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/2008/01/29/AR2008012900745.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008013019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/29/AR2008012900745.html
|
It's a Guac-Off: He Says Serrano, She Says Lime Juice
|
2008013019
|
With a mere five food shopping days left till Super Bowl XLII, we both know where we're headed: the pile of Hass avocados in our grocers' produce departments. It's guacamole time.
And not surprisingly for those who remember our chili smackdown last year, our go-to recipes come from different playbooks. The Texan (Joe) might think he would have the edge with a Mexican dish. His plan is to stick with a Diana Kennedy classic, so pure that no spritz of lime juice is allowed to defend against a threat of brown oxidation on that lush field of green.
"An incentive to eat it all before the halftime show," the Texan says with the confidence of a Tom Brady. Besides onion, serrano chili peppers, cilantro and salt, his dip needs only ripe avocados and a little tomato. The accompaniment: fried corn tortilla chips. Why mess with success?
However, he launches the challenge unaware of all the building years the non-Texan (Bonnie) has put into her own Team Guac. Early batches were inconclusive and all over the place, not unlike the career stats of Eli Manning.
But she has found a winner. Lime juice, cumin, scallion, cilantro, salt and pepper go into the bowl first; then it's the fruit squad's turn. Avocados must be ripe, but a few should be firm for texture and depth. Sometimes, sour cream smooths things out -- or stretches the guacamole into overtime. A splash of hot pepper sauce keeps things lively.
For extra points, dip with house-baked flour tortilla chips. Fritos need not apply.
On several points we do agree: Buy the avocados in the next few days, so they can ripen to your liking. The words "making guacamole" and "mayonnaise" should never appear in the same recipe. Lots of other varieties of avocados may also be used to make a fine guacamole, but we prefer the pebbly-skinned Hass, which are often specially priced on Super Bowl weekend.
And don't even think about those frozen, overly acidulated, soon-to-be-slimy avocado halves sold by the bag. That's a penalty, for sure.
TIPS: ABOUT AVOCADOS AND CHIPS
- To ripen avocados more quickly, place them in a bowl or paper bag with some ripe bananas or apples.
- To keep a bowl of guacamole from oxidizing (turning brownish-gray), press plastic wrap directly against the surface.
- To bake flour tortilla chips, preheat the oven to 350 degrees. Lightly grease 2 large rimmed baking sheets with nonstick cooking oil spray. Using 1 1/2 tablespoons of oil total, brush the tops of eight 8-inch flour tortillas, then sprinkle lightly with kosher salt. Cut each tortilla into 8 wedges and spread them out on the baking sheets. Bake for about 15 minutes or until they are golden brown and crisp. Serve warm, or let cool and place in an airtight container.
Staff Favorites is an occasional series in which staff members share a recipe that we turn to time and again:
|
With a mere five food shopping days left till Super Bowl XLII, we both know where we're headed: the pile of Hass avocados in our grocers' produce departments. It's guacamole time.
| 15.815789 | 1 | 38 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/29/AR2008012901040.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008013019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/29/AR2008012901040.html
|
Bad Parents Don't Make Bad Schools
|
2008013019
|
Do unsupportive parents create pathetic schools or do pathetic schools create unsupportive parents? It is the most frustrating of chicken-and-egg questions. Many education experts will say it is a bit of both, but that's a cop-out. Most of our worst schools are full of low-income children in our biggest cities. No one has yet found a way to revive those schools in any significant way by training the students' parents to be more engaged with their children's educations. It is too hard to do and too unlikely to have much impact on the chaotic school district leadership.
What has worked, again and again, is the opposite: Bring an energetic and focused leader into the school, let that person recruit and train good teachers and find ways to get rid of those who resist making the necessary changes. Great teaching makes great schools, and once you have a good school, parents become engaged and active.
This happens, if you think about it, not only in our most disadvantaged neighborhoods but in those places where the rich folks live. Why do parents moving to this area flock to the suburbs where the housing is most expensive? It is because they have the best schools. Why are those schools full of parent volunteers? Because those mothers and fathers know their children are being given the best possible instruction and realize that their extra efforts will enrich an already good product. Schools that reject parental help and are slow to rid themselves of inadequate teachers -- there are some even in wealthy neighborhoods -- are readily detected by parental radar and find their PTA meetings poorly attended.
Yet we still blame parents for bad schools, a vestige of the racism and classism that distorts popular opinion on education everywhere. Stroll down any street in America and ask the neighbors about the local school. If it is full of the children of affluent parents, they will say it is great place to learn. If the children are largely from low-income, largely minority homes, they will say it is not a good school, even if some of its teachers have made great strides in raising achievement. When I write stories praising such schools for confounding expectations, I invariably get e-mails saying I have to be wrong, that such kids with such parents just can't be doing what I am seeing them do.
The Washington Post survey proved this point in a vivid way. When asked what was the biggest of a list of problems in D.C. schools, the highest portion of respondents, 20 percent, said parental apathy. When asked to read a list of issues and check all that they thought were big problems in the schools, parental apathy at 76 percent came in a close second to condition of facilities, 78 percent. (That is also an incorrect answer. I have visited some terrific schools in creaky buildings, but that is an issue for another day.) The choice that got the lowest number of votes as a big problem was quality of the teachers. Only 47 percent picked that issue, even though it is clear to anyone who has seen a bad school change to a good one that the teaching is by far the most important factor. (To be fair to D.C. teachers, I am talking about the quality of the teaching, not the quality of the teachers, which in some circumstances may not be the same thing. Good teachers stuck in a badly run school rarely do their best.)
Parents, no matter how much money they have or how difficult their lives are, are often smart about schools. They can figure out which ones are adding value to their children's lives, which are not, and they act accordingly. Mount Vernon High School in Fairfax County was struggling to keep middle-class families from moving away in the early 1990s as low-income families moved into the Route 1 corridor and standards lapsed. A group of community leaders, including then-school board member Kris Amundson, former superintendent Robert R. "Bud" Spillane, then-assistant superintendent Nancy Sprague and former Mount Vernon principal Calanthia Tucker, introduced the International Baccalaureate program to the school and staffed it with exceptional teachers, like Betsy Calhoon and Bernie Glaze. Three years later, Amundson was hearing middle-class parents at cocktail parties brag about their children being admitted to IB at Mount Vernon.
Or consider an example in a New York City neighborhood much like the poorer parts of the District. Dave Levin and Frank Corcoran, both in their 20s, tried to start a middle school called the KIPP Academy in the South Bronx in 1995. Parents were not impressed. Some called them crazy for thinking they could make any headway in a school system that had disappointed them for so long. But Levin and Corcoran kept at it and succeeded in adding some first-class veteran teachers, such as Charlie Randall and Jerry Myers, who were decidedly not crazy. Five years later, KIPP test scores were the highest in the Bronx. When the local school board considered a plan to eject the school from its building, 200 parents showed up and chanted, "KIPP! KIPP! KIPP!" incessantly until the plan was shelved and the meeting adjourned.
The Jan. 21 Post story by David Nakamura and Jennifer Agiesta that accompanied the poll results indicated that D.C. Schools Chancellor Michelle A. Rhee understands this dynamic. She said the school system cannot demand more of parents until it offers better services. "I have seen firsthand how parents are treated in our schools," she said. "I can't blame them if they do not jump to volunteer."
Nor, I think, can they be blamed if they protest when Rhee tries to close their neighborhood schools, having learned that change in the D.C. schools is rarely for the better. But Rhee has spent all of her professional life doing exactly what has to be done, finding ways to get the best principals and best teachers so parents will have a great school to rally around. It is always a risk for any D.C. parent to hope that school system leaders will finally do it right, but at least Rhee, unlike most D.C. residents, doesn't think the sorry state of education in the city is the parents' fault.
|
A Washington Post poll this month revealed, once again, that D.C. residents put the most blame for their failing public schools on apathetic and uninvolved parents. Many Americans feel the same way about the same school troubles in their areas. They are wrong, but in such a convoluted way that it is...
| 20.637931 | 0.775862 | 1.189655 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/01/edwards_to_leave_presidential.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008013019id_/http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/01/edwards_to_leave_presidential.html
|
Edwards's Departure & A New Democratic Race
|
2008013019
|
Former senator John Edwards (N.C.) ended his bid for the presidency today in New Orleans, bringing to a close a five-year quest for the nation's highest office.
Edwards was joined by his wife, Elizabeth, as well as his three children on stage. He took part in a Habitat for Humanity event following the announcement.
Edwards did not endorse either Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) or Barack Obama (Ill.) today and has no plans to weigh in for either candidate in the immediate future, according to aides.
"It's time for me to step aside so that history can blaze its path," Edwards said to a small crowd of supporters and reporters.
Edwards spoke in person to both Obama and Clinton yesterday and informed both candidates he was considering leaving the race. Sources familiar with those conversations insist Edwards did not asked for any sort of quid pro quo in exchange for an endorsement but rather asked Clinton and Obama to promise him to keep the focus on the issue of poverty as the campaign moved forward.
Today Edwards said that the two remaining frontrunners "both pledged to me and through me to America that they will make ending poverty central to their campaign for the presidency."
In a statement released this morning, Obama praised Edwards for shining a light on the issue of poverty and serving as a voice for the middle class in the campaign.
"While his campaign may end today, the cause of their lives endures for all of us who still believe that we can achieve that dream of one America," Obama said of Edwards and his wife, Elizabeth.
Clinton echoed those sentiments: "John Edwards ended his campaign today in the same way he started it -- by standing with the people who are too often left behind and nearly always left out of our national debate."
For Edwards, the decision to leave the race marks a significant reversal. Despite poorer-than-expected performances in Nevada's caucuses and South Carolina's primary, Edwards had pledged to remain in the race through the convention. His senior campaign strategists believed that if the former North Carolina Senator continued to accrue delegates through Super Tuesday and beyond, he would be in a position to directly influence the identity of the nominee.
Edwards struggled from the start to disrupt the dynamic of a two person race between Clinton and Obama. A win in Iowa's caucuses might have done the trick but Edwards came in second -- well behind Obama and slightly ahead of Clinton. In New Hampshire, Edwards attacked Clinton as a defender of the status quo and tried to cast the race as a choice between two change candidates: himself and Obama. But, New Hampshire voters disagreed, handing Clinton a stunning win and relegating Edwards to third place. The die was cast. Edwards received a dismal four percent in Nevada and, in his home state of South Carolina, ran a distant third last weekend.
Less than 48 hours ago, his campaign announced a new advertising effort in 10 states set to vote on Feb. 5 and reiterated their insistence that he was in the race to stay.
"This thing is going for a long time," deputy campaign manager Jonathan Prince predicted at the time.
In the end, it was not so. The campaign was loath to discuss the reasoning behind Edwards' decision before he formally made it, but the long odds of actually winning the nomination must have played a significant role in making up Edwards' mind. Edwards has also been at this game since at least 2003 -- ending up as the vice presidential nominee after a stronger than expected showing in the 2004 primary process and announcing his second run for the presidency in late 2006 from the same place he will end his race today: New Orleans.
With Edwards out of the race, the Democratic fight becomes a true two-person affair with Obama and Clinton battling one another for delegates on Super Tuesday and, in all likelihood, beyond. As we wrote earlier this week, Edwards' Super Tuesday strategy of focusing on states in the South and with significant rural populations seemed to make Obama's path rather than Clinton's more difficult over the coming weeks.
Edwards' departure also throws open the debate over whether his supporters will flock to Obama or Clinton.
Opinions differed in the moments after the decision became public.
Charlie Cook, a political analyst and publisher of the Cook Political Report, said that the racial divisions apparent in early votes could impact where Edwards' supporters ultimately wind up.
"While one can plausibly argue that Edwards withdrawal may unite the anti-Clinton vote, one can also argue that Edwards overwhelmingly white block of supporters come loose and might behave much as other white Democrats have done in the contests after Iowa, not vote for Obama," Cook said. "I don't know which of those arguments will prevail."
Carter Eskew, a senior Democratic strategist unaffiliated in this contest, offered a contrary opinion. He argued that "on balance" Edwards' departure will help Obama more than Clinton. "The Edwards voter profile is closer to her voters, but if they weren't for her before, not sure they will switch now," he said.
Exit polling conducted yesterday in Florida suggests that Edwards supporters are equally inclined to back Obama and Clinton. Forty seven percent of Edwards backers in Florida said they would be "satisfied" with Clinton as the nominee with 13 percent saying they would be "very satisfied". A similar 47 percent said they would be "satisfied" with Obama as the party's standard bearer with 19 percent saying they would be "very satisfied". Those trends were affirmed by exit poll data from South Carolina's primary on Jan. 26 as more than six in 10 Edwards supporters said they would be satisfied with either Clinton or Obama as the nominee.
By Chris Cillizza | January 30, 2008; 1:38 PM ET | Category: Eye on 2008 Previous: Florida: First Thoughts on McCain, Clinton Wins | Next: Winners and Losers: Florida Primary Edition
Add The Fix to Your Site
At a recnet debate, a reporter asked Hillary about the dislike between the Latino and Black populations and she answered back "that's Historic", but what she did not Say or try to Do is try to bridge the divide by stating something like "yes, that is too bad" or "and we will try to work on bridging the differences." NO! It is to her advantage to pit one group against the other for her own personal gain. She is no change agent and she is no Real champion for unity. Maureen Dowd's new op-ed piece gives an insightful glance into the real Hillary. That it was her in the beginning who Snubbed Barack and not the otherway around. She is one way for the cameras and another way when no one is apparently looking. A reporter asked her if she thought she was snubbed by Barack Obama and instead of trying to defuse the situation (like Barack would have for unity's sake) she commented on how she put her hand out and is still waiting. That was such spin and such a divisive remark. However, I do think the facade is coming off.
Posted by: wdsoulplane | January 31, 2008 5:54 AM
Obama is the one that could never win a general elction .If he was elected to run against the GOP they would just do what they hve done in every election , and that is play the fear factor in saying that Obama has no experien when it comes to National defense ( which is true ). They would scare most independent voters in voting for them and you would see another 4 years of GOP in the white house
Posted by: FritzieGr | January 31, 2008 12:50 AM
For what little its worth I'm glad to see so many other people are disappointed Edwards is out of the race. With all the focus on Obama/Clinton, it was easy to forget that had he not had to go up against two historical candidates, his chances would have been much better. I like both Barack and Hillary a great deal, but Edwards insistence on pro-poor, pro-union, and pro-piece ideas are going to be difficult to completely replace. My hope is that he will become Secretary of Labor and help turn it around for the working men and women out there.
Posted by: StrayCatSeventeen | January 30, 2008 6:35 PM
People people People...I cannot believe all of the folks ..Edwards supporters to be sure...who wonder at Edwards dropping out before super Tuesday. Look y'all...he is a world class opportunist. It is pretty clear he would have been under the 15% threshold in most if not all of the super Tuesday contests and received no delegates. He has really struck a wrong chord with Americans given his divisisve, shallow, opportunistic, manipulative rhetoric. And he is very unpoplular in the south, NC and SC in particular. I'm in NC and he couldn't win dog catcher. I feel some sympathy for those counting on Edwards to bring meaning to their lives. Hire a lawyer and sue somebody for no reason and maybe you'll feel better. Or get a life. This is a happy day for the USA!
Posted by: GGGF55 | January 30, 2008 6:16 PM
Edwards' chief issue, poverty, is a phoney issue. The only Americans who are poor are those unwilling to work. The voters saw Edwards' populism for what it was: self-indulgence and fraud.
Posted by: ravitchn | January 30, 2008 5:34 PM
Claudia - how do Jews feel about Obama?
Posted by: jimoneill50 | January 30, 2008 5:19 PM
"Since Iowa Obama has not done well with the white vote, last night he did worse than he did in SC, 23% to his 25% in SC.
The whites who went to Edwards are going to hold their breath and vote for Hillary.
Posted by: PatrickNYC1 | January 30, 2008 04:14 PM "
you racists show your face. Keep it up. Racism is really helping hillary. Your doing great. Hows the weather in la-la land
Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 30, 2008 4:46 PM
Why does Charlie Cook keep pounding the race drum? Frankly, he has become part of the problem. Reporters defer to his political judgments because of his years of experience and admittedly impressive ability to spout off on any Congressional race with merely the district number as a prompt. However, his analysis is stuck in the the cynical mindset of the '80s, '90s and early '00s and is rooted in a arrogant disdain for the voters.
Posted by: jonathanmstevens | January 30, 2008 4:16 PM
'My fellow democrats, ask yourself this: Can you support in good conscience a candidate, HRC, who wants to change the delegate selection rules (FLA. & Mich.) in the middle of the game? I can't. That's the way Republicans do business. Has anyone thought thru the consequences of seating the FLA. and Mich. delegations and what would happen if that decided the nomination?
John, end this maddness. Endorse OBAMA. Do it now while your voice will still be heard and make a difference.'
Posted by: m_tommy | January 30, 2008 03:26 PM
Man you Obamaheads crack me up. First of all the seating of FL and MI delegats would not happen until either HRC or BHO get the nomination. They also both endorsed doing so, Obama did it last year at a fundraiser in FL. Both canidates have been doing fundraising there, the deal was not to campaign there. The one who broke that promise was Obama, by running his ads on cable which were broadcasted last week all over the country.
I wish you people who back him would look at the numbers but that would take both thinking and some work, you'd all rather have 'hope' and sing kumbaya. Since Iowa Obama has not done well with the white vote, last night he did worse than he did in SC, 23% to his 25% in SC.
The whites who went to Edwards are going to hold their breath and vote for Hillary.
Posted by: PatrickNYC1 | January 30, 2008 4:14 PM
I am surprised. I thought he would continue at least through Tuesday. Perhaps there are personal reasons.
All three of the top Democratic contenders are center left so I think Edwards' supporters are up for grabs. I think someone would be wrong to see votes for Obama and Edwards as "anti-Hillary" votes, therefore Obama claims most of them.
It will be interesting to hear what kind of tune we are singing next Wednesday.
Posted by: AlaninMissoula | January 30, 2008 4:12 PM
All the best to the Edwards family.
Posted by: lylepink | January 30, 2008 4:10 PM
just adding my vote for edwards as attorney general (preferably in the obama administration, of course).
he could raise hell, and he'd do more with the job than he could as VP.
i also feel for the guy -- something was missing, but i don't know what. but i have nothing but respect for him and elizabeth.
Posted by: news.briefings | January 30, 2008 3:27 PM
I've been an Edwards supporter since his announcement, or actually 2004. With his loss in Iowa and NH, I moved to the Obama camp out of necessity. The writing was on the wall.
My fellow democrats, ask yourself this: Can you support in good conscience a candidate, HRC, who wants to change the delegate selection rules (FLA. & Mich.) in the middle of the game? I can't. That's the way Republicans do business. Has anyone thought thru the consequences of seating the FLA. and Mich. delegations and what would happen if that decided the nomination?
John, end this maddness. Endorse OBAMA. Do it now while your voice will still be heard and make a difference.
Posted by: m_tommy | January 30, 2008 3:26 PM
Edwards supporters need to throw their support to Obama. Can you imagine an Obama vs. McCain race. Obama is 46 McCain is 71, it will be a race about the past vs. the future. Democrats will get a coalition of the young, the middle aged and yes even the old. Many old people are very forward looking and they want to hand the country over to the next generation. Obama will be that next generation against a McCain. If Hillary is the nominee McCain will crush her in a landslide, independents and the old voting block will flock to him. Hillary they know is divisive and they don't want another four years of a divide America. I hope democrats make the wise choice of looking forward and not backwards.
Posted by: lumi21us | January 30, 2008 3:22 PM
'1] I do not know anybody who ever was for DK.'
--he had quite a few fans in NY, mark. where i live is an old aritists/boho community, altho very upscale now, very 'social justice/activist place.
also, strangely, as I said, kucinch seemed to have had a lot of fans in the catskills, which is something like half radical rightwing/militia and half vacation homers and artists. ron paul big up there too, of course.
'2] Are you telling me there are some physicians in your congregation who like HRC?'
absolutely... again one of the major philosophical underpinnings of judaism is helping those in need, and many physicians beleive single payer is the only way to bring fairness to the health care system. most of the docs i know--and i have several as neighbors and friends - loathe the insurance companies and bemoan how they have damaged patient care with their profit-driven buisness model.
that said, of course there are differences among jews, too --there are your scarsdale types, cross county, who are mostly interested in making money. but these aren't the people i know, or want to know.
and yes, hillary is pretty popular in NY, most dems seem to like her, think she's a decent senator and i don't hear much grumbling from r's either.
Posted by: claudialong | January 30, 2008 3:20 PM
Goodbye Edwards! Thank You for being a great voice for the party and those who seek a true progressive path. It's a shame the media killed your bid from the start.
Hopefully Edwards will get the VP and we have an Obama/Edwards ticket. What Edwards needs to do is announce on Feb 4 that all of his supporters should vote Obama, the only decent democrat left. Those of us on the far left who supported Edwards will definately go to Obama since he's a democratic and Clinton is basically a Republican war monger. Edwards needs to assert this though, and let the people know that Clinton will only be a minor step up from Bush. Obama is by no means a flawless candidate, but I think he could do a good job and he has some potential to make real change.
As for those who think Clinton will now win because white people will vote for her I ask this, why are you so hung up on race? It seems the media wants to make this a black v.s. white which is just ridiculous. Yes most Clinton supporters are white, but most of those people have been for Clinton since the beginning. Personally, I think since Bidan, Dodd, and Richardson dropped most voters who would go for Clinton were already supporting her. I think most of the Edwards vote is anti-Clinton. And BTW, Obama has a much better chance of beating McCain than Clinton (there really is not much of a difference between McCain and Clinton). Clinton is too polarizing and McCain would get more from the middle and beat her(and some of us on the far left would look for a third party before supporting Clinton). Obama, on the other hand, is a more likeable guy, who would sound much more different on the issues than McCain. With Obama, McCain could be exposed as a conservative who is more to the right (and more in line with Bush) than people realize.
Bottom line Obama beats McCain or Romney Clinton maybe can beat Romney McCain beats Clinton Huckabee could still win the nomination but he could not win a general election
Posted by: mcgratsp | January 30, 2008 3:16 PM
for the clinton supporters here using edwards droppingout as a club to bash obama. Edwards is droppin gout so clinton doesn't win. Sacraficing himself for his country. He is a true patriot. The edwards and the tillman's are what this country is about. The gop/clinton is what is wrong with it. Choose wisely.
"John Edwards: It's time for me to step aside so that history can blaze its path By: Nicole Belle @ 11:59 AM - PST
Download | Play Download | Play (h/t Bill)
The Edwards campaign has put the full speech up on YouTube.
I began my presidential campaign here to remind the country that we, as citizens and as a government, have a moral responsibility to each other, and what we do together matters. We must do better, if we want to live up to the great promise of this country that we all love so much.
It is appropriate that I come here today. It's time for me to step aside so that history can blaze its path. We do not know who will take the final steps to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, but what we do know is that our Democratic Party will make history. We will be strong, we will be unified, and with our convictions and a little backbone we will take back the White House in November and we'll create hope and opportunity for this country. "
God bless. May your wife get health if it is God's will.
Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 30, 2008 3:06 PM
Mark-in-A: Apropos Ron Paul--life's little ironies--a friend in upstate NY [RP fan] just sent me the following, on American Idol meets the Republicans. It's worth a laugh on this dreary day if you haven't seen it:
Posted by: radicalpatriot | January 30, 2008 3:04 PM
Meanwhile, two more senior GOP House members are packing it in, Kenny Hulshof and Tom Davis. Hulshof is joining a crazy governor's race in MO, while Davis simply sees the handwriting on the wall for him in his Dem-trending VA district.
The minority caucus in the 111th Congress will be younger, less experienced, kookier, and smaller.
Posted by: Spectator2 | January 30, 2008 2:52 PM
Although I disagre with much, the edwards mindframe is to be respected if their people are going to be obama's. How anyone can hate obama right now I do not understand. You can call bush and many in his party terrorists. He deserves that.
what has obama done to generate hate from the right and moderates? Just being himself? So he's a terrorist muslim? that is why the race questions come into play. not by obama, but by his enemies.
A agree with some said above but not all, at all. Jsut thought I could save some people soem trouble. Be respectful of what edards represented. Otherwise clinton will get them by default.
Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 30, 2008 2:42 PM
Mark - well, just goes to show me... every time I start to think I understand something about Texas, I find out that I'm wrong.
Posted by: rpy1 | January 30, 2008 2:39 PM
"Some tips for Obama supporters, from an Edwards partisan by JedReport Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:15:10 AM PST Here's a list of ten thoughts for Obama supporters, from an Edwards partisan.
Don't worry, they aren't snarky. They are actually thoughtful (I hope) and sincere. For real.
I don't speak for all Edwards supporters, just for myself.
JedReport's diary :: :: These are no particular order.
Probably the most visceral concern that people have about Obama is the Donnie McClurkin thing. Now, I know you're probably sick of hearing about it, especially given how the Clintons were last weekend, but the racialiciosness of the Clinton campaign does not excuse the McClurkin incident. You should bookmark Obama's apology for McClurkin and have at hand quotes from his recent speech repudiating homophobia at Ebenezer. Firing back with Hillary's position on DOMA will not be convincing. You need to make a positive case for your guy. For a lot of people who'd otherwise support Obama, getting this wrong would be a deal breaker. Read this article (Subprime Obama) and this article ('Irresponsible' Mortgages Have Opened Doors to Many of the Excluded). The latter article is written by his chief economist. It might take awhile to get it, but inside these articles you'll find the reasons why many Edwards fans are so skeptical of Obama on an ideological level. Stop hating on Paul Krugman. If you want to be neutral, fine. (Though you shouldn't be.) I know Krugman seems like he's being tough on your guy. The reality -- hard though it may be to see -- is that in the long run, Krugman is giving him very good advice. Never utter the name "David Brooks" in the presence of an Edwards supporter unless you append "is a piece of poo" or some equivalent. If you don't understand why even right now Brooks is undermining your candidate, read this diary. Concede that the mandates battle for what it is: Obama chose an inferior policy option because he thinks it is more viable politically. Moreover, the only excuse for him having gone Harry and Louise is that he was responding to some pretty rough attacks by Hillary Clinton. It's actually a fair argument to make -- Hillary started hammering him during the Las Vegas debate in November, and continued with some pretty heavy artillery in Iowa. Don't take everything Obama says as gospel. Nobody is perfect. It's okay to disagree with him. He's also a good politician. Sometimes he's lying. That's cool. If I thought he was 100% honest, I'd be concerned. Help Obama's campaign get some pickup truck in it. Believe it or not, when Bill Clinton ran in 1992, people thought he was too much of an elitist blowhard. Carville put some pickup truck in him. The line of attack on Obama is going to involve making him out to be an elitist. Don't let him get on the wrong side of a culture war. Don't get cocky. If the election were held today, Hillary would win. More Edwards supporters lean to Hillary than to Obama. I'm not one of them. I lean towards Obama. He's got so much more upside. But you'd be surprised at the number of people who are deeply skeptical of Obama. You can learn a lot from people on this site, sometimes by just listening. I know I have. I'm one of the younger Edwards supporters -- I'm just 34. I have much more cultural affinity towards Obama than I do Edwards, even though I'm white and was born in Chapel Hill. Still, despite all of Obama's generational chasm bullsht, you can learn a lot from people who have been around the block a time or two. The conservative movement -- typified by hacks like David Brooks and even expressed by co-opted organizations like the DLC -- are the enemy. Their aim is to crush every dream and ambition you have, unless you happen to own a huge corporation. I know we here a lot of talk about post-partisanship and such. That's a brilliant way to hoodwink Republican voters into supporting Democrats. But when push comes to shove, the only thing the conservative movement will respect is being defeated. They have no respect for you or me, and when you compromise with them, they have even less. In short the only good member of the conservative movement is the one on his knees, begging for mercy. Well, there you have it. Ten tips. Some of it's probably good advice. Some of it is probably crap.
I'm wishing you and your guy luck not just because you need it, but also because I sincerely hope he is able to pull this off and win, not just in the primary, but also the general.
Finally, at the risk of sounding cheesy, I'd like to thank John Edwards and his campaign staff and his supporters around the country for having run a phenomenal, graceful, classy campaign.
Edwards put issues that matter front and center, and I hope Barack Obama can pick up that mantle. "
EDWARDS SUPPORTERS ARE A LITTLE TOUCY today. Still i appreicate their passion and their goals of helping botht he country and obama. good to know. Lay off of edwards and his people. Edwards is a great man. Focus yoru venom where it should be focused. On the people who got us here. The gop and the clintons
Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 30, 2008 2:36 PM
Edwards campaign: Unsung hero: Elizabeth Edwards.
Posted by: nooztime | January 30, 2008 2:35 PM
The obamistas have argued florida didn't count or matter, but if that's so, how could it have driven John Edwards out of the race? If Edwards had won Florida like Clinton did, wouldn't we be talking about his renewed viablity?
Posted by: tonysmith | January 30, 2008 2:33 PM
I would be surprised if Obama got much of the vote that would have gone to Edwards on 2/5. As someone who was undecided between the two until Obama became viable (and my anti-Hillary vote wasn't destined to be just a protest vote), I have to believe that the anti-Hillary vote that might ever have voted for Obama would have voted for Obama on 2/5, Edwards or not.
So the voters who would have remained with Edwards on 2/5 specifically don't like Obama and won't vote for him now that Edwards is gone. They will either stay home or vote with Hillary.
Posted by: ravishah516 | January 30, 2008 2:33 PM
"PRINCETON, NJ -- Barack Obama has now cut the gap with Hillary Clinton to 6 percentage points among Democrats nationally in the Gallup Poll Daily tracking three-day average, and interviewing conducted Tuesday night shows the gap between the two candidates is within a few points. Obama's position has been strengthening on a day-by-day basis. As recently as Jan. 18-20, Clinton led Obama by 20 points. Today's Gallup Poll Daily tracking is based on interviews conducted Jan. 27-29, all after Obama's overwhelming victory in South Carolina on Saturday. Two out of the three nights interviewing were conducted after the high-visibility endorsement of Obama by Sen. Edward Kennedy and his niece Caroline Kennedy.
Clinton's lead in the three-day average is now 42% to Obama's 36%. John Edwards, who dropped out of the race today after Gallup conducted these interviews, ended his quest for the presidency with 12% support. Wednesday night's interviewing will reflect the distribution of the vote choice of former Edwards' supporters as well as the impact, if any, of Hillary Clinton's popular vote win in Florida on Tuesday.
These national numbers are a critically important indicator of the political environment when voters in more than 20 states go to the polls next Tuesday. At the moment, Obama has the momentum among Democrats nationally.
That's before the edwards announcement. Not to gloat. Just trying to marginalize and point out the hillary propogandists here. She has zero chance. I know oobama needs the seasoning, but keep it on the issues.
Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 30, 2008 2:29 PM
Edwards and Obama both have been running as iconoclastic "change" candidates, so it strikes me that Edwards' departure from the race has to help Obama more than it will help Hillary. Beyond that, someone who is searching for a candidate to support at this point is probably going to gravitate toward Obama, since he's getting all the positive media exposure and he's rising in the national polls (Gallup has him going from 15 back of Hillary to 6 back in a single week).
btw, that Rassmussen poll showing that McCain would beat Obama by six points seems deeply suspect to me, considering that Obama beat McCain's vote total in South Carolina by 20,000 or so.
Posted by: pjkiger1 | January 30, 2008 2:27 PM
Hey, Chris, there have been a number of important developments in House races, including Tom Davis's, over the past week or so.
While the presidential race is obviously of huge importance, those of us who are into the nitty-gritty of politics (which is just about everyone that reads your blog) can get tired of just hearing about that. Please, PLEASE, discuss what's going on with the upcoming Congressional races.
Posted by: rlalumiere | January 30, 2008 2:26 PM
if you too want rush and fox marginalized great. Why do the right and left bicker, jd. Let's get these goals done. Are you calling fox and emailing o'liely or should I today? :)
Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 30, 2008 2:26 PM
Before the "I'm running for president" announcements, the media was expecting the '08 election to be a McCain-Clinton contest. I hope that this indeed will be the case, because the best way to end the political divisiveness in this country is to elect a president who is a moderate.
The battle for the GOP nomination seems as much an internal battle for the party's direction. McCain's win last night represents an acknowledgment by the GOP that they cannot continue to put forth right wing candidates and expect to win in '08. There's no other explanation for the most reviled GOP member winning in Florida. (True conservatives hate him!)
Hillary is hated by the extreme left of the DNC in the same way that McC is hated by the right wingers. She's deemed too moderate by the die-hard liberals - which is precisely the reason I personally support her candidacy and why I would vote for McCain if Obama gets the nod instead of her. Ted Kennedy's and John Kerry's endorsements of Obama are proof-positive to HRC supporters that he is further left than she is. Even my GOP friends say that if a Dem had to win, despite personally disliking her and won't vote for her, they prefer that it be Hillary than Obama in the White House. They, too, see her as being considerably more moderate than Obama.
As far as where Edwards' support will go, my guess is that he'll end up endorsing HRC. Just a gut feeling, but there's no love lost between him and John Kerry, and he wouldn't want to be seen as agreeing with the guy on anything. Schoolyard stuff, but I've long believed that life is an awful lot like high school.
Posted by: femalenick | January 30, 2008 2:21 PM
All my goals thus far have been achieved. So far everything I say and fight for has to to fruition. If that is yoru plan to jd, then more power to ya.
If you are a gop'er for mccain or huckabee, your doing pretty good. If you are for obama, good.
HAHAHAHAHAHHAAH. I'm not understanding you right now jd? Who are you supporting again? Rudy? Good luck with that. And the niners may win the superbowl this weekend
Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 30, 2008 2:21 PM
I completely agree with kbloom: "John Edwards ran a visionary campaign based on issues, moral responsibility, and integrity."
For those of you wondering where his votes will go, the one I cast for him on Tuesday will go to Hillary. I hope that whomever the Dems finally nominate, the vote I cast here in Florida in November means more than the one in the primary or the one in 2000 - you know, actually counts and all that.
Posted by: mgl_8 | January 30, 2008 2:20 PM
right. I have been here for months. your plan is working to perfection. :)
Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 30, 2008 2:18 PM
rufus, I most assuredly do NOT want you gone. Your continued posting here can only further cement the public's view of you as the face of the American Democrat party.
Which is pretty good for conservatives.
Posted by: JD | January 30, 2008 2:17 PM
What are you saying mark? Obama-Paul? :)
Differant goals, domestically. Polar opposites. Also, paul does not seem ot have the necessary support to force that bi-party pairing.
I say paul and other real republcains definatly have a place moving forward. Paul deserves much credit for the current state of america (with many gop'ers now listening to reality). He must be rewarded for his patriotism. Someone like pual will probably be running the RNC after an obama win. Paul represents what his party was.
Low taxes, non intervention overseas, econmic, and so on. He may be a figure of the past. But he is the gop of the future. How else, rudy mitt jed?
for the gop to regain their relvance they must either go back to their roots, or change drastically looking otwards the future. they now are the party of the past. they need to start with new ideas, rather than rehashing teh same thing for decades.
Make no mistake, the gop is done. If they want to come back into the fold they need a drastic face-lift. Just trying to help you people. We are all americans after all, even if the gop'ers have forgot this
Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 30, 2008 2:11 PM
I doubt anyone posting on these boards is a sample of where Edward's supporters will go. His supporters don't strike me as the type of people that would want to take the time to post their political comments. Most of them are to busy working or worrying about their finances. We can speculate all we want...but I don't think the analysts or the media will be able to "get inside" the Edward supporter's heads.
Posted by: badger3 | January 30, 2008 2:11 PM
John Edwards ran a visionary campaign based on issues, moral responsibility, and integrity. I will still vote for him next Tuesday.
Posted by: Kbloom | January 30, 2008 2:07 PM
from cnn. Altough I would never assume.
"Whom do you think John Edwards will endorse? Hillary Clinton 29% 10858 Mike Gravel 4% 1683 Barack Obama 67% 25466 "
Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 30, 2008 2:05 PM
You're using information from Florida exit polls? According to Dana Milbank, it didn't matter what the people from Florida had to say.
Posted by: badger3 | January 30, 2008 2:05 PM
I can see how you would think that, but I read my online "Daily Texan" every day and there have been two stories related to DK that both drew blog comments. One was about DK's inspired "Alliance for Peace" Parade. Here is a quote.
"The alliance held a nationwide walk on Sept. 15, but Austin did not participate because of a conflict with the Austin City Limits Music Festival.
Not many UT students attended the march, which was held during the Longhorn football game against Kansas State."
The other was when DK got thrown off the ballot by the SDC for scratching out the "loyalty oath" and immediately lost his suit to get back on in USDC-WDTX.
"Typical stupid Texans. Even the Democrats in Texas are moronic, inbred, knuckledragging idiots. Let Kucinich run. That loyalty oath is ridiculous."
"Whatever, a vote for Kucinich is like a vote for Ralph Nader."
On the other hand, BHO draws a crowd that is enormous, 20k+ in the rain outside on a Friday, and many articles about him in the DT get big responses. RP would excite student comment, too.
So that's why I think no one cares about DK in Austin.
Posted by: mark_in_austin | January 30, 2008 2:03 PM
Hillary's "victory" speech last night just made me feel sick. What will she NOT stoop to? Dana Milbank hit the nail on the head in WaPo today on that topic. What a goose she is.
My feel is that most Edwards voters are "change" voters. Hillary has a 50% cap on her support I suspect. Now Obama will begin to romp it home. But it will still go beyond Super Tuesday.
All the best John Edwards. You were my man in '04. I moved to Obama a little earlier than some... but the rest of your supporters will now follow.
Posted by: Boutan | January 30, 2008 1:59 PM
Post you jd. Unless you got something for me.
you know I do that to anger you gop'ers. Like you do to me. Every week I feel is the last for rush fox savage malkin. Every week I'm dissappointed. you only have to deal with me in the short term. you can leave this site.
I will not leave my country. And I won't stop until you remove your people. I'm here for balance. You want me gone? you know how to accomplish your goal. If that is not a priority for you, then be happy about my posts. LEarn from them. :)
Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 30, 2008 1:59 PM
John Edwards is a good man, and he would have made an excellent president, because he is smart, experienced, and he actually cares about the American people. An Obama or Clinton Administration would be crazy not to give him a high position in their Cabinets. America need him very badly.
Posted by: yeungseuyoon | January 30, 2008 1:59 PM
The Edwards vote will break for Obama even if Edwards doesn't endorse and if he does I think he will endorse Obama! One of the core issues of the Edwards campaign is TRADE POLICY and the Clinton's are the architects of NAFTA and the like! BAD trade policies for the middle class the poor and unions! I heard Mudcat Saunders a top advisor for Edwards on MSNBC say he will work as hard as he can to make sure that Edwards DOES NOT endorse Hillary! Senator Barack Obama for President of the United States of America! ITS TIME!
Posted by: gfsurrette | January 30, 2008 1:58 PM
Mark in Austin, no, I was thousands of miles away in a state as blue as Kansas is red. But I heard about it from people who were there. John Edwards has some lifelong fans in Lawrence now, even if his accent does sound a lot like a certain ex-coach's.
And speaking of, you're right. The Jayhawks have quite a team this year. This might be the year they finally get past the first weekend. I was a sophomore at KU the year Danny and the Miracles won it all. That's a long, long time ago for us Hawks.
Posted by: novamatt | January 30, 2008 1:57 PM
"leave the Golden EIB Microphone. (applause) I will not retire. I will not concede. (cheers and applause) I will not drift away! I will not fade away, until every American agrees with me --
AUDIENCE: Rush! Rush! Rush! Rush!
RUSH: -- as I have always said.
AUDIENCE: Rush! Rush! Rush! Rush!"
Fascism. And I don't have any reservations about calling it. It is by the definition of the word. The gop are terrorisits and propogandaists. Again, not because I say so, but by the definition of those words.
the right should fear being fascists. I should not fear calling them on it.
Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 30, 2008 1:56 PM
so Rufus says he's done for the day, then posts, by my count, 9 more times?
What happened, mom said you can stay down in the basement awhile longer?
Posted by: JD | January 30, 2008 1:55 PM
Let's have an Obama-Richardson ticket, with John Edwards as Attorney general.
Posted by: ponpal | January 30, 2008 1:52 PM
"RUSH: Thank you. I love you, too.
AUDIENCE: Rush! Rush! Rush! Rush! Rush! Rush! Rush! Rush! Rush! Rush! Rush!
RUSH: My friends, my friends, there is reason for optimism, there is reason for hope. By the way: "change" is a stupid slogan, and so is "hope," but I know some of you want hope. Be of good cheer. From the shadows of this setback, let me offer this uplifting thought. In Florida, half the liberals voted for Mrs. Clinton. One-third of the Republicans voted for Senator McCain. Our friends in the media predicting my demise (boos) talk about how conservatism is dead. Let me ask a simple question, ladies and gentlemen. Why is it that all of the Republican candidates claim, to now carry the mantle of Ronald Reagan? Senator McCain is the most recent. "McCain Claims Conservative Mantle." Said McCain (impression), "It shows one thing: I'm the conservative leader who can unite the party." How can I be said to have lost, ladies and gentlemen, when what I stand for is rock ribbed conservatism, and each one of these candidates -- each one of them flawed, by the way, which has caused many conservatives to be wandering aimlessly in the electoral woods. How can it be said that I have lost or that conservatism has lost, when all of our Republican candidates claim to be conservative and to carry the conservative mantle?
AUDIENCE: Rush! Rush! Rush! Rush! "
hahahhaha. The gop is scared poopless. Trying as hard as they can to hate clinton but get her elected at the same time. It's all they know. funny to watch, yet sad. do not pity these people. They've made millions destroying their country and lying to the elderly (fox rush clinton bush). they made their bed's. Do not pity sending them to the irrelevance abyss where they belong. Time to cut teh chains of millions and allow them to think for themselves.
Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 30, 2008 1:52 PM
Sometimes I really wonder whether Hillary supporters can think beyond the primary. The point of the primary is to select a candidate who will go on to win the general election. If Hillary is going to win in November, she'll need the votes of Obama supporters.
But many of Hillary's supporters don't seem to care about that. On this site today, I've seen Clinton supporters call Obama supporters nuts, racists, and cultists. And that's without even mentioning the things they say about the candidate himself.
It's fine to like Hillary better than Obama, or vice-versa. It's fine to refuse to vote for one of them, with a good reason. But when Hillary's supporters demonize Obama and his supporters, that's just bad for the Democrats in general. Winning the primary is nice, but not if it makes you lose the general election. Grow up, people.
Posted by: Blarg | January 30, 2008 1:50 PM
Gop!. forcing a free people to bend to your goals or ideals will never work. Most times the opposite of yoru goals happen. Same with the d's media, supporting clinton. People have brains of their own .this is not a nation of dittoheads. to force yoru will on a free peopel clinton/gop will alwys yeild the opposite results. Escipcially when people have zero trust for their government and media.
It's fun to watch. But a true american already knows what's going to happen. A true american follows the heart of this great nation. No propogand is needed. His/her goals are americans and vice versa. the gop 9clinton included) brand of shove it down you ropponents throughts is done. Time to re-unite the countyr and all to be free again. not just the fascist gop
Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 30, 2008 1:50 PM
In my opinion, the supporters of John Edwards are unlikely to switch to a candidate so closely embraced by Senator Kennedy. It seems more plausible that they will now go to Senator McCain (if he is the nominee) - or to Mayor Bloomberg, if he runs.
Posted by: index1 | January 30, 2008 1:45 PM
Mark-in-A: Greetings again, back in the same old blog, after our sorties to the IA Register [and the NH Concord Monitor, or did you forgo that one?]. We are on at least two threads here. [I am Nigerian orphan who want share with you my millions of dollar]
I do like Ron Paul, although I do not wear RP buttons or give contributions--I don't for anyone, yet. But I find it amusing and amazing beyond belief, though, how the mainstream media and the RNP have tried to marginalize if not actually demonize him. Ron Paul not only talks the talk but has also walked the walk--at least far more than any other politician I know--about getting government off our backs, that government is the problem and not the solution, that the excessive tax burden on the people should be reduced, that we should have a policy of fiscal restraint, etc. etc. Now where have I heard all that before [but only as talk]??? What do conservative Republican values have anything to do with those sorts of ideas?
I need to get my amusement wherever I can, no matter how sadly ironic!
Posted by: radicalpatriot | January 30, 2008 1:36 PM
An Obama/Richardson ticket would definitely lead to a Republican victory! Richardson has stated he wants a national water policy plan which includes diverting water from the Great Lakes. While people don't really care for Granholm too much here in Michigan anymore, her resounding "HELL NO" to Richardson & Washington greedily grabbing our Riparian rights is shared by the voters of the Great Lakes States. Michigan won't vote for Obama anyways since he doesn't care about Michigan voters when he purposefully took his name off our ballot, made no effort to get it back on the ballot, and now wants to make sure we're excluded (& Florida's delegates) from the convention. So, Obama, won't get Michigan on his own because he doesn't care about our voices or votes, Richardson on the ticket will surely lose not only Michigan, but also, Ohio, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana.... oh yah, great strategy there. Yes, lets further destroy the one resource that attracts tourists in the midwest since no one is willing to tell the auto companies to grow up & move into the 21st century!
Posted by: neecee | January 30, 2008 1:35 PM
"Bush authorizes the NSA to police the Internet-but it'll be AT&T doing the policing By: Nicole Belle @ 10:29 AM - PST Want to know why getting that retroactive telecom immunity is so important to Bush? It's not just about tapping phone calls.
Following up on my post from a little while back discussing Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell's desire to police the Internet, the Washington Post's Ellen Nakashima confirmed last weekend that the Decider had signed a classified directive authorizing the NSA to more expansively monitor intrusions on federal networks for signs of cyberattacks:
Until now, the government's efforts to protect itself from cyber-attacks -- which run the gamut from hackers to organized crime to foreign governments trying to steal sensitive data -- have been piecemeal. Under the new initiative, a task force headed by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) will coordinate efforts to identify the source of cyber-attacks against government computer systems. As part of that effort, the Department of Homeland Security will work to protect the systems and the Pentagon will devise strategies for counterattacks against the intruders.
As Brian has said recently, the U.S. is absolutely not ready to handle cyberwar on almost any front. I'm all in favor of redirecting tax money towards protecting and strengthening our Internet infrastructure against any one of the millions of crippling threats it can face, rather than expensive, crappy weapons systems that have little measurable effect except fattening defense contractors' coffers.
But in an expansive profile of Mike McConnell, the New Yorker's Lawrence Wright touches on the myriad obstacles our intelligence community faces towards handling a real threat, and why they get it wrong so often.
opps, here's the post. Fear teh yale plan. Take america back from those who stole it. They don't own this country. We do
Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 30, 2008 1:34 PM
For bloggers this should be a warning. your rights are being taken away. Be aware the government is spying on you. Better make it good. It may show up in court. Free speech? Only the gop has free speech in america. Are the people whom just posted from being watched? i doubt it. Only the left. While the real terrorists and the gop continue to do their worse. Enjoy it while it lasts gop. Your irrelevant come 09
Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 30, 2008 1:33 PM
Mark, are you sure you're really in Austin? I would think that (being a college town) would be a great place to find Dennis supporters...
Posted by: rpy1 | January 30, 2008 1:30 PM
" wonder what the folks in America that wish to kill other Americans who might disagree with McCain shall do? dtodeen | Homepage | 01.30.08 - 7:18 am | # "
First they are asking if kennaddy is scared for obama now this. don't do it gop. don't do it. The american people see you now. it's not worth it. Taxes to the rich, ie money, is not worth it. Support your country. Stop being traitors of face teh consequences traitors face.
Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 30, 2008 1:28 PM
drindl, I am amazed by two of your assertions, although I take them to be consistent with your local experience.
1] I do not know anybody who ever was for DK.
I could call every D Jewish lawyer and engineer and businessperson I know and ask and it would be like they never heard of him. They are generally people committed to social justice, as you say, and certainly, civil liberties. But DK? No. That really surprises me.
2] Are you telling me there are some physicians in your congregation who like HRC?
I suppose this could be a TX v. NY thing. A lot of people in NY like HRC, obviously. Even the D Party pros here do not. So my local viewpoint would be different than yours.
Posted by: mark_in_austin | January 30, 2008 1:25 PM
Mark_in_austin - "Dave, did Carter REALLY say BHO was "titillating"?"
I smiled at that myself. According to the story, it's a direct quote...
Posted by: dave | January 30, 2008 1:20 PM
Obama supporters apparently are not living in the same country as me. It's like the bizarro world in Superman comics.
In their parallel country, southern and rural voters can't wait to vote for a lightly experienced, liberal black man for president. They also waited to make this decision until their hero, Ted Kennedy, gave them their orders. As far as racism is concerned, what racism?
Posted by: lpeter59 | January 30, 2008 1:20 PM
I was an Edwards supporter. I had nothing against Hillary, and as a woman took pride in her campaign. I would happily have voted for her if she'd won the primary. Until South Carolina. Now I am an Obama supporter, and don't know where I'll end up if he doesn't win the primary. I suspect there are more than a few of us out here thinking like this. Many Democrats were appalled at the tactics that were used by the Rovians et al on the Clintons from 1992-2000. The Clintons failed to realize that we'd be just as appalled when similar and worse tactics were used by them on our own candidates. Go Obama and thank you John Edwards.
Posted by: whittrl | January 30, 2008 1:20 PM
Right on q. Clinton supports pulling the race card. LEave it out wuss. clinton has enough prblems without you helping obama :)
Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 30, 2008 1:17 PM
TO: CSNEED1937 | January 30, 2008 12:03 PM Re: your post. That's what I hate about the south; ignorant, racist, bigoted, red necked, idiots that can't deal with a different color. I can see that you are one of them. I am white and voted for Obama. I would write what I really want to write but it would not be posted.
Posted by: gfaigen | January 30, 2008 1:16 PM
The hillary's and di fi's and rockafller's and lieberman's. Those are the the dems siding with the fascists. The obama's edwards and keenddays are the ones standing agaisnt them. to back clinton is to back bush.
The proof is in the pudding.
Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 30, 2008 1:16 PM
Hillary Clinton will carry Edward's torch for universal health care, ending the war, minority rights and immigration reform.
Obama is a whiner who demands preferential treatment. If you question Obama's record or such you are a racist.
Barack "special treatment" Obama is not right for America.
Posted by: mehuwss | January 30, 2008 1:16 PM
dO NOT WASTE YOUR VENOM ON OBAMA, edwards supporters. He like you are on the same side fighting the same battle agaisnt eh same foe. Do not forget who is the enemy of america now. you have new america and the new demoractic party agaisnt the gop and the old moderates. Pick a side, but choose wisely. Our children's future is at stake. It's easier and safer to be a clone robot, but it is disasterous for our country, as the last 8 years have shown.
Eithe ryou are fighting the fascists in america, or enabling them. The future is today. Let these cry baby elementary school children take their balls and go home. Let them enjoy the irrelevance they have earned. Do not pity or fear the fascists. they made the bed they must lay in.
But know your enemy and yoru freind. Edwards supporters! you are freinds to this great nation. And freinds tot eh new democratic party. Don't throw away john's work to spite obama. the future is now.
"Wednesday January 30, 2008 07:50 EST What "bipartisanship" in Washington means Whenever the mavens of "bipartisanship" attempt to do more than spout pretty platitudes, they invariably reveal just how vapid and bereft of substance are their slogans. Former Sen. Bob Graham -- who recently joined David Boren, Sam Nunn and others in threatening the country with a plutocratic Michael Bloomberg candidacy if the presidential candidates failed to become more "bipartisan" -- has an Op-Ed in today's Washington Post which is a classic entry in this genre.
Graham purports to list a slew of problems suffering from a lack of bipartisanship -- "huge gaps in national and homeland security"; "Nearly 50 million Americans still have no health insurance"; crumbling infrastructure; high gas prices; and a lack of a brighter future for the next generation -- and then proposes a litany of shallow process "solutions" such as a bipartisan cabinet, changes to the format for presidential debates, and regional primaries. Those "solutions" are total nonsequiturs. How would they resolve any of the intense differences over those policies? They manifestly wouldn't.
But more importantly, "bipartisanship" is already rampant in Washington, not rare. And, in almost every significant case, what "bipartisanship" means in Washington is that enough Democrats join with all of the Republicans to endorse and enact into law Republican policies, with which most Democratic voters disagree. That's how so-called "bipartisanship" manifests in almost every case.
Many people, especially partisans, always believe that their own side is compromising too much and that the other side is always winning, so it's best to consult objective facts in order to know how "bipartisanship" works. Here are the vote breakdowns by party over the last couple years on the most significant and contentious pieces of legislation, particularly (though not only) in the area of national security.
In almost every case, the proposals that are enacted are ones favored by the White House and supported by all GOP lawmakers, and then Democrats split and enough of them join with Republicans to ensure that the GOP gets what it wants. That's "bipartisanhip" in Washington:
To support the new Bush-supported FISA law:
To compel redeployment of troops from Iraq:
To confirm Michael Mukasey as Attorney General:
To confirm Leslie Southwick as Circuit Court Judge:
Declaring English to be the Government's official language:
To renew the Patriot Act:
Cloture Vote on Sam Alito's confirmation to the Supreme Court:
Authorization to Use Military Force in Iraq:
On virtually every major controversial issue -- particularly, though not only, ones involving national security and terrorism -- the Republicans (including their vaunted mythical moderates and mavericks) vote in almost complete lockstep in favor of the President, the Democratic caucus splits, and the Republicans then get their way on every issue thanks to "bipartisan" support. That's what "bipartisanship" in Washington means.
Leaving aside how shallow and, shall we say, unserious is this endless chirping for more "bipartisanship" -- as though it's a magic feel-good formula for resolving actual policy differences -- it's hard to imagine how there could possibly be any more "bipartisanship" in Washington even if that were the only goal. Other than formally disbanding as a party -- or granting a permanent proxy of their collective vote to Mitch McConnell -- how could Congressional Democrats possibly be more accommodating than they already are?
We got them where we want them. RAcism is dead, if we allow it to die. Fear and terrorism against americans is dead, as we do not fear to give power to those that would enslave us anymore. New america is within our grasps. John's plan is in our grasps. If you believe what he said, then back obama. If you backed him because he is white, back hillary. Just know why and what you are doing.
Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 30, 2008 1:13 PM
Rockchalk, that bb team is scary good. Were you in the crowd at the station?
Dave, did Carter REALLY say BHO was "titillating"?
There's your nuclear engineer as wordsmith!
RadPat, good to hear from you. The Austin American-Statesman was gleeful this morning that the TX primaries in March might mean something this year. All the bloggers immediately jumped on the editor for not mentioning Ron Paul, and perhaps unfairly I thought of you and our first series of posts.
Posted by: mark_in_austin | January 30, 2008 1:10 PM
Much like the ypocrite gop goin after the dem's ubn terms or immagration when reagan offered teh last amnesty and the gop did nothing to solve the issue in two decades.
Like with the terrorism issue when the gop supplies our enemies then calls the dem's unpatriotic.
Like the r's who impeach a president over a bj, but support lies if they lead to war and the splintering of the country.
All edwards supporters out there. don't think about what might have been, and get angry. Think about what is. it is not obama's fault he is gone. Obama never went after edwards. He went out of his way to praise him.
You must think of this in terms of teh future vs the past. Or the future democratic party agaisnt the current gop. And clinton is gop. Get yoru priorities straight ladies and gentlemen. Who is the cause of your anger and why?
The gop machine is to balme for where we are. Let's not forget that. use yoru venom on who is to blame
Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 30, 2008 1:04 PM
While I am neither a Republican nor a Democrat--[a plague on both their Houses, they've made wormsmeat of America]--I am actually sorry for the Democratic Party that Edwards has left the race. He seems [like Obama to some extent] to represent what are the best virtues of the Democratic Party when it is not merely playing antagonist to anything and everything Republican [like a mirror-image Ann Coulter].
And I see these virtues as putting people and country above the Party [something Republicans have never done for many years]. You may not have agreed with Edwards on whatever issue, or even believed him, but he did seem to keep focused on the American people. That focus could be the saving grace for the Dems, and it is a virtue, it is in Obama but not in Clinton.
The real victory in Florida is that Giuliani is stuffed into the trashcan of history now, where he belongs.
America will get what it deserves. It is now up to the rest of America to decide if it wants the left-for-right mirror-image of President Clinton-Clinton to replace President Bush-Cheney--or if it wants something better.
Posted by: radicalpatriot | January 30, 2008 1:03 PM
last one, I'm don for the day. But slinton is gop. The gop are hypocrites. Edwards support goes tot eh future, obama.
"That's the same John Ashcroft, of course, who -- once he and his party were in power -- immediately discarded those "principles" and went on to approve and help implement far more invasive and unchecked surveillance programs than the ones which, when sought by Clinton, he scorned as Orwellian Big Brother tyranny.
But Republicans were unabashed in attempting to limit government power when Democrats controlled the White House. And does anyone doubt they will be so again if a Democrat is in the White House in 2009? Even when it's grossly hypocritical, that's how our adversarial system is actually supposed to work; one party opposing the other's unchecked power is an important form of checks and balances. One can be forgiven if one's recollection of this concept is rusty since it's been many, many years since we've seen it in action, and we're highly unlikely to be given a refresher course over the next 15 days.
Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 30, 2008 12:59 PM
coloradodog - I've not heard of any attacks by Obama on Clinton. It's been mostly defending himself against the various whispering campaigns and outright lies by Bill. He did point out that her "healthcare reform" amounts to a 200 billion dollar give-away to the private healthcare industry and dosn't even guarrantee insurance for even one person not having it now (and I work in the healthcare industry and am well aware of that - so does bhoomes and he can verify this). Also, new polling numbers are out today. Rasmusson, Zogby, ABC, NYT, USA, all showing Clinton loosing to McCain by, and this is the best of them, 48-40. Furthermore, as the campaign continues, she is evening loosing that 40 points, as roughly half of her support is weak. Obama also looses, by the way, but by a 41-46 margin, with his core support strong. Interestingly, especially becasue of he topic here, Edwards tied McCain. It looks like the Democrats are seizing defeat from the jaws of victory once again.
Posted by: mibrooks27 | January 30, 2008 12:57 PM
" It was just good and decent people taking time out of their busy schedules to thank other good and decent people for their support."
"Maybe, John, if you had tried out for American Idol you might have had a better chance at reaching that public psyche with some of that basic truth you always spoke..."
"And the whole time he was a gracious man. Great man, John edwards. I have much more respect today for him than I did yesterday...A true american patriot. This will not be forgotten. You haven't heard th elast of John edwards."
"John Edwards ran a good, clean campaign; played by the rules; was always gracious to one and all, candidates, public, press. The economic causes he championed need the attention they haven't received since the days of JFK, LBJ, and JEC. It seems his dedication was genuine, much more than the quadrennial lip-service that they've had lately. It's been a very long three decades for the poorest among us--and that with all the politicians singing "Hallelujah! Amen! I have seen the Lord!" day and night. A lot of folk are still waiting for the first drop to trickle down to them. Patience has not paid."
Will somebody please tell me what time this lovefest ends?
Posted by: dave | January 30, 2008 12:56 PM
For those asking about John Edwards' delegates:
If memory serves, there is a "gentlemen's agreeement" that he has the right to endorse another candidate and endow them with whatever delegates he has earned (or will earn).
For those who are so certain that Hillary will now win the nomination, I only remind you of this:
In a primary contest in Florida that was run largely on name recognition and national media exposure, HRC won 50-33 over Barack.
That margin of victory is still smaller than Obama's win in South Carolina, and Hillary is still trying to wash the tread marks off her back from being run over there.
Only in MI and FL have fewer Democrats come out to vote than Republicans. More of the die-hards will back Clinton. Obama can bring the independents and the new voters.
In Florida, a state that's 41% Dem., 37% Rep. and 19% Independent, McCain would spank Hillary. Obama puts FL in play. Remember that. Also remember that GOP turnout in the South is likely to be depressed with a McCain nomination. Hillary won't be able to compete there. Obama can explode African-American turnout and put GA, SC, NC, KY, TN, and AR in play.
Posted by: cam8 | January 30, 2008 12:56 PM
"That all fell on deaf ears, of course. In 1997, the Clinton administration sought increased surveillance powers over Internet communications on the ground that such powers were necessary to stop terrorists and other criminals, who were using the Internet to do bad things. In particular, the Clinton administration wanted a law requiring that any encryption technology allow the federal Government to bypass it for spying purposes.
Our stalwart small-government conservatives vehemently opposed those proposals, and the opposition was led by then-Sen. John Ashcroft, who argued in an Op-Ed:
J. Edgar Hoover would have loved this. The Clinton administration wants government to be able to read international computer communications -- financial transactions, personal e-mail and proprietary information sent abroad -- all in the name of national security. . . .
Not only would Big Brother be looming over the shoulders of international cybersurfers, he also threatens to render our state-of-the-art computer software engineers obsolete and unemployed.
Granted, the Internet could be used to commit crimes, and advanced encryption could disguise such activity. However, we do not provide the government with phone jacks outside our homes for unlimited wiretaps. Why, then, should we grant government the Orwellian capability to listen at will and in real time to our communications across the Web? . . . .
The protections of the Fourth Amendment are clear. The right to protection from unlawful searches is an indivisible American value. . . .
Every medium by which people communicate can be exploited by those with illegal or immoral intentions. Nevertheless, this is no reason to hand Big Brother the keys to unlock our e-mail diaries, open our ATM records or translate our international communications.
Clinton is gop. Fear the yale plan
Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 30, 2008 12:56 PM
I'm greatly disappointed. Edwards understands and speaks the truth about the challenge we will all face in bringing about necessary changes.
I'm not that happy with either Clinton or Obama.
I share the reservation many have expressed about the prospect of a "dual presidency." I'm troubled by how indebted the Clinton camp are to casino gambling interests; Hillary has too often voted pro-war and anti-civil liberties in the Senate.
I'm troubled by Obama's inexperience in the executive side of international relations. He would certainly be a more inspirational leader than Hillary, but can he be tough when he needs to be tough?
Both have the kind of groundedness in religious faith that allows me to hope they would ultimately lean in the direction of peace and justice.
I'm not ready to choose between them. All I can do is wait and see how each of them picks up on Edwards's challenge to give more emphasis on the problem of persistent poverty in rich America.
Posted by: richard.e.edwards | January 30, 2008 12:55 PM
call your congressman. And your senator.
""Trust Us" Government After vowing yesterday to veto a 30-day extension of the Protect America Act, the White House and Congressional Republicans today agreed to a 15-day extension. The Senate will now proceed to vote on the various amendments pending on the Cheney/Rockefeller bill and will then almost certainly vote in favor of that bill in some form, granting amnesty to lawbreaking telecoms and new warrantless eavesdropping powers to the President.
Realistically, there are really only two possible ways for all of this to be derailed: (1) the Senate passes one or more pending amendments which is unacceptable to the White House and thus provokes a veto of the bill Congress passes (the most likely candidates: Sen. Feinstein's amendment declaring (again) that FISA is the "exclusive means" for eavesdropping and/or Sen. Feingold's amendment compelling the disclosure to Congress of the secret FISA court rulings which the White House claimed prompted the need for changes to FISA in the first place); or,
(2) the House stands firm with the bill it already passed and refuses to provide telecom amnesty and new warrantless eavesdropping powers, even once the Senate does so. At this point, option (1) seems far more likely, as the Blue Dogs can single-handedly fulfill all the President's demands by voting (along with the Republicans) in favor of the Senate bill.
The White House -- understandably -- is extremely confident that they will win, as they always do, telling "conservative journalists" with whom they met today: "once the Senate votes to make FISA permanent -- including immunity for the telecoms -- the House will acquiesce." And here is what the GOP leadership is telling Democrats in light of this extension: "House Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-MO) warns: 'This is the Democrats' last chance - in two more weeks, if they fail to get a bill completed, there will be no more excuses available.'" Note the tone Congressional Republicans use when they "warn" Democrats and give them their marching orders -- that of an increasingly impatient teacher warning a delinquent student.
With all the focus on the travesty of telecom amnesty, it has been easy to forget just how Draconian the Protect America Act really is, how radical are the warrantless eavesdropping powers it vested in the President. In essence, that bill allowed the Government to eavesdrop on every single international telephone call made or received by an American with no restrictions or judicial oversight whatsoever, and further empowered the Government to read every international email sent or received by an American with no restrictions or judicial oversight.
In a meeting with several bloggers this morning, Russ Feingold provided a very concise and easy-to-understand explanation for why this is so threatening:
"Trust us" Government is exactly what the Republican Party has come to stand for, with the eager help of many Congressional Democrats. Under this "theory" of government, there is no need for oversight or limits on the power the President possesses because he is Good and you can trust him and his underlings to exercise those powers only for your Protection. Nobody needs to look over his shoulder or "check" what he's doing. We can place blind faith in our leader.
This is what Republicans previously pretended to believe about "Trust Us" Government, from Ronald Reagan's 1980 acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention:
"Trust me" government is government that asks that we concentrate our hopes and dreams on one man; that we trust him to do what's best for us. My view of government places trust not in one person or one party, but in those values that transcend persons and parties. The trust is where it belongs -- in the people"
brother? Not me? Camera phones. Security cameras. Email phone satalitte? We are living in a fascist police state.
Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 30, 2008 12:54 PM
Edwards' showing in 2004 made it appear to a lot of us who want real change in Washington that he was THE best option we had for that to happen - if not in 2004, then now.
I think Edwards' believed that, too. But he was eclipsed by another - another agent for change who was far less encumbered by all the baggage of a multi-millionaire trial lawyer (or $400 haircuts).
I'm certain that Edwards is disappointed. So are his supporters. I am, too. (I'd hoped that we'd be having a truly substantive debate between the only two REAL agents of change - Edwards and Obama - by this point in the process.)
And I'm sure that there's a place for John Edwards in whichever nominee's upcoming Democratic administration.
Meanwhile, my heart goes out to Elizabeth Edwards. She's one classy, courageous and inspirational lady! (You can just tell so VERY much about a person by their spouse.)
And finally, my heartfelt gratitude to you, John Edwards, for running a clean and honorable campaign! That fact alone makes your prospects for the future all the brighter (I hope).
Posted by: miraclestudies | January 30, 2008 12:52 PM
Just a reminder to those discussing HRC's "win" in our Florida non-event Democratic primary:
Florida is a closed primary state. The results may look somewhat different than those in the earlier races as independents and republicans cannot vote in the Democratic Primary. Therefore, the segment of Obama's support which comes from independents and republicans (which is considerable) does not show up in the results. I'm not sure if any of the other early states have been "closed primary" states.
Also, since the candidates had pledged not to campaign in Florida when the national party decided to strip the state of its delegates, name recognition was much more in HRC's favor than in Obama's.
In addition, a huge number of Floridians voted absentee or early -- some nearly a month ago -- before Obama's Iowa and SC wins, further highlighting his lack of name recognition in the state.
Posted by: dhajra | January 30, 2008 12:51 PM
ben smith? The edwards haircut guy? the obama hit piece master? he says 9/11 politics is over. WOW. That's your boy, right cc? Will you act right now, cc, and stop the clinton love?
"Rudy defeat marks end of 9/11 politics By: BEN SMITH and DAVID PAUL KUHN | 01/30/2008 12:19 AM Giuliani's loss is the beginning of the end of a period in Republican politics that began on Sept. 11, 2001."
Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 30, 2008 12:45 PM
Now what? We've got Hillary and Obama displaying poor judgments in their Rovian attacks on one another. Let's hope they wise up and shut up about each other before more voters get disgusted with them and vote for McCain. What the hell is wrong with these guys?
Posted by: coloradodog | January 30, 2008 12:44 PM
BGreat_in2008, Where is Jimmy Carter? Funny you should ask. From the wires... "Former president Jimmy Carter praised Barack Obama's run for the White House as "extraordinary" and potentially healing.
The elder statesman of the Democratic party also revealed that he had also spoken at length with former president Bill Clinton about his involvement in the 2008 presidential race.
"Obama's campaign has been extraordinary and titillating for me and my family," Carter said in an interview at his Georgia home Monday in which he stressed that he and his wife have never endorsed any presidential candidate since leaving the White House.
"We have four children with their spouses, we have eleven grandchildren, four or five of them are married, and all of them, except one, are for Obama," he said in an audioclip of the interview on the Wall Street Journal's website.
"I think that Obama will be almost automatically a healing factor in the animosity now and the distrust that relates to our country and its government," said Carter, 83, who was president from 1977-1981.
The 2002 Nobel Peace prize laureate added that his Democratic successor in the White House had called him Monday to confirm his participation in an event Carter has organized.
But the tension over race that erupted on the Democratic campaign trail last week dominated the conversation, Carter revealed.
"I got off the phone with a long talk with Bill Clinton who called me this morning trying to explain that he was not raising the race issue, and that sort of thing. I won't got into detail," Carter said.
Clinton "has said a few things that I think he wishes he hadn't said," the Wall Street Journal quoted Carter as saying.
"He doesn't call me often, but the fact that he called me this morning and spent a long time explaining his position indicates that it's troublesome to them, the adverse reaction.
"I told him I hoped it would die down...the charged atmosphere concerning the race issue. And I think it will," he said."
To this I say, if it walks like an endorsement and talks like an endorsement and sounds like an endorsement...
Posted by: dave | January 30, 2008 12:43 PM
During the '04 campaign, Kerry and Edwards and their wives had just given a late-night speech in Kansas City and were on a train headed to New Mexico. An hour down the tracks, something like a thousand well-wishers had gathered at the train station in Lawrence, Kansas, a very blue dot in the very red sea of Kansas, just to voice their support.
The conductor didn't slow the train down, but the candidates, getting ready for sleep, saw and were amazed by the size and enthusiasm of the crowd, and it was too late to stop the train by the time they had gotten a message to the conductor. Imagine: dark night, dark night, dark night, huge gathering of people shouting your names and waving your signs, dark night, dark night.
The people lined up for a half-mile along the tracks in the middle of the night were disappointed they didn't get a chance to see Kerry and Edwards, but they knew the game: it's 270 electoral votes to win, and Kansas wasn't on anyone's to-do list. No one in presidential politics cares about places like Lawrence, Kansas. It might as well be Lawrence, Gabon, or Lawrence, Luxembourg.
But John and Elizabeth Edwards cared. They sent word to folks in Lawrence that they would come back to thank them. And sure enough, a couple of days of hard campaigning in New Mexico and Colorado later, they kept their word, and came back to Lawrence to talk for hours to an overflow crowd of thousands of Kansans whose votes didn't matter, just because it was the right thing to do. It wasn't about electoral votes, or what the polls told them to do, or what some consultant told them to do. It was just good and decent people taking time out of their busy schedules to thank other good and decent people for their support.
We get too wrapped up sometimes in the numbers games and "framing" the narratives that we forget what this is really all about. And I want to stop for a moment and think about what good, decent, honorable, caring human beings John and Elizabeth Edwards are, and thank them for what they've brought to this race and to the '04 race, what they've brought to the Democratic Party, and what they brought to little old Lawrence, Kansas. Thank you, John and Elizabeth, and my best to you both. Hope to see you around again sometime soon.
Posted by: novamatt | January 30, 2008 12:37 PM
"Mark, earlier on, a leading Jewish publication suggested the only two candidates who most conservative Jews would vote for would be Rudy or Hillary, because they were the most connected to Israel. Huckabee and Romney, never, because all observant Jews here are very concerned about church/state separation, naturally. "
Is choosing an outside influence over the good of your nation stills treason? I think so. India China isreal? time to have our politicans represent america. nto isreal. we had enough of that.
Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 30, 2008 12:36 PM
I can't understand why Edwards would not endorse Obama.
Posted by: hschoenbach129 | January 30, 2008 12:23 PM
Because he wants the AG job if/when HRC gets the nomination, and manages to steal the election. :-)
Posted by: JD | January 30, 2008 12:31 PM
dmorale, if you call yourself a true fiscal conservative, you cannot seriously be for HRC.
She is running on a potentially devastating campaign promise - federal sponsorship of universal healthcare.
When our deficit is already measured in the hundreds of billions, how many more hundreds would she add through this initiative?
Posted by: JD | January 30, 2008 12:28 PM
I too, can't help but wonder about Elizabeth -- the warmest woman in politics. Knowing something about cancer staging, I can tell you her prognosis is not good, but I think she beleived so much in John, and his vision for the country, and unlike the mean-spirited jerks who constnatly pounded on him for growing up poor and doing well in the world, I think he was sincere--that she didn't want to give up while it still looked like he had a chance.
It's a sad commentary on politics that someone who was born with a silver spoon up their butts like bush or mittens is worshipped by the r party, but someone who made it on their own is ridiculed. And the media's pathetic coverage [or lack of it--did they ever bother to talk about anything but this childish drivel about his hair?] Again, pathetic and juvenile.
'The south FL Jewish vote is skewed elderly, but they liked McC better than RG or WMR, who both pandered strongly on Israel and in RG's case, on the entire neocon line.'
Mark, earlier on, a leading Jewish publication suggested the only two candidates who most conservative Jews would vote for would be Rudy or Hillary, because they were the most connected to Israel. Huckabee and Romney, never, because all observant Jews here are very concerned about church/state separation, naturally.
Liberal, social-justice Jews leaned toward Kucinich. IN any case, toward the end it became clear that voting for Rudy was essentially throwing your vote away after all his losses--the obvious flaw in his 'strategy.'
So more conservative R Jews would have favored McCain. However socially liberal Jews [who far outnumber conservatives] will favor Hillary, and that plus McCain's invisibility on Israel will tilt that vote to her. Most of the Jews I know won't vote for ANY R at this point in time no matter what, and that is true of everyone who belongs to my Reconstructionist congregation.
Posted by: claudialong | January 30, 2008 12:28 PM
ok DenVinBer1. The sky is red up is down and left is right. We know. We have seen your people's faces the last 8 years.
do not blame the left for your parties downfall for a generation. It is not edwards or obama's fault. They just drew the line in the sand. You and those like you destroyed your party. If you want someone to blame, look in the mirror. Do not sabotage your countries future out of spite.
You fascists had your chance. you showed yoru faces and made yoru choices. It was the wrong face and the american people reject yoru choices. Now stand down and stop sabotaging your great nation. Choosing party/money over country is treason. Always will be
Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 30, 2008 12:25 PM
With Edwards out, it may come to a McCain Obama race. We may have a choice between the too young and inexperenced v. the too old. This race may end up being more about age than race or gender.
Posted by: Chris_Dionigi | January 30, 2008 12:24 PM
I can't understand why Edwards would not endorse Obama. Most of what i heard in the first debates was his anger at the influence of lobbyists in Washington and at HRC for accepting tons of money from them. Also, the openness of the Edwards campaign and his honorable campaign tactics are in direct contradiction to her's. What she did in Nevada regarding the casino polling places which she once had endorsed and her pledge to Back the DNC re Florida which she has just trashed are not tactics Edwards would have used. Congratulations to Edwards for his great campaign. I wish he had found his voice in the last election.
Posted by: hschoenbach129 | January 30, 2008 12:23 PM
Edwards voice, reason and vision will be missed from this debate. I wish he would have stayed in as he has forced attention to the issue of poverty which no one else really wants to seriously talk about. The media's role in this race leaves much to be desired. Look at past headlines when the big two made policy annoucements and compare their plans to John's. More times than not John was there first (ex: fiscal stimulus) but never got the credit. If the spotlight would have been put on him and his policies I think things would have been different. But in this day of People magazine like political coverage who wants specifics when we can talk personalities and celebrity.
Posted by: krantsu | January 30, 2008 12:23 PM
Is anyone surprised? I'm not, the guy is a loon! He never cared about the poor or struggling middle class, he just thought they would fall into his plan. As for the other two candidates, one who's change theme is ridiculous (yeah change is good but not when it means higher taxes, socialized medicine and heading our country into the direction of European countries) and the other who claims she is against big business but has millions invested in them and who's husband takes millions a year, "by consulting," from the Saudi's. What a joke! Fear not the Republicans will prevail!
Posted by: DenVinBer1 | January 30, 2008 12:14 PM
Posted by: thedamedomain | January 30, 2008 12:14 PM
I would like to weigh in on the McCain vs HRC/Obama fight.
In my view, I believe McCain is now creating a new Republican party. A party without the religious freaks and more moderate fiscal minded voters.
I like conservative fiscal policies (registered dem here)...which are not necessarily always Republican values considering how Bush has spent us into debt. So for either HRC or Obama to defeat McCain you need to "steal his thunder" and appeal to a more fiscal agenda and back away from the liberal tax and spend strategy of Bill/Gore/Kerry.
I think HRC has portrayed herself as a more moderate Dem and Obama is taking more of a liberal side with Kennedy/Kerry endorsements. Having said that, HRC is the only Dem in a position to appeal to those fiscal voters who happen to also be moderate Dems. If it comes to McCain vs Obama, I might lean more toward McCain because of the fiscal policies not because he advocates them but because he has been consistent in them. Obama has now alligned himself with the liberal wing and that will ultimately play into McCain's winning strategy.
Posted by: dmoralestx | January 30, 2008 12:10 PM
For what it's worth, I would like to have voted for Edwards in the Georgia primary, but worried about throwing away my vote. I'll go with Obama for sure now. Hillary is qualified to be president, but the prospect of a choice between her and McCain is a little depressing. It's time to move on.
Posted by: vrob90 | January 30, 2008 12:09 PM
Thanks for posting a balanced report on WaPo. All the media bias against Clinton is making me want to vote for her.
Posted by: krm22201 | January 30, 2008 12:08 PM
When all is said and done, the Democrats are left with a polarizing Hillary and a young buck name Barack. I wished the Democratic party Godspeed.
Posted by: Gharza | January 30, 2008 12:07 PM
"John Edwards has spent a lifetime fighting to give voice to the voiceless and hope to the struggling, even when it wasn't popular to do or covered in the news."
Just when exactly was it not popular to give a "voice to the voiceless and hope to the struggling"? This is the type of idiotic statement that gives populism a bad name.
Posted by: dave | January 30, 2008 12:04 PM
I hear that mikeb. At least they show their faces and lose credibility. this is not cheerleading. What ever happened to credibility? What happens to clinton when edwards backs obama? "OH, this is great for clinton because." HAHAHAH
Everything can't be roses always. sometimes people have to acknowledge reality.
Posted by: JKrishnamurti | January 30, 2008 11:59 AM
I have to wonder about what some people are saying that the anti-hillary vote will now consolidate - I have to feel that Edwards' vote will be split in some way between Obama and Edwards. It is not certian that Obama will pick up the vast majority of support.
We will have to see.
I am uncertain of the motives not to wait through SuperTuesday - and uncertain of the consequences, whether they be unintended or intentional.
Posted by: Miata7 | January 30, 2008 11:59 AM
rpy1, 0 for two am I. Thanks for the post. I'll shut up about Dennis now.
Posted by: dave | January 30, 2008 11:58 AM
well said Birddog. If you support clinton and think she would put edwards in that position, I can see that wisdom. To me, as an obama supporter, I see her as a status quo republcain. I don't think, if she is the establishment, she would nominate edwrads to take on said establishment. Whereas obama is about the futu
|
Chris Cillizza joins washingtonpost.com as the author of a new politics blog called The Fix. Cillizza will provide daily posts on a range of political topics, from the race for control of Congress in 2006 to scrutinizing the 2008 presidential contenders.
| 420.227273 | 0.840909 | 1.295455 |
high
|
medium
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/29/AR2008012903342.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008013019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/29/AR2008012903342.html
|
Beware of the Sunshine State, Where It's Easy To Get Burned
|
2008013019
|
Florida, home of sunshine and land scams -- how it continually betrays us. People are always looking for paradise there, or a fountain of youth. They're always saving up for half their lives to die there.
Florida is the place for dreams, political and otherwise. And for having your dreams dashed.
(Two words, as if they needed to be mentioned: Al. Gore.)
Does anyone drive to Florida anymore? No doubt they book cheap flights on the back of that Travelocity gnome. (Maybe they notice how cheap it is to fly to Mexico, and decide to skip Florida altogether.)
But let's pretend it's still the '70s, since those were good days for Florida, and let's say a family did drive, and let's say they drove a car with hand-crank windows and no air conditioning, because that's what they had. The kids would play a hand-slap game in the back that would inevitably turn ugly, and the dad might threaten to turn the car around without ever meaning to do it, and the whole hot, fraught, interminable journey would be broken only by bathroom stops and South of the Border billboards and, most of all, imaginings of Disney World. That journey is where the dream of Florida is formed.
Florida is as much about the imagining as anything else.
You'd need imagination to see yourself living in Florida if you'd visited the state a century ago. Hot and humid. Mosquito-heavy. All that swampland. Heck, much of Florida wasn't really land till somebody made it so, filling it in or draining it. There were, of course, unsavory characters who sold land that was still underwater. (Dreams dashed.)
The books about Florida's history have names like "Land of Sunshine, State of Dreams." DDT killed the mosquitoes. Spring break blossomed. (If we lived in Florida, we could be as orange as George Hamilton in "Where the Boys Are" or Gov. Charlie Crist on CNN.) Castro came to power and Florida became a dream state for a million-plus Cubans.
In 1940, Florida was the smallest state in the South in terms of population. Today it's the fourth-largest in the country, and people come to live there from all over, and older folks buy spots in retirement communities and wait for retirement to come. And imagine.
"A Styrofoam, paper-plate society," as some Florida Democratic Party bigwig put it some 20 years ago. Florida still feels that way. Everybody's coming from someplace else, and the old folks in Boca still talk like New Yorkers, because how else would you expect them to talk?
But Florida is tough on people. It may be a dream to visit, but it can be hell to live there. You've got rising property taxes, you've got rising homeowners' insurance. Ton of foreclosures. You've got overdevelopment, the Everglades dying. Storms with nice enough names and nasty behavior.
From the Orlando Sentinel this month: "Nearly half of the Floridians polled for the second-annual Sunshine State Survey say life in Florida is worse today than it was five years ago." Not what you want to see in the same sentence -- Sunshine State Survey and "life is worse."
Politicians, those experts of holding their fingers up to test the winds, should know the risks of Florida -- or if they don't, they should. It's massive and massively messy, like five states in one. Lots of weird politicians come out of that state, which happens to excel in things weird. Among them: Katherine Harris and her rages. Mark Foley and his pages. In 2000, all those elderly Jews in Palm Beach County voting for Pat Buchanan? C'mon! So then there was the dissection of the butterfly ballot and the recount and the lawyers, the ritual counting of hanging chads, the suspicions of conspiracies and cronyism (Harris again).
Giuliani put all his eggs into the Florida dream basket, to mix metaphors terribly, and for what seemed like ages, purveyors of Conventional Wisdom kept saying what a risk it was that he wasn't campaigning in Iowa and elsewhere. (The Conventionally Wise do tend to go on.) Could he pull it off? Could he win Florida?
No, as it turned out. He spent all that time there, but came in behind John McCain and Mitt Romney. Giuliani was holding events in recent days and fewer than 100 people were showing up. So much for dreams, fading like the weak winter sunlight in a place far from Florida.
|
If yesterday was the beginning of the end for Rudy Giuliani, it's fitting that it happened in Florida.
| 43.380952 | 0.714286 | 1.095238 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/29/AR2008012903054.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008013019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/29/AR2008012903054.html
|
Video Reveals Violations of Laws, Abuse of Cows at Slaughterhouse
|
2008013019
|
Video footage being released today shows workers at a California slaughterhouse delivering repeated electric shocks to cows too sick or weak to stand on their own; drivers using forklifts to roll the "downer" cows on the ground in efforts to get them to stand up for inspection; and even a veterinary version of waterboarding in which high-intensity water sprays are shot up animals' noses -- all violations of state and federal laws designed to prevent animal cruelty and to keep unhealthy animals, such as those with mad cow disease, out of the food supply.
Moreover, the companies where these practices allegedly occurred are major suppliers of meat for the nation's school lunch programs, including in Maryland, according to a company official and federal documents.
The footage was taken by an undercover investigator for an animal welfare group, who wore a customized video camera under his clothes while working at the facility last year. [ Warning - Graphic Video: View the video on the Humane Society Web site ] It is evidence that anti-cruelty and food safety rules are inadequate, and that Agriculture Department inspection and enforcement need to be enhanced, said officials with the Humane Society of the United States, which coordinated the project.
"These were not rogue employees secretly doing these things," the investigator said in a telephone interview on the condition of anonymity because he hopes to infiltrate other slaughterhouses. "This is the pen manager and his assistant doing this right in the open."
The investigator and Wayne Pacelle, president of the Humane Society, said the footage was taken at Hallmark Meat Packing in Chino, Calif. Hallmark sells meat for processing to Westland Meat Co. in Chino, according to Westland President Steve Mendell, who is also Hallmark's operations manager.
Over the past five years, Westland has sold about 100 million pounds of frozen beef, valued at $146 million, to the Agriculture Department's commodities program, which supplies food for school lunches and programs for the needy, according to federal documents.
In the 2004-05 school year, the Agriculture Department honored Westland with its Supplier of the Year award for the National School Lunch Program.
In an interview, Mendell expressed disbelief that employees used stun guns to get sick or injured animals on their feet for inspection.
"That's impossible," he said, adding that "electrical prods are not allowed on the property."
Asked whether his employees use fork lifts to get moribund animals off the ground, he said: "I can't imagine that."
Asked whether water was sprayed up animals' noses to get them to stand up, he said: "That's absolutely not true."
"We have a massive humane treatment program here that we follow to the n{+t}{+h} degree, so this doesn't even sound possible," Mendell said. "I don't stand out there all day, but to me it would be next to impossible."
|
Video footage being released today shows workers at a California slaughterhouse delivering repeated electric shocks to cows too sick or weak to stand on their own; drivers using forklifts to roll the "downer" cows on the ground in efforts to get them to stand up for inspection; and even a veterin...
| 10.089286 | 0.964286 | 52.071429 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/29/DI2008012901978.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008013019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/29/DI2008012901978.html
|
The Technologist
|
2008013019
|
This week's column focuses on a new pricing experiment that could charge you fees for downloading content from the Internet. He also recently reviewed the MacBook Air.
Levy started covering the digital revolution more than 25 years ago while writing a story for Rolling Stone about computer hackers. Since then, he's written books about hackers, Apple, artificial life and the iPod.
Steven Levy: Hello, everyone. I'm delighted to be doing this chat for the Post, and even more delighted that my column will be regularly running in the paper. I'm happy to answer questions not only regarding this week's column on broadband issues, but the previous week's review of the Macbook Air (on which I'm working at this very moment) as well as any other tech issues you might want to throw at me.
Alexandria, Va.: Instead of wasting their time making goo-goo eyes at professional athletes during the "steroids" hearings, why aren't our Congresspeople and Senators looking into questionable practices such as this per-gigabyte fee - or more importantly, why the 4 largest cellphone providers are all offering essentially the same calling plans? The cellphone providers appear to be more collusive, than competitive.
Steven Levy: First, I should emphasize there's nothing illegal about Time-Warner's testing out a pricing system based on pricing by volume. That said, it seems to me that there is a national issue in that our system, as you note, does not seem to be delivering the virtues of competition. In terms of broadband, most people have two choices: the cable company with the local monopoly or the telco that has the local voice franchise. (Some have one or no choices.) Even though there is competition in wireless networks, it seems, as you note, that it's rare for a company to break away from the pack and offer consumer-friendly packages. Maybe this is beginning to change, as we see Verizon indicating that it may open up more. Also, if consumers push back on things like restrictive contracts, we may see better service.
Annapolis, Md.: This is an experiment. We have no idea how much the price will be per byte, we should judge this before it's been rolled out. Have you asked them about the pricing?
Time Warner is making an effort to curb bandwidth abuse and this is the method they've chosen. Let's find out the specifics before we judge the program.
Steven Levy: Of course I asked Time Warner about pricing. The answer was that pricing has not been set yet. The indication, though, is that the pricing won't be much different in various tiers. I infer (though I can't take this to the bank) that the standard 4-5 mbps speed I currently pay in New York City (for about $40) might put me in the 20 gig a month speed. Depending on my travel schedule (I buy more TV shows on iTunes to watch on the plane) and a few other variables, I can easily exceed that. So even someone who is not a P2P denizen can wind up paying more.
Washington, D.C.: What about people who download tons of illegal movies who pay the same amount as i do, when i only check my email. Time Warner is trying to make it better for people like me.
Steven Levy: As I just indicated, my conversations with Time Warner do not indicate that the charges for service packages will decrease. If you are using the lowest level of service and paying the lowest level, you probably won't be paying less.
Silver Spring, Md.: Bucks for bytes?
I don't have a problem with the idea of charge different rates by bandwidth usage. IF the overall effect is revenue neutral, this will mean that low bandwidth users will pay less than they do now.
In fact, I would agree with a pricing scheme that is like my electric, water or gas bill. Charge 1 is simply to bring it to my door, even if I don't use it. Charge 2 is how much I used (gigabytes). Of course, this is ONLY acceptable if there is a meter on my PC that shows me where I stand on my usage for the month.
In the end, I don't like the scheme because:
1. Bills for low bandwidth customers will NOT go down; the scheme is not revenue neutral.
2. The overage charges will be punatively high and will be a suprise when they happen - just like those cell phone plans.
Steven Levy: We don't know if this will be revenue neutral but the way it has been explained to me it would not seem so.
My problem with metering in general is that broadband consumers in the US right now pay more for broadband than in many other countries -- and get much slower speeds. The arc of innovation in the Internet is moving towards media-rich applications that eat up more bandwidth and work better at higher speeds. If US users can't generally take advantage of these break through products they will be developed and adopted elsewhere. Do you want our country to miss out on the next 10 YouTubes?
Arlington, Va.: How many people out there are really downloading movies at all let along HD movies over the internet? I would guess it is a small fraction of 1 percent. Won't this actually effect very few people? Unless they find out that they aren't meeting their revenue targets so they adjust the limit downwards to gouge more consumers?
Steven Levy: I don't have the numbers at hand, but I think that Apple has sold maybe 7 million movies, a disappointing figure. HD is only beginning. But clearly this is a starting point. It seems logical to assume that digital distribution will blossom and it could be great for movie studios. (The problems are not the same as with music, since people generally only watch a movie once and don't have a need to store them.) But one reason it hasn't taken off quickly is that our broadband speeds are too lame for fast downloading.
Arlington, Va.: So why don't we have better, cheaper broadband like Asia and much of Europe? Is it government intervention there that requires high speeds? Are the broadband providers there just more willing to innovate and beef up their networks? Population density? Evil companies here too greedy and devoted to making as much money as possible instead of providing their customers with good service? Do people there really have more choices or are the providers just better?
Steven Levy: No simple answer here, and in fact a vigorous debate. The big bandwidth providers do argue that population density is an issue, but I've seen papers that dispute that. I think it's a combination of things, but one cannot avoid the perception that an aggressive, coherent government policy would help sort out the problems and use carrots and sticks to improve the situation. In other countries, it has been a high priority to make this happen, even if it meant taking on big powers (Japan thwarted its most powerful telco)
Follow up about restrictive contracts: If people want the monopolies, anti-consumer practices, non-competitive contracts to continue, they should continue to vote for the republicans who tout competition but actually do all they can to make sure there is none -- like here in Florida. There are virtually no consumer protections or consumer advocacy groups in FL.
Business rules here, unlike states like CA where consumers have many more protections and choices, much better pricing and their is huge competition.
Just a reminder that your vote matters and has actual consequences in real life.
Steven Levy: I'm not sure it's fair to dump all of this on the Republicans (though if the policies of presidential candidates are an indication, the Democrats seem ahead on this issue). But you are absolutely right that if citizens make demands on this issue, there is a much higher likelihood that politicians will act in the public interest instead of the interest of the big communications companies.
Seattle, Wash.: What's the status on the pay-per-channel system that telephone companies were pushing (and cable companies fighting)? That seemed to me to be one way of breaking cable companies' local monopolies somewhat.
Steven Levy: As far as I can see, the video offerings of the Telcos adopt the cable model of bundling rather than an a la carte system. In the long run, it will be pure Internet TV that takes on that model -- when services like Joost and others are able to deliver quality on a level with HD cable. Oh, but that would mean higher broadband speeds. . . hmm, maybe there's another reason why the companies who want to sell us separate video service aren't rushing to increase our broadband speed.
Rockville, Md.: With my cell phone, I can login to my account and see how many minutes I have used so far this month. Then, I could alter my habits if I were approaching the limit.
If my ISP set a limit, how would I know how much I've downloaded so far? Could I ever know that? If I knew I had 50gigs left, I would download the movie/file/etc but if I had 50megs left, I would wait until next month. Basically, could we reasonably know where we were on our limit at any given time?
Steven Levy: Good question. I assume that if Time Warner or some other company did meter use, it would be only fair to let users know when they were getting close to hitting their limit. But, as I point out in the column, this only points to the insidious part of the scheme that might push you to favor Time Warner's cable video on demand instead of an Internet alternative like iTunes. (If I'm close to my limit, I'll avoid iTunes and maybe buy a movie on demand from Time Warner cable, which won't count towards my limit.) By the way, if Time Warner decided to exclude its own properties on the Internet (like HBO online) from the total, that would raise a lot of red flags. But TW hasn't indicated it would do that.
Washington, D.C.: We haven't missed out on any YouTubes so far, and I think the U.S. has been in the driver's seat in terms of creating the innovative applications like iTunes, YouTube and NetFlix online downloads that you're talking about despite our "inadequate" broadband speeds.
That being said, I feel more comfortable seeing broadband providers trying new ways of managing demand for broadband than I do having federal bureaucrats or, worse, Congress dictating how networks ought to function. Shouldn't we be cautiously optimistic about these kinds of experiments?
Steven Levy: Talk to leaders in the technology field like Ed Zander or John Chambers and they will tell you they are VERY concerned about this. And though YouTube started here, there are many great services abroad that most Americans simply haven't heard of.
I don't think many people want Congress to micromanage networks, but the idea of pushing for broadband competitiveness is another matter.
Washington, D.C.: I suggest one policy change is to reduce or limit local control over broadband franchisees. Verizon has been limited in its roll-out of FIOS because it has to get permission from every town first. Of course, they're being forced to jump through the same hoops each cable co. did in the 80s before wiring up.
BTW, any word on when/if FIOS will be coming to the District?
Steven Levy: This is an interesting situation that seems to come about because cable operators are trying to slow down competition from telcos. Of course telcos can take care of themselves, and I think eventually they will be able to offer their video services where their fiber is. Don't know when Verizon is coming to DC, sorry, but I'm sure you'll get flyers in your bill when it arrives.
Betehsda, Md.: Here's how much I hate the cable-telco-wireless companies: I'm a card carrying Libertarian and I want them all nationalized!!!! The service we get from these guys is worse than the post office. They have the laziest, surliest, most pig-headed employees on the planet.
