Delayed to May
|
2008031219
|
The new deadline, replacing the April 6 starting date, came about after Judge Henry F. Greene ruled that the D.C. government had published different timetables for public comment on the final regulations for the new meter system. A city official blamed it on a typographical error.
The ruling was considered a victory by D.C. cabdrivers who sued last week to stop the historic changeover from zones to meters in calculating fares.
"We got exactly what we came for, exactly what we sought," said Jeffrey O'Toole, attorney for the drivers. "Now we have to take things one step at a time. But a victory is always a victory."
The suit, against Mayor Adrian M. Fenty (D) and Taxicab Commission Chairman Leon J. Swain Jr., challenges Fenty's authority to set rules and rates for the new system, claiming the mayor assumed authority he didn't have. Fenty decided to go with meters in October, after U.S. Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.) attached a provision to an appropriations bill requiring the District to switch to meters unless the mayor issued an executive order leaving the zone system intact. The suit contends the eight-member commission was left out of decision-making.
Yesterday's court hearing addressed the cabdrivers' request for a temporary restraining order so they wouldn't have to install meters until the issue is settled. That became moot when the start date was extended. A hearing was set for March 27.
Interim D.C. Attorney General Peter Nickles said the drivers were trying to accomplish in court what they had failed to do politically. "We are very confident" of victory on the larger issue, he said.
Greene ruled that the District had erred in its Jan. 26 published notice of the final rules for the meter system. One section said the public had 60 days to comment; another mentioned 30 days.
The District ended comments 30 days later, in late February. Greene reinstated part of the 60-day comment period yesterday. That would have given drivers only a few days to install meters between the end of the comment period and the April 6 startup date. So the parties agreed to make May 1 the new effective date for meters.
"There was apparently a typo in the Jan. 26 notice of rulemaking, and we want to make sure this process is transparent," Nickles said.
The lawsuit, filed Friday, is the latest attempt by cabdrivers to stop meters and preserve zones. It was brought by the D.C. Professional Taxicab Drivers Association; the D.C. Coalition of Cab Drivers, Companies and Associations; Stanley Tapscott, a driver representative on the Taxicab Commission; and Silverlene Hill, a Northeast Washington resident described as a frequent user of cabs.
"I think the judge did the right thing to give us more time," Tapscott said. "I hope we'll be able to straighten this mess out, to everybody's benefit: the D.C. government, the passengers and the drivers."
Nathan Price, who heads the drivers' coalition, said drivers are trying to research practices in other cities where taxis have meters to bolster their argument that meters will force them to concentrate in busy downtown areas instead of neighborhoods. He said the real test comes with the March 27 hearing.
"This is a minor victory today," Price said. "If we don't look at the big picture, we're dead."
|
A D.C. Superior Court judge yesterday extended the start date for time-and-distance meters in the District's 6,500 cabs to May 1.
| 24.296296 | 0.888889 | 1.333333 |
medium
|
medium
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031101342.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031101342.html
|
STD Data Come as No Surprise, Area Teenagers Say
|
2008031219
|
Elizabeth Alderman, adolescent specialist at the Children's Hospital at Montefiore Medical Center in New York, was astounded by a federal report this week showing that two out of five teenage girls who have had sex have experienced at least one sexually transmitted infection.
Lorena Granados, a junior at W.T. Woodson High School in Fairfax County, was not the least bit surprised.
"A lot of girls fall in love, and it doesn't seem they care about protection," she said yesterday. "It's 'What am I going to enjoy right now?' Or they'll say, 'I know he hasn't been with anybody. . . . He's clean.' Or, 'He'll stop before we go too far.' "
That same attitude shows up in doctors' offices, Alderman said yesterday.
"Kids are not comfortable disclosing what they do," she said. "Or when they do come in, every single one will tell you they or their partner are using a condom. Obviously, many are not."
The study, released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, analyzed data on 838 girls ages 14 t0 19 who took part in a 2003-04 government health survey. Overall, one in four girls in the sample, which officials said was nationally representative, had a sexually transmitted disease. The teens were tested for four infections: chlamydia, trichomoniasis, herpes simplex and the human papillomavirus.
There was a big difference by race: Nearly half of the black teens had at least one STD, compared with 20 percent among whites and Mexican Americans.
About half of the teens acknowledged having sex, though studies indicate that by the time they finish the first year of college, more than two-thirds of young women have engaged in intercourse.
The report follows other studies indicating that girls today are as active sexually as boys -- and it suggests that many girls are paying a price for that.
In 2005, the CDC reported that slightly more than half of teenage girls and boys had engaged in oral sex, which carries the risk of herpes and HPV, among other infections. Still another survey disclosed this year that after 16 years of decline, the birthrate among 15- to 19-year-olds has started rising.
"When you look at the grand sweep of data, it's a rather sobering picture," said Bill Albert, deputy director of the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy in the District.
Sobering, as in the fact that Khadijah Marrow, an eighth-grader at Thomas Johnson Middle School in Lanham, knows a friend who has had a sexually transmitted disease.
|
Elizabeth Alderman, adolescent specialist at the Children's Hospital at Montefiore Medical Center in New York, was astounded by a federal report this week showing that two out of five teenage girls who have had sex have experienced at least one sexually transmitted infection.
| 10.978723 | 1 | 47 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/undergod/2008/03/the_righteousness_of_the_secul.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031119id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/undergod/2008/03/the_righteousness_of_the_secul.html
|
Greener Than Thou
|
2008031119
|
What is really going on with the Vatican?
Perhaps the Vatican is on to something in being finally environmental aware to state it as one of the new seven "contemporary" sins being identified to add on to the Seven Deadly Sins. Don't ask me why they won't say it as an "irresponsibility" to add to environmental degradation.
I love some of the temporal punishments for the Seven Deadly Sins which could be considered to be applied to sinners of the new sin of enviromental degradation.
For those sinners who burn tracts of forests for golf courses and amusement parks, we can smother them in fire and brimstone. This punishment was for "lust" originally, but if we look at it as cremation, it would be more environmental friendly - no land taken up for human bodies, and as ash, recycled back into nature.
Or, we can throw sinner who kill animals in the wild or at home, including newts and goldfishes in snake pits. This punishment for "sloth" would be good and better over fines or short jail terms.
For those sinners who wantonly pollute rivers and lakes, we can put them in freezing water. Time to used this original punishment for "envy" useful again.
Of course, those sinners who live in sloth at home and in the office giving plenty of co-habitation to coachroaches and rats, should be made to eat rats, toads and poisonous snakes to make the punishment for "gluttony" useful again.
Declaring something sinful is not enough, wheter mortal, venial or environmental. There must be also temporal punishment as effective deterrences, no?
I just hope our own ulema don't get this idea to identify new "transgressions" from the Vatican's new listing of seven additional sins.
It is interesting that apart from the environment, the Vatican also listed as a sin, cloning as well as genetic engineering "manipulating" the DNA. Even the Iranian ayotallahs allow for stem-cell research, including on human embryos.
Since I'm not a scientist in the DNA field, and I don't throw around rubbbish indiscriminately, at least I am not in danger of losing my mortal soul if I don't repent for what I've done by according to the Vatican's criteria.
God help us all. We have to deal with enough transgressions by our fellow Muslims against us, and the interesting punishments some meted out (stonings, beheadings, hangings) for what they deem to be transgressions.
We don't need our clergy/ulema to tell us what are new sins/transgressions they came out with. We need to look at their sins/transgressions for the things they do and said to us, and claiming it to be in the name of God and for God. Thanks and regards
|
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.
| 12.318182 | 0.477273 | 0.522727 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/eboo_patel/2008/03/whos_talking_about_religion.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031119id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/eboo_patel/2008/03/whos_talking_about_religion.html
|
Who's Talking About Religion?
|
2008031119
|
People tell me all the time that theyâre afraid to talk about religion â they donât have the knowledge, they donât have the language, they donât have the courage.
Just remember, as the political philosopher Michael Sandel once observed, âFundamentalists rush in where liberals fear to tread.â
A few years ago, I taught a student from a liberal arts college in Colorado named Kristin. She had grown up in a strong Christian family, but told me she stopped going to church in college and no longer calls herself a Christian. I asked her if she still found solace in the Bible, if she occasionally hummed Christian hymns, if she was still inspired by the words of Christian preachers. She answered yes to all of these questions. âI donât understand,â I said. âIf all of that is true, why do you not want to call yourself a Christian now?â
Kristin told me that an official from an organization in Colorado Springs came to speak at her college on Christianity when she was a first-year student. He said that Christians believe women should be subservient to men; that people of other faiths, especially Muslims, are wicked; and that professors who teach courses applying philosophical and intellectual frameworks to Christianity should be avoided because they will just dilute your faith. One group of students in the room excitedly gathered around this man. They wore the label âChristianâ on campus. The other group slunk away and scattered.
Reflecting on this, Kristin told me: âI donât want to be subservient because of my gender, I donât want to hate anybody because of their faith and I donât want to put my mind on hold because of my beliefs. If thatâs what being a Christian is about, count me out,â she said.
The more I talked to Kristin, the more I realized that everything she learned about Christianity growing up focused on how to speak and act in church. She knew about the rituals of her own Protestant denomination, but her education about religion never related her faith to the world. Kristin had only a private language of faith. When she went off to college and was confronted by one particular public language of faith â meaning how faith related to the broader issues in the world, not just issues in her personal life and her hometown church â Kristin had no knowledge to challenge what she was being told about the relationship between faith and gender, Christianity and other religions, or religion and reason.
Perhaps the leaders of Kristinâs church intentionally offered a religious education that was relevant only within the walls of the faith community. Perhaps they did this out of some sort of sense that faith is only a private affair, a connection between the believer, the church and the Creator.
If so, they made a terrible mistake. By not addressing the public dimensions of faith, they effectively forfeited that dimension and that discourse to a group of people who were willing to talk about it â a group that happened to have an extremely narrow view on that subject. In the absence of alternative perspectives, Kristin was left to believe that Christianity only had a right wing understanding of gender equality, religious diversity and reason. She was presented with a false choice: Christianity on the one hand, or progressive ideas and intellectual growth on the other. And even though she still felt spiritually nourished by Christianity, she had given up on it as a tradition that could guide and support her as she made her way in the world.
Kristinâs church leaders failed her, they failed their religion, and they failed their democracy.
And if what Iâm hearing out there is true, that type of failure is happening all the 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.
| 16 | 0.568182 | 0.704545 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/william_gumede/2008/03/wests_lack_of_urgency_in_midea.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031119id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/william_gumede/2008/03/wests_lack_of_urgency_in_midea.html
|
West's Lack of Urgency in Mideast Shameful
|
2008031119
|
The Current Discussion: With the Israeli re-invasion of Gaza, it's clear that the "Annapolis Peace Process" is collapsing. Does it matter? Who's to blame?
The lack of urgency by the West to act more resolutely to end the carnage in the Gaza is shameful. The UN Security Council is depressingly impotent. It is splitting hairs over the text to describe Israelâs spectacularly disproportional military attacks to respond to rocket attacks from Gaza. The Israeli blockade of the entire Gaza population, which is essentially collective punishment of all Palestinians for the actions of a few Hamas militants and their leaders, cannot be right. Israeli use of military tanks to bomb Hamas out of power once and for all will not only worsen the already terrible humanitarian crisis, but it will increase Palestinian bitterness.
The truth is, a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict must include the security and well-being of the Palestinian people as well as that of the Israelis, not only the one or the other. The U.S. will have to bring a greater degree of fairness to Israeli-Arab conflict diplomacy. Ultimately, U.S. President George Bushâs open bias in favor of Israel, rather than acting as an impartial mediator in the conflict, is not going to bring the end of the Israeli-Palestine conflict, as he predicted during the Annapolis Peace Process. U.S. impartiality will only undermine its own credibility, and thus its power to mediate in conflicts, whether the Israeli-Palestine one or others elsewhere.
Mediators are ineffective unless they are credible. Without that credibility, it has hard to imagine how the U.S. will be able to protect its interests abroad or, even its friendsâ interests for that matter. An important element of friendship is the ability to criticize oneâs friends when they act in ways that endanger themselves. The U.S. friendship with Israel must include criticizing those Israeli actions that are patently wrong, those that endanger not only othersâ, but its own, security.
U.S. Senator Barack Obama recently said, quite correctly, that being pro-Israel cannot mean adopting the hard-line policies of the Likud, which the Bush administration appears to have done. But the West must act with the same vigour it did a decade ago to stop Serbiaâs excessive revenge attacks against Albanian rebels in Kosovo. Each brutal Israeli military attack, and continuing inaction by the West and especially the U.S., chips away Palestinian confidence in peace negotiations.
|
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.
| 14.090909 | 0.30303 | 0.30303 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031001617.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031001617.html
|
Studies Suggest There's An Art to Getting Older
|
2008031119
|
In the Greenbelt Community Center, 25 elders sit in a circle, watching professional storyteller Candace Wolf. She moves around the circle, smiling, giving someone's shoulder a gentle squeeze, making eye contact. The artist, on the faculty of the nonprofit Bethesda-based Arts for the Aging (AFTA), enlists the group's help in creating a story, based on a silly photo she has passed around of a stocky older couple arm-wrestling.
Most of her listeners seem engaged, going along with the gag.
"Why are they wrestling?" Wolf asks.
"He wants to go out to a bar, but she won't let him," one woman suggests.
"She's smarter than he is, too," says another. A man in the circle rolls his eyes.
"Why is he so strong?" Wolf asks.
"Used to work on the railroad," offers another woman.
Before long, a narrative has been spun, with threads offered by participants -- most of them people with dementia or other cognitive problems -- and woven by Wolf. She has adapted her storytelling workshops to this audience because studies suggest that making art, or even listening to music or viewing paintings, supports physical, mental and emotional well-being and eases some symptoms of illness, including dementia.
The idea is gaining traction.
In 2006, artists, policymakers and aging experts held the first-ever national conference on the arts and aging in Newark. Early this year attendance at two "webinars" on creativity and aging, hosted by the National Council on Aging, topped 100, exceeding the organizers' expectations. New York announced a $1 million initiative to connect 57 of the city's arts and cultural organizations to 150 senior centers. And December's move to the District of the National Center for Creative Aging, founded in New York in 2001, promises closer ties with such institutions as George Washington University and the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA).
The movement was bolstered in 2006 by preliminary findings from the federally funded Creativity and Aging Study, suggesting that participating in an arts program may have health benefits for older people.
"We needed this kind of data desperately to prove what we've observed over the years," said Paula Terry, director of the NEA's AccessAbility office, which helps make the arts accessible to veterans, the elderly, the institutionalized and those with disabilities.
|
In the Greenbelt Community Center, 25 elders sit in a circle, watching professional storyteller Candace Wolf. She moves around the circle, smiling, giving someone's shoulder a gentle squeeze, making eye contact. The artist, on the faculty of the nonprofit Bethesda-based Arts for the Aging (AFTA),...
| 7.933333 | 0.983333 | 58.016667 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/03/10/DI2008031002217.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/03/10/DI2008031002217.html
|
Drinking Water Contamination
|
2008031119
|
But the presence of so many prescription drugs and over-the-counter medicines like acetaminophen and ibuprofen in so much of the drinking water supply is heightening worries among scientists of long-term consequences to human health.
Barbara S. Minsker, professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering and director of the Hydrology Group at the University of Illinois, was online Tuesday, March 11, 10:45 a.m. ET to discuss the investigation and consumer concerns about health risks.
Barbara S. Minsker: Hello, this is Barbara Minsker at University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. I look forward to your questions.
Newport News, Va.: Professor Minsker, I have two questions.
First, do you think the popular news stories about this are blowing it out of proportion? Yesterday morning I saw CNN online running huge headlines on how the U.S.'s drinking water is contaminated with all these chemicals. Only when I clicked on the article and read past the summary paragraph did I see that the traces are infinitesimally slight, and that this isn't a new or sudden situation. Most other news stories I've seen (including the Post's) are about the same. Frankly, it seems like this almost sensationalistic journalism will only encourage the public to buy more bottled water -- which is usually the exact same water, just in a less environmentally-friendly package.
Second, do you know of any reports of allergic or adverse reactions to these traces of drugs in our water? I know that many people are allergic to certain medicines, so it seems like allergic reactions after drinking contaminated water would be a logical concern. If not, are the concentrations just too low to trigger a reaction? (And if the concentrations are that low, are they really enough that I or any other reasonably healthy person needs to be concerned?)
Barbara S. Minsker: The issue of pharmaceuticals in drinking water has been known for some time - I've certainly heard about it for several years - and most likely led to this more widespread study. The levels are so low that no one knows whether they are harmful or not, and more study on the human health effects is certainly needed. I have not heard of any reports of allergic reactions to the water, but it would be difficult to separate them from day-to-day exposure we get from many other chemicals in our lives, through food, household chemical use, etc.
Chicago, Ill.: So we've learned the bad news, but the AP story doesn't offer any current solutions...Are ALL bottled waters unsafe as well?The story mentions the well-known bottled waters that are city water packaged in plastic containers as not being safe alternatives, so what, if any, options are there?
Barbara S. Minsker: Most of our water supplies (including bottled water) draw from water that is continually recirculated across large areas of the country and ultimately the planet through atmospheric transport (e.g., PCBs have been found in polar bears, and they sure didn't get there from direct exposure). The only exception would be deep aquifers from ancient sources, but even those can get mixed with other waters when wells are drilled or during treatment and distribution/bottling. I don't think there is any way to avoid this issue until more research is done to figure out where the chemicals are coming from, what their effects are, and how they can be removed.
Arlington, Va.: Okay, so if one is going to err on the side of caution and avoid drinking tapwater, what are the alternatives? Much bottled water will have the same issues, as will tapwater run through home purifiers such as Brita.
Barbara S. Minsker: There is no evidence that home purifiers will remove these contaminants. I asked one of my colleagues who is a drinking water treatment expert (Chuck Haas, Drexel University) about removal and he thinks reverse osmosis systems would be the only effective approach for broad spectrum removal, but they're relatively uncommon (and not available in home form, as far as I know).
Ft. Washington, Md. : How did the medications get into or watr supply?
Barbara S. Minsker: The medications could get directly into our water supply either by people directly flushing medicines or through their bodies the old fashioned way! The wastewater is treated and usually discharged to surface water (rivers, lakes), where downstream it enters other water supplies. The treatments have not been designed to remove pharmaceuticals, although I'm sure we will see moves to make that happen. More indirect exposure paths also could exist, such as landfills with medications leaking into groundwater supplies, but given how widespread the chemicals are being found, this seems unlikely to be the primary source.
Washington, D.C.: Does boiling water have any affect on the drugs-in-water problem?
Barbara S. Minsker: Seems unlikely, since they are neither volatile chemicals (that would vaporize when heated) nor biological organisms (that would be killed when boiled).
Fairfax, Va.: I have to wonder about the potential for these contaminants to impact those of us with chronic health problems. I have celiac disorder, an autoimmune condition that affects the digestive system dramatically. I cannot have gluten, which may not be found in the water supply - but I react violently to some of the drugs mentioned as widely present in the water, such as naproxen sodium. I continue to have digestive difficulties in spite of rigorous avoidance of gluten; is it worth considering whether the water supply might be a source of trouble for me?
Barbara S. Minsker: Hard to say whether these low levels would make a difference in your case or not. You could do an experiment by changing your water supply for a few weeks and seeing if it makes a difference. See if you can find a bottled water that comes from a relatively untouched source. Of course, whether or not you can believe the claims on the bottle is an open question - I have heard that many of the bottled water companies just treat tap water with ozone to remove the chlorine taste and then sell it. I have had immune system problems in the past, stemming from food allergies, and found that the chlorine in tap water gave me stomach aches - fortunately a simple home filter removes that.
Arlington, Va.: While small concentrations of pharmaceuticals may not be harmful to humans in the short term, what about fish and other aquatic life in the rivers?
Barbara S. Minsker: No one knows about the aquatic life either, as far as I know. One question is always whether the chemicals bioaccumulate, meaning that they are absorbed into fat tissue and in that way increase in organisms over time. Chemicals like PCB act in this way and can be a serious concern for mammals (like us!) since the chemicals can concentrate in milk. I haven't checked on these chemicals to see if they are bioaccumulators or not.
Alexandria, Va.: I'd guess that a lot of people, most people, are going to want to blame the water company for not ensuring our safety, and they certainly have to accept part of the blame.
But if I take an ibuprofen or two for a sore back, and that ends up in the water supply (eventually), shouldn't we be looking at the pharmaceutical companies to make drugs that are more completely absorbed? If I take a 200 mg capsule of ibuprofen how much am I passing along for it to be measurable in the water supply?
Barbara S. Minsker: That's a good question. I don't know how much gets absorbed vs passed on, but I'm sure the pharmaceutical companies do know and calculate dosages accordingly. One way around it could be a more direct drug delivery mechanism into the bloodstream, like shots, but that's harder for consumers to do (and more unpleasant!), or some of the newer skin patch or sub-dermal delivery.
New York: The "spin" this morning is that these drugs are overwhelmingly waste from individual users. I suppose it's just a coincidence the concentrations are so high in Northen New Jersey, the home to America's pharmaceutical industry? Or, is this just the media "overwriting" the science to serve its advertisers?
Barbara S. Minsker: I don't see how anyone could know that it's primarily waste from individual users, although it certainly has to be a contributor. I hadn't read that the concentrations were higher in northern NJ - that would be an interesting one to tackle, but really what is needed is an intensive research effort to identify the key sources. I'm leading an effort called the WATERS Network (http://watersnet.org), sponsored by the National Science Foundation, which is proposing that we deploy a network of observatories around the country to study water systems as large scale coupled human and natural systems, using emerging sensors and information technology. We're interested in exactly this type of question, if we can get support from Congress to build the network.
Boston, Mass.: What is the alternative?Do we need to start drinking bottled water instead of tap water?
Is the bottled water free of comtamination with medicinal drugs?
Barbara S. Minsker: No, there is no guarantee. Many of the bottled water companies just re-treat tap water to remove the chlorine and then sell it. There are far fewer regulations on bottled water and I doubt that their claims for "pure" sources are ever checked. Even pure sources (e.g., from old underground sources) could get mixed with newer water when wells are dug or during treatment or bottling.
Do on-the-spigot water filters do anything for this problem?
Barbara S. Minsker: I hear from my colleagues who study water treatment that they do not.
Alexandria, Va.: I'm assuming most of these trace levels is due to excreting them from our bodies as opposed to dumping pills down the toilet. True?
Barbara S. Minsker: That seems likely, but no one knows for sure without further study. We used to be told that flushing was the safest way to dispose of medications so that children wouldn't eat them out of the garbage, so some people may still be flushing.
San Francisco, Calif.: Can pharmaceutical contaminants be eliminated in the home by reverse osmosis filtration?
Barbara S. Minsker: I've never heard of reverse osmosis systems being available for home use, but if they were then this might be an effective approach.
Washington, D.C.: So is bottled water the only option for those of us who are now wary of the contaminants in the municipal supply? But doesn't a lot of bottled water come from municipal sources as well? Is the Poland Springs/Dasani/etc., purifying process any better to use? Thanks!
Barbara S. Minsker: Yes, bottled water often comes from municipal sources and it's hard to know whether their claims of "pure" sources are true or not. Even deep aquifers can get contaminated when wells are installed or during distribution of treatment, though. Also bottled water companies are less regulated than municipal supplies.
Arcata, Calif.: I am a psychiatrist from California, and I believe that 90-plus percent of drug traces in our water supply are because of unused drugs that are flushed away. There needs to be a national program telling people how to get rid of unused or outdated drugs responsibly. I advocate returning them to the pharmacy who would return them to the manufacturer for disposal, and that this cost should be factored into the drug price.
Barbara S. Minsker: We don't have enough data to know whether they're coming from direct flushing or through humans, but I think your suggestion is an excellent one while we study the sources in more detail.
Rockville, Md.: Parts per trillion? As far as that goes, they might as well talk about astrology or ghosts. I will never worry about a part per trillion. Unless it is radioactive, of course.
Barbara S. Minsker: It is an extremely low level and we really don't know what, if any, human health effects there are at such low levels. It's also very difficult and expensive to do toxicological (lab studies on rats or mice) or epidemiological (surveying humans) studies for such low levels, since you need very large samples of rats/humans to control for natural variability in responses.
Arlington, Va.: Obviously, this issue if of vital concern to the entire population. But, do you have any additional warnings or advice for pregnant women?
Barbara S. Minsker: I have two young children and when I was pregnant I did try to avoid as many chemicals as I could by buying organic food, e.g., just to be safe. It's really a personal choice how far you want to take it, since it's not known whether the pharmaceuticals have any effect or not. The major question is whether you can avoid it, and whether bottled waters that say they are from "pure" ancient sources really are, and have not been contaminated along the way. E.g., I believe there can be some health effects from the plastic in the bottles too, so it's possible it just can't be avoided. If you live in an area that takes its water from a deep aquifer, you certainly would have less concerns from pharmaceuticals, but there are naturally occurring contaminants even there (e.g., arsenic in some places). Not sure you can win on completely avoiding low levels of contaminant exposure in our society, regardless of what you do, so best not to lose sleep over it!
Silver Spring, Md.: Other than possibly households with small children in them (who might be tempted to rumage through waste baskets), is there any reason anyone should be flushing their old meds into the water system rather than simply throwing them out? It wastes water, for one thing. I don't get why people would do that.
Barbara S. Minsker: I believe the advice to flush medications did come from concerns about young children eating them. That advice has now been changed, but some people may not have heard and may still flush them. However, some of the chemicals may come through people's bodies who take the medications, not through flushing. There need to be studies to figure out where it's coming from, since that is harder to address.
Palo Alto, Calif. : Apologies in advance for a dumb question: How do we get our local municipal water districts to test water, report to the community, take remedial action and keep on top of this shocking situation?
Barbara S. Minsker: I'm sure the water companies are already hearing from people and will be taking steps to try to modify their treatment systems to remove the contaminants.
Fort Washington, Md.: Simple question since I drink about 3 quarts of water a day not including tea, coffee, etc., should I start drinking distilled water?
Barbara S. Minsker: Distilled water tastes awful, and I don't know whether it removes these chemicals or not.
Barbara S. Minsker: Thanks everyone for your questions, and I have to go now. The best thing you can do is encourage Congress to invest in more water research to better understand how chemicals are moving through our environment and affecting our water supplies. Water research has been woefully underfunded for many years, despite increasing problems with both amount and quality of water in the environment and in our taps. The WATERS Network (http://watersnet.org) is proposing a national network of observatories to study exactly this sort of large-scale problem using emerging sensors and information technology. We just released our draft science, education, and design strategy document on our web site and it is open for public comment on an online blog. Please help us build support to better understand and manage our water systems for the future.
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.
|
Barbara S. Minsker, professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering and director of the Hydrology Group at the University of Illinois, discusses the Associated Press investigation into pharmaceuticals and other chemicals leaking into the water supply of 24 states, and the health risks.
| 67.717391 | 0.891304 | 11.326087 |
high
|
medium
|
extractive
|
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/03/11/hillary_clintons_spitzer_probl_1.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031119id_/http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/03/11/hillary_clintons_spitzer_probl_1.html
|
Hillary Clinton's Spitzer Problem
|
2008031119
|
New York Governor Eliot Spitzer addresses the media with his wife Silda Wall Spitzer at his office in New York, March 10, 2008. (Reuters.)
By Peter Baker For a supporter, New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer sure hasn't done Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton any favors lately.
After all, it was Spitzer who in the view of her advisers started the slide that led her to where she is today, fighting from behind for the Democratic presidential nomination. A question about his proposal to let illegal immigrants get driver's licenses tripped her up in a debate at the end of October and ended 10 months of unquestioned dominance in the nomination race.
Now, his apparent involvement with a prostitution ring has not only distracted from her efforts to take down the front-runner, Sen. Barack Obama, it has brought back unhelpful memories of her own husband's dalliances in office. There on cable television again were pictures of Bill Clinton hugging Monica Lewinsky. And the image of Spitzer's wife standing painfully by his side while he acknowledged unspecified wrongdoing could not help but remind some viewers, and voters, of Hillary Clinton's own stand-by-her-man moment.
How this will all play out remains unclear, of course. Spitzer chose not to step down yesterday in the face of some pretty sordid allegations, much as Bill Clinton resisted calls for his resignation in 1998 after news of his trysts with the onetime White House intern, which can only guarantee that the story will live on for a while, particularly in the hungry vortex of cable television, talk radio and the Internet. It may be that most voters long ago discounted Bill Clinton's infidelities when making their minds up about his wife's qualifications for president. It may be that voters conclude that Spitzer's indiscretions have nothing at all to do with whether Hillary Clinton can effectively serve as president. And it may be that Spitzer ultimately does resign, allowing the political dialogue to move on.
Yet this certainly is not the way Clinton's strategists would have mapped out this week on the campaign trail. They want voters to be thinking about that 3 a.m. phone call in terms of who is ready to handle a crisis in the White House, not in terms of where an unfaithful husband might be catting around town. And, sure enough, the late-night comedians wasted little time linking the Spitzer case to the Clintons. Jay Leno joked last night that Spitzer's scandal "means Hillary Clinton is now only the second angriest woman in the state of New York." David Letterman offered a Top 10 List of excuses Spitzer might cite, including the number one excuse: "I thought Bill Clinton legalized this years ago."
Hillary Clinton was asked about the case late yesterday and, predictably enough, tried to brush it off without comment. "I obviously send my best wishes to the governor and his family," she told reporters. Still, it is hard to imagine that will be the last time she is asked about it. She could hardly want to be there on camera, once again being asked to account for yet another man in her life who can't live up to his marriage vows. And what will Bill Clinton say if and when he is asked to comment?
Spitzer has been a bad-luck charm for Hillary Clinton to this point. His illegal immigrant driver's license proposal arguably became the first time she was thrown off her stride in this campaign. Fairly or not, her muddled answer at a debate in Philadelphia about whether she supported it or not played into a narrative promoted by her opponents that she is more about calculation than principle. That led to a bad patch for her that lasted all the way through the Iowa caucuses. Her advisers pinpoint that inartful two-minute answer as the moment when the race turned.
Now Spitzer may throw her off stride again at a moment she needs to keep her momentum going. And on top of that, even if he does spare her by resigning soon, that has a cost too -- one fewer superdelegate for her at the convention.
Posted at 11:08 AM ET on Mar 11, 2008 | Category: Morning Cheat Sheet Share This: Technorati | Tag in Del.icio.us | Digg This
I believe the current (for now) Lt. Gov. of New York is a staunch Hillary DIANE Clinton supporter too ; )
Posted by: JakeD | March 11, 2008 11:20 AM
Can't it also be a an eventual plus for Hillary? I'm not saying for the presidential, but if she loses the nomination to Barack, then she's still the junior senator from NY, with Schumer the senior senator and also the DSCC chair.
If Barack maintains enough of a pledged delegate lead, even with PA and re-votes in FL and MI, and goes onto November, then Hillary will most likely look at how she could become part of the Senate leadership.
That's where the Spitzer scandal could help Hillary. Schumer wants to be governor of NY. If Spitzer ends up resigning, Schumer could end up running in 2010 instead of for re-election to the Senate. That would mean that Hillary becomes the senior senator in NY.
Look at the Senate leadership. Reid, Durbin, Murray, Dorgan, and Schumer are all their states' senior Democrats. Seems to me that junior senators don't get into leadership (which wouldn't bode well for Rockefeller or Kerry -- examples of two longtime senators who are junior to even more long-term senators in Byrd and Kennedy).
Posted by: ericp331 | March 11, 2008 11:22 AM
The focus on Spitzer's legal problems as they might relate to the presidential race is wrong. Such topics should be our focus to use against Republicans in November, not against Democrats. At least it's coming out now, though, and not near the election. We can be sure that the good stuff against McCain is being saved for an October surprise like we used in 2000. -Trevor Wynne Washington, DC
Posted by: trevorwynnewhitehouse | March 11, 2008 11:24 AM
Hillary does not have a "Spitzer" problem.
Hillary has proven she can win big in the big states that are the must wins for the Dems in November.
Obama has proven himself UNELECTABLE.
Posted by: TAH1 | March 11, 2008 11:27 AM
One can only wonder if Gov. Spitzer is going to become the Clinton campaign's scapegoat. This article somehow seems to tie the Governor with Sen. Clinton's muffed answer in the debates, which could hardly be the case. Sen. Clinton needs to stand on her own two feet, if possible, when responding to questions, and to have viable answers available for questions without blaming others for her own inadequacies. Both of these politicos have stumbled on the illegals question, and have been broadly accompanied by the rest of the candidates, but NOT by the public, which seems to have better sense than the fools it elects to represent it. For the number of candidates who initially were in the campaign, our politics have brought forward a crop of candidates all across the board which has been the weakest in the past 150 years of American Presidential politics, bowing and scraping to what they suggest is the popular will while showing a mass lack of good common sense and a strong disconnection with the genuine interests of the American people. ALL branches of our government now are extremely weak and unfit to serve in the capacities, and this is reflected in the disregard shown for them all in every poll that is taken. This MUST reflect a basic flaw in our candidate selection process, and this flaw is almost certainly related to campaign financing and the over-representation of monied interests in the process. We change, or we fall as a nation. It's as simple as that.
Posted by: bong_jamesbong2001 | March 11, 2008 11:31 AM
The ugly attempt in this post to smear Hillary Clinton by linking her to the Spitzer episode is typical of a punditry that knows no limits to its destructive, sexist, misogynist assaults on the first serious female candidate for the presidency. Republicans and Obama supporters across the internet will be having a field day amplifying this trash in their comments on every message board.
Posted by: ichief | March 11, 2008 11:35 AM
Hillary should come out swinging on this one, for, as James Carville said yesterday, this is clearly a Republican plot to discredit a prominent Hillary supporter, with FBI cooperation. Nothing more than a "vast right wing conspiracy," she should say, and stand firmly behind yet another unfaithful husband.
Posted by: gene9 | March 11, 2008 11:43 AM
It is unfair to tie this scandal to HRC. The problem though is that these scandals turn to dominate news and the governor's line of work to the point where we get nothing done. Why don't we just move on. Let's turn the page with Obama and write a new chapter. Its time to move on. The Clintons will continue distracting us and fighting with the GOP and we will never get anything done. Its time to move on.
Posted by: bobor1 | March 11, 2008 11:46 AM
Birds of the same feather flock together.
Dems and Republicans are no different. Power corrupts so we must set term limits to the Oval Office, including "term limits to the same couple".
You can't blame the Clintons for taking the White House as their permanence home and the furniture inside.
If it's not a theft of $190,000 of White House furniture, this means Hillary could not manage moving out of the White House. How can Hillary manage and never mind lead the nation?
Now Mrs. Spitzer is qualified to run for the White House. You have to think positively.
Posted by: dummy4peace | March 11, 2008 11:47 AM
Eliot Spitzer's story reminds us all of the sleaze and slime during the Clinton's years. We expect the same old slime and sleaze again in the White House with Bill Clinton as the de facto President. Let us all remind voters in all the remaining primaries of the dangers of voting for the Clinton's. This is something that is going to happen again. Hillary calls it the right wing conspiracy. Voters should be reminded of the ugliness, slime and sleaze of the Clinton years. Voters should be reminded of thugs and criminal who rented the Lincoln bedroom in the Whitehouse. Enough of this dirt. We need a fresh start with Obama. We need a breath of fresh air.
Posted by: sbgamatt | March 11, 2008 11:48 AM
Only in the mind of Peter Baker, one can associate this to Hillary Clinton's campaign. The public long ago voted for her knowing all about her past. The ones that still want to punish her for the behavior of her husband are with Obama or somebody else.
Posted by: jcarlosluna | March 11, 2008 11:55 AM
Do I see another tear welling up? I wish the slimy dirt carrying Clintons would go home and pull down their shades.
Posted by: shacktoe | March 11, 2008 11:56 AM
Obama's muslim mother and father:
1. Mother married a muslim man who already had multiple wives in Kenya 2. Mother married a second muslim man to help bring up her "only child" after first husband left her 3. Mother moved her "only child" to Indonesia to provide a muslim environment and life style for her only child. Indonesia is the largest muslim country in the world and site of "Bali bombing". Indonesia is a terrorist hot bed. 4. Obama has no record of participating in Christian church activities in his early age 5. Obama has no record of participating in Christian church during college years. 6. Obama has no record of church activities after his graduation 7. Obama started church activities after he decided to run for public office and started participating in voter sign up activities. His church leader is friend with Farrahkhan 8. Obama's relation with Farrahkhan is unknown at this time
Obama can not win a general election.
Posted by: SeedofChange | March 11, 2008 11:58 AM
Hillary cannot win now, even if she were to win the nomination. In the same way that Senator Kerry was connected by Republicans (to bring out the reactionary right) to the Massachusetts Supreme Court decision to recognize the right of gay persons to marry, Senator Clinton will be connected to Governor Spitzer's indescretion. And it will be code-worded. The Republicans will continually talk about the "character issue" with respect to Senator Clinton and allow the listener to fill in the blanks, connecting her with President Clinton's indescretion with Ms. Lewinsky as well as Governor Spitzer's alleged connection with a prostitute.
Senator Obama will _not_ be a fresh start. Republican campaigns are filled with innuendo and they'll try to link Senator Obama with Muslim extremism, Malcolm X and the Black Panthers, and anything else they can -- all the while using code words to indicate their racist stance. And this is what Senator Clinton has been trying to telegraph to the Obama campaign all along.
I believe that, in light of Governor Spitzer's ill-timed indescretion (or the timing of the investigation), Senator Clinton will never be able to fully deflect "character issue" attacks no matter how skilled she is. And, were Obama chosen to lead the ticket, he'll need Senator Clinton's help in deflecting attacks aimed at him.
Posted by: mhollis55 | March 11, 2008 11:59 AM
The only tie to Hillary that should be seen is her denouncing and rejecting him, which isn't happening. Why the double standard? :p
Posted by: Charlene-K | March 11, 2008 11:59 AM
TAH1. Which is it? Obama is unelectable because he's a BLACK MAN and Hillary is a WHITE WOMAN, or Obama is good enough to be my VP...the person capable and ready to be President if Hillary gets run over by a bus on DAY ONE? The more she talks, the more desperate, deceitful and untrustworthy she reveals herself to be.
Posted by: x32792 | March 11, 2008 11:59 AM
I do not think it is unfair to tie Clinton to this or for her and Bill to be asked to comment. He is a superdelegate that is supporting them. It does speak of the kind of people they attract. Birds of a feather flock together!! I hope the press does not let her get away with that comment, she needs to properly answer. She should also REJECT HIS SUPPORT!!!!!
Posted by: melissawoodsnp | March 11, 2008 12:00 PM
Yet another reason why it is time for a woman to take over the presidency.
Posted by: jdsinillinois | March 11, 2008 12:00 PM
James Carville is right. This is a vast Republican conspiracy to take down a prominent governor and Clinton supporter. Did the FBI repeatedly drug Governor Spitzer, then convince him to solicit escorts over the 'phone on multiple occasions, arrange rather hefty financial payments and coordinate their travel plans? Is the same unit that got Lewinsky her unpaid gig at the White House and loaned her money to buy pizza? Did they appoint New Jersey's homeland security coordinator to the McGreevey administration? Maybe it's not just Democrats: could this same FBI team have convinced Senator Vitter to repeatedly dial the DC Madam? Did they entrap Senator Craig in Minnesota?
Posted by: InspectorOh | March 11, 2008 12:04 PM
Wow, sbgamatt. Insightful comments. I'd forgotten that Bill Clinton was the only politician who was caught doing something sleazy and slimy recently. Of course.
In that light, I'm happy to clear up some misconceptions:
Mark Foley, head of the caucus for missing and exploited children, was NOT caught sending text messages to underage congressional pages looking for measurements of their sexual organs. David Vitter, who ran his campaign around family values, did NOT show up in the D.C. Madam's phonebook. Larry Craig, who spent a large part of his career restricting gay rights, is clearly not gay at all, and does not seek sex in public restrooms, so we can forget about that one as well.
Then, of course, there's the non-sexual Republican scandals that never happened: Renzi and Stevens and their FBI investigations are, of course, purely fictional. And of course, everybody's favorite, Jack Abramoff, we all know he's merely a character in J.K. Rowling's books.
Now we all know the truth. All sleaze comes from the Clintons.
Posted by: nathan.h.abbott | March 11, 2008 12:04 PM
To say that Spitzer is somehow a problem for HRC is, quite simply, absurd. Will it be more of a problem when an even more vocal supporter, an African American to boot, assumes office?
Posted by: johnvirginia881 | March 11, 2008 12:09 PM
How does Hillary combat the suspicion that "she is more about calculation than principle" when it comes to her refusal to comment on the Spitzer case? Whether or not Hillary joins the crowd calling for his resignation, will she demand his resignation as a superdelegate?
Will Bill be asked about all of this? And as an aspiring co-President, will he answer?
Posted by: FirstMouse | March 11, 2008 12:09 PM
If congressman Vitter isn't resigning because of a hooker connection, why should Spitzer? Maybe we should reevaluate these puritanical laws that are obviously anti-free market?
Posted by: larryecoffey | March 11, 2008 12:11 PM
My comments aside, I am backing Obama. I'm just not naive enough to believe his Teflon coating won't wear off within a few years of being elected.
With apologies to the few in Washington who are the exeption to this rule, sleaze and slime are endemic to politics. I get sick of hearing act like Slick Willy was the first to use his power to get BJ.
Seriously, is anyone actually shocked by this? A politician using prostitutes--stop the presses!
When are we going to get over our faux-puritanism? How long can we exist as a society in which pop culture and advertising push scantily-clad underage women down our throats while we gasp and drop our monacles whenever anyone in the public eye actually gets caught having sex?
I'm not saying we should let Spitzer off the hook here, but damn... this is news?
Posted by: nathan.h.abbott | March 11, 2008 12:12 PM
"Yet another reason why it is time for a woman to take over the presidency." Huh? How is Spitzer's wandering winky a reason to have a female president? The man is obviously a moral hypocrite, but how does this make gender the new litmus test? We still have all the old ones; gay marriage, stem cell research, race, religion, do you love Jesus and abortion...all still great "wedge issues."
Posted by: x32792 | March 11, 2008 12:14 PM
"Hillary has proven she can win big in the big states that are the must wins for the Dems in November. Obama has proven himself UNELECTABLE."
This is some of the worst rhetoric I've heard this whole campaign. According to this sort of so-called "logic," only the states where Hillary can win ...matter, and the other 39 states do not. Obama has won twice as many states as Hillary and is winning in delegates and in popular votes. This makes the "Obama is unelectable" meme as ridiculous as the "Obama is a muslim who won't answer the phone after midnight" meme.
As regards Spitzer ...He's just another example of the kind of fine choices the Clintons like to surround themselves with. Put him in the same pile with Peter Paul, Norman Hsu, James Levin and David Rosen ...not to forget her favorite paid liar, Howard Wolfson. Yeah, let's bring back the good ol' days of Clintonian scandals ...We haven't had enough of that these past 7 years.
Posted by: alamantra | March 11, 2008 12:15 PM
JakeD: Still on the middle name huh?
Oh how the mighty have fallen!
All of you HRC supports - What say you? Should Silda 'be some Tammy Wynett standing by her man' like HRC?
You can take all of the comfort you'd like in David Patterson....he was already a hill super (not that it will matter)...so she is dn 1! No way around it. Nice reminder of the 'fighter'.
Too bad this story surpassed the renewed scrutiny of her so-called foreign affairs experience.
Posted by: dab23 | March 11, 2008 12:15 PM
Trevor Wynne wrote: "The focus on Spitzer's legal problems as they might relate to the presidential race is wrong."
Sorry to say, but you need to get over yourself and read the specifics of the article. YES, Hillary has a "Spitzer" problem. #1.) Unfortunately, it clearly creates "negative" publicity around one of her highly visible supporters, and reminds the public of Bill Clinton's own infidelity. #2.) He's a Super-Delegate, and a possible resignation removes a super-delegate from Clinton's column in a race where every delegate counts. #3.) She will be asked distracting questions about it by the media for the next few days, and more, as additional details and breaking news develops. Trying to "control" the news cycle is a constant battle for the candidates, and you always want to keep your image in the right context.
News like this is never welcome, but don't become so blind as to realize how the world works and how things relate simply because you don't want it to relate that way. That's just naive.
If Spitzer had endorsed Obama, this would be a story about how its Obama's "problem" (regarding the potential loss of a delegate and support), yet touching on how Clinton will likely want to steer clear of the topic matter in attacks him.
Posted by: washingtonpost | March 11, 2008 12:18 PM
This is news because the same governor who rode to albany on the promise of ethics in state government, and one who personally prosecuted multiple prosecution rings ended up being involved in one.
He has no more mandate and any times that he would spend as governor from now on is wasted time.
As far as how this relates to Clinton - I can't POSSIBLY be the first person to at least think Bill Clinton in relation to what Spitzer did. And that association for better or worse, is something that hillary will have to deal with.
Posted by: perryair | March 11, 2008 12:18 PM
Hillary Clinton can't be blamed for the men who disappoint her. She can, however, be blamed for her pantsuits.
Posted by: listats | March 11, 2008 12:19 PM
Lord knows how many more Spitzers are lurking bbehind the scenes of Hillary's campaign. These are the guys, that will hold high offices in a Clinton whitehouse.These are the guys we will trust our futures, our security with? These are the hypocrites and sycophants that represent the rot - A rot that Sen. Obama is fighting.
Posted by: titindgp | March 11, 2008 12:21 PM
Obama has the popular vote, he has more delegates and will keep more elected delegates through the remaining states and he has won more states. To the person who mistakenly commented he was unelectable....perhaps the facts don't fit your reality but to the MAJORITY of Americans? He fits theirs just fine. Thanks anyway :) As for this affecting Hillary? I would hope that it would not. It has no place in this race though one does have to consider the possibility of Bill Clinton's influence with Hillary and this sad connection of infidelity. He talked her into keeping him after over 20 "stepping outs" so his influence is great. Do we really want to take this chance? In that respect it may hurt her in some manner along with the rantings of women all over the country who made the same decision she did when it came to "Staning by her Man"....regardless of the cost to her own self respect.
Posted by: Bulldoglover100 | March 11, 2008 12:22 PM
Lord knows how many more Spitzers are lurking behind (or in other anatomical locations) re: Hillary herself.
Posted by: JakeD | March 11, 2008 12:25 PM
Bush kills 350,000 in Iraq and gets a free pass from the American public. War criminals are real criminals.
Americans and the American Press is a joke.
Posted by: hhkeller | March 11, 2008 12:30 PM
As a man, I feel sorry for Mrs. Spitzer. Why she would allow herself to be on stage with Gov. Spitzer while he announces wrongdoing is beyond me?!?! Obama should continue to stay above the fray of petty politics, but let some of his surrogates chime in. His surrogates could play up the need to keep any future scandals out of the White House, and point to how distracting this is to the country and the problems we face.
Posted by: ajtiger92 | March 11, 2008 12:31 PM
Hillary's BIG NY Supporter. Her 'SUPERDELEGATE' Spitzer the John.
How close were you to SPITZER Hillary?
It's time you told the truth.
Posted by: PulSamsara | March 11, 2008 12:37 PM
Truman kills 220,000 in Japan (with only two bombs) and gets a free pass from the American public too.
Posted by: JakeD | March 11, 2008 12:38 PM
Lets' ask Billery "show us your Tax return" and also the money $50 million or so, Bill received from Kazahkstan for his foundation, all these people are crooks and cheaters and they are all tied together in one group...
Posted by: pwalterkumar | March 11, 2008 12:41 PM
Lets' ask Billery "show us your Tax return" and also the money $50 million or so, Bill received from Kazahkstan for his foundation, all these people are crooks and cheaters and they are all tied together in one group...
Posted by: pwalterkumar | March 11, 2008 12:41 PM
You don't need a pundit to write this. First thoughts in my mind when I heard this was Bill Clinton. Are you kidding me? Anytime I see the "I am sorry" speech with wife standing by reminds me of the Clintons. I was reminded of that when the NJ governor gave his too. How will that play in the mind of voters? I have no clue. I know it does not help Hillary! If he stays it should help Barack. The GOP will be talking about Spitzer, not Barack, the press will be talking about Spitzer, not Hillary. Both are bad news for Hillary. That's the implications I see. Implication I said, not connection.
Posted by: al_164_1999 | March 11, 2008 12:49 PM
TAH1 are you delusional. Obama has won more states, more popular votes and more delegates, and he's not electable. Please, wake up and smell the cappucino
Posted by: gideon102002 | March 11, 2008 12:52 PM
I think that this is relative to Hillary's campaign because it looks an awful lot like foreshadowing. Another Clinton Administration is certain to contain new scandals of all shapes and sizes. Hillary is the worst hand we could be dealt at this point, with McCain coming in at a close second worse. The sad part is, Obama is actually a wonderful candidate... unfortunately for us most of the nation isn't smarter than a fifth grader and thus cannot recognize this fact.
Posted by: formlessness | March 11, 2008 12:53 PM
. . . Ahh, the titillating glee of a good political sex scandal.
But seriously, even as an Obama supporter, I don't think Spitzer will bring much harm to Clinton. It may help her because if Spitzer resigns then the Lt. Governor of NY, David A Paterson, would (probably) become the Governor and a superdelegate. He is a black man and has already very publicly endorsed Hillary Clinton. I'm sure Clinton could make hay out of that.
State of the horse race (from Wikipedia): --------------------------------------------------- 1st Place: Obama w/1594 delegates, 49.1% popular vote, 31 states
2nd Place: Clinton w/1470 delegates, 47.1% popular vote, 15 states
* Note: winning "big" states hasn't helped Clinton lead the popular vote. This "big state" argument just continues to piss off those of us who live in "small" states. We're ignored year after year by the bi-coastal politicians, but to be dissed by a candidate who wants to be "my president" is insulting and appalling.
Posted by: egc52556 | March 11, 2008 12:56 PM
Where's Bill today? Laying low?
You bring up Obama's (supposed) unelectability -- what number was Bill on the client list?
And, what about the McClatchy News reports about that dirty Wall Street guy the Clintons are tight with -- Ruckles, or something?
Or the Republicans' promise to re-open Whitewater?
Or the Clintons' STILL secret tax returns and prez library papers? And Hillary's college paper from Wellesley -- sealed (after all these years -- why?) and the only student's who is?
Hmmmmm . . . yes, you make a good point about unelectability. The Clintons sure are that -- unelectable!
Posted by: nads1 | March 11, 2008 01:02 PM
Did you mean to say "he is not UN-electable"? If so, please see my next comment.
Hillary would be in the lead if Florida and Michigan were counted. Just wait until all those GOP / Independent McCain voters in the upcoming States re-register just to vote for Hillary DIANE Clinton one time and permanently split the Democratic Party in half ; )
Posted by: JakeD | March 11, 2008 01:04 PM
Hillary's comment is appropriate since she understands the pain of having your personal life exposed because of their public service career.
The superdelegate's vote rests with the gov's office, not with Spitzer himself. I hope that I understand it correctly.
Posted by: cybervote | March 11, 2008 01:08 PM
I think that for Obama and his supporters to un-earth Clintons' marital problems are the worst kind of politics. Obama should focus on the new issues that both Hillary and him have raised, issues that affect our lives. If it is a new scandal about a candidate then we need to know, otherwise, it is just a tabloid tactics.
Posted by: cybervote | March 11, 2008 01:11 PM
Spitzer is just another criminal clinton supporter. It doesn't unfairly color her or smear her - it accurately defines her.
She can rid herself of the criminal element is she so choses - but it is easier and more profitable to keep them, and their money, and blame the attention focused on their criminal activity on the vast right wing conspiracy.
It has worked in the past.
Posted by: VirginiaConservative | March 11, 2008 01:12 PM
Uh. No. Even counting the popular votes in Florida and Michigan (and how you can count the popular votes in Michigan when he wasn't on the ballot because of an agreement is beyond me), Obama still leads in the popular vote if you include Iowa, Nevada, Washington and Maine's popular vote (which has not been released) in the totals (the difference is more than the 19,000 vote "lead" that Clinton has after counting Michigan and Florida), and his lead is larger if you also count the "unpledged" votes in Michigan for Obama. And of course, after tonight, that 19,000 vote "lead" is going to be erased in any event.
Its a "sophist" argument based on careful selection that allows Clinton to generate her only claim of lead.
Posted by: dcraven925 | March 11, 2008 01:17 PM
SeedofChange - You are a liar, and you know it. Obama joined his church at least 8 years before he ever ran for office. He has *no* relationship with Farrakhan, and has publicly rejected *and* denounced him for his racist views.
Posted by: HowardsJohnson | March 11, 2008 01:17 PM
What a B.S. article. Somehow Spitzer = Bill = Hillary. That's patently false and degrades a wonderful candidate for president. If you can't check your prejudice against women then please don't write for a national newspaper, you belong in an alley writing for rats.
Posted by: twotier97 | March 11, 2008 01:20 PM
I like how Spitzer gets caught soliciting prostitutes and it's Obama's fault for "unearthing" the Clinton and Lewinsky scandal.
You Clinton supporters have a dubious sense of logic. And the frank parallel between men of power (Spitzer and Clinton) soliciting sex is so clear that we'd have to wonder about your IQ if it didn't immediately come to mind.
Posted by: bhuang2 | March 11, 2008 01:21 PM
cybervote - You're right that the Governor's position gives him superdelegate status, but his Lt. Governor is also already a superdelegate as a DNC member. So unless the Lt. Governor resigns his DNC position and someone else is appointed, Clinton loses a superdelegate if Spitzer resigns.
Also, as an Obama supporter, I agree that Hillary Clinton should be left out of the Spitzer story. She has nothing to do with his personal failings and should not be unfairly tainted by them.
Posted by: HowardsJohnson | March 11, 2008 01:21 PM
why do the idiotic hillbilly Hillary supporters keep buying into Hillary's attempt to steal the election with her "I won big states" argument. Her argument is BS. The voters she's had in those big states are hard core, solid democrats that aren't voting republican in the fall. Obama has pulled in more independents then her, who most likely would not vote for her in the general. Obama will win the big democratic states in the general.
Posted by: vflex | March 11, 2008 01:22 PM
Questions: Hey... was Ken Starr involved in this some way? Does Monica Spitzer Swallows? Will Mrs. Spitzer run 10 years from now accusing a right-wing conspiracy behind the prosecution of her husband?
Posted by: AB68 | March 11, 2008 01:27 PM
Anyone that thinks they might vote for Hillary should read the chapter on Bill Clinton in Gregg Jackson's book, Conservative Comebacks to Liberal Lies. All FACTS about Bill that cannot be denied! And we would vote to put another Clinton in office? I think not.
Posted by: jillsadesigner | March 11, 2008 01:29 PM
It was all the buzz last night as to why Spitzers wife was standing with him, rather than having her own press conference. Having said that, it is no wonder that he would endorse Clinton, He is her kind of man. Piously going after others for the same things he does. Just as Clinton attacks Obama over NAFTA with the Canadians, when her campaign made some phone calls to the Canadians at the same time. Not a meeting, but you can communicate with a phone call just as effectively. Clinton is not "denouncing or rejecting" Spitzers endorsement. No one in her campaign is either. THAT SPEAKS VOLUMES!!
Posted by: marthadavidson | March 11, 2008 01:29 PM
i'm not a HRC supporter and, even to me, this article is ridiculous. reaching a bit? report news, don't try to make news.
Posted by: mahoghoney | March 11, 2008 01:30 PM
Is that what passes for cogent analysis these days at the Washington Post? My goodness.
Posted by: cali_snowboarder | March 11, 2008 01:30 PM
Hillary is LOSING and CANNOT win. This just highlights her baggage, which she failed to manage well.
Posted by: democraticvoter | March 11, 2008 01:31 PM
This is another one of the skeletons that will continue to crawl out of the Clinton closets. The Clintons have been surrounded by corruption since their days in Arkansas. People seem to remember the good things that happened in the 90's but haven't we been embarrassed by our President enough? We need someone to return dignity to the whitehouse again.
Posted by: vhorlick | March 11, 2008 01:31 PM
If Obama gets the nomination, its going to wind up being President McCain.
From Obama's repeated use of cocaine, to the guy on the net who accuses Obama of having a homosexual affair with him and has now passed a lie detector test to the fact that Obama let the people who supported him rot in slums, Obama has way too many negatives to get elected.
Republicans were scared of this election turning into a referendum on Bill Clinton vs. George Bush, which Republicans would lose and what will happen if Hillary is the candidate, even though netiher Bill Clinton nor George Bush is running.
The real Obama is a real jerk. People in Chicago know that already, and the rest of the country will know it soon.
The question is whether the rest of the country will wake up in time.
Will Obama supporters wake up before its too late? crusade"
The real Obama isn't a very nice guy, or a very honest one. He's as crooked a politician as they come and he let his supporters rot in slums while he got rich.
Watch this report on Obama, Obama's slums, Rezko, and $100M of wasted taxpayer money, from Chicago's most respected TV news program.
Posted by: svreader | March 11, 2008 01:32 PM
As is obvious from Clinton supporter comments on this board, the Clinton campaign in morally bankrupt. They are losing and can't stand it.
Posted by: democraticvoter | March 11, 2008 01:32 PM
First, and most important, could the gov. have looked any more GOOFY in that photo if he tried? Is he doing an impression of a wooden dummy?
Second, this is meaningless for Clinton. No one cares, at least not anyone who he would impact.
Third... I'm with hhkeller, we're not worried about the Bush administration but we're worried about who this guy paid to get his knob polished? Our priorities are, well, a little skewed, no?
Posted by: fake1 | March 11, 2008 01:33 PM
Here's a list of the potentially damaging documents that WILL eventually be public: Clinton tax returns (haven't released any to the public in 7 years), Bill's sketchy business deals with dictators/terrorist states (Kazakhstan uranium deal, and just today it came out Bill's advising a Brazilian company accused of human rights violations and caught in an ethanol scandal), there's also the thousands of white house documents that the Clintons don't want to release, and there's Bill's donor list to his foundation which may have donors from terrorist countries, and then ofcourse there's the women Bill has been seeing since leaving the white house. News Corp's (Fox News, Wall Street Journal) Rupert Murdoch claims he has a list of these woman and he's waiting for the fall to release them. All I'm saying is: that's a lot of potential for scandal - and its not like Clintons haven't already proven to be scandal prone (whitewater, cattle futures, illegal campaign cash, monica lewinsky). Voters should seriously think: do we really want the Clintons back in the white house? The GOP will make sure voters have are focused on this question in November.
Posted by: the964kid | March 11, 2008 01:34 PM
If Obama gets the nomination, its going to wind up being President McCain.
From Obama's repeated use of cocaine, to the guy on the net who accuses Obama of having a homosexual affair with him and has now passed a lie detector test to the fact that Obama let the people who supported him rot in slums, Obama has way too many negatives to get elected.
Republicans were scared of this election turning into a referendum on Bill Clinton vs. George Bush, which Republicans would lose and what will happen if Hillary is the candidate, even though netiher Bill Clinton nor George Bush is running.
The real Obama is a real jerk. People in Chicago know that already, and the rest of the country will know it soon.
The question is whether the rest of the country will wake up in time.
Will Obama supporters wake up before its too late? crusade"
The real Obama isn't a very nice guy, or a very honest one. He's as crooked a politician as they come and he let his supporters rot in slums while he got rich.
Watch this report on Obama, Obama's slums, Rezko, and $100M of wasted taxpayer money, from Chicago's most respected TV news program.
Posted by: svreader | March 11, 2008 01:34 PM
This is the relation between Spitzer and Clinton in a nutshell: Hillary has touted the role of superdelegates because of their superior judgment to mere mortals who vote in primaries or caucuses. She believes that superdelegates are there to make superior judgments to the mere mortal voters, who are not as enlightened and savvy. So we look at a poster child of a Clinton superdelegate, Mr. Spitzer, plastered all over the media at this critical time. And we say, "Yup, there's that superior judgment at work." LOL!
Posted by: ginnymci | March 11, 2008 01:35 PM
TAH1 - you know, just because you put words in capital letters doesn't make them any more accurate.
ichief - I am not even slightly interested in "amplifying this trash" because it is disgusting and pathetic and as a former New Yorker I had a lot of respect for Governor Spitzer. I'm hard pressed to understand what exactly is sexist about this story, or why you think the press would ignore it or fail to mention that he is a major supporter of Clinton. You know what trash ISN'T getting amplified at the moment? The vicious and ignorant comments Geraldine Ferraro made about Obama's race. Perhaps if Clinton's supporters weren't conducting themselves so poorly, the "pundits" wouldn't have trash to discuss. Give 'em trash, they'll take it. We need the best people to serve these roles, not the shadiest. The bums will be thrown out.
