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/2007/02/16/AR2007021602016.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007022219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/16/AR2007021602016.html
|
AOL CFO To Leave As Layoffs Continue
|
2007022219
|
AOL said yesterday that its chief financial officer, Stephen Swad, plans to leave the firm for a position at a private-equity firm.
In an e-mail memo to employees, AOL chief executive Randy Falco said Swad was "ready for new and different challenges" after four years at the Dulles company. AOL declined to name Swad's new employer. Falco said in the memo that AOL planned to name a replacement for Swad soon.
Separately, AOL has begun to trim its workforce further by laying off a few dozen employees within different divisions at its Dulles headquarters, according to a source familiar with AOL's plans, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the layoffs had not been made public. The source said these layoffs had begun and would continue for the next several weeks but that the company had no plans for any larger reductions.
Swad, 45, follows a number of longtime AOL executives who left shortly after former chief executive Jonathan Miller was abruptly replaced by Falco late last year. Ted Leonsis, who headed the company's efforts to boost its audience for its free services, recently stepped down from that role, although he will remain vice chairman of the company. An executive in Europe and several other leaders of key divisions have also departed in recent months.
The management shifts also come as AOL tries to shift its focus from its legacy of Internet-access subscriptions to an advertising-based business. AOL has evolved from a subscriber-based service that connected people to the Web to an ad-supported model providing Internet content, such as e-mail and instant messaging, for free to consumers.
"Over the past four years as chief financial officer, Steve had done a remarkable job of steering AOL across challenging financial terrain," Falco wrote in the e-mail to employees. "During his tenure, AOL consistently hit or exceeded its financial targets, even while we were transforming our business in the face of a rapidly changing marketplace."
An AOL spokeswoman declined to comment on Swad's departure.
In addition to the ongoing layoffs, AOL completed a major layoff of nearly 600 employees locally and 5,000 worldwide in December as part of a major restructuring. Many of the other layoffs were at U.S. call centers or overseas positions. AOL employs about 4,000 people in Dulles.
Swad has spent the past nine years of his career at Time Warner, parent company of AOL. Before joining AOL, Swad served as executive vice president of finance and administration at Turner Entertainment Group. He also worked as vice president of financial planning and analysis at AOL Time Warner.
|
AOL said yesterday that its chief financial officer, Stephen Swad, plans to leave the firm for a position at a private-equity firm.
| 18.555556 | 1 | 27 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/16/AR2007021601867.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007022219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/16/AR2007021601867.html
|
GSA Defends Administrator in Hill Inquiry
|
2007022219
|
The U.S. General Services Administration has responded to a congressional inquiry by saying its chief, Lurita Alexis Doan, did nothing improper last summer when she tried to arrange for a study by a company run by a woman with whom she had a "close professional relationship."
In a Feb. 2 response to Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.), the agency said Doan was trying to promote diversity when she signed a "service order" for the $20,000 project. That July 25 document was intended to authorize a company, Diversity Best Practices, run by Edie Fraser, to write a 24-page report and analysis concerning the GSA's use of businesses owned by minorities or women.
At the time, GSA contracts worth more than $2,500 had to be competitively bid. The proposed project was terminated in August because it "did not meet government contract requirements," the agency said in its six-page response.
In the response, GSA Associate Administrator Kevin Messner rejected "the implication that her intentions were improper" and said the project was stopped before any money changed hands.
"A procedural mistake was made, discovered and corrected," Messner wrote. "In an initial attempt as new Administrator to champion the cause of small minority, women, and disabled veteran-owned businesses, the Administrator recognized and took responsibility for the mistake."
Waxman, chairman of the House Government Reform Committee, which oversees the GSA, sent a letter to the agency raising questions about the events following a Jan. 19 story in The Washington Post. Waxman asked the agency to produce e-mails and other documents relating to the no-bid order and disputes between Doan and her inspector general's office.
A spokeswoman for Waxman said the committee is reviewing the GSA's response and declined to comment further.
Shortly after she became GSA administrator in May, Doan clashed with the agency's inspector general over budget matters. Last year, the inspector general's office launched its own investigation of the attempted project with Diversity Best Practices.
Doan told The Post in a taped interview last month that she took over the agency in a time of falling revenue and morale. In its response to Waxman, the GSA noted that Doan wanted the inspector general's office to rely on its $43 million budget appropriated by Congress and no longer depend on an extra $5 million that came from other GSA divisions. That additional money had been mandated by the White House Office of Management and Budget to help bolster contract audits in 2003.
"What started out as yesterday's benefit to help them out with their budget has turned into today's entitlement," Doan said in the interview.
The GSA's response said that the inspector general refused to identify any areas for possible cuts in its budget, despite an agency-wide push by Doan to reduce spending. Instead, the inspector general's office "demanded a substantial increase in spending" in its budget, according to the response. The $5 million in extra funding is included in the 2008 budget submitted by President Bush, along with an increase of about $4 million for the inspector general's overall budget.
In September, the inspector general's office notified Doan and Fraser of its investigation into the circumstances surrounding the $20,000 no-bid project, issuing subpoenas for e-mails and other documents.
|
Latest politics news headlines from Washington DC. Follow 2006 elections,campaigns,Democrats,Republicans,political cartoons,opinions from The Washington Post. Features government policy,government tech,political analysis and reports.
| 16.589744 | 0.512821 | 0.820513 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/16/AR2007021602065.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007022219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/16/AR2007021602065.html
|
Sculpting Winter Into a Gallery of Giants
|
2007022219
|
WINNIPEG, Manitoba Miguel Joyal is thinking Styrofoam.
It is almost the end of a long, brutally cold day, the latest in a frozen march of them for Joyal. Under many layers of clothing and behind a mustache walrused with icicles, Joyal is contemplating -- well, he is contemplating a bison's nose, a gigantic one, close up.
But he really is thinking of how much better it would be to be sculpting in Styrofoam than standing on a street corner in Winnipeg carving a statue in snow when the temperature is 10 degrees below zero.
"I did a Styrofoam polar bear, life-size. And people think it's snow," Joyal says, pausing to appraise his latest strokes. He's turned his attention to the bison's mane now.
"So I could do it all summer and all spring, and it doesn't matter, it won't melt," he muses. "Then the first little snowfall -- bang, it's up. People will say, 'Boy, does he work fast, this guy.' "
Of course, that would not be quite in the spirit of snow sculpting, which is a good industry for artists such as Joyal in Winnipeg during the annual winter Festival du Voyageur, which ends Sunday.
But one could be humbuggy about spirit when the wind chill reaches 30 below.
Joyal, 48, is doing seven snow statues this year for the festival, an annual celebration of the French Canadians who transported furs thousands of miles by canoe and backpack.
By the time the festival is finished, he will have worked pretty much five weeks straight, every day. In the cold. Global warming be damned, this has been a cold winter on the prairies. One of the coldest he remembers, and Joyal has been carving snow sculptures for the festival for 22 years.
He's a professional artist, with an accomplished repertoire. His bronze Louis Riel, the father of Manitoba, stands behind the legislative building. He's done wood chieftains and Madonnas, stone figurine rear ends and eagle heads, and glorious snow pieces ranging from gigantic bears to an almost life-size airplane greeting visitors at the airport.
His works are commissioned. "I don't do this for nothing. You think I'm crazy?"
How much is he paid? "Not enough," he says. "I wish I got paid like a lawyer."
|
World news headlines from the Washington Post,including international news and opinion from Africa,North/South America,Asia,Europe and Middle East. Features include world weather,news in Spanish,interactive maps,daily Yomiuri and Iraq coverage.
| 10.304348 | 0.347826 | 0.347826 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/16/AR2007021601613.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007022219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/16/AR2007021601613.html
|
Tracing the Lines Of 20th Century's Varied Influences On Religious Art
|
2007022219
|
NEW YORK -- The artistic giants of the 20th century -- the Andy Warhols, Jackson Pollocks and Pablo Picassos of the art world -- were known more for their modernist and abstract impulses than their depiction of religious themes.
But does that tell the whole story of art in the 20th century?
That's the question animating an exhibit of 20th century art, "Biblical Art in a Secular Century: Selections, 1896-1993," at New York's Museum of Biblical Art.
The show features artists whose work was often expressly religious in theme -- such as Marc Chagall and Ben-Zion -- as well as such artists as Andy Warhol whose work is rarely linked to religion.
Curator Patricia C. Pongracz said she hopes the exhibit helps counter the "broadly held notion" that 20th century artists had little or no interest in biblical or religious themes. It's a "rediscovery," she said, "a more nuanced approach to the 20th century."
There are two competing ideas at work in the exhibit -- one that religion and art grew apart in a century dominated by wars and bloodshed; the other, said museum Executive Director Ena Heller, that many 20th century artists "savored the challenge of interpreting the 'lingua franca' of the Bible" on their own terms.
Take Warhol, for example. The exhibit features his "Crosses (Twelve)," in which 12 repeated crosses seem cut from the same imaginative cloth that inspired his more famous Campbell's soup-can prints. The piece seems to speak more about commodity, less about veneration. It's up to the viewer to decide whether Warhol is critiquing religion itself or the way faith is represented in a media-saturated age.
Then there is American painter George Bellows, whose critique is more explicit. His 1916 painting, "The Sawdust Trail," depicts both the rapture and hypocrisy surrounding a crusade by evangelist Billy Sunday. Bellows made no secret that he loathed Sunday, linking him with "death to imagination, to spirituality, to art."
"I like to paint Billy Sunday, not because I like him," Bellows said, "but because I want to show the world what I think about him."
Still, alongside such stinging rebukes are works of quietly felt reverence, such as Georges Rouault's "Crucifixion" (1937). Kiki Smith's "Processional Cross" (1990), where the body of Christ is "floated" in the clear glass of the cross, is the only piece in the exhibit meant for use as a devotional object -- in this case by St. Peter's Lutheran Church in Manhattan.
Jewish artists with deep personal ties to the Bible take pride of place in the exhibit, including Ukrainian-born Benzion Weinman -- known as Ben-Zion -- whose 1957 painting "The Prophetess Deborah" reflects a deep debt to biblical themes for inspiration.
"I know of no other book in which the apocalyptic and elementary conflicts, as well as the psychological complications of our time, come to a strong symbolic expression than in the Bible," Ben-Zion said.
The intersection of history, personal experience and religious themes is reflected in several works where the sacred and the secular interact, touching on the carnage wrought by 20th century wars.
German artist Kathe Kollwitz said her sculpture "Pietà " (1938) -- a monument to her son killed in World War I -- was both autobiographical and non-religious. Unlike Michelangelo's poignant "Pietà " at the Vatican, which captured the sorrow of Jesus's mother as she held her son's body, Kollwitz's version depicts an "old, lonely, darkly brooding woman."
George Segal's sculpture depicting the sacrifice of Isaac by his father Abraham was created as a memorial to the student protesters killed at Ohio's Kent State University in 1970. It's a striking example of what Pongracz called an overlooked truism of 20th century art: that Biblical art in a predominately secular art world was not limited to "staid representations."
"Biblical Art in a Secular Century: Selections, 1896-1993" continues through March 11 at the museum in New York City. More information is available athttp://www.mobia.org.
|
NEW YORK -- The artistic giants of the 20th century -- the Andy Warhols, Jackson Pollocks and Pablo Picassos of the art world -- were known more for their modernist and abstract impulses than their depiction of religious themes.
| 19.829268 | 1 | 41 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/16/AR2007021601470.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007022219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/16/AR2007021601470.html
|
Gay Pastor Loses Ruling, But Not His Flock -- Yet
|
2007022219
|
ATLANTA -- It was a typical Sunday scene and, in its own way, a small act of defiance.
Members of St. John's Lutheran Church last weekend filed by their pastor, hugging him and exchanging jokes. Gleeful children rushed past toward a treats-laden table.
Many in the 350-member Atlanta congregation say they don't plan to let the Rev. Bradley E. Schmeling leave the pulpit Aug. 15, as ordered last week by an Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) disciplinary committee because he is in a gay relationship.
Defying the order could end Atlanta's oldest Lutheran church affiliation with the ELCA, cutting off the small church and its members from the large denomination's resources, including community service programs, hymn books and access to synod officials for guidance on legal, financial and spiritual matters.
St. John's members hope it doesn't come to that. They want the denomination to change its rules about sexually active gay clergy at its biennial churchwide assembly in Chicago next August, just days before Schmeling is to be removed from the clergy.
"We are not an activist church, even though we can stand for issues of justice," said Charles Fox, who occasionally assists Schmeling at Sunday worship. "He exemplifies the kind of love and empathy I envision Christ to have had."
The committee, which basically served as the jury in a closed-door trial, found Schmeling guilty of breaking the denomination's rules for having a same-sex relationship. However, the committee also called those rules "at least bad policy" and recommended changing them, which the ELCA could consider doing at its biennial meeting.
St. John's -- a congregation that gathers in a 1914 Tudor-style manor in one of Atlanta's historic neighborhoods -- now finds itself in the middle of a campaign to allow sexually active gays to be pastors in the largest Lutheran denomination in the United States.
"It hasn't been a problem to explain Brad or his relationship to our children as much as what the church wants to do," said Fox, a married father of a 10-year-old boy and an 8-year-old girl.
The ELCA, which has 4.9 million members, allows openly gay clergy, but only if they are celibate. Still, many Lutheran churches support ordaining partnered gays and perform same-sex blessing ceremonies despite the policy. The same debate over how biblical verses on gay relationships should be interpreted is tearing at many mainline Protestant groups.
Schmeling told his bishop and congregation about his sexual orientation before he was chosen pastor in 2000; at the time, he was not in a relationship. Last year, when Schmeling told Bishop Ronald B. Warren of the Southeastern Synod that he had found a lifelong partner, Warren asked the 44-year-old pastor to resign. Schmeling refused, and Warren started disciplinary proceedings.
Much like a trial, a closed-door disciplinary hearing committee of 12 ELCA members, both lay and clergy, heard evidence for nearly a week in January. Seven of them felt the rule as stated left them no choice but to defrock Schmeling. But the committee also wrote that, if not bound by the church's rules, they "would find almost unanimously that Pastor Schmeling is not engaged in conduct that is incompatible with the ministerial office" and would order no discipline.
|
ATLANTA -- It was a typical Sunday scene and, in its own way, a small act of defiance.
| 30.52381 | 1 | 21 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/16/AR2007021600616.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007022219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/16/AR2007021600616.html
|
The Dish on a New Orleans Renaissance
|
2007022219
|
Eating lunch at Cafe Minh, a sunny year-old restaurant in New Orleans's Mid-City neighborhood, it's easy to imagine that Hurricane Katrina was nothing more than a summer rainstorm. Neighborhood folks are chair-to-jowl with BlackBerry-punching business types. Platters keep coming out, laden with chef Minh Bui's signature Vietnamese-Louisiana cuisine: nut-crusted oysters drizzled in chili sauce, sticky pork chops over beds of lemongrass-scented rice.
It's hard to reconcile this scene with the floodwaters that inundated Mid-City until I go around the block to retrieve my car, which is parked on a side street littered with piles of debris. The ubiquitous National Guard spray-paintings still stain most porches. FEMA trailers sit in front yards of sad houses with peeling clapboards and lawns that look etched in acid.
Such is the reality of New Orleans a year and a half after what locals call The Thing. Despite a serious slump in business, most of the city's restaurants are back -- even if the tourists aren't.
Ironically, though, it's an ideal time for a food lover to visit. Dining rooms are open, hotel rooms are cheap (by national standards) and tables are easy to get, even at the big daddy of call-ahead restaurants, Emeril's.
"The only hard-to-get seat in this town," says chef-restaurateur Emeril Lagasse, "is one to a Saints game." And he laughs.
Certainly a few iconic places were lost to Katrina, including Bella Luna, a romantic hideaway overlooking the Mississippi River, and Chateaubriand, the city's best French steakhouse. Newcomers, though, are sprouting.
"In the last year, dining has just taken off," says Lorin Gaudin, who hosts "All Over Food," one of several local radio shows about the culinary scene. "What surprises me are the sheer number of brand-new restaurants that have opened since Katrina."
Indeed, a clutch of newbies shows the city's still got game. Cochon, in the city's Warehouse District, offers Donald Link's spin on Southern comfort food, heavy on the pig (ham hocks, pork ribs with pickled watermelon, and that Cajun delicacy, boudin). Todd English, the celebrity chef behind New York's Olives, has opened Riche, a sleek, glittery classical French restaurant in the new Harrah's hotel. And chef Kevin Vizard, a local best-kept secret, has opened a tiny Garden District jewel box of a restaurant, Vizard's on the Avenue, where he cooks up such marvels as a savory scallop flan and redfish tamales. And, I'm told, on occasion: truffled tater tots.
Perhaps the most unusual newcomer is Mélange, on the third floor of the remodeled Ritz-Carlton hotel. The menu comprises greatest hits from other New Orleans restaurants, using recipes supplied by the chefs themselves. Weird? Yep. But misgivings are gone with the fork when you're in Mélange, eating Upperline's fried green tomatoes with remoulade, following it with alligator sausage from Jacques-Imo's and finishing up with pompano Napoleon (puff pastry brimming with Gulf fish, scallops and shrimp) from Broussard's. Tasting all those standards in one room is like a culinary Epcot.
Mélange's sort of experimentation, Gaudin says, is going to be vital as the city struggles to revive its tourist trade -- even for the grandes dames eateries, which have traditionally resisted change, relying instead on visitors and loyal locals. Katrina "did light a fire under the old-line restaurants," she says. "They must jump into the millennium to survive."
A few of the old-timers recovered quickly. Elegant, time-warped Galatoire's still refuses to take reservations for its downstairs dining room, as it has for 100 years. And it's still worth waiting on line for damn-the-cholesterol delicacies such as crabmeat Sardou (crabmeat, artichokes and hollandaise sauce) -- especially for Friday lunch, when the sly servers bust out their best dirty jokes and the restaurant turns into a raucous playpen for the city's well-oiled gentry.
Brennan's reopened in June, having lost its entire 35,000-bottle wine cellar in the electrical failure after Katrina. But its insouciance is intact -- as is chef Lazone Randolph, in his 42nd year at the stove. Sitting in the French Quarter courtyard, watching an order of bananas Foster being flamed at a table by one of Brennan's silky waiters, is still a quintessential New Orleans pleasure.
Over in the Garden District, it took a year for Commander's Palace to reopen, during which proprietors Lally Brennan and Ti Martin completed a $6 million renovation. It shows, from the immaculate hand-stitched cream wallpaper to a gleaming new kitchen. In the dining room, a strolling jazz band entertains guests as waiters bustle around with gold balloons and platters of turtle soup and shrimp Henican. "New Orleanians think they don't like change, although we sneak new things on the menu all the time," says Brennan, though she knows better than to mess with such standards as the Creole bread pudding souffle, which manages to be both feather-light and indulgently rich.
But not all the standard-bearers are open yet. Mr. B's Bistro, the popular French Quarter power-lunch spot, is still a construction site. "It's easier to run a restaurant than to deal with this," says owner Cindy Brennan (Lally's sister), gesturing at the workmen and plumbers. But Brennan is aiming for a March reopening, and chef Michelle McRaney's menu -- including the swamp-dark gumbo ya-ya and the trademark barbecued shrimp -- is coming back intact.
And then there's Lagasse -- chef, TV personality and proprietor of three local restaurants: Emeril's, NOLA and Delmonico.
"We were lucky, my wife and I. Our houses in New Orleans, they were okay," he says in that famous rasp. "But my in-laws, they had two houses in Gulfport. They're still livin' out of two rooms."
Emeril's reopened in December 2005; it suffered, in Lagasse's words, "major pilferage." His French Quarter eatery, NOLA, followed soon after: "Nobody was around. We were serving lunches to the National Guard," he says. Finally, in October, Delmonico got the FEMA trailers out of its parking lot and opened its doors.
Lagasse has the same problems as everyone else, though: lack of staff and lack of visitors. It's not that the handsome dining room is empty, or that you can waltz in anytime for his veal chops with risotto and braised chicory; it's just that you no longer need to call months in advance for a reservation.
"You know what saved us at Emeril's? The Saints," Lagasse adds, referring to the town's National Football League team, which had its best year in the history of the franchise, obsessing the locals for four months. During the season, Lagasse opened the bar on Sundays, drawing football fans and, after the game, some of the players. "Who knew?" he says.
Like everyone else in New Orleans, Lagasse is adapting.
I can't leave town without driving across the Mississippi River to an old favorite, Hoa Hong 9 (Nine Roses). Located in an unlovely neighborhood, it serves some truly lovely Asian home cooking. The staff looks worn and overworked. "Tired," the waitress says. "We're all so tired." But the food is, if anything, better than I remembered: a pungent, sinus-clearing pho (soup) with fresh-picked okra bobbing in the bowl; a clay pot of tender pork and eggplant in a garlicky bean sauce; and, most spectacularly, a whole just-caught tilapia, brought to the table head and tail intact, bubbling in a scallion-ginger broth.
I'm stuffed, but on the way out I notice a new takeout tamale stand at the edge of the parking lot. I poke a $5 bill through a slot and am rewarded with a bag of six homemade tamales in a plastic supermarket bag. New Orleans never had much in the way of Mexican food, but the influx of day laborers helping to rebuild the city has changed that, probably for good. The smells of warm corn, lime and pork steam up the car, and I'm hungry again.
Even in a town as steeped in its past as New Orleans, change and adaptation can be good. And delicious.
Kevin Allman, a former resident of New Orleans, lives in Portland, Ore.
|
Despite a serious slump in business, most of the city's restaurants are back -- even if the tourists aren't.
| 74.130435 | 1 | 23 |
high
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/02/02/DI2007020201935.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/02/02/DI2007020201935.html
|
Broder on Politics - washingtonpost.com
|
2007021619
|
Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter and Washington Post columnist David S. Broder will be online Friday, Aug. 26 at 10 a.m. ET to answer your questions about the world of politics, from the latest maneuverings on the campaign trail to developments in the White House.
Broder has written extensively about primaries, elections, special interests and the business of politics. His books include "Democracy Derailed: The Initiative Movement & the Power of Money," "Behind the Front Page: A Candid Look at How the News Is Made" and "The System: The American Way of Politics at the Breaking Point."
Submit your questions and comments before or during today's discussion.
Archive: David Broder discussion transcripts
Buffalo, N.Y.: The roller coaster this week got me thinking: If we assume the McCain/Palin ticket loses in November, will Palin become the de facto head of the Republican Party? It seems like her selection is a tremendous boost for the social conservative wing of the Republican Party, and she certainly appears to be a polarizing influence on the party itself. What would her emergence as a major player mean to the future of the party?
David S. Broder: Good morning, everyone. What a moment! I hope we don't have more calamities during the next hour togehter. The question about Governor Palin is intriguing, but I don't think we can judge much until we see how shefares in this campaign. In any case, under the circumstances you describe, her role as a potential party leader would almost certainly be challenged by some of those who contested the 2008 nomination with Senator McCain--Mitt6 Romney, Mike Huckabee and perhaps others.
Greensburg, Pa.: I'm amazed that executive pay continues to be a stumbling block in the bailout. Is there really no one in the United States with a high degree of business acumen who would step up to lead a troubled business during this time just because it's the right thing to do, without a guarantee of making more money than God? Has it really come to this? Bush talks a lot about patriotism -- shouldn't he be calling on it now from the business sector?
David S. Broder: Good point. But this president has ;not called on anyone except the troops and their families for sacrifice.
Prescott, Ariz.: The House Republicans and McCain are acting in a deeply unserious and partisan fashion. It must kill you, knowing how much you favor bipartisanship over pretty much everything else. How badly are you going to chastize them on Sunday?
David S. Broder: I have not written my Sunday column yet, but if the impasse contiinues, I will certainly try to put the blame where it fits.
Ann Arbor, Mich.: Thanks for chatting in this busy season for you and all on The Post. Short phrases and misleading commercials have been the rule in this presidential race, despite the promises from both sides. Do you think there are any forces that might change strategies like this in future elections? It would be wonderful if candidates went back to talking with the press, answering questions rather than sparring through surrogates, and being straightforward.
David S. Broder: Amen. I share your frustration with the tawdry nature of this campaign. As you know, I thought McCain's offer of joint town meetings promised a better course, but now things have descended to insults and cheap shots. I once suggested that the newspapers boycott campaigns unless and untiil candidates agreed to regular press conferences, but that is not practical either, so I am stymied on how we change this dynamic.
Asheville, N.C.: I see a lot of commentary that Main Street needs to recognize its role in this mess. For a lot of us out here, this isn't about populism -- rich people versus average people. It's about values -- people who live within their means versus people (and a government) that refuse to. Combine that with an absolute lack of trust of politicians of all stripes, and so many bills are coming due at once that it makes my head spin. That's a long preamble for this question -- if John McCain really wants to help, why can't tonight's debate be turned into a national discussion on the bailout plan? Isn't building popular support for a plan -- any plan -- more critical than D.C. backroom echo chambers?
David S. Broder: You said a moutful. It would be far better to have this discussion as scheduled than to leave people wondering what the next president will do about this mess.
Atlanta: Mr. Broder, is this bailout becoming just another political football? If so, that would be remarkable, and truly sad for our country. Could you share your unvarnished thoughts on the matter? Thank you.
David S. Broder: I am no economist, but I take the warnings from the Treasury secretary and the Federal Reserve chief very seriously. This is a time where action of some kind is better than inaction, even if corrective steps must be taken later. I hope Congress--and the House Republicans in particular--will deal with realities.
Anonymous: The House Republican proposal contains a suspension of the capital gains tax for two years, which they claim will help ensure participation in the "rescue" plan. Will they be able to pull off appearing as acting for Main Street when in reality they are protecting the wealthy?
David S. Broder: I doubgt that that kind of fundamental change in the taxc xystem will be part of any rescue plan.
Re: Town Meetings: You fell hard for the McCain excuse that it was Obama's decision to opt out of town halls that justified McCain's nasty, inaccurate ad campaign against Obama. Are you ready to buy his new line using the town halls as an excuse to skip the debate as well?
David S. Broder: No, that is not my position. I thought and think that the town meetings were a wortwhile innovation. I do not think that their rejection justifies false and misleading ads.
Seattle, home of Washington Mutual: Does yet another bank failure mean that McCain has to find another excuse to avoid a debate, or will he get a Bush Bounce after skipping the debate and insulting Americans who know that debates occurred during the Civil War, Vietnam and both World Wars?
washingtonpost.com: U.S. Forces WaMu Sale As Bank Sinks (Post, Sept. 26)
David S. Broder: I want the debates to go foreward, but I have to question your history. The first presidential debates occured in 1960.
Columbia, N.C.: Are members of Congress who are now opposing the economic rescue plan sufficiently knowledgeable about the ramifications of not acting, or are they viewing the situation naively?
David S. Broder: I think they are responding to what they take to be publ8ic opinion at home. As with the immigration bill and some other issues, the talk radio-populist reaction to this proposal is quick, loud and emotional--and the House Republicans are particularly prone to give it great weight.
Hampton Cove, Ala.: This is a quote from Barney Frank in 2003: "These two entities, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are not facing any kind of financial crisis. ... The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing." Why in the world would we allow this fool to be in charge of a $700 billion bailout?
David S. Broder: I don't think Barney Frank would be in charge of the bailout. He is one of several congressmen trying to figure out how to get out of this mess.
Anonymous: Palin's choice as vice president invigorated a part of the Republican Party, but what effect has it had on the party as a whole? Sarah Palin, one heartbeat away?
David S. Broder: As I said earlier, I don't think we can judge Gov. Palin's impact until we see her in more open, excposed situations, rather than the sheltered life she has led so far on the campaign trail.
Arlington, Va.: Did you ever think that in an election year you'd see the Democrats actaully siding with the Bush White House, or the Republicans trying to block Bush legislation? What does this show about each party and putting aside differences in order to better the country?
David S. Broder: As I've said in earlier answeers, I think the burden is now very much on House Republicans to step up to the challenge of this almost unprecedented financial crisis.
Washington: I know I'm in the minority on this, but honestly, I am perfectly happy to have the first debate moved a few days so that both presidential candidates can participate in hammering out a plan that we will have to live with for decades to come. Given the magnitude of the dollars and the potential effect on the economy, I can't think of a better use of their time and energy. If fact, I might not watch the debate if they hold it tonight, because I would have lost respect for both candidates if they put getting elected ahead of determining how to save our economy.
David S. Broder: It would not be terrible, in my view, to postpone the first debate for a few days, byt the practical problems in a postponement are serious. What happens to Sunday night and Monday night football? I do think it important for the country to have this long exposure to the candidates answering thoughtful questions.
Scotia, N.Y.: Was reading "The Boys on the Bus," from back in the '70s, and you are quoted back then as being so disgusted with the artificial manner in which Nixon ran his campaign that you quit covering it. The integrity of our elections, in this view, was at stake, because there was no genuine expression of views by the candidate in a nonmanaged setting -- just made-for-television productions in front of hand-picked participants. You know, it doesn't look like things have gotten any better ... and there were no 529s, partisan cable shows or 30-second attack ads back then. I'd say it's far worse. You disagree?
David S. Broder: No, I don't disagree. The one improvement has been the return of presidential debates, which Nixon refused. And now those debates are in jeopardy.
Phnom Penh, Cambodia: If Senator McCain is busy in Washington, has it been suggested that he could send Vice Presidential Candidate Palin to the TV debate with Sen. Obama? If not, why not? If elected, she has to be ready stand in for the president at any time.
David S. Broder: That thought crossed my mind, as well. But I doubt that the McCain camp would agree.
Pittsburgh: It's really hard to trust anyone in this debacle. About 80 percent of us went along with the idea that war in Iraq would be quick and easy. Now Congress is flooded with calls from irate constituents who don't want a bailout. I'm not happy about it either, but I'd rather these decisions be made on some rational basis. Who do you see as the most knowledgeble among our leaders in the House and Senate?
David S. Broder: I think the senior Democrats and Republicans on the Banking Committees of the Senate and House have been working conscientiously on this. I have less confidence in the party leaders on both sides of the Capitol.
Candidates hammering out a solution?: Are either Sen. McCain or Sen. Obama on the relevant committee? Was it significant that the Obama campaign sent a Senate staffer with the candidate while the McCain camp sent a campaign operative to Washington?
David S. Broder: Neither senator is on the relevant committees. I don't know the significance of the accompanying aides.
Glen Allen, Va.: David, you're The Man! So, help me here, please. I'm listening to people like Sens. Shelby, Graham and Hatch, and they are against The Paulson Plan. The plan, as I understand it, is that three-page ditty with no oversight, accountability, reciprocity, etc. That's fine, everyone objects to that! But I thought we were well past this point. Even Bush's speech covered the elements that everyone had issues with. And the framework yesterday afternoon also covered these issues. So, what are the Republicans objecting to? What alternatives are they offering? Or are they still back at square one, objecting to a bailout in the first place? Enlighten us, please.
David S. Broder: As I said in response to an earlier question, the House Republicans appear to be responding to the populist pressure from home objecting to a bailout of Wall Street. I have not seen enough substantive discussion of their proposed alternative to be able to judge whether it is practical, but Paulson and Co. apparently do not think so.
Stuart, Fla.: I seem to get an inordinate number of calls from political and other pollsters -- two in the past two weeks. Is this logical under the supposed random selection, or is there a list of people they keep polling?
David S. Broder: No, there is not such a "target" list. But living in Florida, the classic swing state, probably means that you are being poolled often by many independent greoups.
South Riding, Va.: Why don't U.S. senators and congressmen see themselves as people who can bring leadership and change to Washington? From the earliest days of the primaries, there was talk about Washington needing new leaders and someone who could bring change; the people talking were already in Washington, and in my opinion in a position where they could show that they have what it takes to lead their party and to strike agreements that cross the aisle. For some reason, they all thought that the U.S. only had room for one leader, in the Oval Office.
I don't know that I completely support John McCain and all that he stands for, but I do respect the fact that he was willing to go back to Washington and do his job and work to find a solution to the current problem. In my mind, that is what leaders do -- solve problems, not just talk about problems that need to be solved. Why couldn't Obama, Clinton, McCain and the others do this in a non-election year? I challenge all of our representatives to step up to the plate and be true leaders. Don't worry about party politics -- work to find the best short- and long-term solution to our problems.
David S. Broder: I agree. I would say this: As critical as I have been of Congress, it is only fair to note that the "Gang of 14" senators did avert an institutional crisis over judicial filibusters and the "Gang of 10" senators is trying to frame a constructive approach to energy legislation. And the negotiations this past week by members of Congress and the Treasury did narrow the differences on the bailout plan
Bethesda, Md.: I feel like there has not been enough coverage of the crazy, astromonic compensation that the people running these banks made the last couple of years. Paulson walked away with $163 million for his last year at Goldmans. That blows me away.
David S. Broder: I agree. But that is an issue for another day. It should not block action needed to avert a financial meltdown./
Raleigh, N.C.: Good morning. As I understand it, over the last few days, John McCain has been calling for more regulations in the financial industry. But now, the House Republican package involves deregulation, and McCain is backing that proposal. Is that a correct understanding? If so, how does Sen. McCain explain his change of position?
David S. Broder: I am not at all clear on the regulatory aspects oft the House Republican package.
Chantilly, Va.: What are the chances that the Democrats and Republicans can come together and create a solution to our current financial problem in a timely manner? Which party will be hurt more in the upcoming elections if they can't solve the problem?
David S. Broder: As we visit, I cannot judge the chances of agreement, byut I think there are huge risks for both parties if no agreement is reached.
Washington: Can you shed some light on exactly what would happen if Wall Street ISN'T bailed out? What would be the consequences? Why would it cause a major economic disaster?
David S. Broder: This is far from my area of expertise, but the warnings are that without intervention, credit markets would dry up and all forms of commerce would be crippled.
Cheltenham, U.K.: Now that conservatives columnists such as Kathleen Parker have taken a negative view of Sarah Palin, do you think the counter of liberal media elites continues? It seems to be starting to balance out that both the left and right have issues and concerns about Ms. Palin's qualifications for the world stage.
washingtonpost.com: The Palin Problem (Townhall.com, Sept. 26)
David S. Broder: AS I have said beforee, the testing of Gov. Palin lies ahead, and I think it well to reserve judgment about her abilities until we see her in less guarded environments.
Olney, Md.: It's interesting that Prescott, Ariz., sees the House Repubs as acting "in a deeply unserious and partisan fashion." I'm a far-left liberal, and yet I'm surprised how much I agree with their hesitancy to absolve of much of their responsibility the banks that made such horrendous errors. If I invested all my money in one bad choice, can I get a do-over, too? I'd be willing to see my meager retirement fund take a huge hit if it meant that my tax money -- better spent on public transportation, the crumbling infrastructure and public education -- would not go toward rescuing the financial giants from themselves.
David S. Broder: Your generosity of spirit is admirable, but multiiply your situation by millions of others and the risk to the nation becomes unsupportable. Our priority ought to be saving the economy, not exacting revenge.
McCain and the debate: David: Given that you have known him for many years, does John McCain have any particular expertise, experience or leadership ability to apply to the negotiations to settle this financial crisis? Enough to justify keeping him from attending the debate?
David S. Broder: As to expertise, no. There have been times when his excample and leadership have served to bring people together--immigration, filibusters, etc.--but this may not be one of them.
Boston: Mr. Broder, in your opinion, should the debate tonight go on?
Rockville, Md.: Mr. Broder, your reaction to the following: Most Democrats believe they are the party of government, and are more likely to be willing to make a deal even if it's not the optimum; most Republicans are hostile to government and would torpedo a deal rather than (take your pick) compromise their moral beliefs or lose a political advantage.
David S. Broder: That may be true, but this "deal" is more about the private economy than the government--and I'm surprised that Republicans are willing to run such a risk.
Crystal City, Va.: Do the democrats in both the House and Senate have the votes to pass the bailout proposal without the support of House Republicans? Why not do so and call their bluff? Either negotiate in good faith, or we'll pass our version of the bill and Bush will sign that.
David S. Broder: The Democrats believe--and justifiably so--that this is a national problem and both parties should share the evident risks in committing such a vast sum to an uncertain fate.
Fairfax, Va.: You stated several times during this chat that you're reserving judgment about Gov. Palin until you see her take a more active and public role in the campaign. But what if that doesn't happen between now and Election Day?
David S. Broder: It will happen in the October 2 debate and as she travels with a large and increasingly impatient press corps.
Waukesha, Wis.: With all these bank failures, is it still legal for me to trade my chickens for food?
David S. Broder: Yes, but drive a hard bargain.
First presidential debate was 1858: According to this article, Lincoln-Douglas was the first presidential debate.
David S. Broder: Nope. Lincoln and Douglas were candidates in Illinois, not running for president.
Anonymous: McCain's position is "no bailout deal, no debate." Will he follow through on this promise and allow an Obama 90-minute infomercial viewed by tens of millions?
David S. Broder: I don't know.
Baltimore: Okay, so McCain says he needs to go back to Washington to fix this problem and wants to suspend his campaign. But he doesn't get involved until the last minute and his campaign offices are still open and running. While he's in New York in the morning yesterday everyone thinks a bill is going to pass, but when he gets back to Washington the bill falls apart. Did this just backfire on him big time?
David S. Broder: So far, little good has resulted from McCain's intervention or Bush's summit. But the story is still continuing today.
Re: Consequences of not reaching a deal: One thing that I don't think has been explained to the American people is that, although relatively few people directly invest in the market, many do so indirectly. If you have a pension, it's invested in the market. If the market crashes on Monday because no deal has been reached, kiss the pension goodbye.
David S. Broder: You are right. That's why this is really important.
Washington: Mr. Broder, have you found any consensus among independents and undecideds with regard to Palin's recent mediocre interview? I belive this might foreshadow her performance in the upcoming vice presidential debate.
David S. Broder: I doubt that many people ar5e following the Palin interviews, with everything else that is going on. The debate between her and Sen. Biden will havbe vastly more influence.
Tuckahoe, N.Y.: Doesn't this look like a replay of the (successful) right-wing radio response to McCain's bipartisan immigration plan, which he embarrassingly was forced to disown?
David S. Broder: Yes. I made the same point in response to an earlier question.
Lawrence, Kan.: Do you sense that the financial crisis will lead to a serious rethinking of how we regulate industries in this nation? Or will it be back to the same political split after we get past this mess?
David S. Broder: I think this has the potential to be a game-changer. What emerges from the next Congress is unpredictable, but I think the chances of systemic change are much greater now.
Springfield, Va.: How is allowing bad decisions to have bad consequences exacting revenge, exactly?
David S. Broder: Bad decisions are already having bad consequences. I sense in some of the comments a desire to really punish the bad guys on Wall Street.
I realize you're too young to remember this, but ...: what do you think FDR would have done in the present economic circumstances?
David S. Broder: As I wrote in a column the other day, in 1933 it was FDR's voice that was heard, calming the nation. Unfortunately, George Bush at this point has lost so much credibility he cannot fulfill that role.
Fairfax, Va.: Does it appear to you that we may be on the verge of a meltdown of the U.S. political system with its inability to act on the financial crisis, if that is what happens? How will the November election change all of that?
David S. Broder: I don't think the political system will melt down, but we are seeing it severly tested. And those who fail this test will be punished, I would think, in Novbember. I have to go back to work now. Thank all of you for participating.
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 Columnist David S. Broder answers your questions about the world of politics, from the latest maneuverings on Capitol Hill to developments in the White House.
| 163.344828 | 0.931034 | 8.793103 |
high
|
medium
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/02/09/DI2007020901514.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/02/09/DI2007020901514.html
|
John Kelly's Washington
|
2007021619
|
John Kelly writes five times a week about the joys and annoyances of living in Washington. He aims to show readers the Washington (and Silver Spring, Alexandria, Manassas, Bowie ...) that they know and take them places they don't know. He wants to make them see familiar things in unfamiliar ways and unfamiliar things in familiar ways. ("We may occasionally end up seeing unfamiliar things in unfamiliar ways," John says, "but such are the risks of the job.") His columns take a cockeyed view of the place the rest of the planet knows as the Capital of the Free World but that we all call home. John rides the Metro for fun and once kidnapped an Irishman to see what made him tick.
John Kelly: Okay, before we get too far, can someone tell me how "CSI" ended last night? This happens to me all the time: I have a glass of red wine with dinner, relaxing after a long day at the office and looking forward to my "CSI" or my "Law & Order." At 9 I settle down on the couch and get into the program. Then, about 9:58 I awake with a start and realize the show's over. This never happens with shows that wouldn't suffer from such an episode--a silly sitcom, say. It only happens with shows that have some sort of twist or denouement.
Last night's "CSI" was about a missing high school basketball star and his cheerleader girlfriend. By the time I came to, the "CSI" guys were standing around going, [[SPOILER ALERT!!!]] "Well, Sheila and Kate are dead and Megan won't be charged with a crime."
Sorry about missing last week's chat. A German friend is living in Cambridge, Mass., for a few months so we headed up to visit her. I'll sneak in some of the questions that were sent to last week's chat in vain.
But it gives us lots to talk about today. Since we last chatted I've written about such things as lousy AM radio reception; Whitman High School's "meditation" classes; my love of honest-to-goodness D.C. blizzards; Merv Conn, accordion legend; books devoted to public sculpture around town; the day I helped install a museum exhibit at Walter Reed; my love-hate relationship with opthalmologists; and Arlington's new ice arena and a few unfortunate design flaws.
And my, so many things are in the news. I had never heard of outsize plastic testicles before Lisa Rein's story today about how a lawmaker in Western Maryland wants to ban them. And chimps are making weapons! Is the human race doomed?
I mean, yes, it is doomed. Of course it is. But will weapon-wielding chimps play a part in our demise?
Okay, on to happier things....
McLean, Va.: Hi John - Some time ago, perhaps as much as year, a chatter inquired about the knotted rope hanging from the Key Bridge over the exit from the GW Parkway. You looked into it and reported back that it was left over from construction and would be removed within a couple of weeks. It's STILL there. Wanna check it out again?
John Kelly: I saw it myself not long ago. It wasn't there for construction but as an aid for when the bridges are inspected. At least, that's what I was told. The old DC Department of Transportation spokesman is gone. I should ask the new guy. But maybe we should hope it doesn't get taken down. It's become kind of a quirky landmark now, like a hanging garden or the Shroud of Turin.
washingotnpost.com: Answer Man: Opening Up About Bridges (Post, Feb. 13, 2006)
John Kelly: It's been almost exactly a year since I wrote that column....
Bowie, Md.: Submitting early due to scheduling conflict:
I just read yesterday's column about the Arlington Iceplex, and naturally I'm appalled but not exactly surprised. What astonishes me is that we have so many resources in this area upon which to draw, yet everybody depended upon the architects who apparently either knew little about the ADA or continued to treat it as something "extra" instead of something as basic as meeting the fire codes, the plumbing codes, the electrical codes, etc. Why the city of Arlington couldn't have simply invited a couple of officials from the US Access Board to review the plans and tour the facility prior to completion, formally or informally, is beyond me. They're right here! And the Center for Universal Design at NC State isn't that far away.
It's probably too late to make alternate arrangements for the March 11 US Disabled Hockey/NRH/United Spinal sled hockey clinic, or for the April 18 competition, but I feel compelled to note that the City of Bowie, MD has a rather nice ice rink with fully-accessible bleachers and integrated seating. Granted, it's not perfect, having been renovated in the mid-'90s rather than newly-built from the ground up; but then neither is the Arlington Iceplex. And given the higher-than-average population of persons with disabilities in Bowie (due to the overwhelming number of houses in which ground-floor living is possible), it would seem like a better match demographically as well.
John Kelly: The problem with the bleachers won't affect either of those events. The ice isn't a problem. In fact, they've had disabled skaters there before. It's just if you're in a wheelchair there's no place to watch.
Frankly I was surprised by this. I thought ADA was a no brainer. But many of the people I spoke with said this sort of thing happens all the time. Some of it is relatively small and easy to fix stuff: a urinal too high, for example. Other stuff is harder. And some of it, I was told, is open to interpretation: what does the ADA REALLY stipulate? I'm not an ADA expert but this seemed an unfortunate case, and ironic, given that Arlington, I think, usually does a pretty good job with this. Ballston, I was told, has a high concentration of wheelchair users, who like the accessibility of the neighborhood.
By the waya, if you want to check out disabled hockey, click here.
Woodley Park: So, Mr. Kelly. Please identify the best chinese restaurants in DC. If you must, you can venture to MD and VA -- but I can't really find a truly great chinese restaurant in DC. Yes, I even ventured to China Town.
John Kelly: I'll throw this open to the chatters, since I'm no Tom Sietsema. I do see that among the editor's picks on washingtonpost.com's City Guide are Ching Ching Cha, Eat First, Hollywood East Cafe, Mark's Duck House, Spices and Yuang Fu Vegetarian Restaurant.
And I recommend the dim sum at Chow Chow's. The only problem is, it's in Boston. We ate there last Sunday, ordering all sorts of steamed and fried stuff as it was whisked past on rolling carts. Very good.
Karen Vasquez, Arlington Economic Development: John - I wanted to add a couple comments to the discussion on your recent column about the Kettler Capitals Iceplex. First and foremost, Arlington is very committed to ensuring that the Kettler Capitals Iceplex is fully ADA compliant -- it was a complex project, and we are committed to getting it right.
When we received the temporary Certificate of Occupancy in November, it came with a list of items, some of which had to do with ADA compliance. We've been actively resolving these issues and only one remains outstanding.
The ADA issues are one part of this -- the other part, which we're very proud of, is that Arlington has actively sought out groups within the disabled community, to use the rink. We've provided them with free ice time at convenient hours - no other ice rink in the Washington, D.C. region has done this.
Your column shed light on a really great resource for the community, and we appreciate the participation of the community in this process.
The disabled groups I spoke with are very appreciative of that free ice time, which was envisioned from the start. I think that's why some wheelchair users were so surprised by the bleacher screw-up. Over and over again I heard, "The ADA's only been around for 17 years. How long until builders get it right from the start?"
Bowie, Md.: Have you resolved your dehumdifier problems yet? I have had two running in my basement nonstop throughout the year for about 3.5 years now with no problems (knock on wood). They have models that work well below 42F.
Reason I have two is b/c I have a huge unfinished basement, and there's not enough air circulation down there to get all the moisture out. You'll get localized removal of moisture only, unless you have a fan to circulate the air or have at least two running. With two running, it's less stress on one machine.
I have a Maytag and a Goldstar (Goldstar makes them for Fedders, which is a big name). You can generally get good prices on dehumdifiers around this time at Walmart (& online), but they sell out quickly come spring.
Whole house dehumidifiers are generally not necessary, unless you want to spend the money, since you have the AC running during the summer which helps remove moisture. The basement is the more important area because it's unfinished, below ground and cool where the moisture condenses, and more likely to have mold growth. There are also dehumidifers that come with pumps in case you don't have a sump pit to drain the water, and don't like to empty buckets every couple of hours. Just some tips based on my experience.
John Kelly: Thanks. As I mentioned in my follow-up column, that subject drew enormous amounts of e-mail. Here I was thinking I was the only one with a problem. A few people said a properly aired-out basement doesn't need dehumidifiers at all. One person recommended adding a air conditioning duct and a return air duct. He said they could be installed for the price of a decent dehumidifier.
A woman said she just left her basement windows open and that was enough to keep things dry. I don't think I'd do that, lest animals and humans attempted to crawl in. But the AC idea sounds feasible.
washingotnpost.com: Where Dehumidifiers Go to Die (Post, Feb. 5, 2007)
John Kelly: Requeim for a dehumidifier....
washingotnpost.com: Readers Weigh In on Battling the Dankness (Post, Feb. 19, 2007)
John Kelly: The final word on the subject?
Columbia, Md.: Just wanted to put out a questions to see what kind of answers people give. Last night I was picking up some things at Lowes and realized after I got to the car and packed up, that I had not been charged for an $89.00 kitchen light. The friend who was with me said "Oh well, they rip people off all the time, I wouldn't take it back in." I said, two wrongs don't make a right (I know a lot of cliches) and that I did not feel right about keeping it and was going to take it in. I took it in, showed my receipt, the cashier thanked me several times and I went on my way feeling like I did the right thing, but I just would like some honest posts from people about what they would do, since no one will know the person responding, hopefully people will be honest in the poll. The poll won't change my mind about next time it happens for me but I am just curious. Thanks
John Kelly: Okay folks: What would YOU have done?
Nice Neighborhood: What is my best approach to the neighbor kid who "walks his dog" on my front yard. I caught him in the act one cold night - much to his surprise. The boy denied it. But the dog was obviously, uh, busy.
Since expressing my doubts and telling him to no longer "walk his dog" near our year, I have received the expected response. Fresh evidence daily.
The boy was pegged as a juvenile deliquent by my wife on the day we moved in 10 years ago. Parents are reclusive with obvious anger problems. This is not the type of thing you can discuss with a reasonable neighbor. Best approach? Trancendence and my own plastic bag daily?
John Kelly: Whatever you do, don't throttle the kid, like that local official did not long ago. If you kid hasn't been responsive and you can't talk to the parents, I don't know where that leaves you. I take it you mean that a "reasonable" neighbor wouldn't let it happen in the first place?
I'm tempted to suggest that you go take a dump on their lawn one morning, but that might end badly.
Dewey Beach, Del.: One of these days you might let us know why the obits with color pictures are always at the end of the rest of the obits. Seems odd when they are on the same page and could, presumably, be amongst the others.
John Kelly: My Lovely Wife has been obsessed with that too. I just checked with advertising and was told their antiquated (1955) layout system has to do it that way. Looks weird, doesn't it?
Just for John: A drummer, sick of all the drummer jokes, decides to change his instrument. After some thought, he decides on the accordion. So he goes to the music store and says to the owner, "I'd like to look at the accordions, please." The owner gestures to a shelf in the corner and says "All our accordions are over there." After browsing, the drummer says, "I think I'd like the big red one in the corner." The store owner looks at him and says, "You're a drummer, aren't you?" The drummer, crestfallen, says, "How did you know?" The store owner says, "That `big red accordion' is the radiator."
Del Ray, Va.: Last accordion joke I promise: This guy walks into an antique store and notices a brass rat sitting on one of the top shelves. He asks the clerk, "How much for that brass rat?". The clerk says "Well sir, it's 25 bucks just for the rat, and 50 bucks if you want to hear the story that goes with it. Take my word, you'll want to -hear- the story." The guy says "No, I believe I'll just take the rat for 25 bucks."
So, this fella takes his brass rat and heads down the street. Right away he notices that a -real- rat is following him, so he makes a quick turn down the next street. He passes an alley, at which point about a half-dozen rats come out and start following him. This guy is getting pretty panicked at this point, so he starts heading out toward the outskirts of town. When he passes the town dump, -hundreds- of rats stream out and follow him. Our hero is beside himself at this point, so as he passes the river that winds around town, he tosses the brass rat right in the drink. Every last one of the real rats follows the brass rat into the river and drowns.
Relieved, our protagonist heads back to the antique store where he got the brass rat. "I knew it!", says the clerk, "You're back to hear the story about the rat, aren't you?". "No sir", says the guy, "I just wanted to find out how much you're asking for that brass accordion I see you've got up there."
John Kelly: And yet I would say that drummers are some of the most curious people I know.
And speaking of accordions, the Merv Conn movie was such a hit at AFI last Sunday--it sold out--that they're screenig it again this Sunday, at 4:30. Merv'll be there too. Given how over oversubscribed it was last week, it might make sense to reserve tickets.
Anonymous: Hi Dad/Julie/other person screening questions:
Rebecca, Erin and I are software apps right now and bored so we are reading your chat! This is so cool! Just thought I would let you know because I'm at RM, and you're at the Post and we are looking at the same thing! Also, I'm avoiding doing my powerpoint on an "influential world leader." See you at 11:15.
John Kelly: Get to work! Rigorous!
Lust in Space: Do you think that C.W. Woodward High School has removed Lisa Nowak's mementoes from the display case?
John Kelly: I hope not. I think they'd provide a good lesson: Anyone can be an astronaut, if you try hard enough. And anyone can flip out. So, study hard kids! But not too hard!
washingotnpost.com: A Legend With Oomph -- and Oompah (Post, Feb. 15, 2007)
John Kelly: The one, the only, Mervyn Conn.
I actually hired him once, to play Sousa's "The Washington Post March" here in the newsroom. That was 10 years ago. I really needed him for about 5 minutes, to burst into the daily story conference meeting pumping out that song. But I'd paid him for two hours so he stayed the whole time, wheezing away back in the Weekend section, which I edited at the time.
Once I've made my way through many of the Smithsonians, where the best place to find out about free (or really cheap) events taking place around town?
John Kelly: Look in the Weekend section every Friday. It lists lots of free stuff. The Kennedy Center's Millennium Stage performances are free every day. The service bands will be starting their free, warm-weather concerts soon. This is a good town for cheapskates.
Rats & ketchup packets: I've noticed a few dead rats while walking to Courthouse Metro in North Arlington. Not just at that site, but at other areas in North Arlington. One was huge, laying right in front of a McMansion on north adams street across key school. I wonder if Arlington county is aware of the rat problem.
Why is it so hard for McDonald employees to INCLUDE ketchup packets with a customers order. Everytime I order (especially during drive thru) I have to ask for ketchup. So many times I've gotten back to the office and ketchup is missing. Do the McDonald employees have some sort of incentive to not distributing the packets? Does it come out of their paychecks if too many ketchup packets are distributed.
Thanks for letting me rant.
John Kelly: I think there must be some scientific corollary involving ketchup packets, some Newtonian rule: For every ketchup packet there is an equal and opposite ketchup packet. Or: Ketchup packets may not be created or destroyed.
What I mean is, there is a constant number of ketchup packets in the world. I always end up with too many. You end up with not enough. We need to start going to McDonald's together, like Jack Spratt and his wife.
And don't even get me started on catsup.
Merv Conn: So, would it be appropriate to attend the screening of the Merv Conn movie with one's main squeeze?
John Kelly: Accordion' to The Washington Post, yes.
Falls Church, Va.: Naughtiest phrase in today's news: "Vilsack withdrawal."
John Kelly: Worse than "outsized plastic testicles"?
Petworth, D.C.: Chinese Restaurant in DC - in my opinion, the best Chinese restaurant in DC is Meiwah, at New Hampshire Ave and M St NW.
John Kelly: I think Tom Sietsema likes that one too. You might see him there someday: short chap with a Mohawk and a dueling scar.
Bowie, Md.: The ice isn't a problem. In fact, they've had disabled skaters there before. It's just if you're in a wheelchair there's no place to watch.
That was kinda my point: At Bowie, you can skate or watch, and wheelchair seating is dispersed throughout the bleacher area (i.e., not segregated).
John Kelly: And the Kettler Arlington Iceplex will have that too. They're looking at plans now and have a subcontractor working on getting the materials they'll need.
washingtonpost.com: At the Ice Rink, Left Out in the Cold (Post, Feb. 22, 2007)
John Kelly: The column in question....
Washington, D.C.: I saw a hilarious collection of court documents on some website regarding a lawsuit against some guy who had those oversized plastic testicles on his truck. To add insult to injury, his vanity plate said "strokin'". He claims it's because the engine on his truck is a two-stroke, or a four-stroke, or whatever kind of engine manly men would brag about. Needless to say, many of his fellow motorists were offended, and tried to sue him into good taste.
John Kelly: A stroker motor is one that uses a different crankshaft to get more horsepower out of the engine.
But that's not what we were talking about. I'd never heard of those "decorations." I looked them up on the web and they're ridiculous. They don't seem that outsized to me. (It's hard to tell in the photos, but I was expecting something like beachballs not the nauseatingly realistic things companies such as Your Nutz sell.)
I wouldn't want them on my car or truck and I don't think I even like looking at them. But I wouldn't pass a law to ban them. Of course, these guys who put them on their trucks don't have to look at them. I'd insist they also hang a pair from their rear-view mirror.
Doggy doo: Collect it in a bag and leave it on the miscreant's doorstep. If you want to be certain you've got the right person, set up a little webcam to catch 'em in the act.
Nothing like a little passive-aggression to brighten the day!
John Kelly: But is that only going to make things worse?
McLean, Va.: If I knew the owner of the pooping dog, and felt that I could not engage the owner in reasonable conversation, there's always the flaming bag.....
John Kelly: While that might stop the bad neighbor from letting his dog poop on the guy's lawn, that might only be so he could save it up and retaliate for the flaming bag.
Tourist: I'm heading to the Smithsonian museums tomorrow. There aren't any wacko protests on the mall this weekend, are there?
John Kelly: I don't know of any. Of course, the great thing about Washington is a wacko protest can pop up anywhere, anytime.
All About Me: I was looking through the archived chats and I realized the chats that I didn't participate in was rather boring. I sure am glad that I'm here.
John Kelly: I am too. And the chats of mine that *I* don't participate in are real snoozefests.
Free lamp?: I would have done exactly what the poster did. But I have to temper that by saying that a lot depends on the cost of the item. If it were a $1.99 gizmo I probably would have gone on home; I don't know where the price break point is between reporting it and not reporting it.
It gets more complicated if I don't discover the discrepancy until I get home. Then I would be likely to call the store, and go back later when I was making the trip anyway.
John Kelly: I'll tell you what I really hate is when I order carryout from a restaurant, drive to pick it up, pay for it, then get home and realize something has been left out. I'm ready to commit homicide at that point.
23112: Definitely go back in and rectify the error. Otherwise the cashier gets in trouble, and what kind of person would you be if you just let that happen?
John Kelly: A bad person. Or a not very good one anyway.
Kitchen Light:: Stealing is stealing. You had the item, you didn't pay for it.
In your case it was an accident and you did the right thing.
Keeping the light without paying for it is
John Kelly: Yeah, you've gotta fess up. Life shouldn't be a grim contest to see how much you can get away with. We need to be reasonable people, people.
McLean, Va.: I really liked your recent column on honest-to-goodness snow days. It reminded me of what snow days should be - a gift, not a burden (like the recent snow/ice that closed school for THREE days)! I actually cut the column out of the paper to save - thanks!
John Kelly: Thanks for your nice note. I had another column written for that day, but when I heard the forecast I knew I had to change my plans. Who knew whether it would snow again this winter.
Of course, instead of the pillowy white snow I was hoping for we got that ugly sleet/ice mixture.
washingotnpost.com: Let It Snow, Let Drifts Grow, Let Us Slow (Post, Feb. 13, 2007)
John Kelly: Feel free to clip this out of your computer screen.
Need a neologism here: I hate it when I'm reading a chat and nothing new is posted for a long time. What's the word for the feeling I experience after I click "Refresh" and the screen goes right back to where it was?
(This is in the spirit of Lyndsey Layton's chat earlier today, where some poster casually dropped "squadoosh" into the chat. Not really a neologism, but certainly a word I've never heard.)
Acrobat: John, can you do this?
John Kelly: Yes, but I usually have pants on when I do it.
Washington, D.C.: Avoid Full Kee in DC's Chinatown. The Post reported yesterday that they were recently closed due to gross unsanitary conditions, food kept at dangerous temperatures, and evidence of vermin. Not very appetizing.
John Kelly: If you go, bring a brass rat.
washingotnpost.com: From yesterday's P.G. Extra:
Closed on Friday for incorrect handling of potentially hazardous foods, operating a food establishment with gross unsanitary conditions and vermin infestation, and operating a food establishment without a current business license. Reopened Saturday.
John Kelly: The gory details.
But, hey, it reopened Saturday.
Was 5 minutes enough?: I thought your Mervyn Conn story would have a punchline that you had to pay him AGAIN so that he WOULDN'T stay the whole two hours.
John Kelly: Merv's a real professional. He learned the Sousa march at my request. After a couple of false starts he really got into it. I only really needed him to play the first 20 seconds or so, the really recognizable part. But he'd learned the whole thing and wanted to play it all. And he did. Merv loves to play the accordion.
Fairfax, Va.: re: Person in nice neighborhood with dog problem.
Another question: Is it bad or unneighborly to put up a fence in a nice neighborhood? I know a lot of these types of neighborhoods where if you want some privacy, keep out dogs, and/or want your kids not to get kidnapped, a fence (even front fence) is the perfect solution, but the very thought of it is poo poo'd because it's deemed as antisocial.
John Kelly: Don't some neighborhoods have covenants against fences? I can see not wanting an 8-foot-high stockade fence in a front yard, but a fence in the back to keep in a dog or a low, pretty one in the front to keep OUT a dog seems reasonable to me.
Washington, D.C.: re: Mei Wah rec.
Only if you like Americanized Chinese food.
John Kelly: I wonder where the Chinese diplomats go.
Ice Rink ADA: Back in college I worked at a local ice rink in the DC area. One day, I think it was during a mid-day session, a person entered the building in a wheel chair. I asked if they were there to watch some friends or family-members. The answer was "No." as I noticed the next person in the door carrying some form of skis/skids that the person then had fixed on the wheels and off they went. Someone did have to provie the propulsion, but the enjoyed some icetime that day.
John Kelly: YEah, it's called sledge hockey.
Washington, D.C.: I don't get the brass accordian joke.
John Kelly: You must be a bass player.
The Chair: You are not the only one who has trouble deciding. I'm always asking to go back and forth between lense settings.
Perhaps that goes along with the time I went shoe shopping and tried on 17 pair and took home the first pair I tried.
John Kelly: You had to be sure, right?
And, hey, that sales person made a sale. He should be happy with that.
Knotted rope: Come on, John, you need to pursue that knotted rope thing. I would think you'd be all over that one, given that you work for a noose-paper and all.
John Kelly: Well I'm all tied up right now, but I'll try.
Inreta, Ill.: Of course you should go back and pay for the lamp. What if you owned a store and a customer did that to you? Sure, it seems different when the store is a huge soulless corporation that gives its workers lousy pay and benefits. But does stealing from The Man improve their lives? Nah. Nor does it improve your soul.
Pay for the lamp. Be honest. Stuff matters.
John Kelly: Right. There's that whole karma thing. Besides, if you've already mentlly spent the money, why not physically spend it?
Unpaid Items: The story about the Lowe's item that the buyer didn't get charged for reminds me of an experience I had some years ago while I was in college. After a Thanksgiving visit to my relatives, I fueled up and headed back to school. Somewhere along the journey, it occurred to me that I hadn't paid for my gas, which left me horrified (I was on a major honesty kick in those days). I called my cousins the next day to get the number of the Chevron station, which I then called to apologize, following up with a check to cover the cost of the inadvertently stolen gas.
When I visited again the following summer, I noticed the gas station where I'd filled up at Thanksgiving. It was across the street from the Chevron station I'd sent the check to.
I take it the Chevron station didn't send your check back?
Accessoriz, IN: I've seen the oversized plastic vilsack hanging off the back of a truck a few times in my travels around the Beltway. Understand that I am a middle-aged man, educated by Irish and Italian priests; I'm a former fratboy, a one-time working musician, and an occasional journalist. My heroes and role models include Lenny Bruce, George Carlin, and Gene Weingarten. I am not an easy person to offend.
But an oversized plastic vilsack hanging off the back of a truck?
John Kelly: I know. I'd love to have witnessed the thought process that resulted in said product: "You know what would look great at the back of a truck?"
They make those incontinent Calvin decals look as classy as a Faberge egg.
Be honest! DO the right thing.: I had the same situation a couple months ago at World Market in Tysons. While shopping I had put an item (worth $25) in the bottom of the baby stroller and totally forgot that it was there when I went to pay for my other purchases. I didn't find it until I got out to my car. For an split second I thought of just driving off, but it was an easy decision to just go back in with the item, get back in line, and pay for it.
John Kelly: Good for you!
Takoma Park, Md.: Your daughter needs to learn the first golden rule of goofing off in class: DON'T send a note to your dad telling him you're goofing off in class. Sheesh.
John Kelly: She was doing vital research, I'm sure--on the use of the Web in early 21st century America.
CW Woodward....: ceased to exist in 1987, so my guess is they removed ALL mementos back then!
John Kelly: Yeah, and moved them over to Peary.
(Inside joke for 40ish attendees of Montgomery County high schools. Peary is gone, too.)
Honest Abbey: Are you kidding about the $89 light? I found once that I had neglected to pay for a half-gallon of milk as a Safeway employee was loading my car, and even HE told me just to take it. I did - I took it inside and paid for it. And that's like, $2.79 worth.
You did the right thing, and your friend is dishonest
John Kelly: According to our unscientific poll, honesty is always the best policy. Now what if your spouse asks: "Do these pants make my butt look fat?"
If I noticed that I either didn't get the correct change or wan undercharged (or not charged at all) while I was in the store then I would certainly say something. I cannot say for sure that I would go back if I didn't notice it until I got home.
I once had an instructor who asked the question "If someone gave you too much change would you tell them". Most of the people in the room said "yes".
Then he asked, "What if you didn't notice it until you were in your car?" Still about 3/4 of the people said "yes".
Then he asked how many would return to the store once they got home on a stormy night. Maybe 10% said they would go back out.
John Kelly: Well my memory is such that if I don't notice it right then, when the change is put in my hand, I'm not going to notice it when I get home, no matter what the weather.
On being undercharged: Once when I got my hair done I was only charged for the tip, not the service. I didn't notice it until I got my bill so when I went next time I told them what happened. They said they weren't short, so they wouldn't charge me the extra money.
The only time I haven't gone back was when I accidently walked out of the grocery store with a magazine in my cart. I'd been overcharged so many times that I really couldn't bother. I felt guilty for a little bit, but then remembered them forgetting to put stuff in my bag before, so I felt less guilty. But I double check my cart before leaving since.
John Kelly: I think they call that "situational ethics."
Baltimore: Hi John, The corridor-cleaning guy in my apartment building has been stealing my Newspaper. I finally have proof and I am mad as hell. I want to report the guy to apartment management but I don't want him to lose is job. What can I do? Please help.
John Kelly: I know where you can get some dog poop, if that helps.
No. How about just saying, "Hey, don't take my paper anymore, okay?" And if he protests say, "Look, I know you're a good guy and I don't want to tell your boss, but I will if the paper ever goes missing again."
Chinese restaurant: Big vote for Mark's Duck House on Rt. 50 in Arlington. Excellent food, as certified by presence of large numbers of Chinese-looking individuals. Go with a group and shareshareshare! Dim sum, sometimes, too.
John Kelly: Noted. Thank you!
Arlington, Va.: return it or not?
I once bought a racket at Sprots Authority and left it to get strung. When I went to pick it up they told me I had already paid for everything. I insisted I had not but they laughed and said "if you want to pay twice, go ahead." So I went home and checked my receipt and it didn't have the amount for the racket. believe it or not, I went back (the store is a 15 mn drive) and told them the story again. But again they insisted I had paid for it. So I left with my free $140 racket. What else could I have done?
John Kelly: Yeah, I think if they won't listen to reason you shouldn't have to beat your head against a wall. You did all you could do.
Nosey: John, what did you get your lovely wife for Valentines Day?
John Kelly: A card from CVS. It's the thought that counts.
MoCo, Md.: Man, that nutjob cop in PG county needs to spend a lot of time in jail for killing one guy and wounding another. All over scratched bedrails.
John Kelly: Man I hope he and his lawyers aren't able to muddy the waters as this case progresses. You know they're going to attack the witness's veracity, try to turn into a he said/he said kind of thing. But Washington has sounded like trouble from the start and I really feel sorry for the Marlo guys.
Butt too Fat: If you think that pants/butt/fat question is hard what about "Do you like my hair the way it is ?".
John Kelly: The only honest answer is: "Well, whatever I think, it's too late to do anything about it."
The Wrong Gas Stati, ON: Hey, it doesn't matter which Chevron station you sent the check to. Dick Cheney gets paid either way.
John Kelly: And he thanks you for your support.
Good Chinese: Try China Canteen on 355 in Rockville. The "Specials" board is in Chinese (not sure if it is Manderine, Cantonees, etc.) but many of the parton can read it. One of these days we'll get up the nerve to ask what some of the specials are, and perhaps eat one.
John Kelly: My Lovely Wife's foodie cousin was our guide at the Boston dim sum. He kept the good stuff coming and waved away the carts bearing chicken feet. I'm sure the hardcore people love them, but some nice pork rolls were fine with me.
RE: Dog on Lawn: Motion activated sprinklers timed to work when he's walking. Works every time.
John Kelly: That's a great idea.
Free lamp? Reply to 23112: Actually, I doubt the cashier would be in trouble. The store manager might be, because of "inventory shrinkage," but there is nothing to tie the cashier to the omitted transaction.
That said, it wouldn't change what I would do. I would still take the lamp back and pay for it.
John Kelly: Right. Only if it was rung up and literally shortchanged would the cashier take the fall.
Ketchup: FF restaurants do actively ration ketchup packets b/c it cuts into their bottom line. Also, they person with his or her hands all over those packets has been touching money all day and has not washed his or her hands for a while. I know some people like to put them in their mouths aftr they have squeezed out the ketchup . . .
John Kelly: What I've noticed in the last five years or so is serious napkin rationing. A lot of places--in mall food courts especially, it seems--keep the napkins behind the counter and only give you two with your order. I don't mind necessarily--you can always ask for more. And a lot of those napkin dispensers give you a huge handful when you pull on them. It's probably better for the environment to only get a few. Or we could all start carrying napkins.
Bowie, Md.: Re: Airing out the Basement
Just to follow up, it's actually not a good idea to leave windows open to air the basement out. Reason is that it allows moist air to enter the basement. Mold needs moisure to grow. Also, if you live in the 'burbs with trees, plants, and other types of rotting vegetation like leaves and mulch, there are multi millions of mold spores floating in the air that can come into your basement and start colonies, especially if your basement is unfinished.
Mold loves organic material (cardboard boxes, books, paper, wood, etc.) and dark/damp conditions, and a basement has all of those ingredients. The most important thing is to keep the air dry down there, and keep mold from coming in. An AC return can help, but it can't do the job of a dedicated dehumidifier. Also, it depends on the size of your basement though.
John Kelly: Her suggestion was to open the windows and install a window fan, sucking air in and through the basement.
Silver Spring, Md.: John Kelly: You must be a bass player
John Kelly: We kid because we love. Now, let's take it from the middle eight.
Slacker!: Where have you been?? Some of us look forward to the Friday chat!
John Kelly: I know I do.
Thanks for stopping by today. As always, a veritable cornycopia of opinion. Look for me in the paper on Sunday, when we unveil a special video Answer Man.
How CSI ended: You need a DVR or TIVO. That way when you wake up you can hit rewind and pick up where you fell asleep. Works like a charm.
John Kelly: Hey! 72 minutes of chatting and no one told me how "CSI" ended! I see I can't depend on you for anything.
Chug: Can we all go to happy hour now?