Then the companies pull tricks like charging for something I signed up to have unlimited. I can't imagine how the executives sleep at night. They are profit maximizes without the threat of completion, and they act like I'm they're doing me a favor by letting them sell their service to me.
The thing that has me really ticked off: been a Verizon wireless customer for 7+ years. My office decided to give me a phone on our network, which is on Sprint. Well, if I were a new customer, they'd pro-rate my cancellation fee. But since I'm an old customer, the promises their CEO made in front of congress don't apply, so I am stuck paying 3 more months of my bill because they won't waive my cancellation fee.
When Verizon hears about this usage, I bet they'll install an iris scanner and charge me whenever I look at my phone.
Steven Levy: Not many people would agree that the companies should be nationalized, but it is significant that there are people like you who feel so strongly that you've been abused. Telcos and cable companies have monopoly in their genes, but should be given a chance to develop more competitive approaches. The problem is that there isn't enough competition. In broadband, a duopoly situation doesn't seem to be doing the trick.
Any idea how the tech industry is equipped to deal with any economic downturn? It will suffer like all industries, but is it in any way better built to take the hits?
Steven Levy: OK, now moving to some other issues.
If you recall what happened in the early part of this century, when the tech bubble burst, clearly the industry is prone to a big economic hit. However, no matter what is happening with stock prices, the underlying conditions that push tech innovation -- Moore's Law (more powerful computers, cheaper), more pervasive Internet use, and, more recently, the ability to start a company with very little capital outlay -- will still be around. So it's one story for shareholders and another for users.
Baltimore, Md.: There's no portability for e-mail addresses when you switch providers, is there? I'd dump Comcast for Verizon FIOS but I don't want to the lose the comcast.net email address I've had for years.
Steven Levy: It wouldn't seem right to use Verizon for with a comcast.com address, would it? You might have to bite the bullet and send out email to everyone you know. But before you switch to a Verizon address, you might think about using an web-based service (that wouldn't be linked to your isp) or registering your own domain and linking it to whatever service you're using.
Newllano, La.: You must have money to throw away to buy a Macbook Air, even the Mac boy's dont like it.
Steven Levy: Actually, in the category of subnotebooks (which is pricey), but Macbook Air is far from the worst offender. For some people the ability to have a good quality Mac computer that weighs so little and looks so good will be worth the price. I only wish that it had the 160 gig drive in the upperlevel iPod classic instead of only an 80-gig drive.
Washington, D.C.: Are HP and Gateway, and maybe even Dell these days, pretty similar in what they can offer in performance and reliability in their processor and specs in a desktop for the at home use?
Steven Levy: A few years ago everyone was competing with Dell's model of low-innovation and low pricing. (To be fair, Dell was very innovative in its distribution and supply chain.) Now that that's not working as well, and because Apple is succeeding in innovation, we're seeing PC makers using more imagination in design and features. But as far as specs are concerned -- processor speed, etc--that's pretty much determined by what chipmakers and storage companies provide.
New York City: What seems to be winning in the technology wars, the Wow Factor or practicality. In the wake of the iPhone I say the later. Thoughts? Oh, and any thoughts on the Fake Steve Jobs Blog? I was just introduced and thought it quite funny.
Steven Levy: The Wow factor means a lot, as Apple has proved, but buyers will resist if a product is not practical. When it was time for me to send back my review unit of the iPhone I thought long and hard about whether to keep my Newsweek blackberry for mail or switch to the iPhone, even though it didn't handle mail as smoothly. I went for the iPhone because it was so much better at web access and everything else -- and because, I guess, of the Wow factor.
Washington, D.C.: Welcome to the Post!
When do you think we'll get our paws on a 3G iPhone? I'm ready to sell my first gen once they offer me a second gen!
Steven Levy: It seems that AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson has already said that we'd see one this year. I think that the crucial factor is how quickly AT&T can make its 3G network pervasive. A more widely available Edge network was supposedly why the iPhone wasn't 3G from the get-go.
Arlington, Va.: With the lack of security in 802.11, and more importantly most people not knowing how to set it up this is a disaster waiting to happen. Some single mom (or poor family) in an apartment is going to get a monsterous bill because they didn't lock down their wi-fi, and the signal is bound to spread beyond their walls.
This is going to be impossible to implement.
Steven Levy: I asked the Time Warner spokesperson about this, and he indicated that this was something the company would try to take into account when it rolled out the plan. Interestingly, TW has a relationship with FON, a system that allows users to share broadband wirelessly.
Steven Levy: I have to say that you are a GREAT chat audience. In my queue are a number of really smart questions I wasn't able to get to. Thanks so much for your attention and I hope I can get to more of you next time.
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
|
Join live discussions from the Washington Post. Feature topics include national, world and DC area news, politics, elections, campaigns, government policy, tech regulation, travel, entertainment, cars, and real estate.
| 90.097561 | 0.634146 | 0.780488 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/29/AR2008012902850.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008013019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/29/AR2008012902850.html
|
Recruit the Soldier, Put the Spouse on a Career Path
|
2008013019
|
President Bush, in the State of the Union address Monday, praised the sacrifices that military families make and asked Congress to create a new hiring preference that would give military spouses an edge in getting a civil service job. Spouses of active-duty military personnel receive preferential treatment only when they are seeking jobs in the Defense Department.
Bush's proposal would expand that advantage, probably by permitting spouses to enter the government through internships that would lead to a permanent job, a Pentagon spokesman said yesterday. "It would be a career path into the civil service," the spokesman said.
Details of the proposal were not available, but most federal agencies operate two-year intern programs to recruit college graduates and other young people. The programs provide a competitive salary and benefits, and when successfully completed, the intern usually goes into a full-time job at their agency.
According to the Labor Department, the unemployment rate for military spouses is three times that of their private-sector counterparts. Frequent movement of military personnel make it difficult or too costly for spouses to establish careers or meet state credentialing and licensing requirements, the department said.
The Pentagon has been working on ways to help military spouses for several years. Most recently, in November, the departments of Defense and Labor launched a three-year pilot project, the Military Spouse Career Advancement Initiative, at 18 bases in eight states with large military populations.
Under the project, spouses are eligible for $3,000 a year to pay for education and training in "portable career fields," such as education, health care, technology, construction trades and financial services.
Participation in the project is limited to spouses of military personnel in the lower enlisted and officer ranks, E1 through E5 and 01 through 03. Spouses must have high school diplomas or the equivalent or have completed some college courses.
The State Department also has grappled with the issue. It has hiring programs so that family members of Foreign Service officers can qualify for employment in U.S. embassies and consulates abroad.
Providing military spouses with a hiring preference at all federal agencies would be a significant change to federal hiring rules. Under current law, only military veterans receive special consideration when competing for federal jobs.
Bush also called on Congress to approve legislation allowing military service members to transfer their unused education benefits to their spouses or children.
The G.I. Bill, as the program is known, provides up to 36 months of education benefits to veterans for college, technical and other training. About 70 percent of veterans use all or a part of their entitlement.
|
Recruit the soldier. Retain the family. That's been common wisdom at the Pentagon for ages.
| 26.315789 | 0.736842 | 0.842105 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/30/DI2008013002350.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008013019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/30/DI2008013002350.html
|
Rep. Tom Davis To Retire
|
2008013019
|
Capitol Briefing Blogger Ben Pershing, was online Wednesday, Jan. 30, at 4 p.m. ET to discuss reaction.
Analysis: Pragmatic, Centrist Style Brought Davis Success and Suspicion
Ben Pershing: Hi everyone. One of the big stories on Capitol Hill today -- and the entire D.C. area -- is the retirement announcement of Northern Virginia Rep. Tom Davis (R). You can read a couple of different stories about his retirement and a Capitol Briefing blog post I wrote on it by looking at the links above. Let's get started with your questions.
Fairfax, Va.: Ben, obviously this will be mean a big loss in clout for the region's congressional delegation. Where/how do you think that loss will be felt the most?
Ben Pershing: This is definitely a loss for the entire D.C. area. Davis has been the biggest Republican supporter of D.C. voting rights in the House for quite a while. He also has been a driving force behind bringing federal money to Northern Virginia and supporting the area's military bases. And he has been a strong advocate for the Dulles rail project, which as you know hasn't been doing so well lately. There is no obvious way to replace his seniority, though the area still has some pretty powerful members of Congress, like Steny Hoyer and Frank Wolf.
spidey103: I guess by current standards Davis is considered a "moderate" Republican, but he voted to impeach President Clinton and always seemed to go along with whatever Bush wanted.
Ben Pershing: That's true -- it's not as though Davis bucked his party on all the major issues -- but he has been pretty liberal on social issues like abortion, and he has been a big supporter of federal workers and their unions, which generally tend to support Democrats more than Republicans.
Arlington, Va.: Ben, should we start getting used to hearing "Congressman Connolly," or does former Congresswoman Byrne have a real chance of beating him in the Democratic primary? Who's going to run on the GOP side, now that Davis is retiring (and will be making more use of his Nationals season tickets)?
Ben Pershing: Reading all the coverage today and talking to people here on Capitol Hill, it doesn't seem that any obvious Republican successors have emerged yet. On the Democratic side, it does seem like the party establishment is more likely to get behind Gerald Connolly, the chairman of the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, than ex-Rep. Leslie Byrne. But it's too early to say for sure which of them is the likely nominee.
Arlington, Va.: What some people don't realize is that strongest advocate for D.C. voting rights is actually a Republican. He is the only person with enough clout to get that done. I guess D.C. statehood chances are back to the starting point?
Ben Pershing: With Democrats running the House and Senate now, it's not quite as necessary for there to be a strong Republican champion in the House for D.C. voting rights. The Senate, with its 60-vote hurdle, is the bigger challenge. If a Democrat wins the White House in November I think you'll see a reinvigorated push to get this done next year, especially if Democrats can pick up a few seats in the Senate.
Arlington, Va.: Though I live in a neighboring district and am a Democrat, I always have admired Mr. Davis' efforts to bring practical solutions to the region's problems. I hope his retirement from public office is only temporary -- rest up, Mr. Davis, then come on back!
Ben Pershing: Voters like you are the reason Davis would have been a favorite to win re-election, but a different GOP nominee may have a harder time. Davis always has been able to attract at least some Democrats and independents to vote for him. Will his successor?
Fairfax, Va.: For a Republican he wasn't half-bad. I'm almost sorry to see him go. But not really. Have to give him credit for having a lot of energy, the guy showed up for every event.
How much can a former congressman like Davis expect to make from the lobbyist who will surely hire him?
I'm surprised he jumped ship. He still would have won.
Ben Pershing: Davis apparently already has begun talking to some possible employers on K Street. He can expect to command a seven-figure salary. He's got lots of contacts in both parties, and he knows policy well, particularly on high-tech issues. He should have a nice menu of job options waiting for him.
Alexandria, Va.: Is Davis's retirement yet another nail in the coffin of previously Republican-leaning Northern Virginia?
Ben Pershing: Northern Virginia definitely has been trending toward Democrats in recent years, from Arlington out to Loudoun County. That trend has been particularly noticeable at the state and local level. Remember, Davis's wife -- Jeannemarie Devolites Davis (R) -- just lost her Virginia Senate seat last year to Chap Petersen, a Democrat.
Fairfax, Va.: Ben, with Tom Davis's announcement today and Sen. John Warner's decision also to not seek re-election, Virginia is losing two of our most important leaders. Does this also mean that the moderate, common-sense wing of Virginia's Republican party is gone?
Ben Pershing: Well, Davis certainly is frustrated by the direction the state party is taking. When the state GOP decided to pick their nominee for the race to succeed Sen. John Warner by using a nominating convention, rather than a primary, that was a clear signal that the party establishment wanted a more conservative nominee (Jim Gilmore) instead of Davis. But Davis and other moderates think a strongly conservative candidate will have a lot of trouble beating a Democrat as popular as Mark Warner in the general election. This same moderate vs. conservative tension has played out in the state for a while, and will continue.
hyogo66: A "vibrant defense-contracting industry"? Can you spell gravy train? I'm glad he's going. Good riddance.
Ben Pershing: That is probably the view of a fair number of conservatives. Davis was never shy about bringing home the bacon to his district and the entire D.C. area. For Republicans whose number one issue is cutting pork and federal spending, he probably wasn't their favorite guy.
Falls Church, Va.: Tom was obviously very disappointed about the Senate race. It strikes me that he might be well advised to run for governor. It could position him to challenge Sens. Webb or Mark Warner, or even to run for president. Have you heard any speculation about this?
Ben Pershing: Obviously he passed on challenging Mark Warner for the open U.S. Senate seat this year. As for his future, here's what he said today: "It's time for me to take a sabbatical. I would say I'm not ruling out future public service, but it's time to be refreshed, to see what it's like in the private sector. That doesn't mean I will or won't come back."
Now, there are two main issues here: If the party wouldn't help him become the Senate nominee this year, would it be any easier for him to run for governor or challenge Sen. Jim Webb in the future? If he does become a high-paid lobbyist, will that hurt his future campaign chances? It might be pretty easy for his opponents, either Democratic or Republican, to use his lobbying career against him.
Seattle: Some people say that Davis was a moderate Republican because of his stances on abortion and D.C. voting rights, but it's not clear to me that his voting record reflects this. What do you think? Also, what's your favorite rock album cover? Thanks.
Ben Pershing: He does have a mixed voting record, but he has generally been more liberal than most House Republicans. As for album covers, it's tough to pick a favorite, but I always thought Ted Nugent's "Weekend Warriors" cover was pretty great, in a ridiculous, God-of-Rock kind of way.
Washington: On the Democratic side, there's increasing buzz about Doug Denneny to take Davis's seat. He's a medal-recipient Iraq War vet, former Navy Legislative Fellow and deputy legislative liaison for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He's now president of the Mantua Citizens Association, and was appointed to and has served on three Fairfax County Boards: the Tysons Corner Land Use Task Force, the Environmental Quality Advisory Council and the Industrial Development Authority.
I'm really impressed by this guy, and a little surprised that you didn't mention him. I mean, while Leslie Byrne was writing letters about the Iraq War, he was fighting in it. The man is a genuine war hero, and has years of sophisticated experience on Capitol Hill. In a purplish district like the 11th, he seems like the natural candidate to pull in independents and moderate Republicans while still taking sensible, progressive positions on the issues.
Ben Pershing: Are you, by chance, Doug Denneny himself? If it's you, here's a plug for your Web site. But it does seem at this point like Connolly or Byrne will have the upper hand.
Anonymous: Do Dave Albo or the recently defeated Jay O'Brien take a shot at holding the seat for the GOP?
Ben Pershing: I have seen both those names mentioned on some local blogs, but neither of them has taken any concrete steps to run. Republican candidates generally were waiting until Davis announced his decision before making any real moves. The field should get a lot clearer in the next week.
Natstural: Davis is (and was) a great politician for the D.C. area, not just Northern Virginia. He has helped promote growth across the whole religion, and he may be the District's strongest voice in Congress (of those with a vote). It will be almost impossible for a freshman congressman to provide the level of service to the region. He will be missed by all.
Ben Pershing: It's definitely true that a freshman member, from either party, will start off in a lot weaker position in the House compared to Davis's current position. One of the best ways to measure a particular member's clout -- or the clout of an entire state delegation -- is by simply looking at seniority. Between the retirements of Davis and John Warner, Virginia clearly is losing some clout.
Washington: Nope, I'm not Denneny -- just an admirer, and (full disclosure) a donor. I admire his proven courage, service to country, and forward-looking thinking, especially as opposed to, say, the tired Byrne -- a proven loser in this district.
Ben Pershing: Okay, because I was also wondering if you're related to Denneny. As for Byrne, she definitely has piled up some losses in the past. She only served one term in the House before losing, and also has tried and failed before in runs for the Senate and for lieutenant governor. But it seems like she hasn't given up trying to get back to Congress.
Kingstowne, Va.: Ben, speaking of The Nuge: He is a known conservative Republican and strong advocate of gun rights. If he were to relocate to Northern Virginia, which locality or county in the Washington area would look to be safely Republican leaning for the near future?
Ben Pershing: Ted Nugent definitely would be an interesting dark-horse candidate for this seat. In addition to supporting gun rights and the rights of bow-hunters, I hear he also has some fascinating views on the Dulles rail project and the future of development in Tyson's Corner.
Washington: Does Davis take a shot at Webb in 2012? Or does he wait for the governor's race in 2013?
Ben Pershing: As I noted earlier, Davis will have some difficult challenges in any future statewide race. If he does run again, it probably will depend on how strong or weak Webb looks at the time.
adjjones: Tom forgot his roots and the people of Fairfax. Probably correct in that it's time to move on. Doubtful that he could be reele
Ben Pershing: It's true that Davis's re-election races have gotten progressively tougher, but he still would have been the favorite if he'd decided to run again. He is a very, very good fundraiser and would likely have been able to outspend just about any Democratic opponent.
Center Channel: Bad news for Republicans. The Christian Soldiers have had their way for too long in the GOP. This country needs moderates from both parties in charge. Instead, DeLay and company forced the Republicans into a tight straightjacket that didn't allow them to breathe. Holy wars aren't good for anybody except those who profit from them, no matter what part of the world you live in.
Ben Pershing: All these retirements by moderate Republicans will be a real test for the House GOP. They really can't win back the majority without the ability to keep their centrists and swing-district members from retiring. And are there promising moderate Republican candidates out there who see all these retirements and decide not to bother running for Congress?
Northwest Washington: As a political layman, this period seems very reminiscent of when Nunn, Mitchell and other rational/diplomatic members left Congress (House/Senate) prior to the Republican conservative revolution or Gingrich's so-called mandate. With the recent announcements are we embarking on a similar type era?
Ben Pershing: I definitely have heard both Democrats and Republicans lament that there is a lot less bipartisanship on Capitol Hill and a lot fewer pragmatic deal-makers than there used to be. I guess it depends on how highly you value pragmatism versus members who have strong ideological views and fight for them.
Fairfax, Va.: To all those complaining about him becoming a lobbyist -- pretty much everyone in any presidential staff does this (on both sides). Let's see you walk away from $1 million-plus a year. It's easy to complain without having that offer in front of you. I doubt anyone here could turn down a seven-figure job.
Ben Pershing: I, for one probably would not turn down a seven-figure job, but public officials have to make choices: Davis can take the money now, but it may hurt him if he wants to return to elected office. He has to decide which is more important to him.
Arlington, Va.: Shouldn't Rep. Moran be the Northern Virginia congressman with the most clout, given that he's been in office longer than Davis and is a Democrat? Oh wait, that's right... he squandered most of his clout with all his indiscretions over the years and got stripped of his Whip Team post, as well as losing out for an Appropriations cardinalship for the subcommittee that he was the the most senior Democrat on.
Ben Pershing: For all the problems he's had, Jim Moran still has some clout as a member of the Appropriations Committee. That's where the real money is, more so that on Davis' panel -- Oversight and Government Reform.
Ben Pershing: Okay everyone, thanks for the great questions. This race to replace Davis should be interesting to watch.
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.
|
Capitol Briefing Blogger Ben Pershing discusses reaction to the announcement made by Rep. Tom M. Davis II (R-Va.) to retire from Congress at the end of the year.
| 89.411765 | 0.794118 | 1.735294 |
high
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/28/DI2008012801845.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008013019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/28/DI2008012801845.html
|
Post Politics Hour - washingtonpost.com
|
2008013019
|
Don't want to miss out on the latest in politics? Start each day with The Post Politics Hour. Join in each weekday morning at 11 a.m. as a member of The Washington Post's team of White House and Congressional reporters answers questions about the latest in buzz in Washington and The Post's coverage of political news.
Washington Post campaign finance reporter Matthew Mosk was online Wednesday, Jan. 30 at 11 a.m. ET to discuss the latest news in politics.
Get the latest campaign news live on washingtonpost.com's The Trail, or subscribe to the daily Post Politics Podcast.
Archive: Post Politics Hour discussion transcripts
Matthew Mosk: Good morning, and what a morning it is: We're right on the heels of news that that Democrat John Edwards and Republican Rudy Giuliani both will be exiting the main stage today. What does it all mean? Let's hear your thoughts, and talk about what to expect as we approach Feb. 5, the biggest contest of the primary season.
Arlington, Va.: Many big questions today, but here's the biggest one: Will Edwards dropping out of the race help Clinton or Obama more?
Matthew Mosk: I agree -- this is a big question. I've just returned from the winter convention of the American Association of Justice, the industry group for trial lawyers. Both Clinton and Obama had representatives there trying to pluck off Edwards donors, and among the trial lawyers, there was a great deal of confusion, it seemed to me, as to which candidate to get behind. There was a lot of speculation about whether Sen. Edwards had brokered a deal with either camp. If he has, and he jumps behind one or the other, that could have some sway with voters. If he stays neutral -- as he has hinted this morning -- it's much harder to tell which one of them it helps.
Certainly, in Southern states, it opens the door further for Obama, who would have competed with Edwards for support.
Arlington, Va.: Does Giuliani owe a refund to all the people who sent him money to run for president, given that he didn't seem to actually have much interest in really running for president? Was his campaign the biggest fraud ever?
Matthew Mosk: I don't know about biggest fraud ever, but certainly it will go down as one of the biggest political gambles ever. Giuliani knew his strategy of waiting until Florida to compete never had worked before, but he went for it. I've spoken to a number of his donors, and they were -- grudgingly in some cases -- convinced that this was the right path for him.
Fairfax, Va.: Is there any conceivable path to the nomination for either Obama or Romney if they don't win California?
Matthew Mosk: Fairfax, you've struck on one of the central questions of Feb. 5. California is clearly a crucial battleground -- but its impact is minimized somewhat by the fact that it is not a winner-take-all affair in either contest. That means the likely outcome is that both Sens. Clinton and Obama will find pockets of support, and emerge from California with a divided count of delegates. The same for Romney and McCain, at least in theory.
Anonymous: The big unanswered question -- with Giuliani out, what will Pat Robertson do? I'm sure he's waiting for a personal message from on high, but has The Post heard anything? Could tip the race one way or another, don't ya think?
Matthew Mosk: I'm not sure I agree with the premise here, and I have no insight on Pat Robertson's plans. That said, there remains a real divide in the Republican primary between fiscal and religious conservatives. One crucial factor in Romney's ability to compete, it seems to me, will be Huckabee. Right now, he continues to draw away a segment of religious conservatives who otherwise might be predisposed to Romney.
Washington: Some recent polls have Obama within 12 points of Clinton in California and closing fast. Is there a realistic chance that Obama wins California?
Matthew Mosk: The gap there is pretty big. The latest CNN/Los Angeles Times poll has Sen. Clinton running ahead of Sen. Obama by 17 points. We learned in New Hampshire that these gaps can close quickly -- literally overnight -- but at the same time, Sen. Clinton's consistent, sizeable lead in California does seem to pose a pretty serious obstacle for Sen. Obama. And five days is not much time to close a gap like that.
Washington: It says you're the campaign finance reporter, so I was wondering if you could explain why there seems to be so much animus toward John McCain because of his support for campaign finance reform. A lot of conservatives -- and I think evangelicals -- are very unhappy with him for this reason, but why? I don't buy the "because they're regulating free speech" argument, no matter how many columns George Will wants to devote to it! We regulate lots of speech -- obscenity, slander, etc.
Matthew Mosk: Broadly, my sense it that Republicans generally resist the idea of having government intervene in peoples' personal choices, especially when the matter at hand is politics. And the "regulate free speech" argument is one that has been taken seriously by more that just George Will (the Supreme Court comes to mind). And so for these reasons, I think his work on campaign finance reform has made him some enemies in his own party. At the same time, Sen. McCain has started to garner significant support in some powerful Republican circles. It's worth noting that he has more Washington lobbyists raising money for him than any other candidate, Republican or Democrat, according to a Public Citizen report published yesterday. (Sen. Clinton finished second.)
Portland, Ore.: What happens to the delegates that John Edwards has won? Does Edwards have any control over whom they vote for at the convention?Thanks.
Matthew Mosk: He does have control over his delegates, and that should give him some pretty significant clout if this race remains undecided as we approach the Democratic convention. So what does Edwards want with this clout? Some of his supporters have told me they want to see him be strongly considered as a future attorney general. That kind of deal can't be brokered in any formal way, but you can bet it will be the subject of whatever private discussions he has with Sens. Clinton and Obama in coming weeks.
Bloomington, Ind.: Was Sen. Edwards priced out of the race?
Matthew Mosk: This is an excellent question. My strong suspicion is that the answer is no. For starters, Edwards top fundraiser, Fred Baron, told me just two days ago that he was raising more money this month than in any previous month. That money was due to be matched with federal funds because Sen. Edwards had decided to play within the public financing system. And other candidates -- Huckabee comes to mind -- have done pretty well relying on media coverage to keep them in the public eye.
The more likely reason he made this decision was that he had yet to win a single primary, and he lost the one primary -- South Carolina -- that he had won four years earlier. That's just a tough hand of cards to be holding.
Birmingham, Ala.: Any chance Richardson endorses Obama when Ted Kennedy visits New Mexico later this week?
Matthew Mosk: I think Richardson has deep and strong ties to the Clintons -- and it should be noted that one of his top fundraisers, a Denver political consultant named Mike Stratton, signed up with Sen. Clinton last week, with Richardson's blessing.
That said, there is no doubt Richardson is feeling pulled in two direction. Here's what my colleague Jose Vargas wrote when he went to see Richardson yesterday.
"Richardson's torn. He served in the Clinton White House, first as ambassador to the United Nations, then as Clinton's Secretary of Energy. 'I have a history with the Clintons,' Richardson said. 'And I've always liked her. She always seems very genuine.' But Richardson considers Kennedy, who's long been respected by Hispanics, as 'a mentor.' In 1982, when Richardson ran for Congress for the second time -- he lost two years before -- Kennedy flew to Santa Fe and campaigned for him. 'That might have been the reason I was elected,' Richardson said. And he said he likes Obama, telling a story about how Obama saved him during one of last year's Democratic debates:
" 'I had just been asked a question -- I don't remember which one -- and Obama was sitting right next to me. Then the moderator went across the room, I think to Chris Dodd, so I thought I was home free for a while. I wasn't going to listen to the next question. I was about to say something to Obama when the moderator turned to me and said, "So, Gov. Richardson, what do you think of that?'"But I wasn't paying any attention! I was about to say, "Could you repeat the question? I wasn't listening." But I wasn't about to say I wasn't listening. I looked at Obama. I was just horrified. And Obama whispered, "Katrina. Katrina." The question was on Katrina! So I said, "On Katrina, my policy..." Obama could have just thrown me under the bus. So I said, "Obama, that was good of you to do that." ' "
Chicago: Worst campaign of the season: Rudy or Fred?
Matthew Mosk: I like this question, Chicago. I think these two guys had two very different problems besetting their campaigns -- Fred Thompson's greatest difficulty seemed to be organizational, while Mayor Giuliani's was strategic.
Thompson spent months in what seemed like a rudderless drift. Folks inside his campaign told me that Sen. Thompson and his wife were micromanaging the campaign to the point that they needed to sign off on the color scheme for bumper stickers. Dozens of campaign consultants and strategists came to the campaign and discovered they could not stomach the work environment. It's hard -- no, impossible -- to keep a presidential campaign afloat in that kind of situation.
Rudy, as we discussed, took a strategic gamble; if it had paid off, we would be calling him a genius today. But it didn't, and we aren't.
Avon Park, Fla.: Are we too quick to write off Mitt Romney? Sure, he'd rather win Florida than lose it, but he has deep pockets and can at least spend money on TV ads. Combine that with the conservative distrust of John McCain, and I'm not convinced that the GOP race is over.
Matthew Mosk: Thanks for this question, Avon Park.
I think you are right that Gov. Romney remains a serious challenger for the nomination, and you are right to focus on the reason -- his money. The question is, will Romney come up with a message that draws folks away from McCain? The money is useless if the message isn't right.
California: I've seen news reports describing recent 527 efforts on behalf of Obama (Project Hope is one I believe?). These efforts contrast with Obama's criticism in Iowa of Clinton and John Edwards for benefiting from similar 527 efforts (Emily's List, for one). Has Obama or his campaign said much about these efforts, distancing itself to the extent possible?
Matthew Mosk: I don't think you have the details here quite right (Emily's List is supporting Sen. Clinton, and is a PAC, not a 527). But the gist of the question is worth addressing.
The misperception here is that all independent groups are equal. Obama's beef with the groups that were supporting Sen. Edwards focused on one major no-no in outside-group activity -- coordination with the campaign. There was no evidence that the group supporting Edwards was coordinating with him, but Sen. Obama was suspicious of this because the group was headed by Nick Baldick, a former top Edwards aide. Obama's question was, can Nick Baldick leave the campaign in early 2007, then turn around a few months later and lead the efforts of an outside group to support Edwards's campaign?
No such allegation has surfaced in connection with the groups backing Sen. Obama.
Fairfax, Va.: Doesn't Edwards leaving now help Clinton enormously? And, doesn't it suggest that he will ultimately endorse her? Had he stayed through Super Tuesday, he would have split some of the key demographics. White men are really a key demographic in play -- Edwards seemed to split them with Clinton; if they go toward her, Obama is done, right?
Matthew Mosk: That's one way to look at it. Though I would note that Sen. Obama actually beat Sen. Clinton among white men in South Carolina. And Obama's strategy for Feb. 5 seems to be centered on the Southern states that are competing that day -- states like Georgia and Tennessee -- where you might think Edwards would have peeled votes away from Obama.
Washington: Can I just dispel a rising myth about McCain? On today's front page your fellow Post reporters Jonathan Weisman and Paul Kane have an analysis piece (and it's a good one) about Romney and McCain. In the article John Weaver, McCain's longtime political adviser dismisses Romney with having been born on third base. Okay, that's true -- but given the fact that McCain was born into a family where his father and grandfather both were admirals in the Navy and went to Annapolis, McCain at the very least was born stealing third. Last time I checked it's quite difficult (now as then) to get into the Naval Academy. McCain also has married into wealth with his wife Cindy. Sorry about the long rant, but please let's not feel bad for poor John. He's loaded, and also was given more opportunity than many of us, just like Romney.
washingtonpost.com: After Romney's Barrage, McCain Stands Tall (Post, Jan. 30)
Matthew Mosk: I think this is a point worth making. The truth is, both of these men have backgrounds that set them on the path to success. They also both have strong points that owe to their own efforts, and not just their bloodlines -- Sen. McCain's war record, for one, and Gov. Romney's turnaround of the Winter Olympics for another. How each makes use of those advantages ultimately will spell the difference.
Los Angeles: Can you determine which candidates have been the most efficient in the expenditure of money, and which have been the most profligate? And if so, please identify them.
Matthew Mosk: Thanks for this question, L.A.
We will have a much better sense of this tomorrow, when candidates file their 2007 reports with the FEC. My sense is that both Sens. Clinton and Obama spent most of the $100 million they each brought in last year, and both have had strong fundraising efforts in January. It's hard to knock them, or anyone else, for spending it all -- that's why they raised it.
Probably the most efficient candidate has been Gov. Huckabee, who never has seemed to be successful with raising money. He has had some outside help, but has been very effective at drawing attention to himself on television, whether on late night talk shows, news programs, or during debates.
Sen. McCain is another who has made good use of very limited funds. He nearly hit rock bottom at the end of this past summer, but he managed to make the most of his strength in New Hampshire.
Giuliani Ran: One of the biggest media frauds ever is that Giuliani did not run until Florida. The facts show otherwise. Rudy ran in Iowa until he learned Iowans didn't really like him. He ran and spent hard in New Hampshire, until he found out that the Granite State did not like him either. He skipped South Carolina and ran hard in Florida, until he learned that Floridians didn't have much use for him. Giuliani spent $60 million ... he was running ... only voters were running too -- as far away from the Sept. 11 maniac as possible!
Matthew Mosk: I wouldn't call this a media fraud, as I've read a lot about this in ... the media. But I do think if you look comparatively at the time and money he spent in the early states, you will find that it was not comparable to what other candidates were doing there. At the same time, he was spending money and time in Florida when others were spending all their time in the early states. My colleague Mike Leahy had an excellent piece earlier this week that offered some insight into why Giuliani never caught on in states like Iowa and New Hampshire -- he simply did not embrace the idea of retail campaigning.
Not so fast: Re: "Certainly, in southern states, it opens the door further for Obama, who would have competed with Edwards for support." Where exactly do you get that assumption? In numerous Florida counties in which Edwards won, Clinton was a close second. I've spoken with elderly white males, even veterans, who said they would be willing to vote for Hillary because of their favorable assessment of the economic record of Bill. I'd like you to back up your statement with facts, not statements that don't even contain a logical argument, much less facts.
I think I gave you a fact when I referenced the results in South Carolina. I don't know if it will be determinative, just as I don't think the Florida votes tells us all that much (considering none of the candidates campaigned there).
All that said, there is not much behind any of these theories and predictions. As we learned in New Hampshire, only the voters actually can answer these questions.
Fairfax, Va.: Your response to why Republicans criticize McCain on campaign finance reform sure makes them sound awfully high-minded and noble. Isn't their concern really that their money offsets the Democrats' superior numbers, and McCain's efforts might help the Democrats and hurt them?
Matthew Mosk: Well, I was trying to explain why they take the position they do. I'm not weighing in on which side is right.
As for the idea that money offsets numbers, I don't think I would reach that same conclusion. Democrats have been very effective fundraisers. In most of the recent presidential campaigns, there has been enough money on both sides to suggest that it was not the key factor in determining who would win.
College Park, Md.: How much money did Clinton and Obama raise in the fourth quarter?
Matthew Mosk: We'll know the exact amounts tomorrow night, but I've been told that both raised roughly $20 million (Sen. Clinton's number may be a little higher than that). Both campaigns confirmed reaching $100 million by the end of the year.
What the numbers won't tell us is how they are positioned going into Feb. 5. My (educated) guess is that they both have raised well over $10 million just this month, and will be on relatively even footing going into Feb. 5.
Savannah, Ga.: Can you clarify? Does John Edwards get to determine whom his delegates vote for? Even if he does not officially endorse anyone?
Matthew Mosk: Sorry for the pause in the action. I was trying to get an answer to Savannah's question.
What I'm told here in the newsroom is that he does not have formal control over the delegates (beyond that they would be obligated to support him on the first round of voting if he were still a candidate). At some point, it's expected that he would release his delegates and they could go wherever they want.
Either way, he has 26 delegates and there are 4,049 overall, so he is not likely to be a kingmaker.
San Francisco: Hope I got this in in time. So, when an Edwards or a Giuliani drops out of the race, what happens to all the money they raised? I'm assuming they don't issue refunds. And is there a limit to them transferring that cash to the candidate they then endorse?
Matthew Mosk: They'll be lucky to emerge without big debts -- which is to say, most if not all of it has been spent already. (Buyer beware.) The more likely scenario is one we just saw in an Los Angeles Times report today -- Sen. Sam Brownback, who dropped out with some sizeable debts, threw his support behind Sen. McCain. At the same time, Sen. McCain's top donors made contributions to Sen. Brownback to help him retire his debt.
Matthew Mosk: Lots of great questions still waiting for answers, but alas, I'm out of time. Lots of news to cover today.
Thanks so much for joining me.
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
|
Washington Post campaign finance reporter Matthew Mosk discusses the latest political news and The Post's coverage of politics.
| 207.3 | 0.95 | 4.85 |
high
|
high
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/12/18/DI2007121801733.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008013019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/12/18/DI2007121801733.html
|
Lost Book Club: 'Through the Looking Glass'
|
2008013019
|
Start reading now. Then, join Jen and Liz on Wednesday, Jan. 30, at Noon ET (just one day before the premiere of "Lost's" fourth season) to discuss this final book in the discussion series.
Liz Kelly's day job is Celebritology blogging, while Jen Chaney presides as Movies editrix. Both consider "Lost"-watching a passion.
Liz Kelly: Okay, so "which dreamed it?" Jen or Liz? Or the Red King, who I certainly would guess is the unseen author in the case of "Through the Looking Glass" and the myriad writers/producers who create "Lost." It's funny. As I finished up reading the book last night, I had a vision of the final "Lost" episode a few years from now and having the camera follow the actors as they leave the set and return to their trailers, suddenly assuming their real world personas and shaking hands with JJ Abrams. Wouldn't that be an ending: It was just a dream, folks -- just a show... but what a show it was. I'm interested to hear where Jen and everyone else comes down on Carroll's influence on "Lost's" plotline. We can also, of course, talk about tonight's ABC airing of an annotated version of last season's finale and, of course, tomorrow night's season opener. Jen?
Jen Chaney: Oh, Liz, don't say that about people walking off the set in the last episode. That reminds me way too much of a Christmas episode of "Moonlighting" where they did the exact same thing. Not that I don't love me some David Addison, but I really don't want my fourth wall breaking. (Speaking of Agnes DiPesto, didn't she write "Jabberwocky"?..) Reading "Looking Glass" actually made me appreciate the genius of that season finale even more. Just as Alice's experience in the looking-glass world often delved into mirror images, so did the finale. It makes perfect sense, doesn't it, that once you go through the looking glass in the "Lost" universe you would get a mirror image of a typical episode -- one with a flash-forward instead of a flashback? The fact that the episode closed with a plane taking off above Jack's head (as opposed to one crashing down) only added to the effect. Genius, really. All of which is a long way of saying that I'm so excited about tomorrow's premiere, I might pee in my pants.
Liz Kelly: Jen, please don't pee your pants. At least until the chat's over.
Jen Chaney: I'm trying my best. All this Coke Zero probably isn't helping...
Looking Glass World: Some things I noticed:
There's a black and white theme in this book, seen in the black and white chessboard and the black and white kittens. This reminds me of the black and white rocks, etc. in "Lost."
In chapter five, the crow is described as a great black cloud and people hide from it, like Smokey on Lost.
Chapter 4 suggests the entire story is just the Red King's dream, and Alice insists that she -is- real, just like Libby did when Hurley thought the island was his hallucination.
My copy of the book notes that Carrol had a special affinity for the number 42. The number 42 appears several times in the Alice books: there are 42 illustrations in Wonderland, and the King of Hearts mentions Rule 42. In Looking Glass, the White King sends 4,207 horses.
Jen Chaney: You rock, my friend. Fantastic observations all around. For me the most potentially important connection is the stuff about dreams or hallucinations vs. reality (see the last line of that closing poem: "Life, what is it but a dream?"). The fact that our Entertainment Weekly buddy Jeff Jensen raises the issue of Dave in his most-awesome cheat sheet today also leads me to believe this theme will continue to play a role. Theories about the island existing solely in Jack's mind have been dismissed before. And I personally don't buy into that either. But I feel like there is something to this notion of there being two realities, or a reality that isn't quite what it seems. That said, if "Lost" ends with Hurley waking up in bed next to Suzanne Pleshette (may she rest in peace), I am going to be really ticked.
Liz Kelly: Ya, cuz it'd make much more sense if Jack woke up next to Tom Poston, considering. As you both note, lots of similarities to be found in the book and our show. But one thing that really bothered me about this story -- and I really loved it for many other reasons -- was the notion that there are NO RULES. That anything can happen. It gives the creator (be that an author or producer) license to make anything happen. And, as a reader, I cry foul. It may have worked for Lewis Carroll, but LindeCuse had better tie this show up in a nice, clever, sense-making bow or I will go ballistic. Anyone have any thoughts about Alice's progress from reality to reality each time she crossed a stream. Is there an equivalent in the "Lost" world?
Jen Chaney: Just a quick though: I think LindeCuse play by a much stricter set of rules than Carroll does here. So I don't think we have to worry that all of a sudden Sawyer is going to start talking to a slab of mutton. Although, honestly, I would happily watch Josh Holloway talk to pretty much anything. In the context of Alice, I thought her passing from stream signified a journey toward maturity or adulthood. The obvious equivalent in "Lost" is that the viewers cross a "stream" every time we jump forward or back in time. Not sure about the characters, though.
Washington, D.C.: Here's a question that my friends and I have been debating endlessly -- why did Charlie lock himself in the room (where he would drown) rather than running out of the room and closing the door behind him? Having watched the scene over and over, I can say he certainly had time to do so. We have some theories:
1. He was afraid that Desmond would stop at nothing to break into the room to hear Penny's video, and if that had happened, both Desmond and Charlie would have died.
2. He believed that he had to die, given Desmond's prediction, to save Claire.
3. He felt that he had to be 100% certain that Desmond survived, so that he could carry the message "It's not Penny's boat" to the other Losties.
Jen Chaney: I'm curious to see what Liz says. My interpretation -- and I just rewatched this episode last night, and probably will again when it airs tonight, because I'm just that much of a dork -- is that the answer is 2. When he first arrives in the Looking Glass station, he shouts out that he is alive with great relief, thinking Desmond's prediction won't come true. But as soon as he spots that equipment and the flashing yellow light, he resigns himself to his fate. He knows he has to die to save the others, not only based on Desmond's prediction, but also because of what you suggest in point 3. Desmond is the only person who can tell the Losties that Naomi is a liar. That scene is so wrenching, though. You so want him to get out of that room. I think that's why so many viewers have fixated on that scene and had a hard time accepting what happened.
Liz Kelly: I agree with Jen, here. He believed it was his fate. That his death would ensure Claire's survival -- and baby Aaron's (that is his name, right?). Interesting, though, considering all the railing against fate Desmond himself has done. If Des can buck the odds, why not Charlie? Maybe the producers knew Evangeline Lilly was cooling to real-life (now ex) boyfriend Dominic Monaghan.
Jen Chaney: I would hope the producers and writers wouldn't be that cold-hearted about letting Monaghan go. They set up that storyline before that relationship went south, I think (hope?). Now, if Monaghan had been arrested for DUI, you know THAT would have been the reason for his death.
Cleveland, Ohio: The plot structure of "Through the Looking Glass" is based on a chess match. Recently, there was mobisode of Lost called "King of the Castle" about Jack and Ben playing a game of chess.
Can you think of any other blatant chess analogies? And if Lost is symbolic of a chess game, which characters represent which pieces?
Liz Kelly: I'm, sadly, not the biggest chess fan, so any inside baseball from that realm may well be lost (hehe) on me. Although not addressed in the book, I think one general analogy is the idea of playing a shortgame vs. keeping the endgame in sight. I think last season we saw that transition happen for our "Lost" writing team. Anyone chess whizzes out there willing to share some theories?
Jen Chaney: Yeah, my 7-year-old nephew is way into chess. I'm still trying to figure out Yahtzee. Generally speaking (and not just in "Lost"), chess analogies are the classic go-to metaphor when one character is trying to outstrategize the other. Hence that mobisode, which underscored the fact that Jack and Ben were trying to stay one step ahead of each other in terms of the plan to get Jack off the island. It's also worth noting that in "Enter 77" -- or as I like to call it, "The McPatchy Episode" -- Locke gets sucked into a game of chess at Mikhail's farmhouse. Mikhail says there is no way Locke can beat the computer, which of course makes him determined to do so. Once he does, he unlocks Dharma instructions that lead to him entering the numbers 77 and blowing up McPatchy's place. Cats also play a recurring role in that episode -- very "Looking Glass"-esque.
Liz Kelly: Speaking of DUIs, we had another in the off season. This time Daniel Dae Kim (Jin) was the culprit. Are his "Lost" days now numbered?
New York City, NY: Team: At what point is "Lost" trying to be too clever by a half and ruin the experience for the average viewer?
Liz Kelly: Good question. Is "Lost" becoming something only enjoyable to those geeked out enough (and I count myself among them) to pore over a continually expanding universe of pop culture references for esoteric clues? Possibly. But (and Jen may disagree) I think not. I think "Lost" functions on at least two different levels, if not more. Or perhaps it's more of a continuum. At one end, we've got a pretty good weekly show that lets the casual viewer follow the misadventures of a band of hot-bod castaways through their on-island quest and their often repetitive back stories. (Though that back story part will change a bit in the future. Literally.) One can check in and check out, enjoy Sawyer's one-liners and continue with the rest of life. At the other end, it's a full on experience complete with a canon of literary references, a mini-empire of related Web sites and more Easter Eggs (little hidden nuggets in each show) than the White House lawn in April. Or March, as the case may be. The point is, it's kind of a "choose your own adventure" construct. Take it as far as you like. Despite it's slippage in last season, I'd still find it hard to believe that the majority of "Lost" watchers are Tail Section or Lostpedia -- or even Jen and Liz -- diehards.
Not Shlomo: I must say, I enjoyed TTLG the most of all our selections. A funny, clever and delightful read. The conversation with Humpty-Dumpty was amazing!
As for how it relates to our lust for Lost, I think the final chapter is perhaps the key: "Which Dreamed It?"
Many of us have conceded that there must be at least two parallel worlds to Lost and that things are not as they seem in either -- flipped, if you will. But is one world real and another fantasy? Which one? Who's doing the dreaming? Are we seeing through one person's eye, experiencing one person's dream?
Interesting that last season's finale is bears the title and the two worlds the episode portrays. Dreaming? Waking? And if things are as skewed at they are in Alice's mirror world, our attempts to figure out what's really going on are nearly futile unless we let go of reason.
Liz Kelly: By the way, the title of tomorrow night's season opener is ""The Beginning of the End."
Jen Chaney: I like that that's the title. It tells me that they really are going to start answering some major questions as we head toward a now definitively set end of the series. At least I hope that's partly what it means. I'm with you, Not Shlomo. (What a funny coincidence. I, also, am not Shlomo.) As I said before, I think this notion of dreaming and parallel realities is important, though I still am not sure why. I refuse to let go of reason, though. I think the "Lost" universe has been created with some sense of logic behind it, as opposed to just nonsense. One semi-related issue: After Comic-Con, there was a lot of talk about the orientation video that was shown there, the one where Marvin Candle (or whatever name he is going by these days) holds up a rabbit with the 15 on it. (The video is on abc.com, not to mention YouTube.) Anyway, there is a big commotion and suddenly a second rabbit with 15 on it seems to fall out of the sky. This struck me as a clue to what might be going on with flight 815. I'm still convinced -- and I base this partly on Lindelof's reference to the movie "Capricorn One" as inspiration -- that there were two planes. One that publicly crashed with no survivors and the one the "Losties" were on.
Silver Spring, Md.: Does anyone know if tonight's annotated finale is on the DVD? I bought it but haven't had time to crack it open yet.
Jen Chaney: I reviewed the DVD in December and, unless I missed a major Easter egg (which is possible), there was no annotated finale. Sounds like tonight's will be sort of a pop-up video version with notes, etc. Which means now I definitely have to watch again. Damn you, ABC!
Liz Kelly: From what I read, ABC decided to annotate late in the game after seeing some other network -- Spike or G4 -- do the same with some older "Star Trek" episodes. And that may be a model that becomes the norm once this show reaches syndication. It doesn't really lend itself to casual viewing so side by side cheat sheets may help to keep folks watching again and again.
dre7861: Jen/Liz -- The Lost Book Club was a great idea -- Thanks! I hope it resurfaces after the season ends however long or short it is. BTW, great timing with the last book, "Through The Looking Glass" appearing on the day before the season premier and the day the repeat the episode named after our selection -- You planned it that way all along, right?
What occured to me while reading the book is hope much reflections or mirroring has taken place in "Lost." In the Book Club we have already seen "Fearful Symetery" in "The Watchmen" along with numerous mirror images. I've been struck with how the titles of the season premiers and finales have mirrored each other. In Season 2 we began with "Man of Science, Man of Faith," and ended with "Live Together, Die Alone." Both titles present clear polarities of philosophy on how to look at life, whether personal or social. The third season starts with "Tale of Two Cities," with its wonderful tie back to Desmond's love of Dickens introduced in the previously mentioned season 2 season finale. This title represents the arching theme of the third season of the us vs them that the Others represented to our Losties. The 3rd season finale was of course, "Through The Looking Glass," which in and of itself reprsents the duality of this world and the world that lies just beyond. It also keeps the motif of the titles coming from books that began the season. Clearly from the events of that episode the Losties and the switch to fast forwards we have reached a turning point in the story where things will not be how they were before. The alluding to the Carrol book also brings the battle of the red and white chessmen in the book to mind as being an apt metaphor for the battle with the Others. Again I'm stand in awe at just how well written this series is.
Again a big Thanks for hosting this Book Club! Enjoy the Season Premier tomorrow!
Liz Kelly: Thanks Dre, you too. Speaking of which -- we can all enjoy it together. Tomorrow night we'll be experimenting with a little tool called Yaplet that will let us chat in real time while watching the season opener. Jen and I may be a little quiet as we're busy notetaking, but it will be a free, open chat. Check back tomorrow afternoon for a link.
Jen Chaney: Yes, thank you dre. I stand in awe alongside you. The Yaplet Liz mentioned will go into effect at 8, by the way, which is when the always crucial (especially during a writers' strike, when there is nothing else to air) recap begins. Liz and I will try to yap a little during that. And of course, you readers can yap amongst yourselves.
Washington, D.C.: What I really want to see in Season 4 is either Hurley or Claire confront Desmond about Charlie's death. I really hope either one looks him right in the eye and says, "I hope she's worth it."
I know I'm in the minority here but I don't trust that what Desmond did regarding Charlie was right or neccessary. Desmond is too close to these visions to be making life or death decisions. If what Ben said about the freighter people is correct he may have doomed Charlie to death just to bring some really bad people to the island.
Liz Kelly: Yes, well, that brings up the enitre question of who and who is not trustworthy. We all have our hunches -- Jack, for instance, and Sayid -- but we don't know. A line from the press release for tomorrow's opener reads "Even heroes have secrets" meaning one of the good guys could have a fatal flaw that will throw everything into jeopardy. Which is all by way of saying that I wouldn't center any speculation about motives solely on Desmond. Each one of these characters has his or her own agenda when it comes right down to it. That's part of what makes the show so nuanced and unpredictable.
Jen Chaney: I'm with Liz on this. I'm hesitant to place all the blame on Desmond. I have a feeling that some seriously bad stuff is going to happen to some other beloved "Losties," mainly because of Jack's refusal to listen to Ben. So you'll have him to be mad at, too. Yeah, you heard me: Benjamin Linus, The Hero. I suspect we're going to learn more about what is motivating him and realize that, while controlling and kinda freaky, he might not be such a bad guy after all.
Liz Kelly: Another interesting parallel from "Through the Looking Glass" was the White Queen's assertion that she lives backwards and, in effect, remembers the future and the past. Much like Desmond and September's discussion of "Watchmen" and the Dr. Manhattan character, who experiences all time simultaneously. And for anyone who wants to get a jump on reviewing the season before tonight's season finale re-airing, visit our "Lost" hub for the last season's worth of analyses.
Jen Chaney: Yes, good call on the Queen. I also noted the following passage from Alice: "Somehow it seems to fill my head with ideas -- only I don't exactly know what they are!" That's kind of how I feel after watching an episode of "Lost."
Washington, D.C.: What's the deal with the "annotated" version of the season finale tonight?
And does tomorrow's premier start with a clip show review or is it going to be two hours of all new stuff?
And why the heck did they have to schedule the Dem debate on the same night?!
Jen Chaney: Wait, let me make sure I understand you: You're actually contemplating watching the debate instead of "Lost"? Don't you know that "Lost" supercedes everything else that's happening in the world? As I mentioned about the annotated version, it will involve pop-up text. But as the smarties over at Wired point out, LindeCuse did not write the enhancements because of the strike. So you may get things like: "DID YOU KNOW?: Matthew Fox used to be on a show called 'Party of Five.'" And yes, you're correct about tomorrow. Recap at 8, the big show at 9. If they really wanted to stretch this out, they'd put Ryan Seacrest on a red carpet at 7, just for the heck of it. ABC, feel free to borrow that idea for next time.
Liz Kelly: Another aim ABC is trying to accomplish with the annotation is to draw in new viewers. As I mentioned earlier, last seasons ratings were a bit off from the high water mark hit in seasons 1 and 2. The suits are hoping to capitalize on the writer's strike by drawing in viewers sick of watching "American Gladiator" and pesky presidential debates. They realize, though, that these people will not stick around if they don't understand what is going on.
Liz Kelly: Ben as hero? Interesting. I suppose it's possible in a "he was a sheltered precocious kid and still fiercely selfish despite a good soul" kind of way.
Jen Chaney: Well, maybe hero is pushing it. That remains to be seen. I definitely think that he wanted to prevent Jack from calling the freighter for a good reason. I think that he is so fixated on that motivation that he often does nutty things (like demanding that Sayid, Jin and Bernard be killed, for example). Then again, you could easily say the same about the Losties.
Liz Kelly: I think you're on the right track re: Ben knowing the freighter is a bad idea. But something tells me he knows much more than he's letting on and that, in some perverted way, he likes having that knowledge and liked having the Losties around to play with. Like my cat, who is lately enjoying a puzzling influx of Boxelder bugs into our house.
Jen Chaney: Oh, I never said it wasn't perverse. I think it's possible to be somewhat heroic and perverse at the same time. (Please insert jokes about various politicians here.)
Two bunnies: Here's a theory -- the "Orchid" orientation video answers a question for us. Just as there were two bunnies all of a sudden, there was some sort of temporal splice near the time of the crash, creating two Oceanic flights. Hence Naomi thinks that the flight, with all its passengers, was found, while a duplicate, containing our beloved Losties, is on the island.
Jen Chaney: Yes, this gets at what I suggested, though I didn't use the awesome term temporal splice to describe it. I like it.
Liz Kelly: Thanks to everyone for joining us today and over the past several months as we made Jen's dream of a "Lost" Book Club a reality. Kudos to her for the spark and to all of us for doing our homework. We'll have a special pre-"Lost" post going up in the blog tomorrow around Noon. Then join Jen and I online at 8 p.m. in the Yaplet chat where we'll gear up for the 9 p.m. airing. And, of course, we'll have our post-show analysis to share on Friday. And, in closing, I'd just like to thank Josh Holloway for existing.
Jen Chaney: Yes, thank you to everyone for all the book club fun. The discussions of "Watership Down," "Watchmen," etc. will all live fondly in my memory. I am still amazed that anyone read the Stephen Hawking book. And by anyone, I mean me. Tomorrow is "Lost" day. Hooray! Liz already gave you all the details, so you know where to be and when. Lastly, I echo Liz's gratitude for Josh Holloway's existence. I also would like to give a shout-out to the fake beard Matthew Fox wore in last season's finale. You clung to our Jack's chin with a commitment that was inspiring. Kudos, my fuzzy friend. We hope to see you again soon in another awesome flash-forward.
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.
|
Jen Chaney and Liz Kelly -- co-authors of the weekly "Lost" analysis -- discuss Lewis Carroll's "Through the Looking Glass," the final selection in the monthly "Lost" Book Club series.
| 124.756098 | 0.926829 | 2.682927 |
high
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/29/AR2008012903142.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008013019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/29/AR2008012903142.html
|
Ewing Has Big Hand In Hoyas' Success
|
2008013019
|
Everyone, it seems, has an opinion about whether Patrick Ewing Jr. committed a goaltending violation in the final second of Georgetown's 58-57 victory at West Virginia on Saturday night. But Coach John Thompson III -- who, for the record, thinks the officials made the correct decision in not blowing the whistle on Ewing's soaring block of Da'Sean Butler's layup attempt -- prefers to focus on the effort displayed by the senior forward, rather than the result.
"Just the way he got to that basket, I don't know that there are too many people that would've put themselves in a position to make a play," Thompson said. "Forget all the discussions about whether it was a good block or bad block. Just the effort to help his team -- that epitomizes what he's done here."
That blocked shot might end up as the defining play in the Georgetown career of Ewing, who has carved out a role as the sixth-ranked Hoyas' top reserve. Last week he helped Georgetown (16-2, 6-1) win two close games with his aggressiveness and effort, particularly on defense.
Tonight, he will play at Madison Square Garden, where his famous father, Patrick Ewing Sr., had so many dominating performances as both a Hoya and a New York Knick. The younger Ewing could start against St. John's, if sophomore forward DaJuan Summers, who suffered a high-ankle sprain in the final minutes of Saturday's game, can't play. Summers, Georgetown's second-leading scorer, did not practice yesterday and is "day-to-day," according to Thompson.
Ewing started the first 10 games of the season, until he was replaced in the lineup by freshman Austin Freeman. Thompson said he made the move in part to solidify the Hoyas' second unit. Ewing said he didn't mind because he thinks he brings more to the team coming off the bench. His minutes have not dropped significantly, nor has his production; he's averaging more rebounds and shooting a higher percentage from three-point range as a reserve.
"I just get a feel for the game more after watching it for a few minutes," said Ewing, who averages 6.2 points and 4.1 rebounds. "I feel that I have an ability to set a tone, and I'm better at setting it when I've had a chance to view what's going on while sitting on the bench. I'm able to evaluate the game, see which ones of my teammates are hot at the time, see which defenders are boxing out, see where I can get the rebounds."
Thompson has often praised Ewing's basketball acumen, and Ewing says if a professional playing career doesn't pan out, he could see himself going into coaching like his father, who is currently an assistant with the Orlando Magic. During his two years at Indiana University, prior to transferring to Georgetown, Ewing occasionally coached his friends' intramural basketball teams. He claims: "I'm undefeated. I'm the Pat Riley of intramural basketball."
"The fruit doesn't fall far from the tree," Thompson said. "That pride that Big Pat has, you see in Little Pat. That determination, that effort -- you see that in Little Pat, and that's what is talked about most of the time with him. But at the same time, he is a very smart basketball player. Particularly as of late, he's been the guy on our team throwing a lot of the passes. He is much more than just an effort player, but at the same time, he is that."
The Hoyas count on that effort, and they feed off his passion. Ewing is the team's most outwardly emotional player, and it sometimes gets the best of him. Over the past two seasons, he's been called for more technical fouls (three) than any other Georgetown player; his most recent one came at DePaul on Jan. 8, and the play can be seen on YouTube under the heading "Patrick Ewing Jr. Gets Technical, Yells at Fans."
He readily admits to being the most hated Georgetown player -- at West Virginia, for instance, the student section shouted an obscenity at him nearly every time he touched the ball -- but he relishes that role. For one thing, he says it takes some of the pressure off of his teammates; for another, "it always helps me play better, it helps me get more focused and get in a zone, and do more things to prove to them I'm a better player than they think I am," he said.
But Ewing likes interacting with the crowd, too. At Rutgers, he chatted with a young fan who was sitting in a courtside seat at the Louis Brown Athletic Center. Early in the second half, Ewing told the boy, "I'm going to get a dunk for you right here." The Hoyas had just come out of a timeout during which Thompson had called for a play that usually results in a layup or dunk off a backdoor cut.
"But we ran the play to the other side, and didn't get a dunk. When the ball came to my side, I remember J.R. Inman slacking off me, and I made a three," Ewing recalled. "I said to [the boy]: 'Is that better? I couldn't get the dunk, so I got the three for you.' I gave him a high-five later on."
The only high-fives that Ewing got Saturday in Morgantown were from his teammates; his father, who has yet to attend one of his son's games this season, watched on television and later praised his son for the way he stayed with the play. As Butler took the pass in the corner and started driving along the baseline, Ewing drifted down and then leapt high into the air to swat the shot. Butler later said that he never saw Ewing.
"If I don't go for the block, maybe [Butler] makes it, maybe he misses it," Ewing said. "I'd rather not have it come down to him making or missing it. I'd rather make the play myself or have a teammate make the play. Make the refs make a decision, because nine times out of 10, they're not going to make a call that late in the game."
And if the officials did make the call, and the Hoyas lost the game as a result?
"I can live with that," Thompson said. "History has shown, you're going to get that call and sometimes you're not. But just the effort to help your team out is what's important."
|
Patrick Ewing Jr. may get a chance to start at Madison Square Garden, where his father put forth so many dominating performances, when No. 6 Georgetown faces St. John's.
| 38.941176 | 0.882353 | 2.941176 |
high
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/29/AR2008012902981.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008013019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/29/AR2008012902981.html
|
India Uncovers Kidney Racket
|
2008013019
|
"When I woke up after several hours, I felt a pain in my right side," Saleem recalled, sitting on a metal cot in a city hospital ward. "The men said, 'We have removed your kidney, and you better not breathe a word about it.' My life broke into pieces when I heard that."
Saleem was the latest in a long list of poor laborers who had come to Gurgaon to work and lost their kidneys as a result. Police say they were victims of a major organ-trafficking racket based in this city for nearly a decade.
The scam was discovered last week after police, acting on a tip from a middleman, raided the bungalow where Saleem had been held. They said they found a labyrinthine kidney bazaar run by a group of men posing as doctors. Five suspects were arrested.
Since then, police from several Indian provinces have launched a massive joint investigation into the alleged traffickers, who police said robbed poor people of their kidneys and sold them to rich patients around the world.
Several people who were believed to be among the intended recipients of the organs have been detained, including four Greeks and a couple from New York who are of Indian origin. They had all come to India on tourist visas and were found staying at a guesthouse near the bungalow.
Investigators said they believe the trafficking network includes buyers from Canada, Greece, Saudi Arabia and Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
Given India's sagging medical infrastructure, cases of kidney trafficking are not unheard-of here. Hospital facilities for the storing and transporting of organs remain inadequate, and poor Indians lured by the prospect of extra money ensure the traffickers a continuous supply of fresh kidneys. According to a government estimate, more than 100,000 kidney transplants are needed in India every year, but only 5,000 are performed legally.
"People think getting a new kidney is like changing the car tire, after which the car will run full-steam," said Sandeep Guleria, who heads the kidney transplant unit at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences in New Delhi. "In much of the country, dialysis facilities are poorly developed. It is a cheaper alternative [to] recurring expenses for the family."
Transplant operations are complicated, and recipients need to be closely matched to donors to reduce the risk of rejection. After receiving a new organ, patients initially require intensive care and long-term treatment with powerful anti-rejection drugs.
Some analysts say trafficking is made worse by the absence of regulation of legal donations. The Indian government is currently considering launching a full-fledged national organ transplant program that would simplify the procedures for such donations.
According to police, the racket uncovered last week was run by Amit Kumar, who was among those who posed as doctors and who had previously been accused of running a trafficking operation based elsewhere in the country. He is still at large.
|
GURGAON, India, Jan. 29 -- Three weeks ago, Mohammad Saleem, 33, agreed to work at a construction site in this bustling city near New Delhi. A house painter with an extended family of eight, he was drawn here by the promise of an extra dollar in his daily wage. After a few days of waiting in a bl...
| 8.462687 | 0.567164 | 0.835821 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/29/AR2008012903639.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008013019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/29/AR2008012903639.html
|
U.S. to Expand Outposts Across Baghdad by 30%
|
2008013019
|
BAGHDAD, Jan. 29 -- The U.S. military plans to boost the number of neighborhood outposts across the capital by more than 30 percent this year even as American forces begin to withdraw, the new commander of U.S. forces in Baghdad said Tuesday.
During a luncheon with reporters in the heavily fortified Green Zone, Maj. Gen. Jeffery W. Hammond said he would increase the number of garrisons in the city from 75 to 99 by June to "push ourselves into locations where maybe in the past we didn't go before."
"I don't want there to be anyplace in Baghdad where al-Qaeda or anyone else can start to take hold because we've ignored that particular" area, he said, referring to the Sunni insurgent group al-Qaeda in Iraq. He called the improved security conditions in Baghdad "remarkable."
In northern Iraq, meanwhile, the remains of 19 people -- 10 heads and nine intact corpses -- were discovered in the town of Muqdadiyah in Diyala province, northeast of the capital, police said. Elsewhere, officials said a suicide car bomber in the northern city of Mosul injured at least 15 people.
The carnage underscored how northern Iraq has become a growing hub for al-Qaeda in Iraq, even as U.S. troops succeed in driving its fighters out of the capital and Anbar province in the west.
In Diyala province, most of the dead had been shot in the head, and several bodies had decomposed so badly that officials concluded they had been buried for quite some time. But hospital officials said at least four of the intact corpses had been freshly interred and may have belonged to al-Qaeda in Iraq fighters killed in recent battles.
The attack in Mosul, the third-largest city in Iraq, targeted a U.S. military patrol, though no American soldiers were wounded, Iraqi officials said. There were conflicting reports on whether an Iraqi civilian had been killed in addition to the suicide bomber.
The bombing came one day after five U.S. soldiers were killed in an attack in Mosul and one week after a blast killed as many as 60 people in the city.
Iraqi forces in recent days have sent troop reinforcements to the city in what Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki promised would be a decisive battle against the insurgents, though U.S. officials have cautioned the fighting is likely to be a long struggle.
"The problem is that all the fighters escaped here because they have nowhere else to go," said Brig. Gen. Sayeed Ahmed Abdulla, spokesman for the police in Nineveh province, whose capital is Mosul. "But, God willing, we will clean every last one of them out of this city."
Special correspondents in Mosul and Diyala contributed to this report.
|
Washington Post coverage of the American occupation of Iraq, the country's path to democracy and tensions between Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds.
| 21 | 0.48 | 0.64 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/29/AR2008012903387.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008013019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/29/AR2008012903387.html
|
Mukasey Holds Back on Torture Issue
|
2008013019
|
In a three-page letter to Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), however, Mukasey stopped short of offering a clearer legal opinion, because he said the CIA no longer uses the practice on prisoners.
The lawyerly response to demands from Congress was delivered in a last-minute letter before Mukasey's scheduled appearance today before the Judiciary panel. It is likely to anger Democrats who nearly derailed Mukasey's appointment over his refusal to render a firm legal judgment on waterboarding.
Mukasey said in the letter that waterboarding -- a simulated drowning meant to coerce disclosures by a resisting prisoner -- is not part of a "limited set of methods" being used by CIA interrogators. Mukasey said he has found the current methods, which he did not specify, to be legal.
"I understand that you and some other members of the (Judiciary) Committee may feel that I should go further in my review, and answer questions concerning the legality of waterboarding under current law," Mukasey wrote to Leahy. "I understand the strong interest in this question, but I do not think it would be responsible for me, as attorney general, to provide an answer."
Mukasey also wrote that "it is not an easy question" to determine whether the technique is lawful. "There are some circumstances where current law would appear clearly to prohibit the use of waterboarding," he wrote. "Other circumstances would present a far closer question."
In a statement last night, Leahy said Mukasey's response "echoes what other administration officials have said about the use of waterboarding" but does not answer "the critical questions we have been asking about its legality."
"Attorney General Mukasey knows that this will not end the matter and expects to be asked serious questions at the hearing tomorrow," Leahy said.
Mukasey wrote to Leahy that he will answer questions about waterboarding today "to the best of my ability, within the limits that I have described." He also said those limits might make his task "more difficult for me personally" but that he must "do what I believe the law requires."
"Despite disagreements we may have on this issue, I hope that the Committee will respect my judgment on this matter," he wrote.
Mukasey did not elaborate on what circumstances would present a close call on waterboarding. He also did not identify which laws the practice might violate, or explain his reference to "current" law.
Waterboarding was used in 2002 and 2003 by the CIA on three suspected terrorists at secret overseas prisons, and lawmakers have specifically sought Mukasey's judgment about whether it was legal then, under the laws that prevailed during those years. At the time, the Justice Department said it was, but current and former military lawyers, human rights experts, and international lawyers have challenged that position.
|
Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey said yesterday that the interrogation tactic known as waterboarding appears to be clearly prohibited by current law in some circumstances, but said that other circumstances would present "a far closer question."
| 13.9 | 0.8 | 2.2 |
low
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/29/AR2008012902908.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008013019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/29/AR2008012902908.html
|
Study Finds Government Ethics Lapses
|
2008013019
|
The study, released yesterday by the nonprofit Ethics Resource Center, found that nearly 60 percent of government employees at all levels -- federal, state and local -- had witnessed violations of ethical standards, policy or laws in their workplaces within the last year.
Observed misconduct was lowest at the federal level, with 52 percent of federal workers surveyed saying they had witnessed problems such as conflicts of interest, abusive behavior, alterations of documents and financial records and lying to employees, vendors or the public within the last year.
"Since Enron, policymakers have given a great deal of attention and emphasis to the need for the business sector to address their ethics issues," said Patricia J. Harned, president of the group. "But in reality, government has their own issues to address, as well."
What is at stake is government's ability to keep the public trust, Harned said.
The group analyzed data taken from a telephone survey conducted last summer that included 3,452 employees in the business, government and nonprofit sectors. Analysts culled responses from 774 government employees but did not identify participants by agency. The survey's margin of error was plus or minus 3.5 percent.
¿ Thirty percent of federal workers and 14 percent of state and local government workers believe their organizations have well-implemented ethics and compliance programs;
¿ The misconduct most frequently observed by federal employees was abusive behavior (witnessed by 23 percent), safety violations (21 percent), lying to employees (20 percent) and putting one's own interests ahead of the organization's ( 20 percent);
¿ Fifty-eight percent of all government workers who saw misconduct did not report it because they did not believe managers would take action, and 30 percent of all workers feared they would face retaliation if they reported what they saw. One percent used anonymous hotlines.
Not all of the survey findings were discouraging.
The group found that, compared with a previous survey in 2000, there were declines in several overtly illegal types of misconduct, including stealing, bribes, sexual harassment and discrimination. Moreover, the survey found that in government organizations with well-implemented ethics programs and strong ethical culture, misconduct fell by 60 percent, and the reporting of bad behavior increased by 40 percent.
But the data showed that fraud occurred as frequently in government as in the private sector, with comparable rates of alteration of documents, misreporting of hours worked and lying to customers, the public and workers.
For 30 years, the federal government has had an agency, the Office of Government Ethics, that provides political appointees and employees with advisory opinions and training materials. It ensures that each agency has an ethics officer and helps resolve conflicts of interest.
Ethical issues have become increasingly important, "if for no other reason than the fact that the [federal] government has become increasingly reliant on contracting and grants to independent suppliers, who are providing the government with an increasing range of goods and services," said Kenneth Ryder, a project director at the National Academy of Public Administration. "That puts a premium on having an effective ethics program."
|
The Enron scandal of 2001 set off a tidal wave of concern about corruption and unethical behavior across corporate America, but a new survey shows that government agencies are not free of such behavior.
| 16.861111 | 0.527778 | 0.527778 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/29/AR2008012903043.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008013019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/29/AR2008012903043.html
|
Lawmakers Study Ways To Cut Cost Of Textbooks
|
2008013019
|
Several bills that would affect the college textbook industry are moving through the state legislature at a time when students across the nation are complaining about textbook prices. Although no votes have been cast, the bills appear to be gaining broad bipartisan support. Meanwhile, the influential House Ways and Means Committee is preparing its own comprehensive bill on the subject.
Drawing particular scrutiny are agreements between bookstores and universities under which, lawmakers allege, both parties profit from the sales of books students are required to buy for their classes.
Barnes and Noble operates the official campus bookstore at the University of Maryland campus in College Park. The store is authorized to sell textbooks for as much as 25 percent above the wholesale price, and the bookstore pays the university between 10 and 14 percent of gross sales, according to the terms of the operating contract.
"They're trying to make a profit," Del. Marvin E. Holmes Jr. (D-Prince George's) said. "My concern is the students. How can we find a way for students to buy the books to serve the purpose of their classes as cheap as possible?"
Holmes's bill, the Textbook Fairness Act, was the subject of a hearing yesterday in the House Appropriations Committee. Holmes said he became concerned about the cost of textbooks last spring when he enrolled in a law course at the University of Baltimore.
A study released by the federal Government Accountability Office in 2005 said that textbook prices nationally rose at twice the rate of inflation between December 1986 and December 2004, in part because of the bundling of CDs and other supplemental materials. Books on biology, chemistry and other scientific subjects often sell for $200 or more, an independent bookseller told lawmakers yesterday.
Patricia Kosco Cossard, legislative affairs chair of Maryland's Council of University System Faculty, said the money received by the university helps fund student services.
"If we were properly funded by the state, there would be no need to augment our income by other means," Cossard said.
Sen. Katherine A. Klausmeier (D-Baltimore County) has introduced a bill similar to Holmes's. Klausmeier said the prices of books are "out of whack." She said "it gives you pause" when retailers and publishers profit off students who need textbooks for their courses.
The Ways and Means Committee is preparing a third bill that would address the textbook issue comprehensively, Del. Craig L. Rice (D-Montgomery), a committee member, said.
"The textbook cost has become an absolute burden for students," Rice said, calling it the "hidden cost of tuition."
|
Maryland lawmakers voiced support yesterday for legislation to control the escalating costs of college textbooks, including a measure that would prohibit public university employees from taking benefits from publishers in exchange for assigning particular books.
| 13.675676 | 0.621622 | 0.675676 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012303282.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012303282.html
|
Slowly, but Surely, Pyongyang Is Moving
|
2008012619
|
The optimism with which the October agreement with North Korea was welcomed has faded amid accusations that the North again is not keeping its commitments. First came word that "disablement" of nuclear facilities was slowing. Then there was the missed Dec. 31 deadline for North Korea to declare the full scope of its nuclear program, including its plutonium stockpile and uranium enrichment activities. And earlier in the fall, North Korea was accused of helping Syria construct a nuclear facility in its desert, reportedly a reactor.
The finger-wagging, told-you-so naysayers in and out of the Bush administration should take a deep breath. There is no indication that North Korea is backing away from its commitments to disable key nuclear facilities and every reason to expect this process to unfold slowly, with North Korea taking small, incremental steps in return for corresponding steps from the United States and others in the six-party discussions.
Disablement of the five-megawatt reactor at Yongbyon slowed in part because the United States decided that unloading the irradiated fuel rods as fast as North Korea proposed could needlessly risk exposing the North Korean workers to excessive radiation. North Korea is unloading the rods and making steady progress on the other aspects of disablement at the Yongbyon site. Could it be happening faster? Probably, and North Korea would point out that promised shipments of heavy fuel oil are also slow in coming.
North Korea's nuclear declaration was to be received by Dec. 31. On Jan. 2, White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said the United States was still "waiting to hear" from the North. Pyongyang responded that the United States had its declaration. After some tail-chasing, it emerged that North Korea had quietly shared an initial declaration with the United States in November. According to media reports, this declaration stated that North Korea had a separated plutonium stockpile of 30 kilograms and denied that it had a uranium enrichment program.
Does this quantity of separated plutonium make sense? Yes. In short, 30 kilograms is at the lower end of the range of plutonium that we have assessed North Korea could have separated. This estimate is based on what we know about how long its reactor operated to build up plutonium in the fuel rods and how much plutonium was chemically extracted from this fuel at the nearby reprocessing plant.
What about any enriched uranium? There is no question that North Korea has committed to providing the other nations in the six-party discussions with information about its uranium enrichment efforts and should be held to that commitment. But we should not lose sight of an uncomfortable fact -- that U.S. policymakers misread (at best) or hyped information that North Korea had a large-scale uranium enrichment program. There is ample evidence that North Korea acquired components for a centrifuge-enrichment program, but few now believe the North produced highly enriched uranium or developed its enrichment capabilities in the manner once claimed by the United States.
The success or failure of this latest agreement with North Korea must not hinge on the uranium issue. This is an interesting and relevant part of its nuclear program, but it is still a footnote in the context of its plutonium production.
Reports that North Korea has cooperated with Syria on a hidden nuclear program are troubling but must also be kept in context and, until additional information is available, should not be allowed to undermine the agreement. It is possible that North Korea was selling sensitive or dual-use equipment to Syria's nuclear program. The best argument for holding the deal together is that it brings North Korea into the fold, bit by bit, making it harder for it to slip back into the arena of illicit deals and keeping a bright light on its activities. As for the "box in the desert" that Israel bombed in September, it is gone now and whatever has replaced it is almost certainly not a reactor.
Accusations in the Israeli media that North Korea transferred plutonium to Syria, where it was to be placed into bombs, are baseless. The transfer of such material for weapons would be a casus belli with dire consequences for both countries, and this surely is understood by both Kim Jong Il and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
North Korea is looking to the United States to keep its promises on delisting it as a terrorist state. Unfortunately, given the climate in Washington and the perception that North Korea is slow-rolling the declaration process, this is unlikely over the near term. Pyongyang should be realistic in its expectations.
For Washington, and the unfairly maligned advocates of the six-party process, the task is to maintain laser-like focus on taking the next step toward fulfillment of the October agreement, with the goal of moving to the disarmament phase, and not allowing these hard-won steps to be drowned out by the noise of detractors.
David Albright, a former U.N. weapons inspector, is president of the Institute for Science and International Security. Jacqueline Shire is a senior analyst at ISIS and a former State Department foreign affairs officer.
|
The finger-wagging, told-you-so naysayers in and out of the Bush administration should take a deep breath.
| 40.125 | 1 | 24 |
high
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012303286.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012303286.html
|
The Pork-as-Usual GOP
|
2008012619
|
When House Republicans convene behind closed doors today at the Greenbrier resort in White Sulphur Springs, W.Va., they have a chance to make two bold moves to restore their reputation for fiscal responsibility. First, they could declare a one-year moratorium on Republican congressional earmarks. Second, they could name earmark reformer Rep. Jeff Flake to a vacancy on the House Appropriations Committee. In fact, they almost surely will do neither.
Instead, during the retreat Republicans are likely to adopt some limitation on earmarks that will have no public impact and will exert no pressure on the earmark-happy Democratic majority. Consideration of Flake's candidacy for Appropriations was postponed until after this week's earmark debate at the Greenbrier. But, content with a half-measure on earmarks, the House Republicans are unlikely to place Flake, an insistent reformer, in the midst of the pork-dispensing appropriators.
Republicans are staring into a 2008 election abyss, having lost credibility as upholders of lean government by sponsoring profligate pork-barrel spending during 12 years in the congressional majority. And they have not reformed since the 2006 Democratic takeover. The message out of West Virginia this week predictably will be business as usual.
Rep. Jerry Lewis, the Appropriations Committee's ranking Republican, is leading fellow appropriators against the moratorium. They are joined by the most seriously challenged Republican incumbents, who see political salvation in bringing funds home to their districts, principles be damned.
If the moratorium were adopted, it would make sense to put Flake on the Appropriations Committee to harass its irascible, earmark-loving Democratic chairman, Rep. David Obey, without offending GOP appropriators. But if Republicans have not foresworn pork, Flake as an appropriator would be on a collision course with Lewis. Under federal investigation for earmarks, Lewis has lost his customary California cool on the floor when Flake has challenged his pork projects.
Flake, a four-term congressman from Arizona who previously ran the Goldwater Institute in Phoenix, is usually a dependable party man and is personally well liked. But the Republican Party, preferring to operate as a secretive private corporation, deplores Flake for discussing the GOP affinity for pork in public instead of in closed forums such as the session at the Greenbrier.
Flake's most prominent competitor for Appropriations is Rep. Tom Cole, a major political figure in Oklahoma who heads the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC). A few sensitive Republicans worry about Cole solving the NRCC's fundraising woes by dispensing earmarks. But opposition stems mostly from the belief that Cole's NRCC chairmanship is enough for one congressman.
The most likely winner of the Appropriations derby will be Rep. Dave Reichert, a former sheriff of King County, Wash., who has not distinguished himself during three years in Congress and gets only a 60 percent rating from the American Conservative Union. His sole qualification appears to be that he is the most endangered Republican House member in 2008 and needs to bring home the bacon to Seattle.
As far as Republicans recovering their fiscal brand, the appropriators say earmark reform is strictly Washington inside baseball with no public support. They should follow Sen. John McCain on the presidential campaign trail, where he is cheered for promising to veto bills containing earmarked pork.
McCain as the party's leader is one possible new development for the earmarkers to ponder. Then there are possible new indictments tied to earmarks. In addition to Lewis, Alaska's two longtime purveyors of pork -- Sen. Ted Stevens and Rep. Don Young -- are under federal investigation. Though Flake will probably be kept off the Appropriations Committee, he will not go away and will be joined this year by additional Republicans proposing the elimination of individual earmarks. Flake up to now has not tried to kill more than a dozen earmarks in any appropriations bill. This year, he promises to introduce "many, many more" than a dozen amendments per bill.
Ironically, the Appropriations vacancy was created by the appointment of Rep. Roger Wicker of Mississippi to the Senate. The Post reported last week that as an appropriator late last year, Wicker inserted a $6 million earmark for a defense firm that contributed to his campaign and was lobbied for by Wicker's former chief of staff. Roger Wicker is a poster child for an earmark moratorium.
¿ 2008 Creators Syndicate Inc.
|
Two moves could show that Republicans are serious about cutting earmarks. They won't do either.
| 43.210526 | 0.631579 | 0.842105 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012302350.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012302350.html
|
I've Got News for You, David Simon
|
2008012619
|
Much like the stubborn movie buffs who insist good film died with actors like Humphrey Bogart and Henry Fonda, Simon similarly laments that the corps of youngsters that packed journalism schools in the 1970s were the last great generation of journalists. In reality, journalism school enrollments have been climbing -- even in the face of plagiarism scandals, declining circulations and overall anxiety about the future of the business.
Unlike Simon, I work for a newspaper. (Also unlike Simon, I am young.) Like most of my friends just starting out, I became a journalist not out of a brief curiosity or a fleeting excitement brought on by a viewing of "All the President's Men," but because we want to do work that matters. None of my journalism school classmates or my current colleagues got into the news business for the money. Rather, many took jobs at tiny community papers in small towns like Adrian, Mich., and Palmdale, Calif., or at obscure trade publications, just to stick with the news business.
Certainly the Web and the proliferation of online news sites have changed the business dramatically. No one is refuting that. Newspaper readership has been declining for decades, and young people today simply don't subscribe to, buy or even read actual newspapers.
But change and doom are two different animals.
Older readers like Simon may bemoan their increasingly thin papers. But a whole new generation of Internet-savvy youngsters is being introduced to newspapers on the Web. There they can post links to their favorite stories on social networking sites like Facebook, compete against each other in online news quizzes and gain exposure to different opinions and coverage. Every day, my friends, family members and I trade e-mail about what we read online. My best friend and I, who exchange dozens of e-mails daily, gossip just as feverishly -- and as frequently -- about Ronald Brownstein's political insights as we do about Britney and Lindsay's latest shenanigans.
Perhaps I notice people's news-gathering habits more than most because ultimately, my career depends on people staying interested in the news. But to be honest, I see people who care about the news everywhere. On Saturday mornings, my local coffee shop is packed with people poring through their papers. On a recent trip to my hometown, I was stopped by dozens of people -- some of whom I hadn't seen in years -- who congratulated me on an article I'd written for my hometown newspaper several months earlier.
Some of the turmoil in the newspaper business that Simon describes is real. Internal struggles and firings, mostly related to proposed budget cuts, at the Los Angeles Times have made headlines this week. Papers across the country are dealing with similar issues.
The fact remains, however, that Americans are genuinely and intensely concerned about news. Suggesting otherwise might be a good plot device for Hollywood dream weavers like Simon. But that story is purely fiction.
The writer is legal editor at the Los Angeles Daily Journal.
|
I was absolutely dumbfounded by David Simon's recent article in Outlook in which he suggests not only that the era of eager, dedicated journalists is over, but that nobody even cares about the news anymore. Ultimately, as Simon himself admits, his assessment should be taken for what it is: the m...
| 9.666667 | 0.566667 | 0.8 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/findingfaith/2008/01/honoring_the_deaddo_not_publis.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012619id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/findingfaith/2008/01/honoring_the_deaddo_not_publis.html
|
On Faith on washingtonpost.com
|
2008012619
|
ARLINGTON, Va. â I stood on the hillside alone and looked toward the Washington Monument, the Capitol building, and the White House. Our nationâs capital. I have been here a number of times as a journalist. Once, many years ago, I came as a tourist. And now, today, I came to Arlington National Cemetery as a pilgrim-journalist, searching for the soul of America.
But it was not the soul of America I was thinking about in this stark, somber place. It was the souls of young men and women killed in their prime, the remains of old soldiers and war heroes and wives and presidents, all laying side by side underground. And the cavern their deaths left in the lives of wives and children, parents and siblings, and, collectively, a nation.
Amid the keening wail of Taps and a far-off 21-gun salute, I asked Andre Seth, a 27-year-old security guard, how he defined faith, if he could feel any trace of the men and women buried in this cemetery, if he could feel whether some small part of their souls lingered around those graves.
âFaith is believing in something you canât see,â said Seth.
His job is to watch the tourists, to protect these grounds. He doesnât feel the presence of the people buried there as much as he feels the force of history and the grief and heaviness of some who have come to find family or friends.
Go down to section 60, he said. Thatâs where youâll see where the Afghanistan and Iraq soldiers are buried.
In the distance, âTapsâ could be heard. The clicking of heels and of guns at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. A backhoe. Hooves striking pavement ahead of a creaking wagon bearing a flag-draped casket. The wind whistling through the trees.
An average of two dozen burials are performed each day at Arlington, as the older generations of World War II, Korean and Vietnam veterans die. The oldest graves are located mostly up on hillsides. The youngest soldiers â some killed within the past month -- are buried on a flat lawn well behind the Visitorâs Center.
There, the grief was played out in photographs and dead flowers and statues and notes left for the dead. The ground, saturated by snow and rain, was soft around these new graves. Mud squished up around my shoes and splattered on my pants as I made my way around headstones, looking for clues into the lives left behind. âHappy anniversary, sweet cheeks,â says one note with a dried floral arrangement sent through a floral shop. Someone painted âHeroâ on rocks and left them on the top of the tombstones. A girlfriend or wife addressed a letter in crayon to a soldier and left it inside a sealed plastic bag. There was a photo of a handsome young man in military fatigues holding a young boy, not older than four or five. The man looked to be somewhere in his mid-to-late 20s. The boy was smiling for the camera.
I tried to think of that young man, dead and buried beneath my feet. Does his soul linger here? But maybe Seth is right: All I could feel is a heavy sadness.
All I could hear was the wind.
|
Finding Faith on On Faith; blog of religion in the news on washingtonpost.com. Visit http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/findingfaith/
| 37.411765 | 0.529412 | 0.647059 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/needtoknow/2008/01/kashmir_for_the_kashmiris.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012619id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/needtoknow/2008/01/kashmir_for_the_kashmiris.html
|
PostGlobal: PostGlobal on washingtonpost.com
|
2008012619
|
Some say it was al-Qaeda, others see the malevolent hand of the Taliban, and still others see shadowy forces aligned with state security services. But regardless of who was responsible for the assassination of former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto last month, the tragedy once again brings the issue of regional terrorism in South Asia to the forefront. But long before al-Qaeda and the Taliban emerged as destabilizing forces in Afghanistan and Pakistan, long before indigenous Islamists began raising money to disrupt national life, there was the issue of Kashmir: the 60-year dispute with neighboring India over a mountainous region that both countries claim. It was an issue on which Pakistan's Pervez Musharraf, Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif remained unified. And it is an issue that will be conspicuous on the agenda of a new Pakistani administration after next month's expected elections â not the least because of the resurgence of the right-wing Bharatiya Janata Party in India, which has won important state polls in which party leaders more than once implicitly reasserted India's claim to all of Kashmir.
The Bhutto assassination, of course, is likely to have ripple effects that will most certainly be felt in Kashmir and India. But in Kashmir itself, the anti-India insurgency is far from being eliminated, even if Indian authorities are publicly reluctant to discuss it. Indian officials have even attributed terrorist acts in other parts of India to militants trained in Kashmir. While Kashmir may not figure prominently on the global geopolitical radar because of other world crises, tensions remain high in this region, where the towering Himalayan and Karakoram ranges meet. Organizations such as Human Rights Watch are accusing the Indian armed forces of brutalizing the indigenous population; hundreds of young Kashmiri males continue to cross the "Line of Control" to obtain weapons from Pakistani-administered Kashmir; and what was once known as the "Switzerland of Asia" has disintegrated into the equivalent of a battle-scarred Lebanon or Kosovo. The dispute has cost tens of thousands of lives over the years, and has driven an unsustainable arms race, diverting much-needed funds from domestic economic development in both countries. There was even talk in India that parts of the Pakistan-controlled section of Kashmir had been used by Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda for training purposes: that wouldn't be such a stretch because the borders between northern Afghanistan, Pakistan and Kashmir are porous, and virtually impossible to monitor continuously. Yet, before Bhuttoâs assassination, there was a sense that both governments were privately willing to give serious consideration to stepping down the conflict. One of several teams working toward this goal was the privately-funded Kashmir Study Group, which consisted of several retired American diplomats as well as influential scholars. While there's never been a shortage of ideas on resolving the Kashmir imbroglio, officials in both New Delhi and Islamabad say that the Kashmir Study Group's report was taken more seriously than several other independent studies, largely on account of the group's composition. The Kashmir Study Group's 26 members included several distinguished former American diplomats such as Ambassador Howard Schaffer, Director of Studies at the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy â which is part of the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service â who spent 36 years representing America in South Asia. The group was formed in 1996 and was led by the Kashmir-born M. Farooq Kathwari, chairman and chief executive officer of one of the world's most prominent interior design companies, Ethan Allen. As a boy, he moved with his mother and siblings from his native Srinagar to the Pakistani-controlled section of Kashmir, where his father had initially gone to do business. He was refused re-entry to the Indian-held portion of the state. Kathwari eventually returned to Srinagar and distinguished himself academically at Kashmir University; he was also captain of the cricket team, an experience he often cites as shaping his leadership values. (Perhaps because Kathwari has lived on both sides of divided Kashmir, there have been long-running rumors in India that he has secretly funded the Kashmir separatists â an allegation he strongly denies. It's unlikely that top officials in India would receive him if his presence in their country suggested a security hazard.) While there was no formal multilateral endorsement of the KSG's recommendations, there was quiet recognition that they advanced arguments worth debating for sustainable governance of Kashmir. The group's recommendations consisted of three elements: (1) That three entities â Kashmir, Jammu, and Ladakh â would be established in the portion of the pre-1947 state now administered by India; (2) That two entities â Azad Kashmir and the Northern Areas â would be established on the side currently administered by Pakistan; and (3) That an all-Kashmir body would be created to coordinate issues such as regional trade, tourism, and the environment. This body would have representatives from each of the five proposed entities, plus from India and Pakistan. The critical subtext of the proposals lay in the fact that they acknowledged the cultural identity of the peoples of Kashmir, quite possibly for the first time. In effect, there were three categories of Kashmiris: those that live in the Kashmir Valley; those who inhabit the part controlled by Pakistan and tend to be more tribal in their characteristics; and those who live in Jammu, who are mostly Hindus. Kashmir hasnât belonged to the Kashmiris for quite some time now â since India and Pakistan became independent countries in 1947, carved out of the larger entity of India that was long regarded as the British Raj's jewel in the crown. Pakistan controls roughly a third of the 220,000 square-kilometer territory, seized by Pakistani-armed marauders and administered under the rubric of "Azad Kashmir," or "Free Kashmir.â India has possession of almost 45 percent of the territory, ceded to it by the Hindu maharajah of an overwhelmingly Muslim land; and China has bitten off the rest, an area so remote and forbidding that the glacial chunk doesn't even figure in most international discussions about Kashmir.
To be sure, the recommendations of the Kashmir Study Group are unlikely to be adopted in totality. They seem to challenge India's claim of sovereignty over the entire region. They don't fully address the question of terrorism. And they don't tackle the issue of how to revive Kashmir's once flourishing economy, one that drew tourists from many corners of the world to ski, to ride boats on lakes, to buy saffron and carpets, and to take in the sheer beauty of the place. It was, after all, General Musharraf who supposedly supported the Kashmir turmoil when he was commander of Pakistan's armed forces. Nawaz Sharif was not far behind in staking Pakistan's claim to Kashmir. And Benazir Bhutto, notwithstanding her occasional conciliatory remarks about India, was steadfast in her belief that India had no business claiming sovereignty over Pakistan. Perhaps most distressing of all, Pakistan's ISI and major segments of the military believe that it is important to keep India on the edge on the Kashmir issue. One need look no further than a recent report that $5 billion that the Bush Administration gave to Pakistan to fight terrorism was, in fact, diverted to developing new weapons systems - against India. There are those who may argue that Kashmir should be left for the moment as a dormant geopolitical issue. But they are mistaken. The ultra-rightwing Hindu Bharatiya Janata Party - which recently won stunning victories in legislative elections in Gujarat and Himachal Pradesh - is poised to make a comeback on the national scene. There's increasing uncertainty if the current fourteen-party, Congress-led coalition government of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh will last its full term through May 2009; a snap election may well be called before then if the Communists in India's parliament withdraw their support. The BJP is unlikely to soften its traditional hard-line stance on Kashmir - which is that all of Kashmir, not just the portion now occupied by India, belongs to India. Whatever the unfolding political scenario, it would be prudent to preempt a more volatile situation in Kashmir for the next Pakistan administration and for Prime Minister Singh's government to revisit the issue. After all, trade between the two countries - currently around $12 billion annually -- is blossoming, and there's potential for more. More visas are being given on both sides for personal and professional visits. Both countries could better use their revenues for domestic economic development instead of ratcheting up their defense budgets. All it would take for fresh talks on Kashmir is the political will to make a fresh start. One likes to think that there are Pakistani and Indian leaders who might be able to summon such will.
Pranay Gupte is a veteran international journalist who has written for The New York Times, Newsweek International and Forbes. The author of six books, he currently writes for Portfolio.Com, and is working on a major book on the Middle East.
|
Need to Know - PostGlobal on PostGlobal; blog of politics and current events on washingtonpost.com. Visit http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/needtoknow/
| 89.684211 | 0.526316 | 0.526316 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/swaminathan_aiyar/2008/01/prosperity_its_all_relative.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012619id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/swaminathan_aiyar/2008/01/prosperity_its_all_relative.html
|
Swaminathan Aiyar
|
2008012619
|
The Current Discussion: In the future, global prosperity will present more of a threat than poverty, according to a recent Post op-ed. Is this just rich-American rhetoric, or is the world really getting too prosperous for its own good?
Will prosperity be more of a threat than poverty in the future? If GDP keeps rising the world over as it has in recent years, poverty will virtually disappear by any absolute yardstick (like the World Bankâs benchmark of consumption per capita of $1 per day in PPP, or purchasing power parity, terms) in, say, 50 years. For most countries, however, poverty has become a relative concept, not an absolute one. Countries have a habit of constantly adjusting the poverty line upwards as they get richer. The U.S. poverty line is $10,400 per year for an individual, against just US$200 per year in India. So by Indian standards, the American âpoorâ are fabulously well off. Yet the concern of Americans about their âpoorâ is as genuine and strong as it is in India.
Relative poverty is insoluble: no matter how rich a society becomes it will never go away. We may one day have a plutocratic society where all the rich are billionaires or trillionaires, and so drip with sympathy for âpoorâ millionaires. You could call this a problem of relative poverty. You could also call it a problem of relative prosperity.
Prosperity in absolute terms is not a problem. Yes, it carries undesirable side effects, such as pollution and urban congestion. But a rich society has the money to tackle such ills. The air and waters of rich countries are much cleaner than they were 50 years ago. The very opposite is true in poor countries like China or India. Indira Gandhi, Indiaâs former Prime Minister, once said that poverty was the greatest pollutant.