REPUBLICAN & INDEPENDENT PA FOLKS - Re-register to vote in the Democratic Primary here:http://www.dos.state.pa.us/voting/lib/voting/02_voter_registration_applications/onlinevoterregformblank.pdf - it needs to be postmarked by March 24!
Posted by: squintz | March 11, 2008 01:35 PM
There's not a doubt in my mind Hillary will succeed to the nomination even though her Governor will be out by Friday... but I wouldn't count on anybody but McCain putting his feet up in the Oval Office. The Democrats don't deserve it after this fiasco they call their campaign.
Posted by: scotty5720 | March 11, 2008 01:36 PM
The Spitzer story could hurt Hillary to the extent it brings the Clintons' complicated history to the fore of voters' minds. Unfortunately, the Clinton's baggage does not begin or end with the Lewinsky affair. There has never been a first husband before, let alone one who is a former president. Bills words, deeds, financial dealings and the like will come right along with Hillary if she is elected, and the risk of unproductive distractions is quite real. They do nothing to quell this concern by concealing White House documents and joint tax returns.
Posted by: MShaughn | March 11, 2008 01:36 PM
TAH1: With an imagination like yours, who needs facts or logic?
Posted by: DoTheMath | March 11, 2008 01:38 PM
OMG!!! IT COULD HAVE BEEN BILL!!!
Posted by: oneofcolor | March 11, 2008 01:38 PM
Hillary isn't a leader. It's time to smarten up America - McCain is the answer. A true leader, a person of integrity, ethics, morality, and courage. He has the most experiece of anyone. No more Marc Rich's of the world. Enough. Hillary is just obsessed with being president, and America isn't ready for that in today's world.
Posted by: pc12 | March 11, 2008 01:38 PM
Sen Clinton needs to distance herself from Spitzer & take a distinct stance on how what he did was wrong. The "my thoughts are with the gov and his family" line is not helpful. Her problem, obviously, is that she can't criticize Spitzer for infidelity, having given Bill a pass on that charge. Therefore she has to focus on the difference between Bill & Eliot: the cash. She needs to clearly state her disappointment in the Governor's apparent/alleged lawbreaking behavior, suggest he might step down & thank him for his prior support, which she no longer expects, due to his focus on more immediate, personal issues.
Posted by: bsimon | March 11, 2008 01:38 PM
Don't you guys have any sympathy to the painful wife of the governor? I think this is going to help Hilary instead of hurting her. It's more evident now that we need woman president. Who knows what scandal BO will bring to white house!
Posted by: ystao17 | March 11, 2008 01:40 PM
When I heard from my Republican contacts many months ago that they wanted Obama as the candidate for the Democrats because they knew they could beat him no matter what, I didn't know why they were so confident.
Obama does have a past, and it is going to come back and bite him.
Obama betrayed the trust of the poor people in Chicago he swore to look out for.
While he was focusing on how to get to the Whitehouse, the people who trusted him were getting screwed "big time"
Republicans have done an amazing amount of background research on Obama, and there is no way in the world he's going to be elected to anything once they get done with him.
"Who would you rather vote for, the coke head or the war hero?"
is only the tip of the iceberg.
He couldn't even handle the job of being a State Senator.
Why would anyone in their right mind trust him with the Presidency?
Posted by: svreader | March 11, 2008 01:40 PM
It's a bit interesting that these Rockefeller guys are beginning to fall. Let's see if they manage to get Parsons appointed as the next mayor so they can continue to have us subsidize illegal immigration.
Who cares about the sex. The banks are colluding with the IRS to watch what you are doing with your own money. If you take $4,000 cash out of your account to buy your kid a used car, your wife a piece of jewelry, or help a strapped relative, they will be notified.
The stock market is continuing its downward spiral, the price of oil hit a record high, the dollar is continuing to fall, and the U.S. is trying to start a war with Iran. Let's stay on task.
Posted by: websmith1 | March 11, 2008 01:42 PM
"Obama does have a past, and it is going to come back and bite him." "He couldn't even handle the job of being a State Senator. Why would anyone in their right mind trust him with the Presidency?"
As of late night yesterday, Hillary still wants Obama to be her VP - despite this?! WOW!
Posted by: titindgp | March 11, 2008 01:45 PM
"Hillary does not have a "Spitzer" problem. This game is OVER. Hillary has proven she can win big in the big states that are the must wins for the Dems in November. Obama has proven himself UNELECTABLE."
So Hillary is going to win Texas in November, and Obama could lose New york and Cali? Are you serious? Are you forgetting Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri and possibly Kansas where Obama dominated Hillary as opposed to the big states where the votes were tight? What does her campaign feed you supporters to be so delusional? Look at the scoreboard.
Posted by: BlahBlahBlah314 | March 11, 2008 01:48 PM
Hillary doesn't have a spitzer problem.
Obama has a COCAINE problem.
Posted by: svreader | March 11, 2008 01:50 PM
Someone said here that the old man(my friend) ,McCain is a man of integrity, but you should check the reason why he and his first wife were DIVORCED. Besides, McCain needs to be evaluated for his spontaneous outbursts for "anger". Do you need someone like this in the white house, as you will see missiles flying all over.......................
Posted by: daxjen13 | March 11, 2008 01:50 PM
Posted by: julieds | March 11, 2008 01:51 PM
Clinton is done given the math. If she takes it, she will have stolen it. One more super delegate isn't going to mean a hill of beans to her.
Posted by: ac11 | March 11, 2008 01:52 PM
"Who would you rather vote for, the coke head or the war hero?"
America picked a incompetent cokehead in '04 over the war hero. Now it's time for a competent one.
Posted by: BlahBlahBlah314 | March 11, 2008 01:52 PM
TAH1 (whom I respectfully submit is clearly innumerate) wrote:
Hillary has proven she can win big in the big states that are the must wins for the Dems in November. Obama has proven himself UNELECTABLE.
Well, I have news for you, from the 13 largest Primary contests held so far, Obama leads 8-5. And most of his delegate count comes from large states, not small. Hillary's 3 biggest wins, CA, TX and NY are hardly swing states by any measure and any Democrat that runs a campaign as efficient as Obama's would win them (or lose them in the case of Texas) by a margin. The figures don't lie and here they are:
State . . . . . . . Obama . . . . . . . .Clinton California . . .2,126,000 . . . . . . .2,553,000 Texas . . . . . 1,358,000 . . . . . . .1,459,000 New York. . . . . 698,000 . . . . . . .1,003,000 Illinois. . . . 1,302,000 . . . . . . . .662,000 Ohio . . . . . . 982,000. . . . . . . 1,212,000 Georgia . . . . . 704,000 . . . . . . . .330,000 New Jersey. . . . 492,000 . . . . . . . .603,000 Virginia . . . . 627,000 . . . . . . . .350,000 Washington . . . 354,000 . . . . . . . .316,000 Massachusetts . . . . 512,000 . . . . . . . .705,000 Minnesota . . . . 142,000 . . . . . . . .69,000 Missouri . . . . 405,000 . . . . . . . .395,000 Wisconsin . . . . 646,000 . . . . . . . .453,000
Total of Big 13 . . . . . 10,348,000 . . . . . . .10,108,000 Popular Vote...13.4 million... 12.7 million ------ California . . . 167 . . . . . . 203 Texas . . . . . 99 . . . . 94 New York . . . . . 93 . . . . 139 Illinois. . . . 104 . . . 49 Ohio . . . . . . 66. . . 75 Georgia . . . . . 60 . . . 27 New Jersey. . . . 48 . . . . 59 Virginia . . . . 54 . . . . 29 Washington . . . 53 . . . 25 Massachusetts ... 38 ...55 Minnesota ... 48 ... 24 Missouri ...36 ...36 Wisconsin ...34 ...29 Total . . . . . 900 . . . 844
Unless America's demographics are very different from what we know to be true, these numbers kill the "black voters argument" the "vice president argument" the "small states argument" the "unelectable" argument and the "caucuses" argument. I can see why there is a correlation between lack of clear, factual analysis and strong support for Hillary Clinton. Most people voting for her are voting for her name and familiarity.
Posted by: asja | March 11, 2008 01:52 PM
Hillary has the best view on this this matter. Our country has much bigger problems then who is sleeping with who. She has gotten past the rhetoric and trash by choosing to stand by the man she loves through thick and thin knowing life is just not a bowl of cherries. Personal relationships are just that and not the nations concern. See: http://salem-news.com/articles/october172007/repub_scandals_10_17_07.php These are human event which test our relationship with or mate. When the nation, religious groups, meddle in our relationship at home it just creates pressure on the people who are doing all they can to get through the little time we have on this planet. Mr. & Mrs. Spitzer can get past this by taking a lesson from Mr. & Mrs. Clinton by honoring the responsibility to one another as their vows demand when they promised to love and cherish one another through the good times and the bad. How is it that this is somehow reflective on Hillary? Bill a good wife is hard to find. Nice work dude! Kudos go the Mrs. Spitzer for standing by her man on national TV even though our sex seeking law enforcement community has made America's bedrooms their business for profit. How long will we have to live with Johnny law between our sheets.
Posted by: Keith_Richard_Radford_Jr | March 11, 2008 01:52 PM
I think the real issue is if: Can Hillary apply for the presidential comand when she has standed the same betray from her own husband?
Posted by: ariana.diaz01 | March 11, 2008 01:54 PM
Hillary's men--Bill, the President of the US, the mayor of Los Angeles, the Governor of NY--can't keep their pants zipped the way the Queen of Mean can't keep her lies zipped. Rush Limbaugh's call for Republicans to cross over to vote for Mrs. Clinton to keep the race going and "bloody" Obama brought out over 4% of the so-called Hillary voters in Texas, and this fact has been supported by both Hillary precinct folks and exit polls. Hillary is dirty-gaming the system, wink, wink, playing the gender, race and poor-me-class (but I loaned myself five million of my own money as a good investment to win the presidency) cards.
Posted by: shirleylim | March 11, 2008 01:54 PM
Silda Wall Spitzer for President!
Posted by: MrM1 | March 11, 2008 01:54 PM
Leave it to the Post to make this an issue. This paper should be on payroll for the Obama campaign. I'm sure that some of his Superdelagates have skeletons in their own closets.
And JakeD, what's with the DIANE? What's that about?
Posted by: rgs_tnr | March 11, 2008 01:56 PM
The following story is tied into Cinton not releasing her tax returns. As well as Bill making multi million dollar deals in Kazikstan with the Russians (on behalf of a Canadian)for his library. Consulting for the Prince of Saudi Arabia(more major $$$$) over getting around US laws concerning US ports. We all know how expert both Clintons are at getting around the law. These "deals" Bill made are against US foreign policy. Wake up America!!!Before it's too late.
While Hillary Clinton battles Barack Obama on the campaign trail, a judge in Los Angeles is quietly preparing to set a trial date in a $17 million fraud suit that aims to expose an alleged culture of widespread corruption by the Clintons and the Democratic Party. At the conclusion of a hearing tomorrow morning before California Superior Court Judge Aurelio N. Munoz, lawyers for Hollywood mogul Peter F. Paul will begin seeking sworn testimony from all three Clintons - Bill, Hillary and Chelsea - along with top Democratic Party leaders and A-list celebrities, including Barbra Streisand, John Travolta, Brad Pitt and Cher. Paul's team hopes for a trial in October. The Clintons' longtime lawyer David Kendall, who will attend the hearing, has declined comment on the suit. The Clintons have tried to dismiss the case, but the California Supreme Court, in 2004, upheld a lower-court decision to deny the motion.
Bill Clinton, according to the complaint, promised to promote Paul's Internet entertainment company, Stan Lee Media, in exchange for stock, cash options and massive contributions to his wife's 2000 Senate campaign. Paul contends he was directed by the Clintons and Democratic Party leaders to produce, pay for and then join them in lying about footing the bill for a Hollywood gala and fundraiser. The Clintons' legal counsel has denied the former president made any deal with Paul. But Paul attorney Colette Wilson told WND there are witnesses who say it was common knowledge at Stan Lee Media that Bill Clinton was preparing to be a rainmaker for the company after he left office. Paul claims former Vice President Al Gore, former Democratic Party chairman Ed Rendell and Clinton presidential campaign chairman Terry McAuliffe also are among the people who can confirm Paul engaged in the deal.
Paul claims Rendell directed various illegal contributions to the DNC and Hillary Clinton's campaign and failed to report to the Federal Election Commission more than $100,000 given for a Hollywood event for Gore's campaign and the Democratic National Committee in 2000. McAuliffe, Paul says, counseled him in two separate meetings to become a major donor to Hillary Clinton to pave the way to hire her husband. Paul asserts top Clinton adviser Harold Ickes also directed him to give money to the Senate campaign but hid that fact in "perjured testimony" during the trial of campaign finance director David Rosen. Rosen was acquitted in 2005 for filing false campaign reports that later were charged by the FEC to treasurer Andrew Grossman, who accepted responsibility in a conciliation agreement that fined the campaign 35,000. Paul points out the Rosen trial established his contention that he personally gave more than $1.2 million to Clinton's campaign and that his contributions intentionally were hidden from the public and the Federal Election Commission. Rosen, accused of concealing Paul's in-kind contribution of more than $1 million, was acquitted, but Paul contends the Clinton staffer was a scapegoat. Paul points out chief Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson told the Washington Post he was aware of the donation, yet he never was called as a witness in the Rosen trial. Paul contends his case will expose "the institutional culture of corruption embraced by the Clinton leadership of the Democratic Party," which seeks to attain "unaccountable power for the Clintons at the expense of the rule of law and respect for the constitutional processes of government." The complaint asserts Clinton has filed four false reports to the FEC of Paul's donations in an attempt to distance herself from him after a Washington Post story days after the August 2000 fundraiser reported his past felony convictions. Clinton then returned a check for $2,000, insisting it was the only money she had taken from Paul. But one month later, she demanded another $100,000, to be hidden in a state committee using untraceable securities. "Why wouldn't that cause someone to inquire?" Paul asked. "Especially since it was days after she said she wouldn't take any more money from me." Paul has the support of a new grass-roots political action group that is helping garner the assistance of one of the nation's top lawyers Republican activist Rod Martin says his group plans to highlight Paul's case as it launches an organization based on the business model of the left-wing MoveOn.org but rooted in the principles and political philosophy of former President Reagan. Martin's group also is assisting in Paul's complaint to the FEC asserting that unless the agency sets aside the conciliation agreement and rescinds immunity granted the senator, it will "have aided and abetted in the commission" of a felony. Paul's case is the subject of a video documentary largely comprised of intimate "home movies" of Hillary Clinton and her Hollywood supporters captured by Paul during the period.
Posted by: marthadavidson | March 11, 2008 01:56 PM
"Voters should be reminded of thugs and criminal who rented the Lincoln bedroom in the Whitehouse. Enough of this dirt. We need a fresh start with Obama. We need a breath of fresh air."
Yes. Oh my YES. Much better to have a corrupt "Fixer" whom is backed by a convicted Iraqi thug than to leave the possibility of sexual dalliance open.
What exactly does this say about the importance of issues? I mean if BC gets some on the side well that will most likely not effect me. On the other hand (no pun intended) if a convicted Iraqi criminal gets to indirectly finance wonder boy's house that could very much affect me. I'll stick with the former rather than the latter.
Posted by: RetCombatVet | March 11, 2008 01:58 PM
While I agree that this episode does not concern Hillary, it has been Hillary supporters who have been vociferously advancing the "guilt by association" argument against Obama (Rezko, Rev Wright, Farrakhan). As such, I find it highly likely that she will be repeatedly forced to answer for this. Hoisted by her own pitard, eh svreader?
Posted by: JoeBewildered | March 11, 2008 01:59 PM
The problem with the Lt. Gov. being a Hillary supporter, delegate-wise, is that he is already a superdelegate as a DNC member. He cannot vote twice... so if he takes over as Governor, he loses that DNC vote.
It's certainly possible the DNC would give the then-open at-large superdelegate slot to a Hillary supporter, but if they do not fill it (or if it were to go to an Obama supporter--not all that likely), then yes, Spitzer represents a loss of a superdelegate for Hillary.
Posted by: exerda | March 11, 2008 01:59 PM
Attention: Sen Hillary Clinton has opened up a new testing center for the "Commander in Chief" test. She conducts the test herself, she is the examiner as well. A number of pre-qualifications apply. Following is a sample: 1. You have to be the spouse of a former president so that by virtue of doing nothing, you can feel and be important. 2. You must be able to take the phone call at 3am in the morning to know that your promiscuous spouse was found unconscious with a blue dress beside him, in a DC hotel room. 3. You must show that you can cajole former criminals into donating huge amounts to your campaign in exchange for a presidential pardon 4. You must be able to sit on the board of the worst employers of the planet and espouse your support for underpaid, overworked workers. 5. You must be able to raise gazillions from all kinds of lobbyists, then raise your rhetoric against lobbyists, and finally meet behind closed doors with those lobbyists to hammer out sweet deals for them. 6. You should not be ashamed of sending our military to a war without any cause whatsoever; you should not apologize to those mothers who have lost their sons and daughters, for your responsibility in voting for such a war. And a ton more....
Problem is there is only one person who fits the bill. No wonder Sen. Obama doesn't qualify!
Posted by: titindgp | March 11, 2008 01:59 PM
"Eliot Spitzer's story reminds us all of the sleaze and slime during the Clinton's years."
Why? Why doesn't it remind you instead of Jimmy Swaggart, or Larry Craig, or Ted Haggard, or any number of prominent people caught in a sex scandal?
And Obama people like to compare BHO to JFK. Why doesn't John Kennedy's philandering remind them of Bill Clinton, hmm?
Posted by: hitpoints | March 11, 2008 01:59 PM
The secret weapon that Hillary can't talk about but voters know is there is Bill.
Bill Clinton was the best President since JFK.
He turned a Republican deficit into a Democratic surplus.
Hillary and Bill have worked as a team since the beginning of Bill's career.
For high achievement professional men that's more often the case than not.
The NYT tried to be polite, but the bottom line is that the only thing special about Obama is his ethnicity.
Obama has done very little in the Senate and has a very poor reputation there.
Obama supporters are in love with the idea of "Obama" but know nothing about what a jerk Obama really is.
He's arrogant, self-centered, and doesn't care about anyone but himself.
He laughs at his own supporters.
From a character standpoint, he's even worse than Bush.
Posted by: svreader | March 11, 2008 01:59 PM
While I think losing White House emails, outing a CIA agent, torture and lying about reasons for starting an unnecessary and costly war are worse crimes than seeking the services of a prostitute, and I don't know how this will play for Hillary, but it is hardly irrelevant. One can't see that news conference and not be reminded of the soap opera the Clinton presidency became. I'm mad at Spitzer in the same way I was and still am mad at Clinton, not because I am the morality police, but because they both knew there were bigger fish to fry and they both knew they had serious enemies and they both let their own weaknesses take a lot of people down. Clinton set us back as a country with his little zipper problem in the same way Spitzer has hurt the good people of New York who voted for him in unprecedented numbers.
How any man can get national security clearance is beyond me.
Posted by: SarahBB | March 11, 2008 02:00 PM
As usual today the Post is full of all the problems that Clinton has without a single story with regard to any problems that Obama may have with regard to being President. Shall we offer him another pillow?
Posted by: politicalobserver1 | March 11, 2008 02:01 PM
I see the "energizer bunny" of smear is here. Why is it that all of Clinton's supporters resort to racist remarks, innuendo and outright lies? Why is it that the Post, especially after long exposure to these toxic fools, even allows them to be published? We don't know if svreader is a man or a woman, a lesbian or whatever...he/she/it has claimed to be all of those things at various times, on various posts. What we do know, is that svreader is a Clinton hack lacking any sort of morals, a sociopath much like the "toxic hag" it worships like some loyal dog.
Gov. Spitzer is just the tip of the ice burg here. There have been reports, at least in the European press, that "Bubba's" name and voice are in the files on this. Washington is awash with reliable information that **A LARGE NUMBER** of senior Clinton staffers and elected supporters have their voices on tape and the fed's have id'd them. Now, I don't want to wait until after the nomination tpo know that, I want to know it NOW. I also want to know how the Cltinon's got their money - release those tax returns, where the laundered campaign contributions to her campaign came from (no one believes thousands of immigrants from India and China, working as minimum wage dishers, all gave $2300 donations to the Clinton campaign - the LA-Times has traced that monye back to the *government* of India and China and to enormous companies in those countries), where the "donations" to the Presidential library came from, how much money she and Bill got from corporations for providing outsourcing services and tens of thousands of Indian H1-B workers. And, while we're at it, lets actual demand to know about the missing White House records, the money that changed hands for those last minute pardons by the Clinton White House, and on and on. The fact is, Hillary Clinton is the single most corrupt politician in modern history. Her history of misusing government powers to award friends and punbish enemies ought to disqualify her from being dog catcher, mcuh less a U.S. Senator. Nominating her as President would mark the end of the Democratic Party. But, of course, the Clinton's and the idiots supporting them all know that. I wonder what they're really up to?
Posted by: mibrooks27 | March 11, 2008 02:02 PM
How does having been a POW qualify you for President? Another President with another secret ax to grind? A war hero is not what this country needs, it is in desperate need of a Peace Hero. How much peace do you think this country will have with McCain ... running primarily as a military President, Commander and Chief? What do you think he's going to do in the White House, sit around twiddling his thumbs? I don't think so. Some how I see him wanting to play with tanks and soldiers and air craft carriers. Buyer beware.
Posted by: ac11 | March 11, 2008 02:03 PM
Human failings are painful to watch. The dinasaur political class apparently has other things on their minds than governing to solve our state and national problems, needds and goals.
They operate from personal desire, greed, and ambition.
Hillary IS the dinasaur political class' president.
That's why an honorable and ethical President Obama would be so refreshing, and why we need to support and vote for massive changes in how business is conducted in DC.
Posted by: onestring | March 11, 2008 02:03 PM
Like all Obama supporters you viciously attack anyone who doesn't worship him as a god.
Like all Obama supporters, you lie as easily as you breathe.
I am a man. I support Clinton because she's worlds better than Obama.
I am a CEO who lives and works in Silicon Valley and have excellent contacts in Washington.
They all say the same things about Obama.
He's an egotistical jerk with a messiah complex.
Obama totally screwed over the poorest of the poor in Chicago who voted for him.
He funneled $100M to his buddy Rezko while the people who voted for him rotted in slums.
Obama's a world-class jerk and so are most of his supporters.
Posted by: svreader | March 11, 2008 02:07 PM
I have read many of the posted comments from the many Hillary Haters. Sad to say, the Haters always take every opportunity to rage against her? They are afflicted with a mental problem that is apparently incurable? And since they all proclaim to be Obama supporters, it appears many of Obama supporters are also "mental" cases! I believe most of his supporters think he can win in America? False, America is not likely to vote for a black man for president. No matter how fundamentally wrong McCain is for America. It's called "Racism"! America is Racist! They always were, and will be for a long time to come. In the same way they are puritanical, hypocritical, and condemning of any one who is not of the same cloth as themselves, they will not elect Obama!!
Posted by: charmenone1 | March 11, 2008 02:07 PM
OK; so Spitzer paid a hooker 4300, she must have been fantastic, SO What... How many males here, if they could afford it, would not have. Does having sex with a woman make you unfit to govern?
Posted by: ashruff | March 11, 2008 02:11 PM
Hillary does not have a "Spitzer" problem.
Hillary has proven she can win big in the big states that are the must wins for the Dems in November.
Obama has proven himself UNELECTABLE.
Posted by: TAH1 | March 11, 2008 11:27 AM ************************************************
So by winning more states, more votes, and more delegates than Clinton Obama has proven himself un-electable? OK, if you say so. I say Hillary has proven she only has the support of the mentally handicapped and the career criminals and that's not enough to get her elected. All she can do now is get John McCain elected.
Posted by: eco-pharm | March 11, 2008 02:12 PM
Rather ironic for someone labeling Clinton supporters for spreading innuendo, to then do exactly that. How about some links to European press sources?
Posted by: hitpoints | March 11, 2008 02:13 PM
SeedofChange - You are a liar, and you know it. Obama joined his church at least 8 years before he ever ran for office. He has *no* relationship with Farrakhan, and has publicly rejected *and* denounced him for his racist views.
Posted by: HowardsJohnson | ***************************** Hey, Howard: seedless is just a tool (in every sense of the word) for the racist websites and blogs strategy - since they are being monitored by several organizations who work with the FBI, they cannot all out advocate harming him. What they are doing instead is spreading falsehoods via emails and some blogs. As the monitors note, these attacks by dupes like seedless are an attempt to demonize Obama and encourage others to take action. They are also monitoring public boards like these as these racist sites encourage "spreading the word." It is sad, in this day and age, but the internet is a weapon as well as a tool.
Posted by: LABC | March 11, 2008 02:13 PM
It's over already for Hillary; she just won't admit it. As Bill handed his head to the Republicans on a platter when caught fooling around with that young female intern, Mrs. Clinton all but handed the election over to Senator McCain by stating that he was better qualified to act as commander in chief than her rival, Mr. Obama.
An act of despiration, and not the conduct of a candidate who seeks her party's endorsement for President of the United States. Thus, we the people may be in for four more years of Republican blundering and arogant behavior. God hlep us!
Posted by: scottshot | March 11, 2008 02:15 PM
HILARY HAS FOUND HER RUNNING MATE IN SILDA WALL!!!!!
(Well if Silda decides not to divorce her hubby to run the next election!).
Posted by: chowdhury.zahid | March 11, 2008 02:15 PM
"Obama's a world class jerk and so are most of his supporters".
Good luck winning people over with that line.
Posted by: JoeBewildered | March 11, 2008 02:15 PM
Gee whiz, this is really such a shame for Hillary.
Posted by: richardb1 | March 11, 2008 02:16 PM
Too much stuff for the right to brainwash americans on Clinton and Obama...McCain wins...Game over!
Posted by: terrill | March 11, 2008 02:17 PM
Most, but not all ;-)
Posted by: svreader | March 11, 2008 02:17 PM
Drivers licenses for ILLEGAL immigrants?? What kind of bozo IS this guy? That should have been a clue to his demented morality. Impeachment and IMPRISONMENT is the only solution for this horrid type of illegal activity and corruption. What a slime ball. This has nothing to do with being a democrat. Is has to do with a total lack of morality and respect for women.
Posted by: northbetty | March 11, 2008 02:18 PM
Posted by: SeedofChange | March 11, 2008 11:58 AM Obama's muslim mother and father:
1. Mother married a muslim man who already had multiple wives in Kenya 2. Mother married a second muslim man to help bring up her "only child" after first husband left her 3. Mother moved her "only child" to Indonesia to provide a muslim environment and life style for her only child. Indonesia is the largest muslim country in the world and site of "Bali bombing". Indonesia is a terrorist hot bed. 4. Obama has no record of participating in Christian church activities in his early age 5. Obama has no record of participating in Christian church during college years. 6. Obama has no record of church activities after his graduation 7. Obama started church activities after he decided to run for public office and started participating in voter sign up activities. His church leader is friend with Farrahkhan 8. Obama's relation with Farrahkhan is unknown at this time
Obama can not win a general election.
What? LOL. Pathetic. Not even the GOP is peddling this hogwash. Get a life and do some real research, instead of collecting your bumper sticker propaganda. Whats next Obama is a commie for not wearing a flag lapel pin? Please for Gods sake just stick to facts and truth. Dislike him or ridicule him for policies or something substanative. At least then we can have an honest discussion as opposed to a short cut to thinking.
Posted by: feastorafamine | March 11, 2008 02:19 PM
svretard writes: "I am a CEO who lives and works in Silicon Valley and have excellent contacts in Washington."
LOL!!!! Yeah, sure you do. And I invented silicon and dug the valley out with my spoon. I personally know every single person in Washington and they all think you are a loser.
You are sounding more shrill and deluded everyday, sv...
Posted by: LABC | March 11, 2008 02:19 PM
If Spitzer were supporting Obama, we'd be reading about the Clinton campaign telling him that he needs to reject his support.
Where's the denunciation and rejection, Hillary?
Posted by: Charlene-K | March 11, 2008 02:19 PM
nathan.h.abbott: Abramoff? He was elected to which office?
Unfortunately, the Hil camp is right now pleading with Spitzers wife _not_ to divorce him and to stand by her cheating/lying man. If she does the right thing and divorces him, that would bode very poorly for HIl. It would just further demonstrate her marriage of convenience to Willie. Which is the real reason no one wants to see her elected.
Posted by: rahaha | March 11, 2008 02:20 PM
From your post, you seem more like a lunatic.
Posted by: svreader | March 11, 2008 02:20 PM
Reply to Seed of Change: Since when did being a Muslim, which Barack Obama is not anyways, prohibit someone from being the President? Maybe we should examine the moral underpinning of Mr. Eliot Spitzer, who this article is ABOUT more closely.
Posted by: northbetty | March 11, 2008 02:21 PM
Spitzer's fall which splashed mud on the Clintons will pale when their billionaire supporter and (former) friend Jeffrey Epstein gets his day in prostitution court followed by multiple civil suits from 16 year old girls.
Posted by: bnscientist | March 11, 2008 02:22 PM
After the constant attacks Obama supporters make on Hillary for standing by Bill, I can't wait for Obama's first sex scandal.
He's a smooth talker and a good looking guy.
Do you Obama-nuts really believe st. Obama has never had sex with anyone but Michelle?
Boy are you in for a rude suprise!
Posted by: svreader | March 11, 2008 02:23 PM
prostitution = illegal (well, in most states, and certainly across state lines)
consenting adult sex = NOT ILLEGAL
Bill Clinton = NOT SPITZER
Please, this has jack squat to do with Hillary Clinton. Drop the loose comparisons and grow up or the Repubs will just use this to smear the Dem party LATER, regardless of the nominee, like later, meaning NOVEMBER.
Posted by: jack9 | March 11, 2008 02:24 PM
Maybe Spitzer's wife will decide to run for President. After all, the Big Dog's adulterous affair with Monica is the essence of why HRC is where she is today.
Posted by: ccoblas | March 11, 2008 02:24 PM
How ignorant can one person be? Have you lived with Obama at any point in his life? How could you possibly know what his religious affiliations have been throughout his life? On top of that, since when is being a Muslim a bad thing? Did you know that there are 6,000,000 practicing Muslims in the US? In fact 21% of the world's population is Muslim and 33% are Christian. I guess they don't matter to you. I guess in your mind they are all terrorists.
Posted by: mharrell | March 11, 2008 02:25 PM
If Obama gets the nomination, its going to wind up being President McCain.
From Obama's repeated use of cocaine, to the guy on the net who accuses Obama of having a homosexual affair with him and has now passed a lie detector test to the fact that Obama let the people who supported him rot in slums, Obama has way too many negatives to get elected.
Republicans were scared of this election turning into a referendum on Bill Clinton vs. George Bush, which Republicans would lose and what will happen if Hillary is the candidate, even though netiher Bill Clinton nor George Bush is running.
The real Obama is a real jerk. People in Chicago know that already, and the rest of the country will know it soon.
The question is whether the rest of the country will wake up in time.
The real Obama isn't a very nice guy, or a very honest one. He's as crooked a politician as they come and he let his supporters rot in slums while he got rich.
Watch this report on Obama, Obama's slums, Rezko, and $100M of wasted taxpayer money, from Chicago's most respected TV news program.
Posted by: svreader | March 11, 2008 02:28 PM
From your post, you seem more like a lunatic.
svretard, is this assessment based on your experience as a "CEO"? I'm not the one sceaming about Obama hating his supporters, listing a bunch of nonsense or bringing up Rezko like a good little soldier. How is your deal with Bill Gates going? Maybe you should call your contacts in Washington to move it along...maybe they can tell you that Senator Obama doesn't wash his hands when he goes to the bathroom.
Posted by: LABC | March 11, 2008 02:29 PM
Hillary supporters are in denial. They do not recognize that she is in 2nd place, that her staff and supporters are flawed. They are not committed to what is best for the country, for the Democratic Party, or for any one but the Clintons. Her supporters continue to call other Democrats names, and yet fail to explain why it is the highly educated Democrats and our youth who support the "empty suit". Entitlement is not a redeeming quality in anyone.
Posted by: WLHSMom | March 11, 2008 02:29 PM
You're probably using my stuff right now.
The very though of it brings a smile to my face.
Posted by: svreader | March 11, 2008 02:31 PM
|
For a supporter, New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer sure hasn't done Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton any favors lately. --Peter Baker
| 711.73913 | 0.956522 | 19.217391 |
high
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031003022.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031003022.html
|
Ticket-Sharing Talk Dominates Day's Campaign Activity
|
2008031119
|
A day before the Mississippi primary, which Obama is favored to win, he rejected Clinton's idea that he become the vice presidential nominee on a ticket her husband described last week as "an almost unstoppable force." The senator from Illinois said the Clintons' talk was designed to disguise his lead in the nomination fight and convince fence-sitters that they could vote for Clinton and get Obama, too.
"First of all, with all due respect, I've won twice as many states as Senator Clinton," Obama said to cheers here. "I've won more of the popular vote than Senator Clinton. I have more delegates than Senator Clinton. So, I don't know how somebody who's in second place is offering the vice presidency to somebody who's in first place."
Obama also said, with evident delight, that the Clintons' notion undermines their central challenge to his candidacy -- that he is not prepared to be president.
"I don't understand," Obama told the crowd at the Mississippi University for Women. "If I'm not ready, how is it you think I would be such a great vice president?"
To emphasize his point, Obama cited a CBS News interview in May 1992, when candidate Bill Clinton said that the most important criterion for the vice presidency was "someone who would be a good president if, God forbid, something happened to me a week after I took office."
Obama said: "You all know the okey-doke, when someone's trying to bamboozle you, when they're trying to hoodwink you. You can't say that -- 'He's not ready on Day One unless he's willing to be your vice president, then he's ready on Day One.' "
The duel over the Democrats' readiness to lead the nation in a time of war has become a critical subtext as the party seeks a nominee to face Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a prisoner of war in Vietnam who counts national security as his strong suit.
The Clinton camp contends that Obama is untested. His campaign charges that Clinton showed poor judgment when she voted to authorize the Iraq war and backed President Bush's more recent effort to challenge Iran's Republican Guard, which Obama on Monday called "saber rattling."
Clinton campaign spokesman Howard Wolfson on Monday said that Obama has not proved his ability to be president, but that he could by the time Clinton would choose a running mate -- by August's Democratic National Convention in Denver.
"Senator Obama has not passed the commander-in-chief test," Wolfson said, adding: "We have a long time between now and Denver." An invitation to become vice president, he said, "is not something that she would rule out at this point."
Asked what Obama could do to prove his worth by August, Wolfson avoided the question.
|
COLUMBUS, Miss., March 10 -- Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama hardly sounded like potential running mates Monday, with Obama accusing his rival of "gamesmanship" and the campaigns sparring over who is more qualified to be commander in chief.
| 12.12766 | 0.595745 | 0.723404 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031100884.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031100884.html
|
Fuel Prices Siphoning Money From U.S. Economy
|
2008031119
|
Crude oil prices continued a record-breaking climb today that pushed it past $109 a barrel, while the price of regular unleaded gasoline at the pump came within half a cent of its all-time high.
A White House announcement that Vice President Cheney would probably ask Saudi Arabia to boost oil output during a trip to the Middle East next week did nothing to blunt a run-up in prices that yesterday added $3 to the cost of a barrel.
As the rising cost of crude oil trickles down to the gasoline pump, fuel prices are siphoning cash away from other consumer spending, making it harder to revive the flagging U.S. economy and putting pressure on the Bush administration. It also siphoned more money out of the country: The Commerce Department reported today that the U.S. trade deficit jumped in January to $58.2 billion, compared to $57.9 billion in December, as a record, $27.1 billion monthly bill for imported crude helped offset an increase in U.S. exports.
According to the auto club AAA, the price of gasoline climbed to $3.222 a gallon yesterday, just shy of the $3.227 record set May 24.
"We're hurting in this thing, and it doesn't look like there's any end of it," said Ralph Bombardiere, executive director of the New York State Association of Service Stations and Repair Shops. "It looks like it's heading to $4" a gallon.
Bombardiere, who said members of his group of small service stations were having trouble raising pump prices fast enough to keep up with rising wholesale costs, added: "As the price goes up, it becomes a concern for us. We're the last line. We're the guys you face."
An opinion poll conducted in early February by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press showed that 35 percent of Americans named the rising price of gasoline as the economic issue that worried them most. In the same poll, 60 percent of those surveyed said it was "difficult" for their families to afford gasoline. Since the poll was completed, retail gasoline prices have risen 24.7 cents a gallon.
The prices of other petroleum products are also soaring. Diesel fuel, usually cheaper than gasoline, is now more expensive. The Energy Department's Energy Information Administration said the average U.S. price of diesel was $3.819 a gallon in the week ending yesterday, up 53.9 cents in just four weeks. Heating-oil prices are also at all-time highs, up more than a dollar a gallon over the past year.
Cheney is scheduled to meet Saudi King Abdullah during a trip that starts Sunday. Discussions are expected to deal with oil and the security situation in Iraq.
Saudi Arabia is the world's biggest oil exporter and has more excess production capacity than any other member of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries. However, despite President Bush's entreaties, Saudi officials have asserted that oil markets have adequate supplies.
"I'm sure that energy issues will come up there," said White House spokeswoman Dana Perino. "Certainly the position of the United States and the president is that we believe that more supplies should be out there on the market. And the president does want OPEC to take into consideration that its biggest customer, the United States, that our economy is weakened, and part of the reason is because of higher oil prices; we think that more supply would help."
Democrats seized on the price increases to hammer Bush for his threat to veto an energy tax bill that would eliminate a tax break for the five biggest oil companies and extend tax breaks for solar and wind projects.
"How many records does the price of oil have to set and surpass before President Bush stands up for hardworking American families and stops taxpayer giveaways to Big Oil?" House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) asked in a statement.
Analysts blamed the relentless increase in petroleum prices on an influx of investors fleeing sinking and unsteady financial markets and those searching for hedges against inflation. Unlike most other days recently, however, prices of other commodities -- including gold, copper and platinum -- fell while oil prices rose again.
While there are signs that U.S. gasoline consumption has flattened or declined slightly in the past few weeks, traders and investors still expect world demand for oil to remain strong. China's crude oil imports grew 18 percent last month, according to Bloomberg News.
Last week, Goldman Sachs raised its forecast for 2009 U.S. crude prices to $105 a barrel from $90 a barrel. Lehman Brothers has also raised its first-quarter forecast for crude prices, and today the Energy Information Administration is expected to increase its short-term oil price forecast. Its last forecast, issued only a month ago, had predicted oil prices of just $88 a barrel for March.
Gasoline prices are rising as crude costs grow. Tancred Lidderdale, an analyst with the EIA, said gasoline prices rise about 2.4 cents a gallon for every $1-per-barrel increase in crude oil.
Lidderdale said an additional factor in rising gasoline prices was the annual switch of refineries to make summer-grade gasoline, a more expensive form designed to minimize the evaporation of fuel in the summer heat.
|
Crude oil prices continued a record-breaking climb today that pushed it past $109 a barrel, while the price of regular unleaded gasoline at the pump came within half a cent of its all-time high.
| 24.804878 | 1 | 41 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031002480.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031002480.html
|
Food and Energy Shortages Stoke Inflation, Anxiety in Pakistan
|
2008031119
|
She had waited in the line seven times for seven hours over the course of a week and left empty-handed every time. But with the price of cooking oil at most markets nearly double what it was at government-subsidized food shops, she couldn't afford to do anything but wait.
"I'm a poor woman. I cannot purchase this from the open market for 140 rupees a kilogram," Bibi said. "They should do something for us. First, it was a flour crisis. Then it was cooking oil prices. What are we supposed to do next?"
With consumer prices for basic goods hitting new highs in Pakistan, anxieties about the country's economy are also on the rise. After seeing five years of strong gains under the government of President Pervez Musharraf, officials are scaling back expectations for growth in the face of wrenching food and energy shortages.
The crisis has taken a severe toll on Musharraf politically -- public frustration with rising prices helped the opposition win big in parliamentary elections last month. Now those parties, the Pakistan People's Party and a faction of the Pakistan Muslim League led by Nawaz Sharif, must confront the unpleasant task of managing the crisis. Economists here say a surge of foreign investment and export growth are needed.
The economic downturn has hit poor Pakistanis hardest. But at the same time, the middle class, which has prospered under Musharraf's government, is feeling the pinch, particularly in the country's all-important flour industry.
Qasim Ali Khan, who owns a flour mill in the northwest frontier town of Charsadda, said wheat shortages have put a dozen mill owners out of business in his district alone. He blames Musharraf's government for the crisis.
"There is a lot of wheat in our country. The government gave all the surplus wheat to foreign countries," he said. "If there is a problem with wheat, it's in Islamabad, not the northwest. The government has robbed us."
Sakib Sherani, chief economist for ABN Amro Bank Pakistan, blames years of "bad administration and bad governance" for the situation. He said overblown government projections of a bumper wheat crop are just one example of the Musharraf government's missteps. Smugglers are increasingly taking wheat from Pakistan to Afghanistan, where it is in even shorter supply.
"There's a very clear incentive to smuggle wheat at this stage," Sherani said. "If you can get four or five times the price across the Afghan border, why not try it?"
Salman Shah, Pakistan's finance minister in the caretaker government, acknowledged that wheat smuggling and skyrocketing consumer prices have become serious problems. But he blamed increases in global prices for food and oil for much of the crisis. He pointed to strong gains on the Karachi stock market, the country's largest, as a sign that the post-election economy is as viable as ever.
"The market is sensing that there is going to be a kind of grand reconciliation and consensus in Parliament. Things will start moving toward stability soon," Shah said. "On the other hand, if you end up in a conflict situation in Parliament, then I think the markets don't like confrontation and that could throw things off balance."
|
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.
| 13.826087 | 0.391304 | 0.434783 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031003097.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031003097.html
|
U.N. Alleges Nuclear Work By Iran's Civilian Scientists
|
2008031119
|
Experts at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) have repeatedly invited Fakhrizadeh to tea and a chat about Iran's nuclear work. But for two years, the government in Tehran has barred any contact with the scientist, who U.S. officials say recently moved to a new lab in a heavily guarded compound also off-limits to U.N. inspectors.
The exact nature of his research -- past and present -- remains a mystery, as does the work of other key Iranian scientists whose names appear in documents detailing what U.N. officials say is a years-long, clandestine effort to expand the country's nuclear capability. The documents, which were provided to the IAEA, the U.N. nuclear agency, in recent months by two countries other than the United States, partly match information in a stolen Iranian laptop turned over by Washington.
IAEA officials say these documents identify Fakhrizadeh and other civilian scientists as central figures in a secret nuclear research program that operated as recently as 2003. So far, however, Iran is refusing to shed light on their work or allow U.N. officials to question them. After being presented with copies of some of the new documents, Tehran denied that some of the scientists exist.
"When the allegations are raised, Iran simply dismisses them," said a Western diplomatic official familiar with the agency's dealings with Iran. "It insists that the documents are mostly fakes."
The standoff over interview requests has cast a shadow over a five-year U.N. effort to excavate the truth about Iran's nuclear past. In that search, Western anxieties have been compounded by Tehran's reluctance to clarify the history of its interest in technologies that could be used for either nuclear power or weapons.
A similar set of uncertainties helped provoke the U.S. war with Iraq, which the Bush administration justified partly by positing that Baghdad was deliberately concealing nuclear weapons research from U.N. inspectors. The outcome of that invasion suggests caution, however, since U.S. troops were unable to find any convincing evidence of banned weapons work, and deposed Iraqi officials said they had been secretive to conceal from regional opponents that they had ended such work, not continued it.
In Iran's case, U.N. officials say, the new evidence does not prove that the scientists carried out plans to build a nuclear device, but shows that Fakhrizadeh and other scientists struggled to master associated technologies. Several of the scientists, including Fakhrizadeh, appear to have moved freely between military and civilian research venues.
The documents purport to show advanced research into a variety of nuclear-related technologies, including uranium ore processing, warhead modification and the precision-firing of high explosives of the type used to detonate a nuclear device. Other documents point to attempts by civilian scientists to purchase sensitive equipment of the kind Iran would eventually use in its uranium enrichment plants.
Some of the new documents came from inside Iran, according to European officials familiar with them. None specifically include the word "nuclear," and IAEA officials say there is no evidence that any of the plans advanced beyond the paper stage.
The National Council of Resistance of Iran, a major opposition group that claims to have informants inside Iran's government, contends in materials provided to The Washington Post that nuclear weapons design work persists and has migrated to universities and schools. But U.S. and U.N. officials say they cannot corroborate the group's claim.
Instead, U.S. intelligence officials have said that Iran worked on weapons design in the past but halted the research in 2003. But government officials and weapons experts acknowledge concerns over Iran's refusal to answer questions or explain what key scientists are doing now.
|
Iranian nuclear engineer Mohsen Fakhrizadeh lectures weekly on physics at Tehran's Imam Hossein University. Yet for more than a decade, according to documents attracting interest among Western governments, he also ran secret programs aimed at acquiring sensitive nuclear technology for his governm...
| 14.744681 | 0.531915 | 0.702128 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031001612.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031001612.html
|
It's on the Tip of Your Tongue
|
2008031119
|
If only there were simple means to solve every tip of the tongue experience. You know the kind. Like the one I had a couple of months ago when I could visualize the Vermont clothing store where my friend Dan and I regularly stock up on white wool socks, but I just could not recall its name. Not until several weeks later, when I retrieved the plastic bag containing my last two pairs of slightly imperfect Wigwams, did I find the answer staring me in the face: Sam's.
Two questions flow from this experience: What made such a simple memory task so out of reach? Is this a bad sign?
We'll start with the less encouraging news.
First off, my brain is shrinking. (In case you are starting to feel smug, don't. Yours is, too.) Second, my subjective sense that it is not as easy as it once was to recall words is no illusion. Tip of the tongue experiences (TOTs) increase as we get older, and this is true in spades for the recall of proper names.
Here's some good news. While TOTs are a sign of aging (and have been shown to correlate with specific brain changes), they are not a sign of impending dementia.
Meredith Shafto, a research associate at Britain's University of Cambridge, has been studying normal cognitive aging for five years. TOTs, she says, are "part of what we call normal or healthy aging. . . . With normal aging there are changes that are noticeable and distressing and irritating, but they are not pathological."
What makes TOTs interesting is not that they are that dreaded knock on the door, but that they tell us something about how our brain functions normally to produce the vocabulary we use on a daily basis.
Deborah Burke, a psychology professor at Pomona College in Claremont, Calif., who has written widely about language, aging and TOTs, explains the current thinking:
"We like to think of words as being stored in a unit in our head, and that we have a little place in our minds where we have [for example] Brad Pitt, and we know what he looks like and what movies he's been in and his name and all that."
Instead of storing information that way, she explains, there is "a network of information across different parts of the brain, and you can lose access to one part and not the other. So you can see Brad Pitt's face and say, 'Yes, that's his face,' but you're not able to recall his name because it's not stored as a unit with his face or with [other] information about him."
As we age, the connections in our information network deteriorate, causing so-called transmission deficits. This is especially true when we haven't activated a particular connection for some time. What used to be a two-way street between Brad Pitt's face and his name is now, say, a bike path that has some overgrowth. The connection is still there, but it is weak and needs attention.
A recent study in the Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience reports a correlation between face-naming difficulties and shrinkage of a particular area of the brain. Shafto and colleagues showed a series of famous faces to adults between ages 19 and 88. Using MRI imaging, they found that increased TOTs were strongly associated with age-related atrophy in the left insular cortex, a cortical structure deep on the brain's left side.
This finding helps explain why we have more TOTs as we get older, but not why forgetting proper names is the most common problem. To understand this, we have to turn to transmission deficit theory, which provides a straightforward rationale.
Unlike most other words, proper names are arbitrary and usually tell us nothing about the person named. Larry King the name tells us nothing about Larry King the face or Larry King the man. If we lose the connection between the face and the name, we have no alternative route to get there. We may remember that his name starts with an L or has three syllables, but we still cannot quite make it all the way down the overgrown bike path to retrieve all the key word sounds (or phonology), which is what makes TOTs so frustrating. On the other hand, if we recall King's face and want to connect it to what he does (rather than what he calls himself), we have a lot of connections to choose from: talk show host, interviewer, emcee and so on.
One instructive exception to the proper name rule provides additional support for transmission deficit theory. Some cartoon characters have names that do in fact carry meaning (Spider-Man, Goofy), while some don't (Homer Simpson, Garfield).
In a recent article, "Charlie Brown Versus Snow White," in the Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, University of Colorado researchers tested young and old adults on how well they could name both kinds of characters. Young adults outperformed older adults on the naming test even though, as is routinely found in almost all studies on aging, the older adults did better on a standard vocabulary test. They just had trouble naming faces.
More pointedly, young adults differed little in their ability to name the two kinds of characters. Older adults, by contrast, had much more difficulty naming characters such as Charlie Brown and Garfield than they did Snow White and the Pink Panther -- names with an added semantic boost.
When I asked Burke what we can do to limit our TOTs, she enthusiastically endorsed the idea of using our language skills as much as possible in lively conversations where we are fully engaged and firing on all eight cylinders. Beyond that, she said, there are no all-purpose exercises to ramp up our ability to recall names from the past. Tried-and-true techniques do exist, however, to learn specific names at a specific time and place. We just have to apply these techniques every time we want to learn new names.
Still, I could not resist asking Burke if she thought doing crossword puzzles might have TOT-reducing benefits. She demurred, thinking I meant those rarefied crosswords with esoteric clues and solutions. I did not. I was referring to my mother-in-law.
Antoinette Berardi owned a truckload of moderately challenging crossword magazines with clues such as: Moby Dick author; Mo of Arizona; Mikhail's wife. I have clear recollections of her hunkering down at her kitchen table, turning to a fresh puzzle and blasting through that baby with the intensity of a NASA engineer working to rescue a crew from space. My wife claims that her mother did this to relax. I don't know about that, but I do know this: I have never met anyone with a more impressive memory. And, unlike her son-in-law, she never had to rehearse the name of the place she bought her socks.
Charles Zanor is a practicing psychologist in Massachusetts. Comments:health@washpost.com.
|
If only there were simple means to solve every tip of the tongue experience. You know the kind. Like the one I had a couple of months ago when I could visualize the Vermont clothing store where my friend Dan and I regularly stock up on white wool socks, but I just could not recall its name. Not u...
| 21.5 | 0.96875 | 60.0625 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031002794.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031002794.html
|
Trenton's Story
|
2008031119
|
On a mild afternoon last fall, 11-year-old Trenton Robinson watched his sister pedal a tricycle on a crumbling patch of sidewalk in front of their apartment at 3339 10th Pl. SE, over the broken glass, past the mangled fence, beyond the windows splintered by bullets, around the dead rat, next to heaps of reeking trash that hadn't been collected in weeks.
Trenton was happy to be outside, in his roller sneakers after school.
Inside, through a softball-size hole in the floor of his family's apartment, Trenton can peer into the building's basement, so dark he can barely make out the walls. But he can smell the raw sewage on the floor, alive with bugs, and hear the constant gurgle of water streaming down collapsed walls.
For at least four years, Trenton's father said, their apartment has had no heat. Thomas Robinson said he leaves the oven on, but Trenton can still see his breath in the icy air.
"I have to put, like, five blankets over me," the sixth-grader said. "Three isn't going to do it because I'll still be cold."
The red brick building with 13 units is owned by Prince George's County resident Edward Knott, who bought it in 2002 for $215,000. Tenants fear that he's refusing repairs to drive them away.
The District's 28-year-old tenant rights law requires property owners to give tenants the first shot at buying their apartments before buildings are sold to outside bidders. The law also requires that tenants approve a conversion to condominiums.
Tenants on 10th Place say they are working with a lawyer from the nonprofit Bread for the City to try to buy the building.
Knott, who presented an offer of sale to tenants for $690,000 last summer, said that the process is time-consuming and that he wants the building sold quickly.
"I want it vacant," Knott said. "If I didn't have tenants, then I could sell it."
Knott said that he's made repairs over the years, including replacing windows and doors, but that many tenants are "squatters" who don't have legitimate leases and don't keep up the building, often allowing strangers to get inside and cause damage.
"I've cleaned that place up so much," he said. "I don't understand why the tenants allow that to happen."
Attorneys representing the tenants say they have legitimate leases and have tried to maintain the building themselves, replacing broken locks on doors and putting plastic on windows to cover holes in the glass.
Records show that tenants have repeatedly asked the D.C. Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs to step in, complaining about bad smells, rodents, the lack of heat and collapsing ceilings. In many instances, DCRA said, it closed cases when it couldn't reach the owners or tenants to get inside the building.
The agency has made roughly $20,000 in emergency repairs at the building, which Knott has not repaid, despite a special charge on his tax bill. But most of the problems linger. The building was still without heat on a blustery winter day, and a cat lay dead in the sludge on the basement floor.
"We can't get support," said Thomas Robinson, a sheet-metal mechanic who mops the building's hallways. At the advice of housing advocates, he said, he has recently stopped paying rent, which city officials say is legal when landlords fail to fix code violations. "It's a depressing thing. They treat you just like the building looks."
DCRA Director Linda Argo said the agency has cited Knott for hundreds of violations in recent years, but there has been little cooperation from Knott or the tenants, who have "denied access or ignored requests to enter the building and individual units."
Late last week, after The Washington Post asked DCRA about the building, the agency sent inspectors. It has arranged to remove trash, scheduled another inspection and might make repairs using city money set aside to fix up buildings when owners refuse to step in.
Tenants, meanwhile, are working with a pro-bono attorney from the Jones Day law firm to sue Knott for negligence, among other things.
Trenton stays away whenever he can. He takes the subway to a public charter school in Northeast and catches a ride with his coach every fall Saturday to practice football. He loves the game. But it also signals the beginning of cold weather, when his apartment is unbearable.
"They say we could die in that house," Trenton said. " . . . I don't know. I never thought about it like that. But they say, 'Man, we could die.' "
Staff researcher Meg Smith contributed to this report.
|
On a mild afternoon last fall, 11-year-old Trenton Robinson watched his sister pedal a tricycle on a crumbling patch of sidewalk in front of their apartment at 3339 10th Pl. SE, over the broken glass, past the mangled fence, beyond the windows splintered by bullets, around the dead rat, next to...
| 15.459016 | 0.983607 | 59.016393 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031002935.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031002935.html
|
Study: More Women Can Cut Cancer Relapse Risk
|
2008031119
|
Women who survive breast cancer are often haunted by the fear that it might come back. But new research indicates that many more women than had been thought can do something to protect themselves.
Currently, women whose tumors were fueled by the hormone estrogen can take the drug tamoxifen after undergoing surgery, radiation and chemotherapy to reduce their risk of a recurrence. But tamoxifen only helps for five years. After that, it may be dangerous.
Five years ago, researchers stopped a large international study early when it showed that women who had early-stage breast cancer and who took another drug, known as an aromatase inhibitor, after tamoxifen were nearly half as likely to suffer a relapse. But many questions remained, including whether it would work for women who had been diagnosed years ago.
In the new research, Paul E. Goss of Massachusetts General Hospital and his colleagues looked at more than 1,500 women who had been taking a placebo in the original study but then started taking the aromatase inhibitor letrozole after the study was stopped. It had been at least a year and as many as seven years since they had stopped taking tamoxifen.
Even so, compared with the risk to about 800 women who did not start taking letrozole, the risk of a recurrence was cut by 63 percent. In addition, the risk of the cancer spreading was cut 61 percent, and the chance that a new tumor would be found in the other breast dropped more than 80 percent.
A second paper, also published online yesterday by the Journal of Clinical Oncology, answered another crucial question. Hyman Muss of the University of Vermont did further analysis of the original study and found that letrozole, which is sold under the brand name Femara, was effective in cutting the recurrence risk for women of all ages, including those older than 70.
A third study, involving 1,598 patients, found that a different aromatase inhibitor, known as exemestane or by the brand name Aromasin, was equally effective at reducing the recurrence risk.
Together, the research indicates a need for a "paradigm shift" in treating breast cancer survivors, Nancy U. Lin and Eric P. Winer of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute wrote in an editorial accompanying the new research.
|
Women who survive breast cancer are often haunted by the fear that it might come back. But new research indicates that many more women than had been thought can do something to protect themselves.
| 11.861111 | 1 | 36 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031100931.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031100931.html
|
Google Cleared To Buy Ad Firm
|
2008031119
|
It also strengthens Google against its fiercest rival, Microsoft, another titan of technology that is also trying through acquisitions to win more of the online advertising market. Both companies seek the ability to better target ads at consumers based on their Web habits and tastes, a marketing practice that relies on amassing huge databases about online behavior.
Approval of the deal was granted over the objections of privacy advocates, who argued that consolidation of companies that control these databases further erodes consumers' control over their personal information.
The commission ruled Tuesday in Brussels "that the transaction would be unlikely to have harmful effects on consumers, either in ad serving or in online advertising markets."
The global reach and consumer base of Internet companies have complicated the regulatory process, requiring agencies in Europe and the United States to consider many acquisitions. The European Commission did not impose any conditions on the deal, removing the final regulatory hurdle for Google. The U.S. Federal Trade Commission approved the acquisition in December, ruling that it would not create a monopoly.
Microsoft opposed the deal on the grounds that it would put too much information about consumers under one company's control.
Microsoft declined Tuesday to comment on the commission's decision. In May, Microsoft bought aQuantive for $6 billion. AQuantive, like DoubleClick, helps advertisers measure the effectiveness of their ads and allows Web publishers to track and manage online advertising.
While defending its takeover of DoubleClick, Google has argued that Microsoft's proposed $44.6 billion acquisition of Yahoo would give the combined company too much control over the e-mail and instant-messaging markets.
Despite nearly a year of waiting, Google chief executive Eric E. Schmidt wrote in the company's blog, "we are no less excited today about the benefits that the combination of our two companies will bring." The combination will make advertising more relevant to consumers, he said. Google declined to comment beyond the blog posting.
DoubleClick, which leads the industry in banner and video advertisements on Web sites, installs software bits known as cookies on Internet users' computers to track the pages they view. Google retains users' search terms so they can be identified through their Internet protocol addresses. The combination of the tools could give companies more specific information about users' Internet habits and allow advertisers to more precisely target individuals.
In his blog, Schmidt said Google would preserve users' privacy. "Because user trust is paramount to the success of our business, users will continue to benefit from our commitment to protecting user privacy following this acquisition," he wrote.
The European Commission said its ruling does not diminish Google's obligation to observe European laws protecting the privacy of individuals in the processing of personal data.
Opponents of the deal, including consumer groups, argued that the commission's decision sets a precedent that will give companies more access to personal information and Web users less control over their privacy.
Jeff Chester, executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy in Washington, said approval of the Google-DoubleClick deal "perversely sets the stage for Microsoft's goal of acquiring Yahoo," which would also need regulatory approval. The decision has "literally paved the way for the emergence of a global digital duopoly over online advertising," he said.
Joseph Turow, professor at the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania, said the Google-DoubleClick approval means that regulators probably will also approve the sale of ChoicePoint to Reed Elsevier's LexisNexis, a deal announced last month that would create another information-gathering powerhouse.
With more data in the hands of fewer companies, consumers are likely to have less control over that information or how it is used, Turow said.
|
PARIS, March 11 -- European regulators Tuesday cleared Google's proposed $3.1 billion acquisition of Web-advertising giant DoubleClick, a cyber-marriage that would combine their abilities to track individuals' private lives and interests online.
| 16.952381 | 0.666667 | 1.047619 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/03/10/DI2008031002001.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/03/10/DI2008031002001.html
|
Eliot Spitzer Scandal
|
2008031119
|
Montgomery Village, Md.: Mr. Richburg, my understanding is that Gov. Spitzer has not been charged with a crime, but still could be. It seems that he likely would be using the little time he has (yesterday and today) to negotiate a possible deal that would avoid prosecution in exchange for his resignation. Perhaps he also "gives up" some others who also used this same "service." Should that happen, he would not lose his license to practice law, although his legal career prospects would be limited. If all that is true, it is not surprising that he did not already resign. Your thoughts?
Keith Richburg: We've heard much the same thing -- that he is now looking at his possible legal exposure, that might include concealing payments to a criminal enterprise or crossing state lines for prostitution purposes (the Mann act). But until he comes out and speaks again publicly, we are just speculating as to what he's doing now.
Spitzer Prosecuted: Although johns normally aren't prosecuted, what are the chances the U.S. Attorney prosecutes Gov. Spitzer to make an example of him? If Martha Stewart can spend time behind bars for her crime, why can't Spitzer be next? How often has the Mann Act been used to convict johns?