John Kelly: Yes, and please remember to tip your waitron.
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
|
Post columnist John Kelly takes questions on his recent columns, life in the Washington area and more.
| 450.894737 | 0.947368 | 1.578947 |
high
|
high
|
mixed
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/wendy_doniger/2007/02/sex_and_religion_joined_at_the_1.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021619id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/wendy_doniger/2007/02/sex_and_religion_joined_at_the_1.html
|
For Many Religions, Sex Both Blessing and Curse
|
2007021619
|
You misunderstand. Consciousness is never a part of evolution and natural selection at all. Neither the male "mate guarding" nor the female choosing has anything to do with conscious choice. You might ask how females know who to choose? Many studies have shown that females of many species choose males based visual signals (plumage in birds, body size in mammals and reptiles), audio signals (birds, frogs, crickets), and pheromones (insects, humans, mammals). They donât have to know why they choose one mate over another, only that the signal (visual, acoustic, smell) indicates some sort of quality (i.e. genetic) component of the male. They obviously donât have to know consciously that the signal is an honest signal either.
There has been a lot of work recently showing that mate choice in both men and women are affected by pheromones, which affect hormone levels and behavior. Below is a recent study. None of this requires conscious choice.
Male Sweat Boosts Women's Hormone Levels
Science Daily â Just a few whiffs of a chemical found in male sweat is enough to raise levels of the stress hormone cortisol in heterosexual women, according to a new study by University of California, Berkeley, scientists.
The study, reported this week in The Journal of Neuroscience, provides the first direct evidence that humans, like rats, moths and butterflies, secrete a scent that affects the physiology of the opposite sex.
"This is the first time anyone has demonstrated that a change in women's hormonal levels is induced by sniffing an identified compound of male sweat," as opposed to applying a chemical to the upper lip, said study leader Claire Wyart, a post-doctoral fellow at UC Berkeley.
The team's work was inspired by previous studies by Wyart's colleague Noam Sobel, associate professor of psychology at UC Berkeley and director of the Berkeley Olfactory Research Program. He found that the chemical androstadienone - a compound found in male sweat and an additive in perfumes and colognes - changed mood, sexual arousal, physiological arousal and brain activation in women.
Yet, contrary to perfume company advertisements, there is no hard evidence that humans respond to the smell of androstadienone or any other chemical in a subliminal or instinctual way similar to the way many mammals and even insects respond to pheromones, Wyart said. Though some humans exhibit a small patch inside their nose resembling the vomeronasal organ in rats that detects pheromones, it appears to be vestigial, with no nerve connection to the brain.
"Pheromones are chemical molecules expressed by a species aimed at other members of the species to induce stereotyped behavior or hormonal changes," Wyart explained. "Many people argue that human pheromones don't exist, because humans don't exhibit stereotyped behavior. Nonetheless, this male chemical signal, androstadienone, does cause hormonal as well as physiological and psychological changes in women. More cognitive studies need to be done to understand how androstadienone affects female cognitive functions."
One implication of the finding is that there may be better ways to raise cortisol levels in patients with diseases such as Addison's disease, which is characterized by low cortisol. Instead of giving the hormone in pill form, which has side effects such as ulcers and weight gain, "a potential therapeutic mechanism whereby merely smelling synthesized or purified human chemosignals may be used to modify endocrine balance," the authors wrote.
Sweat has been the main focus of research on human pheromones, and in fact, male underarm sweat has been shown to improve women's moods and affect their secretion of luteinizing hormone, which is normally involved in stimulating ovulation. Other studies have shown that when female sweat is applied to the upper lip of other women, these women respond by shifting their menstrual cycles toward synchrony with the cycle of the woman from whom the sweat was obtained.
Androstadienone, a derivative of testosterone that is found in high concentration in male sweat, and in all other body secretions, has garnered the most attention. However, though its effect on a woman's mood, physiological arousal and brain activity suggests that the chemical is a possible pheromone-like signal in humans, its effect on hormone levels was unknown.
Wyart and Sobel set out to test whether androstadienone affects hormone levels as well, focusing on the hormone cortisol. Cortisol is secreted by the body in times of stress, priming the body for "fight or flight."
In two trials, a total of 48 undergraduate women at UC Berkeley were asked to take 20 sniffs from a bottle containing androstadienone, which smells vaguely musky. Over a period of two hours, the volunteers provided five saliva samples from which cortisol levels were determined.
Compared to their response when sniffing a control odor (yeast), the women who sniffed androstadienone reported an improved mood and significantly higher sexual arousal, while their physiological response, including blood pressure, heart rate and breathing, also increased. This was consistent with previous studies.
In addition, however, the UC Berkeley researchers found that cortisol levels rose within about 15 minutes of sniffing androstadienone, and remained elevated for more than an hour.
Wyart noted that, though this is the first time a specific component of male sweat has been shown to affect women's hormones, other constituents of male sweat likely have a similar effect. The question remains: Which comes first - the change in cortisol level, which may induce a change in mood or arousal; or a mood change that increases cortisol levels?
"We next need to look at other hormones that could explain the diversity of effects of androstadienone on sexual arousal and mood," she said.
Coauthors of the report include UC Berkeley undergraduates Sarah Wilson, Jonathan Chen and Andrew McClary; senior scientist Rehan Khan; and Dr. Wallace Webster, an otolaryngology resident at Kaiser Permanente Hospital in Oakland, Calif. The work was sponsored by the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communicable Disorders of the National Institutes of Health, and by the Army Office of Research.
Note: This story has been adapted from a news release issued by University of California - Berkeley.
Posted February 15, 2007 10:38 PM
|
A conversation on religion with Jon Meacham, Sally Quinn and Wendy Doniger. Visit http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/wendy_doniger/
| 69.411765 | 0.352941 | 0.352941 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/15/AR2007021501270.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/15/AR2007021501270.html
|
Marjorie Valbrun - Black Like Me? - washingtonpost.com
|
2007021619
|
What does it mean to be black, and who is the arbiter of authentic blackness? As Sen. Barack Obama's "blackness" has increasingly been discussed on black-oriented radio shows, at political conferences and on Sunday morning news shows, I've grown more dismayed by the day.
The discourse, occurring mostly among black people, has been dominated by questions about Obama's being biracial, his immigrant father and his suitability as a presidential candidate, given that his life story doesn't parallel that of most blacks born in the United States. Some have implied that only a black candidate whose ancestors were slaves here or who have themselves experienced the trauma of this country's racial history can truly understand what it means to be black in America and represent the political interests of black Americans.
This is a narrow-minded and divisive notion. At a time when blacks living in this country, whether by birth or by choice, should be harnessing their collective political clout to empower all black people, we're wasting time debating which of us are truly black.
As a black immigrant and a Haitian-American who has lived in the country for 37 years, I know how it feels to have my blackness challenged by native-born blacks.
It makes me angry. I'm angry for Obama, too. People are asking whether he's black enough to represent them. I ask, black enough by whose standards? Why must Obama's life follow the same track of "authentic" black folk to pass this litmus test?
Many of my black immigrant friends have also had their blackness questioned by native-born blacks who see us as "not really black." My ancestors probably weren't enslaved on American soil, but they were enslaved on Haitian soil. So how am I less black or less worthy of kinship with black Americans? How ridiculous that someone would think me unable to understand the pain of racism and the long-term costs of white supremacy and slavery.
Last Saturday, Obama's name was raised at the State of the Black Union, a gathering of some 10,000 black people in Hampton, Va., in a forum on the social and economic challenges facing black America. Top black scholars, intellectuals, civil rights leaders and opinion makers were present. Princeton professor Cornel West took Obama to task for not attending. West also criticized Obama's decision to announce his candidacy that day and to do so in front of the Illinois statehouse where Abraham Lincoln began his political career.
A thread of doubt about Obama's commitment to black America ran through some speakers' comments. Harvard law professor Charles Ogletree, who has known Obama since his time at law school, came to his defense. Ogletree noted Obama's record on civil rights and suggested his scheduling conflict was a transgression worthy of forgiveness.
So this is what things have come to: If you don't walk to the beat of the black establishment, you might get kicked out of the club. What's next? A scarlet insignia for IBMs (Inauthentic Black Men)?
We don't all have to like or vote for Obama, but we shouldn't allow this debate to undermine him or discredit his stated commitment to the black community.
When did the social and political cause of American blacks start trumping the larger cause of all blacks living in this country? American blacks don't have a monopoly on blackness or suffering. We black immigrants and children of immigrants are also often stopped by police for driving while black. Ever heard of Abner Louima or Amadou Diallo? Many immigrants feel just as powerless and as excluded from the promise of America.
Yet the hopes, dreams and successes of immigrant and American blacks are also interconnected.
Black immigrants such as myself would probably not be here if not for the sacrifices of those who were on the front lines of the civil rights movement. And that's why I identify myself as black -- not that I have a choice -- with pride and without apology. But black Americans can't on the one hand complain about black immigrants consciously separating themselves from black Americans, which many immigrants do, and on the other hand say: "But you aren't really black like us."
Few American blacks can say with certainty that they don't also have white ancestors. Does that make them less black? Who knows that some distant ancestor of Obama's father was not enslaved here? The more important question is why any of this should matter. When did having slave ancestors become a barometer for political office? Surely those blacks supporting Hillary Clinton aren't holding her to that standard.
I also wonder if Obama's message of racial inclusion worries some blacks. Do they think if he reaches out to "them"(whites), it means he neglects "us" (blacks)?
Malcolm X and Martin Luther King Jr. recognized the universality of the struggle for dignity and self-determination of black people around the world. What were our protests against South African apartheid about if not this very principle? If American blacks can view black South Africans thousands of miles away as brothers in need of their support, why are they having such a hard time seeing Obama as one of their own?
Whether Obama is ready to run, deserves our vote or has enough experience for the job are all legitimate questions. Whether he is black enough is not.
Marjorie Valbrun, a journalist in Washington, is writing a book about the Haitian immigrant experience. She can be reached atmval63@yahoo.com.
|
Those asking if Barack Obama Is 'black enough' are asking the wrong question.
| 66.4375 | 0.9375 | 1.3125 |
high
|
medium
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/15/AR2007021501271.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/15/AR2007021501271.html
|
Bush Regains His Footing
|
2007021619
|
It may seem perverse to suggest that, at the very moment the House of Representatives is repudiating his policy in Iraq, President Bush is poised for a political comeback. But don't be astonished if that is the case.
Like President Bill Clinton after the Democrats lost control of Congress in 1994, Bush has gone through a period of wrenching adjustment to his reduced status. But just as Clinton did in the winter of 1995, Bush now shows signs of renewed energy and is regaining the initiative on several fronts.
More important, he is demonstrating political smarts that even his critics have to acknowledge.
His reaction to the planned House vote opposing the increase he ordered in U.S. troops deployed to Iraq illustrates the point.
When Bush faced reporters on Wednesday morning, he knew that virtually all those in the Democratic majority would be joined by a significant minority of Republicans in voting today to decry the "surge" strategy.
He did three things to diminish the impact of that impending defeat.
First, he argued that the House was at odds with the Senate, which had within the past month unanimously confirmed Gen. David H. Petraeus as the new commander in Iraq -- the man Bush said was the author of the surge strategy and the man who could make it work. Bush has made Petraeus his blocking back in this debate -- replacing Vice President Cheney, whose credibility is much lower.
Second, he minimized the stakes in the House debate by endorsing the good motives of his critics, rejecting the notion that their actions would damage U.S. troops' morale or embolden the enemy -- all by way of saying that the House vote was no big deal.
And third, by contrasting today's vote on a nonbinding resolution with the pending vote on funding the war in Iraq, he shifted the battleground to a fight he is likely to win -- and put the Democrats on the defensive. Much of their own core constituency wants them to go beyond nonbinding resolutions and use the power of the purse to force Bush to reduce the American commitment in Iraq.
But congressional Democrats are leery of seeming to withhold resources from the 150,000 troops who will be fighting in that country once the surge is complete; that is why they blocked Republicans from offering resolutions of their own in the House or Senate pledging to keep financing the war. Democrats did not want an up-or-down vote on that question, but Bush has placed it squarely before them.
In other respects, too, Bush has been impressive in recent days.
He has been far more accessible -- and responsive -- to the media and public, holding any number of one-on-one interviews, both on and off the record, leading up to Wednesday's televised news conference. And he has been more candid in his responses than in the past.
|
As strange as it sounds, President Bush may be poised for a political comeback.
| 34 | 0.875 | 3.125 |
medium
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/15/AR2007021501282.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/15/AR2007021501282.html
|
The Putin Doctrine
|
2007021619
|
Vladimir Putin -- Russia's president, although the more accurate title would be godfather -- made headlines last week with a speech in Munich that set a new standard in anti-Americanism. He not only charged the United States with the "hyper-use of force," "disdain for the basic principles of international law" and having "overstepped its national borders in . . . the economic, political, cultural and educational policies it imposes on other nations." He even blamed the spread of weapons of mass destruction, which the United States has been combating with few allies and against constant Russian resistance, on American "dominance" that "inevitably encourages" other countries to acquire them.
There is something amusing about criticism of the use of force by the man who turned Chechnya into a smoldering ruin; about the invocation of international law by the man who will not allow Scotland Yard to interrogate the polonium-soaked thugs it suspects of murdering Alexander Litvinenko, yet another Putin opponent who met an untimely and unprosecuted death; about the bullying of other countries decried by a man who cuts off energy supplies to Ukraine, Georgia and Belarus in brazen acts of political and economic extortion.
Less amusing is the greater meaning of Putin's Munich speech. It marks Russia's coming out. Flush with oil and gas revenue, the consolidation of dictatorial authority at home and the capitulation of both domestic and Western companies to his seizure of their assets, Putin issued his boldest declaration yet that post-Soviet Russia is preparing to reassert itself on the world stage.
Perhaps the most important line in his speech was the least noted because it seemed so innocuous. "I very often hear appeals by our partners, including our European partners, to the effect that Russia should play an increasingly active role in world affairs," he said. "It is hardly necessary to incite us to do so."
Soviet foreign minister Andrei Gromyko once boasted that no conflict anywhere on the globe could be settled without taking into account the attitude and interests of the Soviet Union. Gromyko's description of Soviet influence constitutes the best definition ever formulated of the term "superpower."
And we know how Putin, who has called the demise of the Soviet Union the greatest political catastrophe of the 20th century, yearns for those superpower days. At Munich, he could not even disguise his Cold War nostalgia, asserting that "global security" was ensured by the "strategic potential of two superpowers."
Putin's bitter complaint is that today there remains only one superpower, the behemoth that dominates a "unipolar world." He knows that Moscow lacks the economic, military and even demographic means to challenge America as it did in Soviet days. He speaks more modestly of coalitions of aggrieved have-not countries that Russia might lead in countering American power.
Hence his increasingly active foreign policy -- military partnerships with China, nuclear cooperation with Iran, weapon supplies to Syria and Venezuela, diplomatic support as well as arms for a genocidal Sudan, friendly outreach to other potential partners of an anti-hegemonic (read: anti-American) alliance.
Is this a return to the Cold War? It is true that the ex-KGB agent occasionally lets slip a classic Marxist anachronism such as "foreign capital" (referring to Western oil companies) or the otherwise weird adjective "vulgar" (describing the actions of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, which infuriated Putin by insisting upon a clean election in Ukraine). He even intimated that he might undo one of the unequivocal achievements of the late Cold War era, the so-called "zero option" agreement of 1987, and restore a Soviet-style, medium-range ballistic missile force.
Nonetheless, Putin's aggressiveness does not signal a return to the Cold War. He is too clever to be burdened by the absurdity of socialist economics or Marxist politics. He is blissfully free of ideology, political philosophy and economic theory. There is no existential dispute with the United States.
He is a more modest man: a mere mafia don, seizing the economic resources and political power of a country for himself and his (mostly KGB) cronies. And promoting his vision of the Russian national interest -- assertive and expansionist -- by engaging in diplomacy that challenges the dominant power in order to boost his own.
He wants Gromyko's influence -- or at least some international acknowledgment that Moscow must be reckoned with -- without the ideological baggage. He does not want to bury us; he only wants to diminish us. It is 19th-century power politics at its most crude and elemental. Putin does not want us as an enemy. But at Munich he told the world that, vis-Ã -vis America, his Russia has gone from partner to adversary.
|
Russia's president made a speech last week in Munich that set a new standard in anti-Americanism.
| 46.2 | 1 | 8.1 |
high
|
high
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/15/AR2007021501468.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/15/AR2007021501468.html
|
Reluctantly, the Senate's Weekend Warriors
|
2007021619
|
After four years of fighting in Iraq, and two weeks of trying to force senators to debate the conflict, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid yesterday wheeled out the ultimate weapon.
He ordered his colleagues to work on Saturday.
To the average American, this would be an inconvenience. To a senator, a Saturday vote is a hardship reserved for national crises such as impeachment or Terri Schiavo. Votes have been held on Saturday only five times in the past 10 years.
"Time is of the essence," Reid told a rapt audience in the Senate television studio yesterday afternoon. "That's why the Senate will have another Iraq vote on Saturday."
The "vote on Saturday is a crucial vote not just for the moment or for the week, but for the history of America," added an overwrought Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.). "We're calling their bluff. We're staying here. Now vote yes or no."
But in trying to force Republicans to debate Iraq, Reid caused untold pain and suffering for his Democratic colleagues, many of whom prefer to spend their weekends running for president. Hillary Clinton was supposed to be campaigning in New Hampshire on Saturday. Barack Obama had plans to be in South Carolina and Virginia. Joe Biden had an Iowa trip scheduled. Chris Dodd had events scheduled in South Carolina.
And then there was Republican John McCain, who had an Iowa engagement, and all those senators on both sides planning to leave on trips for the Presidents' Day recess.
The Post's Shailagh Murray asked Reid whether he had considered the burden his Saturday plan was placing on his ambitious colleagues.
"I'm confident they will be -- most of them will be here," he hedged.
Moments after Reid's bombshell, one presidential candidate, Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), went to the Senate floor to voice his dissent. "I don't think that is a fair or appropriate process for this body to follow," he said. Particularly because he had plans to attend the National Religious Broadcasters convention in Florida on Saturday.
The prospective loss of his Saturday caused great distress to the Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell (Ky.). He scheduled a news conference for 4 p.m., then moved it to 4:15, then 4:45, then back to 4:30, and finally arrived at 4:40. There, he was asked how his colleagues felt about surrendering their Saturday. "You'll have to ask all of them," he said tightly.
|
Now this is war. After four years of fighting in Iraq, and two weeks of trying to force senators to debate the conflict, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid yesterday wheeled out the ultimate weapon. He ordered his colleagues to work on Saturday. To the average American, this would be an inconvenience. To a senator, a Saturday vote is a hardship reserved for national crises such as impeachment or Terri Schiavo. Votes have been held on Saturday only five times in the past 10 years. ...
| 5.157895 | 0.978947 | 35.610526 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/15/AR2007021502078.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/15/AR2007021502078.html
|
Traitors of Trust: 'Breach' Goes to the Soul of a Spy
|
2007021619
|
The young director Billy Ray is quickly emerging as the John Ford of Washington. He tells mythic tales of ambition and folly, against a monument valley all will recognize as uniquely American. But his monuments aren't buttes outlined against a bright desert sky. They are filing cabinets, desks littered with half-full Styrofoam coffee cups, the square solidity of computer screens. If there's brightness, it's the brightness of the humming fluorescents, which cast a pellucid gleam on the grim mugs of us office rats who toil in the bullpens and committee meetings of the low, gray D.C. cityscape.
Needless to say, the one thing this landscape is missing is a John Wayne figure. To some degree, the subject of Ray's work is the absence of John Wayne: His is a post-heroic culture.
Ray broke through in 2003 with "Shattered Glass," an account of a journalistic scandal at the New Republic, which caught exactly the nuances of office warfare, waged hard and without mercy. He's now followed that with "Breach," a superior account of the bring-down of the notorious FBI mole Robert Hanssen, who is said to have done the most damage to U.S. security of any traitor in history.
Ray finds a curious and unexpected angle on the material. Unlike the broader "Master Spy: The Robert Hanssen Story," written by Norman Mailer and starring William Hurt, of the 2002 TV season (I reviewed it, not that I remember anything about it and even had to look it up to get the title right), it's not a panoramic view of Hanssen's perfidy over the years.
In fact, it doesn't even dramatize the traitor's espionage activities on behalf of the Soviet Union; he's never seen slipping docs to the KGB until Minute 108 of 110, during his arrest (in 2001). As for his parallel life as the allegedly "platonic" friend of a Washington stripper for whom he bought a Benz and with whom he globe-trotted, that, too, is never dramatized. His flamboyant sexual practices -- secretly taping his love sessions with his wife and having a friend watch; narrating his erotic adventures online -- are referenced but not exhaustively documented.
Instead we see Hanssen (played by Chris Cooper as a dark Lucifer fallen from grace) entirely from the point of view of his assistant and counter-mole, a young FBI surveillance officer (not yet a Special Agent) named Eric O'Neill. He's stolidly played by Ryan Phillippe, who, after this film and "Flags of Our Fathers," seems to have inherited the dutiful-kid role once played by Van Johnson.
The earnest, somber movie's one concession to pop culture is its central conceit, which recalls "The Silence of the Lambs": In "Breach," O'Neill is a sort of a male Clarice Starling. It's the same gig, really: A youngster, smart but not yet salty (and not yet Special), is selected for immersion with a world-class sociopath and deviant. The FBI supervisors know that he (or she) has a chance where the more sophisticated may fail, because, knowing nothing and hiding nothing, the neophyte will be unreadable by the normally uber-perceptive arch-fiend. Thus did Starling voyage out to Baltimore to interview the chained and masked Hannibal Lecter; thus does O'Neill find himself appointed assistant, clerk and gofer to the newly appointed Bureau Director of Computer Assurance Services.
Except there is no Department of Computer Assurance Services. It's endgame. Hanssen's secrets have been blown by two defectors, unbeknownst to him; a whole unit, headquartered just down the hall (he passes the closed door every day) has been set up to catch him red-handed and get that sure conviction, while isolating him so he can do no more damage. It is to this unit that O'Neill's true allegiance must belong, even if he doesn't know it at first. He thinks they've recruited him because of the sexual deviancy allegations against Hanssen.
Thus he enters his new job as factotum and traitor with a heavy heart. He's on the pervert detail, ugh. He finds the new boss brusque, demanding, hardworking, controlling but strangely decent and not a little charismatic and certainly insightful as to the actual nature of the agency's culture and bureaucratic ways. In fact, in spite of himself O'Neill begins to develop a grudging admiration for his quarry, even, eventually, an emotional intimacy, though he resents the older man's lectures and religious proselytizing and creepy behavior around O'Neill's wife, played by Caroline Dhavernas. And he doesn't like what the bureau, represented by the iron presence of supervisory agent Kate Burroughs (the great Laura Linney, tough as brass bushings), is requiring him to do -- go through the wastebaskets, peek into every nook and cranny and eventually separate the man from his Palm Pilot.
Possibly Ray and screenwriters Adam Mazer and William Rotko overdo this issue. When O'Neill must maneuver Hanssen away from his electronic gizmo, and plans go suddenly awry, the suspense is artificially jacked up until it seems like you're watching a safecracking caper or a commando mission to blow up a bridge. It would be a lot more convincing if all this took place behind enemy lines instead of in the big FBI building on Pennsylvania Avenue. It's their home territory, not his, so the only "danger" is administrative and the only "damage" to one's career, not to the nation's security.
The movie is at its best as it chronicles the stickiness of what might be called the inevitable Stockholm Syndrome. Certain activities -- catching spies, writing books about murderers, being kidnapped and held for ransom and so forth -- require you get close to and empathize with your enemy. It takes a harsh man to quell those natural feelings for a fellow being, even when you know he or she is "officially" bad. These are the struggles Phillippe's O'Neill deals with. You look the guy in the eye, you ask about his wife, you destroy him. Nothing personal, chum. Duty. But duty sometimes crushes the most dutiful, and the movie makes the point that its psychic costs are high: O'Neill quit the FBI after the case was closed, and his enemy and mentor was given a life sentence.
Breach (110 minutes at area theaters) is rated PG-13 for violence, sexual content and profanity.
|
Search movie listings, reviews and locations from the Washington Post. Features national listings for movies and movie guide. Visit http://www.washingtonpost.com/movies today.
| 50.12 | 0.52 | 0.6 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/15/AR2007021500942.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/15/AR2007021500942.html
|
Kenny Chesney Denies Gay Rumors
|
2007021619
|
NEW YORK -- Kenny Chesney explains why the word "fraud" was used on the document filed by Renee Zellweger to annul their marriage and denies the gay rumors it sparked, in an interview to air Sunday on CBS' "60 Minutes."
"It's not true. Period. Maybe I should have come out and said, `No, I'm not (gay),' but I didn't want to draw any more attention to it," the 38-year-old country singer says. "... I didn't have to prove to anybody that I wasn't (gay). I didn't feel like I really did."
Zellweger and Chesney were married on the Caribbean island of St. John in the U.S. Virgin Islands in May 2005. It was the first marriage for both. Four months later, Zellweger listed "fraud" as the reason she was seeking an annulment.
An annulment is a judicial declaration that a marriage never legally existed.
In California, an annulment may be granted when either party in the marriage is under 18, of unsound mind, bound to a previous marriage or if the consent to marry was obtained by fraud or force.
The Oscar-winning actress later issued a statement saying the term "fraud" was "simply legal language and not a reflection of Kenny's character."
"We thought the least harmful (stated reason) was fraud because it (is) kind of broad ... doesn't specify," Chesney says. "And boy ... we were wrong."
"The only fraud that was committed was me thinking that I knew what it was like ... that I really understood what it was like to be married, and I really didn't," he says.
Chesney, who is set to go on tour this summer, says he has no regrets.
"Not at all. Not one bit," he says. "Even though I'd sit here and say I wish we'd gotten divorced instead of all that annulment stuff, and saved me a lot of public humiliation ... I still don't have any regrets. I loved her, you know? And it was real."
Zellweger, 37, won an Oscar for 2003's "Cold Mountain."
|
NEW YORK -- Kenny Chesney explains why the word "fraud" was used on the document filed by Renee Zellweger to annul their marriage and denies the gay rumors it sparked, in an interview to air Sunday on CBS' "60 Minutes."
| 9.382979 | 1 | 47 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/09/AR2007020900764.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/09/AR2007020900764.html
|
Phoenix Puts Some Zest on the Menu
|
2007021619
|
In the not-so-distant past, Phoenix restaurants were about as stylish as a pair of Bermuda shorts. Vacationers flocked there for world-class golf courses, shopping and spas, but certainly not for the food.
But there's no need to settle for stodgy, overpriced continental cuisine any longer. The Phoenix dining scene is now vibrant and varied, an engaging mix of stylish new bistros and old favorites. This desert resort has matured into a destination that even a foodie can love.
With its open kitchen and warm, welcoming owners, Zest (4117 N. 16th St., just northeast of downtown, 602-274-7442) has a funky-chic style that exemplifies the new breed of Phoenix restaurants. The setting is colorful and hip, but there's not a trace of attitude: The staff seems genuinely concerned that you have a great meal and a great time.
The gallery-like space often displays the work of local artists; that's only fitting, for there's a creative spirit at work in the kitchen as well. The "innovative American" menu is full of intriguing combinations, such as seared halibut with artichoke rice and a melon gazpacho. The center-cut pork chop was a knockout: Moist and savory, coated in light Japanese-style bread crumbs, it's served on a bed of smashed potatoes, with a bold cranberry-orange chutney. Dinner for two runs $70 to $80 with drinks.
For romance under the stars, head to Lon's at the Hermosa (5532 N. Palo Cristi Rd., 602-955-7878) in the exclusive residential neighborhood of Paradise Valley. This adobe hacienda -- with wooden beams, stucco walls and Western memorabilia -- brims with rustic elegance. But the outdoor patio, lighted by glowing fireplaces, is pure magic. Arrive at sunset to enjoy views of Camelback Mountain looming over the spectacular desert scenery.
Chef Michael Rusconi took over the kitchen in 2005, and his results are impressive: a sophisticated contemporary American menu punctuated by spicy Southwestern accents. Start with the hacienda prima, a trio of appetizers including a duck taco, a red chili beef empanada and a mini tamale stuffed with wood-grilled vegetables. That's just a teaser for the main event, perhaps a tender pepper-crusted pork tenderloin or the ancho-spiced grilled salmon. Expect to spend $150 for a special dinner for two with wine.
Duck and Decanter (1651 E. Camelback Rd., 602-274-5429) is a terrible name for a wonderful gourmet deli. Located in the Camelback Corridor, a short drive from the Arizona Biltmore Resort, "the Duck" makes lunchtime soups, salads and sandwiches that it cheekily calls "nooners."
These are no ordinary grab-it-and-go sandwiches. Choose from 11 kinds of fresh-baked bread (the ciabatta is irresistible) and invent your own combination from a voluminous list of fresh ingredients such as maple-glazed ham, albacore tuna, avocados, pine nuts and longhorn cheese. Or try one of the signature sandwiches, such as the Briesciutto (prosciutto and Brie, of course, with zingy sun-dried tomatoes).
While your sandwich is assembled, browse the aisles for prickly pear honey mustard, Ghirardelli chocolates or imported olive oils. Better yet, grab a glass of wine and linger on the outdoor patio, where musicians perform on weekends. Lunch for two is about $20.
Authentic New York-style pizza in the Arizona desert? It's not a mirage. Right in the middle of Old Town Scottsdale stands Patsy Grimaldi's (4000 N. Scottsdale Rd., 480-994-1100), a legendary name that makes pizza purists salivate.
The long-reigning king of New York pizzamakers, Patsy routinely snags top honors from Zagat's. In 2003, he entrusted his trade secrets to his nephew, who expanded the family business 2,000 miles west of the Brooklyn Bridge.
Patsy's trademark crust is the key: It's thin, crispy and ever-so-slightly charred by the blazing heat of the coal ovens. That glorious crust is the foundation for such toppings as fragrant basil, roasted sweet red peppers and Italian sausage. The sauce is a revelation -- the sunny taste of fresh tomatoes comes through in every bite. Dinner for two with wine will set you back about $50.
To literally put the cherry on top of your Patsy's experience, head across the street to the Sugar Bowl (4005 N. Scottsdale Rd., 480-946-0051). This classic ice cream parlor, with its eye-popping hot-pink decor, hasn't changed a whit since it opened in 1958.
There's a full menu of salads and sandwiches, but that's beside the point. The crowds line up for gargantuan hot-fudge sundaes and banana splits, piled high with whipped cream and chopped nuts; $5 to $7 will buy you a giant helping of old-fashioned decadence.
There's nothing new or inventive about the Sugar Bowl, but why improve on perfection?
For general information on Phoenix, contact the Greater Phoenix Convention & Visitors Bureau, 877-225-5749,http://www.phoenixcvb.com/.
|
In the not-so-distant past, Phoenix restaurants were about as stylish as a pair of Bermuda shorts. Now, the city's dining scene is vibrant and varied, an engaging mix of stylish new bistros and old favorites.
| 21.425532 | 0.893617 | 15.234043 |
medium
|
medium
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/15/AR2007021501750.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/15/AR2007021501750.html
|
Bernanke Rebuffs Frank on Rate Cut
|
2007021619
|
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke yesterday rejected a Democratic lawmaker's suggestion that he consider cutting interest rates to bolster the economy.
Bernanke, testifying for a second day on Capitol Hill, this time before the House Financial Services Committee, repeated that the Fed is likely to hold rates steady for a while if slower economic growth nudges inflation lower this year and next as expected.
JavaScript is required to display this interactive graphic. If it is turned off, please enable JavaScript in your browser preferences.
But the Fed also thinks inflation is too high and might go higher, Bernanke said. If he and his colleagues adjust borrowing costs in coming months, they are more likely to raise rates than lower them.
"In order for this expansion to continue in a sustainable way, inflation needs to be well controlled," Bernanke said in response to remarks by committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.). "If inflation becomes higher for some reason, then the Federal Reserve would have to respond to that by raising interest rates."
Frank had told Bernanke the Fed's stance was "troubling" to him because the central bank also forecasts the economy will grow at a moderate rate this year, below its long-term average, and that inflation will drift lower over time.
"I don't see how we get a concern of inflation," Frank told Bernanke. "Why is there not at least an equal chance for there to be a reduction" in interest rates?
Bernanke responded that he and his Fed colleagues see several risks that the economy may not behave as forecast, and they would adjust interest rates as needed.
One possibility is that the economy weakens more than expected, perhaps if the housing slump deepens. Many private analysts have recently lowered their estimates of the economy's pace of growth because of a series of weak figures, including the Fed's report yesterday that U.S. industrial production fell in January.
But the Fed sees a greater risk of high inflation. Bernanke noted recent strong growth in consumer spending and incomes, "which suggests that the economy may be stronger than we think. It's possible."
If so, consumer demand might rise faster than the economy's ability to produce goods and services, he said. Already, the labor market is tight, with unemployment at a low 4.6 percent, and businesses' use of their production capacity is slightly above average, according to the Fed report.
The inflation risk lies in this danger of excessive demand, not in low unemployment alone, the Fed chairman said.
There is no specific level of unemployment that automatically triggers inflation, Bernanke, a former chairman of the Princeton University economics department, said in response to several lawmakers' questions.
That contrasts with the traditional view of many economists that unemployment below about 5 percent is inflationary. Bernanke's remarks partly reflect years of research that has debunked the idea of a long-term trade-off between unemployment and inflation. They also reflect the nation's experience in the late 1990s, when unemployment fell as low as 3.9 percent without causing much inflation.
The Fed's top policymakers forecast inflation to fall over the next 18 months while unemployment remains below 5 percent, indicating they are comfortable with joblessness so low.
Bernanke also said rising wages are not necessarily inflationary, as was widely believed in the 1970s when high inflation was blamed partly on unions' salary demands.
If businesses accept smaller profits -- they have been high lately -- companies can raise workers' wages without boosting prices, he said. Also, if labor productivity, or output per hour, rises quickly, businesses can produce more with the same labor force; again, workers' earnings can climb without pushing prices higher.
The low unemployment of the 1990s coincided with a takeoff in productivity growth. Bernanke's predecessor, Alan Greenspan, recognized this at the time and did not increase interest rates, despite the urgings of the Fed staff and some Fed Board members. The high inflation of the 1970s coincided with lousy productivity growth.
Productivity growth has slowed recently, but it remained solid at 2.1 percent last year. And Bernanke said "underlying productivity trends appear favorable."
Even so, he said, it is possible that strong economic growth "could allow firms to pass higher labor costs through to prices, adding to inflation," and that would erode the purchasing power of any wage gains.
|
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke yesterday rejected a Democratic lawmaker's suggestion that he consider cutting interest rates to bolster the economy.
| 35.666667 | 1 | 24 |
high
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/15/AR2007021501661.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/15/AR2007021501661.html
|
250,000 Condoms Deployed For HIV Awareness, Prevention
|
2007021619
|
It comes in a purple and mustard-yellow package, with a message aimed squarely at anyone having sex in the nation's capital, and today the city will dispense 250,000 of these DC-branded condoms during a massive giveaway.
In a single morning, the kickoff distribution to groups working on the front line of HIV/AIDS will almost equal the number of condoms supplied by the D.C. Health Department in 2005 and 2006 combined. The agency wants to hand out 1 million by year's end, making the small package the most visible element of the District's efforts to reverse epidemic levels of the virus.
"It's overdue -- tangible proof we're doing something good for public health," said Gregg A. Pane, director of the department,
With condoms one of the most effective ways of preventing the spread of HIV, Pane hopes that they will be placed prominently and accessibly not only in government buildings, health clinics and social service agencies but also in barbershops, nightclubs, convenience stores and other locations.
"We want to go places we haven't gone before," Pane said.
Officials had planned to introduce the new design on Valentine's Day, which, because of its amorous overtones, doubles as National Condom Day. And if internal complications and bad weather had not delayed the launch, the District would have shared the distinction of having the first municipally authorized protection in the country.
New York City alone claimed that distinction Wednesday, debuting a snazzy black condom wrapper with lettering like that used by the subway system. As many as 18 million are expected to be distributed in the city's five boroughs this year.
Compared with New York's catchy approach, including "We've got you covered," the District slogan, "Coming together to stop HIV in DC," seems clunky. And the slogan, borrowed from the department's HIV testing campaign last summer, has in this context a double entendre that officials said was not intended.
But the local package, printed in English and Spanish, has its defenders. "The good news is, it does have 'stop HIV' on it. It does say DC. It does have important information," said Walter Smith, whose organization, the DC Appleseed Center for Law and Justice, has issued several critical evaluations of the city's efforts to combat HIV/AIDS. Smith called today's distribution "a good first step," though he said the real test will be getting the condoms to the most at-risk populations.
"It's going to take some time to fine-tune the system to get to that," he added.
The first quarter-million condoms will go to a variety of community providers. Nearly half will be delivered to the Life Guard project, which in two months passed out 7,000 free condoms through a 24-hour laundromat, a late-night pizza joint and a fast-food restaurant east of the Anacostia River.
Early on, health officials largely dismissed the alliance of groups behind the project. They have had such a change of heart that today's announcement will be at that same SpinCycle Coin Laundry. "I think they understand the power of the community," said David Johnson, who has scouted Life Guard drop sites in Wards 7 and 8. "We're really looking for places to be in the city."
More than a dozen beauty salons and barbershops along the lower Georgia Avenue corridor will have plenty of condoms available to customers in coming months, thanks to the tens of thousands that Us Helping Us will receive today from the city. The nonprofit organization also will offer them in black gay clubs and neighborhood haunts already visited as part of its HIV outreach program.
Ron Simmons, Us Helping Us executive director, wonders whether people will treat the wrapper as a novelty -- and not use its contents. "The city is going to have to do a really good social marketing campaign," he said yesterday, "so people will become accustomed to the colors and packaging and realize these are reliable condoms."
At HIPS, which helps sex workers in the city, Executive Director Cyndee Clay offered a different thought.
"Packaging is very important in normalizing condom use, in showing that condoms are something everyone should carry, that everyone can carry," she said. "But all the cool packaging in the world is not necessarily going to make up for the conversation."
This first batch of condoms, made in China, expire in 2011.
|
It comes in a purple and mustard-yellow package, with a message aimed squarely at anyone having sex in the nation's capital, and today the city will dispense 250,000 of these DC-branded condoms during a massive giveaway.
| 19.840909 | 1 | 44 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/15/AR2007021500597.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/15/AR2007021500597.html
|
Peanut Butter Recalled Over Salmonella
|
2007021619
|
OMAHA, Neb. -- ConAgra Foods Inc. told consumers to discard certain jars of Peter Pan and Great Value peanut butter after the spread was linked to a salmonella outbreak that has sickened almost 300 people nationwide.
Lids of jars with a product code beginning "2111" can be returned to ConAgra for a refund, the company said.
The salmonella outbreak, which federal health officials said Wednesday has sickened 288 people in 39 states since August, was linked to tainted peanut butter produced by ConAgra at a plant in Sylvester, Ga. How salmonella got into peanut butter is still under investigation, said Dr. Mike Lynch, an epidemiologist at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
CDC officials believe the salmonella outbreak to be the nation's first stemming from peanut butter. The most cases were reported in New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Tennessee and Missouri.
About 20 percent of all the ill were hospitalized, and there were no deaths, Lynch said. About 85 percent of the infected people said they ate peanut butter, CDC officials said.
ConAgra officials said it was unsure why the CDC identified peanut butter as the source of the problem. Its own tests of its peanut butter and the plant have been negative, but it shut down the plant so it can investigate, spokesman Chris Kircher said.
"We're trying to understand what else we need to do or should be doing," he said.
Kircher called the recall a precaution. "We want to do what's right by the consumer," he said.
ConAgra officials haven't said how much peanut butter is covered in the recall. The Peter Pan brand is sold in 10 varieties, according to ConAgra's Web site. The Great Value brand, which is also made by other companies, is a Wal-Mart brand.
He said the CDC contacted the Food and Drug Administration, which sent investigators to the Georgia plant to review records, collect product samples and conduct tests for salmonella.
Kircher said ConAgra makes peanut butter only at the Sylvester plant, for distribution nationwide.
ConAgra randomly tests 60 to 80 jars of peanut butter that come off the line each day for salmonella and other pathogens, he said.
|
OMAHA, Neb. -- ConAgra Foods Inc. told consumers to discard certain jars of Peter Pan and Great Value peanut butter after the spread was linked to a salmonella outbreak that has sickened almost 300 people nationwide.
| 11.157895 | 1 | 38 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/15/AR2007021501738.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/15/AR2007021501738.html
|
Anatomy Made Controversial
|
2007021619
|
Ever wonder what another person might look like without makeup or hair? How about without skin?
Washingtonians will soon be able to gaze at -- and, in some cases, handle -- human remains that have been transformed at the cellular level into silicone mummies at an exhibition in Arlington this spring.
"BODIES . . . The Exhibition" will open in the former Newseum building in Rosslyn in mid-April, organizers said. It is one of at least three exhibits using human cadavers that have stirred controversy nearly everywhere they go.
Catholic and Protestant churches have protested the opening of body exhibits in Europe, and the directors of an off-beat museum in Seattle filed a legal challenge to "BODIES . . . The Exhibition" there. The German physician who pioneered the preservation method created a competing exhibit and has been accused of using bodies without proper consent, which he has denied.
The specimens include entire human bodies that have been skinned, dissected, rubberized, colored and reassembled to highlight particular organs. They are then posed doing everyday activities, such as kicking a soccer ball or pedaling a bicycle. At the end, visitors can handle a kidney, a brain or a heart. Arnie Geller, chief executive of Premier Exhibitions Inc., estimated that the Washington exhibit could draw as many as 500,000 people over six months.
"It's the kind of education you'll never get in the classroom," Geller said in an interview this week.
"BODIES . . . The Exhibition" and the competing exhibits have been riding a voyeuristic craze for several years, drawing hordes of the living wherever they go. Their fans and backers say they offer startling but ultimately wholesome opportunities for ordinary people to explore and demystify human anatomy.
But others dismiss the ventures as ghoulish freak shows mounted by modern-day P.T. Barnums. Questions also persist about the provenance of the specimens, especially because many come from China, where there have been documented abuses in the sale of organs for transplants. Some organs sold to Westerners for transplants, for example, have been traced to criminals executed for petty offenses.
Nancy Scheper-Hughes, a professor of medical anthropology at the University of California at Berkeley, said some of the bodies might have come from people whose consent was not obtained or was obtained involuntarily, despite recent laws designed to crack down on such abuses.
"Consent has no meaning in China," said Scheper-Hughes, who created Organ Watch to monitor international trafficking in organs.
But Roy Glover, who is the medical adviser to the coming exhibit, said all specimens in his company's exhibit were obtained legally and ethically.
Glover, a former director of the University of Michigan Medical School's polymer preservation laboratory, said the bodies are from people who died of natural causes and had no known family member to claim them. Under Chinese law, such bodies are given to medical schools or other institutions for educational uses.
Premier Exhibitions said its bodies are all obtained through Sui Hongjin, a doctor at the Dalian Medical University Plastination Laboratories. The Chinese government also has given them "letters of assurance" that the bodies were obtained legally, he said. Glover and Geller said the reason so many bodies come from China is because no other country has such a supply of technically skilled people who can dissect them.
"I would not be associated with Premier Exhibitions or have any dealings as a spokesman for the exhibit if the bodies we were using were obtained illegally or unethically," Glover said. "Members of the company spent a considerable amount of time in China finding just the right partner."
Premier Exhibitions is a publicly traded corporation. A subsidiary, RMS Titanic Inc., owns the rights to artifacts salvaged from the sunken ocean liner.
One of the competing exhibits, "Body Worlds," is the work of Gunther von Hagens, the German doctor widely credited with inventing the preservation process, known as plastination, in the 1970s. His exhibit made a cameo appearance in the latest James Bond movie, "Casino Royale."
The other competing exhibit, "Our Body: The Universe Within," is produced by Baltimore-based the Universe Within Touring Co. LLC and contains 20 human bodies obtained from China. The Baltimore group says on its Web site that its specimens were obtained "consistent with the laws of China."
Tickets to "BODIES . . . The Exhibition" will cost $26.50 for adults, $18 for children 4 to 12, and $10 for children on field trips. Geller said more than $25 million was invested over five years in acquiring the preserved specimens.
|
Ever wonder what another person might look like without makeup or hair? How about without skin?
| 49.722222 | 1 | 18 |
high
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/09/AR2007020900778.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/09/AR2007020900778.html
|
Snowed by Tahoe
|
2007021619
|
I vividly remember the first time I drove the mountain passes leading to Lake Tahoe 15 years ago and have been eagerly anticipating seeing them again. But now I'm here. The song "Is That All There Is?" is running through my head.
Sure, the views of deep gorges and craggy mountains and tall green trees are beautiful. But I'd remembered the vistas as being not just among the best, but of a singular, even a different order of beauty. What's missing?
Fresh snow, it turns out. On my third day, it falls, transforming spectacular into magical. If you've seen the movie "The Chronicles of Narnia," the scene where Lucy walks through the back of the closet and finds herself in an amazing, wondrous, wintry land -- Tahoe is like that, only better.
My recent experience is a reminder of why you must come here in winter, even if you don't ski. Granted, the lake with 72 miles of shoreline is fantastic all year long: the biggest, clearest, most pristine alpine lake in the United States, surrounded by peaks that reach more than 10,000 feet above sea level. Straddling the Nevada-California border, the lake gets the most visitors in summer. But if you've never seen the mountains around Lake Tahoe after a fresh, brilliantly white snow has fallen and the sun comes out to set it aglow, you haven't properly seen Lake Tahoe at all.
"Even people who have lived here all their lives rush outside like little kids at the first snowfall," says McAvoy Layne, who lives on the northern Nevada side of the lake in Incline Village. "It's so quiet, so pristine. Just blue sky, white snow, emerald lake, a little bit of dark green showing on the trees.
"And the air," adds Layne, who is a Mark Twain impersonator. "Twain, who loved it here, described it as the air the angels breathe."
The Lake Tahoe area was also a favorite subject for photographer Ansel Adams. A combination of public ownership of much of the land and strict environmental laws means it hasn't changed much since he captured "Thundercloud, Lake Tahoe" in 1936. John Steinbeck wrote his first novel here while working as a winter caretaker of a lodge, and it has been a favorite backdrop for Hollywood since silent-picture days.
The lake, which reaches depths of 1,645 feet, never freezes, so you can boat and fish even in the coldest months. Ride gondolas up the mountains just for the views or to dine in a mountaintop restaurant. Have lunch there, then dinner in a lakeside restaurant as the setting sun turns the landscape pink and gold. Ice skate, snowshoe across meadows and into silent, empty woods, or see the area by horse-drawn sleigh or snowmobile.
On the Nevada side, casinos and nightclubs are a major draw. On the California side, you can visit or even stay in historic buildings, see a museum, stop at the memorial to the wagon train emigrants who were caught in the Sierra Nevada over the winter at the infamous Donner Pass.
Granted, many visitors who come in winter are drawn mainly by the skiing, and both North and South Tahoe offer great alpine and downhill skiing and snowboarding, often well into April, given the magnitude of the snowfall here -- more than 30 feet a year on average. By March, you can ski in your shirtsleeves; showoffs ski down the mountains in swimsuits.
But there is plenty for non-skiers to do. In fact, it's worth the trip just to look, to gaze on what winter adds to an already awesome landscape.
|
California or Nevada? Ski or gamble? On this iconic lake, you don't have to take sides.
| 34.333333 | 0.761905 | 1.142857 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/02/09/DI2007020901071.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/02/09/DI2007020901071.html
|
K Street
|
2007021419
|
Before we get started in earnest, I apologize about the headline in the politics section on washingtonpost.com's home page. My column today is not about the White House, as the headline suggests. It is about the House and its new ethics rules. Thank you to the readers who pointed that out.
But that said, let's chat about the loopholes that got into those House rules and anything else that's on your mind. A whole bunch of legislation is about to move through Congress and lobbyists are getting ready for the avalanche.
College Park, Md.: I enjoyed the Post's article on how relatives of Members and senior staff are often lobbyist. Do you think this is a loop hole that needs to be closed?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: That's a tough one.
It's hard to make the case that relatives of lawmakers and their staffs should be deprived of a vocation. So a blanket prohibition doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
A narrower ban is clearly a good and reasonable idea, however. The relatives and spouses of lawmakers should be barred from lobbying those specific relatives and spouses on the government payroll. That is a rule that many individual offices on Capitol Hill have already, and it seems like a common sense one to me.
In addition, the case of leaders in either chamber, it also makes sense to have the Daschle rule, which I have named after the former Democratic leader in the Senate, Tom Daschle. His wife, Linda, is a prominent airline lobbyist but she did not lobby the Senate--or at least she said she didn't.
That makes sense for any other leader as well. Don't you think?
There has been considerable discussion regarding the revelation in Congressional hearings last week that 360 tons of $100 dollar bills were shipped to Iraq as part of the reconstruction effort.
I found it interesting that some political pundits, who normally espouse fiscal constraint and accountability for any type of government spending, quickly defended this wholesale dump of $12 billion in cash into a war-torn city.
And it is interesting that the billions of dollars approved for the reconstruction efforts in post-Katrina New Orleans are being bottlenecked, in part, by the numerous government accounting controls being placed on the funds.
So, it appears that for a war-torn city in another country, we can hand out $12 billion in cash. But it's an unacceptable practice for the reconstruction of New Orleans.
If we invaded New Orleans, would that help ease the rules on disbursing the reconstruction money?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Your comment is so beautifully argued, I hardly know how to improve on it.
Although I must say, invading New Orleans is probably not a good idea.
The question is, Was invading Iraq ever a good one?
Fargo, N.D.: Since the recent revelations at the Libby trial have now opened the proverbial "can of worms," has anyone ever considered what really happened between the original parties of Ms. Plame, her husband, and her bosses? Why this happened in the first place is the real story if anyone dares venture in that direction.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: That is a worthy question, but it is not one that is likely to be addressed in court.
It seems to me a simple example of nepotism. The wife got the husband a gig.
It's hard to say he was not qualified to do the job, but it is a manner of recruiting that is usually frowned up, and for good reason.
Herndon, Va.: Have you every been to Johnstown, Pa and driven around Congressman Murtha's district? Do you really think those government contractors made a sound business decision to put offices in that district or do you think it had more to do with getting "earmarks" from Murhta.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Clearly those defense contractors have made a very economic decision. By locating in the district of such a powerful appropriator they have obviously enhanced their ability to get him to earmark money for them in the federal budget.
Is that a savory or taxpayer friendly practice. Absolutely not. Is it worthy of a story. Yes, indeed, and versions of it have and will be written.
The best thing I can say about it is that it looks like Chairman David Obey of the House Appropriations Committee is screening would-be earmarks more closely than ever and cutting most of them in half compared to FY 2006, the last year that the budget was peppered with them.
Maybe Mr. Murtha will be forced to make those contractors' move to his home city a less economic decision.
Silver Spring, Md.: HI, Jeffrey, I love K Street gossip, but what's up with today's recycled news column? (Exhibit A: the winners and losers on the budget? Didn't I read all of that stuff a week ago?) I thought for sure you'd give us some good inside juice playing off the presidential campaigns that dominated the coverage this weekend or the debates coming up in Congress. I know every week can't be great and I'm not trying to give you too hard of a time, but I'm addicted to this stuff, so help us out.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: I'm glad you like the column and that type of item. Thank you.
Last week's item was about the Senate-passed minimum wage bill. This week's is about President Bush's budget proposal.
They are two completely different measure and I gave them two completely different sets of winners and losers. No overlap at all.
The next time will be different, too. And yes, I will be getting deeply into gossip.
Anyone out there have any to share?
College Park, Md.: Me again. An outsider like me thinks there are PLENTY of other vocations. Just because someone can make the most money trading in on their relationship to a member or staffer doesn't mean they can't do something that pays what is in line with their other skill sets.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: I agree that people can find other things to do. And in some cases, they probably should.
But need they be barred entirely? The Senate voted to prevent spouses of senators from lobbying. I wonder whether that measure will make it all the way through the legislative process. My guess is, it won't.
So something in the middle along the way would be welcome in an otherwise lawless area. Don't you think?
Rockville, Md.: Is John Graham really that great or is it more his staff?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: I don't know Graham--the Mr. Loophole in my column today--very well. But my reporting indicates that he did get the job done and with the help of very effective lobbyists.
Whether what he and the others did was "great" is a matter of opinion. Graham is convinced he made terrific strides as do a lot of interests on K Street. Self-proclaimed reformers think that Graham is more like a terrorist who has taken credit for a bombing.
Baltimore, Md.: Re the Valerie Plame/Joe Wilson question: It would seem to me that Joe Wilson would have been just about the first person one would have picked to go to Niger to investigate the "yellowcake" question, given that Wilson had done a stint as U.S. ambassador to that fairly obscure African country and would therefore likely know people who could answer that question. He went, found out there was no trafficking in uranium and came home. Then he had the temerity to actually discuss his findings in public!
Is there another out there?
It should be against the law for any congress person to accept ANYTHING of ANY value outside of their government compensation. PERIOD. No vacation money or travel. No gifts of ANY kind. No campaign contributions of ANY kind. Further, it should be illegal for congress people to accept legislation written by any lobbyist. Let them hire staffers who know more than how to run a campaign, hire more staffers to write legislation if needed, but today nearly all legislation is written by a special interest group lobbyist team.
Finally, third-party lobbying should be illegal. Let the corporations and interest groups hire these people directly so we know which group is in the open sunshine asking for favors when they feel the need to.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Your view is shared by other reformers. But the legislators who make these decisions are not willing to deprive themselves.
Voters don't seem willing or even interested in punishing lawmakers for filling their politically motivated bans with loopholes.
As long as that's the case, ethics will be a sometime sort of thing on Capitol Hill.
They did what?, Va.: I think one of the problems these days is people have no shame or capacity to be embarrassed. Even if things are not technically illegal, people doing them should not be able to look themselves in the mirror or hold their heads up. But they do, shamelessly, and profit like the dickens. I guess that makes those of us who are not that shameless the fools?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: To be fair, many lobbyists believe in the causes they work for. That they also make money advancing those causes is a bonus.
John Graham believes strongly that a travel ban is a bad idea. He worked to alter it and succeeded. That is what lobbyists do.
You may disagree with his point of view and how he accomplished his end.
But what Graham and his allies did is repeated many, many times every day in the nation's capital.
That's why I wrote the story about him.
Thoughts on Romney getting into the race? My own take is that he isn't "black enough" but perhaps this won't be an issue if people look past color and at experience.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: If by that you mean that Romney is not conservative enough, that is possible. He was once an advocate for gay rights and abortion rights. Now he is the opposite.
If the conservative base of the Republican Party does not believe that Romney is a sincere conservative then he might be rejected by them.
But he is a very intelligent, charming and able politician. He should not be counted out, certainly this early in the campaign.
In fact, it would not be wise to count anybody out this soon.
Better to sit back and enjoy the show. And it will be a good one!
New York, N.Y.: Hi Jeffrey,
Tim Russert asked Steny Hoyer and John Boehner about all those loopholes on Meet the Press, on Sunday. It was painful to watch those two guys -- who minutes before were trading barbs like the old political pros they are -- trying to explain it all away. Neither made any sense at all. Did you see it?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: I did, and it certainly is hard to justify in a public setting. Behind closed doors where the deals are cut, like these, such accommodations seem to make excellent sense. In the light of day, in front of the public, not so much.
Bethesda, Md.: Will there be an ethics bill this year?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: That's the plan, I know.
But last year, the same plan was in place and nothing happened.
The House and Senate last year passed separate lobbying/ethics bills and didn't reconcile them. In the end, therefore, no bill made it through final passage. Nothing changed.
This year, the Democrats in charge say they will not let that happen. They say a bill will become law.
I, for one, will wait and see.
Arlington, Va.: How many lobbying firms are actually on K Street? I know that the educational lobbies are scattered although they are referred to a Dupont Circle as a collective description.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: I don't have a good number on lobbying firms. The number of registered lobbyists is about 31,000 according to the Senate's number keepers.
I was amazed to learn about how many educational associations there are in town and how many individual colleges have lobbying offices. There are hundreds, for sure.
Dupont Circle is only one of many gathering places for them.
Fargo, N.D.: Regarding the Libby-Plame scenario and your comment about nepotism. She was by no means a final decision maker, which everyone seems to forget. Their marriage was "the key" in an attempt to force her husband "to go along" with their disinformation and cover-up campaign which was her job i.e., "intelligence fixing."
Jeffrey Birnbaum: I stand corrected then. I think.
I'm not sure that Mrs. Wilson will concur with your description.
Washington, D.C.: Will campaign finance reform be addressed this year by Congress?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: It doesn't look like the campaign finance system will even be touched by lawmakers this year.
That will be a problem for the lobbying legislation, in my view.
As I have written a few times in the paper in and in my column, almost everything that the lobby legislation in Congress would curtail or ban would be allowed in the guise of a campaign fundraiser.
That means that almost everything being considered in the ethics bills--except perhaps the enhanced disclosure, which is a healthy idea--would be trumped and overwhelmed by lawmakers' eagerness to shake down lobbyists for campaign contributions.
That's the short version of my tirade. More later.
RE: They did what?: Now wait a minute. A lobbyist says "I strongly believe that it is OK for me to fly a congressman to Tahiti" and that makes it all right? The lobbyist is shamelessly misusing our system for personal gain. That is wrong, no matter how you look at it.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: A lobbyist-paid trip to Micronesia would be prohibited by the new House rules (unless it lasted no longer than a couple days, which I doubt).
Then again, if the lawmaker held a fundraiser in that exotic land, that would be perfectly legit.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Well, it looks like I've run out of time today.
Thanks for writing in. We'll do it again in a couple weeks!
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online 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.
| 69.390244 | 0.658537 | 0.707317 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/13/AR2007021300400.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/13/AR2007021300400.html
|
Romney Joins the 2008 Race
|
2007021419
|
DES MOINES, Feb. 13 -- With a call for "innovation and transformation in Washington," Mitt Romney formally stepped into the Republican presidential field on Tuesday morning, portraying himself as both a political outsider and an experienced executive who would bring efficiency to the White House.
Romney, who until last month served as governor of Massachusetts, launched his campaign in Michigan, the state where he was born and where his father was governor in the 1960s. He then flew here to Iowa, where next January's caucus will be a key test of whether the former governor of a state that Republicans like to depict as synonymous with liberalism can make inroads with conservatives.
He was met by a relatively small group of supporters who battled snow to greet him at the Iowa fairgrounds. In a stump speech that he was still honing, Romney, dressed in a navy suit and a blue tie, decried a system in which politicians are "unable to actually act -- they talk and the debate goes on forever. The ball is kicked down the field, but nothing actually gets done."
In a subtle swing at Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), his major Republican rival, Romney continued: "I don't believe Washington can get transformed by someone from the inside, by someone who has been part of politics through their entire life, who's made all the deals, who's done all the arrangements that have to be done, who's had all the entanglements. I think you have to have somebody from outside."
Still, he said, this is not the time for a president who has "never run a corner store, let alone the largest enterprise in the world."
A Mormon father of five, Romney, 59, brings personal wealth, dashing looks and business credentials to a race that is relatively open. Although McCain has led the Republicans in the early stages, he has been met with skepticism by the socially conservative wing of the party, leaving room for a challenge from the right.
Romney took the stage in Michigan as supporters waved blue-and-white signs that simply said "Mitt Romney." He was joined by his children and grandchildren, buttressing his wholesome image as he jumps into the fray against two Republicans, McCain and former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, who both have been divorced and are viewed with some suspicion by the party's conservative base.
Romney comes to the campaign trail with an impressive pedigree and personal record: Raised in a political family in Michigan, he watched his father, George, win three terms as governor, only to stumble in the 1968 presidential race when he said he had supported the Vietnam War because he had been "brainwashed" on an official visit there three years before. Romney's mother, Lenore, later ran unsuccessfully for the U.S. Senate.
Romney, one of four children, spent the early part of his career at Bain & Co., a management consulting firm in Boston, before co-founding Bain Capital, a private equity firm. He ran unsuccessfully against Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) in 1994; years later, Olympic officials tapped Romney to restore the scandal-marred institution's good name before the 2002 Winter Games in Salt Lake City. He won the Massachusetts governorship in November 2002.
While Romney focused Tuesday on his executive experience over the past decade and a half, his political evolution during that time is proving problematic: A significant obstacle is his history as a self-described moderate Republican during his 1994 Senate campaign. On issues such as abortion and gay rights, Romney has made sizable shifts since then, exposing himself to charges of inconsistency and political opportunism.
He spoke directly about social issues in his announcement in Dearborn, held at the Henry Ford Museum to underscore his faith in American ingenuity. "I believe that the family is the foundation of America -- and that it needs to be protected and strengthened," Romney said.
"I believe in the sanctity of human life," he said. "I believe that we are overtaxed and government is overfed. I believe that homeland security begins with securing our borders. And I believe that our best days are before us, because I believe in America."
The emphasis contrasted with his words in 1994, when he at one point argued that the "gay community needs more support from the Republican Party" and presented himself as the candidate to make that happen.
After one term as Massachusetts governor, he says that he no longer favors a federal nondiscrimination law for gay men and lesbians, and that he would not support allowing them to serve in the military. He has also altered his stance on abortion, saying he would now support overturning the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which legalized abortion nationwide.
As a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Romney also faces questions about his faith. In a Washington Post-ABC News poll in December, 35 percent of respondents said they would be less likely to vote for a candidate because he or she is a Mormon, vs. 3 percent who said they would be more likely to vote for someone of that faith. Among Republicans, Romney appeared to face an even more uphill battle: 39 percent said they would be less likely to vote for a Mormon.
With the war in Iraq proving an increasingly important fault line in the presidential race, Romney said little about his plan for ending the occupation or quelling the violence, and he left himself room to maneuver if President Bush's troop increase fails to calm the strife. "I believe that so long as there is a reasonable prospect of success, our wisest course is to seek stability in Iraq, with additional troops to secure the civilian population," Romney said in his opening address.
|
DES MOINES, Feb. 13 -- With a call for "innovation and transformation in Washington," Mitt Romney formally stepped into the Republican presidential field on Tuesday morning, portraying himself as both a political outsider and an experienced executive who would bring efficiency to the White House.
| 22.078431 | 1 | 51 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021201062.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021201062.html
|
The Explanation Hillary Clinton Owes
|
2007021419
|
Yet another man has betrayed Hillary Clinton. This time it's George W. Bush, who not only deceived her about weapons of mass destruction but, when granted congressional authorization to go to war in Iraq, actually did so. This, apparently, came as a surprise to her, although in every hamlet and village in America, every resident who could either read or watch Fox News knew that Bush was going to take the country to war. Among other things, troops were already being dispatched.
Somehow, Bush's intentions were lost on Clinton, who then as now was a member of the United States Senate. This was the case even though she now rightly calls Bush's desire to topple Saddam Hussein an "obsession."
"From almost the first day they got into office," Clinton said last weekend in New Hampshire, the Bush administration was "trying to figure out how to get rid of Saddam Hussein." If that was the case -- and indeed it was -- then how come she now says she did not think Bush, armed with a congressional resolution, would hurry to war?
I certainly did. It was about the only thing I got right about the war, which, the record will show, I supported. If I were running for the presidency, I might call my position "a mistake" and bray about being misled. But it was really a lapse in judgment. For reasons extraneous to this particular column, I thought the war would do wonders for the Middle East and that it would last, at the most, a week or two. In this I was assured by the usual experts in and out of government. My head nodded like one of those little toy dogs in the window of the car ahead of you.
So I do not condemn Clinton and other Democratic presidential candidates -- Chris Dodd, Joe Biden and John Edwards -- for voting for the war because I would have done the same. I fault them, though, for passing the blame to Bush as the guy who misled them. They all had sufficient knowledge to question the administration's arguments, and they did not do so. Not a single one of them, for instance, could possibly have believed the entirety of the administration's case or not have suspected that the reasons for war were being hyped. If they felt otherwise, they have no business running for president.
The odd man out in this debate is Barack Obama, who was not in the Senate in October 2002 when Congress passed the war resolution. He has been on record from that time as always being opposed to the war. That is to his credit. But we will never know how he might have voted since, clearly, being in the Senate and having presidential ambitions work wonders on the mind. (Indeed, once Obama got to Washington, he made only one Senate speech on Iraq.) Can it only be coincidence that all the other Democratic senators now running for president voted for the war? Can it also be a coincidence that they, in fact, voted as a majority of the American people at the time wanted? Not a single one of them bucked the zeitgeist, yet other Democratic senators -- 21 of them, in fact -- voted against the resolution. They were the ones not running for president.
The zeitgeist has reversed course. A clear majority of Americans and a preponderance of Democrats now oppose the war and have no confidence in Bush's handling of it. Is it yet another coincidence that, aside from Obama, all the Democratic presidential candidates from the Senate have also reversed course, arriving at their opinions after excruciating thought, or have they merely put their finger to the wind? In other words, have they changed their minds or merely their positions? It's hard to know. In Clinton's case, she is dead center in American public opinion, foursquare for what's popular and courageously opposed to what's not. Most Americans oppose a precipitous pullout from Iraq and -- surprise! -- so does Clinton.
Too often when a candidate throws his hat into the ring, he tosses principle out the window. Yet this is precisely what we want in a president -- principles and the courage to stick to them. Instead of Clinton saying she had been misled by Bush and his merry band of fibbers, exaggerators and hallucinators, I'd like to hear an explanation of how she thinks she went wrong and what she learned from it. I don't want to know how Bush failed her. I want to know how she failed her country.
|
I don't want to know how President Bush failed Hillary Clinton. I want to know how she failed her country.
| 36.791667 | 0.958333 | 6.791667 |
high
|
high
|
mixed
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/guestvoices/2007/02/prayer_offeres_humans_tranquil.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021419id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/guestvoices/2007/02/prayer_offeres_humans_tranquil.html
|
Prayer Offers Humans Tranquillity
|
2007021419
|
Veritas vos Liberabit, Anonymous and others who believe OT is no good and abrogated and NT is the source of guidance, keep reading for the contradictions in your "Holy Book". I know you have spent so much time trying to find fault with Islam and Quran. It will be a good investment to read the following, it's long, but hey, it's about NT and Jesus :)
(1) According to Mark, chapter 8, verse 12, Jesus says: "In truth, no sign shall be given (by me) to this generation (which refers to the generation of Jews who rejected his claims)." John chapter 12 verse 37 (cf. Acts chapter 2 verse 22) says, in evident contradiction, that Jesus gave "many signs" to this same disbelieving generation of Jews.
(2) Mark, chapter 6, verse 5 says that Jesus "could do no miracle" on at least one occasion. The word is could (not would) which means it was not possible for Jesus to perform a miracle at that time. But Mark, chapter 10, verse 27 says just the opposite, that "with God all things are possible." Hence, Jesus is eliminated as a god.
(3) In John, chapter 5, verse 31, Jesus supposedly says: "If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true." But a little later he reportedly exclaims: "Even if I bear witness of myself, yet my witness is true (John 8:14)." Furthermore, to make matters even more confused and conflicted, this passage was added to the Christian Bible in the sixth century. It is first found in a paper called "Liber Appologeticus" in the fourth century. It is noted that the words are sixth century additions to the original text. The footnote in the Jerusalem Bible, a Catholic translation, says these words are "not in any of the early Greek manuscripts or in the earliest manuscripts of the Vulgate itself." It is interesting that the Catholic church, who originally added this verse would admit now that it a spurious addition to the Greek Testament!
(4) It is supposedly the Last Supper. John, chapter 13, verse 36 has Peter ask Jesus: "Where are you going?" Then John, chapter 14, verse 5 has Thomas say to him: "We know not where you are going." But John, chapter 16, verse 5, has Jesus reply: "None of you are asking me where I'm going!" Because Peter asked Jesus where he was going, it is very clear that Jesus has deliberately lied.
(5) In John, chapter 7, verse 38, Jesus reportedly says: "Scripture said: 'From his innermost being shall flow rivers of living water'." There is no such passage in the Hebrew Tanach or anything resembling it.
(6) Matthew 2:23 says that: "He came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, he shall be called a Nazarene." There is no mention of this in the Ketuvim (the prophets). This narrated prophecy does not even exist! In the Old Testament (King James Version), the words "Nazareth" and "Nazarene" do not ever appear!
(7) John 17:12 mentions a "son of perdition" and says the "scriptures are being fulfilled." There is no reference, however, to a "son of perdition" in the Tanach.
(8) Jesus says that it was Zechariah, son of Berechiah, who was killed in the Temple courtyard (Matthew 23:35). Apparently Jesus didn't read the Bible very closely or he would have known it was another Zechariah, whose father was Jehoiada, who was killed there (II Chronicles 24:2-22).
(9) Regarding Jesus' stepfather, was he Joseph son of Jacob son of Mattan son of Eliezer (Matthew 1:15-16) or Joseph son of Eli son of Mattat son of Levi (Luke 3:23-24)? And how can both sets of genealogical tables validly include Shealtiel and Zerubabbel (Matthew 1:12; Luke 3:27), given that both of these men are descendants of Jeconiah (1 Chronicles 3:16-19), of whom G-d has said: "No man of his seed shall prosper, sitting on the throne of David or ruling any more in Judah" (Jeremiah 22-30)?
(10) Was John the Baptist Elijah, as Jesus claimed (Matthew 11:14)? If so, why did John himself deny it (John 1:21)? Would "Elijah" have been so unsure of Jesus' messianic identity (Luke 7:19-20)? And where in our Scriptures is it written that Elijah would be mistreated, as Jesus claimed (Mark 9:13)? Don't our Scriptures indicate, to the contrary, that Elijah will be successful in his mission of restoring harmony among the people (Malachai 4:5-6)? Moreover, Mark 9:11-13 and Mark 6:16 declares that: "Elijah has come" and "It is John who I beheaded." There is no indication from the Tanach that Elijah would be beheaded. I refer you, once again, to Malachai 4:5-6.
(11) Who's to judge the sinner? According to Jesus in John, chapter 5, verse 22: "For the Father judges no man but has committed all judgment to the Son" (meaning Jesus himself). But, then Jesus contradicts himself; "I judge no man" (John 8:15) and "I did not come to judge the world (John 12:47)." So who did? Listen to Jesus this time: "You (disciples) shall judge the twelve tribes of Israel" (Matthew 19:28). Unfortunately, this contradicts Jesus' original warning to them: "Not to judge, lest you be judged (Matthew 7:1)."
(12) Paul says. "It is shameful for a man to wear his hair long" (I Corinthians 11:14). Glaringly, this is the only way Jesus is ever pictured.