Please e-mail PostGlobal if you'd like to receive an email notification when PostGlobal sends out a new question.
|
Swaminathan Aiyar at PostGlobal on PostGlobal; blog of politics and current events on washingtonpost.com. Visit http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/swaminathan_aiyar/
| 21 | 0.333333 | 0.333333 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/24/AR2008012400263.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/24/AR2008012400263.html
|
Speedy Deal on Stimulus Plan May Not Yield Short-Term Help
|
2008012619
|
The $150 billion stimulus package Congress and the Bush administration unveiled yesterday meets the tests most economists prescribed for the ailing economy: It is targeted, temporary and (relatively) timely.
But even the fast political action on the package -- it took barely a week to negotiate -- may not be fast enough to help the economy over the next several months. The first of the 117 million checks won't be in the mail until late May; some won't arrive until early August. And the shot in the arm for the economy does not directly address the problems of the sagging housing market, towering consumer debt, teetering mortgages and capital-short banks.
"If someone could build the most appropriate stimulus package, it wouldn't be what we got today, but this comes close enough given the realities of the political situation," said Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody's Economy.com, a consulting firm. Still, he added, "This doesn't solve the fundamental problem plaguing the economy."
Stock and commodity markets were heartened by the package. Despite a 2.2 percent drop in the sales of existing U.S. homes announced yesterday, the stock market rose. Despite an increase in crude oil and gasoline inventories, crude oil prices rose more than $2 to $89.41 a barrel on expectations that a stronger economy would boost consumption of petroleum products.
The stimulus package will send checks to anyone who earned at least $3,000, and as much as $600 for an individual and $1,200 for a couple, with more for people with children. Individuals with more than $87,000 a year of income, however, and joint filers with more than $175,000 of adjusted gross income get nothing.
Economists praised the compromise for including $35 billion for 28 million of the working poor, who are most likely to spend the money, and excluding the top wage earners, who don't need the extra cash.
"This is pumping a lot of money into the pockets of people who are likely to spend it and spend it quickly," said Robert Reischauer, president of the Urban Institute.
Douglas Elmendorf, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, estimated that 2008 growth in gross domestic product will be 0.7 percentage points higher than it would have been without the stimulus deal.
But many analysts, state governments and business people were disappointed. Democrats had sought a boost in the food stamp program and an extension of unemployment insurance benefits, which they said would find their way into the economy faster.
A study by Zandi estimates that every dollar put into the food stamp program produces a $1.73 increase in the economy as the money is spent and spent again. By contrast, every dollar put into the business tax breaks that are in the stimulus package will increase the economy by 27 cents, according to the study. The business portion of the stimulus package allows companies to write off 50 percent of the cost of equipment in the year of purchase. This will help firms that sell long-lasting equipment such as machine tools, aircraft, and agricultural and construction equipment. Technology firms could also benefit. But much of that investment would have happened anyway, according to some economists.
Retailers will get a boost, too, not because of business tax breaks but because of consumer spending. Two thirds of the money in rebate checks sent to spark the economy after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks was spent within six months.
Many business people had hoped for other provisions that they say would have provided a longer-term boost to the economy. Renewable energy advocates had sought an extension of tax credits for wind and solar; those credits expire at the end of this year, and they say that new projects could soon start to slow down because of uncertainty about the fate of the credits.
|
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.
| 16.704545 | 0.477273 | 0.477273 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/24/AR2008012401025.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/24/AR2008012401025.html
|
French Bank Links Lone Futures Trader To $7 Billion Fraud
|
2008012619
|
PARIS, Jan. 24 -- For five years, Jérôme Kerviel toiled in the back offices of Societe Generale, learning the intricacies of the six-layer security system that France's second-largest bank used to protect its money, investors and customers from fraud, according to bank officials here.
Kerviel then made an unusual career move. He was promoted to trader -- becoming one of the very employees the security systems are designed to oversee and keep honest.
Over the next several months, his chagrined employer alleged Thursday, Kerviel used his inside knowledge of the security system and his brazenness as a futures trader to pull off one of the largest banking frauds in history, ringing up losses of more than $7 billion for Societe Generale.
The trader hid the massive fraud "using extremely sophisticated and varied techniques," Societe Generale Chairman Daniel Bouton told reporters Thursday. Bouton and other bank officials had little explanation for Kerviel's motivation, except to say he appeared to have acted alone and to have made no personal profit, instead creating losses through successive transactions of buying dear and selling cheap.
There was no comment Thursday from Kerviel, whom the bank said it had fired along with several of his supervisors. The man described as a 31-year-old computer genius dropped out of sight, but Elisabeth Meyer, his lawyer, said on French television that he "is not fleeing" and is "available for judicial authorities." She did not specify where he was; calls to a telephone number listed under his name went unanswered.
The disclosure of the losses was the latest shock to world financial markets as they struggle to recover from a massive sell-off earlier in the week linked to problems in the U.S. subprime mortgage market. Some analysts suggested that high-volume sales by Societe General on Monday as it secretly liquidated Kerviel's tainted investments contributed to the global market drops that led the U.S. Federal Reserve to counter Tuesday with an interest rate cut of three-quarters of a percentage point.
The Fed was unaware Monday that the bank was making its sales, according to a Fed source who spoke on condition of anonymity, leading some analysts to charge that the central bank overreacted in its rate cut. Investors in futures markets are now betting there is less likelihood that the Fed will make another steep rate cut at its regularly scheduled meeting next week.
The case highlighted global distrust of the financial institutions that hold personal nest eggs and corporate wealth, and the regulators charged with keeping them honest. The Bank of France, the country's banking regulator, conducted 17 investigations at Societe Generale during 2006 and 2007, but spotted no evidence of fraudulent activity, its chief reported Thursday.
"I don't consider this a failure of our controls," Christian Noyer, governor of the Bank of France, told reporters. "We can't have a controller behind every trader at every bank in the country at every moment. Even the best laws and the best police can't always stop someone who is determined to defraud the system."
But analysts and banking experts said the statements by both institutions revealed troubling failures in oversight. "What guarantees do we have that this cannot happen again tomorrow with another trader?" asked Xavier Timbeau, director of analysis and forecasting at the French Economic Observatory. "None."
If confirmed, the losses at the bank would be the largest ever caused by an individual trader. They are far higher than the $1.4 billion run up by trader Nick Leeson in the mid-1990s in Singapore. His fraud caused the collapse of the institution where he worked, Britain's 233-year-old Barings Bank.
Leeson, now living in Ireland after serving a prison sentence in Singapore, told the BBC that he was not shocked such a fraud had happened again, but that "the thing that really shocked me was the size of it."
|
PARIS, Jan. 24 -- For five years, Jérôme Kerviel toiled in the back offices of Societe Generale, learning the intricacies of the six-layer security system that France's second-largest bank used to protect its money, investors and customers from fraud, according to bank officials here.
| 13.087719 | 0.947368 | 36.947368 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/21/DI2008012101585.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/21/DI2008012101585.html
|
National Security and Intelligence
|
2008012619
|
Dana Priest covers intelligence and wrote " The Mission: Waging War and Keeping Peace With America's Military" (W.W. Norton). The book chronicles the increasing frequency with which the military is called upon to solve political and economic problems.
Archive: Dana Priest discussion transcripts
Dana Priest: Hi everyone. Nice to have you here. Let's begin.
Peaks Island, Maine: On Sunday, The Washington Post carried a commentary by Kagan, Keane and O'Hanlon who were upbeat about Iraq. The column brought forth 110 mostly critical comments showing considerable familiarity with the facts. Yet, there is little that appears in The Washington Post or elsewhere in the mainstream media (such as the Lehrer NewsHour) that takes strong issue with the authors, who are widely viewed by well-informed observers as presenting the information that supports their longstanding positions while ignoring that which indicates they long have been wrong. What accounts for the absence those taking issue with these people?
washingtonpost.com: Making Iraq Safe for Politics (Post, Jan. 20)
Dana Priest: You can bring a horse to water, but ... apparently you have missed many articles recently that have presented a completely different analysis. To start with, I would point you to Andrew Bacevich's tough, well-argued piece on the front page of Outlook last Sunday. If you read the mainstream media that really cover the war (The Washington Post, New York Times, Los Angeles Times and the mainstream magazines -- mainly Atlantic Monthly, New Yorker, New Republic, Economist, etc.) I just don't see how you credibly can make that claim. There is no conspiracy -- there's not even some implied direction. It's a free-for-all with war correspondents even more unencumbered by the preconceptions of office-bound editors than normal, because they are so far away.
washingtonpost.com: Surge to Nowhere (Post, Jan. 20)
Crestwood, N.Y.: Here's the shortest question you'll ever get: Sibel Edmonds?
Dana Priest: And the shortest answer: Worth following
Raleigh, N.C.: Good afternoon. East Africa has a recent history of being either a target for terrorism (embassy bombings, anti-Israeli hotel bombing in Mombassa), a home for Islamists (Somalia) or a haven for terrorists (bin Laden in the Sudan). In that context, what is the U.S. doing to ensure Kenya doesn't become a failed state? In your reporting, have you heard any word as to what might be a "trigger" (figurative) for greater U.S. involvement? My wife is Kenyan and I have many in-laws there. The return in the past week to incendiary rhetoric from Odinga and Kibaki is disturbing.
washingtonpost.com: Strife Laps at Gates of Kenya's Privileged (Post, Jan. 24)
Dana Priest: We are far from any such trigger, with our hands full everywhere else in the world. You might want to look up some articles on the military's new African Command. Apparently it will be the military in the lead again. I'm fairly certain the State Department and aid initiatives are flatlined for the foreseeable future. This is not a particularly good thing in my mind. (see: "The Mission, Waging War and Keeping Peace with America's Military," Norton, 2003, for an analysis of the overdependence on the military to save the world).
Is this a hare-brained idea?: Could the Gaza strip be given to Egypt? Not that they want it, but would it make some sense?
washingtonpost.com: Gazans Stream Into Egypt As Border Wall Is Breached (Post, Jan. 24)
Dana Priest: Egypt would not accept that, and many of the Palestinians living in Gaza would not either.
Port-au-Prince, Haiti: I fully understand that the U.S. is going though an electoral period,but vigilance towards national security should be intact, more robust than ever. In your judgment, Does the U.S. focus enough on some potential threats in its neighborhood? Hugo Chavez, the Venezuelan ruler, is going to inaugurate this weekend ALBA, which is the "anti-imperialist" "Bolivarian" integration alliance with many countries, including Ecuador, Bolivia, Haiti and others -- and it looks that ALBA is going to closely work with the Iranian government. Despite the appearance Haiti is collapsing now, with the all perverse consequence that this could entail for anti-U.S. and Western actors. The democratic process has not been consolidated, and economic conditions have not improved at all. What do you think about all that? Thank you.
Dana Priest: I think you are right in the largest sense. So much of the government's focus is on Iraq and Afghanistan. I don't really see any alternative, though, right now -- except perhaps empowering lower-level bureaucrats who are tasked with dealing with these countries to actually be able to make decisions, begin dialogue and create initiatives or whatever. The U.S. long has had a more reactive, crisis-driven State Department and national security apparatus, so it will probably take some major crisis (not in Haiti, unfortunately -- you are in perpetual crisis) to turn attention to the region.
Boston: Dana, do you think that we'll actually get the Senate Intelligence report on White House analysis of Iraq WMDs before 2009?
Dana Priest: Maybe. How's that for answer? On the other hand, it seems to me that almost everything that report would say already has been said. The latest was a report issued yesterday, I believe, that counted up the number of times that Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz spoke falsehoods, like mentioning the connection between Iraq and al-Qaeda. The number was astronomical. More than 500 times. I can't remember the source, but I'm sure one of our chatters knows and will write in shortly.
St. Louis: Is there an association of journalists on the defense and intelligence beats?
Dana Priest: Nope. There is a Military Reporters and Editors association, but the number of reporters covering intelligence is very small -- full-time, probably 15. If you include reporters who are also responsible for a military beat, then you'd climb to about 30.
Buffalo, N.Y.: Is it correct that many foreign journalists work for their country's intelligence services?
Dana Priest: No, I don't think that is correct. It's probably true for any journalists from a Chinese paper, though, or Cuban ... maybe Iranian.
Ocala, Fla.: When retired generals in the U.S. form a more-or-less consistent chorus on some point of policy (say Don Rumsfeld) it is assumed that they are speaking on behalf of their active-duty colleagues who can't speak for themselves. Question: Does the same assumption apply for the recent collective statement by retired generals in Pakistan about Musharraf? Is the Pakistani Army putting distance between itself and the former chief?
Dana Priest: Yes to both. Most retired U.S. general are conduits for the views of their active-duty counterparts. There are some exceptions. Gen. Barry McCaffrey, for example was one of the first and only to be critical of how the Iraq war was being planned. I believe he was blackballed for a while from the fraternity of generals for his willingness to stick out his neck (of course, he turned out to be right, so he's back in fashion among them).
Boonsboro, Md.: That report on "Bush Lies" was just another hit piece paid for by George Soros. Not worth a roll of toilet paper.
Dana Priest: I can't vouch for the analysis here, but the piece I mentioned didn't have any insider information -- all it did was count up quotes. My point is that the Senate intelligence report, were it to be released, probably would be something of the same -- a counting or analysis (or something in between) of the public rhetoric versus the intelligence findings.
935 lies: The report was put out by the Center for Public Integrity. But Dana Perino assures us that nobody cares.
Dana Priest: Here it is. Thank you.
New York: I was disturbed to read last month that the Russians prevented something like 270 instances of radioactive material smuggling in 2007; do you know of any nuclear smuggling that has been stopped at U.S. borders?
Dana Priest: Honestly, none that we ever have heard about. It's something our national security reporters check all the time. That said, the problem of loose nukes is huge and always has gotten less attention than I think many people believe.
Toronto: Thanks for taking our questions. Your colleague Carol Leonnig wrote last Saturday that: "CIA spokesman George Little said ... that about 30 of 100 CIA prisoners had required 'special methods of questioning.' " I read an article from an English language Pakistani newspaper telling readers that waterboarding was routine in Guantanamo. I think the truth level of authorized abuse of captives by U.S. personnel lies somewhere in between. But where? How does the number of instances of unauthorized and semi-authorized abuse compare to the number of authorized instances? Does the now-acknowledged authorized use of torture merely represent the tip of the iceberg, with a vast bulk of hidden unauthorized or semi-authorized instances?
washingtonpost.com: Lawyers for Detainee Refer In Filing to More CIA Tapes (Post, Jan. 19)
Dana Priest: Interesting question. First, I do not believe waterboarding was used at Guantanamo. That was a technique reserved for the CIA. Second, I doubt any unauthorized waterboarding was conducted by CIA officers. The unauthorized abuse would be more like what you saw from the contractor in Asadabad three years ago who killed a detainee, or the young CIA officer in charge of The Salt Pit who allowed Afghan guards to freeze a detainee to death. Or the taxi driver killed at Bagram. People doing stupid things back in 2001-2003 (I'm excluding Iraq for the moment) because they were stupid, desperate, inexperienced, evil or so arrogant they believed they never would be caught.
Natick, Mass.: I know that telecom immunity is a big concern, but even if Congress got a backbone and passed a veto-proof law that didn't include telecom immunity, couldn't the president as executive simply pardon the telecoms, even in advance? That wouldn't solve the issue going forward, but it would prevent the telecoms from suffering huge judgments, right?
Dana Priest: I don't think you can pardon anyone in advance, no. So they would have to go through trials and be convicted of something.
Sun Prairie, Wis.: Hi, Dana. This is outside the current news cycle, but I'd like to know if you're aware of any planning being done in the relevant agencies for a major change in the Cuban government? Situations ranging from immigration to drug importation to, of course, intelligence would be impacted substantially if Cuba became something other than a Communist dictatorship. Now, maybe it does and maybe it doesn't -- but major changes in foreign countries have taken our government by surprise before, and I wondered whether steps have been taken to prevent that from happening in this case. What do you think?
Dana Priest: Yes. There are contingency plans on a host of issues, probably in this order: immigration, immigration, immigration. Coast Guard, Navy, AID much involved. There's also the typical "stabilization" planning -- how to help a new government make a peaceful transition. How to talk with them. How to airlift supplies, do a military blockade if needed. Emergency surveillance of military and research installations via satellite and other airborne platforms. Those kinds of thing.
Dana Priest: Oh boy, time's up. Hope you come back next week. Until then, keep bundled up if you're on the East Coast!
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
|
Washington Post staff writer Dana Priest discusses the latest developments in national security and intelligence.
| 147.375 | 0.75 | 1.375 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012304036.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012304036.html
|
Some in Party Bristle At Clintons' Attacks
|
2008012619
|
The ad takes one line from an Obama interview -- "The Republicans were the party of ideas for a pretty long chunk of time there over the last 10, 15 years" -- and juxtaposes it with GOP policies that Obama has never advocated.
"Really?" a voice-over says. "Aren't those the ideas that got us into the economic mess we're in today? Ideas like special tax breaks for Wall Street. Running up a $9 trillion debt. Refusing to raise the minimum wage or deal with the housing crisis. Are those the ideas Barack Obama's talking about?"
The Clinton campaign argued that it was simply quoting Obama. But in the original context, Obama was describing the dominance of Republican ideas in the 1980s and 1990s, without saying he supported them, and asserting that those ideas are of no use today.
The ad marked the escalation of a bitter fight between the two Democratic front-runners that has taken on a new dimension because of the involvement of Bill Clinton, the titular leader of the party. While his wife campaigns elsewhere, the former president has been making daily appearances in South Carolina in anticipation of the state's Democratic primary on Saturday, and he has adopted the role of attacking his wife's opponent the way a vice presidential candidate traditionally does in a general election.
Responding to the negative ad, Dick Harpootlian, a former chairman of the Democratic Party in South Carolina, accused the Clintons of using the "politics of deception," and he compared the former president to the late Lee Atwater, a Republican operative from South Carolina who was known for his tough tactics.
In response, Bill Clinton said Harpootlian's comments were a distraction, and he accused the Obama campaign of funneling smears through the media.
"They are feeding you this because they know this is what you want to cover. This is what you live for," he told CNN reporter Jessica Yellin, who asked him for a response to Harpootlian at an appearance in South Carolina. "They just spin you up on this and you happily go along," Clinton said. As aides steered him away, he scolded: "Shame on you."
In Washington, Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), who endorsed Obama last week, castigated the former president for what he called his "glib cheap shots" at Obama, saying both sides should settle down but placing the blame predominantly on Clinton.
"That's beneath the dignity of a former president," Leahy told reporters, adding: "He is not helping anyone, and certainly not helping the Democratic Party."
That concern was also voiced by some neutral Democrats, who said that the former president's aggressive role, along with the couple's harsh approach recently, threatens to divide the party in the general election.
A few prominent Democrats, including Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (Mass.) and Rep. Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), have spoken to the former president about the force of his Obama critiques. There is some fear within the party that if Obama becomes the nominee, he could emerge personally battered and politically compromised. And there is concern that a Clinton victory could come at a cost -- particularly a loss of black voters, who could blame her for Obama's defeat and stay home in November.
|
DILLON, S.C., Jan. 23 -- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's presidential campaign aired a new radio ad here Wednesday that repeated a discredited charge against Sen. Barack Obama, in what some Democrats said is part of an increasing pattern of hardball politics by her and former president Bill Clinton.
| 12.226415 | 0.660377 | 0.811321 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012303543.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012303543.html
|
Romney, McCain Take Lead in Fla.; Tax Talk Pervades
|
2008012619
|
NAPLES, Fla., Jan. 23 -- After months of debate over illegal immigration, social issues and the Iraq war, the economy and taxes have emerged as the central focus of the Republican race in Florida.
Former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, who has staked his entire candidacy on winning here, has shifted his focus from terrorism to taxes in a late effort to halt his slide in the polls. He told several hundred people on the Gulf Coast on Wednesday that his plan to reduce corporate and individual taxes would reinvigorate private investment and spending.
"Right now, we're focused on the question of the economy and turning around an economy," Giuliani told reporters later. "I'm the only candidate who has ever turned around a government economy."
With former senator Fred D. Thompson (Tenn.) quitting Tuesday and former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee largely shifting his focus elsewhere, Giuliani is now pitted against the men who have been his main rivals from the beginning: former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney and Sen. John McCain (Ariz.).
A new poll for the St. Petersburg Times shows McCain and Romney leading the contest in Florida, with Giuliani and Huckabee fading. The poll put McCain at 25 percent and Romney at 23 percent, with Giuliani and Huckabee tied at 15 percent each, and 13 percent undecided. The Times's November poll had Giuliani in front of Romney by nearly 2 to 1.
Florida Gov. Charlie Crist (R) said he thinks the new poll reflects fallout from Giuliani's failure to win in any of the earlier states. "It's important to win," Crist said in an interview at the governor's mansion. "If you're going to win somewhere, you've got to win."
Crist has not endorsed a candidate but said he has not ruled out doing so before Tuesday's primary. With an approval rating over 70 percent, Crist could offer an important boost in the final days of a campaign.
The governor said the Florida winner is likely to head into the big round of contests on Feb. 5 with real momentum. "We're the first megastate to weigh in on this primary season, and I think you could make a very good argument that Florida is a very good bellwether of the country," he said.
Aside from concerns over the nation's economy, a referendum on Florida's ballot that would lower property taxes is also contributing to candidates' anti-tax rhetoric.
Both McCain and Romney campaigned across a sunny Florida on Wednesday, offering voters similar promises of tax cuts and economic recovery as their campaigns lashed out at each other over charges of flip-flopping on key issues.
"Lower taxes, less regulation, restrained spending, a cut in the corporate tax rate . . . are the keys to the economic recovery of this country," McCain said during an economic roundtable in Orlando. In a new television ad, McCain vows to "protect your pocketbook" and make President Bush's tax cuts permanent.
A Romney news release ridiculed the McCain ad as a flip-flop, noting that the senator opposed Bush's tax cuts in 2001 and 2003. Brian Rogers, a McCain spokesman, responded dryly that "Mitt Romney has earned the Olympic gold medal for flip-flopping in this race."
|
NAPLES, Fla., Jan. 23 -- After months of debate over illegal immigration, social issues and the Iraq war, the economy and taxes have emerged as the central focus of the Republican race in Florida.
| 16.307692 | 1 | 39 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012304123.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012304123.html
|
From Sudan to Sundance, 'Art Star' Questions Celebrity
|
2008012619
|
PARK CITY, Utah -- The international art star Vanessa Beecroft knows her story of vanity and obsession is controversial, because controversy is the point. She understands you might dislike her. "I totally agree," she says. "I don't like myself either."
A global art phenomenon, Beecroft is best known as the bard of bulimia (she has serious food issues) and for her infamous performance pieces in which she assembles dozens of naked women, accessorized in wigs or chains or Gucci, and displays them before an audience of elites, who sip champagne and stare.
Beecroft went to Sudan two years ago with a camera crew and photographer because, she says, she was interested in the plight of Darfur, though she concedes that she didn't know exactly where Darfur was, and never did get there.
Instead, she found herself in southern Sudan, where she visited an orphanage, found a pair of malnourished twins and offered each a breast, swollen with milk because she had left her own young child back in New York. Beecroft says she "fell in love" with the twins, that she wanted to "save" them, and began a quixotic quest to adopt the two infant boys.
Beecroft also photographed herself with the twins suckling her breasts. In an interview, she calls the work "a souvenir." The iconographic portrait, of a white-robed Madonna and two black babies, is arresting and disturbing, raising questions about celebrity, race, colonialism, international adoption. Exploitation or liberation? "There's never been anything like the double breast-feeding photo," says Jeffrey Deitch, her former dealer in New York. The photographs are for sale through her gallery in Milan. Beecroft says they sell for $50,000 each. Most of the collectors have been Americans.
This is the story told by New Zealand filmmaker Pietra Brettkelly in the world premiere of her documentary "The Art Star and the Sudanese Twins" at the Sundance Film Festival. The movie follows Beecroft from the orphanage and Dinka cattle camps in Sudan to her home on Long Island to art exhibits in Milan and Venice. At times Beecroft's behavior is appalling, her motives and methods highly questionable, but it is difficult to turn away, and the more you watch, the more you wonder: What is best for these African children -- to be adopted by a wealthy vain celebrity, an Angelina, a Madonna, a Vanessa (who admits she is a little crazy), or for the babies to live with their relatives in a hut, and take their chances with poverty and disease?
In its review, the Hollywood Reporter concludes, "It probably would have taken a few more years of filming to have answered the most pertinent question: Can this kind of celebrity adoption work out satisfyingly for either parents or children?" The critic from Variety admires the film, writing that "Brettkelly offers an unvarnished picture of her subject, peeling away Beecroft's delusions about her seemingly noble adoption quest." Brettkelly's documentary is presented without narration, leaving the judgment to us. She is seeking a buyer and distributor for the film.
The day after the premiere, Brettkelly and Beecroft visit a photographer's studio at Sundance to have their portraits taken. Beecroft is tall, slender and dressed in black. Brettkelly is tall, slender and dressed in ski clothes. Beecroft is an Italian raised in Italy by an Italian mother (her father is an eccentric Englishman who appears in the film) and she speaks English with a melodic accent. Does she come across well in the film? "I thought, what a freak I am," Beecroft says softly, almost a whisper. "But it was really me."
Though Beecroft is an astute manipulator of media, she comes across in the film as annoying and clueless, like a dangerous child. In person? She seems harmless.
Brettkelly met the art star in Sudan, while the filmmaker was there working on a project on land mines. Beecroft had come because she read a brief article on Darfur in the New York Times.
"When I went I thought I was going to the Darfur area, but I wasn't really familiar with the south or west of Sudan," Beecroft recalls. "As soon as I landed -- because I was nursing my baby at home -- after all those hours of flying, I was in pain. I asked the bishop if he needed mother's milk, because I didn't want to waste the milk, and he handed me to the Sisters of Charity congregation and they brought me to three newborns. The twins and a baby girl. So then I spent two weeks nursing them and taking care of them. Sister Jacqueline kept telling me thank you for being here, and they called me 'the mother milk that comes from the sky,' literally the airplane."
Beecroft learns that the twins are not orphans, but have a father, who appears. The children's mother had died soon after their birth and he has quickly remarried. "I feel bad for the father," she says in the film. "I feel as if I'm stealing his children." But Beecroft persists. On camera she says, "I want them, but do I deserve them? I'm afraid of the judgment of the people, the bishop, the Dinkas, the world. Ah, here she is -- not that I'm important -- another white woman wanting something exotic."
|
PARK CITY, Utah -- The international art star Vanessa Beecroft knows her story of vanity and obsession is controversial, because controversy is the point. She understands you might dislike her. "I totally agree," she says. "I don't like myself either."
| 20.461538 | 1 | 52 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012303954.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012303954.html
|
Olympic Teams Prepare for the Dirty Air in Beijing
|
2008012619
|
BEIJING -- American runners are trying out face masks. Dutch cyclists will train in South Korea.
Fearful of the effects of air pollution on their performance, Olympic athletes are taking extreme measures to prepare for this summer's Games in Beijing.
Delegations from dozens of nations are setting up training bases in nearby countries and planning to fly into China at the last minute to minimize exposure to what they say is a hostile environment.
Teams from at least 20 countries, including Britain, Sweden, Germany and Brazil, are preparing training camps in Japan. Another 15 teams, including those from the Netherlands and Switzerland, will be based in South Korea. U.S. track and field competitors will be in Dalian, a Chinese coastal city.
In past Olympics, athletes typically arrived in host cities at least 10 days before the start of events to get used to the conditions. This year, some of the 10,000 expected competitors say they will come to Beijing just 72 hours before their first event -- raising the prospect of a fireworks-filled opening ceremony on Aug. 8 without many of the athletes.
The International Olympic Committee is aware that some countries have decided to put their final training bases outside Beijing. That is "not for us to make a judgment or comment," said Giselle Davies, an IOC spokeswoman. She said she was confident that this would not spoil the collegial spirit of the event.
"We have no doubt that once the Games kick off that the atmosphere will be there of all the athletes being together and bringing what's magical about the Games," Davies said.
Situated in a basin where smoke from factories and construction and dust from desert storms gather and shroud the city for days, Beijing has struggled to control air pollution for several years. To prepare for the Olympics, the city has spent $16.4 billion, moving the heaviest polluters outside its borders, planting trees, rerouting traffic and inducing rain.
Over the past few months, the Chinese government has vacillated on whether it would close factories or ban cars during the Olympics. The heads of companies in the area have asked that no action be taken, warning of devastating economic consequences if it were, while some foreign Olympic teams have pushed China to close everything for three weeks before the Games. The Beijing News reported this week that China could reduce traffic by half during the Games.
Recent measurements show that on some days the amount of smoke and dust particles in the air exceeds by three to 12 times the maximum deemed safe by the World Health Organization. So while some teams say they are encouraged by the progress, they are preparing for the worst. Jacques Rogge, the head of the International Olympic Committee, has said events could be rescheduled if the air quality does not meet safety standards on a given day.
"The magnitude of the pollution in Beijing is not something we know how to deal with. It's a foreign environment. It's like feeding an athlete poison," said David Martin, a respiratory expert who is helping train U.S. marathoners.
Frank Filiberto, a physician for the U.S. boxing team, thought concerns about Beijing's pollution were exaggerated -- until he came to visit.
|
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.
| 13.369565 | 0.521739 | 0.608696 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012303895.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012303895.html
|
A Legacy That Remains To Be Seen
|
2008012619
|
Eerie-strange, really, when a famous actor dies unexpectedly. His unreleased work eventually appears, like tomorrow's bloom on a rose cut today.
Life after death for Heath Ledger, who died at 28 on Tuesday in Manhattan, includes "The Dark Knight," a movie scheduled to be released this summer, with Christian Bale reprising his role as Batman, and Ledger as his archnemesis, the Joker.
Ledger's family said his death had to be accidental, but almost none of the questions swirling around the case were answered yesterday. The medical examiner's initial autopsy results were inconclusive, and further tests could take more than a week. The New York Police Department offered more details about items found in Ledger's apartment -- a rolled-up $20 bill, half a dozen different prescription medicines -- but shied away from suggesting a theory on how Ledger died. President Bush postponed a White House event about prescription drug abuse prevention.
As friends and fans continue to express grief and puzzlement, there are also unanswered professional questions. For producers, directors and studio marketing armies -- who also mourn -- the untimely demise presents special challenges.
"It's spooky," says Peter Bart, editor in chief of Variety magazine. Bart was a studio executive for 17 years. During his tenure, he says, two stars died while making films. Robert Shaw suffered a heart attack in 1978 before finishing "Avalanche Express." And Natalie Wood drowned in 1981 while filming "Brainstorm" with Christopher Walken.
Sudden death "puts the studio and the marketing people in a very depressed state," Bart says. "It's a terrible thing to have to deal with."
Studios need "a suitable gap" before releasing a star-crossed movie, he says. Wood's "Brainstorm" did not do well at the box office, "but that wasn't her fault." It was, he adds, "a lousy movie."
There is no guarantee that the added publicity cloud following a star's death will hurt or help ticket sales, Bart says, "but some people really get curious to see someone's last performance."
Patricia King Hanson, historian at the American Film Institute in Los Angeles, says many screen actors' works have appeared posthumously. The first such actor that springs to her mind is Jean Harlow, who fell ill and died in 1937 before completing "Saratoga" with Clark Gable. "She was at the top of her career," Hanson says.
To finish the film, she says, "they took Harlow's double and reshot a couple of scenes." Harlow's stand-in wore a face-obscuring hat and the cinematographer shot her from a distance, Hanson says. The movie was released after Harlow's funeral and did fairly well.
Marilyn Monroe's unfinished movie "Something's Got to Give" was never released; the actress died in 1962. Monster man Bela Lugosi was working on "Plan 9 From Outer Space" when he died in 1956; the director's transparent efforts to disguise Lugosi's absence made a terrible film terribler. Brandon Lee was killed in 1993 on the set of "The Crow." The following year, John Candy died while filming "Wagons East!"
Just before the 1998 action flick "Small Soldiers" was released, star Phil Hartman was murdered by his wife. The movie was not well received. Hartman's death "brought a certain mortality to something that was supposed to be a goof-off," director Joe Dante told USA Today.
Oliver Reed passed away before "Gladiator" was finished; Ridley Scott used computer technology to insert Reed into certain scenes. Aaliyah, star of the 2002 film "Queen of the Damned," died in a plane crash before the movie was released. Actress-director Adrienne Shelly was murdered in Manhattan before she could see her 2007 film "Waitress" in commercial theaters.
Over the years, television has also been forced to deal with unexpected deaths. John Ritter died in 2003 while starring in the series "8 Simple Rules for Dating My Teenage Daughter." He also starred in a movie, "Bad Santa," released a few weeks after his death. The movie was dedicated to Ritter.
When Ledger died, he was in the middle of shooting another movie, Terry Gilliam's "The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus." Last night, Us magazine's Web site reported that everyone on the set in Vancouver, B.C., was told to go home, and the movie's future is in question.
One of the most world-changing examples of a young star dying in the middle of a dazzling career, says AFI historian Hanson, is James Dean. Like Ledger, Dean had finished shooting scenes of a major motion picture: "Giant."
Before releasing the movie, the director called for some changes in a scene where Dean is drunk and loud. "They had Nick Adams dub his voice," Hanson says.
"Giant" turned out to be a huge success. And Dean's fatal car crash, she says, secured his place in the Hollywood pantheon. "His death," adds Hanson, "almost kind of made him live longer."
|
Get style news headlines from The Washington Post, including entertainment news, comics, horoscopes, crossword, TV, Dear Abby. arts/theater, Sunday Source and weekend section. Washington Post columnists, movie/book reviews, Carolyn Hax, Tom Shales.
| 20.019608 | 0.352941 | 0.352941 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/12/20/DI2007122001481.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/12/20/DI2007122001481.html
|
Goss's Garage - washingtonpost.com
|
2008012619
|
He visits right here once a month to answer questions about fixing your car.
For more auto advice and industry news, visit our Cars section.
washingtonpost.com: Good morning. Pat Goss is running late. He should be starting shortly.
Northeast D.C.: Pat: I am usually quite particular about applying the correct torque to my wheel lug nuts when rotating my tires. I have used a click torque wrench up to this point, however, I like the promise of the torque stick approach (easier!) I recently purchased (from SnapOn) a torque stick that is applicable to my vehicle's wheel lugs specs. Can I use this with my impact wrench and be comfortable that I am not going to damage my discs, etc when I install my lugs?
Pat Goss: You have to use it with an impact wrench. But you have to be schooled in how to use it properly and the results will be okay. The torque wrench is still far superior.
Princeton, N.J.: Question about snow tires, I have them mounted on an extra sets of rims and I have a short commute. I'd guess I am probably putting less than 2-3k miles on them each season. What is the useful life expectancy assuming they still have tread left and aren't dried out or cracking? Does the tires compound change over time to where they lose their grippy-ness in bad conditions? Thanks.
Pat Goss: They last up to five or six years. As far as I know there is no significant change in the tread composition. At least not until you start seeing cracks. But because snow tires wear rapidly on dry pavement this should not be an issue.
Laurel, Md.: Pat, any truth to this statement about making your battery work better on a cold morning? "On those very cold mornings,you can help your car start by turning on the lights for a few minutes before starting your car. It warms up the battery and helps it start better. The the current flowing through the internal battery resistance generates some heat in the battery making it more efficient." I think it is a myth?
Pat Goss: It is an old trick to get a car with a dead battery started. It does work occasionally in those circumstances but it should have no effect on battery life.
Los Angeles: I appreciate your chats, Pat. You often stress regular transmission flushes. I assume you're speaking of an automatic. Does the same advice apply to manual transmissions? This applies to my 2001 Passat 4 cyl turbo with about 85k mi. I've had the timing belt/thermostat/water pump job done at my mechanic's suggestion, both CV boots have needed replacing, brakes flushed every couple of years, vacuum hoses replaced after a check engine light where that was the suggested remedy, and of course two ignition coils failed for which we replaced all three remaining when the second one failed; I understand coil failure is endemic for this model. But otherwise it's near perfection, and to me that's a reasonable set of repairs. (Is it?) I'm also wondering what sort of failures I should expect in the next couple of years -- and beyond, perhaps, as I plan to keep it another 5-10 years if it will last. I understand a new clutch is pretty expensive.
Pat Goss: No you do not flush manual transmissions but the fluid in them should be changed regularly. Look for electrical problems and not much else unless you are skimping on oil changes and oil quality. By the way the coils were covered by a recall.
Arlington, Va.: Is it true that a 1998 AWD Mercury Mountaineer has three catalytic converters? If so, what would you estimate it would cost to replace all of them? Thanks.
Pat Goss: Yes many cars have either three or four converters. Average on the Ford SUV style is about $1,300 to $1,500. But look in the aftermarket before buying, there are sometimes less costly converters that meet government requirements and have the same warranty as replcement OEM cats for a LOT LESS money.
Takoma Park, Md.: I have a '03 Honda Element that I love. I usually just take it to Jiffy Lube and I've started putting synthetic oil in for the oil changes about two years ago. Last time I was in they noticed I was low on brake fluid and said they don't top that off but to just go and buy brake fluid and add it. It looks simple enough. I bought the brake fluid recommended for ABS brakes but am afraid to add it since my owners manual said to NEVER put anything in but HONDA brake fluid. I don't know if this is just Honda making sure I spend money on their products or if it would really make a difference. Thanks for your response.
Pat Goss: Virtually all manufacturers say the same thing. Hey it does drive a few folks back to the dealer to buy their products and that is a good thing for the dealers. But if you are using non-Honda fluid make sure it has the proper rating and that is not ABS. Your car probably requires DOT 3 or DOT 4 fluid. Also the low fluid means it is time for a brake check --- it would be advisable to have them checked yesterday.
Washington, D.C.: Hi Pat: Can a (positive) battery cable be the cause of corrosion? Had a vehicle die on us this week as the result of massive corrosion (completely severed the band around the positive terminal). The garage replaced the entire length of the cable and said the battery was fine, but the corrosion I saw seemed consistent with what I recall from the pre-maintenance-free battery days -- meaning acid-related. And there were signs of arcing, as well (black on the inside edges of the rubber terminal cover). Thanks.
Pat Goss: No the cable does not cause corrosion, battery acid or battery fumes do. This could mean one of two things --- you are not having yearly service performed on the battery cables and therefore not having the anti-corrosion pads and chemicals renewed or you have a bad seal around the positive battery post. A bad seal usually comes from someone being very ham-fisted when working on the battery. This causes the seal to open and acid laden fumes then come up around the cable and eat it alive.
Washington, D.C.: Is an 'all-wheel' alignment really that much better than a front-end wheel alignment? Does one offer more benefit over the other on a front-wheel drive vehicle?
Pat Goss: All-wheel or more corretcly four-wheel alignment is not an option. Either the car needs one or the car does not need one. The only way to know is to connect the alignment equipment to the car and take readings. The first thing the equipment does is read the settings on the rear wheels. If the settings on the rear wheels are good (YOU DO NOT NEED A FOUR_WHEEL ALIGNMENT) there is absolutely NO reason to align the rear wheels. If the rear settings are incorrect you will need a four-wheel alignment. Be exceedingly cautious of any shop that offers or suggests a four wheel alignment before the car has been checked on the alignment machine. Either they have no clue what they are doing or they are greedy.
Ocala, Fla.: Pat, nitrogen filled tires: beneficial or hype?
Pat Goss: Not a miracle but definitely a benefit. The primary advantage comes from the lack of moisture in Nitrogen. I have a NitroFill machine and find that my cars go a lot longer between topping off and since I have converted I have had no problems with tire pressure sensors or corrosion on the inside of my alloy wheels.
Seattle: Pat, I have the dumbest problem in the world, but I guess what bugs you, bugs you. Anyway, I have a 2005 Acura TSX that I love in every way -- it's well-appointed, good looking, quick, handles terrific has a great stereo. Except there's one thing that is making me want to sell it -- I have to fill the tank too often. It's not fuel economy -- I get about 22-24 mpg in mostly urban/suburban driving, which is just fine -- it's that the 14-gallon tank basically gives me about 300 miles between fill-ups, and I just find it a pain to have to go the gas station so much. So -- since I can't imagine there's anything I can do about increasing my car's range, I'd like to know if there's a car that's as likeable but gives me a lot longer between gas-station visits.
Pat Goss: I really doubt it unless you are ready to go to a diesel or a hybrid. I find the same thing on my car. I had a diesel Mercedes but had a lot of little problems with it and traded for a domestic gas car with a small tank. With the diesel I could go 600 or more miles between refuelling but mot now the best I can do is slightly over 300. The reason I say not likely is that carrying a lot of fuel around costs money because it reduces fuel mileage. To make cars more fuel efficient there hass been a trend toward smaller tanks for more miles per gallon. But if you want more information about tank size miles per gallon and range go to fuel economy dot gov.
Columbia, Md.: Someone told me the other day that if I would put high test gas in my car that I would be better gas mileage. Is that correct? My car, an Escort 1999 ZX2, does not call for this grade of gas. Would it add enough mileage to make the difference in price worth it? Any problems to the engine in using it? Thanks.
Pat Goss: That's pure bunk!
Falls Church, Va.:2006 Chevy HHR owner here. Warranty just expired, and -- just my luck -- the heating is going out. Do you know why the heater will function only on full-blast, and not on any of the lower settings?
Pat Goss: Blower module, switch, or blower resistor are the most common causes.
Warrenton, Va.: Pat, can you convert one of the dash spaces in a 2005 Corolla to a dash ashtray with a light? I find that the cup is dangerious, you tend to take your eyes off the road more than if it was in the dash.
Pat Goss: I'm sure it could be done but it might become involved. Due to the lack of smokers these days most cars no longer even have ash trays except as an option. Also there used to be lots of accessory ash trays in auto parts stores but I don't know if they still exist. You might look in the auto stores to see if someone still makes one of the add-ons.
Atlanta: 2006 Honda Civic. My brakes refuse to stop squeaking. I've taken it a non-dealer shop repeatedly. They can't find the squeak, but assure me the car is "fine." Do I just gather my pennies and go to the dealer?
Pat Goss: It isn't the name over the door it is the quality of the technician working on the car. Some independent techs would do fine and some dealer techs would do fine. The problem is finding the one that knows how to make brakes quiet. There are several steps involved in getting rid of brake noises and a really qualified tech should be able to take care of the problem in about an hour. That is providing you don't have cheap pads.
Silver Spring, Md.: Pat, why do you think so many high price cars like BMW's, and Jaguars end up breaking down so much in the first three years?
Pat Goss: I wasn't aware that they did. They used to but my experience has been that later ones are quite reliable.
Clifton, Va.: Actually, Pat, the heat cycles can have effect on the rubber compounds etc. used in snow tires. Several years of heat cycles will render these compunds useless. The compounds that gave you extra grip in snow and ice will be gone. These compounds are what make the difference between a real snow tire and a AT tire.
Pat Goss: If you say so!
Adelphi, Md.: Pat, what is the correct type of "dry gas" to use, methanol or isopropyl alcohol? How often should I add it? I have heard every fill up in the winter and monthly the rest of the year. Thanks.
Pat Goss: The dry gas to use --- the only dry fgas to use is isopropyl dry gas. The methyl products only help prevent freezing they do help get the water out of the tank. Use isopropyl dry gas once every month twelve months of the year. One conatiner once a month.
Anonymous: For Seattle: The same thing drives me crazy on my RX300. My solution has been to find a few full-service gas stations around me. I'm a lot less bothered by needing to fill up all the time if I'm not the one who has to do it.
Pat Goss: Tough thing to do these days but you're right I found one as well and it does make the chore less painful.
Washington, D.C.: What type of car do you drive and do you have any problems with it?
Pat Goss: I have three cars: 2004 V8 Explorer, 2006 Mustang GT convertible, 2007 Cadillac DTS Performance Sedan. The only problem I have had with any of the three is with the miserable tires on the Cadillac. Bagain basement and no end of aggravation.
Alexandria, Va.: Hi Pat, I broke a drillbit tip about a 1/4 inch long trying to drill out a broken bolt. Unfortunately I think it fell in the area where the cam, rocker arm assembly and valve springs are (lots of nooks and crannies). The bolt holds down the valve cover gasket. Question is will that broken tip eventually make it into the oil filter or the bottom of the oil pan? Thank you.
Pat Goss: Yipe! DO NOT EVEN engage the starter motor much less start the engine until the piece has been extracted from the engine. It probably will never hurt anything but it could and if it does the damage could be horrific.
Trenton, N.J.: What are you seeing these days on the longevity of the latest CVT transmissions? One of the first I remember was the Justy I believe in the 80's. But how are all the current Nissans and Fords holding up? Did Ford drop them for a 6sp auto because of mechanical issues, or did buyers just not like them? Do they need similar maintenance to a regular auto? Thanks.
Pat Goss: Ford dropped the CVT because of poor sales is what I am told. We see no problems and never have seen problems even with the early Subaru and Honda versions.
Kansas City: Pat, just curious -- do you detail your cars regularly? While we are learning lots of tips about taking car of our cars under the hood from you, I was wondering if you have any day-by-day tips about maintaining the interior and exterior as well. You must see cars that run the gamut from filthy to sublime. What things do you see most neglected that could be simple ways to keep cars looking sharp all around? Thanks.
Pat Goss: One of the most common mistakes I see comes from the driver who believed the sales person who told them they don't have to wax their new car because of some miracle paint or sealant. Wash your car weekly, if possible, wax it quartely, clean the leather and plastic inside (body oils must be removed) keep the brake dust off the wheels and be careful about protectants as many are not beneficial except to appearance.
Silver Spring, Md.: Pat, thanks for these chats. A while back in one of these chats you had mentioned seeing some issues with the 2007 Camry. Can you elaborate on that and inform us if they've been fixed for 2008?
Pat Goss: Mostly performance issues, especialy hesitation during acceleration.
Northwest, D.C.: Hi Pat. I have a 2007 Hyndai with about 4,700 miles. The manual says I'm supposed to check my tire pressure and oil at least once per month, but I only drive the car on the weekends, and even then, it's usually just for short trips to grocery store and dry cleaners. Am I in danger of getting a flat or running on dirty oil if I don't check my tire pressure and oil? I know I should, but I'm a typical girl -- I love driving but hate the maintenance. (And my boyfriend knows nothing about cars, so he's no help.)
Pat Goss: You are giving your poor car some of the hardest use it could possibly get. First tires don't care whether you drive the car or it sits, air escapes so they must be checked at least monthly. Oil could be a real problem unless you step up your maintanenace to time rather than mileage. All owner's manuals give a mileage interval for services for people who drive a reasonble distance. But they also give a time interval for those who drive a very little. You need to perform service based on time not miles.
Reisterstown, Md.: Hi, Pat, my chemistry teacher explained the turning on the lights trick, the current generated warms the electrolyte solution allowing starting a little more quickly. However, he also explained that this method is only really useful in climates where the winter temperatures drop below 32F on a regular basis, when the electrolyte solution will come near to freezing solid. Here in Maryland there is no noticeable difference. See you on the back roads of Owings Mills!
Pat Goss: Absolutely correct. The trick works well in Alaska and if you have a dead battery it can sometimes get the car started. Lights on for 0ne minute then try to start the car.
Wheaton, Md.: Pat, I have an '80 Nissan Frontier 5 speed. What can I do about this, when on below freezing mornings my emergencey brake locks and when I release the emergency brake the vehicle will not move normally when in gear and giving it gas.
Pat Goss: Check for faulty seals in the parking brake cables, proper lubrication of the brake system, and proper friction material on the rear brakes.
Herndon, Va.: Pat, I received an Autocommand remote start/alarm kit as present for my '03 Accord, which already has an alarm, key fob, trunk release. Are those devices expensive to install and would installing it be risky to the cars current systems? I really don't need the remote start as the car is garaged. I'm thinking about giving it to my wife for her much older Camry, which doesn't have those features.
Pat Goss: Remote starter systems have very few advantages and some have a lot of disadvantages. These systems are usually easy to install providing the technician follows directions carefully. We had one a few weeks back that was connected into the air bag system -- EGAD! Some completely disable the factory alarm, etc. so you have to make sure what affect this individual system would have on your car and if you don't have a specific need don't use it.
Fairfax, Va.: I have a 1999 Mazda Protege that runs fine, except when the temperature is below freezing. Then it starts and runs, but will not go into gear when it's put in drive, and will not move forward. If I press really hard on the accelerator sometimes I can get it to lurch forward, but I don't think that's good for the engine! It also causes a small amount of antifreeze to squirt out on the pavement, though I don't believe I have an antifreeze leak; maybe it's coming from the overflow tank. Do you have any idea what the problem might be? Thank you.
Pat Goss: You need to have the transmission checked. Sounds like a hardened seal inside the trans.
Alexandria, Va.: Pat -- I purchased a 2008 Chrysler Sebring convertible (with the mid-range V-6 engine) last August to use at a weekend home. Consequently, it gets very little time on the road... the current mileage is about 1,400 miles. I took the car to the dealer at 3 months and asked about routine service (oil change, etc.) They told me that since the car gets little use, as long as the oil is clean, I could wait to change it until it has more miles on it. Does this make sense? How should we maintain a vehicle that gets little regular driving? Thanks.
Pat Goss: No it does not. OIl should be changed at leats every six months.
Gaithersburg, Md.: Hi Pat. I have a 9-year-old cougar with about 150K miles. I've noticed lately that when I have the turn signal on, the "turn signal" light inside the car will turn off, and the indicator sound will go off. If I turn the signal off and then on again, it is fine... for the next couple of seconds. What do you think causes this?
Pat Goss: Check the ground wires on the bulb sockets and the sockets themselves. If all is okay check the flasher module.
Anonymous: Given the price of gas, I'll be driving my 1999 Toyota van more this summer across country for two family reunions -- probably a total of 5,000 miles over two long trips. I have 180,000 miles on the Sienna now and maintain it regularly. Aside from having my mechanic look it over before I leave, do you have any suggestions for preparing for any other potential problems? Thank you.
Pat Goss: Actually no! What you propose is right. That is if your technician knows how to look for impending problems not just broken parts.
Vienna, Va.: Hi Pat, I'm submitting really early because I'll be at a meeting during your chat. I have a 2007 Nissan Altima 2.5S with around 3,500 miles on it. I took it to get an oil change a few hundred miles ago and they advised me to use synthetic oil instead of standard (of course it was over $20 more for synthetic). I thought you only used synthetic if you had a high mileage car or it was a luxury car. So this may be a dumb question, but should I use synthetic oil instead and what are the advantages?
Pat Goss: If you want to keep a car for a very long time (in miles) use synthetic from the beginning as it can provide up to four times longer engine life. You would not use it on a worn engine.
Frederick, Md.: Pat, a question on tire rotation: I have a new Jeep Wrangler with a full size spare. I had the tires rotated at the dealer recently, and they only rotated the 4. I thought that the spare should be rotated in. I asked, but they said that isn't normal. What would you do? Thanks.
Pat Goss: Some people use the five tire rotation but most do not when they find out how much extra it costs. To do a five tire rotation requires removing the spare tire cover, unbolting the spare, then replacing the spare after the job is done. Takes about 15 minutes and there is an extra charge. That extra charge usually negates any savings in tire wear but you have to ask the price then decide.
Manassas, Va.: Hi Pat, question about Ethanol containing fuels. Is dry gas really still needed with these? I am putting 10% ethanol gas in my truck and i cannot see what additional effect adding a small pint of isopropyl alcohol will do in addition. I know water will be absorbed (or more accurately dissoved in the ethanol).
Pat Goss: Yes you need Isopropyl dry gas more than ever now that gas contains Ethanol. Ethanol attracts water so there is more that accumulates in everyones fuel tank.
Rockville, Md.: Hey Pat, I have a simple question, I think. My 1999 Nissan Maxima's AC/heater fan only works on the highest setting but the fan will not turn on for the lower ones. I thought it was a blown fuse but I didn't see one. Any ideas on what it may be? Thanks.
Pat Goss: Sorry to call it quits but time has run out. Thank you for participating, I really appreciate it. Until next time please support our troops and please everyone -- drive gently!
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.
| 119.097561 | 0.634146 | 0.829268 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/10/DI2008011002866.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/10/DI2008011002866.html
|
Celebritology Live: Remembering Heath Ledger
|
2008012619
|
When stars shave their heads, couch-jump, spend countless minutes in jail, commit a fashion faux pas and/or other random acts of ego-inspired inanity, washingtonpost.com Celebritology blogger Liz Kelly is on the job. Every weekday, Liz shares the buzz, offers perspective and provides crucial links to juicy alternate news sources and, of course, takes your reaction in her daily blog.
Join Liz LIVE every Thursday at 2 p.m. ET to gab about the latest celebrity pairings (and splittings), rising stars (and falling ones), and get the scoop on the latest gossip making waves across the Web.
In her pre-celeb obsessed days, Liz ran washingtonpost.com's Discussions section, where she enjoyed talking to really interesting people -- including some Post reporters, Busta Rhymes and Elmo (as in "Tickle Me") -- on the phone. She still produces both Carolyn Hax's advice discussion and Gene Weingarten's Chatological Humor.
Liz Kelly: Okay, sorry about last week. I punked out in the face of a little snow. What can I say? I'm a true Washingtonian. We freak at the sight of the first flake. A depressing week for celeb watchers with the death of Heath Ledger. We'll talk about that and much more in the next hour. So grab some tea, pull up a chair and send in your questions. Let's get started...
Liz Kelly: And I am shocked, shocked I tell you, about the apathy most of you are displaying for Sean Combs's naming dilemma. For those of you who did vote, it would seem "Sir Puffs-a-Lot" is currently leading the poll.
Bethesda, Md.: What's your take on the use of tabloid celebrity "journalists" like Perez Hilton and TMZ as SOURCES of celebrity news (pardon the oxymoron)? Why are they never challenged on the rumors, innuendoes, or outright falsehoods they publish on their Web sites? And why do so many celebrities seem to like them or even court them? I personally find that revolting.
My own theory is that Hilton, TMZ, etc., are blackmailing celebrities into submission. The ones that get hit hardest on their sites are the ones who don't suck up to them. But of course I couldn't publish that in a blog or anything, since I have no evidence.
Liz Kelly: Actually, I challenge you on your assertion that no one challenges Perez Hilton or TMZ. In fact, one challenger just lost her defamation case (and approx. $85K) to Perez Hilton. So, it does happen. And while not 100 percent accurate 100 percent of the time, TMZ.com is often the go to place for breaking celebrity news. And when they're wrong or mistaken, they often admit to that. Is the damage already done? Sure, but here's the thing: For many afficionados of celebrity news, it's not necessarily the cold hard facts that are so interesting, but the art of innuendo and salaciousness that has been perfected in the gossip realm. So, f'rinstance, while we can usually immediately discount a headline that reads "Jennifer Aniston Had Torrid Affair with Angelina," we can simultaneously appreciate the effort -- the daring, the unashamed outrageousness and the image conjured. And I don't know that I'd go so far as to say that these sites are "blackmailing celebs into submission." Yes, some do court them -- but no more so than they courted (and continue to court) print tabloids for a little attention.
There seems to be so much information floating around regarding Heath Ledger's death. One thing that I am confused about is just the timing. If the housekeeper and masseuse found Heath at 2:45 p.m., shouldn't they have called 911 immediately for help? From what I have read, it sounds like they didn't call until after 3 p.m. Frankly, if this is correct I am stunned. If this is all true, I wonder why more hasn't been made about this strange timing. And supposedly the masseuse called Mary Kate Olsen and her bodyguard?
Maybe you have better information than all of us? Thanks.
Liz Kelly: I don't think we know enough to start finding fault. At the very least, if they were sure he was beyond help they were probably scared and not sure how to react. Hence the delay and the misguided call to an Olsen twin.
I have to say -- I think your blog post about Heath Ledger was way off. We don't know what happened. You're right that we don't know the secret lives of celebrities and we often can't see things like this coming. But you're interpreting this as if we was a drug addict -- something we don't know. What special insight into his life do you have to jump to that conclusion? Sorry Liz, I think the post might be in bad taste.
Liz Kelly: I appreciate your opinion, but let me try to explicate that post a bit further. That post was written within an hour of hearing of Ledger's death and reflects my immediate reaction. Heath seemed like a nice guy and it was almost inconceivable for him to go so quickly and in the way that he did. You're right. We don't have all the facts yet and I tried to make that clear in the post. Maybe I did a bad job of it, but I said something about us not knowing if his death was accidental or intentional. But what is undeniably true is that his death instantly invoked the drug-related deaths of other young actors. And unless the medical examiner finds evidence of an aneurysm or some other as-yet undetected fatal health flaw, it looks as if drugs caused his death in one way or another.
Mississippi Gulf Coast: Tuned in to Nancy Grace the night Heath Ledger died and she was beside herself that no one on her distinguished panel had considered that he had been MURDERED. What about strangulation, she asked, or poisoned, has anyone checked the pills. I honestly thought her head would explode. It was disturbingly funny.
Liz Kelly: I wish her head would explode. She makes me ill.
Paul Newman: Any information on reports about Paul Newman being seriously ill following major surgery for cancer? He and Joanne Woodward have been the gold standard for Hollywood coupledom for so many years.
Liz Kelly: According to a very small handful of tabloids -- including the Enquirer -- Newman is actually on the mend following "secret surgery" for an unknown form of cancer. Get the full scoop, such as it is, here.
Paris, Hi: In case we all missed it, Paris Hilton once again endorsed Britney's mothering instincts. But most important, I have a new theme song for Britney's court appearances on E! "Should I Stay or Should I Go"
Liz Kelly: Ya know, I saw that headline yesterday ("Paris Says Britney's a Good Mom") and I just couldn't bear to include it in the Morning Mix.
Atlanta, Ga.: Hey Liz Kelly,
I'm shocked, shocked, shocked that you bailed because of snow. But I'll get over it since that's what Atlantans do, too.
So, what's your feeling about the Heath Ledger story and how many of the commentors on your blog have responded to what you've posted? Should you have mentioned the possible suicide? Should you have mentioned the rolled up $20 bill? Should readers lighten up and realize you're a reporter underneath the Celebritology cloak and are expected to "report" such facts as there are?
Liz Kelly: Hey, if it makes someone feel better to vent a little steam in my direction, so be it. I've got thick skin. I'd almost term it "hide" like.
Sir Puffs-a-Lot: Hasn't Mr. Combs found himself yet? Maybe he should he just go the Prince route and change his name to a symbol.
Liz Kelly: I can think of a couple.
RE: That post was written within an hour of hearing of Ledger's death and reflects my immediate reaction. : And the news we were given at the time was that he was surrounded by pills. We have since found out that wasn't the case, but easy enough in the first moments to assume drug overdose. In fact, almost impossible not to.
Liz Kelly: Actually, we don't know at all what the case is. The autopsy was inconclusive. We won't know for about 10 days -- if ever -- what really happened there. There are many rumors swirling. His family says he'd never commit suicide, that he didn't have a drug problem. Friends say he'd been depressed since his split with Michelle Williams. That he had substance abuse problems in the past. Again, though, it's all hearsay at this point. I mean, when it comes right down to it, we still don't have the entire story on Anna Nicole Smith's death. Suicide? Accidental overdose? So I'd say the piece holds up.
Britney smitney: What about Jamie Lynne handing over her child to her mother so she can resume her "normal life"
Seriously. Let's talk about actions and consequences.
Liz Kelly: Well, here are the choices for this as-yet unborn kid: A high school aged mom or a stage mom. There is basically no sure fire good option in this case. Unless Angelina Jolie puts herself in the running.
Indianapolis: Unrelated to celebrities, what's your anticipation about the season premier of LOST next Thursday? Is this season gonna be better than the last?
Liz Kelly: I hope so. Last season was a transition season for "Lost" and one which ended up much better than it started. A lot has changed since the dark days of Nikki and Paulo. Producers have responded to criticisms of the show and already changed in response, the show is moving to an earlier time slot and -- most importantly -- "Lost" has a definite endpoint. So producers and writers now know exactly where they're going with this thing. All cause for optimism, I think.
Lost: Was watching my Lost Season 3 DVDs these past few weeks getting in the mood for the new episodes. Just watched the scene where Locke blew up the sub and went through frame by frame and it doesn't look like he actually blew it up. Just the dock.
Liz Kelly: This is probably the right moment to remind everyone that "Lost" is returning next week -- Thursday night at 9 ET. Actually, it may be 8 next week because there will be a one-hour pre-show thingy. To prep, review last season's analyses and join in next Wednesday's last "Lost" Book Club chat about "Through the Looking Glass." And, of course, Jen Chaney and I will be back with our weekly post-show analysis, which should be posted each Friday by Noon.
Annandale Dude: Missing a day cuz of snow? What are you, some sort of snot-nosed brat?
Bailed because of snow?: Gee, Liz, and we were all worried about you all week. I'm glad you're okay. Well, that, and I'm glad you're back because every Thursday when I think how boring my week has been at work, I brighten up when I realize I will be spending my lunch hour chatting about celebs.
Liz Kelly: Awww, thanks. I'm sorry. It won't happen again because I've now got the Internets up and running at Celebritology central. So snow is no longer an issue.
Is it kerfuffle or kerfluffle -- either way is has to be one of the top ten words ever.
Liz Kelly: I've always used the "Kerfuffle" variation. "Fuff" is much funnier and more satisfying to say than boring old "fluff."
Chicago, Ill.: I'd just like to note that it's -4 degrees F here in Chicago, about --20 with the wind chill, and I dragged my butt out of bed to stand on a street corner, wait for a bus and go to work. A little bit of snow? Sheesh.
Liz Kelly: As I said, I'm a wimp and I deserve every bit of pointing and laughing you guys are doing right now. Also, this is why you will not see me living in Chicago.
Methinks: I watched the (WaPo) Sally Quinn "On Faith" interview with Richard Gere and was struck by the difference between that video and the Tom Cruise Scientology rant/screed. I don't subscribe to Gere's religious beliefs but I don't think he's a cream-faced loon either. One would think Cruise would be a little more concerned about perception since it tends to become people's reality.
washingtonpost.com: Divine Impulses: Being a Buddhist (Richard Gere)
Liz Kelly: That Richard Gere sure gets around. He was on "The Simpsons" not long ago, either.
Washington, D.C.: So, Liz... if you died unexpectedly, what would your surroundings tell the paparazzi about YOU? (The key to the game is to think like a gossip rag headline writer.)
Liz Kelly: Blogger ODs on Chocolate. Dog Biscuits Found Near Body.
Liz Kelly: Meaning, point taken.
Best Actress Oscar noms: None of the actresses nominated appeared in movies seen by more than a tiny fraction of the population, except Ellen Page in Juno which was a "small" film by Hollywood standards. Seems like every year we lament the lack of real opportunities for women to shine in mainstream Hollywood films.
Liz Kelly: Another way to look at this is that maybe more people need to get out to the movie theater to see this year's other nominees -- I haven't seen them all yet, but I can happily report that Laura Linney ("The Savages") and Marion Cotillard ("La Vie En Rose") shine plenty. In addition, of course, to Ellen Page who you already mentioned. As for mainstream opportunities -- right you are, there aren't enough -- but the Oscars don't typically highlight box office-friendly fare. Something about art and profitability not always walking parallel paths.
Pneumonia survivor: Re Heath Ledger: Even if he took no drugs, pneumonia alone can be enough to kill, especially if he was run-down and sleep-deprived to start with. It darn near got me, and I'm a clean, sober vegetarian who walked daily! See Post article last month "Virus Starts Like a Cold But Can Turn Into a Killer" at Virus Starts Like a Cold But Can Turn Into a Killer
Liz Kelly: Thanks... at this point anything is possible.
Brit and paps: What do you make of Britney's recent friendships with paparazzi? First there was Adnan, and now she invites another into her car? Do you think these are just the only people she can relate to? Or she sees them so much that they are now all pals?
Liz Kelly: I think these may be the only people who will willingly step into close quarters with Brit. I saw a report this morning -- I didn't use it in the blog because I couldn't find it in more than one place -- about folks close to Brit saying she may actually have multiple personality disorder. That she'll walk into a room as one person and emerge as another. Which would explain the on-again/off-again British accent and wildly varying looks/wigs.
What about his ex?: Has Michelle Williams said anything about her ex's death? I would think the reporters would be after her for comment since they so recently broke up. Poor lady. Poor Matilda, too.
Liz Kelly: Not yet, no. And at this point I wouldn't expect anything beyond a statment from a rep saying she's deeply saddened.
Unless Angelina Jolie puts herself in the running. : Cuz the woman who admits to not paying much attention to one of her children because she, unlike the other two, was lucky enough to be born into good circumstances is a good mom? Yeah, there's Mom of the Year material.
Liz Kelly: Oh please, she made an offhand comment about one of her kids. I find it hard to believe she's not giving Shiloh the same love and attention she seems to lavish on her other children.
LOST in Chantilly, Va.: So, inquiring minds want to know: Will there be a recap episode to tease us with before the season premiere on 1/31?
I can go to abc.com and get caught up in 8m15s (note reference to flight number), but I'd rather sit on my couch and fast-forward through TiVo.
Also, what's this season supposed to be about? Flash-forwards? Off island? The monster wreaking havoc on NYC?
Liz Kelly: Yes, there will be a one-hour pre-show to get us all geared up. Also, expect a lot of background in the next-day analyses from Jen and me. She's actually gone back and rewatched last season while I, slacker that I am, have not. (It snowed and I couldn't get to my DVD player). So I'm sure I'll have lots of questions which Jen will answer in our analysis. We don't know yet what this season will be about. All I know is that the final episode of last season took us to an entirely different place in the "Lost" continuum -- into the future and with the imminent arrival of newcomers to the island. I expect we'll pick up where we left off.
Fairfax, Va.: I was very sad to see that Suzanne Pleshette died. Because of your great youth you might not remember watching her on the Bob Newhart show. At the time she was inspiring to many young women by showing that you could be both independent and married to a nice doctor.
Liz Kelly: I do remember Suzanne and "The Bob Newhart Show" very well. It's filed in the same place in my brain as "Love American Style." Agreed -- she was a classy woman and a great actress. She'll be missed.
Jake Gyllenhaal: Obviously no comment from Jake about the loss of his friend at such a difficult time. One hopes as Matilda's godfather he will step up to help Michelle Williams sometimes.
Liz Kelly: I'm sure Michelle's friends are gathering around her now to offer love and support. Mathilda's godmother, interestingly, is actress busy Philipps, who you might remember as Kim Kelly from "Freaks and Geeks" and Audrey Liddell from "Dawson's Creek."
It has to be said: Cocoa Puff
Liz Kelly: Thank you. Your work is done.
Washington, D.C.: Did you hear that John Travola said, "I would give back all of my awards and my nominations just to have him back again¿" Did this sicken anyone as much as it did me? It shocked me how out of touch someone had to be to say that.
Liz Kelly: Well, he was approached soon after hearing about Heath's death. It's a gut reaction. I'm glad, though, that he is willing to give up something so vital to his happiness and welfare as his "awards and nominations."
Silver Spring, Md.: Is it possible for a public figure to be anything but "deeply saddened" in the shadow of bad news or "thrilled" when something good happens. It's scary to hear or read everyday people (non-public figures or non-media types) starting to talk like this. Also interesting to hear people who probably didn't know Heath Ledger had a kid or couldn't tell you the name of said child now asking how Baby Matilda is. Can't we just go back to the good old days of posting voice mails from local school administrator wives!
Liz Kelly: Oh, so it doesn't bug you that people in Kalamazoo, Mich., now know there's a Lake Braddock High School?
Reston, Va.: I have to say I have come a full circle with celebrity gossip blogs and all other media outlets. Your blog after Heath's death and yesterday's chat with Reliable Sources columnists put me off so much. Amy started off with "I will happily take any questions on Heath's death" and after a while she said, "I will happily post opinion in a minute about his whole thing but first ..." I am not quoting word to word here, but "happily"? Somehow we expect more careful usage from you and them -- even if you are only celebrity blog wannabes -- may be b'coz you work for a respectable newspaper.
Liz Kelly: Okay, thanks for weighing in.
Ann Arbor, Mich.: Do you think fear of the press played into calling/not calling 911 when Heath was found? I doubt it would have helped, but when I first heard that the masseuse called Mary-Kate, I thought that the first choice would be to avoid calling a public emergency service for fear of the papparazi.
Liz Kelly: I certainly wouldn't be surprised. Paps routinely monitor police and rescue emergency lines. Perhaps the masseuse thought there was some quieter way in which the whole thing could be handled. Unfortunately, a celebrity death' is news and at some point everyone's going to find out.
Capitol Hill, D.C.: The only Heath Ledger film I've ever seen was Brokeback Mountain. It was beautifully done, and Ledger's portrayal of Ennis Del Mar was nothing short of brilliant. As a gay man I'm feeling like I should be feeling something about his untimely death but I'm just not feeling it. I'm feeling sad for not feeling sad. What's up with that?
Liz Kelly: Of all the introspective navel-gazing you could possibly do to find your shortcomings, this is not the one to zero in on. In fact, your reaction sounds like a pretty sane reaction to me.
Washington, D.C.: While I was trying to wrap my head around the sadly comic Keystone Kops routine that celebrities deem appropriate for emergency medical situations ("Quick, he's unconscious, call an actress!" "Good lord, he may be dead, call a private security team!")I read that Sarah Larsen is moving in with George Clooney. Should we be looking forward to a baby bump soon?
Liz Kelly: I'm not sure how to answer without first consulting Miley Cyrus. I'll get back to you later in the show.
Re: Brit: "That she'll walk into a room as one person and emerge as another"... British accent, wigs. Actually, this is what someone who is PLAYING at multiple personality disorder would do. The real thing, and whether or not there even is such a thing remains a controvery, is far more complicated. Don't get me wrong, I think the fact that she may be playing MPD Dress Up is a pretty good indication that she's messed up, but I would not be surprised to find that SHE thinks this is her problem.
Liz Kelly: Agreed. And "playing" or "feigning" this disorder would go hand in hand with her apparent desire to be pregnant and wishful pregnancy test shopping spree.
Sean John/P. Diddy/Puff Daddy/Puffy/Diddy/whatever: Puffy Shirt?
Liz Kelly: Ooh, you. sir or madam. deserve a cigar.
N.Y. Giants: Liz Kelly, who are you picking in the Super Bowl?
McLean, Va.: So I take it you never played the "Bob Newhart" drinking game? You take a sip whenever someone says "Bob." How we loved the gentle rants of Marcia Wallace:
"Bob, Bob, Bob, Bob, Bob, Bob, Bob..."
Liz Kelly: I think I'd still be drunk.
Hicksville: RE; Heath Ledger. Just read on some Web page that he was dating Mary- Kate Olsen. Why? What is it about that skinny waif? She always has the deer in the headlights look in her photos. Is she supposed to be hot?
Liz Kelly: Yet he was also linked to an Australian model over the holidays -- Gemma Ward -- and to Helena Christiansen, who was apparently on her way to his apartment when he was discovered.
Origins of Fuff: Dorothy Parker said that "fuff" is the mysterious fuzzy flotsam that appears in the bottom of one's purse.
Liz Kelly: Which is very different from "fluff," -- which is the mysterious, fuzzy entity that is my blog.
Southern Maryland: Regardless of the cause of Ledger's death, do you think movie studios and other entertainment companies should offer guidance to young stars to help them deal with their sudden fame? It seems like the problem is not necessarily the temptations that come with fame, but that these can exacerbate any psychological or emotional issues that predated the fame.
Liz Kelly: Yes, sure, but that's no guarantee that more young stars will avoid the pitfalls of fame and ego-inflation.
Why do you think Heath Ledger's death has gotten such a huge amount of attention? Yes, he was a good actor, and yes, his death was tragic, but you'd think he was Elvis Presley the way people are carrying on. Obit on the front page of many newspapers. The NY Times Web site shut down its discussion forum about his death after they got more than 1,100 comments. It seems a little crazy. And surprising. If you had asked me a week ago to name, in terms of popularity, the top ten actors under age 30 (or even the top twenty) I don't think his name would have come to mind. Am I missing something?
Liz Kelly: Because it was a surprise. Because he was an actor still riding the momentum of a budding career. He'd wowed us in "Brokeback Mountain" and looked to be set to deliver a genre-busting performance as the Joker in "The Dark Knight." Because the circumstances surrounding his death are still unclear. Because the thirst for celebrity news continues to grow exponentially. Take your pick.
Fluff question because I'm getting upset by all of the Heath news: I didn't want to wait until tomorrow to ask Carolyn so maybe you can help. A friend and I are having a disagreement.
While lounging around watching TV is it weird/inappropriate for a grown man to drape his legs accross his mother's lap? What if he did it to his sister? Can a daughter put her legs across her mother's lap?
Liz Kelly: Umm, okay, I don't think we need Carolyn for this one. I believe I speak for all of us who maintain a healthy relationship with our parental units when I say: No in-family draping, s'il vous plait.
Lexington, Ky.: What about those a--hats that are planning on protesting at Ledger's memorial service? This is the same bunch that has anti-gay demonstrations at soldiers' funerals. Grrr.
Liz Kelly: Yeesh. I heard that this morning on the news. I won't even name the group here because I don't want them to have publicity, but their leader made some kind of inane statement about this being divine just desserts for Heath's portrayal of a gay cowboy. Honestly, I'd rather be dead than ever espouse that kind of twisted logic.
Arlington, Va.: How 'bout Fuff Daddy
Liz Kelly: Oooh! Fuff prevails!
Not in Burke, Va., but...: ...I did graduate from Lake Braddock.
Please note it's officially Lake Braddock Secondary School and not Lake Braddock High School.
And now, back to the important stuff.
No in-family draping, s'il vous plait.: Not even if they match the carpet?
Liz Kelly: Bite your tongue.
Liz Kelly: Your OWN tongue.
"deeply saddened" or "thrilled": I don't understand why that's scary. It's publicists talking. They have to say something. Would you rather they gave out every minute detail of how the celeb is really feeling? Don't they deserve some time to collect themselves in the face of bad or good news?
Liz Kelly: Exactly. There really are only a few basic human emotions when confronted with abrupt tragedy or elation. Why waste the time getting creative?
Oscars: Tilda Swinton in Michael Clayton was out of this world and a lot of people saw that. More should have, as it was a totally fabulous movie.
Liz Kelly: I haven't seen that yet. It's on my to-do list. Producer Rocci says she needs a suntan.
Men's Wear Dept, Tysons Corner: On Tuesday, Hank Stuever weighs into Weingarten's discussion about needing the incentive of having the subject be deceased to kick-start the Appreciation Muse.
Later on Tuesday, Heath Ledger dies.
On Wednesday, an appreciation of Heath Ledger, written by Hank Steuver, appears on the front page of the Style section.
Liz Kelly: I had the same thought, Men's Wear. But we can't possibly believe that Hank would go that far to prove his point. Can we?
Foggy Bottom, Washington, D.C.: Liz, I had sinus surgery last week (deviated septum, just like all the stars!) and when I heard the news of Heath Ledger's death, I was still in a somewhat drugged-up post-op phase. That night, I had a dream that you were my surgeon, Gene was my male nurse (murse?) and Heath was my roommate in the hospital. It was kind of a happy/sad dream. RIP, Heath!
PS: you were an excellent surgeon.
Liz Kelly: Oh boy. I just don't even know where to go with this one.
Arlington, Va.: That's funny how you mention that Busy Phillips being Matila's godmother. I rememeber noticing Kim Kelly at the Oscars in 2006 with the Brokeback Mountain crowd and I wondered whether she was there with Linda Cardellini from Freaks and Geeks or Michelle Williams. I suppose Katie Holmes is too magical these days to pal around with fellow Capesiders.
Anonymous: Brit has Multiple personality disorder? Now we know who showed up dancing at that awards show, her inner-Accountant.
Arlington, Va.: Unlike the Capitol Hill poster, I am a gay man who is sad about Ledger's death. Other well known actors passed on Brokeback, but Heath and Jake will always have my great respect for taking the roles. I don't feel like I lost family or a friend, but I had a deep respect for Ledger and am sad at the loss of such a talent.
Liz Kelly: Thank you for writing in, Arlington.
No no no: Amy Winehouse is in rehab? Thank goodness! Although, can she still sing her brilliant song now?
Liz Kelly: Yes yes yes. Here's the story. Let's hope it lasts more than 24 hours this time.
Dorothy Parker: Yay! Someone mentioned Dorothy Parker. For all you young whippersnappers in the audience, Dorothy is hugely witty. When asked to use horticulture in a sentence, she replied, "You can lead a whore to culture, but you can't make her think." Love that.
Liz Kelly: I normally wouldn't the sanction of that word here, but this is really education, right? She's also credited with: "Men don't make passes at girls who wear glasses," I think. There was a movie some years back in which the sometimes loathsome Jennifer Jason Leigh played Parker. It was pretty good in an Algonquin Round Table geek-fest kind of way.
Cutesy:: Diddy Fluffikins: a name-changing, producing cuddly kitten.
Liz Kelly: And he could tap into a younger audience by marketing a brand of Diddy Fluffikins onesies.
Washington, D.C.: Not to make light of death or anything, but my friend and I have a pact that if either of us unexpectedly dies, that we would go to each other's apts, and clear out any incriminating material. This is pretty important since he's still in the closet to his parents. We are Heath's age, so I got a frantic call to make sure our pact was still in place yesterday. EVERYONE NEEDS THIS PACT. Maybe Mary-Kate was his emergency person...
Liz Kelly: Somehow, I find that hard to believe. Though a solid plan, for sure.
Washington, D.C.: The protesters are just so upset that Heath made being a gay cowboy look so fun. Now all their vulnerable little boys will want to be gay cowboys.
Liz Kelly: I'm having a lot of fun in my head right now with that "Urban Cowboy" soundtrack song "Mama, don't let your babies grow up to be cowboys." Wasn't there a line about "smoking big cigars?"
Draping: I think daughter draping legs over mother's lap is okay, especially if room on the couch is limited. Son/mother or brother/sister -- NO.
Liz Kelly: I dunno. I think when said child reaches adulthood -- regardless of gender -- there are just acts of intimacy that become off limits. Hugs are okay, holding hands, pecks on the cheek. But leg draping? Nay.
Heath Ledger coverage: Was anyone else seriously disturbed by the paparazzi shots of Michelle Williams on her way to NYC? Please leave her and others grieving alone! While we (the public) are free to comment and speculate all we want, Michelle Williams, Heath's family, and others are people who have never wanted the spotlight on their personal lives and are being forced to live out their heartbreak in front of the cameras. Please, paps, give them space to deal with this privately and decide whether or how to address the public.
Liz Kelly: I linked to a story about her with one shot of her leaving Europe but steered clear of posting any myself. To shove a camera in her face (and the face of her two-year-old) at such a moment is cheap and low. I felt the same way last week when we were shown pix of a forlorn looking Gwyneth Paltrow leaving a New York hospital. My god -- she could've just had a huge health scare, lost a pregnancy, whatever -- she was clearly not in a position to deal with cameras. These are extreme examples of the double-edged sword that is celebrity. Unfortunately, the wall-to-wall pap coverage seems to come with the territory.
Hugh Laurie homeless?: Okay, not really. But tell me this guy doesn't look exactly like Hugh Laurie ("Dr. House") plus 20 years and some hard knocks. Air Force Veteran (Washington Post Photo)
Liz Kelly: Okay, this is too funny. This picture is from last week, yes? In fact, I believe someone made the same observation in the comments section of the blog. Was it you, I wonder, or are there others who have noticed the eerie resemblance? Personally, I think this poor guy looks like the aged lovechild of Hugh Laurie and Peter Fonda. With a smidgen of consumption thrown in. Poor guy. I wish there was something we could do to put them in touch. He'd make a great go-to guy for future flashes on "House."
Busy Phillips: She was TERRIFIC in F and G!!! I graduated from HS in 1981, the same year the show was set, and she was spot on some of the girls I knew!!!
Liz Kelly: She did indeed rock on "Freaks and Geeks." Although I didn't graduate high school until 1989, we had our share of Kim Kellys, too.
Displaced Washingtonian: Will the writers' strike ever end???
Liz Kelly: Yes. And I predict it will be before the Oscars.
Baltimore, Md.: I enjoyed Hank S.'s chat about Heath Ledger yesterday. What's he like (Hank, I mean). He seems like a good guy, might even be worthy of a man-crush but I have to know more about him before a full on bro-mance can ensue.
washingtonpost.com: Heath Ledger: His Life, Career and Death (Live Online, Hank Stuever, Jan. 23)
Liz Kelly: I don't know Hank well, but I would say he's totally crush-worthy in every way.
Re: Dorothy Parker Movie: Ms. Parker and the Vicious Circle. Add it to your NetFlix cue. Now.
Liz Kelly: Yes, that's it.
Kerfuffle : has always sounded like the most amazing, creamy-Bavarian dessert to me.
Liz Kelly: Kind of reminds me of my childhood assumption that lip stick and soaps of cake would taste firmly creamy and somehow sweet. I found out pretty quickly that wasn't the case, but I still salivate sometimes when looking at a brand new luscious tube of lipstick. I need to just stop this right now.
Draping: How 'bout feet-in-lap? That seems innocent enough. A couch is only so big, y'know.
Quipper snapper: Do you think anyone actually asked Dorothy Parker to use horticulture in a sentence? Great quote, but suspect scenario.
Liz, use agribusiness in a sentence please.
Liz Kelly: You can lead a whore to agribusiness, but you can't make her Monsanto.
Why Celebs call security people or publicists: When faced with a real emergency, most celebs say "what's that number you're supposed to call in an emergency? Quick, get me my publicist!"
Liz Kelly: Right. So not totally unusual that people who spend much of their time working for celebrities would think twice about how best to react to a potentially explosive situation.
Tom Cruise should have been nominated for an award for his performance in the Scientology video. He covered the whole gamut...disturbingly intense, exceedingly creepy, unintentionally hilarious, bat-guano crazeee.
Oh wait, that wasn't acting...Never mind.
Liz Kelly: Yes, it's his best work since Jerry Maguire.
Round Table, NYC: I was having coffee in the lobby of the Algonquin last summer and none other than David Carradine came strolling in. There's a big grand piano in the lobby and he started playing it. It could have been obnoxious but it was actually kind of cool. He was very friendly in a zen sort of way.
Liz Kelly: I love David Carradine. He's so full of himself.
Chicago, IL: "Not to make light of death or anything, but my friend and I have a pact that if either of us unexpectedly dies, that we would go to each other's apts, and clear out any incriminating material."
That was used in the very first episode of "Coupling," where Jeff talks about how he and Stephen are "porn pals"; they each had keys to the other's place and were charged with clearing out the porn in the event of a sudden death.
Liz Kelly: I believe Larry David and his fictional agent Jeff on "Curb Your Enthusiasm" also have a similar arrangement. Maybe this is more widespread than we realize.
Soaps of cake?: I think you need a nap...
Liz Kelly: Righto. Or It've been reading too much trippy "Through the Looking Glass."
RE: my friend and I have a pact that if either of us unexpectedly dies, that we would go to each other's apts, and clear out any incriminating material. : Well, just be careful you don't get charged with murder if you do this.
Liz Kelly: Right. That's an important part of the job to understand before accepting.
Baltimore, Md.: And the Jerry O'Connell spoof is also his best (and only) work since Jerry McGuire!
Liz Kelly: Zing! And on that note, we'll close this mutha down. Join me here next week and tomorrow in the blog for an interview with "The Brady Bunch's" Barry Williams. Yes, really.
|
Join Celebritology blogger Liz Kelly to gab about the latest celebrity pairings (and splittings), rising stars (and falling ones) and get the scoop on the latest gossip making waves across the Web.
| 209.578947 | 1 | 15.105263 |
high
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012303378.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012303378.html
|
The Slimming of the MacBook
|
2008012619
|
Early in my writing career, I had an assignment to follow around a mohel -- the guy who does ritual circumcisions in the Jewish tradition. My subject learned the trade by watching his dad, a renowned figure in the field. One day, father told son he was ready to handle the tools himself. Why now? the son wanted to know. "Most students ask me how much to take off," the senior explained. "You asked me how much to leave on."
Apple faced a similar question when designing the MacBook Air, the sub-notebook computer that goes on sale next week. The category -- ultra-portable laptops weighing less than four pounds -- has been known for sharp compromises in price, performance and features, all in the service of the high-tech equivalent of a crash diet. What to leave on and what to take off?
Certainly, Apple has fulfilled its goals in terms of thinness. The Air is a sleek sheath of aluminum so slim that it can slide under my office door. Packed inside the shell, which is 3/4 inch at its thickest point, trailing off to a wispy 0.16 inches, are 2 gigabytes of memory, a bright 13.3-inch screen (lit by cutting-edge LED technology) and a full-size keyboard.
Did I mention that it's really skinny? When I slip it in the sleeve of my backpack where my 6-pound MacBook Pro usually travels, the pocket still looks empty. Surely this is salve for the shoulders of anyone who springs for the $1,799 to buy it.
The Air shines most, of course, when it's out in the open. The gentle curves and the absence of protrusions make this an instant object of techno-lust. Most importantly, its diminutive dimensions pretty much evaporate the eternal quandary of whether to take your computer with you.
The compromise story is more complicated. Apple was unstinting in including an excellent keyboard with its great automatic backlighting feature that radiates illumination in dim conditions. Its brain is the powerful Intel Core II Duo processor (though running at a lower speed that Apple offers in other laptops). And the battery life is acceptable -- I didn't have time for a definitive study but was getting only slightly less than the five hours per charge that Apple promises. Also, the Air breaks ground as the first Apple computer to integrate some of the multi-touch technology introduced on the iPhone.
But in service of slimness, something had to go, and depending on how you use computers, these compromises might be negligible, or they might be deal-killers.
To maintain its Zen-like profile, the Air has a minimal selection of ports -- one USB, one for video output to a bigger screen and a single jack for earphones. That's it. Many people will choose to pay $29 for a "dongle" that plugs into the USB port to allow the Air to be plugged into Ethernet. There's no slot to plug an EVDO card for cellular broadband, so if you want that, you must use a different USB dongle connecting to a card. No Firewire port either. Because so many things may vie for the single USB port, it might be wise to buy a hub that multiplies a single USB socket to many, even at the risk of spoiling the Air's sleek figure.
There's also no built-in optical drive. (That's the component that reads and writes CDs and DVDs.) Apple's main compensation is a new feature called Remote Disc. This allows you to borrow the optical drive of a different computer so you can burn CDs, play DVDs and (most importantly) install software to restore a damaged operating system. Clever idea, but trickier than it sounds. Macbook Air owners would be nuts if they didn't buy Apple's new $99 SuperDrive external disk drive. (Of course, that's one more suitor for that lone USB port.) More disturbingly to power users, the maximum built-in storage option -- the only one -- is an 80-gigabyte hard drive. Apple insists that if it used the 160-gig hard drive it offers in its high-end iPod Classic, it would blow the profile of the MacBook Air. Eighty gigs isn't much these days; you can get a bigger drive on even the low-end MacBook.
In one sense, this is a prescient look forward to the day when people will store their digital assets remotely, "in the cloud," as this concept is described. But since it's still a couple of years before my voluminous iTunes collection of movies and songs will be stashed in the ether, I need a computer with a standard-size drive, and the Macbook Air will work for me only as a second machine, a luxury item for on-the-go use.
While these omissions may be troubling -- especially to someone in a down-turning economy deciding whether to spend a premium sum for a computer with sub-premium storage -- the fact is that simply using the Macbook Air, as I'm doing right now in writing this review, is rather copacetic. Though I can quibble with a few of Apple's choices of what to take off, the product's dimensions and design definitely show that that the losses were not in vain. The things that Apple left on were the ingredients for a quality computer. And did I mention how thin it is?
Steven Levy, a senior editor atNewsweek, can be reached atsteven.levy@newsweek.com.
|
This is your source for news on personal technology. Find info and reviews on the newest technology that affects your life. Read our latest features on new tech gadgets.
| 31.411765 | 0.588235 | 0.705882 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012303498.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012303498.html
|
When Writers Can't Write, They Pretend
|
2008012619
|
Usually, the Rayburn Building is the kind of place reserved for all sorts of serious goings-on conducted by sober-looking folks in suits. The people who think they're running the country. Which is to say, it's not too often that you see the likes of Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) donning a ZZ Top-esque beard and proclaiming "solidarity" with the people who really matter -- entertainment types.
You know, the ones who've single-handedly consigned the nation to endless reruns of "Law & Order: SVU" and marathon episodes of "Celebrity Apprentice," "American Gladiators" and "The Biggest Loser." The self-described "creative, socially awkward malcontents" who've pretty much rendered the need for DVRs obsolete thanks to the never-ending Writers Guild of America strike. (Do we sound bitter?)
So, yesterday, you had writers from "The Daily Show" coming to the Hill to face off against scribes from "The Colbert Report" in a kind of meta-debate about the two-month-long strike: "Resolved, [the aforementioned malcontents] deserve to be paid for the work they produce, however it is distributed." It was a way to lobby their cause -- specifically compensation for work distributed over the Internet -- milk a few laughs and keep the creative juices flowing.
It was also a way for certain Democratic congresspeople to insert themselves front and center in the debate -- particularly those whose districts just happen to be populated with members of the WGA or the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers.
Rep. Anthony Weiner (N.Y.) declared that he wanted "the studios to do well," adding that "you can have a successful company and share that success" with the not-so-rich people who make it happen -- writers. Rep. Jerrold Nadler (N.Y.) ticked off statistics: Studios made $95 billion last year, he said; writers, an average of $62K. Schakowsky did her bit with the beard (a homage to David Letterman and Conan O'Brien, who grew strike whiskers).
Rep. Steve Cohen (Tenn.) stepped up to tell everyone he had fun on "The Colbert Report," and Rep. John Hall (N.Y.), a onetime singer-songwriter, reminded everyone that for professional scribblers, "This is a feast or famine business for all of us."
"It is the writers that make us laugh, or make us cry," Schakowsky said. "They're the engines that keep the show going. The wizards behind the curtains."
Once the formalities were dispensed with, said wizards were finally given the floor, with "The Colbert Report" writers playing the sushi-loving, morally challenged members of the AMPTP ("First of all, I would like to say unequivocally that I had no idea what substance my trainer was injecting into my buttocks," said one role-player) and "The Daily Show" members portraying the insufferably intellectual, ink-stained wretches ("When the Hegelian dialectic is imposed on the current labor negotiation we're left with a kind of floating signifier. . . . What I'm trying to say is: I went to Cambridge").
Former White House press secretary Dee Dee Myers, a onetime writer for "The West Wing," played moderator -- and managed to keep a straight face.
"We saw 'Charlie Wilson's War' last night," said "The Colbert Report's" Peter Grosz, playing a studio suit. "We were really disappointed by the lack of strippers and hot tubs here."
Ultimately, this was a decidedly one-sided debate, with the "producers" coming off none too well: "We've reevaluated our stance on the Internet. We now believe it exists. Therefore, we are prepared to increase our offer to the writer from nothing to next-to-nothing." The WGA-ers denied charges of nerds' revenge, defended unions ("Without unions, American workers wouldn't have . . . the 40-hour workweek . . . and hilarious Dilbert cartoons") and, amid the jokes, managed to insert their reason for being there:
"This strike is obviously difficult, because we're fighting just a very small number of very powerful media companies," Tim Carvell of "The Daily Show" said. "It's almost enough to make you wish there were an organization that could -- I don't know, for want of a better word, 'legislate' restrictions on those companies and their ability to monopolize an industry."
|
Search Washington, DC area TV schedules and reviews from the Washington Post. Features DC, Virginia and Maryland entertainment listings for television programs. Visit http://tvlistings.zap2it.com/partners/zipcode.asp?partner_id=wpc today.
| 30 | 0.4 | 0.4 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012303420.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012303420.html
|
HGS Stock Dips After It Ends Hepatitis C Test
|
2008012619
|
Shares of the Rockville biopharmaceutical company dropped 44 percent, or $4.40, to $5.62, hitting a 12-year low after adjusting for dividends and stock splits.
Human Genome, which in 16 years has not yet brought a commercial drug to market, said that during a routine review, an independent drug-monitoring committee recommended lower doses of Albuferon for chronic hepatitis C. The committee said it found "serious pulmonary adverse events" that were higher in the treatment of a trial group got arm injections of 1,200 micrograms of the drug every two weeks, compared with a separate group given doses of 900 mcg.
The company gave few details on the rate of side effects but said the pulmonary problems were "expected and rare" in interferon therapy.
H. Thomas Watkins, president and chief executive of Human Genome Sciences, described the announcement as a "hiccup" and said the recommendation by the Data Monitoring Committee isn't expected to delay the Phase 3 trial of Albuferon, which was predicted to finish by spring 2009. Filing for global marketing approval is expected to be complete by fall 2009.
Watkins said the company had expected to market the lower dosage of the drug and that the trials for the higher drug won't impede progress for the 900-mcg dose or Food and Drug Administration approval.
"The data committee didn't express any concerns with the 900-mcg dose, and for some time we've viewed the 900-mcg dose as the most likely marketed dose," Watkins said in an interview. The company began its first trial of the drug in March 2001 and is in the final stages of trials before it can get approval from the FDA to sell the drug commercially.
Human Genome Sciences, which has 770 employees, this year entered its most critical stage, with the hepatitis C drug and a drug for treating lupus in final trials before commercialization.
Han Li, a research analyst in New York for Stanford Group, said the concerns raised could affect perceptions of the drug.
Trial participants could drop out of the tests because of worries over the drug's side effects, which could affect the progress of the trials, Li said. When taken to market, doctors may think of the problems faced during the trials and weigh the potential safety concerns against the convenience of taking Albuferon once every two weeks. Its competitor, Roche's hepatitis drug Pegasus, is taken every week.
"If you want to get a drug to compete with Pegasus, which dominates the market and has been out for a few years, you have to have an advantage over the current therapy," Li said. "I don't know if a physician would trade the risk of pulmonary adversary risks for taking the drug from weekly to biweekly treatments."
Another analyst said the market overreacted to the news and that trials for the 900-mcg dose have been promising.
The analyst, William Sargent of Banc of America, said Human Genome Sciences said the efficacy of its lower-dose treatments has been above 90 percent, which should be enough to file for regulatory approval.
|
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.
| 13.318182 | 0.431818 | 0.431818 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012300029.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012300029.html
|
Math Classes At Elementary Schools Prompt Parents' Outcry
|
2008012619
|
The group, whose members include parents from such elementary schools as Westridge, Ashland and Springwoods as well as teachers from various schools, plans to present the Prince William County School Board in February with its petition, which has about 500 names. Parents in the group, whose Web site ( http://www.pwcteachmathright.com) lists several of their complaints, say that the Investigations curriculum is putting their children behind grade level and is too convoluted.