Keith Richburg: Good question as to what the U.S. Attorney might do, and unfortunately their office isn't tipping their hand. The Mann Act has been used against Charlie Chaplin and Chuck Berry, among others, so he would be in good company.
Washington: Two comments, basically. Regardless what I think of the governor or his alleged actions, are the standards so low that (some of) his supporters say he should not resign because others, such as Sen. Craig, didn't resign? Can't we have a higher standard than comparing people to others with low standards? Can't the accused decide on their own standards of ethics, guilt, etc.?
And, why, if you're not going to say anything, make a public (press conference) apology? Why say, publicly, that "I have acted in a way that violated the obligations to my family and that violate my, or any, sense of right and wrong ... I have disappointed and failed to live up to the standard that I expect of myself"? Unless you are willing to say "I did this" or "I did that" and "it was wrong; I apologize for doing it," then the public apology is simply a sham. Better the individual not say anything.
Keith Richburg: Interesting comments, so I'll just publish without comment of my own.
Harrisburg, Pa.: Why was anyone looking into Spitzer's financial transactions in the first place?
Keith Richburg: The IRS routinely looks at what it considers "suspicious" banking transactions and large, regular movements of money. In this case, when it was seen that large payments were moving from an account belonging to the Governor -- and going to what ended up being shell companies -- the agents notified the U.S. attorney's office. Apparently they suspected it might be a case of political corruption. Little did they realize...
Falls Church, Va.: Do we know yet who the other eight clients were?
Keith Richburg: We don't know -- and I'll bet there are some really nervous guys around today ... and maybe some wives now looking closely at the joint bank statements.
Detroit: In retrospect, was there any evidence or rumors among the media that Spitzer was involved with call girls?
Keith Richburg: Absolutely nothing that's come up yet -- that's why this story was such a shocker in New York. He was really seen as "Mr. Clean." We'll have to wait and see if anything else now comes out...
Baltimore: Is Joe Bruno the happiest man in Albany this week?
Keith Richburg: I'm sure he was doing his share of cartwheels down the Senate aisle.
Hampton, Va.: What's the penalty if Spitzer is convicted of soliciting prostitution and across-state-lines transport of prostitutes? Any chance he actually will face the music?
Keith Richburg: I'll have to consult a legal expert on the penalties, but I am told that the financial issues (concealing the payments, etc.) would bring more severe penalties than the prostitution. Whether he'll even be charged with anything is not known.
Spitzer: How do reporters keep a straight face when reporting on this story?
Keith Richburg: Darn, you can see my face?
Bow, N.H.: Where did he get the money? As I understand the facts, he only worked in the private sector for four or five years, and has been a government employee for the rest of the 20-plus years since he finished law school. I wouldn't think he could afford these kinds of rates on a government salary.
Keith Richburg: Spitzer's comes from a wealthy family. There was a bit of a scandal during one of his runs for attorney general, when it was revealed that his father had put of millions to finance his campaign. So the source of the money wouldn't likely be an issue -- unless it came from a campaign account!
Alexandria, Va.: Has anyone found "Kristen"? Any comments from her?
Keith Richburg: I am looking far and wide...
If you are out there, Kristen, please e-mail me.
Louisville, Ky.: Without commenting on the actual allegations, I'd like to know more about the anonymous source ("a person familiar with the case") who identified Spitzer as Client 9. Were they part of the government investigation? A political enemy? Any more you can give us? I'd also like to know if this federal investigation dotted all the Is and crossed all the Ts, or whether they perhaps took advantage of the warrantless spying that this administration uses so freely.
Keith Richburg: Our source was not a political enemy and was familiar with the case, and that was all the source would allow us to use in identifying him/her, so unfortunately that's all we can say.
And as far as we know now (and this is now), when the U.S. attorney realized that a high-ranking official was involved, they really followed procedure, which is to go straight to the U.S. attorney general for the okay to proceed.
Birmingham, Ala.: In regards to the other clients who used this "service," does it reason that it would take someone of similar significance to that of Gov. Spitzer to lead to his involvement with the group? I mean, the best marketing tactic for goods and services is word of mouth from someone you trust and respect. Thus, can we expect that someone of prominence and who is close to Spitzer likely will be implicated as well? I know that is a lot of supposition, but I'm just trying to predict what tomorrow's headline might read.
Keith Richburg: Good inferences, and I was thinking the same thing -- is the other shoe yet to drop? sounds a bit like the D.C. Madam case. Is there a little black book? Who are clients 1 through 8? And yes, usually the high-end gentlemen who use these particular services are referred by others clients, to ensure discretion.
Olney, Md.: Thanks to Hank Stuever for his hilarious article on Hotel Babylon. I too travel for work (returned from Southeast Asia yesterday), and like most women I like coming back to the hotel and "finding it all spiffed up and ... everything exactly where I left it." Seriously -- did the governor really think no one was going to stumble on this sooner or later?
washingtonpost.com: Hotel Babylon: For Men, A Promise Of Impunity (Post, March 11)
Keith Richburg: Back from Southeast Asia? I'm jealous!
And we love Hank Stuever.
Raleigh, N.C.: For Washington, the crime involved isn't the prostitution but rather the wire transfer across state lines to pay for the prostitution. This is what makes it a federal crime. As for the writer who asks why, it's simply because the size of the transfers naturally raise curiosities in the banking world. What's really amazing is that Spitzer should have known all of this.
Keith Richburg: Yes, you put it better than I did.
Safety?: Any indication what Kristen and the booker meant when they talked about how Client 9 liked to engage in practices that some of the women thought were unsafe? Is this story going to get even more sordid?
Keith Richburg: You picked up on that too, huh? I could speculate, but this is a family newspaper. We will try to keep it all above-board here. But that's the problem with this story for the governor -- people are going to start asking those kinds of questions. The New York press corps is relentless, and they are now totally focused on getting more details on this story.
Hampton, Va.: $5,000 an hour?! And this man is in charge of New York's economy?
Keith Richburg: Hey, we haven't seen or heard from Kristen yet.
New York: The local New York TV stations are declaring that Gov. Spitzer may resign as early as today. How does this press know this? Is there no presumption that he might try and fight this?
Keith Richburg: He may try and fight. I think he, his wife, and his inner circle are now trying to figure out the best path. But he's maintained his silence since that terse press conference. So we don't really know. He's an ambitious politician at the height of his power. Walking away is huge, and would ruin his career. And there are precedents for staying and fighting -- Bill Clinton being Exhibit A. One big question will be whether the prosecutors are considering bringing any charges.
Chattanooga, Tenn.: The articles on the Web mention many other leaders that have made the same error and not resigned; what are the chances that he would attempt the same thing?
Keith Richburg: See the answer above.
Tampa, Fla.: "May" force him out of office? He already has stated his mea culpa. Assuming that he did solicit prostitution -- and he wasn't at the Bunny Ranch in Nevada at the time (where prostitution is legal) -- he has committed a crime, correct? You commit a crime -- especially considering you are a former DA of New York city and the current governor of New York state (and legally should have known better, if not morally), you lose your job. Of course, he can make the argument that he's innocent until proven guilty, but in a roundabout way, he did confess, true?
Keith Richburg: Well, he never did confess to anything specific -- just that he hasn't lived up to his own standards and let his family and the public down. It was a very lawyerly statement that didn't actually admit to anything, if you read it word for word. Nothing that could be used against him as a confession.
Now tell us more about this Bunny Ranch...
Wall Street: Until yesterday, I had no idea the enmity Wall Street had for Eliot Spitzer. Why were some of his overzealous prosecutions not more covered? Didn't Spitzer cost Ken Langone of Home Depot his CEO job, even though no crimes were committed?
washingtonpost.com: Shock and Smirks on Wall Street as Longtime Foe Spitzer Squirms (Post, March 11)
Keith Richburg: Some of his biggest Wall Street busts were covered at the time. That's how he made his name, as the so-called Sheriff of Wall Street.
It's never too early...: I was struck by Mrs. Spitzer's resemblance to Jennifer Aniston, which got me to wondering: Who you think should play Eliot Spitzer in the miniseries or movie?
Keith Richburg: Hmmm, maybe Kevin Costner. Didn't he play Eliot Ness?
Troy, N.Y.: I remember seeing the Eliot-Spitzer-for-governor ads when I moved to New York. He talked about how on Day 1 it all changes, and how he was going to reform Albany, make it work for the people. That has not exactly happened. For those not following New York politics, his approval rating now is similar to Bush's, despite a Putinesque 69 percent gubernatorial victory a bit more than a year ago. Any speculation that his difficulties as governor led him to escort services, or was he doing this while busting prostitution rings as attorney general?
Keith Richburg: That's a question we'll have to see if we ever get answered. It's hard to believe, though, that you have a few political defeats in the legislature so you decide to start frequenting a high-end call girl service as a kind of therapy.
Olney, Md.: MSNBC just had breaking news that if Spitzer doesn't resign in 48 hours, the state assembly will start impeachment proceedings.
Keith Richburg: Yes, I had been hearing that from Republicans. But don't forget, they don't control the assembly (the lower house) and are hanging on by a thread in the senate. It's unclear what the Democrats would do.
Bethesda, Md.: Are any of Client 9's criminal prosecutions in jeopardy because of this matter? If I were someone who'd been sent to jail by this prosecutor, shouldn't I be given some leeway to reopen a case that had some questionable evidence?
Keith Richburg: Interesting question. I guess one of those people he busted in those prostitution round-ups as attorney general might be thinking of filing for a mistrial. Not sure how far that would go, though.
Massachusetts: What do we know about how the state police were involved in either knowing about it and/or hiding it? Are there other dates and hotel rooms? Do we think he put himself on the congressional committee witness list in order to justify the travel to Washington?
Keith Richburg: All good and important questions. We know as a governor he has 24/7 police protection. So the question is out there -- what did the troopers know and when did they know it? There were apparently other times he used the same service, from the words of Client 9 on the wiretaps. ("Yup ... same as always.") And what we have reported is that Spitzer was not initially scheduled to speak at the hearing, but suddenly decided he really needed to go to Washington at the last minute to give his views on insurance bonds.
Get the facts straight!: She got $4,300 for four hours, her train ticket, cab fare, hotel and room service/mini bar. So really it's probably like $1,000 an hour
Keith Richburg: Does that make it more of a bargain?
Plus there was the initial deposit sent to the hooker booker.
New York: Given that some of these women were charging $5,500 an hour, is there any chance that Gov. Spitzer might pursue the head of the Emperors Club for "excessive compensation"?
Keith Richburg: I think if he was not a satisfied customer, he probably could have found a cheaper service around.
My question is, who imports a call girl from New York to Washington?
Birmingham, Ala.: From the reports I have read, it seems as though Spitzer was a repeat customer of the "service." Have their been any rumblings about how long Spitzer has had a relationship with this "service"? Did he participate in this "service" while he was New York's Attorney General?
Keith Richburg: Those are the exact questions we are all asking now. ... I think there may be another shoe yet to drop here.
Anonymous: Why has there been so little focus placed on uncovering the entity that owned this prostitution ring? Isn't it fair to speculate that it is organized crime, and that by becoming one of its customers, Spitzer not only was putting himself at risk but also putting at risk the state of New York? By making himself vulnerable to blackmail, he made the constituents of New York State also vulnerable. So, Alan Dershowitz saying that it comes down to a man and a prostitute is just deceptive spin -- it has many more implications than that.
Keith Richburg: I had not thought of the possibility that he may have been opening himself up to blackmail, but it's an interesting thought.
I think more about the ownership of this service will come out at the trial (the four arrested last week I believe have all pleaded not guilty). But it seems like a fairly small, tight-knit operation run by email and cell phone.
Pseudonym: What is the background of George Fox, the name Spitzer used to register at hotels? All I've heard is he is a political friend of Spitzer's.
Keith Richburg: Fox is a friend/fundraiser for Spitzer, who seemed surprised when a reporter asked him if he had accompanied the governor.
Interesting, that only some of these call girls actually recognized Spitzer as Spitzer, since he'd be one of the most recognizable faces in the state. Guess they don't look at the newspapers much.
Should Washington Call Girls be Insulted?: Seriously, I wondered that too -- why import a call girl? Then again, why even leave New York -- is he going to blame it on Rudy's cleanup job in Times Square?
Keith Richburg: It's like taking coals to Newcastle. I don't get that part either. Maybe we should find some D.C. call girls for reaction.
I would suspect -- and this is pure, unadulterated speculation -- that as governor of New York, he couldn't just check into a New York hotel without being noticed. But in the District, he probably would not be easily recognized (except by real political junkies).
Arlington, Va.: What can you tell us about the current lieutenant governor, Paterson? Other than his coming from a prominent Harlem political family, I know nothing about him.
Keith Richburg: People I have spoken with like him a lot. He's legally blind, went to Hofstra law school, was in the State Senate (the first African American, I believe, but don't quote me), and the highest-ranking black elected official in the state.
"My question is, who imports a call girl from New York to Washington?": Maybe he remembered what happened to Marion Barry when he hired a local D.C. call girl?
Maryland: Many cases like this come to the attention of authorities because of routine filing of currency transaction reports (required for movements of cash in and out of bank accounts totaling greater than $10,000 in a single day) and/or suspicious activity reports (filed when the customer looks like he or she is trying to avoid the currency transaction report, among other reasons -- and since "structuring" is what was mentioned in this case, that likely was the issue here).
Huntington, Ind.: You said he booked a trip to testify at last minute in Washington. If he set up to testify just to get the trip to book the prostitute, wouldn't that add misappropriation to the potential charges?
Keith Richburg: That's exactly what Spitzer's Republican opponents will be looking into, if he stays in office. They'll want to compare the wiretap prostitution transactions with his travel schedule. Then you start getting into the costs of moving his security detail around. It could get ugly.
Washington: My guess is that he just wanted to use one agency, and that's why he imported to Washington -- did not want to expose himself twice. I bet he knew who owned the agency, had them checked out and knew he could deal with them.
Keith Richburg: Good theory. Sounds right.
Olney, Md.: I get that a crime is a crime is a crime and that no one is above the law -- especially someone as sanctimonious as the soon-to-be former governor of New York; the comment about a link to organized crime is totally valid. But the American obsession with prosecuting prostitution still slays me. I'm infinitely more concerned with my tanking retirement account, the war in Iraq and women's rights in Afghanistan. Of course, this story is going to be a continuing source of amusement.
Keith Richburg: Well, there is an entire other debate about whether prostitution should be illegal (as long as it involves adults, no coercion, etc). I covered the story in the Netherlands when they legalized prostitution and brothels a few years ago, and the hope there was that legalizing it would remove the criminal element, and also allow girls who had problems with "johns" to go to the police, since they were engaged in a legal business. Also, the Dutch believe that if you legalize it, you can regulate it and go after those who traffick women and minors. It's a debate that's bound to continue.
Prescott, Ariz.: Do you think Spitzer will fight this with an "selective prosecution" argument or something of the like? Basically, because johns are not prosecuted like this normally, he can make the argument that he is being singled out unfairly because he has enemies in the U.S. attorney general's office. Sen. David Vitter skated on his prosecution, e.g.
Keith Richburg: I'm going to post this and the next comment, as you two seem to be talking in the same point.
El Paso, Texas: Sorry for the late post. Where I come from (I am a criminal lawyer) johns most certainly are prosecuted, and there are sting operations to catch johns who are charged with "prostitution" just as the prostitutes. I'm not for or against Gov. Spitzer but, were I his lawyer, I would worry about his Internet usage, as a motivation for prosecution and revival of the Mann Act.
Keith Richburg: Here's the second comment to that point.
Keith Richburg: I think that's an hour, folks. Thanks much for an interesting and lively discussion.
Keith Richburg: For all of you D.C. call girls out there, let us know if you have any reaction to this. And if anyone out there knows Kristen....
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.
| 107.829268 | 0.658537 | 0.853659 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/03/10/DI2008031001125.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/03/10/DI2008031001125.html
|
Forced Out
|
2008031119
|
A real estate boom that transformed neighborhoods across D.C. also took a human toll: bitter fights erupted as landlords drove out hundreds of tenants in order to convert buildings to condominiums. Post reporters Debbie Cenziper and Sarah Cohen were online Tuesday, March 11 at noon ET to take questions about the paper's investigation.
Debbie Cenziper: Hi everyone. Thanks for joining us. Sarah and I are here to take questions.
Fort Washington, D.C.: This is clearly a bad situation, and I hope your series will bring about needed changes. But there are irresponsible people in all walks of life, and for every landlord who lets things decay, there is a tenant who actively contributes to that decay. And D.C. is known nationwide as the place where you do not want to own rental property.
My late husband and I owned a few D.C. rental properties until we were driven off. The 1970 Landlord/Tenant Handbook said flat out, "Failure to pay rent is not cause for eviction." That has now been changed, but a tenant can still disconnect a wire to the oven and claim the place is uninhabitable. Or break a window or take a hammer to the required smoke detector and run crying to the D.C. Housing Authority. I've seen pigstys (I grew up on a farm) that were cleaner than some of our properties after the tenants moved out.
I don't know what the answer is, since you can't legislate responsible behavior, but I do know there are two sides to this story. Thanks for letting me have my say.
Debbie Cenziper: You've got an interesting perspective, Fort Washington. D.C. is indeed known as a city with very strong tenant rights laws, and there are certainly cases of irresponsible tenants and responsible landlords who are trying to work within the laws and make a living at the same time.
The tenants we met were doing what they could to make their situations livable -- mopping the floors, buying jumbo chains and locks to secure buildings when landlords wouldn't step in. One woman used bleach and rubber gloves to clean used syringes and condoms off the floor of her apartment building after strangers broke in. She couldn't get help from the landlord.
Washington, D.C.: Thank you for exposing the corruption that started under Anthony Williams. Everyone is always bashing Marion Berry, but Anthony Williams could have cared less about the people of this city. His love was developers and big business. I just want to state that the comments made by many bloggers to the article today disgust me. I am terrified to know that people in this area have so much hate toward poor people. I am well off and could never look down on anyone. To those cold hearted, ruthless people ..No one know where their future lies. Just because you are on top today doesn't mean that you will remain there. The same people that you stepped on and looked down upon on your way up are going to be the same people you may need a helping hand from on your way down.
I've had enough of this. It is too depressing.
Debbie Cenziper: Almost everyone we met was working, sometimes two jobs. We met city government employees, secretaries, construction workers, waiters and college students. Many of the people we met simply couldn't afford to move -- it can cost thousands of dollars to give up an apartment and come up with the money for moving expenses and deposits for a new place.
Arlington, Va.: As someone looking to buy a home, is there a way that I can verify that a condo building I might purchase didn't use these kind of tactics with former tenants?
Debbie Cenziper: Hi Arlington. We studied building code violation reports and court records from landlord-tenant court, among other things, to learn about the histories of troubled properties. Getting records from DCRA can take time.
By the way, there's an online link on our series that takes you to DCRA's website for requesting records.
Washington, D.C.: I think you article is so slanted. D.C. is the most tenant-friendly jurisdiction in the country. Tenants can basically stop paying rent for six months and trash your house and you have to pay thousands to evict them. Why don't you interview a bunch of landlords to hear the other side of the story, of how low income tenants lets dozens of people live with them, and destroy the property, etc. No other city in the country gives so much power to tenants. I will never understand why D.C. punishes people who actually manage to own their own properties!
Sarah Cohen: This is one perspective
Washington, D.C.: I don't believe you examined the vacant property tax law, which imposes a 5 percent tax on vacant properties. If the owners are admitting to DCRA that the properties are vacant to avoid paying the 5 percent conversion fee, then that's also an admission to DCRA to pass along to Office of Tax and Revenue to collect the 5 percent vacant real property tax. The owner has to pay one or the other but they're not. Why?
Sarah Cohen: This issue was a small obsession of mine while reporting the series. I didn't understand why one arm of DCRA would declare a property vacant without proof that the owner had properly registered the property.
For those of you less intimate with the vacant property law: the government considers them a nuisance because they attract squatters, and can become dangerous. So there is a very high property tax on vacant buildings, and owners have to pay a fee and guarantee they are properly boarded up and safe. DCRA did not require that this registration be done before they granted the vacancy exemption that we wrote about.
A new agency now administers the tax break, but its officials said they basically have to take the owner's word that the property is vacant, and approve it unless there are big red flags.
Herndon, Va.: Too bad we can't make some of those landlords live in those buildings.
I also agree with the poster who was disgusted at some of the blog postings. People, with the economy going the way it is nobody knows how or where they'll be living in a year or two. Most families are a job loss or major illness away from being on the streets. Some compassion, please.
It was an amazing experience to meet the families featured in these stories.
One lawyer representing families on 10th Place SE (featured in the paper today) described a father who doesn't have heat. He keeps the oven on at night to make sure his kids are warm. Problem is, heat from the oven makes the air in his apartment really dry, and his daughter gets nose bleeds. So he boils hot water as a makeshift humidifier.
We met another woman, not featured in the stories, who spreads paint thinner around her daughter's toddler bed to keep the bed bugs at bay -- much of the building is infested. She doesn't sleep because she's so worried that her daughter will get bit up at night.
Rockville, Md.: Even with my awareness of the District and its problems, this shocks me. There is no justification for such activities. What does the new mayor say?
Debbie Cenziper: We haven't talked to him yet. Late last year, as we reported, he proposed legislation that would ban developers with outstanding housing code violations from converting to condos. Hoping to talk to him soon.
Arlington, Va.: Baltimore and NYC have an active community of public interest attorneys and local nonprofit organizations that help residents fight owners of derelict property and city officials whose inaction aids these owners. Will your series address what role these nonprofits play in D.C. and how D.C. laws either permit this or need revision to permit?
Debbie Cenziper: We talked to a lot of housing advocates and attorneys representing tenants, who are working across the city on these issues. I recently moved here from Miami, where I spent almost two years writing about housing. The advocates here are extremely organized and active.
Washington, D.C.: I want to know why DCRA is so lax on owners of multi-units (developers) while extremely strict on owners renting out single-family homes. DCRA takes owners of single family homes through the ringer to rent out property. First you have to get a business license, then go through a rigorous home inspection. Then I forgot to mention that you have to spend all day in DCRA to get the business license -- if you are lucky. It doesn't make sense to me. Why isn't the playing field equal? Just shows that big business and money continue to run D.C. Thanks Anthony Williams!
Sarah Cohen: And this is another.
Sarah Cohen: Here's another perspective.
Re: Slanted Article ???: I don't agree with Washington, D.C. that the article is slanted. Didn't the article show how the current system is not working because of less than honest tactics by both tenants and landlords ?
Washington, D.C.: I would like to commend the both of you for this excellent series of articles. I am a former renter of almost 25 and I have worked as a tenant advocate for nearly 15 years. I know what you write is absolutely true. I have had generally good experiences with all my landlords and none of them ever tried to empty any of the buildings I lived in by letting it run down. I therefore know the difference between good landlords and slum lords. Your articles are the M.O. of greedy slumlords trying to make money at any costs.. The other side of your article is about how an agency so ineptly run, continues to fail in its duty to protect the health, safety and welfare of tenants.
The mayor should send a clear message to these slumlords that we don't want you in this city. The attorney general should prosecute slumlords as criminals who are risking the health and safety of residents of the District of Columbia. The city council should pass laws which will enable the city to take these buildings from slumlords and put them into receivership so that the bldgs can be fixed and the bills are paid. The mayor should also extract the housing inspection functions from DCRA and provide funds to set up a separate organization which will implement a systematic citywide inspection system of all multifamily housing in the city and provide funding to hire inspectors and training to get the job done.
Last, I would like to tell your readers there is a tenant receivership law which allows tenants to request a receiver for the building who will collect rent to pay for repairs and bills. They should contact the Office of the Tenant Advocate for help on this and any other tenant problem.
Sarah Cohen: Thanks for the comment, and for the information for renters.
We didn't write about the attorney general's role in all of this. There have been only a handful of criminal prosecutions in recent years.
Washington, D.C.: I'm curious about how the decision was made to do this series. I must say the pieces struck me as The Post looking for scandal where none really existed. The pure speculation without proof of the arson by the building owners was quite a stretch. Why are these stories any different from the usual D.C. bashing The Post does with regularity?
Debbie Cenziper: Thanks for the question.
Just to clarify, the fire on Vernon Street was officially ruled an arson. Fire investigators have not determined who was responsible.
It capped an 18-month battle between tenants and the owners, and was the subject of a series of District Council hearings. We felt it was important to take a look back at one of the more widely publicized and contentious disputes of its kind in the city.
Silver Spring, Md.: The article was very painful to read. In both your article and the Monday article, it was stated that neither landlords nor tenants would cooperate. The tenants would not allow the D.C. Government staff to see how terrible things were. Yet, you show these horrific pictures.
I am confused. If the tenants refuse entry, why is that. Also - for the sake of the children in the building - is there a way to donate blankets, money, etc?
Debbie Cenziper: This is a good question, Silver Spring.
DCRA says it can't inspect apartments without permission from tenants. Housing advocates say the agency doesn't try very hard to reach them, that there's little communication and that inspections are often canceled if someone isn't home.
At the same, some tenants are also incredibly afraid their buildings will be condemned and they'll be put out of their homes without assistance from the government.
But I met very few tenants who have refused access to inspectors.
Other readers have asked about donations. We'll try to post some info on the web site for the series. If you want to follow up, please call us directly:
Washington, D.C.: I am curious if either of you rent your housing. I am concerned that there might be retaliation by real estate interests because of your reporting. Plus, do you know if The Washington Post Company has received any threats to cut some real estate advertising in The Post because of your stories?
Sarah Cohen: Right now, neither of us our renters. But I've been a renter for many, many years -- for a long time in the District.
We have heard of retaliation and we're following up.
On the advertising -- I don't know that we'd hear about it if there was any retaliation there. The company keeps the news and advertising sides pretty separate.
Washington, D.C.: Isn't this an indictment of the rent control system? Rent control creates perverse incentives that lead to bad outcomes. Why not scrap rent control for a system of payments to lower-income families?
Sarah Cohen: This is a great question -- thanks for bringing it up.
The rent-control issue wasn't directly addressed in our stories, but we've been hearing from landlords about their frustration with it. It's probably a good question for the politicians.
The series addressed whether owners were following the intent of the District's law on condo conversions -- which has been on the books for 28 years -- and whether owners were forcing tenants out in dangerous ways
Washington, D.C.: Several of the comments so far have suggested that many posting comments on the article in the Washington Post blog are heartless and have no compassion.
For the most part, that's simply not true. No one likes to see people living in filth and bad conditions.
What we are commenting on is the root causes for the situation.
Everyone (or most everyone) would like to see a fix to these problems. It's just that some of do more than just react with a knee-jerk condemnation of landlords to the exclusion of other factors, like rent control or tenant damages.
So please don't assume just because people say there are other factors at play they are hateful or want to see people live in squalor. That's just not the case.
Washington, D.C.: As it relates to bedbugs and roaches, have you considered that many tenants bring bedbugs and roaches to their apartment? Many people in these apartments have extended families that come and go. Boyfriends and girlfriends that come and go. They haul their belongings in and out bringing and taking whatever with them. A landlord couldn't possible continue to exterminate a small building when people are coming and going. I can't enforce cleanliness.
Debbie Cenziper: You've raised a good point. Thanks for making it.
The cases we found were building-wide infestations, with little or no extermination. Tenants were repeatedly bombing their apartments, throwing away furniture etc. One woman had her couch covered in thick plastic to keep the bugs away.
Arlington, Va.: Kudos on a well-researched, well-written piece. How long can we expect to read about this, i.e. how many articles do you plan to publish on this?
Debbie Cenziper: Yep, please keep reading. We have more stories planned.
If you have tips and story ideas, send them my way:
Washington, D.C.: Debbie, Great articles. I've been navigating the DC Govt agencies (DCRA, OTA, DHCD) for nearly a year now - to no avail. They're either too understaffed or not knowledgeable enough to acually do anything. The legal system is not a good option for most people in these circumstances becuase if they don't have the means to move into a better situation, they usually wont have the means for legal representation.
Sarah Cohen: I can understand your frustration.
We had a lot of difficulty even finding records and then more getting access to them. Many of the records were inaccurate when we did get them, and we had to return many times to get things right.
So we feel for your frustration - it's a rough government to navigate.
Debbie Cenziper: Thanks for writing in today. Enjoyed it.
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.
| 82.439024 | 0.634146 | 0.829268 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/03/09/DI2008030902237.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/03/09/DI2008030902237.html
|
The War Over the War
|
2008031119
|
More coverage of The War Over the War | War Over the War discussion transcripts
Ricks has covered the U.S. military for The Washington Post since 2000. Until the end of 1999 he had the same beat at the Wall Street Journal, where he was a reporter for 17 years. His book, " Fiasco: The American Military Adventure in Iraq" was published in July 2006.
Newport Beach, Calif.: How is it that eight U.S. soldiers killed in one day in Iraq doesn't warrant front-page treatment in The Washington Post? Is the paper that out of touch with how much we, as Americans, care about our troops?
washingtonpost.com: Eight U.S. Soldiers Die in Iraq Attacks (Post, March 11)
Thomas E. Ricks: I can't speak for all Americans. But I can count, and there are fewer questions here today than ever before. So, judging by that and other recent indications, I think Americans really aren't paying that much attention to the Iraq war right now.
Black Mountain, N.C.: Whatever else it was, one thing a "surge" was for was to quiet the streets of Baghdad and play to the "safe streets" mentality of brain-dead, religious-right bigots. What spin will "sell" the renewed violence in a key, supposedly-safe, district of Baghdad -- toward deliberately-targeted American troops?
Thomas E. Ricks: I'm not sure that anyone was selling Mansour -- the neighborhood where five soldiers were killed -- as "safe." The U.S. military tends to talk in more constrained terms, about making an area secure, or reducing the level of violence to something acceptable in terms of Iraq's history.
I for one wouldn't define anywhere in Baghdad as safe. Better than it was, sure. But a long ways from strolling down the street without concern.
Reston, Va.: Two quick questions. First, do you think the recent attacks augur a renewed insurgency, capitalizing on the "drawdown," or was this just a lucky strike for the terrorists? Second, are we seeing any real progress on the political front -- is the surge really working?
Thomas E. Ricks: The surge is working, tactically, in that it is improving security, despite the recent hits. Those are to be expected--no one has given up in Iraq. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to see violence increase this year. Why? For several reasons: Various adversaries have been studying the U.S. military for new vulnerabilities. Also, more refugees will be returning from other countries, if only because they are running out of money, and many will want their old houses back, only to find them occupied by sectarian militias. Third, the patience of some Sunnis may run out if the Shiite-dominated Baghdad government continues to drag its feet. Fourth, holding provincial elections may be the right thing to do, but it is likely to increase turbulence. Finally, the U.S. ability to bring security and otherwise influence events will diminish as the "surge" troops head home and aren't replaced.
Anonymous: How safe is Camp Victory?
Thomas E. Ricks: I've been there three times over the last year--May, November, and January -- and I find it very safe. Yes, some rockets landed there one morning at 7 a.m. But I think the biggest danger at Victory is the terrific food. I always eat too much there -- especially when they serve Indian food.
Fort Bragg, N.C.: Can someone remind me what Gen. Lute is doing? Has his role changed or diminished significantly?
Thomas E. Ricks: Let me know if you hear anything. I almost never hear him mentioned. Of course, some might interpret that to mean that he is doing his job, and making things run so smoothly that no one is complaining to the media about him.
Arlington, Va.: With eight U.S. soldiers recently killed in attacks in Iraq, and with violence there continuing, do you think any significant troop drawdown is realistic this year? If not this year, when? What would be the circumstances that would allow it?
Thomas E. Ricks: My best guess is that troop numbers will come down this spring and by mid-July will be at about 135,000, close to the pre-surge level.
The drawdown will then pause for several months, with probably one more brigade of about 4,000 troops coming home in December.
Burke, Va.: Have you read the soon-to-be released book by Douglas Feith? Where is he on the mark and where is he totally off-base?
Thomas E. Ricks: Yeah, I read a manuscript from the editing process--it looked to me like what book publishers call "page proofs."
My biggest problem with the book is that he condemns the "conventional wisdom" or "accepted narrative" of the Iraq war--essentially as a bunch of screw-ups and lack of planning--but doesn't really address that narrative. Instead, he portrays a parallel universe where he and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld were right but were undercut by those rats at State and CIA.
Here is the summary I wrote with my colleague Karen DeYoung for the Sunday edition of The Post.
Fairfax, Va.: I saw the piece from your "Inbox" and I too was struck by Part D (Timing of the Dissent) in Col. Don M. Snider's formulation. I guess if I were in the shoes of a general, even if I disagreed with a policy I might not necessarily speak out immediately; I don't have a monopoly on wisdom. I guess, in my mind, it would depend more on whether I felt opposing views were at least given proper consideration.
washingtonpost.com: Tom Ricks's Inbox: When is it legitimate for a general to criticize a war? (Post, March 9)
Thomas E. Ricks: That's a good point. I think what Col. Snider was trying to say was that if something is really worth dissenting about, it is worth dissenting about at the time of disagreement -- not months or years later when it might be more convenient. I suspect he had in mind, for example, retired Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, who commanded U.S. forces in Iraq in 2003-2004, but didn't step up and criticize the war until years later.
Silver Spring, Md.: I read your article on Feith's book in disbelief, because it sure seems the clown is still cooking the books. Or is it such an early draft that he expects to fill in blanks and clean up the contradictions?
washingtonpost.com: Ex-Defense Official Assails Colleagues Over Run-Up to War (Post, March 9)
Thomas E. Ricks: Nah, my impression is that this was a draft from pretty late in the editing process. It wasn't a typewritten manuscript.
Peaks Island, Maine: What is your view of the "State of Iraq" report by O'Hanlon et al in the Sunday New York Times, which runs with the lead "Iraq's security turnaround has continued through the winter"? Among other things the report states that Iraqi security forces now number 425,000. Does O'Hanlon pull our collective leg in implying that there exists this number of people who, by implication, are capable of perform at least the low-level security functions? If they are as numerous (and capable) as he implies, why are Iraqi forces not doing the patrols that result in U.S. troop casualties?
washingtonpost.com: The State of Iraq: An Update (New York Times, March 9)
Thomas E. Ricks: Hey, Peaks Island! My best to everyone at the general store, where I am sure "Fiasco" is a bestseller, even if it doesn't mention Manny Ramirez or any other of the Red Sox.
I think O'Hanlon does a good job. I pay close attention to what he writes. He was one of the first to pick up on the turnaround in Baghdad security trends -- and got a lot of grief from people who should know better.
Now get back out there and catch those lobsters! Or whatever it is Mainers do during the winter.
Bow, N.H.: Do you ever wonder whether maybe Shinseki was right, and we needed to go in with more troops on Day 1?
Thomas E. Ricks: Yeah, I do. I used to think General Shinseki was right. (The background here is that in the spring of 2003, before the invasion, he told Congress, in response to questioning, that the thought several hundred thousand troops would be needed to occupy Iraq. For his honesty, he was denounced by Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and others.)
But the more I think about it, the less sure I am. Why? Because U.S. troops, and their commanders, weren't trained or equipped or mentally prepared to deal with the rise of an insurgency. So there is a good chance that twice as many troops might have made twice as many errors. For more on this, see the chapter in my book 'Fiasco' on "The Descent Into Abuse."
Boston: "I can't speak for all Americans. But I can count, and there are fewer questions here today than ever before. So, judging by that and other recent indications, I think Americans really aren't paying that much attention to the Iraq war right now." Are you covering the news, or what is popular?
Thomas E. Ricks: I'm covering the news. I am working on Iraq full-time this year, because I think it is important. But that doesn't mean Americans want to read it.
Newfoundland, Canada: If you graph violence in Iraq from the past four years, there is a lull every January or February and an upsurge and peak later in the spring, usually April or May. A second surge occurs in most of the falls, peaking around November or December, though that was less prominent this year. Why is this? Weather? Religious reasons? Is the recent seem upsurge part of this cycle?
Thomas E. Ricks: Two reasons, I think: Weather and religion.
It really does get cold in Iraq during the winter. I just think it is hard for fighters to hang out all night in the wind and cold and mist, than it is for them to do so in the summer, when the night time is the right time to move around. So spring is when fighters start moving back out again.
I think fall has seen spikes in violence because for the last several years, Ramadan has some then -- first late October, then (moving forward under the lunar calendar of Islam) to early October, then to mid-September. In 2007, the violence of Ramadan was lower than it was in 2006, but about the same it was in 2005.
Sacramento, Calif.: An historical question: Is there a war in U.S. history that widely was disapproved of, yet public opinion turned around and victory enthusiastically was pursued? Is it a valid question regarding the Iraq War?
Thomas E. Ricks: I dunno. I think the closest parallel to the war in Iraq may be the U.S. war in the Philippines around 1900. I don't know if there was any reliable public opinion polling back then -- but I doubt it because I didn't see it mentioned in Brian Linn's terrific history of that war. The U.S. military did get better at fighting that war. On the other hand, the occupation lasted several additional decades.
Pacific Northwest: Mr. Ricks, violence in Pakistan seems to be increasing dramatically. This cannot bode well for democratization in that country -- nor for the ongoing war in Afghanistan, which also seems to be experiencing an increase in insurgent violence. Could you share your thoughts about these developments? Thanks.
Thomas E. Ricks: Yeah, I am really worried about events in both Pakistan and Afghanistan. What is happening in those two countries presents much more of a threat to us, I think, than anything happening in Iraq.
The real worry is that Pakistan descends into chaos, and then control of its nuclear arsenal goes up for grabs. I don't believe there ever has been a nuclear-armed state in as fragile a position as Pakistan is now.
For a variety of reasons, I've been reading a lot about the Spanish Civil War lately. The ferocity on both sides was astonishing. I'd hate to think of what one side would have done with a nuke.
Greenville, S.C.: Thanks to you and Karen DeYoung for the preview of Douglas Feith's memoir "War and Decision." Your article got more than 500 online comments. I read about a hundred of them and couldn't find one that had anything positive to say about Feith. Most of the comments excoriated him for serving his superiors the cooked intelligence that justified a war of aggression against a nation that was no significant threat, and had no connection with the Sept. 11 attack or al-Qaeda. Does Feith, in his book, acknowledge the extent to which he is reviled among the thousands, maybe millions of Americans who actually have followed the events of this war from the beginning, or does he assume his readers are the brainwashed and ignorant viewers of Fox News?
Thomas E. Ricks: No, he really doesn't address any of that. Rather he takes the posture that everything you know about the war is wrong, and he is gonna take the high road and correct the record.
Lafayette, Calif.: Tom, listened to your book -- so great. The deaths -- they keep coming, but they aren't on the front page. Why not? They are soldiers with names, faces young. My son is in Kirkuk and they just put a young soldier to bunk with him because he has lost three best buddies from boot camp. My son is a great comfort, but where are the stories? Where is the sacrifice? Thanks for listening, from a Blue Star Mom.
Thomas E. Ricks: First, thank you for your family's contribution. I think it is harder having a relative in Iraq -- especially a son or daughter -- than it actually is to be in Iraq.
On the coverage: Well, we keep doing a lot of stories. The other day two of our reporters were hiking all over Kurdistan working on a story. I just think a lot of America is bored with Iraq, or perhaps despairing of it. Five years is a long time to be in a war. The Iraq war is now longer than any of our overseas wars but Vietnam, and I think it will wind up far longer.
Fairfax, Va.: If troops stayed at 135,000 how long would it take for us to achieve victory in Iraq? McCain is thinking long-term, but what is a reasonable estimate, short of 100 years?
Thomas E. Ricks: Our troops are not going to achieve victory in Iraq, and they aren't being asked to. Rather they are being asked to help achieve conditions which will lead to political progress and so allow Iraq to have some sort of "sustainable security."
How long is that gonna take? My guess is at least another three to five years. You wouldn't need 135,000 troops for that duration, but you'd probably need 40,000 to 80,000 during that time.
South Portland, Maine: Do you find that the majority of troops (enlisted) fall into the gung-ho category, or -- as I found in Vietnam -- the lemme-outta-here group?
Thomas E. Ricks: More gung-ho than get-me-outta-here. I think the improvement in security, and the sense that we finally have a meaningful strategy, has made many soldiers feel better about the sacrifices they and their buddies have made. That said, soldiers on their third tours are getting tired. I am worried not just about soldiers leaving the Army, but especially the quality of those who are getting out.
Manhattan, Kan.: One quick question: Are we building a welfare state in Iraq that will remain dependent forever on the generosity of the American taxpayer?
Thomas E. Ricks: I don't think so. After all -- at the risk of sounding like Paul Wolfowitz -- they do have lots and lots of oil.
That said, right now the welfare state we have is a system where we are paying lots of former insurgents $10 a day not to kill us. I can live with that.
Chicago: It seems there has been a significant uptick in violence in Iraq. Is this correct? If so, to what do you attribute it?
Thomas E. Ricks: I don't think so. Rather, I think there have been a few spectacular attacks. But, unfortunately, time will tell.
Washington: I think that it seems to many of us who follow the Iraq conflict casually (for lack of a better word -- I mean something less than keenly), Iraq is in a holding pattern at the moment. What do you think is the next event/decision that will change the current pattern and move Iraq more toward stability and security, or instability and insecurity? Do you think it could be some change in tactics/position on the part of one of the Iraqi political figures?
Thomas E. Ricks: I follow it keenly, and I agree with your assessment.
The problem with a holding pattern is that it is very easy for that to morph into a spiral of slow descent.
The event that would move Iraq forward is some sort of change in its politics, especially the emergence of someone who transcends differences and seems to offer a new path -- kind of an Iraqi version of Nelson Mandela. So far, no sign of that.
There are lots of ways for it to go wrong.
Seattle: Do you feel that we don't want to dedicate the proper diplomatic and military attention to Pakistan and Afghanistan, or that we just can't with the commitments to Iraq?
Thomas E. Ricks: I am not sure there are any good answers. All I know is that the path we have been on doesn't seem to be working.
San Diego: Mr. Ricks, have you read Michael Scheuer's new book, "Marching Towards Hell"? If so, what are your thoughts? I found it every bit as disturbing and incisive as your own book, "Fiasco."
Thomas E. Ricks: San Diego, I haven't. What did you particularly like about it?
Arlington, Va.: What is your take on the current public debate regarding counterinsurgency between Army lieutenant colonels? Any bets on whether Col. McMaster is among the upcoming brigadier general promotions?
Thomas E. Ricks: I've been following this counterinsurgency debate on the terrific Small Wars Journal Web site, which is worth checking out. I think Col. Mansoor has it about right.
I would be very surprised if Col. McMaster isn't selected for the brigadier list. I was embedded with the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment when he was commanding it outside Tall Afar in northwest Iraq. Many people know about his insightful new approach to fighting there. What isn't as well known is how well he commanded. He had one of the best run headquarters I've ever seen, with information flowing quickly to the people who needed it.
Arlington, Va.: I just want to say that I hope that the fact that you haven't been getting as many questions lately doesn't mean that this chat will be going away. I don't always submit a question myself, but I always read the chat (either live or later in the day). It's an important source of information for me. Thanks much for sharing your expertise and insight with us.
Thomas E. Ricks: Thanks. I enjoy it, but I have got to tell you that there seems to be much less interest than in the past. I actually have been thinking of taking off the summer from this chat.
Dallas: "Bored or despairing" ... please don't say bored. Bored breaks my heart. From an Army brother.
Thomas E. Ricks: I know what you mean.
Anonymous: Why are Petraeus and Crocker both leaving soon after the inauguration in 2009? Doesn't seem to wise to have a new commander-in-chief without these two experienced leaders on the ground...
Thomas E. Ricks: Yeah, that is worrisome, especially with a new administration moving in.
New York: "Because U.S. troops, and their commanders, weren't trained or equipped or mentally prepared to deal with the rise of an insurgency." But had we gone into Iraq with Shinseki's number of troops, would there have been an insurgency? Wouldn't it have been nipped in the bud? And don't forget the looting...
Thomas E. Ricks: Yes, I think there would have been an insurgency, in part because the counterproductive actions of U.S. forces alienated many Iraqis. Also, the three things an insurgency needs are recruits, weapons and financing, and for a variety of reasons, our actions helped them solve that problem. I explore this in the chapters in 'Fiasco' about 'How to Create an Insurgency.'
It wasn't until 2007 that U.S. forces made it their mission to protect Iraqis -- and that is when the air began to go out of the insurgency.
Thomas E. Ricks: Thank you for all your questions, and also for the civil tone of 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.
|
Join Washington Post military reporter Thomas E. Ricks to discuss the debate in Washington among government, military and intelligence officials about what course to follow in Iraq.
| 146.724138 | 0.896552 | 1.37931 |
high
|
medium
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/03/10/DI2008031001759.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/03/10/DI2008031001759.html
|
What's Cooking With Kim O'Donnel
|
2008031119
|
A graduate of the Institute of Culinary Education (formerly known as Peter Kump's New York Cooking School), Kim spends much of her time in front of the stove or with her nose in a cookbook.
For daily dispatches from Kim's kitchen, check out her blog, A Mighty Appetite. You may catch up on previous transcripts with the What's Cooking archive page.
Kim O'Donnel: Hey folks! Nice to be back after a break at the beach. Trying to keep the vacation glow, as my producer just mentioned, is one tall order. How is it we rush right back to the stuff that makes us run away in the first place? It's all a balancing act, I know, but I gotta get better on that darned trapeze. So whatcha been cookin' lately? We've got St. Pat's coming up on Monday -- I have a brisket in the fridge awaiting its brine -- and then on the 19th there's St. Joseph's Day, and in honor of the protective patron saint, I'm going to make St. Joseph's bread, just like they do in New Orleans and Jersey and other Italo-Sicilian communities. I'll keep you posted. Next week is first week of spring! With the time change, life always feels a bit more brighter. Love the transition, even when it's cool adn the march wind roars. So, let's hear about you....
Washington, D.C.: Hi Kim. I have a food safety question that I don't know if you'll be able to help me with, but I thought I'd give it a shot. My power went out for about 6 hours last night. During that time neither the fridge nor freezer was opened, but I was asleep when the electricity came back on so I'm not sure of the food temp at that time. Is there anything I should throw out, or am I ok?
Kim O'Donnel: The power went out here at Casa Appetite on Saturday night for about the same time. Me too, I didn't dare open the fridge. I didn't have to throw anything out, all was fine. If it was 75 degrees out, I think you'd have another story. the most at risk stuff would be raw poultry and seafood, fyi.
Clifton, Va.: Why did Emeril and the Food Network part ways?
Kim O'Donnel: Reader is referring to today's blog post on Emeril's upcoming TV show on Planet Green on the Discovery Channel. To be more precise, Emeril is still part of the FTV gang; "Emeril Live" is no mas (but in rerun form), but "Essence of Emeril" is still in production and even with the new Emeril Green show, will continue on FTV.
Lunch in the air??: Welcome back Kim, I hope you had a great time in P.R.
Now, it's my time to fly, and I was wondering if you and the gang could give me some ideas as what to pack for lunch on my next flight. It will be right around noon and I am hoping to brown bag it instead of getting combo #3 from one of the vendors.
Kim O'Donnel: For our flight to PR, I brought along this wild smoked salmon pack that I found at Whole Foods. They're kinda like roulades with some cream cheese and capers. In a separate bag, I brought crackers. It was a great snack -- and no, it didn't smell. If fish is not your game, a container of hummus and some veggie sticks is a great portable meatless option. I'll all over dried fruit and nuts when I fly, and always a smidge of chocolate as a treat.
Birthday Cake: Kim, I'm in need of a fabulous birthday cake. I'm thinking of trying the Edna Peacock chocolate cake, but the chocolate frosting will be too much. Would a cream cheese frosting or perhaps whipped cream work with the cake?
Kim O'Donnel: I think you mean the Edna Lewis/Scott Peacock cake from their "Gift of Southern of Cooking," right? If it's too much choc on choc, yeah, I think a cream cheese frosting would be fine; try this one that is paired up with the Guinness Chocolate cake from Nigella Lawson: 8 ounces cream cheese, 1 cup confectioners' sugar and ½ cup heavy cream. (I've reduced the confectioners' to 3/4 cup with good results)
re Clifton: I have read several pieces on Emeril and I think the biggest reason they cut back was the cost. Why use a big name star when they can go with more reality type programming that cost a lot less money.
Kim O'Donnel: There was a breakdown in contract negotiations back in the fall. Remember, they let Mario Batali go as well.
My local farmers market re-opens mid-April...I know it won't really get going until mid-May but what could I find there in April? Anything good?
Kim O'Donnel: You'll see lettuces, as they're cool weather crops...MAYBE some rhubarb, pea shoots, baby kale, leeks... asparagus comes to this area later than down south...
Washington, D.C.: I LOVE chocolate when I fly. I can't figure out the connection, but it's a must. I find some foods taste better than others that high up. Dried fruit and nuts also do the trick like you mentioned.
Kim O'Donnel: Foods that taste better high up. I like that theme. I also like drinking green or herbal tea high up.
I make a very yummy roux-based Cheddar Beer soup. I've been thinking of adding potatoes in, to give it more bang for the buck. Would I need to alter liquid levels or do anything else? I'm not up on the chemistry of soup. FWIW, the liquids are 3 c chicken stock, 2 c milk and 1/2 c beer.
Thanks! Hope you enjoyed your vacation!
Kim O'Donnel: Hey Boston, the trip to Vieques was lovely and restful, thanks. Without seeing the recipe, hard for me to automatically say sure, go right ahead. I'm guessing the cheddar soup is much like a fondue consistency. Were you thinking to puree potatoes or add as chunks? Chunks, added at the end, might work, but you'd need to be ensure thorough seasoning...thoughts anyone?
Pennsylvania: In a chat a couple of weeks ago, someone posted a recipe for roasted broccoli. I never would have thought of that method, but I am so sick of steamed vegetables, so I tried it. The broccoli was wonderful. I've also tried roasted asparagus, which was also very good. Thanks so much for the tip.
Kim O'Donnel: Hey Pennsy, It's one of my favorite ways to eat brocc. I wrote about it yesterday in my new column on Real Simple.com, by the way. I too am a fan of the roasted asparagus -- and you must try roasted cauliflower! And kale!
Babycakes: Kim, I am making cupcakes for my nephew's 1st birthday party. I am thinking a banana cake since babies love bananas, and for frosting was considering whipping cream and mixing it with some fabulous S. American dulce de leche. Do you think that would hold up for a frosting? The party will have I think about 15-20 people, mostly adults with a few toddlers. Thanks and welcome back!
Kim O'Donnel: Hmm...I like sound of the flavor combo...I think cream cheese would hold up much better than whipping cream, which is oh so pesky and likes to break when you're not looking...
Ellicott City, Md.: Hi Kim-
Can you give me any ideas of how I can use mint? For Christmas, my mother-in-law bought me one of those hydroponic indoor herb gardens. It came with seven different herbs, all of which I use regularly, except for the mint, which has been growing like crazy. I don't like it in tea, and I don't cook lamb, desserts, or Asian food much. Is there any room for mint in basic American/continental cuisine?
Kim O'Donnel: Do you like mojitos? What a tasty way to use up mint on a Saturday afternoon...MInt is great as part of a pesto, with cilantro, basil and/or parsley...works nicely over fish or chicken...
St. Pats, Cabbage: I'm always at a loss for what to do with the Cabbage on St. Patrick's Day. I really don't want to boil it. Any suggestions?
Kim O'Donnel: I'm a fan of cabbage slaw, made with vinegar rather than the dreaded mayo. Add julienned red bell pepper, chopped cilantro, carrots, with a rice wine vinaigrette, and you'll be in business. Will cut against the fat of your Irish roast, too.
ROAD TRIP!!!: Kim - In keeping with the traveling theme: We're headed down to Florida (tomorrow) to Washington Nationals Spring training! It will be quite a drive. Can you offer suggestions for healthy energy boosting snacks (and drinks) to take on a road trip? Thanks in advance... and great chats!
Kim O'Donnel: I don't know if you have time to bake today, but a batch of Lulu's cookies would fit the bill, for breakfast, midafternoon snacks with a cup of coffee or as late-night dessert. They are loaded with protein and have lots of fiber. Short of baking the day before your trip, what about a variety of Lara bars? I've really come to rely on them as a convenient on-the-go snack. Again, I'm a fan of dried fruit and unsalted nuts. A cooler with hummus and veg is good, even a batch of homemade popcorn would be fun.
Beer Soup Again: I was thinking chunks of potatoes, like a potato chowder. The soup itself is not as thick as a fondue, but not as runny as a chowder.
Recipe is pretty easy, brown bacon in pan, add diced onions, celery, carrots until tender. Add flour to make roux. Add liquids, let simmer. Melt in 12 oz cheddar, season with worcestershire, hot sauce, salt, pepper. So potatoes at the end? Already cooked, or continue to simmer until uncooked potatoes soften?
Kim O'Donnel: Potatoes at end, yes, and cooked and quartered/cubed before adding to the rest.
Easter weekend: Hi Kim - I signed up to bake a cake for an Easter dinner party (around 10-12 guests) for next Sunday at my uncle's house. Any suggestions on something that will wow the guests and please the kids all at the same time? Thanks!
Kim O'Donnel: For Easters past, I've made an orange-ginger-olive oil cake that is light yet fragrant -- and requires only one baking pan. Nice and easy. I've also made upside down cakes, which always yield a "wow" factor -- you can do bananas, mangoes, a mix of strawberry and rhubarb -- tell me your pleasure and I'll get you the details.
San Diego, Calif.: Hi Kim! My boyfriend and I were going to cook a London Broil for dinner tonight. I've made them before with a very simple marinade of just olive oil, salt, and pepper and it turned out great. My boyfriend seems to think that would be too simple and doesn't believe me that simple can sometimes be better. What do you think? Any other suggestions? I was thinking maybe add in garlic.
Kim O'Donnel: I'll never forget as a little girl discovering the secret behind Mrs. Burkhart's London broil -- Dijon mustard. My mother swears by it. Garlic would def. zip things up a little bit -- and a little acid is good, even if it's a squeeze of lime on top.
22205: Kim- I discovered your chat a few months ago, and I'm just writing in to say THANKS!!! I'm 24, and tomorrow I'm throwing my first dinner party. (YAY!) Reading your yummy suggestions gave me the courage to experiment in the kitchen. I'm finally comfortable enough to cook for 10 people. I'm slightly overwhelmed but looking forward to having my friends over for a nice mid-week reprieve. So yeah, thanks again for making cooking seem so approachable!
Kim O'Donnel: Bravo! Good for you, my dear. What is on the menu?
We're having a casual dinner/game night at my place this weekend. There will be four of us -- one is vegetarian and the others are veg-friendly. I was thinking of mezze-type thing. I'm lucky to live near a great Middle Eastern market, so the basics are covered: spinach pies, pita, hummus, baba ganoush, olives, desserts. It just seems there's something missing, like a hot dish. Any ideas? I was thinking along the lines of a legume dish (maybe fava beans?) but can't get beyond that.
We're trying to do-ahead as much as possible, so something I could throw together and reheat would be great.
Kim O'Donnel: What about a lentil soup to start things off? Check the following link for a zillion lentil-y ideas, plus a recipe for lentils, syrian style, with pomegranate molasses and chard.
I feel a little silly asking this question, but here goes. When chopping up herbs for a dish, are you supposed to just include the leaves? Or can I include the stems as well? Obviously I wouldn't use the stems from rosemary or thyme or anything with a heartier stem, but what about parsley, basil or cilantro? Is it ok to toss the stems in or should I pick off the leaves? Thanks!
Kim O'Donnel: I like using stems from both cilantro and parsley for sure. Basil sometimes can be a little too woody. But yes, add the stems, it's all good stuff that would otherwise be tossed.
Easter Dinner Party: The wow cake sounds delicious! How can I get started?
Kim O'Donnel: Check these details for strawberry-rhubarb cake. Feel free to sub in sliced bananas, mangoes or the traditional pineapple. You can't go wrong.
Lulu's cookies: They look great! Would it be possible to get the nutritional info for them.
Kim O'Donnel: Nutritonal 411 on Lulu's Cookies
mac and cheese question: Hi Kim! Welcome back! Got a question regarding mac and cheese. When I make it, I use a bechamel to which I add sharp cheddar and parmesan and some dried mustard. It's OK, but never has that intense cheese flavor I crave (unless I add way more cheddar than anyone should eat in one serving!) Is there another cheese, or herb or spice, that would help boost the cheddar flavor?
Kim O'Donnel: See how my recipe compares. I think the smidge of heat from cayenne or paprika helps bring out the cheddar.
HdG, Md.: Love the chats, but almost never write in. I just wanted to say I've finally gotten the nerve to start branching out in the kitchen. I am eating the leftovers from last night, an Indian-flavored concoction with collards and black-eyed peas. Sounds southern, but with Indian spices like ginger, cinnamon, and garam masala. Such a new flavor combo with the peas and greens. Yummy!
Kim O'Donnel: Wonderful! Big high five to you, dear. Keep up the good work!
Pennsylvania, again: Here's a recipe for the group since the broccoli was so good!
I recently cooked this recipe and I think it was one of the best dishes I've ever made. No kidding. Easy and so flavorful; my husband raved about it. I used scallops instead of shrimp. Enjoy!
REC: Camarones al Mojo de Ajo or Quick-Fried Shrimp with Sweet Toasty Garlic
3/4 cup peeled garlic cloves (about 2 large heads)
1 cup good extra virgin olive oil
2 canned chipotle chiles en adobo, seeded and cut into thin strips
2 limes, cut into wedges
3 T chopped fresh cilantro or italian parsley
1. Make the Mojo de Ajo:
Chop the garlic with into 1/8-inch bits. You should have about 1/2 cup chopped garlic. Place garlic, olive oil (you need it all) and 1/2 teaspoon salt in a saucepan and set over medium-low heat. Stir occasionally as the mixture comes barely to a simmer (there should be just a hint of movement on the surface of the oil). Adjust the heat to the very lowest possible setting to keep the mixture at that very gentle simmer (bubbles will rise in the pot like sparkling mineral water) and cook, stirring occasionally, until the garlic is a soft, pale golden (the color of light brown sugar), about 30 minutes. The slower the cooking, the sweeter the garlic.
Add the lime juice to the pan and simmer until most of the juice has evaporated or been absorbed into the garlic, about 5 minutes. Stir in the chiles, then taste the mojo de ajo and add a little more salt if you think it needs it. Keep the pan over low heat, so the garlic will be warm when the shrimp are ready. Scoop the lime wedges into a serving bowl and set on the table.
Set a large (12-inch) heavy skillet (preferably nonstick) over medium-high heat and spoon in 1-1/2 tablespoons of the oil (but not any garlic) from the mojo. Add half of the shrimp to the skillet, sprinkle generously with salt and stir gently and continuously until the shrimp are just cooked through, 3 to 4 minutes. Stir in half the cilantro or parsley, if you're using it. Scoop the shrimp onto a deep serving platter. Repeat with another 1-1/2 tablespoons of the garlicky oil and the remaining shrimp.
When all of the shrimp are cooked, use a slotted spoon to scoop out the warm bits of garlic and chiles from the mojo pan, and scatter them over the shrimp. (You may have as much as 1/3 cup of the oil left over, for which you'll be grateful ¿it's wonderful for sautéing practically anything.) If you're a garlic lover, you're about to have the treat of your life, served with the lime wedges to add sparkle.
Kim O'Donnel: thanks much. always glad to receive tried-and-true faves from readers...
Cabbage for St. Patrick's day: Colcanon, of course! Throw in a little horseradish if you want to kick it up.
Kim O'Donnel: This is true. I've been thinking of a potato-centric meal, myself. Every course with potatoes. I'll keep you posted...I love horseradish, should be coming into markets soon...
Re. cupcakes: How about a layer of dulce de leche right on top of the cupcakes and then a (stabilized) whipped cream on top of that? I would think the dulce de leche is too stiff/heavy to be mixed in directly with the cream. Or you could cut the cupcakes in half and do a middle layer with dulce de leche. Regardless, sounds yummy!
Kim O'Donnel: Yes, she likes this idea. I think some experimentation is in order...
Sticks Mount Airy: For the Mint person...Make a pesto of it and use on peas, or stuffing leg o' lamb. Make stuffed grape leaves (I'll share my recipe, by sending it to Kim). If you make a pesto you can freeze it in ice cube trays and just use what you want.
What's better than homemade lemonade with mint? Freeze mint too and add it to your lemonade.
Kim O'Donnel: Mint in the old grape leaves is a grand idea, which of course reminds me of tabbouleh, another dish that loves mint..and yes lemonade. Can't wait for some of that!