(13) "Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall be called sons of God" (Matthew 5:8). Yet, Jesus asserted the contrary; that he "did not come to bring peace on earth, but a sword" in Matthew, chapter 10, verse 34.
(14) John, chapter 14, verse 9 says: "he who has seen me (in reference to Jesus) has seen the Father." This would include his mother, disciples, and others. However, the Torah teacher that "He who has seen the face of G-d shall die (Exodus 33:20)." This Torah verse amounts to eternal damnation in fundamentalist Christian theology. (Note: Even in our times, thousands of Christians claim to have seen Jesus.)
(15) According to Acts 7:53 and Galations 3:19, the Holy Torah was given to the Jewish people by "angels." But, according to Exodus 20:1, it was given to Moses by G-d: "And G-d spoke all these words."
(16) Acts 7:14 says that 75 souls went down to Egypt. Yet, Genesis 46:27 it says "threescore and ten" (70) went down to Egypt.
(17) Jesus tells Peter to buy a sword (Luke 22:36). Peter reportedly uses his sword to cut off the ear of a Temple guard (John 18:10; Matthew 26:52-53). But Jesus, even though he urged Peter to buy a sword, criticizes Peter: "All those who take up the sword shall perish by the sword (Matthew 26:52)."
(18) Continuing with Matthew 26, we find in verses 17 through 20 that the Last Supper was a Passover Seder. On the contrary, we find in John 19:14 that it was the preparation day for the Passover.
(19) Hebrews, chapter 9, verse 22 says: "Without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sin." But, the Bible, in Isaiah, chapter 43, verses 23 through 25 teaches just the opposite; "You (Israelites) have not honored me (G-d) with your (blood) sacrifices. (Nevertheless) I will forgive your sins." And Hosea, chapter 14, verse 2 says G-d accepts "words" of thanks (prayer in place of sacrifices).
(20) Romans, chapter 10, verse 13: "For whoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." But Matthew, chapter 7, verse 21 says "Not everybody who says to me (Jesus), Lord, Lord, shall enter the Kingdom." Thus, we learn that Jesus is not G-d or an emissary of G-d.
(21) It is claimed in Ecclesians 1:4 that the earth does abideth forever. In II Peter 3:10, the opposite is stated.
(22) Further, why does John 8:14 say that: "If Jesus bears witness of himself his witness is true if John 5:31 says "If Jesus bears witness of himself his witness is not true?"
(23) According to Matthew 17:11 and Mark 9:2, Jesus led Peter, James, and John up a high mountain after six days. Or was it eight days in accordance to Luke 9:28?
(24) The claim is made that Jesus "justified" the sinner (Romans 4:5; Romans 15:9). But, the Bible in Proverbs 17, verse 15 teaches that "He who justifies the sinner is an abomination to G-d."
If there is any area in which the Christian Bible's imperfections and errancy is most apparent, it is that of inconsistencies and contradictions. The book is a veritable miasma of contradictory assertions and obvious disagreements, which is to be expected in any writing formulated over approximately 1,500 years by 40 or 50 different writers, few of whom seemed to be precisely concerned with what the others had penned.
In fact the writers were just never there.
Posted February 14, 2007 3:49 PM
|
A conversation on religion with Jon Meacham and Sally Quinn. Visit http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/guestvoices/
| 142.642857 | 0.357143 | 0.357143 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobalinbox/2007/02/nuclear_north_korea.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021419id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobalinbox/2007/02/nuclear_north_korea.html
|
PostGlobal on washingtonpost.com
|
2007021419
|
I am tempted to dismiss this ,,tentative,, agreement for the farcical manner in which it has been negotiated. But that would be wrong, perhaps just as wrong as the expectation that it is solving anything.
A tentative agreement it is, particularly in its uncertain sense of the word. As much as I believe that it has been reached not only on North Korean terms, but above all at their own leisurely timing, this administration deserves some credit for facing down such an evil adversary without firing a shot. That in itself is a sober, if not accomplished, at least a good attempt at diplomacy.
The Communist China gains more out of having been elevated to play a role in this farcical barter negotiation than even North Korea does out of getting their Communist elite,s luxury goods back on track, not to mention the fuel to keep the masses warm enough to tolerate the Communists. Yes, the same Communists who otherwise deny them the fuel, the food and other necessities, all in the name of sacrificing for the glorious future of Communism.
What Communist China gains is a permanent status of facilitating the farce to go on. Since this is by all accounts a blackmail, it may go on for a long time. America will be busy, always asking for Chinese assistance as North Korea will change the rules as they please.
A good bargain also because the fuel and other goodies will come from America so that Communist China will not have to help prop up their Communist brothers in North Korea. America will do it for them. America already imports almost everything Communist China manufactures by using next to slave labor and destroying the environment. America only pretends to be concerned about the sorry state of democracy and freedom in Communist China. America has a farcical foreign policy, and Communist China loves to help it stay that way for obvious reasons.
There are many issues with the nature of this tentative agreement, issues which go beyond the immediate relevancy of it. Ironically, the first that comes to my mind is a concern for lack of consistency in American foreign policy. Consider Secretary Rice's scoffing at **the bipartisan panel's recommendation that the United States seek the help of Syria and Iran in Iraq, saying the ,,compensation,, required by any deal might be too high. She argued that neither country should need incentives to foster stability in Iraq.** Quote from Washington Post Dec. 15/06: Rice Rejects Overture to Iran and Syria, further to Dec.14/06 interview. So much for the compensation of the North Korean deal, but they need the incentives, don't they? But who else needs the incentives to foster stability in the Korean peninsula? Of the Six Party Talks?
Similarly, if the ,,terrorists,, in Iraq--most of them being acknowledged to be Sunni insurgents--would construe an American troops withdrawal as a victory, I wonder what the North Koreans think of the way they bullied their tentative agreement with America out of such a well facilitated six-party negotiation?
There are many global implications to this agreement. Judging by the performance of this administration, I hardly think they have been given the proper attention by the experts and the students of history among them. Some posters before me have pointed out more than a few, and very aptly some of them.
Well, we must support our negotiators. They are doing a fine job, the strategy is working : The axis of evil is on the last throng, trust our illustrious leaders to deal with any remnant. We will take the fuel, I mean the fight, to the enemy. Our leaders will be friends with ,,the dear leader,, in no time. Just like Vladimir and the several Communist Chinese friends we made lately.
And remember folks: Sic Transit Gloria Mundi, as we sleep on our laurels! Too bad it is our world.
|
postglobalinbox on PostGlobal; blog of politics and current events on washingtonpost.com. Visit http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobalinbox/
| 50.2 | 0.333333 | 0.333333 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/13/AR2007021300508.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/13/AR2007021300508.html
|
Joint Statement: Six-Party Talks on N. Korea Disarmament
|
2007021419
|
Initial Actions for the Implementation of the Joint Statement
The Third Session of the Fifth Round of the Six-Party Talks was held in Beijing among the People's Republic of China, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation and the United States of America from 8 to 13 February 2007.
Mr. Wu Dawei, Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs of the PRC, Mr. Kim Gye Gwan, Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs of the DPRK; Mr. Kenichiro Sasae, Director-General for Asian and Oceanian Affairs, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan; Mr. Chun Yung-woo, Special Representative for Korean Peninsula Peace and Security Affairs of the ROK Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade; Mr. Alexander Losyukov, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation; and Mr. Christopher Hill, Assistant Secretary for East Asian and Pacific Affairs of the Department of State of the United States attended the talks as heads of their respective delegations.
Vice Foreign Minister Wu Dawei chaired the talks.
I. The Parties held serious and productive discussions on the actions each party will take in the initial phase for the implementation of the Joint Statement of 19 September 2005. The Parties reaffirmed their common goal and will to achieve early denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula in a peaceful manner and reiterated that they would earnestly fulfill their commitments in the Joint Statement. The Parties agreed to take coordinated steps to implement the Joint Statement in a phased manner in line with the principle of "action for action".
II. The Parties agreed to take the following actions in parallel in the initial phase:
1. The DPRK will shut down and seal for the purpose of eventual abandonment the Yongbyon nuclear facility, including the reprocessing facility and invite back IAEA personnel to conduct all necessary monitoring and verifications as agreed between IAEA and the DPRK.
2. The DPRK will discuss with other parties a list of all its nuclear programs as described in the Joint Statement, including plutonium extracted from used fuel rods, that would be abandoned pursuant to the Joint Statement.
3. The DPRK and the US will start bilateral talks aimed at resolving pending bilateral issues and moving toward full diplomatic relations. The US will begin the process of removing the designation of the DPRK as a state-sponsor of terrorism and advance the process of terminating the application of the Trading with the Enemy Act with respect to the DPRK.
4. The DPRK and Japan will start bilateral talks aimed at taking steps to normalize their relations in accordance with the Pyongyang Declaration, on the basis of the settlement of unfortunate past and the outstanding issues of concern.
5. Recalling Section 1 and 3 of the Joint Statement of 19 September 2005, the Parties agreed to cooperate in economic, energy and humanitarian assistance to the DPRK. In this regard, the Parties agreed to the provision of emergency energy assistance to the DPRK in the initial phase. The initial shipment of emergency energy assistance equivalent to 50,000 tons of heavy fuel oil (HFO) will commence within next 60 days.
|
Joint statement following Six-Party Talks on North Korea's nuclear weapons program, as released by the People's Republic of China:
| 23.28 | 0.8 | 2.56 |
medium
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/13/AR2007021300519.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/13/AR2007021300519.html
|
House Begins Debate On War
|
2007021419
|
The House plunged into a heated, partisan debate yesterday on President Bush's war policy, with Democrats challenging lawmakers to take a stand against the deployment of more troops to Iraq while Republicans accused their political foes of emboldening the enemy with their symbolic resolution.
Democrats won control of Congress last fall in a political backlash against Bush's Iraq policy, and yesterday they decried a war they said was illegitimately launched and has been badly managed, with devastating consequences. They were helped by three newly elected Democratic lawmakers who were propelled into politics by their military experience in Iraq.
"We stand together to tell this administration that we are against the escalation, and to say with one voice that Congress will no longer be a blank check to the president's failed policies," said freshman Rep. Patrick J. Murphy (D-Pa.), who was a captain with the 82nd Airborne Division in Baghdad. "The president's plan to send more of our best and bravest to die refereeing a civil war in Iraq is wrong."
Republicans focused on loftier themes, warning darkly about ceding Iraq to Islamic radicals who are bent on destroying not only the Middle East but also the American way of life. "We are engaged in a global war now for our very way of life," said House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio). "And every drop of blood that's been spilled in defense of liberty and freedom from the American Revolution to this very moment is for nothing if we're unwilling to stand up and fight this threat."
Scores of Democratic and Republican lawmakers took to the floor on the first of what is likely to be three days of intense debate on a tightly worded resolution opposing Bush's decision to deploy more than 20,000 additional U.S. combat troops to Iraq.
The resolution affirms Congress's support for "the members of the United States Armed Forces who are serving or who have served bravely and honorably in Iraq" before breaking with the president's new strategy.
The debate is expected to extend late into the night today and tomorrow before culminating in a House vote Friday. It is not the first extended House debate on the war, but it is the first since the invasion of Iraq nearly four years ago that is likely to conclude with a vote against the president.
"In a few days and in fewer than 100 words, we will take our country in a new direction on Iraq," pledged House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). "Friday's vote will signal whether the House has heard the American people: No more blank checks for President Bush on Iraq."
The House debate unfolded in an orderly, dignified fashion, in stark contrast to last week's tumult in the Senate, where Republicans blocked even a debate on the war resolution. Under House rules that heavily favor the majority, Democrats set the terms of the debate and even denied Republicans the opportunity to introduce an alternative measure. By the end of the week, only the Democratic resolution will come to a vote in the House, despite party leaders' pledges last week to give Republicans at least one vote.
The Democratic resolution is not binding on the administration, and both sides of the debate agreed that the real fight will come next month, when Democrats are to move to attach to a $100 billion war spending bill binding language that would limit future deployments to Iraq and begin to bring troops home.
Still, passage of the resolution this week would be a stinging repudiation of Bush's strategy to try to put down sectarian violence in Baghdad by bolstering troop levels, and Republicans struggled to discredit the importance of the measure.
Boehner denounced it "a political charade lacking both the seriousness and the gravity of the issue that it's meant to represent," even as he called the resolution "the first step toward abandoning Iraq."
|
Latest politics news headlines from Washington DC. Follow 2006 elections,campaigns,Democrats,Republicans,political cartoons,opinions from The Washington Post. Features government policy,government tech,political analysis and reports.
| 19.205128 | 0.512821 | 0.666667 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021201365.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021201365.html
|
'I'm Doing Fine,' President Tells Worried Father
|
2007021419
|
As the House gets ready to begin debating the Iraq war today, President Bush has a piece of advice for his father: Turn off the television.
It seems that former president George H.W. Bush has been getting agitated watching all the attacks on his son -- so much so that the current president said yesterday that he is worried for his father's well-being.
"I am actually more concerned about him than I have ever been in my life, because he's paying too much attention to the news," the president told C-SPAN in an interview to be broadcast this morning. "And I understand how difficult it is for a person who loves somebody to see them out in the political process and to kind of endure the criticism. My answer to him is: 'Look, don't pay attention to it. I'm doing fine.' "
That is advice he apparently intends to follow himself. Bush has no plans to watch the House debate his decision to send 21,500 more troops to Iraq.
"You know, I've got a full day," he said. "I mean, it's not as if the world stops when the Congress does their duty."
Besides, he added: "I already know what the debate is. I hear a lot of opinions."
Bush's comments were not the first hint at frustration inside the Bush family over his political troubles. After the November elections, which ousted Republican majorities from both houses of Congress, the elder Bush bristled at those disparaging his son. At a conference in the United Arab Emirates, he responded to Arab critics. "When your son's under attack, it hurts," he said. "You're determined to be at his side and help him any way you possibly can."
The president's travails may have brought father and son closer in some ways. In the interview yesterday, the younger Bush said he thinks his father is underestimated. Bush has identified politically more often with Ronald Reagan and Harry S. Truman. But he offered the 41st president as his first example when asked by C-SPAN's Steve Scully who is the most underrated president.
"Well, George H.W. Bush is one of them," the 43rd president said. "He followed President Reagan, who was such a really strong president that people have yet to take a look at my dad."
|
Get Washington DC,Virginia,Maryland and national news. Get the latest/breaking news,featuring national security,science and courts. Read news headlines from the nation and from The Washington Post. Visit www.washingtonpost.com/nation today.
| 11.142857 | 0.47619 | 0.52381 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/02/12/DI2007021200815.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/02/12/DI2007021200815.html
|
The Libby Trial's Implications for the Media
|
2007021419
|
The defense team in ex-Cheney aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby's perjury trial has opened its case by calling D.C. reporters to divulge who told them about CIA agent Valerie Plame.
Executive Director Lucy Dalglish of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press was online Tuesday, Feb. 13 at 2 p.m. ET to discuss the legal and ethical implications the case holds for the media. Prior to joining RCFP, Dalglish was a Minneapolis-based media lawyer; before that she spent 13 years as a reporter and editor for the St. Paul Pioneer Press.
Let's get started. I'm going to focus mostly on the legal questions because that's where I have the most expertise.
Raleigh, N.C.: Given your position, I think I can predict your thoughts on the spectacle of a bunch of reporters being called in to testify in a case such as this. (You're a lil' bit freaked out, right?) Given that, what if any changes in the canon of journalistic ethics would you recommend to avoid these situations?
Lucy Dalglish: No, you're wrong -- I am super-duper freaked out. The notion that reporter after reporter can be called to testify about confidential conversations with sources horrifies me.
There are a few things we media lawyers have been advising clients to do to minimize their risk of being subpoenaed. For example, we recommend they not use their home or office telephones and use disposable phones instead. We also strongly suggest they have comprehensive conversations with their sources about the exact scope of the promises they are making.
I think the basic "canons" remain the same: Report the truth, minimize harm, keep promises and act independently.
Reading, Mass.: Is there an ethical difference for a reporter talking to the FBI about conversations with a source and a reporter talking to a federal grand jury?
Lucy Dalglish: If the source was a confidential source, I don't think there is a difference.
Burke, Va.: I care about freedom of the press but the more I watch the passel of overpaid, uncurious, played-by-the-Bush-administration weasels on the stand the more I enjoy it. I'd always kind of suspected these guys weren't the noble people trying to ferret out the truth they claimed they were. I feel bad for the Sports journalist who is being threatened with jail, but seeing Russert have to answer questions -- I love it.
Lucy Dalglish: I've not enjoyed any of it. I know most of the reporters and editors who have been forced to testify, and they are hard-working, conscientious journalists. They have very difficult jobs and most days they perform admirably.
Mobile, Ala.: Re: the ethics of Mr. Wilson's writing an Op-Ed piece and the paper those of that printed it. Mr Wilson was a CIA agent when he went to Niger (regardless of whether he worked for the CIA full-time, at that moment he was a CIA agent). How then can he legitimately disclose what he learned in Niger when, for instance, a Station Chief in Niger, undoubtedly would be prosecuted or at least fired for making a similar disclosure in The New York Times?
Lucy Dalglish: That's a question I remember asking myself when the Wilson/Plame story first broke. I don't know what his obligations were. Perhaps because he went there not as an employee but as a favor to the CIA he did not have a legal obligations to keep silent about what he found out.
Albany, N.Y.: I realize that reporters need to protect sources, but in creating the false impression that they did not know who leaked Plame's name, weren't these reporters essentially lying to the public, and isn't that a more important issue than protecting these administration sources?
Lucy Dalglish: I don't recall reporters saying they don't know who leaked the name (except for, perhaps, Tm Russert). My recollection is that most of them said they had sources they were not willing to identify.
Having been a reporter (many years ago), I know that often, at the time you make a promise of confidentiality, you have no idea whether the information is going to take you to a blockbuster story or into a black hole. One thing I have always believed, however, is that when you made a promise to a source, you keep it.
Monroeville, Pa.: A prosecutor being able to jail anyone who won't answer any or all specific questions on a topic he chooses, to incarcerate that person for the 18-month duration of the grand jury, is a travesty of justice. And then he can continue that person's time behind bars if he wants to impanel another 18-month grand jury attempting to force the person to answer the same or other questions, and if he still does not have the cooperation of the now-jailbird at the end of that grand jury, he can continue impaneling 18-month grand juries indefinitely. The 1972 Supreme Court decision that allowed this modus operandi to exist for prosecutors is a repudiation of our Constitution's First Amendment rights, and a flagrant corruption of the unique justice system for protection of civil rights that was so carefully defined and scripted by our forefathers.
Lucy Dalglish: You won't get any argument from me.
New York: The Libby trial has affirmed the insular establishment-protecting reputation of the national media. While reporters appear one after the other in the courtroom and on the chat shows we (the public) are receiving stunted legalistic versions of what happened here. Everyone who follows the case knows that it really is about the management of information and the shameless attempt by the administration to obstruct the truth. They got a lot of help from reporters who decided their access was more important than our right to know. These same reporters shortly will be selling us a new war -- should we expect to rely on their judgment of what truths to protect and what lies to let slide?
Lucy Dalglish: In the aftermath of 9/11, I also was disappointed in the timidity of the news media. Those of us who were out there pushing reporters to be more aggressive in covering the administration's pursuit of government secrecy often got hate mail and death threats. But I believe most reporters have learned an important lesson in the past few years and will continue to improve in their role as watchdogs. I'm seeing evidence of the pendulum swinging back every day.
Arlington, Va.: Frankly, I am disgusted with the Washington Press Corpse. The testimony at the Libby trial yesterday just underscored my opinion. They are more concerned with being invited to the right cocktail parties, and hobnobbing with the right White House insiders, than in comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable. The White House lies to them, they know they are being lied to but continue to parrot the White House meme. Stop trying to be the cool kids and do some real work for a change.
Lucy Dalglish: Quite honestly the reporters I work with in Washington usually don't have time to hit cocktail parties. There are a few egomaniacs, but most reporters got into the business because they have enormous respect and reverence for democracy and believe they have an important role in protecting it.
Ashland, Mo.: If revealing a CIA agent's name is a crime, why isn't a reporter an aider and abetter if he or she repeats what they have been told or refuses to identify the leaker? How is this any different from a member of the public hiding a robber in his or her house?
Lucy Dalglish: There are several aspects of your question that should be addressed:
First of all, I think it has been demonstrated conclusively that identifying Valerie Plame's name in this particular case was not a crime.
Secondly, if the intelligence identities act is violated, it specifically exempts journalists from being charged with a crime.
Third, journalists have very good reasons for refusing to identify sources. We can talk more about that later, if you'd like.
San Francisco: Do you think academic training and work experience in actual journalism would have helped Tim Russert from getting into such a bind? The idea that conversations with government officials are "off-the-record" unless he explicitly asks for and receives permission seems so contrary to how people imagine journalists behaving. Is is wise for media >outlets to hire political spokespersons to become journalists?
Lucy Dalglish: We don't have licensing of journalists in this country. Anyone can become a journalist by doing journalism. They don't have to go to school to prepare for it.
I think Tim Russert (who is a valued member of the steering committee of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press) established his bona fides as a journalist a long time ago.
San Francisco: Can you explain why no Traditional Media outlet is providing live-blogging of the trial of Lewis Libby? Seems to me that if TradMed and its reporters were interested in redeeming themselves for their compliant role in the run-up to War on Iraq, live-blogging the trial might be one place to start.
Lucy Dalglish: Interesting question. I happen to know that the access to the trial by media bloggers was negotiated during a two-year period by Robert Cox of the Media Bloggers Association. I think Cox just thought of it before anyone else, and he passionately worked to get his members accredited.
If this blogging experience works well, my guess is that we'll see more traditional media doing it in future trials. I think it has been very interesting to read the blogs.
Columbus, Ohio: Do you draw a distinction between anonymous sources ... for instance, you could be protecting a whistleblower from repercussions by not revealing their identity. In the Plame case, this was turned on its head. The government itself was discrediting a whistle-blower by anonymously leaking information to reporters.
Lucy Dalglish: Now you know why I was quoted in the Wall Street Journal last week describing watching this messy case as "being on the floor of a sausage factory."
Again, I think reporters have learned in the past couple of years to be far more discriminating about who they offer confidentiality to and under what conditions they offer it. I get interviewed by the press all the time and have noted that reporters have become much more precise about the terms of the confidentiality agreements they make. Obviously whistleblowers deserve the utmost protection.
Baltimore: What legal strategy led Libby's team to allow Judith Miller to be jailed for weeks, only to allow her release later?
Lucy Dalglish: I wasn't privy to the conversations Libby's team had with Judy Miller. Certainly they could have come forward on their own to say Libby was a source and spared her the jail time. I recall having conversations with her two years ago in which she said she was not going to ask her source for a waiver because she strongly believed that would be unethical. Perhaps her personal legal counsel persuaded her to change her mind once she spent time in jail.
Columbus, Ohio: "First of all, I think it has been demonstrated conclusively that identifying Valerie Plame's name in this particular case was not a crime." That is not true. The CIA referred this case to the Justice Department as an Intelligence Identities Protection Act investigation. That is all we know about whether the IIPA was violated.
Lucy Dalglish: That may have been what the referral was about, but I believe Fitzgerald's investigation concluded releasing her name (while stupid and possibly unethical) was not a crime under these circumstances.
Baton Rouge, La.: From Ari Fleischer's testimony, we know that David Gregory was leaked Plame info. Add that to Andrea Mitchell's "Everybody knew" statement and how likely is it that Tim Russert's "it was impossible for me to know" holds up? Wouldn't Mitchell and Gregory have shared info on what was at the time the biggest news story?
Lucy Dalglish: Aha. You probably have never worked in a newsroom. Journalists are very protective of their sources and stories. In addition to these competitive reasons, these folks are traveling a lot and preoccupied with their own assignments. While it may seem logical to you that Mitchell and Gregory would have shared the information, it doesn't surprise me that it wasn't.
New York: I am struck by your repetition of reference to professional standards and high ideals, but no discussion at all of the extent to which reporters should be careful not to be used by administration reps. This was an obvious case of same, but the response of the press is a shrug: "We get the story in whatever form we can; the rest is the public's problem." In this case was not "the story" the attempt to cast doubt on the Ambassador's credentials?
Lucy Dalglish: You are stating the obvious -- of course reporters should be careful not to be "used" by the administration. At the end of this very troubling case, I'm still not sure what "the story" is going to turn out to be.
Boston: The Libby trial reads like a witch hunt, something this country has seen before and looks back upon with the question of why did it happen? As a citizen I wonder, why did the Justice Department let Fitzgerald continue after Armitage admitted he was the source? Do you believe Libby's "lies" are worthy of criminal prosecution whereas other "lies" from reporters and government officials are equal but not charged? Do you think with this liability of a witch hunt, trial and persecution, that it will detrimentally effect willingness of a reporter to go after an unpopular story -- David against a Goliath? Will David stop trying because he can't afford the attorney fees and trial? Should there be public funds available to defend the reporters?
Lucy Dalglish: I'll answer your last question first -- under no circumstances should public funds be available to defend reporters. Yuck!
I don't know a lot about the inner working of the Justice Department but I believe Fitzgerald was tasked with investigating the leak and other "related" crimes. Keep in mind that once he was given the case as a special prosecutor, the Justice Department gave him enormous discretion to pursue things as he saw fit. Prosecutors have enormous discretion and I personally believe that once Armitage identified himself as the original source, the case should have been dropped.
Is this case having a chilling effect? Absolutely. We know that some sources are drying up and some newsrooms (particularly smaller ones) are dropping important investigative stories because they are concerned about winding up in court (which ain't cheap).
Cache Valley, Utah: Hello Ms. Dalglish -- thanks for the chat! Over at the CNN web site there is a "news alert" proclaiming that Cheney and Libby will not testify. Do you have any thoughts on this development?
Lucy Dalglish: Very interesting ... that doesn't surprise me at all. Putting Libby and Cheney on the stand would have been an extremely risky move, but if I were a juror I have to believe I'd want to hear from Libby himself. I'd want to judge for myself whether this man had as bad a memory as his lawyers claim.
Lucy Dalglish: I'm told it's time to end our chat. Thanks for the thought-provoking questions, folks.
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online 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.
|
As I. Lewis. "Scooter" Libby's defense team calls members of the Washington press to divulge who told them about Valerie Plame, Lucy Dalglish of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press will discuss the legal and ethical implications the case holds for the media.
| 59.72549 | 0.980392 | 7.254902 |
high
|
high
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/02/12/DI2007021200686.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/02/12/DI2007021200686.html
|
Science: Global Warming and the Government
|
2007021419
|
Kevin Trenberth of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was online Tuesday, Jan. 13, to discuss the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report and testimony before Congress.
Trenberth was one of several members of the IPCC to testify before the House Science and Technology Committee on Feb. 8 about the report's findings. He is the lead author of a chapter on observations on the earth's surface and in the atmosphere in the IPCC's most recent report. He is also head of the Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo.
You can read more about the IPCC report here: Humans Faulted for Global Warming, Post, Feb. 3, 2007. More Post coverage on global warming is available in our special report.
I'm a biologist by training, so I am not conversant in the details of climate models, but I often hear from people outside the workplace who want to discuss climate change with me.
Something I often hear from skeptics is that global warming is merely a correlation to increased atmospheric carbon dioxide. I try to explain that it's well supported, but that often is not convincing.
The problem, I think, it that non-scientists do not understand the difference between a mechanism-driven hypothesis that is tested via a correlation, and a random correlation. Laypeople often hear in the news media of random correlations, such as those between health outcomes and diet, that don't stand up in later studies. The public need to know that a mechanism-driven correlation is fundamentally different, in that it will make a variety of predictions that can be tested.
Kevin Trenberth: Indeed, as scientists we are concerned with much more than correlations but we seek why those exist and what the processes are. The climate models include many but not all processes. And given that they can simulate the observed phenomenon, which is increasingly the case, then it provides more confidence in future projections. Kevin Trenberth
Manassas, Va.: Even before I ever heard of "global warming", I always believed that the climate is extremely complex to understand and even harder to forecast. At certain points in time throughout millions of years, long before gases caused by the industrial age, temperatures have been much higher than now and much colder than 30 years ago (when there was a fear of "global cooling"). If there were no industrial gases then, what caused such climate changes? I never heard a response to that question.
Count me as a skeptic. It seems that this report's favorite argument is that there is no argument to its conclusions.
One last thing. I live in Northern Virginia, where a prediction of 2 inches of snow causes school closures, government delays, and almost universal panic. For days up to last night, the best that meteorology can buy predicted that it would start snowing at 4 AM in the area. Well, as of 8 AM, there is no snow (just some sleet) and a bunch of kids happy not going to school. My point is, if a simple forecast for the next few hours is missed, why should we believe in climate forecasts that will happen decades from now?
Kevin Trenberth: See some of the other responses about weather vs climate. Weather relates to the processes and instabilities in the atmosphere, but climate relates to systematic influences on the atmosphere. e.g. if the sun heats up, so will the climate. But there will still be weather and colder periods. Historically the main changes from glacials to interglacials have been caused by the changes in the Earth's orbit around the sun. The precession of the equinoxes occurs with about a 20,000 year period. The axis of the earth's rotation changes on 40,000 year periods. The shape of the orbit changes also. The last major ice age was 20,000 years ago. There are subsequent changes in atmospheric composition and ice on the surface that provide feedbacks and amplify these changes. Now we have changed the atmospheric composition, carbon dioxide has increased by 35% since 1750 (pre-industrial times) and half of that increase has occurred since 1970. It changes the greenhouse effect and alters the natural flow of energy through the system by about 1%. That is enough to produce global warming.
Steaming in Maryland: While I appreciate the value of double- and triple-checking in science, really, this consensus on anthropogenic GW has been largely in place for between 5 and 10 years. But oil industry lobbyists and sociopathic conservatives ensured the public would be confused enough to doubt the science for a decade (Exxon alone spent $8 million doing this). What can our country learn from this ignominious period of our history about the value of listening to science when it comes to, well, scientific issues?
Kevin Trenberth: It is important to realize that science deals with facts and not beliefs. And it is easy to amplify uncertainties or misunderstandings such as a cold spell caused by weather. It has been disappointing that science has not been treated appropriately in recent years, and the well funded disinformation campaigns have not helped.
Arlington, Va.: Thanks for doing this chat. I understand most of the predicted outcomes of global warming, but am curious about how two of them would interact. The theory is that if enough ice melts, the ocean currents that keep northern Europe warm would cease, thereby plunging them into somewhat of an ice age. Would that not then refreeze a great deal of water that had melted and counteract the original problem to some degree? Or would the freezing of northern Europe not be that severe? Thanks.
Kevin Trenberth: It is true that melting of ice in the north changes the density of the ocean and can affect ocean currents. It is projected that the Gulf Stream may slow down in future decades, bringing less heat to Europe. But because this change is caused by warming, the warming wins out and the net effect is still warming in the North Atlantic, but just a bit less than there would be without such changes. There is a lot of mythology about this that is wrong (such as in the movie "The day after tomorrow".)
Washington, D.C.: What I don't understand is if global warming is such a big issue, then why doesn't Congress pass a law banning chlorofluorocarbons? It concerns that even when cases get to the Supreme court, such as Mass. v EPA, they're about such small things, like tailpipe emissions in future years. Can't we do something big? Thanks.
Kevin Trenberth: Chlorofluorocarbons contribute very slightly to global warming. They are a bigger culprit for the ozone hole and ozone depletion. They have been largely banned for that reason. The problem now is fossil fuel burning in cars and power plants and so on, which creates carbon dioxide.
First of all, I want to thank you and everyone that worked on this report. The document is excellent and also somewhat overwhelming.
I believe that the two most stunning statements in the document are these:
"The atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide in 2005 exceeds by far the natural range over the last 650,000 years (180 to 300 ppm) as determined from ice cores.
The atmospheric concentration of methane in 2005 exceeds by far the natural range of the last 650,000 years (320 to 790 ppb) as determined from ice cores."
Wow. It is astounding to think that the current levels of these two gases in our atmosphere exceed the range seen in the last 650,000 years.
I would like to see how critics of this report could toss aside that evidence as meaningless.
Thank you again for your work on this report.
Kevin Trenberth: Thanks. Yes that kind of information should make anyone pause.
Washington, D.C.: I am still skeptical about what man can do to stop global warming. We had two full ice ages before one plant/car was built. Every time you breathe, go to the bathroom, or clap the planet heats us. Plus, the rate the planet is heating up isn't abnormal or out of line with history. Short of leaving the planet and shutting down our economy, I don't see any steps we can take that will make any difference.
We should focus on clean air and water, stuff we actually can work on, rather than the new poster child of the enviro-left. Remember DDT? That used to be there poster child, we stopped shipping it to Africa, and millions of children died because of it.
I don't want the US economy to be the next victim of a mis-guided policy.
Kevin Trenberth: The first step is to identify if there is a problem, and we think there is. What to do about it is another matter and involves many factors and value systems. How much do we value the planet we leave to the future generations? My own experience tells me it is less what we do and more how we go about it and implement it. Politicians are a key in this. Obviously one should not change policy instantly or it will hurt the economy, but if implemented over years so that people can plan for it then it can help the economy by making us more energy efficient. For cars the time horizon is order 10 years. For coal fired power plants it is order 35 years.
Vienna, Va.: Why are more and more people without a scientific background so willing to dismiss the analysis of those with specialized training? No matter what the issue, whether it be global warming, vaccines, etc, it seems like everyone feels like they are qualified to analyze the issue even though many do not have the training and expertise to understand the issue.
Kevin Trenberth: There is a lot that can be said that is based on science: facts. This is not about beliefs or religion. What to do about it may be a different story.
Washington, D.C.: I have read that global warming's "dirty little secret" is that there is no fix, barring drastic and immediate switches to alternate energy sources, which don't seem ready for mass consumption yet anyway. In your brutally honest assessment, have we crossed the Rubicon here? Will lowering emissions have any positive effect?
Kevin Trenberth: Lower emissions will not do much for the next 30 years, but will make a huge difference thereafter say by 2100. This is because carbon dioxide has a long lifetime (>100 years) and so what we already have in the atmosphere will be with us for quite a while. And the oceans heat up only slowly. We should act to slow down the problem but we also must recognize the problem and plan for it. Slowing it down allows for more planning and adaptation, and less disruption.
Detroit, Mich.: Although, human causes of global warming have been discussed in the press for a while now, what and when was the particular finding(s) that ultimately led the majority of the scientific community to conclude that this was real?
Kevin Trenberth: The IPCC was set up 1988 indicating concerns. The major assessments of the IPCC have occurred in 1990, 1995, 2001 and now 2007. In each one there has been a progression of confidence that global warming is happening and is due to humans, mainly starting in 1995. Mother nature has played a major role as warm years keep piling up and the patterns of change in winds and rain are now evident and can be reproduced in climate model simulations. This is new. Previously it was temperatures. There was no singular event in the science, but some singular events have occurred that have raised public awareness. These include especially the 2003 heat waves in Europe that killed over 30,000 people (and which we can demonstrate was related to global warming), and Katrina in the US. Hurricanes are natural, but if they are even a bit more intense, then the damage goes over a threshold and things break.
Falls Church, Va.: Can you distinguish the difference between climate change and weather? Many skeptics of global warming point to the weather for evidence when this doesn't seem to be the same thing.
Kevin Trenberth: Yes this is often a source of confusion. There is enormous variety of weather that occurs naturally. I think of it as what goes on in the atmosphere. Climate is when there are systematic influences from outside the atmosphere, such as from the sun, the oceans, or land. El Nino is a climate phenomenon involving the tropical Pacific ocean and the global atmosphere. Heat from the ocean alters heating pattern sin the atmosphere that affects the jet stream and wave patterns in the atmospheric winds. So it affects weather patterns. So does global warming.
Silver Spring, Md.: Fighting climate change is just one more justification for a "light" rail project that would take trees and homes in my neighborhood, just for the tracks. Zoning changes would finish the job -- this neighborhood of small houses and big trees would be gone. There is no such thing as "Smart Growth." Without stabilizing the human population, there is no stopping climate change. We talked about that in the 1970s. Why is population a taboo topic now?
Kevin Trenberth: I agree with you. Energy use is very much per capita related. In China the use per capita is 1/10th that of the US but they have so many more people. To bring up their standard of living to that of the US has consequences. Population should be a big part of this discussion.
Ice core data going back hundreds of thousands of years from prior glacial periods and warming periods indicates that warming occurs first, then CO 2 levels increase. This seems to indicate that the increase in CO2 levels is an EFFECT of global warming, NOT the CAUSE of global warming. An easy physical explanation: CO2 has a lower solubility in warmer water than it does in colder water, so when the oceans warm, they release CO2.
Secondly, there is ample evidence of SOLAR FORCING for global warming. During the Maunder Minimum (1600's), there were almost no sunspots. During this period of time, the Earth cooled, and glaciers ADVANCED! Since then, sunspots have reappeared, and lo and behold, the Earth has warmed, and the glaciers have been retreating ever since. This process has been going on BEFORE INDUSTRIALIZATION!!!
To my point: There is evidence that the Earth is warming. There is evidence that CO2 levels are rising. But just because you can put the 2 together on a graph, DOES NOT make for a CAUSE and EFFECT relationship.
Kevin Trenberth: You are absolutely right. In the case of the thousands of year fluctuations, the climate changes and carbon dioxide and methane amounts in the atmosphere respond through changes on land and in oceans. For instance, as things warm up, the carbon and plant material in soils decays much faster (as it does in summer but not in winter) and if wet it does so anaerobically producing methane, but if dry it does so aerobically producing carbon dioxide. However, we have measurements of the sun from space since 1979 and we know that the recent warming is not from the sun. Instead carbon dioxide has increased about 16% since 1970, and that does have a major effect.
Peoria, Ill.: The earth has been warming and cooling like clockwork in fairly regular cycles for about 2.5 million years. After a warming trend, the earth plunges into an ice age, and then slowly recovers through a warming trend that keeps getting warmer until, you guessed it, another ice age. Man has not existed through ANY of these cycles except for the very teeny tiny end of the current cycle. And, even then, the period of man's industrial activity is even more miniscule.
For example, regarding sea levels, consider that it is well known that the Florida Keys are comprised of ossified coral. Coral grows underwater. 100,000 years ago the Keys were under water. Currently they are not under water, but they will be once again, as they have been, repeatedly, in geological history. It is known that, during previous periods, the peninsula of Florida was much wider than it is today, extending far into what is now the Gulf of Mexico. These types of natural events have been occurring repeatedly in cycles well before man existed. Man's emissions may enhance this particular cycle of nature, but I doubt if it is the CAUSE of this particular warming trend. The participation of industrialized man in this current warming cycle comprises about the last 1% of the warming period. To give a perspective, today's current warming period started many hundreds of thousands of years BEFORE the ancient Greeks.
It is terrible to imagine the pain of Venice, Italy, Mauritius, or the Florida Keys going under water due to global warming. However, I do not think that man is in charge of these events. Since the 1800s scientists have known that the earth's wobble on its axis, coupled with its eccentric (i.e.: not truly circular) orbit are the likely cause of these repeated cycles of warming and cooling. As mentioned above, man did not even exist during any of these cycles, except for about the last 1% of the current warming trend. (For reference see National Geographic, Sept 2004 issue. See the graphs.)
Man cannot control many natural events such as meteorites striking the earth, volcano eruptions, earthquakes, solar storms, and many other natural events. I am all for limiting emissions, and I do my part. However, I feel that the "Al Gore" mania, while probably sincere, underestimates the power of nature and exaggerates the power of man.
Kevin Trenberth: The fact that there are changes in the past in climate that are mainly related to changes in the earth's orbit about the sun, is all the more reason to believe that if there is an agent of change then the climate will respond. We can measure the changes in forcings of the climate system, and human induced changes are occurring at rates a hundred fold those in nature. So yes, natural variability is occurring, but it occurs mostly much slower than recent climate change. The exception is when a volcano puts gases and debris into the stratosphere, causing a cooling for a couple of years, fairly quickly.
Washington, D.C.: How would you respond to a Senator Inhofe who characterized global warming as a hoax or a Rush Limbaugh who said it was bogus.
Kevin Trenberth: The answer has to be that there are demonstrable facts that are clear. The debate should be on what to do about it, not that global warming is real.
Arlington, Va.: Fareed Zakaria had a great op-ed in yesterday's Post, basically saying that it's too late to do much about the global warming problem. Do you think it's too late? What can we practically do to make a significant impact without dramatically changing our Western, industrialized lifestyle?
Kevin Trenberth: It is late and we can not do much to alter the outcome for the next 30 years, but actions we take now make an increasing large difference from that point on. So what we start to do now makes a big difference by 2100. We should think hard about energy and whether we can sustain current practices? More likely we need to change for those practical reasons and develop renewable energy that is sustainable. We will have to do this sooner or later.
Washington, D.C.: Is there something wrong if you're anti-global climate? I'm at EPA and instead of having people agree to disagree with me, I was told otherwise and lost the respect of many people.
Kevin Trenberth: You know climate change is not necessarily bad. But rapid climate change is. The ecosystems can not live with rapid change: they can evolve if it occurs slowly enough. You should think about how to best frame the issues, look into why you and other disagree and what you agree on, and focus on what are the real points of debate.
Rockville, Md.: I don't deny warming, but I do want to expand the debate beyond the first question "Will it be warmer in the future?"
I understand why political debates can stick to one point to discuss, but this should be science. And we should be able to ask "Is warmer good or bad?" when there are clear scenarios in the future where warmer would help. As in the verge of an ice age.
When I see people trying to get to the next stage of the debate they usually are attacked as "deniers." What good does that do?
Kevin Trenberth: Yes if you move from New York to Miami you have different climate. No problem. But ecosystems can't do that. Warming may have some benefits: longer growing seasons, reduced heating bills. But it also has downsides: more severe storms, hurricanes, droughts, heat waves, and higher air conditioning costs. Let's debate what to do about it, and how to plan for it.
Washington, D.C.: A major 1974 article that appeared in Time Magazine cited a number of international and well-respected scientists (including from the National Weather Service and American universities) for the proposition that global cooling could be occurring and that catastrophic changes to the global environment could result. Given this past history, should citizens be quick to accept this new scientific "consensus" that human-engineered global warming is occurring?
Kevin Trenberth: That was media hype. It was never accepted in the scientific community. Two things happened. 1) Scientists realized that major ice ages were related to the orbit of earth around the sun, and thus on a time scale of tens of thousands of years we were headed toward the next ice age. We still are. 2) After World War II there was a lot of industrialization and air pollution. Clean air acts were introduced and cleanup up the air in many places (London smog, Pittsburgh etc). The visible pollution causes cooling, and that was also a result that was accepted at that time. The two items got a bit mixed up in the press. But there was never any reports from the national Academy or elsewhere (like IPCC) to say that cooling was on the way. The situation now is quite different.
Arlington, Va.: It's kind of funny that now that we finally have winter weather in the D.C. area. There was a lot of hubbub about global warming when it was 75 degrees in January. Do you think the fact that we now have "normal" weather shows that the warming is not really happening? What about the fact that we had some unseasonably cold days? Shouldn't that counter the unseasonably warm days? Or is the extremes that all of the country has been seeing the last few years all a part of the climate change problem? Thank you.
Kevin Trenberth: Yes. With global warming we still have weather, and we still have winter. We also have El Nino: there is one underway now and that is influencing the character of the winter. Other effects from the Indian Ocean affected the first part of winter and led to the warmth on east coast. Now the El Nino component is coming more to the fore (the main storm track farther south than usual). All these effects can dominate at a place or time. But the overall change is for one of warming. Ironically, more warming means the atmosphere hold more moisture and so we get greater snow falls as a consequence of warming. In upper NY state, the absence of ice on the lake helps too.
Washington, D.C.: I have heard that the Earth periodically goes through periods of rapid cooling resulting in occasional ice ages. I know that this process takes thousands of years, but is the Earth due for another such period of icing in the not too distant future?
Kevin Trenberth: The latest assessment is that this is quite a long time off. Not sure off top of my head, but beyond 30,000 years. It relates to tilt of orbit, precession of equinoxes and shape of orbit.
Rockville, Md.: Are there any non-atmospheric reasons or factors to change the temperature of the Earth? Would it be possible for the Earth to enter a region of thin dust or gases that would lower the Earth's temperature Is it possible for a band of gas to circle the solar system and have periodical changes to affect the climate? We have detected bands of matter beyond the outer planets. Do we pay attention to these factors?
Kevin Trenberth: Yes we should pay attention to any such factors. Having appropriate satellites in space to measure their effects and any changes on the sun is essential (but threatened by cut backs in budgets). Other factors relate to land use: changing plants, forests etc.
Mt. Lebanon, Pa.: The "argument" that global heating - I'm an engineer, we don't have a word for a thermodynamic process called "warming" - may be due mainly to natural causes is a foolish and evil canard. The outcome of the turkey in the oven in not dependent upon whether he's being roasted by an electric oven or one fired by natural gas. The net result from either alternative is a crispy carcass. Perhaps all of us adults can dispense with that pointless debating dead end.
Aside from models - which are notoriously unreliable when abutted onto real time events - what physical evidence is clearly attributable to global atmospheric changes?
And are there local changes - again correlated with hard physical evidence - that move against the global trend lines? If so, what accounts for these local events?
Kevin Trenberth: Indeed the term "warming" is ambiguous. For some it means increases in temperature. In the case of global warming it should mean increases in heating, one consequence of which is increased temperature. The increase in carbon dioxide increases the greenhouse effect and produces a warming equivalent to about 1% of the natural flow of energy through the system. Some of that heat goes into drying: evaporation. Over the oceans, where it is always wet, this happens. If the ground is wet after a shower, and the sun comes out, the first thing that happens is the ground dries out and then the temperature rises. Water is the air conditioner of the planet, as it is for our bodies. If you run out of water you get heat stroke. These symptoms of warming are widespread now and physically consistent: rising temperatures, rising sea temperatures, melting glaciers, less snow cover, rising sea level (from expansion and added melt water), increased drought in subtropics, and increased rains at high latitudes (as air can hold more moisture), heavier rains and snows. These observed changes are now simulated in models: this is quite recent.
Washington, D.C.: According to NASA's Jim Hansen, the last time Earth's temperature was five degrees warmer sea levels were 80 feet higher. Other studies suggest the polar ice sheets are melting much faster than previously thought. Do you believe that the IPCC report's estimated sea level rise of less than two feet to be low?
Kevin Trenberth: The IPCC states the values but also has caveats that ice sheet collapse could add to the values considerably. There is an inadequate basis for saying what that might be. Glaciers tend to surge and then stop. 130,000 years ago in the Eemian period, it was warmer and sea levels 4 to 6 m higher, and Greenland was much smaller. This could happen if we keep on the current path but probably on about a 1000 year timescale.
Washington, D.C.: I have a comment and a question.
Comment: I wish we could get politics out of this whole process. I am sure you will have numerous Bush hatters blaming this on him, etc..
Question: I recently read about a study that attributed the rise in global temperatures to the rise in methane in the atmosphere. They said it?s a much better insulator then CO2, and they tracked the increase to increase in the world population of cattle. What is you take on this?
Kevin Trenberth: Methane is a substantial contributor to global warming, second to carbon dioxide. But it has a shorter life time of about 10 years. I am from New Zealand where methane emissions are the major problem along these lines. A lot of research is going on with feed for livestock to reduce methane emissions (which mainly come from the stomach through the mouth). Every bit helps.
Washington, D.C.: The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Chris Landsea resigned a year ago from the IPCC and leveled charges that the IPCC, and you in particular, had a overly-politicized view of global warming trends. (Post, Hurricane Scientist Leaves U.N. Team, Jan. 23, 2005). Specifically, I believe that Landsea objected to the fact that some on the IPCC would "utilize the media to push an unsupported agenda that recent hurricane activity has been due to global warming." I assume that you disagree with Mr. Landsea. Do you believe that recent hurricane patterns have been negatively affected by global warming?
Kevin Trenberth: This is what the IPCC says in the Policy Makers Summary: "There is observational evidence for an increase of intense tropical cyclone activity in the North Atlantic since about 1970, correlated with increases of tropical sea surface temperatures. There are also suggestions of increased intense tropical cyclone activity in some other regions where concerns over data quality are greater. Multi-decadal variability and the quality of the tropical cyclone records prior to routine satellite observations in about 1970 complicate the detection of long-term trends in tropical cyclone activity. There is no clear trend in the annual numbers of tropical cyclones. " This was agreed to by the US Govt and crafted by the lead authors present (including me). Landsea's comments were not correct.
Washington, D.C.: A lot of scientific research requires substantial sums of money to conduct. My guess is that money, depending upon the scientist or foundation at issue, comes from a variety of sources: government grants, corporate sponsorship, non-profit sponsorship, and universities, right? My question is: are there any uniform standards of conduct or other self-regulation imposed by the scientific community related to the acceptance of funding to ensure that scientists' results and analysis are not swayed by the source of their funding?
Kevin Trenberth: Most grants are peer reviewed. Publications are peer reviewed. Disclosure of funding sources is not as open as it could and should be. Reproducibility of results is a longstanding criterion for science.
Alexandria, Va.: Even if global warming is not caused by man, why wouldn't we want to take steps to save our finite resources and live on a cleaner planet? Green technology exists and, if eased into use, will not cripple our economy. The US is the biggest polluter, by far, on the planet. Other countries have emission standards in place right now that far exceed our own, and their economies are doing great (see Japan, their fuel emission standards, and the efficient cars they drive in order to meet those standards). It's time for the US consumer to demand better; time for lawmakers to help make it happen.
Kevin Trenberth: Agree. Companies that have responded have seen huge savings by increasing energy efficiency. I predict that in 100 years our ancestors will say about us, "Look at all those petroleum resources, and what did they do with them they burned them!"
Albany, N.Y.: Does the use of ethanol based fuels create less global warming than fossil fuels such as oil based fuels?
Also, why did our government place a tariff on the imported sugar cane used for ethanol production? It is my understanding that the yield of ethanol is much greater and therefore provides a more efficient conversion to energy than corn. Is this purely political or is there some scientific reason?
Kevin Trenberth: I believe it relates to lobbyists for sugar in this this country.
Washington, D.C.: I saw an interesting show in the PBS series "NOVA" about global dimming--about how we're actually getting less sunshine, all over the world, than we used to because of a combination of increased cloud cover and pollutants. As a result, temperatures have actually been cooler than they might have been. Have the new reports taken that into account?
Kevin Trenberth: Yes in my chapter we have a special section on this. 1) global dimming was not in fact global: it did not occur over the oceans and observations were biased by urban areas, where pollution plays a role. 2) In other places, it relates to increases in cloudiness, this is true over much of US. That blocks the sun (dimming) but also provides a blanket (a greenhouse effect) so the net effect is not as big as advertised by some. Also more heat goes into evaporating moisture from the extra rains associated with the clouds, and thus temperatures have not warmed up as much as they would have otherwise.
Wilmington, N.C.: "Now we have changed the atmospheric composition, carbon dioxide has increased by 35% since 1750 (pre-industrial times) and half of that increase has occurred since 1970. It changes the greenhouse effect and alters the natural flow of energy through the system by about 1%. That is enough to produce global warming."
I read a lot of news and this is the first I have seen this statistic. It is compelling. Would you mind terribly going on every radio and television show in the US and repeating it? Please.
Kevin Trenberth: Easier said than done.
Washington, D.C.: You keep saying 2100....so what are going to be the unstoppable affects felt from now-till 2100?
Kevin Trenberth: Projected changes are much larger beyond 2100. Between now and then we expect to see more of what we already have signs of, but much bigger: more severe and long lasting droughts, heat waves and wild fires, especially in SW U.S. Risk of bigger and more intense hurricanes. Heavier rainfalls. Heavier dumps of snow episodically. More humidity. And a longer growing season!
Potomac, Md.: There is no regulation on use of electricity all over the united states: no buildings, public or private, have motion sensor light control or time control switches, like you see in Europe, in hotels, apartments, complexes, etc. I see a enormous, huge waste of energy in this regard and would like to know if something could be enforced in this regard?
Kevin Trenberth: In Europe the per capita consumption of energy is 2.5 times less than in the United States. Surely we can do better? One reason is gasoline is much more expensive and so is electricity. The best force is probably the market place, something like a carbon tax, or other incentives for changes in behavior. The can be punative or rewards.
Mt. Lebanon, Pa.: The earth precesses as you mentioned in the same way a top does when it spins. Have any models taken into account the changes in the earth's magnetic field - both strength and polarity - as it has swapped polarity in the earth's past? Internal earth currents from changes in the core induce this field; the field itself also affected by the solar wind. Ultimately, everything is connected - through physics.
Kevin Trenberth: Not to my knowledge. Believed to be a small effect.
Hampton, Va.: Hi Dr. Trenberth:
How does the radiative forcing produced by anthropogenic CO2 compare to the orbital eccentricity radiative forcing that produces the ice ages?
Kevin Trenberth: Actually, if the Earth's orbit changes, the net radiative forcing may be very small or even zero. But what happens is the energy is redistributed. Easiest example is if the tilt is less: the same energy arrives but less at the poles, and so they get colder (tropics get hotter). But at poles the snow and ice build up and reflect solar radiation and that does result in net cooling.
The Worldwatch Institute puts out a trends report each year called "Vital Signs." In their 2005 edition, they mention that air travel accounts for 2 percent of all human-caused CO2 emissions but nearly all NOx emissions found 8-15 km above the Earth's surface.
Does the new report address air travel's contribution to climate change? Have the facts above changed significantly in the new report?
Kevin Trenberth: Our report does not deal with specific sources. Two more reports are forthcoming: Working group II deals with vulnerability, impacts and adaptation. WG III deals with mitigiation and is more likely to address your question.
Richmond, Va.: I've done some studying on my own, and from everything I've seen the CO2-global warming thing is questionable at best. Long term (100's of thousands of years) of ice core data says that CO2 levels have been rising and falling as the earth has been warming and cooling. It also says that the CO2 levels LAG BEHIND the temperature increase, which leads one to believe that the increase in CO2 levels is an EFFECT of global warming, not the CAUSE of global warming.
There has also been data that says that glaciers have been retreating since 1750. Prior to that, the Earth was in what was called a mini-ice age. There is ample evidence that this was caused by a drop in solar output, as evidenced by the LACK OF SUNSPOTS during the 1600's and early 1700's. What we are seeing today is a contrast from the earlier cool period when glaciers were ADVANCING!!!
Finally, geological data says that the Earth has been through 50 periods of glaciation of the past 5 million years, which means that we've been through 50 periods of GLOBAL WARMING over the past 5 million years. This is a quite normal phenomina.
Kevin Trenberth: You are partly right. Natural variations occur and volcanoes also play a role. It is likely that the little ice age was as much cause by volcanic aerosols blocking the sun as changes in the sun. But the sun has not changed noticeably since 1979 when we have excellent measurements of it. The atmospheric composition has. That has a major effect, but now it is humans.
St. Leonard, Md.: I read your IPCC "Summary for Policy makers" and while I felt it was filled with great facts supporting the conclusion that global climate change is caused by human actions, it was lacking on its read-ability and big-picture context. The problem with global climate change has not been a lack of science, but a lack of public understanding. How can you expect policy makers to make a difference if they do not have an understanding of the context? Beating people over the head wih facts about how much the sea-level is going to rise doesn't seem like an effective way of making people change their lifestyles.
Kevin Trenberth: The document is not as user friendly as I would like. In our fill report we have a series of "frequently asked questions" which are all written in much friendlier english and with nice figures. Participating in this is another method of outreach.
Mt. Lebanon, Pa.: And, of course, the changes you noted in the earth's physical structure are, in turn apart of other closed feedback loops which result in other changes to the earth's structure and climate.
I take it, the models you imply are at work in understanding these phenomena take into account these feedback loops. I'd love to see someone apply Mason's Gain Formula (for one) to simplifying these transfer functions.
Kevin Trenberth: Many processes are included but some are not. The carbon cycle is a case in point. As warming occurs and permafrost melts, soil carbon (bogs etc) will be released as either methane or carbon dioxide (depending on moisture presnet or not). That could amplify warming. Similarly methane hydrates (clathrates) in ocean sediments could be destabilized, etc etc.
Cedar Falls, Iowa: What would your response be to someone who mentioned many of the strange theories of the past (not to say that global warming is strange) that were accepted as science? Isn't our knowledge of the climate and climatology still in its infancy? No field of science immediately starts out with everyone knowing all the answers. Many fields (medicine for example) take hundreds and hundreds of years to develop. To put it plainly, do you think you and your colleagues have a sufficient understanding of the climate?
Kevin Trenberth: We have a lot of understanding and we have built models that encapsulate that and which can be tested: on the annual cycle, on the past 100 years on past ice ages etc. And they are now much better and quite good. But they also need to get better. They are tools: useful tools, but still only tools. They are not the "answer" by themselves. They have to be used intelligently.
Middletown, Md.: I see that someone from DC just asked a question that I was just about to ask about: Methane production. In your response, you noted that methane is a secondary contributor to warming behind CO2. However, other studies indicate that Methane is a much more potent greenhouse gas than CO2, and that focusing on CO2 reduction, while certainly helpful, ignores this major cause of warming. Also, as more cattle are bred for human consumption, this usually results in loss of vegetation which in turn can also cause CO2 levels to rise.
I lived in California during a serious drought in the 1980s. At that time, the politicians insisted that residential water use be restricted. However, they were uninterested in encouraging more efficient water use or limiting water consumption among the Central Valley farmers, who used 90% of the state's water. Having the non-farmers save 25% of their 10% of the water consumption really didn't do much, other than cause a lot of people a great inconvience.
Kevin Trenberth: Methane has shorter lifetime 10 vs >100 years) and what happens to methane? If burned it becomes carbon dioxide. As you note, one has toprovide the right incentives; often monetary
Washington, D.C.: So, if we switched in 30 years (not unattainable, but we'd better start now) from coal and oil burning power plants to, say, nuclear power, and more people ride/use hybrids, public transportation, motorcycle/scooters, and bicycles, will this be sufficient for a while?
Kevin Trenberth: It will help: but it is a global problem. The US must become more engaged in developing global solutions and lead by example.
Washington, D.C.: Just a comment: Thank you for answering questions today - even the tough, critical, or skeptical ones. Many kudos!
Katy, Tex.: You didn't answer the person's question on ethanol. Does converting to ethanol significantly/measurably change the CO2 output on a capita basis?
Kevin Trenberth: Ethanol is renewable: it comes from growing biofuels essentially. So while it may not change net output, it comes from carbon dioxide in air going into plants creating hydrocarbons and those are used for energy. Overall that is closer to neutral at least.
Alexandria, Va.: All this discussion about global warming and the technologies that address this issue should not be looked at as a strain on the economy or way of life. Corporations, Congress and Consumers should look at the implementation of these technologies as an outstanding OPPORTUNITY. Why can't we keep our standard of living, but just change the way in which we achieve it? Some smart folks out there are going to make a fortune.
Kevin Trenberth: I agree. Other countries, especially Japan and Europe have the lead (look at Toyota). I think we could be amazed at what might eventuate given the right incentives.
Kevin Trenberth: OK I am done, whew!
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online 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.
|
Kevin Trenberth, coordinating lead author of a chapter on observations at the surface and in the atmosphere,?was online Tuesday, Jan. 13, to discuss the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report and testimony before Congress.
| 226.684211 | 0.947368 | 12.473684 |
high
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021201571.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021201571.html
|
Oliver North's Tiff With the Smithsonian
|
2007021419
|
The Smithsonian Institution rejected a request from Oliver North to film a stand-up in front of the Enola Gay, the B-29 that dropped the first atomic bomb. This is the latest flap in the Smithsonian's development of programming for a cable television network.
North, who hosts a Fox News Channel series called "War Stories," returned fire, condemning the Smithsonian's decision. He said in an opinion column that the museum's action raises questions about the propriety of the contract between Showtime Networks and the Smithsonian, which limits access of film crews.
Claire Brown, a spokeswoman for the National Air and Space Museum, which displays the Enola Gay at its Northern Virginia annex, said she held a series of discussions with North's producers and thought the door was open to more talks. "We were surprised to read the column because we consider the request to be pending," Brown said. She said she received the request Jan. 22.
North's column first appeared on Fox's Web site and was reprinted by the Washington Times on Sunday. North, a retired U.S. Marine and a key figure in the Iran-contra episode during the Reagan administration, is now a highly successful commentator and author.
"In a series of written, e-mail, telephone and personal exchanges with Smithsonian officials we explained what we wanted to do, how we would do it and offered to compensate the museum for any expenses incurred," North wrote in his column. "What we didn't know was that the institution's management had concocted a secret, backroom deal with Showtime -- granting the premium cable TV channel, owned by media giant Viacom, exclusive rights to control all but 'incidental usage' of all video footage shot at the Smithsonian."
The museum did turn down the request initially, Brown said, explaining that the application was asking for "more than incidental use" of the site and the plane. The Showtime contract, which limits such use, has angered many independent filmmakers.
After North's producers appealed the first decision, Brown said she "offered the producer the alternative of shooting film at Air & Space's Udvar-Hazy Center [near Dulles Airport]. We also asked the producer to contact us in writing with any questions. We have not heard back."
In essence, the Smithsonian was telling the show they could film the plane but couldn't film a commentator talking in front of it.
"We were commencing production of a documentary on nuclear weapons tentatively titled, 'From the Manhattan Project to Tehran' and wanted to shoot a few minutes of the videotape of the Enola Gay . . . . Our requests fell into a bureaucratic black hole," North wrote.
|
The Smithsonian Institution rejected a request from Oliver North to film a stand-up in front of the Enola Gay, the B-29 that dropped the first atomic bomb. This is the latest flap in the Smithsonian's development of programming for a cable television network.
| 10.734694 | 1 | 49 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021201341.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021201341.html
|
Tribune to Sell New York Spanish-Language Daily
|
2007021419
|
The sale, expected to close during the first quarter, does not include the Hoy newspapers in Los Angeles and Chicago or weekly Spanish-language newspapers in Orlando and South Florida.
Tribune continues to dispose of select small parts of its overall holdings as it considers whether to sell or spin off a large chunk of the company or undertake another plan to increase its lagging share price.
The Wall Street Journal, citing unidentified sources, said the company was leaning away from accepting any outside offer and opting instead for a restructuring. The report said board members and advisers were working on a "self-help" plan widely expected to involve spinning off the company's broadcast division and borrowing money to pay out a one-time cash dividend to shareholders.
The media conglomerate has sold three television stations since last summer, leaving it with 11 daily newspapers, 23 TV stations, Internet businesses and the Chicago Cubs baseball team.
"Although Hoy New York made good progress over the last year, we did not see a path to profitability in this market," said Scott Smith, president of Tribune Publishing.
|
Tribune Co. said yesterday that it would sell Hoy New York, a free Spanish-language newspaper with a daily circulation of about 56,000, to ImpreMedia, the owner of New York's El Diario La Prensa, the nation's oldest Spanish-language newspaper.
| 4.346939 | 0.632653 | 1.040816 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021201443.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021201443.html
|
Schottenheimer Fired, Feud With GM Is Cited
|
2007021419
|
The San Diego Chargers fired Marty Schottenheimer as their coach last night, only weeks after losing in the second round of the AFC playoffs but then announcing that they would retain Schottenheimer.
Club president Dean Spanos announced the decision and cited the ongoing feud between Schottenheimer and General Manager A.J. Smith, as well as the recent defections from Schottenheimer's coaching staff.
"The process of dealing with these coaching changes convinced me that we simply could not move forward with such dysfunction between our head coach and general manager," Spanos said in a written statement released by the team. "In short, this entire process over the last month convinced me beyond any doubt that I had to act to change this untenable situation."
The Chargers lost both their coordinators to head coaching jobs, with offensive coordinator Cam Cameron being hired by the Miami Dolphins and defensive boss Wade Phillips by the Dallas Cowboys. Tight ends coach Rob Chudzinski left to become the offensive coordinator of the Cleveland Browns and linebackers coach Greg Manusky was hired as the defensive coordinator of the San Francisco 49ers.
Schottenheimer and Smith barely were on speaking terms at times. The Chargers had a league-best record of 14-2 during the regular season but lost an AFC semifinal at home to the New England Patriots, dropping Schottenheimer's career postseason record to 5-13. The Chargers announced soon thereafter that they were retaining Schottenheimer but he had rejected an offer for a one-year, $4.5 million contract extension through the 2008 season with a $1 million buyout if he was fired.
· GIANTS: The team released linebacker LaVar Arrington and two other starters in the first major shakeup under new general manager Jerry Reese.
New York also cut linebacker Carlos Emmons and offensive tackle Luke Petitgout, both of whom were slowed by injuries over the last two seasons.
The release of Arrington ended a brief and unsatisfying tenure with the Giants for the former Pro Bowler, who was signed last year for $49 million over seven years but suffered an Achilles' injury against Dallas on Oct. 23 and played in only six games.
· EAGLES: Andy Reid is facing a crisis far tougher than a quarterback controversy or a disruptive player.
The Philadelphia coach will leave the team for a month to deal with developments that have rocked his family the past two weeks -- one son tested positive for heroin, another was arraigned on drug and weapons charges.
|
The San Diego Chargers fire coach Marty Schottenheimer on Monday, citing an "untenable situatiion" that existed due to friction between him and general manager A.J. Smith.
| 15.433333 | 0.733333 | 1.866667 |
low
|
low
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021200629.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021200629.html
|
FBI Reports On Missing Laptops and Weapons
|
2007021419
|
The FBI said that 160 laptop computers were lost or stolen in less than four years, including at least 10 that contained sensitive or classified information -- one of which held "personal identifying information on FBI personnel," according to a report released yesterday.
The bureau, which has struggled for years to improve its sloppy inventory procedures, also reported the same number of missing weapons -- 160 -- from February 2002 to September 2005. Those weapons included shotguns and submachine guns, according to the report by Justice Department Inspector General Glenn A. Fine.
In addition to the 10 laptops that were confirmed to contain sensitive information, the FBI could not say whether 51 other computers may also contain secret data, the report said. Six were assigned to the counterintelligence division and a seventh belonged to the counterterrorism division. Both units routinely handle classified information.
"Without knowing the content of these lost and stolen laptops, it is impossible for the FBI to determine the extent of the damage these losses might have had on its operations or on national security," the report said.
The results are an improvement on findings in a similar audit in 2002, which reported that 354 weapons and 317 laptops were lost or stolen at the FBI over about two years. They follow the high-profile losses last year of laptops containing personal information from the Veterans Administration and the Internal Revenue Service.
In a statement yesterday, FBI Assistant Director John Miller emphasized that the report showed "significant progress in decreasing the rate of loss for weapons and laptops" at the FBI. The average number of laptops or guns that went missing dropped from about 12 per month to four per month for each category, according to the report.
But several lawmakers said they are still concerned about the FBI's difficulties in keeping track of weapons and sensitive data.
" 'Making progress' may seem like a win for the FBI, but it's unacceptable when you're talking about lost weapons and computers with sensitive information," said Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee and a frequent FBI critic.
The report acknowledged the FBI's improved loss rates, and said that "some weapons and laptops will inevitably be stolen or go missing" in a large law enforcement agency. But investigators said they were still troubled by the numbers of lost or stolen items and the haphazard record-keeping surrounding them.
The FBI maintains more than 52,000 weapons and 26,000 laptops, according to the report.
The FBI failed to report 20 percent of the missing weapons and 76 percent of the missing laptops to the Justice Department as required, the report found. In the case of stolen or lost weapons, the bureau even failed to enter the losses into its own criminal information database, the report said.
It also said that in four of the 10 confirmed cases involving missing laptops that contained sensitive data, FBI officials did not attempt to assess the potential damage to national security.
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (Va.), the ranking Republican member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, said the Justice Department reported only two missing laptops to his committee when asked for a tally of incidents last year.
"This is the latest in a long string of personal information breaches at federal agencies, and there is no end in sight," Davis said.
The FBI quarreled with the inclusion of 43 missing weapons in the current report, saying that they were lost or stolen before the inquiry began. But Fine's investigators said the report includes all weapons and laptops reported missing during the study period, and noted that the weapons in question were not included in the previous audit.
To "delete them would give the appearance that the FBI had 43 fewer lost or stolen weapons than was actually the case," the report said.
The FBI reported that the contents were unknown for six of the 10 missing laptops with potentially sensitive data.
The rest included one in Boston with software for creating identification badges; one in New Orleans used to process digital images from surveillance operations; and one stolen from the security division that contained a "security plan" for an electronic access system. The final laptop was stolen from the FBI Laboratory at Quantico and contained the names, addresses and telephone numbers of FBI employees. The lost or stolen weapons include "handguns, rifles, shotguns and submachine guns," the report said. More than 80 percent were pistols, and about 10 percent were training weapons that did not use live ammunition.
The 2002 report found nearly 1,000 firearms were missing at the FBI and other Justice agencies, including at least 18 weapons later recovered by local police departments in connection with criminal investigations. Several were used in armed robberies and one was found in the pocket of a murder victim, according to the previous audit.
|
The FBI said that 160 laptop computers were lost or stolen in less than four years, including at least 10 that contained sensitive or classified information -- one of which held "personal identifying information on FBI personnel," according to a report released yesterday.
| 19.458333 | 1 | 48 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021201337.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021201337.html
|
Bill Would Make ISPs Keep Data On Users
|
2007021419
|
A House Republican is pushing a measure that echoes a long-sought Bush administration goal: to require all Internet service providers to keep records on their subscribers.
The measure, introduced by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tex.) last week as part of the larger SAFETY Act, would give the attorney general broad discretion to write the rules on what information companies have to retain and for how long.
It is aimed at protecting children from predators, but privacy advocates say its privacy and civil-liberties implications are huge, and industry is concerned about the costs of compliance. News of the measure has spread around the blogosphere, as critics seek to mobilize opposition to the SAFETY Act.
The provision would require Internet service companies to provide at a minimum the Internet subscriber's name and address, which can be linked to an Internet protocol address -- an identification number associated with a particular computer at a given time. Law enforcement officials would have to obtain a subpoena to have access to the records and could not use the tool to track law-abiding citizens on the Internet, Smith said.
Smith, the ranking minority member of the House Judiciary Committee, said law enforcement has identified mandatory data retention as "the number one tool" it needs to identify and prosecute Internet sexual predators. Last year, the European Union adopted a two-year data-retention requirement for all Internet service providers, and Smith said Congress should adopt a similar law that balances the cost of retaining data with the benefits to law enforcement.