The group's formation comes right after the school system presented a year-long study of the curriculum that showed 80 percent of second-graders and 70 percent of first-graders are proficient on all 10 subtests of the Stanford Diagnostic Mathematics Test. The school system wants to continue studying the program and incorporate data from student performance on the state Standards of Learning exams.
School Board member Julie C. Lucas (Neabsco) said in an interview that she wants to examine the program inside a classroom to assess its effectiveness. She added that she has been hearing positive reviews from at least one principal in her district but that she wants to withhold making public comments until she visits schools.
The Investigations program has been undergoing a phased-in implementation since the School Board adopted its materials in 2006. In the 2006-07 academic year, kindergarten through second grade started the program; this year, third-graders began it; and next year, fourth-graders will use the material.
Investigations teaches children new ways of learning mathematics and solving problems. For instance, a student may not need to learn how to add 37 and 23 by stacking the figures on top of each other, and carrying the numbers. They may learn to add up the tens and then combine the seven and three to arrive at 60.
"When they first rolled this out, it sounded great at the time. I had faith that school officials knew what they were doing," said Alexis Miller, 42, who helps spearhead the anti-Investigations group and has two daughters at Westridge Elementary School. "But then I started seeing my daughter have difficulty doing basic math functions. I started questioning it."
Miller said she connected with other disgruntled parents at a School Board meeting in December. Soon, they devised the idea of a petition. She got frustrated on a recent day when her second-grade daughter complained that she did not want to do her homework. Miller said the work required her daughter to put a combination of stickers on a grid -- each sticker valued with a different number -- so that the total equaled 45.
"This was an incredibly futile exercise. She knows how to count to 45. My kindergartener can do a lot of homework that my second-grader is doing," Miller said.
School Board Vice Chairman Michael Otaigbe (Coles), who voted to approve the program and has visited Investigations classes regularly, said in an interview that he thinks the program deepens a student's knowledge of mathematics, beyond rote memorization. "With the old way of teaching math, you have a class of 30 students, and maybe three or four students understand what's really going on," he said. "What I see are students actively engaged in learning math. I see students defending their answers and solutions to problems."
Otaigbe, who serves as academic dean of students at the Woodbridge campus of Strayer University, added that it can be difficult for parents who he said may not want to be open to material that they do not know. He said he welcomes the parents' petition and hopes it can prompt a conversation about how to improve the school system's math programs. "We will look at it and discuss it," he said. "I don't want to dismiss it as a wasted effort."
|
A group of Prince William County parents is mounting a campaign to repeal a new elementary school math curriculum, using an Internet discussion group and an online petition to gather support and fuel criticism.
| 20.194444 | 0.694444 | 0.972222 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012303386.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012303386.html
|
For Sale: Big Ideas About Humanity
|
2008012619
|
Compassionate Apes, Competitive Humans, and Other Tales From Evolutionary Economics
Have you ever wondered how people develop trust and live together peacefully? Michael Shermer's new book uses psychology and evolution to examine the root of these human achievements. He notes that the original environment in which people evolved, namely the small groups in hunter-gatherer societies, helped people develop altruism and cooperative behavior.
At the same time, our biological heritage drives human discontent. Our evolution on the East African plains did not equip us to cope emotionally with the large-scale and often impersonal nature of a modern market society. Small tribal groups are used to sharing, not to extremes of wealth. That is why envy is rife. In other words, he says, you may feel that modern capitalism is unfair if you apply the outmoded moral code of the tribe. Shermer believes we nonetheless should look to the market as the dominant mode of organizing social affairs.
The tension between the author's rationalism and romanticism is the most interesting angle in "The Mind of the Market." The scientist in Shermer seeks to root his defense of the market economy in the objective sciences of psychology and evolution. But his background in Ayn Rand's philosophy of objectivism has given him an ardent love of capitalism, peaceful trade and the power of the creative individual mind. Thus a problem arises: If our brains are just computational programs, as indicated by modern neuroscience and genetics, then autonomy and free choice are illusions. That makes it hard to justify such political tenets as individual liberty and the value of the capitalist marketplace. What has to happen has to happen, and what is the point of asking for something better or elevating the dignity of the individual?
Shermer is well aware of these dilemmas. He argues that a free society is the best means of assuring prosperity and the progress of science, and therefore the case for freedom is compelling whether or not we have free will. Markets embody more knowledge and mobilize more expertise than is held by any single human being. That's why South Korea is so much richer and happier than North Korea. Shermer also cites Bastiat's principle: "When goods do not cross borders, armies will." His corollary is that when goods do cross frontiers, armies will not, and so we should base our societies on trade.
I'm sympathetic to Shermer's conclusions, but I fear his standard of evaluation is too blunt an instrument. If the options are capitalism and the Khmer Rouge, no doubt capitalism wins hands down. But to what extent should we restrain capitalism to fund a social safety net? Should our government place heavy taxes on beer and potato chips to fund the National Science Foundation at higher levels? Most broadly, to what extent is it morally permissible to interfere with freedom, or can we even use freedom as a concept in a world where we do social science by hooking people up to brain scanners?
Shermer is famous for founding the Skeptics Society and editing the magazine Skeptic, which debunks claims of the supernatural. His monthly column for Scientific American is a regular plea that reason should govern human affairs. But his book raises very real questions about just how far skepticism should extend. Should we also be skeptical about using moral judgments of right and wrong to address the tough questions of politics? For instance, can we make normative judgments about who deserves to pay how much of the tax burden to finance the U.S. government, or as to whether somebody's job should be protected from foreign trade?
Shermer either needs to dismiss moral philosophy as an illusion and a mere byproduct of human evolution, and thus display skepticism, or he needs to grant it credence and take his own moral stance. Descriptive science doesn't tell us whether it is fair to allow kidneys to be bought and sold, even if it helps explain why some people find the practice repugnant. Judgments of right and wrong cannot be avoided, and thus we tread away from the realm of familiar natural science.
There are really two books within "The Mind of the Market." The science book is finished and polished, yet it does not present fundamentally new results. The book on capitalism discusses important questions, yet it is unfinished and unpolished. Shermer does promise us an entire new book to fill in the missing pieces here. He already has earned the right to our attention; the next question is whether he will give his philosophic and romantic side the greater rein that it deserves and requires. This East African plains ape is optimistic.
|
Michael Shermer's new book uses psychology and evolution to examine the roots of people's abilities to live together peacefully.
| 39.772727 | 0.909091 | 7.181818 |
high
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012304105.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012304105.html
|
'Argonautika' Charts a New Course for the Mythic Voyage
|
2008012619
|
On the eve of its tumultuous voyage, the crew of the Argo gathers on the stage of the Lansburgh Theatre for something like a pep rally in antiquity. As drums pound and shoulders bounce, each mate steps up and exuberantly chants in modern cadences his or her name and bio -- "Hercules!" "Castor!" "Atalanta!" "Pollux!" -- as if the audience were a USC booster club and they were the bowl-bound players.
Above the intoxicating din, a shout-out would absolutely be in order, too, for the unseen captain of this pulse-quickening squad: Mary Zimmerman, the author and director of "Argonautika," a sensational, panoramic rendition of "Jason and the Argonauts."
The Chicago-based Zimmerman, whose image-and-metaphor-rich "Pericles" was a deeply pleasurable offering in Washington three years ago, makes her return to the Shakespeare Theatre Company with this new foray into the classical canon, long the chief inspiration for her visionary style. (She won a Tony, you may recall, for the direction of her best-known play, an adaptation of Ovid's "Metamorphoses" set in a shimmering pool.)
One might have expected a new coterie of wet actors in "Argonautika," but it appears Zimmerman wants to let the waters settle. Her metier on this occasion is not tied so transparently to any one element, visual or otherwise. If anything, the story she recounts here has more to do with ephemeral things: the finite tragedies of man in the cosmos. Buffeted by chance, chastened by prophecy and manipulated by gods, the athletic Jason (Jake Suffian) sails confidently with his boisterous crew in pursuit of his trophy, the Golden Fleece.
It would be one thing if the tale ended with Jason's triumph at Colchis, with the taking of the fleece and the Argo's escape with the mortal enchantress Medea. (We all know how well that marriage worked out.) But "Argonautika" reminds us of the hollowness of Jason's victory, how short-term gains inevitably yield to long-term follies, how the ultimate product of human endeavor is always a permutation of heartbreak.
Zimmerman's trademark mischief with text -- her approach to the classics is what you might call a respectful irreverence -- is thoroughly on display in this work, brought dazzlingly to fruition by her, along with Zimmerman's longtime set designer, Dan Ostling. She's derived her version from accounts by the Greek poet Apollonius and Roman poet Valerius. Her mode of storytelling, evolved in the rehearsal room, mixes the language of epic soliloquy with the vernacular of our time.
It's a style geared to upending our expectation, as when Jason, rationalizing to Atley Loughridge's Medea his sexual betrayal, informs her, "It's not about you." Or when the goddess Athena (Sofia Jean Gomez), eavesdropping on their lovemaking, remarks with a profoundly urban inflection, "Oh yes they DI-id."
Those self-conscious turns of phrase are intended to demystify the stately characters of myth. Sometimes, though, the effort to modernize the dialogue feels a bit cheap -- chintzier, anyway, than the lavishly refined images that Zimmerman and Ostling and lighting designer John Culbert manage to create. The varying degrees of vocal ability among the actors also at times convey a sense of the characters being less than fully inhabited. (Some could use more of an assist from the whizzes in the sound department.)
The linguistic flatness is leavened by sheer invention, both in the staging and some of the performances. The Hera of Lisa Tejero -- she and Athena are, aptly, the story's omniscient narrators -- is as physically and vocally alluring as you'd want a god to be. Gomez's Athena is an agreeably tomboyish counterbalance. Suffian brings a steadying demeanor, too; audiences may remember him as the brainless locker-room bigot of Studio Theatre's "Take Me Out." Here, he drops the attitude, equipping the leader of the Argonauts with the proud and intrepid -- if accessible-- heart of a hero.
Jason's eventful trip is framed in "Argonautika" by the back story of the mission and where-are-they-now details of what occurred long after Jason's pinching of the fleece. A sense of doom hovers over the characters, due in part to the forecasts of the multiple seers and prophets. And yet their adventures can still embrace all that is irresistible in the human imperative to explore new worlds and try new things.
The core pleasure of "Argonautika" is the way in which we're invited to share in the delights of each exotic place that the Argonauts encounter, revealed as wondrous fruits of collective imagination. The Argo's universe is interpreted as a space of limited horizons: a room of polished wood, including a paneled ceiling. The ship's thick mast extends up through the ceiling, and a wooden catwalk is the perch for, among others, the sneaky, snarky Hera.
A tinsel-covered water nymph, a hooded Fury, a gaggle of Harpies and an assortment of monsters all make their marks, although it is the conjuring of Scylla and Charybdis that most effectively shows off Zimmerman's penchant for playing with scale. Perhaps best of all is the concept of a sympathetic Medea, run through with desire, the depth of her Eros-instigated passion for Jason expressed as a wound that never heals.
You could write out a long list of the crafty notions -- speaking of which, costume designer Ana Kuzmanic makes handsome work of this elaborate toga party -- and still omit half the catalogue. Zimmerman doesn't so much inject creative blood here as engorge it, and the ethereal images with which she leaves us make it a special contentment to go with her flow.
Argonautika, written and directed by Mary Zimmerman, based on "The Voyage of Jason and the Argonauts." Sound and original music, Andr¿ Pluess and Ben Sussman; puppet design, Michael Montenegro. With Soren Oliver, Jesse J. Perez, Andy Murray, Allen Gilmore, Tessa Klein, Ronete Levenson, Casey Jackson, Chris Kipiniak, Justin Blanchard. About 2 hours 40 minutes. Through March 2 at Lansburgh Theatre, 450 Seventh St. NW. Call 202-547-1122 or visit http://www.shakespearetheatre.org.
|
Search Washington, DC area theater/dance events and venues from the Washington Post. Features DC, Virginia and Maryland entertainment listings for theater, dance, opera, musicals, and childrens theater.
| 33.054054 | 0.432432 | 0.540541 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/22/AR2008012202614.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/22/AR2008012202614.html
|
Whose Stimulus Makes the Grade?
|
2008012319
|
One of the benefits of an extended presidential campaign is that it presents real-world tests for candidates. Some take the form of pop quizzes assessing contenders' instincts in a crisis. Others are more like take-home exams -- the latest, and perhaps most revealing, being competing plans for an economic stimulus.
In practical terms, this is irrelevant: The moment for stimulus will be long past by Inauguration Day. But as a way of judging how candidates view government's role, how they balance politics and policy, and how sound their thinking is on economic policy, the proposals offer a revealing report card.
My grading starts with President Bush, because he sets the curve.
George W. Bush: B-minus. The president gets extra credit for signaling flexibility on his roughly $145 billion package and for not insisting on extending his tax cuts, which made no sense as stimulus and would have doomed its chance of passing.
A tax rebate -- the White House has floated $800 per individual -- is a good approach. Bush loses points, however, for excluding those without income tax liability, even if they pay hefty payroll taxes. Points off, also, for failing to extend unemployment benefits. In efficiency and fairness, both are exactly backward. As Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke explained, "If you're somebody who lives paycheck to paycheck, you're more likely to spend that extra dollar."
Bush says tax incentives for business investment must be a significant part of the package. But such breaks didn't have nearly the positive effect anticipated after they were adopted from 2001 to 2003; the Congressional Budget Office found the impact of those provisions to be "relatively modest"; Moody's Economy.com put it at 27 cents for every dollar spent.
Barack Obama: A-minus. I criticized his previous tax plan, but Obama is at the head of the class with an intelligently designed, $120 billion stimulus plan. He would speed a $250 tax credit to most workers, followed by another $250, triggered automatically, if the economy continues on its sour path. Obama would direct a similar rebate to low- and middle-income seniors, who are also apt to spend and could get checks quickly. One demerit: Obama omits any increase in food stamp benefits, which Moody's estimates would have the greatest bang for the buck, $1.73 for every dollar spent.
John Edwards: B-minus. Edwards gets points for handing in his paper early -- in December, he issued a $25 billion stimulus proposal (plus $75 billion more if needed), including important help to states to avoid cutting Medicaid rolls. But like Hillary Clinton (see below), he would spend too much money on programs -- investing in "green collar" jobs, for instance -- with too long a lag time to make them an effective stimulus. Edwards's grade goes down because he also hasn't explained how the $75 billion would be spent.
Hillary Clinton: C-plus. Clinton, too, raised the issue early, then turned in a faulty first draft with a $70 billion stimulus plan that didn't provide much immediate stimulation. It included a $25 billion increase in the program to help low-income Americans with heating costs -- an excessive amount (the current program is under $3 billion) that probably wouldn't kick in until next winter. Even worse was her housing plan, including a five-year freeze on subprime mortgage rates that could produce higher interest rates and reduce liquidity.
Four days later, Clinton said she would immediately implement a $40 billion tax rebate plan she had put in reserve in her first draft. Fine, but overall, the Obama plan devotes a far greater percentage to spending that is more likely to jump-start the economy.
John McCain: D-plus. The senator should have his plan sent back with "Did you read this assignment?" scrawled in red ink. There's a respectable argument that stimulus isn't needed, wouldn't be effective and could be counterproductive. But the normally straight-talking McCain doesn't make it. Instead, he proposes permanent tax cuts -- cutting corporate rates, increasing investment breaks, eliminating the alternative minimum tax -- masquerading as a stimulus plan.
Mitt Romney: D. Romney's plan is way too big ($233 billion) and badly constructed (most of the stimulus goes to business breaks, his individual tax credits don't go to those who need them most, and his huge, long-term tax cuts would harm growth if not paid for). You don't have to be a Harvard Business School grad to understand that encouraging savings is not stimulative.
Mike Huckabee: D-minus. Huckabee understands economic anxiety better than economic principles. The only way his sketchy proposal could stimulate the economy is by scaring Americans into consuming now, before his Fair Tax takes effect.
Rudy Giuliani: Incomplete. His position is too internally contradictory to grade. The former New York mayor told ABC's George Stephanopolous that "permanent reductions have a bigger impact in stimulating an economy," then said of the Bush plan, which has no permanent cuts, "If it stays where it is, it's a good idea."
|
The presidential candidates' views on economic stimulus are a revealing way to judge their thinking on economic policy.
| 51.1 | 0.9 | 1.5 |
high
|
medium
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/22/AR2008012202618.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/22/AR2008012202618.html
|
The GOP's Security Gap
|
2008012319
|
The affable McCain has on more than one occasion affably admitted that the economy is not his strong suit. It's an admission you can make when you're confident that your bona fides on national security will eclipse your economic deficiencies. And that confidence is evident in McCain's view of the world, and of himself. The "transcendent challenge" of our time, he says in his stump speech, is "radical Islamic terrorism." Given that, who better to fight it than McCain?
But suppose we face challenges that are just as great and defining as those that McCain highlights. Suppose, come fall, that American voters are also concerned about the immediate soundness of the economy -- that is, their jobs, incomes, health coverage and ability to put their kids through college. Suppose that their anxiety over the long-term prospects of the U.S. economy -- over the long-term prospects of America itself -- mounts every time that our banks and other major businesses sell chunks of themselves to Middle Eastern oil interests and the Chinese state.
McCain's first crack at a stimulus package stressed a theme he has sounded throughout his career -- reining in federal spending on projects earmarked in congressional appropriations. Whatever the merits of McCain's proposal in general, however, its effect today would be to further deflate our already tanking economy. It's an anti-stimulus proposal. If McCain, in arguing for the surge in Iraq, had proposed arming our troops with pom-poms, it would have been no less ludicrous than his proposal to cut spending at a time when lending is sharply contracting.
That said, I don't think the various candidates' stimulus packages will matter that much as voters sort out their primary preferences. What's vexing voters is anxiety that America's economic preeminence has peaked -- that our major banks and corporations have exported our productive capacities to China, even as our dependence on oil is exporting our consumption capacities to the Middle East. No xenophobia is required to note that America's rise as a 19th-century industrial power was largely funded by British capital, that as the economic powerhouse of the 20th century, America funded the rise of other nations' economies, and that today, some of those nations are funding us so we can keep buying goods and commodities from them.
This is where McCain's narrative of what ails our economy -- indeed, all the Republicans' narratives of what ails the economy -- is woefully off point. Like his fellow GOP candidates, McCain stresses the need to aid American business in getting our economy back on track.
This is unexceptionable as far as it goes, except that it's the offshoring proclivities of American big business that to a large degree landed us in this fix in the first place. Tax breaks to businesses must be conditioned on their using those funds to stimulate Cincinnati, not Shenzhen. And if we really wish to create good jobs at home, the kind of "mega-greening" projects that the Democrats are talking up are far more likely than across-the-board corporate tax cuts to deliver the goods. (To his credit, McCain favors creating green jobs; to his discredit, he favors those across-the-board corporate tax cuts.) The larger question -- one that Americans have never had to consider -- is this: What constitutes national security at a time when the American economy may be declining while the economies of such nations as China and Saudi Arabia, whose values are quite distinct from ours, are expanding at our expense? Is a national security candidate, or a national security party, really one that keeps us in Iraq while lagging behind in supporting research and development of alternative energy sources? Is it in our national security interest to say and do nothing when U.S. multinationals in China actively oppose granting labor rights to Chinese workers, something that could create a crack in the Communist Party's control?
Until now, Americans' discussions of national security have taken our economic preeminence as the Great Given. But unless the Republican national security hawks show some inkling of understanding that Wall Street and many U.S.-based multinationals have enriched themselves and our nation's rivals at America's expense, they are not really national security hawks at all. And Democrats, reluctant as they too may be to break with Wall Street, will wrest at least some of the security mantle -- and quite possibly the White House -- from the Republicans' grasp.
|
Real discussions of national security must include economic security considerations.
| 77.545455 | 0.727273 | 1.818182 |
high
|
low
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/22/AR2008012202616.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/22/AR2008012202616.html
|
Now or Never for Obama
|
2008012319
|
Whatever the outcome of Saturday's Democratic presidential primary here, the Illinois senator has the money and the organization to compete in the nearly two dozen states voting on Feb. 5.
But as his first and only victory, in Iowa on Jan. 3, slips further into history, his strategists concede that Obama badly needs to demonstrate broad enough support to slow Hillary Clinton's progress toward the nomination.
Having trailed her in popular votes in both New Hampshire and Nevada, where he was favored, Obama finds himself more in need of help than he perhaps expected from the voters here.
This state offers him many advantages he will not enjoy automatically when the competition moves to California, New York, New Jersey and other delegate-rich states next month.
The African American vote is a larger percentage of the Democratic electorate here -- perhaps half the total -- than in any of those states, and even Clinton supporters credit Obama with having the best field organization on the ground. Clinton has switched her South Carolina leadership several times, while Obama has had steady and impressive local management.
This is also the state where John Edwards won in 2004 -- and is perhaps the last place where the native son can be expected to siphon off a significant number of white votes this year, simplifying the math for an Obama victory in a state where racial polarization often prevails.
For all these reasons, anything other than an Obama victory on Saturday would represent a significant setback to his long-term prospects, while Clinton has built-in alibis for a possible loss.
The stakes may explain why tensions became so obvious during the Monday night debate in Myrtle Beach, with Clinton and Obama accusing each other of distorting the record and falsifying their own voting histories.
Their exchanges were personal and angry. He referred to her as a corporate lawyer who had served as a director for Wal-Mart, a company with an anti-union reputation. She shot back that he had been a lawyer for a reputed Chicago slumlord. Any thought that these two might someday team up as a Democratic ticket vanished into the night.
Edwards seemed stunned by the ferocity of the other two but took advantage of the situation by landing some punches of his own on both. He sided with Clinton on health care but reinforced Obama's contentions on campaign finance, special interests and Social Security, only to switch and join Clinton in questioning why Obama had voted "present" so often in the Illinois legislature.
No one came out unscathed, but Edwards probably fared best, raising the possibility that he could split the white vote with Clinton and, ironically, thereby help Obama.
|
Anything other than an Obama victory in South Carolina would represent a significant setback to his long-term prospects.
| 24.238095 | 1 | 7.761905 |
medium
|
high
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/18/AR2008011802939.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/18/AR2008011802939.html
|
Making Iraq Safe for Politics
|
2008012319
|
Iraq's parliament this month passed a new de-Baathification bill, which awaits only expected approval by the five-member presidency council before becoming law. Much remains to be done, but this is an important step toward political reconciliation -- and it further strengthens the case for America to remain committed to its crucial mission in Iraq in the months and years ahead.
During Saddam Hussein's day, if you wanted a professional job in Iraq you basically had to join the Baath Party. For most of the 1 million-plus who did so, this hardly implied direct involvement or even complicity in crimes of the state. Hussein was so paranoid that only his very inner circles were entrusted with information on the dictator's plans and policies.
Appropriately, the new legislation will punish only former Baathists who were in the three highest circles of the former regime's power structure. That probably amounts to a few thousand people. Others will generally be allowed to rejoin Iraqi society, regain their access to jobs and federal pensions where available, and avoid prosecution for previous crimes of the state. Under earlier rules, dating to edicts issued by Paul Bremer during his early weeks as Iraq's administrator in 2003, the four highest circles had been effectively ostracized. This meant tens of thousands of individuals were directly affected -- and hundreds of thousands indirectly, including family members. That precluded many of Iraq's most talented professionals and politicians from helping rebuild their nation -- and it created widespread bitterness among Sunnis, who constituted the bulk of Baathist Party members, that the current Shiite-led government would never accord them fair rights in the new Iraq.
The legislation is imperfect, of course. Most notably, the law could keep all former Baathists out of Iraq's security and legal institutions. While understandable as a way to alleviate Shiite worries about a possible Baathist-Sunni resurgence, this goes too far. Taken literally, it would interfere with efforts to bring Sunni volunteers into Iraq's security forces (unless waivers are issued). This possible problem will have to be cleared up. But if that happens, a major step will have been taken toward building sectarian trust.
The reformed de-Baathification legislation is one of half a dozen key political issues codified into American law last year by President Bush and Congress as "benchmarks" we expected Iraqi leaders to address. Other matters so identified are hydrocarbon legislation; a provincial powers act (clarifying the roles of Iraq's 18 provinces vis-a-vis the central government); a provincial election law to facilitate the next round of local elections; a process for holding a referendum on the political future of Kirkuk, the disputed northern oil city (and for compensating individual property holders and sectarian groups who lose out in such a vote); and a more transparent and trustworthy process for purging sectarian extremists from positions of government authority.
These benchmarks are reasonable goals. It is regrettable that insufficient progress has been made on the others (with the exception of the long, slow progress of purging extremists from official positions). What really matters, however, is that Iraqis come to view themselves as a single people working together to build a new nation, and address their inevitable differences legislatively rather than violently. As such, to the extent that benchmarks are employed, we would advocate using a longer list -- and include Baghdad's sharing of oil revenue with the provinces, the hiring of Sunni volunteers into the security forces and into the civilian arms of government, improvements in the legal and penal systems, and, over time, reform of the electoral system to weaken the role of the sectarian parties. In all but the last of these considerable progress has been made in the past year.
This political progress resulted from a year's worth of substantial effort to reduce violence in Iraq. Proponents of the surge always said that getting violence under control was an essential prerequisite to reconciliation, not the other way around. The full surge has been in place and operating for just over six months, and already violence has fallen dramatically across the country. The achievement in such a short time of significant legislation that requires all sides to accept risk and compromise with people they had been fighting only a few months ago is remarkable. It would have been unattainable without the change in strategy and addition of American forces that helped bring the violence down.
The progress of the past year also required American political pressure. The ongoing engagement of Ambassador Ryan Crocker, Gen. David Petraeus and others in cajoling and compelling Iraqi political leaders into making compromises across sectarian lines has been crucial -- not only in passing the reformed de-Baathification law but in purging Shiite extremists from government and persuading Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to gradually, if begrudgingly, hire Sunni volunteers into the security forces. American politicians of both parties have sometimes applied useful pressure too -- when they have made clear that they are focused on Iraq, that they are determined to insist that Iraqi leaders behave responsibly, and that the United States will not underwrite sectarian violence or oppression. But they have acted harmfully when threatening to withdraw U.S. forces rapidly, without regard to conditions, without regard to whether Iraqi leaders are trying to make compromises across sectarian lines.
As Crocker said last spring, "The longer and louder the debate gets, the more danger there is that Iraqis will conclude that we are going," leading to "a hardening of attitudes" among sectarian factions." Iraq's institutions are too weak, and its sectarian wounds still too raw, for us to expect the gains of the past year to endure in the face of a quick and nearly complete American withdrawal.
The number of American forces in Iraq matters. Although the change of U.S. strategy announced last January and the change in attitude among Sunni Arabs were critical to the successes achieved in 2007, the addition of five Army combat brigades and three Marine battalions was also critical. Petraeus and Gen. Ray Odierno know the strains the surge has placed on the military and believe that we can reduce our forces to pre-surge levels by this summer without compromising our gains. Considering the big steps taken by Iraqi security forces over the past year, as well as the tremendous damage our forces and Iraqi forces, together with the Iraqi people, have done to al-Qaeda in Iraq, the Sunni Baathist insurgency, Iranian-backed special groups and the fighting elements of the Jaish al-Mahdi, this belief is probably justified. But we cannot be sure.
Al-Qaeda in Iraq is working hard to regroup, and our soldiers are fighting hard to prevent that. Activities of Iranian-backed special groups continue to be worrisome. And much remains to be done politically at the local and national levels to secure the gains we have made.
Some in Washington are already calling for a commitment to additional reductions, resulting in force levels below pre-surge levels, even before we have finished the current drawdown. Such calls are unwise. America has made this mistake in Iraq before -- withdrawing too soon, attempting to hand security responsibilities over to Iraqi forces unable to accept them, and assuming that the best-case scenarios will play out. We must not make that mistake again. It is inappropriate to try to evaluate the possibility of reductions beyond pre-surge levels before we have had time to examine the situation after the completion of that drawdown. Therefore, Congress, the president and the American people should not expect Petraeus to report in March on the feasibility of still further reductions but, rather, on the sustainability of the reductions already in progress.
The strain on the U.S. military is great, and we are all concerned. But sustaining 15 brigades in Iraq for six more months or another year will not break the force. Reducing forces in Iraq too rapidly, however, even by one or two brigades, might seriously jeopardize the tenuous success we are seeing. We should not take that risk.
Frederick W. Kagan is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. Retired Gen. Jack Keane was vice chief of staff of the U.S. Army from 1999 to 2003. Michael O'Hanlon is a senior scholar at the Brookings Institution.
|
Don't believe the surge is having a positive impact? Ask the Iraqi Parliament.
| 97.875 | 0.5625 | 0.8125 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/undergod/2008/01/american_passions_stars_and_se.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012319id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/undergod/2008/01/american_passions_stars_and_se.html
|
On Faith on washingtonpost.com
|
2008012319
|
For those who arenât reading this column religiously, yesterdayâs post discussed Tom Cruiseâs zealous public witnessing for his Church of Scientology. I mentioned that Americaâs fascination with fringe religious movements and movie stars seem to be equally rabid. Why is that?
America has always been fertile ground for new religious movements, in part because of the first amendmentâs barring the establishment of any one faith. This may be a stretch, but I put part of the blame for our celebrity-addiction on the second part of the first amendment, which guarantees a free press -- though I'd argue that the media is an enabler of our desires, not a creator.
So, is it just that we like to watch passion and drama writ large? Is it that both upstart preachers and celebrities have a knack for projecting our desires and fears and assumptions on a big screen? Iâm looking for a better word, but is it just that David Koresh and Angelina Jolie are both well, kind of freaky and who doesnât like to watch a freak? (Before you start drafting me hate mail, think about it.)
Anyway, we continue with a Q & A with the New Yorkerâs Dana Goodyear who wrote a compelling piece on the Church of Scientologyâs Celebrity Centre, a place where the church welcomes the celebrity who they say are a âspecial public.â Indeed.
Hereâs Dana and I chatting about the intersection of religion and celebrity:
ME: What do you think about the role of celebrities in religion today? Demi? Tom? Mel?
Dana: There's an argument to be made (and I'm not the first to do it) that through non-stop media attention we've effectively deified celebrities, assigning outsize importance to their every outfit change and baby bump and divorce-filing, as if, like classical gods and goddesses, their personal and domestic lives really affected us. Is it any wonder then that celebrities emerge as spokespeople for religious movements? Who better?
Hollywood has always instinctively understood the compatibility of entertainment and religion; likewise, religions new and old have long seen a highly susceptible population in Hollywood and its folk. In the twenties, Cecil B. De Mille made "The Ten Commandments" and "The King of Kings"--a life of Christ, including the Crucifixion and the Resurrection. Mel, you could say, is our De Mille.
Scientology makes me think of Sister Aimee: Aimee Semple McPherson, a successful Pentecostal preacher who in 1923 built the still-thriving Angelus Temple in Echo Park.
The historian Kevin Starr describes Sister Aimee's appeal: "Knowing her audience, their limited background, their credulity, their love of movies and make-believe, McPherson evolved a technique of costumed sermonizing linked to a theme. Dressed as a USC football player, she preached on carrying the ball for Christ. Entering the Temple on a motorcycle in a policeman's uniform, she placed sin under arrest and urged her audience not to speed to ruin.â Sister Aimee's performative sermonsâand her "electric marquee," a primitive Jumbotron--bring to mind the dazzle of Scientology productions and signage, though the content is different.
ME: I felt throughout your piece that you did a subtle and interesting job of tying together the impulse of people here to be "discovered" and become famous, and the desire to belong and be a part of a larger spiritual community that is pursuing ultimate meaning. Are they the same impulse?
Dana: Discovering one's self and being "discovered" are linked through suggestion in Scientology. Scientologists believe that courses and auditing "enhance" artists and allow them to realize their true potential, which, it can be hoped, will mean professional success. The aim of Scientology is personal transformation, but its unspoken promise is inclusion in a group that also counts Tom Cruise as a member. That is a potentially powerful attraction for many hoping to flourish in the clubby, sharp-elbowed Hollywood industry.
ME: Thereâs such a fear of Scientology from Angelenos which is particularly interesting since in you're article you talk about all the good they've done for the community? Why is that?
Dana: For an organization that places such a premium on image and damage-controlâvery Hollywood, thatâthe Church is fascinatingly oblivious of the visual impact some of its materials make. The counterpoint to the exquisite 1920s Norman-revival castle they call Celebrity Centre is the Citizens Commission on Human Rights building on Sunset, home to the Psychiatry: An Industry of Death Museum. The Church either doesn't realize or doesn't care how off-putting their bannersâshowing haunted-looking children and the purported macabre side effects of psychiatryâare. A good example of this mixed message was on display at the Hollywood Santa Parade in late November. On the one hand, you had a Scientology Winter Wonderland, complete with towering Christmas tree, and cute kids in santa hats singing songs; on the other hand, you had Scientology workers passing out "Admit One" tickets to the anti-psychiatry museum which depicted an empty hospital bed with restraints awash in chilling blue and reddish light.
When considering the fear factor, it's also important to remember how young a religion Scientology is. Mormonism has a hundred years on it.
|
Under God on On Faith; blog of religion in the news on washingtonpost.com. Visit http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/undergod/
| 59.235294 | 0.647059 | 0.882353 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/needtoknow/2008/01/racing_toward_riches_together.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012319id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/needtoknow/2008/01/racing_toward_riches_together.html
|
PostGlobal: PostGlobal on washingtonpost.com
|
2008012319
|
The Current Discussion: In the future, global prosperity will present more of a threat than poverty, according to a recent Post op-ed. Is this just rich-American rhetoric, or is the world really getting too prosperous for its own good?
Michael Gerson describes only part of the problem of prosperity. To understand the issue, you need to think of the whole world going down the same road, but starting at different times. Some are further ahead, and we can use their experience to see what those who are coming later can expect.
When Abraham Lincoln was a boy, the U.S. was poorer than most countries are today. For some time he lived in a house that didn't have four walls. About a century later the U.S. became the first country to become wealthy if you use a populist definition of "wealthy:" that is, if you look at how ordinary people live. A "wealthy" country can today be defined as one in which life expectancy is over 72 and at least three-fourths of children complete secondary school. About 15% of the world's people now live in wealthy countries. Portugal is an example of a country that has recently crossed the border to wealth, and many countries are getting close. By the end of this century, when China and India will have become wealthy, probably three-fourths of the world will live in wealthy countries.
So what is the problem with this growing prosperity? There are two kinds of problems. One is the kind of practical task that Gerson talks about. This includes increasing production of all kinds of things that people who are not poor will buy when they have enough money, and keeping the planet clean against the environmental pressures of so much production. The second kind of problem is the effect of wealth on human character and happiness. We all know wealthy people whose lives are a mess â whom we suspect would have been better off never having been wealthy.
The practical tasks of providing for, and cleaning up after, billions of newly wealthy people will be a big challenge for some years. But we can gain perspective from experience. Because of population increases â which may be coming to an end in the middle of this century â and growing wealth, the world has been multiplying its use of all kinds of raw material for well over a century. During that time the cost of grain, meat and all kinds of raw materials has been steadily declining. We now need only a fraction of the amount of money, or of the work hours, that we used to need to produce a ton of grain or a ton of copper. We can be confident that we will rapidly overcome the difficulty of meeting the demands of those who are now becoming wealthy. Prices may rise for a little while, but before long the long-term trend of price declines for material goods and price increases for human effort.
The pattern concerning pollution that we have seen, in one country after another, is first poverty and clean air, then development and pollution, then wealth and steadily reduced pollution. We have found that, like our houses, we can keep our environment about as clean as we can agree on and decide to pay for. There is every reason to believe that these lessons will apply to the part of the world now becoming wealthy, as it applied to the part that became wealthy before now.
We have less basis for confidence in our ability to overcome the deeper problem concerning the effect of prosperity on human life, which comes from the removal of traditional challenges and constraints, and the increasing rarity of many of the kinds of experiences that once helped people to learn discipline, patience, and other practical virtues.
In another century or two we will live in a wealthy world. If the experience of Western Europe, which used to be dominated by war and tyranny, is any guide, it will also be a democratic and peaceful world. Then we will see whether we can make good and happy lives in a wealthy, free, and peaceful world. Gerson may be right that prosperity can be a trap â but we shouldn't despair, the result depends on what we do ourselves.
Max Singer is a futurist and the co-founder of the Hudson Institute. His book about the paradoxes posed by a more prosperous world, A Passage to a Human World, is reviewed here.
|
Need to Know - PostGlobal on PostGlobal; blog of politics and current events on washingtonpost.com. Visit http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/needtoknow/
| 44.894737 | 0.526316 | 0.631579 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/shoptoit/2008/01/tuesday_tips_kitchen_remodelin.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012319id_/http://blog.washingtonpost.com/shoptoit/2008/01/tuesday_tips_kitchen_remodelin.html
|
Tuesday Tips: Kitchen Remodeling
|
2008012319
|
Kitchens are one of those rooms in the house that we either love or hate. People who love their kitchens probably had them recently renovated and those of us who hate ours need a serious facelift. I'm probably in the second category, considering my kitchen is way too small for a family of four. But the thought of taking on a major kitchen renovation can be daunting to even the gutsiest homeowner. So I sought the help of a designer and two local kitchen experts for tips on saving money -- and headaches -- when renovating your kitchen:
What have you learned from a kitchen remodeling project? Do you have big dreams for your kitchen? Post a comment and tell me about it.
By Tania Anderson | January 22, 2008; 10:50 AM ET Tuesday Tips , Home Improvement Previous: Hunting for Deals at C-Mart | Next: Not Your Mother's Tupperware Parties
I completely agree with installing as many drawers as possible, in fact, there is no need for any base cabinets. My 6-year-old can empty the dishwasher because all plates and glasses are in drawers. Another great countertop option is soapstone. The folks at Designer Surfaces Ltd. in Frederick, MD do a fabulous job. The stone absorbs and radiates heat so you can put a hot pot on it, unlike granite or marble which can crack from temperature shock. Northern European countries use it for furnaces. Soapstone also will not stain as easily as other stones, and if it does, you can just sand off the stain. A cheap floor option is industrial grade vinyl tile. You can find it in many doctor's offices. But for a more luxurious feel on the feet, opt for porcelain tile. 3 years ago, we bought Italian porcelain tile for $3 /sq.ft. at Stone Source in Dupont Circle. When shopping for kitchen cabinets and countertops, don't omit Ikea.
Posted by: Grachel K | January 23, 2008 7:50 AM
I think the only consideration I had to make when remodeling my kitchen a few years ago was a question you neglected to mention: What will you do in your kitchen and how often will you be in it? For example, I make my own breads and so I only wanted granite countertops as they are the "cold surface" one needs for kneading. Your article mentions quartz, but quartz chips too easily. And I bought appliances too big for my daily needs and was glad every Thanksgiving that I had.
Posted by: Anonymous | January 23, 2008 8:23 AM
I think it's crazy how much money people spend on kitchen cabinets. Heck, my kitchen cabinets are the highest quality furniture I've got in my house! I say, go for a few sturdy, attractive, reasonably priced cabinets for the "public" part of the kitchen and store everything else in a big walk-in pantry.
Posted by: Rebecca | January 23, 2008 8:50 AM
Not all granite needs to be sealed every three months. Some (like mine!) are harder and denser than others and only rarely need to be sealed.
Another point - shop around! I bought cabinet knobs and pulls, faucets, my sink and other pieces online for a fraction of what other charged. I also got a great deal on hardwood flooring online.
A really nice kitchen remodeling doesn't have to cost $25K (or much more!).
Posted by: jen | January 23, 2008 9:20 AM
I gutted and redid my Arlington condo's kitchen last year, which hadn't been updated since the building went up in 1987 (and it showed). My goal was to maximize every square inch of storage because my kitchen is a small galley-style.
I completely agree that drawers are king! I spent a little more on the cabinets to get drawers with the soft-closing mechanisms. For a couple of hundred bucks, it's less wear and tear on the drawers and on the fingers - and it's safer for kids. You can make base cabinets almost drawer-like if you get 2 slide-out shelves in each cabinet (again, soft-closing mechanisms on the slide-out shelves are key). I also have 12 inch overhead cabinets on one side of the kitchen, for which I opted to buy galley doors that open upward instead of traditional swing-out doors with spindles between them. They are a huge help and make the space much more usable and accessible.
I ended up picking granite over quartz for aesthetic reasons - granite is natural and looks natural, while quartz by definition is engineered stone and it looks engineered and uniform. (Granite Outlet in Alexandria has a great selection and good prices on both). It really isn't that hard to keep granite sealed. You can buy all-in-one cleaner and sealer from any big-box home improvement store which is not expensive, and it seals everytime you clean your granite.
The other thing I did that I was so greatful for was to get rid of the stupid double-basin sink I had and replace it with a single basin, deep sink ($200), to maximize counter space. What is the point of the split sinks with the itsy bitsy basin on one side - which of course is always where the garbage disposal is? It is so hard to get anything down the disposal without making a mess, particularly if you're pouring from a large pot or skillet. Arg!
Posted by: stodge | January 23, 2008 9:49 AM
I am not sure I accept the 'do it all at once' idea. My wife and I have been redoing our kitchen as we have time and money. Hwever, early on we decided to keep the old, high quality cabinets. They are solid cherry and with a little cleaning and updating look great. The floor, countertops and applances have all been replaced in the last couple of years. We did hold off on doing to floors untill we were sure of all the layout changes however.
Posted by: Dan C | January 23, 2008 9:50 AM
Red appliances! Wow! I would want to buy that house for that alone....
Posted by: Pat | January 23, 2008 10:14 AM
2 things: (1) focus on how things will work before you spend a lot of time on decorative details; and (2) make sure you spend your money on the stuff that really matters to you, and go cheaper with the rest.
We knew when we bought our house we needed to redo the kitchen, which was a lovely combination of non-functional (couldn't open stove and dishwasher at same time; couldn't open fridge if someone was at sink, etc.) and butt-ugly (laminate countertops held together by masking tape). I spent a year planning the new kitchen around how we operate. I cook, my husband cleans, so I separated the cooking and cleanup areas. I bake, so I made a dedicated baking area with storage underneath, a nice Silestone countertop for rolling, and a spice rack up top. I put storage for pans and bowls and knives next to the area where I planned to use them. I planned a separate pantry and mini-fridge with breakfast and kid stuff out of the main cooking area, so they can take care of themselves without traipsing through where I am. Etc. etc. etc.
We also focused the money on the things that matter to us. I'm the opposite of Rebecca: I love beautiful wood, so having natural cherry cabinets was a big deal to me -- plus I didn't want to go through all that effort and end up with cheap cabinets that fall apart in 5 yrs. So I looked closely at cabinet construction (dovetailed drawers, no particleboard, etc.), and got various add-ons to make things really functional (roll-out shelves and the like).
On the other hand, a $7K 48" wide refrigerator didn't matter to me, so we got a normal KitchenAid side-by-side plus a separate mini-fridge for the kids' drinks -- same storage space, half the price. Same thing with 48" ranges -- LOVE them, definitely wanted more than 4 burners and double ovens for the big holiday feasts, but I found I could get a 36" all-gas range and a separate electric wall oven for several thousand dollars less (added bonus of gas oven for roasts and electric convection for cookies and pies). In the end, our kitchen works perfectly for the way we live, and looks very nice, but I didn't have to spend $25K on appliances.
Posted by: Laura | January 23, 2008 10:16 AM
If you are more adventurous (and have some talent and patience), consider doing the work yourself. You can save thousands!!! My friend just redid her kitchen with help from friends for less than $5000 (new cabinets, granite, lighting and floors) and it looks great. It probably would have cost double that amount had she had contractors do it. IKEA cabinets are probably the best bet for amateurs to install and I would consider taking a floor tiling course at Home Depot or Lowes if you want to learn how to do that as well. Of course, in any do-it-yourself situation you need to know your limits.
Finally, I second the recommendation on the Granite Outlet in Alexandria. I know two people who have bought their granite from there and saved a good deal of money in the process.
Posted by: SEF | January 23, 2008 10:41 AM
I'm surprised that there is no mention of Corian. My husband and I chose Corian over granite in our kitchen and have been very happy with the choice. It is both cheaper and requires less maintenance. We have a huge center island that would have required two pieces of granite leaving a visible seam. With Corian, the seam is undetectable.
Posted by: Christina | January 23, 2008 11:42 AM
I did a quickie makeover six years ago (new vinyl and wallpaper). Fairly soon, it'll be time to remove the 1984 cabinets. I hadn't thought much about cabinet design until IKEA opened in Orlando. Drawers! Slideouts! All sorts of ways for baby-boomer me to pull stuff out of bottom cabinets without getting on hands and knees!!! I'm likely to end up with cabinets other than theirs, but the IKEA approach to design and storage has raised my expectations.
Posted by: Dave of the Coonties | January 23, 2008 12:03 PM
I am in the process of remodeling a condo galley kitchen from the 1970's and plan to do all the install myself (except plumbing) to save some bucks. The kitchen is the last part of a two year remodel of the entire condo. I have been practicing the last six months on my brother and sister's house since they justed remodeled kitchens and I helped them with the install since they wanted to save on costs - a good education. Many of the tips above are excellent. As stated the most important factor to me is to understand what does not work in our current kitchen and to find a fix for it. Our current Kitchen has cheap hard to use cabinets, poor lighting, clutterd counter tops, insuffecient electrical outlets, no place for trash/recycle receptacles, and appliance door swings that get in the way of each other. I spent a lot of time figuring how to fix these problems and hope to start the remodel in the spring of 2008.
Posted by: Brian | January 23, 2008 12:38 PM
We are almost done with our remodel. We went from bottom of the barrel fake cabinets to 100% wood maple and they alone are just fantastic. Yes, we did do one drawer cabinet and aside from it being extremely heavy(we did our own install) it is wonderful for storage. I highly recommend Just Cabinets for the cabinets(we bought Kraftmaid), they had the best price around and they have a giant screen to view your new kitchen. We did granite tops too after much debate and after shopping around we used Plan-It Granite in Sterling. They gave us such a deal from a free sink, free cut of our choice and they arranged a plumber for us to disconnect and connect the plumbing without us having to deal with it. Basically for just over 40 sf we paid less than $4000.00 including tax. For the flooring we used Hardwood Solutions in Frederick MD. We bought 4" Select Ash at less than $5.00 per square foot. We found our own installers but they got it to us quickly and we had plenty of time for it to sit in our home to adjust to the climate. Now we are going to do our own back splash and after searching around, we found the best deals at Home Depot. We can have some color but not put $1000.00 just on the wall. We spent around $200..00 for the decorator tiles and now we'll fill in with tiles that run $13 - 14 cents each. And we are doing a diamond pattern too. Just wanted to share some of the best deals that we have found.
Posted by: Lisa | January 23, 2008 2:00 PM
Just wanted to let everyone know there is a great forum for discussing kitchen and bathroom remodeling -- www.bathroomremodeling.org -- despite the name, it contains discussion of both kitchen's and bathrooms. It's completely free, so check it out.
Posted by: Mandy | January 23, 2008 2:56 PM
I redid the kitchen in my last house twice in 7 years - the first time just a spruce-up and the second time a complete gut job. I wholeheartedly agree that much of the work can be done yourself, resulting in HUGE savings. Watch some Saturday morning TV, get some books from the library, and ask questions. There's not any magic to lots of this stuff. Just do your homework. As far as specific suggestions: I made sure to include open shelf space for storing cookbooks - it looks nice and it's really handy to have that stuff at your fingertips. I used sheet vinyl for the floor (easy to clean, durable, economical, comfortable to stand on) and tile on my countertops and backsplashes (hard to clean the grout lines, and a guarantee that whatever you drop on it accidentally will smash). I included an undercounter wine chiller, which fit in a 15-inch wide space. I got it online from www.vinotemp.com, "scratch-and-dent." I think it was under $200. You can get the best deals by shopping carefully online. When I sold my house, the wine chiller, with space above it for hanging stemware, got a lot of positive comments.
Posted by: Mark | January 23, 2008 7:30 PM
I am a mom of three who loves to cook and entertain. The best investment we made during our kitchen renovation was putting in two dishwashers. I never have dishes in the sink or on the counter anymore. My kitchen always feels clean. And when I'm too tired after entertaining, I put it all in the dishwashers and worry about it the next day - especially the fine china and crystal. My husband thought two dishwashers was a crazy idea at first, but now he's glad he went with it.
Posted by: Catherine Lorenze | January 23, 2008 9:35 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.
|
Visit www.washingtonpost.com/.
| 1,562 | 0 | 0 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012300628.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/23/AR2008012300628.html
|
Wall St. U-Turn Pulls U.S. Stocks Out of Nosedive
|
2008012319
|
The stock market soared yesterday afternoon, capping a remarkably volatile day, as new efforts by key players in the U.S. financial system aim to raise enough cash to guard against some of the fallout of the credit crisis.
The Dow Jones industrial average was down 326 points at lunchtime, then finished the day up 299 points, a 5.4 percent swing. For the day, the Dow rose 2.5 percent.
Analysts attributed the turnabout to news that regulators are persuading banks to plow money into bond insurance companies, a crucial and troubled part of the world financial infrastructure. Bank of America said it will raise $6 billion, which would help it continue lending even after massive losses from loans tied to mortgages.
Those pieces of news, combined with the aggressive Federal Reserve interest rate cut announced Tuesday, gave investors solace that U.S. financial institutions are starting to come to terms with the fallout from the slowing economy and credit crisis. Stocks of financial services companies rose a combined 9.2 percent Tuesday and Wednesday.
Analysts were pleased with the signs of stability in the financial sector but cautioned not to assume that the crisis has passed. "The financials have put together two good days," said Neil Hennessy, president of Hennessy Advisors. "But that's like the first two minutes of a basketball game -- you've still got 38 minutes left."
European financial markets, by contrast, continued to plummet, a reflection of contrasting approaches to dealing with the financial crisis and economic downturn on the two sides of the Atlantic. The German stock market was down 4.9 percent yesterday and is down 12 percent for the week.
The Federal Reserve cut interest rates sharply Tuesday to try to arrest a widening financial panic. The head of the European Central Bank took a different approach yesterday.
"Particularly in demanding times of significant market correction and turbulences, it is the responsibility of the central bank to solidly anchor inflation expectations to avoid additional volatility," bank President Jean-Claude Trichet told the European Parliament.
That signaled that central bankers in Europe will be strongly disinclined to cut interest rates unless the European economy slows significantly. In the short history of the European Central Bank, and the long history of the German Bundesbank, on which it was modeled, bankers have rarely followed the American tradition of taking aggressive action to try to calm financial markets.
"They don't have the philosophy we do in terms of activism," said Edwin M. Truman, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics in the District. "That is an American way of doing things."
The lack of expected rate cuts from the European bank was not the only problem haunting European markets. Analysts there increasingly expect major European banks to report losses related to complex securities tied to American home mortgages. "German banks are just as involved in these problems as U.S. banks because it is a global financial system," Truman said. "In that sense, the problem is ahead of them."
Since European markets plummeted Monday, European leaders have been saying that their economies are strong and that the current problems are due to weakness in the United States.
|
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.
| 13.152174 | 0.521739 | 0.565217 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/23/DI2008012301681.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/23/DI2008012301681.html
|
Heath Ledger: His Life, Career and Death
|
2008012319
|
An autopsy on Heath Ledger was inconclusive, and more tests are needed, the medical examiner's office said Wednesday, a day after the 28-year-old actor was found dead with sleeping pills nearby.
Washington Post staff writer Hank Stuever was online Wednesday, Jan. 23, at 2 p.m. ET to discuss the life, career and death of Ledger. Read the Appreciation.
Submit your questions and comments before or during the discussion.
Hank Stuever: Hi everyone. We're here to chat about Heath Ledger, who died yesterday at age 28. My only caveat is that I am not in New York, and I know nothing more than what the rest of us (instantaneously, nowadays) already know. But I can help post your comments and ruminations on celebrity death, the way in which we break and analyze these stories, Ledger's career, etc., etc. Let's chat.
Washington, D.C.: There's a story up now on CNN that an estimated 45,000 people are dying EACH MONTH in Congo as a result of internal conflict and humanitarian crisis. Five million people have died since 1998.
It's running secondary to the lead story about Heath Ledger's kindness to strangers.
I thought Heath Ledger was a wonderful actor with great promise. I'm truly sorry to hear about his death. But this kind of skewered priorities in our country is what breaks my heart.
Why is this, do you think? Are those 45,000 people not real enough because theyre not on screen? Or is it just an unimaginable number that can't be grasped, while one handsome man's death can be?
Hank Stuever: This line of thought always comes up when a celebrity dies. In a world of constant pain and death for so many, how come everybody focuses on the death of a movie star? I have some immediate thoughts on that: 1. People have a capacity to care about more than one thing at once. 2. A narrative is always more interesting than a statistic, more real. 3. Celebrity is a language many more media consumers (and media makers, frankly) speak. We're more fluent in celebrityhood than say, global politics, etc. But it's always a good frame of reference, to put some celeb death against the perspective of something far worse. And I think most movie stars would agree. Thanks.
Washington, D.C.: Was his first name really Heathcliff and was he named after that character in Wuthering Heights?
Hank Stuever: Yes, according to his bio.
Washington, D.C.: Since "The Dark Knight" is already in post-production, it's easy to see how it can still be released on time in the summer of 2008. But what about the other movie that Heath Ledger was filming, Terry Gilliam's "The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus"? What will happen to that production?
Hank Stuever: I believe "Imaginarium" was still filming, so I don't know. If anyone has seen any industry news on that (Hollywood Reporter? Variety?), please send a link. "Dark Knight" is in the can, mostly, and all indications are that Ledger totally dominates the role of the Joker, and that he's really terrifying. That may just be the makeup. We shall see. Others have asked if this is a marketing detriment for "Dark Knight." I would guess the contrary.
Washington, D.C.: There are plenty of middle-aged (and younger and older) adults on multiple prescription drugs for sleep disorders/anxiety/pain/ depression, etc. What is so sad is that it seems as though Heath was ill with pneumonia, and coupled with the presciption and nonprescription drug use, coupled with perhaps recreational drugs...his body just collapsed. He was so young, but frankly, it is a wonder that it doesn't happen to more of us!
Hank Stuever: The pneumonia thing is still a possibility, though last I checked the wires, there was nothing conclusive. The Reliable Source women said this earlier, and I will AMEN it: Insomnia is the worst. I can knock myself out with a single Excedrin PM, but then again, I'm not trying to finish two films at once, dodge paparazzi, deal with all the BS that comes with being a movie star, co-parent a 2-year-old ....
washingtonpost.com: Discussion: The Reliable Source (washingtonpost.com, Jan. 23)
Gaithersburg, Md.: So sad about Heath. He was a favorite of mine. One thing I hate about this is separating the tabloid speculations from the truth.
Hank Stuever: I'm afraid that's the world we live in now, Gaith'burg. I also prefer the wait-and-see. I am grateful that my only assignment yesterday when the news broke was to just think about his life and try to tie something thematically. Does anyone remember back to when all the rock stars were dying in the late 60s and early 70s? How quickly did news like that spread? How intense was the coverage of say, the death of Jim Morrison, Jimi Hendrix ... Legendarily, the drag queens rioted in the streets the night Judy Garland died, but that was because they were being hassled by cops already and IN NO MOOD at that point for any krep from the cops. How about Marilyn Monroe? What was the TMZ equivalent, besides weekly gossip mags, in 1962?
Re: Celebrity death vs. More important stuff: I think people spend so much time focusing on celebrities' lives because 45,000 people dying in the Congo is sometimes too sad or emotional to think about. I know that there are much more important and pressing/depressing issues going on in the world right now and that is precisely why I read about celebrity gossip -- it's a break from all of that.
Hank Stuever: Yes, you're right. People read celebrity stuff as a salve to the "real" news. I just hope they're also reading the real news. I think we've all had the experience of reading -- in the Post or NYT or LAT -- a really compelling story/narrative about ONE person or family in a Congo-type situation in another part of the world, and that makes it so much more real, and less like a number. I have always believed that we pay attention to celebrities because, as long as there's been civilization, we need godlike figures, about which to tell stories of triumph and tragedy. It's all Greek to me.
Tampa, Fla.: A comment: I was watching CNN last night, trying to get caught up on the presidential election. Of course they were just going on and on about Heath Ledger.
I really dislike the way celebrity infotainment seems to be taking over traditional hard news outlets.
Hank Stuever: I sympathize, and I suppose if there was a way to win the ratings game without doing infotainment, then the people at CNN would have thought of it by now. I guess in situations like that, you could turn off CNN and pick up an actual copy of the day's Washington Post, which would get you up to speed on both, and you could decide which you want to look at first...
Re: The Dark Knight: I've heard that Heath Ledger gives one mighty performance in The Dark Knight. Would it be beyond the scope of possibility for him to receive a posthumous Oscar nomination next year, much like Peter Finch did for Network?
I'm willing to bet that Christopher Nolan will dedicate the film to Heath, too.
Hank Stuever: I suppose it's possible, though Oscar is never kind to performances in big-budget movies like that -- Johnny Depp in Pirates being a rare exception.
I think part of why people care about the death of a performer like Mr. Ledger is that he gave them something specific and they are grateful. It's perfectly natural that they should feel personal connection and personal sorrow.
People may certainly feel sorrow over things like the deaths in the Congo or similar terrible situations. However, it is a much more abstract sorrow. How could it be otherwise?
Hank Stuever: Good comment. Thanks.
Say what, Washington, D.C.?: What the poster from Washington, D.C., is suffering from is a lack of perspective. If we compare everything we do and discuss to the most disastrous events going on, we'll never do or discuss anything. I was brushing my teeth this morning when I realized 45,000 children are dying in Africa. How could I be so selfish to be brushing my teeth when so many children are dying? I was devastated.
The obvious question for the Washington, D.C., poster is: with so many people dying in Africa, why are you wasting your time posting to a Washington Post discussion?
Needless to say, most of us are dynamic enough and have enough perspective, to discuss an event that isn't Number 1 on the World's Priority List.
My condolences to Mr Ledger's family and fans.
Germantown, Md.: I didn't realize that Heath Ledger's latest role was that of the Joker in the newest Batman movie, Dark Knight. Have people who've had a peek into his performance commented on his interpretation of the character? How does his recent work compare to his past work?
Hank Stuever: There's a terrific trailer that came out in theaters in December and is probably available online if you Google "Dark Knight" and "trailer." It's a very different Joker than the Jack Nicholson one. It's terrifying and psychotic, more like the "Arkham Asylum" Joker that comic-book fans really love. I remember people groaning when it was announced that he was playing Joker. Now people are raving about the glimpse we got in the trailer. I even put "Heath Ledger as Joker" as "in" on this year's In and Out List on Jan. 1. (I put Emile Hirsch as Speed Racer as "out", but of course people disagree.)
Baltimore, Md.: You mentioned some comparisons in your appreciation. I have another one. Brandon Lee. Can't help but think of "The Crow" including the makeup (like the Joker in Dark Knight) and how the movie was released after his death.
Hank Stuever: I thought of The Crow too, especially because of the makeup. But I also thought about how little anyone ever mentions him anymore. Heath Ledger had a much bigger career behind him, and ahead of him, IMHO.
Louisville, Ky.: I think the Ledger news is more upsetting because he had real talent and seemed to have more of a sense of who he was and what he wanted to do than most young actors. I have to admit I lost some respect for him when he split up with Michelle Williams and started modelizing this fall. Carrying on in bars, sleeping with Lindsay Lohan (rumored), and running around when he had a beautiful little girl at home and a fiancee he could have been working things out with. It just seemed stupid and really disappointing -- though it's not my business or anyone else's how he or any other public figure chooses to spend his time.
Now these emerging stories of problems with drugs (legal and illegal), depression, etc., throw all that in a different light.
Hank Stuever: I keep thinking of River Phoenix.
Silver Spring, Md.: Before the internet, cellphones, texting, it was just TV, radio and word-of-mouth. The celeb death that affected me most was John Lennon. That was big enough to break in on Monday Night Football and announce.
Hank Stuever: Yes! Lennon was the first one I remember (Dec. 1980, I was in the 7th grade) where EVERYBODY stopped and was sad for several days and weeks, and there was lots of writing about what he meant. It outdid Elvis (d. 1977) by a long shot, at least in my early pop awareness. Because I was still fetal when MLK and RFK were shot, Lennon was the first time I saw a celeb death get the sort of treatment that resembles later celeb death coverage. (And face it, Ledger doesn't come anywhere near that level. I have thought for a long time that we are in for a BIG ONE, but I can't think who. Let's not speculate.)
London, UK /Bklyn: I don't really have a question, but just wanted to make a couple of comments. I think people have been drawn to the news of Heath's death because he seemed like a nice, normal, likeable person, even if he was a celebrity. I also wanted to caution people from guessing what the cause of death was -- no one knows yet. Regardless, it is a sad story. He was too young and had too much to offer as an actor and more importantly, as a truly decent human being by all accounts.
Baltimore, Md.: From the vantage point of age 59, re Morrison, Hendrix and Monroe: I remember hearing about the deaths of Morrison and Hendrix on the radio. They got mentions on the evening news, but they were both symbols of the rebellious counterculture and mainstream media did not, as I recall, make a big deal of it. Monroe was different. I was only 14 when she died, but she was the ultimate American sex symbol and her death was big, big news. God only knows what it would have been like had we had the cable news monster to feed on her bones.
The Heath Ledger story is so sad. Did Michelle Williams break up with him, or vice versa?
Hank Stuever: Before the day is over, I'm going into the Post page archives (we have microfilm pages in electronic form now -- hallelujah) and see where deaths like Hendrix and Morrison played in the paper. I'm curious. I do not know the details of Michelle Williams' and Heath Ledger's breakup. I wasn't reading US Weekly too closely of late.
Re: Judy Garland: True story: my mother went into labor with me (two weeks early), the night the Stonewall riots began. I ended up gay. Nature or nurture, I ask you?
Hank Stuever: Fabulous Nature, doing her thing.
Michelle Williams: I read that the mother of his child was in Sweden with their daughter and that when she recieved the news, she immediately boarded a plane to go home. I was thinking how difficult it must be for her to deal with such shocking and horrible news and having to sit on a long plane ride with everyone knowing what had happened. And then deboarding the plane, and having to deal with more people, etc. This is something us noncelebs don't have to deal with -- having to experience some very dark times out in the open. Very sad.
Washington, D.C.: Thanks for your great appreciation piece on Heath Ledger today. You noted that he kept "dirtying up, dressing down," etc., as part of effort to be taken seriously as an actor. Dressing down in public seems to be a pattern among celebs. Whenever I see stars on talk shows, etc, they seem to be competing to see who's the grungiest. It seems odd to see a star do that, especially when they probably had to focus intently on their looks, etc., in order to become celebs.
Hank Stuever: Yes, other than the dirtiness of fashion (that has come and gone and come and gone five times now), I don't know why they do it, but I have one pet theory: Dressing up and grooming is too much like work. When you're at that level, you spend a lot of time in make up (for movies, for magazine shoots) and you just get sick of it. All you want is to be left alone and pick your own clothes, and, perhaps petulantly, you want people to see that you're real, dirty? Or maybe they just dig it.
N. Carolina: Read your commentary yesterday in Weingarten's chat about "appreciations," very interesting. Thank you.
Hank Stuever: The Appreciation essays in Style aren't entirely arbitrary, but it's really about what more can be said that won't be said in the obit. Notoriety is not the only requirement. Sometimes a writer has to be convinced by the editor to do the appreesh, sometimes a writer really has to beg the editor to get an appreesh on the Style story budget for the next day. The writer's "emotional" attachment to the subject is certainly not a requirement, as I have "appreciated" subjects on deadline having started from almost scratch when the assignment is given. (Sometimes you only have an hour or two to do the whole thing.) Sometimes the Appreciation is not all that appreciative. My favorite ones are of flawed characters (Tammy Faye Bakker Messner, Evel Knievel, etc.). I've certainly written some Appreciations where readers demanded an explanation ("THAT was an 'Appreciation'?!"), and I usually have to point them to the more formal obituary on A1 or in Metro. (We have great obituary writers.) I like to think of the difference as if the obituary is the funeral home (professional, elegant, official), and the Appreciation is the drink at the bar afterward. I can't think of another newspaper that has such a regular feature -- the essay that is NOT the obit, that runs in addition to an obit. Very often the challenging thing for the Style writers is to not duplicate the content of the obit. And yes, sometimes we just skip it -- either no one was moved to write it, or couldn't be assigned to it, or the section is crammed, or there really wasn't anything else to say. Like, the other day, with the Whamm-O guy. (He was the co-founder. We wrote about the first guy, when HE died.) Or Sam the Butcher from Brady Bunch, whose obit is in Metro today. (I can say that I really want to save any stray Brady musings for a biggie -- like ALICE.)
Gene Weingarten: Okay, so this is the definitive word.
Hank Stuever: I think this fits the Alanis Morrisette definition of ironic, dont'ya think? I put this into Gene's chat yesterday when the subject came up, a chatter asking who and what decides how and why Style does an Appreesh. I stand by it! (And I stand by ready for the next one!) I will say this: I think this is the first time I had to write an Appreesh for someone so young. It's much harder, not because it's tragic, but because there's a lot less to write about.
Washington, D.C.: Have there ever been any post-morten Oscar nominations, or wins? Seems like the Academy would be suckers for that sort of thing, particularly since Ledger didn't win for Brokeback.
Hank Stuever: Surely an Oscar trivia buff can help us out here. I'm sure there have been, especially for quite old actors who died byt he time their movie was release. It's probably an obvious one, but I haven't the time to look around for my Oscar trivia books....
Washington, D.C.: Kurt Cobain was a Big One for all the Gen X'ers.
Hank Stuever: Huge, and some newspapers in 1994 did not quite "get" it right away, and either briefed it on their national news page or in their "people" briefs. I was at a newspaper where a young feature writer had to PLEAD with the editors to get Cobain's death the appropriate play. The outpouring that came the next day proved her right. The takeway lesson for any media organization is to make sure you have a roomful of diverse journalists, who will know things the editor may not.
Falls Church, Va.: I was a young adult when Lennon went down. I attended the candle light vigil at Lincoln Memorial afterwards. It was very shocking to see the assassination trend of the '60s move from politicians to celebrities. I truly feared for a remarkable young golf professional when his fame was white hot about 10 years ago. This celebritology thing is a modern and destructive form of gossip. The obsessive media coverage of naughty young starlets/singers reflects a true decline in our culture. Responsible journalists must turn away from this.
Hank Stuever: OK. I wonder if responsible journalists, however, can't bring some quality to it? I know that's what we think about around here. We could never win the gossip wars, but what we sell here is synthesis and thought.
Rhode Island: Just another perspective on perspective -- it's one thing to mourn the passing of a talented young man. The fact that it's Heath Ledger, however, takes it a step further.
His portrayal of Ennis del Mar was a character for the ages. He has been compared, reasonably, to a young Brando. The character of Ennis touched a chord with millions of people. If Heath Ledger had never acted in another film, he'll be remembered for that.
Hank Stuever: Yes, thank you Rhode Island. I have had several messages this morning from the (for lack of a better descrip) "gay community" who are feeling an additional pain, and really hold BB Mountain in special reverence -- for its story, for its filmmakers, and absolutely for the Ledger and Gyllenhaal performances.
Peter Finch died before getting his Oscar....: Peter Finch was in "Network" and died the day after being on the Johnny Carson show. He died before getting his Oscar; his wife accepted for him. This was about 1977 or so.
San Diego, Calif.: RE: Infotainment
I agree, that celebrity gossip has taken over a much larger percentage of "news" coverage. It pays and unfortunately that is how our economy drives these trends. But the media could police themselves and put some morality into their mission statements.
In fact I heard yesterday that the executives of E! Network were meeting to discuss halting the coverage of Britney Spears until she goes to get help. That is great "news" in my opinion.
Hank Stuever: Earlier this week, before Ledger died, there was a bit of a kerfluffle around the fact that the AP has already prepped some obituary copy on Britney, to keep in a file in case she suddenly dies. People think it's crass, but these people have never had to write an obit on deadline. Other people think this may have an added benefit, if a starlet learns that her life has gotten so bad that even the AP has pre-written her obit. Unfortunately, in this case, I wouldn't be surprised if Britney's respone to that is: What's an obit? What's an AP?
Washington, D.C.: I think of the River Phoenix death too. I remember how I didn't even hear about his death until the evening news, when all they would run were the teasers ("Hollywood mourns the loss of a talented actor. Details at 11.") I was in utter shock when I find out who it was, and it wasn't until even recently that I learned of the exact details of his death, thanks to the Internet. For this, and Anna Nicole Smith this year, not only do we get a blow-by-blow account, but we get every single rumor (Mary-Kate's apartment, anyone?) and a picture of the body being taken out on stretcher. Have we lost the idea of death with dignity?
San Francisco, Calif.: Although I am only 35, I clearly felt the generation gap when reading the comments on the times after this actor's death. 900 comments and all nearly the same, the writer felt sad,the event was tragic. Has there come a point now when every minute thought that occurs in one's mind gets dropped onto a keyboard and sent to cyberspace, no matter how inane or superlative? Do people think this isn't tragic unless they comment on it? Just curious?
Hank Stuever: I'm sort of with you on this, yet here we are...
Sad, but with perspective, Md.: I can't seem to read enough interviews or reviews of what I think was an impressive body of acting work. But when the TV Guide Channel assembled their "experts" last night it was Anna Nicole all over again.
I hope this (and I'm including my sadness under the same heading with the presence of a Washington Post online discussion)is more about tragedy and the end of a truly bright career than spectacle, yes? I mean, Ennis Del Mar was an amazing performance and even Casanova was brilliant.
Hank Stuever: Thanks for dropping in.
Heath's next movie: Defamer said the Imaginarium has been terminated. Not going to happen. Apparently Terry Gilliam has some sort of curse....
Hank Stuever: Some instanews. Thanks.
Washington, D.C.: Just a comment: What utterly infuriates me is how some in the press seem to be jumping to conclusions that he either had a drug problem or killed himself. One DJ this morning described him as "talented, but troubled." Troubled? I never got that impression. I wish people wouldn't be so quick to think the worst of others. I read that his autopsy showed he was suffering from pneumonia. Maybe something he was taking for that interacted badly with the Ambien. Scary. Something like that could happen to anyone. What a tragic loss. My condolences to his family and friends.
Hank Stuever: Thanks for the comment.
Baltimore, Md.: It saddened me to hear about Heath Ledger's death principally because of his exceptional talent -- though also because of his young daughter and because he seemed like a nice guy. He had tremendous acting ability, a versatility proven in many roles as well as remarkable depth. His performance in Brokeback Mountain floored me. Before that, I thought he was a solid actor, but nothing special. As a heterosexual woman, I didn't expect to care so much about a "gay cowboy" love story. Brokeback is one of the great cinematic love stories, period. The movie was a revelation for many ordinary people -- those who may not be prejudiced but aren't always necessarily comfortable with gay themes -- feel the pain and waste of any great love that must be hidden. Heath's performance was central to the film's success. What more he might have done onscreen, we'll never know.
Hank Stuever: A lot of my otherwise enlightened straight male friends skipped Brokeback Mountain. Their wives and girlfriends went to see it with one another, or not at all. The men kept complaining that they were being guilted about not seeing it. They were ooky about it. I guess I understand. (I kept telling them that there's a sex scene where you see Ann Hathaway's breasts. They didn't believe me.) It's a great performance from Heath Ledger. It's on HBO a lot these days -- do check it out if you haven't.
Takoma, D.C.: You know, I was 18 and a freshman in college when Kurt Cobain died (and of course I knew some Nirvana songs) and I just don't remember it having any particular impact on me. Was I just the wrong kind of kid? Have the 14 intervening years addled my brain? Was I unable to care without the Internet to give me the details?
Hank Stuever: Did you like the music back then? Were you an involved consumer of new music, or was it all just background noise? Being 18 and following the news/culture don't always go hand in hand, even thought EVERYTHING is marketed straight at you at that age.
Chicago, Ill.: Oscar Trivia: Yes, Peter Finch is the only person to recieve a posthumous acting Oscar. Others with posthumous nominations -- but without awards -- were Jeanne Eagels for The Letter (1928-29), James Dean for East of Eden (1955) and Giant (1956), Spencer Tracy for Guess Who's Coming to Dinner (1967), Ralph Richardson for Greystoke: The Legend of Tarzan (1984), and Massimo Troisi for Il Postino (1995).]
Hank Stuever: Thanks so much, Chicago.
Dirtying up/Dressing down:: Gotta say, it seems to me that it's only in the U.S. (although now increasingly globally where people want to be "western/modern") that anyone upper class (be it by birth, celebrityhood, or money) dresses down in any way. It's sort of a fake nod to the fallacy that we're a classless society. Everywhere else, when you can, you dress up. So that people won't think you're poor/shabby/without.
Just an observation. And one that occurs to me all the time when celebs dress grungy, in clothes that are frequently stupidly expensive.
Hank Stuever: Some fashion analysis. Thanks.
Central Virginia: What has really disturbed me about all the media attention (in addition to what's going on in the Congo), is the fact that I read that his housekeeper discovered his body shortly before 3:30 Eastern, and I read he was dead at about 3:45 Eastern on post.com. Was it even possible for any of his family to be contacted? How horrific to hear this from the media! Why can't news like this be kept under wraps for say, at least an hour?
Hank Stuever: It simply can't. Not when you're famous. That is the price of fame. Police routinely hold IDs of deceased from reporters when it's a non-famous victim, until the family has been notified.
Baltimore, Md.: Of course it's his work from Brokeback Mountain that has prompted our friends from the Westboro Baptist Church into action -- they will be protesting his funeral and are already celebrating his eternal damnation.
Hank Stuever: They may have to go to Australia to do it.
1. I read somewhere that it was actually Mary-Kate Olsen's apartment he was found in. Is there any validity to this?
2. It struck me last night that Heath Ledger's death, while tragic, is getting far more press than Brad Renfro's, who also died recently. Why the difference in coverage?
Hank Stuever: 1. That rumor was shot down last night. But nevertheless it worked its way all the around the web, which is what makes some of us newsosaurs jittery about the way journalism is done now. 2. Brad Renfro's career in no way stacks up to Ledger's.
Bethesda, Md.: Ann Hathaway and Michelle Williams!
Also, Ledger was impressive in Monster's Ball as Sonny.
Hank Stuever: Yes! He was great in Monster's Ball. He plays Billy Bob Thorton's son. It's also a tragic role.
Washington, D.C.: I'm actually okay with the amount of coverage.
To me, the difference is that Anna Nicole was famous for having no talent, Heath was famous because he did have talent.
I could have done without wall to wall Anna Nicole death coverage for that very reason.
Hank Stuever: Good point. I think we also got soooo much Anna Nicole coverage because there were about six storylines to follow there -- the baby, the paternity, the will, the downspiral, the mess..... On that sad note, I thank all of you for choosing to drop in and chat, or lurk. I think that our celebre-culture, while disturbing, can be navigated with intellect and emotion and thought, and you have proven that over the last hour. We're not as messed up as we seem. Take care. Bye.
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.
| 153.902439 | 0.634146 | 0.878049 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/01/22/ST2008012202375.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/01/22/ST2008012202375.html
|
Heath Ledger: His Life, Career and Death
|
2008012319
|
An autopsy on Heath Ledger was inconclusive, and more tests are needed, the medical examiner's office said Wednesday, a day after the 28-year-old actor was found dead with sleeping pills nearby.
Washington Post staff writer Hank Stuever was online Wednesday, Jan. 23, at 2 p.m. ET to discuss the life, career and death of Ledger. Read the Appreciation.
Submit your questions and comments before or during the discussion.
Hank Stuever: Hi everyone. We're here to chat about Heath Ledger, who died yesterday at age 28. My only caveat is that I am not in New York, and I know nothing more than what the rest of us (instantaneously, nowadays) already know. But I can help post your comments and ruminations on celebrity death, the way in which we break and analyze these stories, Ledger's career, etc., etc. Let's chat.
Washington, D.C.: There's a story up now on CNN that an estimated 45,000 people are dying EACH MONTH in Congo as a result of internal conflict and humanitarian crisis. Five million people have died since 1998.
It's running secondary to the lead story about Heath Ledger's kindness to strangers.
I thought Heath Ledger was a wonderful actor with great promise. I'm truly sorry to hear about his death. But this kind of skewered priorities in our country is what breaks my heart.
Why is this, do you think? Are those 45,000 people not real enough because theyre not on screen? Or is it just an unimaginable number that can't be grasped, while one handsome man's death can be?
Hank Stuever: This line of thought always comes up when a celebrity dies. In a world of constant pain and death for so many, how come everybody focuses on the death of a movie star? I have some immediate thoughts on that: 1. People have a capacity to care about more than one thing at once. 2. A narrative is always more interesting than a statistic, more real. 3. Celebrity is a language many more media consumers (and media makers, frankly) speak. We're more fluent in celebrityhood than say, global politics, etc. But it's always a good frame of reference, to put some celeb death against the perspective of something far worse. And I think most movie stars would agree. Thanks.
Washington, D.C.: Was his first name really Heathcliff and was he named after that character in Wuthering Heights?
Hank Stuever: Yes, according to his bio.
Washington, D.C.: Since "The Dark Knight" is already in post-production, it's easy to see how it can still be released on time in the summer of 2008. But what about the other movie that Heath Ledger was filming, Terry Gilliam's "The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus"? What will happen to that production?
Hank Stuever: I believe "Imaginarium" was still filming, so I don't know. If anyone has seen any industry news on that (Hollywood Reporter? Variety?), please send a link. "Dark Knight" is in the can, mostly, and all indications are that Ledger totally dominates the role of the Joker, and that he's really terrifying. That may just be the makeup. We shall see. Others have asked if this is a marketing detriment for "Dark Knight." I would guess the contrary.
Washington, D.C.: There are plenty of middle-aged (and younger and older) adults on multiple prescription drugs for sleep disorders/anxiety/pain/ depression, etc. What is so sad is that it seems as though Heath was ill with pneumonia, and coupled with the presciption and nonprescription drug use, coupled with perhaps recreational drugs...his body just collapsed. He was so young, but frankly, it is a wonder that it doesn't happen to more of us!
Hank Stuever: The pneumonia thing is still a possibility, though last I checked the wires, there was nothing conclusive. The Reliable Source women said this earlier, and I will AMEN it: Insomnia is the worst. I can knock myself out with a single Excedrin PM, but then again, I'm not trying to finish two films at once, dodge paparazzi, deal with all the BS that comes with being a movie star, co-parent a 2-year-old ....
washingtonpost.com: Discussion: The Reliable Source (washingtonpost.com, Jan. 23)
Gaithersburg, Md.: So sad about Heath. He was a favorite of mine. One thing I hate about this is separating the tabloid speculations from the truth.
Hank Stuever: I'm afraid that's the world we live in now, Gaith'burg. I also prefer the wait-and-see. I am grateful that my only assignment yesterday when the news broke was to just think about his life and try to tie something thematically. Does anyone remember back to when all the rock stars were dying in the late 60s and early 70s? How quickly did news like that spread? How intense was the coverage of say, the death of Jim Morrison, Jimi Hendrix ... Legendarily, the drag queens rioted in the streets the night Judy Garland died, but that was because they were being hassled by cops already and IN NO MOOD at that point for any krep from the cops. How about Marilyn Monroe? What was the TMZ equivalent, besides weekly gossip mags, in 1962?
Re: Celebrity death vs. More important stuff: I think people spend so much time focusing on celebrities' lives because 45,000 people dying in the Congo is sometimes too sad or emotional to think about. I know that there are much more important and pressing/depressing issues going on in the world right now and that is precisely why I read about celebrity gossip -- it's a break from all of that.
Hank Stuever: Yes, you're right. People read celebrity stuff as a salve to the "real" news. I just hope they're also reading the real news. I think we've all had the experience of reading -- in the Post or NYT or LAT -- a really compelling story/narrative about ONE person or family in a Congo-type situation in another part of the world, and that makes it so much more real, and less like a number. I have always believed that we pay attention to celebrities because, as long as there's been civilization, we need godlike figures, about which to tell stories of triumph and tragedy. It's all Greek to me.
Tampa, Fla.: A comment: I was watching CNN last night, trying to get caught up on the presidential election. Of course they were just going on and on about Heath Ledger.
I really dislike the way celebrity infotainment seems to be taking over traditional hard news outlets.
Hank Stuever: I sympathize, and I suppose if there was a way to win the ratings game without doing infotainment, then the people at CNN would have thought of it by now. I guess in situations like that, you could turn off CNN and pick up an actual copy of the day's Washington Post, which would get you up to speed on both, and you could decide which you want to look at first...
Re: The Dark Knight: I've heard that Heath Ledger gives one mighty performance in The Dark Knight. Would it be beyond the scope of possibility for him to receive a posthumous Oscar nomination next year, much like Peter Finch did for Network?
I'm willing to bet that Christopher Nolan will dedicate the film to Heath, too.
Hank Stuever: I suppose it's possible, though Oscar is never kind to performances in big-budget movies like that -- Johnny Depp in Pirates being a rare exception.
I think part of why people care about the death of a performer like Mr. Ledger is that he gave them something specific and they are grateful. It's perfectly natural that they should feel personal connection and personal sorrow.
People may certainly feel sorrow over things like the deaths in the Congo or similar terrible situations. However, it is a much more abstract sorrow. How could it be otherwise?
Hank Stuever: Good comment. Thanks.
Say what, Washington, D.C.?: What the poster from Washington, D.C., is suffering from is a lack of perspective. If we compare everything we do and discuss to the most disastrous events going on, we'll never do or discuss anything. I was brushing my teeth this morning when I realized 45,000 children are dying in Africa. How could I be so selfish to be brushing my teeth when so many children are dying? I was devastated.
The obvious question for the Washington, D.C., poster is: with so many people dying in Africa, why are you wasting your time posting to a Washington Post discussion?
Needless to say, most of us are dynamic enough and have enough perspective, to discuss an event that isn't Number 1 on the World's Priority List.
My condolences to Mr Ledger's family and fans.
Germantown, Md.: I didn't realize that Heath Ledger's latest role was that of the Joker in the newest Batman movie, Dark Knight. Have people who've had a peek into his performance commented on his interpretation of the character? How does his recent work compare to his past work?
Hank Stuever: There's a terrific trailer that came out in theaters in December and is probably available online if you Google "Dark Knight" and "trailer." It's a very different Joker than the Jack Nicholson one. It's terrifying and psychotic, more like the "Arkham Asylum" Joker that comic-book fans really love. I remember people groaning when it was announced that he was playing Joker. Now people are raving about the glimpse we got in the trailer. I even put "Heath Ledger as Joker" as "in" on this year's In and Out List on Jan. 1. (I put Emile Hirsch as Speed Racer as "out", but of course people disagree.)
Baltimore, Md.: You mentioned some comparisons in your appreciation. I have another one. Brandon Lee. Can't help but think of "The Crow" including the makeup (like the Joker in Dark Knight) and how the movie was released after his death.
Hank Stuever: I thought of The Crow too, especially because of the makeup. But I also thought about how little anyone ever mentions him anymore. Heath Ledger had a much bigger career behind him, and ahead of him, IMHO.
Louisville, Ky.: I think the Ledger news is more upsetting because he had real talent and seemed to have more of a sense of who he was and what he wanted to do than most young actors. I have to admit I lost some respect for him when he split up with Michelle Williams and started modelizing this fall. Carrying on in bars, sleeping with Lindsay Lohan (rumored), and running around when he had a beautiful little girl at home and a fiancee he could have been working things out with. It just seemed stupid and really disappointing -- though it's not my business or anyone else's how he or any other public figure chooses to spend his time.
Now these emerging stories of problems with drugs (legal and illegal), depression, etc., throw all that in a different light.
Hank Stuever: I keep thinking of River Phoenix.
Silver Spring, Md.: Before the internet, cellphones, texting, it was just TV, radio and word-of-mouth. The celeb death that affected me most was John Lennon. That was big enough to break in on Monday Night Football and announce.
Hank Stuever: Yes! Lennon was the first one I remember (Dec. 1980, I was in the 7th grade) where EVERYBODY stopped and was sad for several days and weeks, and there was lots of writing about what he meant. It outdid Elvis (d. 1977) by a long shot, at least in my early pop awareness. Because I was still fetal when MLK and RFK were shot, Lennon was the first time I saw a celeb death get the sort of treatment that resembles later celeb death coverage. (And face it, Ledger doesn't come anywhere near that level. I have thought for a long time that we are in for a BIG ONE, but I can't think who. Let's not speculate.)
London, UK /Bklyn: I don't really have a question, but just wanted to make a couple of comments. I think people have been drawn to the news of Heath's death because he seemed like a nice, normal, likeable person, even if he was a celebrity. I also wanted to caution people from guessing what the cause of death was -- no one knows yet. Regardless, it is a sad story. He was too young and had too much to offer as an actor and more importantly, as a truly decent human being by all accounts.
Baltimore, Md.: From the vantage point of age 59, re Morrison, Hendrix and Monroe: I remember hearing about the deaths of Morrison and Hendrix on the radio. They got mentions on the evening news, but they were both symbols of the rebellious counterculture and mainstream media did not, as I recall, make a big deal of it. Monroe was different. I was only 14 when she died, but she was the ultimate American sex symbol and her death was big, big news. God only knows what it would have been like had we had the cable news monster to feed on her bones.
The Heath Ledger story is so sad. Did Michelle Williams break up with him, or vice versa?
Hank Stuever: Before the day is over, I'm going into the Post page archives (we have microfilm pages in electronic form now -- hallelujah) and see where deaths like Hendrix and Morrison played in the paper. I'm curious. I do not know the details of Michelle Williams' and Heath Ledger's breakup. I wasn't reading US Weekly too closely of late.
Re: Judy Garland: True story: my mother went into labor with me (two weeks early), the night the Stonewall riots began. I ended up gay. Nature or nurture, I ask you?
Hank Stuever: Fabulous Nature, doing her thing.
Michelle Williams: I read that the mother of his child was in Sweden with their daughter and that when she recieved the news, she immediately boarded a plane to go home. I was thinking how difficult it must be for her to deal with such shocking and horrible news and having to sit on a long plane ride with everyone knowing what had happened. And then deboarding the plane, and having to deal with more people, etc. This is something us noncelebs don't have to deal with -- having to experience some very dark times out in the open. Very sad.
Washington, D.C.: Thanks for your great appreciation piece on Heath Ledger today. You noted that he kept "dirtying up, dressing down," etc., as part of effort to be taken seriously as an actor. Dressing down in public seems to be a pattern among celebs. Whenever I see stars on talk shows, etc, they seem to be competing to see who's the grungiest. It seems odd to see a star do that, especially when they probably had to focus intently on their looks, etc., in order to become celebs.
Hank Stuever: Yes, other than the dirtiness of fashion (that has come and gone and come and gone five times now), I don't know why they do it, but I have one pet theory: Dressing up and grooming is too much like work. When you're at that level, you spend a lot of time in make up (for movies, for magazine shoots) and you just get sick of it. All you want is to be left alone and pick your own clothes, and, perhaps petulantly, you want people to see that you're real, dirty? Or maybe they just dig it.
N. Carolina: Read your commentary yesterday in Weingarten's chat about "appreciations," very interesting. Thank you.
Hank Stuever: The Appreciation essays in Style aren't entirely arbitrary, but it's really about what more can be said that won't be said in the obit. Notoriety is not the only requirement. Sometimes a writer has to be convinced by the editor to do the appreesh, sometimes a writer really has to beg the editor to get an appreesh on the Style story budget for the next day. The writer's "emotional" attachment to the subject is certainly not a requirement, as I have "appreciated" subjects on deadline having started from almost scratch when the assignment is given. (Sometimes you only have an hour or two to do the whole thing.) Sometimes the Appreciation is not all that appreciative. My favorite ones are of flawed characters (Tammy Faye Bakker Messner, Evel Knievel, etc.). I've certainly written some Appreciations where readers demanded an explanation ("THAT was an 'Appreciation'?!"), and I usually have to point them to the more formal obituary on A1 or in Metro. (We have great obituary writers.) I like to think of the difference as if the obituary is the funeral home (professional, elegant, official), and the Appreciation is the drink at the bar afterward. I can't think of another newspaper that has such a regular feature -- the essay that is NOT the obit, that runs in addition to an obit. Very often the challenging thing for the Style writers is to not duplicate the content of the obit. And yes, sometimes we just skip it -- either no one was moved to write it, or couldn't be assigned to it, or the section is crammed, or there really wasn't anything else to say. Like, the other day, with the Whamm-O guy. (He was the co-founder. We wrote about the first guy, when HE died.) Or Sam the Butcher from Brady Bunch, whose obit is in Metro today. (I can say that I really want to save any stray Brady musings for a biggie -- like ALICE.)
Gene Weingarten: Okay, so this is the definitive word.
Hank Stuever: I think this fits the Alanis Morrisette definition of ironic, dont'ya think? I put this into Gene's chat yesterday when the subject came up, a chatter asking who and what decides how and why Style does an Appreesh. I stand by it! (And I stand by ready for the next one!) I will say this: I think this is the first time I had to write an Appreesh for someone so young. It's much harder, not because it's tragic, but because there's a lot less to write about.
Washington, D.C.: Have there ever been any post-morten Oscar nominations, or wins? Seems like the Academy would be suckers for that sort of thing, particularly since Ledger didn't win for Brokeback.
Hank Stuever: Surely an Oscar trivia buff can help us out here. I'm sure there have been, especially for quite old actors who died byt he time their movie was release. It's probably an obvious one, but I haven't the time to look around for my Oscar trivia books....
Washington, D.C.: Kurt Cobain was a Big One for all the Gen X'ers.
Hank Stuever: Huge, and some newspapers in 1994 did not quite "get" it right away, and either briefed it on their national news page or in their "people" briefs. I was at a newspaper where a young feature writer had to PLEAD with the editors to get Cobain's death the appropriate play. The outpouring that came the next day proved her right. The takeway lesson for any media organization is to make sure you have a roomful of diverse journalists, who will know things the editor may not.
Falls Church, Va.: I was a young adult when Lennon went down. I attended the candle light vigil at Lincoln Memorial afterwards. It was very shocking to see the assassination trend of the '60s move from politicians to celebrities. I truly feared for a remarkable young golf professional when his fame was white hot about 10 years ago. This celebritology thing is a modern and destructive form of gossip. The obsessive media coverage of naughty young starlets/singers reflects a true decline in our culture. Responsible journalists must turn away from this.
Hank Stuever: OK. I wonder if responsible journalists, however, can't bring some quality to it? I know that's what we think about around here. We could never win the gossip wars, but what we sell here is synthesis and thought.
Rhode Island: Just another perspective on perspective -- it's one thing to mourn the passing of a talented young man. The fact that it's Heath Ledger, however, takes it a step further.
His portrayal of Ennis del Mar was a character for the ages. He has been compared, reasonably, to a young Brando. The character of Ennis touched a chord with millions of people. If Heath Ledger had never acted in another film, he'll be remembered for that.
Hank Stuever: Yes, thank you Rhode Island. I have had several messages this morning from the (for lack of a better descrip) "gay community" who are feeling an additional pain, and really hold BB Mountain in special reverence -- for its story, for its filmmakers, and absolutely for the Ledger and Gyllenhaal performances.
Peter Finch died before getting his Oscar....: Peter Finch was in "Network" and died the day after being on the Johnny Carson show. He died before getting his Oscar; his wife accepted for him. This was about 1977 or so.
San Diego, Calif.: RE: Infotainment
I agree, that celebrity gossip has taken over a much larger percentage of "news" coverage. It pays and unfortunately that is how our economy drives these trends. But the media could police themselves and put some morality into their mission statements.
In fact I heard yesterday that the executives of E! Network were meeting to discuss halting the coverage of Britney Spears until she goes to get help. That is great "news" in my opinion.
Hank Stuever: Earlier this week, before Ledger died, there was a bit of a kerfluffle around the fact that the AP has already prepped some obituary copy on Britney, to keep in a file in case she suddenly dies. People think it's crass, but these people have never had to write an obit on deadline. Other people think this may have an added benefit, if a starlet learns that her life has gotten so bad that even the AP has pre-written her obit. Unfortunately, in this case, I wouldn't be surprised if Britney's respone to that is: What's an obit? What's an AP?
Washington, D.C.: I think of the River Phoenix death too. I remember how I didn't even hear about his death until the evening news, when all they would run were the teasers ("Hollywood mourns the loss of a talented actor. Details at 11.") I was in utter shock when I find out who it was, and it wasn't until even recently that I learned of the exact details of his death, thanks to the Internet. For this, and Anna Nicole Smith this year, not only do we get a blow-by-blow account, but we get every single rumor (Mary-Kate's apartment, anyone?) and a picture of the body being taken out on stretcher. Have we lost the idea of death with dignity?
San Francisco, Calif.: Although I am only 35, I clearly felt the generation gap when reading the comments on the times after this actor's death. 900 comments and all nearly the same, the writer felt sad,the event was tragic. Has there come a point now when every minute thought that occurs in one's mind gets dropped onto a keyboard and sent to cyberspace, no matter how inane or superlative? Do people think this isn't tragic unless they comment on it? Just curious?
Hank Stuever: I'm sort of with you on this, yet here we are...
Sad, but with perspective, Md.: I can't seem to read enough interviews or reviews of what I think was an impressive body of acting work. But when the TV Guide Channel assembled their "experts" last night it was Anna Nicole all over again.
I hope this (and I'm including my sadness under the same heading with the presence of a Washington Post online discussion)is more about tragedy and the end of a truly bright career than spectacle, yes? I mean, Ennis Del Mar was an amazing performance and even Casanova was brilliant.
Hank Stuever: Thanks for dropping in.
Heath's next movie: Defamer said the Imaginarium has been terminated. Not going to happen. Apparently Terry Gilliam has some sort of curse....
Hank Stuever: Some instanews. Thanks.
Washington, D.C.: Just a comment: What utterly infuriates me is how some in the press seem to be jumping to conclusions that he either had a drug problem or killed himself. One DJ this morning described him as "talented, but troubled." Troubled? I never got that impression. I wish people wouldn't be so quick to think the worst of others. I read that his autopsy showed he was suffering from pneumonia. Maybe something he was taking for that interacted badly with the Ambien. Scary. Something like that could happen to anyone. What a tragic loss. My condolences to his family and friends.
Hank Stuever: Thanks for the comment.