London Broil: Marinate in can of beer and Kikkoman teriyaki sauce (not their glaze). Poke it all over then put in marinade, poke it every 1/2 hour or so. Marinate up to 1 hour at room temp or 4 to 5 hours in fridge. Then grill and slice thinly on bias. It's what's for dinner tonight, great with rice and roasted asparagus
Kim O'Donnel: Thanks for sharing, dear!
CSA Kale: What should I do with the CSA kale that I received in my box last week? I don't really like it, so something to mute its strong flavor would be great!
Kim O'Donnel: I like to remove the stems and lather in olive oil and garlic and throw into a roasting pan, with some white beans and rosemary and roast for about 1o minutes at 400 hundred. Keep an eye on things, so kale doesn't completely crinkleup.
Washington, D.C. : Wasabi peas or sesame sticks are good high up too. I've always wondered if it's a tastebud or a stomach thing when I fly.
Kim O'Donnel: More on food high up....
Budd Lake, N.J.: Welcome back! Is it possible to take an already made granola, and make it into a bar? Recipes for bars usually have egg whites as the binder. Is that all I would have to use?
Kim O'Donnel: I don't know the answer to this, but I'm thinking no. I'll get back to you on this.
22205 again: I'm expanding on a pork carnitas recipe that I read in this month's Bon Appetit, and we're going to use it to make de-constructed Philly roast pork sandwiches I read about in the Travel section. The sandwiches are served with broccoli rabe, so I'm making that, along with a vinegar-based slaw. I've made a cheese spread with some Dijon that will be served alongside soft pretzels before dinner, and we're going to drink Flying Fish beer.
A dear friend is moving to Philly in April, so we're watching "Its Always Sunny in Philadelphia" to laugh away the good-bye tears!
Kim O'Donnel: I saw that pork carnitas recipe too, looks tasty. Your friend is moving to a city with a vibrant food scene, and just think, it's only 2 hours away by train!
London Broil: Nigella Lawson has a great recipe for a vodka based marinade that include vodka, capers (or maybe I just throw that in) and crushed peppercorns. It's wonderful. I'm sure a quick Google search would pull it up. Great served with rice and some crusty bread.
Kim O'Donnel: If you don't mind the booze, vodka, rum and tequila make great marinades. Thanks for the tip.
Ham handed: This may sound a little unusual, but I have never "made" a ham. Hubby would like ham for Easter dinner. I am happy to accommodate but lost as to what I am supposed to do. I sort of thought that ham was already cooked when you buy it... but I also sorta know you're supposed to bake it...
We'd prefer savory to sweet, for the most part. A little sweet is OK, but glazed is too much for us.
Kim O'Donnel: Would you be open to a fresh ham? Check recipe for details. This is one helluva ham, without the 7-Up, glaze or any other goopy stuff. Holler if you have more questions.
Kim O'Donnel: Oh my. I went past the hour. Thanks for stopping by! Great to catch up with you. In the meantime, come see me at A Mighty Appetite. All best.
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.
|
Calling all foodies! Join us Tuesdays at noon for What's Cooking, our Live Online culinary hour with Kim O'Donnel.
| 204.913043 | 0.782609 | 1.043478 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031002777.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031002777.html
|
Boeing to File Protest on Lost Tanker Deal
|
2008031119
|
The Air Force awarded the initial $40 billion contract to build 179 new refueling tankers two weeks ago to a team of Northrop Grumman, the third-biggest U.S. defense contractor, and EADS, the parent company of Airbus, Boeing's competitor in the commercial airline business. Because EADS is based in Paris and Munich, members of Congress and supporters of Boeing have voiced concerns about national security and complaints about job losses, especially in Kansas and Washington state, where Boeing has major facilities.
Air Force procurement officials debriefed the Boeing team Friday and the Northrop team yesterday. In a statement released yesterday, Boeing, which is based in Chicago, said a "rigorous analysis of the Air Force evaluation" led it to the conclusion "that a protest was necessary."
"Our team has taken a very close look at the tanker decision and found serious flaws in the process that we believe warrant appeal," said Jim McNerney, Boeing's president and chief executive.
Some leaders in Congress, including Rep. Norm Dicks (D-Wash.), whose district includes a Boeing manufacturing plant, applauded the company's decision to protest with the Government Accountability Office, which has 100 days to issue an opinion. He is calling for the Air Force to open the contract for auction again.
"We have to turn this decision around," Dicks said. "This is a bad decision. It was just not fair."
EADS and Northrop, which is based in Los Angeles, said that while parts of their aircraft would be made in Europe, they expect to create nearly 2,000 jobs in Mobile, Ala., where the new tanker will be assembled. The team said yesterday that the number of jobs supported nationwide could reach 48,000.
Both teams wanted desperately to win the deal. It gives EADS a bigger foothold in the U.S. military aircraft business and an opportunity to expand its commercial business. It leaves Boeing, which built the KC-135 tankers that the Air Force has used for nearly 50 years, with the strong likelihood that it will have to shut down its 767 line on which its tanker is based because commercial sales of the aircraft are down.
Air Force procurement officials, who testified last week before Congress, have said they stand behind their decision and that they followed procurement regulations, choosing the Northrop-EADS team because it offered better value. Defense consultants who have talked to executives and Pentagon officials close to the deal said Boeing did not put its best foot forward and that Northrop beat it in key areas, including past performance, cost and operations in a wartime scenario. Sue C. Payton, assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition, said Northrop brought its "A game" with its proposal, which was based on the Airbus A330.
Boeing and Northrop put out statements firing back at each other. In one, Boeing denied defense consultant's assertion that "Boeing didn't manage to beat Northrop in a single measure of merit."
"Nothing could be further from the truth," Boeing said in its statement. The company said it received the "highest rating possible" when judged on its mission capability, that its proposal was low risk and its past performance was rated "satisfactory."
Boeing officials and congressional leaders say the Air Force modified the requirements on the kind of aircraft it wanted after the request for the proposal was issued, switching from a medium-sized plane to a larger one, which favored the Northrop team. The Air Force has denied the allegation.
Northrop said in a statement after its debriefing that its K-45A was selected because it was "more advantageous to the government" on many of its requirements. "Our tanker clearly provides the war-fighter with the best capability and at the best value to the American taxpayer," said Paul Meyer, Northrop's tanker program manager and vice president of its air mobility system.
|
Boeing said it will file a formal protest today with a government oversight agency after it was passed over in favor of its rival commercial airline company, European Aeronautic Defence and Space, in a competition for one of the U.S. military's largest contracts.
| 15.93617 | 0.659574 | 1 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031001613.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031001613.html
|
New Ways To Manage Health Data
|
2008031119
|
You already bank online and use computer software to do your taxes. So why don't you trust technology to help you manage your health? Microsoft, Google and more than 100 Web sites offering personal health records know the answer, but they're betting they can quell your fears about posting your most private information online and get you to sign on soon.
Online personal health records, or PHRs, began years ago as password-protected templates for storing basic medical information, accessible from any computer connected to the Web. Some still function that way, making them a convenience for patients with chronic conditions, life-threatening allergies and long medication lists. Many experts also recommend PHRs for adult caregivers of elderly family members or parents of children with chronic health problems.
"I think [they] can be very valuable for people who want to keep close track and have portable -- available for them when they need it -- detailed medical records," said Peter Basch, a Washington physician and medical director of MedStar's e-health initiative.
Many PHRs automatically link to hospital Web sites; some upload data from lab tests and medical devices; and others allow emergency rooms to access your medical history even if you're unconscious and far from home.
Lately, Internet giants Microsoft and Google have upped the ante, developing sites that combine PHRs with search engines and other services. (See sidebar.) The new capabilities raise the value of PHRs -- as well as the risk from breaches of privacy. And as the records sites grow in number and sophistication, privacy advocates are stepping up their warnings, especially about PHRs offered by health insurers.
"There are many, many pitfalls about personal health records," said Texas psychiatrist Deborah Peel, founder of Patient Privacy Rights, a nonprofit that wants Americans to retain exclusive control over their medical records. "Giving more information about yourself to your health insurer is probably the worst possible thing to do." Many online PHR firms share information with data-mining companies, which then sell it to insurers and other interested parties, Peel said.
Still, some feel the value of PHRs outweighs the risks. Andy De became a PHR user after doctors in India delayed his father's heart surgery for days last August while De tried to track down records of treatment the older man had received for a related condition during a recent U.S. visit. (De, a marketing executive for a software firm, lives in Dallas; his father lives in India.)
"My father ran the risk of losing his life . . . because of our lack of access to his previous health info," De explained by e-mail. "I promised myself that this [kind of thing] would never happen again," De wrote on his Web site.
Most online PHR systems allow you and others you designate (family members or doctors) to access the record. Patients who see many doctors and keep their PHR up-to-date can log in at a doctor's office and see what medications and tests were ordered by other physicians. In an emergency, a family member or physician could access the PHR and provide the information to emergency room staff.
A more sophisticated option, launched last year, is Microsoft's HealthVault, which is partnering with hospitals to allow patients' lab results or EKGs to be automatically uploaded to their PHR. Other sites have launched ventures to incorporate readings from, say, home blood pressure monitors and glucometers into a patient's online record.
Microsoft has also partnered with ActiveHealth Management, whose software combines personal health information with medical research it regularly updates by scouring peer-reviewed journals. The program looks at information entered by the patient and at other data, such as the patient's insurance claims; it can then alert the patient and his doctor to risks such as possibly dangerous interactions between medications the patient is taking.
ActiveHealth Management, which was purchased in 2005 by Aetna, contracts with employers and insurance companies.
Online PHRs are not covered by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, which protects the privacy of an individual's medical information. And courts have yet to settle many legal issues surrounding the Internet and privacy. So most experts advise online PHR users to read Web site privacy policies carefully. But they differ on just how much trust consumers should place in them.
"I think it is unrealistic to be comfortable or feel secure about the privacy of things that are on the Internet," said Sidney Wolfe, director of Public Citizen's Health Research Group. Even if an Internet-based PHR has a strong privacy policy and secure technology, an employee of the company could still steal information and sell it to insurers or employers, who could potentially use it to discontinue health coverage or fire a worker, Wolfe warns.
But other experts say the benefits of online PHRs far outweigh the risks. University of North Carolina researcher Gary Marchioni, who has studied online PHRs, says fears about the risks on secure sites are overblown.
"I think [people's assessment] depends on their level of paranoia," he said. "It still sort of boils down to how much trust you have in the world."
Patient Privacy Rights plans to rate the privacy and security policies of a number of PHR systems later this year.
Among experts, Microsoft earns generally high marks for its promise not to divulge information without a user's say-so. HealthVault lets patients search for health information without leaving the site -- so other sites cannot access users' Internet protocol addresses and other identifying data, Peel says. And before connecting a patient to a partner's or an advertiser's site, it posts that site's privacy policy.
"We think that's pretty cool," Peel said. "There's nothing else like it, as far as we know."
Experts familiar with Google's new PHR say the company has also set a stringent privacy policy. Google Health (now undergoing a trial by patients at the Cleveland Clinic) will not be linked to advertising, unlike Google's e-mail and search engines.
"I'm pretty confident that at least these big, well-known sponsors will be responsible," John Rother, director of policy and strategy for AARP said of Microsoft and Google.
Besides security, "data liquidity" may be a key new test of a PHR's value. The most important thing to look at is whether "I can get the information from the health plan and from the laboratory and from the other doctors, and can I assemble it" in a way that is useful and easy to access, says David Kibbe, a North Carolina family practice doctor and expert on medicine and technology. "We think there's a lot of good that can come from this data liquidity," Kibbe says.
For users who don't trust even the most secure and private online personal health records, there are options. CapMed, for example, offers a PHR on CD or on an encrypted, password-protected USB thumb drive. Users can store information digitally but can access the record only on their home computer or via the thumb drive. Patients can take the CD or thumb drive to their physician's office or print out the record at home and carry a paper copy. But, just as with your old paper records, if you forget and leave them at home, you're out of luck.
Michael S. Gerber is a Washington area freelance writer. Comments:health@washpost.com.
|
You already bank online and use computer software to do your taxes. So why don't you trust technology to help you manage your health? Microsoft, Google and more than 100 Web sites offering personal health records know the answer, but they're betting they can quell your fears about posting your most...
| 25.068966 | 0.982759 | 56.017241 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031002703.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031002703.html
|
In First for Studios, Paramount Offers Snippets of Movies
|
2008031119
|
Paramount Pictures is chopping its feature films into short scenes, some as little as a few seconds, and distributing them free on the Internet, becoming the first major movie studio to answer consumers' desire for repeat viewings of short-form video on such sites as YouTube.
Paramount, which is owned by Viacom, launched the service yesterday on Facebook, the popular social-networking site. The application is called VooZoo; it is a combination clip library and media player. It includes scenes from such films as "Braveheart," "Sunset Boulevard," "Breakfast at Tiffany's" and "School of Rock." The clips include a link that sends users to http://Amazon.com to buy DVDs of the movies.
Increasingly, consumers want to watch archived on-demand short video, such as skits from "Saturday Night Live" or highlights from a football game that was played weeks if not years ago.
Other movie studios may be reluctant to join Paramount, owing to complicated rights and residuals issues. Also, some directors retain "final cut" privileges over their films and may not want them sliced into scenes. The issue includes some tricky guild rules, too, that can prohibit the re-purposing of content created as one piece.
Yet the market has demanded bite-sized clips from nearly every other form of video content. And clips are so easily retrievable on YouTube that it is no longer surprising to find one. An e-mail conversation between two friends fondly remembering, say, a Phil Hartman skit from a 1992 "SNL" episode can be augmented in seconds with a link to the clip online.
Frequently, such clips are unauthorized. They have been bootlegged and posted in violation of copyright laws. Viacom is suing YouTube, which is owned by Google, over the unauthorized posting of clips from such Viacom television programs as "The Daily Show."
VooZoo is a first attempt by a major film studio to give consumers what they want, within the law.
Derek Broes, Paramount's executive vice president for digital entertainment, got the idea about a year ago, when he began using Facebook. He saw the popular network as "voyeuristic" and a "zoo of people," he said yesterday, which gave him the idea for the name VooZoo.
Paramount sells its full-length movies on Apple's iTunes. Apple not only popularized the online music store, the company recognized and answered the growing desire for a la carte entertainment.
Broes said Paramount has not yet talked to Apple about selling the movie clips on iTunes but said he probably will soon. Apple declined to comment.
Paramount and other movie studios make their money on windows of distribution for their films -- theatrical release, followed by DVD sales, rental, video on demand, premium cable, basic cable and then network television. Each window is predicated on the idea of selling the entire movie.
Broes recognized the popularity of short-form video on the Internet and saw the movie clips as a way of driving more users to Facebook, thereby increasing advertising views, and using the clips as what he calls "moving emoticons": ways for Facebook users to communicate with each other. So, instead of typing "What do you think of that?" a Facebook user may send a clip of Jack Nicholson in "Chinatown" saying, "How do you like them apples?"
For now, Broes said, the clips are streaming only, meaning they cannot be downloaded onto a device and kept. So far, the service has dozens of Paramount films in the VooZoo vault, and continues to work to add more, sifting through the studio's library. The application could become ad-supported, Broes said.
"Our intention is to continue clipping movies and get as much product as possible out there so the consumer has a diverse collection to choose from," Broes said.
|
Stay updated on the latest technology news. Find profiles on different sectors of the tech industry. Learn about new developments in tech policy. Read technology reviews for PCs,laptops,cell phones,and other new gadgets.
| 16.8 | 0.4 | 0.533333 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031002690.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031002690.html
|
George Mason Wins Its Way Back
|
2008031119
|
No anxious waits, no persuasive arguments for an at-large berth.
The Patriots sealed their first automatic bid in seven years with a 68-59 victory over upset-minded William & Mary, completing three days of astounding defense and timely offense to claim the Colonial Athletic Association tournament title.
"To be a part of this and go to the NCAA tournament and not have to worry about, 'Are we going to get an at-large bid?' -- just sitting at the TV on Selection Sunday and knowing our name is going to be picked is a great feeling," said senior guard Folarin Campbell, who was named the tournament's most valuable player after tallying 20 points, 6 rebounds and 4 assists against the Tribe.
The triumph by the third-seeded Patriots (23-10) marked only the fifth time in the league's 26 years that one of the top two seeds did not win the championship. Mason had lost in the 2004 and '07 finals, and an at-large berth two years ago preceded its historic run to the Final Four.
Senior forward Will Thomas, who like Campbell started on that 2006 squad, had 18 points on 6-of-8 shooting and added 13 rebounds. And for the second consecutive evening, the Patriots received a significant boost from their reserves as freshman Cam Long and junior Chris Fleming combined to shoot 7 of 10 for 15 points and add eight rebounds and four assists.
The Patriots never trailed, but the fifth-seeded Tribe, seeking late-game heroics for the fourth straight game, did not fold. Mason's defense, which held Northeastern to 52 points and UNC Wilmington to 41 in the first two games of the tournament, held the Tribe to 38 percent shooting and had a 35-28 rebounding advantage.
"We came here with a mind-set that it isn't really about the offense," Patriots Coach Jim Larranaga said. "You have days when you shoot great, you have days when everything clicks on offense, but you have days when you don't shoot so great, and it's so important your defense be your consistent part of your game.
"It takes great effort, great heart, great determination and a great team effort, and I thought that's what we did for three straight days."
Campbell, who missed 6 of 7 shots in the first half, sparked a 9-0 run after halftime to give Mason a 10-point lead. He made three three-pointers in 8 1/2 minutes and then hit free throws down the stretch.
Laimis Kisielius scored 15 of his 22 points in the first half for the Tribe (17-16), but could not do it alone after intermission.
"We really couldn't get others going," Tribe Coach Tony Shaver said. "It's tough to come from behind on the fourth day."
|
Folarin Campbell scores 20 points, Will Thomas adds 18 and 13 rebounds as George Mason beats William & Mary, 68-59, to win the Colonial Athletic Association tournament Monday night.
| 16.028571 | 0.828571 | 1.857143 |
medium
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031002591.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031002591.html
|
California Regents Sue Animal Activists
|
2008031119
|
LOS ANGELES -- It was late into the night when 25 people in ski masks descended on professor Dario Ringach's family home. Pounding on the door, frightening his small children, they screamed into megaphones, "Animal killer! We know where you live! We will never give up!"
And they apparently meant it. That year, 2006, according to court documents, animal rights activists launched a summer-long campaign of harassment against Ringach, an assistant professor of psychology and neurobiology at the University of California at Los Angeles and other scientists who conduct research with laboratory animals.
They hurled firecrackers at his house in the middle of the night and planted Molotov-cocktail-like explosives at other faculty houses, threatening to burn them to the ground.
UCLA hired private security, but Ringach feared for his family. "Effectively immediately, I am no longer doing animal research," he finally wrote in an e-mail to his persecutors, pleading to be left alone. "Please don't bother my family anymore."
The University of California regents have responded by suing UCLA Primate Freedom, the Animal Liberation Brigade, the Animal Liberation Front and five people allegedly affiliated with them. It is a tactic that the regents successfully employed nine years ago.
The regents hope to win a permanent injunction similar to one granted against Last Chance for Animals in 1989. But some experts note that the regents now are battling more violent, Internet-savvy foes who thrive in online communities, post faculty "targets" on Web sites and upload how-to guides for their attacks.
"The reality is that, unlike in the past, where movements really relied on interpersonal communication and gatherings to ferment this radicalization, all this is happening online now," according to Oren Segal, co-director of the Anti-Defamation League's Center on Extremism in New York. "The ability for people to learn about the movement and how to carry out attacks on behalf of it are easier than it's ever been because of the Internet."
Indeed, a temporary restraining order -- prohibiting harassment and posting of faculty members' personal information on the Internet -- was granted Feb. 21 by a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge. But three days later, six masked protesters reportedly disrupted a child's birthday party at the home of a University of California at Santa Cruz researcher and confronted her husband at the door, hitting him on the hand.
It is unclear whether the protesters are connected to those named in UC's lawsuit.
Harassment by violent animal rights activists has climbed at universities across the country, including Oregon Health and Science University, the University of Utah, and Ohio State University, where researchers have been victims of home visits or, in one case, found their windows slathered in glass-eating acid. Scientists, administrators and lawyers are closely watching the effectiveness of the California regents case.
Experts say the shift toward more personal attacks is a response to increasingly fortified laboratories, which universities began securing in the 1980s and 1990s as attacks heightened.
Now, groups have shunned "Fort Knox" in favor of ill-prepared homes, said Jerry Vlasik, the former vivisector turned spokesman for the North American Animal Liberation Press Office. Vlasik has repeatedly advocated for using "whatever force against animal research scientists necessary."
"If killing them is the only way to stop them," he said in a telephone interview, "then I said killing them would certainly be justified."
Some scientists refuse to relinquish their work, but others are not taking chances. Like Ringach, some continue to work but not with animals. Most who leave the profession make their decisions quietly, not wanting to fuel the movement.
Still, ripples are spreading through the science community. Positions in animal research are increasingly difficult to fill, according to Frankie Trull, president of the Foundation for Biomedical Research, a national organization that supports the humane and responsible use of animals in medical and scientific research.
"I do hear scientists say that they have open positions and nobody to fill them because it's animal research," Trull said. "The bigger question, and we worry about this a lot, is what will happen to the future of biomedical research? Will brilliant young minds go to some other field because this field has become too contentious?"
|
LOS ANGELES -- It was late into the night when 25 people in ski masks descended on professor Dario Ringach's family home. Pounding on the door, frightening his small children, they screamed into megaphones, "Animal killer! We know where you live! We will never give up!"
| 15.017857 | 1 | 56 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031003124.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031003124.html
|
Uneasy Calm Emerges in Gaza as U.S., Egypt Push Talks
|
2008031119
|
While no truce has been signed and no direct negotiations are taking place, Israel and Hamas appear to have informally agreed not to fire on each other for the time being. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said as much at a news conference Monday, reiterating an earlier statement indicating that Israel won't fire if Hamas doesn't.
"Israel will not tolerate a continuation of Qassam and Grad missile-shooting at Israeli residents," Olmert said, referring to the two kinds of rockets favored by Hamas and other armed groups in Gaza. "If this will continue, we will shoot. If it will not, we will have no reason to shoot."
Since Friday, Israel's military has recorded 14 rockets or mortar shells fired from Gaza toward Israel. That is down dramatically from the rate of over a week ago, when Hamas had been averaging several rockets every hour. Since the beginning of the year, 1,059 rockets or mortar shells have been fired at Israel from Gaza, according to the military.
Hamas, which calls for a state governed by Islamic law across territory that now includes Israel, won the January 2006 parliamentary elections over the rival Fatah movement. It then ruptured a power-sharing arrangement with Fatah in June 2007 when its military wing seized control of Gaza.
The pace of attacks has also slackened on the other side. Since Friday, there has been one Israeli attack in Gaza, the military said. That followed a massive five-day Israeli operation at the end of February and the beginning of March that killed more than 125 Palestinians. Three Israelis also were killed.
Israeli and Palestinian officials said Monday that the slowdown in violence has come as a result of talks mediated by Egypt and supported by Washington. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was in the region last week trying to reignite stalled negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, which is dominated by Hamas's secular rival Fatah, over a settlement to the two sides' decades-long conflict.
Those negotiations could not go forward, however, until the violence in Gaza abated. Because neither Israel nor the United States will talk to Hamas, Rice focused on using Egypt as a mediator, the officials said.
"All the sides have an interest in some calm right now," a senior Israeli official said. The official added, however, that "the ball is in Hamas's court" and that the lull in violence "is fragile. It could end at any moment."
Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhoum denied that there had been any truce, but acknowledged that Egypt was mediating talks. He said any truce would have to involve Israel agreeing to end its attacks in the West Bank and Gaza, as well as lifting a crushing economic blockade in Gaza. "If they want calm, it has to be a comprehensive calm," he said. Until then, he said, Hamas reserves the right to use violence.
Israel on Sunday announced plans to build hundreds of new homes in a West Bank settlement north of Jerusalem. The move was quickly condemned by Palestinian negotiators, and on Monday U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon called on Israel to halt the expansion in the interest of peace. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said the plans "aren't helpful."
Israel has said it has the right to expand existing settlements but has pledged not to build new ones.
The White House announced that Vice President Cheney will travel to the region starting Sunday, a trip aides said was planned before the recent violence. He will visit Israel and the West Bank as well as Saudi Arabia, Oman and Turkey.
Staff writer Peter Baker in Washington contributed to this report.
|
JERUSALEM, March 10 -- An uneasy calm has settled over southern Israel and the Hamas-run Gaza Strip in recent days as the United States and Egypt work to broker a cooling-off period following nearly a week of frantic fighting.
| 15.777778 | 0.622222 | 0.933333 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031002671.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008031119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/10/AR2008031002671.html
|
Anti-Gang Law Is Underused, Chief Says
|
2008031119
|
The law, enacted in 2006 by the D.C. Council, was supposed to generate tougher penalties in cases involving gang activity. Defendants can face up to five more years in prison if their crimes are found to be gang-related.
The U.S. attorney's office, which prosecutes adult defendants, has used the law twice. The D.C. attorney general's office, which handles cases involving juveniles, has brought charges under the law 12 times but has not fully enforced it, Lanier said.
"These charges were later dropped through plea agreements or because prosecuting attorneys were satisfied with other felony or violent misdemeanor convictions," Lanier wrote of the juvenile cases. Her assessment came in a statement to the D.C. Council and was first reported by the Washington Examiner.
Regardless, Lanier said, the five-year penalty holds little sway for juveniles because, no matter their sentence, they cannot be held beyond their 21st birthdays.
Gangs and crews have been a persistent problem in the District. Officials point to fighting among neighborhood groups as one of the reasons that homicides and other gun violence increased last year. In recent months, police have dealt with a rise in violence among gang and crew members in Shaw, Columbia Heights and other parts of Northwest Washington.
Council member Phil Mendelson (D-At Large), head of the council's public safety and judiciary committee, said authorities must get ahead of gang activity.
"If it gains too much of a foothold, it can be very hard to combat it," Mendelson said. "That was one of the reasons to write the law, to give law enforcement the tool."
The D.C. office of the attorney general did not respond to inquiries about the law yesterday.
Monty Wilkinson, a spokesman for the U.S. attorney's office, said prosecutors prefer to use tougher, more established laws in gang prosecutions, building more sweeping cases on conspiracy and racketeering charges. Those can carry life prison sentences.
"These are long-term investigations," Wilkinson said. "It's an efficient way to prosecute that type of conduct."
Wilkinson said his office has not ruled out using the D.C. law.
"That's not to suggest that in certain instances we would not use the local provision," Wilkinson said. "It's relatively new."
Lanier and Mayor Adrian M. Fenty (D) announced plans late last year to target crews and set aside nearly $3 million for a gang initiative: $1 million for community partnerships for gang intervention and $1.8 million to expand the ShotSpotter gunshot recognition system.
Lanier also consolidated the department's gang intelligence unit, saying at the time that "crews are a very, very strong driving force behind the crime."
|
D.C. Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier said the city's anti-gang law is rarely used to its full extent by prosecutors and has had "little impact" on preventing gang crime.
| 15.2 | 0.628571 | 0.742857 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/05/AR2008030501942.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/05/AR2008030501942.html
|
A Dumb Argument - washingtonpost.com
|
2008030819
|
Women are silly for a variety of reasons, according to Allen, starting with the way they gush and swoon over politicians who inspire them. Barack Obama, Allen points out, is responsible for a grand total of five women fainting in the past six months. Without granting legitimacy to this pointless observation, let it be noted that there's no way to determine exactly why these women fainted. Perhaps they hadn't eaten, or locked their knees, or were overwhelmed by their own feeble-mindedness. But we can at least be reasonably sure that they didn't pass out because, say, they were so intent on watching football on TV that they forgot how to chew a pretzel.
Yet despite her list of Reasons Why We Babes are Dopes, Allen has no judgment to make about the equivalent of this behavior in men. For every woman who faints at a rally, surely there is at least one man who has shivered shirtless through a football game, his bare skin smeared with body paint to match his team's colors. Allen's piece implies that men are permitted to indulge and express their own absurdities without it necessarily reflecting on the entirety of their intellect -- but women aren't granted that same freedom.
The saddest aspect of Allen's whole piece is that, while mocking women who gush over Obama, she adopts the insecure seventh-grade girl pose of playing down her own intelligence in order to be popular. "Oh my God, you guys, I'm SO DUMB. I don't even KNOW how I won the science fair!" It's heartbreaking to watch an adolescent sell herself out this way. But Allen is selling us all out, letting us know we should probably be ignored.
Allen's most effective argument -- that women's opinions are meaningless and should not be listened to -- is buttressed beautifully by her inability to support her own arguments, even that one. She allows that there are some women fighter pilots, and good for them. It's just that the rest of us, who are not fighter pilots, probably shouldn't be. Because women are bad at that, unless they are not. Ah, logic. She compares a ratio of women who have car accidents per miles driven to a ratio of men who do so, "even though" men drive more, which actually does prove that at least one woman doesn't know how statistics work. She continues her immaterial rambling with declarations like, "No man contracts nebulous diseases -- such as Morgellons." Even the inaccuracy of this blanket statement is irrelevant, as Allen presents not so much an argument as a puzzle. What is she trying to prove?
Her essay doesn't prove anything so much as raise a question: Is this the best an anti-feminist can do? Perhaps Allen could have some space in the Post each week for her finest material. She could point out that women wear pink and smile a lot and can't lift heavy things. Once a month, women go crazy and eat a lot of chocolate! Did you know babies come out of women sometimes? Yuck!
The more profound question underlying Allen's piece is this: What is it? We know what it isn't -- skillful or comprehensible, for starters. It isn't satire, because there is no indication in tone or substance that she doesn't really mean what she says. It isn't humor, because, to be blunt, it's just not funny. The only possibility is that this is social commentary -- a plea to women to stop acting like ninnies. But she is delivering it with such lack of intelligence, it almost seems self parody.
So ... why on Earth did she write this? Maybe it goes back to the middle school scenario -- someone needs to be comforted that, despite the unusual prominence of women in this election, we are still silly and no threat at all to the way things are. Even if you let us write opinion pieces.
Caitlin Gibson, legal administrator for The Post, is a writer who lives in Bethesda. Rachel Manteuffel is an actor and a writer who lives in Vienna.
|
Allen's article is so illogical and incoherent that it more forcefully argues that women who think women are dumb are dumb.
| 34.826087 | 0.73913 | 1.086957 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/daoud_kuttab/2008/03/title.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030819id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/daoud_kuttab/2008/03/title.html
|
Step Up Your Mideast Game, America
|
2008030819
|
The Current Discussion: With the Israeli re-invasion of Gaza, it's clear that the "Annapolis Peace Process" is collapsing. Does it matter? Who's to blame?
The situation in Gaza reflects exactly what happens when a superpower (like the U.S.) makes a plan, sets parameters, declares deadlines and then lets the situation on the ground fall apart. Conventional thinking in the Middle East is that the Israelis don't carry out wide-ranging military activities without a green light from Washington D.C. Whether or not they gave prior approval, the U.S. has done little to stop the Israelis excessive use of force, which, according to international humanitarian law, is a crime of war.
Furthermore, the situation in Gaza is also reflective of the illogical policy of accepting certain facts and rejecting other facts. President Bush sent a letter to the then Israeli Prime Minister Sharon telling him that the U.S. understands the realities of some of the illegal Jewish settlments built on Palestinian lands. Bush's April 2004 letter states, among other things, "in light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli populations centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949, and all previous efforts to negotiate a two-state solution have reached the same conclusion." But President Bush is unable or unwilling to the political and military realities in Gaza. The U.S. and Israelis refuse to deal with the fact that Hamas candidates won a free and fair election and the Hamas's military is in control of the situation on the ground in Gaza.
If anyone had doubts about the effects of the pressure cooker on the imprisoned 1.4 million Gazans, then the break of the border and the flood of people into Gaza last month should have been a clear sign that there is a humanitarian time bomb that must be dealt with quickly and in a humanitarian way. No moral or political explanation can justify permanently keeping the people of Gaza imprisoned with an unjust siege. If this isn't collective punishment I don't know what is. For the peace process to move, Washington needs to keep its eye on the ball and its engagement with Israelis and Palestinians continuous. The U.S. willingness as articulated in Annapolis to be a referee and not just an observer has yet to be fulfilled.
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.
| 14.69697 | 0.484848 | 0.484848 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/deepak_chopra/2008/03/why_jesus_lost_the_nomination_1.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030819id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/deepak_chopra/2008/03/why_jesus_lost_the_nomination_1.html
|
Why Jesus Lost the Nomination
|
2008030819
|
Actually, it seems to be forgotten that Jesus once ran for President, and the result was a fiasco. Since the first plank of his platform was "Love your enemies," he had no choice but to seek the nomination of both parties at the same time, promising to merge the two into one. Republicans and Democrats were brought up short by the idea. Jesus called it a win-win situation for them, given the enormous savings in campaign costs. Pollsters were bothered by Jesus's claim that he knew how the election would turn out in advance. It seems that his Father, who has a finger in everything, had tipped him off.
As it turns out, Jesus's other planks caused even more problems on the bumpy road to the nomination. The second one was "Money is at the root of all evil." This forced his campaign to refuse contributions from lobbyists and special interest groups. For a long time Jesus hadn't been returning phone calls from K Street -- something to do with his third plank, "Resist not evil." On the other hand, this plank earned him unexpected popularity because of its enormous tax benefits. A country that doesn't resist evil would not wage war and therefore had no need for the Pentagon or the military-industrial complex. Jesus pointed out that the cost of a few Stealth bombers could finance all the symphony orchestras and day care centers in the country. Contented babies would have time for Mozart. Democrats liked the proposition better than Republicans, which cynics attributed to the higher birth rate among Democrats. (Behind his back the Republican smear machine started the rumor that Jesus was against sex and would abolish births altogether.) What finally sank the "Audacity of Salvation" campaign, however, was Jesus's policy about rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar's. This was widely interpreted as a coded way of giving Congress a substantial pay raise if Jesus was elected. But when close reading revealed that he also wanted to render unto God what is God's, enthusiasm quickly soured. Democrats, always the party of intellectuals, went back to reading Dostoevsky's "The Grand Inquisitor," while Republicans, eager to build upon the Bush administration's impeccable civil liberties record, nominated an actual inquisitor. Jesus shrugged it all off as God's will. He has promised to return again and run under the slogan, "Repent ye, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand." Talk about an insurgent candidate.
|
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.
| 10.840909 | 0.477273 | 0.477273 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/findingfaith/2008/03/largest_church_in_america.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030819id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/findingfaith/2008/03/largest_church_in_america.html
|
On Faith on washingtonpost.com
|
2008030819
|
HOUSTON â On the eve of the crucial Texas primary, the place to be seen was not at a campaign rally. It was inside the countryâs largest church.
Sunday, former President Bill Clinton, daughter Chelsea Clinton and their Secret Service entourage attended Lakewood Church, whose 47,000 members praise God in a converted sports stadium, once home to the Houston Rockets basketball team.
I decided to drop by a Lakewood service, not because of the Clintons â I learned of their presence that morning after theyâd cleared out â but because I was curious. In a country populated by Spanish missions, churches converted from houses, quaint New England-style chapels, storefront churches, temples, synagogues, large modern worship complexes, and metal warehouses with crosses and hand-painted signs on them, how do people worship God in a sports stadium? Who goes there? Why are megachurches so popular? What draws people to Lakewoodâs message?
Parking my rental car in Lakewoodâs underground garage, I followed a stream of churchgoers. They were all startlingly young â in their 20s, 30s or early 40s. As a group, they were ethnically diverse. Some carried Bibles, held hands or pushed baby strollers the length of the underground garage, up a concrete ramp and onto a street where Lakewood employees kept foot traffic moving and offered rides.
The church still resembles a sports stadium. Attending Lakewood felt a lot like attending a concert or civilized sporting event. A sea of multi-colored clothing advancing in an orderly fashion toward the seats, the expectation of the main event, a certain group mentality that comes with identifying oneself as a sports fan or a churchgoer.
Inside the glass entrance was a guest services counter. Volunteers with Lakewood name tags greeted the congregation warmly with a handshake and âGood morning. God bless you.â They were stationed at the door, at either end of the escalators, and throughout the building, and I must have shook hands with five or six people on my way up the escalators toward the stadium entrance. On my way to my seat, I noticed a âcrying roomâ with rocking chairs and beds, a child care center, a bookstore, kiosks for various church programs and for discreet donations, and a donor wall etched with names.
The stadium was dark, with dark blue carpeting and colored lighting. Taped music played over the sound system as people filed through the doors. I took a seat in an empty section and was quickly surrounded by people -- a young white family with grandparents and a toddler on my left, a white Hispanic couple with four young children in front of me, and a young African-American couple to my right.
Professional lighting highlighted sections that were full and downplayed areas of the stadium that were not. Waterfalls cascaded down two rock formations on either side of the choir. A large golden globe sculpture, visible on the television broadcasts, rotated behind the stage. Churchgoers got a close-up of the pastor, ministers and performers via huge screens above the stage. Swooping camera angles captured the magnitude of the standing, singing and waving crowd under the spotlights, giving the viewer an impression of traveling above a canyon of people. These were interspersed with close-ups of the musicians, pastors, and people singing, crying, or clapping in the crowd.
To get an idea of what Lakewood might be like, I had picked up Pastor Joel Osteenâs new book "Become a Better You" in the Charlotte airport, and leafed through it on the flight down. The book was a feel-good mixture of Norman Vincent Peale meets Anthony Robbins. The religious message was there, but understated, I thought.
For the first 15 or 20 minutes, upbeat music pumped up the crowd. Musicians took the stage with microphones and guitars, backed by a professional sound system and more instruments behind the stage. The chorus dressed in black or blue, fanning out to take up the benches.
Pastors Joel and Victoria Osteen are young and tastefully dressed in suits with super white smiles and well-coiffed but not overdone hair. Their message â the message that thousands came to hear â was full of positive catch phrases: âDestined to win,â âThe best is yet to come,â âAll things are possible,â âDiscover the champion in you,â âPress through obstacles,â âVictors, not victims.â There was no raining down of hellfire and brimstone, no prolonged reading from the scriptures, no mention of sin or sinners that I heard. Instead, it felt very much like a motivational speaking rally, delivered in Christian language.
It was easy to see what was so attractive to young people like 19-year-old Jason Higgins, who attended Lakewood for the first time Sunday and described the experience as âamazingâ and âreally different.â
The grass farm worker from Brazoria, Texas, grew up in a Baptist church with a sterner, darker message.
âHere itâs more confidence to live a better life,â he said.
It would be easy but probably unwise to dismiss whatâs happening at the largest church in the country and similar churches across the country as âevangelical lite,â part of the whole âfeel goodâ megachurch trend that has drawn young people away from traditional churches in droves.
âI think that other people might not think itâs real because itâs so big, and itâs on TV,â said Lakewood member 29-year-old Ginger Battise, a customer service representative from Houston. âI tell them they should give it a try themselves.â
She said she grew up attending a non-denominational church that was part of the Assemblies of God but stopped going as a teenager when she lost interest. Her mother brought her family to Lakewood Church seven months ago. And theyâve been coming every Sunday since.
Battise likes Lakewood because Osteen is more like a motivational speaker. He doesnât get lost in long diatribes, doesnât endorse politicians or let them speak from the pulpit (though he welcomes them publicly if they attend his services, as he did the Clintons), and his message is easy to follow.
Hilario Rios, Battiseâs fiancé, said he didnât really grow up going to church. The 23-year-old warehouse worker found the sermons confusing. âReally, I didnât understand what they were saying before,â he said.
âSince we started coming back, weâve seen lots of positive changes in our lives,â said Battise. âWe just recently bought a house, a new car. Weâre getting married. I know itâs because of faith.â
|
Finding Faith on On Faith; blog of religion in the news on washingtonpost.com. Visit http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/findingfaith/
| 73.529412 | 0.411765 | 0.529412 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/undergod/2008/03/huckabee_says_goodbye.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030819id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/undergod/2008/03/huckabee_says_goodbye.html
|
On Faith on washingtonpost.com
|
2008030819
|
"Though he has been painted as the evangelical candidate, Huckabee has millions who support him because of his platform on illegal immigration, border security, American sovereignty, the FairTax, an accelerated program to energy independence and myriad other "non-Christian" issues.
He was never anti-Mormon, either. He is refreshingly open in welcoming others' religious beliefs (or absence of them). All he did was answer a question about LDS belief that a reporter asked him- accurately. Period."
Huckabee did have some genuine supporters that did not vote for him because he was Christian. Polls estimate about 20%. But his win in Iowa and other areas are attributed directly to the Evangelical Christian vote. The crux of the issue is that because an overwhelming number voted for Huckabee solely based on religion, it gave rise to a false sense that Huckabee had broad base appeal. Because he won early in Iowa, people thought that he had "real" appeal. (i.e. leadership, vision, and answers to solve real problems in the country.) Can he talk folksy and play the guitar, yep... he get's an A for appearing likable. But that wasn't enough.
In regard to Romney, he had the most broad-base appeal overall regarding his conservative platforms, experience and leadership. Evangelical Christians with an antimormon bias sunk him in Iowa - and Christian conservative voters other places were confused whether or not it was "ok" (religiously speaking) to vote for Romney (who is mormon.)
Huckabee gets an "F" for LDS relations as his comments were truly antimormon. Let me give you an example. If someone asked a conservative Christian, "Don't Christians believe that Jesus Christ created evil?" Would you say yes or no? On one hand you'd have to say "yes" since Jesus Christ created all things knowing before hand the outcome of that creation. But then you'd want to say no because then it would mean that Jesus is not omnibenficient.
Mormons don't believe that the "Devil" and Jesus are brothers, they believe that Lucifer, son of the morning, who dwelled with God, WERE brothers. It has to do with the premortal life - something that Evangelical Christians know very little about. Therefore, asking the question in that way misleads the unsuspecting listening to conclude that Mormons believe in some "brotherly" connection between Jesus and the Devil TODAY.
Everyone knows that Christian pastors preach against Mormons in their own Churches calling the the LDS Church, the "tool of the devil" among other things including that its a "cult of the devil".
Huckabee's comments were code for "hey remember... this is the cult of the devil".
By the way, the reporter didn't ask Huckabee about Mormons. Huckabee WILLINGLY offered it as a dig in the interview. It was an off the wall comment, totally UNSOLICITED by the reporter.
Further, about 4 years ago, Huckabee went to a Souther Baptist conference in Salt Lake City to specifically preach against Mormons that they are a cult and of the devil.
Andrew, I wish it were true that Huckabee wasn't a bigot, but he is. His own campaign staff got caught on camera telling conservative Christians in Iowa, "How can you vote for Romney when he believes that the Devil and Jesus are brothers?"
Huckabee won because they used religious intolerance against Romney. Huckabee's win in Iowa gave him momentum ..and the rest is history.
I hope that Huckabee will not be VP. He's not ready for the job. He doesn't have enough respect for people that are not like him. I do not believe that he lives his religion very well either - especially a person who calls himself a "pastor".
|
Under God on On Faith; blog of religion in the news on washingtonpost.com. Visit http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/undergod/
| 43.470588 | 0.529412 | 0.647059 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/yossi_melman/2008/03/forget_annapolis_nine_steps_to.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030819id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/yossi_melman/2008/03/forget_annapolis_nine_steps_to.html
|
Forget Annapolis: Nine Steps to Peace
|
2008030819
|
The Current Discussion: With the Israeli re-invasion of Gaza, it's clear that the "Annapolis Peace Process" is collapsing. Does it matter? Who's to blame?
Whoâs to blame? Nobody and everyone. The Palestinians. The Arab world. The Israelis and the Bush administration. All are to blame for showing lack of vision, willingness and readiness to compromise and achieve genuine peace.
I don't like to boast about my previous writings in the style of I TOLD YOU SO. But I did. This is what I wrote four months ago, in Nov 2007 before the Annapolis Summit was convened:
"Since THE Camp David peace treaty between Israel and Egypt, back in 1978, there have been so many bilateral, multilateral, regional, international, and you-name-it summits and conferences to enhance peace, security, stability and tranquility in the Arab-Palestinian-Israeli conflict that only obsessed media and news freaks can recall all of them. Annapolis is probably going to be more of the same. Like most past meetings, this one began with high expectations that were eventually shattered by its participantsâ narrow-mindedness and lack of vision. Annapolis is doomed to the same fate."
It was so easy to forecast the failure of Annapolis. It was easy because the Bush administration and all the other participants, representing more than 100 states and organizations, had no real intention to really do something about the disaster in our region. Then, as now, they paid only lip service to the "PEACE PROCESS.â
All involved parties know very well what has to be done to solve the problems, to reduce the tensions and put out the fire â to achieve peace. You don't need to have a crystal ball to envision the future. The recipe is here in our hands and we all know it by heart.
Here are my ideas about how to enhance the process and achieve a real peace. You may call it the Melman Nine-Point Plan.
1. The world has to acknowledge and declare unequivocally that Hamas is a group of Muslim fundamentalists and terrorists, sponsored by Iran. They hate Israel and don't recognize our right to exist, not to mention the right for self-determination. They hate the U.S. and the West and see them as the source of all evil on earth. They are an anti-democratic movement seeking to establish a theocracy. They toppled the legitimate government of the Palestinian Authority in a military coup.
2. If the Arab world, especially Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the UAE, really care about the fate of the Palestinians, they must stop their financial, military and political support for Hamas. The moment Hamas loses its constant supply of weapons and money from the above-mentioned states, it will cease to control Gaza.
3. Gaza would return to its original rulers: the Palestinian Authority, led by Mohammad Abbas (Abu Mazen).
4. The rocket shelling of Israeli towns (which is a war crime) would come to an end.
5. In return, Israel must stop all its military operations in Gaza and the West Bank.
6. After securing a stable and permanent cease-fire, an intensive round of negotiation will be opened to conclude a peace treaty based on four central principles: A. Israel has to agree to withdraw from all the occupied West Bank lands and dismantle most of the Jewish settlements there, while guaranteeing its security needs. B. A Palestinian State will be declared and recognized by the UN. The Palestinian State will be fully demilitarized. C. Arab States and the Arab League have to recognize Israel and form full diplomatic and commercial relations with it. D. Israel within its 1948 recognized borders will not accept Palestinian refugees.
7. An International Fund has to be established, with monies contributed mainly by the rich Saudi Arabia, UAE, Russia (which is also a very wealthy nation), U.S., EU, China and Japan to compensate the 1948 Palestinian refugees for the loss of their of their property. The refugees can resettle in the newly established Palestinian State and or Arab states.
8. An international force will be deployed to supervise and implement the agreement.
9. The U.S. administration will exert its ultimate power and influence to coerce all parties to accept this international agreement. If a party or parties refuse to cooperate with the agreement, the U.S. will break off its relations with that party and together with the UN Security Council will impose sanctions.
Of course. But it's easier said than done. Why? Because of what was said in the opening sentences of this blog post: narrow-minded leaders lack courage and vision. As long as there is no real change in individual and group thinking of the Middle Eastâs leaders, the region is doomed to paralysis.
|
Yossi Melman at PostGlobal on PostGlobal; blog of politics and current events on washingtonpost.com. Visit http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/yossi_melman/
| 51.833333 | 0.444444 | 0.444444 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/needtoknow/2008/03/a_real_kurdish_solution.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030819id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/needtoknow/2008/03/a_real_kurdish_solution.html
|
PostGlobal: PostGlobal on washingtonpost.com
|
2008030819
|
The single biggest problem is that Kurds have no credibility with respect to the principles they claim to uphold, such as freedoms and rights.
Glowing contradictions are many, but here are a few. 1) Talabani and Barzani rule TWO SINGLE-PARTY dictatorships, and their ruling MO is VERY SIMILAR IF NOT IDENTICAL to the typical ME tyrant, including Saddam. Taking a closer look at the local "governments" in Northern Iraq, you see the same oppressive, patriarchic, oil-driven regimes you find in much of the oil-rich ME. Has anyone seen any signs of an effective (functional/free) political opposition? Has anyone seen free enterprise (i.e. free of government meddling and cronyism)? What about the minorities? Should a people so determined about minority rights be so obtuse (or worse) towards the freedoms and rights of their OWN minorities?
2) What do the Kurds want? PKK self-declared their intent to partition Turkey when they were first established. Since Ocalan was captured and they temporarily lost an international base to operate, they suddenly "realized" they should be pursuing autonomy. The question is, WHO REALLY KNOWS what they mean, if they are being honest? Are these not the same people that pretend to be innocent civilians one moment and act as terrorist the next and call themselves guerillas the next? If the Kurds could convince others through consistent, humble action they do inded intend to live in peace as majority (in N Iraq) and as minority (in Turkey, Syria, Iran), then other may begin to give them a chance. Until then, it is much safer to keep the finger on the trigger than to risk outright civil war and worse.
3) Rights vs. Freedoms: Kurds frequently (always?) appeal to Western powers that have a history of divide-and-conquer and realpolitik. Until just two decades ago, Europe and the US were busily helping Saddam build his WMDs, for example. Much worse, these same powers do NOT give community rights; they give individual freedoms. Just read an average proclamation by the German PM Merkel or French Prez Sarkozy. None of these governments favor creating parallel, autonomous systems for Kurds or Turks or Arabs or various Northern African communities! On the contrary, Merkel is quite vociferous about Turks, for example, accepting assimilation. If a German Turk wants to marry a Turk in Turkey, the spouse in Turkey should be required to learn German and satisfy other German-ic requirements before being able to live a life in Germany!! This is what Merkel is proposing for the Turks in Germany. For the Kurds in Turkey, she wants not just the freedom for Kurds to do whatever they claim is cultural, but convert them into rights that the Turkish government would have to enforce/deliver, which is the same as saying Turks should pay for Kurds' way/culture.'
4) The last point brings me to an important topic: Minority incorporation in the West. Native Americans, European Jews, African American descendent of slaves, tax-paying ethnic-Americans, etc. do not get ANY communal rights, not even when they have been firmly established as law-abiding, tax-paying, 2nd, 3rd, etc. generation Americans. For example, I do not see Kurdish-Americans demanding that Uncle Sam should open Kurdish-language elementary and secondary schools. Why not? Are they not the same Kurds as the ones in Iraq or Turkey? Are they any less human? No. The reality is, divisions have a tendency to weaken a society, while diversity does help. The American model insists on assimilation, but does not forcefully reject differences. YET, each individual must fight (and pay out of pocket) to continue their membership in a community (as Kurds, Turks, Arabs, Greeks, Jews, etc.) -- they have to set up their own Sunday/weekend schools, set up their own community halls, train and employ their own rabbis, priests, imams, etc. Uncle Sam does not (generally) interfere, but does not provide direct material assistance beyond, maybe, providing some tax relief (e.g. churches and other religious organizations are usually tax-exempt, or get breaks).
So, why do the Kurds deserve anything different than Turks, Kurds, Iranians, Arabs, etc. living in other lands? Why is it that the Kurds think that life will be better if they cannot communicate with other Kurds (Kurdish has three distinct flavors) or with their neighbors? Are the Indians doing something terribly wrong by speaking English or Hindi? Is it better to create societies that are literally deaf and mute with respect to one another? Why are Turks (and Kurds) spending so much time and money trying to get their kids to learn foreign languages, then?
There are so many problems with the Kurds, but all them can probably be summed up as immaturity. They really need to read a few history books and look at the world map and understand that they can either choose to be a productive piece in the jigsaw puzzle of nations, or choose to become a "cost of business" for countries that are naturally intent on keeping their lives from falling apart in trying to please Kurds at any cost.
|
Need to Know - PostGlobal on PostGlobal; blog of politics and current events on washingtonpost.com. Visit http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/needtoknow/
| 53.947368 | 0.473684 | 0.578947 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/03/05/ST2008030501226.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/03/05/ST2008030501226.html
|
Strength in Numbers
|
2008030819
|
A n organizer by nature and profession, Rachel Rosenthal Strisik's impulse toward order hit full throttle when she learned she was pregnant with twins.
Right away she sought out a local support group and started networking with mothers who had twins or triplets. At her Bethesda home, she created folders for medical bills and parenting articles. She set up areas upstairs and down to diaper and dress the babies. She baked and froze lasagnas and chicken casseroles for those days when she was sure to be too harried for cooking.
Her operating theory: "You need to bring order to the chaos before it happens."
For most parents, hearing that they are having multiples is "joy mixed with terror mixed with moments of calm," says Patricia Malmstrom, co-author of "The Art of Parenting Twins" and director of Twin Services Consulting, a support Web site for parents with multiples. After absorbing the news, Malmstrom says, many parents-to-be find themselves "scrambling to find balance in the midst of a very unstable feeling."
Much of that scrambling centers on how to keep a household running smoothly -- or just running -- with two, three or more babies crying at once.
Multiple births are increasingly common in this country. Between 1980 and 2005, the rate of twin births almost doubled, according to the National Center for Health Statistics. Triplet and higher-order multiple births more than quadrupled. Experts say the jump can be attributed to more women delaying childbirth: After the age of 35, women have an increased chance of conceiving multiples, especially if they are undergoing fertility therapies.
This trend complicates matters on the home front: Women expecting multiples are often confined to bed before delivery and may have a longer recovery afterward, which can add to a general unraveling of housekeeping.
Rosenthal Strisik, 30, runs Rosey's Urban Style, a personal organizing and shopping service, so she was already skilled at planning. And since the arrival of identical twins Ellie and Marin in January -- the first children for Rosenthal Strisik and her husband, Marshall Strisik Schattner -- she says she has also learned to be flexible. Because her girls are different weights and require different amounts of food, she started labeling bottles with their initials. She makes a habit of keeping Ellie on the left and Marin on the right during feedings, naps and playtime so friends and relatives can tell who's who.
"Get your systems in place as early as possible," she says. "But know that the babies will change your system. Things are constantly changing."
Annie Elliott, 37, is a Washington designer and first-time mother of 3-year-old twin girls. When she learned she was expecting, she put up plenty of open shelving in the nursery and hung a clear plastic shoe holder on the wall next to the changing table so onesies and wipes were nearby and visible. "You have to have everything at your fingertips," she says. "Wrestling a baby in and out of clothing is more stressful when you have another baby crying."
She devoted an entire shelf -- not just a charming little basket -- to diapers. ("Really stock up. You won't believe how fast you go through things.") And she color-coded the girls' clothing to help others tell them apart: red for Ruthie, green for Georgie.
Becky DeStefanis, 34, and John Spirtas, 33, parents of 2-year-old triplets, have some counterintuitive advice for couples expecting multiples: Resist the impulse to move to a bigger house right away.
|
A n organizer by nature and profession, Rachel Rosenthal Strisik's impulse toward order hit full throttle when she learned she was pregnant with twins.
| 25.814815 | 1 | 27 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/05/AR2008030503621.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/05/AR2008030503621.html
|
Even in Victory, Clinton Team Is Battling Itself
|
2008030819
|
And then Clinton's advisers turned to their other goal: denying Mark Penn credit.
With a flurry of phone calls and e-mail messages that began before polls closed, campaign officials made clear to friends, colleagues and reporters that they did not view the wins as validation for the candidate's chief strategist. "A lot of people would still like to see him go," a senior adviser said.
The depth of hostility toward Penn even in a time of triumph illustrates the combustible environment within the Clinton campaign, an operation where internal strife and warring camps have undercut a candidate once seemingly destined for the Democratic nomination. Clinton now faces the challenge of exploiting this moment of opportunity while at the same time deciding whether the squabbling at her Arlington headquarters has become a distraction that requires her intervention.
Many of her advisers are waging a two-front war, one against Sen. Barack Obama and the second against one another, but their most pressing challenge is figuring out why Clinton won in Ohio and Texas and trying to duplicate it. While Penn sees his strategy as a reason for the victories that have kept her candidacy alive, other advisers attribute the wins to her perseverance, favorable demographics and a new campaign manager. Clinton won "despite us, not because of us," one said.
Sifting through the data yesterday, her divided circle offered other theories. Some credit field operatives who set up organizations in record time. Others cite strong Hispanic outreach in South Texas that held off a late Obama push. And even some Penn opponents grudgingly cite his television commercial that asked which Democrat is more prepared for a 3 a.m. crisis call at the White House.
In the days leading up to the Ohio and Texas contests, Clinton presented herself as the victim of media bias and displayed a sense of humor on "Saturday Night Live" at the same time her staff was holding daily conference calls attacking Obama on his trade record and for his ties to an indicted real estate developer. The yin-yang approach -- going positive and negative at the same time -- may not have been deliberate, but it seemed to work.
"There has been a long-term disagreement on strategy over whether to focus on character . . . or raising questions about Senator Obama," said one top Clinton aide who was at the core of the fight. "What's happened over the last two weeks is we've done both."
One of Clinton's favorite books is "Team of Rivals," Doris Kearns Goodwin's account of Abraham Lincoln's Cabinet, and she assembled her own team of advisers knowing their mutual enmity in the belief that good ideas come from vigorous discussion. But while many campaigns are beset by backbiting and power struggles, dozens of interviews indicate that the internal problems endured by the Clinton team have been especially corrosive.
They fought over Penn's strategy of presenting Clinton as a strong commander in chief rather than trying to humanize her, as aides such as admaker Mandy Grunwald and chief spokesman Howard Wolfson wanted to do. They fought over deployment of assets and dwindling resources, pointing fingers over the failure to field organizations in many states. They fought over how to handle former president Bill Clinton and his habit of drifting away from his talking points into provocative territory.
At the center of much of this turmoil has been Penn, the rumpled, brusque, numbers-crunching strategist respected even by his foes for his intelligence, if not his social graces. A trusted adviser to the Clintons since helping orchestrate Bill Clinton's reelection campaign in 1996, Penn mapped out a strategy emphasizing strength and experience but, in the view of critics, did not adjust adequately when it became clear that voters wanted change.
"I think about all camps think it's Mark's fault," said a Clinton White House veteran close to the campaign. "I don't think there is a Mark camp." Another person who has advised the senator from New York said: "Penn should have been let go. He failed the campaign in developing a message and evolving the message as things changed."
|
For the bruised and bitter staff around Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, Tuesday's death-defying victories in the Democratic presidential primaries in Ohio and Texas proved sweet indeed. They savored their wins yesterday, plotted their next steps and indulged in a moment of optimism. "She won't be st...
| 14.107143 | 0.589286 | 1.053571 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/behind-the-numbers/2008/03/toe_to_toe_on_issues_and_attri_1.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030819id_/http://blog.washingtonpost.com/behind-the-numbers/2008/03/toe_to_toe_on_issues_and_attri_1.html
|
Toe to Toe on Issues and Attributes
|
2008030819
|
A new Washington Post-ABC News poll finds each of the two contenders for the Democratic nomination for president holding an edge over presumptive Republican nominee John McCain if the general election were held today.
And digging deeper on a contest between McCain and the Democrats' delegate leader, Barack Obama, the poll shows potential stumbling blocks for both candidates, with Obama somewhat better positioned on issues and attributes overall and among that quintessential swing group, independents.
On five of eight attributes tested, Obama leads McCain by wide margins, and among independents, racks up larger margins on empathy and having a clearer vision for the future:
Q: Regardless of whom you may support, who do you think...
But McCain leads on two measures of strength and experience and as the candidate with better knowledge of world affairs. On both experience questions, McCain widens his overall edge among independents:
Q: Regardless of whom you may support, who do you think...
On the issues, Obama has a lead on all but two of the six tested. On the war in Iraq, the two are close, though McCain has an edge among independents. On terrorism, McCain leads by double-digits overall and among independents on terrorism.
Q: Regardless of whom you may support, whom do you trust more to handle...
Some of Obama's edge on these issues may come from greater acceptance of his ideological point of view. Most, 56 percent, said his views on most issues are "just about right," while 41 percent said the same of McCain.
Eight years ago during his unsuccessful run for the White House, 55 percent judged McCain's views to be about right while 19 percent called him "too conservative" and 16 percent said "too liberal." Now, the same percentage say he's too far to the left, 34 percent say too far to the right, and among independents, the percentage calling him too conservative has leapt from 18 percent to 40 percent.
Complete data from the Washington Post-ABC News poll can be found here.
By Jennifer Agiesta | March 5, 2008; 6:03 PM ET Post Polls Previous: Veepstakes | Next: SCOTUS: 2nd Amendment
It was Clinton's camp that downplayed its own trade bashing, reports the Canadian media
March 6, 2008 12:30 PM
A storm of reports in the Canadian media say that the Nafta-gate flap last week involving Barack Obama was started by a key aide to Canada's prime minister - who told journalists that Hillary Clinton's campaign - not Obama's - had contacted the Canadian government to play down its Nafta-bashing.