But Lauren Weinstein, co-founder of People for Internet Responsibility, an advocacy group, said Smith's proposal is far too vague. "This bill is so incredibly bad that it opens up a whole array of things that can go wrong, because there's nothing in this legislation to prevent the attorney general from simply saying, 'Save everything forever,' " he said.
He called data retention the "single most important issue" relating to privacy, free speech and technology.
Under mandatory data retention, the chances of targeting innocent people would go up, opponents say. In Arlington County last summer, detectives thought they had tracked an Internet child predator to an apartment, only to find that their target was an innocent elderly woman whose computer's wireless router sent a signal throughout her 10-story building that could be easily hijacked.
Last fall, a child-porn squad in central Virginia led by sheriffs armed with semiautomatic pistols scared a farmer who was mistakenly targeted when his Internet provider gave authorities the incorrect IP address.
U.S. Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, who began pushing for mandatory data retention about a year ago, told the Senate Judiciary Committee last month that child exploitation investigations have hit dead ends because Internet service providers were not required to keep subscriber data.
A Justice Department spokeswoman said the department had not taken a position on Smith's proposal but was looking at data retention. "We do believe that there is a need for it," spokeswoman Tasia Scolinos said.
What concerns both privacy advocates and industry is the bill's open-endedness.
|
A House Republican is pushing a measure that echoes a long-sought Bush administration goal: to require all Internet service providers to keep records on their subscribers.
| 19.9 | 1 | 30 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021201348.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021201348.html
|
House Wage Bill Gets Tax Breaks
|
2007021419
|
The House Ways and Means Committee yesterday approved a modest package of tax breaks for restaurants and small businesses that would be affected by an increase in the federal minimum wage, breaking a logjam with the Senate that has delayed passage of one of the Democrats' top legislative priorities.
By a voice vote, the committee agreed to expand and extend a handful of tax credits and deductions worth $1.3 billion over 10 years. Those provisions would be offset by adjustments to the tax code that would raise a similar amount. The full House is expected to vote on the measure later this week, Democratic aides said.
The House tax package is far less generous than an $8.3 billion package approved by the Senate this month under pressure from that chamber's Republicans, who refused to support a minimum-wage increase unless it included tax relief for small businesses. Senate leaders yesterday said they were hopeful that differences between the two chambers would be worked out. With both houses now willing to go along with tax breaks, congressional aides said it was just a matter of resolving the details.
"The bottom line is, it's moving in the right direction," said Don Stewart, spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). "Everyone recognizes we have to help both the employees and the employers who hire them. I think that's clear in both parties and in both chambers."
As recently as two weeks ago, Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles B. Rangel (D-N.Y.) and other House leaders had insisted that the Senate approve the first increase in the minimum wage in nearly a decade without tacking on a batch of small business tax breaks. After six years of tax cuts from the Bush administration, House Democrats argued, businesses needed no additional help. Meanwhile, they said, the value of the minimum wage, when adjusted for inflation, had fallen to its lowest point in 50 years and should quickly be increased from $5.15 an hour to $7.25.
However, the push to approve such a bill failed in the Senate, which instead overwhelmingly approved the wage hike with tax relief. House leaders quickly reconsidered their hard-line stance, and Rangel and the ranking Republican on Ways and Means, Jim McCrery of Louisiana, introduced their own tax package late last week.
Yesterday, after less than 30 minutes of discussion, the committee unanimously approved the package. It would extend for one year a tax credit for employers who hire former welfare recipients, at-risk youth and other targeted groups. Like the Senate bill, the House measure would expand the credit to apply to military veterans. The bill would also extend for one year a law that allows small businesses to quickly deduct $112,000 for equipment purchases, and would raise the deduction amount to $125,000.
The House bill would also adjust a tax credit paid to restaurant owners whose workers earn more than the minimum wage when cash tips are counted. That change would ensure that restaurant owners continue to receive the same tax benefit after a higher minimum wage is enacted.
To pay for the changes, the House bill would prohibit dependent children who do not support themselves from claiming the lowest tax rate for capital gains and dividends. That measure is aimed at preventing wealthy taxpayers from sheltering income from taxation by shifting it to their children. And the bill would require businesses with assets over $1 billion to pay more in estimated taxes in 2012, though all the excess payments would be returned to them in 2013. The temporary bump in revenue would cover the cost of the tax breaks through their most expensive period.
In a statement, McCrery called the package "a better balance of targeted tax relief and sensible offsets than the Senate has approved," adding that he had "serious concerns" about the Senate's proposal to impose new limits on deferred-compensation plans, one of the most popular executive benefits in corporate America. The House bill omits those limits.
|
The House Ways and Means Committee yesterday approved a modest package of tax breaks for restaurants and small businesses that would be affected by an increase in the federal minimum wage, breaking a logjam with the Senate that has delayed passage of one of the Democrats' top legislative priorities.
| 14.673077 | 1 | 52 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/13/AR2007021300553.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/13/AR2007021300553.html
|
Obama Apologies for 'Wasted' Comment
|
2007021419
|
NASHUA, N.H. -- Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is apologizing for saying the lives of the more than 3,000 U.S. troops killed in the Iraq war were "wasted."
During his first campaign trip this weekend, the Illinois senator told a crowd in Iowa: "We now have spent $400 billion and have seen over 3,000 lives of the bravest young Americans wasted."
He immediately apologized on Sunday, saying the remark was "a slip of the tongue."
During an appearance Monday in Nashua, N.H., he apologized again, telling reporters he meant to criticize the civilian leadership of the war, not those serving in the military.
"Even as I said it, I realized I had misspoken," Obama said. "It is not at all what I intended to say, and I would absolutely apologize if any (military families) felt that in some ways it had diminished the enormous courage and sacrifice that they'd shown."
Obama made his second visit to New Hampshire on Monday, following his speech Saturday announcing his candidacy in Illinois on Saturday and a visit to first-caucus state Iowa.
|
NASHUA, N.H. -- Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is apologizing for saying the lives of the more than 3,000 U.S. troops killed in the Iraq war were "wasted."
| 6.8125 | 1 | 32 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021201448.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021201448.html
|
Freed Cleric Is Planning Lawsuit
|
2007021419
|
A radical Muslim cleric who Italian prosecutors say was abducted by the CIA in Milan in 2003 and flown secretly to Cairo has been freed from an Egyptian jail and plans to sue the U.S. and Italian governments for damages, the man's attorney said Monday.
Hassan Mustafa Osama Nasr, known as Abu Omar, was ordered released Sunday by an Egyptian security court and is "recovering with his family in Alexandria," the attorney, Montasser al-Zayat, said in a telephone interview from Cairo.
An Italian official said Monday that Nasr, an Egyptian national, would be arrested on terrorism charges if he returned to Italy. When he was abducted, the official said, Italian authorities had been developing a case that he was helping recruit men to go to Iraq to join the insurgents.
Zayat said his client has retained Italian lawyers to take action there. "Abu Omar will be filing a suit against the U.S. and Italian administrations to seek damages for his kidnapping, his moral and financial losses and his excruciating personal and psychological torment," he said.
Zayat said another lawsuit would be filed against former Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi, alleging he "personally gave the green light to the operation." Berlusconi has denied having prior knowledge of the abduction plan.
Khaled el-Masri, a German citizen who German prosecutors say was seized by the CIA in Macedonia, flown to Afghanistan and released after five months, filed suit against the agency. The case was dismissed last May on grounds it could harm national security operations. That decision is being appealed.
The disappearances of Nasr and Masri were apparent cases of a CIA tactic known as "extraordinary rendition," in which individuals the agency deems extremely dangerous are captured abroad and sent without judicial review to friendly third countries, often ones with records of human rights abuses and heavy-handed interrogation methods.
Italian prosecutors have charged 25 people they say are CIA operatives and one U.S. Air Force officer in connection with Nasr's abduction. In addition, prosecutors are pursuing charges against six Italian intelligence officials who they say cooperated in the abduction.
CIA spokesman Mark Mansfield on Monday declined to comment on the case, as did Luca Ferrari, spokesman for the Italian Embassy in Washington.
In sermons at his mosque in Milan, Nasr frequently denounced the United States, Zayat said. He was abducted on a street as he walked to his mosque, stuffed into a white van, blindfolded, beaten and taken to Aviano Air Base, a joint U.S.-Italian installation, his attorney said.
Zayat said Nasr was so badly roughed up that while in flight he suffered a serious cardiac episode. "He almost choked, and they ended up making an emergency landing in what I believe was an American military base in Germany," he added. "When the imam recovered, he was flown to Egypt, where he was thrown in jail."
There, according to Zayat, Nasr was systematically beaten, tortured and otherwise physically abused. He attempted suicide three times while in prison, the lawyer said.
Nasr was initially charged with membership in an illegal organization. After those charges were dropped, he was released briefly in 2004, then detained again under special emergency laws. Zayat said he was only allowed this past year to visit Nasr in prison, where the cleric was held in solitary confinement.
The Italian news agency ANSA quoted Nasr as saying by telephone Monday that "I've been reduced to a wreck of a human being. I cannot speak, I cannot leave the country. I don't want to go to prison again."
Zayat said he spoke with Nasr for several hours by telephone late Sunday and again Monday. "At first, we thought he should go overseas to relax, but now he has made up his mind to stay home with his family. After four hard years of suffering, far away from the press and from the eyes of the world, he now is recovering."
Zayat speculated that the release resulted from the abiding publicity about Nasr's case.
|
A radical Muslim cleric who Italian prosecutors say was abducted by the CIA in Milan in 2003 and flown secretly to Cairo has been freed from an Egyptian jail and plans to sue the U.S. and Italian governments for damages, the man's attorney said Monday.
| 16.3125 | 1 | 48 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021200626.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021200626.html
|
Midday Naps Found to Help Fend Off Heart Disease
|
2007021419
|
The next time the boss finds you snoozing at your desk, take heart.
A large new study has found that people who regularly took a siesta were significantly less likely to die of heart disease.
"Taking a nap could turn out to be an important weapon in the fight against coronary mortality," said Dimitrios Trichopoulos of the Harvard School of Public Health in Boston, who led the study published yesterday in the Archives of Internal Medicine.
The study of more than 23,000 Greek adults -- the biggest and best examination of the subject to date -- found that those who regularly took a midday siesta were more than 30 percent less likely to die of heart disease.
Other experts said the results are intriguing. Heart disease kills more than 650,000 Americans each year, making it the nation's No. 1 cause of death.
"It's interesting. A little siesta, a little snooze may be beneficial," said Gerald Fletcher, a cardiologist at the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Fla., speaking on behalf of the American Heart Association. "It's simple, but it has a lot of promise."
While more research is needed to confirm and explore the findings, there are several ways napping could reduce the risk of heart attacks, experts said.
"Napping may help deal with the stress of daily living," said Michael Twery, who directs the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute's National Center on Sleep Disorders Research. "Another possibility is that it is part of the normal biological rhythm of daily living. The biological clock that drives sleep and wakefulness has two cycles each day, and one of them dips usually in the early afternoon. It's possible that not engaging in napping for some people might disrupt these processes."
Researchers have long known that countries such as Greece, Italy and Spain, where people commonly take siestas, have lower rates of heart disease than would be expected. But previous studies that attempted to study the relationship between naps and heart disease have produced mixed results. The new study is first to try to fully account for factors that might confuse the findings, such as physical activity, diet and other illnesses.
"This study has a number of advantages," Trichopoulos said.
He and colleagues at the University of Athens examined 23,681 Greek men and women ages 20 to 86 who had no history of heart disease or any other serious health problem when they enrolled in the study between 1994 and 1999. The researchers asked the participants whether they took midday naps and, if so, how often and for how long. They also asked detailed questions about their health and lifestyles, such as whether they had any illnesses that might make them sleep more, how much exercise they got and what they ate.
After an average of more than six years of follow-up, 792 of the study subjects died, including 133 who died of heart disease. Of that group, 94 were nappers. After the researchers accounted for factors that could confuse the issue, they found that those who took naps frequently were 34 percent less likely to die of heart disease than those who did not. The biggest nappers -- 79 people who took a siesta for 30 minutes or more at least three times a week -- had a 37 percent lower risk.
Naps appeared to offer the most protection to working men: Those who took midday siestas either occasionally or systematically had a 64 percent lower risk of death from heart disease. Non-working men had a 36 percent reduction in risk. A similar analysis could not be done in women because too few died of heart disease.
While it is too soon to recommend naps to prevent heart disease, Trichopoulos said the finding offers one more reason to nap.
"If you have an opportunity to take a nap, then, yes, do it," he said. "If you're accustomed to taking a nap, then don't give it up."
Trichopoulos also noted that siestas are becoming less common around the world as globalization spreads the Western workaholic lifestyle.
"If you visit many countries, during the middle of the day everything stops. People have an opportunity to have a large meal and take a nap," he said. "With globalization, this is out. If this turns out to be right, people may think again before introducing the continuous, stopless activity that's happening with globalization."
|
The next time the boss finds you snoozing at your desk, take heart.
| 56.8 | 1 | 15 |
high
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021201447.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021201447.html
|
Putting the Mysteries of Islam and Numerology to Work
|
2007021419
|
The air is still cool at 9:30 a.m. as Yagoub Ali Hamid steps out of his pale yellow house into the sandy courtyard that leads to his office. His blue and gray plaid tunic skims the ground as his black sandals gently sink in with each step. The sound of a generator firing up across the street breaks the peace and quiet of a Sunday morning.
Inside his dusty office, Hamid lays a prayer rug out on the floor, reaches for a bamboo stylus and a bottle of black ink and sits down. He dips the bamboo into the ink and begins to write on a loh, a rectangular piece of wood cut with a handle on one end and two sharp points on the other.
"Exalted is the Majesty of our Lord."
He continues writing out the Jinn chapter of the Koran, the section of the Muslim holy book that deals with invisible creatures known as jinn that in Western culture spawned the legend of the genie in a bottle. He sings verses aloud as he works his way down the wood.
But this is not only a religious exercise. Hamid is a faki, a uniquely African mixture of Islamic scholar and witch doctor. People seek his help on everything: curing a cough, for example, or predicting the future. Government employees are among his regulars, he says, especially when they're hoping for a promotion.
"There are among us some that are righteous and some the contrary."
The words mark the beginning of a 40-day treatment Hamid designed to help one of his patients who suffers from seizures. "They try to get treatment in Egypt, Sudan and Cameroon, and it doesn't work," Hamid says. "They come to me, and it works."
He puts down the loh and picks up a book, "Fire to Get Rid of the Devil," waving it in the air. He boasts of his success rate: "If you bring me a crazy person, I swear I will cure him. I've done it many times."
At 9:45 a.m., three cousins pass through a lace curtain that separates Hamid's office from the courtyard and sit down on a couch. Hamid, switching from Arabic to the tribal language of Zaghawa, asks them why they have come. Someone stole $200 from them, they say, and they want Hamid to help them get it back.
"We trust him because he believes in the Koran and will ask God," says Mahamat Khatir, 22, sitting between his two cousins. "The faki will get the money back."
As the young men tell their story, Hamid rummages through books and papers stacked on the floor and on a small table. A picture of the Great Mosque in Mecca hangs on the wall above him. About five minutes later, he finds what he is looking for -- prayer beads.
|
N'DJAMENA, Chad The air is still cool at 9:30 a.m. as Yagoub Ali Hamid steps out of his pale yellow house into the sandy courtyard that leads to his office. His blue and gray plaid tunic skims the ground as his black sandals gently sink in with each step. The sound of a generator firing up across the street breaks the peace and quiet of a Sunday morning. ...
| 7.643836 | 0.958904 | 65.232877 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/02/07/DI2007020701910.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/02/07/DI2007020701910.html
|
Post Politics Hour
|
2007021119
|
Don't want to miss out on the latest in politics? Start each day with The Post Politics Hour. Join in each weekday morning at 11 a.m. as a member of The Washington Post's team of White House and Congressional reporters answers questions about the latest in buzz in Washington and The Post's coverage of political news.
Washington Post congressional reporter Shailagh Murray was online Monday, Feb 12, at 11 a.m. ET.
Political analysis from Post reporters and interviews with top newsmakers. Listen live on Washington Post Radio or subscribe to a podcast of the show.
Shailagh Murray: Hi everyone, quite a news blizzard this past week. Bring on your comments and questions.
Re: Obama announcement: The contrast between Obama's beautifully inspiring speech on Saturday announcing his candidacy, and HRC's clever dancing on the head of a pin answer about her vote to support the invasion of Iraq is so obvious. Is that going to be HRC's constant problem -- these on-the-fence, carefully crafted positions vs. Obama's definite stances and candidness?
washingtonpost.com: Obama Joins Race With Goals Set High (Post, Feb. 11)
Shailagh Murray: Interesting you should point out the contrast, and I want to hear from others on this. Is is just me and the voters of New Hampshire, or is Sen. Clinton's war position just not working for her?
St. Louis: Hey Shailagh. Here's a thought I had yesterday watching Charlie Cook on C-SPAN: The primary system evolved a century or more ago to counteract the influence of the kingmakers in smoke-filled rooms, but now candidates have to sell themselves to their (usually quite extreme) party base just to have a crack at the nomination. And then once they get it they have to spend half the time apologizing for stands they took to win it. Maybe it's time for a new approach to selecting nominees?
Shailagh Murray: Is there a state not seeking to move up its primary to Feb. 5? While the kingmakers aren't going anywhere -- that's part of natural selection -- both parties definitely are gonna have to address this calendar train-wreck.
Rochester, N.Y.: How much of a freak show will the House hearings on the anti-escalation resolution turn into? The Post reported today that the Republicans will have a resource center where members can pick up visual aids and supporting documents. Can I look forward to seeing my Congressman up there with a big map of Iraq, waving some crazy Heritage Foundation pamphlet at the cameras as he butchers names like "Moqtada Al-Sadr" and "Kirkuk?"
washingtonpost.com: GOP Expects Defections as House Debates Iraq Resolution (Post, Feb. 12)
Shailagh Murray: I presume you mean the debate on the House floor this week? I am going to make the bold prediction that it'll be predictable and even somewhat tedious, or at least that would be my definition of 435 people saying basically the same thing.
Oxford, Miss.: It's not just you. Hillary Clinton's fine-line-walking war position is too reminiscent of John Kerry's "I voted for it before I voted against it" nuance bear-trap. Regardless of whether it's true or not, it just makes me feel like either she doesn't really have a position on it or she doesn't trust voters enough to tell them her position. Either way I don't like it.
Shailagh Murray: My Oxford focus group reports back.
Obama v. Clinton: I hardly think the comparison is apt. Making a speech is a lot easier than answering a question in a town meeting. Obama will bog down if he's ever forced to answer with specifics on anything.
"is Sen. Clinton's war position just not working for her?": What about other Senators running for President who voted for the Iraq War but now oppose it? Are their explanations getting more traction than HRC's?
Shailagh Murray: The other candidates -- namely Chris Dodd, Joe Biden and John Edwards -- who were in the Senate at the time have been plainspoken on this subject, saying they were wrong, etc., and Sen. Clinton has sort of triangulated. Hey, remember that word? Anyway, I think the problem she's running into is that Democratic voters are pretty clear-headed about the war, and they expect their candidates to be also.
Toswon, Md.: Why not just go to a nationwide primary? Winners of each party's primary face off in the general election. The current system stinks (to put it nicely).
Shailagh Murray: Lots of complaints today about the primary situation.
St. Louis: It doesn't seem to be working for her probably because she is trying to be intellectually honest about the multiple pressures she was under at the time. Obama has a free ride on this one, sitting quietly in the Illinois state house.
Shailagh Murray: Well, he wasn't sitting quietly. He spoke at antiwar events and expressed his views very clearly at the time. Calculated or not, he took a political gamble, and it's paying off. You make a good point about the gray zone -- lots of Democrats and Republicans faced those multiple pressures and cast their votes with a heavy heart. But when it comes to electing presidents, black-and-white almost always beats gray.
Pittsburgh: Your colleague David Broder asserted in a column last week that Democrats haven't traditionally been familiar with or sympathetic to the military. In covering Democrats in Congress, have you found that to be true? Judging from my husband's 19-year association with the Army, an awful lot of Democratic households have sent sons and daughters to the military services.
washingtonpost.com: The Other Democrats Weigh In (Post, Feb. 6)
Shailagh Murray: Allow me to state for the record that David Broder is an inspiration to us all, and I mean that.
Here's my take: the Cold War and debates over missiles and nuclear disarmament and whatnot turned the military into a political issue, and that's definitely worked against Democrats over the years. However, I think most politicians would make a major distinction between the Pentagon and the troops. The troops were never part of that Cold War debate, but they are very much a part of the Iraq debate and I think some of that lingering anti-Democratic bias continues.
Nationwide primary?: How can we ever hope to have a nationwide primary when we don't even have a nationwide general Presidential election? How long do you think it will take before the Electoral College is abolished and the U.S. votes for President by popular ballot, like in most free nations?
Shailagh Murray: Not going to happen. If we can't amend to Constitution to ban flag burning, we sure can't amend it to change our election system.
Antwerp, Belgium: As the 2008 presidential campaign takes shape, friends say it has annoyed John Kerry to keep hearing about how formidable his onetime running mate, John Edwards, might be. They say that Mr. Kerry feels betrayed by Edwards, whom he defeated easily in the 2004 Democratic primaries, and faults him for being too quick to second-guess their campaign, distance himself from it and embark on his own 2008 effort. How much truth is in all this? Has Kerry reason to be upset?
Shailagh Murray: John Kerry ... I'm trying to place him ... any relation to that senator from Nebraska?
I must say I strive mightily not to get anywhere near the feelings of politicians. But I think it's safe to say that the two former nominees aren't taking a lot of fishing trips together. Or shooting hoots in Edwards' new entertainment complex in North Carolina.
Rolla, Mo.: So now we have Australian PM Howard jumping into American electoral politics with his criticism of Barack Obama's position on Iraq. The strange dustup did reveal some fire by Obama in his response, not the nuanced approach that he could easily have done.
Shailagh Murray: I agree, it was revealing. It was a touch of Jim Webb.
Philadelphia: Good Morning Shailagh. To what extent does the media run the show with regards to the candidates for President? And do you think someone like Bill Richardson will be able to gain traction once the Hillary and Obama Show gets tired?
Shailagh Murray: Clearly both sides have their frontrunners. But what's interesting about this year is that both sides also have strong contenders in the second tier -- and if you ask them, that's exactly their strategy: to pounce when the frontrunners stumble. Candidates like Richardson and Dodd are sophisticated, very experienced politicians. We can't and won't write them off. That said, the challenge for these guys is raising money to stay in the game. Bank balances are the new poll numbers.
Fossil, Ore.: We have had enough of the Senate's political posturing re: the Iraq "troop surge." Why doesn't the Senate go back to basics and begin with a yea or nay vote on the surge? Our elected officials should be on record by taking a stand -- not like Oregon Sen. Gordon Smith, who seems to be on both sides of the issue.
Shailagh Murray: Try having to explain all this procedural nonsense in news stories -- it's a nightmare. And yes, it's also a big smokescreen.
Dryden, N.Y.: Sen. Clinton is campaigning on her "invincibility." What happens in a match-up with Mayor Giuliani? He trumps her "tough on terrorism" image and is a Washington outsider to boot. He's not my guy but from listening to my fellow upstaters I think he might even beat the Senator here in a general election, thus eliminating a huge chunk of the electoral college votes the Dems need. Gore, where are you?
Shailagh Murray: Yes, let's get that Gore rumor going again.
Washington: Actually, Obama did answer questions in an open town-hall style meeting in Iowa on Saturday. He didn't get bogged down.
Shailagh Murray: This campaign is going to be an endurance test, and also a pacing challenge. Clearly Obama is off to a strong start, but he'll get hit with difficult questions and unflattering revelations, just like everyone else does. So far I see little evidence that he'll wind up like Howard Dean, suffocating on his own hype. But you never know.
Portland, Ore.: Ms. Clinton has had a rough couple of weeks over her position on the war, and I think her advisors are kidding themselves when they say this will blow itself out. In Novak's column today he speculated as to why some big Hollywood names are being slow to commit to her. I have my own hunch that Ms. Clinton's stick-by-your-guns, never-admit-you're-wrong tack on this reminds Democratic primary voters of George W. Bush and his talk-to-the-hand style. If that's the case, her problems could only be beginning. Do you agree?
washingtonpost.com: Not Sold On Clinton (Post, Feb. 12)
Shailagh Murray: The challenge for Hillary Clinton is simple but monumental: she has an enormous public record and history that she has to sell to voters as a net positive. It's a cliche, but elections really are about the future -- and I don't remember voters ever deciding to revisit an era that ended ambiguously at best, as the Clinton era did. Sure, Democrats want to dwell on the Clinton economic policies, and welfare reform and whatnot, but if she's gonna run on that, she's gonna have to own the Marc Rich pardon, too.
Washington: Shailagh, Who do you think is more cynical, you or the people you cover?
Shailagh Murray: You can't be a cynic and spend all day on the campaign trail answering the same questions and delivering the same speeches, and ultimately putting your name on a ballot.
Reporters, on the other hand, are standing on the other side of the rope line, shuddering in the cold and trying to get their wireless cards to work. We know the candidate is going to lose. That's the basic difference.
Richmond, Va.: Since charisma, especially how one appears in front of a camera, is so important for candidates these days, can anyone hope to derail the candidacy of the former GOP governor of Virginia, good old what's-his-name?
Shailagh Murray: And which former governor would that be? I count at least three in the mix this cycle, at least at one point or another.
Thanks for participating, one and all, and hope to hear from you again in two weeks. Cheers, Shailagh
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
|
Washington Post congressional reporter Shailagh Murray discusses the latest buzz in Washington and The Post's coverage of political news.
| 120.619048 | 0.952381 | 8.761905 |
high
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/02/06/DI2007020601096.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/02/06/DI2007020601096.html
|
Freedom Rock
|
2007021119
|
washingtonpost.com: At the Grammys, Making Very Nice; The Dixie Chicks Take Five, Including Album of the Year
J. Freedom du Lac: Hola from Hollywood, peoples. How 'bout them Chicks? Let's talk Grammy.
N.Y, N.Y.: The Dixie Chicks for Album of the year? Was this a comment on thier "music" or a Sally Field - "we really like you" moment?
J. Freedom du Lac: Yes and yes. It's a great album (We At The Washington Post named "Taking the Long Way" as the No. 1 album of 2006), but you have to think that some voters were also making a statement. Still, when you consider the field, the right album won. Gnarls, the Chili Peppers, Timberlake and John Mayer didn't deserve to win over the Chicks. Dylan, however, should have also been in the mix -- probably over Mayer. A joke that he wasn't nominated.
Reston, Va.: Dixie Chicks. Love them as country, hate their whining. They've blamed their fall in the charts on Maines' remarks. Could it be because they've redefined themselves as pop?
J. Freedom du Lac: Absolutely not. At the time of The Incident, as they call it, "Travelin' Solider" was No. 1 on the country charts. Almost immediately, though, it disappeared from country radio playlists. The backlash was officially on. And it's not like the country world is inherently opposed to pop stars. Just look at the success Faith Hill and Shania Twain have had. They're about as country as I am.
Concord, N.H.: How much of this Dixie Chicks stuff is a larger battle between Hollywood/New York and Nashville?
J. Freedom du Lac: Good question. In the final version of my story (available on This Very Web Site), I quote the Recording Academy's president Neil Portnow on the question of what the vote means -- and who the voters are. He was asked whether the Recording Academy is basically a bi-coastal group (the implication being that it could be out of touch with middle America), and he scoffed at the notion, saying there are 11,000 voting members in 12 chapters across the country. Not sure what percentage of the voters are on the coasts, but the LA and New York chapters surely account for the majority of the academy's voting membership. Nashville would likely be the third-biggest group.
Orange, Va.: As Grammy telecasts go, I thought last night was better than most EXCEPT for the train wreck that was the Eagles covers by Rascal Flats. Sheesh, "Life In The Fast Lane", was painful. Only their lead singer could make Don Henley seem kinda hip.
J. Freedom du Lac: Honestly, I took off my headset for that medley. It seemed like a very strange idea - Bob Wills plus three Eagles songs by a couple of lightweight performers? Nah. I mean, Carrie Underwood is perfectly pleasant (and gee, ain't she purty?) but she doesn't really excite. And I really don't care for Rascal Flatts. At least they didn't cover REO Speedwagon, though that would be playing to their strength.
Best New Artist: Bah humbug. Why couldn't they have given James Blunt, or even Imogen Heap, the kiss of death? Either of them are far more irritating than Carrie Underwood.
J. Freedom du Lac: Does anybody else think that James Blunt should wear sunglasses when he sings? He has psycho-killer eyes. Best new artists ain't a kiss of death anymore, but I was rooting for Imogen Heap, if only because she wears the most interesting hats among the nominated artists. I did, however, think it kinda strange that she was even nominated. What about, say, KT Tunstall?
Herndon, Va.: Timberlake. Your take. He stunned me as to how good a performer he is.
J. Freedom du Lac: He was pretty OK, but something seemed to be off with his voice and overall energy. Apparently, he's been sick -- and even cancelled his appearance at the big Clive Davis pre-Grammy party on Saturday. I saw him during rehearsal on Sunday morning and he was definitely dragging. Absolutely hated the idea of the hand-held camera. Or maybe I liked the idea but hated the execution. Whatever; it didn't work.
Seattle, Wash.: The pressures of being a grownup and parenthood keep me from being the pop-idol worshipper I once was/would still like to be, so I have to ask, how were the Police?
J. Freedom du Lac: Wasn't as exciting as it could/should have been. They did "Roxanne," and it was similar to Sting doing the song solo -- only this time backed by his old bandmates. He's singing lower now, too. At least yesterday he was. I still think they're capable of giving good show, though. Looking forward to the tour.
Bethesda, Md.: What was the reaction of the country establishment artists to the Chicks winning best country group? I heard that Reba Mcintire made a face and some country stars did not clap and Carrie Underwood said or did not say some things. What is the scoop?
J. Freedom du Lac: I didn't see Reba's reaction to the country album announcement, but in a stroke of editing genius, the director had a camera on her after the Chicks won duo/group country vocal and she looked ... bemused. Carrie ducked our questions about what the establishment thinks of their win and no other country types came through the press room after her, save for the Dixie Chicks, who finally showed up at around 1 am EST.
Cleveland Park, Washington, D.C.: If they changed the Grammys to be called "The Worst Music Made This Year" would the nominees have been the same? Black Eyed Peas?! Chamillioinaire?! American Idols!?! Ugh.
J. Freedom du Lac: Some yes, some no.
Baltimore, Md.: Hey J. Free,
First of all, congrats to you on picking "Taking the Long Way" as Album of the Year way before the Grammys did. I'm happy for the Dixie Chicks, talk about sweet vindication.
My question is about genre classification and categories. Who decides which album/song goes into which category? I don't think the Dixie Chicks consider "Taking the Long Way" to be a country album, and the fact that it won in that category is completely ironic (as Natalie Maines not-so-subtly said last night). Does the Academy decide what goes where, or is that up to the artist?
J. Freedom du Lac: Yes, yay me for calling this. Though I didn't forsee a major-category sweep - and definitely didn't think they'd win country album of the year. In fact, I'd just typed a sentence saying they didn't win that category when they were announced as the winner. Completely shocking.
I don't believe that the artists get to decide what categories they wind up in. Pretty sure it's a decision made by the nominating label.
Reston, Va.: Do you think the Grammys represent contemporary music? Some of the songs they awarded were 2 years old, and the same groups get nominated year after year. My kids won't even watch it (old fogey music).
J. Freedom du Lac: Definitely not a big night for the yutes as the awards skewed old (don't they always?). As one of my colleagues noted last night, it felt like we were watching a VH1 show or something.
Washington, D.C.: Can you explain to me the difference between album of the year, record of the year and song of the year? I have never understood how these aren't the exact same award.
J. Freedom du Lac: Album = the full-length recording. Record = a specific track, and the award honors the performance (vocals and music) as well as the production. Song = a songwriting award for a specific song.
It would probably help if the Recording Academy changed the middle category to single of the year.
My Humps!?!?!?: Are you kidding me? That is one of the worst songs ever produced. Did the BEP's win just because of Fergie's short skirts?
J. Freedom du Lac: When "My Humps" was announced as the winner (category: best pop performance by a duo or group with completely stupid vocal), more than a few folks in the press room gasped. Not the Recording Academy's finest moment. And what a weird category -- they were up against the Fray, Keane, Pussycat Dolls and (oddly enough) Death Cab for Cutie. I might have gone with a write-in vote myself.
Washington, D.C.: Let me preface my comment by saying that I think Cee-Lo is a genius, & Gnarls Barkly performances are generally awesome. I was, however, really surprised that St. Elsewhere was nominated for album of the year. Sure Crazy is a great song but the rest of that album is pretty average, and at least 4 or 5 tracks are plain awful. Your thoughts?
J. Freedom du Lac: I agree -- it's not a great album, in my opinion. More like one incredible single plus, well, some other stuff. I thought "Crazy" deserved to win record of the year, but you can't stop a sweep so they got steamrolled by the Dixie Chicks. By the by, ran into Cee-Lo's ex-Goodie Mob bandmate, Big Gipp, at an industry event on Saturday. Gipp's manager says they're working on a new Goodie Mob project. Could be interesting. Their stuff was underrated - always overshadowed by OutKast.
Chattanooga, Tenn.: How long do you think Bob Dylan cried when he wasn't nominated for Album of the Year? For hours? Days? Is he crying still?
J. Freedom du Lac: No, he's probably laughing at the idea of winning a best rock vocal award. How funny is that? (Very, if you've paid close attention to his voice lately.)
A real shame that he was omitted from the album of the year category, though. "Modern Times" absolutely deserved to be in the mix. And it's not like the nominating committee has anything against Dylan -- his two previous CDs got album of the year noms. So strange.
Pittsburgh, Pa.: Don't know if you saw the Grammy show commercials, but I thought that in the aggregate they were better than the Super Bowl ads. Do you or the chatters agree/disagree?
J. Freedom du Lac: Didn't see them. The press-room feed was of the show only. During the breaks, all we could hear was the open-mic chatter in Staples. Any thoughts?
Sterling, Va.: Any inside skinny on Ludacris giving a shout-out to Oprah and BILL O'REILLY????
J. Freedom du Lac: O'Reilly and Luda have been beefing for years -- ever since O'Reilly decided to launch a moral crusade against the rapper. Plays well with his audience. Created problems with Luda's relationship with Pepsi, but it also did decent things for his visibility and credibility. Nice going, Bill. Oprah hasn't shown much love for hip-hop, so hip-hop artists have been giving her a hard time lately.
Washington, DC: Anyone else love Chris Brown's performance? I thought it was such an electrifying, fun song/dance combination in comparison to some of the other performers.
J. Freedom du Lac: Absolutely electrifying. He has some funky footwork. Love that kid. Tappahannock, Va, represent!
Washington, D.C.: How did James Blunt not win at least one for U're Beautiful? Was it all wrong timing? Was the song overplayed and ppl got tired of it? He surely would have won if he had been nominated last year.
J. Freedom du Lac: Backlash, possibly. Or maybe Grammy voters just don't like the sound of Blunt's voice. I know I don't. Sounds like his junk is in a vice.
Washington, D.C.: The Boss won for best Folk album, and Dylan won a rock grammy? Color me confused...
J. Freedom du Lac: The Boss didn't just win for folk -- he won for TRADITIONAL folk. But it made sense: The album was all about old songs popularized by Pete Seeger.
As for Dylan: Yes, rock. Weird, innit? He also won for contemporary folk album.
J. Freedom du Lac: Confidential to the idiot poster inquiring about CD players: Upper left drawer. Now leave me alone.
Washington, D.C.: Let's talk about Gnarls Barkley for a minute... Shouldn't that album have won for Least Maximization of Talent? Cee-Lo and Dangermouse, two of the very best at what they do, somehow managed to put out a completely average, totally forgettable album. What gives?
J. Freedom du Lac: But what a great single! The track should have been celebrated. No single piece of pop music was better in 2006.
Woodbridge, Va.: I don't know too much about the Dixie Chicks but I did notice that each time they won, the blonde Chick was very uncomfortable speaking and avoided the mic. When she did have a chance to speak she pushed the man up to speak. Is she known to be really shy? It just seemed odd that the other 2 girls spoke and then the guy (and who was he?) spoke and not her.
J. Freedom du Lac: The sisters have been deferring to Natalie for a long time now, and both of them seem a little bit uncomfortable in the spotlight.
What I found odd/interesting was that they had multiple shots at the podium, with millions watching, and they never did seize the moment to speak their mind about the world circa 2007. Almost as though they'd made a conscious decision not to get political. But when they came backstage, Natalie opened up a little bit, saying: "I'm worried about our future as a country." She said this in a room full of reporters, so it's not like it was a private thought that she wanted to keep to herself. So why not say that in an acceptance speech?
Desperate to be hip: The name of the single by Dangermouse and Cee-Lo that's so good?
Silver Spring, Md.: I caught glimpses of the Grammys - overall pretty good. What happened to Corinne Bailey Rae? I heard she had three nominations but didn't see her in the winners column of the Post today.
J. Freedom du Lac: She, too, got run over by the Dixie Chicks. Also couldn't hang with Carrie Underwood in the best new artist race. CBR probably would have won an award or two if she'd been nominated in some lesser categories.
My Humps: Come on, J. Free-- that song is pure poetry! "My Humps, My Humps, my lovely lady lumps." I mean, do you think Lennon & McCartney could have crafted a better song? I think not.
J. Freedom du Lac: You're right. Upon further review, I'm shocked -- SHOCKED -- that My Humps wasn't up for song of the year. will.i.am is the new ee cummings.
Clearly an old geezer: I'm obviously an old fart. I think Chris Brown was ridiculous. Of course, I also thought the Police and Lionel Ritchie were boring. I did think John Legend was excellent, though, so maybe there's hope for me.
J. Freedom du Lac: Yes, obviously. We agree on John Legend, though - absolutely. He's just marvelous. One of the highlights of my week in LA was a songwriting panel at the Key Club on Saturday afternoon. Seven writers up there talking about some of the songs they've written -- and a few of them performed their tunes. John Legend did two at the piano and brought the house down. Though he was overshadowed by the country writer Jeffrey Steele, who told the crowd that his son died two weeks back in an ATV accident and that he wasn't sure he wanted to be there but decided it was good to get out of the house and that the song he was going to play had new meaning for him given recent events ... at which point he played an incredibly powerful version of "What Hurts the Most," a song that I don't particularly care for in the treacly hands of the Rascal Flatts but that sounded so amazing as a solo piano number. Lots of tears in that room (the moderator had to leave the stage, she was so torn up). Also a lot of people, including moi, wondering why Steele doesn't sing some of his own songs as a recording artist.
Columbia, Md.: Were you up late partying? You seem a wee bit grumpy this fine day.....
J. Freedom du Lac: I'm always grumpy, but especially so when I have to go on the radio at 5:20 local time after staying out well past midnight. Now leave me alone.
N.Y., N.Y.: I understand (but don't accept) country radio's banning of the Dixie Chicks, but what's up with AC radio's relunctance?
J. Freedom du Lac: Obviously, there's something in their research that indicates the listeners won't respond favorably. Because commercial radio is all about research. (Check out Marc Fisher's new book on radio for more insight.)
I'm very curious to see what kind of Grammy bounce the Dixie Chicks get. Their sales are going to spike for sure; question is, by how much? I read a quote by the great Rick Rubin recently where he said something about "Taking the Long Way" being somewhat of a disappointment commercially. This despite the fact that it was one of the 10 best-selling albums of 2006. Between the sweep and the strong performance last night (I'm sure that was the first time a lot of people had heard anything from the album), they could wind up selling a lot of extra albums.
Washington, D.C.: Maybe Gnarls should have done more anti-war work.
J. Freedom du Lac: Personally, I think they were done in by the togas they were on stage at V-Fest in Baltimore. Grammy voters don't forget, you know.
Re anti-war work: I really wanted Neil Young to win something for his not-very-good "Living With War" album if only see him on the soapbox.
Tysons Corner, Va.: Your piece was outstanding. Great backstage comments. Gotta love Ike Turner.
So, did Vince Gill have anything to say about his victory for "The Reason Why"? That's a great song, but with all the talk about Country at the GRAMMYs this year, I've not heard a thing about Gill.
J. Freedom du Lac: Ike was pretty twitchy when he came backstage. But his comment about the suit was a classic. As was the suit itself.
Never did see Vince Gill in the press room. He was one of the few who skipped. Something we said? Yeah, probably. I like his vocal on that song, too -- though I might have voted for Josh Turner's "Would You Go With Me."
Dixie Chicks: J. Free: Those Grammys had to provide a little sweet revenge for the Chicks, but I think it may be a short-lived victory. What were the sales of that CD? How well can they leverage their win if they're not getting airplay on country stations? Is anybody playing it now or going to play it? In other words, what do they do next?
J. Freedom du Lac: The album wasn't a blockbuster, but there are no blockbusters anymore. A Top 10 best-seller is nothing to sneeze at.
20003: So when are some broadcasting folks gonna get smart and start an "All Shakira All the Time" channel? Boo-yah!!
J. Freedom du Lac: Not soon enough, my friend. Not. Soon. E. Nough.
Grammy-land, Calif.: JF: With the Great J Freedom available at the keyboard in California WHY did your newspaper use so many wire stories covering the Grammys???
J. Freedom du Lac: Our Web site always offers a lot of wire in addition to the staff-written stuff. All about volume, baby! My all-time favorite post.com wire story? The short Associated Press recap of a story I'd written and reported on Joni Mitchell's "River." Why we decided to put a wire story about our own story on our Web site is beyond me.
Washington, D.C.: J. Free -
The Police have a webcast today at 2:00 (http://www.thepolicerehearsals.com) - any idea if they are actually doing a rehearsal and playing songs or just announcing the tour? I've read a couple reviews not too hot on their performance last night - my only complaint is they didn't get to do two or three songs, I thought they sounded great!
PS - I read Andy Summers is 11 months older than Keith Richards, he looks about 20 years younger!
J. Freedom du Lac: They're doing both, I believe: Open rehearsal and an announcement by Live Nation. Not sure if they're planning to release the itinerary today, but word on the streets (Sunset Strip, anyway) is that DC is on the schedule.
McLean, Va.: So was the theme of this year's show to see who could come up with the most over-the-top performance? Mary J. Blige, Chris Brown, Christina Aguilera...it just kept getting more ridiculous by the moment.
J. Freedom du Lac: I thought Mary sounded great, actually. And I don't typically love her voice. She was on fire. And if you're turning to her music for emotional restraint, then you've come to the wrong place.
Chicks Top 10 Best Selling?:2006 Not Ready To Make Nice Adult Contemporary 32
2006 Not Ready To Make Nice Hot Country Songs 36
2006 Not Ready To Make Nice Pop 100 23
2006 Not Ready To Make Nice The Billboard Hot 100 23
J. Freedom du Lac: Those aren't sales charts. Nielsen SoundScan had them in the year-end Top 10 with 1.86 million sold.
Top 10 albums (physical and digital sales combined, Jan. 2 to Dec. 31):
1. High School Musical: 3.72 million
2. Rascal Flatts/Me and My Gang: 3.48 million
3. Carrie Underwood/Some Hearts: 3.02 million
4. Nickelback/All the Right Reasons: 2.69 million
5. Justin Timberlake/Futuresex/Lovesounds: 2.38 million
6. James Blunt/Back to Bedlam: 2.14 million
8. Hannah Montana: 1.99 million
9. Dixie Chicks/Taking the Long Way: 1.86 million
10. Hinder/Extreme Behavior: 1.82 million
Bethesda, Md.: Have the Grammys regained any legitimacy since awarding Milli Vanili a Grammy several years ago?
J. Freedom du Lac: Yes.
John Legend may be well-named: I'm nearly 50 but try to keep an open ear to the new artists coming on the scene. Frankly, most of them fail to impress, but the more I hear of John Legend, the more I think he's the real thing, a real talent, someone who will be around for some time to come. I don't know how many Grammys he won last night and don't care. He blew away John Mayer and Corinne Bailey Rae in their performance last night.
J. Freedom du Lac: I absolutely agree - he's a major talent as a songwriter, musician and singer. The most exciting arrival in R&B in a long time. He'll be touring this summer with Corinne Bailey Rae -- coming to Merriweather Post on April 28. His real name, by the way, is John Stephens.
Hips don't Lie: J Freedom,
I'm in my fifties and love Mr. Bennett and Wonder. But no way do they win best pop duo. If it doesn't go to Wyclef and Shakira then it should go to Nelly Furtado and Timbaland.
J. Freedom du Lac: The Recording Academy loves the old-timers. That was Stevie's 25th Grammy, Bennett's 14th (he won another award earlier in the night). Chick Corea and Springsteen are up to 14 now, too. Vince Gill got his 18th. John Williams Nos. 19 and 20. Jimmy Sturr, 16. Grammys beget Grammys, apparently.
Washington, D.C.: Red Hot Chili Peppers win four Grammys. Are the awards really for current work, or more recognition for a long history? I don't think their current stuff is as good as earlier.
J. Freedom du Lac: Supposedly for current work but the Recording Academy often finds itself playing catch-up.
23112: I wish they'd done a different song, but wow, the Police threw it down. My wife wants to see them live...it'd be nice if there were a glimmer of hope for that happening, considering how good ticket scalpers have gotten. Alas, my attention span for the Grammys lasted about as long as it took Jamie Foxx to realize his first joke bombed (but I did laugh at the BET comment).
J. Freedom du Lac: Could happen if they play a large enough venue. FedEx Field, for instance. Or, I don't know -- something a little bit more unconventional, like Pimlico. If they do smaller venues, though -- Nissan or Merriweather, for example -- then forget it because, you're right, the scalpers are going to wind up asking for the title to your car.
Falls Church, Va: The real measure of the Chicks sales is to compare most-recent album with sales of previous...their last album before this sold 8 million, I think...
J. Freedom du Lac: Nobody lives up to their previous sales anymore. Sales continue to plummet industry-wide. There hasn't been an 8 million-seller in several years. Not last year, not the year before that, and not in 2004, either. Not sure about 2003 since I don't have my SoundScan folder here, but the top end of album sales seems to have dropped by a million or more every year since 2004. So the real measure of the Chicks sales is to compare their sales figures to the other best-sellers. Carrie Underwood has lapped them, and Rascal Flatts are close. But they've managed to outsell just about every other country artist who came out with an album in 2006 or late 2005.
Boston, Mass.: I have to disagree with you about Carrie's performances on the Grammys last night, I thought she was great. She is a real genuine talent and getting more interpretive with her singing everyday. Her performance of Desperado, one of my all time favorite songs, gave me chills. She's deserving of all the awards she has won IMO.
J. Freedom du Lac: Noted. I personally don't think her voice is all that interesting or special. Nothing wrong with it, per se; it's just that I don't ever hear her sing and think to myself, "Wow."
Washington, D.C.: I am not a Shakira fan. Don't really like her music but man when she starts dancing, all of a sudden her music sounds a lot better!! Do I have a problem?
J. Freedom du Lac: You're among friends here. No problem whatsoever. (Unless your wife catches you watching Shakira videos with the sound off. Then you might be in trouble.)
Toronto, Ontario: I won't give the Grammys any credit, because I'm sure it was an accident, but in their effort to reward the Dixie Chicks for their perserverance, didn't the best of the five nominated albums also happen to win?
Remember the year Celine Dion's trimphant "Falling Into You" beat mediocre efforts by Beck, The Fugees, Smashing Pumpkins and a soundtrack produced by Babyface?
J. Freedom du Lac: Yes, the best in the field won. And yes, I remember the year Celine won. I thought it was one of the most embarassing moments in Grammy history, which is really saying something. Either The Fugees ("The Score") or Beck ("Odelay") deserved to win that year. Fantastic, critically acclaimed albums. It was great that they were nominated (I think that was the first year that the academy had a blue-chip panel vetting the nominees in the major categories). But it was incredibly lame that they lost. Showed just how out of touch the Grammy voters were.
Album of the Year: Has a "country" album ever won the prestigious "Album of the Year" award before?
J. Freedom du Lac:"O Brother, Where Art Thou?" won in 2002. Glen Campbell also won once, for "By the Time I Get to Phoenix." But I think that's it.
Washington, D.C.: Re the "are the Grammys contemporary?" question.
J. Freedom du Lac: Jeez, speaking of contemporary: Can't you find a more recent reference? And here I thought that my own material was getting stale.
N.Y., N.Y.: Has Mary J Blige never won a Grammy before? I'm sure she's been up for dozens over her career. Last night she seemed like a deer caught in headlines she was so stuned she won. By the way I think she's a great singer and puts her heart and soul into a performance.
J. Freedom du Lac: She'd won three or four previously. But she was the leading nominee this year (with eight), and she was up for a couple of major awards, and she was obviously a featured attraction during the telecast itself. So it was like a coming-out party for her and, yes, I think she was nervous. She seemed much more vulnerable and humble than usual, but I thought that worked in her favor. Because as we all know, she can be really brash and obnoxious. Couldn't have been sweeter when she came into the press room, though. She got a nice amount of applause, too. (Dirty secret: There IS some cheering in the Grammy press box.)
Seattle, Wash.: So, looks like Weird Al didn't win for comedy. I thought White & Nerdy was hysterical! And Chamillionaire DID win...borrrrring
J. Freedom du Lac: I was tempted to include "White & Nerdy" in my Top 10 singles list. Pure genius. Chamillionaire actually talked about Weird Al some backstage last night. I wasn't paying close attention, but I think I did hear him say something to the effect of, "Weird Al, he ain't all that weird." Which was kinda funny. (Kinda.)
Washington, D.C.: Is it just me or was last nights show a big boring snooze? 3 and a half hours and only 11 awards handed out? How many people deserve to get an "honorary" award in one night? Does anyone have any idea what Reba's speech was about? What was the Eagles tribute about anyway? I actually really like the Dixie Chicks but c'mon, they didn't deserve album of the year. And John Mayer beating Justin or Mary J? I think its official that the Grammys have gone the way of the Oscars-safe, boring and OLD. As for the Police, that was cool, I love them but Sting was trying a little to hard to be "hip" in his weird vest thing.
J. Freedom du Lac: One reviewer's review.
Smokey Robinson: He's the most powerful argument against Botox I have ever seen. Wasn't it creepy when he sang "The Tracks of My Tears" last night with his face frozen solid? It looked like an alien possessed him.
J. Freedom du Lac: Very strange, indeed. He sort of looked like a wax statue on stage. Still in good voice, though, isn't he?
New York, N.Y.: Where was the rap? That Ludacris performance left a lot to be desired. What a boring song. Why not "Money Maker?" How about Chamillionaire or another nominee?
And Mary J. is getting a little tedious talking about overcoming adversity at every turn. Both her performances seemed perfunctory
J. Freedom du Lac: The Grammys seem to have a hard time booking the right rap artists. Same problem with rock. But it's kind of obvious why they'd want to spotlight Ludacris, isn't it? Mad mainstream appeal. I was glad to see TI get a little bit of stage time during Justin's duet with that My Grammy Moment chick, though that's not exactly the best verse Tip's ever written.
Starting an argument: From a technical standpoint, isn't Blige ever-so-slightly flat every time she holds a note?
J. Freedom du Lac: Yes, I've said as much In This Very Space on multiple occasions. She's sort of pitch-impaired. But she seemed to be singing better than usual last night.
Hair Questions: Hey, do you think that if that Rascal Flatts singer stuck a fork in an electric outlet his hair would relax.
J. Freedom du Lac: Not sure, but I'd be interested to see if that made the band's music any better. (On both accounts: Probably not.)
Atlanta, Ga.: Was that Stewart Copeland who said, "We're the POLICE, and we're BACK," last night? He seems to be disproportionately enthused about the reunion, at least compared to his bandmates.
J. Freedom du Lac: Well of cour$e he is.
St Louis, Mo.: As usual, the Grammys show themselves to be the joke that they are. My rant is on one of the more "technical" awards, in this case Best Surround Sound Album.
No surprise, a smooooth Yacht Rock Grammy fav, Donald Fagen, won in that category over other albums that, again from a surround sound standpoint, are head and shoulders above his very lacklaster surround production. I'm talking about Alan Parsons' "A Valid Path" (ain't nobody on the planet short of Bob Ezrin better at surround engineering and production than Alan) and the Norwegian choral album that was also up for the award.
Once again, Grammy voters show themselves to be the ignorant knuckleheads that they are.
J. Freedom du Lac: OK, you can have some soapbox time. Yacht rock references always play here. Can't say I paid any attention whatsoever to that particular category, however.
Mechanicsburg, Pa.: One poster asks: What was the Eagles tribute about anyway?
The Eagles are the template for modern commercial country music; it's that simple.
Dress up and act as if you're all about working ranches and punchin' dogies, but put out overblown, overproduced pop music, with lyrics that are all about feelin's.
Make the guitars loud, and use lots of flashing lights onstage.
J. Freedom du Lac: Don Henley also received some sort of big industry award during Grammy weekend. Not sure what it was about since I didn't read the press release and didn't pay attention when it was discussed, either during the telecast or in the press room. But I guess they're celebrating him/them this year. Hence, the tribute. (Though not sure what Bob Wills has to do with any of this.)
Silver Spring, Md.: So last question of the day...
If you could rate last nights Grammys on a scale of 1 - 10, What would it be? Why?
J. Freedom du Lac:10, because I didn't get attacked by a bomb-sniffing dog, I had a fantastic taco-stand lunch, I got to see Shakira perform and I made deadline. Oh, and I also won a bet with The Post's former music editor. I think it was in or around November when I called the race in favor of the Dixie Chicks. I'm coming home soon to collect, my friend!
Thanks for stopping by everybody. Tons of questions; sorry I couldn't get to them all.
I'll be back online for my regularly scheduled Freedom Rock chat next Tuesday at 2 pm EST.
Come on back if I didn't get to your questions today.
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
|
Join live discussions from the Washington Post. Feature topics include national, world and DC area news, politics, elections, campaigns, government policy, tech regulation, travel, entertainment, cars, and real estate.
| 177.536585 | 0.585366 | 0.731707 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/02/08/DI2007020801640.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/02/08/DI2007020801640.html
|
Academy Award Nominee: Best Original Screenplay
|
2007021119
|
"Iwo Jima" is a complementary film to "Flags of Our Fathers," also directed by Eastwood, recently won a Golden Globe award and is nominated in several categories for an Oscar. The film is subtitled.
"Letters From Iwo Jima" is Yamashita's first produced screenplay.
Read The Post Story: Debt of Honor: For a Slain Iwo Jima Cameraman He Never Knew, Man Asks U.S. to Move Remains to Arlington Cemetery ( Post, Feb. 9)
Washington, D.C.: Iris: As a 1.5 generation Japanese American, I thought you did a great job with the movie. What impressed me most was the dialogue, you managed to capture the "whiny" component of Japanese and also the noble components of it. Did you write the dialogue in Japanese or was it translated?
Iris Yamashita: I wrote the dialogue in English and it was translated. They had three different translations and they picked the best of the three.
Philadelphia, Pa.: Please pardon my ignorance about your movie, but how much of the script comes from actual recollections and how much of the script did you need to recreate what likely happened because little records remain?
Iris Yamashita: Most of the events depicted were based on some sort of reality, the actual conversations might be different and some of the characters were fictional. Regarding the lack of records, I extrapolated from accounts of other battles.
Honolulu, Hawaii: I understand that you studied the Korematsu case -- how his criminal conviction was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court only to be overturned years later by a lower court after key evidence showed that there was no factual basis for the internment. Have you written or do you plan to write a screenplay on the Korematsu case?
Iris Yamashita: That was a project that did come by my way but the investors fell out so that project is no longer in the works. But that is a very interesting worthwhile story.
North Hollywood, Calif.: I remember touring the building where the Oscars are awarded and as they showed us where the big stars sat, I asked where the screenwriting nominees sit. The tour guide pointed to the back of the room. Any chance the Academy has finally recognized the importance of the screenwriters and at least upgraded where you sit?
Iris Yamashita: (LAUGHS) That's pretty funny. Unfortunately I have no idea where I'll be sitting this year but it's nice that you recognize that screenwriters are important.
Morristown, N.J.: Thanks, Iris, for the opportunity to ask you questions. I have a few after seeing the film.
One of the first scenes shows someone asking in awe, "How did these soldiers build these tunnels?" I was wondering why there were no scenes in the movies answering that significant question or showing the tunnels being dug.
Were letters really found in tunnels in Iwo Jima or was that fictionalized for the film?
Finally, why were the Japanese soldiers portrayed as having so little respect for their superior officers? They seemed to question almost every command, and that surprised me.
Thanks again for the chat!
Iris Yamashita: Regarding the tunnels, we were working on a very low-budget (in Hollywood terms)so we could not design those types of sets showing the digging of tunnels. The cave shots used existing caves in Barstow and some were "set" caves at the studio.
Regarding the letters, that was fictionalized; however, within this last week I discovered that a World War II veteran has discovered a sack of letters on the island and has been sitting on it for 62 year and because of the movie has decided to have them translated and is looking for the families.
I was also surprised in doing my research that there actually was a lot of conflict between the chains of command. Officers actually did disobey orders that they received from their higher ups. I imagine there was a lot of chaos on the island.
Irvine, Calif.: What software do you like to use when writing scripts? Thanks.
Washington, D.C.: I've seen very good reviews of "Letters From Iwo Jima" but I want to see it DVD so I can view it at my own pace since it has many subtitles. When will it be available for sale?
Iris Yamashita: I don't know when the DVD will be coming out since "Letter From Iwo Jima" is still playing in theaters but "Flags of Our Fathers" has recently been released on DVD.
Palo Alto, Calif.: Congratulations! Could you tell us a bit about how you got hooked up with Clint? Did he hire you to write the script or did you approach him? Also, what's your "backstory", i.e., where did you go to school, and how long have you been writing for?
Iris Yamashita: Thank you. Clint Eastwood originally came up with the idea to write the Japanese perspective while doing pre-production on "Flags of Our Fathers." My agent at CAA heard about the project and sent a few sample scripts to Paul Haggis who is the executive producer on the film and Paul responded positively on my script and I was able to get a meeting with him (Haggis). I came in with a take on the story and the characters so by the end of the second meeting Paul Haggis told me that I was hired.
Haggis started making phone calls and told me I could quit my job as a full-time Web programmer. He also set up a meeting with Clint Eastwood.
I went to UCSD for my undergraduate in bio-engineering with a minor in writing and at UC Berkeley I got my graduate degree in mechanical engineering. I also took UCLA extension courses in screenwriting.
I've been writing ever since I can remember as a hobby.
Arlington, Va.: Thank you for this excellent film. It isn't often American movie-goers are exposed to the human side of an enemy. More likely we will see films produced such as "Pearl Harbor" or "Saving Private Ryan," which have some good qualities, but ultimately have to fit a Hollywoodized stereotype of a plugged in romance, or an unbelievable ending. "All Quiet on the Western Front," and Stalingrad come to mind as comparisons.
Any idea how Letters from Iwo Jima has been received in Japan?
Iris Yamashita: I believe the movie has been very well received in Japan. It was Number One at the box office for six weeks. I also read many moving comments from viewers as well as hearing great things from friends in Japan.
Freising, Germany: I've been to Okinawa, Ishagaki and Iriamote within the southern archipelago of Japan, and they seemed so serene and beautiful. It's hard to imagine the brutality of trench and tunnel warfare while palm trees are swaying the breeze.
What was it like to film on Iwo Jima? Were there any reminders of the war?
Also, have you read, "With the Old Breed: At Peleliu and Okinawa", by E. B. Sledge? Is this good description of the conditions on Iwo Jiwa during WWII?
Iris Yamashita: Most of the movie was actually filmed in California. There was only a one-day shoot on the actual island of Iwo Jima which I was not able to attend. It's very difficult to get to the island because it is a restricted military base. Clint Eastwood was able to take a plane with only about 10 people to the island. But the footage that appears in the movie is very striking and a moving reminder of the war.
No, I'm sorry I have not read the book that you mentioned.
Washington, D.C.: Since Clint Eastwood considered "Flags of Our Fathers" and "Letters From Iwo Jima "as "partner" pieces, has there ever been talk of releasing the two as a "double feature?" How about a re-edit of both movies to intertwine them into a single movie?
Iris Yamashita: I have not heard anything officially but that sounds like a good idea.
I doubt that they would do a re-edit of the movies into a single movie.
New York, N.Y.: You are an inspiration to aspiring screenwriters like me. Question: How did you land an agent at CAA with no produced credits? -Thanks.
Iris Yamashita: Thank you. The way I got an agent at CAA was by entering a screenwriting competition for which my present agent was a judge. I won first place in the competition and she asked if she could represent me.
Arlington, Va.: I saw the movie this week and thought it was wonderful. Definitely not a "typical" Hollywood war film!
You mentioned that you wrote it in English and that it was then translated into Japanese. That made me curious to know if the subtitles are the words that you wrote, or if they were translated from the Japanese.
Also, are there any scenes that got "cut" that you wish had stayed in?
Iris Yamashita: The subtitles were for the most part close to what I had written and my Japanese friends tell me that the translations were fairly accurate and natural.
As with any movie, there were several scenes that were shot but were cut in the editing room. I'm not sure if they actually shot some of the scenes that I included about the soldiers' desperation for water, for example.
Great Falls, Va.: I thought this one one of the best pictures of WW II that I have seen. Thank you so very much and thanks to Clint Eastwood as well. I was almost ten years old when the battle took place. At that time you know I am sure that Japanese soldiers were portrayed according to the propagandists. Not a pretty picture. This film put a very human face on some very brave men, who as I think you intended to and did show were not much different than the Marines they fought.
I would urge the person who is waiting for the DVD to see the film on the big screen. You will not be much distracted by the English translation at the bottom. It is very easy to follow.
Iris Yamashita: Thank you for your kind comments and yes, I encourage everyone to see the movie on the big screen.
Iris Yamashita: Thank you for your questions and kind comments. I hope this movie was able to portray the struggle for humanity in a time of chaos and help promote some understanding about the differences and similarities between cultures.
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online 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.
| 51.146341 | 0.536585 | 0.634146 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020801678.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020801678.html
|
The War And the Words
|
2007021119
|
In other words: yes, no, maybe. Multiple civil strife, but way too messy to rank with the classics such as America in the 1860s or Spain in the 1930s.
I don't deny that this is a fair application of "civil war" to the current situation. What I note with dismay, however, is how important -- and absurdly irrelevant -- the application of certain loaded words to the situation has become.
What is striking is how much of the debate in Washington about Iraq has to do not with the war but with the words. Who owns them, who deploys them, who uses them as a bludgeon. NBC's announcement in November that it would henceforth use the term civil war -- a statement far more political than analytical, invoking the same fake authority with which the networks regally "declare" election winners (e.g., Florida to Al Gore, Nov. 7, 2000) -- set the tone of definitional self-importance.
Words. We had weeks of debates in the Senate about Iraq. They eventually went nowhere, being shut down (temporarily) by partisan procedural disputes. But they were going nowhere anyway. The debates were not about real fighting in a real place. They were about how the various senators would position themselves in relation to that real fighting in that real place. At issue? With what tone and nuance and addenda to express disapproval of a troop surge that the president was going to order anyway.
When it came to doing something serious about the surge, the Senate ducked. It unanimously (81-0) approved sending Gen. David H. Petraeus to Baghdad to do the surge -- precisely what a majority of the senators said they did not want done.
If you really oppose the surge, how can you not oppose the appointment of the man whose very mission is to carry it out? Yet not one senator did so. Instead, they spent days fine-tuning the wording of a nonbinding -- i.e., entirely toothless -- expression of disapproval.
A serious legislative body would not be arguing over degrees of disapproval anyway, but about the elements of three or four alternative plans that might actually change our course in Iraq, something they all say they desire. But instead of making a contribution to thinking through how the war should be either prosecuted or liquidated, they negotiate language that provides precisely the amount of distancing a senator might need as political insulation should the surge either succeed or fail.
Words. The Democrats are all in favor of "redeployment" and pretend that this is an alternative plan. But the word redeployment is meaningless. It simply means changing the position of our soldiers and, implicitly, changing their mission. Unless you're saying where you're redeploying to, and with what mission, you've said nothing. It's a statement of opposition, yet another expression of disapproval of the current strategy -- much like an empty, nonbinding congressional resolution -- until you say whether you want to redeploy to Kansas or Kurdistan.
Words. Consider "surge." It carries an air of energy, aggression and even hope. That, in fact, is a fairly good reflection of Petraeus's view of it -- not just more troops but a change in the rules of engagement, with more latitude to fight, less political interference by the Iraqi government and a much tougher attitude toward foreign, especially Iranian, agents in Iraq.
The opposition prefers "escalation," as featured, for example, in the anti-surge commercial that aired in certain markets during the Super Bowl. The main reason for using escalation, of course, is that it is a Vietnam word. And the more Vietnam words you can use in discussing Iraq, the more you've won the debate without having to make an argument.
The problem with this battle over words is that it is entirely irrelevant to what is happening in Iraq. There will be real troops on real missions regardless of what label they are given. The country is engaged in a serious debate about exactly what strategy to pursue to either prosecute the war or withdraw in an orderly fashion. The Senate might consider putting such a debate on its agenda.
|
What is striking is how much of the debate in Washington about Iraq has to do not with not the war but with the words.
| 31 | 1 | 14.384615 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020801677.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020801677.html
|
Budget Games That Hurt Children
|
2007021119
|
It was one of those moments when a public official gives away a larger truth by offering what seems to be a throwaway line.
Testifying this week on President Bush's budget, Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. suggested he would not mind a bit if the Democratic Congress added money to prevent cutbacks in coverage under the federal government's children's health insurance program.
"It just may be," Paulson said mildly, "that the Congress believes that that's something that should be funded at a higher level."
In other words, Bush's budget is a collection of artificial numbers -- including cuts in domestic programs that Congress will inevitably reverse -- that allow the president to claim fiscal responsibility while demanding that his tax cuts for the wealthy be made permanent.
The cutbacks in health coverage for lower-income working families are among the most egregious of the president's fiscal choices. And it's not just Democrats who are saying so.
"These cuts interfere with the fundamental responsibility of government: to safeguard the lives of its citizens," said Connecticut Gov. M. Jodi Rell, a member of that small, hardy group of Northeastern Republicans to survive November's Democratic tide.
"Whether we are helping struggling families stay warm through the harsh winter months or protecting homes and residents against terrorism and natural disasters, we expect our federal partners to carry their fair share," she said. "The cuts to these programs place extraordinary burdens on the states."
Or consider the response of the Rev. Larry Snyder, president of Catholic Charities USA. "The president's new budget," he said, "hurts those living in poverty at a time when we should be doing even more to help the most vulnerable among us."
You'd think Bush would understand this since he regularly praises faith-based groups and long ago touted himself as a compassionate conservative. After all, the president made big news last week when he finally acknowledged what has been close to unmentionable in his administration. "The fact is," he said, "that income inequality is real." Facts, as Ronald Reagan observed, are stubborn things.
But this is a budget destined to make income inequality much worse. The liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has created a chart that should be a centerpiece of discussions concerning Bush's accounting.
The center examined what the White House's proposals would mean in 2012, the magical year in which Bush -- with much flimflammery -- claims his plan will produce a surplus. It found that, if enacted, the president's budget would lead that year to $73 billion in tax cuts for households with annual incomes of over $1 million and $34 billion in cuts to domestic discretionary programs, many of them benefiting Americans of low and middle incomes.
So here is a president who believes passionately in redistributing income -- upward.
|
The cutbacks in health insurance coverage for lower-income working families are among the most egregious of the president's fiscal choices. And it's not just Democrats who are saying so.
| 15.885714 | 1 | 26.2 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/guestvoices/2007/02/congress_needs_an_interfaith_c.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021119id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/guestvoices/2007/02/congress_needs_an_interfaith_c.html
|
Congress Needs an Interfaith Caucus
|
2007021119
|
The National Prayer Breakfast, an annual gathering of inspiring speeches and solemn moments of silence, recently drew President Bush and hundreds of lawmakers when it was held in Washington. This year, the event was unusual in that it was attended by much of what is the most religiously diverse Congress in American history.
The 110th Congress includes one Muslim and two Buddhists. The U.S. Senate is now led by a Mormon. All of these are firsts. The new Congress also includes more Jews than Lutherans, Congregationalists or Episcopalians.
The writer G.K. Chesterton famously remarked that America is "a nation with the soul of a church." One look at Congress, indeed one look around the country, shows that Chesterton is only partially correct. Throughout the centuries, America has remained a devout country, with uniquely high rates of belief in God and attendance at religious services, when compared to Europe. But we have also become the most religiously diverse country in the world. To be true to our 21st century demographics, we have to amend Chesterton's line by adding "mosque, synagogue, temple and gurudwara" after âchurch.â
In this era of global religious conflict, when religious tensions travel in nanoseconds over the Internet, America's religious diversity can be a great opportunity or a great danger. It is not impossible that violence engulfing Shiites and Sunnis in Baghdad, Hindus and Muslims in Bombay, or Catholics and Protestants in Belfast could have ripple effects in Boston. Already, there are too many examples of religious communities who refuse to talk to one another on college campuses in America because they come down on different sides of the political debate on issues ranging from domestic spying, to immigration, to aid to Israel.
America was founded partly on the idea of religious diversity. We are a nation of ideas formed by people who wanted freedom to worship God as they felt called. In a world where conflict between faiths threatens to set off a centuries-long clash of civilizations, Americans would do well to remember this heritage of reverence combined with tolerance. Indeed, this tradition has played an important role throughout American history. Take, for example, the famous picture of Martin Luther King Jr. marching through Selma with Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel, both called by their different faiths to extend the American promise to all people. Heschel later acknowledged the religious differences between him and King, but still claimed that the march was worship: "I felt like my legs were praying."
The U.S. Constitution has protected the free exercise of religion at the same time as it has prevented any one religion from defining the public square. As such, America is in a position to draw strength from its ethnic/religious diversity instead of having it threaten its social fabric. This is a compelling model for a world enmeshed in religious conflict.
Congress can play an important leadership role in this effort by starting a bipartisan Interfaith Caucus. If a few members from each party and from different faiths formed such a Caucus, it could be a focus for discussion, a platform for outreach and a symbol of religious cooperation for the world.
An Interfaith Caucus could meet regularly to discuss the positive role that religion plays in people's lives and in communities across the country and the world. It could also explore how religion is misused by demagogues of all faiths to fuel conflict around the world. The Interfaith Caucus could interview leaders from a range of faith backgrounds, widening their understanding of the various faiths that call America home. In case of another attack like the bombing at the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta, perpetrated by someone loosely affiliated with the Christian Identity movement, or a second 9/11, the Interfaith Caucus could be a platform for a cooperative, balanced response.