Baltimore, Md.: It saddened me to hear about Heath Ledger's death principally because of his exceptional talent -- though also because of his young daughter and because he seemed like a nice guy. He had tremendous acting ability, a versatility proven in many roles as well as remarkable depth. His performance in Brokeback Mountain floored me. Before that, I thought he was a solid actor, but nothing special. As a heterosexual woman, I didn't expect to care so much about a "gay cowboy" love story. Brokeback is one of the great cinematic love stories, period. The movie was a revelation for many ordinary people -- those who may not be prejudiced but aren't always necessarily comfortable with gay themes -- feel the pain and waste of any great love that must be hidden. Heath's performance was central to the film's success. What more he might have done onscreen, we'll never know.
Hank Stuever: A lot of my otherwise enlightened straight male friends skipped Brokeback Mountain. Their wives and girlfriends went to see it with one another, or not at all. The men kept complaining that they were being guilted about not seeing it. They were ooky about it. I guess I understand. (I kept telling them that there's a sex scene where you see Ann Hathaway's breasts. They didn't believe me.) It's a great performance from Heath Ledger. It's on HBO a lot these days -- do check it out if you haven't.
Takoma, D.C.: You know, I was 18 and a freshman in college when Kurt Cobain died (and of course I knew some Nirvana songs) and I just don't remember it having any particular impact on me. Was I just the wrong kind of kid? Have the 14 intervening years addled my brain? Was I unable to care without the Internet to give me the details?
Hank Stuever: Did you like the music back then? Were you an involved consumer of new music, or was it all just background noise? Being 18 and following the news/culture don't always go hand in hand, even thought EVERYTHING is marketed straight at you at that age.
Chicago, Ill.: Oscar Trivia: Yes, Peter Finch is the only person to recieve a posthumous acting Oscar. Others with posthumous nominations -- but without awards -- were Jeanne Eagels for The Letter (1928-29), James Dean for East of Eden (1955) and Giant (1956), Spencer Tracy for Guess Who's Coming to Dinner (1967), Ralph Richardson for Greystoke: The Legend of Tarzan (1984), and Massimo Troisi for Il Postino (1995).]
Hank Stuever: Thanks so much, Chicago.
Dirtying up/Dressing down:: Gotta say, it seems to me that it's only in the U.S. (although now increasingly globally where people want to be "western/modern") that anyone upper class (be it by birth, celebrityhood, or money) dresses down in any way. It's sort of a fake nod to the fallacy that we're a classless society. Everywhere else, when you can, you dress up. So that people won't think you're poor/shabby/without.
Just an observation. And one that occurs to me all the time when celebs dress grungy, in clothes that are frequently stupidly expensive.
Hank Stuever: Some fashion analysis. Thanks.
Central Virginia: What has really disturbed me about all the media attention (in addition to what's going on in the Congo), is the fact that I read that his housekeeper discovered his body shortly before 3:30 Eastern, and I read he was dead at about 3:45 Eastern on post.com. Was it even possible for any of his family to be contacted? How horrific to hear this from the media! Why can't news like this be kept under wraps for say, at least an hour?
Hank Stuever: It simply can't. Not when you're famous. That is the price of fame. Police routinely hold IDs of deceased from reporters when it's a non-famous victim, until the family has been notified.
Baltimore, Md.: Of course it's his work from Brokeback Mountain that has prompted our friends from the Westboro Baptist Church into action -- they will be protesting his funeral and are already celebrating his eternal damnation.
Hank Stuever: They may have to go to Australia to do it.
1. I read somewhere that it was actually Mary-Kate Olsen's apartment he was found in. Is there any validity to this?
2. It struck me last night that Heath Ledger's death, while tragic, is getting far more press than Brad Renfro's, who also died recently. Why the difference in coverage?
Hank Stuever: 1. That rumor was shot down last night. But nevertheless it worked its way all the around the web, which is what makes some of us newsosaurs jittery about the way journalism is done now. 2. Brad Renfro's career in no way stacks up to Ledger's.
Bethesda, Md.: Ann Hathaway and Michelle Williams!
Also, Ledger was impressive in Monster's Ball as Sonny.
Hank Stuever: Yes! He was great in Monster's Ball. He plays Billy Bob Thorton's son. It's also a tragic role.
Washington, D.C.: I'm actually okay with the amount of coverage.
To me, the difference is that Anna Nicole was famous for having no talent, Heath was famous because he did have talent.
I could have done without wall to wall Anna Nicole death coverage for that very reason.
Hank Stuever: Good point. I think we also got soooo much Anna Nicole coverage because there were about six storylines to follow there -- the baby, the paternity, the will, the downspiral, the mess..... On that sad note, I thank all of you for choosing to drop in and chat, or lurk. I think that our celebre-culture, while disturbing, can be navigated with intellect and emotion and thought, and you have proven that over the last hour. We're not as messed up as we seem. Take care. Bye.
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.
| 153.902439 | 0.634146 | 0.878049 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/22/AR2008012202890.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/22/AR2008012202890.html
|
A Rough-Edged Actor Who Carved An Indelible Image
|
2008012319
|
A young movie star dies and the mind automatically cues up the clip reel and FFs through the footage, even before it occurs to you to simply turn on the television and just watch the actual, endless loop:
Here is Heath Ledger -- fresh and hunky and unknown -- singing "Can't Take My Eyes Off You" and dancing on the school stadium bleachers in a teen flick adaptation of Shakespeare ("10 Things I Hate About You," a reworking of "The Taming of the Shrew"). Here is Heath Ledger caressing that empty, soiled cowboy shirt kept by his dead lover in "Brokeback Mountain." And Heath Ledger as one of the Bob Dylans in "I'm Not There," in sunglasses and a dour expression, one of the Bob Dylans who were impossible to be around.
A sneak peek of Heath Ledger from this summer's upcoming Batman movie as the Joker, fully unhinged, erasing in a few seconds any ownership Jack Nicholson may have claimed to that role. Working backward now, here is Heath Ledger in period pieces, wooing women or fighting in the Revolution. Heath Ledger in a knighthood fantasy, with swords. Heath Ledger as the unhappy prison guard in "Monster's Ball" who shoots himself in front of his father . . .
Edit that, rewind, start again:
Video suddenly from someone's phone of the curious crowd that gathered in the early evening yesterday, the gawkers and stalkers in all of us, at the SoHo apartment where Ledger was found dead at 28 by the housekeeper and the massage therapist. He was naked in a bed, with prescription sleeping pills reportedly found nearby -- fame's tragic tableau mort. Next we carry him to the gauzy and reverential place we reserve for such men: James Dean in a roadster on the highway, River Phoenix at a nightclub.
There can only be so many articles about a young actor's understatement, about his steeliness and cool. These always go with pictures of him in $400 jeans. Here you had a man who got a decent chance at everything a young actor could hope for, starting from Australian TV and leading to an Academy Award nomination for "Brokeback Mountain" -- a part that, by conventional Hollywood wisdom, had just as much potential to kill a leading man's career.
Had he lived to old age, Ledger would have never stopped hearing "I wish I knew how to quit you" jokes, the line uttered by his co-star Jake Gyllenhaal in "Brokeback Mountain." MTV gave the two of them the "best kiss" prize at its movie awards show. What got lost in all that is how good the movie was, and how good Ledger was as Ennis Del Mar, the pent-up ranch hand with a broken heart. (Really it was a role about not talking, about the unsaid. Easier said than done.)
Some of Ledger's movies worked, and many of them did not, but all along, a viewer could sense that he went about the craft with almost too much seriousness, with pain. In almost every interview he downplayed celebrityhood, tried to deny its meaning and place in his life, shrugged the usual serious-actor shrugs -- often while lighting his cigarette, creating a mood of nonchalance. Just a couple of years ago he and his pretty girlfriend moved to the pretty part of Brooklyn and had a pretty baby girl. People (the magazine, and actual people) followed them everywhere. They broke up, and it seemed like a shame, though what sort of shame you can never quite say: Ours? Theirs?
Despite the initial huzzah and marketing by Ledger's publicists -- the Vanity Fair cover eight years ago and the expert chiseling that goes along with that -- the heartthrob thing never clicked for Ledger. He worked another angle, something that is sometimes called "smoldering" when writers are out of ways to describe it. It looked like it was a chore for him to be cute. "He's handsome, but not in a traditional sort of way," Shekhar Kapur, who directed Ledger in the 2002 drama "Four Feathers," said about the actor to The Washington Post. "He's a bit craggy, but he's very, very sexy."
Craggy sexy. That was it, and perhaps that was all of it. Craggy sexy is not a lot of smiles and fashion spreads. The result of craggy sexy is that a certain niche of fans winds up swooning, writing letters of adulatory praise to Entertainment Weekly, but not as many people who opt for the more mainstream definition of sexy. Those people like Brad Pitt.
In public, Ledger kept dirtying up, dressing down, adding tattoos, chain-smoking, letting his hair get long and greasy. (Message: I don't care about that kind of thing. Message: Only the art matters.)
But like all of them -- all of these craggy sexy serious actors in search of a good part -- he cleaned up good. The lasting photo is of him in a tuxedo, making his way down the red carpet in 2006 with his then-girlfriend, Michelle Williams. They'd met on the set of "Brokeback Mountain." They'd just had the baby a few months before, and named her Matilda. In the carpet moment, Williams is in curry yellow Vera Wang chiffon. The couple do their best to fulfill all the requirements of the carpet, talking optimistically and proudly about his nomination for Best Actor, and also talking about nothing, and looking great.
He didn't win. Hours later, at the Vanity Fair party at Morton's in Beverly Hills, he was drinking with friends. People stood near him and just watched him. It was Ledger, Williams and Jake Gyllenhaal. It was Gyllenhaal's talented sister, Maggie, and her fiance, the un-craggy, heavy-lidded Peter Sarsgaard.
We hovered around them and tried to overhear their conversation. Soon enough they all drew closer and shut everyone out with their body language. They formed an impenetrable circle of young Hollywood cool.
|
Get style news headlines from The Washington Post, including entertainment news, comics, horoscopes, crossword, TV, Dear Abby. arts/theater, Sunday Source and weekend section. Washington Post columnists, movie/book reviews, Carolyn Hax, Tom Shales.
| 23.313725 | 0.470588 | 0.627451 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/22/AR2008012203538.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/22/AR2008012203538.html
|
Iraq's New Law on Ex-Baathists Could Bring Another Purge
|
2008012319
|
But now, under new legislation promoted as way to return former Baathists to public life, the 56-year-old and thousands like him could be forced out of jobs they have been allowed to hold, according to Iraqi lawmakers and the government agency that oversees ex-Baathists.
"This new law is very confusing," Awadi said. "I don't really know what it means for me."
He is not alone. More than a dozen Iraqi lawmakers, U.S. officials and former Baathists here and in exile expressed concern in interviews that the law could set off a new purge of ex-Baathists, the opposite of U.S. hopes for the legislation.
Approved by parliament this month under pressure from U.S. officials, the law was heralded by President Bush and Iraqi leaders as a way to soothe the deep anger of many ex-Baathists -- primarily Sunnis but also many Shiites such as Awadi -- toward the Shiite-led government.
Yet U.S. officials and even legislators who voted for the measure, which still requires approval by Iraq's presidency council, acknowledge that its impact is hard to assess from its text and will depend on how it is implemented. Some say the law's primary aim is not to return ex-Baathists to work, but to recognize and compensate those harmed by the party. Of the law's eight stated justifications, none mentions reinstating ex-Baathists to their jobs.
"The law is about as clear as mud," said one U.S. senior diplomat.
The confusion has been compounded because the information on former party members comes from the de-Baathification commission headed by Ahmed Chalabi, the former deputy prime minister who as an Iraqi exile sought to convince U.S. officials that Hussein's government had weapons of mass destruction. In light of the absence of such weapons, many Iraqi and U.S. officials are suspicious of his commission's statistics.
In an interview at his lavish home in the Mansour district, Chalabi said the new legislation would drive out some of the former Baathists his commission had allowed to return to government. The new measure, he said, is much harsher than the existing policy and a draft of the law that the United States had encouraged parliament to pass.
"Put this under the category of: Be careful what you wish for," Chalabi said.
The new law was supposed to ease the homeward passage of former Baathists such as Muhammed Kareem.
After 35 years as a civil servant in the Oil Ministry, Kareem fled his home in Basra after the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003. Four fellow Baathists from the ministry in Basra had turned up dead. Searching for him, militiamen had ransacked Kareem's house.
|
BAGHDAD -- Maj. Gen. Hussein al-Awadi, a former official in Saddam Hussein's Baath Party, became the commander of the Iraqi National Police despite a 2003 law barring the party from government.
| 13.578947 | 0.657895 | 0.868421 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/22/AR2008012203660.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/22/AR2008012203660.html
|
Va. Student's Snow-Day Plea Triggers an Online Storm
|
2008012319
|
Snow days, kids and school officials have always been a delicate mix.
But a phone call to a Fairfax County public school administrator's home last week about a snow day -- or lack of one -- has taken on a life of its own. Through the ubiquity of Facebook and YouTube, the call has become a rallying cry for students' First Amendment rights, and it shows that the generation gap has become a technological chasm.
It started with Thursday's snowfall, estimated at about three inches near Lake Braddock Secondary School in Burke. On his lunch break, Lake Braddock senior Devraj "Dave" S. Kori, 17, used a listed home phone number to call Dean Tistadt, chief operating officer for the county system, to ask why he had not closed the schools. Kori left his name and phone number and got a message later in the day from Tistadt's wife.
"How dare you call us at home! If you have a problem with going to school, you do not call somebody's house and complain about it," Candy Tistadt's minute-long message began. At one point, she uttered the phrase "snotty-nosed little brats," and near the end, she said, "Get over it, kid, and go to school!"
Not so long ago, that might have been the end of it -- a few choice words by an agitated administrator (or spouse). But with the frenetic pace of students' online networking, it's harder for grown-ups to have the last word. Kori's call and Tistadt's response sparked online debate among area students about whether the student's actions constituted harassment and whether the response was warranted.
Kori took Tistadt's message, left on his cellphone, and posted an audio link on a Facebook page he had created after he got home from school called "Let them know what you think about schools not being cancelled." The Web page listed Dean Tistadt's work and home numbers.
The Tistadts received dozens more calls that day and night, Dean Tistadt said. Most were hang-ups, but at one point, they were coming every five minutes -- one at 4 a.m., he said. At the same time, his wife's response was spreading through cyberspace.
Within a day, hundreds of people had listened to her message, which was also posted on YouTube. A friend of Kori's sent it to a local television news station, and it was aired on the nightly news program. As of yesterday, more than 9,000 people had clicked on the YouTube link. Hundreds of comments had been posted on the Facebook and YouTube pages, largely about what constitutes proper and polite requests for public information from students.
One Oakton High School student said in a posting yesterday that the crank calls to the Tistadts' home were out of line but that Kori's call was appropriate. "I am not happy that [Dean Tistadt] gambled multiple times with our safety just so we might have a bit more knowledge crammed in our heads at school," he wrote.
A Westfield High School student agreed: "thank God someone stood up for us at last!"
Some were just as adamant the other way. A student from James Madison High School in Vienna wrote: "It's called a home phone number for a reason. My dad is a physician and I can't tell you how irritating it is to get calls at all hours of the night from people who think they are entitled to immediate attention . . . leave the poor guy alone."
Kori, a member of the Lake Braddock debate team who said his grade-point average is 3.977, said his message was not intended to harass. He said that he tried unsuccessfully to contact Dean Tistadt at work and that he thought he had a basic right to petition a public official for more information about a decision that affected him and his classmates. He said he was exercising freedom of speech in posting a Facebook page. The differing interpretations of his actions probably stem from "a generation gap," he said.
"People in my generation view privacy differently. We are the cellphone generation. We are used to being reached at all times," he said.
Kori explained his perspective in an e-mail yesterday to Fairfax County schools spokesman Paul Regnier. Regnier said, also in an e-mail, that Kori's decision to place the phone call to the Tistadts' home was more likely the result of a "civility gap."
"It's really an issue of kids learning what is acceptable and not acceptable. Any call to a public servant's house is harassment," Regnier said in an interview.
Kori said that he was called into the principal's office to discuss the matter but that he was not punished.
Candy Tistadt did not return phone messages, but Dean Tistadt credited Kori for having the "courage of his convictions to stand up and be identified." He also credited him for causing the high volume of crank calls, not to mention considerable grief and embarrassment for his wife.
"This has been horrible for her," he said, adding that he and his wife both learned a hard lesson about the long reach of the Internet.
|
Snow days, kids and school officials have always been a delicate mix.
| 73.214286 | 1 | 14 |
high
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/18/DI2008011802727.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/18/DI2008011802727.html
|
Dirda on Books
|
2008012319
|
Prize-winning critic Michael Dirda took your questions and comments concerning literature, books and the joys of reading.
Each week Michael Dirda's name appears -- in attractively large type -- in The Post's Book World section, where he writes about new novels, neglected classics, fat biographies, European literature, fantasy, science fiction, thrillers, poetry, works of scholarship, the occasional children's book, almost anything under the rubric of "arts and letters." Although he earned a Ph.D. in comparative literature from Cornell, Dirda has somehow managed to retain, well into middle age, a myopic 12-year-old's exuberant passion for reading.
As he has for the past 40 years, Dirda says he still spends inordinate amounts of time mourning his lost youth, listening to music (classical, jazz, oldies, country and western), and daydreaming ("my only real hobby"). He claims that the happiest hours of his week are spent sitting in front of a computer, writing. His most recent books include "Readings: Essays and Literary Entertainments" (Indiana hardcover, 2000; Norton paperback, 2003), his self-portrait of the reader as a young man, "An Open Book" (Norton, 2003) and a collection of his essays and reviews titled "Bound to Please" (Norton, 2005) Last year he brought out "Book by Book: Notes on Reading and Life" (Henry Holt, 2006) and this fall Harcourt will publish "Classics for Pleasure."
Dirda joined The Post in 1978, having grown up in the working-class steel town of Lorain, Ohio and graduated with highest honors in English from Oberlin College. His favorite writers are Stendhal, Chekhov, Jane Austen, Montaigne, Evelyn Waugh, T.S. Eliot, Nabokov, John Dickson Carr, Joseph Mitchell, P.G. Wodehouse and Jack Vance. He thinks the greatest novel of all time is either Murasaki Shikubu's "The Tale of Genji" or Proust's "A la recherche du temps perdu." In a just world he would own Watteau's painting "The Embarkation for Cythera." Dirda is a member of several literary associations, including the Baker Street Irregulars and The Ghost Story Society. Despite a penchant for quiet and solitude, he enjoys giving talks, teaching, and traveling. People tell him that he can be pretty funny for a guy who usually has his nose in a book.
(He also thinks he can be pretty funny at times...)
An archive of his reviews is available here.
An archive of his discussions is available here.
Dirda was online Tuesday, Jan. 8, at 2 p.m.
Baltimore: Capote's comment on Kerouac as a writer: Michael, last week I posted that Capote's famous putdown of "On The Road" was made to Jack Paar on the Tonight Show, while you thought is came from a Paris Review interview. My (admittedly cursory) research shows we were both mistaken.
According to James Wolcott's 2005 Vanity Fair review of the film "Capote," Truman uttered that mal mot on David Susskind's Open End program. (And anyone who remembers Open End is definitely on the far side of 50.)
Michael Dirda: Welcome to Dirda on Books! It's a bright, sunny day here in Silver Spring, Maryland, and I've just come back from running around the block for 35 minutes. Up until just before Christmas I was hitting the gym five times a week -- alternating weights and cardio (mostly running) -- and feeling I was getting some place with my modest ambition to become, if not buffed and cut, then at least lightly polished and abraded. But over the holidays I managed to go running only once or twice, lifted once. Finally, I started back on my regular routine and I felt I was almost starting over. Sigh. I had injured my shoulder a little and so was, admittedly, taking it easy. But still. . . Oh well. I'm told one's muscles have a good memory and will snap back.
But let's look at this week's questions.
Well, I suppose we can trust Wolcott--or at least the Vanity Fair editors. But I"m still confident that TC mentioned the Kerouac remark in his Paris Review interview. Maybe he was referring back to when he made it on TV.
I've decided not to remember any cultural phenomena earlier than the mid 1980s. I mean if I start mentioning The Jack Benny Show people at the gym will stop regarding me as a proto-Greek god in the making and realize I'm just another middle-aged coot trying to stem off decrepitude.
Washington, D.C.: I'm new to this chat so please excuse me if you have answered this before. Have you had the opportunity to use the Kindle reading device? Do you like it? Will it ever replace the real thing?
Michael Dirda: Nope, I haven't even seen a Kindle yet. If science fiction movies and novels are any indication, we will almost certainly be using some kind of downloadable device for our reading. (But what will happen if the main computer, with all our literature and knowledge, crashes?) But I like books as objects and I like the books I read to look and feel different. The physical object, not just the text, is part of the experience of reading a book. Plus, I scribble in the margins, turn down pages, and generally abuse the poor things horribly. Harder to do that with a computer screen.
At the moment, I'm still trying to integrate a digital camera and an iPod Nano into my life. I was excited by them at first, but then realized that I have an innate high-tech ineptitude. I know how trite this must sound, but there you are.
Lenexa, Kan.: I first "encountered" Thomas Love Peacock several years back in one of your "First Encounters." Alas, bookstores didn't have him stocked. With your Peacock essay in "Classics for Pleasure," I was this time sufficiently motivated to place an order. I just finished (really enjoyed) "Nightmare Abbey" and am starting "Crotchet Castle." Nice to be familiar with his work (become a "pavonine connoisseur") and have in my library.
Also, a thank you to "Ashburn VA"--who apparently admires Murikami's "Kafka on the Shore" as much as I do--and saying "The Wind-Up Bird Chronicles" is even better. I just picked up a copy--talk about someone being primed for a read. This forum has been very useful. Thanks for doing it.
Michael Dirda: The pleasure is mine. The great essayist and scholar, Guy Davenport, spent his last days rereading Peacock.
New Lenox, Ill.: I read a trio of art books: Marc Chagall and the Jewish Theater, Gauguin by Michael Howard, and Georgia O'Keeffe: The New York Years.
It was interesting to hear about the used books that you recently acquired. Congratulations on the first edition of The Three Mulla Mulgars by Walter de la Mare, which I'd never heard of before, and the nice copy of the Starrett in dj, which should be fun. I also enjoyed reading about the music that you loaded on your new Nano. You've got some splendid choices (ah, the Mozart). Do you have a preference in Beethoven piano sonatas for Schnabel or Kovacevich (Bishop), or someone else?
What is your opinion on the controversy over whether or not Dmitri Nabokov should destroy (as per his father's request) the fragment The Original of Laura?
Michael Dirda: Beethoven sonatas -- I like Solomon for those he recorded.
My favorite all-round pianist is Sviatoslav Richter; among living pianists, I'm a Marthe Argerich fan. But really it depends on the music.
I don't think Dmitri should destroy anything of his father's that survives. He doesn't have to publish it; he can even embargo its use by scholars for 50 or more years. But anything from a major writer's pen should be preserved.
Woodlawn, Va.: The New York Times Book Review Web site carried an article yesterday about the popularity in Japan of so-called cell phone novels, novels composed on cell phone keypads, uploaded on the Internet where users can read and make comments, then published in print form. According to the article, these works are written mainly by women in their early 20s who compose while commuting or during sporadic moments of down time, and they use standards of text messaging such as smiley faces and shorthand keystrokes. Apparently, though not surprisingly, they involve little in the way of plot and character development (not sure what that leaves exactly), yet they are extremely popular. The three best-selling novels in Japan are cell phone novels. I can't begin to imagine the appeal of such a thing, and I'm grateful that they haven't found a wide audience in the U.S., but should I worry that this is where fiction and reading are headed? I like to think that a general interest in literature can be revived (I don't think it will die out altogether). Am I being naive?
Michael Dirda: Make it new, make it new. The young are always going to be experimenting with this or that -- how else will literature be revitalized in each generation? These cell phone novels sound bizarre -- how long can they be? You mean people actually spend time typing on those teeny tiny keypads? I'd say these were a fad, but who knows? The Japanese have loved manga and anime for years and raised them to an art form.
Minnetonka, Minn.: Michael, I just finished "People of the Book" by Geraldine Brooks. I like bibliomysteries and was hopeful despite the intense promotion. It had some features of "Sixteen Pleasures", book conservator and romantic entanglements. I didn't like the alternating chapter at first but I was impressed by the end. Any thoughts?
Michael Dirda: I haven't read the Brooks, I'm afraid. I used to like biblio-mysteries too, and probably still do, given the right one. But I can't tell whether you really liked the book or not.
Lexington: Michael, Your review of the bio of Washington Irving was timely. I was in the middle of a collection of ghost stories put together by the late R. Chetwynd-Hayes and Stephen Jones. Sure enough there was "Ghosts of Gibbet Island" by Irving. A gothic, pirate, ghost story with the flavor of the recent "Pirate" movies. A wonderful story -- are you familiar with it? Irving appears to have appreciated the darkness of early America.
Michael Dirda: Yes, it's in the anthology I mentioned. But how cool that you should be reading this story just when I was writing about Irving.
What's this anthology? Does it have a theme?
Boston: Is it fair to say that good humor writing is dying? As a fan of PG Wodehouse, Spike Milligan, Gerald Durrell, the Yes Minister/Prime Minister series -- I am yet to find authors that provide an opportunity for a chuckle!!
Bill Bryson does come close - but I would appreciate any other suggestions.
Michael Dirda: Well, the obvious examples are Terry Pratchett and, to a lesser extent, Tom Holt. Both write very witty humorous fantasy. In the case of Pratchett, particularly, the language is a real joy.
There are three very Wodehouse like novels -- but featuring gay heroes -- by Joe Keenan. He was for many years the script writer for "Frasier."
Michael Malone's "Handling Sin" and Charles Portis's various novels are rollicking and picaresque and very funny.
And you could do worse than go back to Thomas Love Peacock, with whom we opened this session of DOB.
For other ideas, consult the essay in "Readings" in which I annotate a list of my hundred favorite comic novels and a few works of nonfiction.
During a recent trip, I happened upon a copy of W.H. Auden's "Forewords and Afterwords" at an airport book store. This book has a collection of some his New York Review of Books and New Yorker essays as well as several forewords that he penned. Although I am familiar with his poetry, I have not read any of his prose until now. I was very impressed with two forewords in particular -- "The Greeks and Us" as well as "The Protestant Mythics." They reminded me a bit of Oxford's "A Short Introduction" series. I found Auden's prose enjoyable to read and very thought provoking.
Are you familiar with any other poets who also did equally well as literary critics?
Michael Dirda: Auden is a wonderful prose writer, with an analytic mind and a sly humor. You should look for his first collection "The Dyer's Hand," or the posthumous lectures on Shakespeare. Princeton has been bringing out all of Auden's works and are just about to issue a volume of his prose from the 1950s.
"The Greeks and Us" was originally the introduction to the Viking Portable Greek Reader.
Poets who write prose -- the late William Matheson, chief of rare book at the Library of Congress, used to collect just this subject. But let's see:
Byron's letters are wonderful -- racy, funny, and irresistible.
Passages in Keats's letters are almost as revered as some of his poems.
Coleridge's "Biographia Literaria" is half wonderful, half tedious.
Matthew Arnold and T.S. Eliot were equally important as poets and critics.
Ezra Pound's prose was incredibly zingy and crazed -- try his "Literary Essays" or letters or "The ABC of Reading."
Contemporaries: Almost every poet has written a fair amount of prose--James Merrill wrote a novel, Elizabeth Bishop some short stories.
Still, no poet wants to be remembered for his essays.
Washington Navy Yard: Good afternoon Mr. Dirda,
Lately I've been indulging myself in my lifelong fantasy of becoming a published writer. Honestly, should I grow up and accept the fact that I have a 9-to-5 job or do I have a prayer in this day and age of giant publishing houses and tales of rejection letter horror stories??
Michael Dirda: Well, what do you think? Have you ever published anything? If not, why not?
If you still want to write, then you should give it a try. Sit down after work or before work and put words on paper. See what happens. Maybe take a writing class. Try to get something into print. Agents and editors want two things: 1) to make money, and 2) to gain the respect of their colleagues by publishing important writers. Bear these two points in mind.
Fairfax, Va.: My daughter is taking an art class in college. Her current assignment requires the destruction of a hardback book to make a multimedia "statement." The instructor's example had pages ripped out, holes drilled through, objects hanging from ribbons and rods threaded through the holes, etc. My daughter selected a Sherlock Holmes book, not to abuse it but to save it.
She is REALLY bothered by this because she loves books. I suggested she use the opportunity to show up the philistinism she sees in the exercise. Or to abuse her arch-nemesis, the Algebra textbook. Or, since one student is using the Bible, what about the Koran?
My poor father, a reader raised in the Depression who never had enough books, will be rolling in his grave. I just needed to vent a bit.
Michael Dirda: I admit this is difficult. But if you go to your local library, you will discover that many books are tossed into dumpsters (if they don't sell at the in-library bookroom). Some books are more expendable than others -- a volume of Reader's Digest Condensed Books, for instance.
In the old days at Book World, when we needed art, Francis Tanabe would whip out his xacto knife and slice it from the beautiful volume of Cezanne paintings. We used to trod on top of piles of galleys to reach the shelves.
I admit that as a collector -- and author of a little guide to caring for your books -- this is chilling. But the books were tools, means to an end -- the promotion of the book itself, usually.
And art is cold. I knew a guy at Oberlin who made a print by inking the sides of a dead fish. That carp died for art.
We wrote in last week but only made the end of the chat and thought we would try again. We are trying to get some suggestions on good non-fiction books for seventh-grade girls for the next book review assignment. They read "Of Mice and Men," "Raisin in the Sun," and "To Kill a Mockingbird," to give you an indication of reading level.
Michael Dirda: We had a couple of good suggestions last week. Does anyone remember what they were?
Lexington: The Irving ghost story is in "Great Ghost Stories: Tales of Mystery and Madness" ed. by Chetwynd-Hayes and Jones ( Cemetery Dance Pubs., 2004 ). No real theme so much as stories that 'create an atmosphere, plus a generous helping of fear'. The oldest story is by DeFoe, most are from the classic authors, Marion Crawford, Bierce, Scott, Le Fanu, E. Nesbit, even Jerome K. Jerome, Irving, of course, and contemporaries like Ramsey Campbell, Stephen King, and Brian Lumley.
Michael Dirda: Sounds like a good anthology. I bet I can guess the stories by the authors you mention:
Bierce--"The Damned Thing" or "An Appearance at Owl Creek Bridge"
Le Fanu--"Green Tea" or "The Watcher"
Lumley--"Fruiting Bodies" (I think this is right but I cold be wrong--I've never read Lumley really, alas).
Baltimore: I got an advance copy of "People of the Book" and read it a few months ago, oddly enough. Without any book reviews to read, I had to form an opinion completely without outside input, a novel experience. As a plot-centric reader, I really enjoyed it. It was all of the fun of "The Davinci Code," but well written and thought provoking in a non-conspiracy way.
Re Auden: Kenneth Fearing was a poet, but is mostly known today for "The Big Clock" (1946; later filmed with Ray Milland, remade as "No Way Out" with Kevin Costner).
Auden was a mystery fan; his essay "The Guilty Vicarage" is recommended.
Michael Dirda: Yes. I once wrote an essay about "The Guilty Vicarage" -- talk about meta-criticism.
Fearing also wrote a dark comedy/mystery set at an artists colony -- "Dagger of the Mind."
Freising, Germany: What precisely would you consider to be psychological fiction?
In a way, almost all fiction is psychological, in that it tries to bind the reader into staying with the book through perhaps psychological means. Perhaps a good plot is sufficient, but psychological fiction is usually associated with Freudian insights rather than blood and action, even in crime thrillers.
Would it be accurate to say that psychological fiction is cranial and not action oriented?
Michael Dirda: I guess psychological fiction is simply fiction that focuses on the protagonist's psychology. That sounds -- bad rhyme coming up -- like a tautology. But "Crime and Punishment" is psychological fiction, but "Treasure Island" isn't -- not that there isn't action and murder in the first, and psychological complexity in the second.
But these days just as the short lyric, with a confessional tone, dominates the entire field of poetry, so most of our esteemed novels tend to focus on the hero's psychology, his or her progress from what state of mind to some epiphany or conversion. We forget that there are whole schools of civic poetry, odes honoring national holidays, epics about heroes, satirical verse, etc etc. So too fiction can be grander than any one character's psychology--e.g. "Moby-Dick"--or more interested in the pleasures of plot--e.g. Christie mysteries.
northwestern: Of poets who also wrote fine prose, Randall Jarrell comes immediately to mind. In fact, Jarrell is almost as famous for his razor-edged criticism as for his poetry. Jarrell's critical pieces are indeed memorable reading, and his novel, Pictures from an Institution, is one of the best campus novels ever published.
And then there are folks like James Agee and Delmore Schwartz, although the former didn't think of himself as a poet first while the latter most certainly did.
Michael Dirda: Thanks for bringing up Jarrell and Agee -- two of my favorite writers. "His poems sound as if they were written on a typewriter by a typewriter." (Jarrell.) But here's a favorite line from Agee's poetry:
Against time and the damages of the brain
Currently in Paris: For Freising, who asked about modern German prose in translation -- I would certainly recommend Christa Wolf, especially the translation of "Kein Ort, Nirgends" (No Place on Earth) which plays on Kleist, or perhaps Cassandra. Neither overtly political, nor entirely apolitical, but thoroughly enjoyable. A fair amount of Peter Handke's work is translated, although one could never accuse him of being "pleasant" to read. And if one is reasonably conversant in German, Maxie Wander's "Guten Morgen, du Schoene" is fascinating, not available in English translation, however, at least as far as I know.
Jumping considerably farther east, I've found Gambrell's translations of Tatyana Tolstaya's work quite enjoyable, and as true to the spirit of the Russian original as one could expect. So if you tire of modern German prose, you can always look to Russian!
Washington, D.C.: My child is ferocious reader; finishing two books in a week is not out of the question. I have issues with her actual comprehension and have decided WE need to read a book together so I can converse with her on the book. I am a little old school, and prefer classics from my era, the '80s of all things. We started with "The Pearl." What other ninth-grade level or so book would you recommend? She'a middle school kid, but expanding her horizons should not hurt.
Michael Dirda: "The Pearl" -- for a moment I thought you were a very modern parent indeed, but then I remembered Steinbeck's novella.
I love Joan Aiken -- all the Dido and Is Twite books, especially "Black Hearts in Battersea." The language is Dickensian, it's a fantasy set in an alternate Britain (like the Golden Compass, which is also recommended), and it's very funny.
But really, you should allow your daughter to read anything she wants (within reason). She will go through the Nancy Drew mysteries or their equivalent, then move on to Agatha Christie, then Sherlock Holmes, then "Crime and Punishment" and end up chief justice of the Supreme Court. But reading should be a slightly illicit pleasure -- and I think parents who are lucky enough to have a kid who reads ferociously should just let her be and thank their lucky stars.
Falls Church, Va: re: Lately I've been indulging myself in my lifelong fantasy of becoming a published writer.
Well, I am a published writer. And I also work a 9-to-5 job, totally unrelated to my being a "writer." The two are not mutually exclusive. I'd be willing to bet that there are many more published writers who are also working 9-5 jobs than there are published writers who are not.
Michael Dirda: Given that there are probably no more than a couple of hundred people in the country who can actually make a decent living solely by writing books and articles, I'm sure you're right.
Woodlawn, Va.: In answer to your question about the cell phone novels: Yes, apparently, the "authors" do compose on those tiny keypads, although some are trying to duplicate this success by mimicking text messaging patterns while (horror) typing on their relatively giant computers. The novels are short -- not much over 100 pages or so. And yes, "bizarre" was the word that came to my mind.
They do, however, make me think of examples of innovative story-telling like the novella in Stephen Millhauser's collection, Little Kingdoms, in which Millhauser uses an exhibition catalogue to chronicle the decline and fall of an artist. But as I understand it from the NYT article, there is no story to speak of in the cell phone novel.
Michael Dirda: Well, another reason to get rid of your cell phone before it's too late.
I do like innovative forms of storytelling -- in fact, I've an essay on such books in "Readings." Books as decks of cards, books based on the objects found on a kitchen table, actions determined by the movement of chess pieces, etc.
New Bedford, Mass.: Dear Mr. Dirda,
Unable to wait for publication here, I broke down and ordered "The Collected Letters of Ted Hughes." In the UK it was named book of the year at the Guardian, and, having just finished all 700 pages, I have to agree. I found them some of the most brilliant letters I've ever read. Hughes was amazingly generous to young poets and willing to explain his work in great depth. I was fascinated by his Shakespeare commentaries. Have you read his book on the plays and will you be reviewing the letters?
Michael Dirda: Gee. I'd like to review the letters--I must ask about them. Hughes came out with a gigantic book on Shakespeare a decade ago--a kind of Shakespeare through the lens of Graves's "White Goddess." But I only dipped into it. I did review his "Tales from Ovid" and have long admired much of his poetry. I'm of two minds about the man, though, but then how could anyone not be?
Biloxi, Miss.: In your intro, you say that you can be pretty funny at times. I've been thinking about writing a few novels: "Warren Pease," the dark side of a bipolar peace activist, or "Buddha the Pest: The secret life of a spiritual stalker." I wonder if you've thought of any book titles that might be funny?
Michael Dirda: Hmmm. Probably, though none come to mind right how. I did once envisage a restaurant for aging '60s revolutionaries: Chez Guevara.
I can be pretty good with a pun, but these only work when someone inadvertently sets up the right context.
Cleveland: Steve Jobs got some attention recently when he said the concept of the Kindle is all wrong because nobody reads any more. (He said something like only 40 percent of people read even one book.)
That's not encouraging, if true, but is this really a recent phenomenon? I suspect that for some time, the majority of people in this country (and most others) don't read books.
Michael Dirda: In the past, of course, literacy wasn't as widespread as it is now. But one of the ideals of American education is to provide a basic grounding in the three Rs for all children. If people can't or won't read, we have failed somewhere. The National Endowment for the Arts is the source of all these dire statistics; they've come out with a couple of reports on reading and they aren't very reassuring. What I fear is that we will gradually become an ever more shallow people, in thrall to television and cell phone fiction.
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.
| 135.414634 | 0.585366 | 0.682927 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/16/DI2008011602818.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/16/DI2008011602818.html
|
2008 Washington Auto Show
|
2008012319
|
Want to know which concept vehicles, hot rods and luxury cars are coming to town for the 2008 Washington Auto Show? Check out our special feature for a sneak peek.
Kimatni Rawlins is the founder of Automotive Rhythm Communications. In 2001, he started the Web site AutomotiveRhythms.com to help bridge the gap between automotive companies and the urban car buying market. Rawlins company includes print, internet, radio and network TV properties. Through Automotive Rhythms, his goal is educate urban consumers on how they view and and purchase vehicles.
He was online to discuss the popularity of car customization and its presence at the 2008 Washington Auto Show.
Kimatni Rawlins: Hello everyone and thank you for joining us today. So let's get into the business.
Silver Spring, Md.: Hi, Kimatni. Is it possible to add a little something to my truck (besides rims) to make it stand out, but not make it an all out "pimp my ride" look? And are we talking lots of money?
Kimatni Rawlins: Hello. Yes of course. Actually you don't want to bling out a truck because it still needs to perform like a truck. Are we talking SUV or pickup?
Upper Marlboro, Md.: Does your shop handle small-scale customization?
Kimatni Rawlins: Yes. From chrome fuel filler caps to replacement door handles. It's the small things that count the most.
washingtonpost.com: If you plan to attend the auto show, you can find the discount coupon online by clicking here.
Washington, D.C.: Hi there. I'd love to know what the major differences are between the urban car buying market and any other car buying market. I mean, aren't urban car buyers interested in the same things that other car buyers are?
Kimatni Rawlins: Yes, the product interest itself does not change. Whether you are from the Bronx, NY or Frederick, MD if you like power and performance than an M5 or CL63 AMG is going to peek your interests the same. The difference is how the auto companies target the urban market compared to their general marketing plans. Just as their ad language need to be specified to an auto consumer in France and auto consumer in Italy. The urban market has a different ear and is more open when the messages are communicated in their respective lingo.
Washington, D.C.: Is Toyota showing the Venza here?
Kimatni Rawlins: No. It's still in Detroit along with the A-BAT hybrid. It may make the Chicago show.
McLean, Va.: I'm headed to the show this afternoon, is there anything I should not miss?
Kimatni Rawlins: The Chevy Corvette ZR1. GM's fastest production vehicle ever. The first one went for $1M this past Friday at the Barret-Jackson Auction. Jay Leno hosted the proceedings.
Annapolis, Md.: What is your car of choice for a young business professional? And what size rims would give it a clean look without going to far over the top?
Kimatni Rawlins: Infiniti M35/45 or Lexus LS or an Audi A6 if you are into German technology. The M has great power in both the six and eight-cylinder engine with updated comfort features like Bluetooth and MP3 auxillary jacks. The Lexus will give the same with a little less style. We don't go past 20" on sedans
Willingboro, N.J.: Do I need specialized brakes when upgrading to 22 inch wheels or larger?
Kimatni Rawlins: Depends on what your base rims were. The Escalade, Tahoe and Yukon can be had with 22s directly from GM. So the OEM brake would be suitable. If not, then look into a brake with more than 4 pistons. Remember, bigger rims are heavier and decrease the stopping distance of your vehicle.
Bowie, Md.: Anything unveiled at the auto show that is particularly fabulous?
Kimatni Rawlins: Did you see my Vette ZR1 reference?
Bowie, Md.: If I may, where is your shop located?
Kimatni Rawlins: Big Boys Toys -- 6210 Oxonhill Rd., Oxon Hill, Md. 20745
Silver Spring, Md.: Thanks for taking my question. We're talking large-size SUV.
Kimatni Rawlins: No bigger than 22" rims, step bars, fuel filler cap, mirror and door handle covers/replacements, exhaust tips and a clean grille. Tint the window slightly and you're good. Don't tear off the electronics. Just upgrade the speakers, if need be.
Arlington, Va.: I'm a woman, and am curious about how many customization makeovers you do for female customers.
Kimatni Rawlins: They come in all the time. Woman are very style consious and want that appeal just as much as men. yet, we don't get obtrusive with their rides because we don't want others to think they are riding their husband/boyfriend's vehicle.
Fairfax, Va.: What are the hottest cars going to be this year at the show that have changed or are new to the line for the first time?
Kimatni Rawlins: Nissan GT-R, Pontiac G8, Escalade Hybrid and the Rolls-Royce Drophead Coupe
Alexandria, Va.: The car customization market seems to be leaning more towards the extreme nowadays, and much of the accessories don't seem practical for everyday use. What are some good subtle ways to upgrade and customize a vehicle without making it look too "pimp-ish"?
Kimatni Rawlins: Turn the TV off. That's what these shows glorify, but best believe there are some hardcore and pretty, custom jobs happening everyday. Paint will always turn a bucket into a beauty. Rims don't need to be chrome, just classy. Grilles are a must. Hoodscoops for nostalgic performance vehicles and pickups. Check out our 2008 Yukon Denali and Ram down at the show. Hall C.
Reston, Va.: Hi, there. Did the production version of the new Challenger make an appearance at the show this year? Or did they just bring the concept again?
Kimatni Rawlins: Nope. Production has not begun. Should go on sale this summer.
Washington, D.C.: What is the resale value of customized cars? Do you generally get your money back from the customization when you sell it?
Kimatni Rawlins: Value is based on model. But the value will deplete quicker than if it wasn't customized. Unless it's a restored classic.
Detroit, Mich.: I am in the Detroit area where domestics rule. American manufacturers seem to be turning the corner on styling to keep up with foreign automakers. What took them so long?
Kimatni Rawlins: Toyota/Lexus woke the Big Three up. Now that the imports are stealing market share quicker than bank robberies, the Americans had no choose but to let go of their ego and unleash all those concepts. Did you see the Cadillac CTS Concept Coupe and HUMMER HX which will become the H4?
Woodbridge, Va.: Will Automotive Rhythms be at the auto show?
Kimatni Rawlins: Yes, Hall C for sure.
Mitchellville, Md.: Have you driven the new Toyota Sequoia? Any feedback?
Kimatni Rawlins: One of my writers drove it. Toyota has too many big SUVs. They all drive and feel the same. The Sequoia does nothing to my senses.
Washington, D.C. What about car customization at this year's show? I know you guys are there every year ... what should we enthusiasts be looking forward to seeing?
Kimatni Rawlins: We toned it down a bit to focus on some new ventures like www.ARtvLive.com our new online TV platform. We have videos of GM's latest including the ZR1 and HUMMER Concept
Arlington, Va.: Where do you see the traditional SUV market moving in the coming years now that Crossovers are flooding the market and gas prices remain at all time high levels?
Kimatni Rawlins: The bigger luxury SUVs will always remain in their position. Those who can afford Range Rovers and Porsche Cayennes don't worry about fuel because they can afford it. But the mid-priced SUV market will shrink as Fuel prices began to rival European prices. Imagine $8 a gallon.
Washington, D.C.: How has the factory customizations from companies like the Mini and Volvo C30 changed your company?
Kimatni Rawlins: My company test drives cars for consumers. We have two shops. So the media component is first and foremost. I like what Mini, Scion and GM's SPO are doing. It gives the owner a better since of security since warranties stay intact and the parts are engineered specifically for that vehicle.
Washington, D.C.: How has the dollar affected import versus domestic cars?
Kimatni Rawlins: Oh it's rough out there. Now the canadian dollar can join, the euro and the yen and come to america and buy up the place.
S.E., D.C.: Can you elaborat on the little things making a big difference?
Kimatni Rawlins: Fender flares, light covers, LED reflectors, side air vents, exhaust tips, brake pads, etc.
D.C.: Had the chance to attend the charity preview last night and found myself drooling over the Audi R8. What more can you tell me about it?
Kimatni Rawlins: I drove it in the Nevada dessert. It's a pure sports car! Engine borrowed from Lambo so it trully performs. Add quatrro AWD and you're snaking around corners with skipping a beat.
2008 Audi R8: Hark, Listen, (AutomotiveRhythms.com, Aug. 4, 2007)
Arlington, Va.: Does your shop do super-charger installation say for a 2003 Infiniti G35 Coupe? Thanks.
Washington, D.C.: RE: Dollar ... are domestic cars less expensive now compared to the imports?
Kimatni Rawlins: Depends on makes and Models. Some domestics are still pricey like the Escalade. And some imports like Scion are priced very well. Yet, auto companies are building more factiories in the U.S. to reduce labor costs which ultimately reduces the price of a vehicle and alleviates import taxes.
Glendale, Md.: Are you participating in the auto show? I'd like to see some of your work. I missed last years show, but looking to update my '07 Range.
Kimatni Rawlins: Yep. Hall C. STRUT makes a nice and expensive Grille for the Range
washingtonpost.com: That's all for today. Thanks to Kimatni Rawlins of Automotive Rhythms for joining us. And in case you missed it, check out our special feature for this year's show here.
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
|
Join live discussions from the Washington Post. Feature topics include national, world and DC area news, politics, elections, campaigns, government policy, tech regulation, travel, entertainment, cars, and real estate.
| 51.170732 | 0.536585 | 0.634146 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/22/AR2008012200565.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/22/AR2008012200565.html
|
Judge Sentences Padilla to 17 Years, Cites His Detention
|
2008012319
|
The sentencing brought an end to years of high-profile legal battles that tested the limits of presidential power and the government's ability to hold American terrorism suspects indefinitely without charging them. In handing down the sentence, U.S. District Judge Marcia G. Cooke also implicitly criticized the government's treatment of Padilla during the time it held him without charges.
The ruling marks a major setback in a terrorism prosecution for the Justice Department, which had urged Cooke to sentence Padilla to life in prison.
Prosecutors already had been forced to drop the "dirty bomb" allegation and pressed ahead with a case involving less specific charges of support for terrorism and conspiracy. They won convictions against Padilla, 37, and two co-defendants in August, but Cooke's sentence means that he could be freed in his early 50s.
"Hallelujah," his mother, Estela Lebron, told reporters.
Accused at trial of conspiring to aid Islamic militants in Chechnya, Somalia and elsewhere, Padilla and his two co-defendants were convicted by a jury of participating in a "conspiracy to murder, maim or kidnap." But, Cooke, a Bush appointee, seemed to look askance at key prosecution claims, noting, "There is no evidence that these defendants personally maimed, kidnapped or killed anyone in the United States or elsewhere."
Moreover, in rejecting the government's plea for a life sentence, Cooke said she took into consideration what she called the "harsh" conditions that Padilla suffered for 3 1/2 years after he was arrested in 2002.
Detained without charges as an "enemy combatant," he was held at a Navy brig in Charleston, S.C. Padilla's attorneys have alleged that he was tortured through a combination of sleep deprivation, stress positions and isolation. Prosecutors had sought to keep consideration of his time in the brig from becoming a part of the case.
But, Cooke said, "I do find that the conditions were so harsh for Mr. Padilla . . . they warrant consideration in the sentencing in this case."
Cooke also handed down prison terms of more than 15 years to Adham Amin Hassoun, 45, whom Padilla looked to as a spiritual mentor; and more than 12 years to Kifah Wael Jayyousi, 46, who prosecutors said helped finance radical Islamic military efforts overseas.
The Justice Department did not disclose whether it would pursue an appeal. Nor did officials comment on the relative leniency of the sentences for the men.
In a statement, Kenneth L. Wainstein, assistant attorney general for national security, said that "the defendants' North American support cell has been dismantled and can no longer send money and jihadist recruits to conflicts overseas."
Padilla, a Brooklyn-born convert to Islam, was arrested returning to the United States at O'Hare International Airport in 2002 and was soon designated an enemy combatant by President Bush.
The case was announced at the time with great fanfare by then-Attorney General John D. Ashcroft and other Bush administration officials, who portrayed Padilla as working on a plot to detonate a "dirty bomb" inside the United States.
Authorities later alleged that Padilla attended a terrorist training camp in Afghanistan, met with senior al-Qaeda leaders and planned to blow up U.S. apartment buildings with natural gas. Initially, he was not granted access to an attorney.
His case became a key test of Bush administration claims that U.S. citizens could be held indefinitely and without charges as "enemy combatants" in the efforts against terrorism. Once the Supreme Court seemed to tilt against that tactic, the administration moved him to the criminal justice system, where he was charged and tried.
But the Miami court case did not include any mention of the "dirty bomb" or natural gas explosion plots, largely because much of the evidence had been obtained through interrogations of Padilla, Sept. 11 planner Khalid Sheik Mohammed and other al-Qaeda prisoners that would not be admissible in regular criminal courts.
The trial did include a written form that Padilla filled out in 2000 when he attended an al-Qaeda training camp in Afghanistan, as well as thousands of telephone conversations intercepted by the FBI during an eight-year probe.
Federal prosecutors portrayed Padilla and his co-defendants as participants in an effort to spread "violent jihad" across the globe. Defense attorneys characterized their efforts overseas as "humanitarian," and last week his co-defendants told the judge that they were moved to help Muslims overseas after watching their slaughter in Bosnia.
"I have nobody's blood on my hands," Jayyousi told the judge last week during the sentencing phase.
Padilla did not testify in his own defense and did not choose to address the court before his sentencing. As a result, he remains to court observers as much a mystery as he did more than five years ago after his high-profile arrest.
|
MIAMI, Jan. 22 -- Jose Padilla, the former Chicago gang member originally accused of plotting with al-Qaeda to detonate a radioactive "dirty bomb" on U.S. soil, was sentenced on Tuesday to 17 years in prison on less dramatic charges.
| 19.893617 | 0.659574 | 1.340426 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/22/AR2008012200329.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/22/AR2008012200329.html
|
Six Powers Back U.N. Draft on Iran
|
2008012319
|
To break an eight-month deadlock, the Bush administration accepted a plan that includes largely voluntary monitoring of transactions involving two banks, and calls for restraints on export credits, cargo traffic and business involving individuals or institutions linked to proliferation. The toughest restriction is a travel ban on key officials, the European officials said.
The final talks in Berlin were dominated by intense negotiations between Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, according to U.S. and European officials. Announcing an agreement afterward, German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier acknowledged that the lengthy diplomacy to get a draft "was not always all that easy."
The U.N. Security Council passed two earlier resolutions, in December 2006 and March 2007, calling for Iran to suspend its enrichment of uranium, a process that can be used to produce peaceful energy as well as deadly weapons. It promised a third resolution if Iran did not comply in 60 days. Washington hoped that new sanctions would add more meaningful pressure.
But Russia and China, which do significant business with Iran, resisted earlier British and French drafts -- inspired by Washington -- that called for asset freezes on Iranian banks and parts of the military, including the elite Quds Force, as well as a ban on arms sales to Iran. All these measures were either dropped or watered down.
At this stage, the draft itself is the primary achievement, diplomats say. "This will come as a rude shock to the Iranians," departing Undersecretary of State R. Nicholas Burns said in an interview. "They had been predicting that the Security Council was no longer unified enough to pass a third resolution, and they were wrong. The council will pass this resolution in several weeks, and it will add to the international pressure on Iran to suspend its uranium enrichment."
European envoys say the main impact of a new resolution may be the psychological effect on international financial transactions and institutions, which have already cut back their dealings with Iran. The new draft calls for U.N. member states to "monitor" financial activities with Bank Melli and Bank Saderat, two of Iran's biggest banks. It also calls for vigilance on export credits to Iran, a provision dropped from a previous resolution at China's insistence, diplomats say.
"It's going to be more difficult for Iran to do business," said a European diplomat. "It sends a useful political message that Iran is not off the hook and at a good time in the electoral cycle." Iran is set to hold parliamentary elections in March, usually a harbinger of what will happen in the next presidential election, due next year. The U.S. goal is to isolate the Tehran government in ways that would lead the population to turn against it at the polls.
Britain, France and Germany will co-sponsor the resolution, which will be shared with the 10 nonpermanent Security Council members this week. It is not expected to be put to a vote until next month, after Libya's council presidency ends.
|
The United States and five other major powers agreed yesterday on a new draft U.N. resolution on Iran, but the compromise incorporates weakened language that calls only for "vigilance" or "monitoring" of financial and military institutions without most of the tough economic sanctions sought by th...
| 11.153846 | 0.634615 | 0.75 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/22/AR2008012203266.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/22/AR2008012203266.html
|
Md. Weighs Stadium for D.C. United
|
2008012319
|
The Maryland Stadium Authority has decided to spend $75,000 on a feasibility study to look at the economic impact and potential tax benefits. The step concerned Vincent C. Gray, chairman of the D.C. Council, who noted the team's success and potential for financial growth.
"I continue to believe that we should work with D.C. United to construct the stadium in Poplar Point," Gray (D) said.
The study comes two months after Prince George's County Executive Jack B. Johnson (D) wrote a letter to David Raith, the stadium authority's acting director, asking the state to help the county lure the team.
In the letter, Johnson said that he met with Victor B. MacFarlane, the managing principal of the team, and Kevin Payne, the chief executive, in November and that they had expressed interest in sites in the county.
"Prince George's County is prepared to work with D.C. United to make this their new home, and would like the support and assistance of the Maryland Stadium Authority to make this happen," Johnson wrote.
United had been informally negotiating with Mayor Adrian M. Fenty (D) about building a stadium and mixed-use development at Poplar Point along the Anacostia River, but the talks broke down last summer.
United has shown interest in two locations in College Park. But David Byrd, deputy chief administrative officer for the county, said Johnson wants the team to build a stadium near the Metro stations in New Carrollton or Greenbelt, where it could anchor a mixed-used development.
"The new D.C. United stadium . . . would be a tremendous addition to our county, bringing not only great economic benefit but adding significantly to the identity of Prince George's County, and enhancing the lifestyle our residents and visitors enjoy," Johnson wrote.
The county's mission was also twofold when it pursued the Washington Redskins: to raise revenue and lift the image of a county that has been snubbed by investors for high-end retail and residential projects.
A 1997 report estimated that the football stadium, then known as Jack Kent Cooke Stadium, would generate $6 million in taxes a year: $2 million in property taxes and nearly $4 million in admission and sales taxes.
In fiscal 2006, the county received $10 million, including more than $8 million in admission and amusement taxes, from the stadium, now FedEx Field.
|
With negotiations to build a stadium for D.C. United stalled in the District, Maryland officials have agreed to consider constructing a home for the soccer team in Prince George's County.
| 14.121212 | 0.727273 | 1.636364 |
low
|
low
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/17/AR2008011702243.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/17/AR2008011702243.html
|
Callous Conservative
|
2008012019
|
This contrast between Thompson's large political talent and his poor political performance has led to persistent questions: Does he lack ambition? Energy?
This week, he added one more to the list: Does he lack moral seriousness?
At a campaign stop attended by a CBS reporter in Lady's Island, S.C., Thompson was asked if he, "as a Christian, as a conservative," supported President Bush's global AIDS initiative. "Christ didn't tell us to go to the government and pass a bill to get some of these social problems dealt with. He told us to do it," Thompson responded. "The government has its role, but we need to keep firmly in mind the role of the government, and the role of us as individuals and as Christians on the other."
Thompson went on: "I'm not going to go around the state and the country with regards to a serious problem and say that I'm going to prioritize that. With people dying of cancer, and heart disease, and children dying of leukemia still, I got to tell you -- we've got a lot of problems here. . . . " Indeed, there are a lot of problems here -- mainly of Thompson's own making.
While he is not an isolationist, he clearly is playing to isolationist sentiments. His objection, it seems, is not to government spending on public health but to spending on foreigners. But this is badly shortsighted. America is engaged in a high-stakes ideological struggle in Africa, where radicals and terrorists seek to fill the vacuum of failed and hopeless societies. Fighting disease and promoting development are important foreign policy tools in this struggle, which Thompson apparently does not appreciate or even understand.
Thompson's argument reflects an anti-government extremism, which I am sure his defenders would call a belief in limited government. In this case, Thompson is limiting government to a half-full thimble. Its duties apparently do not extend to the treatment of sick people in extreme poverty, which should be "the role of us as individuals and as Christians." One wonders, in his view, if responding to the 2004 tsunami should also have been a private responsibility. Religious groups are essential to fighting AIDS, but they cannot act on a sufficient scale.
Thompson also dives headfirst into the shallow pool of his own theological knowledge. In his interpretation, Jesus seems to be a libertarian activist who taught that compassion is an exclusively private virtue. This ignores centuries of reflection on the words of the Bible that have led to a nearly universal Christian conviction that government has obligations to help the weak and pursue social justice. Religious social reformers fought to end child labor and improve public health. It is hard to imagine they would have used the teachings of Christ to justify cutting off lifesaving drugs for tens of thousands of African children -- an argument both novel and obscene.
In the lifeboat dilemma Thompson proposes, we are asked to throw overboard either an American child with leukemia or an African child with AIDS -- and, by gum, it had better not be the American. The real issue is different: Should we increase the amount of money devoted to our generous cancer research efforts at the expense of African lives that can be saved for about $90 a year?
What of the more than 1.4 million men, women and children who have received treatment with the help of Bush's AIDS initiative? According to Thompson, they are not a priority. The 800,000 HIV-positive pregnant women who have gotten treatment to prevent transmission to their children? Not a priority. The care of nearly 3 million orphans? Not a priority.
Does Thompson actually believe this? Perhaps he was merely pandering to anti-government conservatives -- though it is difficult to imagine what collection of shriveled souls would be excited by an attack on AIDS treatment. Either way, Thompson's image as a courageous teller of hard truths -- the "adult" in the race -- is damaged. It cannot be called bravery for a millionaire actor, with a blessed life, to pick on the most vulnerable people on the planet.
Thompson's questioner got it wrong. Support for the fight against AIDS is not a matter of being a "Christian" or a "conservative" -- or a liberal or a Buddhist. It is an expression of compassion and empathy, which also reflects a serious conception of America's role in the world.
These attributes are not only admirable in a president; they should be required.
|
Fred Thompson's seeming indifference to AIDS in Africa is astonishing.
| 73.166667 | 0.666667 | 1 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/17/AR2008011702239.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/17/AR2008011702239.html
|
Black Dreams, White Liberals
|
2008012019
|
-- Hillary Clinton, Jan. 7
So she said. And then a fight broke out. That remarkable eruption of racial sensitivities and racial charges lacked coherence, however, because the public argument was about history rather than what was truly offensive -- the implied analogy to today.
The principal objection was that Clinton appeared to be disrespecting Martin Luther King Jr., relegating him to mere enabler for Lyndon Johnson. But it is certainly true that Johnson was the great emancipator, second only to Abraham Lincoln in that respect. This was a function of the times. King was fighting for black enfranchisement. Until that could be achieved, civil rights legislation could only be enacted by a white president (and a white Congress).
That does not denigrate King. It makes his achievement all the more miraculous -- winning a permanent stake in the system for a previously disenfranchised people, having begun with no political cards to play.
In my view, the real problem with Clinton's statement was the implied historical analogy -- that the subordinate position King held in relation to Johnson, a function of the discrimination and disenfranchisement of the time, somehow needs recapitulation today when none of those conditions apply.
The analogy Clinton was implying was obvious: I'm Lyndon Johnson, unlovely doer; he's Martin Luther King, charismatic dreamer. Vote for me if you want results.
Forty years ago, that arrangement -- white president enacting African American dreams -- was necessary because discrimination denied blacks their own autonomous political options. Today, that arrangement -- white liberals acting as tribune for blacks in return for their political loyalty -- is a demeaning anachronism. That's what the fury at Hillary was all about, although no one was willing to say so explicitly.
The King-Johnson analogy is dead because the times are radically different. Today an African American can be in a position to wield the emancipation pen -- and everything else that goes along with the presidency: from making foreign policy to renting out the Lincoln Bedroom (if one is so inclined). Why should African American dreams still have to go through white liberals?
Clinton is no doubt shocked that a simple argument about experience vs. inspiration becomes the basis for a charge of racial insensitivity. She is surprised that the very use of "fairy tale" in reference to Obama's position on Iraq is taken as a sign of insensitivity, or that any reference to his self-confessed teenage drug use is immediately given racial overtones.
But where, I ask you, do such studied and/or sincere expressions of racial offense come from? From a decades-long campaign of enforced political correctness by an alliance of white liberals and the black civil rights establishment intended to delegitimize and marginalize as racist any criticism of their post-civil-rights-era agenda.
Anyone who has ever made a principled argument against affirmative action, only to be accused of racism, knows exactly how these tactics work. Or anyone who has merely opposed a more recent agenda item -- hate-crime legislation -- on the grounds that murder is murder and that the laws against it are both venerable and severe. Remember that scurrilous preelection ad run by the NAACP in 2000 implying that George W. Bush was indifferent to a dragging death of a black man at the hands of white racists in Texas because he did not support hate-crime legislation?
The nation has become inured to the playing of the race card, but "our first black president" (Toni Morrison on Bill Clinton) and his consort are not used to having it played against them.
Bill is annoyed with Obama. As Bill inadvertently let on to Charlie Rose, it has nothing to do with race and everything to do with entitlement. He had contemplated running in 1988, he confided to Charlie, but decided to wait. Too young, not ready. (A tall tale, highly Clintonian; but that's another matter.) Now it is Hillary's turn. The presidency is her due -- the ultimate in alimony -- and this young upstart refuses to give way.
But telling Obama to wait his turn is a tricky proposition. It sounds patronizing and condescending, awakening the kinds of racial grievances white liberals have spent half a century fanning -- only to find themselves now singed in the blowback, much to their public chagrin.
Who says there's no justice in this world?
|
The nation has become inured to the playing of the race card, but the Clintons are not used to having it played against them.
| 32.269231 | 0.961538 | 11.423077 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/susan_brooks_thistlethwaite/2008/01/pride_caused_us_to_attack_iraq.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012019id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/susan_brooks_thistlethwaite/2008/01/pride_caused_us_to_attack_iraq.html
|
Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite
|
2008012019
|
Since âstupidâ is not one of the âSeven Deadly Sinsâ (though I think it should make the list), Iâm going with pride as the deadliest sin for the United States of America in recent years. Deaths of U.S. troops, deaths of Iraqi civilians and military, death upon death has been the result of overreaching pride on the part of the United States in attacking a country that had not attacked us first. In theological terms, this is hubris, hubris or hybris from the Greek. According to its modern usage, hubris is exaggerated self-pride or self-confidence (overbearing pride), often resulting in fatal retribution. Iâd say that fits.
Arrogance, conceit, self-importance and smugnessâprideful behavior on every level is what caused this administration to violate 1,600 years of Christian moral reasoning, the Just War theory, and attack Iraq. âRogue stateâ is the term usually applied to countries that engage in pre-emptive war; blind pride is usually the cause.
This kind of prideful behavior is not only a political and strategic error, it is a fundamental faith error. The Christian theologian who best grasped the magnitude and meaning of the sin of pride is Reinhold Niebuhr. He wrote, regarding the sin of pride, âBut the self lacks the faith and trust to subject itself to God. It seeks to establish itself independently. . . .By giving life a false center, the self then destroys the real possibility for itself and others. Hence the relation of injustice to pride. . . . The sin of inordinate self-love thus points to the prior sin of lack of trust in God. . . . The anxiety of freedom leads to sin only if the prior situation of unbelief is assumed.â
This kind of overwhelming self-love that defines the sin of pride has its roots in a lack of trust in God. It is, in short, the very essence of unbelief in a religious sense.
The irony of the religious blather that has accompanied the various justifications for our attack on Iraq is made evident as we consider Niebuhr's articulation of the theological basis of the sin of pride. It is unbelief, not faith, that led us to the blind arrogance that has mired this country in an unwinnable war now longer than WWII.
Now, it is important to distinguish this kind of hubris from appropriate forms of pride as self-regard and the healthy integration of self. Christianity has often overextended the notion of pride as a sin and done a lot of harm especially to women and children who are chastised for being âpridefulâ when they are really just achieving normal and healthy selfhood. With that caveat, then, let me just end with the tried and true verse from Proverbs, âPride goeth before destruction and a haughty spirit before a fall.â (16:18 KJV) Translation: We need to get out of Iraq.
|
Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite on OnFaith; Visit http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/susan_brooks_thistlethwaite/
| 60.666667 | 0.222222 | 0.222222 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/thomas_j_reese/2008/01/global_sin.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012019id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/thomas_j_reese/2008/01/global_sin.html
|
Thomas J. Reese: OnFaith on washingtonpost.com
|
2008012019
|
Theologians have traditionally argued that pride is the core sin because it is placing ourselves above God and Godâs law. Most of us, however, donât live on that philosophical plane.
On a personal level, each of us sins and is sinned against in unique ways that are hurtful to ourselves, our families and our neighbors. Each of the deadly sins can lead to personal unhappiness, family disunity and interpersonal conflict. These sins rarely occur in isolation; we experience them in bundles.
On a global level, we also see how these vices are driving terrorism, ethnic and tribal conflicts and war. The anger and pride of terrorists lead them to treat other humans as expendable objects on the way to their political goals. Pride, envy, anger and greed drive ethnic and tribal conflicts. And anger, pride and some say greed compelled the United States into an ill-conceived war in Iraq.
As bad as all these things are, it may be gluttony and greed that will do us in as a species. Gluttony is not just about food but about everything that we consume including energy. Our consumer economy is eating up resources and destroying our global environment. Greed motivates those destroying the environment to feed this consumer economy.
Every indication is that we are headed toward a disaster, but even a minor slow down in consumption is throwing us into a recession. During this political campaign, we should be talking about how we can consume less and invest in the future of our children, but that is not going to sell. The deadly sins are alive and well in America.
More Posts About: Catholic , Christian
|
Thomas J. Reese on OnFaith; Visit http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/thomas_j_reese/
| 34.888889 | 0.222222 | 0.222222 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/eboo_patel/2008/01/the_alliance_of_civilizations.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012019id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/eboo_patel/2008/01/the_alliance_of_civilizations.html
|
OnFaith on washingtonpost.com
|
2008012019
|
MADRID -- Iâve been to lots of interfaith conferences over the past decade, but none with the kind of juice of the Alliance of Civilizations meeting that just took place in Madrid.
The Prime Ministers of Spain, Turkey and Malaysia were here, as was Mary Robinson, the former President of Ireland. And there were more religious leaders in flowing robes and dramatic headgear than you could shake a stick at.
The political leaders who showed up came with a set of clear messages: Turkeyâs application to the European Union deserves serious and positive consideration. The Muslim world and Europe share several concerns, among them making sure that their kids donât grow up hating each other. And Europe needs to face the fact that there is no turning back from the immigration of the past several decades. It is now a multicultural/multifaith continent, and needs to embrace that fact fully.
Before 9/11, the Prime Ministers and Archbishops present might well have sent their fourth secretaries to read a statement about the importance of building multicultural societies, nurturing good relations between regions, blah blah blah. But these days, because there are plenty of people who are sharpening their swords in preparation for the clash of civilizations, the big guys decided they needed to come and speak for this themselves.
As UN Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon said, âNever in our lifetime has there been a more desperate need for constructive and committed dialogue, among individuals, among communities, among cultures, among and between nations. The threats are terrifying but the responses are at hand.â
That was the other thing unusual about this conference: the power in the room actually invested in a set of concrete responses to the problem. Sheikha Mozah of Qatar announced a personal commitment of $100 million for youth programs in the Middle East, saying "By investing in our youth, we are investing in the security of our nations, and only secure and confident nations can build alliances based on mutual respect and common objectives.â
Unlike a lot of royalty at events like this, she didn't bolt the minute she got off stage. In fact, she spent the next morning in the Youth Session listening to representatives of some of the most innovative programs from around the world.
Queen Noor announced a $100 million media fund for films with positive cross-cultural themes, a project that Participant Productions (the company behind Syriana, An Inconvenient Truth, and Charlie Wilsonâs War, among others) and other media groups are connected to.
American civil society did our nation proud at this event. Foundations, nonprofits, artists and business people were involved in some of the most important initiatives, both on-stage and behind-the-scenes. American Muslims played a particularly important role â most notably, as the principal organizers of the conference itself and the catalysts behind the media fund.
There is a palpable sense among the jet set that those bent on tribalism and totalitarianism are not going to give up and go away, so the folks who believe in pluralism better get busy doing more than talking. As Rabbi Arthur Schneier of the Appeal of Conscience Foundation remarked, the gauge of the Allianceâs effectiveness is in the amount of real-world action that it catalyzes, resources and networks.
As an occasional witness to the goings on of the jet set, and a full-time leader of a real-world organization committed to concrete interfaith action, it was music to my ears.
|
Eboo Patel on OnFaith; Visit http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/eboo_patel/
| 82.5 | 0.125 | 0.125 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/needtoknow/2008/01/how_washington_fails_colombia.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012019id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/needtoknow/2008/01/how_washington_fails_colombia.html
|
PostGlobal: PostGlobal on washingtonpost.com
|
2008012019
|
Editor's Note: Readers may find it useful to refer to a Washington Post editorial on the same subject. The author references this editorial in his response to reader comments, which is posted directly below the original op-ed text.
It has had the makings of a telenovela â a Latin American soap opera: hostages held for years deep in the Colombian jungle, anxious anticipation and tearful reunions, and most spectacular of all, the boy: Emmanuel. Born three and a half years ago in captivity, of a liaison between a FARC guerilla and captive Clara Rojas, his tiny arm broken at birth by a difficult Caesarean under jungle conditions, surviving leishmaniasis and dumped off on a poor rural family that transferred him to the state â he somehow survived and was found in time to reunite with his mother as she savored her long-awaited freedom.
But for those who had the time to look beyond the headlines, there were important political realities that the drama underscored. Most importantly, the Bush Administration has once again staked out a position on a long-running armed conflict that puts Washington outside the mainstream of the international community.
First, the facts: Clara Rojas was a vice-presidential candidate when she was kidnapped by the FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia) in 2002; at the same time, the FARC also kidnapped presidential candidate Ingrid Betancourt. Consuelo Gonzalez, a Colombian Congresswoman, was kidnapped in 2001. The FARC is holding hundreds of other hostages and prisoners, and hopes to exchange at least some of the high-profile ones for prisoners held by the government.
The Colombian government appears to believe that it can win the 40-year war through purely military (and paramilitary) means. The Bush Administration shares this view, and supplies Colombia with more than $600 million annually in military aid, which is sometimes labeled "anti-drug" aid. But there has been increasing pressure for negotiations: from inside Colombia, led by the courageous Senator Piedad Cordoba; from the families of the hostages; and from Europe â where Ingrid Betancourt, a dual French-Colombian citizen, is well-known and has much sympathy.
President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela offered to mediate, and in August, President Alvaro Uribe of Colombia accepted his offer. Uribe and Chavez had maintained a mostly cordial relationship for years, despite being on opposite ends of the political spectrum.
But on November 21st, Uribe suddenly withdrew Chavez's authorization to mediate. The move came just after a phone call from President Bush, who clearly did not want Chavez to have an international diplomatic success on the eve of a Venezuelan constitutional referendum (December 2). Chavez was furious at what he saw as a betrayal by Uribe, and suspected Uribe was caving to his most important funder. Uribe's stated reason for sacking Chavez was that the Venezuelan president had, very briefly, talked to one of his generals after Piedad Cordoba had passed the phone to him. It seemed like a flimsy pretext for cutting off the negotiations without even a phone call to Venezuela, and Chavez let loose with a barrage of insults.
But Chavez persisted and by the weekend of New Year's Eve, a mission was assembled to receive the two women and the boy Emmanuel, with representatives of Brazil, Argentina (former President Nestor Kirchner), Bolivia, Cuba, Ecuador, France, Switzerland and the Red Cross on hand. While the other governments expressed hopes that the release could lead to peace talks, Washington showed no interest in the effort. It failed, and the story took a new twist when it turned out the boy was not in the FARC's custody after all but in foster care in Bogota.
On Friday, the two women hostages were finally released to Venezuelan and Red Cross officials, and on Sunday Clara Rojas was reunited with her son.
Interestingly, the foreign policy establishment here â which includes most of the major media â does not seem to notice that the Bush Administration is the outlier in this situation. For them, Chavez is the enemy, and his intervention is viewed with suspicion, and even as an attempt to side with the FARC.
In the last few days, Chavez has called for the FARC to be recognized as insurgents rather than terrorists. This has been portrayed as "support" for the FARC. However, his position is the same as other governments in the region, which have consistently rebuffed U.S. pressure to officially label the FARC as a "terrorist" organization. Brazilâs government has said that to classify the FARC as âterroristâ organization would likely damage any prospects of negotiating a solution to the countryâs civil conflict.
The FARC clearly does engage in actions that can be considered terrorist, including kidnappings. However, so does the Colombian government, and over the years international human rights groups have found right-wing paramilitaries linked to the government responsible for the vast majority of atrocities. And during the last year, revelations of ties between Uribe's political allies and the death squads have severely damaged the government's reputation, and led to the arrest of more than a dozen legislators.
To label only one side "terrorist" would therefore be seen as adopting the U.S. strategy that favors violence over negotiation as a means of ending the conflict â which is why other governments in the region have refused to do so. For his part, Chavez has stated clearly that he does not support the FARCâs armed struggle or kidnappings, and has offered to try to convince its leadership to put down their arms and pursue a peaceful, electoral route to political change.
The Bush Administration's policy of "no negotiations with terrorists," with the label selectively applied, makes no more sense in this hemisphere than in other parts of the world. It is also a blow to the families of three U.S. military contractors who are currently held by the FARC. The release of Clara Rojas and Consuelo Gonzalez is progress, and could be a first step toward negotiating an end to this prolonged war. Washington should join with the rest of the hemisphere â including Venezuela â and support a negotiated solution.
Mark Weisbrot is co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, D.C. (www.cepr.net).
Response to Comments From Author Mark Weisbrot, 9:30 a.m., January 17, 2008
Let me respond to some of the comments below. First, as a few alert readers pointed out, most of these comments do not apply to anything that I wrote, since I did not say anything at all about the FARC, except that they have engaged in actions which can be considered terrorist. And anyone who reads my op-ed carefully will see, I simply argued that most of the governments of this hemisphere â other than the U.S., Canada, and Colombia â who have refused Washington's requests to officially label the FARC as terrorist, have a valid reason not to do so. They believe it would be counter-productive and do not want to be identified with the U.S. strategy of favoring a military solution. It has nothing to do with whether the FARC commits terrorist acts, which all would agree is true.
In fact, even President Uribe has said that he is willing to drop the label "terrorist" for the FARC "the moment that peace advances."
Several readers cited the Washington Post's January 16 editorial board piece, "Ally to Kidnappers."
The Post's claim that "Mr. Chávez was endorsing groups dedicated to violence and other criminal behavior in a neighboring Latin American democracy, and associating his agenda with theirs," is clearly misleading, as evidenced by his widely reported (but omitted in the editorial) statements against the FARC's armed struggle and kidnappings, etc. The Post also claims that "even governments allied with Mr. Chávez, such as those of Argentina and Ecuador, recoiled from his appeal," but there were no criticisms of him from these governments, and in fact President Rafael Correa of Ecuador praised Chavez for his role in negotiating the hostage release. In short, this editorial is just one of many diatribes against Venezuela from an editorial board that has become one of the most extremist voices, among U.S. newspapers, of hostility towards left-of-center, democratic governments in Latin America.
Finally, with regard to the aborted hostage release mission on New Yearâs weekend, Chavez and others claimed that it failed because of Colombian military operations in the area. Uribe claimed that the guerillas were simply lying and had no intention to release anyone, because the FARC did not have the boy. According to one of the released hostages, former Colombian Congresswoman Consuelo Gonzales,
"'On December 21, we began to walk toward the location where they were going to free us and we walked almost 20 days. During that time, we were forced to run several times because the soldiers were very close,' she said. Gonzalez also lamented that on the day that Alvaro Uribe set as a deadline for the release, the Colombian armed forces launched the worst attack on the zone where they were located. 'On the 31st, we realized that there was going to be a very big mobilization and, in the moment that we were ready to be released, there was a huge bombardment and we had to relocate quickly to another place.'"
I could not find any reference to this statement by Gonzalez in the U.S. press.
|
Need to Know - PostGlobal on PostGlobal; blog of politics and current events on washingtonpost.com. Visit http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/needtoknow/
| 95.052632 | 0.421053 | 0.421053 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/17/AR2008011700851.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/17/AR2008011700851.html
|
Fed Chairman Backs Stimulus
|
2008012019
|
President Bush plans to lay out the principles behind his preferred stimulus today, although he will not provide details. The leading ideas in the administration are to give rebates of up to $800 to each taxpayer and introduce tax incentives for business investment, but administration officials said no decision has been made on exactly what to do to try to prevent a recession.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Congress will have a package ready for action by Jan. 28, when Bush delivers his State of the Union address. House Republicans backed away from their demand that Bush's tax cuts be made permanent, which would have been a deal-killer for Democrats. Some tension between the administration and congressional leaders remained, though, as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) sharply criticized Bush for talking about his stimulus plans prematurely.
While consensus was forming in Washington, yesterday was another painful day on Wall Street. The Dow Jones industrial average fell 306.95 points, or 2.5 percent, as Merrill Lynch reported a huge quarterly loss and a report indicated that U.S. housing starts fell 14.2 percent from November to December.
Bernanke, in testimony to the House Budget Committee, seemed to repudiate those in Congress who seek to use economic stimulus to put in place policies that would affect the economy over the longer term -- permanent tax cuts, for example, or big infrastructure projects. Bernanke explicitly and repeatedly urged Congress not to conflate policy changes that might make sense in the long run with those that would provide immediate help for the economy.
"Fiscal stimulus that comes too late will not help support economic activity in the near term, and it could be actively destabilizing if it comes at a time when growth is already improving," Bernanke said. He added later, "I think in order for this to be effective you need to move very quickly."
Bernanke has been reluctant to take on the role his predecessor, Alan Greenspan, played as the nation's economist-in-chief. Greenspan often told Congress of his economic policy preferences, but Bernanke yesterday repeatedly declined to take positions on what tax and spending levels are appropriate. ("Does Congress spend to much?" asked Rep. J. Gresham Barrett (R-S.C.). "That's not my call," Bernanke said.)
The Fed chairman did state some principles for what kinds of policies would do the most to keep the economy from slowing too drastically in 2008. He called the stimulus packages being considered, $50 billion to $150 billion, "reasonable." And he indicated that money provided to low- and moderate-income Americans is likely to result in more new economic activity than funds that go to people with high incomes.
Congressional leaders appeared to heed the advice about separating long-term economic policy from short-term stimulus. Pelosi emphasized, after a conference call with Bush, that Congress and the administration were working on a proposal that will be "timely, targeted, and temporary," which is consistent with what Bernanke advised in his testimony.
"We'd rather keep this as plain vanilla as we can," Budget Committee Chairman John M. Spratt Jr. (D-S.C.) told reporters.
Republican leaders, meanwhile, indicated that they could go along with a stimulus plan that does not include a permanent extension of Bush's first-term tax cuts, which are to expire in 2011.
"They've drawn a line in the sand on the Bush tax-cut extension, so we've seen a shift," said Rep. Eric Cantor (Va.), the Republicans' chief deputy whip. "There's been a realization that we need to get something done, and the expectations are not that high that we will get that done."
|
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke endorsed government efforts to stimulate the economy yesterday, as congressional leaders and the Bush administration moved closer to agreement on a plan.
| 24.333333 | 0.633333 | 0.966667 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/17/AR2008011703252.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/17/AR2008011703252.html
|
CIA Places Blame for Bhutto Assassination
|
2008012019
|
Offering the most definitive public assessment by a U.S. intelligence official, Hayden said Bhutto was killed by fighters allied with Mehsud, a tribal leader in northwestern Pakistan, with support from al-Qaeda's terrorist network. That view mirrors the Pakistani government's assertions.
The same alliance between local and international terrorists poses a grave risk to the government of President Pervez Musharraf, a close U.S. ally in the fight against terrorism, Hayden said in 45-minute interview with The Washington Post. "What you see is, I think, a change in the character of what's going on there," he said. "You've got this nexus now that probably was always there in latency but is now active: a nexus between al-Qaeda and various extremist and separatist groups."
Hayden added, "It is clear that their intention is to continue to try to do harm to the Pakistani state as it currently exists."
Days after Bhutto's Dec. 27 assassination in the city of Rawalpindi, Pakistani officials released intercepted communications between Mehsud and his supporters in which the tribal leader praised the killing and, according to the officials, appeared to take credit for it. Pakistani and U.S. officials have declined to comment on the origin of that intercept, but the administration has until now been cautious about publicly embracing the Pakistani assessment.
Many Pakistanis have voiced suspicions that Musharraf's government played a role in Bhutto's assassination, and Bhutto's family has alleged a wide conspiracy involving government officials. Hayden declined to discuss the intelligence behind the CIA's assessment, which is at odds with that view and supports Musharraf's assertions.
"This was done by that network around Baitullah Mehsud. We have no reason to question that," Hayden said. He described the killing as "part of an organized campaign" that has included suicide bombings and other attacks on Pakistani leaders.
Some administration officials outside the agency who deal with Pakistani issues were less conclusive, with one calling the assertion "a very good assumption."
One of the officials said there was no "incontrovertible" evidence to prove or rebut the assessment.
Hayden made his statement shortly before a series of attacks occurred this week on Pakistani political figures and army units. Pakistani officials have blamed them on Mehsud's forces and other militants. On Wednesday, a group of several hundred insurgents overran a military outpost in the province of South Waziristan, killing 22 government paramilitary troops. The daring daylight raid was carried out by rebels loyal to Mehsud, Pakistani authorities said.
For more than a year, U.S. officials have been nervously watching as al-Qaeda rebuilt its infrastructure in the rugged tribal regions along the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan, often with the help of local sympathizers.
In recent months, U.S. intelligence officials have said, the relationship between al-Qaeda and local insurgents has been strengthened by a common antipathy toward the pro-Western Musharraf government. The groups now share resources and training facilities and sometimes even plan attacks together, they said.
"We've always viewed that to be an ultimate danger to the United States," Hayden said, "but now it appears that it is a serious base of danger to the current well-being of Pakistan."
Hayden's anxieties about Pakistan's stability are echoed by other U.S. officials who have visited Pakistan since Bhutto's assassination. White House, intelligence and Defense Department officials have held a series of meetings to discuss U.S. options in the event that the current crisis deepens, including the possibility of covert action involving Special Forces.
Hayden declined to comment on the policy meetings but said that the CIA already was heavily engaged in the region and has not shifted its officers or changed its operations significantly since the crisis began.
"The Afghan-Pakistan border region has been an area of focus for this agency since about 11 o'clock in the morning of September 11, [2001], and I really mean this," Hayden said. "We haven't done a whole lot of retooling there in the last one week, one month, three months, six months and so on. This has been up there among our very highest priorities."
Hayden said that the United States has "not had a better partner in the war on terrorism than the Pakistanis." The turmoil of the past few weeks has only deepened that cooperation, he said, by highlighting "what are now even more clearly mutual and common interests."
Hayden also acknowledged the difficulties -- diplomatic and practical -- involved in helping combat extremism in a country divided by ethnic, religious and cultural allegiances. "This looks simpler the further away you get from it," he said. "And the closer you get to it, geography, history, culture all begin to intertwine and make it more complex."
Regarding the public controversy over the CIA's harsh interrogation of detainees at secret prisons, Hayden reiterated previous agency statements that lives were saved and attacks were prevented as a result of those interrogations.
He said he does not support proposals, put forward by some lawmakers in recent weeks, to require the CIA to abide by the Army Field Manual in conducting interrogations. The manual, adopted by the Defense Department, prohibits the use of many aggressive methods, including a simulated-drowning technique known as waterboarding.
"I would offer my professional judgment that that will make us less capable in gaining the information we need," he said.
Staff writer Robin Wright and staff researcher Julie Tate contributed to this report.
|
The CIA has concluded that members of al-Qaeda and allies of Pakistani tribal leader Baitullah Mehsud were responsible for last month's assassination of former Pakistani prime minister Benazir Bhutto, and that they also stand behind a new wave of violence threatening that country's stability, the...
| 20.442308 | 0.730769 | 1.230769 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/17/AR2008011703575.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/17/AR2008011703575.html
|
White House Study Found 473 Days of E-Mail Gone
|
2008012019
|
The 2005 study -- whose credibility the White House attacked this week -- identified 473 separate days in which no electronic messages were stored for one or more White House offices, said House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.).
Waxman said he decided to release the summary after White House spokesman Tony Fratto said yesterday that there is "no evidence" that any White House e-mails from those years are missing. Fratto's assertion "seems to be an unsubstantiated statement that has no relation to the facts they have shared with us," Waxman said.
The competing claims were the latest salvos in an escalating dispute over whether the Bush administration has complied with long-standing statutory requirements to preserve official White House records -- including those reflecting potentially sensitive policy discussions -- for history and in case of any future legal demands.
Waxman said he is seeking testimony on the issue at a hearing next month from White House counsel Fred F. Fielding, National Archivist Allen Weinstein and Alan R. Swendiman, the politically appointed director of the Office of Administration, which produced the 2005 study at issue.
Another official in that office on Tuesday challenged the study's credibility in a court affidavit, contending that current White House employees have been unable to confirm the veracity of the analysis or to recreate its findings. Waxman's disclosure provides the first details about the study's findings.
The White House is required by law to preserve e-mails considered presidential or federal records, and it is the target of several lawsuits seeking information about missing data and efforts to preserve electronic communications.
The internal study found that for Bush's executive office, no e-mails were archived on 12 separate days between December 2003 and February 2004, Waxman said. Vice President Cheney's office showed no electronic messages on 16 occasions from September 2003 to May 2005.
Archived e-mails were missing from even more days in other parts of the White House, the analysis found. The Council on Environmental Quality and the Council of Economic Advisers, for example, showed no stored e-mails for 2 1/2 months beginning in November 2003. The Office of Management and Budget showed no messages for 59 days -- including the period from Nov. 1, 2003, to Dec. 9, 2003 -- and the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative showed no e-mail for 73 days.
The administration has so far refused to release the study and a number of documents related to it, including a large summary chart used in a closed-door briefing conducted for Waxman and other lawmakers last September by Emmet T. Flood, special counsel to the president.
The briefers took the chart with them when they left, Waxman said, but committee staffers had copied many of the details.
Waxman described the findings in a letter to Fielding, which he released. "Mr. Fratto's statements have added to the considerable confusion that exists regarding the status of White House efforts to preserve e-mails," Waxman's letter said.
|
The White House possesses no archived e-mail messages for many of its component offices, including the Executive Office of the President and the Office of the Vice President, for hundreds of days between 2003 and 2005, according to the summary of an internal White House study that was disclosed y...
| 10.339286 | 0.857143 | 1.857143 |
low
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/17/AR2008011703620.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/17/AR2008011703620.html
|
Chief of Veterans Charities Grilled on Groups' Spending
|
2008012019
|
A congressional investigation yesterday uncovered new allegations of questionable spending practices at two veterans charities, including one that paid retired Army Gen. Tommy Franks $100,000 to appear in its solicitation letters using money the nonprofit raised to help soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.
At a raucous, three-hour hearing yesterday, House members questioned California entrepreneur Roger Chapin about his management of two charities. One charity, Help Hospitalized Veterans, spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations that were to help wounded soldiers on personal expenses for Chapin, executive director Mike Lynch and Richard A. Viguerie, to whom the charity has awarded millions of dollars in fundraising-consulting contracts, the hearing found.
The expenses included at least $340,000 in meals, hotels and entertainment; a $135,000 loan to Lynch for a divorce settlement with his former wife; a $17,000 country club membership; three airplane tickets to Hawaii; and a $1 million loan to Viguerie for a start-up initiative at his firm, several members of the committee said.
The second charity, the Coalition to Support America's Heroes, used Franks in its solicitation letters, the House Committee on Government Oversight and Reform found.
Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.), chairman of the committee, said Help Hospitalized Veterans raised more than $168 million from 2004 to 2006. The charity spent a quarter of those donations on the veterans, with the rest going to direct-mail fundraising, salaries and other expenses, Waxman said.
Republicans and Democrats voiced outrage over what Waxman called "an intolerable fraud."
"Most of the millions they receive never reach veterans or their families," Waxman said. "Instead, the groups waste those contributions on bloated overhead costs and self-enrichment."
There are no laws that regulate how much charities spend on fundraising and overhead costs. There also are no requirements that nonprofit groups disclose such breakdowns in their solicitations. Several lawmakers signaled yesterday that they may introduce legislation aimed at helping donors better understand the finances of nonprofit groups.
Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.) asked Chapin what would happen if his charities told donors how their donations were spent.
"If we disclose, which I'm more than happy to do, we'd all be out of business," Chapin said. "Nobody would donate. It would dry up."
Chapin said few people know how expensive fundraising can be.
"If I could do better, I would," Chapin said. "I've tried television, I've tried radio, I've tried foundations, I've tried corporations and the only thing that works is direct mail."
|
A congressional investigation yesterday uncovered new allegations of questionable spending practices at two veterans charities, including one that paid retired Army Gen. Tommy Franks $100,000 to appear in its solicitation letters using money the nonprofit raised to help soldiers returning from Iraq...
| 11.444444 | 0.977778 | 43.022222 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/17/AR2008011703519.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/17/AR2008011703519.html
|
A Newly Confident Clinton Focuses More on Economy Than on Obama
|
2008012019
|
COMPTON, Calif., Jan. 17 -- Ten days after she choked up while answering a question from a New Hampshire voter, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton took the pulpit at Citizens of Zion Missionary Baptist Church here on Thursday to cite a Bible verse in support of her main argument against Sen. Barack Obama.
"As the Scripture reminds us, we cannot be just hearers to the word, we must be doers," she declared. The mostly African American congregation applauded and murmured in agreement.
Abandoning the defensive crouch she assumed in the days before rebounding from her defeat in the Iowa caucuses with a victory in the New Hampshire primary, Clinton has resumed her role as the forceful aggressor in the Democratic presidential race, showing few signs of vulnerability, and playing down her emotions in favor of a heavy emphasis on policy details.
In swings across Nevada and California over the past few days, the senator from New York has returned to one of her favorite subjects -- the economy -- while her advisers have been mounting a fierce behind-the-scenes effort to undercut Obama and lower expectations for Clinton. She did rounds of interviews about the economy, took questions from pastors, traveled to the San Fernando Valley to meet college students and took questions again from voters, concentrating on California, the biggest prize of Super Tuesday on Feb. 5, even as the Nevada caucuses loom this weekend.
In some ways, Clinton has returned to her pre-Iowa days. Though quoting the Bible Thursday, she also drifted back toward specific (and notably liberal-sounding) promises: payments of $650 per person to help people, especially seniors on fixed incomes, pay utility bills; mandatory preschool; a $30 billion fund to help communities cope with the mortgage crisis; a $200 million program over five years to help communities transition ex-convicts back into society.
"I believe strongly that when someone has served his or her time, her debt or his debt to society, then they ought to have the slate wiped clean," Clinton said. "They ought to be able to vote; they ought to be able to have a job. And I've been around long enough to know that you don't make things disappear by just talking about it -- you've got to have action."
Clinton acknowledged that she is amid a fierce fight for the Democratic nomination, but did not mention her chief rival by name. In her stump speech, she has mostly scaled back her more explicit contrasts with Obama. The references to having the "strength and experience" to be president "on Day One" have largely given way this week to remarks about people's economic worries, and her speeches have been filled with anecdotes she has heard from voters on the campaign trail. The word "change" has been replaced by far greater emphasis on the "middle class."
"There is a lot of questioning going on: "Why isn't it working for hardworking middle-class Americans?' " she said to a large crowd of students during a stop at California State University at Northridge late Thursday.
Even in her morning church visit, Clinton talked about racial equality in economic terms. "So many heroic people, following the example that Dr. King set of nonviolent resistance, changed our country and changed our world, but let us also remember that when Dr. King was taken from us too soon, he was marching for economic justice," she said. "And there still is a long way to go today, particularly when it comes to voting rights and job discrimination."
In shifting into a full-throttle emphasis on the economy, Clinton is once again following in her husband's steps. She has not used the phrase "It's the economy, stupid," which defined Bill Clinton's presidential campaign in 1992, but her approach is strikingly similar. She encourages voters to consider their own interests as they think about how to vote, and offers examples of how her proposals will help them.
She is noticeably cool about one theme from her husband's campaigns -- hope -- because it is now more associated with Obama.
"We're supposed to all go up together, and I pledge to you that I will do everything in my power as a senator, as a president to make sure that we do deliver on the dream that all of us know should be a reality," she said, "and not just a hope."
|
Full coverage of Congress, including the House of Represenatives and the U.S. Senate. The Washington Post and washingtonpost.com provide analysis of Capitol Hill.
| 33.230769 | 0.461538 | 0.538462 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/17/AR2008011702828.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/17/AR2008011702828.html
|
Chris Matthews Backs Off 'Nasty' Remark on Clinton
|
2008012019
|
For 10 days, the "Hardball" host had doggedly insisted he was just reciting a bit of history when he said on the air that "the reason she's a U.S. senator, the reason she's a candidate for president, the reason she may be a front-runner is her husband messed around."