The Canadian Press wire service - the equivalent to AP - reports that Ian Brodie, chief of staff to Stephen Harper, was talking to journalists last week: "Brodie was asked about remarks aimed by the Democratic candidates at Ohio's anti-Nafta voters that carried economic implications for Canada." It quotes a witness who reported Brodie's remarks:
"He said someone from (Hillary) Clinton's campaign is telling the embassy to take it with a grain of salt ... That someone called us and told us not to worry."
Here's today's splash in the Globe and Mail, which begins: "The leak of a confidential diplomatic discussion that rocked the US presidential campaign began with an offhand remark to journalists from the Prime Minister's chief of staff, Ian Brodie." It goes on:
Mr Brodie ... stopped to chat with several journalists, and was surrounded by a group from CTV.... The conversation turned to the pledges to renegotiate the North American free-trade agreement made by the two Democratic contenders, Mr Obama and New York Senator Hillary Clinton.
Mr Brodie, apparently seeking to play down the potential impact on Canada, told the reporters the threat was not serious, and that someone from Ms Clinton's campaign had even contacted Canadian diplomats to tell them not to worry because the Nafta threats were mostly political posturing.
Posted by: ac11 | March 6, 2008 3:55 PM
There is something fishy here. Someone at the Canadian Embassy is trying damage control.
Before we have a memo written by a Canadian Consul employee who was sitting on a meeting between Austan Goolsbee and the Canadian Consul. Obama denied the meeting for days if not weeks, before admitting it. Here we have Mr. Brodie saying that "someone" from Clinton's campaign contacted "Canadian Diplomats". I see the vast contrast between the two reports.
Posted by: pKrishna | March 6, 2008 4:09 PM
As important at this point is the fact that many more Republicans will be voting for Hillary now that McCain is the obvious candidate. In Texas, 8% of those voting for Hillary were Republicans hoping that would insure McCain's victory in Nov. In Fla. the numbers were not that significant but many Republicans did switch parties to vote for Hillary.....more important than that however, is the fact Independents were barred from voting for any candidate and if the past 2 Presidential elections show anything, Florida Independents do not like Clinton (or those associated with him...such as Gore and Kerry).
So you can probably count both Florida and Texas in the McCain camp come November.
Posted by: Will | March 6, 2008 4:09 PM
I think the media has been negligent in awarding a Texas win to ANY candidate since the caucus delegates are still being determined. They represent 1/3 of the state's delegates (ie 2/3 from the primary and 1/3 from the caucuses).
How can an winner be announced when 1/3 of the delegate count has not been determined yet?? The primary was so close, that Clinton only bested Obama by 4 delegates. It's not over folks till the last caucus is counted!
Posted by: barbara (Toronto) | March 6, 2008 4:52 PM
Will Someone please tell the American Voter if McCain is a Dem, as registered, A Conservative as he claims, or a Republican as Bush claims! Actually, there doesn't seem to be a Rep. candidate. All Republicans are hiding, and with good reason!
Just another point for the young voter,. Hussein contributed to the Bush ILLEGALE WAR FUND. AND ALSO VOTED TO INCREASE TUITION FOR COLLEGE, SO HOW WILL OUR YOUNG PEOPLE MANAGE TO GET hIGHER eDUCATION WHEN PARENTS ARE TRYING NOT TO LOSE THEIR HOMES, WAGES AND HEALTH BENEFITS. jOIN THE aRMED fORCES AND put your lives on the line. Obama has no money problems, and could care less no matter what he preaches. He has Oprah, Farrahkan, and Tony, the Gangster.(and his Football) "So where's the BEEF"? and more impotantly WHAT IS THE CHANGE HE IS TOUTING!!
Posted by: lynn parker | March 6, 2008 5:20 PM
Posted by: Dave | March 6, 2008 5:23 PM
McCain is favored by most voters over Obama in the category cited above "has the better experience to be president." McCain certainly has more experience in national office, but having more is not necessarily better. Better, in my opinion, includes having good judgment, integrity, a bold vision, ethical values, etc., not how many years a person has been a governor, Senator, or Vice-President.
Posted by: Koreen | March 6, 2008 6:23 PM
WE ALL KNOW THIS, BUT IT BEARS REPEATING. McCAIN IS NOW ATTACKING OBAMA PERSONALLY, IN MUCH THE SAME WAY THAT CLINTON HAS BEEN DOING FOR A LONG TIME. McCAIN IS AFRAID OF OBAMA. OBAMA WILL BEAT BOTH CLINTON AND McCAIN.
Posted by: Robert M Kraus Sr | March 6, 2008 8:35 PM
Obama has yet to be the nominee of the Dem!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
But this article and author talked like he has!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: diaohp | March 6, 2008 10:14 PM
Posted by: Ohg Rea Tone | March 7, 2008 7:54 AM
Check out this website... obamatruth.org
Posted by: Kathy Rogers | March 9, 2008 6:57 PM
A "democracy" will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.
From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the "most benefits" from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.
1. From bondage to spiritual faith; 2. From spiritual faith to great courage; 3. From courage to liberty; 4. From liberty to abundance; 5. From abundance to complacency; 6. From complacency to apathy; 7. From apathy to dependence; 8. From dependence back into bondage
In aggregate, the map of the territory Bush won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of this great country.
Gore's territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare.
Number of States won by: Gore: 19 Bush: 29
Square miles of land won by: Gore: 580,000 Bush: 2,427,000
Population of counties won by: Gore: 127 million Bush: 143 million
Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Gore: 13.2 Bush: 2.1
Some forty percent of the nation's population already having reached the 'governmental dependency' phase.
If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million criminal invaders called illegal and they vote, then we can say goodbye to the USA in fewer than five years.
Posted by: BLUEFLORIDA | March 10, 2008 12:47 PM
2008 Presidential Election Weekly Poll
Check Out Our New Polls Posted Weekly!
Posted by: votenic | March 13, 2008 2:36 PM
Why would anybody vote for McCain? See this video that Iran released and tell me who won the 2003 Iraq war?
I'll tell you who won, Ahmadinejad! And yet McCain wants to stay in Iraq for another 100 years!!!!!
Posted by: Ali | March 15, 2008 12:26 PM
It's time for us to move beyond the Bush-Clinton years. Hillary has the experience to lie and cheat her way into the office. McCain is positioning himself as an extension of the Bush years.
Obama is the best choice to move the country forward.
Posted by: radiocboy | April 11, 2008 1:10 PM
R M Kraus is out of the loony bin now???
Posted by: Desiree | April 27, 2008 3:41 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.
|
Behind the Numbers is a blog about political data, from campaign contributions to congressional votes to the last polling numbers. Behind the Numbers is written by the staff of The Washington Post and washingtonpost.com
| 60.054054 | 0.756757 | 1.135135 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/06/AR2008030600631.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/06/AR2008030600631.html
|
Reputed Global Arms Dealer Arrested
|
2008030819
|
Russian arms dealer Viktor Bout was usually a careful man, dealing with customers through intermediaries and ordering subordinates to throw away cellphones, receipts and anything else that could be traced.
After two buyers claiming to be Colombian guerrillas approached him last November, Bout tried to double-check their identities using photographs of known leaders of the group, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, court documents say.
"Our man has been made persona non-G- for the world," an associate wrote to one of the purported militants in an e-mail, explaining the need for Bout's security precautions.
Yet the prospect of a $15 million arms deal lured Bout from Moscow to Thailand this week for a final meeting with buyers. It turned out to be part of a four-month sting by the Drug Enforcement Administration with secret help from security officials in four other nations.
Bout, dressed in scruffy khakis and an orange polo shirt, was arrested at his Bangkok hotel yesterday by the Royal Thai Police and was charged in New York with conspiracy to provide material support to FARC, which Washington calls a terrorist group. U.S. officials say they will seek his extradition.
Bout's odds-defying career as an amoral arms merchant who sometimes supplied both sides in military conflicts has been the focus of journalistic expos¿s, a recent book and, loosely, a 2005 movie called "Lord of War," starring Nicolas Cage. Bout, 41, has at least five passports, is fluent in six languages and has used numerous aliases and birthdates, authorities say.
Emerging from the wreckage of the former Soviet Union, Bout used military and intelligence connections to become the "FedEx of arms dealers," in the words of a U.S. arms sales analyst.
Bout allegedly used front companies and fleets of military cargo planes to drop weaponry into war zones from Africa to the Middle East. In the FARC case, he allegedly offered to move tons of arms from Bulgaria to Colombia after flying them over Nicaraguan and Guyanese airspace.
Bout has recently weathered international sanctions by hiding in plain sight in a luxury apartment building in Moscow, while Russian authorities deflected outside attempts to apprehend him. U.S. and European intelligence agencies have long suspected that Bout received assistance, particularly early in his career, from Soviet and later Russian intelligence agencies. Bout has denied it.
"He took his Soviet military experience and used that to build a very lucrative business operation," said James A. Lewis, a former State Department expert on arms smuggling now at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "His reputation was that he could deliver large quantities of weapons anywhere in the world. That was his competitive edge."
The DEA is involved in the case because of past allegations that Bout engaged in drug trafficking, as well as concerns that FARC would use weapons to protect its cocaine business, either by shooting down fumigation planes or by harming U.S. personnel, according to the complaint released yesterday. In a similar DEA sting last year, international arms dealer Monzer al-Kassar was arrested at his Spanish mansion on charges of conspiring with FARC.
In the Bout case, a pair of paid DEA informants posing as FARC operatives held successive meetings with a Bout associate, Andrew Smulian, in Curacao, Copenhagen and Bucharest, Romania, the complaint said. The DEA monitored cellphones and e-mail used by Bout and his associates, until Bout agreed to leave the safety of Moscow for Thailand.
|
U.S. to seek extradition of infamous global arms trafficker nabbed by DEA in Bangkok.
| 44.533333 | 0.733333 | 0.733333 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/06/AR2008030601970.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/06/AR2008030601970.html
|
A Canyon-Size Age Difference
|
2008030819
|
Park rangers are instructed to tell them that the canyon has been carved by the Colorado River for the past 5 or 6 million years. The park's Web site, under Frequently Asked Questions, notes that the rocks exposed by the canyon are up to 2 billion years old, and then adds: "The Canyon itself -- an erosional feature -- has formed only in the past five or six million years. Geologically speaking, Grand Canyon is very young."
That might need revision. The canyon is more like 17 million years old, according to a study published today in the journal Science.
And the Colorado River may not be the only river involved in its formation. The study contends that a smaller river cut the older, western part of the canyon. Gradually the canyon formed from west to east on westward-flowing river. Then something happened about 5 or 6 million years ago -- what, exactly, is unclear -- to accelerate dramatically the rate of the canyon-carving.
"The canyon is older than we think," said Victor Polyak, a University of New Mexico geologist and the lead author on the Science paper. "And there's a two-step process, I guess you can say."
Not so fast, said Joel Pederson, a geomorphologist at Utah State University who has spent his career studying the Grand Canyon. He said the estimated age of 5 million to 6 million years is based on abundant evidence amassed by scientists over many decades. Seventeen million is impossible, he said, because there is no evidence of a large quantity of sediment flowing out of a canyon before 6 million years ago.
"They clearly have not taken the time to be rigorous and actually understand the regional geography," Pederson said.
Polyak's research paired new lab techniques with intrepid fieldwork. Researchers had to climb canyon walls to reach caves containing crucial evidence of the canyon's history. The scientists examined mammillaries, also known as cave clouds, which are rounded mineral deposits that tend to form underwater near the top of a water table.
In the canyon, these deposits also contain a lot of uranium. In recent years, scientists have improved techniques for dating rocks based on the predictable decay of uranium into lead.
Polyak, working with geologist Carol Hill, suggested the research project to geochemist Yemane Asmerom, Polyak's boss at the University of New Mexico: Why not use the new lab techniques to measure the ages of the mammillaries? That ought to tell the story, Polyak reasoned, of how the river gradually cut through the plateau and lowered the water table.
Asmerom was skeptical. Scientists have long struggled to figure out the age of the 277-mile-long canyon, which is 18 miles across at its widest and reaches depths of 6,000 feet. Evidence of how and when the huge incision into Earth's crust took place tends to erode.
"Forget it. That was my reaction," Asmerom said. But he was persuaded to join the effort, which received funding from the National Science Foundation.
|
Visitors to the Grand Canyon always want to know: How old is it?
| 39.2 | 0.733333 | 1.133333 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/06/AR2008030602741.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/06/AR2008030602741.html
|
Deal on Sharing Power Goes Before Parliament
|
2008030819
|
Both Kibaki and his rival, Raila Odinga, arrived in twin motorcades of shiny black sedans to Thursday's parliamentary session, the first since the warring leaders signed the deal last week to pull the country out of its worst crisis since independence.
The deal strikes a balance of power that has been lacking in Kenya's government, creating a prime minister position for Odinga, who is to oversee government ministries and be accountable to parliament. Kibaki, whose negotiating team had fiercely resisted the agreement, remains head of the armed forces and retains powers to appoint judges and some ministers.
The two men have also pledged to address issues underlying the crisis, such as land ownership and other social inequalities that millions of opposition supporters had hoped to rectify by electing Odinga, who accused Kibaki and his inner circle of stealing the Dec. 27 presidential election.
The dispute kicked off weeks of protests, clashes between demonstrators and police and, across the lush Rift Valley region in the west, waves of militia attacks.
At least 1,000 people have been killed and 600,000 displaced in the violence, much of it orchestrated by political leaders on both sides, according to human rights groups and Kenyans in the region.
The Sunday Nation, a major newspaper, captured the lingering bitterness in a cartoon showing Kibaki and Odinga standing on a pile of skulls and bones, their arms raised in victory.
As members of parliament slapped hands and celebrated Thursday in white tents in the springlike afternoon, hundreds of thousands of Kenyans remained in displacement camps across the country, lining up for food rations and wondering where they might go next.
"We have not seen any change, and we are not expecting any change from them," said John Mbugua, who was forced to flee his home in the Rift Valley and now lives amid a sprawl of thousands of tents on an arid tract outside the western resort town of Naivasha. "We are not trusting our government."
|
NAIROBI, March 6 -- President Mwai Kibaki urged lawmakers Thursday to pass legislation necessary to enact a power-sharing agreement "so that Kenya can be restored to and even exceed its former glory."
| 9.815789 | 0.447368 | 0.5 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/03/05/DI2008030501501.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/03/05/DI2008030501501.html
|
Security Fix Live - washingtonpost.com
|
2008030819
|
Brian Krebs: Good morning, dear Security Fix readers, and Happy Friday to you! I am ready to answer your security/PC questions. Please be so kind as to include as much information about your problem/computer setup as possible, such as installed security software and/or hardware, any error messages, etc. With that...
Washington, D.C.: I have piled in a corner of a closet the hard drives from every computer I have ever owned, including my first Windows 3.1 PC. All of them have some amount of confidential information on them. What are my options for permanently and securely destroying these drives? Or am I condemned to be buried with them?
Brian Krebs: Hi there. Assuming you'd like to just make sure that any sensitive data is wiped/destroyed on the drives, I'd suggest getting a cheap
IDE-to-USB cable, so that you can connect the drives one at a time to your machine without having to monkey with the insides of your computer.
Then go grab a copy of SDelete, a free secure erase tool from Microsoft. It's a command-line based tool, which means you have to open up a command prompt to use it (start, run, then type cmd.exe).
Make sure you're in the same directory as where you put the Sdelete.exe file, and then follow the command line instructions at this link. So, for example, if you had the drive you wanted to wipe at E:/, you could type: "sdelete -p 3 -c -z e:" (without the quotes); that should write over the used and unused space on the E: drive 3 times, which is more than enough to zero out any data on those drives.
That's just one solution, and there are many others, which I'm sure we'll hear about from readers as this chat progresses.
Falls Church, Va.: As a parent of a 6th grader who is starting to explore the internet what can I do to protect him and the computer from things he might do. What is the best software for controlling the sites he sees. Also Is there anything that works with YouTube to control the content of what he sees - they have a lot of stuff that is fine but some of it is too violent or too adult.
Brian Krebs: Yes. The first thing I would do is make sure that you as the administrator of the computer are the only one who can make important changes on the system or install software (accidentally or purposefully).
Do this by creating a second administrator account (I'm assuming the one you're using now is an admin account), and then switch the account you're currently using over to a limited user account. And then use the limited user account for everyday browsing, etc. Protect the admin account with a strong password that only you know.
Second, I'd recommend using OpenDNS, a tool that allows you as the administrator to decide what sites your machine should be allowed to visit.
It doesn't even require you to install any software. As I wrote in a post last week, not only does this free service let you block most porn sites, it will now let you block sites depending on the content.
So, for example, if you wanted to block all social networking sites, or all video sites like Youtube, there's a setting for that. If you wanted to block sites related to alcohol and drug use, there's a blocking category for that as well. Anything that doesn't fit into neat little categories like that you can always block on a one-off basis by using their blacklist. Alternatively, if you just want to allow your child to go visit a short list of sites and no others, you could adopt OpenDNS's whitelist.
Is "Winspykiller" a legitimate anti-virus software program? An ad for it keeps on popping up on my screen. Txs.
Brian Krebs: WinSpyKiller is yet another piece of scareware that uses malware techniques to get onto your system, and then uses fake reports of malicious programs on your system to try and frighten you in paying for worthless anti-spyware/anti-virus software.
See: CA's writeup, which puts Winspykiller in the infamous BraveSentry category of scareware....
and Sunbelt Software's evaluation which comes to pretty much the same conclusion.
Several self-help forums have removal tools for this rather recent scareware product. See:
411-spyware.com has detailed manual removal instructions, if you feel confident in your skills for editing the windows registry (for experts only!).
NYC: Why doesn't Congress or someone enact a 1/100 of a cent tax on email from those who wish it, so that it can keep out spammers? I'd even pay for my friends, so they can send it to me free, but only then can mail get through to me. Or some such idea which would tax heavily those who send millions of spam messages, from robots or from taken over machines.
Brian Krebs: This *sounds* like a nice idea, until you understand that spammers don't send e-mail from their own computers. They route the spam through thousands or millions of PCs that have been compromised by malicious software, unbeknownst to the rightful owners of those systems. So, in effect, you'd be asking for victims of cyber crime to pay up when their machine is used to send spam.
Now, there is probably a significant portion of the computer security community who would agree that this would be a splendid way to make the average computer user wake up and take PC security seriously. Whether such a radical program would help in that regard, I don't know. Would you think it fair to get a bill for $1,000 because someone took over your system and used it to send spam?
But there are just too many ways such a system could be abused or completely fouled up. For instance, how would the US govt collect such a tax on machines from outside the US? How could it begin to even prove that a given system actually sent the mail, as opposed to just relaying it? I could go on an on with hypotheticals, but I hope you can see the many obvious shortcomings with this approach.
Annandale, VA: Thanks for your external hard drive (500 GB) recommendation from newegg.com. I bought it and it has worked flawlessly. Plus the transfer rates are phenomenal. Just wanted to circle back and let you know your advice really worked for me. Thanks.
Brian Krebs: Fantastic. Happy to hear you like that drive. It has changed my life as well -- not having to worry about whether I have enough hard drive space for all my stuff!
Thanks for the discussions, they are very helpful. My old XP run computer running on an installation several years old, but always running with updated antivirus software (Norton AV mostly) but also several antispyware softwares (System Mechanic, Spybot S&D and Adware Personal). Using this computer, I set up an account with E-trade, and for a reason unknown to myself, I left the account idle for several months. Just recently, I logged back in and realized someone had been writing unauthorized checks from the account! The only conclusion I can make is that the PC I used to set up the account is compromised although my AV and Antispyware software report no problems!! I have not used any other computer to access the account since its inception until I logged into it just recently. What can you tell me about this?
Brian Krebs: Two possibilities: Either eTrade had a data compromise, or you did. Since the latter is more likely, that's probably the best place to start.
Unfortunately, it's difficult to trust a forensic security report on a machine when the machine that's doing the evaluation is potentially compromised. I.e., on a potentially compromised system, you can never be sure when the system tells you it's secure and uncompromised. In order to get a true objective opinion, you'll need to scan the system or hard drive using another machine.
Please drop me a line at brian dot krebs at washingtonpost dot com. I think I may have something for you. Also, eTrade offers customers a token key fob device that generates a one-time password that changes every 30 seconds. So, once you figure out what's wrong and are confidently on a safe machine, go ahead and request one from eTrade. without this data, thieves will be unable to log in to your account remotely. In fact, I think eTrade made it a policy to require that customers who've had break-ins use these devices, but I'm not 100 percent sure on that.
Cody, Wyoming: Hi Brian,This may not be the "preferred" method of wiping out a hard drive.I just donated an older laptop computer to a local nonprofit organization. I physically removed the hard drive since it had so much confidential information on it. Then I smashed into a zillion pieces with a heavy hammer.John
Brian Krebs: Yes. The old "smash the thing to smithereens" is yet another, albeit potentially hazardous, approach.
Anti-Virus: I know you're a NOD32 fan, but is it better than Kaspersky or Bitdefender? Thinking about what to install on my new laptop. Don't really care about costs. Thanks.
Brian Krebs: It's very difficult to compare anti-virus products. I know Kaspersky makes an excellent anti-virus product, which is almost always very good at detecting the latest malware quickly, but my experience with its suite -- which includes the firewall and other protections -- wasn't that great. But then again, I haven't seen a security suite from any vendor that I like very much, mainly because they are all somewhat bloated, usually include a bunch of features that are difficult to disable or silence, and often consume a great deal of system resources.
NOD32 has an excellent heuristic based detection -- meaning it's very good at detecting bad stuff even if it doesn't have a set of instructions for that particular piece of malware conclusively identifying it as such. Kaspersky tends to rely almost exclusively on signatures to detect malware, although it just licensed technology from a promising company called Bit9, which employs a whitelist approach to protecting users from malware (whitelist, as in -- okay, here's a list of all the known good files on an average Windows system -- alert me if someone tries to alter them in any way kind of thing). I'd have to check if Kaspersky's latest AV tool includes that functionality.
Long answer short -- pick one and download a trial version of it to see how you like it. I like NOD32 because I often forget it's even running, until I encounter a site that tries to foist some kind of malware on me.
Schenectady, NY: Does sdelete work on Vista?
Brian Krebs: I honestly don't know. The support/download page for SDelete only says it works on Windows 95, 98, NT, 2k and XP. Doesn't say anything about Vista. Probably wouldn't hurt to give it a shot though.
Alternatively, Eraser is another free tool, and I believe it *does* work on Vista systems.
Collumbia, MD: Hi Brian,I appreciate your blog so much as a teacher at a community college. We are watching your blog in a seminar this morning, and one of the students asked me why you spelled out your email address in a previous response. brian dot krebs at washingtonpost dot comThanks,
Brian Krebs: I do that because of slimeball spammers. Spammers generally purchase their lists of people to whom they send junk e-mail. The primary way those lists are generated is through the use of automated Web spiders that crawl the Internet scouring Web pages for e-mail addresses. Most of those automated crawlers look for addresses by searching for text strings in the usual e-mail format, e.g., someone@example.com.
One way to confuse those crawlers, and potentially prevent them from grabbing your address, is to obfuscate portions of the e-mail address when posting it in a public forum online, as I have done by spelling out the @ symbol, etc.
Hope that helps explain things. Thanks for reading!
Vienna, VA: I'm new to the whole wireless networking thing.I just got an iMac and Time Capsule, which i am using for wireless.What do i need to do in terms of settings to make sure i am protected?Can someone hack into the hard drive on my Time Capsule to steal my info when the mac is off but the power is still on to the Time Capsule?
Brian Krebs: Wow. Color me green with envy.
For those who don't know, Time Capsule is a new wireless backup device from Apple. It combines an Airport wireless base station and a giant hard-drive to use with Time Machine, the backup utility that ships with Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard).
I haven't used this product, but as I understand it Time Capsule uses WPA encryption, which is pretty secure. For written instructions + a nice video on how to set up WPA encryption on an Apple Airport base station (and other Apple components), check out this well-done video over at GetNetWise.org.
Baltimore MD: Just went to the newegg site and I see a number of 500GB external hard drives. Can you provide the brand? Thanks.
Brian Krebs: Hi. I believe this product was the one I recommended at NewEgg. But if you don't need the firewire port and just want a USB drive, this one can be had for about $40 less ($99) when you include the rebate.
wiping disks..: Assuming your computer boots and the disk is attached (and not some SATA RAID drive ...) DBAN is the best thing around to securely wipe the disk: http://dban.sourceforge.net/. [It] gives bootable CD ISO and bootable floppy IMG downloads. Slow, but good.
Brian Krebs: More advice for readers looking to banish data from their old hard drives.
Chesapeake Beach, MD: In so many cyber war games, participants have opted to attack the game controllers systems rather then their opponents systems. In the games schedule this week, do they have some precautions set up for that?
Brian Krebs: Thanks for the question. Chesapeake is referring to a story I wrote that we published today:
Washington Prepares for Cyber War Games
Not sure I completely understand your question, but the people who are playing (not those orchestrating the attack scenarios) are focused mainly on defending and rebuilding networks and systems that are under simulated attack. As I understand it, there is not a lot of emphasis in these games on traditional force-response, or counter-attacking the attackers. My guess is the response for any participant who tried to pull such a stunt would be for the game controllers to inject even more chaos and pain into the counterattacking players' scenario, but I don't know for sure.
RE: Newegg: Yep, that is the external hard drive you recommended and I bought. They must be onto you though, Brian. It was $20 cheaper when I bought it a couple weeks ago. To the poster: buy it and enjoy it. You won't be disappointed.
Brian Krebs: Closing the loop (I hope) on this hard drive thingee.
Anti-Virus Follow-Up: Never really cared about packages (suites) that include firewalls. I'm perfectly fine relying on Windows (Vista) Firewall, right?Thanks again.
Brian Krebs: As with anti-virus software, it's important for Windows users to just have and use a firewall product. The firewall built into Windows XP was and is fine for most users, and the Vista firewall isn't too much different and should suffice for the average user (particularly if you take the time to make sure the exceptions you don't need are disallowed).
burke, va: I have a theory that Adobe purposefully injects security flaws into Acrobat so they can "discover" these at a convenient later date. Then by refusing to release security updates for older versions, they can force people to buy the new versions, even though there are no useful new features that would otherwise make that worth while.I say this as someone who works in DoD, in a department where we could very easily get by with Acrobat 4. Except that we had to upgrade to 5,6,7 and now 8 for the security fixes. Very annoying.
Brian Krebs: Interesting conspiracy theory. I have bene on record several times taking companies to task for making customers pay to upgrades that include security fixes. I understand the arguments that companies make when this occurs -- that they are adding functionality that gets broken when certain elements of the programs aren't updated to the newer code base, and that the older code base has structural programming flaws that aren't easily patchable.
Still, you might cut Adobe just a little slack. Many of the vulnerabilities that are identified and released are found by independent security researchers who are trying to make a name (or money) for themselves. Often times, these individuals post the instructions showing everyone how to exploit the flaws they've found. I can assure you that these individuals go after not just Adobe but any other software product that has a broad user base.
That said, I understand that Adobe still has not shipped an update to fix a security problem that it mended in Adobe Reader 8 but not on version 7. My response is why not upgrade to 8 (the reader, after all is free), but you mentioned Acrobat, which of course is not free. My response would be that Adobe is not the only player in this market. If you are unhappy with their performance, maybe it's time to vote with your wallet and take your software purchases to another company? Just a thought.
Foothill Ranch, CA: Hi Brian - love your columns. I'm running XP/SP2 with NAV 08, ZoneAlarm Pro, & Spy Sweeper. After installing NAV, my outgoing Outlook e-mail failed. A chat session with NAV customer support produced no resolution other than to disable outgoing e-mail checking in NAV - I had to do the same thing with ZAP for the same reason. Do you know of any solution that NAV doesn't?
Brian Krebs: Hi. This is a common problem. Both ZoneAlarm Pro and Norton give users the option of scanning incoming/outgoing e-mail for malicious code/actions, etc. In order for this to work properly, you need to set up these programs just-so with your e-mail provider's settings.
In most cases, in order to do this, you need to set up ZAP or Norton to act as a proxy for your mail client, so that it can scan the incoming mail before it gets to Outlook, and then deliver the scanned mail to your Outlook inbox. This can take some patience and trial and error, however, if you're not accustomed to doing this kind of thing.
You should check with whoever your e-mail provider is to see if they have instructions specific to the security software you're using. Don't let them tell you it's NAV or ZAP's responsibility. They should be at least able to direct you to a Web page that lists their incoming/outgoing e-mail server settings.
Bear in mind, however, that some e-mail security scanning software doesn't support SSL (secure sockets layer) e-mail. E,.g., I know Norton's anti-virus products used to not support any e-mail provider that required users to log in via port 443. I don't know whether NAV 2008 has that limitation, but just something to keep in mind.
You said one solution that worked for you was to disable OUTGOING email scanning. Does that mean the program has no problems scanning INCOMING e-mail? If that's the case, I wouldn't worry to much about it.
Annandale, VA: What do you think about using your Hosts file to block unwanted, third party parasites? Example - the following entry 127.0.0.1 ad.doubleclick.net blocks all files supplied by that DoubleClick Server to the web page you are viewing. This also prevents the server from tracking your movements.Helpful or hurtful?
Brian Krebs: There's nothing wrong with using a hosts file and maintaining it as a means of blocking the loading or rendering of certain Web sites/advertisers. But then again there are plenty of other solutions that are far more comprehensive and to my mind a better use of your time.
I harp on it about 100x a week, but running the system under a limited user account prevents the logged-in user (or virtually any program running under the logged-in limited user account) from altering the system's host file settings. I run under a limited user account and haven't touched by hosts file, and neither has anything else, ever.
Alternatively, add-ons like Adblock and Noscript for Firefox are probably a bit more user-friendly and configurable for the average user.
I recently set up my home wireless connection using the following choices under wireless status.
Selected a channel(I am not sure if the choice of the channel is important)
Wireless Mode--Mixed accepts 802.11b and 80211g which is my configuration.
are there any other steps that I should be aware of.
Brian Krebs: If you're serious about security and encrypting the traffic on your network, see if your router supports WPA or WPA2 encryption, as opposed to WEP. WEP is all but worthless. It will deter the casual surfer who happens by and wants to jump on your network to check his email, but methods and software for cracking WEP are well known and freely available, so it is unlikely to be much of a deterrent for anyone who really wants to break in.
My advice: use or get a router that supports WPA or WPA2. Make sure the router administration page is protected with a strong (not default) username and password. Make sure the WPA key/passphrase that you pick is similarly strong. Disable sharing of Windows files/folders on the network if you are not using that feature. Turn on any of the other features at your discretion (Mac filtering, disable SSID, etc), but realize that these are more window-dressing type security features -- as they are easily breakable -- and understand that unless you know what you are doing they are only likely to make it more difficult for you to set up your encrypted network properly.
Adobe reader: The problem is, version 7 and before were nice lightweight readers. Modern versions are huge bundled masses with auto-update nags, slow load and response times etc. I've used foxit for my PDF viewing since I saw it mentioned either by you, or the Q/A guys in the Post's Sunday Business section.
Brian Krebs: Yup. That's a common complaint. I've recommended Foxit as often as I can. It's extremely lightweight and does the job if all you want is a reader program.
Annapolis, MD: re the data on old disk drives .... drilling 4 or 5 holes in them with a 3/8" or 1/4" drill bit will take care of the problem ..guaranteed!
Brian Krebs: as will dropping it in a vat of muriatic acid, droping it into the ocean from 30k feet, or stuffing it in a hide of beef and feeding it to a pack of wild velociraptors.
Philadelphia, Pa.: Mr. Krebs, Many thanks to you for publishing that FDIC incident report document. The more that information is published, the greater the awareness businesses and the public can have on the topic of fraud-via-Internet.
I visited the FDIC's web site earlier today to search for an official version of that document since the copy provided by the Post was marked "Draft." The top result was an examination for a financial institution's IT Officer. That exam ran through a bunch of 'what technologies do you use' and 'have you followed these procedures' questions. I think the same type of questionnaire might be a great practice for financial institutions and even schools to ask of new adult consumers and students respectively.
From the perspective of an IT support professional, I would love to hear of financial institutions implementing some sort of consumer audit program where they, via phone or on-site support, make sure that their customer's electronic banking affairs are in order. Firewall? Check. Anti-virus/malware software? Check. All account access credentials documented and saved in a secure location? Check.
Same goes for short, mandatory courses in junior or senior high schools on financial transactions via the Internet and their home PCs or mobile devices.
washingtonpost.com: Security Fix: The FDIC Computer Intrusion Report
Brian Krebs: Interesting. I spoke with a guy recently who's starting up a security company in Brazil, where the malware crime groups have taken bank info-stealing Trojan horse programs to another level. The guy I spoke with said he started a company down there b/c the banks are in dire need of forensic analysts. He said some of them will go so far as to roll truck to a customer's house if that customer had a computer intrusion that resulted in a cetain loss amount. The result: if the bank's forensics examiners determined the customer wasn't using a firewall, anti-virus, patching, etc., that customer didn't get their stolen money/account back.
I doubt it would ever come to that in this country, but it's a different and fascinating approach nonetheless.
Las Vegas, Nv: Thanks Brian for all your good information.I have a small home network which consists of a DSL modem and a wireless router. There's a wireless laptop connecting through the router. There are wired desktops connecting through a hub. All run XP Pro. Shouldn't any of the computers be able to "see" all the others in "My Network Places"?Thanks
Brian Krebs: No. You need to enable file sharing on any of the systems you want to share files and folders. Secondly, you need to make sure each computer on the network is set up to use the same workgroup. I think in Windows by default the domain is creatively named "workgroup" or "mshome", I forget which. Anyway, it doesn't much matter, as long as all the systems you want to be able to network together have the same workgroup name.
On XP home, filesharing is turned on by default. On Pro, you can enable/disable it through the Tools menu of Explorer.
To check to see whether they're all on the same workgroup, to to the control panel and click on the System tab, and then on the "computer name" tab. You'll need to be logged in as an administrator to make any changes to the workgroup.
all that done, you merely need to indicate which files, folders or drives you want to share. I'd advise you in this case that more is less. That is, consider sharing just the drives you want, rather than the entire hard drive (especially if the drive you want to share is the same volume that Windows is installed on). To enable sharing of a folder or drive, right click on it and select "Sharing and Security." Note, again, that this right click option is disabled in all non-administrator accounts.
e-endusa: One alternative to removing personal information from hard drives is to take them to an electronic recycle. In Maryland, you can go to MarylandRecycles.org to find recyclers that degauss and destroy the hard drive then recycle all the components in an environmentally safe way. Do the right thing and protect yourself! Recycle!
Brian Krebs: Okay, thanks for the info!
Brian Krebs: That's it, folks. I'm out of time for today. Thanks to everyone who stopped by to read and/or contribute a question. We'll host another Security Fix Live two weeks from today. In the meantime, please consider making a habit of dropping by the Security Fix Blog to stay abreast of the latest security news, tips and warnings.
Be safe out there, and have a great weekend!
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.
|
Security Fix blogger Brian Krebs answers your questions about the latest computer security threats and offers ways to protect your personal information.
| 244.478261 | 0.869565 | 1.391304 |
high
|
medium
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/03/05/DI2008030502502.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/03/05/DI2008030502502.html
|
The 'Lost' Hour - washingtonpost.com
|
2008030819
|
Has "Lost" got you a mite confused and ready to hurl at the next mention of smoke monsters? Or do you have the fate of the Oceanic 6 and the Jack-Kate-Sawyer-Juliet love square all figured out? Who got Scooby Doo'd this week? Are you a new viewer, adrift on an unfamiliar isle or an old hand ready to bare knuckle some quantum physics? In either case, we're here for you and armed with more mediocre puns and pop culture references than a hunky con man than you can shake a stick at and ready to explain exactly what it is that Cheech Marin and Bai Ling have to do with any of the above.
That's right, starting March 7, at 2 p.m. ET post.com "Lost" bloggers Liz Kelly and Jen Chaney will attempt to get to the bottom of these matters every Friday. Liz and Jen, both obsessive "Lost" fans, have been writing their weekly dueling analysis of the show since 2006.
A transcript for the March 7 discussion follows.
When not debating the merits of Sawyer's hotness, Liz Kelly writes the Celebritology blog and Jen Chaney acts as movies editrix and DVD columnist for washingtonpost.com.
Visit washingtonpost.com's new Lost hub.
Liz Kelly: Hello and welcome to the inaugural "Lost" hour. Our motto? You won't get it (the hour) back.
Okay, so Jen and I poured our little hearts into this morning's post-show analysis-- now we're here to read what you've got to say.
Jen Chaney: And don't feel limited to discussion of last night's episode. Questions about Desmond's time traveling or mamma Kate and baby Aaron are certainly welcome as well.
You're also welcome to share feedback about "Lost" Madness, which already seems to have gotten everyone's dander up. So jump ball ... and let's go.
Crisfield, Md.: I felt that Ben was slightly out of character in last night's episode. How can such a confident, manipulative person be reduced to a love-struck school boy around Juliet?
Jen Chaney: Actually, that makes sense. If he sees Juliet as a surrogate for his mother, it would cause him to regress and exhibit childish behavior. Hence, the desire to impress and the terrible-twos-ishness of "You're mine."
Liz Kelly: I thought Ben's kooky mood swings were well-played and totally made sense. As Jen says, Juliet -- and her resemblance to the mom he never knew -- may be the one thing capable of throwing him off his game. We should tuck that fact away in a safe place. It may be his Achilles heel and, eventually, his undoing.
The one thing that made it hard to swallow was the fact that this is obviously a new thread being woven into the "Lost" fabric and we've never seen evidence of Ben's fatal attraction for Juliet in any of the past shows.
Chapel Hill, N.C.: You pitted Sawyer against Hurley in the bracketts? No! If you lose my Sawyer in the early rounds I will be so angry!
Jen Chaney: The bracket has been up for less than four hours and already I have gotten much flack for this. It was impossible to seed these in the same way they do the NCAA Tournament. Why? Because that involves subjectivity, complex RPI numbers and also, math. And Chaney don't play math.
A few years back, MSNBC did a a similar bracket on movie comedies and they took the same approach I did here. That meant some incredibly tough choices in the first round. "Caddyshack" vs. "Blues Brothers"? How can one choose? The Hurley/Sawyer choice is a heartbreaker, too. I want everyone to have to make tough choices, because that's what March Madness is about, right? Hope-crushing buzzer beaters.
Also, let's not forget this is all in good fun. We all know Hurley and Sawyer both rule and the brackets don't change that.
For those of you who have yet to experience the Madness, go here.
Liz Kelly: I'm blissfully unaware of bracket etiquette, but I think Jen's done a fabulous job. As long as Sayid wins, it's all good and no one gets hurt.
New York, N.Y.: I just finished reading the dueling analyses, and just wanted to give you a heads up to aid in the laziness about the anagrams. If you go to http://wordsmith.org/anagram/ you can type in any random combination of letters and it spits out all the possible anagrams. Sadly, I am too lazy for even that, so instead I just pass along the link.
Liz Kelly: Thanks New York -- as I understand from nosing around at a few other blogs today, not much of interest is coming back for the name "Harper Stanhope."
Though I did learn that one anagram for my full name (Elizabeth Kelly) is "Bleakly Heel Zit."
And, it's true. Zits are indeed bleak.
Jen Chaney: I have used those anagram helpers, too. But they give me a headache.
Maybe Harper's name is just ... shocking ... a random last name the writers came up with? Surely that must happen sometimes on this show.
Greenbelt, Md.: Liz! You're not producing Carolyn's chats anymore? I'm so sad. Boo to all the Losties who demanded Liz talk to them about this TV show! I dislike change.
Liz Kelly: Nope. My cottage industry is kind of getting carried away, so I needed to cut back on production duties. She's in fabulous hands, though, with the accomplished Elizabeth Terry manning the controls.
Silver Spring, Md.: What the heck kind of brackets are these? You've got too many of your top seeds in the same bracket. Hurley against Sawyer in the first round? Jin vs. Sun?
Jen Chaney: See previous answer. I didn't say it was going to be easy. One round is hardcore.
I notice no one is complaining about Rose vs. Bernard or Aaron vs. Vincent. Come on, people, that's baby vs. dog! That's a battle for the ages.
Fairfax, Va.: Multiple references to Anna Lucia lately. Is she the one somehow alive on the boat helping Ben?
Liz Kelly: Not unless Michelle Rodriguez (the actor who played Ana Lucia) has changed her name or is uncredited. No. As discussed in this morning's analysis, Ben's boat helper is probably Michael -- though there's an outside chance that it is actually some kind of alternate dimension Locke.
Jen Chaney: From a practical standpoint, there is no way they would bring Rodriguez back on the show. They know the fans don't love her.
I do like the idea of it not being Michael because we all have already figured it out. Maybe it'll be a switcheroo and it will be ... Walt!
Or better yet ... Boone!
Liz Kelly: Wishful thinking, Chaney. I'm only amazed you haven't already started making your case to build consensus for Boone in "Lost" Madness.
Jen Chaney: I have started. Subliminally.
Boone is the sleeper contender in this contest. Don't kid yourselves.
Boone, and Cindy the flight attendant.
NYC: Not that I know what this might mean...but Stanhope is an anagram for Hanso Pet.
Jen Chaney: Well, that's interesting. That observation reminds me of the Porno for Pyros song. Again, though, I'm struggling to come up with the relevance. Liz, over to you...
Liz Kelly: Maybe a Hanso Pet is like some kind of chemical-weapons enabled Chia Pet?
Bethesda, Md.: WHY CAN'T I SUBMIT QUESTIONS!
Liz Kelly: Before we get carried away with conspiracy theories (washingtonpost.com is so paranoid!), make sure you don't have any open-ended parentheses in your question. Our chat software hates them.
Anagram fun: My name came up as "Talk to my hate." Maybe I should go back to my maiden name.
Liz Kelly: Okay, that's scary and coincidental. Cuz I talk to my hate all the time.
Kate wouldn't do that!: No way would she turn her back on Charlotte while she inspected the bag full of gas masks. Claire might. I might. But Kate the ex-con on the run knows better. Come on writers! That was stupid.
Jen Chaney: Point duly noted.
I don't think Liz would turn her back either. And if she were Charlotte, she would have clocked Kate before the conversation even started.
Liz Kelly: Right. I would fly at Kate on site like the evil harpie that I am.
Speaking of Claire, I was pretty impressed with her standing up to Locke last night. I think her demand that she be allowed access to Miles was more calculation than we've ever seen from her. Could this be the dawning of a new Claire-a?
Jen Chaney: Yeah, we didn't talk about that this morning. Why does she care to talk to Miles? Is roomie Kate rubbing off on her?
And more importantly, if Kate and Claire are a Laverne and Shirley of sorts, does that make bunkmates Hurley and Sawyer ... Lenny and Squiggy??
Liz Kelly: Would that make Vincent Boo-Boo Kitty and Jack the Big Ragu?
Jen Chaney: Yes. And Ben is Edna Babbish.
Washington, D.C.: Wait, didn't we see evidence of Ben and Juliet way back when Jack was operating on Ben's tumor?
Jen Chaney: We did. She was clearly angry with him and willing to take the risk of helping Jack. So now we understand all of the reasons why her animosity rose to the levels that it did.
I do wonder why she thought Ben would just let her and Jack get on that sub together, though. (The sub that Locke blew up, that is.)
Liz Kelly: We may have seen Juliet's animosity, but did we see Ben's slavish devotion to her?
Jen Chaney: No, that's true. We didn't.
Baltimore: I'm surprised this chat didn't begin sooner! Thanks Liz and Jen for all the time you guys take to think this stuff out -- although, I'm sure it's fun for you, too. You really show how much of a deeper meaning there is to the show.
I have a somewhat broad question that is surely something to ponder over the long-term.
In your analysis, I loved the way you described Jack's internal conflict between feelings for Kate and Juliet and compared it to to Kate's conflict between Jack and Sawyer. It makes me think (and hope) Jack and Kate will end up together. How central do you think this love triangle, or quadrilateral, I guess, is to the story of "Lost"? Specifically, I mean how central do you think the Jack/Kate relationship is, since that is the common thread in both love triangles.
Liz Kelly: It really is fun. Glad you enjoy it, too, because Jen and I would probably be spending this much time on it even if it was just she and I in a room with a DVR and the past three seasons on DVD.
Good question re: the Jack-Sawyer-Kate-Juliet love quadrangle and, since it was Jen's eloquent observation this morning, I'll let her field it. I will say, though, that watching last week's episode again I was really struck by the contrast between the Desmond/Penny relationship and our more familiar quadrangle. Desmond and Penny actually gave me chills at the end of last week's show, whereas Kate and Jack and the constant flip-flopping of affections usually only elicits groans from me at this point.
Jen Chaney: Well, I think the difference is that Des and Penny are truly each other's constants. Their love is real and based in a reality they both once shared.
As for our love square, my feeling is that Jack has feelings for both of them. He's drawn to Juliet because he sees her as a someone good and who he shares a certain connection with, and to Kate because she has a bad streak and, as always, Jack wants to save people. Actually, in both cases, he's trying to save the other person.
I do think the Jack/Kate one is the central relationship, purely for narrative reasons. Theirs' was the first relationship we saw develop back in the pilot. I believe, in the end, somehow "Lost" will all circle back to where it began.
All of that said, Sawyer's character has gotten so much richer because he really seems to care for Kate. So, unlike Liz, I am not tired of watching all of this play out.
Liz Kelly: It's just that it involves Kate, you understand.
What about...: The polar bear versus Ezra James Sharkington (the official LindenCuse name for the Dharma Shark).
THAT'S a battle for the ages!
Jen Chaney: The shark! Forgot all about him.
Maybe he'll be featured in the 2009 version of "Lost" Madness.
Kate: What is it about Kate that you don't like?
Liz Kelly: Hmm, we've been through this in the past. But her character is ultimately unlikeable and she's played both Sawyer and Jack for fools time and again.
Beyond that, it's just a gut feeling.
Jen Chaney: I don't know, I feel bad for Kate. She's had a hard-knock life. Granted, a lot of is her fault, what with the bank robberies and the arson and the murder and all...
Are there no ideas: On who Mr. Widmore beat up? Was he an Other that we've seen before or was he some other Other that Ben was referring to?
Jen Chaney: I did not recognize the guy. And I looked closely at the screen shot, too.
I was trying to figure out where the video was shot. It almost looked like one of the Dharma stations.
Liz Kelly: I didn't place him, either. He looked like some generic soap opera extra. Which he probably was.
Midlothian, Va.: So Jen, are you a little over your Ben crush, too? After last night's ep, with his whole "YOU'RE MINE!" routine, I found him less lovable. I did chuckle when he said "take all the time you need," though.
Jen Chaney: I have a crush on Michael Emerson's acting ability, not so much Ben.
What I have said -- and will maintain, despite all obvious evidence to the contrary -- is that I think Ben's ultimate goal may be one that is understandable and possibly even noble. His means of achieving it are questionable, but I suspect what he is trying to do really is for the good of those currently on the island.
Almost every line he uttered last night was heavenly, including the one you mention. He is a master.
Liz Kelly: No way, Jen. I'm sorry. He enjoyed Goodwin's death too much for that to have been the by-product of a noble aim. He may intend good, but only for himself and his own survival. We still, after all this time, don't know what drives him -- at least beyond hatred.
No, Ben is a twisted little soul and I'm betting against his being an unlikely savior.
Jen Chaney: Killing Goodwin is part of the questionable means I referred to. Look, the dude is clearly twisted. I didn't say he wasn't.
But even twisted people can sometimes have moments of clarity.
Some day, if it turns out I am right, I expect apologies and 10 bucks from each of you.
Scratch that, make it $3.2 million.
Liz Kelly: Yes, we're going to have to make this interesting. I suggest a tattoo-based bet.
Reston, Va.: The last two years, I've been trying to "will" Charlie to death. I hated that stupid Hobbit's character.
Now, with that mission complete, I need a new character to "will" to death. I'm having trouble deciding between Jack and Kate. Suggestions? Or am I overlooking someone?
Jen Chaney: Wait, is this McPatchy writing in again?
Don't try to will Matthew Fox to death. He's so cute.
Liz Kelly: I think Kate would make a fabulous target for your sick intentions. In fact, it seems the crew of the show shares your (and my) distaste for her. Last week, Jen found this story which claims that one crew member hates actress Evangeline Lilly so much, he or she put sand in her tea.
Jen Chaney: If that story is true, that is way, way mean. Letting her drink it until she chokes ... yikes.
Washington, D.C.: I still don't fully trust Juliet. Do you?
Liz Kelly: I had the same thought last night when she refused to tell Jack why she needed to get to the Tempest, but asked him to just help. That smacked of her thinking he couldn't handle the truth. What else, I wonder, is she holding back.
Another point I wanted to re-touch on from this morning's analysis is the appearance of Harper, which was presaged by the whispery voices that usually mean something supernatural is afoot. Jen speculated that it may have actually been a ghost or otherworldly manifestation of Harper.
But to drill down, I think we need to take Juliet's reaction into account. She wasn't at all surprised to see Harper. Which means she couldn't have assumed Harper to be dead (which she'd need to be for the whole ghost thing to happen). She also wasn't surprised to find her near the beach and the Losties. If she had, wouldn't she have been full of questions for Harper like "Where is everyone else? How did you get here? Who is running things with Ben locked up? Am I being charged for my last missed therapy session?"
I guess that leaves the only possibles as:
1. It was Harper and Juliet knows they're being watched.
2. It was the island using a likeness of Harper to accomplish an end.
Jen Chaney: I need to watch that scene again to confirm Juliet's lack of surprise. That's a good point, Liz.
I do think Juliet is generally trust-worthy, but like all Losties, has some skeletons in her closet. Then again, I also think Ben might have a kind soul in there somewhere so my trust radar may be horribly off-kilter.
Know who was really trust-worthy? Boone.
Liz Kelly: Right. That got him really far, too. He and his Nellie Olsen of a sister.
Silver Spring, Md.: I was disappointed in last night's show, in part because I am not a Juliet fan, in part because it seemed quite strained, and in large part because last week's was one of the best ever. I recall Doc Jensen had a theory a couple seasons ago that the central story of "Lost" is about Desmond and Penelope. Would that it were so.
Liz Kelly: I think that may be true, but they've got an entire season to fill and so we are subjected to a little filler from time to time. But this season's filler is like grade A quality stuff compared to last season's Nikki/Paolo crapola. I can deal with a little melodrama, as long as we're staying true to the story.
I also note there have been no ping-pong tournaments this season. We danced dangerously close with last night's horseshoe showdown, but still, not the same.
Courthouse 11th floor: I hate that the killer-gas-release-countdown went down to 1 second. Come on Lost, you're better than that. What is this, "The A-Team"?
Liz Kelly: Doc Jensen had the same reaction in today's post-show recap over at EW. He was non-plussed with the entire episode, saying it had its moments but was largely a rudderless ship. It was a little formulaic.
Jen Chaney: Maybe so. After last week's, you had to expect a comedown.
Next week's is supposed to be a corker, so maybe we just needed a little breather.
It did give us the Widmore info. And that's something.
Liz Kelly: Right. And introduce a new station and the fact that Ben is basically Chemical Ali.
Boston: : has anyone ever served up so much ham on a date? And there was too much meat on the plate as well. Seriously, Michael Emerson was more hammy --and funny---in last nites' episode than creepy. Although as a suitor he's pretty creepy.
Liz Kelly: Yes, the fact that they were eating ham was not accidental and provided a much-needed moment of levity. After all, they can't all be Sawyer quips.
I liked Juliet's line in that scene: "I hope you like bread."
Jen Chaney: Of course, Ben loves bread.
Man, now I'm hungry for ham.
Lost in D.C.: My brother has this awesome theory that Ben is constantly time traveling like Desmond did in last week's episode, but Ben can control how it happens and what time he goes to, so he can place his consciousness in the right time and place to orchestrate all his plans. What do you think? And what would Ben's constant be?
Jen Chaney: That's an interesting theory. And also, a little alarming.
Ben's constant ... maybe those dolls that his childhood friend Annie gave him? Or just the delicious taste of sweet, sweet power?
Liz Kelly: Or maybe he's figured out a way around needing a constant.
Maybe BEN is his own man on the boat.
I like this theory. Your brother may be on to something.
D.C.: Hey, where did we accept the idea that Juliet reminds Ben of mommy -- I say it's Anna who he's channeling through Juliet.
Liz Kelly: That's as may be. We've never seen the adult Annie (if she made it that far), but the childhood Annie had straight brown hair and freckles. Not exactly a prototype for Juliet.
Jen Chaney: And as pointed out in the blog post, Juliet looks a heck of a lot like Ben's mom.
Previously on LOST and Ben in love?: Ok first of all Previously on LOST is great..I'm loving them right now.
As for Ben being in love with Juliet -- I don't think he is. I think that his comment of how she is "his" is more about power and her fulfilling some need he has in his big grand machinations.
To the others, and Juliet herself it looks like its a jilted lover reaction, but I think much like Ben himself its more complicated. On one level he probably does have a thing for Juliet (Something that I think has been subtly alluded to earlier in how much anger he has towards Juliet. The whole book club thing etc.)
Anyway, I thought Emerson's moment was when he showed Goodwins (gross) dead body to Juliet -- "You're Mine" then "Take all the time you need."
Jen Chaney: I think we should book Previously on Lost for a season finale party. How awesome would that be? What other band can rhyme Scooby Dooing with Xanaduing?
Your Ben analysis is right-on. I think it is about power. Sure, there's an attraction but his reactions are so out of whack that it's clear something else is going on here.
Not to get all psych-majory on you, but look back at his childhood: His mother died while delivering him, and Ben's father told the child it was his fault his mother died. So you have someone growing up who believes he did something horrible that was out of his control. And his response is to try to control everything, and everyone, around him. Even if it means committing genocide.
Lost, island: I've been looking forward to this chat, and it's finally come, but after an episode that I thought had no meat to it. It was the first one not to have me puzzling for days.
I'm frustrated they didn't reveal anything substantial about Juliet we didn't already know. We knew Ben had a thing for her, we knew she had a relationship with Goodwin, just not that he was married. I still don't quite understand what motivates her character, except a desire to get off the island and see her sister.
With a shortened season, why waste an episode that has nothing new to tell us?
Liz Kelly: Remember, the season isn't as abbreviated as first thought. We'll get 13 total episodes instead of eight. So there's time for some big time revelations.
I'm wondering -- if last week's episode hadn't been so textbook perfect would we be grumbling about this week's?
Jen Chaney: I'll answer that: No.
Stop being complainers. Compare last night's episode to pretty much everything on TV except "The Wire" and you can see it's 800 times better.
Liz Kelly: I'm with Jen. Though it would've been a nudge more bearable if we'd had at least a glimpse of what was going on over at the freighter.
20008: You guys do such a great job on the dueling analysis -- what time do you get to sleep on Thursday nights? Or are you early morning analyzers? Very impressive at the turnaround at any hour.
Jen Chaney: I won't lie. Thursday nights are a little rough for me, because Thursday/Friday mornings are very busy re: my regular job -- handling our movie content.
During this "Lost" season, I have routinely gone to bed at 1 or later on Thursday, and gotten up around 6:30 or 7 the next morning. But covering "Lost" is such a pleasure that I certainly am not complaining about it.
To answer your question, we do the analysis in the a.m. But I think we both start processing the night before.
Liz Kelly: Right. I have dreams about this show and keep a notepad on the nightstand for late night epiphanies. I think we're pretty much non-stop from 9 p.m. Thursday night until (now) 3 p.m. Friday.
But as Jen says, it's hardly breaking rocks in the hot sun.
My doctor looks just like Ben: Should I be worried?
Liz Kelly: Only if he books your appointments in a vet's office.
Jen Chaney: Or if his medical license identifies him as Henry Gale.
Boston: Y'know Liz and Jen, it's stressful being an Other. Last night's episode had some of the best lines ever -- "Maybe you and your gun can go too." and "If 5000 people went to see a piece of mold, how many people will come to see you?"
Jen Chaney: Yes, some very good lines.
This is why I think Ben was not being totally straight with Locke. He's totally playing into what gets John going: This notion of miracles and the fact that Locke is a walking one.
Liz Kelly: Ya, poor Locke has lost a lot of hand this season. He was an up and comer and seemingly unflappable character until he decided to out-Ben Ben.
Now there is an example of a guy doing some not so great things (grenade in Miles's mouth, anyone?) for what he thinks is an ultimately noble reason.
Baltimore: Re: Des/Penny chills, I agree. Their phone conversation was so moving and really did show how they were MFEO (made for each other, of course). It made me think that THAT relationship is the most central to the "Lost" story. And I think the growing focus on Penny's dad bolsters that idea.
Liz Kelly: Here's hoping, because it's an exceedingly well-written, well-acted story line.
Harper Stanhope: Lostpedia has the explanation for what that name is a reference to:
The name of Harper Stanhope could be a reference to the book "Empty Cradle" by Karen Harper. In it, a woman wanting a baby heads to a fertility clinic in New Mexico run by a Dr. Stanhope, a feminist embryologist who is stealing the eggs of her patients and using them in experiments with drugs that can cause birth defects.
Liz Kelly: Thank you, Lostpedia.
Kansas City: Speaking of coming full circle and the whole time traveling craziness what do you think of Adam and Eve turning out to be Jack and Kate? (Cue "Lost" sound)
Jen Chaney: This theory has been floated before, along with the idea that the two skeletons we see in season one are Adam/Eve or Jack/Kate as well.
It's a fun idea, but not sure I see the show heading in that direction.
Liz Kelly: Right. I've also heard speculation that Desmond and Penny are Adam and Eve. (Which would mean that Penny somehow makes her way to the island at some point).
College Park, Md.: When Locke opened the safe in the wall, I was kind of hoping that it was the "magic box" that we heard about once and haven't since.
Jen Chaney: I was hoping it was the glowing suitcase from "Pulp Fiction."
Liz Kelly: I was hoping for Geraldo Rivera's head on a platter.
Confused in NW: Who is the guy in the grainy video who maybe wants to gas everybody? I'm sure I've seen him before. Is he Desmond's girlfriend (Penny)'s father?
Liz Kelly: Yep, Charles Widmore. Your can learn more about him over at Lostpedia.
Jen Chaney: You have seen him. Just last week in "The Constant," as a matter of fact.
Dallas: With this reference to "The Tempest" in tonight's episode, maybe we should consider the 1950's sci-fi reinterpretation, "The Forbidden Planet," which may also explain "smoky." Astronauts from our time happen on this planet where a wise scientist and his daughter have harnessed the energy of the planet and are living in relative comfort. but anyone who ventures outside the compound meets with death from strange forces/monsters. It turns out that in harnessing the planet's energy, the scientist's "id" becomes expressed through the monsters outside the planet. So, in "Lost," we have an island with strange powers, harnessed somehow through the Hatch, but with violence erupting through the black smoke. And there are perimeter fences to keep this at bay.
Maybe Ben is the scientist, and has the adopted daughter Alex...The Tempest is the power station...
This theory is due to my husband and his lunchtime legal buddies at a technology outsourcing company in Dallas.
Liz Kelly: I like it. I'll have to add "Forbidden Planet" to my Netflix list.
Jen Chaney: This is a comparison I have heard before, and a good one.
Uh-oh, do we have to do "Lost" Movie Club and "Lost" Book Club? And if so, who, exactly, will raise my kid?
Los Angeles: I don't hear much about Jack's father Christian. Could he be the guy on the boat? How's he alive in the hospital at the end of Season 3?
Jen Chaney: Well, we know he is alive in some form on the island. He was seen in "The Beginning of the End" in Jacob's cabin. And a mobisode -- check back to our analysis of that episode for a link -- shows Christian directing Vincent to go wake up Jack because "he has work to do."
I don't think he's the guy on the boat, though. I really do think it's going to be Michael, which has unfortunately been beyond spoiled by now.
Liz Kelly: Ya, so much for trusting that one to a slow burn. Talk about burn out. The only way they can salvage that one is if Michael has somehow morphed into a half-man, half-goat Pan figure.
Dinner rolls: I think it was "I hope you like dinner rolls" not "I hope you like bread." Precision, precision.
Jen Chaney: Bread, dinner rolls. In the end, it all proves the same thing: Ben has no game as a dinner host.
It's that kind of behavior that gets a person kicked out of book club.
Heavy Metal: Question about the preview for next week's episode...who's the chick wearing chains jumping off the ship? for a split second I thought Libby was back...
Liz Kelly: In fact, actress Cynthia Watros -- who plays Libby -- is listed as a guest star on next week's show. So, perhaps it was her you saw. Remember, island time vs. boat time seems to be a very different matter, so it's entirely possible that Libby could be on that boat.
Jen Chaney: I'll have to look at the preview again. My DVR cut it off last night and when I tried to rewind live TV, it refused to venture back before "Eli Stone."