Even if the Interfaith Caucus met only rarely, its formation would still be of enormous symbolic value. It would show the world that America is proud to recognize its religious diversity at the highest levels of its government. In an era where too many religious minorities suffer discrimination, and many outsiders wonder how American Muslims are treated in the aftermath of 9/11, an Interfaith Caucus would say to the world that America is committed to dialogue, not division.
America's religious diversity has the potential to be either a source of strength or a challenge for the United States in the coming years. People of faith can cooperate and help save our world, or continue killing one another and hasten the destruction of all. As representatives of the three Abrahamic faith traditions, we have seen in our own work the value of interfaith dialogue. We hope Congress will use its own diversity to lead in this area. An Interfaith Caucus would be a good first step.
The authors of this essay are: The Rev. David Gray, director of the Workforce and Family Program at the New America Foundation
Dr. Eboo Patel, executive director of the Interfaith Youth Core and author of the forthcoming book, Acts of Faith
The Rev. Paul Raushenbush, associate dean of Religious Life and the Chapel at Princeton University
Rabbi Sid Schwarz, president of PANIM: The Institute for Jewish Leadership and Values, and author of Judaism and Justice: The Jewish Passion to Repair the World.
|
A conversation on religion with Jon Meacham and Sally Quinn. Visit http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/guestvoices/
| 70.785714 | 0.428571 | 0.428571 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/andrew_mwenda/2007/02/test.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021119id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/andrew_mwenda/2007/02/test.html
|
PostGlobal on washingtonpost.com
|
2007021119
|
I read Mr. Gumede's analysis with great interest. But I do not agree with much of it. China's recent interest in increasing its aid to, investment in and trade with Africa is not worth getting particularly excited or agitated about. The West is doing just fine.
At the G8 Summit at Gleneagles, Western countries pledged to double aid to Africa over the next decade. They also agreed to cancel most African nations' debts. With increased aid and canceled debt, Western aid to Africa has significantly increased, not decreased in recent years. China isn't doing anything new or different; it is only following in the West's footsteps, down a path that's not particularly productive.
More aid to Africa, whether it comes from the West or China, should not give us too much hope because, at root, foreign aid is an ineffective instrument that distorts recipients' incentives for the worse. Aid is given with the assumption that its recipients lack the necessary resource base to generate tax revenue to meet their public expenditure needs. Yet in many African countries, the problem of insufficient tax revenue is caused by poor tax administration, bad policies, and institutions that undermine growth. Then, once taxes come in, there is poor prioritization of expenditures.
The failure of Western aid in Africa has little to do with the conditions attached to it, but a lot to do with poor governance on the continent. Look at China giving Sudan money to build a multi-million dollar presidential palace. That surely does not promote economic growth and development in that poor and conflict ridden republic. You might criticize China, but over the years, Western aid to Africa has done more or less the same thing helping corrupt African rulers build palaces, fly executive jets, and acquire prime real estate in New York while the citizens of their country go hungry and die of disease.
It is also misleading to think that China's loans are particularly generous. Most Western aid to Africa is given as grants, or as highly concessionary loans. Countries like Rwanda, Zambia, Tanzania, Ghana, Mozambique, Mali and Uganda get almost 60 percent of their aid as grants (i.e. free money). The rest is given as concessionary loans by multilateral and bilateral aid organizations as 40 year loans at an interest rate of 0.78 percent per annum. That's fairly generous.
Furthermore, arguments that Chinese aid is good or bad because it does not have conditionality is misplaced. Conditionality has consistently failed to work. A lot of studies on Africa have demonstrated this. What China is doing in Africa is not changing direction, but offering more of the same.
Likewise, Africa's inability to trade itself out of poverty is not due to bad trading practices by the Western world. That is only an excuse that is theoretically convincing but analytically and empirically false. The real cause of Africa's trade predicament is mismanagement of policies and institutions that form the relationship between government and exporters. For example, Africa's major exports are agricultural. Governments in Africa have for many years pursued policies that reduced farmers' incentives to produce both food crops and export crops. Bad government is to blame for the continent increasingly becoming a food importer.
Thus, even when the West has given Africa preferential trade arrangements, the continent has failed to take advantage of them. For example, the EU reached the Cotounou Agreement (formerly the Lome Convention) under which African countries receive quotas on selected goods to export duty free to the EU. Under the Beef Protocol of this agreement, no African country (including Africa's success story - Botswana) has met their quota. Under the same agreement, Uganda has a quota to export 50,000 metric tons of sugar, and has never exported one kilogram.
Under the Africa Growth and Opportunities Act (AGOA), African countries have 6,000 products they can export duty free to the U.S. market. Most African countries have failed to take advantage of this opportunity, and their benefits have been limited. This is because external trade - whether with China or the West - only offers an opportunity. Which country will take advantage of the opportunity depends on its internal institutional capacity.
Unfortunately for Africa, this internal capacity is lacking all around. We need to stop looking outside of the continent for solutions. Africa needs internal reform before it can benefit from the rest of the world - regardless of what China offers.
|
Andrew Mwenda at PostGlobal on PostGlobal; blog of politics and current events on washingtonpost.com. Visit http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/andrew_mwenda/
| 47.111111 | 0.388889 | 0.388889 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/09/AR2007020900680.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/09/AR2007020900680.html
|
Gates: Bombs Tie Iran to Iraq Extremists
|
2007021119
|
MUNICH, Germany -- Serial numbers and other markings on bombs suggest that Iranians are linked to deadly explosives used by Iraqi militants, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Friday in some of the administration's first public assertions on evidence the military has collected.
While the Bush administration and military officials have repeatedly said Iranians have been tied to terrorist bombings in Iraq, they have said little about evidence to bolster such claims, including any documents and other items collected in recent raids in Iraq.
National security officials in Washington and Iraq have been working for weeks on a presentation intended to provide evidence for Bush administration claims of what they say are Iran's meddlesome and deadly activities.
The materials _ which in their classified form include slides and some two inches of documents _ provide evidence of Iran's role in supplying Iraqi militants with highly sophisticated and lethal improvised explosive devices and other weaponry. Among the weapons is a roadside bomb known as an "explosively formed penetrator," which can pierce the armor of Abrams tanks with nearly molten-hot charges. One intelligence official said the U.S. is "fairly comfortable" it knows where the explosives came from.
The Iran dossier also lays out alleged Iranian efforts to train Iraqis in military techniques.
Yet, government officials say there is some disagreement about how much to make public to support the administration's case. Intelligence officials worry the sources of their information could dry up.
Among the evidence the administration will present are weapons that were seized in U.S.-led raids on caches around Iraq, one military official in Washington said on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly.
Other evidence includes documents captured when U.S.-led forces raided an Iranian office Jan. 11 in Irbil in northern Iraq, the official said. Tehran said it was a government liaison office, but the U.S. military said five Iranians detained in the raid were connected to an Iranian Revolutionary Guard faction that funds and arms insurgents in Iraq.
The assertions have been met with skepticism by some lawmakers still fuming over intelligence reports used by the administration to propel the country to war with Iraq in 2003. Gates' comments came as a new Pentagon inspector general's report criticized prewar Defense Department assertions of al-Qaida connections to Iraq.
Speaking with reporters in Seville, Spain, on Friday before traveling to Munich, Gates told reporters that markings on explosives provide "pretty good" evidence that Iranians are supplying either weapons or technology for Iraqi extremists.
"I think there's some serial numbers, there may be some markings on some of the projectile fragments that we found" that point to Iran, he said.
Gates' remarks left unclear how the U.S. knows the serial numbers are traceable to Iran and whether such weapons would have been sent to Iraq by the Iranian government or by private arms dealers.
|
MUNICH, Germany -- Serial numbers and other markings on bombs suggest that Iranians are linked to deadly explosives used by Iraqi militants, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Friday in some of the administration's first public assertions on evidence the military has collected.
| 11.76087 | 1 | 46 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802435.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802435.html
|
The Fantasy Of Happily Ever After
|
2007021119
|
In the minds of most people, she was the most famous gold digger in America, which explains the cataclysmic jolt to the daily news cycle, the explosion of office babble, the reiteration of a joke that went pretty much like this: "And will you always remember where you were when you heard that Anna Nicole Smith died?" For as much as she was a figure of fun, a goddess of tabloid abundance, the shock of her death at 39 was far bigger than that of just any celebrity. She had gotten under our skin, and taken on a role we didn't quite realize was so big in the history of marriage, money and sex.
Poor Anna began her climb to fame and riches as a stripper, and in the end, she was a stripper again, seemingly uncontainable by ordinary clothing. She spilled out of her tops, she spilled into the tabloids, she was a mess. Her death gave you whiplash: Time to feel sad for a woman who was never supposed to be more than a source of amusement. Her final notice was never intended for the front page, just a few inches, 40 years hence, at the back of the obits, reminding us of the bombshell who married well . . . and was forgotten as her beauty faded.
"Courtesan," which in a different age is probably what she would have been labeled (even though she was married), is a category we don't have much use for anymore. The woman who makes sexual alliances for money, who was less than a blushing bride but not so fallen as a prostitute, was once a vigorous cultural type, at least through the 19th century. Courtesans were the essential heroines of our greatest operas. They offered up their bodies, in various states of undress, to painters from Caravaggio to Toulouse-Lautrec -- and too many others to mention. It was a courtesan who set in motion many of our greatest novels, not least of them Proust's "Remembrance of Things Past" -- which begins with the love of a man named Swann for a "great courtesan."
But the idea of the courtesan has all but disappeared, and with it much of the nuance about our analysis of sex and marriage.
Our continuum of sexual alliances runs from the happy marriage of loving equals, on one end, to prostitution -- the pure exchange of sex for money -- on the other. The trophy bride, the marriage of youth and beauty to age and power, is the closest we have to the category of the courtesan -- but it involves the collective pretense that it isn't only about money. To see the old category of courtesanship in operation today, you have to travel to poor places around the globe, where sex, love and sometimes marriages are negotiated between wealthy westerners and local girls without either party acknowledging the idea that the exchange is commercial.
The courtesan was rich but not on her own terms, an object of scorn but not completely disreputable, a living reminder of an economy of sexual exchange that we like to pretend doesn't exist. When Anna Nicole Smith, a voluptuous 26-year-old Playboy Playmate, married an octogenarian oil-rich billionaire, she crossed a line, assuming too high a place in our supposedly mobile society. After her elderly husband died a little over a year later, she stood to inherit $474 million (still in legal dispute), and her name became shorthand for marital opportunism. Her husband went down in the books as the most ridiculous of old goats -- but he was dead and beyond the reach of our scorn. Anna had her second and third acts, on television and shilling for diet pills, but none of these chapters ever did much for her dignity.
Society took its revenge, confining her to gossip magazines and scandal sheets, foreclosing her appearance in the black-and-white party photos of respectable magazines, where trophy brides appear smiling and dazzling with their balding, sagging, tremendously rich husbands.
For centuries, there have been men who have wondered why women really love them. That the real sexual allure of men may not be their good looks, their masculinity or their charm, but rather their power and position, can make men wonder whether they are loved for themselves or for something external and unrelated. When marriages don't look like they look in storybooks -- love matches between princes and princesses -- intimacy is shadowed with doubt.
And it's the same fear that made poor Anna Nicole Smith gibes an endlessly rich source of material for Leno and Letterman; they were laughing at her, of course, but also at men who were foolish enough to marry women like her. We laugh at what makes us uncomfortable, and Anna Nicole Smith made us very uncomfortable indeed.
In the post-feminist age, there has been some gradual reemergence of ideas about love and marriage that are not based on equality or sameness between the sexes. Women are different than men, the argument goes. They look for security and safety, while men look for sexual novelty and opportunity. Men, as Newt Gingrich once said in his famous "giraffe hunting" explanation of biological difference, "are basically little piglets."
Marriage, the thinking goes in some conservative quarters, is about combining the little piglets with the other half of the equation, the women who naturally seek shelter in a hostile world. These alliances are essential for the propagation of the species, the perpetuation of the family. Loveless marriages are a fact of life, but not nearly so dangerous as divorces born of selfishness. Yet the woman who is hard-nosed in her pursuit of the biggest little piglet she can find becomes an object of scorn.
It's difficult to believe in such a mechanistic model of marriage -- two biological entities with very different agendas, looking for the best deal they can find -- without bringing back a lot of cynicism about marriage. That cynicism is nothing new. The 19th century had a far more trenchant view of the very contractual nature of most marriages. Tolstoy, in his novella "The Kreutzer Sonata," condemned marriage wholesale, as a societally sanctioned form of sexual servitude. In "Dombey and Son," Dickens analyzed the marriage of a beautiful, accomplished, independent woman who marries (at about the last moment before she will no longer be sexually marketable) a man of great wealth and no personal charm. To the outside world it seems a brilliant marriage, an alliance of grace and beauty with wealth and power. But she has contempt not just for her husband, but for herself and the whole system of marriage. That contempt cleaves her soul.
We never really knew what motivated Anna Nicole Smith's marriage. Perhaps it wasn't so crass and calculating as it seemed from the outside. But she was clearly unhappy. Now she seems merely a sad and pathetic creature, rather like her forebears in the world of courtesans, Manon (Abbe Prevost's doomed courtesan) and Violetta (Verdi's hooker with a heart of gold) and Proust's Odette. We are at the end of the opera, the wandering woman is dead, and now the clown is the victim. Neither category really does her justice, and so the false tears and moral clucking will sound together -- a reminder that we have eliminated yet another sexual category that allowed for contradiction and ambiguity.
|
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.
| 27.941176 | 0.411765 | 0.45098 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/09/AR2007020901573.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/09/AR2007020901573.html
|
GWU Raises Tuition to More Than $39,000
|
2007021119
|
George Washington University acknowledges having the highest tuition in the country. And yesterday, the board of trustees voted to raise it again.
Tuition for next year's freshmen will be more than $39,000, an increase of 3.8 percent. That's before they pay for housing and food.
"I'm paying over $5,000 a semester" for housing, junior Theresa Lamontagne said.
As for tuition, she said, "like everybody else, I feel they're probably charging too much. The fact that it's going up is ridiculous." She worries about the cost, she said, because she plans to go to graduate school and knows that she will be paying off loans for a long time.
GWU offers fixed tuition rates, so students pay the same amount for up to five years after starting at the school, and a student's financial aid is guaranteed not to drop.
At the board meeting, trustees talked about placing greater emphasis on need-based aid -- as opposed to merit-based scholarships designed to lure top students.
Lamar Thorpe, the Student Association president, said tuition is not a big issue at GWU, in part because parents often pay for it and in part because students think they're getting a great education.
Thorpe, a senior, said he has paid for his education on his own, with financial aid, a job in the Navy Reserve and a part-time job at a loading dock. He is $60,000 in debt. But, he said, he walks around campus and sees where the money goes: new buildings, new programs. "I think people are going to come regardless of how much it costs," he said.
|
George Washington University acknowledges having the highest tuition in the country. And yesterday, the board of trustees voted to raise it again.
| 13.24 | 1 | 25 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802262.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802262.html
|
Obama Forged Political Mettle In Illinois Capitol
|
2007021119
|
CHICAGO, Feb. 8 -- When Sen. Barack Obama heads downstate to Springfield on Saturday to announce his candidacy for president, he will speak in lofty tones of America and Abraham Lincoln, but also of a more prosaic topic: his own eight years in the Illinois Senate.
The heart of Obama's political résumé lies in Springfield, where he arrived in January 1997. He was a newcomer to elective politics after time as a community organizer and University of Chicago law professor operating largely outside the city's Democratic machine.
VIDEO | washingtonpost.com Political Reporter Chris Cillizza discusses the weekend ahead for Democratic presidential contenders, with Senator Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) visiting New Hampshire and Senator Barack Obama (D-Ill.) expected to formally announce his candidacy.
From a district on the South Side of Chicago, he reached Republican-dominated Springfield as a committed liberal, later writing that he understood politics in the capital "as a full-contact sport, and minded neither the sharp elbows nor the occasional blind-side hit."
Yet he emerged as a leader while still in his 30s by developing a style former colleagues describe as methodical, inclusive and pragmatic. He cobbled together legislation with Republicans and conservative Democrats, making overtures other progressive politicians might consider distasteful.
Along the way, he played an important role in drafting bipartisan ethics legislation and health-care reform. He overcame law enforcement objections to codify changes designed to curb racial profiling and to make capital punishment, which he favors, more equitable.
"When you come in, especially as a freshman, and work on something like ethics reform, it's not necessarily a way to endear yourself to some of the veteran members of the Illinois General Assembly," said state Sen. Kirk W. Dillard, a Republican who became a friend. "And working on issues like racial profiling was contentious, but Barack had a way both intellectually and in demeanor that defused skeptics."
"He wasn't a maverick," said Cynthia Canary, director of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform. "There were other legislators I would turn to if I just wanted to make a lot of noise. That wasn't his style."
Obama was a persistent foe of social conservatives on issues of reproductive rights. He was also a reliable vote for gun control and backed a ban on assault weapons, although he took a political hit from Democrats for missing an important gun vote while in Hawaii for the Christmas holidays.
In 1997, Obama was not instantly embraced, Dillard said: "The fact that he was a law professor -- and a constitutional-law professor -- and he was a Harvard graduate made many members of the General Assembly roll their eyes."
Obama went to work. Afterward, he played golf and pickup basketball. He made the social rounds at Springfield cocktail parties. He joined a weekly poker game with legislators and lobbyists in which the ante was a dollar or two.
One regular, former Democratic state senator Larry Walsh, said Obama was competitive yet careful -- and always hard to read.
"One night, we were playing and things weren't going very well for me," Walsh said. "I had a real good hand and Barack beat me out with another one. I slammed down my cards and said, 'Doggone it, Barack, if you were a little more liberal in your card playing and a little more conservative in your politics, you and I would get along a lot better.' "
|
CHICAGO, Feb. 8 -- When Sen. Barack Obama heads downstate to Springfield on Saturday to announce his candidacy for president, he will speak in lofty tones of America and Abraham Lincoln, but also of a more prosaic topic: his own eight years in the Illinois Senate.
| 13.313725 | 1 | 51 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/02/09/DI2007020901135.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/02/09/DI2007020901135.html
|
Dr. Gridlock - washingtonpost.com
|
2007021119
|
Robert Thomson, Dr. Gridlock, diagnoses your traffic and transit problems and offers up his prescription for a better commute..
He was online Monday, Feb. 12, at 1 p.m. ET to address all your traffic and transit issues.
The Dr. Gridlock column receives hundreds of letters each month from motorists and transit riders throughout the Washington region. They ask questions and make complaints about getting around a region plagued with some of the worst traffic in the nation. The doctor diagnoses problems and tries to bring relief.
Dr. Gridlock appears in The Post's Metro section on Sunday and in the Extra section on Thursday. His comments also appear on the Web site's Get There blog. You can send e-mails for the newspaper column to drgridlock@washpost.com or write to Dr. Gridlock at 1150 15th St. NW, Washington, D.C. 20071.
Dr. Gridlock: Hello, travelers, and thanks for looking in on today's discussion. We've got questions about all sorts of topics, from policy matters to traffic lights.
But I see one here that's particularly timely in light of the forecast of snow and ice and goo for Tuesday and Wednesday.
Fairfax, Va.: I can't speak for the District or Maryland since I live over here in Virginia and almost never get to the other areas in bad weather, but why do our area road crews get a "pass" each time they fail in snow removal efforts? Why is it all right that Virginia crews sometimes never get to neighborhoods and do a passable, at best, job on our main roads? The predictable poor efforts in our neighborhood has the predictable effect of causing school closings which in other areas would not happen. (A 3-inch snowstorm wouldn't cause a school closing in Connecticut or Upstate N.Y. in a million years.)
I have lived in New Jersey, Upstate N.Y. and Conn. over the years before moving here 10 years ago. None of those areas tolerate poor snow removal efforts long and if something "unusual" occurs, a politician or two loses their job. Here, for some reason, nobody is ever held accountable that I can tell. (Geographically we are not Miami and we can expect snow here, sometimes in large amounts.)
Dr. Gridlock: Fairfax, I grew up in New York City and Montreal. In New York, every garbage truck had a snowplow on the front for a storm. In Montreal, we had plows designed just to clear the sidewalks.
This isn't to make excuses for local departments, but just for the sake of perspective: Regions that get a lot of snow tend to prepare best and spend the most for storms. We'll never be in their league, but it wouldn't make sense for our local governments to match their expenditures.
But like I say, I don't want to make excuses. Would you other folks share your experiences and perceptions of the snow clearing around here? What sort of a grade would you give our local governments?
Washington, DC: When will the work be completed on Connecticut Ave. beneath Dupont Circle?
Dr. Gridlock: The work that began in May is scheduled to be done at the end of this month.
Wheaton, Md.: I know the forecasts have been downgraded, but what are the rules for Metro running when there is significant snow on the ground?
Dr. Gridlock: I think the basic rule is to be safe. You probably remember times when buses had to either detour or stop running during big storms. There have been times when even the trains had to halt because of conditions along the above ground portion of the system.
Metro has a new general manager, John B. Catoe Jr., who will be paying a lot of attention to safety issues. Judging by the forecast, the next couple of days will be a good test for him. (Catoe came to us from LA, but he's a Washington native.)
D.C. gripe: Why doesn't anyone bother to tell us what's happening on the roads inside the city as well as what's up on the Beltway and inter-urban commuter roads? It took an entire hour this morning for the N4 bus to travel down Mass Ave from the intersection with Wisconsin Ave to Dupont Circle (a trip that's usually 12-20 minutes), but neither TV nor radio traffic reports had mentioned transit problems on that stretch, so more than 50 in-town commuters plus numerous car passengers who might otherwise have taken other routes ended up stuck for an hour, and subsequently, late for work. I'd still like to know what the problem was this morning! The traffic eased once we passed the mosque, but there was nothing apparent going on there.
Dr. Gridlock: Fair question, D.C. I don't have a definitive answer, but here are a few thoughts.
First, I get complaints from across the region about traffic incident reporting. Starting with me, people complain that I haven't covered their road or transit line in The Post's Road Watch column, on page 2 of the Sunday Metro section.
Other folks write in to say that radio and TV aren't reporting in a timely fashion about their roads, trains or buses.
I think they have the same experience I do: It's a huge region with a complicated road and transit system in which there's lots of potential for trouble.
We all -- newspaper, radio, TV -- rely on the transportation agencies, traffic Web sites and the public for our information and we all deal with limited space or time to tell you what we've learned from them.
The traffic camera system has improved a lot. You can find them on our Web site, or at places like http://www.trafficland.com/. (I'm looking at one now that shows the cars following that new traffic pattern across the Klingle Bridge on Connecticut Avenue because of the construction.)
Metro has gotten better about updating conditions on the trains and buses, but it's better about the trains than about the buses. There's a new thing called "Next Bus" on the Metro Web site, at http://www.metroopensdoors.com/, that should be a help, once it's in more widespread use.
Burtonsville, Md.: What's your take on those eye-sore, "Great Wall of China" sound barriers overtaking our landscape? Have they been demonstrated to reduce noise pollution enough to justify their cost? I don't get it; those highways have been there for generations so if noise was problematic, no one is forced to move close to them. It's like those people who move near airports and then complain about the noise from the air-traffic patterns. Well I'm offended by the eye pollution of those sound barriers. At least my way (not installing them) costs the taxpayers nothing, and doesn't kowtow to special interests. Just my two-cents worth.
Dr. Gridlock: Sound barriers have become quite popular. I don't have a problem with them. It's not like they're blocking my view of the Blue Ridge. From the Capital Beltway, or I-95 or I-66, the view wasn't that great to begin with.
If I'm just passing through someone's neighborhood, I don't mind having to look at some sound barriers if it's blocking a bit of the noise from the thousands of cars and trucks passing by their homes 24 hours a day.
Just yesterday, I was walking through a part of my neighborhood that has a sound barrier facing the Beltway. They help block the noise, but it's not like the Cone of Silence has descended over the Beltway.
Vienna, Va.: Any updates on the likelihood of the Virginia General Assembly getting its act together and passing a useful transportation package?
Dr. Gridlock: Post staff writer Mike Shear had a good story on the situation in today's Post. The bill that passed the House of Delegates is in the Senate Transportation Committee today, but the real crunch will be when it hits the Senate Finance Committee later this week.
Virginia has gotten to the point where legislators agree transportation is a big problem that requires a lot of money to solve. Issue is exactly how much money and where it will come from.
Very unclear to me whether anything will actually come out of the legislative session that ends later this month.
washingtonpost.com: Roads Bill Likely to Run Into Divide In Va. Senate (Post, Feb. 12)
Dr. Gridlock: Here's the link to Mike's story.
Washington, D.C.: Submitting early because I keep forgetting. On my morning commute, we come from the east down Rhode Island Avenue, go three-fourths of the way around Logan Circle, and then south on 13th Street.
The stoplights at P Street and Rhode Island Avenue halfway around the circle are completely confusing and contradictory. Some people go, some stop. Do you know this area, and who has the right of way?
Dr. Gridlock: I'll take a walk over there. It's not far from our downtown newsroom.
Reminds me that this week the District is starting reconstruction work near Logan Circle on Q St. NW between 11th and 14th streets. It should still be open to traffic, though.
Is there any update on MoCo's RideOn moving toward SmarTrip on the buses? I would be more inclined to do a Metrorail -> bus transfer if I didn't need to have a transfer card and exact change. And my dear spouse (and the environment) would be spared a trip to & from the train station, too!
Dr. Gridlock: The SmarTrip cards, which you can use to pay the fares on all Metro trains and buses, are going to become a regional system. The DASH buses in Virginia accept them now.
I believe that the hardware has been installed on Montgomery County's Ride On buses, but that there are some software bugs still to be worked out. We're hearing the county hopes to have it working by summer.
Oswego County, N.Y. gets 11 FEET of snow and it can keep its buses running.
So, why is it (and I used to live in D.C.) that the D.C. metro area gets paralyzed whenever they get 1/2 inch of snow? Can you imagine what 11 FEET of snow would do to the D.C. metro area?
Dr. Gridlock: We could take the rest of the year off.
Braddock Road: Regarding the moans from Tysons Corner covered again in today's paper. I live in Alexandria, another neighborhood that has an elevated Metro track running through it. It also has a bike/jogging trail running next to it, and plenty of pedestrian access underneath it. The track hasn't prevented Alexandria from being pedestrian and bike friendly, because this community always was.
Dr. Gridlock: I hear a lot from people on both sides of the Tysons rail issue. Two arguments for a tunnel are that it would be less disruptive for traffic during the construction phase and then it would eliminate a Great Wall effect that would split up what people hope can eventually be the people-friendly neighborhoods of Tysons City.
I don't have the same fears as some do about what an elevated rail will look like and what it will do. Maybe that's from growing up in New York. Maybe it's a feeling that it would be hard to make Tysons look any worse than it does now.
Seriously, Tysons really needs this rail line. It would be nice if it could be in a tunnel, but it would be a disaster if the whole project got lost in an effort to win approval for a tunnel.
washingtonpost.com: On Road To Dulles, Confusion And Angst (Post, Feb. 12)
Dr. Gridlock: There's a link to Alec MacGillis's story in today's Post about the tunnel issue.
Falls Church, Va.: I'm fed up with Metro's constant blare of useless announcements. Lately they've been almost constant; Metro seems to think that passengers would not think to call 911 in an emergency unless they've been bombarded at high volume with the juvenile "SEE IT, SAY IT!" announcement and the long, rambling one from Metro police. Also, the potentially useful announcements about backups, elevator closures, etc., are incomprehensible (but still loud), because Metro doesn't train its employees on speaking into a PA.
So, I finally broke down and bought an iPod, and I'm much happier. The lesson for Metro is important: by running so many irritating announcements, they drove me to put on headphones, and now I don't listen to any announcements at all.
Dr. Gridlock: I've been riding Metro for 18 years now, and certainly have shared the experience of listening -- or trying to listen -- to garbled messages.
Metro has been trying to get more information out to us. The transit authority just launched a service allowing us to get learn details about train delays on the customer information line, at 202-637-7000.
That's fine, but it sounds a bit like an official acknowledgement that the best way -- hearing the information through announcements in the trains and on the platforms -- isn't working.
Before the snow hits: Please turn on your headlights.
Please get the snow off your lights, front and back.
Please brush the snow off the top of your car.
Please leave plenty of room to brake, whether you have 2- or 4-wheel drive.
Please turn off your radio, turn off your cellphone, hush your fellow passengers, and concentrate on driving.
Dr. Gridlock: Pretty good advice for dealing with the Tuesday and Wednesday forecast. Speaking for many drivers, I'm sure, I'd add: Slow down.
Falls Church, Va.: I live very close to Tysons Corner and hope that the tunnel idea will get serious reconsideration -- it seems so obviously the best approach -- especially when you consider all the tall buildings that will be going up as well as the Metro facilities. Is there any hope of getting senators and congressmen involved in this to get approval for the tunnel? Have potential business and customer losses due to the massive disruptions from above-ground construction been factored into this debate?
Dr. Gridlock: The impact of above ground construction should be quite striking for those of you who drive Routes 123 and 7. Tysons Corner employs 100,000 people, and they'll have to find their way through quite a mess of traffic over the next five years. Then there are the commuters who are just passing through.
I will say this on behalf of the Virginia congressional delegation: They've been pushing hard to win $900 million in federal funding for this project. They feel like they're on the verge of success and they don't want to screw it up.
That project is really on the bubble for getting the federal funding. If you live outside our region and you hear what's going to get built and how much it will cost, you probably see it as one more pork barrel boondogle brought to you by the federal government.
I really enjoy my commute on the D.C. Metro everyday. It's very calming to me. I'm able to read, nap or just enjoy the sights. Is there any way to convince Metro to pipe soothing music on the trains? I realize most commuters listen to their own brand of music on personal listening systems, but a little jazz piped in for the rest of us would be great!
Thank you for your attention.
Dr. Gridlock: I'm all for calming commuters, Laurel, but I'm not sure we'd really accomplish that. You know how many things we can find to argue about. Can you imagine how we'd be fighting over the music selections?
Washington, D.C.: I really do want to ride the bus and Metro more. I live in Columbia Heights and work behind Union Station. But until WMATA can get the buses to come more than every 25 minutes at rush hour on U street, I will continue to drive. I even called the number on the stop at 14/U to see when the next bus would come and I swear the recording was "the next bus will not come for a while" -- buses need to be every 5 minutes at rush hour. I still have my old RRP for Capitol Hill so I drive and park on someone else's residential street which I know annoys the neighbors, but maybe they should be the ones complaining to WMATA. Don't even get me started on the trains...
Dr. Gridlock: Lots of us -- including many people at the transit authority -- think that the service on many bus lines is insufficient and unreliable. It's partly a question of getting more buses and partly a question of Metro doing a better job of monitoring where they are, so they don't bunch up, especially at rush hour.
I know there must be a reason for this that you didn't say, but I have to ask: Would it not work for you to take the Green Line train from Columbia Heights to the Red Line over to Union Station or New York Avenue Station?
Silver Spring, Md.: OUR SNOW IS DIFFERENT! I grew up in snow country, where we rarely missed school (unless it took bulldozers to clear the roads).. and that snow was crunchy, easy to drive on, and NOT like here! Our freeze-thaw-freeze-thaw cycle gives us heavy, yucky, treacherous greasy snow. Granted, it could be cleared out sooner, but our usual 3-4 inch snows don't warrant a huge plow investment.
Oh.. and when will Reno Road be finished? And will the closure be extended south across Nebraska?
Dr. Gridlock: That Reno Road job between Fessenden Street and Military Road should be done next month. (Lots of people ask about it.) I'm not aware of any plan to extend it, but I'll ask.
Metro announcements: It's become like the boy crying wolf. There are so many announcements that you just tune them out. When there were less, I listened (or tried to listen) to them.
Keep them few, keep them informational and short.
Put info on the monitors that tell you the next trains. People look up at them all the time so passengers will pay attention to them and they're less intrusive. I know that if there's information on the train display monitors, I always check and see if it's relevant to me.
Dr. Gridlock: Metro is planning to put some more of the monitors outside the fare gates, so we'll know before we pay the fare whether there's a big problem in the system.
Bethesda, Md.: Dear Dr. Gridlock,
I've always wondered about those commuter stores. How do they make money? Do they run on a subsidy from the local governments?
Dr. Gridlock: I find those stores really helpful. I've been to ones on Arlington and Montgomery counties. They are government operations, where you can get lots of useful information and buy fare cards, tickets and tokens.
Lincoln, Neb.: I love this gorgeous part of the country but your traffic is terrible. I am a youth football coach here to speak at the Nike Clinic this past weekend at the Chantilly Marriott. I have no idea how you folks tolerate two-hour stands in traffic. We don't have much in Nebraska, but I'm willing to put up with it to stay out of the traffic.
Dr. Gridlock: Land, lots of land, under starry skies above. It is amazing what we tolerate around here. There's a lot of anger, much of it we direct at each other rather than the people who could actually solve these problems.
You touched on it briefly in your column Sunday, but can you elaborate a little on the status of hybrids in the HOV lane?
I'm not sure that people realize what a huge issue this is for EVERYBODY who drives. Putting thousands and and thousands of hybrids back into already congested lanes will affect every driver.
I know VDOT says that HOV lanes are getting clogged, but on the Dulles Toll Road-66 corridor, that is not the case. Further, I see almost as many violators every day as I do hybrids, particularly on 66.
I can understand if VDOT wishes to end the exemption for new vehicles, but its not fair to punish drivers who already own hybrids. There are major lifestyle issues at play here. For those of us who work in D.C. but live in Loudoun, for instance, the HOV lanes save at least 45 minutes each way. Adding another 90 minutes to my commute would make life almost unbearable. That may sound like hyperbole, but really it is true!
Dr. Gridlock: Many Northern Virginians bought hybrid cars so they could use the carpool lanes. The state created the temporary exemption as a way to encourage purchase of cleaner fuel cars and improve air quality. It was not meant to be a permanent thing.
In the past couple of years, people who carpool have become increasingly aware that the HOV lanes are becoming more crowded. Hybrids are a major source of that congestion.
Still, the General Assembly is considering a one-year extension on the hybrid exemption scheduled to expire July 1.
Alexandria, Va.: I think the person asking about Metro rules during a snowstorm meant, what are Metro's rules for which stations will stay open when it snows? I know the above-ground stations shut once there is a certain amount of snow on the ground, but I don't know how many inches it takes to close, nor do I know if that applies to freezing rain/ice. Thanks...
Dr. Gridlock: While we've been chatting, Metro's public information office put out an advisory about operations during the bad weather coming up Tuesday. I'll give you pieces of it here:
-- Metrorail will operate on a normal weekday schedule (rail service hours are 5 a.m. to midnight). Trains will operate with four and six cars.
-- 20 trains will be equipped with de-icing equipment to combat snow and ice on the third rail.
-- Metro will use "heater tape" which has been installed on sections of track with significant grades/inclines and in critical areas in the rail yards. The heater tape, which has been in use throughout the winter, is a cable clipped onto the third rail that is turned on when temperatures dip below the freezing mark to keep the third rail warm enough to prevent snow and ice from building-up.
-- Metro railcar maintenance staff has also "hardened" its fleet of rail cars by protecting the undercarriage motors from snow ingestion and electrical short circuits that are caused by water/snow and debris.
-- Metrobus will operate on a normal weekday schedule. Metrobuses will operate as road conditions dictate, so passengers should expect possible detours and delays due to changing road conditions on Tuesday.
-- MetroAccess will operate as road conditions dictate, so passengers should expect possible detours and delays due to changing road conditions.
Dupont Circle: Hello -- this morning on my walk to the Dupont Metro station I encountered several fire trucks with sirens blaring trying to get through the Circle. I was totally shocked to see that many cars did not get out of the way. Granted it was morning rush hour and it's a tricky intersection with Mass Ave and Conn. Ave. But there was TOTAL GRIDLOCK in the Circle. It seemed that cars didn't want to turn off onto one of the side streets because (heaven forbid!) that would cause them to be late for work. I observed one woman chatting away on her cell phone despite the fire truck behind her and many of us pedestrians screaming at her to get out of the way.
I guess this is more of a vent than a question. But I've noticed this before with emergency vehicles and city drivers. Are D.C. drivers so self-absorbed or concerned about getting to work that we can't make way for emergency vehicles that might be crucial to saving a life? If so, that's truly pathetic.
Tysons Corner: Any chance we can just name the above-ground Tysons Metro track for Gov. Kaine right now, so everyone can always remember who helped put it there?
Dr. Gridlock: Kaine would prefer a tunnel. But he says he's sticking with the advice he's getting that says he'd risk losing the whole project if he held out for a tunnel.
Washington, D.C. (Shaw): PLEASE, I ask that you look into the traffic light timing at R and Vermont Streets, NW. Since about two months ago, the lights starting at R and Vermont on R Street, are timed so that traffic is backed up from 10th to Vermont Streets on R, where as the lights used to be timed so that you went from one green light to the next, perfectly timed. This is becoming a serious issue as cars are now blocking 11th Street on R, and it is causing an unnecessary traffic back up.
Please put the lights back to where they were!
Arlington Commuter: Could you please ask Arlington County to review the lights and traffic patterns at the intersections of South Glebe/395 ramp onto South Glebe/West Glebe?? PLEASE
Traffic backs up in all directions due to the very interesting timing. I understand that it is a difficult area, but surely we can do better. AND please stop "blocking the box" at the ramp!
Alexandria, Va.: Here's a terrific way to easily raise revenue for the region's existing and future road upgrade/expansion projects. Why not strategically place traffic enforcement officers at various offramps during rush hour to catch and ticket "cheats" who dangerously cut in line at the last possible moment to exit major thoroughfares? That way, since their time is obviously more important than that of those of us who patiently wait our turn to safely exit, they could pay for the privilege of cutting in?
Dr. Gridlock: I'd like to see that too, and I know many travelers would. I hear from drivers all the time about unfair or dangerous behavior by other drivers. Traveling on the shoulders of Route 29 south of White Oak, for example. Use of cell phones while driving in the District is another.
Does a day go by when you don't mutter, "Where's a cop?" In six months, I've heard from only one reader who reported that a police officer was actually there to ticket a violator. That's not a rant about the police. I think it's reasonable that people behave like adults in exchange for a driver's license.
Dr. Gridlock: Thanks, everyone, for your good questions and comments today. Please be safe, whatever this storm brings us.
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online 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.
|
Robert Thomson, Dr. Gridlock, diagnoses your traffic and transit problems and offers up his prescription for a better commute.
| 239.636364 | 1 | 20.090909 |
high
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/02/08/DI2007020800417.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/02/08/DI2007020800417.html
|
Books --- 'Better Single Than Sorry'
|
2007021119
|
Schefft was online Monday, Feb. 12. at 3 p.m.
Jen Schefft: Hi everyone! Recently, I've been all over the place promoting my new book "Better Single Than Sorry" -- as the title suggests, it's about being okay with being single, not settling for someone who isn't right for you, and living life to the fullest regardless of your relationship status. Can't wait to start chatting with you!
Washington, D.C.: I saw your interview on the "Today" show and felt they were trying to construe some of this as women being "too picky" or waiting for the unrealistic "perfect person." The point is that women shouldn't settle for something that is so-so or not all that they are looking for just so they don't have to be single. I would love to have a boyfriend but I would rather be single than be with someone I don't feel strongly about. My friends and I saw you on "The Bachelor" and felt like of all the seasons, you were the only reality show participant that seemed like someone we could identify with, i.e. not needy or looking for exposure. Thanks for being an intelligent and articulate representation for single professional women.
Jen Schefft: First, thank you so much for your kind words! I also agree with you wholeheartedly -- as women, we can take care of ourselves and we don't need men to take care of us. Men should be the icing on the cake, not the cake itself. I think it's best to wait for the right person -- and if he/she doesn't ever pop up, so be it. I'd rather be happily single forever than in an unhappy relationship.
Falls Church, Va.: What single piece of advice would you give to other young single people?
Jen Schefft: Be happy with yourself first -- don't worry about finding a mate. Just make sure you're happy by doing things that you enjoy, just for you. If you surround yourself with people you love and activities you love, you will never be lonely, even if you're not in a relationship.
Annapolis, Md.: Do you have trouble finding single friends? I find it hard to find friends to do things with on weekend evenings and weekend days since my married friends understandably want to be with their spouses. I am not looking to go to bars to "pick up" men but to go out to dinner, to a concert or movie.
Jen Schefft: I know how hard it is to meet single people when all your friends are in relationships. My advice would be to get out and join clubs, get involved with charities, work out at a gym, find a hobby...etc. This way, you'll meet like-minded people who enjoy doing things you like to do. I've met friends at the gym, through work and even in the laundry room of my apartment building! Sometimes, I have to be the bold one and make an effort to get a phone number/make a call, but it does pay off.
Northeast Washington, D.C.: I'm not single now, but when I was there was all this pressure from my friends and family to "find a man" and get married before it's "too late." Too late for what, exactly? Is there a finite date for finding and having love? It's irritating that no one seems to believe that a single woman can be happily single. If you have a full life and thriving career, you don't need a man to feel complete or fulfilled. Whew, thanks for letting me vent.
Jen Schefft: Thanks for venting! It doesn't make sense to me either when people pressure others into settling down and finding someone. I'm happy as a single woman and will be happily single until I meet the right person for me -- and will wait as long as it takes. Why should there be a time limit? It baffles me that others don't understand that. I have plenty of friends that are settled down and married or engaged...and their lives aren't perfect either!
Thanks for agreeing to do this. I haven't read the book, but I'm curious to hear what you think are some of the "keys" in seeking out one's significant other. Do you really think that a lot of people are having a hard time finding love because they have actually "settled" on someone who isn't really right for them?
Jen Schefft: I believe that you have to live your life and enjoy -- with or without a significant other. I want to be married, but not at all costs. Plus, not every person is going to meet The One when they are 22. It can take time.
When seeking out a relationship, people really need to ask themselves:
Is this relationship making me happy?
Does he/she make me feel better about myself or worse?
Does he/she point out my flaws, or do my flaws endear me to him/her?
Is this person who I want for the long haul, or just good enough for now?
Bottom line -- deep down, you know what is best for you. You just have to trust your instincts. If it doesn't feel right...it isn't.
Alexandria, Va.: Hi Jen, ever since I was a young girl, I always knew I wanted to be a mother. Not sure where you stand on that, however, if you did want to mother a child, would you ever have a child out of wedlock to fulfill that part of your life?
Jen Schefft: Great question. I've always wanted children, too. However, I don't want to bring a child into the world with a father I'm not in love with. If I am at an age where I'm not married, but feel it's time to be a mom, I would definitely consider having a child out of wedlock or adopting. I would make sure I had a great support system around me, but I'd do it.
Washington, D.C.: What if you are unhappily single? I am attractive, intelligent, have a good job, own a house, and enjoy my own company. It is not that I don't go out either. I salsa dance, go rock-climbing, kayak, read a lot, travel, go to movies, etc. and a couple of really close friends, but I miss having someone to be intimate with both physically and mentally. I miss sex, snuggling, the sharing of each other's day-to-day, the knowing that someone has your back and that you are interdependant without being clingy. My friends have it, but I can't seem to get it. While I know I may not find someone else, I also don't see how I am going to be completely happy in my life without an intimate partner.
Jen Schefft: I totally understand that feeling, but it's all about keeping a positive attitude. Not always easy to do, trust me. But, if you want to be married, the chances are in your favor that you eventually will be. So...in the meantime, just remain positive and realize that relationships aren't always easy either. You sound like you have a very full life and that's fabulous. Look at it this way -- you still have a lot ahead of you rather than behind you!
Boyds, Md.: Now that you have become a reality TV star, how has that changed your romantic relationships?
Jen Schefft: Reality TV has changed my perspective on a lot of things, especially in terms of relationships. My romantic life has been out there for for everyone to weigh in on -- I've heard nice things and I've also heard some very mean things. It's taught me to trust my own instincts -- and we all MUST do this. My instincts are always right, no matter what anyone else tries to tell me. Deep down, we all know what is best for us. We just have to pay attention!
Washington, D.C.: For those of us who aren't familiar, what motivated you to write your book?
Jen Schefft: I was on both "The Bachelor" (I was chosen by Andrew Firestone) and then on "The Bachelorette" (I walked away alone). Because I "couldn't make it work" with any of these men, I was really ridiculed and told I was too picky, that I'd never be happy and would be single for the rest of my life! As if it was my job, and mine alone, to make it work with these men. Last I heard, relationships are a two-way street!
I couldn't believe people were so upset with me for choosing to be single. I think it's the same message women hear every day, but on a smaller scale. We're made to feel as if we're not complete without a man. That's not the case! We need to complete ourselves first.
Arlington, Va.: Gosh -- all I can say is THANKS so much for doing this chat and your encouraging words! Can't wait to read the book!
My question: What do you think of online dating?
Jen Schefft: You are very welcome -- thanks for reading! I think online dating is a great way to get yourself out there and meeting people. You just have to go into it with an open mind -- realize that not everyone you meet is going to be The One, but at least your practicing! Dating really is difficult, but the more you do it, the better you will be.
Washington, D.C.: Can you define settling in your words? And what are the biggest issues that you feel break up couples? And what factors are you giving singles to help them in their singleness?
Jen Schefft: To me, settling is being with someone who doesn't really make you happy -- but you stay because you feel it's better to be with somebody, anybody, than it is to be alone. A relationship should add to your life, not take away. As for why couples break up...I don't know if I have the perfect answer. However, I do think a lot of people stay in bad relationships for too long. I think EVERYONE needs to follow a three month rule. If it's not working (or feeling right) within three months, you have to move on. If you don't, three months can easily turn into three years. You're time is precious, so don't waste it!
Washington, D.C.: Hey it goes both ways, too. Men can be just as happy alone, and should be, regardless of whether they are in a relationship.
Jen Schefft: Excellent point. It absolutely goes both ways! My book is based on my perspective as a 30-year-old single woman, but the same message applies to men. Men should also never settle, never give into the pressure they're receiving from others and make sure they are happily single before they become part of a couple.
Washington, D.C.: What advice do you have for those of us (single and not) that have a friend that is obsessed with having a boyfriend. It becomes part of every conversation and she tells the other singles that their lives would be better too if they have an SO.
She currently is dating someone but says he is not the one, but she continues to hang on because then she will be alone. She is driving us CRAZY!!!!!
Jen Schefft: Oh...we all have those friends. A friend of mine calls them "toxic friends." You either need to stand up to her and let her know exactly how you're feeling, or pull away from her for a little bit. Not that you need to ditch her completely, but it's important to surround yourself with positive people...otherwise they just end up bringing you down, as well. If you begin to pull away, and she notices...feel free to tell her why! Maybe then she'll take the message to heart.
Philadelphia, Pa.: What, may I ask, are your Valentine's Day plans?
Jen Schefft: I currently don't have any Valentine's Day plans...and I'm very okay with that! However, lots of people ask me "how can I be happy on V-Day with out a boyfriend/girlfriend?"
You can do a number of things: get a group of girls together for dinner, get yourself a massage or pedicure (pampering yourself is great!) or buy yourself a present (I find that buying shoes and purses helps me!). Just make it a special day for YOU. Someone else told me she celebrates all the people in her life that she loves -- not just the romantic loves. I think that is a fabulous idea.
Washington, D.C.: I agree with you that you have to trust your instincts, but I think that that requires a lot of self awareness which is hard to come by as a single woman. People can't stop telling you that you need to marry, have kids, and the white picket fence. I've seen too many of my friends unhappily married because they just couldn't jump off the wedding train on time. It's depressing. Anyway, my real question is, given how attractive and seemingly together you are, do you get people asking you all the time how you could be single? And how do you take that, as a compliment or insult? I myself, think it is an obnoxious thing to say because it presumes that being single isn't a choice. Oh, and another question. How do you feel about romance? Do you think our society has duped us into believing that wine and roses are what we need to make us happy and without it, we are doomed?
Jen Schefft: Lots of questions! Let's see if I can answer a few of them. First, I agree that it's hard to be self aware, but we have to do it -- and we can't make excuses. Life is hard, and being happy is hard -- everything takes work. Most of the time, life doesn't happen to us -- it is what we make of it. And yes, people ask me all the time why I'm still single -- some say it in a complimentary way while others mean it as an insult. I know I can't change how people react to me, but I can change how I react to them. I just know that I can't let anyone get to me. What do they really know, anyway?!
Jen Schefft: Thank you to everyone for chatting with me and asking some great questions. I hope we can do it again sometime soon!! Best - Jen
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online 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 Schefft, winner of the 2003 season of ABC's "The Bachelor," and host of the 2004 edition of "The Bachelorette," discusses her new book, "Better Single Than Sorry."
| 74.825 | 0.8 | 1.85 |
high
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802458.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802458.html
|
Lypsinka's 'Passion': Deeper Than Drag
|
2007021119
|
The fabulousness of Lypsinka has been established so definitively that it could be cited in case law. This alter ego of John Epperson is the glamorous vessel for the spirits (and recorded voices) of assorted movie dames from the era when real women -- voracious, larger-than-life sirens, drama queens and goddesses -- roamed the big screen.
She . . . he . . . they were last in town in 2004, with the gallery of gleefully savage vignettes of "As I Lay Lip-Synching." Lypsinka is back at Studio Theatre with a new show and a divine preoccupation with that star out of a female impersonator's dreams: Joan Crawford.
The hilariously titled "The Passion of the Crawford" is not exactly what you are expecting from Lypsinka, whose trademark is a marvelous gift for the gestures, expressions and mannerisms of the legends she portrays. (You never hear Lypsinka's own voice, of course; she lip-syncs it all, and with peerless technical verve.)
Oh, sure, Lypsinka sinks her teeth into Crawford the way a schnauzer goes for filet mignon. But if you come to "The Passion of the Crawford" expecting a full helping of high camp, the hour-long production might leave you undernourished. Do come -- but for something subtler. (Now there's a word you don't hear in discussions of drag very often.)
In a post-"Mommie Dearest" world, it would be way too easy -- and way too much of a cliche -- to devote an evening to "no-more-wire-hangers" kind of material. That joke has sailed. What Lypsinka seems to have in mind here is a lot riskier and a lot more interesting: an exploration of the image-conscious calculations of a quirky film star, and the gap between what she imagines she's conveying about herself and what we perceive about her.
The bulk of the production, solidly staged by Kevin Malony, re-creates a 1973 interview that John Springer conducted with Crawford at Town Hall in New York. (Steve Cuiffo, in horn-rimmed glasses and suitably cloying manner, is also on hand here, lip-syncing the role of interviewer.) The content is the sort of fawning show-biz drivel that often masquerades as an in-depth celebrity interview. What's fascinating in Epperson's portrayal is the sense of the tightly controlled performance that Crawford is giving, her efforts to milk every moment for grandiose effect, to turn the interview into a worship service, in which she's the holy figure.
How scheming can a person be? Crawford was from an age when a movie studio's publicity machine could practically create a star's persona from scratch, and it's that belief that you are what you manufacture that seems to ooze from every pore. It's funny, for instance, to hear her go over her guidelines for a star's behavior at the Academy Awards (this, in response to what she sees as Marlon Brando's appalling stunt, dispatching Sacheen Littlefeather to accept his Oscar). You see, too, why Lypsinka's show has a title with religious overtones: Crawford issues rules for celebrity comportment with such sanctimony, you'd think they were commandments.
Lypsinka's scarlet-painted lips quiver on cue, too: It's tantalizingly unclear whether the extravagant expression is a reaction to the (canned) applause, or a ruse for squeezing out every ounce of demonstrable love she can from her fans.
We giggle mischievously when "The Passion" shifts to an earlier interview, at her California home, with her young children, Christina and Christopher, who are almost as skillful as their mother at projecting some twisted idea of reality. The tone shifts again -- toward the surreal -- when we see Lypsinka at a rostrum, delivering what sounds like a sermon on the subject of children.
The hypocrisy is on display now, based on what we know from Christina's illuminating memoir. Even more strongly, you sense the strenuousness of the plastic effort to have us believe in this silly movie person as someone inspirational, or even worth listening to.
The lulls in this production have to do with the amount of time we linger in each of Crawford's exercises in self-infatuation. The clever, fast-paced film montage that opens the show is in an odd way misleading, because the rhythms of the rest of "The Passion" never again approximate that level of energy.
Still, satisfaction abounds just in observing Lypsinka at work. She wears an eye-popping dress by Ramona Ponce that you might call Cleopatra kitsch: a neck that is oodles of ruby-colored jewels, to match the earrings. In the tiniest gestures -- a mere looking askew at Cuiffo, for instance -- she offers up volumes of commentary.
The performance ends with one of Lypsinka's signature shticks, a choir of ringing phones that she answers with a recorded line from one Crawford movie or another. It's a reminder of how soapy and pulpy most of her films were. And why she's such an exquisitely bizarre choice for veneration.
The Passion of the Crawford, by John Epperson. Directed by Kevin Malony. Set, Luciana Stecconi; lighting, Catherine Eliot; projections, Grady Hendrix; sound, Gil Thompson; costumes, Ramona Ponce. About 1 hour. Through Feb. 25 at Studio Theatre, 1501 14th St. NW. Call 202-332-3300 or visit http://www.studiotheatre.org.
|
The fabulousness of Lypsinka has been established so definitively that it could be cited in case law. This alter ego of John Epperson is the glamorous vessel for the spirits (and recorded voices) of assorted movie dames from the era when real women -- voracious, larger-than-life sirens, drama queens...
| 17.898305 | 0.983051 | 57.016949 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802095.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802095.html
|
Md. Man Who Treated Palsy Patients Lacked License
|
2007021119
|
A Montgomery County man who police say has been treating victims of facial paralysis for more than 20 years has been arrested for practicing physical therapy without a license and misrepresenting himself as a medical doctor, authorities said yesterday.
Robert Scott Targan, 68, whose office is in Montgomery Village, has been charged with four counts of felony theft, three counts of practicing physical therapy without a license, theft scheme, unauthorized use of a credit card and misusing the title "doctor."
Targan operates a group known as the Bell's Palsy Research Foundation, which offers to assist people suffering from syndromes and palsies causing facial paralysis. Some patients drawn by Internet searches or referrals from physicians have paid thousands of dollars for days of treatment with electrical muscular stimulation devices affixed to their face or chest, according to police.
Barry H. Helfand, Targan's attorney, said yesterday that "the state has it all wrong" and that his client will be cleared. "He didn't hold himself out as a medical doctor, and he doesn't believe he was holding himself out as a physical therapist."
Helfand said he was puzzled by the allegations of theft. "I don't understand where it's theft," he said.
Targan's Web site includes testimonials from doctors at Northwestern University and the Medical College of Georgia, among others. One of the doctors, James C. Andrews, a neurologist and clinical professor of surgery at the University of California at Los Angeles, wrote that the efforts by Targan and his group "have significantly advanced the contemporary treatment of facial paralysis."
Andrews said yesterday that patients whom he sent for treatment to a clinic in Los Angeles associated with Targan showed improvement after receiving his electrical simulation regimen. "I think it helps," he said.
Some patients treated by Targan also attested to his work on the Web site. "Whether he was licensed or not, it was worth it, and I'm happy with the results," Laura Lee, a Fairfax County resident with Bell's palsy, said yesterday.
But others were less impressed, according to a charging document filed in Montgomery County Circuit Court. The document said one woman's credit card was charged $300 for a missed appointment even though she did not give Targan the credit card number.
An Indiana woman who received a diagnosis of Bell's palsy a little more than a year ago was treated by Targan in Montgomery over three days in May after learning about him while doing computer research on her illness, police said. "Based on what she read on Targan's web site she believed him to be a doctor," according to the charging document. The woman told police that she saw licenses on Targan's office walls, including one showing that he was a physical therapist.
Under Maryland law, it is illegal for someone to use the title "doctor" in front of one's name with the intent of having people believe that the person is a medical doctor. Targan displayed the abbreviation "Dr." in front of his name on his business card, placard on his office door and on his Web site, according to the charging document.
Montgomery police began investigating Targan last month after being contacted by the Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, which reported that he was operating as a physical therapist without a license.
Targan was arrested Tuesday in his office at 19550 Club House Rd. At the police station, Targan told police "that he did not have a license to do his work because he did not need a license," according to the charging document.
Targan was charged last year with second-degree assault and fourth-degree sexual offense stemming from an allegation of improperly touching a patient, but the charges were dropped in October. "They didn't have any case," Helfand said.
Lee, the Fairfax resident, said she paid for her treatments herself, as did other patients. She was found to have pregnancy-induced Bell's palsy in February 2003, which was blamed for paralysis in the right side of her face. Her eye would not close, forcing her to wear an eye patch; she drooled; and food fell from her mouth, she said. Lee said she was so devastated that she would not pose for photographs with her baby girl.
Lee said that she soon saw "remarkable improvement" after Targan started an electric treatment program. It was Targan, she said, who restored hope to her life.
|
A Montgomery County man who police say has been treating victims of facial paralysis for more than 20 years has been arrested for practicing physical therapy without a license and misrepresenting himself as a medical doctor, authorities said yesterday.
| 21.170732 | 1 | 41 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020801982.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020801982.html
|
Three Men Convicted in Wave of Violence in Forestville in '02
|
2007021119
|
Lionel D. Gilliam and his partners in crime were on a bloody tear in the summer and fall of 2002 in Forestville, committing a rash of violent crimes, openly wielding assault weapons and brazenly selling crack cocaine.
From July 16 to Oct. 22, 2002, Gilliam killed four men. Two were slain because Gilliam thought they were "snitches" who were cooperating with police, according to testimony presented during the six-week trial in U.S. District Court in Greenbelt. One was a friend so close to Gilliam that they swapped shoes.
Gilliam, 23, and two co-defendants, Sean A. Simpson, 24, and Norberto Quinones, also 24, were convicted Wednesday by a federal jury of a series of violent crimes and drug offenses. Gilliam, of Forestville, was found guilty of murder in the four killings; Simpson, of Suitland, was convicted of murder in one slaying.
Prosecutors said the men were drug dealers in the Hilmar area of Forestville at the Amberwood, Forest Creek, Park Berkshire and Surrey Square apartments and at a shopping center.
Gilliam gunned down longtime friend Donald "Tweedy" Twitty behind a convenience store July 16, 2002. After Gilliam shot him, Twitty tried to climb a fence and asked his friend why he was hurting him; Gilliam did not reply and shot Twitty in the face, government witnesses said.
Twitty was found without his pants or shoes. Gilliam had taken them to make sure he got small plastic baggies of crack cocaine that Twitty was carrying, a government witness said.
On Oct. 22, 2002, Gilliam fatally shot Juan J. Clark 11 times with an AK-47, witnesses said. One witness testified that Gilliam had accused Clark of talking to police.
Gilliam killed another man because he bought just $10 of crack cocaine even though he had a lot of cash. He took $900 from that victim, according to the government's evidence.
Gilliam was also convicted of two carjackings and a nonfatal shooting in which the victim was shot in the head.
Simpson was found guilty of the Sept. 30, 2002, carjacking and murder of Terrence Adams in addition to two nonfatal shootings and another carjacking.
Gilliam, Simpson and Quinones, of Upper Marlboro, were convicted of conspiracy to distribute controlled substances and conspiracy to possess firearms in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime.
During the trial, witnesses testified that the three men were bent on scaring anyone they suspected of cooperating with police. Part of the government's evidence consisted of letters that Simpson wrote to Gilliam while Gilliam was in jail, saying that the defendants would not let anyone "snitch" on them.
At least five government witnesses testified that they were reluctant to testify, and some said they feared for their safety. One woman testified at the trial that she could not recall having testified before a federal grand jury; the judge allowed Assistant U.S. Attorneys Michael Pauze and Deborah A. Johnston to play an audiotape of her grand jury testimony to the jury.
Evidence against the defendants was compiled by a task force of Prince George's County police officers, FBI agents and Maryland State Police officers.
"These defendants brought death, drugs and despair to Prince George's County," said Maryland U.S. Attorney Rod J. Rosenstein. "Their days of pushing drugs, committing murders and intimidating witnesses are at an end."
U.S. District Judge Roger W. Titus scheduled sentencing for Gilliam, Simpson and Quinones for May 7. Each faces a maximum sentence of life in prison and a $4 million fine for the drug conspiracy charges.
Gilliam's attorney could not be reached, and Quinones's attorney declined to comment. Christopher M. Davis, Simpson's attorney, said his client plans to appeal.
|
Lionel D. Gilliam and his partners in crime were on a bloody tear in the summer and fall of 2002 in Forestville, committing a rash of violent crimes, openly wielding assault weapons and brazenly selling crack cocaine.
| 17.9 | 1 | 40 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020801855.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020801855.html
|
Jobs's Music Proposal Rebuffed
|
2007021119
|
The recording industry is beginning to respond to a proposal made this week by Apple chief executive Steve Jobs calling for an open music system that would allow songs to be played on any device.
The answer, so far, is no.
Edgar Bronfman Jr., chief executive of the Warner Music Group, said in a conference call with analysts yesterday that Jobs's stance is "completely without logic or merit."
"We advocate the continued . . . protection of our and our artists' intellectual property," Bronfman said.
Jobs's letter, which was posted on Apple's Web site Tuesday, has sparked a broad conversation about the business of digital music and renewed interest in the measures that have so far limited consumers' options. Today, music purchased on Apple's iTunes store, for example, can be played only on iPod players, while music purchased elsewhere on the Internet is not playable on the iPod, the dominant digital music player on the market.
Jobs argues that without digital rights management, or DRM, software that employs these controls, consumers would be able to buy tracks from any online music store and play them on any digital music device, just as DVDs purchased or rented from any store can be read by any DVD player, regardless of the manufacturer.
"This is clearly the best alternative for consumers," he wrote.
Bronfman attacked the assertion that anti-piracy technology was the reason that iTunes music will not play on anything but an iPod. "The issue is obscured by asserting that DRM and interoperability is the same thing. They are not. To suggest that they cannot co-exist is simply incorrect."
Jobs also suggested that Apple might consider licensing its technology to competitors to help loosen the ties between online music stores and digital players, an idea that the Recording Industry Association of America prefers over the elimination of the protection software.
"We don't think that a wholesale abandonment of DRM is necessary," said Mitch Bainwol, chairman and chief executive of the RIAA. "I think you'll see some experimentation, but that's a lot different from a policy saying 'forget it.' "
Phil Leigh, senior analyst and president of Inside Digital Media, said he believed the two sides needed to come together to compromise on the use of software intended to curb music piracy. Jobs asserted in his letter that the software had not been effective at stopping piracy, which continues on Internet file-sharing sites.
Leigh suggested that music publishers test the waters by stripping tracks that appeal to older audiences, as they are less likely to use file-sharing sites to trade music illegally.
"There's a number of ways to negotiate this transition," he said. "You don't have to flip the switch all at once."
Apple did not return calls seeking comment.
|
The recording industry is beginning to respond to a proposal made this week by Apple chief executive Steve Jobs calling for an open music system that would allow songs to be played on any device.
| 15.416667 | 1 | 36 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020801812.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020801812.html
|
Immigration Raid Leaves Texas Town a Skeleton
|
2007021119
|
CACTUS, Tex. -- The streets of this small, isolated city in the Texas Panhandle are virtually empty nowadays, and "For Rent" signs decorate dilapidated trailers and shabby 1940s-era military barracks that just weeks ago were full of tenants.
Sales of tortillas and other staples are down. Money wire transactions to Central America have mostly dried up. The "Guatemalas," as local residents call them, are almost all gone, and so are a significant number of Mexican nationals. An estimated 12 to 18 children are now living with only one parent since the other was arrested in a massive immigration raid at the biggest employer in town.
On Dec. 12, hundreds of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents clad in riot gear and armed with assault rifles descended on the Swift & Co. meatpacking plant in a coordinated raid of six of the company's facilities nationwide. The operation was the government's largest single work-site enforcement operation ever. The plant in little Cactus -- a town better known in the state of Chihuahua, Mexico, and in the department of Quiché, Guatemala, where workers came from, than in Texas -- was the largest one raided. Almost a quarter of the 1,282 suspected illegal immigrants arrested in the raids were removed from the Cactus plant.
That an obscure town 600 miles north of the border and in the middle of High Plains country once owned by Anglo ranchers and farmers was a haven for illegal Mexican and Central American immigrants was no surprise to anyone here. The draw to Cactus has existed since American Beef Packers opened the meat-processing plant in 1974. Swift's predecessor company bought the plant in 1975, and it became known as Swift & Co.'s Cactus Beef Plant in 2002.
Although opened with local hires, Vietnamese and Laotian refugees became the dominant workforce by the late-1970s. By the mid-'80s the workforce was overwhelmingly Mexican immigrants, and by 2000 the Guatemalans, speaking the Mayan language of Quiché, had started to arrive. Before the Dec. 12 raid, Swift employed 3,050 workers in Cactus at a starting wage of $11.50 an hour to slaughter, process and package several thousand head of cattle daily.
Work inside the plant is hard, dirty, stinky and dangerous, and it is where Cactus's biggest business owner and mayor, Luis Aguilar, and Cactus's largest landlord, Thanh Nguyen, got their starts in the United States. Aguilar, a native of Chihuahua, began working at the plant in 1976 using false identity papers, he admits. In 1986, he was able to legalize his status in the United States, along with 2.7 million illegal workers, under the amnesty program authorized by the federal Immigration Reform and Control Act.
Previously criticized by some local officials who thought he aided and even encouraged illegal immigrants to settle in Cactus, Aguilar took the raids almost personally. He canceled the annual city Christmas party because so many residents, including City Council members, had spouses or other relatives who had been arrested by immigration authorities. Aguilar subsequently lent one of his buildings to be used as a food and used-clothing pantry for residents whose relatives were caught in the raid.
"These are my people," said Aguilar, 50, who today owns the largest house in Cactus, a nearby 575-acre ranch, a laundromat and the town's only full-fledged grocery store. About half of his 26 rental units are empty now.
Nguyen and his family, part of the mass exodus of "boat people" who left Vietnam after the fall of Saigon, arrived as legal refugees in nearby Dumas, Tex., in 1979 under the sponsorship of a restaurant owner who wanted cheap labor. Within six months, Nguyen and his wife left for the better-paying meatpacking plant in Cactus, said Nguyen's son Phuong, 37, who is also known as Ben.
Except for the Nguyens, Asian immigrants moved out of Cactus, which is now 99.5 percent Hispanic. Some local officials recently said that 75 percent of the city's estimated 5,000 residents before the raid were illegal immigrants. Aguilar disputes that, saying it was only 15 percent.
To Ben Nguyen, that number is not important. His father usually offered a few weeks of free rent to immigrants until they got a job at the meat plant and their first paycheck and provided thrift store mattresses and clothes, if necessary, Nguyen said. Now only eight of his father's 60 rental units are occupied. Some were vacated the day of the raid, but the majority were abandoned within weeks, when frightened immigrants moved away. Since then, vandals have been kicking in the doors of the empty apartments, looking for any items of value that might have been left behind.
"I do believe in punishment for the crime, but this is too much," Ben Nguyen said. "You scare kids; you push people so far away that you destroy the economy of the town. . . . This town is built by immigrants. They were just like me when they come over here. They didn't have anything. They came over here just to work and start their lives."
But authorities charge that these immigrants had false identity documents, enabling them to get driver's licenses and jobs illegally, victimizing U.S. citizens and fueling the fraudulent document industry. Traffic stops or crime reports became confusing events in Cactus in recent years. Immigrants would offer two names, said former Cactus Police Chief Tim Turley. The had "el verdadero," as they called it -- the true name -- and their work name.
Mario Lux, 26, from the town of Canilla in Quiché, said the piece of paper that gave him his work name cost him $1,400 and was obtained for him by a friend in Cactus. With that document, Lux said he got an identification card in nearby New Mexico and then a job at the Swift plant in March 2006, cutting fat and gristle off meat for $11.90 an hour. He was not working the day of the raid but now will not return for fear of being discovered and arrested. He says that he still owes $3,200 to the smuggling network that got him to Cactus and that he has been unable to send money to his wife and three children back home. He is also three weeks behind in his rent. He and his three roommates pay $120 a week for their small apartment.
"I have no idea how I will pay that now," Lux said as he stood in the food and clothes pantry established in the Cactus town center.
|
CACTUS, Tex. -- The streets of this small, isolated city in the Texas Panhandle are virtually empty nowadays, and "For Rent" signs decorate dilapidated trailers and shabby 1940s-era military barracks that just weeks ago were full of tenants.
| 26.87234 | 1 | 47 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802292.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007021119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802292.html
|
D.C. Parents and Students Steamed Over Heating-Related Disruptions
|
2007021119
|
Simon Elementary School Principal Adelaide Flamer loaded her 250 students and 26 teachers, along with aides, her security guard, a school nurse and a custodian onto four chartered buses yesterday and traveled 10 blocks to a school with heat.
LaTisha Barnes, a senior at H.D. Woodson Senior High School, sat in the library of Evans Education Center, a former middle school building, and watched classmates talk on cellphones rather than work on English and trigonometry lessons. Her school's water pipes burst Monday in the cold and had not been fixed. The entire student body, she said, passed the time talking in the gym Tuesday and Wednesday.
For the fourth day in a row, D.C. school officials scrambled to keep routines as normal as possible as they tried to repair boilers that failed during the cold snap. Nearly 1,800 students from four schools were reassigned to other facilities this week because of heating problems. The four schools were Woodson and Ludlow-Taylor Elementary, both in Northeast, and Johnson Junior High and Simon Elementary in Southeast.
More than 30 other schools had boiler malfunctions this week that left rooms or sections of buildings cold. School system leaders accused the city of not providing sufficient funds to maintain aging buildings. Parents blamed everyone.
As the D.C. Council weighs whether to give Mayor Adrian M. Fenty (D) control over the school system, parents across the city said they were furious that the heating problems have not been fixed, despite breakdowns year after year.
"I'm really upset, because my kids are not getting an education," said Darlene Williams, who has two grandchildren and a nephew at Woodson.
Some of Woodson's 800 students painted a chaotic picture yesterday of their week at Evans, saying that their education had been seriously disrupted.
Barnes, an 18-year-old with a 3.2 grade-point average, said she was so fed up with the D.C. school system's makeshift arrangements that she joined about 25 other students who walked out shortly after 10 a.m. "Everybody's sitting around doing nothing," she said.
She said she was organizing students to lodge complaints at the Board of Education meeting Tuesday and will return to Evans when real classwork is offered. "I'm a senior, and I need to learn so I'll be prepared for college," Barnes said.
A few Woodson students said they were mystified by the classes they were assigned to at Evans. One sophomore said she was being taught chemistry instead of the geometry she normally studies.