But protests against those and other remarks by Matthews reached a peak yesterday when the presidents of such groups as the National Organization for Women, Feminist Majority and National Women's Political Caucus sent a joint letter of complaint to NBC News President Steve Capus.
On last night's program, Matthews defended the substance of his remarks that Clinton's political career in New York was launched because of public sympathy stemming from her husband's much-investigated affair with Monica Lewinsky. But, he said, "was it fair to imply that Hillary's whole career depended on being a victim of an unfaithful husband? No. And that's what it sounded like I was saying."
Noting that it would be just as unfair to attribute John McCain's political success to having been shot down in the Vietnam War, Matthews said: "Saying Senator Clinton got where she's got simply because her husband did what he did to her is just as callous, and I can see now, came across just as nasty -- worse yet, just as dismissive." He said he would be "clearer," "smarter" and more respectful in discussing women.
Kim Gandy, NOW's president, said last night that "Chris Matthews is a repeat offender when it comes to sexist attitudes toward women politicians. . . . I wasn't really looking for an apology. I was looking for a behavior change, and for him to treat female politicians the same way as male politicians."
In the joint letter, also signed by author Gloria Steinem, the women cited other examples in which Matthews referred to Clinton as a "stripteaser" and called her "witchy." When Nancy Pelosi was in line to become House speaker, the letter noted, Matthews asked a guest if Pelosi was "going to castrate Steny Hoyer" if the Maryland congressman was elected majority leader.
About 30 people affiliated with the National Women's Political Caucus picketed NBC's Nebraska Avenue NW bureau yesterday afternoon as a protest against Matthews's remarks.
"This is a victory for all women. We are pleased that Chris Matthews has shown remorse," the caucus said in a statement last night.
Earlier this month, when Matthews attended a Clinton campaign event in New Hampshire and repeatedly tried to press her on the Iraq war, she smiled and said: "You know, I don't know what to do with men who are obsessed with me. Honestly, I've never understood it."
When the former first lady approached him afterward, Matthews pinched her cheek, and she gave him a brief hug.
As criticism from liberal bloggers and others mounted over the past week, top MSNBC officials urged Matthews to apologize, according to network officials who would not be identified discussing internal deliberations. But Matthews dug in his heels, deciding to deliver the mea culpa only after he had returned from a Democratic presidential debate sponsored by the network in Las Vegas.
In an interview last week, Matthews, a onetime Democratic operative, insisted at length that he was right in describing how Clinton was launched on a path that would carry her to the Senate and a presidential campaign. "I thought what I said was unexceptional about what happened back in '98," he said. "She was facing a trial by fire, and the fire was her husband. I knew I was speaking bluntly, but does anyone disagree?"
Only toward the end of the interview did he acknowledge: "It came over as dismissive, and that's my fault. Maybe I should have said it was an irony."
|
Under pressure from feminist groups and his own bosses at MSNBC, Chris Matthews apologized yesterday for remarks about Hillary Clinton that he now admits sounded "nasty."
| 25.133333 | 0.8 | 1 |
medium
|
medium
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/17/AR2008011703439.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/17/AR2008011703439.html
|
Judge Allows Casino Sites for Nevada Caucuses
|
2008012019
|
LAS VEGAS, Jan. 17 -- A federal judge on Thursday refused to shut down nine casino-based sites for Saturday's caucuses, delivering a victory to Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) in what has become an increasingly bitter Democratic contest here.
U.S. District Judge James C. Mahan rejected the argument that conducting some of the caucuses in casinos would give Obama an unfair advantage because he has been endorsed by the state culinary workers union, which employs thousands of casino workers. Siding with lawyers for the Democratic National Committee, he said federal law "recognizes the parties have the right to determine how to apportion delegates."
The DNC, working with Nevada Democratic officials, approved the at-large precincts last summer to accommodate people who will be working when the hour-long caucuses are held at noon on Saturday. Any shift worker employed within a 2.5-mile radius of the Strip is allowed to participate, but those sites are expected to be dominated by culinary workers, many of whom are Latino. State party officials estimate that casino caucusgoers could account for as much as 10 percent of the total turnout.
The lawsuit, brought by a state teachers' union that has endorsed Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), led to a nasty dispute between her campaign and Obama's, escalating tensions just days after the two tried to defuse a racially tinged dispute.
The Clinton campaign has denied playing any formal role in the suit but has been critical of the casino caucuses.
The group Unite Here, which represents 440,000 textile and hotel workers and is the parent union of the culinary workers' organization, began running a Spanish-language radio spot in which, according to a translation provided by the Clinton campaign, a narrator says: "Hillary Clinton does not respect our people. Hillary Clinton supporters want to prevent people from voting in their workplace on Saturday. This is unforgivable. Hillary Clinton is shameless."
The ad goes on tout Obama's candidacy and his defense of workers' rights.
Chris Bohner, a representative of the culinary workers union, said the union's leadership was deeply offended by the lawsuit.
"We can't think of a more negative and disgraceful political tactic than publicly supporting a lawsuit that would disenfranchise thousands of workers, bellhops, dishwashers, housekeepers, recent immigrants who've just become American citizens," Bohner said. "The ad intends to point out the fact that the Clinton campaign is supporting this lawsuit, which is entirely appropriate, and we completely stand by the ad. We've waited for the Clinton campaign to denounce the lawsuit, and they didn't."
Clinton aides said Obama, who had criticized ads from outside groups affiliated with former senator John Edwards (D-N.C.) when they ran in the Iowa caucuses, has been "strangely silent now that a labor union is attacking the Clinton campaign.
"In Iowa, Senator Obama and his campaign went out of his way to attack labor unions for independently promoting other candidates," said Phil Singer, a Clinton campaign spokesman. "But in Nevada, he's looking the other way as they falsely attack his opponents."
Bill Burton, Obama's campaign spokesman, said in an e-mail that the Clinton objections "take some chutzpah."
|
LAS VEGAS, Jan. 17 -- A federal judge on Thursday refused to shut down nine casino-based sites for Saturday's caucuses, delivering a victory to Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) in what has become an increasingly bitter Democratic contest here.
| 13.652174 | 1 | 46 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/17/AR2008011703440.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/17/AR2008011703440.html
|
Thompson Hopes S.C. Revives His Campaign
|
2008012019
|
COLUMBIA, S.C., Jan. 17 -- Time is running out for former senator Fred D. Thompson of Tennessee to make a statement in the race for the Republican presidential nomination. Once billed as the party's next Ronald Reagan, he is just two days from knowing whether his candidacy has a future.
As the first Southern state prepares to vote, Thompson has conceded that a disappointing finish in Saturday's GOP primary would probably sink his chances. Other candidates have much to gain or lose here, but none more than the man whose candidacy has been one of the campaign's biggest puzzles.
Until now, Thompson has been overshadowed by his rivals. He ran third in Iowa, the state that vaulted former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee to the race's front ranks. He got 1 percent of the vote in New Hampshire, where Sen. John McCain of Arizona came back to life. He attracted 4 percent in Michigan on Tuesday, when former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney resuscitated his candidacy with a victory.
That is hardly the script written for the television and movie actor months ago as he began a high-profile effort to test enthusiasm for his campaign.
Now he is down to one state where he hopes that his combination of Southern roots and conservative views will lead to the breakthrough that has so far escaped him. He isn't reluctant to remind audiences here that he's kin. As he said at a West Columbia restaurant Thursday morning, "It's good to be back in home territory where they know how to cook green beans -- and they're not crunchy."
His rivals doubt his chances, but Thompson believes something is happening in the Palmetto State. Asked during a radio interview at the restaurant Thursday whether his efforts here represent a "too little, too late" strategy, he offered an upbeat assessment.
"We're clearly moving in the right direction," he said. "We had some ground to make up, but from what I can tell, we're moving up."
Noting that Romney's campaign had spent heavily early, only to effectively concede the state this week, Thompson said, "I think you ought to be asking them the question of too early, too late, or something like that."
Thompson advisers see the three biggest strands of the Republican coalition -- economic, social and national security conservatives -- divided among three candidates: Romney, Huckabee and McCain. Thompson, they argue, still has the capacity to unite all three, but only by showing that in South Carolina.
"It's where we feel we need to break through," said campaign manager Bill Lacy.
Lacy said the campaign has run a heavy television ad campaign this week, is making thousands of phone calls and has 200 volunteers to get out the vote.
South Carolina is the key to Thompson's red-state strategy, conceived to take advantage of party rules that award extra delegates to states won by President Bush. A strong showing here, Lacy said, would set up the former senator to consider a major effort in the Jan. 29 Florida primary.
|
Follow 2008 Elections & Campaigns at washingtonpost.com.
| 74.75 | 0.25 | 0.25 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/17/AR2008011702905.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/17/AR2008011702905.html
|
European Ethics Group Opposes Food From Cloned Animals
|
2008012019
|
Opponents of cloning animals for food got a boost yesterday as a European ethics body came out against the practice, expressing concerns about the clones' welfare.
The report, from the European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies, which advises the European Commission, is likely to weigh heavily in the growing European debate on the issue. It counters a scientific report released there last week that, like one by the Food and Drug Administration, found no human health concerns connected to the consumption of meat and milk from clones.
Unlike in the United States, the European Commission is required by law to consider ethical criteria when approving new foods. The new report notes that cloned farm animals have much higher than normal prenatal death rates, as well as a higher prevalence of physiological problems after birth.
Cloned animals' surrogate mothers also tend to have problems during birth and in some cases must be euthanized.
"At present, the EGE does not see convincing arguments to justify the production of food from clones and their offspring," the report concludes.
"I'm just thrilled," said Joyce D'Silva, ambassador for Compassion in World Farming, an animal welfare group in Godalming, England. "There may be no problems from eating this stuff, but there are problems producing it. Ethical problems that are very important."
Barbara Glenn, director of animal biotechnology with the Biotechnology Industry Organization, whose members include the major U.S. farm animal cloning companies, said the report got it backward.
"The ethical imperative to use a proven livestock breeding method such as cloning is clear," Glenn said. "As long as there is hunger, animal cloning is one of the tools to allow farmers and ranchers to continue to produce the healthier livestock that produce healthy foods."
|
Science news from The Washington Post. Read about the latest breakthroughs in technology,medicine and communications.
| 17.2 | 0.5 | 0.7 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/gallery/2007/12/31/GA2007123102000.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/gallery/2007/12/31/GA2007123102000.html
|
ICC names suspects in Kenyan election violence
|
2008012019
|
| NAIROBI, Jan. 18 -- Three days of opposition protests ended violently Friday with hundreds of police officers shooting wildly at protesters in Nairobi's largest slum and clashes just a few miles from one of Kenya's most famous safari playgrounds. At least 11 people were killed.
| NAIROBI, Jan. 1 -- A mob of men wielding sticks, spears and machetes set ablaze a church where villagers had sought refuge from Kenya's post-election violence, burning to death at least 35 people, including women and children, according to aid workers and a priest.
| NAIROBI, Jan. 16 -- Three days of planned opposition rallies across Kenya began haltingly Wednesday, with police facing off against relatively small crowds in several cities and chasing opposition leaders with tear gas through the streets of the capital.
| NAIROBI, Jan. 30 -- The top U.S. diplomat for Africa said Wednesday that the post-election violence in Kenya amounted to "ethnic cleansing" and that both President Mwai Kibaki and opposition leader Raila Odinga should be doing more to calm tensions.
| NAIROBI, Jan. 17 -- Kenyan opposition leader Raila Odinga said Thursday that he would call for strikes and boycotts of businesses owned by President Mwai Kibaki's inner circle to pressure him to address a post-election crisis that has undermined one of East Africa's strongest democracies.
| ELMENTEITA, Kenya -- After reaching a power-sharing deal last week, Kenya's rival political leaders are now confronting one of the most explosive issues underlying the post-election crisis, and one that every Kenyan government since independence has managed to avoid: land reform.
| NAIROBI -- They grew up in farming villages -- Teddy Chwanya in the rolling hills of western Kenya and Samuel Mathu amid the cattle and flower farms of the country's lush central region.
| NAIROBI, Jan. 24 -- President Mwai Kibaki and opposition leader Raila Odinga met briefly Thursday for the first time since Kenya's disputed presidential election threw the country into weeks of protests, riots and ethnically charged violence.
|
The International Criminal Court named several prominent Kenyans as suspects in the violence that followed the 2007 election. More than 1,000 people were killed and hundreds of thousands were displaced during the turmoil.
| 10.942857 | 0.542857 | 0.828571 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/17/AR2008011703583.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/17/AR2008011703583.html
|
Tom Cruise's Scary Movie
|
2008012019
|
It's on the Internet, this promotional video he did for the Church of Scientology. I guess it's out there because of this new book by Andrew Morton, "Tom Cruise: An Unauthorized Biography." It was on several sites, but then disappeared on some and reappeared on others. Gawker.com posted a cease-and-desist letter it said was sent by attorneys representing the church. The letter, according to the site, says the "copyrighted" video was stolen from the church, and demands that it be taken down.
In the video, still posted yesterday on Gawker, The Tom is wearing a black turtleneck and talking to an interviewer just off camera -- for nine minutes! -- about how he wants to help and how he's met with "leaders" all over the world and how they want his help, and how Scientology is "wild and woolly" and how he doesn't like people sitting on the sidelines of life, and how he's "canceled that in my area." And he keeps laughing really LOUD and it really doesn't make any sense and he keeps showing all his teeth and barely blinking and I got really scared but I watched the whole thing even if I didn't want to, and now I can't sleep without the light on.
"We are the authorities on getting people off drugs, we are the authorities on the mind, we are the authorities on improving conditions," he says, while "Mission: Impossible"-type music be-bebops in the background. "We can rehabilitate criminals. . . . We can bring peace and unite cultures."
Yeah, but what if he really means it? Like that part when he talks about driving by a traffic accident, and he knows he has to stop, because as a Scientologist, "you know you're the only one who can really help." If you're on the ground there beside the Beltway, your car totaled, a crowd gathering around, and nobody calls 911 but some guy hollers, "Is Tom Cruise here? Tom?" And what if he is? Or, worse, what if he's watching a Redskins game from the booth with Dan Snyder and becomes convinced only he can help us get to the playoffs?
He talks a lot about Scientology in stern terms -- "You're on board or you're not on board" -- and says: "Now is the time, okay? Being a Scientologist, people are turning to you, and you better know it. You better know it."
It's not really clear what "it" is, Mom, but we're guessing it has to do with the basics of Scientology.
He doesn't stop there! He starts talking about "suppressive persons!" That's "SPs" in Scientology terminology. These are people who attack or don't like Scientology. Boy, he really doesn't like them.
"They don't come up to me and do that. They won't do it to me. Not to my face. Not anywhere in my vicinity . . . where they feel they can be . . . confronted. They're just not doing it."
In the clip, which cuts repeatedly to different parts of the same interview, we just don't know almost anything. He speaks in subjects and verbs and almost no direct objects. We don't know who or what he is referring to when he says, his voice dropping to a whisper:
"They said, 'So like, have you met an SP?' " Then he laughs this sort of loud, intense thing, his mouth open, clapping his hands together. "I looked at them, and you know and I thought, 'What a beautiful thing,' because maybe one day it'll be like that. You know what I'm saying? Maybe one day it'll be like that. Wow, SPs, they'll just read about those in history books."
Yeah, yeah. I know. It's just a movie star. It's just something like in the picture show. Can I have a drink of water? I'll try to forget it. I'll try to forget I ever saw it.
But could you leave the light on?
|
Mom! Tom Cruise is scaring people again! It's on the Internet, this promotional video he did for the Church of Scientology. I guess it's out there because of this new book by Andrew Morton, "Tom Cruise: An Unauthorized Biography." It was on several sites, but then disappeared on some and reappear...
| 13.125 | 0.9375 | 44.03125 |
low
|
medium
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/04/DI2008010402313.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/04/DI2008010402313.html
|
Real Wheels - washingtonpost.com
|
2008012019
|
Brown test drives all types of cars, from luxury sedans to the newest minivans and hybrids. His On Wheels auto reviews are lively, detailed accounts of cars' good and bad qualities.
Brown's Car Culture column addresses the social, political and economic trends of the industry.
Brown comes online Fridays at 11 a.m. ET to answer your questions on every aspect of the automotive industry -- from buying your dream car to the future of the internal combustion engine.
Washington, D.C.: Tell us more of your Smart experience, please. I'd especially like to hear your thoughts about the transmission and the shifting. Thanks for your chats and columns.
Driving the Smart on the highway is a matter of being willing to make certan accommodations. The car is light, which means it is subject to being pushed around by crosswinds. It helps to load the front seat ad rear hatch with luggage. It can get up to 90 miles per hour. But It makes no sense to do that in high winds, or on elevated roads. Once it's at speed, it remains at speed. But geting there takes a few seconds longer than many drivers are accustomed to. It is an automated manual. You start it in neutral. Slap the gearshift lever to the left. You get first gear, indicating manual. Moving the gearshift lever up or down changes gears accordingly. Push a button on the gearshift lever to go to full automatic. Works perfectly. Great car for the city. It CAN do highway. But best performance is definitely city. I like it.
Clifton, Va.: This new Can-Am Spyder three wheel thing I heard about looks really cool! Is it a motorcycle or a 3-wheel car? Can it use HOV lanes? Does it get good mileage?
Warren Brown: I'd rather hink of it as a high-performance tri-cycle. At the moment, it's primarily a concept, as you know. On Hov lanes, check with local officials, whose laws in the matter seldom make sense to me -- allowing single passenger hybrid SUVs to run HOV, but barring the same privilege for more fuel-eficient, two-seat cars. Dumb.
Anonymous: Hello Mr. Brown, I love my Ford Focus, that I've had since 2002. I would love to have a Ford Edge, but like my husband and a lot of folks say about Ford, "don't bother" What's your opinion on Ford models?
The "don't bother" folks have their minds buried in a time and in a Ford that no longer exist. Ford's quality is every bit as good as that of its rivals, as amply documented by a variety of third-party research reports, including J.D. Power and Harbour manufacturing studies. What remains curious to me is the longevity of the quality myth regarding Japanese and European manufacturers. I suppose that's because I spend so much of my time researching these things. For example, would you be surprised to learn that consumer groups in Japan have long complained about the safety of a number of cars built by Toyota, Honda, et al? Would you be surprised that the Greens in Europe are citing Mercedes-Benz, not GM or Ford, both of whom have substantial shares of market over there, for being eggregiously fuel consumptive? Ford can compete with anyone in quality, which is what Ford is doing now.
Hyattsville, Md.: I'm looking at 2008 sedans to replace my 22-year-old car. Warren, How would you rank the following V6 cars in order of preference and why? Buick LaCrosse, Chevy Impala 2LT, Ford Taurus SEL or Limited, Saturn Aura XE V6.
The Saturn Aura XE V6 is midsize, based on the same Opel-derived platform as the much-lauded (rightfully so) 2009 Chvrolet Malibu. It is a very good car.
The Buick LaCrosse, Chevrolet Impla 2LT and Taurus are at the upper end (size-wise) of mid-size, the lower end of full-size. The new Taurus actually is a full-size vehicle, not mid-size, as was its predecessor. Think Ford 500 with a Taurus badge.
My preference in that group is the Chevrolet Impala for no reason other than that I am a life-long Chevy nut and the Impala has always been one of my favorite cars.
Washington, D.C.: I really love the Volvo C30, but a two-door car is impractical for me. I heard a rumor of a five-door C30 (ala the Mazda 3). Anything from Detroit about it?
Warren Brown: I know nothing about that at this time.
Re: Ford can compete with anyone in quality, which is what Ford is doing now: Warren, they can say all they want. The proof is in the number of sales, of which Toyota's new Tundra will grab the biggest share of the market this year.
The Ford F150, even with a downturn in the pickup market occasioned by a downturn in the housing and construction trades and rising fuel prices (which eliminates truck poseur buyers), remains the best-selling pickup in the nation, far outstripping the Tundra by nearly 200,000 units annually.
The Tundra, despite hundreds of millions of dollars in concentrated marketing, including lots and lots of rebates, missed its modest sales goal of 200,000 units in 2007.
Both the Tundra and the lackluster Nissan Titan were clobbered by the likes of the Chevrolet Silverado and the Ford F-Series.
And now with Dodge revving up the 2009 version of the Ram 1500, things won't be any easier for the Tundra or the Titan.
Please get it through your biased, non-research-supported head: NO ONE HAS A CORNER ON COMPETENCE OR QUALITY BASED ON NATIONALITY, ETHNICITY, RELIGION or RACE. Anyone who believes otherwise is digging his or her on grave.
Philadelphia: Hi Warren. I've been following your columns and chats for years. I greatly value your perspective. Here's my question: Do you know when the new version of the BMW X3 will hit the showrooms? My X3 lease is up in the early fall and I may not want to get a 2008 with the old sheet metal. I've seen spy shots in the press. I have driven the Infiniti EX and love it, but the cargo area is too small for my big dog. I've looked at the RDX, but missed the huge sunroof I have in the X3, as well as my heated steering wheel and zenon headlights that turn with the steering wheel (I hit a deer once, so I like this option). What would you do? I'm trying not to let the fact that my daughter will enter college in the fall and tuition bills begin alter my thinking but...
I'd save money, improve comfort and fuel economy, not to mention interior and exterior attractivenes; and I'd maintain/improve quality by buying the Maxda CX9, which I would take over the BMW X3 any day of the year.
Crownsville, Md.: Warren, it seems to me that much of the "myth" -- if it is indeed a myth -- concerning quality of Japanese cars comes from Consumer Reports, which seems to me to consistently rank Japanese cars higher than American cars.
Warren Brown: It is a myth.
And not even Consumer Reports is doing that silliness anymore.
Kindly refer to CR's latest comments on the Tundra.
Re: Mercedes-Benz, not GM or Ford... being eggregiously fuel consumptive: I don't disagree with your point that the quality gap is a myth, but are the GM and Ford products offered in Europe the same as those here? Perhaps the European market is not comparable to the U.S.
Warren Brown: You are right.
The European market is not comparable to the U.S. market. Here is why:
Governments in the European Union are smart enough to realize that you cannot have an effective fuel conservation policy by placing the entire burden of that problem on industry. Accordingly, those goverments heavily tax the least efficient fuels, such as gasoline. They place lower taxes on the more efficient fuels, such as diesel, which is 35 percent more efficient than gasoline.
Those governments also tax horsepower and penalize C02 output. The result is that European consumers maintain freedom of choice in the marketplace. But they exercise that freedom more intelligently and with greater environmental responsibility than we do in the United States.
Car companies are not stupid enough to believe the socialist and environmental extremist claptrap that they can "make" consumers buy what consumers don't want to buy through the almighty power of advertising. Had that been the case, the Tundra would be outselling the for F-150 and the Chevrolet Silverado, which it isn't doing -- not by a long, long, long shot. So, car companies, including GM and Ford, doing business in Europe by giving consumers what they demand and are willing to pay for at a price that returns profit to those companies -- safe, fuel-efficient cars, nearly 50 percent of which are equipped with modern diesel engines.
But what do we have in the United States?
We have a Congress that does not understand the meaning of leadership. We have a Congress that is saying we must make changes that require some degree of sacrifice. But that same Congress, as amply demonstrated in its hideously compromised claptrap of an energy bill (approved last year), is promising consumers that they won't have to sacrifice anything.
It is an unmitigated ruse. Congress should be ashamed. We all should be ashamed for allowing this lie, because that is what it is, to continue. Because the truth is that, while we're shunning necessary sacrifices for fuel conservation at home, other Americans' children are sacrificing their lives for oil in Iraq. I mean, give me a break. Not even Condi Rice believes that we are over there for freedom, do you Condi?
North Potomac, Md.: Thank you for your always thought-provoking columns, articles, and chats. I look forward to them every week. Here are our family demographics -- 6'1" husband, 5'11" older teenage son, younger teenage son who is starting his growth spurt and will be his brother's height within the next year-and-a half, plus 5'6" me. Older son will have a job this summer for which he will need transportation. We are planning on giving him my car to use. Since I will then need a vehicle, we are thinking of getting an SUV/crossover with a comfortable back seat for those big kids on family trips and with a good-size cargo area for said trips and for hauling older son's stuff off to college in a couple years. What do you recommend? Would the smaller SUVs like the Honda CR-V serve us well, or should we be looking at midsize or bigger? My round trip work commute is only 10 miles, so gas economy is not a huge issue but having great safety equipment is important. I've thought of the GMC Acadia, but we would like to keep the cost at the mid-30's or below. Your advice would be much appreciated.
Warren Brown: Hello, North Potomac:
The best full-size crossovers are the Maxda CX9 and the GM Trio (Saturn Outlook, GMC Acadia and Buick Enclave). I would shop all of those. They are about even in my book.
New York: BMW 1 series coupe. What say you?
Warren Brown: As long as you understand that BMW 1-Series does not mean more fuel-efficient than BMW 3-Series or 5-Series, I say go for it. It's a great little coupe. The caveat comes because so many of you out there have been writing me asking if the 1-Series is BMW's fuel miser. Short answer: No.
Lorton, Va.: Hi Warren. I let my "advisors" talk me into buying an SUV without 4WD. Does it really make a difference in the D.C. area in weather like we're having today?
Real story: I had several Michigan-based Ford engineers at my house this morning demonstrating, explaining their plug-in electric, lithium battery powered Edge crossover-utility vehicle. Thing works like a dream, which it remains at this moment at a protypical price exceeding $600,000 U.S. Their comment on our "winter" weather: "This is what you all call snow?"
Frankly, front-wheel drive makes perfect sense in our area. Front-wheel-drive with stability and traction control makes even more sense. Four-wheel-drive and all-wheel-drive make less sense. They cost more to purchase. They are more fuel consumptive. And, in this area, we rarely use them. Bottom line: With the money you saved, take your advisors to lunch.
Jefferson City, Mo.: Also look at CR's latest quick look at the Malibu. I'm a 25+ year subscriber to CR so am loyal in that sense. OTOH, you also pick up what their evaluation biases are, they're not subtle about it. Thus, when using them as a source for purchasing a car, if you're biases are their biases, well, you can feel "safe" in blindly following their recommendations for a purchase. Otherwise, you simply use them as a data point. What I do find helpful are their long term reliability ratings, although as I've learned first hand, that too isn't always a predictor. I purchased an '85 Prelude new and if Honda's rep for reliability and quality was based on that car, then I'd like to know their marketing people. I also still have a 93 'Explorer Sport, purchased new, that's still going strong. Sure, it's falling apart in little ways but still a reliable vehicle. As is my '99 Celica which CR -- still -- never got enough data on to list it's reliability. Longwinded way of saying that while I don't agree with you on most macro issues of the car bidness, the way you perceieve and present CR has always been spot on.
Warren Brown: Thank you, Jefferson City.
Arlington, Va.: Hi, what do you think about VW as a car maker?
Warren Brown: VW/Audi, which is how I think of the company, is a very good vehicle manufacturer that is going through the same restructuring/readjustment ordeals affecting GM, Ford, Chrysler, Mercedes-Benz... and that is beginning to affect Toyota (witness Toyota's current crash programs to clean up a variety of quality problems occasioned by rapid sales growth).
VW/Audi's product quality has improved tremendously. The Audi wing is making laudable strides in moving its marque up-market, which it has to do. Both will be hampered in their endeavors to improve North American market share by a pitiously weak dollar and a very strong Euro. Either their cars will cost more in this market, or they will sell at a profit sacrifice here to maintain market share.
Re: Smart Car: As someone who lived in Europe for awhile and got to drive numerous different cars there, mostly as part of my job, I would recommend that those looking for a smaller car look at some of the other subcompacts such as the Versa, Fit, or Focus. While the Smart isn't a bad car, I agree with you that it doesn't handle well at highway speeds; actually reminds me of the old Geo Trackers. The main advantage that is advertised is ease of parking in the city, but I didn't find that really worked in real world driving. This being conducted in Southern Italian cities with nightmarish parking that makes D.C. and NYC look like a joke. It's not a bad car and it's nice to have more options in the smaller end of vehicles, but I would recommend that potential customers look more closely at other models. Most the advantages of the Smart I find to be slick marketing more than anything.
Warren Brown: I like the Smart as a city runner. But your advice is much appreciated. Thank you.
Reston, Va.: I was just checking out the Washington Auto Show's schedule. Should they rename it the Warren Brown Auto Show located in Washington, D.C.?
Warren Brown: Warren Brown and Ria Manglapus. Just kidding. We both see ourselves as informational servants of the people. Seriously. I learned a long time ago that being a servant, a good one, is a very noble calling. Ria and I are here to serve.
El Segundo, Calif.: Hey Warren, I like smaller, sporty cars and I now need something that can handle an infant's car seat (so long to my Miata). I am leaning towards the Mazda speed 3 or a used Audi A3. Like many of your readers, I almost instinctively avoid looking at American cars, but I wonder if there is an American car that I should be looking at in that market segment. Also, I have been taking the infant car seat with me to see how easy it is to get in and out of the cars in question, and the sales people all act as if I am insane. Am I breaking some unwritten code of car buying?
You'd be selling yourself short not to check out the newest Ford Focus. Seriously. I once thought I'd hate it because it's not the European model. But the 2008/9 version is very, very close. Worth the look. You want the European version? Buy the Mazda3.
Washington, D.C.: I'm a 30-something female fan of your column and discussions. I hope to catch you at next week's auto show. In all the years you've been writing about autos, what have been the best and worst changes in the this industry, including, for example, features?
The best changes have been safety improvements, making more of them, such as stability control, standard equipment.
The worst have resulted from political endorsements of technology, such as gas-electric hybrids, which are by no means the most fuel-efficient, nor the most environmentally sanguine approach to our current energy and environmental problems.
Warren Brown: Okay, good folks. Thanks for joing us today. Please come back next week. Speaking of which: Please visit the Washington Auto Show next week at the D.C. Convention Center. Ria and I will be at the Post booth. (Yeah, I know, most of you guys are coming to see Ria.) My brother, Brian Armstead, and I will be broadcasting from the show, WMET World Radio, 1160 AM on the dial, Tuesday from 12 to 1. Looking forward to meeting you all.
Thanks for today's production, Amy.
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.
| 90.756098 | 0.585366 | 0.682927 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/14/DI2008011401387.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/14/DI2008011401387.html
|
Election 2008: Previewing the Nevada Caucuses
|
2008012019
|
Jon Ralston: Good morning, everyone. My name is Jon Ralston. I've been covering politics in Nevada for more than 20 years. I now host a daily TV interview program, put out a daily e-mail newsletter and write four columns for local publications. I look forward to answering your questions.
Reno, Nev.: How will the Nevada Democratic machine affect the caucus? I hear Sen. Reid and others strongly favor Sen. Clinton; have they fixed the "delegates per precinct" to blunt the impact new voters (Latinos, students) might have?
Jon Ralston: Caucuses are strange birds, almost as strange as political parties themselves. Sen. Reid has remained neutral but many people see his son Rory's support for Hillary Clinton as a signal he is not so Swiss-like. The delegates per precinct are not "fixed." There are nine precincts on the Strip that base delegate counts on attendance instead of voter registration. But they will only make up 6 percent of the vote. They were set that way to try to encourage turnout but now have become enmeshed in the politics of the Culinary workers endorsement.
Los Angeles: Is the Nevada caucus fair, even worth reporting, considering the culinary union's involvement and the strong-arm tactics it is using to assure an Obama victory?
Jon Ralston: Ah, fairness is in the eye of the beholder. A caucus is not as pure as a primary but it does still indicates a candidate's strength. Your use of the word "strong-arm" indicates that you think undue pressure is being applied on union members. There surely is pressure, but the Clinton campaign knows how to apply pressure, too. Check out this morning's Las Vegas Sun for a good story about intimidation -- or lack thereof.
washingtonpost.com: Culinary pushing hard, but inside lines (Las Vegas Sun, Jan. 18)
Arlington, Va.: I notice that John Edwards has risen in recent Nevada polls. Where does he draw his strength from in Nevada? What are his prospects of pulling an upset?
Jon Ralston: I doubt he will get there. Two polls now show him way behind the other two. But a caucus is bizarre, so anything is possible. he does have pockets of strength, especially in the North, and passionate supporters. But I think he comes in third.
Richmond, Va.: It is said that in Nevada (and elsewhere) that the "Democratic base" is behind Hillary Clinton, but I'm not sure I know who comprises that group. Barack Obama is attracting a lot of Democrats, including African Americans, who as far as I can tell usually help to make up that base. So my question is, who is that base (just white women 50 and older)?
Jon Ralston: Breakdowns in recent polls here show her strength here is where it is elsewhere -- as you point out, women, especially older women. But she also has a large lead over Obama among Hispanics, which make up more than a fifth of the population here now. There is an ugly undercurrent here of what some cynics suggest will be Hispanics not voting for an African American -- we will see how that plays out Saturday.
Fairfax, Va.: Do the caucuses elect delegates to county/state conventions, or do attendees merely vote their presidential preference? If delegates to conventions are elected, can they run uncommitted? If a candidate drops out later, what happens to his or her delegates? Are they free agents?
Jon Ralston: Yes, delegates are elected to successive conventions here. I confess that I have forgotten whether they can run uncommitted later, but I believe the answer is yes.
Oak Park, Mich.: I am wondering if the Las Vegas Jewish community has reacted to being disenfranchised by the caucuses occurring on the Sabbath, and what the party's justification is?
Jon Ralston: There has been some chatter about it, but not a lot. There was one story with some people speaking out. Someone -- or some group -- would have had a problem with any day that was picked.
Raleigh, N.C.: Good morning! Rest assured, I'm not one of those Paulistas, so you can be straight with me. I saw some online buzz that Paul might win in Nevada. Given his policies, Nevada figures to be one of his very best states. What can you tell us about his chances? In which parts of Nevada will he run most strongly?
Jon Ralston: I think Paul could finish second here. Romney should win easily but Paul is the only other GOP candidate who has worked the state. And he really has worked it. Considering turnout on the GOP side could be low, he may surprise some people.
Boston: I didn't get the Clinton's beef with the caucus process. It seemed like they were in favor of suppressing people's ability to vote because it served their purpose in Nevada. How does that serve them long-term?
washingtonpost.com: Judge Allows Casino Sites for Nevada Caucuses (Post, Jan. 17)
Jon Ralston: Your characterization of the suit is very pejorative, but that would have been the net effect. This was raw politics -- after Obama got the Culinary endorsement, those nine at-large precincts became very important. If the lawsuit had been successful, it would have diminished the union's impact greatly. It was short-term, raw, ruthless politics. What will the long-term fallout be? No one thinks about that in the crucible of a campaign where every state has come to be important -- at that moment, at least!
Albany, N.Y.: Are people buying Hillary's attack on Obama based on his past statements of concern about gambling in poor communities, or is it being discounted as campaign rhetoric?
Jon Ralston: It's lost in the static. It's clear he is concerned about gambling's impact on communities. He has tried to tamp down the criticism by saying Nevada's model works. What I think the Clinton folks miss is that some core party activists here in the land of Sin City might agree with what he said!
Fairfax, Va.: Why is Romney ditching South Carolina for Nevada?
Jon Ralston: Because he will win here and he will lose South Carolina. He wants another gold medal! And he has been in South Carolina, too.
Hampton, Va.: The hilarious part of the whole racism dustup in the Democratic race (Martin Luther King, the Spanish ads in Nevada, etc.) is that the Democrats honed these tactics when they were the defenders of an aggrieved victim class versus the evil Republicans. But what to do when both candidates are members of aggrieved victim classes themselves? Can they both play victim politics? Well, they're trying -- and they'll certainly bring this nonsense out en masse for the general election -- but it just looks stupid by both of them. Does this diminish the power of victimization in the real race? Isn't that the Democrats ultimate trump card -- it disallows media inquiry into Obama, sets off-limits certain criticisms of Hillary?
Jon Ralston: Even if your construct is correct, it won't last. Nothing will be off-limits very soon -- and all kinds of nastiness are coming. Victimization, by the way, is difficult when you are asking people to install you as the most powerful person on the planet. Difficult needle to thread there, isn't it?
Nashville, Tenn.: Jon, I was surprised that you didn't mention Yucca Mountain as an issue of concern to Nevadans during your NewsHour appearance last night. Sen. Alexander (R-Tenn.) single-handedly has brought about a nuclear renaissance through his position as co-chair of the Tennessee Valley Authority congressional caucus, and we just had a major nuclear waste conference here in Nashville last week. Aren't Mormons in Nevada who oppose Yucca Mountain faced with the same hard choice as black women in choosing between Clinton and Obama? Romney has said that he won't rule out Yucca, which forces Mormons to chose between church and state (Nevada).
Jon Ralston: Nevadans don't see Yucca as top-of-mind anymore unless they are environmentalists or somehow connected to the issue. Candidates love to pander on it because the media are obsessed with it, too. I would guess most Nevada voters -- including Mormons -- won't be thinking much about Yucca when they vote.
Atlanta: Has the legal challenge to the caucuses on the Strip had any boomerang effect (i.e., resentment against the Clinton camp for trying to change the rules after the union endorsement)?
Jon Ralston: The Culinary bosses sure hope so. They are playing that to the hilt in the media and with members. I think it will be effective. How effective? We will see.
Washington: Mr. Ralston, if you could indulge me with a non-primary question: As a non-Nevadan, could you give me some insight into Gov. Gibbons? Every time we hear about him on the East Coast, it's some amazing scandal or nutty-sounding event -- from alleged sexual assault to being sworn in early. How's his popularity in Nevada? What are his accomplishments thus far as governor? Will he be re-elected? Thanks!
washingtonpost.com: Scandals and Missteps Dog New Nevada Governor (Post, April 2, 2007)
Jon Ralston: Gibbons had nothing short of a disastrous first year as governor. I never have seen an administration so afflicted by self-inflicted wounds. You mentioned a couple things, but it has been a constant string of gaffes and missteps. Bad appointments. Poor communication. A bungling of an ongoing budget crisis -- he is on his fourth plan now. What has he accomplished? He hasn't raised taxes -- that's about it and that's all he talks about. His popularity is not good, but he still retains strength in the rural and northern parts of the state. He is not up until 2010; many think he's a one-termer -- some think he won't run. It's way too early. And so many Democrats are salivating to take him on, they easily could shoot themselves in the foot and he could recover.
Washington: As an outsider, I viewed the lawsuit over the caucus sites as simply an attempt to color the caucus results as illegitimate if Obama were to win. I'm curious, though, what you think the "man on the street" opinion of the suit is in Nevada?
Jon Ralston: I think such things are viewed through a personal prism. If you don't like unions, you will say it's all about Culinary's influence. If you like Obama, you will see it as an attempt to disenfranchise workers. I think your point is well-taken, but I think any post-caucus attempts to spin the results will depend on the margin. If it's close, and Obama wins, you may be right. But if he were to win by a lot, what can they say? And if she wins, I can hear it now: "Despite the unfairness..."
Rockville, Md.: What are the rules for reporters covering candidates? Are they allowed to dispute assertions made by candidates if they know for sure they are wrong? If they do, will they face repercussions? This is obviously about the AP reporter and Romney. I found it refreshing to see something not scripted, and candidates challenged and forced to defend themselves.
washingtonpost.com: Romney Criticizes Rivals' Lobbyists (AP, Jan. 18)
Jon Ralston: Reporters should challenge assertions they know to be wrong. When Bill Richardson came on my program and claimed to have a lifetime record against Yucca, I challenged him and it got quite heated. The bigger problem -- I think -- is reporters who don't do their homework and get bamboozled by spin and deflection.
Nashville, Tenn.: "Romney should win easily"? On the NewsHour last night you said that Romney likely would garner support from the strong Mormon presence in Nevada. Because Paul was one of only three congressman to vote against the "Screw Nevada Bill," and Romney says he can't rule out Yucca, does that mean that Yucca Mountain isn't an issue for Republicans in Nevada?
Jon Ralston: As I said earlier, I don't think it is. Romney doesn't just have Mormon support -- he has the only GOP organization in the state. And Yucca just isn't a driving issue for most voters here.
Washington: Obviously a lot of emphasis has been placed on the influence of the Culinary Workers Union, which I imagine would be especially strong in Las Vegas. What are some of the influences in the rest of the state? Are the issues different outside of Las Vegas?
Jon Ralston: Great question. Its influence almost exclusively is in Las Vegas. The union has some presence in Reno but not a lot. Rural Nevada -- 15 percent or so of the vote -- is much more conservative and much more concerned with land-use issues. Reno and environs have urban issues, but not like Vegas.
Rocky Mount, N.C.: I always have been enthralled by Nevada on a demographic level. You have two entirely different electorates: Las Vegas metro area, and then the rest of the state. One describes itself as Sin City and the rest of the state is heavily conservative. If you had to break them in two, who would win each for each party?
Jon Ralston: There are really three areas: the South, the North and the rural areas. The latter two are heavily Republican and the reason Democrats have difficulty in statewide races. Since Lyndon Johnson, only one Democratic presidential nominee has won the state -- Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996, and only because Ross Perot siphoned enough votes. Turnout in the rural areas is always super-high and super-anti-Democratic contender. Reno votes Republican enough to help the GOP candidate, too. Las Vegas has two thirds of the population but the percentages of votes for Democrats usually are not enough. Kerry and Gore won the South, but not by enough to offset losses in rural and Northern Nevada.
Los Angeles: The AP reporter's interruption of Romney was a bit too early. It didn't allow Romney to complete the second part of his statement on the lobbyist. Had the AP reporter delayed his interruption by about five seconds, Romney likely would have completed the statement he started: "I don't have lobbyist that are tied to my..." Had Romney finished that statement with the word campaign, the AP reporter would have been able to nail him cold. As it stands, Romney was able to rely on his initial statement about lobbyist not running his campaign. Perhaps reporters should take a lesson in how to ask questions or when to interrupt with a question.
Jon Ralston: It can be difficult in the heat of the moment. But you are right -- it should be judicious and only when the question is not being answered.
Nashville, Tenn: "Nevadans don't see Yucca as top of mind anymore." Is that because Nevadans think Yucca never will open, and if so, where do they visualize the nuclear waste ultimately going? There was an excellent quote in in a similar Post online discussion on Tuesday: "if you can not imagine what will happen, it will happen in a way you can not imagine."
Jon Ralston: I call it Yucca fatigue. Folks have heard about it for so long that they either think it's inevitable or, because of all the delays, it never will happen. And they think we are pretty powerless to stop it. Waste was supposed to start coming in 1998, so it may not be as inevitable as people think. On the other hand, when was the last time the feds walked away from billions of dollars spent? It's up to the licensing process and the courts now.
Washington (former Nevadan): Can you explain what happened with the Republican caucuses? Nevada went for Bush twice, so it seems like Republicans would have been paying more attention to the state than they are. Why have only Romney and Paul made the effort to campaign there?
Jon Ralston: Giuliani, Thompson and McCain have pursued big-state strategies, so poor lil us has been left out. Romney always knew he might need Nevada as a firewall, and Paul's message is tailor-made for the libertarian strain in some parts of Nevada. But once the nominee is determined, he will campaign out here -- Nevada is a red state but not dark red and could be important in the fall.
San Antonio: What do you think of your coworker David Schwartz's math in his Las Vegas Sun blog entry: " The actual impact of the at-large precincts"? Do you agree or disagree with Schwartz's calculations and opinion?
Jon Ralston: His math is right. And the overall point is salient: The delegates apportioned at those Strip caucuses is unlikely to be a large percentage of the overall delegates. But if it is a close race, they could swing the race.
New York: We have heard a lot about unions pressuring their members (or not pressuring their members) to caucus for Obama. Do you think this is going to play a significant part in tomorrow's caucus? And as a follow up, if union members are largely Latino and minority, do think these demographics trump the union expectations?
washingtonpost.com: Democrats toughen up (Las Vegas Sun, Jan. 18)
Jon Ralston: The answer to your last question may be the key to the election. That is, will women and Hispanics in the Culinary -- Hispanics make up about 40 percent of the union members -- who might lean toward Hillary Clinton stick with her, or out of union solidarity go with Obama? If it were a secret ballot, I think the Culinary's impact would be diminished, but these folks will be standing with other union members and openly stating their preference. How many will go against the union's wishes?
Philadelphia: Can you give us a time tomorrow to check in on the caucus and find out who won? I can't handle watching CNN, FOX or MSNBC anymore. I want to simply turn one of them on, hit the mute button, see who has the check mark next to their name and then turn something else on! Help! P.S. I love Vegas!
Jon Ralston: Thanks for the love! GOP results should be in late morning; Democrats by 2 p.m. or 3 p.m. But the operative words in that sentence is "should."
Meta-cynic: I feel there are more anti-Hispanic white voters than anti-black Hispanic voters. So if the idea gets out that Clinton is winning because of racist Hispanic voters, that actually would turn a larger number of racist white voters against her. Law of Unintended Racist Consequences.
Jon Ralston: This kind of phenomenon is immeasurable. People won't answer truthfully in polls. Racism will play a role in this election -- here and nationally. All kinds of racism. But how significant it will be is a matter of speculation and your degree of cynicism.
Anonymous: Thanks. One more (not to suck up anyone else's time). In an earlier question you answered that the votes in the south that Kerry and Gore won were not enough to offset losses in the north, but that was a general election. In the caucuses, will this have a similar effect if candidates split the state?
Jon Ralston: It could. But Vegas is where most of the Democrats are, so whoever wins Vegas probably will win, unless one of the candidates crushes the other outside Vegas. That's much more likely in a general election.
Rochester, N.Y.: What's the conventional wisdom on who will win the caucuses? I want to know, because I am certain that whatever it is, the opposite actually will happen.
Jon Ralston: No one knows. There is no conventional wisdom because this is so unconventional for us. Not a cop-out, but truly, no one knows. Never been done before. Same-day registration. Anything could happen.
Nevada: What if any verification process will be put in place to validate the casino workers as being legal U.S. residents at the nine at-large caucus locations?
Jon Ralston: None -- no ID required. All they have to do is sign a statement saying they are legit under penalty of perjury. Pretty loose.
Las Vegas: The only instructions I've been able to find say that the caucus centers open at 11 a.m. and register at 11:30 a.m., but there is no statement about how long the process will last ... is this two hours or eight hours, and if you work and only can stay an hour or two, does your attendance make a difference?
Jon Ralston: It should only take an hour or so, they say. Done before 1:30 p.m., they say. We shall see.
Claverack, N.Y.: Seriously: Why a caucus? Wouldn't a primary be easier on everybody?
Jon Ralston: Yes. Believe me! When Nevada first moved up, it was supposed to be before New Hampshire. and that state has a crazy law saying it has primary primacy. The state didn't want to get into a fight with New Hampshire, so it went with a caucus. Now that we are third, turns out we could have been a primary!
Brooklyn, N.Y.: Just a simple question, and not sure you can answer given your paper's endorsement, but who do you think will win, and by what margin?
Jon Ralston: I'm not affected by that endorsement -- just look at what I've written. I predicted Obama a while ago, but I have no idea. And I don't often admit that!
Jon Ralston: Thanks for all the questions, folks. Been a pleasure being here. So long.
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.
| 105.97561 | 0.536585 | 0.634146 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/17/DI2008011702393.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/17/DI2008011702393.html
|
Potomac Confidential
|
2008012019
|
D.C. School Closings: The Hearings ( Raw Fisher, Jan. 17)
Parents Slam Schools Plan at Hearings ( Post, Jan. 18)
Marc Fisher: Welcome aboard, folks. Schools are going to close in the District, perhaps the 23 that Chancellor Michelle Rhee has proposed to shut down, perhaps a slightly different list. And it's the doubt about what the final list will look like that drove about 400 people to head out into the slush last night to testify at 23 separate hearings all around the city.
The turnout was weak by any standard. Does that reflect a lack of interest, or general agreement that the closings are necessary, or cynicism about the legitimacy of the hearings process that Rhee put into place?
Where is the D.C. school system heading? What did you see last night if you did go? What happens after the closings?
Those and many more questions ahead in this hour--here we go.
Dupont Circle, D.C.: I wasn't at any of the meetings last night, but I read the article describing them in the paper today. All of the arguments from the parents seemed to be "Don't close our school because we don't want you to." They didn't seem to have a good reason not to close their neighborhood's school. Is this an accurate representation of what happened yesterday?
washingtonpost.com: Parents Slam Schools Plan at Hearings ( Post, Jan. 18)
Marc Fisher: There are many reasons why parents, neighbors and activists don't want their local school to be shut down, and most of those reasons make a lot of sense in the narrow, local perspective, but if there is general agreement that schools must be closed, then, well, some schools must be closed. The zero or near-zero turnouts at some schools last night is certainly an indicator that those closings are not causing major heartburn. But there are a handful or less of places where the closing really doesn't make a whole lot of sense, and those are the schools that have been able to get people out and active on their behalf.
Among the arguments that make sense in various places: The school is doing decently well academically. The school has recently had major money put into it for renovations. And the school may be underenrolled, but has a good number of kids living nearby who are sent to a far-off location because of the D.C. system's crazy boundary lines.
Capitol Hill, Washington, D.C.: Marc,
Thanks for the article this morning. I can't help but feel that, in general, the Post has done a sloppy job of reporting this issue by allowing a very vocal minority to dominate the news stories. There are potentially thousands of people affected by the proposed closing and only a few hundred have expressed concerns, mostly about their own schools.
As an aside, the belief that your school is fine it's just everyone else's that stinks is alot like the polling on Members of Congress, where most members have approval ratings from their own consituents of over 50 percent, but the approval rating for the Congress as a whole is 13 percent. My guy/gal is great, it's just everyone else that's an idiot.
Anyway, based on the comments to Post articles, there are plenty of people that think closing these schools is exactly what needs to be done, yet the Post can't seem to get around to finding one for the articles. As a result, the impression is that "parents" oppose the closings, when the reality is that most parents do not.
Marc Fisher: As a reader, I agree that the loud but tiny group of opponents has gotten more than its share of coverage from the media all around town. That's an unfortunate tendency in the press--we tend to cover those who shout out against something more than we cover those who quietly sit at home and think to themselves that things are going in the right direction.
Columbia Heights, D.C.: Marc, what's your take on the turnout for last night's meetings? Based on what I've read today, it appears most of those in attendance were in opposition to the entire school-closings plan or at least to the closing of their own neighborhood's school. But I can't help thinking that the overall number of attendees (about 600 between the official meetings and the "people's meeting")in a city of this size is pretty unimpressive.
Marc Fisher: The overall number is indeed very telling. And it makes sense that those who took the effort to head out to a hearing last night would be in opposition--what's the percentage in going out to tell the city that the administration is doing the right thing?
Washington, D.C.: I cannot help thinking Dr. Janey could have provided a better plan, at least he had the institutional knowledge, and has already made these mistakes and learned from them. Rhee is still not looking at the whole picture, facilities, security, achievement and community use when proposing a school closure. Please enlighten me and others how schools were picked.
Marc Fisher: Rhee used a formula based largely on the gap between enrollment and capacity, the recent rate of decline in student enrollment at a school, and the availability of empty space in adjacent schools. Of course test scores and other measures of school quality figured in as well, but this was largely a matter of facilities and geography.
Janey, Rhee's predecessor, had a closings process moving along at his glacial pace, and I haven't heard anyone in the system argue that his list would have differed much from Rhee's--except that Rhee seems determined to use her list to actually close buildings, whereas Janey didn't seem to have his heart in that project.
Washington, D.C.: How does this affect charter schools which seem to be on the rise in terms of quality?
Marc Fisher: I asked Rhee about that when she was at The Post for an interview this week, and she said that neither she nor the school system has any control over the disposition of the closed school buildings. There is law that says that closed schools will be made available to charter schools, which are hungry for decent space and are in many cases relegated to inappropriate space in office buildings, churches and so on. But the DCPS buildings will go into the District's pool of properties and Fenty's administration will determine what happens to them. He has said that there are lots of community needs that the buildings could serve, such as health centers, libraries, offices.
Petworth, D.C.: And what about transportation costs? I think it's fine for kids of all ages to walk at least a mile to school, but is that in the plan? Or will local school closings add huge bus costs to getting the wee ones where they're going?
Marc Fisher: The District doesn't bus kids to school except for special ed students.
Rhee says that while some kids will have to walk a greater distance after the closings, care has been taken to assure that little kids don't have to cross major thoroughfares and that the distances aren't onerous. But parents in several neighborhoods beg to differ and have come up with specific examples of places where kids who now live within a couple of blocks of school will have to walk 15 or so blocks.
SE, D.C.: I am not a fan of Fenty-Rhee on this issue. However, it is an absolute no brainer that DCPS has excess capacity. Every superintendent and school board of the last two decades had to address the issue. Most cowardly avoided it.
My concern is the system they still propose does not breed equity, nor address basic educational needs and instruction. We all know folks from all over the city take and send their kids to select schools in Ward 3/NW. I caught the bus across town myself. Due to the weighted student formula, those kids bring many more dollars to the respective school budget as opposed to their neighborhood school and thus the out of boundary school can provide more. I know of the proposed savings, but I do not see/hear Fenty-Rhee doing or saying anything to address the issue of equity? Looking at the DCPS Web site, Wilson offers 5 additional academies in its school. Of the many high schools, only 4 others offer 1. Of which it seems Wilson has a duplicate program of at least 2. Adding academies and programs to my school that are not for everyone serves no purpose. It just seems to me issues are being ignored. When you have 10th grade kids reading on 5th grade levels, it just seems addressing those needs would have some precedence. I just don't see it.
Marc Fisher: Excellent point. Rhee's argument is that the savings from the closings will help fund the restoration of arts, PE and other academic initiatives. But with the system facing a huge deficit, it's not clear when those additions can be made.
The Ward 3 issue is one that Rhee tends to scoff at, but it is real and remains unaddressed: Ward 3 schools are overcrowded and therefore weren't serious candidates for closing, but there is a quality gap caused by the perception that the Ward 3 schools get more resources or better treatment. For generations, many parents in the city have decided to send their kids to the other side of the park on the theory that the school were better in white, affluent Ward 3. The challenge to Rhee and the city is to alter that perception by creating high quality programs elsewhere around town.
But it's a chicken-egg problem--how do you make the other schools better when the more driven and committed parents are sending their kids to the Ward 3 schools?
This all reminds me of what national retailers say when asked why they don't locate stores in Prince George's County. They argue that the shoppers there wouldn't shop close to home because they believe that the stores in Pentagon City and Tysons are treated better and get the better goods and service.
Washington native: Did it strike you as odd the meeting to close one school was at another school? Granted, it seems folks should care, but can't you see how folks are just disgusted and disenchanted with government as a whole? Come on, 23 separate meetings at the same time? 10-minute cameo appearances? My kids don't go to DCPS but I would be grossly offended and ticked off.
Marc Fisher: I don't see what the offense is. The system already held a long series of regional hearings all around the city at which the chancellor and all her top aides were in attendance. This last step was meant to let each school's defenders make their arguments, so it's natural that the meetings would be held in each neighborhood. As for location, they put the meetings at the receiving schools, that is, the schools where kids would move to if their school is indeed closed. What's the problem with that?
Washington, D.C.: No discussion of the turnout should be missing the known boycotts of these meetings by parents who wanted to talk to Rhee directly. I disagree with them, but there was a definite boycott of the meetings which the Post should have been aware of.
Marc Fisher: Our report actually focused a good deal on the Wilson Building meeting of those who boycotted the individual school hearings.
When I first saw this chat session posted, I thought you were going to discuss school closings due to the snow yesterday.
Are you sure the weather wasn't a factor in the low turnout last night? I heard some bad stories from my co-workers this morning about their evening commutes last night.
Marc Fisher: Strangely, the organizers of the anti-hearings hearing at the Wilson Building went ahead with their so-called People's hearing despite their criticism of Rhee for charging ahead with her 23 hearings on a day in which it had snowed a bit. By 6 p.m., the snow was melting and there was a light drizzle-- not blizzard conditions by any stretch of the imagination. It's hard to imagine that people were really deterred by the weather.
Washington, D.C.: Not trying to be too cynical, but I always thought that 23 was a very large number of schools to close. I figured that the District always intended to close fewer but had to have some sort of give-back after public meetings. It's like developers in D.C. They always want extra stories and no concession, but eventually negotiate a deal that makes financial sense.
Marc Fisher: I don't get the sense that the final number will be much below 23, if there is any change at all in the tally. Rhee wouldn't say specifically whether her final decision will include a different number of schools but she did tantalizingly say that there will be some changes in the plan as a result of the public input. There are a couple of schools that have built compelling cases for remaining open, and I'd be surprised if at least two didn't get saved.
Last night at Garnet-Patterson Middle School, for example, council member Jim Graham (Ward 1) seemed to fear that scenario as he made an impassioned plea for Garnet to remain open, even though it's not on the closings list. Graham's fear is that Rhee will give in to the considerable local pressure to save Shaw Middle School, which is on the closings list, and will simply switch Shaw with Garnet.
At the same meeting, Graham's colleague, Jack Evans, the Ward 2 council member, made a similarly strong pitch to save Shaw Middle. Tough spot for the chancellor.
A DCPS Parent who Supports Change Now: Marc -- Kudos for pointing out how small opposition to the school plan is.
Given the Post's recent survey showing strong popular support for Fenty and Rhee's actions the schools, why does he Post continue to tell the same "opposition" story like today's "Parents Slam School Plan" using the same three or four voices from the Coalition to Save Our Schools?
What is this group trying to save -- dilapidated buildings, consistent failure to make Adequate Yearly Progress, staff who yell at kids daily in poorly managed cafeterias?
Marc Fisher: I have no problem with parents trying to save their kids' school or neighbors who worry that their local school will turn into a mothballed building that attracts vandals and vagrants. But unfortunately, much of the anti-closings crowd consists of people who naturally gravitate to the opposite side of any issue on which the mayor and other elected officials have taken a position. This is the same crowd that fought the baseball stadium, the convention center, downtown development, and the charter schools. And yes, I agree that they are overcovered, which is a credit to their organizing talents.
Omaha, Neb. (D.C. resident on vacation in Omaha!!): Marc, how do you respond to Marc Borbery's (pasted below)comment to your article this morning and especially to the idea that the closings are not about improving education for the DCPS students but really about providing opportunities to area developers?
Marc: You failed to mention the People's Meeting at the Wilson Building. That's where the opposition gathered, in protest of the sham hearings. (Hearings? How can Rhee and Fenty be at 23 places at once to do any "hearing"? Why would someone want to talk to a low-level bureaucrat who has nothing to do with the school closing decisions?)
There's still been no critical media coverage of the Fenty/Rhee claims that this will save $23.7 million. Turns out this was a miscalculation. It's closer to $4 million in savings, when you factor in the expected $9 million (1,000) lost to charter schools as a result of the closings. That's the expectation of the administration's contractors.
$4 million. That translates to $33,000 at each of 120 schools. Wow.
This isn't about saving money or improving DCPS. It's all about moving public school children OUT of buildings, so developers and private charter schools can move IN.
Posted by: Marc Borbely - January 17, 2008 10:33 PM
Marc Fisher: It's sad to see the important debate over how to improve the city's schools devolve into fact-free tirades about the city giving school properties to developers. In fact, the mayor has repeatedly said that there are no plans to sell off the schools that will be closed. I personally believe that the shuttered schools that are downtown, such as Stevens Elementary, should be sold to the highest bidder, with the receipts going to the DCPS capital fund. But I've not heard anyone in any official capacity talk about selling off neighborhood schools, mainly because various other arms of the District government can use those spaces--as can the charter schools, which continue to grow rapidly.
8th Street NW, D.C.: In your blog entry this morning, you missed one thing that happened at the Garnet-Patterson hearing last night. Near the end, a number of parents and teachers from Garnet-Patterson came to testify. They said that they had gotten a call at 5:00 p.m. saying that DCPS had decided to keep Shaw open, but close Garnet-Patterson instead. They complained that they did not get the same chance that the Shaw proponents did to defend their school from closing!
While I like the idea of the rumor (thank you Jack Evans!) I have to consider it still unsubstantiated. The point is that the school closure process has been so murky that any preposterous rumor can gain credibility.
You must tell me: what makes you think that the Fenty/Rhee/Reinoso team will be any more successful that the previous decade of school leaders, starting with General Becton, who told us to shut up and let them alone while they fix the D.C. schools?
washingtonpost.com: D.C. School Closings: The Hearings ( Raw Fisher, Jan. 17)
Marc Fisher: I wasn't able to stay to the end of that hearing as I wanted to visit some others around town, but as I wrote earlier this hour, I did hear Jim Graham speak to exactly the point (or rumor) that you're talking about.
It sounds like a legitimate fear, and I'm not surprised to hear that Garnet's supporters hurried out to make a last-minute stand for their school. Good for them. But if Garnet does survive this, man, does that place need some investment in infrastructure!
As for how Fenty/Rhee differ from all those reform efforts that came before them, I think we have to give them credit for a quick start including an impressive construction campaign led by Allan Lew. That does not necessarily translate into classroom improvements, but this is the best start we've seen in a new schools administration in the 21 years I've been watching this system.
Having moved a whole block and a half out of the District over the summer (from 11th NW and M) can I offer an "outsider's" perspective? As you have noted, the chancellor seems intent on actually doing the things that so many have said for so long needed to be done -- firing underperforming/non-performing staff and closing schools to realign resources. What I think has caught folks off guard is that she is actually DOING these things, not just talking about it. I suppose it falls in the category of be careful what you wish for.
I do believe that Chancellor Rhee is on the right track though. Einstien is famously quoted as saying that insanity is doing the same thing the same way over and over expecting a different result. Chancellor Rhee is doing different things a different way expecting different results. What could it possibly hurt to try? As long as the School Board doesn't sell off the schools once they are shuttered, the next administration can always reopen them.
Marc Fisher: Right--Rhee, like the mayor, is a dynamo intent on fast and furious change. That's not always the smartest or certainly the most diplomatic way to go, but it's certainly very much different from what the District is used to, and after so many years of failed reform efforts, it's worth a try.
Tenleytown, D.C.: I'm hoping against hope that Fenty and Rhee can pull this off, but I'm afraid Rhee's lack of pertinent experience will continue to be a problem. And her associates don't seem to have been chosen for their expertise, either. I've been surprised over all at some of what I consider to be Mayor Fenty's missteps, and he's an experienced politician. I'm sure Ms. Rhee means well, and there will be much rejoicing if she is successful, but I'm not optimistic t his is going to happen.
Marc Fisher: This is a field in which I've come to believe deep experience can be a liability. Rhee has already shown that being a total outsider to the city and its culture gives her a power and perceptiveness that let her say and do things that an insider never could. Her window of opportunity may therefore be fairly narrow--in another year, her "hey, I don't know or get this city's culture" shtick will lack credibility. But I'm encouraged to see how many people both inside and outside the system are cheering her on, even as they disagree with particular programs or policies.
Washington, D.C.:"This is the same crowd that fought the baseball stadium, the convention center, downtown development and the charter schools."
And at the same time ignoring the results of these developments: jobs, a local economic boom. That statement irks me because it seems like half the city still wants to live like it's the 1980s.
It's time to move on. I work closely with DCPS since I work in a special ed law firm, and Rhee and Fenty are doing us a favor by closing some of these schools down. Awful school conditions, deteriorating grades, lack of adequate teachers, and overall...just a really bad schooling experience.
Marc Fisher: Yes, a bad school experience, but that's not the primary motivation here--if you were picking the schools to close based on the worst experiences for kids, you'd have come up with a rather different list. This was done in a much smarter fashion, focusing on geography, demographics and building status.
Capitol Hill, Washington, D.C.: There's not much question of "if" schools will be closed, so I'll take that as read. My concern is that these properties will be shuttered and essentially vacant. Living in the outer reaches of the Hill, there are constant issues with both crime and quality-of-life type stuff on the grounds of existing, functioning DCPS facilities. I fear that as Rhee's plan proceeds, neighborhoods will be left with buildings that are empty 24 hours a day, attracting a variety of negative elements, and decaying property. This will, no doubt, become an issue that is forced upon the community/police and not even remotely on the radar at this point.
Marc Fisher: That strikes me as a legitimate fear. While the city claims it will make good use of the closed buildings, I find it very hard to believe that the D.C. government will be able to absorb 23 buildings and put them to efficient use in anything like a reasonable amount of time. This is the best reason I have heard to oppose so many closings all at once.
Old City, Ill.: Hate to point out the obvious, but the way Fenty-Rhee have handled the school closings is 'intended' to exclude parental involvement, for the most part. Parents are the most involved party -- far too involved to make these decisions. The exact same scenario played itself out in the '80s in Montgomery County (and I'm sure other suburban school districts). The only chance of succeeding with school closings is to rush it through and deliver a fait accompli. More power to them.
Marc Fisher: Well, yes and no. I agree that doing the closings quickly is the best and only way to make sure that they really do happen. And I abhor the administration's embrace of the trendy new style of public hearings that both Williams and Fenty have been foisting on the city--it's also gaining favor in the suburbs, in both Virginia and Maryland--in which rather than have each citizen address all their fellow citizens, paid "facilitators" force the public to sit at round tables in groups of 10 and talk to one another. That's the real divide and conquer tactic going on these days. But I do have to credit the schools folks with holding a long series of meetings all around the District, over the course of more than a month.
Washington, D.C. Parent: Although I keep seeing questions from people wondering how the schools were picked, the Post had a lengthy article a few days ago which detailed the huge gap in capacity and enrollment in every one of the 23 schools. While I understand the loyalty to neighborhood schools, the 23 are very clearly financial drains on the system and should be closed. It is nearly impossible to make any other reasonable case. Close them and use the money elsewhere.
washingtonpost.com: Hearing on School Closings Is Long and Emotional ( Post, Jan. 15)
Marc Fisher: Sounds right to me. People can argue ad infinitum which schools to close--and there were many more candidates than the 23 that ended up on the list--but I've not heard anyone argue that it makes sense to run the same number of school buildings for 49,000 kids as we had when the system taught 150,000 kids.
Washington, D.C.: I was relieved to see your coverage of this issue, Marc, because I agree with earlier comments that the Post has given far too much coverage to the protesters, and makes it seem like the majority of parents are up in arms. As a DCPS parent, I have e-mailed Post reporters, and the Ombudsman to complain about this slanted coverage. Their response is that they are simply covering an event, and the Fenty/Rhee supporters don't have any events of their own. The truth is, they could call involved parents and ask what our schools are doing without because of the drain of these underenrolled schools, e.g., guidance counselors, art teachers, foreign language, asst. principals, math and reading specialists, etc.
Thank you again for your unbiased coverage.
Marc Fisher: Thanks--you said it very well.
Washington, D.C.: Does Chancellor Rhee know the word out on the streets: sub-contractors are sabotaging the work of other sub-contractors? By making their rival look bad, they are hoping to win a work contract with the main contractor. There's a story of shoddy work that was done in a three- year-old school. The roof is leaking and the pipes are bursting. Why doesn't the District make contractors accountable for their work? Or at least expose their dirty dealings with the City.
Maybe Harriet (the Tax Lady) can donate some money to help renovated DCPS schools from her foreign bank account.
Marc Fisher: Thanks for this--sounds like you know some specifics. I'd be grateful if you would email me about what you know or how we can be in contact with you. Thanks.
NE D.C.: I'm baffled by the notion that not showing up to an open forum to voice one's concerns shows anyone anything beyond the fact that grown adults are still able to pout. Yes, Rhee is gearing up to make drastic changes; very business-like. Based on the past year, does it appear that Fenty and company are prone to bow to the wishes of a vocal minority? I applaud the introduction of a plan that's drastically different (and more financially sound) than what I've seen in the 15 years I've been living in the District. (I continue to chuckle when I see Barry trying to relive those days.)
I've seen estimates of savings from both ends of the spectrum. Is the ultimate goal of the consolidation to save money or to gain some (any) credibility for and education from the D.C. public school system? If so, how soon before there's an impact on the charter schools that have been allowed to populate through the city as an alternative?
Marc Fisher: I think the goals are as you put them--save money and gain credibility. That means taking resources saved by shutting down schools and pumping them into remaining schools. Even with a big deficit ahead, Rhee seems determined to focus any new programs at the schools that will be receiving kids from the closed schools, and that makes a lot of sense--that's about keeping and winning trust.
AU Park, Washington, D.C.: Dear Mark,
None of the schools in our neighborhood are scheduled for closing, but I can see why some parents are upset. I strongly disagree with the person from the Petworth neighborhood, who said that it is fine for kids of any age to walk a mile to school. Huh?
My younger daughter is in the sixth grade, and we live approximately 8 blocks away from her school. This is the first year that I have allowed her to walk home from school, and only if she is with friends. I simply cannot imagine having my 5-, 6-, and 7-year-old-child walking more than a couple of blocks to school, especially in an urban area like ours.
IMO, D.C. is highly irresponsible when it comes to providing transportation for younger students -- and DCPS SHOULD provide transportation for all children under 12 years old who live more than four blocks from the school.
Virtually everyone in our neighborhood drives his or her children to the elementary school and drops them off, but not everyone has the luxury of driving, nor should it be expected that parents either should drive or walk the kids to school. What is more, the D.C. school day starts relatively late (8:45 a.m.), which is fine by me, but I cannot help but think that it is a hardship for some working parents.
Marc Fisher: Well, sorry to sound like I've just crawled out of a Waltons show or something, but I fail to see any problem with kids walking a bunch of blocks to school. I walked a mile to school every day in The Bronx growing up, my kid walks half a mile to school every day in the District, and with obesity and sedentary lifestyles growing as national issues, it would be delightful to see more kids walking to school every day. In a city with an extensive train and bus system, it would be downright criminal to add a school bus network to the transportation mess.
Bethesda, Md.: I am a mentor at a NW DC High School and am also involved with my church's outreach efforts to a school in Anacostia. I can't believe that anyone who visits one of these 1/2 (or more!) empty schools can seriously oppose consolidation. Well, other than the pie-in-the-sky letter to the WP Editor a few weeks ago who said use the space for smaller classes and cultural enrichment but did not promise the billion or so dollars it would take to bring this about.
So the question becomes, how to do this fairly? I have to say, on the face of it, not closing any schools west of Rock Creek Park seems blatantly unfair. However, these schools may have larger classes and/or be in better repair than those slated for closing. Could you share your take on this? Thanks.
Marc Fisher: I have to side with Rhee on the Ward 3 issue. The chancellor says she has staffers who wanted her to close a school west of the park just as a symbolic gesture, to show that she wasn't playing favorites. She denounced that as the dumbest thing she'd ever heard, and I agree: The schools west of the park are the smallest and the most overcrowded in the system. To shut them down and leave open more of the remarkably empty facilities elsewhere in town would be foolish. But there are other steps that can and should be taken to make Washingtonians feel more comfortable about their kids going to school near their own homes, rather than having to trek across the city every day. The focus ought to be on creating strong, marquee programs that make parents sit up and take notice of schools in places other than Ward 3.
NE D.C. : The closing of schools is a sham job. This is a land grab. Why you ask I say this, Well for the last ten years the District has been marketed to singles and young adults. Remember the "D.C. living slogans and PR? At no time during this period has the D.C. government considered families. The cost of living has pushed families out of the city and this is how you come up with the low enrollment stats that Mayor Fenty and Rhee keep quoting from. D.C. has opened the door for developers in the last ten years and have to deliver on all the contributions they have taken. Do you really think if the city can sell the land for closing a school to a developer to build over priced single family homes or condos they won't sell the land?
Marc Fisher: Yes, I really think--and in fact this is knowable truth, because it's been layed out in public documents--that the city has and will continue to say no to developers who propose to buy school properties. That's not to say that they should and will always say no--some schools really ought to be sold because they are downtown, where there will never again be a large community of school-age children. But others are in residential areas that could well again become home for families with children, and the city should hold on to those properties. But even there, there may be places where working with developers, large tracts of land can be divided to get private investment for new public facilities. I'd love to see something like that happen on some of the big, sprawling campuses the city controls in nearly every ward.
Washington, D.C.: I am a parent of children in Ward 3 schools responding to the earlier posting suggesting that we somehow get more resources from the city: wrong. We get less. Most Ward 3 schools are overenrolled and don't get the "small school supplement" under the weighted student formula. Other than that, we get the same dollars per student. The reason our schools are functioning better than those across town are (1) parent involvement, and (2) parent dollars, which pay for supplemental staff and other resources that the District won't cover.
Marc Fisher: Exactly right--the myths about the Ward 3 schools that permeate the city are indeed disheartening. It would be great to see that same level of parent involvement spread to other parts of the city. I don't get the sense that that is high on Rhee's list of priorities--she talks about how there's no reason to expect greater parent involvement as long as parents are treated as the enemy, and she's right about that, but one way to change that is to build a corps of parents who refuse to be treated poorly by their principals.
Bailey's Crosswords, Va.: I "got out of Dodge" three years ago by marrying a good man and thereby managing a move from the D.C. projects to a much better life in the 'burbs. Thus I have some sympathy for parents, mostly single mothers, grandparents, aunties and others who are raising DCPS schoolchildren and genuinely do not have time or energy to take an activist role in the school closing controversy. However, you simply have to! It does seem as if some closings are inevitable, and I'm hopeful Mayor Fenty and Chancellor Rhee's efforts will bring about an improved system. If they don't, what then?
I always tried to make D.C. teacher and PTA meetings, when my kids were in schools with a PTA, Open Houses, and the like. I was usually among the 3 or 4 parents or caregivers present. While my kids current schools are by no means perfect, the fact that a lot more parents are involved keeps teachers and administrators on their toes and gives us a lot more confidence in their future.
Marc Fisher: Excellent point--as I said in the previous post, the mere presence of parents can make a huge difference in the way a principal runs a school and in the attitude and performance of its staff.
Washington, D.C.: Weather or no, it's my understanding that based on signups organizers were only expecting about 100 speakers total at the satellite meetings based on signups BEFORE the snow.
Marc Fisher: Right--the early signups were so light that it's clear the final turnout had little, if anything, to do with the snow event.
Washington, D.C.: I am a concerned resident and active supporter of Michelle Rhee and her team. I find it interesting that so many people demand change, but the moment it affects them, they're no longer strong advocates. How can we move forward with reforming such a broken system if there is such resistance to any major reform efforts? Granted, for as much grumbling as there has been, I find it interesting how low the turnout was at the 23 meetings -- weather aside.
Marc Fisher: In fact, there really isn't that much resistance. That's the lesson from last night and from the process as a whole. The number that speaks far more loudly than the measly turnout of 400 people last night is the large majority of D.C. residents who said in the Post Poll last weekend that they support Fenty and Rhee's reform efforts and that they consider the schools to be the city's #1 problem.
As the owner of an old house I know how expensive it can be to try to keep old buildings going. That's why the proposals to close and consolidate some D.C. school facilities seem reasonable. Running a school at 20-30 percent capacity is wasteful and they don't seem to do it very well anyway.
Are these just sessions for the inevitable protests or do the parents groups have some reasonable alternatives proposed?
Marc Fisher: It's a mix--at the schools where there was a decent turnout, the activists present often did have good ideas about rejiggering the closings proposal or about how to save particular programs or advantages of their schools. But I was dismayed to find that even where there was some measurable turnout last night, there were precious few actual parents in attendance. Rather, the meetings seemed dominated by neighborhood political activists rather than the people who actually send kids to the schools.
A.U. Park, Washington, D.C.: I guess that I've had my say already on the DCPS transportation issue, but I cannot believe that most parents feel comfortable letting their small children walk several blocks to school alone (or with other small children). You said that you felt like you sounded like someone out of the Waltons when you advocated kids walking to school. Well,in WaltonLand, I WOULD feel comfortable sending my kids off on foot. But this is an urban area with lots of dangers for children. Am I the only person who thinks this way?
Marc Fisher: You're far from alone in that view. In all likelihood, it's my view that's the minority position. In this highly safety-conscious society, the idea of letting kids walk to school has come to be associated with handing them over to the boogeyman.
Washington, D.C.: Marc, What do you know about D.C. Children First, a group that is forming to oppose those who support the status quo (i.e., the unions)? The Chair of the Board is former mayor Anthony Williams.
Marc Fisher: It's sad to see the former mayor setting up shop with a group that seems determined to spread the pernicious voucher program that Congress foisted on the District. That group--there's more about them here: http://www.allianceforschoolchoice.org/more.aspx?IITypeID=3&IIID=3512
seems designed largely to lobby for more vouchers and more tax dollars for religious institutions.
Marc Fisher: That kicks things in the head for today. Thanks for coming along. The regular edition of Potomac Confidential returns at the usual time next Thursday at noon. And a new audio show, Raw Fisher Radio, premieres here on the big web site Tuesday at noon; it will be a weekly faceoff between newsmakers on top issues in the region. I'd be honored if you gave it a listen (there'll be a podcast available for those who can't join us at noon.)
The column's back in the paper Sunday and the blog is always on. Have a good 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.
|
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.
| 195.390244 | 0.682927 | 0.780488 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/14/DI2008011401453.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/14/DI2008011401453.html
|
Election 2008: South Carolina GOP Gets Ready to Vote
|
2008012019
|
Dawson, president/general manager of family-owned Burns Auto Parts, Inc., was elected South Carolina GOP chairman in spring 2002 and unanimously re-elected in 2004 and 2006.
Washington: What are your predictions for tomorrow's South Carolina primary?
Katon Dawson: Tomorrow, South Carolina Republicans will go to the polls to cast votes in the first truly make-or-break primary contest of the year. As we all have seen, the field is wide open. There are several candidates with reason to be confident heading into tomorrow.
Fairfax, Va.: Why is Romney ditching South Carolina for Nevada?
Katon Dawson: Gov. Romney has a strong team here in South Carolina -- a team he's had on the ground for more than one year. He continues to compete here in South Carolina.
Washington: You guys have been working very hard for tomorrow's primary. What will you do with your time come Monday morning?
Katon Dawson: We have indeed been working hard here in South Carolina to ensure we remain First-in-the-South because our voters have a 28 year history of being right when it comes to picking presidents. As soon as Republicans have a nominee for president, we look forward to campaigning with him in South Carolina.
washingtonpost.com: Do you feel that the penalty imposed by the Republican National Committee on Michigan was sufficient? Do you feel that having several states leap-frog Virginia on the Republican side may have diminished your state's importance in the nominating process?
Katon Dawson: I am proud to say South Carolina is more important than ever in the presidential nominating process. Candidates recognized this early on, and they have spent more time than ever campaigning across our state -- shaking our hands and looking us square in the eye to ask for our votes.
We plan to pursue any avenue necessary to have all of our delegates seated at the Republican National Convention in September.
Sumter, S.C.: What makes our state different from other primary states?
Katon Dawson: We have been extremely excited to host our First-in-the-South Republican Presidential Primary -- and this time, the stakes are even higher. In South Carolina, unlike many of the so-called Super Tuesday states where voters haven't even seen a bumper sticker or yard sign, we have welcomed all Republican presidential candidates into our living rooms, into our restaurants, into our daily lives.
Picking presidents is about much more than 30-second sound bites here. All the candidates have campaigned hard across our state because they know they must shake our hands and look us square in the eye if they want our votes.
Yonkers, N.Y.: I am not one of those New York chauvinists who look down on everyone who lives on the other side of the Hudson River, so please don't misunderstand this question: what is it about the voters in South Carolina that makes them so susceptible to slanderous attacks in political campaigns? Or is it that they really aren't that susceptible; it's just that the political tactics historically are slimier?
I realize that Yonkers, N.Y., has nothing to brag about either, in this context! And liberal New York had a mayoral race only 30 years ago that featured the slogan "Vote for Cuomo, not the Homo" (Koch). South Carolina just seems to have normalized this stuff. Or is it just reported more?
Katon Dawson: You know, that's a fair question. We have a long history of spirited and tough political campaigning in our state, but we also have a long history of being right when it comes to picking presidents. From Ronald Reagan to George W. Bush, the candidate who has won over our voters has been propelled to the presidency. I think our record of picking presidents overshadows any sort of story overhyped about "dirty tricks."
Menomonie, Wis.: Good morning. Do you think the media should give more coverage to those candidates who poll low? The reason the media gives is that candidates who poll low are not worthy of coverage, but how can they poll higher unless the public gets to know them, and if the only way the public can get to know them is through the media? Do you believe the media and not the people pick the candidates, regardless of party?
Katon Dawson: Here in South Carolina, more than ever before, journalists from across the country and across the world, have focused on our First-in-the-South Republican Presidential Primary -- and that has afforded the candidates on our ballot the chance to be heard. Moreover, with the explosive growth of new media -- from blogs to podcasts to YouTube -- candidates have had limitless opportunities to get their messages out.
West Columbia, S.C.: South Carolina bucked the national trend in 2006 by having a successful cycle -- how did you do it?
Katon Dawson: That's a great question, and it's certainly something we are proud of. When I became chairman here in South Carolina -- which is a strictly volunteer position I took on in addition to managing my auto parts business -- my goal was to expand the conservative foothold great leaders like Carroll Campbell and Strom Thurmond had established in our State. I wanted to grow our party, strengthen county and local Republican organizations, expand our grassroots network and kick-start our fundraising. I believe we have a record of accomplishment.
Last year, Republicans lost their way in Washington and across the country, but here in South Carolina we stuck to the conservative principles of limited government -- based on lower taxes and fiscal discipline -- and traditional values that have made our party and our country great. In the toughest of political environments, we re-elected our Republican governor Mark Sanford in a landslide. Even more, we won eight of nine statewide constitutional offices. We will not let up in 2008, and I believe we will build on this success.
Washington: With all the appearances, debates and attacks made by the GOP candidates, has it been hard to stay objective in your role as South Carolina GOP chair?
Katon Dawson: This is a great question, and I have been honored to meet all of our candidates and their families as they have campaigned across our state. We have such a strong field. I have remained focused on giving our Republican voters the opportunity to decide for themselves who the best candidate will be to take on Democrats in November.
Charleston, S.C.: Sir, what are your thoughts on the South Carolina Democratic race and do you believe the leading Democratic candidates have the best interests of South Carolinians as a whole at the forefront of their campaigns?
Katon Dawson: The Democrats in the early primary states certainly have proven themselves to have taken a sharp turn to the left in 2008. The radically liberal candidates on the Democratic side have all promised to raise our taxes, turn our health care system over to Washington insiders and surrender to the terrorists in the Middle East. Regardless of who the Democrats pick, their nominee will follow in the footsteps of history's forgettable footnotes like Walter Mondale, Mike Dukakis and John Kerry to landslide defeat in South Carolina.
Greenville, S.C.: Some people are saying that Florida is more of a "make-or-break" state than South Carolina this year. What would you say makes South Carolina more of a must-win state?
Katon Dawson: I know many of the pundits have made a big deal about Florida's early role, but Florida is new to presidential primary politics. It's tough to make any predictions with respect to any impact they may have this year. I can tell you, however, that all eyes are focused on South Carolina -- and rightfully so. We have a history in South Carolina of being right when it comes to picking presidents, and this year will be no different. The candidates have spent more than one year campaigning in our state because they know they must win over our voters.
Washington: With the Democrats' primary a few days after yours, do you think we'll see more attention focused on their campaigns in South Carolina? Also, if race rears its head on the trail again, do you expect Rep. Clyburn to stay silent? Thank you.
Katon Dawson: Absolutely not. The eyes of the world have been focused on our Republican primary here, and we are the story in national politics. The Democrats will have their chance to shine next week, and I know our good friend Carol Fowler will be proud.
Niles, Mich.: With the pols running neck and neck, what will the deciding factor be?
Katon Dawson: I believe the deciding factor could be turnout. The candidate who turns out the most supporters tomorrow will be on solid ground when it comes time to count votes.
Katon Dawson: I would like to thank everyone who submitted questions today. The stakes couldn't be higher tomorrow.
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.
|
South Carolina Republican Party chairman Katon Dawson takes readers' questions about Saturday's GOP primary in his state and how things are shaping up there for the 2008 election.
| 57.258065 | 0.774194 | 0.903226 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/15/DI2008011502607.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/15/DI2008011502607.html
|
Carolyn Hax Live
|
2008012019
|
Appearing every day in The Washington Post Style section and in the Sunday Source, Carolyn Hax offers readers advice based on the experiences of someone who's been there. Hax is an ex-repatriated New Englander with a liberal arts degree and a lot of opinions and that's about it, really, when you get right down to it. Oh, and the shoes. A lot of shoes.
Here's a situation I'd like your perspective on: Recently I was talking with my cousin, and she said something really racist, which surprised me so much I couldn't react as I'd have liked. Do you recommend just letting it lie, or saying something even now, a week later?
Carolyn Hax: Say something even now, a week later.
Approach it first by admitting you didn't know how to react when you first heard her comment. Then say you've been turning it over in your mind ever since, and so now you;re thinking it would be easier just to ask her straight out what she meant by it.
At least that way you're not accusing, you're asking, and you're also giving her a chance to think about what she said--which is really the point. It's not about a gotcha or an apology, nor is it about relieving you of the burden of feeling as if you should have taken a stand. It's about making her aware of what she said, so she, I hope, doesn't make the same mistake again.
Austin, Tex.: Carolyn: I have a first date with a guy next week. I haven't told my best friend because she has been studying for a very important professional career exam which she'll take in two weeks. I don't want her to freak out about me having a date (which she might do because she has not had a date in quite a while...and she and I are the last two single, unmarried people in our group.) If this date goes well, and he and I are still hanging out when she's done with the exam, I'll tell her then.
Am I being ridiculous? Should I just tell her now? If I wait a few weeks she'll be hurt that I didn't tell her as soon as I met the guy...but I just don't want to distract her in any possible way. Your thoughts?
Carolyn Hax: If she'd freak out that you're going on one date right now, it would feel weird for me just to answer your question and say, sure, tell her later, whatever.
Which would be my answer, except that there's a much bigger problem. It sounds as if you and this friend are just not good for each other right now. You need each other to remain single, in order for it to feel okay to be single? That's not about two friends propping each other up, that's two friends dragging each other down. Please talk to her about your getting a healthier attitude, individually or jointly, about the paths you;ve chosen in life.
Rockville, Md.: Hi Carolyn. I am a 16-year-old high school student. This upcoming spring break, I am traveling abroad with my school orchestra. Though I'm very excited for what will be an amazing experience, I'm also quite apprehensive because I don't have many friends in the group. Sure I know a lot of people and can make small talk with them, but they're not the "hey-we-have-to-room-together" type of friend. I moved here only a while ago, and I do have many very good friends outside the group; however, I have trouble breaking into the cliques that have formed in our orchestra. I have a very three close friends in the group, but none can go because they have other activities during break. I tend to value having a few great friends and have trouble being very effusive and bubbly, as the "popular" people tend to be. I suppose I could join in and be proactive in asking people to room with me or sit with me on the rides, etc., but I always feel guilty because I don't want others just to agree out of politeness. I just don't want to be the tag-along or seem antisocial, while actually I am very funny, cheerful, and kind person with the people I'm comfortable with.
Carolyn Hax: The weeks before these things are all about dread, so don't feel it's only you. But the weeks after are often about the new bonds created by being around people 24-7 whom you might not otherwise have chosen to be around.
And if it doesn't play out that way (since there's no guarantee), think of it this way: There are a lot of introverts out there. Some really just don't want to be bothered, but many are at least understanding, if not outright grateful, when someone asks, "Is this seat taken?" Especially in such a socially demanding circumstances as a multi-day trip with other 16-year-olds, I have a hard time believing there aren't other people who are staring down the idea of being "alone" the whole trip. Look outside the cliques and along the fringes for kindred spirits. And, bring a good book for when you really are on your own. Nothing wrong with that, either.
Re: Friday's Column: Excellent advice. Thank you!
I went through this three years ago. She is definitely grieving, but it's okay. And a few years down the road, she will probably very happy with her little family unit. I couldn't imagine mine any other way.
Carolyn Hax: Thanks. Another reader pointed out that in addition to what I advised, she also needs to apologize to her husband for badgering him/tuning him out for 18 months. And he's right, that's a lot of months of not respecting his position.
His pointing that out caught me in an assumption that I hadn't realized I had made--that the decision to stop after one child was a change, and that there had been some understanding that they would have child-ren-. It wasn't a crazy assumption, because clearly the wife herself had assumed there would be more, but it was mistake nevertheless because assumptions always are when you're in this chair. After all, -her- assumption could have been unfounded.
Meanwhile ... certainly if the husband had originally been party to a plan to have more than one child and changed his mind, her distrust of his new position would make more sense, but she would still owe the apology for not listening--and he'd owe her one for the broken promise.
Whew. Hope that covers it all. Thanks. BTW, another reader agrees with you that it took a few years to readjust her perspective.
Second Babies: Your column today resonated with me, but in a slightly different way. My husband and I have a darling baby (older baby). We love our child dearly but are unsure about a second.
I want one, in theory. The reason I say "in theory" is b/c we have no family in the area and thus no network (beyond friends but they have families of their own). So, we get no help. No breaks. And, I feel like my marriage has suffered some since the birth of our child (not irreparably; just a lack of time/intimacy that we prev. had). The grandparents and other relatives rarely come and when they do, expect to be entertained.
I cannot imagine going back to night feedings, wakings and all the stress that comes with a newborn. And, then, what if baby 2 has colic or other issues that our first VERY easy baby (but still a baby and thus hard) did not.
OTOH, I can't imagine not having a sibling for our child and another child growing up in our house.
How do you make this decision? I'm mid-30s so have to decide in the near future.
Carolyn Hax: This decision is probably making itself as long as you can't bear the thought of night wakeups. They're a low point (IMHO) even when you're mentally prepared for them.
But if you do get to the point when you feel ready, the next question is, can you afford paid help? And if the answer is no, can you re-work your budget to start saving for it, even now while you're undecided? Not full-time care, but relief care--a few afternoons a week, an evening or two*. A lot of people are making do without family helping out. Either grandparents and siblings live in different parts of the world, or they're busy with other young kids in the family, or just flat-out not helpful; my mom died before I had kids, and that's sad but hardly rare.
*Finally--set up a date night, asap, and stick to it. This will all be moot if your marriage is one of chores and estrangement.
thank you, Stepford wives: Yep, she owes him an apology. After all, the desire for a child is such a silly woman thing, and it should be discarded for his wishes without discussion.
Carolyn Hax: Oh come on. Admitting the husband has feelings and frustrations of his own is hardly a trip to Stepford. There's discussion, and there's an admitted refusal to hear what one doesn't want to hear. I'm not surrendering my position of sympathy for someone in her position, I;m merely agreeing that her refusal to hear him does warrant acknowledgment.
To the 16-year-old going abroad on Spring Break: Two things I just want to mention from personal experience that might help you.
The summer before ninth grade, I went to Europe as part of a school group at my best friend's school. She (and two friends from her neighborhood that I had met ONCE) was the only person I knew. The four of us sat together on the plane and had a great time. The day we arrived in England, she decides to hook up with one of the two guys on the trip and totally ditch hanging out with me. I felt like such a hanger on with her two other friends because we only sorta knew each other. The group ended up splitting into two "cliques" and I ended up having a great time with the girls I met! We didn't keep in touch because they went to a different school, but it was still a lot of fun after the initial day or two of awkwardness.
The second thing is that over 10 years later, I don't remember the names of the girls I roomed with, talked with, shopped with, etc. I remember missing out on paying attention to historical and beautiful architecture, etc., because of high school drama. I still regret that and I long for a day when I can afford to go back and really appreciate what I'm seeing and doing. So, really, you only have to share the bathroom with these people. If you don't make lifelong friends, no worries because it doesn't matter. Just try to enjoy the trip because it may be a once-in-a-lifetime experience!
Carolyn Hax: Thanks. I have a similar story, which allows me to add a twist to your twist. I blew off the sights for the social drama, too, and regretted it, then developed a post-regret appreciation both for the drama and the regret (if that makes any sense). The drama was where I was then, and nothing was going to distract me from it, not even Westminster Abbey. The regret, which I no longer have, was really just the usual slap in the face that comes with an education. The lesson being: Don't beat yourself up for missing W. Abbey when you were 14, just go next time you're there.
Which I didn't, by the way, but that's a whole other story.
Charlottesville, Va.: Is there a grievance step-process to getting over an injustice? There's nothing I can do about a wrong I suffered about one month ago. The problem is I wake up every morning angry, furious. I know that's the first step in other step-processes, but I can't seem to move to another step. Is there any book or Web site to help me through this? Thanks.
Carolyn Hax: Can't speak to the book or Web resources, but I do believe that when something prevents you from seeking a remedy to your exact problem, for whatever reason, then you need to turn your energy to something else that you -can- remedy. Just being effective will help you feel better.
You suffered an injustice. Can you help someone else who has been through something similar? Can you help others avoid what you went through? If those are dead ends, can you just do some generalized good? Think of it as channeling your fury into something productive. It's the beginning of so many happy endings, it's its own cliche.
Where's Liz? : I missed her chat yesterday.
washingtonpost.com: Rehab. Strictly for professional reasons.
Carolyn Hax: Hey, if I can work through it, she can.
ugh : I have a thing for my wife's sister and I need to get her out of my sphere, now, before ANYTHING goes wrong. I've got the willpower to stay away, but my wife is a perceptive woman.
How do I explain that I don't want to be around SiL for the time being?
Carolyn Hax: Everyone has a fiercely unattractive side. Park your mind on hers, and don't let it leave until it's convinced. Just thinking about her, too, will have an intensity you can't sustain. It's why crushes don't last.
In the meantime, don't explain you don't want to be around the sister, just be elsewhere. Even when you're there, occupy yourself with something else. Everyone will be so happy you're doing dishes, washing the cars and mowing your neighbors' lawns they won't have time to notice that you're lovestruck.
Cleveland: Carolyn, I am really uncomfortable with the frequency my p>wife is going out to bars with her girl friends for a "girls night out" (3x last 4 weeks). In fact, when and wherever this group of friends gets together (and it is often at one another's homes) there is a lot of drinking. One time I went with my wife to the bar (couples night) and everyone just got hammered -- guys were hitting on my wife (she says they were married guys and just talking). She seemed like a different person. I don't see a problem with the occasional girls or guys night out to socialize and blow off some steam but...I just don't see anything good coming from the bar scene. When I have discussed my concerns with my wife she has told me she can handle herself and it is "too bad" she is going out any way. This is causing a lot of tension in the home. What are your thoughts -- is it simply a control and trust issue on my part?
Carolyn Hax: Sounds like a control issue on both sides, with hot insecurity and a binge-drinking problem on top.
Going out with friends once a week is a non-issue. So is going out with friends once a week and exercising a side of her personality she doesn't use much at home. Even a little flirting gets a big fat "whatever" if she brings her real attention home. You're free to do same; when handled properly by grownups, it can liven things up.