Zoe Bell, aka Regina, is also a contender for chick-with-chains, I would think.
Birmingham, Ala.: It was kind of rough to pit Cindy against Jack -- I always liked their little interaction on the plane in the pilot episode and was sad that he never got to meet her again.
But speaking of her (and Zach and the other girl) whatever happened to the adopted Others -- do you think we'll see them this season? Before the show ends?
Jen Chaney: I hope before the show ends. There's still some 'splaining to do regarding all those kids who were kidnapped. Why did The Others want them? And where are they?
Zack and Emma seem to be well taken care of, at least.
And thank you for giving Cindy her due. I'm tired of people underestimating Cindy. It's just, well, it's enough already.
Liz Kelly: What is this, some kind of ego-boosting exercise? Cindy'll get what she gets and like it.
Considering the hard look the show's creative team gave to themselves after last season's Nikki/Paolo fiasco, one would hope that they are slowly going through a list of things that need some elucidation. One of them being -- where are the rest of the Others who were with Ben at the end of last season? Another being -- where are those kids? A third being -- what's the deal with the four-toed statue?
Washington, D.C.: So Juliet's former love Goodwin just DIED (she thinks within the last 10 weeks, let's say), but she has already moved on and developed strong feelings for Jack? I know the island may operate in slow-time compared to off-isle, but come on! And yes, I realize this is one of the less-significant implausible things happening on the island.
Liz Kelly: I don't think it so implausible that Juliet -- a human in a life or death situation who is facing the possibility of possibly never leaving this island -- would seek comfort. For all she knows, Ben will implode the island tomorrow. She's making hay while the sun shines. Carpe diem and whatnot.
Manassas, Va.: Do you think that the island, manifested as Jacob, could be trying to protect itself from the outside world, using Ben as its protector? Or, could the island be trying to free itself from Ben?
Last night set up a more traditional scenario, with one set of people trying to get something from the other set. All the other weird things can sort of be explained as defense mechanisms against intruders, can't they?
I'm disappointed that Kate, Jack, and Juliet did not realize that Faraday and Charlotte were simply trying to disable the last defense, at the expense of everyone else if need be (the masks and suits for them, in case Dan failed).
Liz Kelly: I really like that theory and that's one that I think Jen and I should probably spend some time considering.
Ben likes to think he's in control and maybe he is. But maybe the island (or Jacob) is actually the real power and merely letting Ben play out his own little game on the end of a long leash. I think your instinct about the island having a life force, or a soul, is a good one. This place seems to be preternaturally alive and reactive.
Jen Chaney: I agree. This is a very good theory. I think we all agree that the island is an entity in itself, hence Hurley's use of the word "it" when arguing with Jack during their game of Horse.
Help me remember: How did Ben escape his imprisonment in the Hatch lockup all those episodes ago? Did Locke let him out then too?
Liz Kelly: Michael released him.
Charlotte: ABC showed promos for a new show at 8 p.m. in two weeks. Does that mean we lose the closed caption version now showing. I will miss the previous week's recap episode just before the new one.
Jen Chaney: I suspect we will once "Miss Guided" starts.
I will miss them, too.
The Udders: Per the usual frustration of not asking blatant questions, but why has there been no mention of the Others who went to, I believe, the temple?
Jen Chaney: They'll come back into play. But yes, that is frustrating. And where the heck are Rose and Bernard?
Liz Kelly: Speaking of disappearing, I see it is now 3 p.m. and time to wrap up. Thanks to everyone for joining us on our maiden voyage.
See you back here next week.
Jen Chaney: Indeed it has been a pleasure.
And in the meantime, complete your "Lost" Madness bracket and come back Tuesday for round two.
Liz Kelly: Jen, one more thing. Your wish is granted.
Jen Chaney: I know we wrapped up, but just had to share this last thing.
I can totally buy my ringer T now. Best Friday ever!
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 Liz Kelly and Jen Chaney, both obsessive "Lost" fans, try to get to the bottom of the show's mysteries. Bring them your questions, comments and theories (no matter how far-fetched) about just what the heck is going on.
| 152.254902 | 0.921569 | 3.27451 |
high
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/05/AR2008030503255.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/05/AR2008030503255.html
|
Congress Threatens To Pull Funding for Air Force Tankers
|
2008030819
|
Since Friday, when the Air Force awarded the initial part of a contract to replace 179 Air Force refueling tankers to the team of Northrop Grumman and European Aeronautic Defence and Space, congressional leaders have questioned why that bid was chosen over one by Boeing, the largest U.S. aircraft manufacturer. Critics have said that the Air Force is outsourcing its purchasing in a way that could threaten national security and have accused the service of not taking the creation of American jobs into account.
At a two-hour hearing of the House panel that controls defense spending, committee chairman John P. Murtha (D-Pa.), said: "There is the industrial base you have to consider. The political implications are important. . . . This committee funds this program. All this committee has to do is stop the money, and this program is not going forward."
After the hearing Murtha said, "This is not a done deal."
He called on Air Force officials to brief committee members in a closed-door session on the technical merits of their choice of Northrop and EADS -- the parent company of Airbus, Boeing's chief commercial rival -- after they brief the two competitors. Air Force officials are expected to brief Boeing officials Friday and Northrop officials on Monday.
Boeing, based in Chicago, built the fleet of KC-135 tankers in use for nearly 50 years and had been expected to win the deal. Four years ago, it was awarded a contract to lease tanker aircraft but the award was withdrawn after a procurement scandal involving officials from Boeing and the Air Force.
Murtha and other leaders said the choice of Northrop and EADS takes jobs away from Americans, especially in Wichita and Everett, Wash., where Boeing has major plants that produce the tanker line, at a time of economic uncertainty and a growing trade deficit.
"An American tanker should be built by an American company with American workers," said Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.), whose congressional district is home to Boeing facilities.
Boeing has said it is likely to shut down its production line for 767 airliners, on which the company's tanker proposal was based, in the next few years because of declining commercial sales.
EADS, on the other hand, gains a major foothold in the U.S. military market and a leg up on winning future orders to replace the entire 500-plane tanker fleet, a deal that could be worth up to $100 billion over the next few decades.
Northrop, the third-biggest U.S. defense contractor, and EADS say their tanker isn't taking away American jobs. They say that while some large parts of the aircraft will be manufactured by in Europe -- much like other weapons systems or planes -- engines will be built in Ohio and North Carolina. Both companies will build new facilities in Mobile, Ala., where EADS will assemble the planes and Northrop will convert them into military tankers. The project will create roughly 1,500 jobs in Mobile; another 300 in Bridgeport, W.Va.; and up to 500 in Melbourne, Fla.
Sue Payton, assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition, said job creation was not a factor in the service's decision to pick the Northrop-EADS team, saying it was not part of federal acquisition regulations. She said her team followed a "carefully structured" procurement process designed to "provide transparency, maintain integrity and ensure fair competition."
|
Congressional leaders threatened yesterday to withhold funding for one of the U.S. military's biggest aircraft programs because the $40 billion contract went to a group that includes a European manufacturer.
| 19.909091 | 0.727273 | 0.969697 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/05/AR2008030503427.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/05/AR2008030503427.html
|
Fidelity Settles After Employees Accepted Gifts
|
2008030819
|
Mutual fund manager Fidelity Investments yesterday settled allegations that more than a dozen of its current and former employees, including star executive Peter Lynch, accepted such perks as sports tickets, tropical vacations and a $160,000 bachelor party from brokers seeking to win business.
By taking Super Bowl tickets and trips to Bermuda, Fidelity traders and supervisors broke rules that bar mutual fund executives from allowing money or personal ties to influence their investment decisions, authorities said.
Under a rule known as "best execution," fund officials are supposed to consider, first and foremost, the best options available for their clients when they decide where to steer stock trades.
Fidelity, which did not admit or deny wrongdoing as part of the settlement, agreed to pay the Securities and Exchange Commission $8 million to resolve the case. The Boston fund giant also said it would turn over more than $42 million plus interest to funds that may have been affected by the improper gratuities, which occurred between January 2002 and October 2004. Fidelity's board of trustees will meet later this month to approve a payment formula, a spokeswoman said.
Three high-ranking executives with longstanding ties to Fidelity, including investment guru Lynch, settled with lawyers in the SEC's Boston office without admitting misconduct. Lynch, a television personality and author of investment books who managed the company's popular Magellan Fund for years before stepping aside in 1990, will hand over nearly $20,000 in penalties and interest for collecting tickets to see the rock band U2 as well as Ryder Cup golf tournament passes.
"I never intended to do anything inappropriate, and I regret having made those requests," Lynch said in an e-mailed statement. His spokesman said that Lynch, who now devotes the majority of his time to charity, did not place or supervise any trades during the period in question.
Eleven current and former Fidelity workers who allegedly pocketed lavish gifts are fighting the regulatory allegations. Among them are Scott E. DeSano, who received travel and gifts valued at $145,000 from brokers soliciting his business, the SEC said. DeSano led the global equity trading unit before his departure from Fidelity last summer.
Another former Fidelity trader, Thomas H. Bruderman, received a three-day Miami bachelor party that featured female entertainers whom one attendee suspected were prostitutes, as well as a bag filled with ecstasy pills that brokers provided, according to the SEC order.
In their filing, regulators cited e-mail messages the Fidelity employees and supervisors exchanged with unnamed brokers. "Our friendship is boundless," one broker wrote to a Fidelity trading desk employee in March 2003. "Now, if you would please think of me next time a big situation appears on your desk, our friendship would be to the moon."
Lawyers for the men declined comment or did not return phone calls yesterday.
The case broke into public view after inspectors at the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority uncovered evidence of possible wrongdoing during a routine visit to the Jefferies brokerage. Jefferies, which employed the brokers who made the Fidelity payments, settled a related case in December 2006.
"It's a hazard to fund shareholders when a money management firm allows Super Bowl tickets and private jet trips to influence decisions," said Sandy Bailey, an assistant regional director at the SEC's Boston office.
Fidelity said it had heightened oversight of its traders and added training to prevent future lapses. "Although the order makes no finding of financial harm to our shareholders or our funds, we do recognize the seriousness of the misconduct found by the SEC," the company said in a statement.
But in a report commissioned by Fidelity Funds' independent trustees and released yesterday along with the settlement papers, retired federal Judge John S. Martin Jr. concluded that "more than logic suggests that there is a substantial possibility that the receipt of travel, entertainment, gifts and gratuities by Fidelity traders resulted in execution harm to the funds."
|
Washington,DC,Virginia,Maryland business headlines,stock portfolio,markets,economy,mutual funds,personal finance,Dow Jones,S&P 500,NASDAQ quotes,company research tools. Federal Reserve,Bernanke,Securities and Exchange Commission.
| 17.227273 | 0.590909 | 0.909091 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/05/AR2008030503619.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/05/AR2008030503619.html
|
Ovechkin Keeps Scoring, Caps Keep Winning
|
2008030819
|
They did -- and he loved every second of it.
Ovechkin, who was roundly booed each time he touched the puck, achieved another milestone Wednesday night, scoring goals Nos. 53 and 54 to establish a career high and, in the process, lift the Washington Capitals to a 3-1 victory.
The NHL's leader in goals and points (92), Ovechkin also now possesses the second-highest single-season goal total in franchise history after passing Bobby Carpenter, who netted 53 in 1984-85. (Dennis Maruk owns the record with 60 goals in 1981-82.)
"I don't listen to the crowd," Ovechkin said. "I heard them booing after I score first goal. I just smile."
Nicklas Backstrom scored his second goal in two games for the Capitals, and goaltender Olie Kolzig made 25 saves to help them earn their fourth victory in five games, and more important, keep pace in the race for the playoffs.
They remained three points behind the Southeast Division-leading Carolina Hurricanes, who defeated the Thrashers in Atlanta, 6-3. The Capitals also pulled within two points of the Philadelphia Flyers for the eighth spot in the Eastern Conference.
That, Ovechkin said, means more than any personal achievement.
"It's very interesting when you play for something," Ovechkin said. "Last few years we didn't play for something. After three months, we knew we weren't going for the playoffs so we start thinking about vacation. Now we just think about the playoffs."
But not all the news was good for the Capitals. Checking-line center and penalty-kill specialist David Steckel suffered a broken right index finger. He's expected to miss two to three weeks.
Despite the injury, all the talk in the visitors' locker room was about picking up two huge standings points in a building that has not been kind to the Capitals. It was their first win here in five tries.
"They want to win; they think they are ready to win," Coach Bruce Boudreau said of his players. "They know the sense of urgency right now."
|
Alex Ovechkin scores twice, establishing a new career high, to help the Capitals earn a rare victory in Buffalo, 3-1, and keep pace in the Southeast Division race.
| 12.142857 | 0.8 | 1.657143 |
low
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/05/AR2008030502476.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/05/AR2008030502476.html
|
Contaminant Found in Heparin
|
2008030819
|
Chief Medical Officer Janet Woodcock said the agency is investigating whether the presence of the contaminant, a large molecule similar to heparin, was the result of faulty manufacturing or was intentionally added to reduce costs.
"We don't know how this heparin-like compound got into the heparin, but we are aggressively investigating it," Woodcock said.
Millions of Americans are treated every year with the drug, which is widely used in surgery and kidney dialysis. The FDA yesterday increased from four to 19 its estimate of the number of patients who may have died as a result of reactions to the drug.
Since the initial deaths associated with heparin were reported more than three weeks ago, the episode has intensified concern over the safety of foods, drugs and other products imported from China and other developing countries with limited regulatory agencies. Some in Congress have questioned whether the FDA has the resources or the will to exercise the same kind of oversight over foreign drugmakers -- which supply a large and growing share of the drugs and drug ingredients sold in the United States -- that it gives to domestic drugmakers.
The active ingredient for much of the heparin used in the United States comes from China, but the problematic batches were sold only by Baxter International, which gets the raw product through intermediaries from a plant outside Shanghai. FDA officials have acknowledged that the agency never inspected the Changzhou SPL plant, apparently because it was mistaken for another plant with a similar name.
Woodcock said the contamination came to light only through a sophisticated test never before used on heparin. She said 5 percent to 20 percent of samples were found to contain the contaminant, but all would have been deemed safe under the standard testing procedures. The substance had never before been detected, she said.
The agency detected a spike in reported severe reactions to Baxter's heparin -- including anaphylactic shock, fainting and a racing heartbeat -- in early February.
While it remains uncertain whether the contaminant caused the adverse reactions and deaths, Woodcock said the FDA and company think there may be a connection. They also suspect that the problem came from the Chinese active ingredients and not from a problem with Baxter's finishing plant in New Jersey.
Heparin, which has been used in medicine for more than 60 years, is made from a compound found in pig intestines. Heparin injections are used to prevent blood clots in people undergoing dialysis and surgery.
Baxter, which supplies about half of the U.S. market, sold 35 million vials last year. Virtually all of the nation's 450,000 dialysis patients use heparin regularly.
In a teleconference, Woodcock and FDA Commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach defended the agency's oversight of the fast-growing number of foreign manufacturers of drugs and drug ingredients. They said the plants are monitored by a complex system of international and local oversight, and supported by quality controls built into their system designs.
|
The Food and Drug Administration has detected a "contaminant" in many samples of Chinese-supplied heparin that may be the cause of hundreds of severe and sometimes deadly allergic reactions to the blood-thinning drug, agency officials said yesterday.
| 12.266667 | 0.777778 | 1.088889 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/29/AR2008022901655.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/29/AR2008022901655.html
|
Islands 2008: Think Small
|
2008030819
|
Finding an island to visit in the Caribbean is about as hard as finding a star in the night sky. But look closely, and sometimes it's the smallest flecks in the heavens that shine the brightest.
Turns out it's the same way when it comes to islands. Size truly doesn't matter. That said, when we set out to find smaller isles off most tourist radars, we figured we'd find pretty much the same thing. Empty roads. No cruise ships. Untrammeled beaches. Friendly locals.
What we didn't count on was the sense of adventure each provides. On Virgin Gorda in the British Virgin Islands, we swam amid hulking boulders pounded by the sea ( Page P4). In the waters off the Grenadines, we sailed on a cramped boat with an energetic mutt (Page P7). And on Montserrat, we came face to face with a smoldering volcano and the people determined not to let it hold them back (Page P8).
|
Find Washington DC, Virginia and Maryland travel information, including web fares, Washington DC tours, beach/ski guide, international and United States destinations. Featuring Mid-Atlantic travel, airport information, traffic/weather updates
| 4.395349 | 0.255814 | 0.255814 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/29/AR2008022901363.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/29/AR2008022901363.html
|
Postcard From Tom: Rome
|
2008030819
|
As much as its citizens like to eat out, Rome is not known for its great restaurants. That doesn't mean locals don't eat well; rather, simple trattorias are where they tend to find the most satisfaction. Highlights from a recent trip to the Eternal City and its suburbs:
IL TORDO MATTO (Piazza San Martino 8, Zagarolo, 011-39-69-520-0050)
Thirty minutes from Rome by train, Il Tordo Matto feels like a secret you don't want to share. The dining room seats fewer than 20. "Would you like me to cook for you?" asks the boyish chef, 31-year-old Adriano Baldassarre. We jump at the invitation, which is followed by some of the best modern Italian cooking -- oysters sheathed in caramelized pork fat, buttery risotto strewn with squid, the best pigeon in memory -- we've ever encountered. Helping the chef in the kitchen is his mother, who returns us to the train station when we finish dinner. Five-course tasting menu $95.
RISTORANTE DITIRAMBO (Piazza della Cancelleria 74/75, 011-39-06-687-1626)
Set in one of the city's liveliest neighborhoods, this snug two-room restaurant is the picture of rusticity, with wood rafters and brick arches. From the tiny kitchen flow dishes that show ambition and imagination: crisp fried eggplant topped with baby squid, a savory "pastry" layered with buttery burrata cheese and pressed fish roe, and pork wrapped in smoked ham and set on chestnut puree. Both the breads and the sweets are baked right here, and vegetarians strike gold with two pages of meatless options. Entrees $13-$24.
IL GELATO DI SAN CRISPINO (Via della Panetteria 42; 011-39-06-679-3924)
There are prettier and friendlier spots to find one of the few snacks Romans willingly eat on the run, but nowhere is the gelato better than at this slender ice cream parlor (one of two), conveniently near the Trevi Fountain. Among the sensational flavors might be Armagnac, lemon and walnut with fig. Only the best ingredients -- hazelnuts from Piedmont, wild honey from Sardinia -- will do. About $3.40 per small cup.
|
Find Washington DC, Virginia and Maryland travel information, including web fares, Washington DC tours, beach/ski guide, international and United States destinations. Featuring Mid-Atlantic travel, airport information, traffic/weather updates
| 10 | 0.27907 | 0.27907 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/29/AR2008022901390.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/29/AR2008022901390.html
|
What's the Deal?
|
2008030819
|
* Luxury seekers looking for a last-minute getaway can save as much as 57 percent March 3-15 on the private island of Cayo Espanto, off the coast of Belize. Three of the island's six villas, which usually range from $1,895 to $2,295 per night, have been reduced to $995 per couple. Deal includes personal butler, all meals, drinks and transfers. Taxes and resort fees are 24 percent extra. Three-night minimum stay required. Info: 888-666-4282, http://www.aprivateisland.com.
* A Skate-a-Date package for two at New York's Rockefeller Center includes ice skating, rentals and a two-course dinner at Rock Center Cafe for $75, plus tip and about $6.50 taxes. Priced separately, the package would cost about $140 per couple. The deal is good through early April. Info: 212-332-7620, http://www.therinkatrockcenter.com.
* Book a suite on select 2008 or 2009 MSC Cruises Caribbean sailings aboard the MSC Lirica or the MSC Orchestra and receive up to 50 percent in savings. For example, a 10-night Panama Canal cruise departing Fort Lauderdale, Fla., on Jan. 13 is $1,449 per person double (plus $91 taxes); brochure rate is $2,825. Book by June 30 and receive a shipboard credit of up to $100 per suite. Info: 800-666-9333, http://www.msccruisesusa.com.
* Oceania Cruises is offering discounts and free airfare on its 2009 European cruises. For example, a 10-night cruise from Rome to Barcelona aboard the Insignia departing Nov. 15, 2009, starts at $2,299 per person double, plus about $725 port charges and air taxes (brochure rate is $4,598). Deal includes round-trip airfare from Washington. Info: 866-765-3630, http://www.oceaniacruises.com.
* Southwest is offering a nationwide fare sale. Round-trip fare from BWI to Houston, for example, is $188, including $20 taxes; fare on other airlines is $215. Travel Tuesdays and Wednesdays April 1-June 25. Purchase by March 20 at http://www.southwest.com; 14-day advance purchase required.
* British Airways is offering reduced Club World (business class) fares to London for travel June 1-Aug. 31. Round-trip fare is $2,725 (including $250 taxes) for Monday-Wednesday flights. (Add a $60 round-trip surcharge for Thursday-Sunday travel.) Other airlines are matching, but the fare typically starts at about $3,800. Book by March 13. Info: 800-247-9297, http://www.ba.com/summerpremium.
* Star Clippers is offering savings of $700 per person on two 13-night cruise/tour itineraries in Thailand. For example, the price starts at $3,590 per person double for the Wonders of the Far East package, departing Dec. 1 and Dec. 10, 2008, and March 11, 2009. Trip includes airfare from Washington to Bangkok, with return from Singapore; domestic air between Bangkok and Phuket; seven-night cruise between Phuket and Singapore; four nights at the Montien Riverside Hotel in Bangkok; two nights at the Orchard Hotel in Singapore; and several sightseeing tours. Port charges are $195 extra each. Book through a travel agent. Info: 800-442-0551, http://www.starclippers.com.
* Save an extra $300 per person on Gate 1 Travel's Crown of Spain escorted tour departing Nov. 13. Package starts at $2,376 per person double and includes airfare from Washington to Madrid, with return from Barcelona; 12 nights' hotel; 17 meals; sightseeing; motor coach transport; taxes; and tour guide. Book by March 15 and request code WPDS300. Priced separately, flights and hotels alone would cost about the same. Info: 800-682-3333, http://www.gate1travel.com.
Prices were verified and available on Thursday afternoon when the Travel section went to press. However, deals sell out quickly and are not guaranteed to be available. Restrictions such as day of travel, blackout dates and advance-purchase requirements sometimes apply.
|
Find Washington DC, Virginia and Maryland travel information, including web fares, Washington DC tours, beach/ski guide, international and United States destinations. Featuring Mid-Atlantic travel, airport information, traffic/weather updates
| 18.046512 | 0.488372 | 0.581395 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/video/2008/03/04/VI2008030402868.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/video/2008/03/04/VI2008030402868.html
|
Candidates React: Clinton
|
2008030519
|
» This Story:Read +|Watch +|Talk +
{ "movie":"http://media10.washingtonpost.com/wp/swf/OmniPlayer.swf", "id":"oplayer-video-swf", "width":"100%", height:"100%", "vars":{ "title":"Candidates React: Clinton", "stillURL":"http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2008/03/05/PH2008030500181.jpg", "mediaQueryString":"http://static.washingtonpost.com/wp/swf/OmniPlayer.swf?id=03052008-17v&flvURL=/media/2008/03/05/03052008-17v&playAds=true&adZone=wpni.video.bc&canShare=false" }, "params":{ "allowFullScreen":"true" } }
Suspicious package sits at Fed building for months
Toyota expects to halt production in U.S.
Aerial view of Japan destruction
Truck dangles over ramp; two trapped
Aftermath of blast, Gaza strikes
Elementary class graduate after tsunami
Baking behind bars on Rikers Island
Plea deal nixed in Conn. home invasion case
Police: Teen shot guardians after being grounded
Playing the oil prices money game
Elizabeth Taylor's stand against AIDS
Obama struggles to enter White House
Radioactive water triggers fear in Japan
Buying a new home means paying more
Allied forces crippling Gaddafi's power
Goldman CEO offers no cover for ex-boardmember
Audio: Silence in the tower at DCA
Libya mission gaining; U.S. looks to cede control
Deadly plane crash in Republic of Congo
Strong storms bring wild weather
Watchdog groups want Ukraine zoo closed
Blast at bus station shakes Jerusalem
Japan buries its dead as radiation fears grow
Obama struggles to enter White House
Obama again defends U.S. involvement in Libya
McCain on no-fly zone: "It's been very effective"
U.S. fighter jet crashes in Libya
Obama lauds Chile's transition to democracy
Coalition stops Gaddafi push on rebel stronghold
The Post's Perry Bacon on Obama in Chile
Obama favors Gaddafi stepping down
Palin: 'Overwhelming' to be in Israel
Gates: U.S. will soon yield control in Libya
The Fast Fix - Is Romney winning the base?
Obama: Brazil's democracy example to Arab world
Obama plays soccer with Brazil youth
Obama authorizes military action against Libya
The Post's Forero analyzes Obama's trip to Brazil
Obama: Coalition prepared to act in Libya
Banks boost dividends as Fed loosens leash
Wisc. judge blocks controversial union law
Obama: U.S. ready to enforce sanctions in Libya
Clinton: 'No other choice' in Libya
Westfield and Robinson tie, 1-1
Post Sports Live: Boudreau vs. McPhee - who deserves more credit?
Post Sports Live: Sweet 16 preview
Post Sports Live: Alex Ovechkin's mysterious injury
Post Sports Live, March 22
Georgetown Prep beats Langley, 12-3
Post Sports Live: Verizon Center has Big East feel for NCAA Tourney
Ali asks Iran to free U.S. hikers
JaVale McGee on his first triple-double
Post Sports Live: Mason faces tough road in East region
Post Sports Live: Georgetown's chances rest on Wright's hand
Navy knocks out in-state rival Towson, 14-11
Georgetown draws 5th-seed, faces Princeton this Sunday
Post Sports Live: NCAA Tournament preview
Post Sports Live, March 15
George Mason reacts to first-round matchup with Villanova
Sneak peek: 'History Will Be Made'
North Point claims 4A title
Centennial loses to Milford Mill, 56-44
Toyota expects to halt production in U.S.
Aerial view of Japan destruction
Aftermath of blast, Gaza strikes
Elementary class graduate after tsunami
No Tweeting: A royal wedding etiquette guide
Playing the oil prices money game
Radioactive water triggers fear in Japan
Allied forces crippling Gaddafi's power
Libya mission gaining; U.S. looks to cede control
Deadly plane crash in Republic of Congo
Watchdog groups want Ukraine zoo closed
Blast at bus station shakes Jerusalem
Japan buries its dead as radiation fears grow
Mass protests in Yemen as emergency law imposed
Bomb explodes at Jerusalem bus stop
Obama again defends U.S. involvement in Libya
Missing Va. teacher's body located in Japan
U.S. fighter jet crashes in Libya
Carriages prepared for royal wedding
Japan slowly recovers, mourns dead
Obama lauds Chile's transition to democracy
Coalition stops Gaddafi push on rebel stronghold
The Post's Perry Bacon on Obama in Chile
Truck dangles over ramp; two trapped
Post Today, March 24: U-Md. demands nuclear fallout info
Baking behind bars on Rikers Island
No Tweeting: A royal wedding etiquette guide
Police: Teen shot guardians after being grounded
Elizabeth Taylor's stand against AIDS
Obama struggles to enter White House
Aflac debuts Gilbert Gottfried-less commercial
Strong storms bring wild weather
Elizabeth Taylor's tempestuous love affair
Adorable polar bear twins meet the public
Bomb explodes at Jerusalem bus stop
Elizabeth Taylor dies at 79
Massive shark spotted off Florida coast
Iowa tornado caught on tape
Post Today, March 23: Naming military operations
Circus elephants take a walk through D.C.
Missing Va. teacher's body located in Japan
Footage of crashed U.S. fighter jet
U.S. fighter jet crashes in Libya
Carriages prepared for royal wedding
| Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton won critically important victories in Ohio and Texas last night, defying predictions of an imminent end to her presidential candidacy and extending the remarkable contest for the Democratic nomination to Pennsylvania's April primary and perhaps well into the summer.
| Buoyed by primary victories in three states last night, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) presented herself today as the Democrat most likely to defeat the Republican nominee for president in November and raised the prospect of joining forces with Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) -- as her vice presiden...
| Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's victories in Texas, Ohio and Rhode Island reinvigorated her once-shaky presidential candidacy and reshaped her debate with Sen. Barack Obama, but those successes yielded only a modest gain in the battle for delegates, underscoring the daunting odds she faces in...
|
Presidential candidate Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) addresses her supporters from Columbus, Ohio after Tuesday's primary election results filter in. Video by AP
| 39.275862 | 0.586207 | 0.793103 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/04/AR2008030402332.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/04/AR2008030402332.html
|
Let's Help the Good Guys in the West Bank
|
2008030519
|
One way to do that is to strengthen its moderate Palestinian opponents. Fortunately, there is a smart and honest leader of these forces: Salam Fayyad, an apolitical economist (with a doctorate from the University of Texas) who is prime minister of the Palestinian Authority. Abbas appointed him to replace a Hamas-led government after Hamas forces seized control of Gaza last June. We have a perfect opportunity -- which will probably last no more than a year if it's not energetically nurtured -- to show Palestinians that supporting moderates such as Fayyad, rather than the radicals of Hamas, can pay off by producing prosperity and peace.
Helping Fayyad should be easy: It requires creating business and educational opportunities in the West Bank, where there has been increasing stability and security cooperation with Israel since Fayyad has been in charge. Such efforts are already underway. Tony Blair, as a special envoy to the region, has been working to enlist donor nations to keep the Palestinian Authority afloat and to create industrial zones in the West Bank where foreign businesses can safely set up shop. And the State Department has set up a U.S.-Palestinian Partnership, which I chair, designed to coordinate government and private-sector efforts to provide job opportunities, youth training centers and business investment.
The youth centers are being built by the U.S. Agency for International Development and will be run by Fayyad's impressive minister of youth, Tahini Abu Daqqa. She took members of our partnership to Hebron last month to inspect the site of one of these centers, and the young people there spoke of their eagerness for technology training and Internet access. Jean Case, a former America Online executive who is a co-chair of the partnership, has been enlisting American companies and nonprofit groups to supply and staff the centers.
Working with the Overseas Private Investment Corp. (OPIC), an independent government agency, the Aspen Institute launched a Middle East Investment Initiative last summer that helps provide loans of up to $500,000 to businesses in the West Bank. With $228 million in loan guarantee authority, it works with local banks to help what is, despite all odds, a resilient private sector run by entrepreneurial Palestinians -- who form the most powerful constituency for peace, stability and normalized relations with Israel.
When President Bush met with the U.S.-Palestinian Partnership, he mentioned that former president Bill Clinton had called him to push for a companion program to help business in the Palestinian territories: risk insurance that would protect against disruptions caused by political upheavals. OPIC is working with the Clinton Global Initiative to put together such a facility. Also being planned are a mortgage guarantee program, which would spur housing construction, and an Israeli-Palestinian venture fund that could invest in technology companies.
To attract foreign investment, Prime Minister Fayyad has announced a May 21-23 business development conference in Bethlehem. He hopes that American, European, Arab and Israeli business leaders will examine the opportunities to locate facilities in the West Bank or enter into joint ventures with Palestinian industries, such as pharmaceutical factories and stone quarries, that are thriving in Ramallah and Hebron. Just showing up at Bethlehem's InterContinental Hotel, a short walk from the Church of the Nativity, will be eye-opening for many international business leaders, who probably picture the West Bank as a land of rock-throwing rather than of business opportunity.
Israeli Prime Minister Olmert and Defense Minister Ehud Barak believe fervently that economic development in the West Bank is in Israel's interest. It will promote stability, create a constituency opposed to militancy and show that following leaders like Fayyad and Abbas is more rewarding than following Hamas's path of Islamist extremism. Olmert, Barak and their Israeli colleagues will have to take risks to make this work. The business conference, and economic investments generally, will succeed only if goods and people can move more freely. That will require lifting some of the checkpoints in areas where there has been security cooperation and streamlining some border crossings.
This could create a virtuous cycle. Freer movement and access could lead to more investment and economic opportunities, which would help shore up the forces of moderation and peace that now prevail in the West Bank. That would stand as a stark and instructive contrast to the vicious cycle playing out in Gaza.
The writer is chief executive of the Aspen Institute and chairs the U.S.-Palestinian Partnership.
|
The U.S. has an interest in strengthening the moderate Palestinian opponents of Hamas.
| 59.785714 | 0.928571 | 1.642857 |
high
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/islamsadvance/2008/03/searching_for_a_fourth_wife.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030519id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/islamsadvance/2008/03/searching_for_a_fourth_wife.html
|
PostGlobal on washingtonpost.com
|
2008030519
|
Farid would take a fourth wife if he could afford one. This 29-year-old gravel supplier says he has already received a dozen calls from single women in his neighborhood who want to join his three current wives. He is something of a catch. His hillside house has no water or electricity, but his business hauling gravel provides a steady income. The fact that he has three wives and seven children, three of them sons, is a mark of his status in the community.
If marriage is the building block of society, then polygamy represents one of the profounder differences between Islam and the West. There are no comprehensive figures for the number of polygamous marriages in the Middle East. The practice is outlawed in Tunisia and Turkey, but may be as high as 25% in Afghanistan, according to UN estimates here. Whatever the figures, polygamyâs legal standing in Sharia law and idealized position in some communities have led to a very different view of society. A certain utilitarianism puts the demands of family and tribal loyalty â and the production of sons â far before the romantic love thatâs central to the concept of marriage in the West.
Some history first: the Koran allows men to have up to a maximum of four wives. When this Koranic verse was revealed, many Muslim men divorced wives in excess of four in order to comply. The Prophet Muhammad had a total of eleven wives throughout his life, though no more than nine at any one time. One of the primary motives both then and now for multiple wives is the need for sons, who will inherit the familyâs estate (women, when they marry, effectively join their husbandâs family). A common justification among Middle Eastern men for taking a second wife is that their first has not produced a son. Another reason is that first marriages are often arranged by families between cousins, without consent from either man or woman. A second wife can often be a âlove match.â On other occasions widows, of which there are many in Afghanistan, are re-married to surviving brothers to keep the children in the family.
In all of these circumstances women are clearly treated as commodities. with little say in whom they marry. There are further, psychological ramifications. In Iraq, I witnessed one family torn apart by a manâs decision to take a second wife. The man, called Ali, had begun work as a driver with a Western security firm and was earning a large salary ($2000 a month), giving him the financial means to take another wife. His original wife, however, refused to accept the legitimacy of the second, leading to a painful rivalry, which ultimately split the children, the sons favoring the father, the daughters the mother, and led to divorce. In other cases Iâve seen in Yemen, the husband has inevitably favored certain wives, leading to simmering rivalries played out among the children.
When I asked Farid if there was rivalry between the different wives and their children, he told me to look at them happily playing together. Farid insists his relationship with his three wives is happy. He says his wives form a tight family unit, sharing the housework. His first wife was happy for him to take a second wife, he claims. âShe went to the family of the second woman and made the proposal on my behalf,â says Farid. Each time he gets a new wife, Farid adds a new room to the house, spending one night in turn with each wife.
But Farid did not allow me to interview his wives for this video, after deciding that their views, if publicly broadcast, would bring shame to the family. He only allowed me to film them on the condition that they wear burqas. (One wife was visiting family in the north during my visit).
âNeither I nor my wives come from a rich or well-educated family, so we value things different to the smart people in the city,â said Farid. âWe want lots of sons, and for them to grow up clever and strong.â
|
Islam's Advance on PostGlobal; blog of politics and current events on washingtonpost.com. Visit http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/islamsadvance/
| 46 | 0.470588 | 0.470588 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/daoud_kuttab/2008/03/title/all_comments.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030519id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/daoud_kuttab/2008/03/title/all_comments.html
|
PostGlobal on washingtonpost.com
|
2008030519
|
Douad Kuttab needs first to tell us why attacking Arabs at sites at which rockets are being launched from Gaza into Israel is a disproportionate use of force in self defence. The effectiveness of Israel's use of force does not make it disproportionate. According to the Israelis, 90% of the casualties were those aiding in the rocket fire.
The Arabs are firing rockets indiscriminately at civilians in Israel. Terrorism is the use of unlawful force and violence to achieve a political goad. The Arabs are engaging in terrorism. The use of reasonable force and violence in self defense is lawful anywhere in the world. So unless Mr. Kuttab explains why attacking the launching sites of the rockets being fired at Israel is unreasonable, he has not made his case.
Secondly, it is the Arabs who are stealing Israeli land, despite the PR to the contrary. They have built some 260 new settlements in the West Bank on this disputed land in which Israel has the far better claim according to Professor Julius Stone who the US has relied on in its view that the Jewish Settlements are lawful. Because the Jordanian entry onto the West Bank and East Jerusalem in 1948 was an unlawful invasion and an aggression, the principle ex injuria non oritur has beclouded even Jordan's limited status of belligerent occupant. Her purported annexation was invalid on that account, as well as because it violated the freezing provisions of the Armistice Agreement. Conversely Israel's standing in East Jerusalem after her lawful entry in the course of self-defence certainly displaced Jordan' unlawful possession.
Once this position is reached, and it is remembered that neither Jordan nor any other state is a sovereign reversioner entitled to re-enter the West Bank, the legal standing of Israel takes on new aspects. She becomes then a state in lawful control of territory in respect of which no other state can show better (or, indeed, any) legal title. The general principles of international law applicable to such a situation, moreover, are well-established. The International Court of Justice, when called upon to adjudicate in territorial disputes, for instance in the MInquirres and Echrehos case beween the United Kingdom and France, proceeded "to appraise the relative strength of the opposing claims to sovereignty" Since title to territory is thus based on a claim not of absolute but only of relative validity, the result seems decisive of East Jerusalem. No other state having a legal claim even equal to that of Israel under the unconditional cease-fire agreement of 1967 and the rule of uti possidetis, this relative superiority of title would seem to assimilate Israel's possession under international law to an absolute title, valid erga omnes...
Most of the Arabs came to Palestine from adjacent states after the Jews drained the swamps eliminating malaria and irrigated the deserts. Arab population quadrupled at that time. See: Aryieh Avneri, "Claim of Dispossession".
His victim Arabs have just killed 8 Israeli religious students at a yeshiva.
As early as 1964, Aarafat had sent Abu Jihad (later the leader of the PLO's militaary operations) to North Vietnam to study the strategy and tactics of guerrilla warfare as waged by Ho Chii MInh. At this time, Fatah also translated the writings of North Vietnam's General Nguyen Giap, as well as the works of Mao and Che Guevara, into Arabic.
Although Arafat was pioneering the use of skyjacking during this time and setting off a wave of copycat airborne terrorism, he discovered that even the flimsiest and most transparent excuses suffice for the Western Media to exonerate him and blame Israel for its retaliatory or preventative attacks, and to accept his insistence that he was a statesman who could not control the terrrorists he was in fact orchestrating.
But while Arafat was finally absorbing and applying the lessons he learned from his Romanian and North Vietnamese hosts and handlers, as Pacepa describes it in Red Horizons, the Soviets still questioned his dependability. So, with Pacepa's help, they created a highly specialized "insurance policy." Using the good offices of the Romanian ambassador to Egypt, they secretly taped Arafat's almost nightly homosexual interactions with his bodyguards, and the unfortunate preteen orphan boys whom Ceausescu provided for him as part of the "Romanian hospitality." With videotapes of Arafat's voracious pedophilia in their vault, and knowing the traditional attitude toward homosexuality in Islam, the KGB felt that Arafat would continue to be a reliable asset for the Kremlin.
Whether or not Arafat's homosexuality was the key to the Soviet's control over him, it is clear that by the early 1970s the PLO had joined the ranks of other socialist anti-colonial "liberation" movements, both in its culture and in its politics; and had reframed its terror war as a "people's war" similar to those of the other Marxist-Leninist terrorist guerrillas in China, Cuba and Vietnam. Thanks to the input from Ceausescu, General Giap,a nd the Algerians, Arafat gradually saw the wisdom of jettisoning his fulminations about "throwing the Jews into the sea," and in its place he developed the images of the "illegal occupation" and Palestinian national self-determination," both of which lent his terrorism the mantle of a legitimate people's resistance. Of course, there was one ingredient missing in this imaginative reconfiguration of the struggle. There had never been a "Palestinian people" or a "Palestinian nation" or a sovereign state known as "Palestine."
The foregoing is principally from Meir-Levi's book "History Upside Down: the Roots of Palestinian Fascism and the Myth of Israeli Aggression." and from Ion Pacepa, "Red Horizons".
|
Daoud Kuttab at PostGlobal on PostGlobal; blog of politics and current events on washingtonpost.com. Visit http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/daoud_kuttab/
| 59.833333 | 0.5 | 0.5 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/fareed_zakaria/2008/03/the_democrats_dangerous_rhetor.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030519id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/fareed_zakaria/2008/03/the_democrats_dangerous_rhetor.html
|
The Democrats' Dangerous Rhetoric
|
2008030519
|
Despite their spirited squabbling, the Democratic candidates are united in their view that one big benefit of electing either of them would be an improvement in America's reputation and relations with the world. Hillary Clinton promises to send special envoys to foreign capitals the day after she's elected. Barack Obama offers to reach out to America's foes as well as friends. Unfortunately, none of this will matter if they continue to spout dangerous, ill-informed rhetoric about trade.
What the rest of the world - particularly poorer countries - really want is for the United States to continue its historic role in opening up the world economy. For a struggling farmer in Kenya, access to world markets is far more important than foreign aid or U.N. programs. If the candidates think they will charm the world while adopting protectionist policies, they are in for a surprise.
Already the mood is shifting abroad. Listening to the Democrats on trade "is enough to send jitters down the spine of most in India," says the Times Now TV channel in New Delhi. The Canadian media have shared in the global swoon for Obama, but Greg Weston recently wrote in the Edmonton Sun: "What he is actually saying - and how it might affect Canada - may come as a surprise to otherwise devout Barack boosters." The African press has reported on George W. Bush's visit with affection and, in some cases, contrasted his views on trade with the Democratic candidates'. The Bangkok Post compared the Democrats unfavorably with John McCain and his vision of an East Asia bound together, and to the United States, by expanding trade ties.
The backlash could be greatest against Obama because he's raised the highest hopes. A senior Latin American diplomat told me, "Look, we're all watching Obama with bated breath and hoping [his election] will be a transforming moment for the world. But now that we're listening to him on trade - the issue that affects us so deeply - we realize that maybe he doesn't wish us well. In fact, we might find ourselves nostalgic for Bush, who is brave and courageous on trade and immigration."
The fact is, NAFTA has been pivotal in transforming Mexico into a stable democracy with a growing economy. And, in Lawrence Summers's words, it "didn't cost the United States a penny. It contributed to the strength of our economy because of more exports and because imports helped to reduce inflation." Trade between the NAFTA countries has boomed since 1993, growing by about $700 billion. No serious economists or experts believe that low wages in Mexico, China or India is the fundamental reason that American factories close. And labor and environmental standards would do very little to change the reality of huge wage differentials between poor and rich countries' workers.
The candidates' supporters often argue that they don't really mean what they say, that their proposals on trade agreements involve only minor tinkering. It is an odd defense of candidates promising change, honesty and a new approach to politics to say that they are being cynical and hypocritical. Besides, Obama and Clinton propose renegotiating NAFTA, which is a terrible idea. (And one that has prompted Canada's prime minister to retort that if that happens, his country would like to get more concessions from the United States.) Clinton also has proposed that free-trade deals be reevaluated every five years, which is absurd. The benefits of trade deals lie in their permance.
Both candidates surely know that it is their general attitude and rhetoric, not their policy papers, that matter. On this crucial topic they are pandering to Americans' worst instincts, encouraging a form of xenophobia and chauvinism and validating the utterly self-defeating idea of protectionism.
I know, I know. This is all about the Democratic primaries in states like Ohio and about union support. But you can't target messages so easily anymore. What is said in Ohio is heard in Ghana, Bangladesh and Colombia.
And isn't the point of leadership to educate and elevate people, not to pander and drag them into the swamp of ignorance and fear? There is a way to speak about the pain of globalization - and about the need for investments in retraining, education, health care and infrastructure - so that we can compete but also absorb the shocks of a changing global economy. Unfortunately, that is not what the Democratic candidates are talking about.
I'm not even sure that protectionist rhetoric works that well in a general election. Americans like optimists. Railing against Mexicans, Chinese and Indians for stealing American jobs smacks of anger, paranoia and fear of the future. Americans want hope, as Obama says, "hope in the face of difficulty, hope in the face of uncertainty, the audacity of hope." Where is that courage now?
Editor's Note: Fareed Zakaria is the editor of Newsweek International, and co-moderator of PostGlobal. His "World View" column and recent pieces for Newsweek can be found here.
|
A conversation on religion with Jon Meacham, Sally Quinn and Fareed Zakaria. Visit http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/fareed_zakaria/
| 57.058824 | 0.529412 | 0.647059 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/29/AR2008022903361.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/29/AR2008022903361.html
|
Tired Beyond Relief
|
2008030519
|
Or maybe you're just tired of hearing others complain about how tired they are.
In this era of burning candles at both ends (whoever works the longest hours wins), with stops only for caregiving and a few stolen winks, most everyone gets tired now and then. Sometimes all you need to recover is a solid night's sleep or an actual vacation, sans BlackBerry. But in some instances, tiredness moves to the next realm and becomes the soul-sucking, energy-draining condition called fatigue.
And whereas sleepiness is generally remedied by sleep, fatigue can maintain its grip even when you sleep for hours on end. Fatigue makes you feel exhausted just thinking of paying the bills or walking the dog. It makes you want to bury your head under your pillow, even though you're sitting in your cubicle at work and there's no pillow in sight.
Kevin Ferentz, director of clinical operations in the University of Maryland School of Medicine's Department of Family Medicine, cites a 1994 study showing that fatigue is the primary reason for between 1 and 7 percent of all medical office visits made by adults, and another study published in 2000 that calls fatigue the seventh most common complaint in primary care.
But for a widespread complaint, fatigue can be frustrating to pin down. It can be a symptom of dozens of physical ailments, including thyroid imbalance, cancer, depression and autoimmune disease. It can be transient or chronic. It can be spurred by stress or sleep loss, a crummy diet or some medicine you take. Or it can creep into your life for no apparent reason.
One explanation for why fatigue is so fuzzy: There is no objective medical definition for the condition, says John DeLuca, editor of the 2007 research compilation "Fatigue as a Window to the Brain" (MIT Press, 2007). Nobody knows precisely where "tired" ends and "fatigued" begins; nor are experts sure how long one has to feel fagged before we start calling it fatigue, or even whether the underlying source is primarily physiological or psychological, or some combination of the two.
DeLuca notes doctors have no concrete way to assess a patient's fatigue. "It's totally nonscientific. A clinician asks the question 'Are you fatigued? Is it mild, moderate or severe?' . . . Everybody defines it the way they think. We need objective ways to measure it."
While garden-variety fatigue remains ill-defined, chronic fatigue syndrome, or CFS, is characterized by severe, disabling fatigue lasting six months or more that can't be traced to a physical cause and that is accompanied by at least four other symptoms, including headache, joint or muscle pain, lymph-node tenderness, and memory or concentration difficulties. More than a million people in the United States have CFS, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
No matter how it's defined, "fatigue in the medical setting is incredibly important," DeLuca says. Beyond its association with myriad conditions and its being a side effect of many medications -- including beta blockers and antidepressants, which are sometimes used to treat persistent tiredness -- fatigue can be a marker of other serious disorders.
For example, DeLuca notes, a study published in the journal Stroke in 2002 shows that post-stroke fatigue is a strong predictor of death. Similarly, he says, people who have had a heart attack and who experience fatigue as their sole symptom of depression are at increased risk of another heart attack.
"People think as you grow older, you fatigue more easily," he says. "The literature shows just the opposite, except in those who have hypertension or diabetes. If you don't have fatigue and you're elderly, you're in pretty good shape. Fatigue may be a sign that something is not right."
|
Are you beat? Tuckered out? Dragging, flagging or just plain pooped?
| 49.733333 | 0.533333 | 0.666667 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/04/AR2008030401987.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/04/AR2008030401987.html
|
Clinton Beats Obama in Texas and Ohio; McCain Clinches Republican Nomination
|
2008030519
|
Clinton also won in Rhode Island, while Sen. Barack Obama captured Vermont. Her victories snapped his winning streak at 12 consecutive contests, rejuvenated her struggling candidacy and jolted a Democratic Party establishment that was beginning to see Obama as the likely nominee.
Clinton still faces daunting odds in her bid for the nomination. Obama began the day with a lead in pledged delegates that will be hard for her to overcome in the 12 primaries and caucus remaining, despite the results from the four states voting yesterday. But her advisers said that the big win in Ohio alone would force a serious look at both candidates and that the race was far from over.
Yesterday's voting came after two weeks of intensive and increasingly acrimonious campaigning. Clinton, her back to the wall, played the role of aggressor, challenging Obama on his readiness to be commander in chief and chastising him on trade and health care. Obama attempted to fend off those attacks with the hope of scoring victories that his advisers were confident would drive Clinton from the race. But exit polls showed that, among late-deciding voters, Clinton had a clear edge.
Former president Bill Clinton had said earlier that she needed to win both big states to have a realistic chance of winning the nomination, and she delivered. But even before the Texas results were in, she made clear that she would continue.
"For everyone here in Ohio and across America who's ever been counted out but refused to be knocked out, and for everyone who has stumbled but stood right back up, and for everyone who works hard and never gives up, this one is for you," she said.
As the crowd chanted, "Yes, she will! Yes, she will!," Clinton said she is in the race to win. "You know what they say: 'As Ohio goes, so goes the nation,' " she said to cheers from supporters. "Well, this nation's coming back and so is this campaign," she continued. "We're going on. We're going strong and we're going all the way."
Obama, speaking in San Antonio before Texas was counted, congratulated Clinton on her victories in Ohio and Rhode Island, something she had never done during his winning streak, but he said her successes would not stop his march toward the nomination.
"We know this," he said. "No matter what happens tonight, we have nearly the same delegate lead as we had this morning, and we are on our way to winning this nomination."
As if to underscore his confidence about the nomination, Obama said he had called Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) to congratulate him on clinching the Republican nomination and said he looked forward to debating the future of the country. McCain, he said, "has fallen in line behind the very same policies that have ill-served America."
Later he criticized McCain and Clinton for dismissing his call for change as "eloquent but empty" and vowed to continue his campaign for change and a new politics in Washington.
A total of 370 pledged delegates were at stake in the four contests. Heading into yesterday, Obama had a lead of about 160 pledged delegates, according to the two campaigns. When superdelegates -- members of Congress, governors and party leaders -- were included, he held a slightly smaller overall advantage. Clinton would be hard-pressed to overtake Obama in pledged delegates in the remaining contests, but he cannot get to the 2,025 needed to win the nomination with pledged delegates alone, likely leaving the outcome in the hands of superdelegates.
|
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton won critically important victories in Ohio and Texas last night, defying predictions of an imminent end to her presidential candidacy and extending the remarkable contest for the Democratic nomination to Pennsylvania's April primary and perhaps well into the summer.
| 15.23913 | 0.565217 | 0.913043 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/2008/03/hillary_surges_and_wins_on_the.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030519id_/http://blog.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/2008/03/hillary_surges_and_wins_on_the.html
|
Hillary Surges and Wins on the Surge
|
2008030519
|
Hillary Clinton's "surge" in Ohio and Texas mirrors the success of the surge in Iraq: The war is not won by any means, and her policy positions on the Iraq war today are only slightly different that those of Barack Obama. But as Iraq has either ceased being the only issue for many Americans (or as their views have subtly shifted as the situation on the ground has improved and the economy has worsened), Hillary has found the middle.
Is it all atmospherics between the extremes of Barack Obama and John McCain? Or does Hillary actually have a better policy stance and message, one that finally can be heard now that the war isn't such an emotional issue?
As we approach the five-year anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, there is a notable shift in public perceptions regarding the war. Nearly half of Americans now think the war is going well, according to polling by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. As the Wall Street Journal says this morning, the perception that the surge has succeeded is "potentially blunting Democrats' political edge on the issue."
The Hill similarly reports that congressional Democrats are retooling their Iraq message with a less ambitious argument to conform to the new reality: "Getting troops out of the conflict is the only way to rebuild a spent military." "Out-of-Iraq now" is decidedly shifting to saving the American military in its time of crisis. When the Senate debated a plan last week to withdraw troops within 120 days, the Hill says, Republicans "seemed more eager to debate it than did Democrats."
I've written before that neither Obama nor McCain is going to be able to implement his proposals of withdrawal or victory. The consensus position of the national security establishment, and the position of the American military, is that drawdowns have to continue, but some sort of relatively large residual force will be necessary to preserve security and credibility.
A president obviously can defy that conventional wisdom and "order" a withdrawal. But the realities on the ground, in Baghdad and Washington, will push the new commander-in-chief to establish a more collegial give and take. After all, the new president will be seen as protector of the armed forces and their honor: Otherwise he or she will not be elected.
Floating between the two extremes is Hillary Clinton, most closely aligned with national security conventional wisdom and ready, she says, to consult with the military "from day one" to hear their views on a plan for a residual force. What's more, as a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Clinton has earned a reputation for being concerned about military readiness and its political impact.
Obama and McCain are of course on the readiness bandwagon. But the tone of of their positions on Iraq -- Obama in favor of the "precipitous" withdrawal in 2009 and seemingly oblivious to American military honor in his withdrawal timetable; McCain equally oblivious to the hurt and limitations of the American military in his victory and never-surrender zeal -- makes Clinton the more attractive candidate in the new real world.
According to the Pew Research Center, nearly half of Americans (47 percent) now think that if things continue to go well in Iraq, the U.S. should keep its troops there for the time being. A year ago, 53 percent favored rapid withdrawal vs. 42 percent who favored keeping the troops in Iraq. According to a recent Gallup poll, 43 percent of Americans think the surge has improved the situation; in July 2007, only 22 percent thought that.
To be fair to Obama, his residual-force proposal, even with a promised withdrawal, is only slightly different than that of Clinton. The question, then, is who would be a more responsible potential commander-in-chief. Here the 3 a.m. phone call, the readiness of the president "on day one," Obama's pledge to talk without precondition with America's adversaries and his supposed zeal for a unilateral strike in Pakistan -- they all hurt.
On the other hand, if Iraq and national security are not issues for voters in November, maybe the issue of who is commander-in-chief will be less central, change will again surge, and Clinton will be seen as the Washington candidate.
But Clinton will not be running against Obama in the general election. The success of her surge is now.
By William M. Arkin | March 5, 2008; 8:25 AM ET Election 2008 , Iraq Previous: Global Progress, or Global Whack-a-Mole? | Next: The Military and the Next President
that is a winning ticket.
Posted by: idaho resident | March 9, 2008 10:08 PM
The Clintons definitely played the game they are good at. That is being dirty and mud slinging. it is amazing how and where they are able to pull the filth from. But they are the best at it. The Clintons deal with the Canadian government and Mexican government got them NAFTA. Now the Canadians want Hillary in office and not Obama. Hillary could have easily set up this whole thing to throw Obama off. They have people in the Canadian embassy. Those people could have just called Obama's office and said 'We want to talk to your expert on NAFTA, Ay. We will talk privately ay. It is unofficial ay'. Once the meeting is setup, they just ask one question about NAFTA and then create an internal memo as if Obama is faking is stance. Well Hillary knows how it is done, since she was the one who gave the Canadians her copy of the Karl Rowe playbook. By the way as a side note, 100% of the Karl Rowe playbooks that were printed were bought by the Clinton library. And the Clinton library is accessible only to the Clintons.
Posted by: Cliff from New York | March 7, 2008 5:54 AM
Hillary's win in Texas and Ohio can not be attributed to her ability or leadership skills. It is puurely dirty politics. If she was a soccer player, she would have been shown the red card long time ago, and will be off the playing field. But her game is more akin to the hockey. The referee watches two players punch each other to death, and when one of them is bloddied enough gets to go and sit out for a few minutes. Well her style of politics is the one that is played in most third world countries, where the politicians have no backbone, and they align themselves with whomever and whatever they can align with to stay in power. Now is that the type of leader we want for this country. During the primaries in Texas and Ohio, Hillary has shown her waved her right hand in front of the people while her left hand dipped into their pocket and stole their wallet. A con artist, a pickpocket. Texans and Ohioans gave their vote to Hillary thinking what she was saying was right. But her camp had approached the Canadians first to tell them that she is going to have some rhetoric that they should not worry about. Then comes out and puts the blame on Obama before he could figure that out. This is dirty politics by all means.
The question is do we want Hillary Clinton in the white house for the next 4 or 8 years fooling the American public and making deals with foreign governments for her own political survival. Well, if we think it is okay, then this country can be ruled easily by people like Saddam or the likes of Castro. We have to see dirty politics for what it is and nip it in the bud. That is possible during the primaries. If we make the wrong choice in the primaries, we are stuck with that choice for the next 4 years or even 8 years.
Posted by: Joe Strossenberg | March 7, 2008 5:36 AM
Hillary will bounce back, just as McCain did. The Clinton campaign was completely blindsided by Obama's success.
Now the real race will begin between these two camps, you might call it 'overtime'. I pray that they won't bloody each other up to much (and look like Steve Nash did) in last year's OT game!
Posted by: The Rev | March 6, 2008 2:50 PM
Posted by: The Rev | March 6, 2008 2:41 PM
All those Obama voters who say they won't vote for Hillary should be ashamed of themselves. They're like those Nader supporters who put Bush in office and claimed there were no differences between Bush and Gore.
I support Hillary but will vote for the Democratic nominee, whoever it is, because the real differences between Obama and Clinton are so small.
If you're deluded about that, read this. http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/3/1/115458/5190
Posted by: TL | March 6, 2008 2:19 PM
I will not vote for Hillary!! A hot debate about this news is taking place in the forum of Richromances.com where celebrities and wealthy singles connected''''''
Posted by: Mark | March 6, 2008 9:24 AM
Hillary is playing a losing game for no purpose other than to serve her overblown sense of martyred entitlement. Her only path to the nomination is through the superdelegates, who appear unpersuaded by her 100-delegate gap behind Obama. Her ruthless ambition is crystallized in her vow to seat the Florida and Michigan delegations. Thank God, Howard Dean finally laid down the law on Hillary's circus today, saying, "Changing the rules halfway through the game is incredibly unfair to both of those candidates and frankly would split the Democratic Party," he said, "so we're not going to do it."
End of story, Hillary. Get over it.
Posted by: Chris | March 6, 2008 12:34 AM
It's a hell of a call, if you care about the country, at all ... The phone rings at the Obama household at 3 a.m. and it is Hillary on the line.
"Okay, so you won. Can I be your vice presidential running mate?
"You know the slash and burn, hack-type politics expected of the No. 2 person comes naturally to me."
Obama: "Hillary, I said you should believe in hope, not miracles.
Posted by: Martinedwinandersen | March 5, 2008 11:39 PM
==HRC will be ready to hit the ground running on Day One.==
Should you not be embarrassed to repeat, word for word, commercially created political advertisements?
Posted by: Dimitry | March 5, 2008 11:30 PM
==P.S. Those who say they are voting for Obama because he is not "dirty" politics. GET REAL. He is. He is.==
Doctur, you sound positively happy to have "discovered" that all your patients have deep phychoses and shoplift, to boot.
Makes youself feel better about your own little "transgressions", don't it?
Posted by: Dimitry | March 5, 2008 11:27 PM
"There's a world of difference between Clinton's lack of action and Bush's actions. Too bad you can't tell..."
You'd have to be deaf, dumb and blind not to see the difference in the level of action. In the aftermath of 9/11, that's to be expected.
But "level of action" isn't success. If 5 years later we've deployed hundreds of thousands of troops and spent a trillion dollars, you'd think we'd have accomplished something.
Instead, we're praying Iraq keeps heading in the right direction, and we're firing missiles at Al Qaeda in distant mountain hide-outs. Worse off than when we started, in other words.
Too bad you can't tell.
Posted by: | March 5, 2008 10:00 PM
THE REV (GREAT POST). P.S. Those who say they are voting for Obama because he is not "dirty" politics. GET REAL. He is. He is. Don't be deluded. He is what we call in my profession an APD.
Posted by: dr. n | March 5, 2008 9:59 PM
Obama is not ready for the Repuglican attack machine. Beside, have you noticed he looks like J Fred Muggs? HRC will be ready to hit the ground running on Day One. You Go Girl.
Posted by: Harry | March 5, 2008 9:59 PM
Will Hillary kill hope as she enjoys her reinvigorated spoiler role?
Here she is, a tool of the lobbyists, claiming she is the "people's" choice.
Hillary even refuses to release her tax returns for the past two years, which would reveal the source of her sudden wealth.