"I think it's crazy. We're not there to babysit children -- teaching and learning should be taking place," school board President Robert C. Bobb said last night when told about the situation at Evans. "If that's happening, heads should roll."
School system spokesman John C. White said that officials had planned to address heating problems in the 10-year master facilities plan, which board members recently approved.
|
Simon Elementary School Principal Adelaide Flamer loaded her 250 students and 26 teachers, along with aides, her security guard, a school nurse and a custodian onto four chartered buses yesterday and traveled 10 blocks to a school with heat.
| 13.093023 | 1 | 43 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802151.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802151.html
|
Debt of Honor
|
2007020919
|
Bob Bolus has a gold nameplate on his office desk that says "President" and a panoramic view of a junkyard. Above the filing cabinet there's an old World War II artillery map, and on a recent afternoon, Bolus stood inches away, peering deeply into its contour lines, searching.
"There it is," he said, as if pointing to an 'X' on a treasure map. "That's Hill 362A."
It wasn't much of a landmark. Hill 362A is a squat, unremarkable ridge, 362 feet at its highest point, on the northwest corner of Iwo Jima. Like much of the island, it was bombed, shot, burned and generally blasted to bits in 1945, when U.S. forces fought to drive out the Japanese from a network of tunnels and caves that crisscrosses its base. Entombed somewhere in those passageways, among the rocks and the rubble and the unexploded ordnance, are the remains of a Marine Corps sergeant and cameraman named William H. Genaust.
Bolus is not related to Genaust, but for the past two years he has been fixated with the Marine's fate. He has lobbied generals, politicians and ambassadors on Genaust's behalf. He has traveled to Hill 362A and drafted surveyors, archivists, military historians and forensic anthropologists to his cause. Bolus is resolute on recovering Genaust's remains from his anonymous grave. He calls this "my mission."
"He belongs at Arlington," Bolus said. "And I'm not going to stop until he's home."
Bolus's persistence has prompted Pentagon officials to begin consultations with the Japanese government about a recovery operation. It would be the first time the United States has searched for missing service members on Iwo Jima since returning control of it to Japan in 1968.
But perhaps what is most unusual to the Pentagon is that someone who is neither family nor a fellow service member has become so engrossed with a long-dead serviceman's remains.
"I believe he's the first," said Larry Greer, a spokesman for the Defense Department's Prisoner of War/Missing Personnel Office."He has demonstrated a lot of energy and a lot of commitment to this."
Bolus, 64, is the owner of Bolus Truck Parts, Scooter's Hot Dawg Hut and a slew of other business ventures in Scranton, Pa. Over the years, he has been a Democrat, a Republican, a trucking tycoon, a felon, a race car driver, a philanthropist and a failed mayoral candidate, among other things. Then, one Sunday morning in February 2005, Bolus read an article about Genaust in Parade magazine, and he was seized.
"I must have read it three or four times," he said. "I just couldn't believe that the man who gave us that image had been left behind."
Genaust was among the Marines and journalists who climbed Mount Suribachi, Iwo Jima's highest point, on Feb. 23, 1945, four days after U.S. forces landed.
Genaust, who was trained to fight -- and film -- at Quantico Marine Corps Base, captured footage for training videos, propaganda efforts and other military purposes. On that day, Genaust went up Suribachi to capture a flag-raising.
|
Bob Bolus has a gold nameplate on his office desk that says "President" and a panoramic view of a junkyard. Above the filing cabinet there's an old World War II artillery map, and on a recent afternoon, Bolus stood inches away, peering deeply into its contour lines, searching.
| 11 | 1 | 57 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/02/02/DI2007020201746.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/02/02/DI2007020201746.html
|
Post Politics Hour
|
2007020719
|
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 White House reporter Peter Baker was online Tuesday, Feb. 6, at 11 a.m. ET to discuss the latest news in politics.
Political analysis from Post reporters and interviews with top newsmakers. Listen live on Washington Post Radio or subscribe to a podcast of the show.
Peter Baker: Good morning, everyone. The president's just released the last budget he'll oversee in full, the Senate is gridlocked on Iraq and Rudy Giuliani is in and "in this to win." Another great day in American politics, so let's get started.
Bethesda, Md.: The Libby trail does not seem to get much attention from the press as it should. Do you feel that The Post has undercut it for the news?
Peter Baker: Gosh, I'm not sure why you say that. Just a quick database search turns up 25 news articles and columns in the Post in the last three weeks, including five on the front page. And the trial's just in its first phase. Wait until Vice President Cheney testifies.
Greenville, S.C.: Yo Peter -- you got any problems with your colleague William Arkin writing an entire column based on the American troops in Iraq being mercenaries and then, after taking a lot of heat, saying words to the effect of "I probably should not have used the word 'mercenary' "? Is this the kind of diversity The Washington Post is looking for?
Peter Baker: Sorry, this is beyond my field. William Arkin writes for the Web site and this is a question better directed to the editors there.
San Francisco: Good morning, Peter, and thanks for chatting with us today. What possible leverage does a President at 28 percent approval hold over members of his party up for re-election to the Senate next year? I particularly am amazed at the party discipline exhibited by Senators Hagel and Smith, who seemed so keen on stopping the surge a few days ago.
Peter Baker: The latest Washington Post-ABC News poll has President Bush's approval rating at 33 percent, matching the lowest ever in that poll. Obviously that means he has limited influence over fellow Republicans, particularly the ones running for re-election. But I think some of the Republicans who oppose his troop increase are irritated by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's decisions about how to handle the debate -- which of the multiple resolutions would be allowed for debate and a vote.
Washington: What's with the Republican's blocking the debate on Iraq? Are they thinking that by avoiding the discussion they will get the public's backing? I know they want the right to offer amendments, but come on!
Peter Baker: I doubt they think this will permanently avoid debate on the war. My guess is this is all about bargaining about the terms of the debate and we'll see this reach the floor before too long. This is fairly typical of the Senate.
Washington: In the new budget the Administration seems to pay for continued tax breaks for the high-income folks by letting the alternative minimum tax cover an increasing number of taxpayers. My impression is that either the AMT or the tax breaks had to trump the other and the Administration has finally expressed its preference. Because I did my taxes last weekend and got hit with the AMT for the first time, I'm not happy about this. Do you think Congress will go along with this?
Peter Baker: Congressional leaders of both parties are eager to keep more middle-class people from being caught up in the AMT so it may be a safe bet that it will not end up the way it is right now in the president's budget.
Dublin, Va.: If Nancy Pelosi wants to use government-paid transportation for security, how about the rest of the Congress? Don't they equally deserve security? And how about the constituency? We also should have free Air Force rides when we travel -- after all, it is a government of the people, by the people and for the people, isn't it? Oops, no, I'm wrong -- it's a government for the elite elected, and their families and friends too. Come on! Where is the outrage from the liberal press on this one?
Peter Baker: Well, this is not something that started with Nancy Pelosi, it started with Dennis Hastert after 9/11. The House speaker is obviously different from the other 434 members since he/she is next in line to the presidency after the vice president. The question that is particular to Speaker Pelosi at the moment is whether she is seeking special treatment beyond that given to Speaker Hastert. The Air Force is going to provide her with a larger plane when she travels home to California because the plane that Speaker Hastert used to go home to Illinois is too small to make it there without refueling.
Raleigh, N.C.: Good morning! On Iraq and the surge and all that ... have you been surprised at how fast the debate has moved since the new Congress came in? At that time, just a month ago, the idea of cutting off funding was a fringe idea; now it seems like while it would lose in a vote, it would garner significant support. Today the Senate Republicans have to use the filibuster to stop a resolution against escalation from passing. I don't think that would have been true a month ago. What, in your opinion, has accounted for the movement -- Events in Iraq or pressure from the public? Or do you disagree with my basic premise that there's been significant movement in Congress?
Peter Baker: I think you're onto something, the debate does seem to have moved pretty fast in recent weeks. Just as you say, the idea of cutting off funds was considered fringe just a few weeks ago. When President Bush accused Democrats during the campaign last year of being willing to do so, the leadership argued angrily back that this distorted their position and it was only the most liberal antiwar part of the caucus that favored something so radical. Now it seems to be a much more central idea in the debate, although as you say it probably would not win a vote in either house at the moment.
Why has that changed? Good question. Certainly events on the ground have only continued to trouble everyone in Washington. The Iraq Study Group report crystallized the bipartisan sense that things in Iraq have spiraled out of control, even to the point that President Bush effectively agrees. And his plan to increase troops, which many Democrats and some Republicans consider contrary to the election results, has clearly fanned the fire in Washington in a powerful way. But some Democrats worry that the funding issue could be politically problematic for them; they're quite leery of appearing to do anything that would be seen, or portrayed, as undermining the troops. And some Republicans are eager to shift the debate to funding in part for that reason.
Senate resolutions: Thank you for taking questions. I'm so confused by what happened yesterday I barely know what question to ask, so I'll keep it to this one: Did I hear correctly that Senator Warner voted against debate yesterday even though his own resolution was on the slate? If true, why would he have voted no?
Peter Baker: Yes, he did. He was unsatisfied with the way Senator Reid planned to control the debate and he sided with the near-unanimous Republican caucus in blocking it to force the Democrats to allow additional resolutions to be considered on the floor.
Des Moines, Iowa: Will you be at the Iowa Straw poll in August 2007, and if so do you think a strong showing of support (15 percent or more) for Secretary of State Condi Rice would be seen as viable? And would that be evidence that people in Iowa really want her to run?
Peter Baker: I'm afraid I won't be there. Obviously, Secretary Rice has said consistently that she's not running. It would be surprising if a non-candidate got such a substantial vote; in the end, delegates tend to vote for people they think really are running for fear of wasting their effort. But if you're right, that would certainly be an interesting story.
washingtonpost.com: Pelosi Catches Nonstop Flights Home (Post, Feb. 6)
Peter Baker: Here's that Pelosi-plane story.
Rolla, Mo.: I've been against the Iraq War from the start, and here is how cynical I have become -- the Democrats should let the Administration have this surge, not find a way to block its funding and settle all doubts about who is to blame for the Iraq failure by 2008. I can already hear the arguments by McCain and others that the Democrats cut off funding for a surge, didn't give our brave soldiers a chance to finish the job, etc. Yes, this is about politics, as it has been for the past three national elections. If you believe the long-range health of this country depends on who is in power for the next decade, you have to look at it this way.
Peter Baker: Not really a question in there, so I'll just post it to see what reaction we get. Thanks for offering your thoughts.
More vicious primary season: Dems or Pubs?
Peter Baker: Fabulous question! Wish I could give you a good answer. You can certainly the potential for a street fight on both sides. Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Rudy Giuliani -- these are all tough, tough pols. Look what they've each been through in the past. And the lesson that Senator McCain no doubt took from the South Carolina primary in 2000 and that the Democrats took from the 2004 race is once again to be as tough or tougher than the other guy. Now how much they're willing to unleash the dogs is another question.
Anonymous: Did you see the poll done by Crain's NY Business that has Rudy winning the Repub primary but losing to Hilary statewide by 20+ points? I know it is crazy-early but that sounds bad for Rudy that he couldn't win his own state. Didn't Gore get crucified by the press for not carrying his own state? Similar situation, maybe?
Peter Baker: Somewhat similar, but in this case, both Sen. Clinton and Mayor Giuliani call New York their political home state, so it wouldn't be quite the same as Vice President Gore losing Tennessee. Have to say, as an old Virginia reporter, I was interested to see what a Mark Warner-George Allen matchup would be like in the Old Dominion, but I guess we'll have to leave that little hypothetical to the what-if crowd.
Prescott, Ariz.: Hello. Were you at those Democratic meetings watching the speeches? I was curious because your colleague David Broder mentioned that General Clark's speech went over poorly, because he preached sacrifice for America (duty, honor, service) and had a pro-military message. Broder went on to say that "few in this particular audience have much experience with, or sympathy for, the military."
Now the other reviews of the meeting I've glanced at made it sound like Clark got a good response. What did you see? And on a more holistic note, I seem to remember somewhere around 40 Iraq vets running as Dems this past November (not to mention heroes like Jim Webb), while there were only a handful of Repub. vets. What is Broder getting at?
Peter Baker: I was not there, so I'll have to punt that to David. Or you can ask Dan Balz the next time he chats, because he did cover it. Sorry.
washingtonpost.com: The Other Democrats Weigh In (Post, Feb. 6)
Bluffton, S.C.: Why is it that I have to go to the blogs to get the actual facts? The Republicans are NOT blocking debate on Iraq. The Dems want to debate only one resolution and refuse to let others come up for debate. I do wish you writers would get it straight so that the chatter from Washington wouldn't be deceived by misleading headlines.
Peter Baker: Well, I think I've said several times in this chat already that the Republicans are objecting to the terms of the debate that Sen. Reid is imposing and that this is a tactical dispute that will presumably be resolved at some point. Our story this morning likewise made that clear: "Republicans said they have no desire to avoid a debate, asserting that they simply want a fair hearing on their proposals. 'We are ready and anxious to have this debate this week,' said Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.)."
Arlington, Va.: While I'm not sure I would vote for Giuliani, it is a shame that for people like him there is no plausible route to the White House. His views on gays (that it's "OK") and abortion mean he doesn't have a snowball's chance of getting the nomination. I only wonder why he isn't smart enough to see that. Perhaps is aiming for the VP?
Peter Baker: It's a good question. I've been surprised that he seems to genuinely be running too, given that his position on such key social issues is at such variance with the Republican primary electorate. No Republican favoring abortion rights has won the nomination since Gerald Ford in 1976, and he barely beat back Ronald Reagan. Having said that, Mayor Giuliani appeals to many conservatives -- even those who disagree with him on such issues -- because they perceive him as being the type of tough, decisive leader needed in dangerous times. What will be interesting to see is if that stays the same even after groups that care very deeply about abortion, gay marriage, gun rights and so on become active in the debate and throw a spotlight on the mayor's views in a more prominent way. And there are other things in his record and past that opponents presumably will remind voters of after the campaign really gets underway that could change the dynamic. So we'll see. He's certainly one of the most interesting candidates to watch in the race for a lot of these reasons.
Iowa: Have we had any further word on Sen. Johnson's medical condition? I am assuming he is still hospitalized. Given the minute Democratic majority in the Senate, his absence is certainly a critical matter.
Peter Baker: He still is hospitalized in a rehabilitation unit at George Washington University Hospital. The last I saw was that he has begun to speak again but will require months of recovery before returning to the Senate. As long as he chooses not to resign, the seat is his and there is no procedure to replace him, so he can remain in the hospital as long as he likes and still remain a senator. And as long as he holds that office and is not replaced by a Republican appointed by the governor, Democrats can claim majority status in the Senate on 50-49 votes. But that's such a razor's edge for any majority to walk, especially when you have some pretty independent-minded members, such as Sen. Joe Lieberman, who actually still calls himself an independent while caucusing with the Democrats.
Atlanta: Peter, you really believe Cheney is going to testify on behalf of Scoot? For what purpose would he?
Peter Baker: He's scheduled to testify, yes, and is not fighting it. I don't know specifically what the planned line of inquiry is going to be. But whatever it is, with cross examination in particular, it promises to be interesting.
Rockville, Md.: At least Rolla has some convictions and seems not to fear that the "surge" will work. Candor works for me even when I don't have the same analysis.
Peter Baker: Thanks for the response.
Moneta, Va.: Did everyone miss fascist Hillary Rodham's "I wanna take those profits..." when speaking about ExxonMobil's very modest 10.5 percent profit margin in 2006? Did she flunk Econ 202 or what?
Peter Baker: Well, modest is in the eye of the beholder of course. Exxon Mobil posted a profit of $39.5 billion in 2006, the largest U.S. corporate profit in history. As you say, as a percentage that doesn't sound as big, so it depends how you present the information. As a matter of politics the Democrats figure it doesn't hurt, and may help, to talk about taking oil company profits at a time of high gas prices. Presumably more politically perilous may be former senator John Edwards's statement this week that he would raise taxes to pay for his health care plan.
Campbell, Mo.: Mr. Baker, thanks for the chat. Why is there no talk about the House of Representatives passing a resolution on Iraq? The House has more structured rules on debate and the resolution would have a better chance of passing than in the Senate when you need 60 votes.
Peter Baker: House leaders decided to let the Senate go first on this one.
Noam, Pa.: Peter, please let Dublin know that the larger plane for Pelosi was a decision made by the House Sergeant at Arms, Wilson Livingood. Livingood has been at that post since 1995. Lou Dobbs, Tucker Carlson, and Wolf Blitzer have been pounding this story (and I'm sure Limbaugh is all over it today). Pelosi was not The Decider here, despite what that bunch is saying.
Peter Baker: Thanks for the post.
New York: Even though you're not a congressional reporter, I'd like you to elaborate on the success of the Republican leadership, if you can. Seems to me that McConnell and Lott are much more effective than the previous leadership. What do they offer their caucus?
Peter Baker: Well, Sen. McConnell has been an effective coalition builder within his caucus for some time and of course Sen. Lott has a lot of experience at vote-counting. Look at his election as whip -- he completely surprised Sen. Lamar Alexander.
Lorton, Va.: First things first -- you are a terrific reporter and as a former journalist (trade, not daily), I appreciate your thoroughness and tenacity. Great job! Now to the question ... with all of the clamoring for earmark reform from the White House to Capitol Hill to taxpayer advocacy groups and others, how do you think the opinion from the 9th District Court of Appeals will play out with respect to requiring earmarks to be part of the statutory language in the appropriations bills as opposed to the more traditional practice of using report language? There have been calls for more transparency and reducing the number of earmarks, but few have called for an outright ban on earmarking, so what do you see happening with the Fiscal Year 2008 budget?
Peter Baker: Well, it may seem a little suspect to take such a flattering post from my hometown, but hey, flattery works. Thanks so much. As for earmarks, as you no doubt know the Democrats have banned them for the rest of this year. I suspect additional transparency rather than an outright ban is where this is going to end up next year. That's in keeping with the House leadership's campaign pledges and of course there's little interest among members in either party in a permanent ban. There's probably an interest in keeping the number down in fiscal 2008 though, so that the majority can go into the election bragging that they cut back on the pork.
Los Angeles: Do you think that a Hillary/Obama (prez/veep) ticket is viable? And can they keep their campaigns clean enough so that neither is too bruised after the primaries to realize a partnership?
Peter Baker: I don't see any reason it wouldn't be viable at the moment. Obviously new information or developments could change that dynamic, and among the possible scenarios is a particularly ugly primary season. With all the bruised feelings George W. Bush didn't pick John McCain in 2000, even though presumably that might have helped him more in the general election than Dick Cheney. Keep in mind no presidential nominee wants to pick someone for the number two slot who may outshine them in some way or another.
Carrboro, N.C.: To Rolla, Mo.: It already is well established whose war it is, and if a person is convinced that the surge would not improve the situation there and it would cost American lives, there is only one way to vote, no matter how tempting it would be to keep the focus on President Bush and his past, present and future mistakes in Iraq.
Peter Baker: A few more posts on this question.
Silver Spring, Md.: Following on Rolla's question, I frequently wonder if it wouldn't be in this country's long-term best interests to learn the painful but unequivocal lesson that we cannot use our armed forces to quell a long-awaited civil war in a large country such as Iraq. That lesson requires a clear, complete disaster in Iraq in order to sink in. Let the idiotic sacrifice of our service members for a Hail Mary on Bush's legacy begin. Let's just hope a minimal number of them get killed.
Leesburg, Va.: I'm curious ... how many of the Republicans who supported the filibuster of the Iraq resolution were in favor during the last Congress of the "nuclear option" to take away the filibuster from the minority? Wasn't the Republican Senate leadership always complaining about the "obstructionist" minority party and how the filibuster/cloture/60-vote rule was un-democratic? So why are they using it now? Where are the cries for an up-or-down vote now?
Peter Baker: You make an interesting point. When you're in the majority you hate the filibuster, and when you're in the minority you defend it as a fundamental part of the system. The Republicans might make a distinction, though, between judicial confirmations and the current debate -- when they proposed the so-called nuclear option to eliminate the filibuster, they proposed to do so only for judicial nominations, not all filibusters.
Boca Raton, Fla.: Peter, I don't understand this budget "thing." The President is proposing a budget for FY2008 when he hasn't signed the budget for FY2007 and the Government is running on continuing resolutions to provide funding at FY2006 levels. What's the story?
Peter Baker: No one understands the budget thing! But the basic answer is Congress basically broke down and decided to move past this year and start fresh with next year's budget. Congress passed, and President Bush signed, an omnibus spending bill that will keep government running through the end of the current fiscal year, which is Sept. 30.
Maquoketa, Iowa: Peter, do you believe there is any chance there will ever be real, substantive campaign finance reform so that running for president -- or any elective office for that matter -- does not cost such an obscene amount of money?
Peter Baker: Not that I'm aware of. Various ideas have been pitched, a few have been tried and none of them has succeeded in stopping the money flow -- they've only redirected it in ways that ultimately change the tactics but not the overall picture.
New York: I noticed in all the news articles of the Republicans blocking debate on Iraq, not one mentions that Harry Reid, the Democratic Majority Leader, voted nay with the republicans. The articles all mentioned Lieberman, Collins, and Coleman as senators who broke ranks with their respective parties, but failed to mention Reid as doing so. But at the same time the articles quote Reid as if he had voted yea with his party. This seems like a major omission doesn't it? If it was known that Reid also voted to end debate it would weaken the case against Republicans.
Peter Baker: Sen. Reid voted no as a parliamentary maneuver because under the rules someone who votes no can make a motion to reconsider the vote at a later time. This is typical when the leadership loses a vote and doesn't indicate a position of substance.
Peter Baker: Once again time runs out with too many good questions still to answer. Thanks so much for another great chat. Tune in again tomorrow -- same time, same channel. And have a good day. Best, Peter.
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online 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.
| 118.170732 | 0.707317 | 0.902439 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/charles_w_chuck_colson/2007/02/does_god_answer_prayers.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020719id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/charles_w_chuck_colson/2007/02/does_god_answer_prayers.html
|
God Does Answer Prayers
|
2007020719
|
For 30 years Iâve attended the National Prayer Breakfast, a wonderful occasion when people gather from all over the world. But please, do not confuse the Jewish or Christian disciplines of prayer with what is a celebration of civil religion.
For the Christian, prayer involves the most intimate relationship with God Himself. And we are encouraged to personally bring our needs to God. The Apostle Paul wrote to the struggling church at Philippi, âDo not be anxious about anything. But in everything, by prayer and petition with thanksgiving, present your request to Godâ (Phil. 4:6).
Prayer is an honest, heart-felt conversation with God. We pray and listen.
I keep in my pocket a list of people for whom I intercede before the Lord daily. High on that list are family, the President and government leaders for whom we are specifically commanded to pray that we might live peaceable lives, and, of course, the Church.
The most consistent Christian prayer is what is known as the Lordâs Prayer (Matt. 6:9-13). I try to go through that verse by verse each day, and I find that it covers most of my spiritual responsibilities, to seek first the Kingdom of God, to be delivered from evil, to forgive others as I have been forgiven, to seek each day my daily bread.
The question not asked, but a very important one, is: Does God answer prayers? Yes.
Thirty-four years ago this August, in the midst of the Watergate crisis, I prayed in a flood of tears for God to take me as I was. He did. From that moment on, Christ came into my life. Nothing has been the same since; nothing can ever be the same again. He has continued to answer prayers, even if not exactly as I would like.
I preach regularly in prisons and always tell the inmates about the two thieves crucified on either side of Jesus. I tell them they must choose which thief they will be like. The first thief dying on the cross next to Jesus looked at him and said, âYouâre God. Get us out of here!â Thatâs a prayer everyone prays; even atheists will pray it if theyâre in enough trouble. But the second thief understood what the first didnât. He looked at the second thief and said, âNo. Heâs innocent. Weâre getting what we deserve.â Thatâs known as repentance, recognizing Jesus as the Son of God.
The second thief then said, âJesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.â Jesus answered this prayer directly, âToday you will be with me in paradise.â
The second thief got it right for all of us.
|
A conversation on religion with Jon Meacham, Sally Quinn and Charles
| 43.333333 | 0.583333 | 0.583333 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/05/AR2007020501188.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/05/AR2007020501188.html
|
A 'Road Home' to Lunacy
|
2007020719
|
NEW ORLEANS -- It's beyond frustrating to hear well-meaning bureaucrats cite all the reasons that so little has been done to rebuild this ruined city and the rest of the Gulf Coast -- why, for example, out of more than 100,000 Louisiana households that have applied to the state government for their share of $7 billion in federal reconstruction funds, fewer than 400 have received their money.
That's no misprint, and I'm being generous. As of last week, when I attended a Senate Homeland Security Committee hearing at the Louisiana Supreme Court building in the historic French Quarter, the actual number of homeowners who had gotten reconstruction money from this program, called Road Home, was 331. My hopeful assumption is that a few more checks have trickled out since then.
The three senators who flew down to conduct the hearing -- committee Chairman Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.), home-state champion Mary Landrieu (D-La.) and presidential hopeful Barack Obama (D-Ill.) -- were remarkably focused and patient, given the circumstances. I got so exasperated that I had to let my mind wander, and it settled on Brownian motion.
That's not a reference to Michael Brown, the ridiculous former director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Brownian motion is a natural phenomenon that bewildered 19th-century physicists. Looking through their microscopes, they could see that a tiny particle suspended in a fluid -- a mote of dust, say -- didn't just float in place. It did a jittery little dance, abruptly jerking left and right and forward and back, always in motion.
It took Albert Einstein to figure out what was going on. Einstein explained that the infinitesimal molecules of the fluid, randomly zooming to and fro, are colliding with the relatively gargantuan piece of dust. If, at a given instant, more molecules hit it from the right than from the left, it moves left. The next instant, if more molecules hit it from the south than from the north, it moves north. The buffeted particle just zigzags aimlessly, never really getting anywhere.
That's where the recovery of New Orleans stands, or floats. Factors such as subparagraph-level provisions of federal programs, fine-print details of a contract signed by the state government and shifting alliances in municipal politics -- minuscule things, compared with the size of the job that must be done -- push from all sides, and the result is a frenzied stasis.
One example: Almost a year ago, Congress appropriated $10.4 billion in special housing funds for reconstruction in Louisiana. Federal bureaucrats at the hearing last week were at pains to tell the senators why the requirement that the state ante up 10 percent of that total in matching funds was being enforced, since this statutory provision was waived in other recent disasters such as the Sept. 11 attacks and several Florida hurricanes.
And no one even tried to explain why Washington won't just let Louisiana write a check for its 10 percent share, and instead wants the state to write, justify and track a separate 10 percent check for each individual rebuilding project -- thousands upon thousands of checks.
Everyone knows this is insanity. Nobody does anything about it.
Another example: Remember those lucky homeowners who have gotten their Road Home checks? The first thing they're being required to do is pay back, in full, any loans they previously received under a special Small Business Administration rebuilding program. Anything else we can do for you?
Washington complains that the state and local governments were painfully slow to develop their reconstruction plans -- and that's true. State and local officials respond that it took months to understand and comply with all the federal rules their projects must follow to qualify for funding -- and that's true, too.
Donald E. Powell, the Texas banker whom President Bush appointed to coordinate the federal post-Katrina recovery effort, was the committee hearing's opening witness. When Obama asked in plain language what the prospects were for an ordinary homeowner who wanted to rebuild and come home, Powell said thoughtfully, "That's a tough question . . . a complex question." Then he spoke about new tax incentives, which he is certain will persuade developers to build affordable housing.
Tax incentives? With most of the city still in ruins? Hello?
To escape the death dance of Brownian motion, New Orleans needs force applied in one coherent direction. I have an idea: If Gen. David H. Petraeus is as smart and tough as the president says he is, if he's good enough to save Baghdad, the president should immediately send him to New Orleans instead -- or explain why policing a civil war in Iraq takes priority over resurrecting a great American city.
|
Maybe the president can explain why policing a civil war in Iraq takes priority over resurrecting a great American city.
| 43.714286 | 0.952381 | 14 |
high
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/23/AR2007012301218.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/23/AR2007012301218.html
|
Coordination Could Breed Control in Iraq
|
2007020719
|
Teamwork and coordination are vital for success in all sorts of activities -- on the athletic field, in business, in government and in war. Yet too often, the different branches of the U.S. military and the U.S. government in Iraq have failed to effectively coordinate their activities with each other and with their Iraqi counterparts.
Better coordination alone won't solve America's problems in Iraq and guarantee victory. But without it, achieving victory will be a lot harder regardless of the number of troops the U.S. maintains, because successes achieved by one arm of the U.S. effort is too often undone by another.
The Iraq Study Group usefully proposed establishing new command relationships for stability operations and counterinsurgency. Such reorganization is badly needed to reduce the fragmentation of U.S. efforts in Iraq and improve coordination and cooperation between U.S. embassy officials and the military.
There is precedence that this type of organization can help foster success. A RAND Corporation study that I conducted after reviewing five decades of research on counterinsurgency across the world noted the benefits of creating integrated civil-military teams at the national, provincial and possibly neighborhood and village level.
The British effectively employed such teams in their counterinsurgency efforts in Malaya and Oman. The current Provincial Reconstruction Team model being employed by the United States in parts of Iraq and Afghanistan is another potential template.
Whatever model is chosen, it should have the ability to issue directives and plan operations rather than being merely a forum for debate. This will be uncomfortable for all agencies involved, as they will be ceding individual agency autonomy to a committee. But such sacrifice will improve efforts in Iraq at little cost.
The high-level command relationships in use today in Iraq are fundamentally the same as they were in Vietnam: a four-star military officer as regional commander, a four-star officer as country commander, an ambassador, and a CIA chief of station.
The country commander is nominally subordinate to the regional commander and the chief of station is nominally subordinate to the ambassador. But in practice these lines are quite tenuous. There is no command relationship, nominal or otherwise, between the civilian and military sides.
This makes civil-military unity of effort highly dependent on the personality of leaders -- an uncertain proposition at best. While the U.S. military and civilian leaders in Iraq have worked well together thus far, the key posts are changing hands this year and the successors may not work nearly so well together.
One area of fragmentation of effort that the Iraq Study Group did not touch upon is the components of the military and intelligence effort within Iraq. Most notably, the counterterrorism operations conducted by elements of Special Operations Command are not always integrated with the counterinsurgency operations of the conventional military and Iraqi security forces. These counterterrorism efforts are conducted by special task forces that do not report to local commanders.
While these special task forces are generally well intentioned, counterterrorism cannot be separated from counterinsurgency in Iraq. A raid that is not coordinated with local commanders can undo painstaking efforts to build rapport with the local population. In order to limit these possibilities, Special Operations Command's task forces should be integrated with the rest of the command structure at both the provincial and national level.
Similarly, all elements of the intelligence effort, both military and non-military, are coordinated only on an ad hoc basis that is dependent on the personalities involved. The CIA, regular military intelligence, and the Special Operations task forces all have information that they often are loathe to share with their fellow agencies. Even when willing to share, it is sometimes inconvenient to do so.
Similar problems in Vietnam lead to creation of the Phoenix/Phung Hoang program. Often portrayed as an assassination program, Phoenix was actually intended to coordinate the myriad streams of intelligence generated in Vietnam. A similar effort is needed in Iraq, and could be incorporated with the provincial and national command structure.
No command structure will guarantee victory, yet it can make significant contributions. How the United States organizes its effort is the sole aspect of counterinsurgency that is completely within its control; the enemy can affect virtually every other facet. Failing to at least get this aspect right will undermine all other efforts, while successful organization will provide benefits at little cost.
Austin Long is an adjunct researcher at the RAND Corporation, a nonprofit research organization. He is the author of the 2006 RAND report "On 'Other War:' " -- Lessons from Five Decades of RAND Counterinsurgency Research."
|
Too often, the different branches of the U.S. military and the U.S. government in Iraq have failed to effectively coordinate their activities with each other and with their Iraqi counterparts.
| 26.9375 | 1 | 32 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/shekhar_gupta/2007/02/india_cant_afford_climate_chan.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020719id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/shekhar_gupta/2007/02/india_cant_afford_climate_chan.html
|
PostGlobal on washingtonpost.com
|
2007020719
|
It is a particularly sobering time to join the climate change debate from New Delhi. The winter seems to have disappeared overnight. Temperatures increased by more than five degrees all of a sudden, and while a sharp but short thunderstorm gave the hope that temperatures will dip again, they did not.
Climatologists, economists and, most of all, farmers are now watching the situation with some trepidation. They are hoping this is just a temporary blip and not a repeat of the sudden rise in temperatures in February 2005 that affected the wheat crop in northern India's grain bowl and resulted in a 7% loss in crop yield. That shortfall, in fact, led to embarrassing imports, a rise in domestic prices and consumer (read: voter) stress.
Officially, the Indian government takes an indifferent or even nonchalant-sounding position on climate change. The official view is âwe did not create the problem, you did, and you find a solutionâ. It is mostly a negotiation position. Indian public opinion by and large, and not just environmentalists or the media, is quite concerned about the issue. There is widespread awareness of the problems climate change is causing: the melting of Himalayan glaciers, erratic monsoons and shortening winters. Over the past decade, India has seen fewer total rainy days during its four-month monsoon, but some days of unprecedented downpour. In 2005, for example, Mumbai was drowned as never before as 94 cm of rain, which fell in one day. 60% of the season's rain came in 24 hours. The flooding left 750 people dead. In 2006, several parts of western India saw occasional cloudbursts during the monsoons, followed by long dry spells.
This is disastrous for a country which relies on the monsoon for most of its water needs and where rivers are already shallow with silting. These shorter, sharper monsoon sessions result in faster run-off, aggravating an already serious water situation.
So nobody who matters in India would take climate change issues lightly. But there is a great deal of cynicism about the way the advanced nations, particularly the U.S., are addressing the issue. Indian officials, as well as environmental activists, point out that the developed countries, led by the US, are the biggest carbon-dioxide generators and cannot now put pressure on the developing nations, particularly China and India, to slow down their own growth to save the world while the Americans build and drive bigger and bigger SUVs and Hummers.
Expect, therefore, a tough stance from India on climate change negotiations for the next Kyoto phase starting in 2012. Not only will it resist any slowdown in its own growth or change its plans to set up new energy plants -- many of them coal-based as India is the third largest coal producer in the world -- but it won't be silly or unrealistic either. Indian establishment as well as the intelligentsia is sensitive to climate change issues and will be willing to move towards a resolution, but in a manner they consider fair and practical.
Expect, therefore, unrelenting demands for emission-cuts by developed countries and also generous compensation to those on the growth curve now, notably India and China, for curbing their emissions by using greener technologies or more expensive fuels.
|
Shekhar Gupta at PostGlobal on PostGlobal; blog of politics and current events on washingtonpost.com. Visit http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/shekhar_gupta/
| 34.888889 | 0.277778 | 0.277778 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/06/AR2007020600553.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/06/AR2007020600553.html
|
Senate Leaders Continue Squabbling Over Iraq
|
2007020719
|
Senate leaders squabbled yesterday over how to consider resolutions opposing President Bush's plan for more troops in Iraq, but the quarrel did not stop lawmakers from launching an informal debate on the chamber floor over the war.
"The only people who believe there is a workable military solution for the conflict in Iraq is the Bush administration," said Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), who advocates requiring Bush to complete the removal of American troops from Iraq within a year.
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) called Democrats disingenuous for declaring support for U.S. troops while denouncing their commander in chief's strategy. Troops serving in Iraq "won't buy it," McCain said. "A vote of no confidence is a vote of no confidence."
Senate leaders made little progress yesterday toward agreeing on the terms of votes on a series of nonbinding resolutions, each of which addresses Bush's decision to deploy an additional 21,500 troops.
"This is all a game to divert attention from the fact that we have before us now an issue that the American people want us to address," Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) said on the Senate floor, nodding across the aisle to Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).
"What we're asking by any standard is reasonable," answered McConnell. "It is not too late to have the debate this week."
Senate Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) disagreed, declaring last night that the Iraq debate was over and that Democrats would move on today to other legislation.
Meanwhile, House Democratic leaders scheduled a war debate to begin next Tuesday, culminating with a vote aimed at repudiating Bush's plan.
House Democrats had intended to work with the resolution offered by Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.), which Senate Democrats have rallied behind. Instead, after assessing the morass on the other side of the Capitol, they are now considering a more narrow statement of objection to Bush's proposal.
In the three days of debate, Each House member will be given five minutes to state his or her views, Democrats said. That is a considerable amount in the House, where speeches typically run one minute.
"We're going to do what's been missing -- a serious debate on the war," said Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.), a member of the House leadership.
Durbin, saying that the "plug had been pulled" on the nonbinding resolution, urged his Senate colleagues to look ahead to other Iraq-related showdowns as future vehicles for opposing Bush's war proposals.
|
Senate leaders squabbled yesterday over how to consider resolutions opposing President Bush's plan for more troops in Iraq, but the quarrel did not stop lawmakers from launching an informal debate on the chamber floor over the war.
| 12.95 | 1 | 40 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/06/AR2007020600186.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/06/AR2007020600186.html
|
Iran Alleges U.S. Role in Kidnap Of Embassy Official in Baghdad
|
2007020719
|
Four Iraqis allegedly involved in the kidnapping Sunday evening of diplomat Jalal Sharafi were arrested and interrogated by Iraqi police, according to two Iranian officials in Baghdad. The detained Iraqis, who wore military uniforms and carried military identification cards, were "not under the Ministry of Defense control, they were directly connected to the American control," said an official at the Iranian Embassy who spoke on condition of anonymity.
A U.S. military spokesman, Lt. Col. Christopher C. Garver, said Tuesday that the military was not involved in the reported abduction and that he was not aware of any involvement by Iraqi forces.
Iraqi officials declined to comment Tuesday on the Iranian allegations, but Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari scheduled a news conference for Wednesday at which he was expected to address the issue.
The Iranian officials condemned the disappearance of Sharafi, whom they identified as a second secretary at the embassy in Baghdad, and said his abduction was part of the Bush administration's effort to counter Iranian influence in Iraq.
"The Islamic Republic of Iran considers it a responsibility of U.S. forces in Iraq to protect members of the diplomatic community, including Iranian diplomats, and will hold them responsible for obtaining the release of the abducted Iranian diplomat," Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad-Ali Hosseini told the Islamic Republic News Agency.
Sharafi, who has worked at the embassy for two years, has a wife and children living in Iran, said Abbass Ittry, the embassy's office manager. At the time of the apparent abduction, which was first reported by the New York Times, Sharafi was traveling with two colleagues, the Iranian officials said. They said that Sharafi's colleagues escaped and notified police, and that police and the abductors exchanged gunfire during a brief clash.
Iraqi Defense and Interior Ministry officials are searching for Sharafi, said Brig. Abdul Khaliq Karim, a spokesman for the Interior Ministry.
U.S. officials have accused Iran, a Shiite Muslim theocracy, of exacerbating tensions in Iraq by providing funding, sophisticated explosives and training to Shiite militias. President Bush last fall secretly authorized the killing or capturing of Iranian intelligence operatives or Revolutionary Guard members operating in Iraq. U.S. officials last month detained five Iranians at a liaison office that provided consular services in the northern Iraqi city of Irbil. Iraqi officials said the men were in the process of being certified as diplomats. In December, U.S. forces detained five Iranians in two raids in Baghdad.
The U.S. military, in statements Tuesday, disclosed the deaths of two American service members. A Multinational Division soldier was killed Tuesday after "insurgents targeted a security post" in southwest Baghdad, and a Marine was died Monday in Anbar province "from wounds sustained due to enemy action." Their names will be released after relatives have been notified.
Meanwhile, U.S. officials said they are investigating a report that a member of the Iraqi parliament had been convicted in the 1983 bombing of the U.S. and French embassies in Kuwait.
"We are actively investigating these serious allegations and continue to be in close contact with the government of Iraq to pursue this case," said Lou Fintor, a U.S. Embassy spokesman in Baghdad. He said he had no further details.
Citing "U.S. military intelligence," CNN reported Tuesday that Jamal Jaafar Mohammed, a member of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's Dawa party, was sentenced to death for his alleged role in the bombings, which killed five people and injured more than 80.
Special correspondents Saad al-Izzi and Naseer Nouri contributed to this report.
|
BAGHDAD, Feb. 6 -- Iranian officials in Iraq on Tuesday accused U.S. forces of collaborating with Iraqi soldiers in what they described as the kidnapping of an Iranian diplomat in downtown Baghdad.
| 19.970588 | 0.764706 | 1.235294 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/06/AR2007020600206.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/06/AR2007020600206.html
|
'I Think They're Rocket Launchers'
|
2007020719
|
LONDON, Feb. 6 -- A dramatic cockpit recording leaked to a British newspaper captures two American pilots reacting in horror and disbelief after one of them mistakenly fired on a convoy of British armored vehicles in Iraq. Told that an allied soldier has died, a pilot is heard saying, "I'm going to be sick" and "We're in jail, dude."
The friendly-fire incident that killed Lance Cpl. Matty Hull, 25, occurred on March 28, 2003, eight days into the Iraq invasion, but the recording was made public only Tuesday by the Sun newspaper. The U.S. government had declined to declassify it. But recently a British coroner investigating the corporal's death demanded that the recording, a cockpit video, be presented as evidence, suspending his proceedings until it was produced.
In Britain, where the Iraq war is highly unpopular, the video caused an uproar with its vivid depiction of an attack that some people here say could have been avoided. Hull's family has expressed anger over his death.
Hours after the video was posted to the Sun's Web site and clips were aired on British television, the Pentagon said it would release the recording to the coroner and the family. Des Browne, the British defense secretary, welcomed the decision, saying, "The release of classified information, even for the closest of allies, is never straightforward, but this is the right thing to do."
While there have been numerous friendly-fire incidents, the U.S. government rarely releases video and audio recordings related to them. "If you show certain tactics and capabilities, of course your enemy can see it, too," said Air Force Lt. Col. Teresa Connor, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Central Command.
The Sun said there had been a half-million downloads of the recording by late afternoon.
The 15-minute video shows the view forward from the cockpit of an A-10 Thunderbolt attack jet, as well as computerized flight data. Its audio track includes the voices of the jet's pilot, the pilot of another A-10 flying in tandem, the voices of several U.S. ground controllers and the sounds of the attacking aircraft's guns.
The two pilots are heard asking a ground controller if there are any friendly troops in the area near Basra where they are patrolling. The answer comes back: "You are well clear of friendlies."
Because of mistaken attacks in past conflicts, friendly vehicles advancing into Iraq were being marked by orange panels visible from the sky.
One of the U.S. pilots who has spotted a convoy of vehicles remarks: "They got something orange on top of them." Later, he says, "I think they're rocket launchers."
One of the jets strafes the vehicles with rapid-fire cannons, then stages a second attack. Shortly afterward, another ground controller is heard telling the pilots: "You have friendly armor in the area."
The pilots are told to abort the mission and, audibly upset and using profane language, are heard asking for word on the condition of the men on the ground whom they have just attacked.
|
LONDON, Feb. 6 -- A dramatic cockpit recording leaked to a British newspaper captures two American pilots reacting in horror and disbelief after one of them mistakenly fired on a convoy of British armored vehicles in Iraq. Told that an allied soldier has died, a pilot is heard saying, "I'm going to be sick" and "We're in jail, dude."...
| 8.416667 | 0.986111 | 70.013889 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/06/AR2007020600732.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/06/AR2007020600732.html
|
Deputy Attorney General Defends Prosecutor Firings
|
2007020719
|
A senior Justice Department official acknowledged yesterday that a top federal prosecutor in Arkansas was removed to make room for a former aide to presidential adviser Karl Rove, but he said that six other U.S. attorneys were fired for "performance-related" issues.
In often contentious testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Deputy Attorney General Paul J. McNulty also disputed Democrats' allegations that the firings appeared to be aimed at rewarding Republican allies and at avoiding the Senate's role in confirming U.S. attorney appointments.
"The attorney general's appointment authority has not and will not be used to circumvent the confirmation process," McNulty said. "All accusations in this regard are contrary to the clear factual record."
McNulty's remarks did little to calm the growing political storm over the recent U.S. attorney firings. Top Democrats have condemned the firings, which have led to proposed legislation that would limit the attorney general's powers to appoint interim prosecutors.
McNulty acknowledged that six U.S. attorneys in the West and Southwest were notified in December that they would be asked to step aside, including the lead prosecutor in San Diego, whose office oversaw the bribery conviction of a former Republican congressman.
A seventh former U.S. attorney, Bud Cummins of Little Rock, has said that he was asked to leave last year to open the job for J. Timothy Griffin, who previously worked for Rove and for the Republican National Committee. McNulty did not dispute that characterization yesterday.
Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said the firings "reek of politics" and warned McNulty that the panel would consider issuing subpoenas for job evaluations of the fired prosecutors unless the Justice Department agrees to hand them over. Justice officials said they will work to accommodate the request.
"What happened here doesn't sound like business as usual," Schumer said. "Even the hiring and firing of our top federal prosecutors has become infused and corrupted with political, rather than prudent, considerations."
McNulty responded later: "When I hear you talk about the politicizing of the Department of Justice, it's like a knife in my heart. . . . Your perspective is completely contrary to my daily experience."
Several top lawmakers, including Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), have been particularly angered by a little-noticed provision slipped into USA Patriot Act legislation last year that allows Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales to appoint replacement prosecutors, such as Griffin, on an indefinite basis.
Feinstein and other Democrats in the House and Senate have proposed legislation to return to the old selection process, which allowed district courts to appoint interim U.S. attorneys after 120 days until a final candidate was confirmed by the Senate. Sen. Arlen Specter (Pa.), the Judiciary Committee's ranking Republican, said yesterday he will join Democrats in pushing for a return to the previous arrangement.
But McNulty said the Justice Department is in "strong opposition" to that proposal because it puts the judicial branch in the position of hiring people in the executive branch.
|
A senior Justice Department official acknowledged yesterday that a top federal prosecutor in Arkansas was removed to make room for a former aide to presidential adviser Karl Rove, but he said that six other U.S. attorneys were fired for "performance-related" issues.
| 12.041667 | 0.979167 | 23.270833 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/06/AR2006110600076.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/06/AR2006110600076.html
|
Minister: Haggard Is 'Completely Heterosexual'
|
2007020719
|
DENVER -- One of four ministers who oversaw three weeks of intensive counseling for the Rev. Ted Haggard said the disgraced minister emerged convinced that he is "completely heterosexual."
Haggard also said his sexual contact with men was limited to the former male prostitute who came forward with sexual allegations, the Rev. Tim Ralph of Larkspur told The Denver Post for a story in Tuesday's edition.
"He is completely heterosexual," Ralph said. "That is something he discovered. It was the acting-out situations where things took place. It wasn't a constant thing."
Ralph said the board spoke with people close to Haggard while investigating his claim that his only extramarital sexual contact happened with Mike Jones. The board found no evidence to the contrary.
"If we're going to be proved wrong, somebody else is going to come forward, and that usually happens really quickly," he said. "We're into this thing over 90 days and it hasn't happened."
Haggard resigned as president of the National Association of Evangelicals last year after allegations of sexual misconduct surfaced. He was also forced out from the 14,000 New Life Church that he founded years ago in his basement after Jones alleged Haggard paid him for sex and sometimes used methamphetamine when they were together. Haggard, who is married, has publicly admitted to "sexual immorality."
Haggard said in an e-mail Sunday, his first communication in three months to church members, that he and his wife, Gayle, plan to pursue master's degrees in psychology. The e-mail said the family hasn't decided where to move but that they were considering Missouri and Iowa.
Another oversight board member, the Rev. Mike Ware of Westminster, said the group recommended the move out of town and the Haggards agreed.
"This is a good place for Ted," Ware said. "It's hard to heal in Colorado Springs right now. It's like an open wound. He needs to get somewhere he can get the wound healed."
It was also the oversight board that strongly urged Haggard to go into secular work.
|
One of four ministers who oversaw three weeks of intensive counseling for the Rev. Ted Haggard said the disgraced minister emerged convinced that he is "completely heterosexual."
| 13.733333 | 1 | 30 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/05/AR2007020501490.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/05/AR2007020501490.html
|
In Super Bowl Ratings Bonanza, Ads Are Minuses
|
2007020719
|
If you were among the 93.15 million people CBS says watched Sunday's orgy of soggy football, ads with budgets equal to a Third World country's GNP, and his royal highness Prince, you are part of the second-largest TV audience in Super Bowl history.
You also are part of the third-biggest television audience ever -- behind only the 105 million who tuned in for the very last episode of "M*A*S*H" more than two decades ago, and the 94 million who caught Super Bowl XXX in '96.
Sadly, only about 26 million of you stuck around to watch "Criminal Minds" -- the lucky CBS series to get the plum postgame time slot. CBS points out that that's the biggest audience ever for the drama about a panel of experts who race to profile pervy criminals before they strike again.
But it's well below the nearly 38 million who'd stuck around after last year's game (which clocked about 90.7 million viewers) to watch "Grey's Anatomy." From which we learn that people who like football presented in five-minute chunks between blocks of very expensive commercials designed to appeal to 18-year-old beer-swilling men also like watching a series about a hospital chockablock with hot, horny doctors. But they are not necessarily people who like to watch a show about a serial killer who videotapes the murders he commits and posts them on the Internet where they become a YouTube-ish hit because we live in a dark and miserable world.
That post-Super Bowl broadcast of "Grey's" catapulted it from a successful sophomore series to the ABC mega-hit it is today. CBS hopes to see similar ratings results for "Criminal Minds," which has been the fastest-growing sophomore series so far this season.
Unlike most Super Bowls, this year the game, in which the Colts trampled the Bears, 29-17, in a driving rain in Miami, may have been more fun to watch than the ads.
Because who doesn't like watching beefy men slipping and sliding on a drenched football field while fumbling a slippery pigskin ball. Really, the NFL should start greasing footballs on dry days.
Meanwhile, instead of pushing the envelope, the 20 or so advertisers who ponied up northward of $2.6 million per 30 secs of Super Bowl airtime played it safe.
The only ad that made you sit up and take notice was the gone-in-a-blink spot in which CBS late-night star David Letterman, wearing a Colts jersey, cozies up on the couch with Oprah Winfrey, wearing a Bears jersey, to watch the game. That ad was striking because Letterman is notorious in his unwillingness to work with his network's marketing and promo people.
As for the rest of the Super Bowl spots, many tended toward sophomoric violence or the saccharine. Gone are the good old days of combusting horse farts, guy bikini waxes and old referees suffering shrewish wives. Even the busty GoDaddy.com skank -- you know, the one with the broken cami strap who titillated faux congressmen at a pretend TV decency hearing the year after Janet Jackson's right breast made its Super Bowl halftime debut -- was this year reduced to a tame dancer-in-the-office joke.
This year, Careerbuilders.com dumped its chimpanzees in favor of a "work is a jungle" theme (been there, seen that) in which office employees are in a jungle being tortured by management.
Budweiser went with two guys playing the rock/paper/scissors game to decide who gets the last beer -- a game won by the guy who decks the other with a rock.
In a Doritos ad sprung from an online contest (Dorito's CEO memo to his marketing vice president: Tell me again why we pay our creative team six figures apiece?), a chip-eating guy crashes his car watching a cute chip-eating chick, who then rushes to his rescue, slips and hits her head on his vehicle.
The manager of the moon's first office arranges for FedEx pickups there, which gets him a slap on the back from his boss, which launches him into space, where he is blown to oblivion by a comet.
And some company or other regaled us with an ad in which Old Heart Guy gets the stuffing beat out of him by a gang of thugs named High Blood Pressure, Cholesterol and Diabetes.
Rating high on the cute-o-meter:
· A stray white dog gets to ride with the Budweiser Clydesdales when he's mistaken for a Dalmatian after being splattered by mud.
· Adorable little red crabs worship a red Budweiser ice chest.
· A Spielbergian-sweet General Motors auto-assembly-line robot gets the sack after accidentally dropping a part, can't hold down another job and becomes so depressed he eventually throws himself off a bridge -- by way of illustrating how GM is crazy for quality.
· Emerald Nuts explains that when your blood sugar gets low in the afternoon, Robert Goulet comes to your office and messes things up.
|
If you were among the 93.15 million people CBS says watched Sunday's orgy of soggy football, ads with budgets equal to a Third World country's GNP, and his royal highness Prince, you are part of the second-largest TV audience in Super Bowl history.
| 19.254902 | 1 | 51 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/05/AR2007020501630.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/05/AR2007020501630.html
|
Liz Taylor's Candle Blowout
|
2007020719
|
And there's Elizabeth Taylor fishing! And there's Liz in hot pants and go-go boots! And there's Liz in a crew cut! And there's Liz driving a convertible and flipping somebody the bird! And there's Liz showing a big brown bear named Bonkers the book "Nibbles and Me," which she wrote when she was 14 about her pet chipmunk Nibbles, who died of a tragic overdose of Easter candy!
The special Elizabeth Taylor issue of Interview magazine is chock-full of great pictures of Liz. But that's not all. It's also got a long interview with Liz that not only will change the way future historians think about disgraced British prime minister Neville Chamberlain but also reveals the heartbreaking details about the death of Nibbles.
"I had let him loose in my room," Taylor tells Interview's interviewer. "And it was Easter. I had left a big chocolate Easter egg, opened, way up on top of a wardrobe at the house we were renting on the beach. I came charging into my room to get some dry clothes. The minute I came into the room, I'd always hear a clatter from wherever he was swinging and he'd come running up my leg. But there was no sound, there was nothing. I called and I called. I looked up at the wardrobe and there was the chocolate Easter egg, half gone, and there was Nibbles, dead, lying beside it with his little feet up in the air."
Whew! That's the kind of amazing info you get in Interview's "Special Eye-Popping, Jaw-Dropping, Show-Stopping Collector's Edition." Interview has been hyping celebrities since Andy Warhol founded it in 1969, but this is the first time it has ever devoted an entire issue to one celebrity! But they really had to do it because (1) she is Liz Taylor! and (2) she will celebrate her 75th birthday on Feb. 27.
Amazing! Elizabeth Taylor is 75! I'm shocked. I thought she was much older than that. I figured she was at least as old as Cleopatra, whom she played in the four-hour-long 1963 movie "Cleopatra," co-starring with Richard Burton, who was her fifth husband, and also her sixth husband.
Sometimes it seems like Elizabeth Taylor Hilton Wilding Todd Fisher Burton Burton Warner Fortensky has been around forever -- the smoldering ur-brunette, starring in movies and tabloid headlines, getting married, getting divorced, wearing diamonds as big as the Ritz, getting rushed to the hospital for various ailments, checking into the Betty Ford Clinic, selling perfume, gaining weight, losing weight, fighting AIDS, befriending Michael Jackson and perpetually floating through crowds of star-struck fans on the way to her eternal limousine.
She appeared in her first movie, "There's One Born Every Minute," in 1942, when she was 10, and she made dozens more -- including "National Velvet" and "Giant" and "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof" and "A Place in the Sun" and "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" -- until she was such a huge movie star that she didn't have to bother making movies anymore; she just played Elizabeth Taylor in the endless soap opera of Elizabeth Taylor.
"Private? What makes you think my life is private?" she once said -- a quote that Interview runs atop a picture of Liz and Burton surrounded by cops and gawkers outside a Broadway theater in 1964, with Burton looking dazed but Liz smiling blissfully.
Interview's special issue is hideously overdone and ridiculously over-the-top, which is, of course, perfect. Who wants an understated Liz Taylor issue?
So Interview runs a gallery of photos of Liz, the queen of bling, wearing scads o' humongous diamonds! And a gallery of Liz's greatest costumes as re-imagined by 10 hotshot designers! And a gallery of artworks created especially for Liz by 10 famous artists I never heard of, including Francesco Vezzoli, whose painting shows Liz with a rose-shaped tear dripping from her left eye and what looks like a diamond dripping from her right nostril! Classy!
There's also an interview with Camille Paglia, the college professor turned over-caffeinated pop-culture pontificator, who warms up by calling Liz "the archetypal femme fatale, the sexual predator, the adventurous, smoldering brunette vixen" and ends up calling her "the flaming embodiment of the erotic energies of the universe!"
|
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.
| 17.372549 | 0.431373 | 0.470588 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2003/11/10/AR2005040701099.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2003/11/10/AR2005040701099.html
|
Recently Released DVDs and Videos
|
2007020719
|
The following is a list of recently released DVDs and videos. All capsule reviews have been taken from The Washington Post's Weekend section.
"1408" (PG-13, 94 minutes): Listen up, all you "Hostels," "Saws" and other purveyors of bloody terror. Lay down your whips, chain saws and paring knives to watch a truly scary movie. Granted, this movie, starring John Cusack and based on a Stephen King short story, is a ghost story, technically speaking. But both genres trade in the same black art: the manipulation of the audience's innermost fears. When Mike Enslin (Cusack), a haunted-house guidebook writer, checks into Room 1408 of the Dolphin Hotel, he learns that familiar objects, such as the clock radio, the Bible and the phone can become instruments of alarming menace. Mike has to enter the tortured past that he's trying to forget, and we realize we are entering Mike's soul and, in a way, our own. Every beat of the film is weighted with significance, and our mounting dread becomes almost intolerable. Contains disturbing sequences of violence and terror, frightening images and profanity. DVD Extras: Featurettes on standard edition; collector's edition includes additional featurettes, extended version of film, and commentary by the director and screenwriters.
"Civic Duty" (R, 98 minutes): This film packs a loose and pat idea inside an intense, gloomy psychological thriller. That idea goes something like this: The events of Sept. 11, 2001, got us so freaked out that we're unable to distinguish between real terrorists and innocent men of "Middle Eastern" appearance. As thoughtful as it means to be -- its agenda is outlined by on-the-nose dialogue from its characters -- "Civic Duty" does little to go beyond this premise. Instead, it merely illustrates the idea. Playing like a B-movie in which psychological states are evoked with dizzying close-ups and sharp sound effects, the film is all cliched atmospherics and no real insight. We meet disgruntled accountant Terry Allen, recently let go from his firm, who suddenly becomes convinced that a new neighbor, Gabe Hassan (an engaging Khaled Abol Naga), might be a terrorist. Resistance from his wife, Marla (Kari Matchett), and an FBI agent (Richard Schiff) who discounts his suspicions only provokes Terry more. In very short order -- and charted out with pedestrian escalation by screenwriter Andrew Joiner and director Jeff Renfroe -- he gets nuttier and nuttier about his mission, until -- holy irony, Batman -- he's acting like the very terrorist he thinks he's condemning. The surprise of this movie is that there is none. Contains profanity and threatening situations.
"Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer" (PG, 92 minutes): This is surely the dullest of Hollywood's many comic-book-derived summer movies. Sentient humans should stay away; all others may enter confident that their IQs are already in the Chernobyl-fried range and will not be affected, except for downward. So many flaws, so little time. The movie has too much plot, not enough sense, no personality, action sequences that die wheezing and slobbering like an old dog, and nothing that isn't generic, stereotypical or without personality or vitality. No action sequence or performance stands out, and the banal squabbling among the four grows annoying. All in all, there is no all, there is no there, there is no is. Contains mild violence and innuendo. DVD Extras: Two commentary tra cks on standard edition; two-disc special edition also includes deleted scenes with optional commentary, making of documentary and featurettes.
"Jindabyne" (R, 123 minutes): "Jindabyne" transmogrifies a Raymond Carver short story into an epic that involves a waterlogged cadaver, a lot of angry Aborigines and a central character (played by Laura Linney) who seems to have more in common with a Sally Field-type heroine than with the tortured souls you encounter in Carverdom. The movie will ring familiar to those who have seen Robert Altman's superior "Short Cuts," a multi-plotted tribute to Carver's works that includes this story segment. In that 1993 film, Stuart (Fred Ward) and his buddies discover the body of a woman in their fishing spot. The men's refusal to interrupt their sport -- as a civic concession of sorts, they tether the body so it won't wash away -- becomes their moral undoing. In the eyes of Stuart's appalled wife, his churlishness makes him as guilty as the woman's murderer. Directed by Ray Lawrence from a script by Beatrix Christian, "Jindabyne" transplants the book's American Northwest setting to the outback. The movie, starring Gabriel Byrne as Stewart (as his name is now spelled), revisits the fishing misadventure but with a cultural twist: The dead woman turns out to be an Aborigine. So Stewart must contend not only with a mortified wife (Linney's Claire), but also the righteous fury of his town's Aboriginal community. In better hands, it could have made for a powerful movie. Unfortunately, "Jindabyne" is a victim of its own over-ambition. Contains violence, profanity and nudity.
Also on DVD Oct. 2: "Bram Stoker's Dracula: Collector's Edition"; Caligula: Imperial Edition; "Entourage: Season 3, Part 2"; "Funny Face: 50th Anniversary Edition"; "How I Met Your Mother: Season Two"; "Jericho: Season One"; "The Jungle Book: Platinum Edition"; "The Sarah Silverman Program: Season One"; "The War- A Film by Ken Burns and Lynn Novick" and "Shark: Season One."
"Black Book" (R, 145 minutes): This Dutch film tells the story of Rachel Stein (Carice van Houten), a Jewish cabaret singer trying to survive the Third Reich in the Netherlands in 1944. An errant bomb turns the farm where she has been hiding into a funeral pyre, and Rachel is on the run. Soon enough, she's reunited with her family and becomes the only survivor of an SS massacre. Indeed, massacres come fast and furious, as does a plot that shunts through developments faster than a dealer can shuffle a deck of cards. On and on it goes, with hardly a dull moment, but far too many lively ones (lots of machine guns) and, more disturbingly, quite a few repulsive ones. Contains violence, nudity, sexuality, torture and degradation. In Dutch, English, German and Hebrew with subtitles. DVD Extras: Featurette; director's commentary.
"Bug" (R, 102 minutes): In this intentionally off-kilter drama -- directed by William Friedkin from Tracy Letts's stage play of the same name -- we seem at first bound for an offbeat story with a sweet conclusion as waitress Agnes (Ashley Judd) finds herself drawn to the sweet-natured Peter (Michael Shannon), who seems like great long-term relationship material. He's confident and sensitive but also strong enough to protect her from her abusive ex-husband (Harry Connick Jr.). As soon as Peter discovers a tiny bug in their bed, however, the reality and good-hearted texture we took for granted become obsolete. And as helicopters hover outside Agnes's motel room, someone rips out their teeth with pliers and two desperate characters pull each other into a downward spiral, we find ourselves in the fascinating no man's land between horror and comedy -- right where this movie wants us to be. Contains disturbing violence, sexual scenes, nudity, profanity and drug use. DVD Extras: Featurettes; director's commentary.
"Knocked Up" (R, 125 minutes): Katherine Heigl (TV's "Grey's Anatomy") plays Alison, an up-and-coming TV executive who, celebrating her promotion one night, gets drunk and ends up in bed with a dumpy slacker named Ben, played by Seth Rogen. Their one-night stand turns into a nine-month nightmare of facing the music and growing up fast. What a drag, except that in the hands of Judd Apatow, this movie turns out to be not just rude, crude and outrageously funny but a deceptively sophisticated meditation on moral agency -- with pot jokes! Heigl and Rogen never generate enough chemistry for the audience to believe they're going to make it (or that they should), but that's almost beside the point. Contains sexual content, drug use and profanity. DVD Extras: Featurettes; deleted scenes; video diaries; gag reels; available in rated and unrated editions.
"Next" (PG-13, 96 minutes): Nicolas Cage plays Cris Johnson, a Las Vegas magician with a startling gift -- the ability to foretell his future, two minutes ahead of time. This allows him to win big at the Vegas tables, and it allows him to quickly road-test the immediate future, as it were, by exploring options, ranging from trying different pickup lines on a woman to seeing if there's a gunman around the corner. Both activities come into play, as Cris pursues the woman of his dreams (Jessica Biel), while FBI agent Callie Ferris (Julianne Moore) forces him to use his powers to save Los Angeles from a dirty bomb. Cage makes a fascinatingly haunted antihero, and director Lee Tamahori keeps the movie pinging and zipping along. But there's no escaping the hackneyed storyline, with its one-dimensional gallery of eastern European terrorists and ear-mike-sporting FBI agents, or the disconcerting feeling that maybe this particular world isn't worth saving. Contains action violence and some profanity. DVD Extras: Featurettes.
|
A look at the week's DVD debuts and other recent releases.
| 135.5 | 0.5 | 0.642857 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/celebritology/2007/02/catching_up_with_ralph_macchio.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020719id_/http://blog.washingtonpost.com/celebritology/2007/02/catching_up_with_ralph_macchio.html
|
Catching Up With Ralph Macchio
|
2007020719
|
How to explain the duality of Ralph Macchio? One of his first film performances, as raspy-voiced, tentative Johnny Cade in 1983's "The Outsiders," hit a magic sweet spot channeling teen angst, insecurity and purity through the lens of S.E. Hinton's tale of warring gangs in 1960's Tulsa. Macchio became the sacrifice made to the altar of innocence and the performances of a microcosm of young Hollywood talent (Tom Cruise, Matt Dillon, Patrick Swayze, Diane Lane, C. Thomas Howell, Emilio Estevez) all spun around his unassuming axis.
But, as we learned in "The Outsiders," nothing gold can stay and Macchio spent the remainder of the '80s utterly subsumed by his role as plucky karate wannabe Daniel LaRusso in the wax on-wax off "Karate Kid" trilogy (except for 1986's guitar-nerd flick "Crossroads"). By 1989's third installment, an initially endearing story was hopelessly corrupted by what became a formulaic underdog tale set to a cheesy Peter Cetera soundtrack.
As other "Outsiders" alums were well on their way to major box office success (Swayze), brat-pack status (Howell) and even bona fide stardom (Cruise), Macchio languished, stuck in a fresh-faced limbo. That's when Macchio defied typecasting to star in 1992's "My Cousin Vinny," ably holding his own on screen with Joe Pesci and Marisa Tomei (who won a best supporting actress Oscar for her role).
Then, on the verge of what seemed to be a comeback, Macchio effectively disappeared until a hilariously self-ridiculing surprise cameo on HBO's "Entourage" in 2005.
What else has Macchio been up to lately? I e-mailed him over the weekend to find out. After the jump, read on to find out about his latest project with "Karate Kid" co-star Billy Zabka, a possible return to "Entourage" and more...
Liz: Okay, let's start with the present and work our way back. What are you up to these days?
Ralph Macchio: I've been juggling some projects behind the camera as producer/director/writer. About to pitch a reality series and also focusing on scripted projects for teens and tweens. Some I will be involved on camera as well... depending. Acted in a new series coming this spring on Starz called "Head Case." Also a fun music video (cameo) for those "Karate Kid" fans in the audience. (Sweeptheleg.com)
Liz: How did you end up on "Entourage?" Did you actually know Kevin Dillon from back in the day or does your relationship begin and end with Johnny Drama?
RM: I've know Kevin for years. His brother Matt and I were in "The Outsiders" together... and have remained friends. Drama's a fantastic character and he just nails it. Very happy for Kevin.
Any chance of seeing you make a repeat appearance?
RM: Spoken to the head writer. The door is open... nothing set. I had a blast.
Liz: You also recently acted in Artie Lange's "Beer League." What was it like working with Howard Stern's sidekick?
RM: Artie is a very talented guy. So instinctually funny. I envy that. He's hilarious. How he treats himself... well, that's another story. How he treated me... he was awesome.. Very appreciative toward me for doing the film.
Liz: Artie is struggling with his weight -- pushing 300 pounds. Do you have any advice for Artie on how to stay in shape? You've managed to stay in good shape. What's your secret? Karate?
RM: Wear loose fitting clothes! Karate is too much work and pain. :-)
Liz: Billy Zabka? Jerk or nice guy in real life?
RM: Good guy... He directed and stars in the Sweep The Leg music video... take a look.
Liz: You played a central role in one of the best movies produced in the '80s -- "Up the Academy." I kid. Seriously, I mean "The Outsiders." The movie was one of your earliest film roles -- what was the biggest lesson you took away from the experience and what was it like to be a part of such a talented group of young actors (Matt Dillon, Patrick Swayze, Tom Cruise, C. Thomas Howell, Rob Lowe)? Who did you get along with best?
RM: The main lesson from working on "The Outsiders" was the use of improv during the rehersal process... we stayed with the script on film but in rehersals we really played around and found very real organic elements to bring to our characters... gotta credit Coppola for that. And some big time young talented actors. My favorite role... read the book as a kid and played the part I wanted. A home run for me.
Liz: What Internet sites are daily must-reads for you?
RM: I'm Boring. Industry trades -- Variety, Hollywood Reporter, News... and I do check iTunes to see how my short film is doing -- "Love Thy Brother" ... I wrote and directed a few years back.
Liz: Any advice for younger actors today looking to transition into more adult roles -- for instance Dakota Fanning ("Hounddog") and Daniel Radcliffe ("Harry Potter"), who have recently taken some heat for some racier choices?
RM: It's a tough transition. I can vouch; but keep moving and don't give up. Always have to reinvent, whether as an actor or director. Sometimes I do find a drastic racy choice could backfire as just trying to make noise. Bottom line: It's always about the quality of material at the end of the day.
Resources: Ralph Macchio at IMDB.com YouTube: "Outsiders" trailer YouTube: "Karate Kid" clip
By Liz | February 6, 2007; 10:43 AM ET | Category: Catching Up With... , Celebrities Previous: Morning Mix: Jessica Simpson Hurt by Lachey's Dating | Next: Morning Mix: Aguilera Describes 'Naked Sundays'
Keep up with the latest Celebritology scoops with an easy-to-use widget.
If you have tips, ideas for stories or general suggestions, let us know.
Are you sure you didn't mean Estevez for the brat pack member? I know C. Thomas Howell is kind of a member, but you picked him over Emilio
Posted by: | February 6, 2007 11:21 AM
Ralph: You're the best around, and I hope that nothing's gonna ever keep you down!
Posted by: Xopher | February 6, 2007 11:55 AM
How could your forget Ralph: The Eight is Enough Years? Am I the only one that remembers he was that show's Cousin Oliver?
Posted by: ep | February 6, 2007 12:41 PM
I saw Macchio on stage in Ohio a few years ago as the lead of the touring version of "How To Succeed In Business Without Really Trying." He was surprisingly good.
Posted by: Alexandria, VA Guy | February 6, 2007 12:42 PM
Ralph and family used to live on the North Shore of Long Island (may still) and he brought his kid or kids (I forget) down to the firehouse for the Fire Prevention Open House a few years ago (maybe five or six at this point). Since most of the people there had no clue who he was, he fit right in.
Posted by: Columbia, MD | February 6, 2007 1:28 PM
Oh Liz. Not to nitpick with your intro, but I have to agree with the first poster that C. Thomas Howell does not really qualify as brat pack material and yet, Emilio Estevez is a charter member (Breakfast Club, St. Elmo's Fire). How'd you miss that?