But getting hammered once a week, making lame ("they're all married") excuses and responding to -any- concern from a spouse with "too bad" is the behavior of someone too childish to be married--or too angry to care any more about acting childish. I also think your making an issue of the guys who hit on her is a mistake, also one of either immaturity or anger that has bubbled over.
I wish I could point to Just the Right Thing to Say that would get you two talking again, but that would require 1. that you purge your words of any anger, jealousy or blame, and 2. that she be willing to do the same. I have hopes for 1., but not for 2. In the end it might be time for some good marriage counseling, but you can still try approaching in a disarming way, with something along the lines of, "How did we end up like this?" (To which my mind just responded, "Like what?" Sigh.)
MtP, DC: Carolyn, I was reading through old transcripts, and apparently you like the band Nickelback.
I don't think we can be friends anymore.
Carolyn Hax: Agh, a music snob! No, we can't be friends.
I actually don't know their music, just one song that I can't even recall now. But I'd appall you anyway; my music tastes are all over the place.
I've been doing some online dating, and whenever people
learn that I'm from W. Virginia they start judging me
immediately as though I'm stupid. Several have made
offensive jokes about my birthplace. Should I stop revealing
Carolyn Hax: No no no, it's a great filter. Just respond with how clever they are to have thought of those jokes themselves, or employ the multi-talented "wow," and be grateful this is all coming out early vs. later.
Re: SiL crush:"Just thinking about her, too, will have an intensity you can't sustain"
I disagree. This is the logic I used when I had a seemingly insurrmountable crush on a co-worker. Unfortunately, thinking about him only made it worse, especially because I did have to see him on occasion. The combination of seeing him and having more things to fuel my thoughts built up. I did eventually act on my feelings, which I regret to this day. If I could do it over, I would have not indulged my early feelings on this "harmless crush" and forced myself to think of other things and cut off ALL contact with him.
Carolyn Hax: I actually agree with that, when it's possible. When it's not possible then it's time for Plan B.
Back again: Hi Carolyn! My now-husband wrote in a long time ago and you printed his letter about his worries that his white family wouldn't accept me, his black wife. Things have been fine between me and the in-laws so far, but now that we're expecting our first babies (twins!), I'd like to start a dialogue with my mother-in-law about some small issues we may need to address as a family. My confrontation-shy husband wants no part of this dialogue, even though it involves him.
Basically, while the in-laws have been good about not openly condemning my race or making their usual racist jokes, I want them to actually become allies in raising our kids to be proud of who they are. I want the in-laws in our kids' lives, and to do that means they need to look at even the nuances of the way they talk about world issues. I don't see anything inflammatory about that, but my husband is freaking. Can I do this without him?
Carolyn Hax: Hmm. Depends. Reading between the lines, it looks as if your definition of their becoming allies in raising your kids is your educating them on which viewpoints are and aren't acceptable to you. That sounds like a grandparent alienation kit, frankly, no matter how right you may be about the subtleties of their racism.
They are who they are, and they have a right to be that way, even if it makes them look ignorant or hostile or whatever it is that has caught your attention. Even if you're right that they would be undermining your children's emotional health.
You, of course, have the right to speak up when your in-laws say something that you find detrimental.
Unless your we're-a-team-here speech really is a positive, pro-family rally, I would advise against any sort of confrontation, and instead for waiting and seeing how they are when the babies come. You have a while before they will really be able to get what's going on, so use the early years to see whether your predicitons even come true--they may surprise you--and to teach yourself a good approach when they do offend. Is there stuff you can let go? Are there things you have to take on? Is there a way to take them on that incorporates the view that all or you are learning, vs. that you are right and they are to be scolded?
Finally, the grandparents who do come with a complicated message are a story as old as family. The answer isn't always to fix them or banish them or even correct them on a case-by-case basis. Often the true winning strategy is to let them be part of your children's larger education about the fact that people aren't paper cutouts. They can have great and awful traits--not just coexisting, but sometimes even woven into the same sentence. They'll have to learn to deal with that eventually, and they're the ones it's your job to educate.
Just for the record: Your statement "Everyone has a fiercely unattractive side. Park your mind on hers, and don't let it leave until it's convinced. Just thinking about her, too, will have an intensity you can't sustain. It's why crushes don't last." cuts two ways.
Focus on the bad in someone you love, and you lose the crush/magic/love. Focus on only the good in someone you can't have, and you're delusional. Reset your mind often and honestly until these make sense.
Carolyn Hax: Thanks. I can extend it even further--that people who have committed to someone, *and are in healthy relationships*, will benefit from keep the positive-thought bubble-machine going. The weekly date I keep flogging is part of that. Keep the good stuff in plain view on a regular basis. Not delusion (please see *), just emotional maintenance.
What's the best way to get over an insecurity and to identify if you're being too sensitive about something?
My very recent ex and I broke up over a major insecurity of mine. I am very loyal and always had his back and people knew better than to trash him or our relationship, and my boyfriend knew that I would defend him and definitely encouraged it. But when it came to a girl talking to my boyfriend at the time and trashing me and saying I was only using him, my boyfriend let her rant on and on and after she said her piece, he decided to turn the subject to making a sexual comment about her. And since she disrespected me in his house or in his presence (pretty much always regarding my relationship with the bf, even though she's not a close friend of either of ours and it's none of her business) and the bf NEVER did anything to let her know that it's not right and he makes me feel like I'm overreacting for wanting him to have my back, even though it's something I have done for him. Even though we're broken up and working on our friendship, his lack of loyalty is still plaguing our relationship and I don't know if I'm overreacting or how to make my feelings clear to him because he just doesn't get it...
-Time to just get over it?
Carolyn Hax: Ya. I've used the "has your back" example before myself, but not in the same way. I'm talking about taking care of someone; you've extended it to opinion-policing. If someone had something negative to say about someone I was seeing, I would -want- them to feel safe saying it (and I hope I'd have the sense not to go reporting it back to my date). They might have useful information for me on things I'm too close to the situation to see. This other girl may have been wrong about your using your boyfriend, and she may have had ulterior motives up and out the wazoo, but who cares? She can both form and express whatever opinions she likes. Your boyfriend can hear them or dismiss them in whatever way he likes--of course, as long as there's no impropriety or wink-wink endorsing of it. What's wrong with a bored sounding, "Okay, [girl], I'll keep that in mind," and going back to whatever he was doing?
I'll admit, part of the reason I'm focusing on this angle is I don't understand your question any more when it gets to the other part--specifically, you lost me with "he decided to turn the subject to making a sexual comment about her." But I think I'm talking about the right part of the issue anyway: You're not "loyal," you're controlling the airwaves around you on any topic that concerns you.
Badmouthing, backstabbing--heck, even people who don't like you for valid reasons and who handle that honorably--these are all part of life. Your feelings about yourself, your BF, about the stability of your relationship--these all need to be able to stand on their own.
Carolyn Hax: Just for clarity, the way I said couples needed to watch each other's backs was in taking care of each other. Paying attention to each other's feelings; sticking up for each other when words do get harmful, like when a family member gets overly involved with the couple's private business; being aware of and making an effort to satisfy each other's needs; listening; all that good stuff.
I love your chats! I have two questions:
1. Do you and your husband actually do the weekly date night thing? It sounds great in theory, but seems like it would be hard to sustain long term.
2. Will you be my personal therapist?
Carolyn Hax: Snort. We do get out once a week at least, and have missed maybe one or two nights out in five years. It's not a forced march, it's just something we look forward to and protect fiercely from outside pressures.
re: Date night: some clarity on date night, please. I am expecting my first child in March and I think that date night for us may become "sit together and talk about something other than the baby" or "watch (part of) a movie." is this what you mean, or does date = night on the town?
Carolyn Hax: Get out, let your eyes see something other than your smudgy walls and stacked laundry. Even if you just take a walk.
I am about ready to send a dear John letter to my long distance relationship of seven years. He has been saying he will move here for six years. He says it, he goes through some of the motions, but never does it. He was MIA when I was diagnosed with breast cancer this fall. He seems to be completely unable to commit to any decision, even to take out the trash. I have come to realize that he is a hoarder and immune to clutter. I have spent quite a chunk of change working with professional organizers to get my place back in the shape it was in before I met him. My other side says we are very compatible in many ways, and maybe he really will move up here. But my evil twin says she'd rather fall in love all over again. Any thoughts?
Carolyn Hax: If I were your evil twin, I'd be really p***ed that the only position you were letting me stand for was a chance to subject yourself to this all over again. HE WAS AWOL WHEN YOU WERE DIAGNOSED WITH CANCER. Even if that didn't have six years of dithering behind it, it would still make me feel good about sending the Dear John letter fedEx. First overnight. (Or is that option not available for Saturday Delivery?)
Lansing, Mich.: My husband has been estranged from his (very toxic) family for 12 years. Yesterday he received an e-mail at work from his sister (she Googled him). Their mother is turning 80 this month and the family is having a card shower. She asked my husband to send a card.
Is it wrong of me to encourage him to send one? She's an old woman and it's not like he's to have further contact with them. I also think that he may find that they have changed just as much as he has in the past 12 years, but I will respect his decision to maintain the status quo.
Carolyn Hax: I'm not going to get into the business of parsing an estrangement whose origins I don't know firsthand. However, because estrangement is so extreme, I do think it makes sense to revisit the decision at some regular interval. If the though of that is too painful, then that might mean it's an emotional decision being made solely as a way of avoiding those painful emotions. Instead estrangement should be a way of -dealing- with them, in which case re-opening your mind to the decision every, say, five years--or when you get a request to participate in a birthday--will only bring more peace, not less. At least in theory.
My best friend is in her late 30s and interested in dating. But she absolutely refuses to date anyone over 40.
I have tactfully tried to explain that many men are not interested in dating someone older then them, even a beautiful smart woman like my friend.
She complains about her lack of relationships, and I know why -- as infuriating as it is. I want to sit her down and explain the facts of life. I've hinted at it, and she responds by saying that I haven't been out in the dating world for a while. But she doesn't really seem to understand what I am saying. Very frustrating! What should I do?
Carolyn Hax: You're trying to make sense to someone who's being ridiculous. When she complains about her lack of relationships, please feel free to ask ... well, whatever amuses you. "Can I mention your rigid and arbitrary guidelines, or is that still off limits?"
For the record, some men don't have a problem with dating someone older, but their radar does usually tip them off to someone who treats dating like a trip to Tiffany (with maxed out credit cards).
Washington DC: You recommend marriage counseling a lot, and I'm down with that. When money is one of the issues standing in the way of marital bliss, though, how do we justify the expense? Or better yet, avoid the expense? Are there therapists that work on a sliding scale, or some such thing?
Carolyn Hax: Try the professional organizations that govern the therapy specialties. The American Association for Marriage
and Family Therapy (www.aamft.org) and the American Psychological Association (www.apa.org) are two that come quickly to mind, and you can check the sites or call the information numbers to get suggesitons for finding care on a low-, no- or sliding-cost basis. Schools that train therapists, churches, hospitals also sometimes offer discounted care and clinics. These are just a start, but often one call will lead to another. Good luck.
I'm a college senior in the middle of an intense 3-week winter semester. My best friend said she understands that I don't have time to talk on the phone now because I have to devote so much time to my schoolwork. But apparently she also feels slighted; last night, she left me a message saying that she is "so much more important" than the grade I get in this course, and she wants to talk.
I agree that people are more important than grades, but I have to study! Is it unreasonable for me to say that I could do short phone conversations now, but I need to wait until after my final to "really" talk?
Carolyn Hax: Since the counterargument is so easy to make--that the grade issue will be gone in three weeks, but you have a lifetime to be good friends to each other--I have to wonder if something else is up. It is possible that she needs something big and hasn't been clear about that, and it's also possible she thinks she has been clear.
If everything else you know about her says she's being high maintenance, then add this to your anecdote pool. If on the other hand you know her not to be high maintenance, put in the call, even a five minute one, to find out what really is up.
Afraid of what you will say but here goes...: I cheated on my fiancee. Took a business trip and got way to drunk and friendly with a co-worker. Almost completed the task but came to my senses.
Overall, I'm freaking about the wedding. Tons of factors make me nervous and, wedding planning or relationship aside, I have a few very stressful events brewing in my life.
So confused now. Do I tell him (it would have to be over-the-phone) about affair or just evaulate my own fears and discuss with him? I never thought I could do something so hurtful and disrespectful to him.
Carolyn Hax: Your slip is telling you something. What, I'm not sure, but tuning it out instead of listening to it would be a bigger mistake than your actual mistake. Stop, breathe, think. What do you know that you;re trying to tell yourself isn't true?
FedEX: Yes you can FedEx overnight for Saturday Delivery. I do it for my job every Friday. Good Luck!
Carolyn Hax: No no, I mean First Overnight. The before-whatever-a.m. delivery. I'm being a real FedEx geek here.
Pack Rat's Wife: From a couple of months ago:
My husband was the one who put straws in the dishwasher and pulled empty containers out of the trash -- well last week my young son asked if I could save his nail clippings! I've run to a counselor. We're laughing about it at least, but there has been an acknowledgment of a larger issue.
Just thought you'd want an update.
Carolyn Hax: And, a parting shot all in one.
Thanks everybody, have a great weekend and type to you next week.
Richmond, VA: Date Night Buddies! Find one. I was complaining to a not so close friend that we could never get a sitter so we never went on dates and she said the same. We decided to take turns watching each other's kids by waiting until after the kids are in bed, then either husband A or wife A comes to watch Couple B's kids and vice versa. Once a week (or two), going to a neighbor's quiet house with no chores staring you in the face and a good book for a couple of hours is an added bonus.
Carolyn Hax: good one, thanks.
Just posting stuff as I go through the outtakes. I'm still gone. Bye.
for marriage counselor: Also, pick one thing in your monthly budget that's equal to counseling, and see if you can do without it. Think of it this way, do you want to tell people, "I got divorced because my cell phone was more important than repairing my marriage"?
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.
| 175.02439 | 0.634146 | 0.780488 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/17/DI2008011701797.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/17/DI2008011701797.html
|
Behind the Screen - washingtonpost.com
|
2008012019
|
Thomson, a movie critic at The Washington Post for 15 years, was raised in England where he was entranced, like most, by Hollywood movies. It was a visit to see David Lean's "Lawrence of Arabia," that made him realize movies had to be a part of his life.
Desson Thomson: Hello folks. As we near the Oscars or the non Oscars, depending on whether the writers' strike nixes the show, it seems like a great time to get to what the awards -- at least in some part -- are all about. I am talking about the performances that affected us this year. What reached you? What didn't? Talk to me baby.
New York, N.Y.: I must be the only person who really didn't like Annie Hall -- jittery Diane Keaton and misogynist Woody just didn't do it for me. I'm glad he's found peace in his life but I really have to wonder why actors agree to star in his stinkers. I know that Scarlett Johannsen was very helpful in reviving press interest in his movies but I think it was bad for her career. It's come to the point that when I see an actor signing up for one of his films I just assume their career is going nowhere.
Desson Thomson: Ha! I know what you mean. But even a blind New Yorker can find the occasional acorn. I mean Woody not you. And he produces a Match Point, which was a fabulous movie. I think the problem is, he has become a hack unto himself. He's more obsessed with having made a movie than making a good one. Or so it seems all too often.
Arlington, Va.: Got to see There Will Be Blood last Friday night at the AFI in Silver Spring! I will be VERY surprised if Daniel Day-Lewis doesn't WIN the Oscar for Best Actor, as he was an extremely powerful presence on screen. And I kind of interpreted his character as Bill The Butcher turned oilman.
But what fascinated me more than anything else was the format of the movie, in that it wasn't an early 20th-century Syriana, depicting oil and capitalism and greed. Rather, I found it to be a very strong and fascinating study of Daniel Day-Lewis's character, and how he essentially self-destructed.
As to the pacing of the movie, the slowness didn't bother me. Rather, I felt the pacing to be very deliberate, very patient. A very well-crafted movie, in my opinion!
Desson Thomson: I agree with you a thousand per cent. Well said. It's a very powerful movie and I intend to see it many more times for its many brilliant qualities.
Washington, D.C.: What did you think of Mad Money? It looks stupid to me and a waist of Keaton's talent.
Desson Thomson: Haha. I like the "waist" of talent pun, intended or not. Ann Hornaday dismissed this with such authority I wouldn't dream of seeing it.
Washington, D.C.: I was very disappointed in American Gangster.
Desson Thomson: I was too. But perhaps you could elucidate why?
Washington, D.C.: I adored Juno. Great ensemble.
Desson Thomson: Many liked this movie too. Me among them.
Waldorf, Md.: Have you heard of any new movie theaters opening up or anymore closing?
Desson Thomson: None either way, unless someone has news to share with all of us?
Washington, D.C.: With the passing of the CO Dupont Circle, we've only got complexes from here on out. I wonder if chatters could share memories from movie palaces gone by, Kiss of the Spider Woman at the MacArthur in Georgetown (1985), Rope at the Key (1984) Manon of the Spring at the Biograph (1987), Indochine at the Outer Circle (1993) Blair Witch Project at the Janus (2001) and Eyes Wide Shut (2001) at the CO Dupont Circle. Anyone?
Weston, Fla.: FIrst, I am 66 years old and don't usually watch a movie more than once. However, I have watched Michael Mann's "Heat" several times. It's not the Godfather, but it gets better each viewing. To me it's almost a classic. Your thoughts on "Heat" please.
Desson Thomson: I enjoyed it very much. And I know what you mean about repeated viewings. I believe Michael Mann has a hypnotic quality to his sequences, which are powered literally and figuratively by music. His stories and scenes have a flow which always get to me. And Heat, of course, has that incredible meeting between two great actors for the first time: Pacino and De Niro.
washingtonpost.com: 'Youth': Coppola's Dizzying Spin On Fleeting Time ( Post, Jan. 11)
Thank you for such wonderful chats! Always enjoy them. I'm a law student who probably spends too much time watching movies, reading about movies, dreaming about movies, etc. I am often delighted and even overjoyed by what I see, but "Once" captivated me to the point where I felt (and feel) changed. Six months later, not a day goes by when something doesn't remind me of the movie. After I saw it, I went back to read reviews as always and I don't know if I've ever seen such rapture for a movie. Kenneth Turan actually said that "Once" was going to come into your life and make it whole, and many reviewers spoke in similarly dazzled tones. That said, why oh why is it not getting more love from the awards circuit? Just too strong a year? Unknown cast? Not enough glitz? I try not to get too caught up in the politics of the Oscar race, but I feel a little hurt somehow this year because there seems to be such a chasm between popular and critical reception ("Once" and also "Ratatouille" come to mind) and award recognition. Thanks!
Desson Thomson: Thank you so much. Very nice of you to say.
I felt similar rapture for Once and put it on my top 10 list. I know what you mean by the apparent forgetfulness of critics for the film at the end of the year. I hope that it resurfaces somewhere in the Oscar kudos list--at the very least for its fabulous central song. Saw it again recently and it had lost none of its powerful innocence.
Cassandra's Dream: I got a charge out of this sentence from your review:
(These British ears could also easily detect a Scot and an Irishman playing English.)
I guess Woody thought 99 percent of his viewing audience wouldn't know the difference...but he didn't reckon with Desson! Keep up the good work!
Desson Thomson: Ha! Thanks, mate. (There was a lot of negative stuff from British critics, at least the ones I know, towards Match Point too. They felt it was a very sanitized, sentimental view of English life.)
Iowa: I'm really, really hoping that Keri Russell's performance in "Waitress" isn't overlooked despite being so early in the movie season.
Desson Thomson: Me too. She was terrif.
I'm going to see "There Will Be Blood" tomorrow, but I feel like I shouldn't go until I've already seen "No Country For Old Men." Please assure me that I'm making this up.
Desson Thomson: You should see both in any order you want.
Washington, D.C.: The latest Francis Ford Coppola film must be really awful if it's heading out of the E St. Cinema after only one week (down to 2 showings a day this week, which usually means it's on the way out). I realize the reviews were uniformly awful, but feel I should see it anyway, because, well, it's FFC's first film in over a decade. Have you seen it? If so, is it really that awful? And if so, should I go see it anyway? I saw all my "must see" movies over the holidays, and a very good lot they were (Atonement, Kite Runner, No Country, Diving Bell, Great Debaters and more) so can can afford to take a gamble. I've not yet seen TWB Blood, but that's because I want to be well rested for a 3-hour, serious film.
Desson Thomson: Yes, get the rest for TWBB.
I have posted my Youth Without Youth review for you.
Jargon: Who is John Anderson and why is he "special"? Is this a euphemism? Has the Post run out of reviewers?
Lots o' questions, but my main point concerns language like "despite director Reeves's tenacious grip on the film's visual signature, the not-so-novel DV view of the world"
I assume that he means Digital Video, but why not spell it out, or has this acronym entered common parlance?
washingtonpost.com: 'Cloverfield's' Monster Also Behind the Lens ( Post, Jan. 18)
Desson Thomson: John Anderson is a terrific person and movie reviewer who reviews for Newsday and Variety. (I presume by special, you mean the "special to" credit that we use for freelancers.) He's based in LA these days. He is filling in for Stephen Hunter who is on book leave. I agree, he should have spelled it out. I don't think it's quite universal yet, in the way that, for instance CGI (computer generated imagery) has become.
Aspen Hill, Md.: What did you think of Christian Bale's job in "Rescue Dawn"? Fairly Oscar-worthy (at least in terms of getting a nod -- not that he necessarily deserves the award) in my opinion. Any thoughts?
Desson Thomson: He was really good in that movie. But it was a small movie in the greater scheme of things Hollywood and I fear it will be overlooked.
Washington, D.C.: I think No Country for Old Men will take home a lot of awards.
Desson Thomson: It is certainly a huge front runner, and the Coen brothers are due many things. And Javier Bardem has a virtual lock on the supporting actor award.
Baltimore, Md.: Re D.C. movie theaters gone by: #1, the MacArthur wasn't actually in Georgetown, it was in the Palisades on MacArthur Boulevard. Last movie I saw there was Aguirre The Wrath of God. There was also a large, very large, theater in Spring Valley on Massachusetts Avenue that closed and was subsequently torn down. I remember seeing The Man Who Would Be King there, but I am darned if I can remember the name of the theater.
And long time Washington moviegoers are most fond of recalling the sadly departed original Circle Theaters that were on Pennsylvania Ave. near Washington Circle. They were called The Circle and the Inner Circle, which was why the theaters up on Wisconsin Avenue got dubbed The Outer Circle. The Circle was a repertory house in the days before video. Daytime double features back in the late '60s cost a buck!
Desson Thomson: Ah yes, I remember all of these places. The theater you are trying to remember was called the KB Apex.
Penelope Cruz/Volver:: we finally saw it this week. Wow! She is simply mesmerizing. I even missed some of the subtitles because I was watching her so intently. Yes, she's stunningly beautiful, but it was her performance that kept me riveted. Funny, haunting, assured, just amazing .Spanish, English, I don't care. She just needs to be in more films.
Alexandria, Va.: Isn't Forest Whitaker amazing? I think is Idi Amin was one of the best acting performances ever, and then compare that to his carefully nuanced James Forest St. in The Great Debaters. Wow.
Desson Thomson: Forest W. is a treasure on screen. You should see him in everything, including Ghost Dog: the Way of the Samurai, Bird, and A Rage in Harlem. But to borrow from Borat: As for his role in "Battlefield Earth", not so much.
Eastern Market, D.C. -- no movie theater here: Hi Desson.
Glad you thought highly of Zodiac, as did I. I'm awaiting the director's cut DVD.
What did you make of Atonement? I was actually annoyed while watching it and the gimmicky music score grated my nerves after about the 3rd time of hearing the typewriter clacking.
In stark, stark contrast, I fell in love with There Will Be Blood and its unconventional music score. I cannot recall ever being more mesmerized in a movie theater before.
As your namesake David Thomson blogged yesterday, he predicts the Atonement director will win the Oscar cuz there's no justice in this world!
I for one hope Blood will sweep the awards -- it's one of the most accomplished pieces of American cinema, IMHO.
Desson Thomson: Well hey, hey Eastern Market. I am glad you appreciated Zodiac. A supreme movie. And I am among the few, apparently, who wasn;t quite as enamored of Atonement as I should have been, I suppose. It's a good movie, though. I will say that. But emotionally, I wasn't as engrossed as others have been. As for There Will Be Blood, I know I am a stuck record, but what a great film. Hope it cleans up too.
Harrisburg, Pa.: Will the Oscar nominations show any love to "3:10 to Yuma"? Ben Foster, maybe? Not the best movie of the year, but I was disappointed the Globes didn't even nominate it for anything.
Desson Thomson: It hasn't been widespread but the movie has shown up on critics' lists here and there. If you check out Film Comment which culled a lot of critics' top 10 lists (which I was a part of), you'll see it made an appearance.
Cinemas of yesteryear: Anything and everything I ever saw at The Foundry -- Ponette, Kolya, The Color of Paradise, The Spanish Prisoner ...
Desson Thomson: Good movies, lousy theater. But it was near good Vietnamese restaurants in Georgetown.
Ocala, Fla.: In memory of the great but crazy Bobby Fischer, whose death was announced today, are there any outstanding movies set in the chess world besides "Searching for Bobby Fischer?"
Desson Thomson: Good question: I recall most immediately The Seventh Seal by Ingmar Bergman in which a medieval knight plays chess with Death himself. And wasn't that sexy scene in 1968's The Thomas Crown Affair, between Steve McQueen and Faye Dunaway, when they play footsie under the table during a game of chess?
Rosslyn, Va.: See Forest Whitaker in The Crying Game. Great flick!
Desson Thomson: Oh duh, I can't believe I forgot that.
Washington, D.C.: I actually feel this was a good year for films.
No Country for Old Men
To name a few. I also applaud Ben Affleck and Sean Penn's directorial efforts.
Desson Thomson: I agree with you. Although I would applaud Casey Affleck, who was the real revelation in "Gone Baby Gone" (not to mention the "Jesse James" movie) rather than his semi talented brother.
Washington, D.C. is wrong: About all theaters here being cineplexes. We have a wonderful theater in The Avalon in upper NW on Connecticut Avenue, and if you're willing to drive an hour or so, the Senator in Baltimore. If you clicksters have not seen a movie at the Avalon, do it -- this is the way movies were meant to be seen. It's also in the middle of a commercial block, with a few restaurants and a fabulous funky clothing store, Catch Can. Don't do the mall cineplexes!
I posed this to Ann last week, and she liked the question.
Some friends sprang this on me after seeing THERE WILL BE BLOOD.
Were there really twins? Or did Eli have some kind of personality disorder?
Desson Thomson: I believe your latter interpretation is mine.
Palisades: The MacArthur was not in Georgetown -- it was in the Palisades neighborhood. It, like the Biograph, which was in Georgetown, is now a CVS. Ugh.
Don't forget that within the past two years, we also lost the great single-screen "Cinema" theater on Wisconsin Avenue, and its neighbor, the great six-screen, auditorium-seating (which was a good thing) and well-managed Wisconsin Avenue 6 theater.
Desson Thomson: Yes, we have lost a lot.
Good to have you back!
It seems to me that The Silence of the Lambs has become the gold standard for psychological/serial killer movies. Do you find that to be the case? If so, why? Don't get me wrong, The Silence of the Lambs is a good movie, but I can still think of several other psychological/serial killer movies that are FAR scarier (psychologically) and far more creepy than Silence.
Just off the top of my head, Copycat and Se7en.
Desson Thomson: Thanks for the welcome. I think that Silence has a subtly creepy quality, not to mention one of the top 5 movie villains of All Time in Hannibal Lecter. I loved Se7en too.
Bucket List: Hi, Desson. Have you seen Bucket List? Ann's chat last week had people saying, it can't be that bad, it's a feel-good movie with 2 great actors going at it, go out and enjoy. Well, I've seen it, and I'm afraid yes, it is that bad. Part of the problem is that it so trivializes the cancer experience. I mean, I realize they can't, or don't want, to show actual effects of cancer and cancer treatment, but these guys might well have been misdiagnosed, judging from their symptoms and treatment. Aaarrgh.
Desson Thomson: Based on reviews I have little desire to see it, and your posting makes that lack of enthusiasm even more pronounced!
Alexandria, Va.: What do you hear about "Honeydripper," the new blues flick highlighted on CNN.com today. When's it coming here?
Desson Thomson: It's coming Feb Uno and Ann Hornaday is reviewing it for Style. Haven't seen yet.
Baltimore, Md.: Zodiac is still getting a lot of Oscar buzz despite its early release, but the same cannot be said for Breach. I found Breach to be far superior to Zodiac, especially in its central storytelling and the performance of Chris Cooper compared to that of Jake Gyllenhaal. Did critics complete forget about this movie?
Desson Thomson: Breach did seem to be forgotten, alas. I liked the movie much but Zodiac was, for me, far more assured in the categories you mention.
Ambler, Pa.: Love your chats!
FYI, my college writing professor chided us for using the phrase you used "one thousand percent." She said there is no such thing as more than one hundred percent.
Desson Thomson: With all due respect to your college professor, who is right in such a dull way, I give you full permission to use a thousand per cent whenever you feel like it. It is so liberating isn't it?
Washington, D.C.: Re: Theatres gone bye -- I saw "She's Gotta Have It" at the Outer Circle. As a Howard student then, I was so very exciting to me. The movie hooked me and I've been a Spike Lee fan since. Prior to that I'd seen Spike's "Joe's Bed-Sty We Cut Heads" screen at the MLK Library downtown.
Desson Thomson: Very cool. Spike was a revelation when he busted out.
Washington, D.C.: Hi Desson! I love your chats! We invoked your name during a discussion last weekend, hoping you could settle a question raised upon our seeing a television commercial for The Spiderwick Chronicles. Here it goes...
I had received passes to see the movie at the end of December. My husband thinks that since the theater release of the movie is in February, this is a very long delay -- meaning that the movie was retooled upon audience reaction during previews in December. I wasn't sure about this, since a six-week delay (the time of the previews we saw and the release date in mid-February didn't strike me as so long).
Can you tell us? Was this movie reworked?
Desson Thomson: Well, I am honored to have my name invoked without a court summons involved. Big movies are very often subjected to preview audiences and re-jiggered accordingly. So I wouldn't be surprised at all. Although such practices tend to strike me as bad and tacky at first blush, there is something to be said for being responsive to audiences so you can build a better mousetrap.
Bethesda, Md.: And don't miss Forest W. in "Fast Times at Ridgmont High" (along with other frequent Oscar contenders Sean Penn and Nicolas Cage). Great stuff.
As for lost theaters, I do miss some of them, not for their "character" (they were claustrophobic and/or dive-y), but simply for the convenient locations. The Dupont one in particular, but also one of the Odeons (I forget which) that used to be in the West End (it was near work, at the time). And I have great memories of seeing "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" and "Rocky Horror" (at midnight, of course) at the Foundry.
Desson Thomson: Ha, yes to all you said.
Washington, D.C.: I didn't write the initial statement, but I too was underwhelmed by American Gangster. I think with the pedigree that the movie possessed, I may have expected more. The biggest problems with this movie occurred in the editing room, which resulted in a movie that had very little flow and LOTS of unnecessary scenes (Could someone please tell Carla Gugino that she needs to give her agent a raise). The movie tries to replicate the "family" aspect of The Godfather and Goodfellas, but does so without falling into the cliches created by other mob movies, and in doing so, it is devoid of a singular tone.
I guess I shouldn't have been surprised considering the number of changes in personnel (actors, directors, and writers) that occurred during the production.
Desson Thomson: I think those are some excellent thoughts on the movie's problems. It amounts to a permanent virus on the left coast: Hollywood overwriting.
RE: Michael Mann's Heat: One of the greatest movies ever made! Though unlike the previous poster, I WILL rank it on the same level as The Godfather. (Just my own personal opinion. Not a shot at the original poster.)
The one thing that burns me about Heat, though, is how it was totally snubbed by the Oscars when it came out. Because I think for such a masterfully crafted and acted movie as that, it deserved Oscar nominations for Best Picture, Director, Actor (De Niro), film editing (the fabulous coffee shop scene and the legendary gun fight in the street), cinematography, sound (the real echos of gunshots), and screenplay.
Desson Thomson: Glad you appreciate this movie!
Philadelphia, Pa.: Actually you can have more than 100 percent literacy. A population is 100 percent literate at the 8th grade level; more than that is above 100 percent. So go for it!
Desson Thomson: I have no idea what this means, but it sounds great.
Underlooked performances, departed venues: A performance that really captivated me this year was Paul Schneider as the brother in "Lars and the Real Girl." The entire ensemble was superb and of course we expect the best from Ryan Gosling, Emily Mortimer, and Patricia Clarkson, but Paul Schneider took what could have been a sit-com-ish role and made it very tender and touching. He was also excellent in the Jesse James movie. My favorite performance of the year was probably Amy Ryan in "Gone Baby Gone," and she seems to be a front-runner for the Oscar. I know you said Bardem is, too, but I would so love to see it go to Hal Holbrook. He broke my heart in "Into the Wild."
I miss the Biograph and the Circle, and I also miss the small AFI theater at the Kennedy Center. We saw many great films there and one of the best evenings ever was when Irene Dunne appeared in person for an interview following one of her movies. I still remember her explanation of why Cary Grant was her favorite leading man: "Don't tell Cary I told you," she said, "but he always said I was the sweetest smelling actress he ever worked with."
Desson Thomson: Fabulous - good stuff. I hear you on all.
Wisconsin: I miss that cinema. My parents took me there for my first R-rated movie: The Commitments. It was the first time I'd ever heard an audience talk back to the screen.
Desson Thomson: Ha, really? They talked back? That's great. I loved that movie. I'll date myself now and tell you the first movies I saw there were Klute and Sleeper.
Re: 1000 percent: That clearly wasn't a math professor. 1000 percent of something is the same thing as times as 10 times that whole something. You agreed with that person 10 times over.
Desson Thomson: I ma getting so immersed in zeros, I am starting to see my math teachers of the past (all of whom who threw their hands up in disbelief at my numerical illiteracy): Mr. Foster, Miss Bostock, Mr. Cairncross...
Austin, Tex.: So the BAFTA nominees were announced this week? Does the American writers' strike affect this awards show at all? Does any U.S. TV outlet have broadcast rights to the BAFTAs? If the strike torpedoes the rest of awards season as it did the Globes but can't touch the BAFTAs, it may be the only full-on red carpet-style awards show we get this year.
Desson Thomson: I seem to remember the BAFTAs can be picked up on a cable channel coz I saw them in the US on one of mine. And it does stand to be the only kudocast (as Varietyspeak would call it) we'll see this year, since the Brits are not on strike.
Petworth, D.C.: I could write an essay on lovely, long-gone theaters. The Circle, The Biograph, The Ontario, the Embassy, The Outer Circle... I could keep going for far too long.
But don't neglect the Uptown, the Avalon and the AFI Silver. Keep them alive people!
Desson Thomson: Agreed. Keep em alive.
Washington, D.C.: I had broken up with a boyfriend and in order to occupy my Sundays which had previously been spent watching soccer (he was English) I went to the Cineplex Odeon to see Chocolate. I was the only person under 75 in the theater and one older woman patted me on the shoulder when she walked by and said "don't worry dear, you'll meet someone."
Desson Thomson: I am so sorry it didn't work out between us.
Washington, D.C.: Hi Desson! Performances I loved this year include Robert Downey Jr. in "Zodiac", Tilda Swinton in "Michael Clayton", Keri Russell in "Waitress", Jennifer Garner in "Juno" (although the entire cast was great, I've never seen JG look so radiant or be so effecting) and Michael Cera in "Superbad." At 32 I am way too old for him, but I do harbor a wee crush!
Desson Thomson: Yes, as Diablo Cody (Juno screenwriter) said of Cera and his impact among girls: You can actually hear teenage girls ovulate as he passes.
The Great Debaters: Hi, Desson. I went to see this film and loved it, but I'm reluctant to take my 11- and 13-year-olds because of the lynching scene. They know a bit of this situation; in fact, two of their grandparents were "freedom riders" and we're very proud of this heritage. But I'm afraid that even if I discuss this situation beforehand, they will have nightmares forever. I don't know how old your children are, but would appreciate your thoughts on this. Or perhaps other chatters can help? Thank you very much.
Desson Thomson: I regret that I haven't had time to see this yet. Good question. And unfortunately we are at the tail end of the chat. If anyone has thoughts on this, I am back on Feb 1. Orf you can raise it with Ann next Friday?
Washington, D.C.: I felt a lot was lacking in the American Gangster script. The acting was fair, but the script didn't call for that extra edge that The Departed had. It tried but failed. Also Denzel didn't bring any to the role that we haven't seen him do before. After much hype, you left thinking that it was only okay.
Desson Thomson: Yep. I can understand that reaction.
Formerly D.C.: Re the poster who asked about memories of D.C. theaters past. I lived in D.C. 1969-1990. My memories are of "mainstream" pornographic movies at midnight at the Biograph on Fridays, such as "Misty Beethoven" and "Behind the Green Door," great for "ending" a Friday night date. Also, wonderful double bills at the old Penn at Penn and 21st, like "Walkabout" and "Zulu" together.
Desson Thomson: You have been around the block, I see.
The MacArthur: The last movie I saw there was "Return of the Jedi" on opening day. I was in the Navy at the time and had worked a 12-hour shift and got off at 06:00 (6 a.m. for you civvies). My friend and I ate breakfast and went to the theater where we took a nap on the lawn nearby before our show time.
I only hope the Uptown can remain. That place has many good movie memories for me.
Union Station, D.C.: Someone misses the Dupont Circle 5? I saw one movie there once and I never went back. What a dump. The Landmark downtown is light years away in quality. There is still the Uptown, though I'm almost hoping that MAC sells it, maybe to the P and G folks, because they don't know what to do with it. I just hope they don't sell it to the church who's renting it on Sundays.
New theaters? I thick the Consolidated folks opened three new ones last year at PG Plaza, Kingstowne and somewhere west of Dulles, but I can't think of any more right now.
Desson Thomson: Thanks for all that.
Re: psychological/serial killer movies: Please don't forget about the often overlooked "Memento." It should have not only won for best original screenplay in 2002, but also been at least nominated for best picture.
Desson Thomson: What a great picture. Was my number one that year.
Washington, D.C.: Hiya Mr Thomson,
Always look forward to the chats. We saw 'The Orphanage' and talk about creepy -- I thought it was much scarier than the 'Freddie'-type horror movies that clue you in when something bad happens by the sudden change in background music. Really a good follow-up, I think, to 'Pan's Labyrinth.'
My question: totally different genre, but, did you see 'The Water Horse'? If so, did you like it (or not)?
Briony (yes, that Briony that was depressed over Atonement)
Desson Thomson: Who can forget that name, Briony. Alas haven't seen the Water Horse. But glad you liked Orphanage as I did.
Waldorf, Md.: Movies that were memorable based on the theater, Blair Witch Project at Outer Circle before it went wide. Got tickets 2 days in advance, got in line, and there was a scalper there! I have never seen that at a movie theater since.
Desson Thomson: A scalper? Seems appropriate for the kind of grass roots success that movie turned out to be.
Daniel Day-Lewis: I haven't seen the movie, only the trailor and while the movie does seem powerful...DDL grates on my nerves in the the TRAILER. I think it's the accent he is working in the movie, it really is jarring to me...anyone else?
Desson Thomson: He is jarring throughout, in an intentional way. But also hypnotically compelling.
Baltimore, Md.: I love a good monster movie and rank The Host among the best movies I saw in '07. I am intrigued by Cloverfield but have not seen anything to indicate that it's worth my $10. Am I better off seeing "There will be Blood" or "The Orphanage" and catching Cloverfield on DVD?
Desson Thomson: You liked the Host too? Great flick! Was on my top 10. I suggest you see Orphanage in case it goes. And see them all. Cloverfield could work just as well on dvd, I'd wager, since it's essentially shot as a point of view video anyway.
Arlington Cinema 'N' Drafthouse: If they ever close that place, I will cry for a year!
Re BAFTAs: Thank goodness for BBC America! Oh and Up the Villa!
Desson Thomson: You are a true supporter of things British. Good for ya.
Greenbelt, Md.: Even though I was spoiled to the fate of the dog, I went to see 'I Am Legend.' After watching, my major objection to it was that religious faith was brought in. Until that point, it was a great popcorn flick for me. Does anyone out there know why they decided to supercede the science aspect with religion?
Desson Thomson: It sure got cluttered up with some messianic business, which wasn't to my taste--not in that movie anyway.
Richmond, Va.: Cloverfield -- yay or nay?
Or, more importantly, since I've already agreed to see it, should I bring my itty bitty book light?
Desson Thomson: I intend to see it soon and am dreading the vertigo.
Desson Thomson: Thanks everyone for playing. Hope you have a great weekend and we will chat again soon!
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
|
Washington Post film critic Desson Thomson discusses acting itself, as seen this year, and in the past. What is about Daniel Day-Lewis's performance that makes "There Will Be Blood" so powerful? Why does Javier Bardem capture us so powerfully in "No Country for Old Men"? What performances this year -- or in the memorable past -- really held your attention and why?
| 91.88 | 0.92 | 2.28 |
high
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/11/DI2008011102857.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/11/DI2008011102857.html
|
The Washington Capitals
|
2008012019
|
Tarik El-Bashir: Hello all and thanks for stopping by. Have you taken a look at the standings today? Considering the depths to which the Caps had sunk, 11th place is pretty amazing? The big question, though, is can they keep climbing? I'm sure someone will ask that very question, so let's get started.
Washington, DC: Will Matt Bradley win the South Carolina primary?
Tarik El-Bashir: I don't know. But I bet he could become the mayor of Stittsville, Ontario, after retiring. And if keeps scoring game winners, perhaps mayor of Washington.
Rileyville, VA: Have you ever bumped into Alexander Semin in a hallway, and if so, did he fall down?
Tarik El-Bashir: He does seem to fall down a lot. But he's also a tremendously agile skater, who can stop and turn on a dime. Maybe he falls because he's always on the ragged edge of his blades?
But if he keeps scoring at the rate he has the past few games, who cares if he falls down every once in a while? It might draw a penalty from time to time.
Vancouver, B.C.: Do you think the Caps might attempt signing a guy like Peter Forsberg as a short term replacement for Michael Nylander?
Tarik El-Bashir: I would never say never. But from what I've read, Peter still has a long way to go before he's ready to contribute in the NHL.
I'm not sure bringing him in would be worth the $$$ or the risk of messing up chemistry. The Caps' locker room is really tight.
At what point will the Caps start to get some of the national attention it deserves? That questions can also be filtered down to Mike Green and Coach Gabby?
Thanks, and keep up the great coverage and blog
Tarik El-Bashir: I think people around the country (and in DC) are slowly starting to take notice. There have been more TV and radio reporters at practice recently, and lots of Caps highlights have been shown on ESPN lately.
As for Green, the accolades will come. As for Boudreau, if the Caps rally and make the playoffs, how could he not be coach of the year? The TV folks vote on that, so if he isn't picked, don't blame me, okay?
Memphis, TN: Any noticeable changes in Ovechkin's behavior/demeanor since the big extension?
Tarik El-Bashir: Not that I've noticed. Same old Alex. But people who are close to him say that he's a bit more relaxed now that he knows where he's going to be for a long, long time.
Alexandria Va: When Clark returns who sits? and will Clarkie eventually be on the 1st line again?
Tarik El-Bashir: That's a tough question. Last time it was Fleischmann.
But I don't see Clark coming back for a while. He didn't even skate on his own today.
Herndon, VA: Can you explain how a Jagr trade will benefit the Caps? Do they no longer owe a portion of his salary if he gets moved?
Tarik El-Bashir: It's my understanding that the Caps will still owe a portion of his salary this season even if he is traded.
Do you think the Caps should try and find a "rental" player in place of Nylander or just use what they have as McPhee has stated?
Tarik El-Bashir: I'm kind of torn right now. The Caps are making a move in the standings, but if they make a trade and give up a young asset for a rental, and then don't make the playoffs, that would be foolish, right?
Sp I would wait before deciding whether to make a trade. But if I did opt to make a trade, I would go for a winger and not a center. Kozlov is okay in the middle. I'm starting to get worried about Clark.
Arlington, VA: Do the Caps players read Capitals Insider? There are some strong opinions, often critical, there.
Tarik El-Bashir: Yep. Some read it. But you must remember that most pro athletes have pretty thick skin. (As do reporters.)
Realizing that chemistry is good now, if the Caps keep climbing and are buyers at trade deadline time, what one (realistic) thing do you think they could add that would make them a serious competitor/threat in the...the...can't say it, but you know what I'm talking about.
Tarik El-Bashir: Depending on the health of Clark and the availability of Fehr, I would go for a top 6 winger. Another veteran D would be nice, but almost every team in the league will be looking for one at the deadline.
I was talking to GM the other day who told me that everyone is making calls, but no one is close to making a deal. The market is dead at the moment.
Columbia, Md.: With the falls (Semin accounting for many) and bouncing pucks last night - are there any updates to how the organization is addressing the 'bad-ice' situation that Clark discussed with you?
Tarik El-Bashir: The ice better. At least no one has complained to me about it during this homestand. And believe me, if it was bad, they'd be talking about it.
1. Is Poti's shoulder keeping him from shooting well, thus no goals on the stats sheet?
2. Is Green becoming the modern day Al Iafrate or is this more serious. Paul Coffey type stuff we are seeing?
Tarik El-Bashir:1. Poti's shoulder is bothering him. And that has a lot to do with his lack of goal scoring. His range of movement is definitely limited.
2. I'm not ready to compare Green to anyone yet. But he's going to be a special (and soon, very rich) player.
Frederick, MD: How much should be read into Olie's comments to Mike Wise the other day and how much of it do you attribute to frustration from getting pulled and then not getting the start against Ottawa?
Tarik El-Bashir: I've talked to Olie at length about the column. He was clearly frustrated when he talked to Mike. He says everything that appeared in the column came out of his mouth. He just didn't mean for it to sound so critical of Boudreau.
Look, everyone gets frustrated and says things they wish they hadn't. That's probably what happened here.
Both coach and goalie, though, have gotten over it (or so it seems).
Alexandria: With the current rates of attendance and TV ratings, can the Caps pay for Ovechkin's monster contract, overall team payroll, and other expenses and still make a profit?
Tarik El-Bashir: They lost $5-6 mil last year, even after getting a revenue sharing check of about $10 mil. (I'm sure someone in the PA might dispute those figures, but that's what I'm told).
So the short answer is no, they aren't going to turn profit. And after signing Green and Morrisonn, and the increases due to Clark and Semin, the Caps could lose a lot of $$$ next year. Unless of course, they make a playoff run and then fill the building more regularly.
Dupont Circle: What is up with the season Pettinger is having?
Were his last two seasons a fluke or is he hurt or what?
Tarik El-Bashir: He's really struggling. I've talked to him at length about his drought, and he's got no answer for why he keeps hitting goaltender's pads, goal posts and misfiring from point blank range instead of the back of the net.
The only thing I see that's different about him this season is that he's wearing a visor. But that can't be it, can it?
What do you think about the Caps latest surge in the standings? Is 3rd place in the Eastern Conference a pipe dream or do you think our young guys can keep this going into the 2nd half of the season?
Tarik El-Bashir: Last night's win was a prime example of what good teams do. They started poorly and fell behind, 2-0. Still, they managed to scratch out a win ... on a goal by Matt Bradley.
Whether the Caps are actually "good" remains to be seen. But it sure seems like they are trending in that direction.
Bonzo, DC: So, are the Caps going to get into the playoffs? Ottawa has to hate the idea of facing the Caps in the first round of the playoffs...
Tarik El-Bashir: Don't get too far ahead of yourself there, buddy. There are a lot of games left to play. A lot can happen.
But, yeah, if I'm on the Senators, the last team I want to see in the first round is the Caps.
That said, if the Caps win the SE and get the third seed, the last team they want to see in the first round is Boston and goalie Tim Thomas.
Arlington, Va.: Which teams are sinking quickly? My say is Tampa Bay and Los Angeles. Do any of those coaches get waxed say around the trading deadline?
Tarik El-Bashir: Tampa probably needs to be retooled at this point, and I think changes are coming. As for L.A., the Kings are a prime candidate to make some moves at the deadline, I hear.
Roanoke, VA: Great game last night...the Caps reacted like they had just won the Cup! How is Green not an All Star selection? He looks faster and every game and his puck handling moves are sick especially in the defensive zone.
Tarik El-Bashir: Green got robbed. He should be an all-star for sure. Does anyone else hear a cash register every time he scores?
Arlington, VA: So did Bradley actually hold a shootout clinic at today's practice?
Tarik El-Bashir: No, and I was sooo disappointed. Today's practice lasted about 20 minutes. It's been a tough stretch.
All-Star Game: Are you going?
Will you be nudging any players about coming to play for the Caps?
Tarik El-Bashir: I am going. All-star weekend is fun for everyone. The players have a great time hanging with guys they don't see often. And the reporters get together and eat and drink way too much, and then complain about stuff.
Seriously, though, it's always a good time.
If you remember, last year in Dallas I blogged about going through a 'What-a-burger' restaurant drive thru at 4 a.m. There's always a couple of nights like that during all-star weekend.
Silver Spring: Now that Nylander is gone for the year, what do you think about Sundin as a rental?
Tarik El-Bashir: No. Sundin is a great player and a great leader, but the Caps would have to send Toronto some real assets to get him. It's just not worth it, considering Washington's precarious -- yet improving -- position in the standings.
Washington, D.C.: Do you think the Caps will pursue a starting goaltender in the offseason? Between Kolzig's performance so far this season (excluding last night) and his quotes in Wise's article, is there any chance the Caps go after a new netminder?
Tarik El-Bashir: That all depends on what happens down the stretch. If Kolzig can be consistent, and is okay with having Johnson play more, it's possible he'll be back. If not, they could part ways.
I think it's pretty telling that the Caps haven't offered him an extension yet. Last time, he was offered on Jan. 2, the day after teams can re-sign their vets.
Washington, DC: A broad question for you -
Have you found being the Caps' beat reporter to be a great experience? For those of us who love the game (and realized at some point in the past that our skating skillz capped out at peewee level), you've got a dream job. I wonder what it's like, on a day-to-day basis. The guys on a team like the Caps seem a lot more entertaining to cover than some of the teams that are more stiff and traditional in their approach to life, playing and media.
Tarik El-Bashir: It is a dream job -- on most days. But there's a common misconception that it's always a blast. It's not. For example: you rarely get days off during the season, commercial travel isn't fun, and you're away from your family a lot.
That said, I wouldn't want to do anything else. Hockey players are the best athletes to deal with and I love writing. So I'm not complaining.
I asked in the last chat about Joe B welcoming viewers from Northern California during the Caps telecasts...were you able to find out about that?
Tarik El-Bashir: Doh! I forgot. I sat next to him on a plane recently, too. My bad. I will ask on Saturday. Send me an email and I'll reply.
Largo, MD: The players must be feeling good about how things have turned around. Any fear of overconfidence on the players and/or coaches?
Tarik El-Bashir: They are definitely confident as a group, as Kolzig said today. But he also said the group isn't going to get cocky. He felt like that was part of the problem after they started off the season 3-0. They got complacent.
Love the columns. If the Caps are buyers who do you see as the #1 asset on this team GMGM would most likely trade? I cannot see most people on this roster being desirable for the kind of player(center/D) that the Caps need to keep this surge going?
Tarik El-Bashir: If they are buyers, I could see them moving a prospect or pick, but I don't see them parting with anyone on the current roster. All the players they would be willing to deal aren't going to be hot commodities at the deadline, if you know what I'm saying.
DC: Went to my first Caps game, and the shootout stuff is riveting. Sweaty palms, not being able to sit down. Great stuff, and this team is fun to watch.
Tarik El-Bashir: Yeah, great for fans. But terrible for reporters who have only minutes to write a story. My head would explode if I had to do that every night (like the Edmonton reporters).
Winter Park, Florida: What are the Capitals plans for re-signing Alexander Semin and Mike Green? I know Green is going to be due a nice raise, and with Ovechkin's new deal, is there enough to keep are young talent in Washington?
Tarik El-Bashir: Semin has already been resigned for two-years, $9.2 mil. Green is going to earn about the same in yearly compensation.
Whether the Caps keep all of their young talent depends on the team winning, gaining more fans and filling the building. It will also help if Leonsis assumes control of the Wizards, the arena and the tickemaster franchise.
Tarik El-Bashir: Thanks for joining me this afternoon. I wish I could stay longer, but I've got a newspaper story to write. See you again next week.
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
|
Washington Post staff writer Tarik El-Bashir will be online to take your questions about the Caps and the NHL.
| 143.636364 | 0.818182 | 2 |
high
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/17/AR2008011703049.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/17/AR2008011703049.html
|
$25 Million Begins Google's Charity
|
2008012019
|
The initial grants begin to fulfill a pledge made four years ago by Google's founders to devote about 1 percent of the company's equity and annual profit to humanitarian causes. Google.org, the philanthropic arm formed in 2006, expects to give away as much as $175 million over the next few years.
"We haven't done anything yet. We're not announcing we're at the finish line, we're at the starting gun," said Larry Brilliant, a physician who took the helm of Google.org a year and a half ago. He said he received tens of thousands of ideas for initiatives and took dozens of research trips to Africa and Asia over the past year to narrow the company's philanthropic focus.
Brilliant said Google.org has decided to spend money in five areas: preventing of disease and disasters, holding governments accountable for providing public services, increasing funding for small- and medium-size businesses, finding renewable sources of energy that are less expensive than coal; and developing more-advanced hybrid vehicles.
Because of Google's size and financial success -- its 2006 profit exceeded $3 billion -- its plan for giving has been widely anticipated by the nonprofit world. Compared with the philanthropic budgets of other top corporations, Google's initial investments appear fairly modest. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, for example, has $70 billion at its disposal. But corporate giving experts said Google may be able to make its money go further by using its expertise in collecting information and connecting ideas and people via the Internet.
"By applying technologies they know to the problems in the world, they play to the strengths of their employees and global operations," said Lisa Philp, managing director and head of philanthropic services for the private banking arm of J.P. Morgan. "They're trying to bring to philanthropy the same kind of creativity they bring to their business model."
In one project, Google.org hopes to improve early warning systems for a variety of threats, such as infectious diseases and severe drought. It has granted $5 million to Innovative Support to Emergencies, Diseases and Disasters (InSTEDD), a nonprofit group that uses software and other technology to fill gaps in the flow of communication between governments, relief organizations and the scientific community.
The foundation is also giving $4.7 million to TechnoServe, a group that helps small businesses get off the ground in rural and developing areas, to provide more loans to business owners in Ghana and Tanzania who do not qualify for micro-loans or private-equity money.
In addition to grants to nonprofit organizations, Google.org is investing in commercial ventures. For example, it made a $10 million investment in eSolar, a Pasadena, Calif., company that uses solar heat to replace fuel in power plants.
"It's becoming more popular for the for-profit world to fund other for-profits," said Christine M. Petrovits, assistant professor of accounting at New York University's Stern School of Business.
The approach sets Google apart from other tech giants. Dell, Apple and Intel have given computers to underserved communities. IBM runs a program that helps teachers get certified in science and math.
Google's investments in new technologies could also help spur new business ideas, Petrovits said. While that could be perceived as innovative, critics may view it as more self-serving than altruistic.
"But Google was also criticized when it first came out with its core business because no one thought it would make money," she said. "Maybe they're just more forward-thinking."
|
Google yesterday laid out its plan for philanthropy and announced $25 million in grants aimed at addressing climate change as well as poverty and health issues in developing countries.
| 22.16129 | 0.580645 | 0.774194 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/16/AR2008011601536.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/16/AR2008011601536.html
|
Navy Wins Exemption From Bush to Continue Sonar Exercises in Calif.
|
2008012019
|
Environmentalists who had sued successfully to limit the Navy's use of loud, mid-frequency sonar -- which can be harmful to whales and other marine mammals -- said yesterday that the exemptions were unprecedented and could lead to a larger legal battle over the extent to which the military has to obey environmental laws.
In a court filing Tuesday, government lawyers said President Bush had determined that allowing the use of mid-frequency sonar in ongoing exercises off Southern California was "essential to national security" and of "paramount interest to the United States."
Based on that, the documents said, Bush issued the order exempting the Navy from provisions of the Coastal Zone Management Act, and the White House Council on Environmental Quality granted the Navy a waiver from the National Environmental Protection Act.
The government filings said the federal ruling limiting sonar use "profoundly interferes with the Navy's global management of U.S. strategic forces, its ability to conduct warfare operations, and ultimately places the lives of American sailors and Marines at risk."
The exemptions were immediately challenged by the environmental group that had sued the Navy and by the California Coastal Commission, a state agency that ruled last year that the Navy's plans to protect marine mammals were too limited and deeply flawed.
"There is absolutely no justification for this," commission member Sara Wan said in a statement. "Both the court and the Coastal Commission have said that the Navy can carry out its mission as well as protect the whales."
Joel Reynolds, attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), said the organization would "vigorously" contest the White House orders in court.
U.S. District Judge Marie Florence-Marie Cooper ruled this month in Los Angeles that the Navy's plan to limit harm to whales -- especially deep-diving beaked whales that have at times stranded and died after sonar exercises -- were "grossly inadequate to protect marine mammals from debilitating levels of sonar exposure." A federal appeals court had previously ruled that the Navy plan was inadequate and sent the case back to Cooper to set new guidelines for the exercise.
In her ruling, Cooper banned sonar use within 12 nautical miles of the coast and required numerous procedures to shut it off when marine mammals are spotted. After the ruling, the Navy indicated that the guidelines would render the exercise useless, but the judge disagreed.
The Navy had received a federal exemption from the Marine Mammal Protection Act for the exercises, which are scheduled to continue through January 2009, but the NRDC and other groups filed suit under other environmental laws. The Navy will still have to convince federal judges that the exemptions are legal. The NRDC said yesterday that waivers are not allowed under the National Environmental Protection Act.
The NRDC also said the situation does not constitute an emergency, because the Navy is allowed to continue sonar training under Cooper's ruling.
"The president's action is an attack on the rule of law," said Reynolds, director of the Marine Mammal Protection Project at the NRDC, which obtained the injunction against the Navy. "By exempting the Navy from basic safeguards under both federal and state law, the president is flouting the will of Congress, the decision of the California Coastal Commission and a ruling by the federal court."
Navy officials have argued that they must step up sonar training because a new generation of "quiet" submarines has made it increasingly difficult to detect underwater intruders. The Navy says that more than 40 nations now have relatively inexpensive diesel-powered submarines, which can be located only with sonar that emits the loud blasts of sound. The Navy trains sailors in sonar use on an underwater range off Southern California and wants to set up another range off the Carolinas.
Adm. Gary Roughead, the chief of naval operations, said in a statement yesterday that the White House waivers were essential and warranted, given that the Navy has 29 procedures to mitigate sonar's impact on whales.
"We cannot in good conscience send American men and women into potential trouble spots without adequate training to defend themselves," Roughead said. "The southern California operating area provides unique training opportunities that are vital to preparing our forces, and the planned exercises cannot be postponed without impacting national security."
Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) sharply criticized the exemptions. "Once again the Bush Administration has taken a slap at our environmental heritage, overriding a court that was very mindful to protect marine wildlife, including endangered whales, while assuring that the Navy's activities can continue," she said in a statement. "Unfortunately, this Bush Administration action will send this case right back into court, where more taxpayer dollars will be wasted defending a misguided decision."
The NRDC said the waters off Southern California are especially rich in marine mammal life and are on migration paths of five species of endangered whales.
|
The White House has exempted the Navy from two major environmental laws in an effort to free the service from a federal court's decision limiting the Navy's use of sonar in training exercises.
| 26.111111 | 0.833333 | 1.888889 |
medium
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/16/AR2008011603711.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/16/AR2008011603711.html
|
GAO Report Challenges Effect of Longtime U.S. Sanctions on Iran
|
2008012019
|
In a report released yesterday, the investigative arm of Congress challenged the impact of U.S. sanctions against Iran dating to 1987. Tehran has circumvented many economic sanctions, it concluded, noting Iran's ability to negotiate $20 billion in contracts with foreign firms since 2003 to develop its energy resources. With the country's oil wealth, Iranian banks also have funded their activities in currencies other than the dollar.
"Iran's global trade ties and leading role in energy production make it difficult for the United States to isolate Iran and pressure it to reduce proliferation and support for terrorism," the Government Accountability Office said. "Iran's overall trade with the world has grown since the U.S. imposed sanctions, although this trade has fluctuated."
The report also faults the Bush administration for not developing a system to assess sanctions and recommends that Congress require the National Security Council to do so and report results regularly to Congress.
The Treasury Department countered that Iran faces "increased economic, financial and political isolation" because of U.S. and U.N. sanctions, with about 25,000 transactions worth more than $5 billion rejected since 1997. Stuart A. Levey, undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, said many financial institutions had stopped doing business with Iran.
The report comes as the Bush administration is struggling to salvage a new U.N. resolution on Iran. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is expected to meet with representatives of the world's major powers in Berlin on Tuesday to try to work out disputes that have significantly watered down new punitive measures on Iran, European and U.S. officials said.
"The substance is getting smaller and smaller," said a senior European official, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive diplomacy still underway. Some of the provisions in the latest draft call for "monitoring" financial transactions with Iran rather than freezing assets of institutions, banks and businesses suspected of ties to nuclear proliferation.
The United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany backed two modest resolutions -- in December 2006 and March 2007 -- demanding Iran suspend its uranium enrichment, a process that can be used to produce energy and to develop a nuclear weapon. After Tehran failed to comply, the Bush administration called on the Security Council to impose tougher restrictions on Iranian banks, financial institutions and military.
"The whole strategy here is to use various kinds of diplomatic pressure at a gradually increasing rate to try to get a different set of decisions out of the Iranian leadership," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said.
After a U.S. National Intelligence Estimate last month said Iran had halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003, the Bush administration has been under increasing pressure from across the Arab world not to consider military options against Tehran. The Arab News yesterday called President Bush's "saber rattling" against Iran during his Middle East tour "sad, even depressing."
Undersecretary of State R. Nicholas Burns has had almost daily conversations with allies over the past two weeks. "We still have some gas left in the tank," a senior administration official said.
But the main product of eight months of intense diplomacy may be just getting a resolution that still has limited practical impact on Iran, European officials said. "Even if there's not much substance in the end, at least we'll have a show of unity," one European official said.
Russia and China balked at earlier drafts. Both countries have significant financial ties to Iran, with Moscow building Iran's first nuclear reactor and China importing Iranian oil. The resolution is now not expected to be put up for a vote until next month, U.S. and European officials said.
The divisions among the world's major powers will make it increasingly difficult for the Bush administration to achieve its goal of getting Iran to suspend uranium enrichment before leaving office, diplomats said.
|
A three-year international effort to pressure Iran is faltering, with a new report to Congress questioning the impact of 20 years of U.S. economic sanctions on Tehran and a long-sought U.N. resolution against Iran in trouble.
| 17.571429 | 0.714286 | 1.190476 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/11/AR2008011101216.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008012019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/11/AR2008011101216.html
|
What's the Deal?
|
2008012019
|
* Restaurant Weeks , with discounted prix-fixe lunches and dinners, are being offered in several cities, including New York (Jan. 21-25 and Jan. 28-Feb. 1), Washington (Jan. 14-Jan. 20) and Virginia Beach (Jan. 13-Jan. 20). Prices vary by city. In New York, for example, lunches are $24.07 and dinners are $35. Info: New York, 212-484-1200, http://www.nycvisit.com; Washington, 202-789-7000, http://www.restaurantweekdc.org; Virginia Beach, 800-822-3224, http://www.vbfun.com/restaurantweek.
* Kids15 and younger stay free at four Club Med properties in Florida, Mexico and the Dominican Republic. Maximum of two children per couple; seven-day minimum stay. Travel dates and prices vary by location. At the Cancun Yucatan Club Med in Mexico, for example, a family of four staying in a two-bedroom deluxe room pays $4,886 (including taxes) for a week in early March, a savings of $4,440. The Mexico deal is valid Feb. 28-June 21. Info: 800-258-2633, http://www.clubmed.com.
* Book a 10-night Azamara cruise with Icruise.com that departs Barcelona on April 25 and receive an onboard credit of $300 to $800 (depending on stateroom) and a free afternoon walking and gondola tour of Venice (worth about $150). A veranda cabin, for example, starts at $2,499 per person double (plus $54 taxes) and receives a $500 credit. Book by Jan. 31 by calling 888-427-8473. Info: http://www.icruise.com.
* Save 40 percent on select departures of French Country Waterways' weeklong cruise aboard the luxury barge Esprit. The cruise through France's Burgundy region is now priced from $3,200 per person double (down from $5,295) including taxes on six departures from April through June. Info: 800-222-1236, http://www.fcwl.com.
* Seabourn is offering savings on its 13-night Portugal Passage transatlantic cruises from Fort Lauderdale, Fla., to Lisbon this spring. The March 17 cruise aboard the Seabourn Pride and the April 6 sailing of the Seabourn Legend start at $3,297 per person double plus $155 taxes/fuel surcharge, a savings of 45 percent . Price also includes a two-night post-cruise stay at the Four Seasons Hotel Ritz in Lisbon (value of $968). Info: 800-929-9391, http://www.seabourn.com.
* Cathay Pacific's Deal of the Month is $748 airfare from New York to seven cities in Asia . Round-trip air to Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, is $826 with taxes; fare on other airlines starts at $1,458. Depart Feb. 15-March 15; maximum stay is 30 days. Purchase by Jan. 31 at http://www.cathaypacific.com/us.
* AirTran has kicked off a systemwide saler th. Fare to Charleston, S.C., for example, is about $196 round trip (with taxes) from BWI, Dulles or National. Other airlines are matching in select markets. Complete travel by Feb. 27 to Florida and by May 21 to all other destinations. Ten-day advance purchase required; lowest fares are for Tuesday, Wednesday and Saturday travel. Book by Jan. 17 at http://www.airtran.com, or for $7.50 more call 800-247-8726.
* Austrian Airlines is offering a Vienna Valentine package for $764 per person double, including about $165 taxes. Deal includes round-trip nonstop airfare from Washington Dulles to Vienna and three nights at the Hotel Albatros with breakfasts. Travel Feb. 7-28. Purchased separately, the package would cost about $917. Info: 800-790-4682, http://www.austrianair-vacations.com.
* Save an extra $100 for three-night stays or $200 for four nights on Grand Bahama Vacations purchased with a MasterCard. Prices vary by hotel. A package for two in early February with round-trip airfare from Reagan National to Freeport, Bahamas, and four nights at Pelican Bay at Lucaya is $897 after discount; priced separately, the deal would cost about $1,344. Complete travel by Feb. 14 and purchase by Feb. 12. Info: 800-822-4262, http://www.grandbahamavacations.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.
|
* The Puerto Rico Tourism Co. has relaunched a promotion that rebates $250 per room in food and beverage costs to travelers who stay at any of 11 participating hotels for at least four nights.
| 22.864865 | 0.513514 | 0.621622 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/15/AR2008011502861.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008011619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/15/AR2008011502861.html
|
A Different Recession
|
2008011619
|
In a normal recession, the to-do list is clear. Copies of Keynes are dusted off, the Fed lowers interest rates, the president and Congress cut taxes and hike spending. In time, purchasing, production and loans perk up, and Keynes is placed back on the shelf. No larger alterations to the economy are made, because our economy, but for the occasional bump in the road, is fundamentally sound.
This has been the drill in every recession since World War II.
Republicans and Democrats argue over whose taxes should be cut the most and which projects should be funded, but, under public pressure to do something, they usually find some mutually acceptable midpoint and enact a stimulus package. Even in today's hyperpartisan Washington, the odds still favor such a deal.
This time, though, don't expect that to be the end of the story -- because the coming recession will not be normal, and our economy is not fundamentally sound. This time around, the nation will have to craft new versions of some of the reforms that Franklin Roosevelt created to steer the nation out of the Great Depression -- not because anything like a major depression looms but because we face an economy that's been warped by two developments we've not seen since FDR's time.
The first of these is the stagnation of ordinary Americans' incomes, a phenomenon that began back in the 1970s and that American families have offset by having both spouses work and by drawing on the rising value of their homes. With housing values toppling, no more spouses to send into the workplace, and prices of gas, college and health care continuing to rise, consumers are played out. December was the cruelest month that American retailers have seen in many years, and, as Michael Barbaro and Louis Uchitelle reported in Monday's New York Times, delinquency rates on credit cards, auto loans and mortgages have all been rising steeply for the past year.
What's alarming is that this slump in purchasing power doesn't appear to be merely cyclical. Wages have been flat-lining for a long time now, the housing bubble isn't going to be reinflated anytime soon, and the upward pressure on oil prices is only going to mount. As in Roosevelt's time, we need a policy that boosts incomes and finds new solutions for our energy needs.
FDR's long-term income remedies included Social Security, the Wagner Act (which made it possible for many workers to join unions) and public works projects -- including a massive electrification of rural America. A comparable set of solutions today would include the passage of the Employee Free Choice Act, which would enable workers in nonexportable service-sector jobs to unionize without fear of being fired. It would include a massive, federally financed program to retrofit America, creating several million "green jobs" in the process.
On these issues, there's a clear difference between the two parties.
Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards and the congressional Democrats favor these measures; the Republicans oppose them (though John McCain at least has begun speaking about creating green jobs).
What Republicans favor is simply more tax cuts, which will do nothing to address our deeper problems of income distribution and energy dependence.
The second way in which the current downturn echoes the Depression is the role played by our deregulated financial sector. Now, as then, the financial foundations of our leading banks and other lending institutions have turned out to be made of mush. Now, as then, this news has come as an appalling surprise not just to consumers but to many of the banks themselves. Now, as then, the banks created such complex and deliberately opaque financial vehicles -- all devised to make them a buck every time they swapped some paper -- that they long ago lost track of the paper's true value.
In his time, Roosevelt, through the Securities and Exchange Act and other legislation, compelled banks to be both more prudent and transparent. Over the past 30 years, however, Wall Street has created a host of new, unregulated institutions (such as private equity companies) and devices (such as the bundled, and bungled, resale of mortgages into ever-larger investment pools). Now it's time to enforce some transparency and prudence regarding financial institutions that have been gambling with other people's money and lives.
When it comes to reining in Wall Street, however, the Democrats have been AWOL almost as much as the Republicans have been -- not least because their presidential candidates get so much money from Wall Street. By refusing to take on the Street, however, they forfeit what could be a potent issue this fall and lay the groundwork for yet another recession.
|
The old remedies won't work for this recession in this economy.
| 70.230769 | 0.846154 | 0.846154 |
high
|
medium
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/13/DI2008011302800.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008011619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/13/DI2008011302800.html
|
White House Watch - washingtonpost.com
|
2008011619
|
Dan is also deputy editor of Niemanwatchdog.org.
Dan Froomkin: Hi everyone and welcome to another White House chat!
My column today -- coming out very shortly, and titled "Bush, the Blessed Peacemaker" -- leads with President Bush's comments about himself to ABC's Terry Moran ("I'm sure people view me as a warmonger and I view myself as peacemaker," says Bush) and then goes on with more about his Middle East trip.
But there's some good stuff buried further below, too. Like the White House's latest explanation of the millions of e-mails reportedly missing from its (legally required) archives. In a statement that we only got because a federal magistrate demanded it, the White House now says, essentially: "What missing e-mails? We're looking into it. Get back to us later. ... Oh, and all the backups of White House servers made before October 2003 have been destroyed."
Here's how Tom Blanton, director of the National Security Archive, put it: "Two years after a special prosecutor concluded that key e-mails were missing from the White House system administered by the Office of Administration, the White House astonishingly now admits it has no back-up tapes from before October 2003 and doesn't know if any e-mails are missing."
And then there's the fact that I was supposed to be up against President Bush, who was doing the equivalent of a washingtonpost.com discussion on the White House Web site at this very moment. But quite suspiciously, the transcript of the "chat" appeared on the White House Web site more than two hours ago.
That's just from today's column -- and it's been two weeks since I was here last. I look forward to your comments and questions.
Silver Spring, Md.: I imagine you'll cover this in your column, but I just saw that the AP is reporting the White House reused the tapes containing the e-mails from 2003, which was "consistent with industry best practices." Obviously there isn't much recourse to recovering these e-mails, but what legal ramifications does this have for the White House?
washingtonpost.com: White House Recycles Backup E-Mail Tapes (AP, Jan. 16)
Dan Froomkin: I wouldn't give up on getting those e-mails recovered. I suspect that will be doable -- when and if the right people get access to the White House servers. What's nearly impossible is getting a straight answer out of the White House on the topic.
As for legal ramifications, this looks like negligence, at least at the beginning. If I were in the West Wing, I'd be much more worried about the other e-mail scandal. See my June 19 column, Casual Lawbreaking at the White House.
Boynton Beach, Fla.: As we finally get to the gun-lap year of this administration, do you see signs that Bush is just as anxious to get this presidency over with as are 70 percent of Americans?
Dan Froomkin: That would be 80 percent, thank you.
And from what I can see, Bush's emotional state has indeed changed. He seems even more self-aggrandizing and giddily optimistic these days than he did before.
Is that an act? (Has it always been an act?) If so, one reasonably might imagine that he's suffering from greater internal turmoil as the countdown clocks ticks away. Or is it for real, in which case he's more confident than ever?
Portland, Ore.: As a Federal employee of almost 20 years -- including a tour in Iraq -- I'm dismayed at how Bush's policies and leadership have ruined entire agencies, politicized science, and made contractual fraud, waste and abuse virtually a standard operating procedure. Besides living "it" eight hours a day, I'm an avid politics junkie who now can't even enjoy "Countdown with Keith Olbermann," let alone the myopically hacktacular "Meet the Press."
How do you follow our national catastrophe in such detail without resorting to your favorite vice full-time? Do you get a sense you have a ringside seat to the Fall of Rome without the incremental, hundreds of years part? Do you think eight years of the Crawford Coward is reversible? How many decades? Needless to say, I'm not optimistic that a national election will "change" our country enough, quickly enough.
Dan Froomkin: I'm hoping those are rhetorical questions, because I don't have nearly enough energy to respond point by point.
Berkeley, Calif.: Have the media pressed Bush to come clean about White House involvement in the Libby affair, now that the appeal route is closed?
Dan Froomkin: No. No no no no no. And this despite my brilliant column last month calling on my colleagues to do just that.
San Francisco: Any news on Susan Ralston? Is that investigation still going on? Is she cooperating with the Justice Department?
Dan Froomkin: A fine question. I long have thought Susan Ralston just might be the one to spill the beans on her former boss, Karl Rove.
The last I've heard was this Paul Singer story for Roll Call (subscription required), which said: "The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee is poised to dive back into the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal in coming weeks, according to several sources who say Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) has issued letters to a range of Abramoff associates seeking information about his contacts with the White House."
Singer wrote: "In May, Waxman's staff deposed Susan Ralston -- former assistant to White House political adviser Karl Rove, who announced his resignation in August -- about her contacts with Abramoff while she was in the White House. Ralston requested immunity before answering, and Waxman told his committee colleagues in a May 22 briefing memo that before considering immunity, 'we should seek to obtain information about the relationship between Mr. Abramoff and the White House from other sources.' "
Kingston, Ontario: Dan, re: self-aggrandizing: I read somewhere that the chief of staff (Bolten?) is required to start his morning meetings with the president by saying something like "thank you for the privilege of serving you this day." Can you confirm whether that's correct, and is it typical of the behavior Bush demands?
Dan Froomkin: Robert Draper reported in his book "Dead Certain" that chief of staff Josh Bolten does indeed tell Bush: "Thank you for the privilege of serving today" each morning. But I think that says more about Bolten than it does about Bush.
Then again it might say more about what Bolten knows about how to manage Bush. Which is his job.
Bush's Demeanor: He's given up on trying to please you and yours, and for the first time since the summer of 2001 he's free to speak his mind. He could run into the street and save a baby and its puppy from a speeding car, and you'd just stand there and call him a showboat ... so why not stop filtering?
Dan Froomkin: Thanks. That's a refreshing perspective -- and quite possibly exactly right. (Well, at least the first part. I'm not so sure about the second.)
West Union, Iowa: What's your take on how the upcoming FISA renewal will play out?
Dan Froomkin: I'm betting on Bush beating the Democrats into submission again. So far, that's been a safe bet.
Dan Froomkin: Bush, the Blessed Peacemaker is available for your reading pleasure.
Washington: What's going on with Dick Cheney these days? He seems to have assumed a very low profile. That's worrisome and makes me wonder what his office is up to (e.g. has he really given up on military action against Iran just because the NIE provides no support for it?)
Dan Froomkin: According to Bryan Bender of the Boston Globe, he has been beaten into full retreat by the combined efforts of Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.
Me, I won't count Cheney out until he's out the door. And maybe for a few months after that, even.
Seattle, Wash.: What happens to Bush's "bling" that he is amassing in the Middle East? If he gets to keep it, he could make three to four trips a year and pay for Iraq himself.
washingtonpost.com: 2003 White House gift list (The Smoking Gun, August 2004)
Dan Froomkin: Almost every gift given to the president is turned over to the National Archives, which does not sell them on eBay.
Berkeley, Calif.: In many columns you have complained about the failure of the White House press corps to "express outrage" when the White House stonewalls or is being plainly dishonest. What would "outrage" look like to you?
Dan Froomkin: Pointing out in a follow-up question that the earlier answer was in fact utterly nonresponsive, and asking again.
When that fails, asking why he thinks the American public doesn't deserve a straight answer.
Writing stories that start: "President Bush refused to say..." rather than finding something he did say and making it look like news.
Keeping "stonewall watches" front-and-center in print and online.
That's just off the tippy top of my head.
Napier, New Zealand: Hi Dan, I was wondering exactly how much Bush can commit the U.S. to treaty obligations without actually having a treaty approved by Congress. The arrogance of tying down the next president and not having to have the agreement scrutinized by Congress is pretty breath taking. Can he really do this sort of thing? Can't the next president just renegotiate such an agreement? Is the Supreme Court going to have to get involved eventually? And what has happened with the "pocket" veto stuff that Bush is trying to pull?
Dan Froomkin: Bush can't literally commit the U.S. to anything treaty-like without congressional approval, but he nevertheless can make it very difficult for his successor to undo certain things without considerable embarrassment. I think that's what's underlying this "long-term strategic partnership" with Iraq that Bush is pushing for. (See Michael Hirsh in Newsweek and me on Nov. 27.)
Dan Froomkin: As for the "pocket veto" it looks like Bush got away with it. Congress apparently will pass a new version, without the one item Bush objected to at the last minute.
Tempe, Ariz.: Wow, it's astonishing that Bush thinks he's viewed as "a hopeless idealist." Perhaps he doesn't know the difference between idealist and ideologue?
Dan Froomkin: Ha! Thanks. Yeah, maybe he just got tongue-tied.
Baltimore: Now that Dodd is off the campaign trail, he's sworn to filibuster FISA all by himself if he has to, if immunity stays in. How will the White House get around that?
Dan Froomkin: One man can filibuster only so long. We're talking about a real filibuster here, like "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington." Not one of these "pretend" ones that successfully have tied up all sorts of major Democratic priorities.
Arlington, Va.: "Stonewall Watch" -- I love it! How many things would be on the list right now, about 10? Seriously, Berkeley's question about the White House press corps' nonexpression of outrage -- and your answer to the question -- was terrific. Any thoughts as to why the press is so supine? Why there isn't a "stonewall watch"? I was in college in the late '60s/early '70s, and personally I don't understand why we aren't seeing huge nationwide student demonstrations on a daily basis to protest the rape of the U.S. by Bush and his cronies.
Dan Froomkin: Thanks. Re: Stonewall Watch -- I really was hoping that the Web would loosen up newspapers a bit, for instance by showing them that recurring features (even with a little repetition) are more valuable sometimes than incremental stories about, well, nothing. Especially when those features are animated with a passion for such journalistic values as transparency, truth in government, fair play and humane treatment.
But it has been one of my greatest sorrows, professionally speaking, that in fact the opposite has happened. There's even more rush for the minutiae, it seems like.
I'm not giving up hope, mind you. For more along these lines, see I.F. Stone's lessons for Internet journalism, an essay I wrote for the Nieman Foundation for Journalism.
Vienna, Va.: Hi Dan: This is not a question, just a comment. I found your subsection in Tuesday's White House Watch ("Bush and the Saudis"), in which the president was quoted as exhorting King Abdullah to increase oil production, very interesting when compared to this past Sunday's Washington Post Outlook "myth-buster" article on the oil market. In the article, it is asserted that the majority of our oil comes from Canada and Mexico.
If this is correct, then Bush is pressuring the wrong country, if he truly wants to ease the pocketbook pressure on the "average" American. Putting naivety aside, it obviously makes for better press coverage for the president to be disingenuous and use this as an opportunity to appear decisive and influential while on his Middle East junket.
washingtonpost.com: Five Myths About Breaking Our Foreign Oil Habit (Post, Jan. 13)
Dan Froomkin: In Bush's defense, oil prices are not a geographical phenomenon.
Here's how Bush himself put it yesterday: "Now in our case, just so the American people know, most of our oil comes from Canada and Mexico. But oil is a market, it's globalized, it's fungible. That's what I meant."
Brooklyn, N.Y.: Hi Dan -- many of us have given up on changing the current administration, or exposing and punishing the Bushie evildoers. Do you feel your energy flagging, and is at least part of you going to be sorry when we don't have Bush to kick around anymore?
Dan Froomkin: My energy is not flagging. I'm as fascinated as ever.
And to the extent that the column -- its tone and themes -- has been a reflection of Bush, it inevitably will change with the next president. But I'm sure I'll find lots of things to be fascinated by with the next crew as well.
Lititz, Pa.: Gaze into your crystal ball and predict what presidential pardons will come down in the 11th hour as Bush is leaving office. I know Bush has been particularly stingy in his pardons, but I imagine he might change is habits in the end. With regard to the backup tapes, what industry was the White House using as a standard? It's one thing to base your backup/archival strategy on a business that wants to provide protection for working documents and quite another to base it on an a standard that is required by law to retain records.
Dan Froomkin: The question of pardons is a fascinating one, and one I intend to address with great regularity as we get closer and closer to Jan. 20, 2009. In fact, I intend to involve you readers in putting together a "canonical list" of potential pardons. So start thinking. Be imaginative.
As for backup tapes, if the IT people had reason to believe that everything was being archived properly, then erasing backup tapes isn't as crazy as all that. They're mostly supposed to be used in case of catastrophic system failure.
My issue is more with the people who were overseeing the archiving process (although it may have been the same people).
New York: I understand what the rhetorical Portland questioner is on about. I grew up in Washington and have family who work for the government. Many of them have mentioned problems caused by the Bush administrations political appointees enforcing their ideology. It has made me think hard about voting for Hillary Clinton, because she knows how the government operates. It's going to take considerable forensic work to undo the damage, particularly at the Energy Department and the Department of the Interior. As for Bush himself, he seems to be completely flummoxed by the costume parade he's been on for the past week. It's amazing how when you see him or Condi on TV they seem to be in a parallel universe (like Bizarro World in the old Superman comics).
Dan Froomkin: Thanks. I think your point about forensic work is an excellent one, and I would be interested to hear the Democratic candidates discuss how they would go about that.
Seattle: The State of the Union address is coming up, and that was a surprise to a political junkie like me. I used to know when President Clinton's next big address was about to begin, but now I no longer care what Bush has to say because I can guess the entire speech in advance. Am I alone in this?
Dan Froomkin: Oh, no. I'm sure there will be lots of surprises. And it's on Monday night, Jan. 28.
Dan Froomkin: Thanks everyone for your great comments and questions. Sorry I couldn't get to more of them. See you again here in two weeks and every weekday afternoon at washingtonpost.com/whitehousewatch.
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.
|
White House Watch columnist Dan Froomkin takes your questions on the latest White House coverage.
| 216.4375 | 0.875 | 1.625 |
high
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/11/AR2008011102000.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008011619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/11/AR2008011102000.html
|
As Obama Rises, Old Guard Civil Rights Leaders Scowl
|
2008011619
|
There was a time in the not-too-distant past when "black president" was synonymous with "president of black America." That was the office to which Jesse Jackson appointed himself in the 1970s -- resigned to the fact that the actual presidency was out of reach. In 2003, Chris Rock wrote and directed "Head of State," a film about the first black man to win the presidency. (It was a comedy.) And in the ultimate concession, some African Americans have attempted to bestow the title of black president upon Bill Clinton -- a white man.
In the wake of his strong showing in the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary, Sen. Barack Obama has already permanently changed the meaning of that term. It is no longer an oxymoron or a quixotic in-joke. And this, perhaps more than anything else, explains his tortured relationship with black civil rights leaders.
The most amazing thing about the 2008 presidential race is not that a black man is a bona fide contender, but the lukewarm response he has received from the luminaries whose sacrifices made this run possible. With the notable exception of Joseph Lowry, the Southern Christian Leadership Conference veteran who gave a stirring invocation at Obama's Atlanta campaign rally in June and subsequently endorsed him, Obama has been running without much support from many of the most recognizable black figures in the political landscape.
That's because, positioned as he is between the black boomers and the hip-hop generation, Obama is indebted, but not beholden, to the civil rights gerontocracy. A successful Obama candidacy would simultaneously represent a huge leap forward for black America and the death knell for the reign of the civil rights-era leadership -- or at least the illusion of their influence.
The most recent example of the old guard's apparent aversion to Obama was Andrew Young's febrile YouTube ramblings about Bill Clinton being "every bit as black as Barack Obama" and his armchair speculation that Clinton had probably bedded more black women during his lifetime than the senator from Illinois -- as if racial identity could be transmitted like an STD. This could be dismissed as a random instance of a politician speaking out of turn were it not part of an ongoing pattern.
Last spring, Al Sharpton cautioned Obama "not to take the black vote for granted." Presumably he meant that the senator had not won over the supposed gatekeepers of the black electorate. Asked why he had not endorsed Obama, Sharpton replied that he would "not be cajoled or intimidated by any candidate." More recently Sharpton claimed on his radio show that the candidates' recent attention to issues of civil rights was a product of pressure from him.
Although Jackson is not entirely unfamiliar with the kind of thing that's happening to Obama -- Coretta Scott King endorsed Walter Mondale over him in 1984 -- he also got into the act. He criticized Obama for not championing the "Jena Six" cause -- the case of six young black men in Louisiana charged with beating a white classmate -- vigorously enough. After Obama's Iowa victory, Jackson demanded that the senator bolster "hope with substance."
Taken as a conglomerate, Jackson, Young, Sharpton and Georgia Rep. John Lewis represent a sort of civil rights old boy network -- a black boy network -- that has parlayed its dated activist credentials into cash and jobs. Jackson, a two-time presidential candidate, has become a CNN host; Young was mayor of Atlanta and sits on numerous corporate boards; and Lewis is essentially representative-for-life of the 5th Congressional District in Georgia. Sharpton is younger than the others but a peer in spirit.
To the extent that the term "leader" is applicable, these four men likely represent the interests of Democratic Party insiders more than those of the black community. Both Young and Lewis have endorsed Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton; Sharpton and Jackson have acted ambivalent, alternately mouthing niceties about Obama and criticizing his stances on black issues.
It may be that, because they doubt that he can actually win, the civil rights leaders are holding Obama at arm's length in an attempt to build their houses on what looks to be the firmer ground. And there are certainly patronage benefits should Clinton win. She owes black pols, starting with Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.), who first suggested that the party endorse her for a New York Senate seat. Rangel has also lined up behind Clinton.
There is far more to politics -- even racial politics -- than skin color. Still it is counterintuitive to think that Lewis, whose political career began when he was bludgeoned in Selma, Ala., fighting for black voting rights, is witnessing the rise of the first viable black presidential candidate and yet opts to support a white machine politician.
One of the most telling aspects of Young's YouTube commentary was his statement that he'd called his political connections in Chicago about Obama and been told "they don't know him." There are certainly reasons not to support Obama, but not having friends in common isn't one of them. Young went on to announce that Obama was too young and should wait until 2016 -- a curious statement considering that Young was apprenticed to Martin Luther King Jr., who was 26 when he launched the Montgomery bus boycotts that eventually toppled segregation.
|
There was a time in the not-too-distant past when "black president" was synonymous with "president of black America." That was the office to which Jesse Jackson appointed himself in the 1970s -- resigned to the fact that the actual presidency was out of reach. In 2003, Chris Rock wrote and directed...
| 16.253968 | 0.984127 | 61.015873 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/11/DI2008011102717.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008011619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/11/DI2008011102717.html
|
Outlook: Civil Rights Vets Won't Pass Torch to Obama
|
2008011619
|
"The most amazing thing about the 2008 presidential race is not that a black man is a bona fide contender, but the lukewarm response he has received from the luminaries whose sacrifices made this run possible. ... That's because, positioned as he is between the black boomers and the hip-hop generation, Obama is indebted, but not beholden, to the civil rights gerontocracy. A successful Obama candidacy would simultaneously represent a huge leap forward for black America and the death knell for the reign of the civil rights-era leadership -- or at least the illusion of their influence."
Spelman College associate professor of history William Jelani Cobb was online Tuesday, Jan. 15 at noon ET to discuss his Outlook article examining how the specter of irrelevancy has made some of the nation's most prominent blacks unwilling or reticent to support Barack Obama's presidential bid.
Archive: Transcripts of discussions with Outlook article authors
Centreville, Va.: I want to thank you for your article on Sunday. It was dead on to what my husband and I have been talking about. African Americans do have to make a decision about new leadership, something I think many young black Americans 35 and below have been longing for.
William Jelani Cobb: Thank you. I'm glad you found the piece useful. It seems to have been a subject that was on a number of people's minds.
Laurel, Md.: Don't polling data show that blacks who are children of civil rights-era immigrants (like Mr. Obama) have a very different view of what it means to be black in America that the descendants of former slaves and segregation victims? Is there a credibility gap to his assertions about what it's like to "be black in America" when (the black part) of his family's history only dates to the mid-20th century in the Land of Lincoln?
William Jelani Cobb: I can't respond to polling data specifically, but I definitely think that there is a generational and historical shift. That said, I don't think the "black" experience ever has been monolithic. Obama may have an unusual variant of it, but it is not necessarily a unique one.
Westbury, N.Y.: Good Morning: I'm wondering if what you mention -- with regards to the old guard and their reluctance to cede turf -- is something you're finding in the area of public intellectuals? "The Devil & Dave" is a great read! Prosper.
William Jelani Cobb: I think that's kind of an apples-and-oranges situation. For better or worse the "public intellectual" arena is probably more democratic than our political ones are.
Silver Spring, Md.: Please help me understand why these black leaders are in love with Bill Clinton. Could you tell me what Bill Clinton has done to lift up African Americans? I can't understand why we owe him or his wife anything. Please correct me if I am wrong, but the three strikes law and welfare reform was created by Bill Clinton. Also, education and health care didn't improve under Bill Clinton.
William Jelani Cobb: I think Bill Clinton has gotten a great deal of traction from his social affinity for black folk -- an affinity that does not necessarily parallel his policy prerogatives. in addition to the points you raise, we also had the specter of Clinton hanging Jocelyn Elders and Lani Guinier out to dry.
Centreville, Va.: How do we educate black America on the fact that Obama can't and shouldn't turn into Rev. Sharpton in this campaign?
William Jelani Cobb: I don't think we're in danger of Obama turning into Sharpton. They have fundamentally different operating modes and agendas. Moreover, Obama has an actual constituency he has to answer to -- Sharpton does not.
Washington: I think you are right on target -- the torch has passed to a new generation of Black leaders like Cory Booker in Newark, Deval Patrick in Massachusetts and our own Adrian Fenty, each of whom attempt to transcend the issue of race. I think the "politics of protest" era is nearing the end and a new more inclusive and non-racial politics is taking its place.
William Jelani Cobb: I agree that there is a new generation on the landscape, but I don't think that the era of protest is over. Unfortunately we still have racial outrages that occur with some regularity (remember we were reading about nooses only a few weeks ago). What I do think is over, or at least nearing its end, is the era of a particular brand of self-aggrandizing, self-interested protest leader.
New York: The Jackson/Young crowd seems to capitalize on their past struggles. Have they sold out to the Clintons and the Democratic Party Machine, at the same time abandoning the black cause?
William Jelani Cobb: I think that Young, Jackson, et al have made a mistake that many long-term leaders make in confusing their own interests with those of the people they are supposed to represent.
Jackson, for the record, has endorsed Obama. But it is the most tepid and ambivalent of endorsements, one that certainly seems motivated by his need to continue the illusion of relevance.
Suffolk, Va.: If Martin Luther King Jr. were alive today, would he have approved of his surrogates' attempts to derail the dream that he saw at the mountain top?
William Jelani Cobb: I think it's hard to know how King would have viewed this situation. It's much easier simply to look at the stands that Jackson, Lewis & Co. took 40 years ago and compare them to where they are now. At some point they became a key part of the establishment they once were protesting, and obviously that creates tangles of personal and political contradictions.
Atlanta: Why did you belittle the civil rights veterans by calling them "boys"? They proved their manhood before you even were conceived by facing the threat of violence with unwavering courage. Please explain yourself.
William Jelani Cobb: Interesting. Had I called them an "old boy" network no one wouldn't have noticed. I could've called them "brothers," and that's not technically accurate either. It was a turn of phrase used, for the record, by another black person. Relax.
Durango, Colo.: But such is the nature of movements. Johnson was the last of the New Deal-era presidents; Carter wasn't and Clinton definitely wasn't. The end seems to be at hand for Goldwater-Reagan conservatives; not one of the candidates has the ability to hold together that coalition. And it is, sadly, the nature of organizations -- not that the Civil Rights Activists are an organization -- is to do everything within their power to defend themselves and assure their own survival. Each era needs a leader to form its coalition. Era-changing elections are about who will identify those who are ready to coalesce, and bringing them together.
William Jelani Cobb: I think you make a valid point. The thing is, though, this story didn't have to play itself out this way. Had that earlier generation taken an active role in bringing the next along as opposed to adopting a choke hold on authority we wouldn't have be having this conversation. How different would Jesse Jackson's legacy have been if he had said in 1992 that his goal was to produce 200 black civic, business, arts and community leaders as opposed to desperate attempts to keep himself in the spotlight?
New York: Why is Barack Obama (for whom I will probably vote) considered a black man? His father is black, his mother is white. He is just as much a white man as he is a black man.
William Jelani Cobb: Identity is largely something self-constructed. He is a black man because, quite simply, his skin color and phenotype would ensure that he would encounter the same life conditions -- for better or worse -- that other "black" people would. The overwhelming majority of "blacks" in this country have significant white ancestry, but no one had difficulty deciding who to put on the back of the bus either.