If Hillary claims experience in foreign affairs, then let her share responsibility for her husband's immoral inaction on Rwanda, when hundreds of millions of black Africans were slaughtered while the Clinton White House refused to act.
(According to the British Guardian newspaper: "President Bill Clinton's administration knew Rwanda was being engulfed by genocide in April 1994 but buried the information to justify its inaction, according to classified documents made available for the first time. ...
"It took Hutu death squads three months from April 6 to murder an estimated 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus and at each stage accurate, detailed reports were reaching Washington's top policymakers." [http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/mar/31/usa.rwanda])
For every comment the Clinton trained seals make about Hillary's favorite target--Rezko--it is important that people remember the reason Jimmy Carter's chief of staff, Hamilton Jordan, called the Clintons our "First Grifters."
Remember their ties to disgraced fugitive financier Norman Hsu?
Remember Bill's supping at the trough of the emir of Dubai?
Speaking of the Middle East, remember Hillary's silence when Yassir Arafat's wife libeled the state of Israel?
Of course, the media bends over trying to accommodate Hillary, today the MSNBC talking heads explained that they have to tread softly because it is hard to criticise a woman.
National security and the fate of the country are apparently tied to some moronic political correctness from a media that did not exactly cover itself with glory when America was about to go to war.
Of course, today's media establishment cares as much about access to the red carpet as anyone else.
The legendary journalist Edward Murrow would have liked Barack Obama, because he also believed, like Obama himself has said, that cynicism is a sorry kind of wisdom.
Posted by: Martinedwinandersen | March 5, 2008 8:53 PM
The bridge to the future, and the future...
Mr. Sullivan it was said, I believe on the Christ Matthews show this past Sunday that the Clintons were the bridge to the future, and that Obama is the future.
If you vote for either one of them, you will not have wasted your vote!
Whatever you do, please stay off of the retrograde bridge to the past. The current administration has shown what it is like when the nation takes a detour back to the neolithic age!
America needs capable and erudite leadership that can solve problems, not create new ones - we have a sufficient amount of problems already that the Republicans simply have not been able to solve!
Posted by: The Rev | March 5, 2008 8:51 PM
Sigh...how about a discussion on if the surge is ACTUALLY working, and what working even means???
People thinking Iraq is "going well" is further proof of the idiocy and asininity of the nation which elected Bush twice.
Posted by: crissyo | March 5, 2008 8:46 PM
//Yes, that limp-wristed Clinton, firing missiles at Al Qaeda in the mountains of Afghanistan. Not like our stout W, firing missiles at Al Qaeda in the mountains of Pakistan.\\
There's a world of difference between Clinton's lack of action and Bush's actions. Too bad you can't tell...
Posted by: Plainfacto | March 5, 2008 8:31 PM
America's "national security consensus" is a consensus of madmen.
It's a bunch of lunatics, collectively agreeing to remain insane.
Posted by: Kevrobb | March 5, 2008 8:01 PM
Yes, that limp-wristed Clinton, firing missiles at Al Qaeda in the mountains of Afghanistan. Not like our stout W, firing missiles at Al Qaeda in the mountains of Pakistan.
With 1000x times the incentive, and 1,000,000x the expense, W is back where we started before 9/11 -- except now we have to rebuild a dysfunctional state that prefers religious civil war.
We are "pot committed" in Iraq, as they say in poker, but as a terror strategy, invading that country always was dangerous, dumb and delusional. Anyone who can't admit that doesn't have a brain.
Posted by: Laughing | March 5, 2008 7:57 PM
I generally don't care for long blogs, but Patrick Sullivan's comments on this page were extremely well written.
Obama's campaign did excite me for the first time in years. Particularly after we elected George Bush the second time, I just thought I was outside the mainstream. "Hey, if that's what America wants, that's what it should get." It wasn't like anyone hid the ball. We voted him in, war(t)s and all.
Then Obama came along and captured the hopes and dreams of millions who had given up on dreaming we could do better. I don't think any of us see him as a hero or a god (as some have blogged), but someone who said it was okay to reach for the stars. To look at issues with an open mind and concerned heart.
I'm fully aware that when you reach high, there is a risk of falling down. But I certainly thank him for giving us that feeling that we can see things and believe they can be better. I respect Senator Clinton mightily, but a unique opportunity still exists. May the best candidate emerge victorious.
Posted by: | March 5, 2008 7:43 PM
I generally don't care for long blogs, but Patrick Sullivan's response on this article was extremely well done.
The Obama candidacy also excited me for the first time in years. After GW Bush got elected the second time, I just figured I was outside the mainstream. Hey, if that's what America wants, that's what it should get. Nobody hid the ball there, and America voted him in again...war(t)s and all.
Maybe America doesn't want real change. In Ohio, I felt like people didn't want change, they wanted a job. And if they had a job, they wanted a more secure job.
In my opinion, Hillary would be a competent president. But there's a chance for so much more. Frankly, there's a risk in reaching even higher. Sometimes you fall down. But there's a unique opportunity in Obama that millions aren't going to give up on yet. And I certainly can't blame someone without a job, or who fears for their job, to vote for Ms. Clinton. The economy was good during Bill Clinton's presidentcy. But a lot of that was the Internet explosion. For once, I'd like us to ask for even more.
Posted by: Well Done Patrick | March 5, 2008 7:31 PM
Remember the days of Bill Clinton's presidency? I sure do. Terrorist attacks upon the US with a limp-wrist response from good ol' Billy Boy.
I doesn't make an iota of difference who will be in the White House, what appeasing change in foreign policy they establish, or where we station our troops. I cannot remember a president who kept his campaign promises, with the exception of Reagan. He didn't keep all of his - either...
We all want to see a return of the good ol'days. How will people react when they realize that may well be over. To put it another way: would you like some cracked pepper on your dog-eat-dog world?
I think Hilary cheated Obama in Ohio and got away with it. Obama doesn't want to make the claim because he doesn't want to appear as slinging more mud in the democrat's mud bath. IMHO, he might as well - at least he would be honest...
Posted by: Plainfacto | March 5, 2008 6:59 PM
has repeatedly praised Ms. Clinton in all of her compentecies, as well as for her hard-work ethic.
Hillary has reached across the aisle, and she has been very succesful working with the less demagogic Republicans, just as Dimity has pointed out.
She will be the conccensus-builder and uniter that her predcessor was supposed to have been. She also has the requisite ability and understanding to manage every aspect of the office of President, including the ability to manage a 'necessary war'!
Neither one of the other candidates even comes close!
Posted by: The Rev | March 5, 2008 6:56 PM
...during the Clinton presidential years argued that Hillary knew better, was smarter and was telling President Clinton what to do. And now that she is a front-runner in the presidential race, they are trying to say that she doesn't know anything!
They can't have it both ways. Of the three, McCain, Obama or Clinton, she is what the world needs, not only today, but in the future. Getting the troops out of Iraq is only one thing, keeping them out of unnecessary wars in the future is more critical.
Clinton is the president of the future who will reform America's venal and reckless foreign policy. If Obama were to become the President tomorrow, he would have to turn to the Clintons for help and guidance.
And that is just one more reason why Hillary needs to be president. Senator McCain admits that his whole reason for wanting to be President is so that he can protect America.
Okay, he can have Donald Rumsfelds old job. What the American mysognists are afraid of is that a female President will be the start of a new trend in Washington DC. Women are the majority in this nation and it is time that they run this nation!
It is time for a course change, again, men have screwed this country up for over the past 232 years, and enough is enough!
Posted by: The Rev | March 5, 2008 6:46 PM
Bill Clinton, Oct. 2004: "One of Clinton's laws of politics is, if one candidate is trying to scare you, and the other one is trying to make you think, if one candidate's appealing to your fears, and the other one's appealing to your hopes. You better vote for the person who wants you to think and hope."
Posted by: Frank | March 5, 2008 6:02 PM
"The consensus position of the national security establishment, and the position of the American military, is that drawdowns have to continue, but some sort of relatively large residual force will be necessary to preserve security and credibility."
that is biggest crock i have ever heard. what has the established wisdom done for amercian security recently? not much. the conventional wisdom was supporting dictators is a great idea. the cw is that supporting the taliban against the soviets was good. that supporting sadam against iran was good. does anybody think that supporting the shah worked out well for us in the long run. the idea that we need to sacrifice the lives of soldiers for "military honor" is absurd. you know how we are keeping the peace in iraq? segregation and bribes. spare me conventional wisdom because really thats just a farce.
Posted by: uclazy31 | March 5, 2008 5:28 PM
To Steve who wrote "I would challenge any of HilLIARy's supporters to tell us what SHE really stands for. Not something she says she stands for but something HER record shows she stands for. By the way, did she really LIE about Obama sending people to Canada to let them know everything with NAFTA would be ok after the election?"
Hillary didn't have to say anything. The Obama camp hung THEMSELVES on that one. WHy don't you ask to see their memo on it? Afraid you'll find out you've been following a fake? Don't drink the Kool-Aid!
Posted by: zlm | March 5, 2008 5:11 PM
There is more action afoot to ruin the democratic party. The Canadian Prime Minister is under attack for trying to influence the democratic election by leaking information the eve of the March 4th vote. Too bad he neglected to mention the republican donations to his campaign that totalled over $1+ million to get him elected.
Posted by: Watchful | March 5, 2008 5:01 PM
FOOLS! That is what Obama supporters are. For all of you who think Rush asking Republicans to vote Hillary to keep her in actually worked. Republicans did vote in the Dem election. 9% in TX- but 53% of those votes went to Obama. So if anything the Republicans helped Obama not lose by as much as he would have. VOTE HILLARY!
Posted by: Jill | March 5, 2008 3:51 PM
FOOLS! That is what Obama supporters are. For all of you who think Rush asking Republicans to vote Hillary to keep her in actually worked. Republicans did vote in the Dem election. 9% in TX- but 53% of those votes went to Obama. So if anything the Republicans helped Obama not lose by as much as he would have. VOTE HILLARY!
Posted by: Jill | March 5, 2008 3:49 PM
Someone said they didn't know what Barack stood for.
Tell you what - I know what he does NOT stand for - Lies and dirty politics. That's good enough for me.
Posted by: Ingrid | March 5, 2008 3:30 PM
If Hillary Clinton's experience qualifies her to be President, what does Monica Lewinski's experience qualify her for, the Secretary of State? This last week has recalled for me why I felt relief at the end of the Clinton presidency. The Clintons are political animals, this country and indeed the world cries out for leaders who can steady the ship and speak to a troubled world in a calm voice. But it seems that many believe that a shrill and strident Hillary Clinton is the right person to succeed the shrill and strident George Bush. You may remember that before there was Rove, there was Carville (the "I will not piss down his throat if his heart was afire" Carville).
We are rightfully proud of our values but we keep offering political space to the worst this country has to offer. Talk of doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.
If Clinton is nominated, this left-leaning independent will sit out the election or vote for McCain.
Posted by: Bewildered in Boston | March 5, 2008 3:29 PM
I would challenge any of HilLIARy's supporters to tell us what SHE really stands for. Not something she says she stands for but something HER record shows she stands for. By the way, did she really LIE about Obama sending people to Canada to let them know everything with NAFTA would be ok after the election?
Posted by: To Steve | March 5, 2008 3:26 PM
And by the way..the economy was great when bill CLinton WASI N THE WHITEHOUSE. OBAMA has alligned himself with some negative radical people and people are questioning that. Many Hillary voters will NOT vote for OBAMA if he is on the ticket. The votes will go to McCain. It makes me sick to think that someone who calls a minister like an "uncle" ...is affiliated with this man who gave Faracon an award and commended his greatness. the man who called white people the "skunks of the earth" and Jews THE DIRTIEST RELIGION. His wife (OBAMA'S) WAS SHOWN ON YOU TUBE SAYING "I AM HEAR TO INTRODUCE MY HUSBAND..but first let me say "if hillary can't control her family she can't control the white house.." what a discusting cheap shot..she is no lady...and she won't be a FIRST LADY EITHER. I am very unimpressed iwth Obama's wife....
Posted by: marshmey | March 5, 2008 3:25 PM
Hillary won because more people think she would make a better presidential candidate. I have never seen OBAMA answer a question once ...he talks in circles. Hillary won because she is the best PERSON for the job. Hillary won because the media and OBAMA'S PEOPLE grossly miscalculated how people feel in the US about her...and OBAMA. BOY they must be eating crow...GO HILLARY!!!! She is an inspiration to all women and American's..eat your hearts out. no more excuses.
Posted by: marshmey | March 5, 2008 3:21 PM
Damn, "Rush was Right." (This time.)
Posted by: Vote Obama | March 5, 2008 3:11 PM
I keep hearing people talk about what wonderful candidates the Dems have this election. One lady even said "I would be proud to vote for either...." Well, I wouldn't!
I am hopeful the Democratic party's "powers that be" will end this thing very, very soon. Or Barack quickly and forcefully gets enough delegates to call it a day. Dems are taking sides now and the longer it goes on the larger the danger of a divided Democratic base looms. Again, we shoot ourselves in the foot and everyone just sits back and says....."it's good for the party to continue this battle.....no way.
At this point, I will not vote for Hillary for she is more of the same, and her "dirty tricks" done, in the waning days of yesterday's primaries, did it for me. It makes me feel physically ill to imagine Bill and Hillary back in the Whitehouse again....and I think I am NOT ALONE in feeling this way.
Posted by: Peggy Welch | March 5, 2008 2:19 PM
==-Out of that came the children's health insurance that many benefit from today. Tell all those children to their face that are being helped today or would be dead otherwise that she was a failure.==
But she didn't set out to produce a children's health care legislation - she headed up a taskforce on national health care legislation. Her hard-partisan approach, secrecy and inability to work with others resulted in a crushing defeat of the whole concept for decades to come. Afterwards, others, who could work together, picked up the wreakage and passed children's insurance - largely inspite of H. Clinton's destructive and divisive history.
==Barack could not vote at that time; so who knows if he was presented with that same information that was off limits to him because he was a mere state senator what he would have done. Plus, the vote was for the use of force in the lack of compliance with U.N. inspections not to go to war in Iraq. ==
What is the meaning of "IS", right? Everybody and their brother knew that vote was a vote for WAR. She, along with many other self-serving politicians voted "YES", because she did not want to be accused of not being "TOUGH". The result was a worst national strategic blunder since Vietnam.
Posted by: Dimitry | March 5, 2008 2:16 PM
The Republicans now have their biggest spokeswoman.
Hillary linked arms with McCain on experience.
How smart can you be when you open a can of worms and find you are one of them?
Posted by: Terry | March 5, 2008 2:05 PM
But her record on hard partisan positions has been dismal failure - consider the health care debaucle.
-Out of that came the children's health insurance that many benefit from today. Tell all those children to their face that are being helped today or would be dead otherwise that she was a failure.
Where she did get "things done" was in compromises or alignment with Republicans
-Which is what Barack is saying he will do with Bipartisan support so they are really no different in that aspect. Barack could not vote at that time; so who knows if he was presented with that same information that was off limits to him because he was a mere state senator what he would have done. Plus, the vote was for the use of force in the lack of compliance with U.N. inspections not to go to war in Iraq.
Posted by: Drew | March 5, 2008 1:51 PM
I would challenge any of Obama's supporters to tell us what he really stands for. Not something he says he stands for but something his record shows he stands for. By the way, did he really send people to Canada to let them know everything with NAFTA would be ok after the election? Assuming this is not a rhetorical question the answer can be found here: http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=7A599C51-3048-5C12-00D200E95BA86DED
LOL, so much for Change you can believe in.
Posted by: Drew | March 5, 2008 1:44 PM
==This is where Hillary's experience has taught her that the reality of trying to get things accomplished in Washington requires a fight so that you wind up somewhere in the middle.==
But her record on hard partisan positions has been dismal failure - consider the health care debaucle.
Where she did get "things done" was in compromises or alignment with Republicans - such as her vote for Iraq war and her vote to make military actions against Iran easier.
Posted by: Dimitry | March 5, 2008 1:41 PM
==They just want to beat him badly in the general election.==
Riiiight! That's why all the polls show him beating McCain.
==Except the African Americans, Obama is not supported by anyone in the spectrum.==
Riiiight! That's why he has consistently lead H. Clinton in both popular vote and delegate count (and stil does). It because nobody is supporting him.
Posted by: Dimitry | March 5, 2008 1:38 PM
You folks who think that Barack Obama can make a republican think that we should NOT drill for oil in Alaska, leave the choice of abortions in women's hands, and remove tax cuts for the wealthy to be extended to the middle and lower classes are full of you know what. These things will still be hotly contested in Washington the day he would presumably step in. Bipartisan support my a**. If they all felt the same way about everything we'd have just one party anyway, DUH! If you think the insurance and pharmaceutical industries won't put up a fight when he tries to pass his healthcare plan you are living in the dark. His plan is starting out in the middle where Hillary's will actually end up. His plan will end up going nowhere because he is starting out in the middle. By the time the insurance and healthcare industries nibble it to death that is. That's why we need a fighter who knows how to wager with these people who have opposite interests in mind. This is where Hillary's experience has taught her that the reality of trying to get things accomplished in Washington requires a fight so that you wind up somewhere in the middle. Not starting out in the middle so that you wind up nowhere! This is why it's also important for people to remember to vote for Democrats in Congress not just the President so that there will be less of a fight and more things get accomplished with the interest of the ordinary, everyday man at heart instead of big business and the wealthy elite.
Posted by: Drew | March 5, 2008 1:36 PM
I am glad to see some even reporting from the press not finding fault in Senator Cllinton's every speech. I also appreciate the publishing comments from both Senator Clinton and Senator Obama supporters in an even matter. It is up to the candidates not only to demonstrate their policies but to point out weaknesses in their opponent. We will more likely have the right democratic candiate at the end as long as the elected delegates make the choice as opposed to appointed Super Delegates from the National Pary.
Posted by: H Pratt | March 5, 2008 1:22 PM
Hillary Clinton keeps on emphasizing her experience and recently started claiming that she has the solutions to America's problems. Solutions to what exactly? The economy? What experience does she speak of? She has the answers to the subprime morgage mess? All in all, the experience she is alluding to is that her husband, not her own. The only reason, she is a Senator is because of Bill Clinton's popularity and influence. Can Michael Jordan's [ex] wife claim that she is an expert at the game of basketball due to her association with MJ? If that is the case, then anyone who has closely follow his playing career can make the same claim and go after top coaching gigs in the NBA. The truth of the matter is the job of the president is not to DO, but to inspire, to movitate and manage; to get things done, in a nutshell, to provide much needed leadership. Anyone can become president. However, to be an effective leader, one needs to be able to reach across party lines and get representatives behind your vision. In that aspect, Obama and McCain can deliver; Hillary cannot. She is and had been a polarizing figure and will not get much done. She's beholden to special interest groups and will keep the status quo. Funny thing is that I use to support her (well I was a fan of Bill, say what you want I'd rather have a "relaxed" prez who is trying to get his groove on than a cranky one looking for wars and senselessly risking the lives of our poor soldiers, while enriching the pockets of his friends at the expenses of the taxpayers).
Posted by: | March 5, 2008 1:17 PM
I would challenge any of Obama's supporters to tell us what he really stands for. Not something he says he stands for but something his record shows he stands for. By the way, did he really send people to Canada to let them know everything with NAFTA would be ok after the election?
Posted by: Steve | March 5, 2008 1:11 PM
But you forgot that the Republicans are not voting for Obama, because they like him. They just want to beat him badly in the general election. Except the African Americans, Obama is not supported by anyone in the spectrum.
Posted by: KAM | March 5, 2008 1:11 PM
==If not, Mrs. Clinton is our best choice.==
She is definitely the best choice for President McCain.
You forget how polarizing she will be in a general election. Many Democrats don't like the Clintons, but ALL republicans hate them.
On the other hand, many Republicans have voted for Obama in the primaries and he consistently outperforms H. Clinton in national polls against McCain.
Posted by: Dimitry | March 5, 2008 1:06 PM
I was deeply dissapointed in Hillary for resulting to scare tatics. It makes me not want to vote for her if by some remote chance that she gets the nomination.
Posted by: Remona | March 5, 2008 1:06 PM
We'd better all get used to President McCain
Posted by: | March 5, 2008 1:04 PM
So far, Hillary's successes came because of using racism, sexism and fear on the Democratic electorate in working class demographics.
She is scaring Hispanics with Obama's race.
She is appealing to gender-identity politics and victimization with female voters.
She is using Rovian fear-mongering to scare voters away from Obama, based on her dubious national security credentials.
Her tactics may secure her the nomination through a back room deal at the convention, but it will severely decrease Democratic turnout at the general election. To people who do not vote based on fear, racism or gender, her behaviour would forever taint her as a potential presidential candidate. Surely there isn't too many of us around, say 20%, but that is generally enough to decide the outcome of a Presidential election.
In a nutshell, by winning the nomination the only way she now can, she will loose about 20% of the votes in the general election. Independents will swing Republican or sit out the election. Young Obama supporters will be no show.
Posted by: Dimitry | March 5, 2008 1:02 PM
I am a life-long democrat, never voted for any Republicans. I am ashamed to see the tactics of Obama and his surrogates. To me Mr Obama is a person driven by ego, but no substance. An Empty, hollow suit. Take the facts. Mr. Obama won the caucuses. Big deal! If you have few activists, you can easily won the caucuses. Working people don't have time to spend that many hours for caucuses. They need to take care their own family. Mrs. Clinton won most of the primaries. She won most of the blue states. It shows only one thing. The real democrats, supports her. NOT the anti-Clinton group, that now supports Mr. Obama. These people will support Obama now, but will leave him in the street during the general election. According to the polls, people who make more than $100,000, support Obama. How many of them are really democrats? Very few. These are all Republicans, trying to play the game. Mr. Obama is not ready to become the president. He need to learn humilty, and learn to work with people. As some one else mentioned before, the only reason he became Senator, because his opponent was Alan Keyes. The day he became tthe senator, he started running for President. The states he won, for example, Kansas and South Carolina, will he win in general election? No way. If he is candidate, not only, the democrats will lose Whitehouse, but will lose Senate and congress, because the true democrats will stay home. It is time for the democratic leadership to take a deep look and understand the democrats, other than driven by some ego. It may be best to recruit Al Gore as the President and John Edwards as the VP. If not, Mrs. Clinton is our best choice.
Posted by: KAM | March 5, 2008 12:59 PM
This is simple: The most important thing is for the Republicans in DC to be removed from power. Every day they run this country further into the ground on behalf of the greedy rich & powerful. Last I heard Hillary's 'negative' rating was around 40%. That would leave McCain needing just over 1/6 of the remaining voters to win, while Hillary would need over 5/6 of the remaining voters. This is simple arithmetic - a Hillary candicacy means a Republican president and a continuation of the Bush disaster.
Posted by: BobGil | March 5, 2008 12:57 PM
Thank you for your article.
I fully concur, Hillary Clinton is the best person for the job at the current situation.
Also, I have yet to see any data that shows Obama has a better chance than Hillary against McCain. There is no such statistical trend. I believe that democrats are much better off to vote for the quality.
Posted by: Meg | March 5, 2008 12:47 PM
Clinton needs to give up. She is not a fighter. She is a self-interested, self-serving politician. If she really cared about the Democratic party, she would drop out now instead of prolonging the primary which she has no mathematical chance of winning. The only way she could possibly win is if the superdelegates give her the nomination at the convention. Or if she keeps whining about FL and MI. This is something that Obama supporters will NOT stand for. And by the way, it does not matter whether she won a couple of big states in a primary because the Democrats in those states will vote for the Democratic candidate, there arent going to switch parties just because she is not going to be the nominee.
Posted by: Jurisdoctor | March 5, 2008 12:44 PM
This guy has no clue about leadership.
If he is not lying to the public about his poistion on NAFT, why doesn't he fire his strategic manager or polititical advisor who went into Canadian consulate in Chicago and told what BO 's poistion on NAFTA is???
Probably BO is a creation of some gangs behind the scene (democratic party) to excite all young people, though they knew this guy is not yet ready to lead this great country. He is a good empty bag in a suite.
Posted by: Dasa | March 5, 2008 12:43 PM
Hillary Clinton didn't win votes on a "surge," but on voters understanding that the Clintons as a team can help get the US out of this economic mess. Both Ohio and Texas voters understand what you have failed to understand, Mr. Arkin, i.e. the economy will always guide people's votes. As we go into recesssion, the more Hillary will gravitate to someone who can make a difference not empty promises like Barack Hussein Obama.
Posted by: Aaron | March 5, 2008 12:43 PM
Clinton was expected to win TX and OHIO. The fact is Obama closed the gap in TX and won the delegates he needs to win. Ohio is a take all state so no point in campaigning hard there. The Clinton campaign did a brilliant 4 day media PERCEPTION blitz starting with Bill Clinton saying if she wins TX and OH she will be the nominee. Mathematically, that isnt possible, but the media jumped on it. Then, Jack Nickelson put a high profile ad for her on youtube. She also put in appearances on SNL and Jon Stewart. Then they created the Canada/Nafta "scandal" which the Canadian govt has scoffed at and denied ever even happened. Then they created the Rezko scandal, which is unrelated to Obama, and they squashed the lawsuit against Hilary in LA for hiding campaign contributions. And that stupid 3 am ad as well. And, she showed up at polling places on election day while Obama was at a rained out Rodeo?! Obama's campaign never saw it coming. And if Clinton has any advantage, it is the experience of using the media to manipulate public perception. The truth: Obama closed the gap in Texas, as he was trying to do, he let Ohio go because it's a delegate take all state and there was no way he could beat Clinton there, and he won Vermont, also as expected. Clinton won RI, as expected. Nothing has changed, except the media's bias. Obama needs to start using the media, instead of running from it. They are beginning to resent his not being available and not giving them juicy phrases like the Clinton dynasty feeds them. Wake up Obama campaign. If the Clinton campaign has an advantage, it is the "experience" of working the media to their advantage.
Posted by: | March 5, 2008 12:37 PM
The war only goes as well as the political situation goes. If Moqtada al Sadr waits until October to end his agreement to keep his forces in line, and the bloodshed starts recurring, I think you'd find that the electorate will have a very different take on how well the war is going.
And this is Obama's point - the political process is what needs to hold. You cannot have conditions where humanitarian aid can step in to help the millions of refugees unless the factions agree to stop shooting at each other and anyone who is not Iraqi. They don't even SEE themselves as Iraqis, as one nation. They see themselves as Baath, Mahdi Army, Sunni, Shia, etc.
The only question is how do we make the political process hold. And whose approach do you agree with? Staying there is not economically feasible, no matter how you slice it, especially in light of the crises with the sub-prime mortgages and the weakening dollar, which is under attack from Iran, Venezuela, and others. 100 years is not the answer.
Posted by: Charlene-K | March 5, 2008 12:35 PM
If Barack wants the nomination lets see if he can win a blue state in an actual primary election, not a caucus. So far he's not doing well in states with demographics similar to the nation. Secondly, lets put it right out there today, Obama people, listen up! You can not win the election without the Hillary supporters, I suspect the reverse is also true. The positions of the candidates on actual issues are virtually the same. The Obama difference is his hope and "bipartisan" promise. The HRC supporters all want to know what his plan B is.
So far there has been nothing that would be considered negative in this election campaign when compared to previous elections. The general election will should much more negative and, dare we say lying, attacks on the cangidates. Someone will say Obama is a muslim and the mainstream media will give it equal coverage with his denial. There will be stories of "is there anything to this". Racial and religious swift boating. How will Obama deal with this? More importantly, how will his supporters?
Posted by: Ed Mahan | March 5, 2008 12:24 PM
Hillary Clinton won because people are really paying attention to what Barack Obama can really bring to the table and what experience does he have to prove things will get done in the white house. I do respect him and admire him. He really inspires people. However, at this point in time our country needs someone who has more knowledge, experience, and has been exposed to events that will make that person more capable to get things done. That person is Hillary R. Clinton. Respect and positive recognition of this nation around the world will come once again when we prove to the world what have a leader who will make the right decisions, our economy improves, and our nation prospers.
Posted by: LEO | March 5, 2008 12:20 PM
Food for thought for my fellow democrats.....
Obama = Inspirational & Idealistic McCain = War Hero & Status Quo Clinton = Politica as usual but Fighter
If Obama can't finish Hillary after 12 lop-sided wins his candidacy and capaign have a problem. Check this out.
1. When a candidate says that phone-ad is fear mongering but cannot substantiate with his/her own forcefull & positive response, they will be seen as weak. For the Obama fans to call the AD negative is fear mongering imho. The republican (right wing) machine would surely ask 100 times more much tougher questions since they have a war hero (Obama's valuation of Mccain) as their candidate. If Obama fails this forget the election in NOV.
2. Obama is inspirational but far from being a change candidate. His senate record or whatever experience doesn't prove that he actually went across the isle to get positive agenda implemented. Clinton even for arguments sake say did not do much either but she fought for democratic principles. In a idealistic world, Obama might work but in the dirty world of politics you need to play dirty and fight to fulfill your agenda.
3. Obama wins red states and has more cross-over appeal. Gimme a break. Except for Missouri (Clinton won every county in that state except for St.Louis) which red-state is in play for the democrats practically speaking. With McCain there is a risk that New Jersey and Calif might be in play for Republicans if Obama is the candidate (even with the bumper African-American vote). The reason is simple, he can lure the independents and low-income white along with traditional republicans. Clinton won the big blue states handily and more importantly won Ohio, Florida(arguable) & New Mexico (probable) the true bellweather states. Let me not even get into the caucus and non-caucus states discussion. Out of Obama's 22+ wins, 13 are caucuses and general election will not be a caucus. Activists and youth vote are the bane for a caucus and the same count very little for the outcome in November.
4. Likability factor: The republican and Independent support that Obama is drawing now will evaporate if Hillary is the nominee because she is polarizing is a stupid argument because, it has already evaporated with Mccain being a maverick. Obama is no sure-shot with that support when pitted against towering Mccain. I think the sisterhood & fighter in Hillary is a better bet to handle Mccain. What more new dirst can they fling at Hillary or Bill. But with Obama, they could define him as in-experienced or speeched-only guy. If Hillary can stick it with obama on that front, think about Republican machine.
I think a Clinton/Obama(as VP) ticket would not only provide a favourable argument of National Security & Experience but also inspire African-American and youth vote. Its a forgone conclusion that Obama cannot have clinton as VP since the premise of his candidacy is anti-washington-insider (though he is one imo)
Just my 2 cents Don
Posted by: Don | March 5, 2008 11:57 AM
Posted by: Lisa | March 5, 2008 11:42 AM
This is pretty shrewd political analysis from a national security expert.
Most of the people who do campaign analysis for a living have missed this aspect of the race on the Democratic side, though they have noticed that the reduction in violence in Iraq has helped the "surge's" greatest champion, McCain. Of course, since McCain brings this up in every speech, it would be hard to miss the impact of Iraq on his candidacy.
What McCain has argued is that as American casualties in Iraq go down, public opposition to the American presence there will go down as well; if no Americans get killed there in the next hundred years, the American public would be fine with having troops there for the next hundred years. Though this is an exaggeration for effect, McCain is basically right. He's gained politically by the American public's decreased focus on the war. But Clinton has too, because she's had to appeal to Democrats whose biggest gripe against her was her vote -- politically expedient at the time, which was why she cast it -- in favor of authorizing force in Iraq.
Less attention to Iraq means less attention to that vote. Since Democratic primary voters are inclined to vote on domestic policy issues anyway, this strengthens Clinton's candidacy in what had been its greatest weakness against Obama. He can still use Iraq against her, but it doesn't pack the same wallop as an issue that it did a few months ago.
Posted by: Zathras | March 5, 2008 11:23 AM
I don't want Hillary anywhere near the white house, in any way, shape or form.
Obama needs someone more uplifting for a running mate.
Posted by: maurice donnay | March 5, 2008 11:00 AM
Hillary has put in thirty years of working and speaking on behalf of the civic values I hold dear. She knows and has worked with hundreds, probably thousands, of people with expertise across a wide spectrum. I KNOW the quality of person she will appoint to work with her. Despite my admiration for Barack, at this point I can only hope--I don't know--that he would appoint such people.
Hillary has worked on issues such as health care and child poverty. Her professional and political resumes are fleshed out; they are studded with verifiable accomplishments. In political terms, Barack is still a neophyte. He has been a US Senator for four years, and I know of no legislation he has sponsored, or issue with which his name is associated as an agent of change.
This election is a watershed moment, and not just because Hillary and Barack are so unique in our political history. There is too much to undo, to repair, too much to accomplish in the next few years. With these stakes, I can't in conscience experiment and put my dearly-loved country in the hands of someone who, though I believe he shares my values and would do his utter best, is untried and untested on this large a stage.
I want Barack to be President someday. But I want Hillary to be President next year.
Posted by: Frances Farrell-Bergeron | March 5, 2008 10:28 AM
It is a good thing that Hillary stay in this race. The voice of America will be heard. The Obama camp, nor the Media will be sending her away, or shutting her up!
Hillary remains the assertive woman, and we admire that the most.
Posted by: electress | March 5, 2008 10:26 AM
As a liberal Democrat I can't stand politicians who will say or do anything to get elected: that's Clinton, starting with her carpet-bagger campaign in New York state.
Attacking a candidate for eloquence is America at it's worst. What a disappointment. For the first time ever I'll say this: I'd rather vote for Nader than Hilary.
Posted by: Jimc | March 5, 2008 10:16 AM
Posted by: Hillary_getting_screwed_by_Barack | March 5, 2008 10:16 AM
Your comments really touched me. Thank you so much for writing such an eloquent reason why Hilary Clinton's "victory" was indeed pyrrhic for the Democratic party and for the American people. It speaks to the triumph of fear and negativity. I am really disappointed in her tactics as well...And how will she realistically "heal" the party after all of her damage? I shudder to think.
I too will keep campaigning for Barack Obama.
Posted by: Malaika | March 5, 2008 10:16 AM
Reality Check. Barack has the delegate votes. Hilary doesn't. The attacks and distortions will continue.
Posted by: thebob.bob | March 5, 2008 10:14 AM
Gee, you whiners sure are long winded. American voters are questioning Obama now. Should have been done long ago. If you take away everything Clinton said you still have a guy who has done nothing, nada, zip. Kumbaya is over.
Posted by: vicsmith | March 5, 2008 10:06 AM
"...the situation on the ground has improved..."
What a truly ignorant thing to say.
Our troops are hunkered down in the secure bases (not so secure really) watching rented Blockbuster videos and munching BK burgers or CiniBonn sticks while the B-2 airstrikes soften up intransigent urban areas and civilian population. (soften... like to to pink bloody mush soften) and the casualty rate for Iraqi security forces is up 30% in the last month.
Posted by: Da' Buffalo | March 5, 2008 9:48 AM
Headline: Clinton Wins, We Lose.
I had not paid much attention to the 2008 Democratic Primary, or any other primary for that matter, before January 3rd. After all, it seemed like it should have been called the 2007-2008 Primary. Then Barack Obama scores an impressive victory and the heir apparent, Hillary Clinton, places third in Iowa.
This peaked my interest and I wanted to find out more about who Barack Obama was. I watched the political talk shows and listened to his speeches and I became even more interested in the Senator from Illinois. After all, the only thing I knew about him was that he made a keynote speech at the last Democratic convention. A lot of what he said at his rallies really made a lot of sense to me and I started thinking that maybe this guy was someone different than the usual politician.
I went out and bought his book The Audacity of Hope, which tells Senator Obama's thoughts on how we can get past our divisions and politics as usual to accomplish what needs to get done to continue to make this country great. I do vote, but prefer not to be registered either Republican or Democrat. I lean towards the Right, having never voted for Bill Clinton and voting twice for George W. Bush.
But after reading Barack Obama's book, I was drawn more to the Left and actually found myself, along with millions of other Americans, truly excited about Obama's candidacy and the outlook of our future through his leadership of bringing America back to a tighter knit community. I became so enthusiastic about the Senator's call for involvement of the American people that I have considered running for a local political office or school board position. He has inspired people to become involved and take action to improve not only our own lives, but that of others. He has created hope for millions that we don't have to put up the same old government and we do not have to stay stuck in the status quo. The critics still claim they are just words.
I am sure that Hillary Clinton is a very nice person and I am sure in her heart she wants to do all that she says she will do. Maybe she will. Being the father of four young daughters, I think Hillary becoming the first female President would only open more doors of opportunity for them and other girls in their generation. But, in the last week I have come to realize why perhaps she shouldn't be our next President.
It is not because of any of her votes in the U.S. Senate. It is not because her unkept promise of 200,000 new jobs in New York State she made during her 2000 Senate campaign. It is not because of the reason she gave Tim Russert of why we have lost 30,000 jobs in New York State since she took office. It is not because of Whitewater and any other dealings she has been scrutinized for in the past. Its not even the fact on national television she lead us to believe she "might release her tax information before today's primaries" and we have yet to see them. None of these are reasons why she shouldn't become the 44th President.
The reason why she should not become our next Commander in Chief is that when she was losing, when her back was up against the wall she did exactly what has become a norm in our society today. She blamed the other guy. She ran negative. After losing eleven consecutive contests in a row and people becoming disinterested in what she had to say about her own qualifications for the job, her campaign became a campaign of fear. Fear of the unknown, fear of Barack Hussein Obama.
I just knew this is how the Clintons would react if they were still behind in the primary when they arrived at their fire wall states, but I did not believe people would actually buy into their fear tactics. I thought this was the year we would finally get beyond that. Unfortunately, I knew I might be wrong when I had lunch with my good friend on this very day.
I mentioned today's primaries and he said he didn't like politics, but he did say that Barack Obama scares him. I asked him why and he said he didn't know, but he just scares him. This is the problem we have today. We are willing to watch hours of an American Idol season seven before we cast our vote for the next idol yet we will cast a vote for the a Presidential candidate who will lead us through the next four, possibly tumultuous years on the basis of a thirty second commercial or sound bite we saw on the evening news.
A campaign of winning at any cost is not the lesson I will be teaching my daughters. I hope for more for my children. Perhaps I have a soft spot for Frank Capra's Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, but I still have hope that this is the year that Jefferson Smith can withstand Senator Joseph Paine's false accusations and someone can stand up to the Clinton, I mean Taylor political machine.
Despite what the pundits might say, I believe that most of us believe that one person truly can make a difference despite tremendous odds. We have seen that repeatedly throughout our great history. I not only hope, but believe with millions of other people, that Senator Barack Obama is the person to make that difference this year for this generation.
Now that Hillary Clinton has won three out of four states tonight, I can hear that Clinton machine revving up to steam roll its way to her the nomination no matter what. Maybe that is best for everyone. That way we can go back to the voting booth and "politics as usual" and perhaps one day one of my daughters can become the first woman President of the United States.
Patrick Joseph Sullivan Upstate New York
Posted by: Patrick Sullivan | March 5, 2008 9:37 AM
Hillary's "victory" is an unfortunate setback for the Democratic agenda. It is great that her supporters can revel in a feminist comeback - triumphing against perceived prejudices that Clinton herself stirred up only in the past few days. It is not so great that a national movement that aims to elect a new Democratic majority has been bludgeoned by personal attacks and innuendo.
It will be up to Obama to rally the people and demonstrate leadership in a difficult hour without responding in Clintonian smear tactics.
Posted by: FLRepublican | March 5, 2008 9:35 AM
Hillary didn't win because people thought her policy positions were better. I've heard her say that she has "very specific plans", but I've yet to hear some real specifics on anything accept healthcare. Another thing, she won this by taking the focus off of her, she won by attacking Obama, not by her own merits. One more thing, in my opinion, Barack can claim victory last night... everyone seems to forget that up until 2 weeks ago, he was down 20 in Ohio and at least 10 in Texas. He gained ground in Ohio, and he only lost by 3% in Texas where the electorate had the largest latino and woman percentage thus far... that's something. It my humble opinion that we raised the bar again on Mrs.Clinton. When her leads are dwindled in her most promising "firewall" states, and we phrase the outcome as if Barack Obama is losing his constituencies... that's ridiculous. As controversial as this may sound, we have set a much higher bar for Sen.Obama and I am proud to be supporting a candidate who does not engage in fear-mongering and runs on his own strengths and ideas rather than condemning those opposed to him. If Hillary gets the nod, I will vote for McCain. People say that's crazy, you'll vote for her... well, I'm going to vote for somebody who can actually get something done in Washington. Hillary has experience... at polarizing opposing forces so much that she could never gain a new majority which is required to bring about any kind of change. John McCain is at least an fair minded Republican, and that's what we want. We're tired of the divisiveness and negative politics that help campaigns and ruin administrations!!! If Hillary decided to change her tone and give me a good reason to vote for her as opposed to blanketting the media with theories as to why I shouldn't vote for Obama, then I could be swayed, but the way she has run her campaign the last few weeks is disgusting and if it continues, she'll ruin the Democratic party.
Posted by: Blake | March 5, 2008 9:04 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.
|
The latest news on computer and network security issues. Visit www.washingtonpost.com/technology.
| 1,012.153846 | 0.615385 | 0.615385 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/05/AR2008030500463.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/05/AR2008030500463.html
|
FBI Chief Confirms Misuse of Subpoenas
|
2008030519
|
Mueller said a forthcoming report from the Justice Department's inspector general will find that abuses recurred in the agency's use of national security letters in 2006, echoing similar problems to those identified in earlier audits.
Inspector General Glenn A. Fine reported a year ago that the FBI used such letters -- which are not subject to a court's review -- to improperly obtain telephone logs, banking records and other personal records of thousands of Americans from 2003 to 2005. An internal FBI audit also found that the bureau potentially violated laws or agency rules more than 1,000 times in such cases.
Mueller testified that a follow-up report from Fine's office, due to be released this month, will "identify issues similar to those in the report issued last March." But Mueller emphasized that the time frame in the report "predates the reforms we now have in place" to avoid further abuses.
"We are committed to ensuring that we not only get this right, but maintain the vital trust of the American people," Mueller said.
At yesterday's hearing, Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) condemned the FBI's "widespread illegal and improper use of national security letters," and urged Mueller to be more attentive to the problem.
"Everybody wants to stop terrorists," Leahy said. "But we also, though, as Americans, we believe in our privacy rights and we want those protected."
A year ago, lawmakers of both parties called for limits on the FBI's use of the security letters, which demand consumer information from banks, credit card companies and other institutions without a warrant as part of investigations into suspected terrorism and espionage. Congress has not followed through with legislation, however, and Mueller sought to assure lawmakers that internal changes will solve the problems. He said new FBI procedures will "minimize the chance of future lapses," including the creation of a compliance office tasked with monitoring the use of security letters.
But Michael German, a former FBI agent who is national security policy counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union, said in a statement that "it's becoming more and more obvious that outside oversight is essential since the Bureau's learning curve is sadly unimpressive."
"Instituting judicial oversight would guarantee that someone would be looking over the shoulder of agents using a tool as invasive as an NSL," German said. The ACLU and other civil liberties groups say the government's use of security letters should be significantly narrowed or brought under court supervision.
Under questioning from Leahy about the Bush administration's controversial use of harsh techniques for interrogating suspected terrorists, Mueller defended the FBI's practice of using "noncoercive" techniques on criminal and terrorism suspects, saying they are "effective and sufficient and appropriate."
Mueller said the FBI's Behavioral Science Unit has found that building trust with prisoners is "particularly effective." He pointed to the FBI's interrogation of Saddam Hussein, which yielded crucial details about the former Iraqi government's actions and motivations.
"Our techniques and the experts that we have . . . believe that our techniques are effective, and are sufficient and appropriate to our mission," Mueller said. "And those techniques are founded on a desire to develop a rapport and a relationship."
President Bush is expected to veto a bill this week that would bar the CIA from using harsh techniques, including waterboarding, a type of simulated drowning.
|
FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III told senators yesterday that agents improperly used a type of administrative subpoena to obtain personal data about Americans until internal reforms were enacted last year.
| 20.8125 | 0.625 | 0.8125 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/04/AR2008030401896.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/04/AR2008030401896.html
|
Cancer Risk Stays After Hormone Therapy
|
2008030519
|
Menopausal women who took estrogen and progesterone faced a small increased risk of cancer for more than two years after they stopped, according to the latest results of a major federal study that has revealed a series of sobering findings about the once-popular hormone therapy.
The study of more than 15,000 women who took the hormones for more than five years found that the chance of developing cancer remained elevated well after they quit, which many did after an earlier stage of the study showed that the risks outweighed the benefits.
While their increased risk of heart attacks, blood clots and strokes appeared to vanish as soon as women stopped taking the drugs, the cancer risk persisted. It appeared to be driven primarily by a continued increased rate of breast cancer but also by a new, unexpected higher risk of other malignancies, such as lung cancer, the analysis found.
"The question has been: Do the risks persist?" said Marcia Stefanick of Stanford University, who chairs the steering committee for the federally funded Women's Health Initiative. "What this clearly shows is, unfortunately, the risk for cancer continues."
Stefanick said the data appeared to show a real trend even though the breast cancer difference was not statistically significant, but other experts warned that the findings could have been the result of chance.
All the same, the findings underscore the now-standard recommendation that women who take hormones to relieve hot flashes and other effects of menopause should use the lowest possible dose for the shortest time, Stefanick said. And the millions of women who have taken the hormones should be monitored closely for cancer, especially breast cancer, she said.
"The important message is women really need to make sure they continue getting their mammograms," she said.
It remains unclear how long the increased risk persists, Stefanick said, and researchers have continued following the women to try to answer that crucial question.
"This says, 'You're not quite safe yet, but let's hope you'll be safe soon,' " she said. It is also unclear whether women who took the hormone combination for shorter periods of time or took estrogen alone face similar ongoing risks.
For years, doctors recommended that women take hormones to alleviate the symptoms of menopause and in the belief that the drugs would protect their hearts. But in 2002, researchers stunned doctors and women when they reported that the Women's Health Initiative found that the hormones actually increased the risk of heart attacks, strokes, blood clots and breast cancer.
At the time, an estimated 8 million American women were taking the estrogen/progestin combination used in the study, and the results soon prompted millions of them to stop. Until the new report, published in today's issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association, no one knew whether the higher risks would continue nevertheless.
The study involved 15,730 postmenopausal women ages 50 to 79 who took estrogen and progesterone for an average of 5.6 years. The researchers analyzed the data for an average of 2.4 years after they stopped and found that the risk of heart disease and blood clots dropped back to a level that is about the same as it is for women who had been taking a placebo. The risk of stroke also appeared to fall, but that finding was somewhat less clear.
The benefits of hormone treatment -- a lower risk of colorectal cancer and bone fractures -- also appeared to dissipate.
But the researchers were surprised to find that the overall risk of cancer was 24 percent higher in women who took hormones, compared with those who took a placebo: 281 of those who used hormones developed some type of cancer, compared with 218 in the placebo group. That appeared to be driven by a 27 percent increased risk of breast cancer, although that difference did not meet a test of statistical significance. There were 79 breast cancers in the hormone group, compared with 60 in the placebo group.
Stefanick said that "breast cancer is really driving" the overall increased cancer risk.
"People were under the impression that once you stop the hormones, your risk for breast cancer goes down," she said. "This is saying, 'No, that's not the case.' It continues. It is bad news."
The findings seem to conflict with a recent report that the rate of new breast cancer cases dropped nationally after the 2002 news about hormones. Stefanick said it could be the result of fewer women starting hormones rather than women quitting them.
Peter M. Ravdin of the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, who reported the falloff in new cancer cases, said the new study's findings could have been the result of chance.
"They just didn't have the statistical power to identify a decrease that we've seen in the population data," Ravdin said. "It's not convincing. All the epidemiological data argues against their results."
Other researchers said they were disturbed that there appeared to be an increased risk for other cancers.
"It is really surprising and unexpected to see more cancers overall after you stop hormone therapy," said Rowan Chlebowski of the Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, who helped run the study. "It is an unsettling thought to think that in the period after you stop hormone therapy, women are at risk for more cancers."
The findings are likely to spur research to try to understand how hormones might increase the risk of other cancers, such as lung cancer, which has not been thought to be fueled by hormones.
"This opens up a new biological question," Chlebowski said.
Other researchers noted that the increased risks found by the new analysis were very small or questionable and worried that the findings might frighten women who really need hormones for a short time.
"I see a lot of patients who are really miserable -- whose interpersonal relationships are harmed, whose careers have suffered," said Hugh S. Taylor of Yale University School of Medicine. "It's a fairly small risk, and when women hear about this, it plays to their fears. I think they are suffering needlessly because of an exaggerated risk."
|
Menopausal women who took estrogen and progesterone faced a small increased risk of cancer for more than two years after they stopped, according to the latest results of a major federal study that has revealed a series of sobering findings about the once-popular hormone therapy.
| 24.244898 | 1 | 49 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/05/AR2008030501053.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/05/AR2008030501053.html
|
Economic Downturn Expands Countrywide
|
2008030519
|
The economic downturn, which started in the handful of states where the housing market was in the worst shape, is spreading to almost every corner of the country and to a wide variety of industries, according to a Federal Reserve report released yesterday.
The trouble is showing up in such disparate ways as weaker demand for staffing services in New England, lower trucking volume in Ohio and surrounding states, and a resistance to spending money on capital projects by financial institutions on the West Coast.
That assessment is based on the "beige book," a compilation of anecdotes from businesses around the country gathered by the Fed's 12 regional banks. The previous report, in the middle of January, found signs of weakness in certain states and industries but described a U.S. economy that was generally holding up.
This time, two-thirds of the Fed's districts described a softening or weakening in the pace of business activity, and the others all referred to subdued, slow, or modest growth.
"The slowing is broad-based," said Julia Coronado, a senior U.S. economist at Barclays Capital. "It's definitely not just a regional issue anymore."
There was some better news about the economy yesterday, though in the current environment, better is a relative concept. An index of business activity at non-manufacturing businesses, based on a survey by the Institute for Supply Management rose to 49.3 in February -- a sharp rise over January but still indicating a contraction in the service sector.
The January reading of 44.6 had stunned analysts and prompted concern that a severe recession could be in the offing; the more modest contraction in February was a relief. "It tells us growth remains sluggish," said Peter Kretzmer, a senior economist at Bank of America. "It's not alarming like last month's number was."
Also yesterday, the Labor Department said the nation's businesses are becoming more productive, as output per hour worked rose at a solid 1.9 percent annual rate in the fourth quarter. But labor costs per unit of output also rose, suggesting some inflation is occurring.
Since the financial markets entered crisis mode in August and the housing market downturn contracted, leaders of the Federal Reserve have been looking for evidence that ordinary businesses were being affected -- not just home builders and Wall Street banks.
The beige book offered that evidence in spades. The business environment for manufacturers was "mixed, but on the whole, subdued," a conclusion underscored by a Commerce Department report yesterday that factory orders fell 2.5 percent in January.
The Fed report described vehicle sales as "slow or sluggish, with little exception." Trucking, shipping, and other transportation services were off. Banks were tightening the availability of credit in most areas, and demand for loans was stable to dropping.
And not only did weakness continue in the residential real estate sector, but it also showed signs of spreading into commercial real estate -- offices, shopping centers, and the like. Among the precious few signs of life in the national real estate market was from the New York Fed, which reported that "Manhattan's co-op and condo market has shown some resilience."
|
The economic downturn, which started in the handful of states where the housing market was in the worst shape, is spreading to almost every corner of the country and to a wide variety of industries, according to a Federal Reserve report released yesterday.
| 13.12766 | 1 | 47 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/04/AR2008030402578.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/04/AR2008030402578.html
|
Government Starts Cutting Sentences Of Crack Inmates
|
2008030519
|
The federal government said yesterday that it has received hundreds of court orders reducing the prison sentences of crack cocaine offenders in the two days since new sentencing guidelines took effect.
A spokeswoman for the Federal Bureau of Prisons could not say how many prisoners have already been released under the U.S. Sentencing Commission's new guidelines, but the bureau has processed about 400 orders modifying prison terms nationwide.
Some activists say the guidelines bring a much-delayed sense of equity, but the Bush administration asserts that they will result in the release of violent criminals.
More than 3,000 crack offenders are eligible for release within the year, according to an analysis by the U.S. Sentencing Commission. The commission modified a 100 to 1 ratio disparity between sentences meted for crack and powder cocaine possession, saying that it was unfair because the drugs are virtually the same.
The Bush administration opposed the U.S. Sentencing Commission's decision to make the new guidelines retroactive for inmates currently serving sentences for crack cocaine crimes. Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey said that crack offenders would clog the courts with petitions requesting a release, and that "violent criminals" would eventually be returned to the streets.
Mukasey and other Justice Department officials asked Congress to block the commission's decision in several meetings of the House and Senate judiciary panels, but lawmakers declined to act.
As early as January, inmates started filing motions for sentence modifications. Judges reviewed the motions and notified federal prosecutors and public defenders that their petitions were being considered.
In the Eastern District of Virginia, which has the largest number of crack cocaine convictions and nearly 2,000 inmates who are eligible for release within the next year, one federal public defender, Michael Nachmanoff, said he submitted petitions for the release of 16 clients, one of whom was freed as of yesterday.
A D.C.-based activist group, Families Against Mandatory Minimums, issued the names of four people who were released in Florida and California, including Natasha J. Marshall, 48, who walked out of Victorville Federal Correctional Complex on Monday.
"It was a beautiful day," Marshall said. A friend, Kathy Harden, picked her up outside the prison gate near San Bernardino, Calif., and Marshall, who served nearly 11 years of a 15-year sentence for possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine, said she was overjoyed because "I could hug my friend, and she didn't have to go one way, and I didn't have to go another. I could go with her."
The Sentencing Commission joined federal judges, public defenders, probation officers and activists in condemning the sentencing disparity because of cases such as Marshall's. She was arrested with her husband, Archie, a drug dealer, in August 1996 and convicted, she said, even though she never touched the drugs or counted the money he earned from dealing it.
"We had been married a long time before he got involved," she said. Marshall was unaware of the sentencing disparity or that a sentence for possessing or distributing crack can be increased if a gun is present at the time of arrest, no matter who it belongs to.
|
The federal government said yesterday that it has received hundreds of court orders reducing the prison sentences of crack cocaine offenders in the two days since new sentencing guidelines took effect.
| 18.75 | 1 | 32 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/celebritology/2008/03/easing_diddys_transition_to_th.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030519id_/http://blog.washingtonpost.com/celebritology/2008/03/easing_diddys_transition_to_th.html
|
Easing Diddy's Transition to the Left Coast
|
2008030519
|
Earlier this week Sean "Puffy" "P.Diddy" Combs announced he was shopping for homes on the West Coast. In an interview with AllHipHop.com he said, "In order to make movies, you gotta be where they are being made."
I'm giving that the big side-eye.
I understand more than anyone the urge to creatively express yourself and to push yourself to learn and accomplish new things. But Puff -- hard pill to swallow coming up next -- you are not a great actor. I'm sorry. It needed to be said. "A Raisin in the Sun" received some good reviews, but you fell far short of the talent and skill of Sidney Poitier next to Audra, Phylicia and Sanaa.
And your small roles in "Monster's Ball" and "Made and "Carlito's Way," well, those didn't carry the movies either, did they?
So before you go buying real estate during a housing crisis, let's pause and reflect on how you might better spend your money and time.
One: Acting lessons. If you haven't already, look up Tasha Smith. She's a working actor who helps folks like the top model wannabes develop their skills in the craft. I'm sure talent played a great part in Angela Bassett becoming an Academy Award-nominee and Golden Globe winner, but hon, Angela also has a degree from the Yale School of Drama. She put the work in and that's how she got the results. And, again, Angie has talent.
Two: Check out the competition among your hip-hop peers. Mos Def was nominated for an Academy Award a Golden Globe and an Emmy for his role in "Something the Lord Made." In a review of "Idlewild," Entertainment Weekly said Andre Benjamin from Outkast pulled off "the considerable trick of making silence speak." Ludacris did a turn in "Crash," and Rolling Stone described him as magnetic in "Hustle & Flow." And then there's Eminem in " 8 Mile." Do you really want to compete with these guys in auditions? 'Nuf said.
Three: Parenting. Don't you have, like, 37 children? I realize you have enough money to pay for help to raise your kids, but maybe it's time you took it to the house. You won't be young forever and neither will your children. Enjoy that before it's gone.
Four: Cut me a check. I mean, if you have to spend money on something worthwhile, I can see no better cause than growing my bank balance.
Five: (and most importantly): Can I get a record deal? Put a sista on the come up man! I can't be worse than Danity Kane. Mull that over and get back at me.
In closing, you keep finding "talent" and doing the music production thing and let's leave the acting to the actors.
-- Tanya Ballard Brown, who admits she has no acting talent, will chew the scenery on her way out of the washingtonpost.com newsroom.
By | March 5, 2008; 10:43 AM ET | Category: Celebrities Previous: Morning Mix: La Lohan Says She's Back on Track | Next: Morning Mix: Doctor Optimistic About Swayze's Cancer Treatment
Keep up with the latest Celebritology scoops with an easy-to-use widget.
If you have tips, ideas for stories or general suggestions, let us know.
Posted by: 23112 | March 5, 2008 11:04 AM
LOVE IT!!! Why do men feel the need to pierce both ears?! He looks absolutely ridiculous.
Posted by: no_bs_4me | March 5, 2008 11:09 AM
Paul Newman and Joanne Woodward live on the east coast. Ditto Susan Sarandon and Tim Robbins. And countless other successful actors. So really, if you're good enough you don't gotta be where movies are made.
Posted by: arlington | March 5, 2008 11:13 AM
He's a (wealthy) mess: I thought his Proactiv commercial was bad enough: "Moisturize my situation and preserve my sexy..." Gimme a break.
Posted by: AAA | March 5, 2008 11:15 AM
Diddy: They banned your wack perfume commercial. Stay behind the scenes, it's what you do best.
Posted by: hype2new | March 5, 2008 11:20 AM
"In order to make movies, you gotta be where they are being made."
Movies are being made in Canada, please move there.
Posted by: Anonymous | March 5, 2008 11:24 AM
He could have just said he was moving to LA to be with Kim and the kids. He's an ok actor. He had some moments in a few films. He was funny in Made. (Tanya you have to admit that!) "Didn't I tell you not to call him Red Dragon?"
I'm not knocking his hustle but I think he should just produce films and not star in them.
Posted by: Anonymous | March 5, 2008 11:25 AM
Liz, you say it so much better than anyone else. Quite simply: you rock!
Anon @ 11:24: best laugh of the morning for me.
Posted by: Centre of Nowhere | March 5, 2008 11:27 AM
Because I'm as much of a spotlight hog as Diddy, I'd like to point out that I, Tanya B. Brown, wrote this post. So, I am rocking. NFT.
Posted by: Tanya Ballard Brown | March 5, 2008 11:30 AM
I've been to Canada. I have a Canadian brother. I ask you, anonymous at 11:24 -- what did Canada do to deserve Diddy? Is it the universal health care or the legal pot that got your goat? They make movies in Transylvania, too. I'm just saying.
Posted by: other liz | March 5, 2008 11:30 AM
Hey, 11.24: one of the unwritten benefits of NAFTA is that the bad actors move from Canada to the US (we already sent you Keanu and Shatner, for instance).
So thanks, but no thanks on Diddy. (Also, no touchbacks. You guys keep Shatner - and Celine, especially.)
Posted by: byoolin | March 5, 2008 11:30 AM
i know it! and he's so hard on those danity girls.
Posted by: amzam | March 5, 2008 11:32 AM
Puffy go back to makin' your once a year club bangers. I miss that. I can't shake it to this current music. And what about the Benjamins? You have plenty. Your acting skills won't bring in Will Smith money. Like Suge said, you all up in the video ... let's take it back there.
Posted by: Flake | March 5, 2008 11:33 AM
Speaking of Celine, I just found out that my dad, a 60 year old black man that turned me on to Miles Davis, Charlie Parker, John Coltrane actually likes Celine Dion and went to see her show in Vegas.
Posted by: 11:24 | March 5, 2008 11:36 AM
That was hilarious. Doh, is that how you spell that? I sure hope so. I regret that you left out that HE should write ME a check. I mean, since he's wasting money and all and has 37 children.
Posted by: honeysmoke | March 5, 2008 11:36 AM
I'm sorry, I just don't get Sean John P. Puff Daddy Puffy Diddy Combs.
I'm gonna go out on a limb, but maybe it has something to do with all the name changes...
Posted by: Chasmosaur | March 5, 2008 11:43 AM
You said it right Tonya! He'd better serve others by really helping...behind the scenes!
Posted by: bbinnc | March 5, 2008 11:52 AM
Stick to perfume,clothes, and music Diddy [or whatever you call yourself these days]
When you have a stellar cast in a classic like "A Raisin In The Sun" you need a trained actor to play a role like Walter Lee. Although, I didn't think he was horrible it could of been so much better with Isaih Washington, Idris Eldra, Anthony Mackie, Hill Harper, etc. Diddy "Stay In Your Lane"!