As for the Karate Kid movies - you make it sound as if being subsumed by the Daniel LaRusso character is a bad thing. The Karate Kid was an awesome movie - oscar nomination and all. I'm sucked in every time it comes on cable. Banzai Danielson!!
By the way, the Peter Cetera soundtrack ruined the second movie and the third (and gulp, fourth) movie NEVER HAPPENED!! I repeat, it NEVER HAPPENED!!
Posted by: Dug | February 6, 2007 3:00 PM
I love Ralph Macchio! And he's so hottttt! Thanks for a great post.
Posted by: | February 6, 2007 3:41 PM
more nitpicking: Cousin Oliver (Robbie Rist) was on the Brady Bunch, not Eight Is Enough, though Cousin Oliver did have the same hairdo as the youngest kid on EIE.
Posted by: Alex VA | February 6, 2007 7:31 PM
What about Rob Lowe (sodapop)?
Posted by: Gary | February 6, 2007 7:39 PM
Yes EP, you are the only one who remembers Ralph played Cousin Oliver - He played Jeremy. Oliver was a late addition to fill the void of the "cute little kid" when Adam Rich started toward puberty.
Posted by: | February 6, 2007 7:42 PM
Thank you for this interview!!! I have to admit, I am an unabashed Ralph Macchio fan. I was an 80s kid, so Ralph Macchio was the center of my kid universe.
I am disapointed that Crossroads hasn't been released on DVD, I would buy that in a second -- that movie is a definite guilty pleasure of mine.
And Dug, I totally agree with you, Karate Kid IV never happened. A friend got me those movies for Christmas when they were released on DVD, and had to buy them individually to make sure the 4th was wasn't in my possession -- I would've run it over with the car.
Posted by: Kristin | February 6, 2007 8:00 PM
All you people who said I was wrong -- I WAS MAKING AN ANALOGY. Read it again. I said he was the Cousin Oliver on that show as in the extra kid brought in to save the show. Do you all know that Chicken of the Sea is tuna fish not chicken?
Posted by: ep | February 6, 2007 8:04 PM
I have an even more obscure Ralph Macchio role..he played a compilation character of my husband and all his siblings in a made for TV movie with Beau Bridges around 1980 or so. I think it was called " Dangerous Company" but I'm not real sure about that. It was based on a book called "Too Dangerous To Be At Large" which was written by my husband's stepfather Ray Johnson about his time in and out of prison.
Posted by: Paula | February 6, 2007 10:29 PM
Karate Kid part one transcends generations. It was my favorite movie in elementary school and my four-year-old is now mesmerized by the crane technique Daniel Larusso employs at the end of the movie (now 20 years later). Macchio is still a legend, in my mind, for the performance he delivered in that movie. Long live Karate Kid.
Posted by: Brad Hartley | February 7, 2007 1:04 PM
Kristin - Remember when you were a teen and you hung an 8x10 glossy pic of Ralph on your bedroom wall????
Well, I remember you finding that picture *years* later still on your wall....and I know, even years later, it was hard for you to take it down.
Posted by: Kelly | February 7, 2007 8:49 PM
I think Ralph is GORGEOUS. And a good actor. Deserves more recognition. He looks fabulous.
Posted by: Alexi | February 8, 2007 8:31 PM
For the people who are saying Karate Kid 4 never happened, actually it did but Ralph did not star in it, Pat Morita co-starred with Hilary swank.
And Crossroads is out on DVD but it's kind of hard to find. I know because I have the DVD in my possession. I think maybe some place you can find it are at Best Buy or probably on Ebay.
Posted by: Larissa | February 10, 2007 9:14 AM
I think I know what EP is trying to say. she means Ralph was an extra put in to save the show just as Robbie Rust was put in to save the Brady Bunch. She wasn't saying that Ralph was cousin Oliver.
Posted by: Laura | February 10, 2007 9:18 AM
Glad to see something Ralph related,miss his talent. He is so handsome and so underused.
Posted by: Carol | February 11, 2007 9:02 PM
I agree with all seniments that KK4 was not even close to being in the same league as the first two. But on the other hand, that was the movie which first introduced Hllary Swank. Of all the actors in the entire series, she is the only one who currently has a solid career.
I'm not saying that is right, but it's just funny how Hollywood works.
Posted by: Mike P | February 14, 2007 11:49 AM
I agree with all seniments that KK4 was not even close to being in the same league as the first two. But on the other hand, that was the movie which first introduced Hllary Swank. Of all the actors in the entire series, she is the only one who currently has a solid career.
I'm not saying that is right, but it's just funny how Hollywood works.
Posted by: Mike P | February 14, 2007 11:55 AM
I love all the Karate Kid Movies-they were great and I enjoy watching each one. Ralph Macchio and Pat Morita were great together- The 4th one is my least favorite of the set-however, Pat Morita was excellent--He played his character extremely well in all of them. In my opinion, they were wholesome family movies--it would be nice if today we had more such movies around to watch that are "family viewing" type. Each had a good message as we watched Danny Laruso learn his life's lessons and being mentored by Mr. Myagi.
Posted by: Rebecca Q â | February 20, 2007 12:59 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.
|
Washingtonpost.com blogger Liz Kelly dishes on the latest happenings in entertainment, celebrity, and Hollywood news.
| 155.555556 | 0.666667 | 0.888889 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/02/06/DI2007020600418.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/02/06/DI2007020600418.html
|
Fitness - Moving Crew
|
2007020719
|
Leah Washington, a faculty member in the Department of Exercise Science at The George Washington University, joined the Health section's Susan Morse on Tuesday, Feb. 6, at 11:30 a.m. ET to take your questions about health and fitness.
The Moving Crew will be online to take questions every other Tuesday at 11:30 a.m. ET.
Susan Morse: Brrrrrr!!! Come on in and warm up those muscles.
Out of kindness - or megalomania - have you ever tried to play trainer for a friend or family member? Oh, not the real thing, sure, but just to help them over a hump?
Then you know some of the surprises you can be in for. You don't? Take a look at today's Moving Crew ("Pick it Up, Sister") on page F3 of the Health section.
For today's fitness chat, we're thrilled to have with us Leah Washington as our guest expert. Leah is a faculty member in the Department of Exercise Science at The George Washington University School of Public Health and Health Services.
She's a certified athletic trainer, with degrees in kinesiology and exercise science and background in sport psychology. In the Athletic Training Education Program, she teaches courses in therapeutic exercise and injury prevention. She is a member of the National Athletic Trainers' Association (NATA) and the Association of Applied Sport Psychology (AAASP).
Okay, then. We're ready for your questions. Let's get started!
Yoga: Right now I mix up my workout routine with cardio, weight training and power yoga. But I really love my yoga classes and was wondering if it is possible to give up strength training for power yoga three times a week?
I have gotten so many mixed signals on this question. Yogis all say yes (and usually have the bodies to prove it!) But other fitness experts say that yoga isn't taxing enough on muscles. Please help!
Leah Washington: Dear Yoga -- It really depends on what your goals are. If your goal is to really increase your strength, then focus on that. Power Yoga is a great way to maintain strength levels and keep lean. My view is do what you love! If you are more likely to do yoga because you enjoy it -- do it!
Northern Virginia: This may not be your specialty, but do you know anything about masters swimming? I'm a decent swimmer, but not fast. I'm taking a stroke clinic right now, but it ends soon. I find that I get a lot better workout with someone telling me to go do another 100 (or 50 or 600), than if I'm doing it alone. I wonder if a Masters swim program would do that and help me improve my speed/technique, or if I would just be in the way of a bunch of uber athletes. Thanks!
You betcha masters swimming can help improve your speed and technique. And don't be intimidated by the name. You don't have to be a superstar to be helped by a "masters" swimming program -- just be an adult with the ability to propel yourself somehow from one side of the pool to another. The idea is to give you the attention and skills to help you get better.
Swimmers in the program are grouped by ability.
I'll put up a link to a story you may find helpful. Try the program. I bet you'll be glad you did. Let us know.
washingtonpost.com: Into the Deep End (Post, Sept. 6, 2005)
Susan Morse: Here's that story about masters swimming.
Alexandria, Va.: I am 64 and gained weight in my abdomen, buttocks and thighs when I was hospitalized in the fall of 2005 for bipolar disorder. I am 5 feet 2 and weigh 135 pounds. My doctors know about my weight gain and aren't concerned about it. My desired weight is 110 pounds. I suspect that my weight gain is due partly to my medication and partly to the fact that I ate more when I was in the hospital. What regimen do you think would be most helpful? I love walking when the weather is nice but find a treadmill boring. Would aerobics in the privacy of my home be helpful if I move and shake various parts of my body?
The most important thing is to maintain open dialogue with your doctors -- keep it up! Make sure you are all on the same page with your treatment. It is not uncommon for drugs to have a side effect of weight gain, and being sedentary sure doesn't help. Aerobics in your living room is a really great option. Start with a low-impact version and see if you enjoy it. You can even rent the videos so you don't have to make a commitment -- look around and find a style or instructor you like. Good luck!
Alexandria, Va.: Do you recommend exercising outdoors in this weather? What about for small dogs sporting cool soccer sweatshirts that are not used to weather? Have a great chat!
Exercising in this cold weather can certainly be a challenge! It is important to wear layers and be careful of the small parts -- fingers, toes, nose, lips and ears. If your little guy is exercising with you, be sure to pay attention to him- don't get too much in your "zone". He will want to follow you until he is beyond exhausted. If your dog isn't used to the cold, you may want to take him on shorter trips to help acclimate him to the outdoors.
Anonymous: Is it too late to work on one's flexibility at the age of 37? If not can you suggest some exercises that might make one more flexible
Susan Morse: Dear No Name,
Come on, you know better. Let me put it this way: If you don't work on your flexibility at 37...or 49...or 65...or whatever, will you feel good gradually watching yourself lose more and more of it -- and all the activities that depend on it?
Yoga is a great flexibility and strength builder at any age. For beginners, especially, it's wise to have a good instructor who can help adjust your form. I'd rather do that in person -- at a gym or studio -- but some DVDs are pretty careful about showing form, too. Hold a stretch; don't bounce. Other than that, the important thing is to know your limit and not take a stretch to point where it's painful.
Swimming Q: I'm a runner who has an IT band injury and can't run (in fact I may be looking at surgery in a month or so -- no improvement yet with time off and PT). Anyway, to waive off depression, I've decided to take up swimming in hopes of eventually doing a triathlon. I can only get to the pool three days a week. I'm just working on my endurance right now. Is three days a week enough swimming? I don't want to win a triathlon, just compete, and swimming by far is my weakest point.
Leah Washington: Swimming is an awesome way to maintain your endurance (and train for your triathlon) while recovering from your injury. Three days a week is a good start. If you don't feel like you are getting a strong enough workout, try running in the wate -r- it's much harder than it sounds! You may also want to consider other non-impact activities like an elliptical machine. Just be sure to keep communicating with your PT so you don't exacerbate your injury. IT Bands can be so stubborn! Good luck on your recovery!
Silver Spring, Md.: I hurt the tendon in my thumb about three months ago and I've been in a brace since then. It's coming off soon and I'd like to some upper body exercise, but not anything that will put stress on my thumb, so as to give it more time to heal. What kinds of exercises could I do?
Leah Washington: A good upper body exercise to start with is the old fashioned push-up. It is a great multi-muscle exercise and shouldn't put too much strain on your tendon. To slowly increase your thumb/grip strength, you can get a small bucket and fill it with dried rice. Stick your hand in it and start grabbing handfuls. You can also do thumb curls (I'm not kidding!) with rubberbands. Just monitor your soreness to keep you from doing to much!
Southern Maryland: Is it really too cold and dangerous to walk outside for exercise?
Susan Morse: Goes beyond my comfort level. But if you're dressed in layers (don't forget to cover your head and neck) and moving briskly, and your fingers or toes aren't turning numb, yeah, you're okay. Maybe not ecstatic, but okay. Don't forget to drink, either outside or as soon as you come in. It's possible to get dehydrated in cold weather, too.... Try to walk in a sheltered area -- between trees, between buildings.
Stretches: I just started upping the intensity of my runs and feel it in my legs and glutes. I was wondering what are some of the best stretches for runners?
Leah Washington: To stretch your glutes: lay on your back and bring one knee up to your chest, keeping the other leg straight. Hold for 15 seconds, repeat 3 times. Next, (still laying on your back) bend your left leg so your foot is flat on the floor. Cross your right leg so your ankle is resting on your left knee. Grab under your left knee and pull towards your chest. There are also some great resources out there on yoga for runners -- you may want to check them out. It is important to hold stretches for at least 10 seconds to be useful, but you don't need to hold them longer than 30.
Silver Spring, Md.: Hi. I am considering training for the Marine Corps Marathon this year, which, of course, takes place in late October. However, my husband and I are also considering starting a family this summer. Assuming I do get pregnant late-summer (I realize this is certainly not guaranteed), how doable is running a marathon at 2-3 months along? Thanks!
Susan Morse: Hi running fan,
What's your priority here: starting a family or racing? Sorry, you have to choose. Experts don't recommend running a marathon when you're pregnant -- even early in your pregnancy -- and especially if it's a first pregnancy. It just puts too much stress on the body.
That's not to say you can't run -- even race. But it's a whole lot safer to stick to shorter distances.
Woodley Park, D.C.: Hi Crew, I've been feeling fatigued lately and, although I plan to go to a doctor if it persists, I'd like to know if it may just be an evolutionary thing that humans tend to be less active in the cold weather? Relatedly, I recently read about a study that looked at getting most of your exercise in on the weekends. I'm healthy and fairly active (other than the recent slump), so is it okay if I get most of my weekly exercise on Saturday and Sunday?
The best effects from exercise come with consistency, so it is better to do several smaller workouts throughout the week. You can certainly up the wattage on the weekends when you have a little more time. Try to squeeze in 30 minutes 3-4 times a week -- even if it's just a walk around your beautiful neighborhood. This consistent exercise may also help improve your energy and your mood since you have more endorphins in your system on a regular basis. It's hard to squeeze in sometimes -- but definitely worth it!
Leah Washington: A question I get asked a lot is how to get into an running program if you've never done it before. What I usually tell people is to start with a brisk walk. If you feel pretty good after about 30 minutes, you can move on to running with your next workout. Start with a jog and continue until you feel pretty tired. Start walking until you feel better, then jog a little more. Keep repeating this until you get to 30 minutes. As you get more fit, you will have fewer episodes of walking and more continuous running. The trick is to -- this will help prevent overuse injuries.
Leah Washington: It get a lot of questions about sit-ups and crunches. Some have said they can be bad for your back because of the repetitive motion. This can be avoided if you do your crunches with proper form. When you are laying on your back with your knees bent, you want to press the small of your back into the floor so your back is flat before you curl up. This take the pressure off of the low back and helps work other core muscles.
It is also important to strengthen your back muscles so you don't end up with an imbalance. Lay on your stomach with your legs straight and your arms stretched over your head. Without using your arms, lift your torso and your legs off the floor (like Superman) and hold for one second. Repeat!
Washington: I want to follow up on the comments you have about the cold weather. Is it a particular problem for somebody with exercise-induced asthma? When it gets cold, my chest feels tighter than usual.
Leah Washington: This is very common -- cold weather is often a trigger for asthmatics! If you are particularly sensitive, you may want to avoid the outdoors when it is so cold and dry. If you really want to try, first work with your pulmonologist to make sure you have the best medication plan for your activity level and be vigilant with your peak flow meter! If cold weather isn't for you, swimming is a great exercise for individuals with asthma -- the humidity really helps. Good luck and be safe!
Washington, D.C.: My husband, who is 47 and was a competitive runner and jumper in his school/college days, has has arthroscopic surgery on both knees. They are still painful, though not acutely so. He insists that exercise is good for them and carries on running. I worry that what remaining cartilage there is will be entirely worn out. (Isn't it the running and jumping that did the damage in the first place?) Is there any evidence to support either of our views?
Whole lot of folks looking for answers to that kind of question over the years. Even experts haven't agreed on the answer. Some research has suggested continued exercise on older or injured knees might increase amount of cartilage cushioning the joint, while some research has suggested it might predispose older or injured knees to osteoarthritis.
Now there's some good news.
New study in journal Arthritis & Rheumatism looked at 36 previous studies and finds exercise may not reduce risk of osteoarthritis but it doesn't appear to increase it either.
Notice, it says exercise, not running specifically. About running: That's more controversial. Some orthopedists maintain that once you've had injury or surgery to older knee, you shouldn't run on it.... better to jog or walk to put less stress on the oint. But there's debate.
Baltimore: I have a tip for people worrying about the cold when they run. Keep your water bottle (and your asthma inhaler) on an inside pocket, so the water isn't too cold (or even frozen) when you need a drink. I've even heard of inhalers becoming hard to use in sub-zero temps.
Susan Morse: Thanks Baltimore for that very useful tip!
Yoga question: Is yoga a good calorie burner workout, or is its main benefits the increased flexibility/strength? I'm just trying to decide whether to add yoga to my weekly workout regime, which usually includes three days of cardio and three days of strength training.
Thanks for taking my question!
The latter. The discipline does lot of good things for you, but it's not primarily an aerobic exercise. I'll post a link to a story you may find helpful on the subject.
Anonymous: I visited a nutritionist and was told that I have 46 percent body fat. I'm 5 foot 7...204 pounds...and female. She's helping me get my diet on track, but I've been exercising like a demon for months, and it is not working. I'm panicking. Help me. What do I do??
Leah Washington: Keep up with your exercise!!! I cannot stress this enough. Many people have the misconception that exercise is the primary weight-loss mechanism. A healthy diet is how you will truly get your weight under control -- I'm glad you are working with a nutritionist! The key here is that exercise will help you keep your weight off! Diet alone is not as effective in maintaining long-term weight loss. Beyond the weight management benefits, exercise has so many other things to offer like more energy, stress-relief, improving cardiovascular fitness, preventing disease, etc., it would be silly to give it up. Keep working -- I promise it will pay off! You can do it!
Alexandria, Va.: Thanks for the chat.
My problem area is my calves and knees.....they are heavy, disproportionately so to the rest of my body. In addition to "self-acceptance", are there good stretches or other exercises that would lengthen the muscles, and reduce my envy of gals who can wear regular boots?
I'm practicing the "down dog" pretty often, by the way.
Leah Washington: Down Dog is a really good stretch for the calves, so keep it up on that one! A good way to tone your calves is to stand on a step; relax your ankles so your heels are below the step. Raise up as high as you can go on your toes, then slowly lower back down. To make it harder (you may need some help with balance) try it standing on one foot. Start with three sets of 10-15 reps. To get the front of your lower leg, stand flat on the ground and tap your toes up and down. You should feel this on the front of your shin.
Lack of motivation: I've had a tough personal time lately. I used to do yoga, and jog. Since I've been in a bad personal batch, I really haven't exercised at all. I need a push, but a reasonable push. How/where can I find that?
Susan Morse: Need a push,
Some ideas that have been shown to work in this area:
* Enlist a friend to exercise with you. (An "exercise buddy" can make workouts more social -- therefore, more fun. And you don't want to let your buddy down by not showing up.)
* Find something active you like to do. (Make it a game, not a chore. Pick something active you like to do. The list is endless: Rollerblading (okay, maybe not today), bowling, ice skating, cycling, pickup basketball, ultimate Frisbee, hiking, walking, tag with your neighbor's kid.... you get the idea....
* Keep track of your efforts and your progress so you can see results.
* Reward yourself (a new yoga mat? a movie?) for progress made. Good luck!
washingtonpost.com: Yoga to Control Weight? That May Be a Stretch (Post, Aug. 16, 2005)
Susan Morse: Here's the link to that yoga and calorie-burning story.
Temple Hills, Md.: I am a 37-year-old black male, who was very athletic during my early years. Now, I can hardly walk. I have noticed that my ailing hip/leg hurts more after long bouts of sex, I can hardly walk the next day. Is there a correlation between sex and joint pain?
I don't think there is a correlation between sex and joint pain, but the positions you are using are probably the culprit. Work with your partner to find something that is comfortable for both of you. You should also consider seeing your physician to make sure there is no underlying problem causing your hip to hurt so much, like avascular necrosis or arthritis (common in former athletes). It does seem unusual for you to have so much pain.
Washington, D.C.: What is the proper wait time between workouts when you are sore? I found a DVD I love -- and by the way my legs feel, I know it will work, but is every other day too much when you are sore?
(I alternate days with Pilates/yoga/etc.) I don't want to lose momentum but don't want to hurt myself either.
You really won't cause further injury if you exercise while you are sore. The important thing is moderation -- alternating with a lower intensity is a great way to go, and often the exercise will help your soreness dissipate. Other things that help are getting lots of fluids (water or a sports drink -- not anything caffeinated!) and keeping your potassium levels up (bananas are great for this).
The trick it to recognize soreness from actual injury (and sometimes this just takes learning how your body reacts to stress and injury). If it's just soreness (and don't get me wrong, we can all get pretty sore!), then just take it easy and your should be fine -- no reason to lose momentum!
Pre-run meal: I'm training for a 10K, and typically do my long run on Sunday afternoons. What should I eat beforehand? Sometimes I come home and within 15 minutes I am ridiculously hungry. So I guess I'm not eating enough beforehand.
Leah Washington: This is a really tough question to answer, because it varies for everyone. You probably want to start with a good carb snack (like a bagel and fruit, an energy bar, etc.). Try to eat about 30 minutes before you run so your snack won't still be in your stomach when you start. Then experiment from there -- some eat a lot, other runners I know can't eat anything an hour before they run. You may also want to look into the glucose gels that are available for long distance runners who might need a snack mid run -- you can find these at a good running store or catalogue (sometimes hiking stores like REI have them too). This can be a challenging time, but it is worth it once you have yourself figured out!
Susan Morse: Thanks, chatters! You've been a great bunch. Wish we could get to all the questions, but that's all we have time for today.
See you back here for the next Moving Crew chat Tuesday, Feb. 20. Keep warm (well, try!!!!) and keep fit until then! Can't wait? Send your questions to move@washpost.com. And look for the next Moving Crew column in the Post's Health section next Tuesday, Feb. 13.
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online 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.
| 112.731707 | 0.585366 | 0.634146 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/01/30/DI2007013001233.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/01/30/DI2007013001233.html
|
Freedom Rock
|
2007020719
|
J. Freedom du Lac: Greetings, Freedom Rockettes. Weather permitting, I'm off to the balmy climes of Southern California tomorrow for Grammypalooza. Lots on tap out there - interviews, shows, Justin Timberlake's party, the Grammys themselves, maybe an hour-two of sleep. But for now ... I'm yours. Let's do this.
Peyton Fan, USA: JF: Any opinions/thoughts on the musical performances during Sunday's Bowl game???
J. Freedom du Lac: The NFL should do away with the Super Bowl halftime show, cuz it's never going to get any better than Prince in a do-rag, standing on a glyph of a stage in the driving rain, wailing away on his guitar, tearing through covers and hits and album tracks. "Baby I'm a Star"? Damn straight! Was there also a football game on Sunday? I don't even remember.
Va. Beach, Va.: Garth Brooks should hire Rick Rubin to produce the "comeback" album by fictional rocker Chris Gaines.
J. Freedom du Lac: Garth Brooks is too busy working the aisles at Wal-Mart, trying to convince the justfolks to buy his latest -available exclusively at Wal-Mart, just like the upcoming Eagles album. (Notice you've never seen Don Henley and Garth Brooks in the same place at the same time. Just saying.) Anyway, Rick Rubin is having himself quite a nice run. It all started with The Washington Post feature story on him! OK, not really. But there is something to The Washington Post feature karma. He's up for producer of the year and three of the five album of the year nominees have Rubin listed in the production credits. (Should mean he's a slam-dunk winner, right? But the Recording Academy moves in mysterious ways.) Anyway, will.i.am, also featured By This Very Newspaper, is also up for producer of the year. Whereas Timbaland, not featured, got no love, despite his assault on the upper-reaches of the charts with Nelly Furtado and Justin Timberlake.
Anyway, The New York Times reported yesterday that Rick may or may not be taking over Columbia Records as co-chairman, which may or may not be a good thing. His strength is in coaxing great music out of artists, not in doing whatever it is that the suits in the executive suites do. (Not that he owns a suit.) He's an art man not a bidnessman.
Hot in herrrrrrre: What can I listen to to stay warm or at least avoid frrrrezing?
J. Freedom du Lac: Hot Hot Heat, of course. (But not John Lee Hooker's "Boogie Chillen," smokin' as it may be.)
Saw the Sufjan show last night. Wow. Worth every hour that I slept out. The only downside was the show was so short, otherwise one of my top ten concerts (out of 200+ shows). The orchestra sounded great with his band and Sufjan's voice has some incredible range. Your thoughts?
J. Freedom du Lac: I thought it was extraordinary. Sufjan at a grand piano with his own orchestra, 25 musicians including a 10-piece string section and two rows of brass and woodwinds -- that's really the way his music is meant to be played and heard. "Detroit, Lift Up Your Weary Head" was particularly breathtaking. "Seven Swans" and the closer, "Majesty Snowbird," too. The show was relatively short, but it was also incredibly intense and I'm not sure he/we could have survived 90+ minutes of crescendos and breakdowns and changes and so on. (And anyway, short is the new long. THe running time of the set was about the same as it was for the Yeah Yeah Yeahs at the 9:30 and Clap Your Hands Say Meh at same and a bunch of other performances I've seen lately.)
Certainly can't say that you didn't get your money's worth ... unless you actually paid somebody $300 plus naming rights to your first born for a pair of tickets on Craigslist. Ah, Capitalism!
Baltimore, Md.: Im a big fan of reggae singer Matisyahu. What do you think of his chances of taking home the Grammy for best reggae album?
J. Freedom du Lac: Seems like just a year ago when everybody was buzzing about Matisyahu. And then, after showing up at pretty much every outdoor music festival in the summer of 2006, he kinda just disappeared, didn't he? Into the ethers. Hypey goes poof. He could win, but he could also face a backlash from the folks who vote in the reggae category. So, I'd say a coin flip.
Burke, Va.: Is the new Fall Out Boy album worth dropping $10 on? What happened to the days of concise song titles? Does everyone want to be like Fiona Apple?
J. Freedom du Lac: No, they all want to be like Sufjan Stevens. Good luck, kids - it ain't happenin!
Allison Stewart's review in today's edition of This Very Newspaper suggests that yes, it's worth buying the album. As always, your mileage may vary.
Burbank, Calif.: How's that Wa Po feature magic working for Sly Stone?
J. Freedom du Lac: Beautifully, actually. We lured him out of his cave, which was an accomplishment in and of itself.
Prince Question: How many sets of twins has Prince gone through ?
J. Freedom du Lac: On stage, or, um, elsewhere? Because we could be getting into Wilt Chamberlain territory if you mean the latter. I'll pass on this one. Next!
Annapolis, Md.: Im not a big fan of reggae singer Matisyahu. What do you think of his chances of being strapped to a rocket and being shot into space, never to be heard from ever again?
J. Freedom du Lac: About 5:2.
Silver Spring, Md.: My wife teaches middle school...the kids thought the halftime show was weak.
My wife refused to discuss the topic with them as the obviously think Justin Timberlake has it all figured out.
Did you hear anything about the Bilal show a week or two ago? I heard some track on BBC radio (really the only option for good new music) and was very impressed with what I heard.
J. Freedom du Lac: Aerosmith with Britney Spears is weak. Paul McCartney sleepwalking through his catalogue is weak. Up With People is weak. Justin flashing The Jackson One is -- well, that was interesting. But not a great musical performance. What the kids don't know the decrepit pop music critics understand.
Burke, Va.: Were you able to catch the Subdudes at the Barns of Wolf Trap a couple of weeks ago? They were very good and would be worth seeing in an outdoor festival type setting.
J. Freedom du Lac: Did not see them. Duly noted. Thanks, etc.
Washingaton, D.C.: So I gotta ask: is Rakim still the illest MC ever?
J. Freedom du Lac: Based on his show at the 9:30 club last fall ... maybe not. Didn't flash enough of that golden flow. Too many crowd rap-alongs. Too much stopping and starting. But, then, who in their right mind would rank the illest based on their live performances? Freestyling is its own category, of course. But that's not what you/we are talking about. I say he's still The Greatest/Illest/Bestest. By the way, Friend of Freedom Rock Brian Coleman did a book a couple years back called "Rakim Told Me," and it's absolutely worth seking out. But wait, there's more! He has an expanded version of the book coming this June on Random House. It's called "Check The Technique." Worth checking out.
C'mon J Freedom: How can you dis McCartney?
Live and let die, man.
J. Freedom du Lac: It wasn't a great performance. Admit it and move on.
He's a guy that needs to get with Rick Rubin, by the way. They could achieve greatness together. I just know it.
Prince O-:->: How does the Vegas show compare to the energy of the Super Bowl set? I expected him to wimp out in the rain (he is Prince) but I thought it was outstanding. The only let down was the lack of an assless chaps wardrobe malfunction. That would have been classic!
J. Freedom du Lac: The Super Bowl set slayed the show I saw in Las Vegas. Prince thrives on audience energy. He'll play longer and harder in Vegas if the crowd is really electric. He hardly mailed it in when I saw him there. But he was explosive at the Super Bowl. The Club 3121 set just didn't compare.
As for the little purple polyglot's pants -- I'm sure CBS had a plan in case the bottom fell out. Like, maybe the halftime show's producers could have pushed a button and the billowing sheet that came up for his guitar solo would have popped up early. Or something.
Peoria, Ill.: Speaking of bands that were awesome but don't matter anymore, you know who I miss? The Sugarcubes.
J. Freedom du Lac: Bjork is working with Timbaland on her new album. An exciting development, though it also has the potential to be a complete disaster. Sorta like her dead swan dress.
Washington, DC.:. Any time someone mentions the Grammys, I start to think about Milli Vanilli. Remind me again...how was it that Vanilli died? I like to think that he just walked out to sea and let the ocean carry him away. So peaceful! But that's also how I imagine Sylvia Plath dying, and I've been told it didn't go down exactly like that.
J. Freedom du Lac: I believe an Arista executive actually killed him.
Washington, D.C.: Free! I went to Barack Obama's rally on Friday and his people played Built to Spill. Based on music choice alone, he's the candidate for me!
J. Freedom du Lac: Wow, really? What song. This is interesting. Also strange that it's February 2007 and we're already talking about presidential candidates and their music. Can it be long before Rudy Giuliani's iPod most-played list is reprinted in The Reliable Source? And do you think Da (ex-) Mayor is a Papoose fan?
Baltimore, Md.: Good call on Mac and Rubin. I'd like to see Rubin work with the Cure. I think Robert Smith might have one good album left in him.
J. Freedom du Lac: Rick actually has Macca at the top of his wish list. At least he did when we talked in late '05. He doesn't call or write anymore. No love.
St. Peters, Pa.: Look, I know you don't know about iTunes since you get all your music for free downloaded straight into your auditory cortex but I'm just wondering if anyone else has noticed how completely useless the reviews are there. The consist of three ratings:
"Oh my god -your band name here] is the best band ever and this album is even better than the last one!!!!"
"-Your band name here] are total sellouts and this album sucks!!!!!"
"-lead singer- of -your band name here] is a total hotty!!!!!"
Though usually the reviews have more exclamation points and spelling errors. I don't have a question, I'm just grumpy about this. Thanks for listening, you awesome, hot, sell-out.
J. Freedom du Lac: I spend more time rooting around on the iTunes Music Store than you might expect. It's like going to the record store, only I don't have to wear pants. And no rockist clerks to deal with, either. The iTunes reviews are, in fact, completely worthless. Somewhat better are the user reviews for CDs on Amazon.com/CDnow.com/and whateverothernamesjbezosowns.com. Though as we all know, writing about music is like dancing about architecture.
Speaking of the Eagles, please call in all of your industry favors to make sure their upcoming "first album of all new material in over thirty years" never sees the light of day. If they want to continue to do biennial "farewell tours" featuring their mellow L.A. cowboy-rock classics and Henley's solo hits (most of which were written by Danny Kortchmar anyway), fine. But does the world need an update of "Already Gone" or "Doolin-Dalton?" I think not.
Please do what you can. Thanks.
J. Freedom du Lac: As Freedom Rock regulars know, Don Henley and I are not exactly best friends forever. (And now, the irregulars know, too.) No juice at Walmart, either, even if I did buy a fancy pair of $14 Wranglers last month at the Walmart #2853 in La Plata. (I've also purchased denim products at the Walmart in Pigeon Forge, TN. All the garden spots!)
Washington, D.C.: Okay, maybe I'm too sensitive after Biden's comments, but it kind of disturbs me to heard the fairer skinned member of Milli Vanilli referred to as "Vanilli". This I do remember from my grade school days, his name was Rob. And he died of a drug overdose. On a related note, Milli Vanilli had the best "Behind the Music" show ever. You just never get tired of "Girl you know it's, Girl you know it's, Girl you know it's..."
J. Freedom du Lac: Very funny. Agreed re "Behind the Music." A true VH1 classic. You know, Nipplegate got more press (by a wide margin), but the "Girl you know it's..." fiasco is probably pop music's greatest all-time oops.
Foggy Bottom, Washington, D.C.: J Free! Hope you had a lovely Super Bowl Sunday. What'd you think of Prince? Rock god or Aunt Jemima dressed as a 70s porn star?
J. Freedom du Lac: If lovely means slogging through 1,400 column inches of interview transcripts and story notes on The Magazine Piece From Hell -- then yes, it was lovely! Thankfully, Prince was there to save the day. I'm not mad at the do-rag. He was clearly trying to avoid having a hair malfunction. (And he's VERY vain about his hair [among other things]; remember his surprise appearance on American Idol last year, when he came out and started combing his hair? Morris Day has nothing on him.)
Leesburg, Va.: I think you've answered this in the past, but who else would you like to see Rick Rubin work with? I'd like to see him work with Dolly Parton and Willie Nelson.
J. Freedom du Lac: I'm not sure Rick's beard and Willie's pigtails could fit into the same room. But it would be incredibly cool if they teamed up. Definitely a more interesting possibility than Willie with Ryan Adams.
Bethesda, Md.: OK I was wondering what you thought of the Kilers taking a mainly unsuccessful CD "First Impresssions of Earth" (the strokes) and using it as inspriation for their own (Sam's Town). Since this CD was mainly unsuccessful, was it smart to use it as inspiration???
J. Freedom du Lac: Actually, they turned to two very successful albums for inspiration: Springsteen's "Born to Run" and U2's "Joshua Tree." Nothing inherently wrong with that, but for the fact that the resulting album felt empty to me, an ersatz epic.
Prince Covers: What was up Prince covering 40 year old songs? First I thought it was because of Black History Month (Tina Turner, Hendrix), but those were covers of covers (Creedence, Dylan).
J. Freedom du Lac: But they worked. That's all that matters. They sounded great -- and fresh. I kind of like that he didn't feel the need to load the set with his own songs, even though he has so many great one in his catalogue. Shows that his ego is still incredibly healthy. I mean, he wouldn't have done the covers if he thought his set list would overshadow the performance itself, right? He transcended the material.
Washington, D.C.: Why don't you answer serious questions?
J. Freedom du Lac: Ask one and I will. But don't ask it with six minutes left to go in the chat. My brain moves at a leisurely pace.
Washington, D.C.: The Police at the Grammy's...
Smoothing of tensions between Sting and Stewart Copeland and the resurection of the best band from the 80s?
I know Coachella and a tour are supposedly in the works, but I won't believe it until I see it.
J. Freedom du Lac: Not sure what the motivating forces were but I'm glad they're coming back. And they hardly intend this to be a one-and-done deal. They're absolutely planning to tour this summer. Promoters are negotiating dates as we speak.
Garth Brooks is too busy working the aisles at Wal-Mart, trying to convince the justfolks to buy his latest -available exclusively at Wal-Mart, just like the upcoming Eagles album. : ya but..
I have to consider that better than the Goo Goo Dolls latest album, which is only available through QVC with a special show this week to hawk it.
J. Freedom du Lac: The traditional music industry is dead. Long live the music industry! Target also has some sort of deal in the works with some oldie artists. It's the new thing.
Prince's Do Rag: I loved the Do Rag (and I find it hilarious that an AP story had no idea of its purpose) and I knew he was going to literally throw down when he tossed it off the stage. That made me go nuts. I love Prince. He should do the halftime show every year.
J. Freedom du Lac: I'm rooting for Sufjan Stevens with a full orchestra next year. "Casimir Pulaski Day" meets Super Bowl Sunday. "And that sound you just heard, ladies and gentlemen, was 93 million people simultaneously scratching their heads."
Herndon, Va.: Do Grammys really mean that much to the performers who recieve them? The award, to me at least, seems like a measure of how mainstream an artist has been in any given year. Is that what all artists should be going for??
J. Freedom du Lac: Sure, it's nice to be recognized by your peers. But I don't think anybody measures their own artistic worth based on the number of statuettes they have in the trophy case. Well, maybe Christopher Cross does. And Sting. But most don't. But winning an award -- or, better yet, multiple awards in the same night -- can really do good things for your career. Just ask Bonnie Raitt. And Norah Jones. And Sheryl Crow. And everybody else whose CD sales have benefitted from a big Grammy bounce. If Mary J Blige and/or the Dixie Chicks sweep up on Sunday, you can be sure that they'll see a huge sales spike the following week. It's like going on Oprah, only you get to wear fancier duds and can kick it the night before at the big Clive Davis party.
RE: Macca: Was that Paul McCartney "I'm Singing in my Back Yard" album any good. It kinda came and went, didn't it?
J. Freedom du Lac: Yes, and I'm disappointed that you don't remember every word of my review. If you ask nicely and send him a bootleg of last night's Sufjan show, Producer David might look for a link.
Herndon, Va.: Hey. With more performers announced at the Grammys, who will make the biggest spectacle of him/herself? There's always someone. Also, I thought Billy Joel was sort of sucky singing the National Anthem at the Superbowl. Your thoughts? Thanks.
J. Freedom du Lac: I'm at once intrigued and perplexed by the latest announcement: Smokey Robinson, Lionel Richie and Chris Brown will be performing together. I get it, but I don't see it. As far as making a spectacle, I vote for whiever of the amateurs wins the My Grammy Moment contest and gets up on stage with Justin Timberlake to do song on live TV, in a room filled with the industry's biggest stars and most important players. No pressure or anything! (Gulp.)
washingtonpost.com: Paul McCartney, Man of Many Parts________________________
Grammy-land, Calif.: J Freedom: Any exciting interviews lined up for Grammy week???
J. Freedom du Lac: Theoretically, yes. Can't talk about who all I'm interviewing out there, but come back here Monday and I'll tell some tales out of school. We're moving the chat up a day to talk Grammy, and nothing but, Monday at noon EST.
Santa Fe, N.M.: I'm judging from your adroit dodge of the Fall Out Boy question that you're not a fan. Is that correct?
J. Freedom du Lac: I punted because I haven't formed an opinion about the new album. I'm going to spend some time with it on the flight west, though, and I'm also going to see Fall Out Boy play live on Saturday night at the Roxy. You, too, can be there! Sorta: The concert will be broadcast on AOL Music LIVE beginning at 8pm PST.
more Prince: Don't forget about the Florida A&M marching band - sheer brilliance.
J. Freedom du Lac: I thought I'd grown tired of marching bands in pop music, but I guess I hadn't. Now excuse me while I head over to YouTube to revisit the halftime show.
Thanks for stopping by, as always. Hope to see you back here on Monday. No Tuesday chat next week so you'll have to send your pop music questions to Mark Plotkin, instead. Enjoy.
Harrisburg, Pa: Wow. I'm glad I reread your response. I thought Rick Rubin was going to produce an album with "Macacca" George Allen, not "Macca" Paul McCartney.
J. Freedom du Lac: Thank you.
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online 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.
| 110 | 0.585366 | 0.731707 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/05/AR2007020501628.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/05/AR2007020501628.html
|
The Emperor's New Clothes. Seriously.
|
2007020719
|
NEW YORK, Feb. 5 -- Designers here are unveiling their fall 2007 collections and already there have been moments that validate the most outlandish portrayals of the fashion industry in popular culture. There has been harmless silliness as well as evidence of the industry's unnerving disengagement from the society it serves. All of it falls under the heading of creative license.
Saturday afternoon, designer Alexandre Herchcovitch sent a group of dresses and tops down his runway at Bryant Park that looked like they had been constructed from black plastic garbage bags. No one laughed. No one's mouth curled into a sneer of dismissal. Instead, the crowd remained respectfully silent. If a designer would like to publicly ponder the notion of "woman as compost," the industry will give him his space. Fashion is fueled by creative expression, so goes the established thinking. To stifle that freedom is to hinder the industry's growth.
No one's health is likely to be damaged by an ugly dress. But the disappointing panel discussion, hosted by the Council of Fashion Designers of America Monday morning, on eating disorders among models and the pressures on them to maintain a reed-thin figure, was not so benign. The smartest voice in the room belonged to the model Natalia Vodianova, best known for her work with Calvin Klein, who was seated in the audience. She talked plainly about her dysfunctional relationship with food, her unhealthy weight loss and the negative feedback from designers when she regained some of that weight.
The four panelists seemed intent on thanking the CFDA for the opportunity to participate in the event and offering reassurance that they were not out to inhibit the designers' creative freedom. No one addressed the responsibilities that come with such boundless artistic expression. No one focused on the core issue of why designers even want to use models who are so thin that their appearance raises fears about ill-health. The presentation hit rock bottom when the physical fitness trainer and panelist David Kirsch offered: "I'd rather see a healthy size 4 than an unhealthy size 0."
Fashion is a business that is willing to put up with a lot. Too much, maybe. No idea is dismissed as being too ludicrous.
On the BCBG Max Azria runway Friday, a model walked out wearing a quilted jacket that folded open in front like the pages of a book. The jacket didn't have lapels as much as it had wings. It was knee-slappingly ridiculous, but the audience watched it pass with the dispassion of the comatose. Azria followed up with jumpsuits that opened across the tush like a pair of chaps. The average person would have reared back in hysteria. The fashion crowd didn't blink.
The industry has worked so hard to be an open and nurturing ground for the eccentrics and the oddballs that it has grown numb. It's proud of the fact that it is never shocked. The goofy and the sublime are greeted with equal good manners. What fashion needs is a lesson in how to boo.
A little of that know-how would have been helpful at the Jackie Rogers show. Rogers once walked the runway for Coco Chanel. Today, she is a voluptuous woman with a brown pixie, but with the height and carriage of a model. She is known for cocktail dresses and evening gowns worn by women who have enough money and vanity to allow them to enter their golden years with few of their original parts.
Rogers showed her collection at Scores West, which is a "gentleman's club." It is hard to resist a womenswear show set in a strip joint, especially one that was recently raided on prostitution charges. The models -- dressed in patent-leather-trimmed dresses, look-at-me fitted suits and riotously colored devore velvet blouses -- strutted through the crowd and posed on a wooden stage decorated with red hearts.
A brass pole was positioned prominently on one side of the room. Would one of the models suddenly fling her leg around it and twirl? And here's a more important question: Would the show be better or worse without the clothes?
When the show ended, Rogers took her bows in a black pantsuit and white shirt with a large, dramatic collar. Surrounded by her models -- all fully clothed -- she looked like a madam overseeing the girls at her bordello.
This city is filled with designers trying to find the sweet spot between clothes that are so boring one can hardly work up the energy to disparage them and clothes that are so ridiculous that one is left trying to figure out where to begin the criticism. Would it be too cruel to find fault with a designer's basic concept? Erin Fetherston, one of the recipients of an Ecco Domani grant, showed her collection Sunday. The cash awards from the wine company are intended to help young designers mount a runway show. Fetherston has a light hand and a passion for feminine, girlish clothes. She is a tall, lanky platinum blonde from San Francisco on whom skirts as short and sweet as a tutu have a frothy charm. But Fetherston has few doppelgangers in this world. Most women -- even those who are just entering their 20s -- would look like they were wearing their Barbie's clothes.
|
NEW YORK, Feb. 5 -- Designers here are unveiling their fall 2007 collections and already there have been moments that validate the most outlandish portrayals of the fashion industry in popular culture. There has been harmless silliness as well as evidence of the industry's unnerving disengagement from the society it serves. All of it falls under the heading of creative license....
| 15.257576 | 0.984848 | 64.015152 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/30/AR2007013001019.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/30/AR2007013001019.html
|
Many Happy Returns
|
2007020719
|
Some of network television's biggest hits took a long winter's nap this season and disappeared from the schedule -- for a while.
There was a time when being placed on hiatus meant that a TV show was awaiting inevitable cancellation. But now, with only 22 episodes to air over a 35-week television season, networks are scrambling for ways to keep fans engaged in serialized dramas.
Fox's "Prison Break" returned Jan. 22. ABC's "Lost" is back on Wednesday at 10 p.m. And CBS's newest success "Jericho" returns to the schedule Feb. 21. They all come back with a promise of uninterrupted runs into the season finales.
Other series also are experimenting with their schedules: After a Dec. 4 cliffhanger, NBC's "Heroes" began airing seven new episodes on Jan. 22. But it will break in March, returning April 16 with five new installments through its May 14 season finale.
"It's reflective of what has become a general climate in TV," said "Prison Break" executive producer Matt Olmstead. "Having a normal schedule where there's repeats, two on and two off -- that can frustrate viewers."
Viewers have become much more demanding, said "Lost" executive producer Carlton Cuse. "The notion that the audience can tolerate repeats is gone."
From their inception, cable shows such as "The Sopranos" and "Rescue Me" have aired new episodes in clusters, and now networks increasingly are following suit.
"It's another way of competing with cable," said "Jericho" executive producer Carol Barbee. "I think the audience is starting to get used to the idea of 'Let me know when you're ready [with new episodes] and I'll watch.'"
In its second season, "Lost" frustrated fans by alternating two or three consecutive new episodes with two or three repeats.
In preparing for Season 3, "Lost" had a few choices: Keep things as they were and continue to antagonize loyal devotees; air the episodes all in a row a la "24"; or strategically break up the season.
The producers and ABC decided to air six episodes in the fall and the remaining 16 beginning in February. But Cuse and executive producer Damon Lindelof weren't prepared for viewer backlash to this season's initial episodes -- which focused almost exclusively on Jack (Matthew Fox), Kate (Evangeline Lilly) and Sawyer (Josh Holloway) being held captive by the Others.
When the series returns it will focus on fan favorite characters such as Sayid (Naveen Andrews) and Claire (Emilie de Ravin).
|
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.
| 17.066667 | 0.433333 | 0.5 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/05/AR2007020501297.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/05/AR2007020501297.html
|
Chief Justice Counsels Humility
|
2007020719
|
Attention, Supreme Court practitioners! Absolutely free advice on how to make your briefs better-read, your arguments more closely followed, your justices more sympathetic, courtesy of the man who's been successful on both sides of the table, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.
First, pretend that you're not always right.
"We get hundreds and hundreds of briefs, and they're all the same," Roberts told a crowd of eager law students and faculty members last week at the Northwestern University School of Law in Chicago. "Somebody says, 'My client clearly deserves to win, the cases clearly do this, the language clearly reads this,' blah, blah blah. And you pick up the other side and, lo and behold, they think they clearly deserve to win."
How about a little recognition that it's a tough job? Roberts asked.
"I mean, if it was an easy case, we wouldn't have it."
He dispensed advice for lawyers, law students and law-school deans during a question-and-answer session that followed a more formal address.
Roberts built a reputation as a powerful Supreme Court litigator, arguing nearly 40 cases as a government attorney and private lawyer and winning about 70 percent of the time. He was known for anticipating hundreds of questions from the justices and carefully practicing each response.
But after 16 months as a justice, he advised that lawyers try to become more "attuned" to what judges are asking. "I would try today to be much more receptive, try to process more effectively, 'Now what does that question tell me about what that judge is thinking?' and respond rapidly rather than trying to stick to my script," Roberts said.
The chief justice said an acknowledgment that the justices face a complicated case can attract sympathy from the bench, while an argument that a case is a no-brainer is a challenge to start looking for holes.
And for the truly brave-hearted advocate, Roberts offered this:
"You don't see it very often and it can obviously be risky, but for somebody to get up and say, 'The biggest argument against us is' whatever, 'this precedent that you decided six years ago, and if you were going to follow it down the line, my client should probably lose. Here's why I think you shouldn't follow it in this case.' " He added: "I think that type of an approach could be very effective."
As for law students, Roberts said he thinks they are more impressive than they were when he graduated from Harvard nearly three decades ago. "People who apply to be clerks [for the justices], for example, it's not just that they did well in law school -- they've got other degrees, they've spent time working in a business, they've written books and cured diseases," he said to laughter.
But he's not sure whether law grads are always able to put their knowledge to work.
"I don't think they spend a great deal of time with what somebody like a Cicero might refer to as rhetoric, or the idea of taking their understanding of ideas and being able to communicate them in a particular way," Roberts said, adding that the ability to advocate or negotiate is "such a big part of what lawyers do no matter where you go."
If he were dean of a law school, Roberts said, looking at Northwestern Dean David E. Van Zandt, he might spend more time on that.
And he took one other stand, when a student asked whether judges' terms should be limited, adding: "Some of our professors say that."
"Um, you know, I'm not in favor of term limits for judges," Roberts deadpanned.
|
Attention, Supreme Court practitioners! Absolutely free advice on how to make your briefs better-read, your arguments more closely followed, your justices more sympathetic, courtesy of the man who's been successful on both sides of the table, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.
| 14.784314 | 1 | 51 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/05/AR2007020501313.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/05/AR2007020501313.html
|
Edwards Introduces Plan For Health-Care Coverage
|
2007020719
|
Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards yesterday issued a blueprint aimed at providing health-care coverage for all Americans and said he would raise taxes to help pay the roughly $100 billion annual bill.
The plan would require employers to provide health insurance for employees or pay a portion of their payroll into a fund that would help individuals buy their own insurance. Edwards said the plan would demand that people take responsibility for obtaining insurance, either from employers or on their own.
The federal government would provide tax credits to help underwrite the cost of insurance and, through the states, would establish state or regional health-care markets, or purchasing pools, that would offer competing health plans to individuals.
"This is the shared-responsibility approach to reforming our health-care system," Edwards said in an interview. "I think it's a dramatic change in the health-care system, the kind of transformation it needs. It's a truly universal system."
Edwards said the cost of the plan would be $90 billion to $120 billion once it is fully implemented. He said the major share of the cost could be paid for by eliminating President Bush's tax cuts for families with incomes of more than $200,000. More revenue could come through more aggressive efforts by the Internal Revenue Service to collect some taxes now going unpaid.
Edwards said the plan bears some resemblance to the new health-care program enacted in Massachusetts, but he said it would require employers that do not provide health insurance to pay a greater share of their revenue into a government fund to help individuals buy insurance.
He called the plan less complicated than that proposed by Bill Clinton and Hillary Rodham Clinton when they were in the White House.
|
Get Washington DC,Virginia,Maryland and national news. Get the latest/breaking news,featuring national security,science and courts. Read news headlines from the nation and from The Washington Post. Visit www.washingtonpost.com/nation today.
| 7.97619 | 0.380952 | 0.380952 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/05/AR2007020501295.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/05/AR2007020501295.html
|
Pelosi Catches Nonstop Flights Home
|
2007020719
|
Amid rumblings from conservatives that she is seeking special treatment, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D) will receive use of an Air Force jet larger than the one used by her predecessor, Rep. J. Dennis Hastert, so she can fly nonstop to her home in San Francisco.
Ever since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the speaker, who is next in line for the presidency after the vice president, has been given use of a government plane for security reasons. Hastert (R-Ill.), who had flown commercially before the attacks, was the first to have use of a plane. But the one he traveled in was too small to make it to California without refueling.
Yesterday, the House sergeant-at-arms issued a statement saying that the leadership is awaiting word from the Air Force on the rules for using the plane. It is unclear, for example, who can travel with Pelosi and whether she can return home from a political event on the taxpayer-funded plane.
Pelosi's office requested the guidelines, triggering a story in the Washington Times in which sources questioned whether she was asking for more than the former speaker received.
Democratic aides sputtered about a "right-wing hatchet job" to make Pelosi look bad. But, said one involved in the negotiations, "this is about security, not about convenience."
An aide in Hastert's office said yesterday that the former speaker used the plane for official business but not for political travel. He did at times transport his wife and staff when he was flying to and from Illinois.
Brendan Daley, a spokesman for Pelosi, said that she will not use the plane for political travel.
|
Latest news on the US federal government. Information and analysis of federal legislation, government contracts and regulations. Search for government job openings, career information and federal employee benefits news.
| 9.138889 | 0.444444 | 0.5 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/05/AR2007020501668.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/05/AR2007020501668.html
|
Overachieving Students Hear a New Message: Lighten Up
|
2007020719
|
Eleven students are breathing deeply in the darkened classroom at Walt Whitman High School in Bethesda. They're relaxing their facial muscles, loosening their bellies and trying to focus on the soles of their feet.
It's not the kind of after-school activity one would expect at this Washington area high school known for academic rigor. But these days, some educators and parents are trying to teach students at Whitman and other top schools a new skill: how to dial it down, pull back and relax.
In a region where the high school experience has evolved into an advanced placement-fueled academic arms race, parents and school officials are starting to do the unthinkable: They're saying no to adolescents who want to load up on AP courses, schedule eight-period days and join the school newspaper, track team and high school band at the same time.
Instead, they're encouraging them to take honors instead of AP courses, instituting homework-free weekends and changing class schedules to give students time to breathe and regroup between subjects. And at Whitman, they're teaching them to meditate.
There has always been stress in students' lives, but parents, counselors and experts say there is more today than ever. And teens say most often it is schoolwork and college applications that are putting them on edge.
In a 2005 poll, conducted by The Washington Post, the Kaiser Family Foundation and Harvard University, more than half the D.C. area adolescents surveyed -- 58 percent -- said school was their biggest cause of stress. About 35 percent of local teens said they experienced stress frequently, compared with 27 percent of teens nationwide.
"People make it seem like you can't be competitive if you don't take a thousand AP courses," said Elaine Singerman, a junior at Oakton High School in Vienna. "It's like our educational system is eating us alive."
At Whitman, the effort to calm students has taken the form of weekly meditation sessions. Every Wednesday, meditation instructor Jonathan Foust leads the group through a series of breathing exercises -- a 60-minute respite from homework, taxing extracurriculars and the daily stress of being a teen.
On a recent day, a mix of boys and girls in hoodies and T-shirts gathered in Room C-124. After they arranged their desks in a circle and the fluorescent lights were dimmed, Foust went around the room and asked them about their stressors. Schoolwork was No. 1 on everyone's list.
Foust then led the students through the exercises: encouraging them to take deep breaths, clear their heads and relax their arms. He had them meditate sitting down and standing up. When a series of announcements over the PA system threatened to break the reverie, Foust gently reminded his pupils that being able to screen out such noise is critical to the art of relaxing.
"It helps you escape for a while," said Sammi Massey, 14.
By the end of the hour-long session, one student was so relaxed -- or, perhaps, so exhausted from a long day at school -- he fell asleep.
|
Eleven students are breathing deeply in the darkened classroom at Walt Whitman High School in Bethesda. They're relaxing their facial muscles, loosening their bellies and trying to focus on the soles of their feet.
| 15.763158 | 1 | 38 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/05/AR2007020501380.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/05/AR2007020501380.html
|
Ancient Temples Face Modern Assault
|
2007020719
|
ANGKOR, Cambodia -- Built by a mighty 9th-century Khmer king, the soaring temple of Phnom Bakheng stands atop the highest peak of ancient Angkor. With a sweeping view that takes in Angkor Wat -- the world's largest religious structure -- the monks stationed here were probably among the first to glimpse the approaching Siamese troops that snuffed out this city's centuries-long domination of much of Southeast Asia.
So perhaps it is not surprising that more than 500 years later, Phnom Bakheng has become the ideal perch from which to watch another assault on Angkor -- by marauding armies of tourists.
As Cambodia has settled into peace and opened to the world, the temples of Angkor have in recent years gone from stone to gold for the national government. This year, a deluge of tour operators is expected to cart in nearly 1 million foreign visitors, a sixfold increase since 2000.
Including Cambodians, the number of visitors to the archaeological park will reach a record 2 million this year and at least 3 million by 2010, according to the U.N. Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), which identified Angkor as a World Heritage site in 1992.
The growth has put the Cambodian government in a difficult position, observers say, forcing it to balance the potential to make money against the need for preservation, restoration and study. It is a dilemma familiar to other countries that profit from treasured cultural sites.
The Acropolis in Athens, the Forbidden City in Beijing and the Hagia Sophia area of Istanbul are all experiencing tourism pressures. In Peru, the massive sand lines at Nazca and Palpa have come under threat from encroaching power lines and roving tourists in jeeps. In Nepal's Kathmandu Valley, UNESCO has decried "uncontrolled urban development."
Preservationists and archaeologists here increasingly fear that the frenzy to commercialize Angkor, now also a hot set location for films such as Angelina Jolie's "Tomb Raider," is winning out over the need for preservation.
Nowhere is that clearer than at Phnom Bakheng, where a number of new guidebooks advise visitors not to miss the sunset from the temple's summit. Tips like that have led to a daily siege by an armada of tour buses around dusk. On a recent afternoon, about 4,000 visitors, speaking Korean, Japanese, Mandarin, English and a host of other languages, scampered to the top of the temple, stepping on pictorial stones and manhandling ancient statues as one lonely guard sat on the sidelines, overwhelmed.
"The problem we're facing is that the pace of visitor growth is accelerating far faster than the ability to manage such huge crowds," said Teruo Jinnai, UNESCO's top official in Cambodia. "There is no doubt that this is beginning to cause damage to the temples and that it has the potential to become much worse if nothing is done."
Six months ago, the U.S.-based World Monuments Fund, which is doing major restoration work at Phnom Bakheng, was forced to rope off the rapidly deteriorating main stone path leading to the temple area because of a combination of trampling tourists and rain runoff.
Inside Phnom Bakheng, statues and carvings in low relief have sustained new damage from tourists. Fresh graffiti have been sprayed alongside sandstone carvings of flying celestial nymphs and Garuda warriors.
On one side of the temple, piles of sandbags placed last year to hold up a retaining wall have been damaged by tourists who have climbed and descended the temple's sides without waiting their turn on a number of steep stone staircases.
|
ANGKOR, Cambodia -- Built by a mighty 9th-century Khmer king, the soaring temple of Phnom Bakheng stands atop the highest peak of ancient Angkor. With a sweeping view that takes in Angkor Wat -- the world's largest religious structure -- the monks stationed here were probably among the first to...
| 11.842105 | 0.982456 | 55.017544 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/01/24/DI2007012401522.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/01/24/DI2007012401522.html
|
PBS Frontline/World: 'The Cell Next Door'
|
2007020319
|
Neil Docherty, a Senior Editor/Producer with the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation's investigative documentary program, was online Wednesday, Jan. 31, at 11 a.m. ET to discuss the PBS Frontline/World film " The Cell Next Door." The film looks at 18 young men in Toronto and two in Atlanta arrested this past summer on terrorism charges, accused of plotting to blow up buildings, behead members of the Canadian parliament, and of attending a terror-training camp in Ontario.
Frontline/World's " The Cell Next Door" airs Tuesday, Jan. 30, at 9 p.m. ET on PBS (check local listings).
Neil Docherty started work for the CBC in 1990 and since has won more than 40 awards for his films including an International Emmy in 1992 and the 2004 Gordon Sinclair Gemini Award as Canada's best broadcast journalist. Most recently he co-produced and directed "A Toxic Company" for the CBC's "The Fifth Estate," "Frontline" and The New York Times; the film won a Peabody and numerous other awards while the Times articles won a Pulitzer.
Quincy, Calif.: Is the tri-border area of South America (where Paraguay, Argentina and Brazil meet) playing any role as a staging are for terrorist trying to enter the U.S. via our southern border?
Neil Docherty: I know intelligence agencies are concerned about this area, but I have not heard of a case so far.
Washington: There's a story in the news today about British police arresting eight people on terrorism-related charges in the central England city of Birmingham. Your discussion today is quite timely. Terrorism plots seem to be cropping up all over the world and not just in the U.S. Can you comment on today's story and further explain these seemingly now frequent plots that are being uncovered?
Neil Docherty: I don't know much about today's plot specifically, but the UK is thought to be one of the prime targets. I like the Dutch Intelligence services analysis of these cells -- which can be found on the Web if you got to their Web site. They are known as the AIVD.
They break the cells down into three groups:
1. Foreign agents -- Atta etc.,
2. Groups gathered around a jihad veteran from Chechnya or the like,
3. And this is the growth area -- young men, often second-generation, disaffected, feeling neither Moroccan or Pakistani or whatever, but feeling they also don't fit in their Western society and seek out a radical form of Islam, then go to the Web for fortification of these beliefs and to gather like-minded souls. They then go on to plan their own assaults without any contact with al-Qaeda.
They are fueled in part by Western foreign policy, which they see as completely hypocritical, with Muslims as its main victims.
washingtonpost.com: Some of these cells that have been broken up seem to in effect be made up of young men who "fell in with the wrong crowd" -- as though it just as easily could have been drugs, gangs, etc. How can friends and family prevent this?
Neil Docherty: This is becoming a huge worry within the Muslim community. I am no expert on this, but I think it would be important for parents to have discussion about the various strands of Islam available -- particularly those pushed on line. I presume it is a little like the drug advice -- "talk to your kids." What I think we don't realize is how pervasive political discussion can be in their lives -- and how widely available is the Salafist -- Wahhabi ideologies, which can be primers for jihad activity
washingtonpost.com: Mubin Shaikh provides an interesting example of a fundamentalist Muslim who acts to prevent a major act of terrorism by people he probably agreed with on a lot of points. How did the FBI and Canadian intel identify him and bring him into the fold? Was he already a part of the group when they approached him or did he infiltrate it? And if the latter, what was the process for that?
Neil Docherty: Mubin called CSIS, the Canadian intelligence agency about another case. They met with him and saw his potential and asked him to infiltrate a group that they were concerned about.
Infiltrating them seemed relatively easy. He was told to attend a lecture from a visiting Wahhabi scholar, which authorities knew some of the group would attend. He chatted with them and talk soon got round to his view of Jihad. He knew all the right answers and knew the territory. He also had something quite rare in Canada -- a licence to obtain and carry firearms. This was because he was once a rifle instructor in the Army Cadets.
Freising, Germany: I thought that Canada and Toronto were supposed to represent the pinnacle of peaceful multiculturalism. Are there areas of Toronto that have become home to a marginalized underclass, as has occurred in some cities in the U.K. and France?
Neil Docherty: I think what is interesting about the Toronto group is they are not from a marginalized underclass. Many of these kids were at university or about to go.
Their homes were classically suburban and their parents were for large part integrated into the community. Hence I think we need to consider that young people are being drawn into what they see as a great cause -- much like young men in the '30s were drawn to fight in Spain, for example.
The U.S. Homeland: Uh, what's the difference?
British Police Arrest 8 in Alleged Kidnapping Plot (Post, Jan. 31)
Germany Orders 13 Arrests in Alleged CIA Kidnapping Plot (Post, Jan. 31)
Terror is the use of fear or violence for political gain, that would make most of the U.S. government ... uh ... terrorists! Right?
Philadelphia: About how long should it be expected before these cases will go to trial? Also, are there any indications if more arrests are to be expected?
Neil Docherty: The trials have just started and will likely take a year or more. The investigation involved about 20 others in countries around the world. Those connections are unclear and are still being investigated. They were likely people talking on the Internet.
washingtonpost.com: What were the D.C.-area targets the pair of Atlanta suspects were planning to attack?
Neil Docherty: Important to note that any attack plans seem to have not got beyond the level of taking pictures or "casing videos." But the list included Capital Hill, a Masonic Temple in Virginia, and a farm of gas tanks in Northern Virginia
Ottawa, Canada: The documentary stated that one of the informants was in hiding. Why would this person be in hiding and the other informant feel free enough to give interviews? Was the person in hiding the one who provided the most info to the police? Also, you mention a young man was one of the ringleaders of the cell. Wasn't there an older man who was also arrested and described by police as being a key figure in the cell?
Neil Docherty: The other informant is in witness protection. I think his concern was for extended family in other parts of the world and fear of retribution being visited on them, rather than any fear for family in Canada, Going into witness protection, then assured his identity would remain a secret.
It was reported early on that the older man in the group was a leader -- at this stage all I can say is that our reporting is that the two young men featured in our film were leading members.
Fairfax, Va.: Have you met any danger in your job investigating these plots? How safe are you?
Neil Docherty: Not really. These groups are not organized like the Mafia and largely are amateurs. We did call on the parents of one young man arrested in association with the Toronto Group. He lived in Bradford England. The father was extremely exercised -- which is his right -- but within minutes two car loads of young men--about ten of them arrived and did make it clear that they didn't like our presence. I found the venom in that interchange instructive.
Anonymous: This phenomenon seems completely decentralized. Crystallized fear and resentment among Muslims in reaction to their perception, right or wrong, of the unfairness and hostility of U.S. policy. How in the world do we expect to wage "war" on this? It doesn't make any sense.
Neil Docherty: I agree. Unfortunately while the phenomenon is out there there is a need for vigilance -- but vigilance doesn't mean an abandonment of our principles of jurisprudence. All the rendition and other abuses have served to foster the problem.
I think we have to take from all this that foreign policy matters and we need to play by our principles.
Washington: It's tough to blow up the U.S. Capitol Building with a Canadian gun permit. Did anyone in the cell have any practical experience (like military training in demolitions) that would have permitted them to carry out their fantasies of Jihad?
Neil Docherty: The short answer is no. But they were very much like the July 7 bombers in London and the Madrid bombers -- amateurs who learned on the Internet.
I am told they were getting better at their tradecraft as their plans proceeded. For example, much less talk on cell phones and on the internet chatrooms; information being put on flash drives passed at drop sites. And they had gathered what they thought was 3 tons of Amonium Nitrate -- though in fact it was a substitute. This all applies to the Canadian group, who seem to have been more determined and organized than the U.S. suspects. The indictment for the Atlanta boys actually states that there was no immediate danger.
Neil Docherty: Thank you for your interest and pertinent questions. May we soon find a way out of this mess. Best regards, Neil Docherty.
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online 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.
|
CBC investigative documentary producer Neil Docherty will discuss the PBS Frontline/World film, "The Cell Next Door," a look at the arrests this past summer of 18 young men in Toronto and two in Atlanta on terrorism charges.
| 44.681818 | 0.977273 | 4.295455 |
high
|
high
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/31/AR2007013100290.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/31/AR2007013100290.html
|
British Police Arrest 9 on Terror Charges
|
2007020319
|
LONDON, Jan. 31 -- British police arrested nine people Wednesday in the central England city of Birmingham as part of a "major counterterrorism operation," police said.
Police released no immediate details, but British media, citing unnamed security sources, reported that the plot involved a potential "Iraq-style" kidnapping of a Muslim soldier in the British army. The BBC and other news outlets reported that the intended victim had served in Afghanistan. They reported that the plot involved abducting, videotaping and executing the soldier, who has been placed under protective custody.
David Shaw of the West Midlands police said at a briefing that eight men were arrested in eight houses in predawn raids, and a ninth person, whose gender was not specified, was arrested on a highway in the Birmingham area just before the briefing.
The arrests were the "culmination of many months of activities," said Shaw, adding that they constituted a "very big operation" for the area's police force.
"The threat of terrorism has been growing over the years," Shaw said. He declined to provide details of the operation and said some of the reporting on it was "potentially damaging to the investigation."
Britain was rocked by Islamic extremist attacks in July 2005, when 52 people and four bombers were killed in attacks on subway trains and a bus. One of the bombers left a videotaped suicide message in which he cited the British government's support for the U.S.-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as a chief motivation. A virtually identical attack two weeks later failed when the alleged attackers' bombs failed to detonate. Five men are currently on trial in that case.
Wednesday's arrests were not related to a similar large-scale attack, according to anonymous sources cited by the BBC, the Press Association and other media outlets. Rather, they said, it allegedly involved a kidnapping that would represent a new departure for radical extremist activity in Britain.
Among the many people abducted and beheaded by extremists in Iraq was a Briton, Kenneth Bigley, whose execution in Iraq in 2004 was captured on videotape. That case shocked Britons, as did the 2004 killing of abducted aid worker Margaret Hassan, who had duel Iraqi and Irish citizenship.
Home Secretary John Reid declined to comment on the details of the case Wednesday, but his spokeswoman called the arrests a "major counter-terrorism operation" that was "a reminder of the real and serious nature of the terrorist threat we face."
The pre-dawn raids took place in Sparkhill, an inner-city area of Birmingham. Police said they had sealed off 12 addresses. Media reports said police raided at least two homes, an Islamic bookshop and an Internet cafe.
In November, Eliza Manningham-Buller, the head of Britain's MI5 domestic security agency, said British authorities were monitoring up to 30 potential terrorism plots involving up to 1,600 individuals in 200 radical groups.
|
LONDON, Jan. 31 -- British police arrested nine people Wednesday in the central England city of Birmingham as part of a "major counterterrorism operation," police said.
| 18.290323 | 1 | 31 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/30/AR2007013001653.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/30/AR2007013001653.html
|
The Clintonian Candidate
|
2007020319
|
There's a Clinton in the presidential race. The surprise: It may not be Hillary.
The truly Clintonian figure running for the Democratic nomination is Barack Obama. The senator from Illinois, it's struck me lately, seems in many ways more like Bill Clinton than does the senator from New York.
When it comes to Obama and Bill Clinton, there are superficial similarities -- the absent father, the humble roots combined with Ivy League pedigree. Leave aside who would be the first black president, as many said of Clinton -- both represent generational change, Clinton as the first baby boomer president, Obama as the first would-be president of the post-baby boom.
Man from Hope -- meet Audacity of Hope.
Of course, the fit isn't exact: Obama, unlike Clinton, doesn't seem to have been running for the presidency since birth. But there are deeper ways, in his intellectual approach, his message and his personal style, in which Obama evokes Clinton.
Like Clinton before him, Obama presents himself as a new kind of politician who can rise above and bridge partisan differences. Go back to Clinton's 1991 announcement speech, and it's easy to imagine Obama speaking.
"Today, our leaders in Washington seem incapable of working together in a practical, common sense way," lamented one politician. The other called for "a new kind of leadership . . . not mired in the politics of the past, not limited by old ideologies." Can you tell the difference? The first is Obama, the second Clinton, but either could have been channeling the other.