Arlington, Va.: Joseph Califano wrote a very interesting editorial in today's paper on how Dr. King and President Johnson worked together to move our country. Do you think Sen. Clinton botched it in her presentation of trying to say the presidency has been important too in moving our country ahead in human/civil rights? Do you think many older civil rights leaders have trouble giving up leadership to new strong leaders?
William Jelani Cobb: I think -- in our era of sound-bites and 24-hour news cycles -- that it was a treacherous comparison, andthat it would have been politically wiser to steer clear of it entirely.
Philadelphia: Just wanted to say how much I appreciated the insight and careful thought that was demonstrated in your article. It was provocative without being inflammatory, and unwaveringly honest without being mean-spirited. And despite the strong and passionate ideas of the piece, it didn't seems to have an "agenda." You put into words what I had been thinking for weeks now, and I'm happy to see the truth there in, uh, black and white.
William Jelani Cobb: Thank you. I'm glad you appreciated the article.
Upper Marlboro, Md.: Great article Mr. Cobb! It was very refreshing to read the truth that not all so-called black leaders are excited about Obama because of their allegiance to the Democratic Party. I especially liked the line "these four men likely represent the interests of the Democratic Party insiders more than those of the Black community." I have believed this for some time now and am very glad to know others feel the same. Shame on our so-called leaders who continue to sell us out to the Democratic Party.
William Jelani Cobb: Thank you. I appreciate your perspective.
Washington: You said if I was weary now, I would be exhausted by November, and boy were you right! What do you make of this latest skirmish between the Clinton and Obama camps? It seems to me that the accusation that Obama is "playing the race card" is far more damaging than the drug issue or the Iraq issue because it tarnishes his clean (and let's face it, colorblind) image. It would be hard to turn Obama into Al Sharpton/Jesse Jackson, but the whole "race card" thing could tap into a well of resentment and defensiveness amongst white voters (especially with moderately inclined independents, who might oppose affirmative action and other similar policies). As you said, if Clinton is going to lose the black vote anyway, it might be in her interest to keep these issues in the news.
William Jelani Cobb: Well, I think the real issue is that even if Clinton wins the nomination, she might well have alienated so many black voters that they'll ignore her in the general election. It was extremely tone-deaf to have Bob Johnson, who is reviled widely in the black community, deliver a proxy attack on Obama. It almost certainly solidified the perception that the blacks supporting her are doing so out of self-interest, not community interest.
Philadelphia: For someone who also is sandwiched between the black boomers and the hip-hop nation, I agree with your comments 100 percent. The older civil rights leaders need to sit down now. Their work was greatly appreciated, but it is time for another generation to use the tools of today to advance our agenda.
William Jelani Cobb: It's difficult to present that argument without sounding disrespectful -- and that was my intention. But I agree with your sentiment that it is time to move toward new models of leadership.
Washington: I was really appalled by Andrew Young's statements. Has he recanted in any way? What do you think about Bob Johnson's thinly veiled attempt to reference Obama's past drug use? I would argue Johnson is in no position to judge considering his history of showing exploitative material on his network.
William Jelani Cobb: Bob Johnson is the last person Hillary should be on a stage with if she is trying to attract black voters. Lots of black folks loathe what his network stands for and the images it promotes. I think that attack he launched did more to harm the Clinton campaign than it did to Obama's.
Boise, Idaho: In your opinion, what do you think the black community sees in the Clinton campaign that they don't see in the Obama campaign?
William Jelani Cobb: I don't know that that is the best way of viewing it. I think that lots of black folk were skeptical that Obama could win with white voters and thereby went to Clinton in hopes that they wouldn't "throw their vote away," to use a phrase I heard. That view changed dramatically after Iowa.
Takoma Park, Md.: Interesting piece. I wonder, did the same thing ever happen when America's Founding Fathers were getting old and gray? Was there a young rising star who bent them out of shape? Which Founding Father was the bitterest? Which was the most responsive to the new currents?
William Jelani Cobb: Good question. Interestingly enough, we saw a similar kind of thing with the Founders -- especially those who aligned themselves with the Federalist Party. By the end of the War of 1812, they were well on their way to political obsolescence, while Jefferson-influenced Republicans became essentially heirs to a one-party state. Andrew Jackson's rise -- particularly in the election of 1824 -- is probably the closest we come to seeing an upstart who shook up the early political establishment (and helped form an entirely new political order).
Laurel, Md.: My point exactly. It's disgusting to see and hear some of the things that are being said. Where are the so-called black leaders who have been saying for years that we need to help each other stay on course and that we are our brothers' keepers? Where are the leaders who spoke all that garbage at the State of the Black Union address? They all have their personal agenda. I believe and feel that our ancestors are with Barack Obama and will continue to shine the light through the dark path ahead.
William Jelani Cobb: Thank you for your perspective. I agree with much of what you've said.
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.
|
Spelman College associate professor of history William Jelani Cobb discusses his Outlook article examining how the specter of irrelevancy has made some of the nation's most prominent blacks unwilling or reticent to support Barack Obama's presidential bid.
| 71.25 | 0.975 | 24.525 |
high
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/america/2008/01/welcome_home_want_change.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008011619id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/america/2008/01/welcome_home_want_change.html
|
PostGlobal on washingtonpost.com
|
2008011619
|
One thing we, as Americans, have trouble understanding is that change comes in many, many flavors.
The best kind of change is continuous and unavoidable. Even in the time I write this sentence, our continent will move hairs of millimeters closer to Africa and Europe. In this slow, unavoidable manner, racism is being slowly drained from America. We all have a ways to go, but any good change takes decades, even centuries, to complete. In fact, we do not even notice effective change.
Then there are flash changes, which are almost always bad because they are almost always ill-thought. Moving quickly and violently is not anywhere near as effective as moving slowly and methodically. Opinions of people in a rapid change do not change as quickly, hence our partisanism. We believe in something blindly, since our brains cannot process deep-seated alterations to our world quickly enough to keep up.
So when you talk about change, what exactly are you talking about?
Every candidate has a change sale for us. They make us believe that a year after getting into office, they will be able to fix all the problems plaguing America. They have to, they have a maximum of eight years, pending public approval, to effect change. Unfortunately for the public, our deep divisions cause any root change to be uprooted in the next election as our pendulum swings from right to left and back again. These fleeting, flashing changes are ineffective, mostly harmful, and wholly disgusting on the larger part.
It does not help that we, as Americans, are subject to an incredibly stressful lifestyle that is more suited to adaptability than to long-distance evolution. Our world's technology is moving at such a rapid pace that, without an incredibly flexible and adaptable mind, we would simply not be able to keep up with all the advancements in modern life. Couple that to a culture which is, on the whole, based deep in a religion of conflict, and you have a people who are subject to quick, decisive, almost violent change while still maintaining our roots to long-held traditions.
As I have said before, Americans are, in spirit, a warrior people. We are more like Spartans than Athenians, more like Norsemen than the Swiss, and more like the English than the Swedes. Deep rooted in our culture, deeper than even our religions, skin color, and social identity is a deeply held set of American values that are reflexive, reactive, courageous and often violent. We rarely recognize these roots in our system because we in America rarely indentify with people outside America often. And I think other people are too polite to bring it up. But there is something in Americans that is both romantic and frightening to the rest of the world.
In effect, our honor is based on courage, tenacity, fearlessness, individuality, upfrontedness, discipline, and strategic adaptability. These are what we most admire, and why our candidates, though they stress change, fear being called "weak." The world over admires us for this, takes this from our culture and markets it as American. This base culture is incredibly intriguing to most of the world's people who have not regularly dealt with Americans. Our universal dislike of Al'Qaida, Hezbollah, and other like military forces is rarely that they are fighting, but that they are cowards. In short, America's military presence in the world is disliked, but the fact that we rarely hide that presence and stand in the open to face our enemies is a long-dying tradition not much adhered to in the face of our strength.
But these same values are also frightening and apalling to those same people who romanticized our culture. These views I have expressed are certainly not the views of a peaceful negotiator, but of a military strategist or warrior. Everything an American at his roots tends to perceive is a war, a war physically, socially, or mentally. Everything is a battle to be won, a trial to face down, an affront to whatever our pet issues are farther up the surface from our deeply held belief in conflict. None of my international friends (sans British, Australians, and Canadians to a degree) have displayed this root behavior at the bottom of their foundations. They found their lives more on oneness with their environments (social more than atmospheric), harmony, understanding, diplomacy, religion, servitude, nihilism, and other such. Depending on where you are, different attitudes are instilled in the basest heart of mens' hearts. But only in America is the culture of warfare so deep seated and so permeating.
I am not saying this in an effort to change our identity as American people. Our foundations have made us who we are in the world for generations upon generations of venerated warriors. Our most famous citizens, those we venerate most, are known for their bravery, tenacity, and relentless pursuit of their conflict. This is the root, and it will doubtful ever change.
I write all these thoughts above simply because change is a word our candidates can sling around for the benefit of their own conflicts without changing anything. We are all warriors, all fiercely fighting the world around us in order to make it a step higher up some mountain we cannot perceive. From this, we draw our identity as Americans far beyond our birth in these borders.
The change these candidates propose is largely cosmetic. If you wish to exact true change in our system, you will have to look in the mirror and understand what you are at the deepest core of your being. What will you fight for? What will you die for? What are you prepared to pour ever fiber of your soul into in order to change?
Do you think these candidates have done that? Have Clinton, Obama, McCain, Guiliani, all of them boiled away the layer of lies, wishful thinking, and international appearances to take a hard look at themselves? Are they not simply strong, but American strong?
Let me be frank. The world needs America because the world has very few people left who are so remarkably adaptable and still obsessed with their cause. Our President needs to reflect this. They must have the key ingredients to a sucessful American success. An iron will (not a heart of gold), an inner strength (not an outer source), a quick mind that forms a strategy of actions (not a reactive mind that does not consider all battlefield considerations), and a dogged determination to do what must be done (not necessarily to whine about the impossible). Are these those candidates? Who amongst them is the strongest, the most steel-hearted, fiery souled, tempered-minded, and honorably disciplined candidate?
I'm sure we all have different answers, but this all relates back to the subject of change and the way they throw it around on a campaign. Do not be fooled. These are not changes they propose. These are adaptive strategies, some better thought out than others. Analyze the strategies and those they come from. Forget what these people are and understand who they are. Are they sniveling panderers or are they capable of something truly principled and steel-hearted? Can they react well? We will never predict the future, much to every candidate's dismay. All we can do is react to changing circumstances.
What we do know is that we have understood ourselves wrong. George W Bush does not react intelligently to immediate difficulties. His strategies have proven to be largely incorrect and misguided. Of course he is devoted doggedly to a cause (as are most Americans) but he has no idea how to get there. Whatever his place in the hierarchy of our society, he was not meant to be our leader because, though he is admirably tenacious and willful, he is not intelligent. But would a more "understanding" candidate be any better? If you are intelligent and reactive but lack vision, you are also not a suitable leader. Determination to a well-thought plan is the hallmark of American leadership.
Above all this election season, never forget who you are at your core. If we understood each other at our base, I am fairly certain that the entire world would get along much better than it does. We are expected to be the world's peacekeepers, but we fare poorly as their peacemakers. Remember that you, as an American, have been born into a world that is at war with you, wherever you are and whatever you do. It is a mindset, a lifestyle, that differentiates us from much of the world. So shrug aside the talk of change. Change is useless. Only strategy is effective, and the way I see it, I think our candidates owe us a lot more strategy than we are seeing from them.
I, for one, am a bit frustrated at how the election race has reduced me to hearing buzz words and tabloid gossip from candidates rather than hearing more about their strategy for success. They treat us like children who cannot feasibly understand the complexities of their minds. We are not this foolish, nor is the world. Tell me what you plan to do to fix the situation and be prepared for an arguement from your detractors.
But don't you candidates dare cloak your campaign and hide as cowards from an honest debate. It isn't a trait Americans look up to, hiding in the face of a conflict. Bring your best plan to the table and be ready for war. Is it too much to ask?
|
America on PostGlobal; blog of politics and current events on washingtonpost.com. Visit http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/america/
| 124.2 | 0.4 | 0.4 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/susan_jacoby/2008/01/blank_slate.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008011619id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/susan_jacoby/2008/01/blank_slate.html
|
OnFaith on washingtonpost.com
|
2008011619
|
I've always been interested in the seven deadly sins--in purely intellectual fashion, of course--because so many of them are not sins at all unless taken to excess and extremes. Pride, for example, is not necessarily a sin (or a moral offense, in secular terms) in my book, but it can be an enormous moral failing when it leads to a reckless overestimation of one's abilities and a reckless undervaluation of the cost to others. Does anyone remember a president who declared, "Mission Accomplished," and the huge death toll that came afterward? This was nothing more than overweening pride--the sort of pride that makes you stupid--in action.
But pride can also be a powerful force for good, if rightly directed toward genuine wisdom and achievement. Many Christian theologians now consider pride the original sin--the vanity of a man and woman wanting to know what only God had the right to know. (This definition of pride as the original sin was one of the first teachings that undermined Christianity for me.) I say brava to Eve for being tempted by the fruit of the tree of knowledge. But then, I am not a Christian or a religious believer, and I regard the story of the so-called sin in the Garden of Eden as a metaphor for growing up.
Lust isn't a sin either, unless it consumes one's life and is forced on someone who does not return our erotic desire. Anger too can be a righteous force if modified by personal self-discipline and civil law. When I was younger, I might have said that sloth was a sin, except it now occurs to me, in a society of people driven mad by the need to work (or appear as if they're working) 24/7, that a certain amount of sloth is a genuine virtue.
That leaves envy, gluttony, and greed. Although there's nothing good to be said on behalf of gluttony and greed (and American society is certainly filled with both), it seems to me that envy is the most prevalent and destructive of all sins. Anyone who has ever experienced envy knows that it is a sickening and unproductive feeling. Envy is often confused with jealousy, which is usually based on the fear that one is going to lose a love object to someone else. Envy is more pervasive, and it often has nothing to do with another person "taking away" what you believe is rightfully yours.
Envy assumes that there is only a finite amount of success, or love, or pleasure and that someone else's achievement inevitably comes at my expense. Envy is looking at glowing reviews of another writer's book and feeling that those reviews somehow mean that your own book won't get its due. Envy is not feeling the loss of a specific man to another woman, but looking at any happily married couple and feeling that their happiness somehow makes it less possible for you to be happy. Envy, in a politician, is looking at another candidate and concluding that he (or she) is a spinner of "fairy tales" instead of someone who has beaten you by offering a better vision for the future. Envy means wanting to tear others down instead of to build yourself up. I am certain, for example, that the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, were motivated by a compound of envy and hatred. Bringing down the World Trade Center, a symbol of successful western capitalism, obviously did nothing to help the millions of Muslims who live in poverty around the world because their countries are run by religious fanatics or oil-rich oligarchs. But the attack certainly showed those greedy westerners that they could be brought low!
Envy is also intimately related to fear--the fear that there just aren't enough good things to go around. If goodness is finite, then it naturally follows that anyone else's success diminishes my possibilities. In Othello, Shakespeare paints what is probably the greatest portrait of envy in western literature, in the character of Iago. Iago is not jealous of Othello; he is envious because Othello enjoys the respect and love that the mean-spirited Iago can never possess. Iago simply uses Desdemona to arouse Othello's sexual jealousy.
In his Agamemnon, Aeschylus wrote that "it is in the character of very few men to honor without envy a friend who has prospered." In democratic societies, the vice of envy is often extended to entire groups. If an upper middle class parent's child doesn't get into the college of his or her choice, it must be because someone else has gained an unfair advantage by virtue of his race, his parent's greater wealth...you name it. Of course there really are groups who enjoy unfair advantages, and it is the business of politics, insofar as possible, to level the playing field. But the way to level the playing field is to build everyone up, not to tear one group down.
Envy is the worst moral failing of all; one only needs to recall envious feelings to realize that they corrupt hope, love, and ambition--in an individual or a society.
And now for something completely different (although racial and ethnic bigotry are often rooted in envy):
There were a number of comments on various threads, including mine, last week indicating that it was high time for Jews to "get over" or "forgive" the Holocaust. All I can say, given that I have spoken out forcefully against Jewish neoconservatives who uncompromisingly support all Israeli goverment policies, is that these comments go a long way toward explaining the anger that fuels Jewish neoconservatism. I do not believe that the Holocaust can or should serve as the primary basis for Jewish identity today. But Jews, who, along with Gypsies, were the only people systematically targeted by the Nazis for group extermination, cannot and should not forget what happened. I was shocked to the core by the anti-Semitism of some bloggers, including one who said that "liberal Jews" had been sent to the gas chambers. The whole point of the Nazi war against the Jews was that all Jews were targeted for death. Liberal Jews and conservative Jews, rich Jews and poor Jews, religious Jews and secular Jews, were herded into the gas chambers together. Decent Christians understand this.
I wish that all of the indecent anti-Semitic bloggers who weighed in with their bigotry and ignorance would simply take their hatred elsewhere, to the many blogs for right-wing nutcases that exist on the Web. Your vicious bile is the equivalent of graffiti scrawled on synagogue walls and it is regrettable that the Internet offers you the opportunity to broadcast your stupidity, prejudice--and yes, envy--under the cloak of anonymity. The same goes for those of you who use this thread to paint a picture of all Muslims as terrorists, murderers, etc., ad nauseam. Arguing about religion and criticizing other beliefs (including atheism) is fine. Lumping together all members of any group as vile human beings is not. I've said this before and I'll say it again: it is the essence of cowardice to broadcast slander and bigotry without having to account for it by using your real name. You people don't have the guts to use the First Amendment as it was intended to be used--to allow citizens not only to express any views they want but to express their views openly, under their own names, and be held accountable for them. There are so many thoughtful commentators on this thread--people who disagree as well as agree with what I have to say--that it's a pity they have to share this forum with no-name, know-nothing bigots.
|
Susan Jacoby on OnFaith; Visit http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/susan_jacoby/
| 186.625 | 0.25 | 0.25 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/15/AR2008011504090.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008011619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/15/AR2008011504090.html
|
Station Chief Made Appeal To Destroy CIA Tapes
|
2008011619
|
The tapes had been sitting in the station chief's safe, in the U.S. Embassy compound, for nearly three years. Although those involved in the interrogations had pushed for the tapes' destruction in those years and a secret debate about it had twice reached the White House, CIA officials had not acted on those requests. This time was different.
The CIA had a new director and an acting general counsel, neither of whom sought to block the destruction of the tapes, according to agency officials. The station chief was insistent because he was retiring and wanted to resolve the matter before he left, the officials said. And in November 2005, a published report that detailed a secret CIA prison system provoked an international outcry.
Those three circumstances pushed the CIA's then-director of clandestine operations, Jose A. Rodriguez Jr., to act against the earlier advice of at least five senior CIA and White House officials, who had counseled the agency since 2003 that the tapes should be preserved. Rodriguez consulted CIA lawyers and officials, who told him that he had the legal right to order the destruction. In his view, he received their implicit support to do so, according to his attorney, Robert S. Bennett.
In a classified response to the station chief, Rodriguez ordered the tapes' destruction, CIA officials say. The Justice Department and the House intelligence committee are now investigating whether that deed constituted a violation of law or an obstruction of justice. John A. Rizzo, the CIA's acting general counsel, is scheduled to discuss the matter in a closed House intelligence committee hearing scheduled for today.
According to interviews with more than two dozen current and former U.S. officials familiar with the debate, the taping was conducted from August to December 2002 to demonstrate that interrogators were following the detailed rules set by lawyers and medical experts in Washington, and were not causing a detainee's death.
The principal motive for the tapes' destruction was the clandestine operations division's worry that the tapes' fate could be snatched out of their hands, the officials said. They feared that the agency could be publicly shamed and that those involved in waterboarding and other extreme interrogation techniques would be hauled before a grand jury or a congressional inquiry -- a circumstance now partly unfolding anyway.
"The professionals said that we must destroy the tapes because they didn't want to see the pictures all over television, and they knew they eventually would leak," said a former agency official who took part in the discussions before the tapes were pulverized. The presence of the tapes in Bangkok and the CIA's communications with the station chief there were described by current and former officials.
Congressional investigators have turned up no evidence that anyone in the Bush administration openly advocated the tapes' destruction, according to officials familiar with a set of classified documents forwarded to Capitol Hill. "It was an agency decision -- you can take it to the bank," CIA Director Michael V. Hayden said in an interview on Friday. "Other speculations that it may have been made in other compounds, in other parts of the capital region, are simply wrong."
Many of those involved recalled conversations in which senior CIA and White House officials advised against destroying the tapes, but without expressly prohibiting it, leaving an odd vacuum of specific instructions on a such a politically sensitive matter. They said that Rodriguez then interpreted this silence -- the absence of a decision to order the tapes' preservation -- as a tacit approval of their destruction.
"Jose could not get any specific direction out of his leadership" in 2005, one senior official said. Word of the resulting destruction, one former official said, was greeted by widespread relief among clandestine officers, and Rodriguez was neither penalized nor reprimanded, publicly or privately, by then-CIA Director Porter J. Goss, according to two officials briefed on exchanges between the two men.
"Frankly, there were more important issues that needed to be focused on, such as trying to preserve a critical [interrogation] program and salvage relationships that had been damaged because of the leaks" about the existence of the secret prisons, said a former agency official familiar with Goss's position at the time.
|
In late 2005, the retiring CIA station chief in Bangkok sent a classified cable to his superiors in Langley asking if he could destroy videotapes recorded at a secret CIA prison in Thailand that in part portrayed intelligence officers using simulated drowning to extract information from suspected...
| 16.44898 | 0.632653 | 1.081633 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/15/AR2008011503968.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008011619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/15/AR2008011503968.html
|
A Piece of the Dream
|
2008011619
|
Every year the nation celebrates one man's birthday like no other's -- with song and poetry, breakfasts and rallies, parades that quicken the heart and films that well the eyes with tears.
Yesterday, the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. would have been 79.
If he could peer across the national landscape, he would see some 125 schools named after him, at least 770 streets, the vast majority of them concentrated in the South, where he fought the hardest -- and resistance was greatest -- to change America.
If King could look out on the presidential campaign trail, he would see a woman and an African American leading the field of Democratic candidates. But over the past several days, he also would have noticed something else -- a bristling debate about leadership in the streets vs. leadership in the suites, as King's onetime lieutenant Jesse Jackson might have framed it.
Here's how Sen. Hillary Clinton got the debate rolling while campaigning in New Hampshire last week: "Dr. King's dream began to be realized when President Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964." She added: "It took a president to get it done."
It is partly a testament to how revered King remains that such a comment would have triggered a backlash among so many African Americans and civil rights veterans.
"I think African Americans do not want to see Dr. King tossed around," says Marc Morial, president of the National Urban League, who is neutral in the presidential contest. "That is the status Dr. King has earned -- not only among African Americans but among folks of all kind. Martin Luther King is not a political symbol to be used in a campaign for president."
Though Sen. Barack Obama also has used him.
To rebut one of Clinton's arguments against his candidacy, Obama said in a New Hampshire speech: "False hopes would mean when King was standing on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, that he should have said to those crowds around the Reflecting Pool, 'Go home, the dream has died. It's not going to happen. False hopes.' "
In one sense, as longtime civil rights activist Lawrence Guyot observed, it is "absolutely ludicrous" to debate the necessity of presidential leadership in enacting civil rights legislation. "There was no one who was in the civil rights movement who disagreed with that thrust," says Guyot, the former chairman of the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party and longtime member of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee.
But Guyot adds that the subtleties of pride and credit were missed by Clinton.
"If Hillary were not concerned about demonizing Obama, some of her advisers could have told her: 'You don't want to be affiliated with a position that says, somehow Lyndon Johnson took over Martin Luther King's dream and got it done.' The whole civil rights movement was united on one position -- you have to have federal involvement."
|
Every year the nation celebrates one man's birthday like no other's -- with song and poetry, breakfasts and rallies, parades that quicken the heart and films that well the eyes with tears.
| 15.432432 | 1 | 37 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/16/AR2008011602202.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008011619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/16/AR2008011602202.html
|
White House Says It Routinely Overwrote E-Mail Tapes From 2001 to 2003
|
2008011619
|
During the period in question, the Bush presidency faced some of its biggest controversies, including the Iraq war, the leak of former CIA officer Valerie Plame Wilson's name and the CIA's destruction of interrogation videotapes.
White House spokesman Tony Fratto said he has no reason to believe any e-mails were deliberately destroyed.
From 2001 to October 2003, the White House's practice was to use the same backup tape each day to copy new as well as old e-mails, he said, making it possible that some of those e-mails could still be recovered even from a tape that was repeatedly overwritten. "We are continuing to analyze our systems," Fratto said last night.
The court filing said tapes were recycled before October 2003, and at that point, the White House "began preserving and storing all backup tapes."
Two federal statutes require presidential communications, including e-mails involving senior White House aides, to be preserved for the nation's historical record, and some historians responded to the court disclosure yesterday by urging that the White House's actions be thoroughly probed.
"There certainly could have been hugely important materials there . . . and of course they're not owned by President Bush or anybody in the administration, they're owned by the public," said presidential historian and author Robert Dallek. "Given how secretive this administration has been, it of course fans the flames and suspicions about what has been destroyed here. I hope we'll get an investigation."
The White House's electronic record-keeping system has been under scrutiny for months by congressional Democrats and is the subject of several lawsuits, one of which prompted the latest disclosures. The administration has previously acknowledged problems with the White House archiving system, but until Tuesday had not disclosed its practice of recycling backup tapes before 2003.
Although the White House said in the filing that its practice of recording over the tapes ceased after October 2003, it added that even some e-mails transmitted through the end of 2005 might not have been fully preserved. "At this stage, this office does not know" whether additional e-mails are missing, said the affidavit filed minutes before a court-ordered deadline of midnight Tuesday night by Theresa Payton, chief information officer in the White House Office of Administration.
The White House disclosure was filed with the D.C. District Court in response to a lawsuit filed by two advocacy groups, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and the National Security Archive, which alleged that millions of e-mail messages sent between 2003 and 2005 are missing from White House servers.
CREW filed the lawsuit after a confidential informant asserted that an undisclosed study by the White House Office of Administration concluded that e-mails involving certain officials were missing from particular days in that period. The lawsuit was primarily meant to force the White House to release a copy of the study.
Payton's affidavit confirmed that a chart prepared by an official whom she did not name "appears to have concluded" that White House records contain no e-mails from certain days or a "lower-than-expected" number on certain days. She said her office has "so far been unable to replicate its results or affirm the correctness of the assumptions underlying it."
|
E-mail messages sent and received by White House personnel during the first three years of the Bush administration were routinely recorded on tapes that were "recycled," the White House's chief information officer said in a court filing this week.
| 13.804348 | 0.826087 | 1.913043 |
low
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/washingtonpostinvestigations/2008/01/new_disclosure_on_farm_program.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008011619id_/http://blog.washingtonpost.com/washingtonpostinvestigations/2008/01/new_disclosure_on_farm_program.html
|
New Disclosure on Farm Programs
|
2008011619
|
POSTED: 12:17 PM ET, 01/16/2008 by The Editors
The Washington Post reported last month that a Department of Agriculture loan program created to spur rural development had cost taxpayers at least $1.5 billion in losses, created few new jobs, undercut some existing businesses and suffered from a lack of oversight.
But the department refused to release the names of the companies receiving the loans and the amount of their losses, saying that the businesses could be harmed.
Now, The Post's Gilbert M. Gaul reports, the department has reversed its decision and agreed to make the information public after a legal appeal by the newspaper.
The data, received yesterday, show that the USDA suffered more than $209 million in losses between fiscal years 2000-2006 in its Business & Industry Guaranteed Loan Program, and recovered some portion of the bad loans in less than 1 in 5 cases. The 344 loans resulted in an average loss to taxpayers of nearly $608,000.
The Business & Industry Guaranteed Loan Program is the USDA's biggest and most popular program aimed at spurring jobs and economic development in Rural America. Although the loans are underwritten by private banks and other lenders, the USDA may agree to back up to 90 percent of the face value of the loan. If the loan goes bad, the agency covers most of the lender's loss and then tries to recover the collateral, if any.
The program's loss ratio since the 1970s far exceeds that for commercial loans and comparable government loan programs. In some cases, loans have gone to companies that have been in and out of bankruptcy or have checkered pasts.
The newly released data show that one-quarter of the USDA-backed loans that resulted in losses occurred in just four states --Louisiana, Pennsylvania, Missouri and Michigan. Nearly 14 percent of the loans -- or 44 loans -- resulted in losses to taxpayers of $1 million or more. The largest loss of $15.6 million was for a USDA-backed loan to the Pacific Northwest Sugar Company, LLC, in Moses Lake, Wash.
The Post previously reported that the Washington state delegation lobbied the agency to guarantee the loan even though the borrower was in default on existing loans. Within months the plant defaulted on its goverment-backed loan leaving taxpayer with a huge loss.
The investigation of the loan program was part of The Post's Harvesting Cash series, a two-year examination of waste and fraud in farm subsidy programs. --Gilbert M. Gaul
By The Editors | January 16, 2008; 12:17 PM ET Harvesting Cash Previous: Child Services Revisited | Next: Scrutiny of Veterans Charity
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.
|
Track Washington Post investigations and get updates on past investigative series from The Post. A blog about investigative journalism by The Washington Post.
| 24.44 | 0.6 | 0.92 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/tvblog/2008/01/american_idol_treacles_in.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008011619id_/http://blog.washingtonpost.com/tvblog/2008/01/american_idol_treacles_in.html
|
'American Idol' Treacles In
|
2008011619
|
First night of the traditional lousy-auditions phase of "Idol" -- three glorious weeks on the road meeting delusional pop-star wannabes -- takes us to Philadelphia.
But why are the judges being so well-behaved?
Aspiring veterinarian Alexis Cohen comes in with her face covered in glitter and channels Grace Slick, after which judge Simon Cowell spits out, "You'll either end up as a country vet and be quite normal or wind up in a band. I don't think this competition is right for you."
Alaa Youakeem, from Egypt, who just wants to find a girl "to love from here [pointing to to top of his head] to the nipple," slaughters a song by "Mr. the Bee-Gees." Does Simon go in for the kill? No! He throws it to America's Sweetheart Paula Abdul, who tells Youakeem, "I'm very impressed with how you phonetically learned the song and I appreciate the work you put into it."
Adds Simon, "Nice to meet you."
Sixteen-year-old Temptress Brown butchers her number and Simon responds with, "Let's start with the positive. You are a sweetheart . . . the not so good news is you're not a great singer, sweetheart . . . don't be sad."
Don't be sad? What is this -- Dr. Phil?
Then Randy Jackson, who has grown a strike goatee and strike sideburns, like Letterman's beard and Jon Stewart's unibrow, and Paula give Temptress a hug and all three judges walk her outside the audition room to her waiting family, which, Randy notes, "is very proud of her."
"I like Temptress," Simon adds. "Sweetheart, see you later."
Can this be the same Simon who just last year mocked a mentally challenged competitor and told another he looked like a bush baby?
Practically the only sign of a pulse we got out of Simon, the resident snark, came when Paul Marturano sang a "love song I wrote for Paula Abdul."
It's about how he broke into her house when she wasn't there, to doff all his clothes and try on her underwear. It went something like this:
I'm not much of a talker so I guess I'll just stalk her. If she were a doggie I would walk her. If she was a blackboard I'd chalk her. If she were Columbo I'd Peter Falk-her. If she was a bathtub I'd caulk her.
"I think you should leave. That was really creepy," says Simon to Marturano, who by that time has sidled up to the judges table and is leering at Paula.
"Seriously, I really want you to leave," Simon says, and asks security to escort the guy out.
It was like an episode of "Criminal Minds." Only without writers. Oh wait, "Criminal Minds" doesn't have writers either these days.
Ben Haar gave the shortest performance in "Idol" history -- about two notes -- before Simon sent him packing, but that was totally reasonable, given that the guy had shown up -- twice -- in a belly-dancer costume. The first time he sported thick chest hair but Paula said she found that too distracting; the second time he was waxed hairless -- equally unpleasant to look at.
Milo Turk, the songwriting social worker, was allowed to perform his entire number -- a little piece he'd written called "No Sex Allowed." He said it needed to be heard by millions of people because it has a "sex is weak, love is strong message." Milo called the song "uplifting and clean."
"In Britain we call it creepy." Simon said. Again, truth was his best defense.
This year, as promised, the producers introduced us immediately to more people with actual talent. They felt that last season, the first in which "Idol" experienced a ratings decline, viewers were not invested in the finalists because they knew so little about them owing to the fact producers treated them to so many lousy auditions in the early days of the competition. The result? Sanjaya Malakar.
Sadly, last night's result was a kinder, gentler "Idol" season debut we're not sure we altogether approve of.
It's like all the nasty has moved over to that new Fox reality series "Moment of Truth," in which average Joes agree to get strapped to a lie detector and answer wildly inappropriate questions for cash:
"Do you really care about the starving children in Africa?"
"Do you think you'll still be married to your husband five years from now?"
"Have you ever touched a female co-worker inappropriately?"
("Yes," says some henpecked guy, nervously.
("That's why you sleep on the couch," his wife snaps.)
Among the Genuinely Talented we got to know on "Idol's" first night back was 26-year-old singer and single mom Angela Martin. Very pretty and bubbly, with a lovely voice that's only slightly wedding-ized, as Simon explained, from too many gigs at weddings and bar mitzvahs.
Angela has a little girl with Rett Syndrome. The heartbreakingly cute child cannot walk or talk.
"When she was born there were no complications . . . after two years she started having seizures," Martin explains.
"Her feet started to turn in . . . her face wasn't growing, her brain wasn't growing. It's like she fell asleep and woke up and that was it," she tells the camera while tens of millions of viewers at home choke up.
"It's not about fame for me, it's about getting her the best care, the best therapist. The doctors told me my daughter was never going to walk or talk. I'm gonna get that for her."
Has Angela Martin got this competition sewn up already? Seriously, can you vote her out of the competition? Me neither.
By Lisa de Moraes | January 16, 2008; 7:08 AM ET "American Idol" Previous: Flatbed Funny | Next: 'Idol' Does Dallas
Lisa....I'm disappointed in you. That hairy dude was not wearing a belly dancer costume. He was wearing the Princess Leia costume from Return of the Jedi (the one Jabba makes her wear). Classic that we had two Leia wanna-be's in one episode.
Posted by: Jen | January 16, 2008 08:32 AM
Still spent way too much time on the really bad auditions. We were subjected to the glitter girl going on and on, when they could have been showing some more of those who got through to the next round. Good news is a young man from Bowie made it through. Interested in seeing more of him.
Posted by: | January 16, 2008 09:12 AM
Sadly, I suspect that the Princess Leah contestant, who was really made fun of, is a young lady with Asperger Syndrome, a disorder on the autism spectrum. People on the Autism Spectrum have a hard time understanding social norms, have poor social/communication skills and experience tremendous rejection in society. Her classic signs included poor eye contact, pressured speech and somewhat odd speech pattern, narrow range of interest in a dorky/nerdy subject- Star Trek, desire to be accepted, and devastation when it didn't happen, etc. This young lady so much wants to fit into society, yet clearly lacks the knowledge of how to fit in or the skills to do so. She clearly states how this experience is like all the others in her life, how she feels so abnormal and rejected. Unlike the other assorted unsual individuals who had the ego strength to withstand rejection by the judges, this person has an easily recognized condition and her misery should not have been mercilessly used for entertainment purposes. Her reaction wasn't just anger or disappointment- it was personally devastating- and there is nothing funny about that. Shows like this need to do some psychological screening, or at the very least be compassionate enough not to make a person with a very real challenge the subject of ridicule. Shame on the producers of American Idol for stooping this low.
Posted by: Julia | January 16, 2008 09:25 AM
more crappy singers and meanness from simon. it's the only reason to watch this show.
Posted by: OD | January 16, 2008 09:41 AM
...or the only reason not to...
Posted by: | January 16, 2008 09:51 AM
"Shows like this need to do psychological screening" for things like Aspergers...
Let's get real. If this child truly does have Asperger's, and I don't doubt your insight into the issue or the seriousness of it, isn't it the responsibility of the parents, grandparents and others who escorted her to the audition to judge whether this is the right situation for her? This show has been on the air for 6 seasons, so it's no secret what the audition process is all about. It's brutal, and I can't believe the girl's parents/grandparents didn't recognize that and understand the situation she was going to be in. I really don't think it's realistic for American Idol to be responsible for psychological screening of the more than 100,000 people who audition.
Posted by: Washington, DC | January 16, 2008 09:59 AM
Last night was paaaainful...too many cheesy soap-opera style stories, not enough singing, good or bad. Simon's the only reason to watch right now.
Posted by: | January 16, 2008 10:17 AM
Regarding the young lady in the Leia costume...
While I don't want to suggest a diagnosis, I think it's pretty clear from the way she was acting that her brain doesn't process social situations in a "normal" way. She's obviously high-functioning (and I'd wager has put a lot of effort into learning how to interact with people), and yeah, given that it's Season Six of the show, and she seemed to feel so familiar with the kinds of contestants who make it to Hollywood, neither she nor her grandparents should have been that surprised. It's not Fox's responsibility to screen people who just show up and try out (screening people who go to Cali is a different story). Where I thought Fox really went wrong was making her gripes the focus of the end of the episode. That entire last montage, of all the different candidates shown over her complaints, seemed designed to prove her wrong. Why would they need to do that? If they think she's wrong, they should've let it go, and if they think she has a point, it's something for the producers to consider for next season. But putting that much time into -showing- how wrong she is just seemed like an a-hole move.
Posted by: boston liz | January 16, 2008 10:24 AM
re: the Star Wars fan who clearly has some level of Asperger's syndrome. Stop suggesting that American Idol "has to screen" them!! Every year this gets said. Last year it was the autistic boy (who ended up on Jimmy Kimmel). The Star Wars girl came with her grandparents: why not have them "screen" her? Why does the show have to take responsibility? Any contestant over the age of 18 is not a minor child; if they're allowed to run around the world and make decisions for themselves, then leave them be. It was her choice, her grandparents reinforced it.
Posted by: keiren63 | January 16, 2008 10:40 AM
Paul Marturano did it for the publicity. He's a songwriter but is above the age limit for the contest. Figures of all the people who tried out from my hometown, I'd know the dude who sang the stalker song!
Posted by: CMc62480 | January 16, 2008 11:20 AM
I'll watch AI when they whittle them down to 12 male singers and 12 female singers. This audition stuff is nauseating and I won't watch it anymore.
Posted by: WI | January 16, 2008 11:48 AM
My main problem with the way Princess Leah girl was treated was that the judges made it seem like their decision was based on her personality, not the fact that she was flat on a number of notes and had a horrible high note/voice crack in the middle of the song. After the personality display when she was singing she was singing straight, so they should have made it clear she just wasn't a good enough singer. By not doing that they encouraged her to think she was too wierd for them. Maybe they just wanted to get out of there?
Posted by: bluemeanies | January 16, 2008 12:24 PM
I would rather spend more time on the good or bad singing than all the clips at home. While I certainly feel sympathy for Angela Martin and her situation, this is a singing competition, not a pity party.
Posted by: mlm | January 16, 2008 12:25 PM
Angela Martin all the way!
Posted by: mom | January 16, 2008 12:29 PM
OK Angela Martin may not win American Idol and no one says she has to...but as a mom with a daughter with Rett's Syndrome I applaud her ability to go for it. The entire Rett's community will support her. You have no idea how hard this disorder hits a family and for her to go to this competition and do so well. Good for her. Rett's is an Autism Spectrum Disorder, as is Asperger's. If the other "princess leia" does have this disorder. Where is the sympathy for her. She is no less able to control herself than little Jessica could. Lets hope for a world of a little more compassion.
Posted by: me | January 16, 2008 12:35 PM
Seriously? If Angela Martin can't sing as well as the other finalists, I would have no problem voting her out of the competition.
I have utmost respect for her as a single mom, and utmost compassion for her daughter's condition, and I thought it was beautiful the way her whole family rallied around her.
But this is a singing competition, not a who-has-the-background-most-worthy-of-some-extra-cash competition.
It's stuff like this (and the Sanjaya crap from last seaon) that makes me really wish America only got to vote once it was down to 3 singers, or that America voted on the bottom two each week and the judges made the ultimate decision.
Posted by: anon | January 16, 2008 12:51 PM
Just wondering if any Chicago conference planners know what a great thing she has done to promote awareness. 20 million folk now know that this disorder exists. My family and I were impressed that the show let her explain the disorder. Sure might be nice to acknowledge Angela at the RETT conference in May since it is in Chicago this year. She has a fabulous voice. It would be great to be able to contact her and show her some support. I am so very proud of the way her family supports her and want her to know that she has the RETT family as support as well. Just a thought..
Posted by: Edith and Britt Rett Syndrome 17 | January 16, 2008 01:36 PM
Posted by: Uh | January 16, 2008 01:48 PM
Julia, I think your definition of Asperger Syndrome could apply to tens of millions of Americans...they are called nerds. They play PS3 and World of Warcraft a lot.
Anyhow, the stalker guy was actually very creepy. I'm surprised they let him get as close to Paula as he did. I'd of had security hustle that guy out pretty quickly.
That being said, I felt that he might have had a decent singing voice had he actually gone with a normal song.
Posted by: bigeugene | January 16, 2008 02:11 PM
I thought the stalker was obviously doing schtick for publicity. He was under control and his lyrics were clever.
Posted by: snead | January 16, 2008 02:24 PM
"Idol" recaps are a dime a dozen, and worth every penny. As it is every year from January to June, Lisa's column if off my reading list.
It's a shame, really, because Ms. de Moares has proven she's often a passable writer when not gripped by the "AI" obsession.
Posted by: bored2tears | January 16, 2008 02:24 PM
Posted by: phil | January 16, 2008 02:33 PM
No more phony "This isn't about the fame. This is about (fill-in-the-relative's name)"
It's more of this Oprah, self-absorbed, self-serving, applaud for me and look at me because I'm a victim.
Everyone knows the score of this show: people want attention and are willing to toss the notion of self-respect and humility aside to be on TV.
No one is a victim on American Idol.
Posted by: ScottBTampa | January 16, 2008 03:03 PM
I too got tired of seeing that young lady go on and on about how she hates Simon, going to be an actress now, etc. That one guy who had that stalking song shouldn't have been allowed to get that close to Paula. He was freaking me out and I wasn't even Paula, the subject of his factuation. Last night was dull, dull, dull and I hope it's better tonight. The judges were too nice in my opinion! Why the sudden niceness out of Simon? YUK!
Posted by: jlplb | January 16, 2008 03:17 PM
The back stories were too much last night. Bring on the singing! Especially the bad ones hehe.
I thought the judges were exceptionally nice too. Simon was really nice to Alexis Cohen and she went off on a rant anyways (after leaving the room calmly on top of that). She and Princess Leia really over reacted IMO.
The back story on Temptress was just too much. A middle line backer? Too much information. And not amusing considering her and her mother's weight.
The tour guide cracked me up. Even Paula couldn't help but laugh too. I wonder what he would sound like in his natural voice though.
Posted by: vw | January 16, 2008 03:46 PM
Ok, no one's mentioned this, so I will...who the hell names their daughter Temptress!!!!?????
Posted by: | January 16, 2008 04:32 PM
Also, according to the chat, the stalker guy was a prankster along with the social worker guy. Check out the transcript.
Posted by: | January 16, 2008 04:34 PM
I can picture what's going to happen with the young woman with the very sick child. Even if she gets voted out, American Idol will give a MAJOR donation toward the child's care. Otherwise, I don't think they would have gone on and on about it. We don't want to have to root for a particular contestant because they have a heartbreaking story.
Posted by: BJ | January 16, 2008 05:37 PM
I want to reply to many of these posts!! But will reply to only BJ. Your post sounds just like what I would have written 5 years ago. So I DO know what you mean. You don't have to root for Angela because of her heart breaking story, I guarentee it does not matter to her. If you do root for her it could be because she seems to be a legitimate contestant? She can sing. She sings now, as her work. But, she has a side story...doesn't everybody? This is my input: she doesn't have a "very sick child!" Very sick children get better or they die. She has a daughter with Rett's Syndrome. And her daughter is not a "pillow angel", or Angela would seldom get out of her house to even go to the grocery store, much less an audition. So she didn't pander to a situation that many parents in the world deal with every day. What I respect was, I don't think she pandered at all, maybe you do? But a dontation from American Idol, Oprah, the federal government, or numerous state agencies for Angela's daughter or any Rett Angel or hundreds-of-thousands of other children with thousands of other disabilities would not be out of line here. If I had a talent, I would pander it for money! And I have always wanted MAJOR Money!
Posted by: Clyde Bryant | January 16, 2008 11:05 PM
I think the show would not be as entertaining if we did not get to see alot of these crazy acts, oh my gosh it is really sad that so many people think they can sing. It is also a little scarey to know so any crazy people are walking among us. So many freaks in this world.
Posted by: | January 16, 2008 11:40 PM
Posted by: Joel | January 16, 2008 11:56 PM
I am suprised that no comments were posted for Alexis Cohen, sparkle girl with the f-bomb tirade after her audition. She was entertaining, and her singing wasn't that bad. Although, I suspect people in Allentown were not pleased by her repesentation. I can't wait for her going to "actressing". So, Alexis thank you for your appearance, or as she aptly stated "I thank you, I will leave with my dignity" and she sure did.
Posted by: Irish_Ed | January 17, 2008 09:10 AM
After reading some of these comments, apparently many people are satisfied by mediocre talent. Forget trying to find someone that has real ability.
Posted by: WI | January 17, 2008 09:24 AM
I think that the oddball "auditions" are just brilliant marketing on the part of American Idol. Think about it- everyone loves to hate and it makes for good conversation! I heard it referred to as "water cooler" talk and that is exactly what the marketing team wants. Then, people who don't know the exact starting date of the new season will. It creates buzz! Now there are also a bunch of American Idol products being sold, like Ice Cream!, video games and karaoke systems, which serve the same purpose. I recently read an article entitled "6 Baffling A.I. Products" www.techtogo.com
Posted by: Ebony | January 17, 2008 12:14 PM
Ebony you hit the nail on the head.
Posted by: Irish_Ed | January 17, 2008 12:57 PM
to those of you who do not understand, Rett Syndrome is a rare neurological disorder affecting primarily girls. it becomes apparent after 6-18 months of early normal development, it results in lifelong severe hadicaps, there is no cure. the girls lose their speech, meaningful hand movement,and in most cases the ability to walk. they suffer from severe seizures,breathing disorders, and swallowing difficulties. Sciolosis becomes a real concern with these girls as well a heart condition associated with the syndrome. There is no Cure! so go for it Angela, I am sure that you will have the support of all families that have been affected by Rett. We know the real hardships you face each day. And thanks for helping to make people aware of the devasting affects of this disorder!!!
Posted by: judith | January 18, 2008 01:15 PM
YES we all are aware that "American Idol" is a singing competion and if I am not mistaken Angela Martin is a good singer enough to go through to the next round. Enough of the remarks regarding the "this is a singing competition, not a pity party."I am a mother of a child with rett syndrome and personally understands her concerns,pain,and struggles from a MOTHER'S point of view because I am walking through the same paths as Angela.I give her lots of credit in even being in this competition taking into consideration that she has to leave her daughter behind for awhile...Its wonderful to see that she has lots of family support which is very important...I really hope that she does well enough to be the next American Idol and yes espically that it wil benefit her daughter in the end to provide the best treatments they have out there.I wish her all the best in her life with her daughter beyond Idol.
Posted by: Angelina Peters | January 18, 2008 02:01 PM
As the mother of a beautiful 4 yr old girl with Rett Syndrome, I am so thankful that a Rett parent is in the public talking about Rett Syndrome to millions of people. I really hope that Angela will blow the judges away and make it to the end. Good luck Angela!
Posted by: Elaine | January 19, 2008 09:05 PM
Hello to all. I met a girl named NIKKI a little more than two years ago with Rett Syndrome and made a documentary about her and Rett Syndrome. I was so thrilled to see American Idol do a little profile on Angela Martin and her daughter Jessica who has Rett Syndrome. Go Angela. Thanks. www.nikkithedocumentary.com
Posted by: Michael Knowles | January 30, 2008 08:11 PM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 8, 2008 07:22 AM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 8, 2008 11:58 PM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 8, 2008 11:58 PM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 10, 2008 09:46 PM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 10, 2008 09:46 PM
I was so glad that Angela was on national t.v. Even though she didn't make it, I'm sure God has another plan for her. It was no mistake that she got exposer on A.I. My daughter Brooke passed away at age 10 in 2005. She is not a Silent Angel any longer. I also sing, but I'm to old for A.I.(40). If I had the chance to go to Hollywood, I would try to get as much exposer as I could. You can't tell enough people about the struggles these girls go through. Some of the mean comments that I have read on the internet are pretty cruel. If these people would get to know a girl with Rett, they would be a little more compassionate! Praying for Angela, Angie
Posted by: Angie Taylor | February 13, 2008 12:04 AM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 13, 2008 06:16 AM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 15, 2008 05:26 PM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 15, 2008 05:27 PM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 15, 2008 05:51 PM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 18, 2008 05:18 AM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 18, 2008 05:19 AM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 18, 2008 11:46 PM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 18, 2008 11:46 PM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 18, 2008 11:46 PM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 19, 2008 02:14 PM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 21, 2008 07:46 AM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 21, 2008 07:46 AM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 21, 2008 11:41 PM
I'm disgraced at any on who thinks that Angela went on Idol for a pity party. I have Known HER FOR aleast 6 or seven years and being around her she lives music, sleep music and thats truely her gift and she got the talent.
Posted by: tiffany | February 22, 2008 02:42 PM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 22, 2008 04:10 PM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 22, 2008 04:10 PM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 23, 2008 08:25 AM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 23, 2008 08:26 AM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 23, 2008 08:27 AM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 23, 2008 08:27 AM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 23, 2008 08:27 AM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 24, 2008 10:08 PM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 24, 2008 10:08 PM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 27, 2008 07:35 AM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 27, 2008 07:36 AM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 28, 2008 01:42 PM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 28, 2008 01:43 PM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 28, 2008 01:43 PM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 28, 2008 10:39 PM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 28, 2008 10:40 PM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 28, 2008 10:40 PM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 28, 2008 10:40 PM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | February 28, 2008 10:41 PM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | March 1, 2008 01:29 AM
[URL=http://www.dailygmat.com/futurama-porno] futurama porno [/URL] futurama porno
Posted by: Juan | March 4, 2008 10:47 AM
Posted by: Johanna | March 5, 2008 12:24 AM
[URL=http://www.friland.net/escort-trans] escort trans [/URL] escort trans
Posted by: Juan | March 5, 2008 06:56 AM
Posted by: ISHMAel back | March 7, 2008 05:43 PM
has anyone email adress for the girl with the sicjk kid
Posted by: tony maguire | March 10, 2008 09:25 AM
Posted by: Hopper | March 14, 2008 02:06 PM
Posted by: Rowina | March 15, 2008 07:12 AM
[URL=http://www.huraiyth.com/lancia-y] lancia y [/URL] lancia y
Posted by: Jose | March 15, 2008 01:06 PM
Posted by: Mary | March 15, 2008 07:02 PM
[URL=http://www.betamate.com/negozi-telefonia] negozi telefonia [/URL] negozi telefonia
Posted by: Argus | March 16, 2008 12:56 AM
Posted by: George | March 16, 2008 02:11 PM
[URL=http://www.ncfliving.net/teen-naked] teen naked [/URL] teen naked
Posted by: Jessica | March 16, 2008 08:14 PM
Posted by: Mark | March 17, 2008 02:25 AM
Posted by: Janni | March 17, 2008 09:31 AM
[URL=http://www.key4fun.com/negozio-expert] negozio expert [/URL] negozio expert
Posted by: Aria | March 17, 2008 03:58 PM
[URL=http://www.fxtend.net/regali-comunione] regali comunione [/URL] regali comunione
Posted by: Sofi | March 17, 2008 10:23 PM
[URL=http://www.fxtend.net/provi-volare] provi volare [/URL] provi volare
Posted by: Juan | March 18, 2008 04:39 AM
[URL=http://www.michaelsteven.net/cura-delle-unghia] cura delle unghia [/URL] cura delle unghia
Posted by: Ace | March 18, 2008 02:05 PM
[URL=http://www.freundetreffpunkt.com/live-video.php] Live video [/URL] Live video
Posted by: Jose | April 5, 2008 06:46 PM
[URL=http://www.conversationing.net/voli-prenotazione.php] Voli prenotazione [/URL] Voli prenotazione
Posted by: Mary | April 7, 2008 09:06 AM
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.
|
The Washington Post presents Lisa de Moraes. Visit blog.washingtonpost.com/tvblog/.
| 482.153846 | 0.615385 | 1.076923 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/08/DI2008010803136.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008011619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/08/DI2008010803136.html
|
Ask Gov. Kaine - washingtonpost.com
|
2008011619
|
Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine was online Wednesday, Jan. 16 at 11:15 a.m. ET to take your questions about his term in office, his State of the Commonwealth speech and his goals for the upcoming year.
Tim Kaine: Hi folks. Thanks for having me online today.
Annandale, Va.: Governor Kaine: If the FTA rejects the current proposal for extending Metro to Dulles, can you assure us that you will work to get this critically important project back on track as soon as possible?
Tim Kaine: We believe we have met the FTA criteria and look forward to approval so we can promptly begin rail to Dulles. We can see no reason why the project would be rejected at this point. Under normal conditions, communities often put up twenty to thirty percent of the costs of these transit projects with the federal government picking up the remaining share. In this instance, the local share is more than 2/3 and Congress has already demonstrated that this is a project of national importance by allocating significant budgetary resources. We look forward to starting.
Alexandria, Va.: What's the status of your early childhood education initiative? Any chance of that passing?
Tim Kaine: We have proposed to increase the number of at-risk kids served by the current state pre-school program from 13,000 to 20,000. We have received very positive comments on the design of our proposal from educators, the business community, local officials, parents and legislators of both parties. While there is much discussion still to take place, we feel that the merits of the proposal will win the day.
Oakton, Va.: After the past few primaries and having a better look at those running for the Democratic ticket, are you still backing Obama?
Vienna, Va.: What can be done to alleviate the significant property tax burdens in Northern Virginia? Wouldn't a local income tax be fairer than punishing local homeowners?
Tim Kaine: I campaigned on the notion that local governments should have additional tools to target tax relief to homeowners. With the support of key northern Virginia legislators (especially Del. Brink and Sen. Whipple), my proposed constitutional amendment to allow localities to exempt up to 20 percent of the value of an owner-occupied home from property taxes passed last year. We think it has a good chance of passing again this year and being before the electorate in a November referendum. I will do what I can to see that it passes.
Arlington, Va.: How much of a chance do you think the smoking ban has of passing? And if it does pass, when would you estimate that it would take effect? I know I, for one, think it cannot come soon enough.
Tim Kaine: Last year, I amended a smoking-related bill to ban smoking in restaurants statewide and my amendments failed by a narrow margin in the House of Delegates. Many of the delegates who voted against my proposal last year suggested modifications, primarily to exclude outdoor dining places, and said they could vote for a revised bill this year. The public support for these measures continues to grow and that makes me think our chances are much better. Please visit www.governor.virginia.gov/SmokeFreeRestaurants and give us your thoughts.
Richmond, Va.: What do you think about term limits for Virgina governors? I am not in favor of it. Thanks for doing a great job. You and Mark Warner are the two best Virginia governors in my lifetime.
Tim Kaine: Thanks for your support. I have long supported a two-term governor, but it has been difficult to get legislative support for placing this constitutional change before the voters.
Alexandria, Va.: When exactly will the abusive driver law be repealed and will it be retroactive?
Tim Kaine: I believe the legislature will follow my suggestion that the abusive driver fees should be repealed. Normally, this kind of legislative action would be implemented on July 1, but if the legislature votes in a super-majority fashion for the repeal there are some circumstances where it can take place immediately. Some of the introduced legislation includes a rebate for those who have been affected already.
Richmond, Va.: As a state employee, I'm not happy that you are proposing to postpone our raises this year. This will be at least the third time in eight years that state employees have not received a raise. Morale can't get much lower. Tell me why we shouldn't start looking for jobs outside public service.
Tim Kaine: Ultimately, all raises are a function of available revenue. The revenues are going to be too tight in the near term to allow for statewide raises, but I definitely appreciate your concern and that's why I built in raises to begin in July 2009. This would translate into an 11 percent across the board raise during my term as governor, which compares favorably to past history. We will continue to look for ways to serve and reward our hard-working employees. We wouldn't be the best managed state in America if it wasn't for motivated employees who love to serve the public.
Fredericksburg, Va.: Thank you doing this discussion, Governor!
I'm concerned about the construction of the HOT lanes in Virginia as opposed to HOV lanes. The HOT's priority doesn't seem to be about reducing congestion, but about actually getting more cars into the lanes so the private companies can make money.
Those of us who faithfully use public transportation would much rather see them as HOV, and therefore help us get to and from work and home much quicker. The drive seems to get longer each year.
Tim Kaine: The proposed HOT lane on the Beltway will add new lanes that can be accessed by 1) buses and other transit vehicles, 2) cars with multiple riders, and 3) people who are willing to pay a toll that depends on time of day. Because the proposal adds significant new lanes to the Beltway, it will reduce congestion. I am particularly excited about how the HOT lanes will expand reliable public transportation options.
Alexandria, Va.: Thank you for your work to repeal such arcane laws like requiring a woman to take a lie detector test when she's raped. Are there any other proposals to increase protection for domestic violence cases?
Tim Kaine: We have proposed to increase funding for community domestic violence prevention programs and also enhanced funding for collection of evidence to prosecute attackers. We are also working to make sure that restraining orders commonly entered against domestic abusers are immediately entered in state crime databases so that they can be enforced in a reliable way.
Herndon, Va.: Why have you ignore continued to ignore public sentiment and Virginia Commission on Immigration regarding state wide implementation of the 287(g) program? The program would provide uniformity enforcement measures and ensure Virginia's roads, highways, and communities are not sanctuaries for illegal aliens. It is time Virginia sent a state wide message that it respects the "rule of law."
Tim Kaine: Virginia does respect the rule of law. The Virginia State Police work with the Immigration Customs Enforcement agency every day to target gang activity and arrest and deport people who are not lawfully here. Other significant work is done by our DMV and Department of Corrections. Our Virginia Guard helps patrol the border between Arizona and Mexico. 287g agreements don't enhance enforcement of the immigration laws, but instead take State Police off the roads to do paperwork instead of fight crime.
Manakin Sabot, Va. : How far has your administration come in reaching your land conservation goal of preserving at least 400,000 acres before the end of your term in Virginia? How is your administration targeting land to preserve to prevent run off into our rivers, streams and lakes from both urban and agricultural/grazing sites? Thank you.
Tim Kaine: I'm at the halfway point in my administration. While we are still collecting some year end numbers, I think we will have conserved about 175,000 acres so far. This is a significant increase over what was being done. Obviously, we need to pick up the pace in the next two years to meet our goal and we're looking at additional strategies to help us get there.
I have to go folks, but thanks for chatting with me today.
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
|
Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine takes your questions about his term in office, his State of the Commonwealth speech and his goals for the upcoming year.
| 60.592593 | 0.962963 | 18.518519 |
high
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/13/DI2008011302763.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008011619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/13/DI2008011302763.html
|
Post Politics Hour - washingtonpost.com
|
2008011619
|
Don't want to miss out on the latest in politics? Start each day with The Post Politics Hour. Join in each weekday morning at 11 a.m. as a member of The Washington Post's team of White House and Congressional reporters answers questions about the latest in buzz in Washington and The Post's coverage of political news.
Washington Post campaign finance reporter Matthew Mosk was online Wednesday, Jan. 16 at 11 a.m. ET to discuss the latest news in politics.
Get the latest campaign news live on washingtonpost.com's The Trail, or subscribe to the daily Post Politics Podcast.
Archive: Post Politics Hour discussion transcripts
Matthew Mosk: Another wild day in American politics. Romney takes a gold. The leading Democrats seemed to patch up their differences last night on the debate stage. South Carolina is looming. And the bell is about to ring for the sprint to Feb. 5. I welcome your questions on all that and more today.
Bloomington, Ind.: Mr. Mosk, if you were a Vegas odds-maker, how would you rate the Republican and Democratic candidates at this point in the primaries?
washingtonpost.com: Why Vote When You Can Bet? (Slate)
Matthew Mosk: Seems like this year will be the toughest ever for political prognosticators. Seems a relief on the Democratic side that there are only three choices. On the GOP side it's anybody's guess. The next two weeks should help considerably to clarify the picture. Who gets the momentum of a South Carolina win? Will Rudy's strategy that banks on a moon-shot out of Florida succeed or fail? Right now, you'd be crazy to lay odds. But this piece offers some advice if you are, in fact, a Vegas odds maker.
Reading, Pa.: It was really puzzling in last nights debate how Obama was cheated out of his question to one of the other candidates -- it was clearly not fair. I watched the debates twice and even though Clinton was allowed to filibuster on a few answers, it was not easy to call a winner, even if the MSNBC pundits wanted so badly to for whatever reason.
washingtonpost.com: Clinton, Obama Distance Selves From Talk of Race (Post, Jan. 16)
Matthew Mosk: I actually thought all three of them were guilty of filibustering at one moment or another. I think the only clear winner last night was the Democratic Party as a whole. The decisions by both Sens. Clinton and Obama to calm things down before the primary derailed into a runaway discourse about race probably was helpful to the eventual nominee. As for Obama not getting his question, these debates force all the candidates to think fast on their feet.
Lisle, Ill.: How are delegates awarded in each state? I assume the rules vary (I recall California and Texas were winner-take-all on the GOP side, at least in the past). The Democrats seem to do something more proportional, but I know that in my home state we vote for the actual delegates by congressional district, so wouldn't it be possible that Obama could sweep all the delegates even if his opponents were getting a substantial minority of the vote.
Matthew Mosk: There is nothing simple about preparing a campaign strategy for Feb. 5, largely because the rules dictating how delegates are awarded are nearly impossible to follow. The best source on this, at least a first blush, is this Web site.
In some states, candidates will be focusing all their attention on a select few counties where they need to win enough support to get a portion of the delegates. In California, Republicans might use their limited resources in GOP-rich television markets like San Diego and Sacramento, while the Dems probably will have enough money to put up ads in Los Angeles and San Francisco.
These are going to be tough calculations, but they could determine who the eventual nominees are.
Fairfax, Va.: Honestly, how much sway did Mitt Romney's "Michigan ties" have in yesterday's primary? The press and his opponents calling Michigan his home state is like saying Connecticut is George W. Bush's home state. He hasn't lived there since he was a teenager and his dad was governor like 40 years ago.
Matthew Mosk: The best answer to this -- and this is not a very good answer -- is that the home-state advantage helped a little. There was one exit poll question on this subject (a little more on this from our polling guru in a moment) that said Romney performed better among those who considered his Michigan roots in picking a candidate. Needless to say, not a great way to test this idea. But there were voters in Michigan who told reporters they thought Romney might look favorably upon Michigan as president because he was born there.
Chicago: Wow, you got a great day to do the chat. Given that you are the finance guru, have the campaigns reported their fourth-quarter fundraising results? What's the status of cash-on-hand for the GOP candidates and for the top three Democrats? Isn't cash-on-hand going to be the crucial factor going into Tsunami Tuesday? With 22 states up -- including California, Illinois and New York, it's all going to be about the TV ads, which will cost big bucks.
The fundraising results from the past three months of 2007 won't arrive until Jan. 31. But the status of cash on hand for most candidates is pretty dismal. Certainly for the Republicans, nearly every penny is being spent on building momentum in the states leading up to Feb. 5. Most of them are hoping to have a big victory or two to give them momentum (and lots of free press attention) going into Super Tuesday. You're right, in theory, that money would be crucial going into what is essentially a national primary, but at least on the GOP side, I don't think any of them (save Romney, with his own personal money in play) will have much beyond fumes to work with.
To Reading, Pa.: He wasn't "cheated" out of his question, he simply wound up asking something other than what he planned, because he wanted to challenge John Edwards's position on troops in Iraq. Of course Barack wanted to ask his prepared question as well; who wouldn't? But then I suspect others would have griped that he got to ask two questions while their candidate only got one.
Matthew Mosk: I agree with our Reading reader on this. It's a little like a candidate complaining after the fact that they got less talking time than the others. Even if it's true, it won't turn the clock back.
Washington: How do you see the South Carolina GOP Primary shaping up?
Matthew Mosk: Right now, it appears to be shaping up to be a real rumble. There is noise coming from some of the same anti-McCain folks who targeted him in 2000. A group supporting Huckabee has been working the phones in much the same fashion they did in New Hampshire and Iowa. And Club For Growth, a group that has spent most of its energies attack Huckabee, is now also taking on McCain. So this should be a bruiser.
Portland, Ore.: Like a lot of Americans, I think torture is wrong, regardless of what our enemies do. Likewise, I think voter suppression is wrong, regardless of what the Republicans do. If someone has the right to vote then they should be allowed to vote. After the events of the past few years I would think all Democrats would be against voter suppression. But sadly I am mistaken, judging by the lawsuit in Nevada and the tacit approval of the suit by the Clintons. This story seems huge to me, some Democrats are going against their core beliefs for short term gain. Do you think this story has gotten the attention that it deserves?
washingtonpost.com: Hearing Is Set on Lawsuit Over Sites for Casino Workers (Post, Jan. 16)
Matthew Mosk: I'll leave aside the torture reference, Portland. But I do think this lawsuit is an interesting backstory to what is happening in Nevada in the run-up to the caucus there. My colleague Paul Kane has been doing an excellent job keeping tabs on the case. You can check out his latest story (Bill Clinton and the state's most powerful union weigh in on opposite sides) here.
Greenwood, Mo.: Note to viewers: All candidates filibuster, not just the one you are against. Rudy really hasn't done very well in any primary/caucus yet? For a so-called front-runner a few months ago, why hasn't he even made a blip in any of these states?
Matthew Mosk: This may be the best story of the campaign, but we won't be able to write it until after Florida. Namely, is Rudy's strategy of laying back until Florida working or not? Someone compared this to a baseball team deciding to skip the regular season and go straight to the playoffs. To the best of my knowledge, a strategy that ignores the early states never has worked in modern American politics. (Please correct me on this if I'm wrong.) Even though Rudy has not made a blip, to borrow your words, the field actually is laying out nicely for his late-arrival theory. His biggest problem would have been if one candidate had become the clear winner early on; instead you have had Huckabee, McCain and Romney all taking early contests. The big question will be, has Rudy been out of sight so long that folks have forgotten him? We'll see on Jan. 29.
Arlington, Va.: There seems to be a lot of buzz today about how the Republican race for the nomination is wide-open because there have been three different winners in three primaries. My question is, so what? In the Democratic primaries there have been two different winners in two primaries (I'm not counting Michigan's Democratic primary), and I don't hear breathless logorrhea about that. As far as I'm concerned, they're both wide-open. Huge surprise, right?
Matthew Mosk: You're right, although the Democratic side has become a more clearly defined battle between Sens. Clinton and Obama, with Edwards as a potential spoiler. The GOP side is almost total chaos.
Tacoma, Wash.: Were you as frustrated by the first 40 minutes of the debate last night focusing only on the horse race and the politics of politics, and not on policy differences? Do you think the NBC and other news outlets focusing so much on this impacts how people view politics? For example, the Pew poll that came out yesterday says that only 49 percent of the population know who won Iowa, but 40 percent of population thinks too much coverage is focused on primaries.
Matthew Mosk: This is a common complaint, but to be honest I don't share your view here. The Post and other outlets have been covering this race for more than a year now. Gallons of ink have been spent on articles that dig into the candidates' positions on issues, the often nuanced differences that separate them, and the personal experiences that color their world view. At this point, I find it refreshing finally to have a horse race to watch.
Matthew Mosk: As promised, a bit more on the question about Romney's home state advantage.
Post polling analyst Jennifer Agiesta tells me that Romney won 67 percent of the vote from those who said "Romney's ties to Michigan" were very important to their vote -- but, as noted before, no other topic was asked about this way, so there's nothing we can really compare it to. 58 percent did say their candidate's positions on the issues were more important than their leadership and personal qualities.
You can dive into the exit poll data yourself to see the full questions and plumb the results. Here's the link.
Washington: Didn't see a location on Paul Kane's story. Does the Post have anyone in Nevada to cover the caucuses?
Matthew Mosk: Members of The Post's political team have been trailing all the candidates. Several were in Nevada last night for the debate.
Woodbridge, Va.: Romney has more delegates than McCain and Huckabee combined. Why isn't Romney treated like the clear front-runner?
Matthew Mosk: At this stage, with so many delegates yet to be committed, it's really too early to declare any of the GOP candidates a front-runner. Democrats, too, for that matter.
Boston: How much money does John Edwards have left? When will he get his Federal matching dollars? And I know he trails the other two Democrats pretty badly in the money race, but how does he compare to the leading GOPers in the race?
Matthew Mosk: Edwards has been spending liberally in South Carolina, so I don't imagine he has too much left in his bank accounts. But I suspect most political strategists would tell you he'd be crazy to be storing up money at this stage. After all, he raised it all to spend it on this exact purpose.
Edwards has had a couple of things working for him. One is the support of SEIU locals, which have waged an independent campaign supporting him in early states. The other is the public funds. He already has borrowed off the $9 million in matching funds that he was certified to receive. He raised another $3 million to $5 million during the last three months of 2007, and should be able to double that with a second certification from the FEC. But if he can't win in South Carolina, the financial picture may start to look much worse for him.
Ron Paul is due: With every other Republican candidate winning a primary isn't it time for Ron Paul to win one? Could the Republicans form some kind of regionally based administration, with Huckabee getting the South, Romney the Midwest, McCain the West and New Hampshire and Giuliani the snowbirds going back and forth from New York to Florida? What's good for Iraq is good for America, right?
Matthew Mosk: I've gotten a couple of Ron Paul questions. I'll try and post them here as a group. I think the Paul folks thought their best chance for breaking out was in New Hampshire, where he seemed to have a fair amount of grassroots interest and a nice fat wallet. Not sure where he takes things next, but he certainly appears to be adequately financed. My colleague Jose Vargas has more info on the Paul campaign up on our Trail column. Here's a piece of it. You can read the whole thing at The Trail.
"Rep. Ron Paul continues to trail his opponents in national polls. He's yet to finish in the top three of any state contests. (He placed fourth in the Michigan primary last night, ahead of Rudy Giuliani, whom he beat in Iowa, and Fred Thompson, whom he bested in New Hampshire.)
"But his passionate, Web-savvy supporters have always forged a community online, where sites independent of his campaign such as Daily Paul, Primarily Paul and Ron Paul Nation have continually popped up.
"And the latest may be one of the most impressive of all. Ultimate Ron Paul was created by Richard Viguerie, often dubbed the 'funding father of the conservative movement.' Viguerie, who founded Conservative Digest magazine in the 1970s, pioneered the use of computerized direct mail, helping raise billions for conservative organizations. Most recently, he authored 'Conservatives Betrayed: How George W. Bush and Other Big-Government Republicans Hijacked the Conservative Cause.' "
Baltimore: To the poster from Arlington: There's more ink and airtime given to how "wide open" the Republican nomination race is because that is such a rarity in the party. In 2000, party bigwigs made it known they wanted Bush and so it came to pass -- despite McCain's win in New Hampshire. In '88, Bush the elder was Reagan's anointed successor just as Reagan was nominated nearly by acclamation in '80. You really have to go back to '76, when Reagan almost toppled Gerald Ford, to find a seriously contested Republican nomination -- which is in great contrast to the Democrats.
Matthew Mosk: This is a smart thought on our earlier question from Arlington.
Arlington, Va.: So Ron Paul has now beaten Fred Thompson and/or Rudy Giuliani in all three of the primaries/caucuses. He has certainly raised more money in the fourth quarter. So why is he not considered by the media to be on the same tier as these guys? I'm not even a Paul fan, but I'm beginning to see why his fans are calling foul.
Matthew Mosk: Another thought about Ron Paul.
Washington: Like many others, I was disappointed by the questioning in last night's debate. While I really appreciate a turn to substance, the debate seemed more like a forum to give pre-scripted answers than anything else. An example is Clinton's (and I don't mean to pick on Clinton here, it's just the one that sticks in my mind the most) response on the bankruptcy bill. She voted for it, but was happy it didn't pass? Huh? That's the kind of response that, in a real debate, would get follow up. But nothing in this one.
Matthew Mosk: I found it pretty dull myself -- and I am pretty into this stuff.
Arlington, Va.: Going into the Michigan vote, all of the polls had him tied with McCain at about 30 percent. How did all of the polls again miss the mark (by one third!) and where did Romney's extra 9 percent of support come from?
Matthew Mosk: My first-blush response to this is that people seem to think polls can do more than they actually can. Most of the polls I saw showed a considerable undecided contingent.
Naperville, Ill.: I understand that everyone says that the banned delegates from Michigan and Florida eventually will be seated at the convention, once someone has the nomination wrapped up. But what if no one has the nomination wrapped up without the missing delegates? For example, suppose Hillary is 100 votes short of the nomination on the first ballot and the delegates she "won" in Michigan would put her over the top -- what would the mechanism be for resolving that fight? Would it threaten to split the party if Obama lost because barred delegates ended up putting Hillary over the top?
Matthew Mosk: This is an interesting question Naperville. There is a story in today's Miami Herald (link here) that looks at just this question. The Democratic National Committee has been pretty clear about its decision to dock states for pushing their primaries up, but this could be a source of considerable friction if there is not a clear nominee.
Ferguson, Mo.: One slight correction to your point about a prime candidate waiting until late in the cycle to throw in his hat: Hubert Humphrey in 1968, for reasons beyond his control, couldn't get into the fray until LBJ "withdrew" in March. Seems to me he didn't get into the primaries before California, but I could be wrong myself!
Matthew Mosk: Washington Post readers are the smartest folks around on politics. Thanks for the help on this one.
Miami: Would you please describe the financial impact of these state-by-state battles during the primary? How much was spent on hotel rooms for the candidates and their staff, plus food and car rentals? Also, isn't this current primary schedule a more fair system than those smoke-filled backroom deals from the conventions back in the 1800s and early 1900s?
Matthew Mosk: Not sure about your second question, but I can tell you that both Sens. Clinton and Obama raised about $100 million in 2007, and that by this point the vast majority of those sums has been spent. A big chunk of that goes to television ads (Romney, for instance, spent $2 million for television in Michigan alone) but at this stage these campaigns are huge operations, with large staffing expenses and huge travel bills. When we get the next round of finance reports from the Federal Election Commission, due at the end of this month, we'll be able to break those numbers down.
Falls Church, Va.: Hi, Matthew. I'm someone who always has been completely decided about the candidate for whom I was going to vote, and made fun of the "undecideds." This year, I can't even make up my mind about which primary to vote in! Currently Obama, Clinton, Edwards and McCain are all on my radar, and all for different reasons. My mother also has said the same thing to me -- and she also always has been someone who has known exactly for whom she was going to vote. Thing is, I wonder how many like me there are out there, and if that's why these primaries are so nuts?
Matthew Mosk: I think our friend in Falls Church provides a window into the unexpected outcome in New Hampshire. I know I spoke with a number of New Hampshire voters who fit this exact description, and who walked into their polling station not knowing for sure which candidate they ultimately would support. This is part of what makes predicting the outcome this year's campaign so tough.
Chicago: Re: Late starts ... maybe too late to chime in, but in 1968, Humphrey won the nomination without, I believe, having won so much as a single primary...
washingtonpost.com: 1968 Democratic Primaries (Wikipedia)
Matthew Mosk: More help on history.
Matthew Mosk: Well, our collective inability to make predictions for the 2008 campaign seems a logical place to finish up. Thank you so much for your questions today. And stay tuned -- South Carolina and Nevada are right around the corner!
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
|
Washington Post campaign finance reporter Matthew Mosk discusses the latest political news and The Post's coverage of politics.
| 216.55 | 0.95 | 4.85 |
high
|
high
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/15/DI2008011502270.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008011619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/01/15/DI2008011502270.html
|
FDA Approves Cloned Meat
|
2008011619
|
Washington Post staff writer Rick Weiss was online Wednesday, Jan. 16 at 1 p.m. to discuss the differing announcements and the larger debate over cloned meat.
Rick Weiss: Hello everyody. I'm sorry to report that Rick Weiss could not make it today. But the folks at ViaGen, home of the cloned beefsteak, agreed on short notice last night to clone him. So I, his newly emergent complete genetic replica, am sitting in for the guy. I am endowed with all his characteristics and knowledge, while giving him complete deniability. So any complaints, just leave Rick out of it. Now, on with your questions.
Capitol Hill: Can someone please explain the point of cloned meat? Have sheep, pigs, cows and their friends suddenly refused to reproduce? This just seems like an excuse to develop a "product" no one really needs.
Rick Weiss: There is no shortage of farm animals here. Nor is there a shortage of milk. Quite the contrary. But what cloners argue is that there IS a shortage of consistently high quality meat and milk. Surveys apparently indicate that the No. 1 complaint of meat eaters is that too many of the steaks and chops they buy are tough or otherwise disapointing. By using uniformly high-quality clones as breeding stock, you can be reassured that every piece of meat you buy will be exactly as good as the last one. You can decide for yourself if that predictability and reliability is a good thing or not.
Berkeley, Calif.: Why was FDA in such a hurry to approved clones as a food source? Was a political appointee pushing the staff? Or are there other factors at work?
Rick Weiss: When I have conveyed this kind of question to FDA people, they either laugh or groan. Hurry? I mean (they say) it has been SIX YEARS! By their accounting (and it does not seem unreasonable to me) they have been looking at this for an awfully long time. The National Academies has weighed in on it twice with reports. FDA has examined hundreds of studies. Responded to tens of thousands of comments. I think they are sick and tired of this project and wanted to move on. "Let the Ag Dept. deal with it now," is what I think it came to at this point.
Fort Washington, Md.: What is the politics of cloned meat and whose money is behind it??
The money spent on cloning livestock could have been well spent on other agriculture research that would have been more beneficial. I don't see a shortage of beef cattle being able to reproduce themselves or pigs unable to breed and make piglets. Sheep is plentiful also. The beef cattle and pig farmers/industries have been producing breeds that meet the public needs. Hereford and Black Angus beef cattle are not on the endangered species list.
The creation of a "perfect" animal for production purposes aka breeding, raising, and slaughtering does not serve a greater purpose for the consumer. What happened to the idea of genetic diversity in animals that responsible breeders work to achieve?
I am a meat eater but I am not adverse to becoming a vegetarian or I may be forced to go to small farmers and buy non-cloned animals for consumption.
Rick Weiss: One of the things that has been most interesting about this story is the unusual political setup. It is not the usual-suspect big corporations who were trying to get this approval through. Indeed, the most powerful players (such as the dairy lobby) were against it. The companies that want to do the cloning are small (at least one went out of business while waiting for the FDA go-ahead). One was from Texas, so you can speculate there, but from everything I've been able to find out they had no access to the White House. What the cloners had on their side in the end was the science.
Another weird part of the politics: Sen Mikulski, who represents Md., where much of FDA is, and who has been a huge supporter of FDA and fought hard for their new HQ in Rockville, for example, became one of the most vocal opponents of FDA making its science-based conclusion. Go figure.
Madison, Wisc.: Is there any test by which to distinguish meat from a clone (or offspring of a clone) as opposed to meat from animals conceived by fertilization? If not, by what possible means could a moratorium on the use of meat from cloned animals be enforced?
Rick Weiss: There is no scientific test that can distinguish meat from clones from meat from non-clones. This is the whole idea about cloning, of course. Same-same. They are twins. This is why it is going to be difficult for purveyors of meat that is not from clones to legally label their meat as clone-free -- because to use such a label, you have to be able to prove to FDA and USDA that the label is true. How are you going to do that? Not by testing the meat. The only way is to prove you have tracked the animals from conception -- a route that some meat producers say they are going to take now. We'll see how well that works ...
Dupont Circle, D.C.: Can cloned meat count as organic?
Rick Weiss: The Ag Dept has said that if it is from an animal clone, it is not organic. So one way to avoid meat or milk from clones is to buy organic.
1- Won't cloning animals put us at risk of losing millions of them in case of a disease? If they all have the same genetics, they will all have the same immunity (or lack there of) to viruses.
2- Do you foresee this as making certain foods/meats more available and cheaper to consumers now?
Rick Weiss: Proponents (and independent scientific reviewers) have concluded that people need not worry about the genetic diversity of herds being reduced by cloning -- at least not in the forseeable future -- becasue so few animals are going to be clones compared to the number of conventional animals. Right now there are a few hundred. compared to tens of millions of ordinary farm animals. Company people have told me they'd be pleased as punch to get five percent of the market in the next decade or so. That is not much of a monoculture. But it is something worth watching.
As for prices, I can see it going either way. Some have argued it could make prices go down because there will be less waste in the form of poor producers and low quality animals sold for scrap. But at least some cuts from clones may be priced at a premium if it really turns out to be noticeably better tasting or more uniformly tender and palatable.
Berkeley, Calif.: What do overseas buyers of U.S. meat like Korea and Japan think about the FDA's decision? How will the FDA's decision affect other agricultural trade negotiations?
Rick Weiss: People in most countries where surveys have been done are wary of food from clones, if not dowright offended and disgusted. So there is not exactly a hungry market for this stuff. But producers believe that once people try it, they will like it. Maybe even demand it in some cases. Who knows? It might happen. But the important thing from a trade perspective is that, under the rules of the WTO, a country cannot reject food from another country unless there is scientific evidence that the food poses some kind of risk. With the safety assessment by FDA now completed, and similar assessments either finished or nearing completion in New Zealand, Australia, Argentina, Canada and the EU, there will not be (assuming they all come out like the FDA, which seems likely) any legal basis on which countries can reject these foods.
That said, the EU's equivalent of the FDA long ago declared gene-altered crops to be safe, but those countries still restrict US varieties of GM crops and foods. So that just shows that these things can drag out a long time, despite the rules.
Silver Spring, Md.: Why is the news focus on safety? It implies there are possible reasons it is not safe to ingest meat from an animal that is cloned, but no one has raised a plausible consequence to the meat safety or any health issues to someone eating it. I personally don't eat cows, pigs or sheep, so I am interested in other issues of cloning, such as the ones other writers have raised. It seems stupid for people to think there are health risks from eating meat from a cloned animal. What could they possibly be? The issue is NOT comparable to eating meat from an animal that is raised a certain way, say farmed fish, hormone-laden cows, etc. No reason has ever been mentioned for what the worry is all about. This is stunning. The news media are their usual beagle selves -- chasing after any new story that leaves a fresh scent.
Washington, D.C.: What I find odd is the notion that the food industry generally is being told to abandon safe, science-based technologies for no good reason. There's a strong argument to be made that one of the reasons we enjoy food at 11 percent of disposable income is because of our prudent use of technology. Why is agriculture the only industry told to go backwards? Bring on the cloneburgers!
Rick Weiss: your wish has been granted.
Eureka, Calif.: If the stated goal is to produce better quality meats, then the producers probably won't mind labeling their products as coming from clones, right? After all, according to them, cloned is better.
Rick Weiss: As mentioned earlier, I suspect that some food from clones will, before long, be proudly labeled as such, and perhaps sold at a considerable premium. The first? I will predict the famously mouth-watering Kobi beef, from Japan.
Oakton, Va.: So the cloned meat industry can't think up a label to describe cloned meat? How about "cloned meat"? I'll just take my consulting fee now.
Rick Weiss: Well, you'd wrong, right off the bat. The meat is not cloned. It probably didn't even come from an animal that was cloned (or, more correctly, that was a clone) because the clones themselves are too valuable to slaughter, at least while they are still young and healthy enough to keep ejaculating, which is what this is all about. The business plan is to sell offspring from clones. So the proper label might be: "Meat from an animal conceived by artificial insemination in which sperm from a clone was squirted into a cow's uterus." Yum. Enjoy.
- Is there currently any cloned meat on the US market?
- Are there any studies to suggest cloned meat may have health ramifications?
- Is there currently any U.S. law requiring labeling of cloned meat?
Rick Weiss: Supposedly there is no meat or milk on the market from cloned animals today, though hundreds of clones have been made and, if you ask me, I would not be surprised to learn that some of those, when they finally made it to their dotage, may just have made their way into the food supply. Who's gonna know? And those suckers are expensive to make. That said, there is good evidence that -- despite a years-old request by FDA to keep offspring of clones off the market -- that lots of those offspring have entered the food stream in recent years. One cattleman I spoke to said thousands have probably done so. Labeling is not required (or even allowed at this point). See earlier responses in this chat to see why.
Penn Quarter, DC: Cloning is associated with a higher rate of fetal demise, over-sized fetuses requiring C-section deliveries, and significant neonatal morbidity and mortality. Isn't all this a significant drag on potential profits? And why aren't the animal welfare activists picketing the FDA?
Rick Weiss: They are not picketing, but they are definitely complaining loudly. Animal welfare concerns are a big deal in this debate, and perhaps the part of the anti-cloning argument with the most science on its side. Rightly or wrongly, though, the perspective that FDA decided to take was: Let's see if there are any animal welfare concerns UNIQUE to clones. As it turns out, all the bad stuff that happens to clones also happens to farm animals made by other assisted reproductive methods (like artificial insemination, in vitro fertilization, embryo transfer etc). Though they happen with far greater frequency in clones, that did not raise a regulatory barrier from FDA's point of view. They claim that as the science gets better, the rates of these problems will decline. In terms of the economics, apparently cloning companies can afford those losses as long as they sell their animals at a big premium (in the case of cattle, about $17,000 instead of perhaps $1,000) and it is worth it to farmers to buy them at those costs, it seems, if they can then sell the clone's semen repeatedly over the years for a big premium as well.
Reston, Va.: What's the big deal? Meat from a clone is the same as meat from the host it was cloned from. It's not like they are grown in a lab like pod-animals or something. Human identical twins are technically clones. Should we ban them from schools or put a label on them?
Rick Weiss: In fact, newborn clones ARE different from the animals they were made from in one interesting, if subtle, way: Their genes, though identical, are turned on and off in patterns that differ from the on-off patterns in conventional animals, at least during fetal development and the first weeks of life. That explains in large part why so many of them die. The FDA could not decide whether this difference poses a health risk to consumers, mostly because they know very little about the NORMAL patterns of gene activity in conventional animals, and even less about the relevance of those pattersn to food safety and nutrition,. In the end, they decided that, lacking evidence that it poses a problem (and given that the ones with really disrupted gene regulation LOOK sick, and so would not pass muster at the slaughterhouse) they would just ignore it.
Your reference to pod-meat is interesting though. One has to wonder if eating meat grown in a lab dish might be more humane, if less natural, and which do we care more about, anyway?
Arcata, Calif.: DNA fingerprinting could distinguish cloned meat from non-cloned meat, assuming that there was either a limited number of clones in production or that clones were required to be registered in a database comparable to the FBI's CODIS database. This would make it relatively easy and inexpensive to test lots for the presence of clones.
(Maybe it could be used to get some of those wrongly convicted cows out of jail too.)
State College, Pa.: I'd think that when scientists make a BSE-resistant, good-tasting cow, cloning that bad boy would give you lots of progeny to propagate the BSE-resistance throughout our food herds. Why would you want to worry about prion disease when you don't have to?
Rick Weiss: That is a long-range selling point made by industry people. But it also raises a new regulatory problem: Now you have an animal that is not ony a clone but is also genetically engineered (assuming that is how you got the prion-resistance trait in there). The FDA has said it has real concerns about putting gene-altered animals (as opposed to clones, which it considers not altered but simply "differently conceived")onto store shelves.
Falls Church, Va.: Hi Rick,
Thank you for hosting this discussion to provide us all with info on this new technology. The Post has done a good job covering this issue. I for one am looking forward to cloned foods. And Howard Stern was even talking about it this morning, wanting to order cloned foods at a restaurant. The people who make this stuff should send him some for a taste test.
Rick Weiss: I will tell the industry folks that Howard Stern could be their iconic representative in ads. Given how much they are hated by so many consumers, even Stern might raise their popularity a tad.
Alexandria, Va.: How does this affect our meat exports abroad? If the Europeans are squeamish about our GMO corn and soybeans, won't they absolutely close the door to U.S. meat and poultry products? This could have a seriously negative economic effect on the various meat industries.
Rick Weiss: I think you are right that this does not look promising from a trade perspective. But it might shake out easier than gene-altered crops. In the case of those crops, there are real issues about the prospect of genes spreading through the environment and promoting the emergence of weeds that are resistant to weedkillers and insect pests. This is already happenng in North America where we have been planting these crops for the past decade. By contrast, clones are genetically identical (by definition) to other farm animals, from which they were made. So nothing new is being introduced that wasn't there already.
Savannah, Ga.: Is there a slippery slope concern here? Does this open doors toward animal genetic eugenics, and onward to people?
Rick Weiss: One of the concerns I have heard is that the more we clone animals, the better we'll get at cloning mammals generally, and before long that is going to make it easy to clone people. That may be true, though I don't think there is going to be much of a market for cloned people. And the people, people who really want to clone people (isn't that a Barbara Streisand song?)probably are not doing apprenticeships in animal cloning companies.
Philadelphia: So cloned milk and meat are okay - but raw milk is still banned?!?!? Explain that one.
Rick Weiss: Well, the evidence does seem to suggest that one poses a health risk, and the other does not. But if having a federal agency trying to prevent the sale of oft-contaminated products is a problem for you, you might want to flip to the political pages and search under Ron Paul.
Rick Weiss: Phew. Well, if I am not already in trouble for whipping through these questions, I will be soon, so I am outa here. Thank you all for writing -- and reading. Thank goodness for readers. I am off to a meaty lunch. Mode of conception unknown -- just the way I like 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.
|
While officials at the Food and Drug Administration approved this week the sale of food from cloned animals, the U.S. Department of Agriculture has asked producers to keep the meat off the market because of consumer fears. Post staff writer Rick Weiss discusses the differing announcements and the larger debate over cloned meat.
| 66.321429 | 0.857143 | 3.642857 |
high
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/15/AR2008011503662.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008011619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/15/AR2008011503662.html
|
Carlyle In Talks to Buy Unit of Booz Allen
|
2008011619
|
Booz Allen spokesman Marie Lerch last night declined to comment on whether Carlyle, based in the District, was in talks with the McLean firm. The report appreared on the Web site of the Financial Times yesterday. A potential sale has been the subject of media speculation for weeks.
Carlyle spokesman Christopher Ullman declined to comment. The stage of the talks could not be determined.
Booz Allen, which is privately held, is among the top government contractors in the country and one of the largest employers in Northern Virginia, with more than 11,000 employees in the region. It has 20,000 employees worldwide, most of whom work on its government business. Its clients include the Navy, Air Force and U.S. Agency for International Development.
On the commercial side, which is believed to be the more lucrative part of the business, Booz Allen is a well-known source of market research. About 20 percent of its employees focus on the commercial sector.
The consulting firm, which went public in 1970 and then was taken private six years later, is owned by 300 top executives and has about $4 billion in revenue. About half of that comes from the government.
A marriage between Carlyle and Booz Allen could make sense for the private-equity giant for many reasons. Carlyle has a long and lucrative history of owning and doing business with government defense contractors, such as aerospace and ground-based military programs.
Carlyle owns Vought Aircraft Industries, an aerospace company. Its buyout arm made a substantial profit with the purchase and subsequent sale of United Defense, another military contractor.
Carlyle has about $75 billion under management and is looking for places to put that money to work. It recently launched an infrastructure fund that will invest in and operate toll roads, water purification systems and other such structures.
Booz Allen hinted last month that it might change its strategic direction. Its chairman, Ralph W. Shrader, sent an electronic memo to employees in December informing them that the company was considering separating its commercial and government businesses.
Shrader said in the memo that the strategy of splitting the company into two parts was in the "development stage." He also said both Booz Allen units were successful but were facing vastly different business models and regulatory issues.
Booz Allen Hamilton was the main sponsor of the PGA Tour stop in the Washington region from 2004 to 2006.
|
The Carlyle Group is in talks with Booz Allen Hamilton to purchase the technology and consulting firm's government business, according to a source familiar with the negotiations.
| 15.266667 | 0.8 | 1.4 |
low
|
medium
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/15/AR2008011504019.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2008011619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/15/AR2008011504019.html
|
Say It Ain't So, Olie
|
2008011619
|
Bruce Boudreau, the team's neophyte NHL coach, informed the 37-year-old goaltender on Monday he would not start against Eastern Conference leader Ottawa last night at Verizon Center, even though Kolzig is 3-0 against the Senators this season.
The benching followed being pulled in the 6-4 loss to the Flyers on Sunday after allowing four goals. It's enough to make the pre-Ovechkin face of the franchise wonder how much longer he will play and where he will finish his career.
"I've talked to my wife about retirement," Kolzig said after the Caps' morning skate. "Things just haven't gone as well for me as I've thought the past two years. I'll wait and see how things play out."
The possibility of Olie the Goalie hanging it up, maybe playing for a team other than the franchise that drafted him in 1989, should be disturbing for even the most peripheral fan.
Just as Washington attempts to turn an abysmal 6-14-1 start into an improbable playoff berth, behind Ovechkin, their newly minted $100 million man, and Boudreau, the meat-and-potatoes, minor-league lifer who finally got his shot, Kolzig leaves? Just as the Caps rejoin the NHL conversation, the guy who held the fort for 12 years might not be here beyond this season?
Kolzig, the player who tended goal full time for the Capitals since 1996 -- the Canadian-reared guy who's been in the orguhn-eye-zation for 19 years and is an unrestricted free agent this summer -- getting cheated out of one more run into June?
Business is business, but that decision would just leave a bad taste throughout the franchise.
With all the incarnations of this team since they went to the Stanley Cup finals in 1998, Kolzig has remained the one constant.
He watched as a new owner, Ted Leonsis, played the big-name game with Jaromir Jagr. He saw Leonsis go the way of new-age, NHL frugality by dumping everybody and building through youth. Then came the drafting of the next NHL superstar and then, 2 1/2 years later, signing Alex Ovechkin to hockey's first $100 million contract. Olie was there, long before Ovie.
"We have the team to do it, to get back there one day," Kolzig said. "We're playing really well. It's unfortunate we dug ourselves such a big hole early on, but I think if we can get ourselves in the playoffs we're a team that can do some damage."
Kolzig, coming off a sprained right knee last season, has a goals against average of 3.04 this season. His save percentage is .888, far off his career-best years. He is asked if he feels like he's slowing down.
|
Olie Kolzig is the one piece of the Capitals that has remained untouched so there is something wrong with the thought of him getting cheated out of another run into June.
| 17.21875 | 0.8125 | 1.625 |
medium
|
medium
|
mixed
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.