Posted by: mydchomegirl | March 5, 2008 11:52 AM
While I'd like to take credit, the above piece was written by an esteemed (and soon departing post.com) colleague -- Tanya Ballard.
Posted by: Liz Kelly | March 5, 2008 11:53 AM
I just saw Four Brothers on TV not too long ago. Andre Benjamin was very good.
Posted by: jlr | March 5, 2008 12:07 PM
11:24, after reading your 11:36, may I suggest that *you* move to Canada? Nobody will know you there and you won't need to tell them about your father. (You'll need to forget about him - being into Celine is like being a Scientologist: you won't get him back.)
Posted by: byoolin | March 5, 2008 12:18 PM
There is no celebrity I dislike more than Diddy. He's fungus on creativity.
Posted by: Lisa1 | March 5, 2008 12:26 PM
Congratulations Tanya! You are a wonderful person and an excellent writer! Best of luck in your new endeavours.
Posted by: mydchomegirl | March 5, 2008 12:31 PM
Also, the man looks like he was hit upside the head with a two-by-four
Posted by: unjustifiable snark | March 5, 2008 12:37 PM
I think perhaps he's limiting his vision by looking only on the West Coast; instead, I believe he should split the difference and look for something in the Midwest to give him access to either coast. (The image of the "P. Diddy Studio and Tornado/Biofuel Research Center" does amuse me.) He could also skip California and instead buy up a section of Montana for a studio/government-repelling compound.
By the by, they do make lots of movies in Romania, but I'm going out on a limb to hypothesize that it's not a celebrity hotspot given its lack of a serious club scene.
Posted by: CentrevilleMom | March 5, 2008 12:43 PM
Oh hells no, CentervilleMom, keep him out of my part of the country. I do, however, like the Romania idea
Posted by: Livin in the Midwest | March 5, 2008 12:49 PM
Don't think I haven't considered it, byoolin.
Posted by: 11:24 | March 5, 2008 1:05 PM
I'd like to get in on that #4 action please but I prefer cash, small bills, 10s & 20s will do just fine.
Posted by: Bored @ home eating lunch | March 5, 2008 1:11 PM
um, could we make it romania after august? i plan to be spending some time there this summer.
Posted by: b | March 5, 2008 1:17 PM
Tanya stay hatin'! That's why we can't get nowhere as a people!
Posted by: Rhome | March 5, 2008 1:19 PM
Hey, I have imaginary friends in Canada. Let's send him to France instead (tee-hee)
Posted by: omni | March 5, 2008 1:43 PM
Even though a lot of great actors live in the West Coast it doesn't mean that P. Diddy has move there to pursue a career as an actor; simply because actors are not established they are taught and they keep on learning from life experiences and that's what Diddy needs to do or analyze in his life.
Posted by: LA26 | March 5, 2008 1:50 PM
liz, i like your column, but a 'sista' you aint. sorry. you took some liberties with that one.
Posted by: sista girl | March 5, 2008 2:00 PM
Hey, I have imaginary friends in Canada. Let's send him to France instead (tee-hee)
Posted by: omni | March 5, 2008 01:43 PM
Yes, let's send him to France & he can hook up w/Marion Cotillard.
Posted by: jes | March 5, 2008 2:10 PM
Liz didn't write this column, sista girl.
Posted by: Whitey McWhiteypants | March 5, 2008 2:23 PM
sista girl, Liz Kelly did not write the column, Tanya B. Brown did, which if you had bothered to read carefully, is indicated at the bottom of the column and by the posts by her and Liz Kelly correcting other posters.
Posted by: Not Tanya | March 5, 2008 2:24 PM
I'm hoping--and thinking--he will producing movies, not making them. He did say "made." C'mon, give him some credit, people: he IS a smart businessman. And as someone smartly noted, Kim and the kids are on the other coast.
Posted by: monica | March 5, 2008 2:33 PM
Agreed. I'm glad someone finally said it. Everything isn't for everybody. Puff makes a good living as an Entertainment Mogul. He should stop there. There's plenty of money in Hollywood, but there's also lots in music. Keep to what you know.
Posted by: Another Brown | March 5, 2008 2:44 PM
Love Mos Def, but correction needed- he did not get nominated for an Academy Award - he was nominated for an Emmy and Golden Globe award for Something the Lord Made.
Posted by: Smitty | March 5, 2008 4:25 PM
I concur w/everyone about Fluffy sticking with what he does best- hanging behind the scenes. While his performance in "Raisin in the Sun" was not horrible, he ain't no Sidney Poitier. That ego of his knows no limits- one critically acclaimed gig and he's already to hone up his "acting" career by moving to the west coast? Bro-man, please.
Posted by: plamar1031 | March 5, 2008 6:13 PM
How could you forget Ludacris' fine performance as the Ice-T's psycho stepson on Law & Order SVU? That was some fine acting there.
Diddy needs to pick something and stick with it. Warren Buffet didn't make his milliions by jumping from job to job. Bill Gates just (!?) did computers. The Hunts tried to corner the silver market. Specialization is the name of the game.
Although, if he is handing out checks, I'd like one too please. He can pay me not to have children.
Posted by: ep | March 5, 2008 6:27 PM
Maybe he's right. Maybe there are no acting coaches in New York, or movies and TV shows filmed there. None whatsoever.
Posted by: Kate | March 5, 2008 9:06 PM
Laughing out loud! Sean is a horrible actor. He made a wonderful screenplay quite boring. Go back to rapper that throws rockin' parties.
Posted by: Cindy | March 5, 2008 10:03 PM
PD should take lessons from Madonna. You can take acting lessons, star in multi-million dollar productions with huge advertising budgets, and even marry a director. But you cannot create acting talent where there is none. Enjoy the spoils of your riches, PD. Try a fake British accent. Pronounce your disgust for Americans who don't find your talent as engaging as you do. Then count your money and just go away.
Posted by: LLL | March 6, 2008 12:19 AM
Dig your article Tanya but I still love Diddy! It's most probably his relentless ego that does it for me!
Posted by: Simi | March 6, 2008 2:48 AM
P.Diddy: Who's to say he isn't moving to the West Coast to take acting classes. He's just putting the cart before the wagon. People please stop the hateration. He's go-getter.
Posted by: Joanne | March 6, 2008 8:02 AM
"Putting the cart before the wagon?" So who's pulling your cart-wagon train, Joanne? You forgot the horse.
It's OK, P.Diddy's doing more that "putting the cart before the horse" too. He's about as horseless as your comment too.
Posted by: Wagoneer | March 6, 2008 8:57 AM
The Swayze - I absolutely heart him. Shameful, yes, but so true. Hope he does well with this terrible disease.
Poofus Papa, or whatever Puff Diddy Combs Guy calls himself - please, oh please go away. There really is no one else as into you as you are into yourself. So maybe you could retreat to somewhere and just love on yourself and leave the rest of us out of it. But keep on supporting those 37 chilluns, it's not their fault their dad's an egomaniac who can't figure out what his name is. Ooooooh, could the name changes be a great way to dodge legal judgements??? Could Poofus be way smarter than we all thought? Gotta chew on this for a while....
Posted by: jaybbub | March 6, 2008 9:47 AM
OMG-I Thought I was the only one who saw through this guy. The guy's only talent is for self-promotion and that's it. He can't rap, sing, act or dance.He can't even run a record label, quick what are his successful acts on Bad Boy right now? ...the last five years?... the last ten?
Posted by: Anonymous | March 6, 2008 4:15 PM
I sincerely apologize! My (very) bad.
Posted by: Centre of Nowhere | March 6, 2008 5:16 PM
I think Diddy did pretty good in a Raisin in the Sun but I have to agree some acting lessons could help. Lets get a couple more roles before we start moving places please.
Posted by: Michelle | March 7, 2008 1:23 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.
|
Washingtonpost.com blogger Liz Kelly dishes on the latest happenings in entertainment, celebrity, and Hollywood news.
| 197.666667 | 0.777778 | 1.111111 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/03/04/DI2008030401988.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/03/04/DI2008030401988.html
|
The Reliable Source - washingtonpost.com
|
2008030519
|
Reliable Source columnist Amy Argetsinger and Roxanne Roberts were online Wednesday, March 5, at Noon ET to discuss your favorite gossip.
Recently: The will.i.am/Obama videos and the Nicholson/Clinton videos -- cool or not cool? Dave Chappelle-- smokin'! Superlawyer Bob Bennett: It's better to be lucky than good. How'd Hillary and Amy Poehler get those matching jackets? The Food Network fraud has an embarassing D.C. trip. Don King skips D.C.'s Don King Day. Anna Kournikova's ex-hubby the hot new bachelor in town.
Amy Argetsinger: Wow, look at all the questions today! Thanks! You're the best. Let's see if any of these questions are, you know, good.
LNS/Wonkette Incident: Breaking of the Barbie camera is one of the most petty, ridiculous things you've ever reported on. I always figured that camera would end up in some Smithsonian Museum of American History or Newseum display on Web site in modern culture....
Amy Argetsinger: I hope you all have read by now about the major (alleged) clique warfare smackdown in today's column. Here's also a link to the infamous web video on Wonkette.
But to clarify -- Liz Glover's legendary pink and green Barbie Polaroid is alive and well and intact. It was her videocam that was (allegedly) broken by Reed Landry.
Event with Queen Rania: Was that the one that Reese Witherspoon also attended?
washingtonpost.com: It's Good to Be the Queen ( Reliable Source, March 5)
Amy Argetsinger: Not to the best of our knowledge. Reese is kind of short, but she does kind of command a room's attention. If you saw reference to her hanging with Rania, it was probably one of Rania's NYC events earlier this week.
Luis Vuitton: Now that they have Keith Richards as their spokesmodel, do you think we'll find out who has the ugly bag?
washingtonpost.com: The Source Quote ( Reliable Source, March 5)
Amy Argetsinger: We're hoping to enlist Keef as a confidential informant.
LiLo's Mom's reality show: Seriously -- who is going to watch this?
Wheaton, Md.: Come on, why ya gotta be hatin' on Keith? You just don't do that to a legend. Oh, and he's shorter than you would think.
Roxanne Roberts: It's not hating to say he looks like a weather-beaten leather purse. And everyone's (well, almost everyone) shorter than you think. When and where did you size him up?
Washington Post: I heard a rumor that somewhere in this town there exists Chuck Brown bobbleheads. Do either of you have one, maybe as an item of "swank" bequeathed on you after one of your many social events? And if so, may I bid on it?
Amy Argetsinger: According to some tiny print on Chuck Brown's MySpace page, this is possibly true. I'm afraid if I got one in a swag bag, though, I'd have to give it to the Style Invitational for them to offer as a prize.
Re: Lilo's Mom's Reality Show: Oh, I absolutely will watch. It's like a hybrid mix between Real Housewives of OC, that movie Best in Show, and Intervention.
Amy Argetsinger: A ringing endorsement, that one.
Washington, D.C.: It's 11:34 a.m. I've already had two cups of instant office-provided coffee, read every article of interest in The Post, wasted non-related work Internet quota time on a few gossip sites, redone my hair, sent the necessary e-mails for the day...
The only thing better than having this chat on a day when my boss is out of town is moving it up a few minutes. And making it last four hours longer. Have any faxes you need me to send?!
Roxanne Roberts: So cute! Really, who sends faxes anymore? It's an e-mail world, we just live in it. But you're adorable to offer.
She weirds me o,UT: What's up with Crystal Koons. I always feel a bit uneasy when her TV ads come on, yet I'm a bit fascinated by her. I'm sure that she's a pretty wealthy gal. What else should we know about her?
Amy Argetsinger: From the Koons dealership? I know I should be familiar with these ads, but I'm not, maybe because of my no-cable-having ways. (BTW, I'm told that this condition is curable -- am consulting with professionals and may have the operation soon.) So you tell me -- what's her deal?
A ticket with both Obama and Hillary: You know what would be fun about this? The spouses campaigning together, doing photo ops, etc!
Roxanne Roberts: Bill Clinton and Cindy McCain? That could be interesting, but perhaps not in the way you meant....or did you?
Cambridge, Mass.: Why won't will.i.am go away?
Roxanne Roberts: Because he's been told too many times he's a genius, and they never go away. Get ready for the next Obama video, and another, and another......zzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Yes, he can.
Virginia: So, will Keith Richards's next move be to portray Gollum (that nasty little creature always bothering Elijah Wood) in a Lord of the Rings remake?
Amy Argetsinger: No matter what you may say about him now, it should be noted that from about 1963 to 1972, Keith Richards was one of the sexiest men on the planet.
Liz Glover's legendary pink and green Barbie Polaroid is alive and well and intact: But what's she going to do for film, now that Polaroid's going to quit manufacturing it? Stockpile a warehouse-full of it?
Amy Argetsinger: You know, I meant to ask her this yesterday. Clearly, another reason we are going to have to write about Liz Glover soon. She's the gift that keeps on giving, as we say in newspapers.
RE: Wonkette Party Crash: Watching this makes me want to move away from D.C. A bunch of jerks who think they're better than everyone else because they have their own exclusive partying club.
Roxanne Roberts: Not so fast. There are jerks in every city who think they're better than everyone else. But you do want to smack them a little, don't you?
Baltimore, Md.: Hi ladies. I'm a Montgomery County native living in Baltimore for the past two years for grad school. I'll graduate in May and always envisioned moving back to the D.C. area to work and live. But when you mentioned that Jenna Bush and her finance and apparently everyone are house hunting in Baltimore, I started to question my relocation back home. Is B'more about to blow up and I am prepping to leave on the verge of a Charm City renaissance? Who should win this Beltway battle?
Amy Argetsinger: Oh, everyone's moving to Baltimore. It's nothing new. This started about six or seven years ago, on account of the D.C. housing market going nuclear, and it's been just terrible. I had to go out and make all new friends. But yes, dollar for dollar, you can get a bigger nicer house in a cooler neighborhood -- you can probably get a whole rowhouse for what you'd pay for a two-bedroom condo here -- the tradeoff being you then have to drive an hour or more to get to D.C.
Fedorov and Kournikova: This bit confused me a little. Is he saying that she didn't want to stay married? You'd have to be a pretty dumb guy to dump her, so I'm guessing that was the case. Maybe the "two career" pressure thing?
Amy Argetsinger: Sergei Fedorov has been rather cryptic about his marriage to Anna Kournikova, though the clear implication was that she wanted out. Poor guy. Anna then moved on pretty quickly to Enrique Iglesias.
Source mysteries: You should do a column with updates (or lack thereof) on several mysteries you have reported -- what happened the statues of the dog and the Venus? Who stole the art and ransomed it for Monopoly money? Who has the over-priced purse? Am I forgetting any?
Amy Argetsinger: Oh, you're right, good idea.... There was also the mystery of who erected the weird shrine to Mary Pinchot Meyer on the C&O Canal towpath last month; we actually got a call from the guy who did it, but then we just got around to writing about it. Any other lingering mysteries from The Reliable Source we need to clear up? Please remind us, here or at reliablesource@washpost.com.
Chris Core?: Do you know where radio legend Chris Core will wind up working? I'm horrified that WMAL could let such a treasure go, and can't help but think that some astute employer will snap him up right away.
Amy Argetsinger: Sad about Chris Core -- and no, he hasn't landed anywhere yet.
Celebrity chef Robert Irvine: I KNEW something wasn't right about this guy. I just knew it! Why do all these TV celebs pad their resumes like that? Don't they know we're eventually going to find out? Someone else did this on America's Next Food Network Star (is that the name of the show?) The guy I'm thinking of was going to be in the final 2 and had to step down because he lied on his resume.
Roxanne Roberts: You're thinking of Jag. He made it to the final two last season, and then the network discovered he lied about being in the military (Marines, I think). I think people lie when they're starting out to get a foot in the door, then they're afraid to fess up. But the Irvine case is really bad, since he's been on the air for a couple years. You'd think someone at the network would have double checked. Then again, it happens all the time. Check out Bob Thompson's piece today about the author who lied about being in a gang.
Bill Clinton and Cindy McCain?: No, Roxanne -- Obama is married to Michelle. She doesn't resemble Cindy McCain much at all.
Roxanne Roberts: The chatter said "spouses."
Jenna and Henry: But is there word on why they are moving to Baltimore? Has he got his post MBA job lined up? Legg Mason? T Rowe Price? Black and Decker? What could it be?
Amy Argetsinger: Good question, I like the way you think. Wouldn't it be cool if he got a job working for David Simon? Then we'd just need Jenna to start a charity with Gilbert Arenas, and all of my obsessions will coalesce into one.
Washington, D.C.: Good morning Ladies,
Any truth to the rumors that Patrick Swayze has pancreatic cancer and only weeks to live? I've heard it on TV, radio and seen it on the Internet this morning and sadly I'm starting to think it's true although no comment has been issued from his PR person.
Amy Argetsinger: This is what the National Enquirer is reporting, which means it's either true or it's not.
Spouses: Duh, it would be Bill and Michelle, not Bill and Cindy.
Roxanne Roberts: Um....that was a joke, people.
washingtonpost.com: True or False: Book Publishers Can Avoid the Agony of Deceit ( Post, March 5)
Washington, D.C.: You know what really bugs me? Not necessarily the union between Benji Madden and Paris Hilton but the fact that she has started to dress different since they've been spotted together. Really Paris? A black leather jacket, a graphic tattoo-like printed T-shirt? Fedoras? Ughhhhhh. Shove yourself back into your Tarte T-shirts and your ridiculous ice-cream colored sun dresses.
I was trying to think of other celeb couples that have started to look like their mates. Thoughts?
Amy Argetsinger: Good question. In "Learning to Fly," the epic, 700-page autobiography of Posh Spice, there's a passage in which Posh describes the night she and Beckham went out to a party both dressed head to toe in black leather biker gear, and notes that "back then, it was rare for couples to go out dressed alike" -- implying... that now it's common? I don't know, the only thing that comes to mind is that picture from maybe five years ago of Britney Spears wearing a faded-denim ball gown with Justin Timberlake in what looked like a matching faded-blue leisure suit. Am I the only person who has been unable to scratch this image from my brain?
Falls Church, Va.: Amy, I feel I haven't sent you any nonsensical ramblings about my lack of a personal life via Facebook for at least three days.
Can I make it up to you somehow?
(no, I'm not drinking at work, thank you)
Amy Argetsinger: I think you just did.
The tradeoff being you then have to drive an hour or more to get to D.C. : Or take the train!
Amy Argetsinger: Remember one of the local TV news shows did an expose about people drinking on the MARC commuter train? There's news you can use!
Woodbridge, Va.: What do you think of the fact that no White House kids (none that I can think of, anyway) want to live/work in Washington? I'm starting with Margaret Truman and going through administrations to Jenna and Barbara. Is this just part of the growing up process, or is it really that horrible here?
When the wedding announcement broke and we were all wondering where it would be, one of you said that Jenna does not consider the WH home. Apparently no one does.
Roxanne Roberts: Let me play Dr. Roberts:
I think that being a president's kid goes against all the thing's children want---They're under constant pressure to behave and not embarrass the family, their parents are always busy, they can't do anything normal....it's probably a pain most of the time.
There are jerks in every city who think they're better than everyone else.: Yes, but the entire culture and media don't revolve around them.
One day I turned a page in The Washington Post and just got oversaturated with the cult of power and wealth in D.C. and moved away. I am happy to report that other cities have diverse culture and value many other things than just power and wealth.
Roxanne Roberts: I'm guessing you're not in New York, LA, Chicago....
D.C., D.C.: This is way late but I think I saw Sharon Osbourne at National Airport on Friday Feb 1. I was at TGI Friday's waiting for a late flight and there was almost no one in the airport. We were both seated at tiny tables and the way we were seated meant we were facing each other. She was on her cellphone for SERIOUSLY 20 minutes, the whole time I waited for food and devoured my chicken fingers with honey mustard sauce. She wasn't talking, just holding the phone up to her ear. I wonder if it was to keep people from coming up to her.
Roxanne Roberts: And you're telling us NOW? You were in a coma or something?
Washington: What do you think -- Valerie Bertinelli have a chance to be the next Oprah?
Amy Argetsinger: Thanks for asking. Valerie Bertinelli is developing a talk show, and yes, definitely, she's got that potential.
You know, of course, that this was all my idea? I met Valerie Bertinelli last year at the Bloomberg party following the White House Correspondent's Dinner, and she was just so nice and engaging and likeable, this great bundle of charisma that I knew just HAD to be channeled into something, though probably not another acting career at this point, and probably not politics, which leaves only one option. So after mulling this over Veuve Cliquot, I walked back to her and said, "You're going to have your own talk show in six months!" And she said, "from your mouth to God's ears!" or something sort of like that... And, well, the rest is history.
Arlington, Va.: Ever wonder if Tracy Morgan is as funny in person as he is on 30 Rock? Wonder no more! I went to see his show at Lisner Auditorium Saturday night and he was terrible! I've never seen so many people walk out of a comedy show. He was getting some laughs from people who don't know any better, but everyone around me was just silent for 90 percent of the show. His act consists of really dated material like Michael Jackson and Bill Clinton jokes, as well as the most disgustingly graphic sexual "stories" (there were no punchlines here.) Just thought I'd share. (By the way, I love filthy comics like Joe Rogan. I just ask that they have actual jokes.)
Look-a-like mates: Hasn't it been noted that Brad Pitt takes on the hair color of his current partner, and their interests -- pseduo rock with Juliette Lewis, Hollywood social life with Aniston and global philanthropy with Jolie?
Other than the time he channeled Billy Idol when he first started dating Jolie, of course, unless there was something we never knew about those two. Allegedly.
Amy Argetsinger: And remember when he and Gwyneth Paltrow had the same hair cut, around the time of "Sliding Doors"?
Couples that look alike: How about TomKat, with matching hair? Or how Brad Pitt's hair color seems to always match that of his significant other?
Gilbet Arenas: When he's back to basketball, will he have less time for blogging? If so, what will you do then?
Amy Argetsinger: I'm worried about that. He doesn't blog nearly enough for my liking -- maybe only once every 10 days or so.
President's kids working in D.C: What about George W? Son of George HW?
Roxanne Roberts: Oops. My bad. But wait---he hates Washington, too!
Arlington, Va.: Isn't the whole Polaroid thing played out? I mean it was hot a couple years back in N.Y. but now I see every Dick and Jane walking around with one at these parties.
Amy Argetsinger: Oh, "hot a couple years ago back in NY" blah blah blah. Though Liz Glover did note that while everyone in D.C. shuns her Barbie Polaroid, folks in NYC are always happy to see it.
Okaaaaaaaaaay: besides you, who would watch a talk show with Valerie Bertinelli? How many of y'all out there even know what she did before she married E.V-Halen? Maybe she could have Marie Osmond and her dolls as her first guest...
Amy Argetsinger: All I know is, she'll probably have a way better talk show than some of those people they give talk shows to, like that guy from first season "Apprentice" and Tootie from "Facts of Life," or that guy who wrote the "He's Just Not That Into You" book...
Secret Service: Former presidents get Secret Service protection, but do their children who are grown and gone -- like Chelsea and the Bush twins after Jan. 2009?
Roxanne Roberts: Nope. Former presidents and first ladies get protection for their lifetime, according to the Secret Service Web site, but former First Kids only until age 16---so Jenna, Barbara and Chelsea are on their own. Of course, if Hillary wins in November, I'm guessing Chelsea gets a security detail.
The spouses campaigning together: I'm surprised I never thought of this... should Hilary become president, Bill will probably hang out with the VP's wife. Trouble there? Kind of reminds me of that movie with Sarah Jessica Parker.. what was it, the family stone? Where the two couples just switched mates?
Re: Keith Richards: That man abused himself for years, how is it he's still alive?
Amy Argetsinger: He's ageless, timeless, lace and fine-ness, beauty and elegance.
No, seriously, he's indestructible. After the nuclear war, it will just be him and the cockroaches and Liz Taylor.
Washington, D.C.: I heard on the radio the other day that there is a rumor that Scarlett Johanson will do a CD of Tom Waits' covers and it will be produced by David Bowie. That can't be true, can it? I am having trouble visualizing Scarlett warbling "Tom Trabert's Blues"
Amy Argetsinger: I thought this album came out like a year ago and that we had already mocked and dismissed it, but apparently we've just been eagerly anticipating its forthcoming release in May. David Bowie is not the producer, but he contributed to two tracks.
So for those of you who enjoyed her "singing" on the will.i.am/Obama video...
City slickers: I can't vouch for L.A. or Chicago, but I have lived in New York and Washington, and there is a definite difference between each city's self-important jerk population. In New York, everyone's drunk on money. In Washington, everyone's drunk on power.
But you know, self-important jerks are everywhere. Doesn't every medium-sized town have some people who think they're the royalty of the country club, the Rotary club, the shopping mall?
Roxanne Roberts: My theory: EVERY town, no matter how small, has at least one jerk. Let's just say every place has five percent. I think it's human nature. The bigger the city, the more jerks.
The Wire: I go and turn on my On Demand Monday expecting to watch the last Wire, and they aren't showing it. What gives? This is an outrage. How are we expected to wait for Sunday?
Amy Argetsinger: Apparently they didn't want any spoilers from the finale leaking out. Fine by me.
SNL sketch: So has there been another SNL sketch less worthy of becoming water cooler talk than the Clinton-Obama debate parody two weeks ago? It was NOT funny! A one-gag sketch stretched out to 3 minutes. Yes, I know that SNL is filled with this kind of filler, but the ones that become TV touchstones are at least funny and well done. If Clinton hadn't referred to this one during a real debate, maybe it would have just disappeared. It's not worthy! It's not worthy!
Amy Argetsinger: Oh, it was okay. Not earth-shattering, not bad. A decent return after months off the air. What did anyone think of Fred Armisen's Obama imitation? I thought it was pretty good; the guy is hard to imitate..
Falls Church, Va.: I thought that Jenna would have been pushed to have a White House wedding in order to raise Bush in the polls -- people would have had a lot of positives around being able to see that event.
Roxanne Roberts: Nah---Bush isn't running for re-election and even if he was, I don't think they would have pressured Jenna to get married here. The family has always given the twins a lot of freedom to make their own choices.
Bertinelli follow-up: Were you really mulling over her talk show future over a Veuve Cliquot, or did you just add that for our benefit? I mean, most people can't remember what they drank last night, much less at a party last year. Incidentally, nice description of a party we all should have crashed.
Amy Argetsinger: When they bring out the good stuff, I remember. At the '06 Bloomberg party (where I talked to Ludacris and Ace from American Idol), the champagne was Taittinger.
Richmond, Va.: I always thought of Valerie Bertinelli as pretty air headed --giggling, shrugging shoulders, saying 'whatever.' I can't imagine her hosting a talk show.
Amy Argetsinger: No, not at all -- she's got this down-to-earth, grounded kind of charisma. Think Rachael Ray except "likeable" and "not annoying."
Alexandria, Va.: Is Liz Glover famous for having a Barbie Polaroid, or is there something else about her that should make me care who she is? I'm afraid to say I have no idea who she is.
Amy Argetsinger: That's okay -- she's mostly famous for being in our column for being the girl at parties who scares VIPs with her Barbie Polaroid. And then she has a cult following among Wonkette readers.
Sharon Osbourne: Does she really count as a celebrity anymore? Would you have written about her if the above correspondent had notified you in a more timely fashion?
Roxanne Roberts: The caller has a point. Amy says yes. I say yes because of the 20-minute cell call.
It will just be him and the cockroaches and Liz Taylor. : And Liz's diamonds, of course.
Amy Argetsinger: Diamonds are forever.
Amy's operation: Amy, if you get cable go with Verizon if FiOS is available in your area. The HD is much superior to Comcast (and so is the customer service).
Amy Argetsinger: HD? Oh, let's not get ahead of ourselves.
How many of y'all out there even know what she did before she married E.V-Halen?: I used to watch her on that sitcom, One Day at a Time.
Roxanne Roberts: For you youngsters---she was adorable on the show.
RE: His act consists of really dated material like Michael Jackson and Bill Clinton jokes: Sounds like Jay Leno! Except Jay has 2 other topics -- teachers who sleep with their students, and how American is getting fat.
There are jerks in every city who think they're better than everyone else: I'll vouch for that, even in my podunk Midwest town.
Spitzer at Central: I wrote in about this last week, but maybe too late... The Friday night before last I think it was...
Amy Argetsinger: Yeah, didn't see that one. Are we talking Eliot Spitzer? (Must be -- is there another famous Spitzer?)
Buckingham Palace: Any way the Brits can change their little constitution to skip over William and make Harry the next king? Nice to see a throwback to the days when kings went off to war with the troops, rather than just playing polo and hanging with Elton John.
Roxanne Roberts: I don't think they'll let William go off to war, so no fair blaming him for staying home. Good on Harry, but I think there will be more drinking and polo from the young prince.
Richmond, Va.: I usually don't know what champagne I'm drinking if it's brought to me in a glass at parties. Did you sneak a look at the bottles?
Roxanne Roberts: Amy's a REPORTER, people. Even while swilling champers with B-list stars!
The McCain Family: Now that he is definitely the nominee, can you give us a rundown on all the kids -- from both marriages. It is confusing. How many are adopted?
Amy Argetsinger: Okay, everyone -- your McCain Kid Cheat Sheet now available!
From the first marriage to Carol Shepp:
-Doug, who is about 48
-Andy, who is about 46
[Shepp's kids, whom McCain adopted when they were 3 and 5]
From the second marriage to Cindy:
-Meghan, 23 (the one you see campaigning with dad)
-Jack, 21 (attends the US Naval Academy)
-Jimmy, 19 (Marine stationed in Iraq)
-Bridget, 16 (adopted from Bangladesh)
Got it? Not as easy to keep track of as the Romney boys (Matt, Josh, Tagg, Ben, and... damn, I keep forgetting!), but you'll get the hang of it. We'll have a quiz next week!
Britney and Justin in denim: The image had been removed from my brain, but thanks for putting it back in.
"Back then, it was rare for couples to go out dressed alike" : Hmmm. I guess she's also implying that when SHE did it, it was cool. Posh, spouses dressing alike is not cool. No matter who is doing it, and when they did it.
Amy Argetsinger: The great joy of reading her autobiography is trying to figure out what exactly she's ever trying to imply. Mostly it seems to be that people who are mean to her are ugly.
That man abused himself for years, how is it he's still alive? : Don't forget Dennis Hopper.
Amy Argetsinger: He actually looks much better than Keef, though.
Speaking of New York: What will they do for police protection when Jesse L. Martin leaves "Law and Order" next month? More importantly, how will I recover?
Amy Argetsinger: He's still on that show? You're still watching that show?
My celebrity spotting: I saw Jacques Frederic ("Freddy" to his friends) Mugnier at Sushi-Ko last Wednesday night, dining with his spouse before heading to San Francisco for La Paulee. He too was shorter than I expected.
Amy Argetsinger: I have no idea what any of this means. Sorry!
Hartford, Conn.: Hello. I have on a news channel while enjoying your chat. I work at home and plan my Wednesdays around you. But, on TV, I am struck that Hillary Clinton is looking a little chunky. Shame on me -- would I say that about a man? -- but Obama is a string bean anyway. My question is -- what do they eat on the campaign trail? Is food catered to them or does someone call Pizza Hut? I know its a weird question but seems like you guys will know. Thanks.
Roxanne Roberts: A little of both. (And yes, I noticed the same thing.) I blame the schedules, which are crazy. It's hard not to gain weight when you don't have time to plan meals or work out---or sleep. I also read that lack of sleep makes it harder to lose extra pounds, but I don't know if that's true.
Washington Post Newsroom: No, Amy knows what type of champagne is is because she normally orders by the bottle
Amy Argetsinger: I don't know what that's supposed to mean.
Wills: He's shipping out also via the Royal Navy.
Sigh. I need a life.
Roxanne Roberts: I hadn't read that. Good for him. Bet he gets the upper bunk.
Denim Don't: Ew, me too. I don't know why the image in my head won't go away. I guess it was that traumatizing.
Meanwhile for the rest of you, just google Britney and Justin and denim and it will pop right up. You have to remember, this was a pre-9/11 thing. So easy to forget that world existed.
Bertinelli: For some people of a certain age (we could not care less about the Van Halen era), she will always be Barbara Cooper. Not the best show, but we watched for one reason -- to see Barbara Cooper.
Roxanne Roberts: I assume that's the operating principle behind the talk show.
And here's a photo of the denim couple for those of you who haven't seen it:: Denim Couple
Amy Argetsinger: My apologies in advance.
Posh the author: Are ugly people allowed to purchase her book?
There are jerks in every city who think they're better than everyone else: I'll vouch for that, even in my podunk Midwest town.: right, but everyone thinks they're jerks for being so deluded. In Washington, everyone supports the egoists' self-centered beliefs.
Roxanne Roberts: Not everyone. Our job is to keep folks from getting TOO full of themselves.
Anonymous: So Bloomberg serves Tattinger and Veuve Cliquot, what is served at a Late Night Shots party? Those little idiots seem a little more exclusive than the Bloomberg party, they better at least have good booze.
Amy Argetsinger: More exclusive? I can't imagine an LNS party attracting the likes of Valerie Bertinelli or Ludacris or Ace from American Idol. Or Maura Tierney! She was at one of those Bloomberg shindigs. Also: lots of reporters.
Washington, D.C.: I am interested in learning more about journalism. I was wondering if either of you ever give talks where you provide your insight on how you landed your current gig covering the D.C. party circuit and following the shenanigans of local politicos? Maybe something explaining how you transitioned to that coverage from your previous beats on the Post's Metro and National desks?
I would find this sort of insight fascinating.
Amy Argetsinger: Are you kidding? I give this kind of talk all the time. It's very boring.
Are either of you going...: to Patrick O'Connell's dinner event/gala? Who will actually do the cooking at this?
Roxanne Roberts: I'm going, and I assume Patrick will oversee the kitchen, as always. I can't imagine he could sit still if he wasn't.
Dupont, Washington, D.C.: I grew up in Detroit and thus am a die-hard Red Wings fan. Sergei Federov was a Red Wing for ages.
Amy Argetsinger: Well, then, you should head up the welcome committee. Let's see if we can find him a nice D.C. girl.
Amy Argetsinger: Meanwhile, I'm told that Frederic Mugnier is the maker of a series of fine, fragrant and scintillating wines. Also, he's French.
In your opinion...: What is the Easter Egg Hunt where one has the best chance of seeing a celebrity? Which one would have the best goodies?
Roxanne Roberts: There's really only one celebrity egg hunt---the White House. There's are usually a few bold-face names, but nothing that merits standing in line for hours to get tickets. Trust me.
Fametracker: Anyone remember this Web site? It was the Farmer's Almanac of celebrity worth--rated various celebs on their "real" fame vs. their "deserved" fame? I miss it.
Amy Argetsinger: Are they still putting up new content? They had some funny stuff back in the day.
What do they eat on the campaign trail? : I remember Geraldine Ferraro saying during her VP campaign that she'd gained about 10 pounds from eating food she was expected to eat on the campaign trail in order to be polite, and one of her first priorities after the November 1984 election was to shed the extra weight.
Roxanne Roberts: That sounds exactly right.
War Princes: Actually I think Charles was in the military, Navy, as is tradition for his family. I just don't think the Brits had any wars going when he was on active duty. His brother however, was a Royal Marine helicopter pilot assigned to HMS Brazen when they visited our beloved Baltimore many years ago. I was 12 or 13 at the time and got to tour the ship with my uncle. I even go to see Prince Andrew's helicopter named, "The Brazen Hussy."
Amy Argetsinger: Was that back in his Koo Stark days?
Poor Britney: The outfit is hideous but look how young and healthy and clean she looks then as opposed to what we see now. In addition to all of her problems right now, I am especially haunted by one thing: Why can't someone help her take off her old finger nail polish? She always has short nails with half the polish gone.
Amy Argetsinger: Now, that's really rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.
Roxanne Roberts: Yikes, already time to fly. Speaking of which, you all LOSE an hour over the weekend when Daylight Savings Time kicks in ("Spring--spring ahead, Fall--fall back.") Set your clocks for noon EDT next week---in the meanwhile, send your tips to reliablesource@washpost.com. Cheers.
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.
|
Reliable Source columnists Amy Argetsinger and Roxanne Robert discuss your favorite gossip.
| 554 | 0.923077 | 3.538462 |
high
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/04/AR2008030400766.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/04/AR2008030400766.html
|
Bernanke Wants Banks To Rework Mortgages
|
2008030519
|
Bernanke's comments positioned him between the Bush administration and congressional Democrats on how far the government should go to try to ease the mortgage crisis.
He publicly and explicitly urged banks to reduce the principal owed on certain loans, which the administration has not been willing to do. But he stopped well short of endorsing ideas embraced by some congressional Democrats, who want to force mortgage issuers to delay foreclosures and who support a government program to buy problem loans.
"Efforts by both government and nonprofit entities to reduce unnecessary foreclosures are helping, but more can and should be done," Bernanke said at a convention of community bankers in Orlando.
The stock market closed mixed on Bernanke's comments and analysts' forecasts of lower earnings at Citigroup and Goldman Sachs. The Dow Jones industrial average fell 45.10 points, to 12,213.80.
Bernanke stressed that banks and other lenders need to take action to reduce the number of preventable foreclosures -- those in which both homeowners and mortgage holders would be better off by renegotiating loans, rather than going to foreclosure.
About 1.5 million subprime, adjustable-rate loans are scheduled to reset to higher rates this year, Bernanke said. That would raise the average monthly payment by more than 10 percent, to about $1,500, he said.
"This situation calls for a vigorous response," Bernanke said. "Measures to reduce preventable foreclosures could help not only stressed borrowers but also their communities and, indeed, the broader economy."
Lenders have been willing to renegotiate mortgage loans to let borrowers with subprime, adjustable-rate mortgages keep low starter interest rates. But they have been more reluctant to renegotiate the value of mortgages. In such a situation, a lender might reduce what a homeowner owes from, say, $200,000 to $180,000, so the borrower could afford to make payments. That loss might be far less than the loss the lender would incur if it foreclosed on the house and then sold it at auction.
"In this environment, principal reductions that restore some equity for the homeowner may be a relatively more effective means of avoiding delinquency and foreclosure," Bernanke said.
Among the obstacles to such write-downs, Bernanke said, is that many investors hold pieces of any given mortgage, and they can have competing interests that lead some to favor a renegotiation of principal and others not to. Bernanke urged the mortgage industry to quickly resolve those conflicts.
"There are, no doubt, tax-related, accounting, and legal obstacles to expanding the use of principal write-downs," he said. "But just as market participants, with the help of regulators, obtained greater clarity on the use of interest rate freezes," they should do so with write-downs of principal.
The Bush administration, like Bernanke, has tried to use persuasion rather than legal force to get lenders to avoid foreclosures. But unlike Bernanke, it has not made a case for how the industry should do it.
"Treasury is not going to dictate how those renegotiations should be accomplished," Jennifer Zuccarelli, a Treasury Department spokeswoman, said yesterday. "If lenders find that in some cases a principal write-down is less costly than foreclosure, then that is an option they have the incentive to consider."
|
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke yesterday called on mortgage lenders to be more willing to renegotiate with borrowers who are at risk of losing their homes and said that the crush of mortgage foreclosures is likely to continue "for a while longer."
| 13.782609 | 0.695652 | 0.956522 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/04/AR2008030401242.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/04/AR2008030401242.html
|
After 17 Seasons, Favre to Hang It Up
|
2008030519
|
Brett Favre told Green Bay Packers officials yesterday that he is walking away after a 17-year career in which he established himself as one of the most prolific and charismatic quarterbacks in NFL history.
Favre, 38, had pondered retirement in each of the last few offseasons but chose to continue a career that's sure to land him in the Pro Football Hall of Fame, even when it seemed as if his best days as a player might be behind him. He reversed the downward spiral in his play this past season, recapturing the exuberance and daring success of his younger days and leading the Packers to the doorstep of another Super Bowl appearance.
That resurgence on a youthful team created the expectation that he was likely to return next season. Instead, he informed Packers Coach Mike McCarthy by telephone Monday night that he would retire and reiterated that plan in a phone conversation yesterday morning with General Manager Ted Thompson.
"I just think it's a decision that he has constantly wrestled with in terms of trying to make the right decision and leave at the right time," Thompson said at a news conference late yesterday afternoon at the Packers' offices. "And I believe he thinks this is the right time for him."
Favre told them he didn't have the energy or willpower to gear up for another season that would have been considered a failure if the Packers didn't finish it with a Super Bowl triumph. Barring a change of heart, he leaves the sport with three NFL most valuable player awards, nine Pro Bowl selections and two Super Bowl appearances, including one victory. He spent the last 16 seasons with the Packers and leaves with numerous NFL records. He also was the most durable quarterback that the league has seen with a record 253 straight regular season starts, 275 counting the postseason.
"Throughout his 17 years, he never lost that feeling of playing the game for the first time," former San Francisco 49ers and Detroit Lions coach Steve Mariucci, once a Packers quarterbacks coach, said in a written statement. "That's what makes Brett Favre unlike any other player I have ever seen."
The news took many by surprise, including Favre's coach.
"I thought he was going to play," McCarthy said. "Last week was the first time, of all the conversations we've ever had, that the word 'retirement' was ever spoken."
Former Packers general manager Ron Wolf, who obtained Favre in a 1992 trade with the Atlanta Falcons, said he learned of Favre's decision from a neighbor in Florida.
"I was surprised when I heard it," Wolf said in a telephone interview. "But when I thought about it and heard what was said, it made perfect sense. Brett always played with a great deal of passion. If he didn't have it anymore, it was the correct decision."
Favre's agent, Bus Cook, suggested the Packers might not have pushed Favre to return. "Nobody pushed Favre out the door, but then nobody encouraged him not to go out that door, either," Cook told the Associated Press.
But both Thompson and McCarthy said they had made it clear to Favre that they wanted him back.
|
After pondering retirement in each of the last several offseasons but continuing a career sure to land him in the Pro Football Hall of Fame, Green Bay Packers quarterback Brett Favre has decided that he's had enough.
| 15.65 | 0.875 | 5.275 |
medium
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/04/AR2008030402833.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/04/AR2008030402833.html
|
For Young, Job Fight Least of His Battles
|
2008030519
|
VIERA, Fla., March 4 -- Weigh-ins at spring training can be a formality, and the figure transferred to the roster is often an approximation of the truth. Why embarrass the 300-pounder if he's promised to slim down to 265? Be kind, and move on.
But here at Washington Nationals camp, there is a somewhat shocking number next to the name of one Dmitri Young. It is 291. That, too, represents Young's weight near the end of last season. When he reported here this spring, Young was up to 298 pounds.
Thus, as Young sat out Tuesday's Grapefruit League game at Space Coast Stadium -- the victim of a strained muscle in his side, one that has kept him out of action five straight days -- he understood that it is easy to draw conclusions about how he looks. Indeed, there are some in the organization who are disappointed in Young's conditioning, because the man who was Washington's most compelling story in 2007 -- overcoming a litany of personal and legal problems to become an all-star and earn a two-year, $10 million extension -- didn't pick up a bat in the offseason. He could be rapidly losing ground to Nick Johnson in the tussle for the first base job.
"People who judge, I could really care less what they think," Young said. "Their opinion means nothing. A lot of people do judge. The only judge I know is God."
Young spoke softly and without animosity Tuesday in an empty home clubhouse. Though there are pockets of disenchantment with Young's physical condition with the Nationals, there are just as many pockets of understanding. Through all of Young's travails in 2006, perhaps the least discussed was the fact that he learned he had diabetes. There is, Young and the Nationals are finding out, a fallout from such a fate.
"It's very difficult," General Manager Jim Bowden said.
"It's a lot tougher than people imagine," Young said.
Nearly 21 million Americans are afflicted with diabetes, and each must learn to handle it as best they can. Young, who received his diagnosis in late 2006, is still figuring what solutions best suit him. He currently takes insulin injections two, three or even four times a day.
Because Young's weight has not gone down -- even though he said he has "learned to eat the right kinds of foods" -- doctors have recently changed his medication. Again. Whether they find the right mix could determine whether Young is able to drop weight before the season opener, which is now just 3 1/2 weeks away.
"There's so much about it I don't even know," Young said. "I learn constantly when I meet people, things that they do to help manage it. I didn't even know that before I do any sort of physical activity, my blood sugar has to be well above 150, so when I do crash, I crash back to normal. It's a constant process."
It is one the Nationals must monitor, just as they have monitored Johnson's right leg, broken in September 2006. With Young out the past week -- he strained his side swinging in the batting cage, and though he is making progress, he will likely need at least a few more days -- Johnson has received most of the at-bats. He got three more in Tuesday's 5-3 loss to the Dodgers, and though he is still unhappy with his swing, he is healthy and fit. Monday, he even stretched a single into a double, sliding into second base.
"That's the test for me right there," Manager Manny Acta said. "That's what I was waiting for. . . . You can't tell. I'm telling you, if you came from Russia, and you didn't know what was going on with him, you wouldn't be able to tell how he looked last year."
|
Though there are pockets of disenchantment with Dmitri Young's physical condition, there are just as many pockets of understanding for his being diagnosed with diabetes.
| 27.964286 | 0.928571 | 5.357143 |
medium
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/04/AR2008030401438.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/04/AR2008030401438.html
|
N. Ireland's Paisley to Relinquish Leadership Roles
|
2008030519
|
Paisley, 81, has appeared increasingly frail and has lost support among Protestants who oppose joint government with Catholics, but his sudden, low-key announcement took many people by surprise.
His exit, scheduled for May, also appears hastened by allegations of ethical misconduct by his son, Ian Paisley Jr., who resigned as a junior minister in the Northern Ireland government last month following criticism of his lobbying activities and links to a property developer.
For decades, Paisley Sr. was despised by the British province's Catholics. He was known as the man who had vowed "never, never, never" to negotiate with Sinn Fein, the political affiliate of the Irish Republican Army and today the province's largest Catholic party.
But last year he startled many people by playing a key role in creating the joint government with Sinn Fein. The new administration was a landmark step following the 1998 Good Friday agreement that largely ended the sectarian violence responsible for the deaths of more than 3,600 people since 1969.
Sinn Fein's Martin McGuinness, who as deputy first minister is the No. 2 leader in the province, praised Paisley's legacy Tuesday, saying that "the historic decision he took to go into government with Sinn Fein has changed the face of Irish politics forever."
When Paisley steps down one year after the power-sharing government began, his Democratic Unionist Party is likely to select Peter Robinson, his deputy, to succeed him. Paisley said he will remain a member of the British Parliament and the Northern Ireland Assembly.
"By going now and going quickly, he saved himself from being pushed out," said Adrian Guelke, a professor of comparative politics at Queen's University in Belfast. "There have been a lot of pictures of Paisley and McGuinness smiling, laughing and joking -- they call them the chuckle brothers -- and that has not gone down well" with some Protestants.
Paisley's supporters feel that Paisley "may have to do business with Sinn Fein but his supporters shouldn't be subjected to the idea that he is enjoying it," Guelke said.
The younger Paisley's "financial shenanigans" contributed to his father's exit and a growing sense in Northern Ireland that "as a family, the Paisleys were on the way out," Guelke added.
In announcing his retirement from his leadership role, Paisley told reporters: "It's time to move on. . . . I came to this decision a few weeks ago." He said he thought the right time to leave would be after a major business conference in May designed to draw U.S. investment to Northern Ireland. "I thought that it is a marker, a very big marker, and it would be a very appropriate time for me to bow out."
In January, Paisley resigned as leader of the Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster, which he founded in 1951. He had also come under pressure there from many of his followers, who preferred the old uncompromising Paisley.
British Prime Minister Gordon Brown praised Paisley on Tuesday, saying, "The whole country values and admires the manner in which he has led as first minister."
Irish Prime Minister Bertie Ahern said he believed that after Paisley steps down, the power-sharing government "will last, because I believe there are very pragmatic people in all of the parties."
"We hope and pray that what has been achieved through the leadership of Dr. Paisley, and others, will continue," the Irish leader said.
|
LONDON, March 4 -- Ian Paisley, the Protestant clergyman who has towered over Northern Ireland politics for 40 years, announced Tuesday that he will resign as head of his political party and step down as the leader of a power-sharing government he helped shape.
| 13.56 | 0.72 | 1.24 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/04/AR2008030402005.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/04/AR2008030402005.html
|
Supreme Court to Release Same-Day Tapes
|
2008030519
|
The Supreme Court announced yesterday that it will take the special step of releasing audiotapes of oral arguments on the same day that it hears a case challenging the District's gun law.
Every argument before the justices is recorded, but the tapes normally are not available until well after the court's term has ended. But beginning in 2000, with the arguments in Bush v. Gore, the court has released same-day audiotapes in high-profile cases when there is substantial media interest.
Because the court is not open to cameras, the audiotapes are the only recordings of the proceedings.
The case of District of Columbia v. Heller, to be heard March 18, will be the court's first consideration of the meaning of the Second Amendment in nearly 70 years. Last year, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled 2 to 1 that the District's ban on private handgun possession violated the amendment.
The Supreme Court is being asked to decide whether the amendment protects an individual's right to own a firearm, and if so, what restrictions government may place on that right. It is one of the most prominent cases of the court's term. More than 60 organizations and individuals have filed amicus briefs to support the city or those challenging what is acknowledged as the nation's strictest gun control law.
This term, the court released same-day audiotapes in two other important cases, one involving the rights of detainees at the Guantanamo Bay military prison and the other involving the constitutionality of lethal injections.
The arguments in the gun control case are scheduled for 10 a.m. March 18. Each side will receive 30 minutes to present its case, and U.S. Solicitor General Paul D. Clement has been granted 15 minutes for the federal government's views. The tapes will be released soon after the proceedings.
Clement's brief agrees with the law's challengers that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to bear arms, but it argues that the appeals court too broadly decided the case against the District. It recommends that the case be returned to lower courts.
|
The Supreme Court announced yesterday that it will take the special step of releasing audiotapes of oral arguments on the same day that it hears a case challenging the District's gun law.
| 11.852941 | 1 | 34 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/04/AR2008030401842.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/04/AR2008030401842.html
|
Park Police Chief Is Relieved of Command
|
2008030519
|
U.S. Park Police Chief Dwight E. Pettiford was removed from operational command of the troubled force yesterday while Department of the Interior officials assess his suitability to continue as chief, the National Park Service announced.
Pettiford will continue to hold the title of chief but will be moved to Interior Department headquarters to help formulate a program of reforms for the force, David Barna, a Park Service spokesman, said.
Command is being taken over by an acting assistant police chief, a former Park Police major, Salvatore R. Lauro, who once commanded the special forces branch, Barna said.
The moves come a month after an Interior Department inspector general's report strongly criticized the force for failing to adequately protect such landmarks as the Statue of Liberty, the Lincoln Memorial and the Washington Monument.
The report, though not referring to Pettiford by name, said the chief must share the blame. It said that the force was plagued by low morale, poor leadership and bad organization and that it was understaffed, insufficiently trained and woefully equipped.
The report suggested that hallowed sites on the Mall are weakly guarded and vulnerable to terrorist attack. It included surveillance photographs of what appeared to be a Park Police officer sleeping in a police vehicle as well as private contract security guards talking on a cellphone and reading the newspaper at the Washington Monument.
The report also criticized the force for failing to monitor the quality of and wear and tear on officers' ballistic vests and for equipping officers with high-mileage patrol cars.
Pettiford will be detailed to work with a management oversight team that the department has set up to respond to recommendations in the report, Barna said.
Asked whether Pettiford might resume command, Barna said, "We don't know." He pointed out that one of the report's 20 recommendations was that the Park Service and Interior Department assess whether the chief "is equipped to effectively advance the mission and operations of the agency."
Phone calls requesting comment from Pettiford were not immediately returned by the Park Police spokesman. In an interview last month, Pettiford said that he was doing the best he could with what he had and that he had inherited some of the problems. He added that he was already moving to address others.
Asked at the time about the accusation that the monuments were not adequately protected, he said: "They're still standing."
He added that he hoped to stay on as police chief.
Pettiford was a top commander for Teresa C. Chambers, the department's first female chief, who was fired in 2004 after raising concerns about staffing and security. He took over that year.
The Park Police has 592 sworn officers, 97 civilian employees and 30 private security guards, officials have said. The agency helps patrol sites mostly in Washington but also is present at the Statue of Liberty and the Golden Gate Bridge.
Jim Austin, chairman of the Fraternal Order of Police labor committee that represents Park Police officers, said of Pettiford's removal: "I think it's an important first step of trying to get the Park Police right back on the track. . . . There was an impediment to our progress with Chief Pettiford."
Austin said he was getting positive reaction to the decision across the board.
Lauro is "a very personable guy who tends to use well-thought-out intelligence and common sense in his decisions," Austin said. "He was widely respected throughout the Park Police."
As head of the special forces branch, Lauro supervised the SWAT team, as well as motorcycle, aviation, canine and intelligence units, the Park Service said. He retired two years ago after 25 years on the force and took a civilian law enforcement job with the Interior Department, Barna said.
|
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.
| 15.804348 | 0.478261 | 0.521739 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/04/AR2008030401239.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/04/AR2008030401239.html
|
Pilot Plan for Incentive Pay Unveiled
|
2008030519
|
The voluntary program, called Financial Incentive Rewards for Supervisors and Teachers, or FIRST, will allow teachers to make as much as $10,000 above base salary for improving the performance of their students, teaching in hard-to-staff schools and subjects, and participating in evaluations and professional development. Principals and assistant principals will be able to make up to $12,500 and $11,000, respectively.
County education leaders hope the offer of extra pay will help Prince George's recruit talented teachers and attract the best teachers and administrators to academically struggling schools. The extra pay would represent a sizable bump for a starting teacher salary of about $41,000.
Although labor organizations across the country have often opposed pay-for-performance programs, saying they can be imposed unfairly by management, union leaders at yesterday's news conference said that they like the voluntary nature of the county's program and that they had been invited to help design it from the beginning.
The program, in the works for more than a year, is funded by a $17.1 million grant from the federal government. It begins next school year at 12 elementary, middle and high schools, and Superintendent John E. Deasy said he hopes to expand the program to the entire system in succeeding years.
The schools in the pilot program are: Largo and Crossland high schools; Oxon Hill, G. Gardner Shugart, William Wirt and Nicholas Orem middle schools; and Bladensburg, Bradbury Heights, Clinton Grove, Morningside, Arrowhead and James H. Harrison elementary schools.
Teachers will receive up to 50 percent of the $10,000 reward if their school and students meet targets for growth in academic achievement. They get 15 percent if they work in a hard-to-staff subject area such as math or science, another 15 percent if they complete an evaluation, and 20 percent for engaging in professional development and assuming positions of leadership.
Pat Fletcher, a Board of Education member and former union representative who had fought against a pay-for-performance program for government workers in Takoma Park, said the school system has gone about the program in the right way.
"The uniqueness of this is that management and unions are working in partnership," Fletcher (District 3) said. "Too often that doesn't happen."
Acceptance of such programs seems to be increasing as the federal No Child Left Behind law pressures school systems to improve performance on tests or face sanctions.
D.C. Schools Chancellor Michelle A. Rhee has said she supports financial rewards for high-performing educators. In December, Rhee and Mayor Adrian M. Fenty (D) gave $500,000 in awards to the principals, teachers and staffs of three schools where students' test scores rose by more than 20 percent.
In Prince George's, labor leaders were optimistic that the plan would improve student performance and teacher compensation.
"We definitely believe that it could work," said Donald Briscoe, president of the Prince George's Educators' Association, which represents 10,000 teachers. "We're trying to do everything possible collaboratively to make it work."
"We absolutely expect ourselves to be a model for other school districts around the country," Deasy said. "A program done well benefits all."
|
Prince George's County education and labor leaders unveiled a much-anticipated pilot program yesterday that will offer teachers and administrators at 12 schools incentive pay for good performance.
| 20.129032 | 0.903226 | 1.548387 |
medium
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/04/AR2008030402514.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008030519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/04/AR2008030402514.html
|
Just Zip It - washingtonpost.com
|
2008030519
|
Pity the carless urbanite. Relying on the subway to get to the mall, the bus to get to the bars, the bike to get to work, feet and friends to get anywhere else. But what happens when the subway line ends or you can't persuade anyone to chauffeur?
I live in the District and am carless by choice -- and proud of it. So when I wanted to do a little market-hopping in Amish country recently, I turned to Zipcar. The car-share program has locations scattered around the city; for a set price, it provides insurance and gas and gives drivers 180 miles per day. (Go farther and you pay extra.)
Turns out that's a rather short tether. I had to nix plans to visit Lancaster County, Pa., which is 130 miles one way. But the Amish community in St. Mary's County? I could drive the whole length of the county, down to Point Lookout, and I'd be only 77 miles from home.
But substituting St. Mary's for Lancaster was hardly a tragedy. As it happens, St. Mary's County was the birthplace of religious freedom in the United States. In 1634, colonists from England set up St. Mary's City, the capital of Lord Baltimore's new colony and the first to trumpet religious freedom for all. Back in the days of England's bloody religious wars, a place promoting peace between Protestants and Catholics was a big deal.
Almost 400 years later, St. Mary's is still home to plenty of mainline Protestants and Catholics. There are bathtub Madonnas in front yards in Clements, tiny Episcopal churches near Leonardtown and three giant wooden crosses next to a trampoline in someone's yard right on Route 5. Interesting variety, all of it, but it's when you see the first buggy-crossing sign that you know you're not in D.C. anymore.
Starting in the 1930s, Mennonites and Amish from Pennsylvania started buying farms in Southern Maryland, with the Amish in the north near Thompson Corner Road and the Mennonites in the south around Loveville. The Amish and Mennonites are Anabaptist, a type of Protestantism dating from the early 1600s. They are known as "plain people" because they largely avoid modern technology (hence the horse-and-buggy transport of the Amish), preferring to live apart from the outside world. Mostly.
But as in Lancaster County, where Amish crafters peddle their goods to tourists, the Anabaptists in Southern Maryland open their doors, too, to shoppers from outside the community. And St. Mary's County conveniently publishes a brochure listing its Amish- and Mennonite-owned businesses. Perfect for a curious day-tripper.
My first stop was the historic hamlet of Charlotte Hall, 15 miles south of Waldorf, where a twice-weekly market draws big crowds in the summertime. It has seven acres of covered stalls, in which vendors sell fresh produce, canned peppers, knockoff purses, body piercing, ATVs and silk-screen tees. The Amish sellers are clustered around the "Buggy Parking" sign on the south end of the market, near the used furniture dealers (perfect for the Ikea-weary). Across the parking lot, a stony-faced man was selling cakes, breads and honey. I asked about the jar labeled "chow-chow," and he silently handed me a laminated sheet of paper listing the ingredients, which included corn, melon and turmeric. I bought it to try on a braver day. Then I opted for a cup of chili from Rudy's Cake & Steak cart, over by the cellphone chargers, rhinestone-studded boots and gospel CDs.
Afterward, while I meandered down Thompson Corner Road, the views were dotted with telltale signs of Amish farms: windmills, clotheslines strung with muted garments and hand-painted signs for crafts or eggs, all marked "closed on Sundays."
Zipping along in my Zipcar, I'd slow down to stare whenever a horse and buggy crossed my path, and craned my neck when I glimpsed a farmer in his field with a team of horses. The longer I looked, the more sheepish I felt, as though I was intruding on people who only wish to live simply.
I felt the most culpable when I pulled over to take a picture of my Zipcar next to a buggy-crossing sign. Across the street, a woman in a bonnet strolling across a field saw me and ducked into a shed, perhaps afraid I was trying to snap a photo of her. (Most Amish and Mennonites prefer not to be photographed. And, P.S., I wasn't.) Of course, I could have just been paranoid; maybe she was going to the shed anyway. But when I got back in the car and started the engine, I saw her leave the shed and keep walking across the field.
As I drove back home, I kept checking the odometer, and I could almost hear it going click click as the miles added up. I'd come close to running through my allowance of 180 miles, having crisscrossed St. Mary's County, cruising down to St. Clement's Island Museum (site of the colonists' first landing), up to Leonardtown (good eats!) and Thompson Corner Road (twice). There were restaurants I wanted to try and more shops I wanted to visit, though I'd be relieved to get rid of the car and stop worrying about speed limits, seat belts and parking spaces.
Till the next time I get a Zipcar. Unless someone invents Zipbuggy. I'd be all over that.
|
A writer wanted to see Amish country, plain and simple. Off to Maryland's St. Mary's County.
| 51.714286 | 0.857143 | 1.619048 |
high
|
medium
|
mixed
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.