Like Clinton, Obama has a homing instinct for the middle -- maybe too much of one. To read his book "The Audacity of Hope" is to be struck by his constant desire to understand -- even more, to respect -- conflicting views on whatever issue he happens to be discussing.
This is impressive until it becomes, finally, exasperating in its seemingly compulsive even-handedness. "I'm not unsympathetic to Justice Scalia's position," Obama, recovering law review president that he is, writes about the debate on constitutional interpretation. "Like many conservatives . . . I believe we ignore culture factors at our peril," he writes about the values debate. "Not all these fears are irrational," he writes of anti-immigrant sentiment.
In fact, Obama fits himself explicitly into the Clinton mold. "In his platform -- if not always in his day-to-day politics -- Clinton's Third Way went beyond splitting the difference," he writes. "It tapped into the pragmatic, nonideological attitude of the majority of Americans."
To Clinton critics drawn to Obama, equating them seems too facile: Obama's centrist tropism is born of a desire to accommodate and transcend differences, they argue, while Clinton's was an artifact of ruthless calculation in which he submerged differences for political advantage.
To Clinton advocates still unsure about Obama, the younger man has yet to demonstrate the capacity, in his own "day-to-day politics," to put his brand of Third Wayism into action. Clinton's Sister Souljah moment may have been the premeditated political move of a Slick Willie -- Obama suggests as much in his book -- but Obama doesn't have anything similar to brandish as a badge of New Democratic difference.
It's hard to name a prominent moment when, like Clinton pushing welfare reform, he deviated from party orthodoxy. Sorry, senator, but voting for class action lawsuit reform doesn't cut it. Obama's book features an erudite discussion of the folly, and futility, of resisting globalization -- at which point he summarily announces that he voted against the Central American Free Trade Agreement nonetheless. His signature divergence from the other leading candidates in the Democratic field comes from the left: He opposed the Iraq war from the start.
Obama is like Bill Clinton in his natural ease with people and his ability to win them over. A New York Times story about Obama's law school days described how Obama "cast himself as an eager listener, sometimes giving warring classmates the impression that he agreed with all of them at once." As they debated whether to use the term "black" or "African-American," "students on each side of the debate thought he was endorsing their side," the story said. " 'Everyone was nodding, Oh, he agrees with me,' " said professor Charles Ogletree.
Sounds like everyone who's ever emerged from a meeting with Bill Clinton.
If Obama is the Clintonian figure in the race, Hillary Clinton may be Al Gore, more disciplined policy wonk than natural politician. Like Gore, Hillary Clinton can be more adroit intellectually than politically; both face the challenge, fair or not, of convincing voters of their "authenticity."
It's hard to know whether the tempered Clinton or the untested Obama will prove the stronger candidate -- or would be the better president. But with both of them in the race, the 2008 campaign presents a twist on the 1992 offer: two Clintons for the price of one.
|
There's a Clinton in the presidential race. The surprise: It may not be Hillary.
| 55.555556 | 1 | 18 |
high
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/30/AR2007013001652.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/30/AR2007013001652.html
|
Why Would Congress Surrender?
|
2007020319
|
In a matter of days the Senate is likely to begin debating several nonbinding resolutions on the president's plan for a troop buildup in Iraq. As the battle is joined, both houses of Congress need to be reminded that the stakes go well beyond this particular buildup, this particular war and even this particular presidency.
At issue is the constitutional law governing the war power of the executive branch, specifically the vastness of the "battlefield" over which President Bush claims inherent authority as commander in chief. Also at issue are all the comparable claims yet to be made by presidents yet unborn, armed with the precedents being set right now.
In these matters, there is no such thing as inaction. In a contest between two branches over separation of powers, silence speaks as powerfully as words.
That's because the Supreme Court rarely involves itself in disputes between Congress and the executive, expressly making it a two-way conversation -- a "shared elaboration" or "shared dialogue" in the words of scholars -- between the elected branches. When one branch drops out by failing to respond, the other branch effectively sets the precedent, which is passed along to the next generation and the generation after that.
Inaction, indeed, strengthens that precedent. Over time, inaction is taken as acquiescence, a form of approval, and the precedent becomes entrenched until it's as good as law.
This is precisely what has occurred over the years. Successive decades of congressional acquiescence in the face of executive claims of war power have allowed the law to be settled exclusively by the executive branch.
Now, people who know better show no surprise at the notion that Congress's only war-related authority is the power of the purse. Timid requests for legislative involvement are ridiculed and caricatured as "micromanagement" or, worse, as comforting the enemy.
It's as if there is nothing left to argue about -- except, of course, there is, though it seems so elementary.
Article II does indeed make the president commander in chief.
But Article I gives Congress not merely the power of the purse. It vests in the House and Senate the authority to "declare war," to "make rules concerning captures on land and water," to "provide for the common defense," to "raise and support Armies," and to "make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces." In addition, the Senate advises and consents on important military appointments, which is why Lt. Gen. David Petraeus was on Capitol Hill last week for confirmation as the general in command of U.S. forces in Iraq.
War is a shared responsibility. The records of the 1787 convention at which the Constitution was drafted unquestionably demonstrate that. An early version of Article I, for example, gave Congress the power to "make war."
The delegates changed the wording to "declare war," not to remove Congress from the process but to leave the commander in chief the "power to repel sudden attacks," as James Madison put it. "The executive should be able to repel and not to commence war," agreed Roger Sherman. In the eyes of some delegates, this limited authority was safe in the hands of a president because "no executive would ever make war but when the nation will support it," said delegate Pierce Butler.
One can argue about this view, of course, but Congress generally chooses not to, despite occasional prodding from Supreme Court justices such as Antonin Scalia. In a dissent in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, the 2004 decision requiring the administration to give detainees some neutral forum in which to make their case, Scalia noted that the Founders mistrusted military power "permanently at the executive's disposal."
"Many safeguards in the Constitution reflect these concerns," he said, including expressly involving Congress in the war-making function. Indeed, wrote Scalia, "except for the actual command of military forces, all authorization for their maintenance and all explicit authorization for their use is placed in the control of Congress under Article I, rather than the President under Article II."
Scalia also chided Congress for its "lassitude" on the topic. "Many think it not only inevitable but entirely proper that liberty give way to security in times of national crisis -- that, at the extremes of military exigency, inter arma silent leges," he wrote. "Whatever the general merits of the view that war silences law or modulates its voice, that view has no place in the interpretation and application of a Constitution designed precisely to confront war and, in a manner that accords with democratic principles, to accommodate it."
The equilibrium of government, in the view of the Constitution's Framers, rested on a stated assumption that each branch would fight fiercely to expand its authority but just as fiercely resist encroachment from another branch.
That Congress would refuse to fight seemed unimaginable.
The writer, who covered the Supreme Court for The Post, teaches at Northwestern University's Medill School of Journalism. He has written widely about constitutional history.
|
After years of deferring matters of war and peace to the Executive Branch, it's time for Congress to speak up.
| 42.956522 | 0.826087 | 1.347826 |
high
|
medium
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/30/AR2007013001666.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/30/AR2007013001666.html
|
Hiding Health Care's Costs
|
2007020319
|
We are awash in health-care proposals. President Bush has one. So does California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden has a plan, as does a coalition led by Families USA (a liberal advocacy group) and America's Health Insurance Plans (a trade group). To some extent, all these plans and others aim to provide insurance to the estimated 47 million Americans who lack it -- a situation widely deplored as a national disgrace. But the real significance of all these proposals, I submit, lies elsewhere.
For decades, Americans have treated health care as if it exists in a separate economic and political world: When people need care, they should get it; costs should remain out of sight. About 60 percent of Americans receive insurance through their employers; to most workers, the full costs are unknown. The 65-and-older population and many poor people receive government insurance. Except for modest Medicare premiums and payroll taxes, costs are largely buried in federal and state budgets.
It is this segregation of health care from everything else that is now crumbling -- and the various health proposals are just one sign. We see others all the time. For example, even with employer-provided insurance, workers' average monthly premiums (which cover only part of the costs) have skyrocketed. From 1999 to 2006, they doubled, from $129 to $248.
Look at Massachusetts. Last year, then-Gov. Mitt Romney made headlines by signing legislation to cover all the state's uninsured. The law required that those whose income exceeded three times the federal poverty line buy "affordable" insurance (those with incomes below that threshold would be subsidized on a sliding scale). Romney suggested that annual premiums for a single worker might total $2,400. But when insurance companies recently provided real estimates, the cost was much higher: $4,560. Is it sensible policy to force workers making $30,000 -- about triple the poverty line -- to spend almost a sixth of their pretax income on health insurance, as opposed to food, rent or transportation? Good question.
The hard questions won't sit still, because health care (now a sixth of the economy, up from one-eleventh in 1980) is too big to be hidden. Myths abound. Contrary to conventional wisdom, the doubling of premiums for employer-provided coverage doesn't mean companies shifted a greater share of costs to workers. In both 1999 and 2006, premiums covered 27 percent of costs, says Paul Fronstin of the Employee Benefit Research Institute. It's simply the rapid rise in total health spending that's depressed workers' take-home pay.
One myth about the uninsured is that, because they're heavy users of emergency-room services, providing them with insurance (and regular care) would actually lower their costs. This may be true for some -- but not most. The trouble is that the uninsured don't really use emergency rooms heavily. A study in the journal Health Affairs finds that their use is similar to that of people with private insurance -- and half that of people with Medicaid. Extending insurance to all the uninsured would be costly, because they would get more and (presumably) better care. John Sheils of the Lewin Group estimates the annual cost of their care would rise 75 percent, to $145 billion.
Our health-care system will inevitably combine government regulation and private enterprise. But what should the mix be? How important is health care compared with other public and private goals? Will an expanding health-care sector spur the economy -- or, through high taxes and insurance premiums, retard it? We have refused to have this debate for obvious reasons. It makes us queasy, because it pits moral imperatives (including the right to live) against coldhearted economics. A case in point: A friend of mine recently had a near-death experience; he survived only because he had superb medical care.
I don't intend to examine -- at least now -- all the new proposals. Some would do better at some goals (say, protecting the poor) than at others (say, controlling costs). But the Bush proposal does have one huge virtue: It exposes health-care costs to the broad public. By not taxing employer-paid insurance, the government now provides a huge invisible subsidy to workers. Bush wouldn't end the subsidy, but by modifying it with specific deductions for insurance ($15,000 for families, $7,500 for singles), he would force most workers to see the costs. By contrast, some other proposals disguise their costs. Schwarzenegger's plan shifts costs to the federal government, doctors and hospitals. It's clever, but it perpetuates the illusion that health care is cheap.
However our health system evolves, Americans need to come to a more realistic understanding of its limits. Underestimating its costs and exaggerating its benefits guarantee disappointment. If the present outpouring of proposals signals a start of our needed debate, it is long overdue.
|
However our health system evolves, Americans need to come to a more realistic understanding of its limits. Underestimating its costs and exaggerating its benefits guarantee disappointment.
| 33.448276 | 1 | 29 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/thomas_kleinebrockhoff/2007/01/soccer_explains_germany.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020319id_/http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/thomas_kleinebrockhoff/2007/01/soccer_explains_germany.html
|
Thomas Kleine-Brockhoff
|
2007020319
|
My home country of Germany is one of the few nations to legalize prostitution. Proponents of legalization argue that all attempts to deal with the sex business have failed and the only option left untried is decriminalization. Legalization helps the victims of the pay-for-sex system, the women, so the argument goes. The law provides them with rights, health insurance, and even benefits. It also provides prostitutes legal recourse. They can sue their client if he doesnât pay.
Years ago the Netherlands legalized marijuana so that in one of the countriesâ so-called "coffee shops" you can now go buy marijuana. Proponents of legalizing marijuana argued that by decriminalizing pot smokers, you could separate them from the hard drug mafia. This experiment didnât succeed.
Citizens legally enter through the front door of the âcoffee shopsâ, but criminal suppliers still use the back door. They sell marijuana legally, but also peddle other drugs prohibited by law. So while smoking marijuana is legal, every smoker remains only a small step away from a criminal. This should give the Dutch pause. Instead they pioneered the legalization of prostitution too.
Legalized prostitution creates the same problems that legalized marijuana does. While prostitution is legal, forced prostitution is not. The latter occurs, and the new German law unintentionally makes it harder to hunt down human traffickers, especially from Eastern Europe and Africa. Similarly, it is harder to combat under-aged prostitution. With legalized marijuana and prostitution, Amsterdam became a magnet for human traffickers, drug traders and petty criminals. This is not the world legalizationâs proponents envisioned, but it happened.
Germanyâs red-green coalition pushed the legalization of prostitution past parliament. In a reflection of the power of feminism in Germany, the fate of the women trumps all other considerations. Now the consequences have to be managed. Questions like should prostitutes be able to collect unemployment benefits? should government be in the business of encouraging prostitution as a career path? can you allow prostitutes to advertise their services on TV?
Some of the solutions to these questions will be plainly ridiculous. Prostitution is just not a profession like any other. Itâs not a service job like a waitress. Government cannot treat all jobs equally if prostitution is one of them. Prohibition might not work, regulation might be difficult and legalization will not be sustainable. So -â and letâs think creatively -- what's next?
|
Thomas Kleine-Brockhoff at PostGlobal on PostGlobal; blog of politics and current events on washingtonpost.com. Visit http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/thomas_kleinebrockhoff/
| 23.05 | 0.3 | 0.3 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/31/AR2007013100921.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/31/AR2007013100921.html
|
Records on Spy Program Turned Over to Lawmakers
|
2007020319
|
The Justice Department turned over documents about the government's controversial domestic spying program to select members of Congress yesterday, ending a two-week standoff that included pointed threats of subpoenas from Democrats.
The deal appears to resolve the latest conflict between Congress and the administration over the National Security Agency's surveillance effort, and it provides new evidence of the administration's more accommodating approach to the Democrats who now control Congress.
The agreement follows the administration's announcement two weeks ago that it was replacing NSA's warrantless surveillance program with a plan approved by the secret court that administers the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA. The NSA had conducted the domestic spying for more than five years without court oversight.
Under yesterday's accord, announced by Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, more than three dozen lawmakers will have access to the secret court orders governing the spying program that were issued Jan. 10 and the applications from the Justice Department that preceded them. The lawmakers include the House and Senate leaders, the members of the two intelligence panels and the heads of the two judiciary committees, officials said.
But Gonzales and other Bush administration officials also indicated that they had no intention of making the orders and related documents available to the public. The lawmakers and staff who view the records will be subject to strict statutes that bar disclosure of classified information. Congressional aides said it was unclear how much new information could be shared with the public.
Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said the documents would help determine "what further oversight or legislative action is necessary.
"Only with an understanding of the contours of the wiretapping program and the scope of the court's orders can the Judiciary Committee determine whether the administration has reached the proper balance to protect Americans while following the law and the principles of checks and balances," Leahy said.
Gonzales -- in remarks to reporters during an unrelated event announcing the formation of a human-trafficking unit at Justice -- played down any conflict with lawmakers. He said: "It's never been the case where we've said we would never provide access."
Gonzales said the orders cannot be released publicly because the subject matter is "highly classified."
One Justice official said Gonzales decided two weeks ago that both of the intelligence panels, along with Leahy and Arlen Specter (Pa.), the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, should have access to the records.
But several congressional aides, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to discuss the details of the negotiations, described a tense two-week standoff between the administration and lawmakers from both parties over the issue.
The staff members said the push for access was driven by Rep. Silvestre Reyes (D-Tex.) and Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.) -- the heads of the House and Senate intelligence panels -- who warned Justice Department officials that they would face congressional subpoenas if they did not turn over the records.
|
The Justice Department turned over documents about the government's controversial domestic spying program to select members of Congress yesterday, ending a two-week standoff that included pointed threats of subpoenas from Democrats.
| 15.783784 | 0.972973 | 21.891892 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/31/AR2007013100918.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/31/AR2007013100918.html
|
House Passes $463 Billion Spending Bill After Deleting Earmarks
|
2007020319
|
The House passed a $463 billion spending measure yesterday that would keep the government operating for the remainder of the fiscal year, an austere plan stripped of billions of dollars worth of special-interest provisions.
The bill, approved 286 to 140, maintains funding for most federal agencies at 2006 levels, but it adds about $16 billion for Democratic priorities, including veterans' health care and Pell grants for higher education. The Senate must pass the continuing resolution by Feb. 15 to avert a partial government shutdown. The White House has indicated that President Bush will sign the measure.
Republicans protested that the bill was not entirely stripped of special-interest funding, or earmarks, as the Democratic leaders asserted, and that they were denied the opportunity to offer amendments.
Rep. Dave Weldon (R-Fla.) complained that funding for NASA would be significantly below the levels requested by Bush and initially approved by the House last year. Under the resolution approved yesterday, the 2007 NASA budget would be $16.2 billion -- about the same as its 2006 budget.
Weldon said that funding for the manned-exploration budget, in particular, would be less than what was expected and that the program to launch a new manned spaceship by 2014 would be delayed as a result.
But more than a quarter of GOP House members supported the resolution, which contains spending provisions for politically popular items, including an additional $1.3 billion for the fight against HIV/AIDS and other diseases. Moreover, half of the House GOP's leadership team in the past two Congresses sided with the Democrats, including Reps. Deborah Pryce (R-Ohio), John T. Doolittle (R-Calif.) and Thomas M. Reynolds (R-N.Y.).
The Senate is expected to take up the measure after it debates and votes on a resolution of disapproval over Bush's decision to send 21,500 more troops to the war in Iraq.
The measure had to be cobbled together because Congress did not finish its work last year and failed to pass nine of 11 spending bills. "Four months into fiscal 2007, we are cleaning up the Republican Party's budget mess," House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) said during the floor debate.
For students, the extra funds for Pell grants would mean an increase of $260 per year, up to $4,310, according to congressional estimates. The National Institutes of Health would have an additional 500 research grants to administer because of almost $620 million in additional funding for the remainder of fiscal 2007, which will end on Sept. 30.
The chairmen of the House and Senate Appropriations committees, Rep. David R. Obey (D-Wis.) and Sen. Robert C. Byrd (D-W. Va.), respectively, announced in early December that they would push to combine and approve all the remaining spending bills but would strip out thousands of earmarks. That decision came after the recent corruption scandals in Congress, which almost all involved earmarks tucked into spending bills, usually with no legislative oversight.
In removing all the earmarks, however, Democrats gave up their ability to direct how government agencies spend billions of dollars.
House Republicans contended that the bill contains nearly $500 million in what amount to earmarks, but Democrats argued that those spending provisions -- including almost $50 million for rain forests in Iowa -- were supported by Republicans or are continuations of projects that had already been allotted millions of dollars in federal funds.
The spending bill does not include the standard cost-of-living adjustment in congressional pay, leaving a rank-and-file member's salary at $165,800.
Unlike in past years, when both parties adhered to a cease-fire in the use of pay increases as a political issue, many Democratic challengers in last year's election campaign pointed to the many salary boosts incumbents received under GOP rule over the past decade while the minimum wage stayed at $5.15 per hour.
Staff writer Marc Kaufman contributed to this report.
|
The House passed a $463 billion spending measure yesterday that would keep the government operating for the remainder of the fiscal year, an austere plan stripped of billions of dollars worth of special-interest provisions.
| 19.846154 | 1 | 39 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/31/AR2007013100192.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/31/AR2007013100192.html
|
Chavez Gains Free Rein in Venezuela
|
2007020319
|
Convening in a downtown plaza in a session that resembled a political rally, lawmakers unanimously gave Chavez sweeping powers to legislate by decree and impose his radical vision of a more egalitarian socialist state.
"Long live the sovereign people! Long live President Hugo Chavez! Long live socialism!" said National Assembly President Cilia Flores as she proclaimed the "enabling law" approved by a show of hands. "Fatherland, socialism or death! We will prevail!"
The law gives Chavez, who is beginning a fresh six-year term, more power than he has ever had in eight years as president, and he plans to use it during the next 18 months to transform broad areas of public life, from the economy and the oil industry in particular, to "social matters" and the very structure of the state.
His critics call it a radical lurch toward authoritarianism by a leader with unchecked power _ similar to how Fidel Castro monopolized leadership years ago in Cuba.
"If you have all the power, why do you need more power?" said Luis Gonzalez, a high school teacher who paused to watch in the plaza, calling it a "media show" intended to give legitimacy to a repugnant move. "We're headed toward a dictatorship, disguised as a democracy."
Hundreds of Chavez supporters wearing ruling-party red gathered in the plaza, waving signs reading "Socialism is democracy," as lawmakers read out passages of the law giving the president special powers to transform 11 areas of Venezuelan law.
"The people of Venezuela, not just the National Assembly, are giving this enabling power to the president of the republic," congresswoman Iris Varela told the crowd.
President Bush said Wednesday that he's "concerned about the Venezuelan people."
"I am concerned about the undermining of democratic institutions. And we're working to help prevent that from happening," Bush said in an interview with Fox News.
But in the square in Caracas, Venezuelan Vice President Jorge Rodriguez publicly ridiculed the idea that the law is an abuse of power, and argued democracy is flourishing.
"What kind of a dictatorship is this?" Rodriguez asked the crowd, saying the law "only serves to sow democracy and peace."
|
CARACAS, Venezuela -- President Hugo Chavez was granted free rein Wednesday to accelerate changes in broad areas of society by presidential decree, a move critics said propels Venezuela toward dictatorship.
| 13.30303 | 0.69697 | 1.181818 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/30/AR2007013000369.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/30/AR2007013000369.html
|
Bowl Game - washingtonpost.com
|
2007020319
|
The two of us are not competitive people by nature. Okay, that's not entirely true. But we've been getting along famously since we started working together a few months ago, finding that our palates are almost as aligned as our senses of humor.
Then came talk of Super Bowl XLI. Neither of us has a dog in this Sunday's fight, but when the subject turned to chili -- a time-honored, crowd-pleasing game-day repast -- a natural opposition emerged. Especially when a Texan is involved, no dish is as contentious.
One of us threw the first flag by suggesting publication of her favorite recipe, a comfort-food riff that includes vegetables and ground beef. The Texan launched a long drive about how real chili, which needs six to eight hours on the stove, has none of the above. The non-Texan said readers could make hers in a fraction of the time and could surely stomach much more of hers than his, which is really just chili-fired beef (and only beef) stew. The Texan not very graciously offered the translation of "chile con carne" from the Spanish, mumbled something about the world championship cook-off in Terlingua, and threatened to use quote marks when referring to her version.
Ultimately we decided that, Super Bowl matchups aside, this is a contest that doesn't need a referee. So we present two chilis, leagues apart but each all-pro in its own right. Make the one that speaks your language: purist or egalitarian, Texan or not. Dish it out and turn on the television. Then let the cheering begin.
|
The two of us are not competitive people by nature. Okay, that's not entirely true. But we've been getting along famously since we started working together a few months ago, finding that our palates are almost as aligned as our senses of humor.
| 6.38 | 1 | 50 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/celebritology/2007/01/when_child_stars_attack_grow_u.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020319id_/http://blog.washingtonpost.com/celebritology/2007/01/when_child_stars_attack_grow_u.html
|
When Child Stars
|
2007020319
|
Two of the planet's most sacred child stars have done the unthinkable: started to grow up.
First, celluloid darling Dakota Fanning caught major fan backlash after a film depicting Fanning as a 12-year-old rape victim premiered at Sundance last week. The movie, "Hounddog," has been decried as child abuse and even inspired an online petition seeking the arrest of Fanning's mother and agent.
Then, yesterday, 17-year-old Daniel Radcliffe -- yes, geeky, awkward and universally adored Harry Potter -- showed us he's all grown up in some racy equestrian shots released to promote his performance in a London stage production of "Equus." Parents are verklempt -- some British moms and dads say no more Hogwarts yarns for their little ones. Said one: "We as parents feel Daniel should not appear nude. Our nine-year-old son looks up to him as a role model. We are very disappointed and will avoid the future movies he makes."
How have other child stars fared in making the leap from G to PG-13? Let's see:
Tatum O'Neal From little pixie in "Paper Moon" to teen sexpot in "Little Darlings" Where is she now? O'Neal does regular TV work with recurring roles on "Rescue Me" and "Wicked Wicked Games."
Macaulay Culkin From lovable commando in "Home Alone" to drugged out murderer in "Party Monster" Where is he now? After a winning role in 2004's "Saved," he's popped up on stage and in cartoon "Robot Chicken."
Drew Barrymore From "E.T.'s" little Gertie to predatory teen in racy "Poison Ivy" Where is she now? Currently starring with Hugh Grant in "Music and Lyrics," Barrymore went on to become a successful romantic comedy regular.
Alyssa Milano From tomboyish Samantha Micelli on '80s sitcom "Who's the Boss" to sexy cheesefests like 1994's "Embrace of the Vampire" and 1996's "Poison Ivy II" Where is she now? Since ending her eight-year run on "Charmed," Milano has laid low. Comedian Sarah Silverman recently told Howard Stern she often battles Milano in online Scrabble.
Jodie Foster From one of the hardest working kid actors on TV to an underage prostitute in "Taxi Driver" Where is she now? After earning an Academy Award nomination for "Taxi Driver," Foster went to Yale and then resurfaced as a serious actress, winning two Oscars before the age of 30.
Dustin Diamond From "Saved by the Bell's" Screech to "Dirty Sanchez" Where is he now? Pretty much nowhere, unless you consider Internet sex tapes and a getting exiled (Warning: graphic language) from a VH1 celeb-reality show somewhere.
Elizabeth Berkley From "Saved by the Bell's" Jessie to "Showgirls" Where is she now? Good question.
Lisa Bonet From "Cosby Show" good kid Denise Huxtable to overtly sexual voodoo scenes in 1987's "Angel Heart" Where is she now? Small roles in "Enemy of the State" and "High Fidelity," and currently in talks to join Jennifer Aniston and Colin Firth in "Gambit."
Celebritology field agents Frank Thomason, Lisa Todorovich, Jenny Markley and Nancy Kerr contributed to this report.
By Liz | January 31, 2007; 10:43 AM ET | Category: Celebrities , Celebritology 101 , Miscellaneous Previous: Morning Mix: Brandy Sued for $50 Million in Crash | Next: Morning Mix: No Love for "Idol"
Keep up with the latest Celebritology scoops with an easy-to-use widget.
If you have tips, ideas for stories or general suggestions, let us know.
Maybe these parents should use this as a chance to encourage their kids to not use celebrities as role models. Um, duh.
Posted by: Puh-leeze | January 31, 2007 12:00 PM
Like you're really going to take the kiddies to see Equus. Your 9 year olds look up to Harry, not to Alan, and certainly not to Dan Radcliffe. They don't even know who Alan is. Frankly, at that age, they probably don't fully grasp that Dan doesn't wear glasses and can't do magic.
(I'm more concerned that the audience who is turning up solely to see Dan Radcliffe naked is going to be v. disappointed in the actual play. But it's the best career move Dan can make if he wants to be taken seriously as an adult actor. Did you see him on Extras this week? I think the scene with Diana Rigg killed me *g*.)
Posted by: MB | January 31, 2007 12:06 PM
Liz, you really should give us the whole list for Saved by the Bell--that whole crew is worth following up on. Seriously!
Posted by: Jim | January 31, 2007 12:11 PM
Elizabeth Berkley was just on a Law and Order Criminal Intent. Not that it's somewhere, it took me a bit recognized Jessie!
Posted by: mfd | January 31, 2007 12:13 PM
Looking at list of former child stars, Maybe Dakota and Daniel might want to consider other careers.
Posted by: Lisa | January 31, 2007 12:25 PM
Elizabeth Berkley - Appearences on Law & Order: CI, Without A Trace and Threshold.
Lark Voorhies (Lisa) - Nothing in the past 5 years, currently working on production of "Black Man's Guide to Understanding Black Women"
Mark-Paul Gosseler (Zack) - NYPD Blue, Commander In Chief, The House NExt Door
Mario Lopez (Slater) - Blod & The Beautiful, Nip/Tuck, and of course, Dancing with the Stars
Tiffani Amber Thiesen (Kelly) - Fastlane and a bunch of other shows you never heard of
Screech - Voice of character on Duck Dodgers, and couple films in post production ("Our Feature Presentation" "Hamlet A.D.D.")
Posted by: BF | January 31, 2007 12:27 PM
Liz, you should do a column on all the crazy stuff child stars have done. (or maybe just a few examples.)
Posted by: SSMD | January 31, 2007 12:31 PM
The funny thing is the parent who was talking about how Daniel Radcliffe could no long be a role model for his 9 year old son is evidently the same parent who has no problem with said 9 year old seeing a PG-13 movie. (Gof was PG-13 and OotP will most likely achive that rating as well)
Posted by: MC | January 31, 2007 12:32 PM
let's not forget 90210 for Tiffani Thiesen
Posted by: | January 31, 2007 12:38 PM
"let's not forget 90210 for Tiffani Thiesen"
I was limiting it to just the past few years. Posting their entire resume would've been longer than Liz's original column.
Posted by: BF | January 31, 2007 12:42 PM
Whoa, I was just thinking about "Ben" from Growing Pains... then he showed up on a DollarMenunaire commercial. What an eerie coincidence.
Haley Joel Osmet, wasn't he on that show with Ed Asner, Thunder Alley? Then Sixth Sense? Now gone the way of a [insert Simple Life star here] in his Saturn.
Posted by: not bluto | January 31, 2007 12:54 PM
Quinn Cummings, the child star of "The Goodbye Girl" and "Family" has her own blog about her normal everyday life at "The QC Report." It's a great read.
Posted by: CallMeSkeptical | January 31, 2007 12:55 PM
Okay, does it not bother anyone that he has a Saturn? Seriously. It's not quirky like Will Ferrel's Prius. It's just odd to me. I mean, I don't even drive a Saturn. As in, I'm someone that should totally be driving a Saturn, not Sixth Sense megillionaire child prodigy. Or maybe it's just me...... okay, but look, that's like I dunno, Soleil Moon Frye, does she drive a Saturn? I bet Gary Coleman at least drives a Camry. Right? RIGHT?
Posted by: not bluto | January 31, 2007 1:11 PM
How can you do this story and skip Kirk Cameron from Growing Pains... I mean Left Behind II: Tribulation Force was the BEST. MOVIE. EVAR. (and inspired what was quite possibly the funniest Xmas present I've ever received).
Kirk is my hero... i lurve the leftovers from the millenarian movements who're still trying to bring about the end of days... they make me all warm and fuzzy.
Posted by: Quintilius Varus | January 31, 2007 1:56 PM
There have always been "child actors"...some have grown up normal, others not, sort of like real life. I think that Daniel Radcliffe made a good choice. He can't help it that he is famous and is burdened with the Harry Potter identity. He can do something positive with his career and continue to grow as an artist. I'm glad to see that he and his parents don't see fame as the end all, but see this as an opportunity to do what he wants to do, which is act in as many good roles as possible.
Posted by: Barb | January 31, 2007 2:00 PM
Also, I have a question, that may seem nosey, but it is really bugging me. Speaking of Jodie Foster, is she gay?
Posted by: Barb | January 31, 2007 2:02 PM
I hope not, otherwise John Hinkley may go shoot another president.
All kidding aside, she does have children and has been an item with Cydney Bernard
Posted by: BF | January 31, 2007 2:17 PM
Mario Lopez just hosted Miss America the other night.
And wasn't Lark doing a weekday soap? Or was that ages ago?
Posted by: Columbia, MD | January 31, 2007 2:23 PM
How does Jodie Foster swing that? She never gets her privacy invaded, or even an unflatter photo printed. Liz, you need to get to the bottom of this so you can teach Britney how to do it.
Posted by: not liz | January 31, 2007 2:24 PM
i think jodie's advantage is a matter of IQ. i don't think you can "teach" britney a thing
Posted by: to not liz | January 31, 2007 2:32 PM
Certainly. But it would make a fun story.
Posted by: not liz | January 31, 2007 2:40 PM
I guess these parents are too stupid to explain to their children that the actors are playing a "role" in Harry Potter.
Posted by: Common Sense | January 31, 2007 3:27 PM
Speaking of child stars, I always wondered what happened to my favorite brown-eyed boy-actor, Barrett Oliver. Oh, how many times did I watch "D.A.R.Y.L." and "The Never-Ending Story" when I was 13?! His picture was in my locker in high school, looking all sensitive and intense.... ; )
Posted by: Maritza | January 31, 2007 3:33 PM
Funny that you didn't mention that Drew Barrymore is a successful film producer and Jodie Foster is a successful film director and producer.
Posted by: | January 31, 2007 3:56 PM
Interesting list of child actors and what they're doing now. But you neglected to include Elijah Wood. A former child star, he was awesome as Frodo in the Lord of the Rings movies.
Posted by: Lisa | January 31, 2007 4:01 PM
Posted by: Vegas Mom | January 31, 2007 4:01 PM
Tell us about Brooke Shields.
Posted by: Hypatia | January 31, 2007 4:08 PM
So the parent who won't take his child to another Daniel Radcliffe movie would prefer that Daniel's career stay in one spot until his nine year is no longer interested in Harry Potter? That's got to be one of the silliest reactions ever.
Dakota Fanning made a very good point regarding her movie. Are you kidding me, people are seeking the arrest of her mother and agent. They need to decrease the dosage on whatever they're taking.
Posted by: petal | January 31, 2007 4:10 PM
Posted by: Hypatia | January 31, 2007 4:10 PM
George W. Bush From legacy drunk at Yale to a National Guard walk-away. Where is he now? Baghdad.
Posted by: DFC | January 31, 2007 4:13 PM
Can we please keep politcal remarks off of here? There are plenty of politcal blogs out there (even a few on washingtonpost.com) It's nice to have things like celebritology to escape the endless politcal bickering and insults.
Posted by: BF | January 31, 2007 4:22 PM
To go back farther, to the early 70s, what happened to my crushes Mark Lester (Oliver!) and Jeff East (Huckleberry Finn)?
Posted by: Peanut | January 31, 2007 4:30 PM
Liz, could you be a little more misleading about the reaction to "Hounddog"?
The backlash is not from "fans", it's from the hysterical religious right (most of whom, typically, managed to work themselves into a frenzy without actually -seeing- the movie in question).
Posted by: JoeBleux | January 31, 2007 5:00 PM
Mark Lester (who's singing voice WAS dubbed by a girl) left show biz in 1977 and I believe went on to become a chiropractor
Posted by: eastportchick | January 31, 2007 5:00 PM
I HATE REPUBLICANS!!!! Whooooo hoooooo!
Posted by: To BF | January 31, 2007 5:07 PM
The funny thing about child stars is that they always grow up. I say good for Dan and Dakota for realizing that they won't always be kids forever and for making the moves to make sure their careers don't die with their youth. Also good for them in even getting the chance, most are pigeonholed and not allowed to grow up on screen.
Posted by: Tiff in the OK | January 31, 2007 5:26 PM
Oh yeah, and I can't wait for Dan to turn 18 so I can stop feeling like I'm a pedophile for finding the pic kind of hot.
Posted by: Tiff in the OK | January 31, 2007 5:27 PM
Someone uses Harry Potter as a role model for their kids????? What is that anyway: proxy parenting??
Posted by: Timothy | January 31, 2007 6:01 PM
Harry Potter is a hero. Very few people, including Dan Radcliffe or that unfortunate 9-year-old's parents, measure up to Harry's standard. That's why we need fiction.
Nonetheless, Mr. Radcliffe seems to be a perfectly decent man dealing with a difficult professional challenge. Certainly some people will go to the theater to see him nude. It's his job to make sure they leave having seen a good performance. There is no good reason to treat him differently from other performers who've appeared without clothes simply because he and many of his fans are young.
Of course, if you REALLY want to look to an actor, rather than a character, as a role model for young people, I recommend Dakota Fanning. She seems to be doing an excellent job insisting on her own professional autonomy at quite a young age.
Posted by: Alexander | January 31, 2007 6:22 PM
Not only that, but Dakota (and her parents) also have the sense to let her continue to be a child while she is a child. I saw her on an interview talking about her Girl Scout cookie drive plans.
Posted by: terri | January 31, 2007 8:30 PM
Going way farther back in film history, 1930s child megastar Shirley Temple grew up to be appointed ambassador to some country or another, making her the predecessor of actor-President Ronald Reagan and actor-Governator Arnold S.
Posted by: Scott | January 31, 2007 10:19 PM
That whole photoshoot makes DR looks so white and gray. His co star looks alright, so I guess it is him. .. Just nit picking.
Posted by: | February 1, 2007 9:44 AM
Lark Voorhies was on Days of Our Lives eons ago.
Posted by: Emily | February 1, 2007 10:44 AM
If this were a girl, a dozen people would have type-gasped in horror at the physique. Give that kid a sandwich, for crying out loud! He's so stringy and malnourished-looking. Of course, it IS hard to keep a 17-year-old fed. Maybe he'll grow out of it.
Posted by: WDC | February 1, 2007 10:45 AM
Oh yeah, and I can't wait for Dan to turn 18 so I can stop feeling like I'm a pedophile for finding the pic kind of hot.
Posted by: Tiff in the OK
Same here Tiff, same here. From what I gather, he should be "legal" in about 171 days.
Posted by: Bored @ work | February 1, 2007 12:20 PM
What about . . .
* Johnny Whitaker? * Rodney Allan Rippie (sp?)? * Ricky Seagull (from the later days of The Patridge Family)?
And the sporadic mention of Robbie Rist? (I remember him once on an awards show in the 70s standing next to, and looking like a mini-me version of, John Denver -- right down to the round wire-framed glasses.)
This could be a whole blog in itself:
* The Tragic Ending (Dana Plato, Anissa Jones a.k.a. Buffy on Family Affair) * The Reality "Star" (Gary Coleman, Tempesst Bledsoe) * The Sibling Teams (Justine and Jason Bateman, MaryKate and Ashley Olson) * The Completely Obscure Child Star Who Seems to Have Disappeared Forever (either Chris on The Partridge Family, Bern'Nadette Stanis on Good Times)
Posted by: Tim | February 1, 2007 2:49 PM
Equus is an amazing show...
Posted by: fun times | February 1, 2007 3:31 PM
I think I would have preferred it if Radcliffe had waited to his 18th birthday to strip down to nothing and prance around on a stage... This looks like pedophile fodder to me. And yes, those few weeks are important and do make a difference. And I'm sorry, but he is not "burdened" with Harry Potter. It made his career, his money, and his future. Let me shed a tear. "I think I'll do something really controversial and then everyone will take me seriously!!" What an original idea...please.
Posted by: Janice | February 1, 2007 4:02 PM
Dakota Fanning is a bit young for any discussion of what kind of an adult actor will she be--she has yet to go through her teens and as history has shown us, this isn't often nice to girls in Hollywood (I can only think of three that recently went to and graduated from a university rather than prance around H-wood touting uneducated opinions). So lets see.
As for Dan Radcliff, this one is a little bit more difficult to reconcile because he is still very much Harry Potter. That said books 4,5,6, and most likely 7, are quite dark and deal with fairly adult themes--things people should not let their 6 year olds or even 9 year olds see or read. Evil, as a motivation, is a hard thing to confront head on, especially as a child...understand that I just finished re-reading the books and am obviously a fan.
My question here is this: why does your child need to know that he is naked on stage? How would they find out? Online? Why is your nine year old surfing the web unsupervised? On TV? How many 9 years olds do you know who watch E!? I mean Jodi Foster did that whole Taxi Driver thing and continued to be Disney's 70's darling. I don't think it will be a problem.
Posted by: CurrentBB | February 1, 2007 5:27 PM
You have a good site buy viagra http://www.mcturl.com/?r=263 [url=http://www.mcturl.com/?r=263]buy viagra[/url]
Posted by: Viagra | February 2, 2007 5:51 AM
tglmrz lkbujqtc fidcmx frqu ytzkdj nidxrsp yqom
Posted by: swmqzfcl muygrc | February 18, 2007 3:51 AM
duhnpx gvspnq olrhzjc peyvabz bjiue txqwgr bavkl [URL=http://www.wuboyi.khibsp.com]dlyxbg gqwsye[/URL]
Posted by: godjyxqvn ibnpwqx | February 18, 2007 3:54 AM
duhnpx gvspnq olrhzjc peyvabz bjiue txqwgr bavkl [URL=http://www.wuboyi.khibsp.com]dlyxbg gqwsye[/URL]
Posted by: godjyxqvn ibnpwqx | February 18, 2007 3:54 AM
duhnpx gvspnq olrhzjc peyvabz bjiue txqwgr bavkl [URL=http://www.wuboyi.khibsp.com]dlyxbg gqwsye[/URL]
Posted by: godjyxqvn ibnpwqx | February 18, 2007 3:55 AM
wcymrd vrntwekx onai oijcxwt yioakvf vqsijawzk weziu [URL]http://www.krminy.wixk.com[/URL] dnyugt ljbs
Posted by: ekgjb afhogn | February 18, 2007 3:56 AM
wcymrd vrntwekx onai oijcxwt yioakvf vqsijawzk weziu [URL]http://www.krminy.wixk.com[/URL] dnyugt ljbs
Posted by: ekgjb afhogn | February 18, 2007 3:58 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.
|
Washingtonpost.com blogger Liz Kelly dishes on the latest happenings in entertainment, celebrity, and Hollywood news.
| 230.055556 | 0.666667 | 0.888889 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/01/17/DI2007011701714.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/01/17/DI2007011701714.html
|
White House Talk
|
2007020319
|
Dan is also deputy editor of Niemanwatchdog.org.
Dan Froomkin: Hi everyone and welcome to another White House Talk. Lots going on these days -- Iraq continues to be an enormous drag on the country and the presidency; There's much speculation surrounding President Bush's intentions regarding Iran; The Scooter Libby trial is mesmerizing to many of us, in large part because of the unique glimpse into the inner-workings of the White House; And Bush is talking about his "microphone" again -- even as the evidence mounts that it's not working anymore.
That and so much more. Read my column and join in the conversation.
Toronto: Hi Dan. As you pointed out the other day, the Vice-President has no credibility left and has been verifiably wrong every step of the way. It occurs to me that there are individuals out there who have been right every step of the way and I wonder why they haven't been identified by the media as people to look to for guidance now. What's your take?
washingtonpost.com: The Unraveling of Dick Cheney (Post, Jan. 29)
Dan Froomkin: I think that's a very interesting point. The liberal blogosphere has been pointing out that those pundits and politicians who were for the war -- and especially those who were for the war and then changed their mind -- seem to get a lot more attention, airtime and even money than those who were against it from the get-go. Jebediah Reed had a particularly good piece in Radar magazine about how that played out among the punditocracy. Why people who accurately predicted what would happen weren't listened to then -- and aren't listened to now! -- truly is puzzling.
Eugene, Ore.: Hi Dan. What do you think of The Post's decision not to pursue Cheney's visitor logs? Lawyers from The Post say there are other lawsuits pending that will cover their request and they had wanted them prior to the election. Seems like The Post is giving up on what is clearly an important piece of history. How do you see it?
Dan Froomkin: I don't know anything more than what I read in Josh Gerstein's story in the New York Sun today. It sounds like a shame to me but I'm sure there was a compelling reason of some kind. That said I very much would like The Post to write something about what happened.
Bethesda, Md.: On the surface, it appears many of the White House witnesses are not interested at all in protecting Libby. Fleischer seemed much more sympathetic to Fitzgerald's questioning that the defense attorney's. Does this reflect a schism between the VP's office and others in the West Wing? Will Libby's defense team actually pursue the idea that Rove is the real bad guy?
Dan Froomkin: Excellent question. In their opening statement, the defense certainly indicated that Libby felt he was being scapegoated on Rove's behalf, and it's doubtful they would have mentioned that unless it's a significant part of their case. And so far all we've heard are prosecution witnesses. But even so, if the defense were out to get Rove, wouldn't you get some hint of it from their cross-examinations? So I think it may be wishful thinking on the Rove Obsessives out there.
Malone, N.Y.: The Libby trial is laying bare the coziness of the MSM with the administration. At what point does this become a trial of the MSM? Acting as propagandists for unnamed government officials, having private interviews to get the party-line straight and not disclosing these relationships -- the MSM media appears increasingly ethically challenged to not come clean, such as with the State of the Union lead up when many MSM had private meetings with Bush, shared his line, but did not disclose their relationship or any strings attached. You've commented on this in the past. Do you think, especially with the Libby trial laying it out for all to see, that the increasingly blatant, unquestioned, and spoon-fed propaganda will become seen for what it is: propaganda and not news?
Dan Froomkin: The Libby trial is such a multi-faceted beast, isn't it? And you're right, it raises questions not just about Libby's guilt or innocence, how the White House does business and journalists' First Amendment rights, but also about whether Washington's "top" reporters are entirely too cozy with the sources who use them to spin without accountability. Not surprisingly that question isn't getting quite as much attention in the MSM as the others. I think the public should be more-skeptical readers -- but I'm not sure this trial will do the trick in itself.
Alexandria, Va.: Do you think having the bloggers in the media room has an impact on the media coverage? Does the media look at the live blogging and the daily round-ups for perspectives they may have missed?
Dan Froomkin: I think the blogger presence has been very healthy for the news coverage. For one, I think Firedoglake's liveblogging has been an enormous resource for everyone who's not in the courthouse, which includes a lot of journalists. I'm mystified as to why no media organization, including my own, appears to be springing for real-time transcription and the Web-publishing thereof. Boggles my mind, really. But beyond that resource -- which of course is more directional than quotable -- the presence of bloggers I think sort of keeps the reporters on their toes. They know if they're sloppy about characterizing something they'll get singed for it. I don't know how much reporters are benefiting from the perspective of the bloggers -- but most journalists would agree that the more voices out there the better.
New Haven, Conn.: Dan, I have a crazy idea. What if Dick Cheney is being completely up-front and simply telling the truth about Iraq? "Bottom line is that we've had enormous successes, and we will continue to have enormous successes." So maybe what Cheney is saying is that he's actually an agent of Iran. Love the new name for the column, although I would have voted for "White House Vigil."
Dan Froomkin: Funny. Thanks. "White House Debriefing" has always been a closet favorite of mine, but I'm delighted with "White House Watch." It was my original first choice.
Libby trial: Hello, and thank you for providing this forum. Do we know why Fitzgerald has not pursued charges against Armitage in the Plame leak investigation?
Dan Froomkin: Former Deputy Secretary of State Richard L. Armitage, it turns out, was columnist Robert Novak's first source for the fact that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA. But it appears that special counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald didn't have evidence that Armitage knowingly leaked classified material -- so no indictment on the leak itself -- and didn't lie about it to investigators -- so no indictment for perjury and obstruction of justice.
Anonymous: The New York Times on Tuesday: "Each agency must have a regulatory policy office run by a political appointee ... the White House will thus have a gatekeeper in each agency..." Isn't this the role of the cabinet members? Doesn't this directive undermine their authority? What do they think?
Dan Froomkin: No one would expect cabinet members to go over ever regulatory change with a fine-toothed comb. But the role of cabinet members in this administration already has been subjugated to the White House in a way that is breathtaking even by previous standards. That was a fascinating story by Robert Pear, wasn't it? And hidden in plain site -- the executive order had been out almost two weeks.
Baltimore: Dan: Can you tell me if I'm wrong or over-simplistic in this analysis? We toppled Iraq's government but failed, miserably, to help make a new one. The country's broken and the reason it's not fixed yet is because the violence there is so bad. The only thing that will fix the violence is the insertion of a bunch more troops who can quell things until the new government gets a foothold -- but we've bungled things so badly so far that the public is against sending any more troops to what they see as a failed thing?
I mean, I'm a liberal, and it looks to me that there are only two options now: get out and let it burn or send more troops and keep trying to make it work. Agree? Thanks.
Dan Froomkin: There are other possibilities. One, which gets remarkably little attention, is championed by retired Gen. William Odom. His argument in a nutshell is that if we leave things actually will get better than if we stay.
Being Right and on TV: Dan, isn't the real answer here that the Media doesn't look for people who are "right" but rather for people who will say things that make people watch? And that they will always (at least the "fair" media) put people on both sides of an issue, if for no other reason than it increases the base of likely viewers? Don't you think that the days are gone when "the Media" worries about truth, justice and the American way?
Dan Froomkin: That's one possibility. Another is that the "media" simply hates smug liberals. But I agree that the quest for "balance" and the appetite for conflict often have overwhelmed the search for accuracy.
Concord, N.H.: A couple of days ago, you linked to an article comparing Dick Cheney to "Baghdad Bob" as an over-the-top propagandist. Hilarious and unfortunately dead-on. It's hard to believe that Cheney could be that disconnected from reality, and it does not appear that he is helping the Republicans politically. So what is he up to? Maybe he is trying to defuse any impeachment talk by making Bush look reasonable by comparison. Thoughts?
Dan Froomkin: You are referring to a column by Greg Mitchell in his column in Editor & Publisher. My point in Monday's column was that Cheney simply is not credible at this point. But I chose not to, and choose not to, speculate as to what's going on in there. I just don't know.
Boston: "Mr. Bush said that each agency must have a regulatory policy office run by a political appointee, to supervise the development of rules and documents providing guidance to regulated industries." Pear, NYT (Tuesday's WHW) Perhaps the political appointee can verify that everyone who works in the agency is on the "right" side of Roe v. Wade and punched the GOP ticket in 2000 and 2004 a la the Iraq CPA...
Dan Froomkin: The Bush administration's politicization of the bureaucracy hardly could be accelerated. But you are forgiven for not knowing that -- it's one of the most under-covered stories in Washington. Princeton Professor David E. Lewis wrote a nice piece about this for NiemanWatchdog.org in September 2005. What Rajiv Chandrasekaran described in his book, "Imperial Life in the Emerald City: Inside Iraq's Green Zone," about CPA hiring, I suspect is replicated in many other places inside the Beltway.
Reading, Mass.: Do you feel constitutionally that President Bush is on firm ground to conduct the war as he sees fit? The Constitution gives Congress the power of the purse. Passing non-binding resolutions to express displeasure with a war policy is a grandstanding measure. What is needed is the political courage to cut off funding.
Dan Froomkin: The consensus among constitutional experts is that Congress has a great deal of power, if not to micromanage the war, certainly to establish its broad outlines -- and stop it, if need be. But what you raise is the question of political will (and a veto-overrideble one at that.)
Arlington, Va.: It seems a little over-the-top to assert that the White House operates by "deliberately" outing a CIA agent and "knowingly" breaking federal law to discredit a critic. Yet that is precisely what you did in your lead Tuesday by using the press secretary's response to a question that asserted such. You did not accurately describe the question, so the answer was out of context. Is that fair reporting? It's one thing to criticize the White House, but to distort what was said to justify such an accusation only seems aimed to rally your liberal supporters on the Web. I hope you will respond to this question.
Dan Froomkin: Thanks for the tough question. McClellan repeatedly used the "that is not the way this White House operates" line and variations thereof to pooh-pooh any White House involvement in the leaking of Plame's identity as part of a campaign to discredit her husband. That of course turned out to be outright deception on his part. There were times when he was responding specifically to the accusation of a criminal leak -- and others when he was not. I'm sure some White House officials would argue that they were not denying what everyone very clearly heard them denying. But that would be sophistry.
Richmond, Va.: The Libby trial reveals the frenzied efforts of the office of the VP to respond to a critic who charged they manipulated intelligence to get us to go to war. At the same time, we learn from Sen. Rockefeller that Cheney exerted constant pressure on the Senate Intelligence committee to stall the investigation on that flawed intelligence. Is it me or are these the actions of people who don't have something to hide?
Dan Froomkin: You know, it does sort of sound that way sometimes, doesn't it?
Baltimore: Has Tim Russert responded to the testimony in the Libby trial that Cheney liked to appear on Meet the Press in order to "control the message?"
Dan Froomkin: Not that I know of. I look forward to it. See Dana Milbank in The Washington Post: "Memo to Tim Russert: Dick Cheney thinks he controls you."
Alexandria, Va.: Dan -- great work on a day-to-day basis. I noticed that today Bush is having another cozy chat (I just can't call it an interview) with Fox News -- this time Neil Cavuto (in a previous chat, Cavuto asked if Bush agreed with his theory that Michael Jackson's trial was hurting his social security privatization plan). This made me wonder -- where has Fox News been in the Libby trial? We know that Cheney and the Administration pitched/leaked the Plame story to Bob Novak, Time, the New York Times, NBC and other "MSM" sources. It seems odd that they wouldn't go through their bread-and-butter/brothers-in-arms. Is it possible that Libby's defense will include Brit Hume or Carl Cameron or some other Foxite?
Dan Froomkin: I think one can take Fox conspiracy theories too far. That said, thanks for reminding me of that Bush-Cavuto interview in June 2005, of which I wrote up in my column, The Foxnewsified Bush Interview: "Thanks to Fox News' exclusive interview with President Bush yesterday, the leader of the free world is now on the record when it comes to John Kerry's Yale grades, Laura Bush's presidential aspirations and -- yes -- the Michael Jackson trial's effect on public policy discourse.
"Who wants to talk about that messy war in Iraq, or the Downing Street Memo? Not Neil Cavuto, Fox News executive, anchor, commentator and Republican campaign contributor."
Cavuto was considerably improved in his August 2006 Bush interview. But obviously he's seen as a safe pick.
Savannah, Ga.: The Libby trial has exposed the way this White House has manipulated the press and certain reporters/news anchors with their cozy relationships and selective leaks. Do you think this is consistent with the way past administrations have tried to control the message, or is this Bush/Cheney crew way, way out there? Thanks!
Dan Froomkin: Press blogger Jay Rosen, among others, has argued that Bush has taken all this to a level never before seen -- and I think he's on to something.
Washington: I'm just now reading today's WHW (I like the new name better), and just read about the bipartisan panel for fighting terrorism. It should be noted that Robert Novak wrote a scathing article about the Dems being rude to Bush in rejecting the initial offer, but didn't mention that Bush would determine the makeup of the panel.
washingtonpost.com: The Democrats' Rude Rebuff (Post, Jan. 25)
Dan Froomkin: Thanks. And the mention of Lieberman was certainly a poke in the eye, too.
Sacramento, Calif.: Is there any practical constraint on a president's power to order an attack on another country?
Dan Froomkin: You'd think I'd know the answer to that question. But I'm not sure anybody does right now.
Ellicott City, Md.: Since they moved you from "news" to "opinion", I have seen your comments have become more common and opinionated. Can not say I disagree, but is this something that you have consciously done or not?
Dan Froomkin: I have felt a bit more free in my writing as the years have passed. But I think the vast majority of what I write falls into the realm of legitimate news analysis, not the espousal of opinion.
Dan Froomkin: Thanks very much for all your questions and comments. I wish I could have gotten to more of them, but I have to run. See you again here in two weeks, and every weekday afternoon on the homepage.
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online 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.
| 85.04878 | 0.658537 | 0.804878 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/30/AR2007013002069.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/30/AR2007013002069.html
|
'The Supreme Court': PBS Does Justice to History
|
2007020319
|
Although the idea of spending four hours listening to professors and law clerks might not sound precisely irresistible, "The Supreme Court" -- a two-part history of "the most powerful judicial tribunal in the world" -- bravely upholds a PBS tradition. Namely, providing television for people who have a serious interest in the country and world around them.
The film is rarely as dry as one might fear, filled as it is with the stories of epochal cases -- Brown v. Board of Education, Roe v. Wade-- and illuminating details, such as the fact that President Dwight D. Eisenhower only appointed Earl Warren to the court because of a promise made at the 1952 Republican convention. Or that when the court handed down its decision on Marbury v. Madison in 1803, it lacked a home of its own and was forced to convene in a hotel lobby.
History is inherently dull stuff only to the determinedly uninformed, but obviously presentation counts, especially in television. Executive producer Jody Sheff keeps "Supreme Court" (airing in two two-hour segments) arrestingly visual. There are various historic photographs, well-shot and edited close-up interviews with authoritative figures -- including current Chief Justice John Roberts, who proves a highly telegenic communicator. And there are printed or written words from key decisions that are pulled from documents, magnified and swept across the screen -- a case in which taking words out of context, literally, is helpful.
One of several professors popping up to comment is the appropriately named Anna O. Law (of DePaul University). Also commenting are former clerks of the stubborn William Rehnquist, the mysterious David Souter and the towering Hugo Black. Lucas A. Powe Jr., former clerk to legendary William O. Douglas, goes a tad over the top with his effusive recollections, but you have to admire his enthusiasm.
Former justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the first woman to be named to the court (a promise made and kept by President Ronald Reagan), is interviewed, and at one point she talks about her trepidation over how well she would perform her duties. "It's wonderful to be asked to be the first to do something," she says, "but I didn't want to be the last." Oddly, Ruth Bader Ginsburg barely gets a mention, but perhaps such is the fate of anybody who's the second to do anything.
In its earliest days of existence, the court met for only one six- to eight-week session per year, and the justices lived together in a boardinghouse. For tonight's two chapters, "One Nation Under Law" and "A New Kind of Justice," the filmmakers resort, briefly, to filmed reenactments (obviously because visual memorabilia of the court's first decades are hard to come by). The reenactments are harmless and without dialogue -- such events as the funeral of John Marshall in 1835, or Thomas Jefferson's inauguration in 1801.
Marshall is credited as the man who "invented" the Supreme Court largely as we know it today, although later chief justices would make it an increasingly assertive part of the national government. Many an illustrious personage is brought to life, as are pivotal cases and decisions, from Fletcher v. Peck in 1809 (involving a corrupt Georgia legislature and the principle of "protecting minorities from majorities," as the script puts it) to the landmark Brown in 1954.
That latter decision was supposed to strike down school segregation, but the practice continued for years. To Virginia's everlasting shame, the citizens and government of Prince Edward County closed down all public schools rather than see even one of them integrated. Although it took years to be fully implemented, the decision was "the second Emancipation Proclamation," says Vernon Jordan, former Georgia field director of the NAACP.
After the decision came down, Black took to wearing a bulletproof vest when returning to his home state of Alabama for visits, we learn, and finally stopped going home altogether when his son was the object of repeated death threats. What seems incredible now is how relatively recent all this was -- as if it were only yesterday when white punks, interviewed for network news, casually used a racial slur when talking about African American students.
Arguably even more explosive was the outcome of Roe v. Wade. Walter Cronkite re-materializes at his once-familiar perch on "The CBS Evening News" to report the decision to the viewing nation: "In a landmark ruling today . . . the Supreme Court legalized abortion," in effect declaring antiabortion laws in 46 states to be unconstitutional. Soon, the high court was a political football to be tossed around irresponsibly by presidential candidates -- among them, the infernally indefatigable Richard M. Nixon, who earned cheers by denouncing courts and court decisions that went "too far."
In a taped telephone conversation, we hear Nixon's first question about William Rehnquist when his name was dropped for a court vacancy: "Is he Jewish?" (Nixon, alas, was nothing if not consistent.)
"The Supreme Court," compellingly narrated by actor David Strathairn (who portrayed Edward Murrow in "Good Night, and Good Luck"), is, of course, more than the story of an institution and those who affected its direction. It's about the great struggle of the American experiment -- finding a balance between liberty and order, with justices such as Rehnquist championing order and others, like William O. Douglas, standing up for liberty and the rights of the individual.
Fittingly and not surprisingly, the documentary struggles to maintain a balance itself -- you can almost hear it being "lawyered" at PBS -- so as not to irritate the ever-irritable right-wing or to offend pious lefties. Time and again, presidents have tried to appoint justices to the court who would advance the chief executives' ideologies. And time and again, judges would surprise even the men who appointed them by being somehow elevated and ennobled once they took their seats on this most august of august bodies.
"Supreme Court" might not have a strong point of view itself, but it's bound to stir healthy debate among factions of every imaginable political stripe -- and that's a pretty good thing for a television program to do.
The Supreme Court (two hours) premieres tonight at 9 on WETA (Channel 26) and MPT (Channel 22); it concludes next Wednesday night at 9 on both PBS stations.
|
Although the idea of spending four hours listening to professors and law clerks might not sound precisely irresistible, "The Supreme Court" -- a two-part history of "the most powerful judicial tribunal in the world" -- bravely upholds a PBS tradition. Namely, providing television for people who...
| 21.859649 | 0.964912 | 47.596491 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/30/AR2007013001696.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/30/AR2007013001696.html
|
Ethics Measures on Development Proposed
|
2007020319
|
A group of Loudoun County supervisors proposed far-reaching ethics and campaign finance measures yesterday that they said would increase public confidence in local decisions on development.
One proposed measure would bar supervisors from accepting campaign checks from any person or company with a development proposal before the county. That would be a sharp departure for some supervisors. Leading up to the 2003 election, the development industry contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to supervisors' campaigns, and fundraising has continued since the election.
The measures also would require Loudoun's nine supervisors to disclose their meetings with people seeking county permission on land-use proposals. Supervisors would also be strongly encouraged to sign on to a code of ethics requiring them to "expose through appropriate means and channels, corruption, misconduct, or neglect of duty when discovered."
"We need to regain the public trust and confidence," said supervisor Lori Waters (R-Broad Run). "I view this also as a protection for the development community, in that there's not a standard of you have to pay to play."
The proposals follow reports published by The Washington Post last week that detailed how major land-use decisions in Loudoun have been dominated by a small network of public officials and their allies in the development industry. Developers, landowners and others profited as they coordinated with public officials to influence land-use decisions in the county, e-mails and other records showed.
In recent months, FBI agents have asked questions about land-use matters and official actions in the county, according to people who have been interviewed.
Waters proposed the ethics package with board Chairman Scott K. York (I). Three other supervisors -- James Burton (I-Blue Ridge), Sarah R. Kurtz (D-Catoctin) and Jim Clem (R-Leesburg) -- co-sponsored the proposals, which are set to be considered by the full board next week.
Burton had put forward an ethics pledge in 2004, supported by the same supervisors.
Under the current proposal, supervisors who decline to sign would lose half the funds from their budgets, which fund staffing and other office expenses. Those accused of violations would face penalties including loss of funding, committee assignments or public censure.
Whether the board has the votes to pass a rigorous package depends in part on Clem, who has been an important vote on development matters in recent years. Clem said yesterday he would vote for the measures, but he also said he wants to discuss them further and make additions. "I need to go back and really read it," Clem said.
Supervisor Eugene A. Delgaudio (R-Sterling), a professional fundraiser who runs an anti-gay lobbying group, declined to offer support for the measures, saying he would present his proposals later.
Delgaudio has aggressively courted building and development companies active in Loudoun. He reported receiving $59,579 in campaign contributions between July 1 and Dec. 31, according to his latest disclosure form.
"I see prolific fundraising as prolific fundraising, no different than what goes on in 435 congressional races, 50 senate races and thousands of local races," Delgaudio said.
A Virginia official said Loudoun leaders must stay within the bounds of state law when considering such measures.
"The law is clear that they cannot pass a regulation or ordinance or any kind of law that limits campaign finance contributions," said Chris Piper, campaign finance manager for Virginia's Board of Elections.
Regarding the Loudoun proposals, he said, "It's a question of whether they are entering into a voluntary pact or passing a new law or regulation."
|
A group of Loudoun County supervisors proposed far-reaching ethics and campaign finance measures yesterday that they said would increase public confidence in local decisions on development.
| 24.344828 | 1 | 29 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/30/AR2007013002039.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/30/AR2007013002039.html
|
Golden Opportunity Is Lost As Capitals Lose in Ottawa
|
2007020319
|
OTTAWA, Jan. 30 -- Alex Ovechkin and the Washington Capitals had every opportunity to upstage the powerful Ottawa Senators on their home ice Tuesday night. But the all-star winger and his teammates couldn't squeeze the puck past seldom-used backup Martin Gerber when it mattered most and came up short, 3-2, at Scotiabank Place.
Gerber, making his first start in three weeks, stopped 35 shots, including all but one of the 14 he faced in the third period. The goaltender also turned aside 15 shots on the power play.
Still, the Capitals refused to single out a hot goaltending effort for their sixth loss in eight games. Instead, several players, including Ovechkin and linemate Dainius Zubrus, insisted they were to blame.
"Gerber played very well today," said Ovechkin, who notched his 32nd goal and finished with seven shots on net. "We have lots of moments, but we didn't score. If we want to win the game we have to score goals."
Washington even got some help from an unlikely source when enforcer Donald Brashear made it a 3-2 game 3 minutes 2 seconds into the final frame. But the more offensively gifted Capitals around him couldn't get the equalizer, despite a final flurry that included back-to-back power plays and another push with six attackers in the last seconds.
"I'm not taking anything away from [Gerber], but at the same time I don't think we shot the puck all the times when we should have," said Zubrus. "Myself included. I had two opportunities. On the five-on-three, I couldn't get over the pad and in the third period I missed on a breakaway. But I just couldn't finish it."
So Dany Heatley (goal and an assist) and the Senators skated off with another victory (they are 13-3-1 in their last 17 games). The Capitals, meantime, departed for Florida for Thursday's game against the Panthers desperately trying to keep up in the race for the eighth and final playoff berth.
Capitals captain Chris Clark said another problem was the team's weak start.
"The second and third period was a solid effort on our part," Clark said. "I don't think we came out as strong as we could have in the first period."
The Senators scored twice on their first nine shots and took a 2-0 lead into the first intermission thanks to a pair of fortuitous bounces.
Daniel Alfredsson opened the scoring at 9:51 with a wrist shot from just inside the blueline that slithered through a screen and tapped Capitals defenseman Shaone Morrisonn on its way past Olie Kolzig, who was solid if not spectacular in making 35 saves.
Jason Spezza scored the Senators' second goal at 16:53 when he slipped loose of Capitals defenseman Lawrence Nycholat and banged in a deflected shot by teammate Peter Schaefer.
Although the Capitals registered only six shots in the opening period, three of them were glorious scoring chances. But Gerber robbed Ovechkin twice and Alexander Semin once to keep the Senators on top.
The second period went much the same way, with Gerber frustrating the visitors time and again.
But Ovechkin finally broke through at 9:04 when he scored while the teams skated four a side. The star winger's shot hit a skate in front and came right back to him. He made the most of his second attempt, firing the puck past Gerber from the slot to make it a 2-1 game and provide his team with a glimmer of hope.
Their hope was short-lived, however.
Heatley scored his 31st 1 minute 27 seconds later on the power play to restore the Senators' two-goal cushion, 3-1. Heatley's first shot hit Kolzig in the chest, but the goalie was unable to hold on to the rebound, which went straight back to Heatley, who jammed the puck in.
Washington's chance to get back into the contest came moments later. With Heatley and Schaefer in the penalty box, the Capitals had a five-on-three advantage for 51 seconds. They generated two quality opportunities, but Gerber gobbled up both to keep it a two-goal game entering the third period.
"We had all kinds of chances on the power play," Capitals Coach Glen Hanlon said. "But there were some good saves by Gerber and we missed some open nets. Sometimes it's not your night. But you can't fault anyone for not doing what they were supposed to do."
|
The Capitals fight to within one goal twice, but the Senators hold off Washington both times for a 3-2 victory Tuesday night in Ottawa.
| 31.857143 | 0.928571 | 1.714286 |
medium
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/30/AR2007013001741.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2007020319id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/30/AR2007013001741.html
|
Local Firms Zoom In on Windows Vista
|
2007020319
|
Forget the people lining up at Best Buy to get Microsoft's new Windows Vista operating system. The real selling took place yesterday in a packed ballroom at the Washington Hilton, where more than 3,000 people from local companies and government agencies gathered to catch a glimpse of the new software.
Here, the ecosystem that centers on Microsoft was on display. Such tech giants as Intel and Citrix Systems showed off their services while dozens of local firms that have built their business selling Microsoft products explained how they could help federal agencies and government contractors upgrade to the new operating system. Rows of computers demonstrated the software, and new features were flaunted in crowded training sessions.
A broad business network connects the software giant with technology vendors, system integrators and software developers throughout the region, totaling about 122,000 jobs and responsible for $3.5 billion in products and services. Microsoft depends on local firms to sell, install and build applications for government agencies and companies. And Microsoft's partners are banking that thousands of clients will need help upgrading their systems.
In the Washington area, Microsoft has 10,000 partners that bring in more than 80 percent of the company's local revenue, according to Reed Overfelt, Microsoft's general manager for the mid-Atlantic.
Enduring development glitches that repeatedly delayed Vista's release, local firms eagerly awaited the expected boost in business that officially began yesterday. This week, Microsoft thanked the partners for their patience with a series of celebrations, including breakfasts and a lavish black-tie gala at the Kennedy Center last night.
"We're just a little piece in the middle," Overfelt said. "This launch is almost a bigger deal for [partners] than it is for us."
CorasWorks and Applied Information Sciences, both of Reston, used the launch to show off the custom services they created to complement Vista's offerings. Both companies say they generate a significant amount of business for Microsoft, which in turn sends customers in their direction.
"They funnel their business to us," said Scott Mitchell, a Applied Information Sciences representative.
Appian, a Vienna-based software company that recently became a Microsoft partner, has created desktop features that link to the new Microsoft Office suite, which also hit shelves yesterday.
Partners that make Vista more useful to businesses will be extremely important to Microsoft during the first year of sales, since analysts predict mainstream adoption may not occur for nearly two years.
Microsoft's "doing anything they can to accelerate that," said Michael Beckley, Appian co-founder and vice president. "They're trying to give customers any excuse to use the product."
Gary Blatt of Herndon has created a business around the new version of Microsoft's SharePoint software, which helps applications work together. He's created a company, SharePoint Resources, that trains information technology professionals on the programs and then helps place them in jobs.
"Everyone wants to do it, but nobody knows what it is," he said from his booth at the launch event. "I'm trying to hit the masses and get people started."
Getting started is what some IT workers and consulting firms are worried about. Sean Rough, who works for Stanley Inc., an Arlington firm that provides software and network services to federal agencies, attended the launch event to get a sense of how his company can make sure the software it designs for the Army is Vista-compatible. Melissa Nolin, who maintains Montgomery County's computer networks, wanted to figure out whether she needs to replace 6,000 computers before upgrading to the system.
"There are sure to be issues," she said. "It will probably be two years before we move to Vista."
Microsoft has a vested interest in making sure its partners succeed in the local market, Overfelt said. The companies often find and trouble-shoot problems with the software before Microsoft does. Most of the partners have been experimenting with Vista for the past year.
The local economy should benefit from the symbiotic relationship, according to a Microsoft-sponsored report written by market research firm IDC. For every dollar of revenue Microsoft gets from Vista this year, its partners are projected to reap more than $19.
"We're just the infrastructure that they build on," he said. "They allow us to have an enormous footprint."
|
Forget the people lining up at Best Buy to get Microsoft's new Windows Vista operating system. The real selling took place yesterday in a packed ballroom at the Washington Hilton, where more than 3,000 people from local companies and government agencies gathered to catch a glimpse of the new...
| 15.90566 | 0.981132 | 51.018868 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.