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/2006/10/30/AR2006103000830.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/30/AR2006103000830.html
|
Don't Worry. Just Back Off.
|
2006103119
|
Go ahead, people, you have your orders from Napoleon Bonaparte, I mean Donald Rumsfeld. "Back off" and "relax." Book a cruise to Chillsville. Don't worry your pretty little heads about the debacle in Iraq, because "it's complicated, it's difficult." Are mere mortals going to be able to get their minds around a problem that even Albert Einstein, I mean Donald Rumsfeld, finds complicated? Let's be realistic here.
We should all thank our lucky stars that "honorable people" are willing to do all this super-advanced thinking for us. Aristotle, I mean Donald Rumsfeld, was kind enough to phrase it that way rather than spell out what he really meant, which was "people who are smarter than you."
I realize that a few news cycles have come and gone since the secretary of defense held that stunning news conference at the Pentagon last week, but it was such a telling moment -- such a revealing glimpse behind the curtain -- that it deserves to remain fresh in our minds, even amid the distracting cacophony of eleventh-hour electioneering. There, in just two words, you have the Bush administration's approach to the war in Iraq. Indeed, you have the Republicans' theory of government:
Could anyone else have summed it up so efficiently? Maybe Tony Soprano, but his vocabulary can't be printed in a family newspaper. The basic style of leadership is the same, though. I'm the boss, so shut up and do as I say.
Republicans who have to face the voters next week, especially those who find themselves trailing badly in the polls, have been going AWOL from Rummy's brigade. Some, such as Maryland senatorial candidate Michael Steele, explicitly disown the Pentagon czar; others avoid mentioning his name and, when pressed, speak of him as if he were some kind of daffy uncle. House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) made news Sunday when he ventured that "Donald Rumsfeld is the best thing that's happened to the Pentagon in 25 years." Boehner would be hard-pressed to find professional soldiers who agree with that assessment, but maybe blind loyalty in the face of overwhelming evidence will turn out to be a winning strategy. I have my doubts.
At least Boehner isn't trying to pretend that the disaster in Iraq is all Rummy's fault. Alexander the Great, I mean Donald Rumsfeld, may have authored the mistakes that have cost nearly 3,000 American lives, including more than 100 in October alone -- sending too few troops, disbanding the Iraqi army, failing to plan for an extended occupation, training Iraqi "security forces" that promptly turned into sectarian militias. But George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice and the rest of the Vulcans were with him every step of the way, and the Republican majority in Congress sang hosannas of praise like an amen chorus.
Now that most Americans oppose the war and want to bring the troops home before more young men and women die needless deaths, Republicans can't blame Democrats, because they froze them out of all the decision making.
House Speaker Dennis Hastert's immutable rule -- that any legislation brought to the floor had to be supported by a majority of the Republican caucus -- effectively muffled any concrete expression of the public's growing doubts about the war. What if substantial numbers of Democrats and moderate Republicans, enough to constitute a majority of the House, had questions about Iraq, or about torturing detainees, or about the whole course of this incoherent "war on terror"? Tough.
The Republican majority came to Washington claiming a populist mandate but has ended up governing with the same breathtaking arrogance that Genghis Khan, I mean Donald Rumsfeld, let slip the other day. Congress is all about lobbyists, earmarks and pork. Democrats aren't immune to these depredations, of course, but if you aren't allowed to participate in any meaningful decisions, you can't be held responsible.
And at the White House and the Pentagon, fantasy reigns. President Bush famously pledged to stay the course in Iraq even if Laura and Barney the dog are his only supporters. Last week he said U.S. forces constantly change tactics to "stay ahead" of the Iraqi insurgents. Excuse me, but when have we ever been ahead of the insurgency? "We're winning" the war, Bush insists. Excuse me, but could you elaborate? In what sense are we winning in Iraq? Where are you seeing anything that resembles victory?
Silly me. Ordinary Americans just aren't smart enough to think about such things. Thank you, Sir Isaac Newton, I mean Donald Rumsfeld, for reminding us of our patriotic duty: Back off.
|
Go ahead, people, you have your orders from Napoleon Bonaparte, I mean Donald Rumsfeld. "Back off" and "relax." Book a cruise to Chillsville. Don't worry your pretty little heads about the debacle in Iraq, because "it's complicated, it's difficult." Are mere mortals going to be able to get their...
| 13.485294 | 0.985294 | 66.014706 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/31/AR2006103100257.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/31/AR2006103100257.html
|
N. Korea Agrees to Return To Talks
|
2006103119
|
North Korea agreed yesterday to return to the six-nation nuclear disarmament talks, just three weeks after it conducted its first test of a nuclear device.
The country's unexpected decision, which was announced by Chinese and U.S. officials in Beijing, will end Pyongyang's year-long boycott of the talks, which have dragged on intermittently for more than three years. Fourteen months ago, North Korea agreed in principle to dismantle its nuclear programs, but hard bargaining is still necessary to determine the sequence and timing of the incentives it expects in return.
Pyongyang had refused to return to the talks until the United States separately negotiated an end to a crackdown on North Korea's counterfeiting of U.S. currency. But that demand disappeared Tuesday during seven hours of meetings, set up by China at Beijing's Diaoyutai State Guesthouse, involving U.S., North Korean and Chinese officials. North Korea instead agreed to a long-standing U.S. proposal to deal with the counterfeiting issue through a working group of the six-party talks.
Assistant Secretary of State Christopher R. Hill emerged from the meetings to say that there was the potential for "substantial progress" in resolving an issue that has raised tensions throughout the region, including the possibility of a nuclear arms race. U.S. officials were privately puzzled by the mercurial government's change of heart, though they said they hope the universal condemnation of North Korea's nuclear test and the swift imposition of U.N. sanctions had played a role.
"In the wake of their test, it became very clear that there were going to be costs and consequences for their actions and that they faced even greater isolation from the rest of the international community," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said. The talks are expected to resume either this month or in December.
Some analysts and diplomats have faulted the Bush administration for being inflexible and ideological during earlier rounds, making it difficult to reach agreement. David Straub, a former State Department official who was part of the U.S. delegation to some of the talks, said North Korea probably shifted tactics to deflect international pressure and divide the nations at the negotiating table. Unless both the United States and North Korea "bring significantly different approaches to the talks, the talks will again amount to nothing," he said. "Indeed, both will almost certainly take even tougher lines."
President Bush, meeting with reporters in Washington, praised China's role in setting up the meeting. "We'll be sending teams to the region to work with our partners to make sure that the current United Nations Security Council resolution is enforced, but also to make sure that the talks are effective, that we achieve the results we want," Bush said.
Last Wednesday, the Chinese government contacted the U.S. Embassy in Beijing and proposed a trilateral meeting involving North Korea, the United States and China. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Friday authorized Hill to cut short the meetings he had in the South Pacific and to slip into Beijing on an unannounced visit. U.S. officials agreed to try the Chinese idea but had little expectation it would yield a breakthrough.
In January, Hill held a 2 1/2 -hour meeting in Beijing with the Chinese and North Koreans to try to restart the talks, but that effort was not successful.
This time, Hill had seven hours of meetings -- including, at one point, with Kim Gye Gwan, the North Korean vice foreign minister who is Hill's counterpart in the talks, and other North Korean officials. Hill said he told Kim that the United States would never accept North Korea as a nuclear power, nor would any other nation. Hill also told Kim that the U.N. Security Council resolution imposed after North Korea's nuclear test was an "international obligation" and not up for discussion before the resumption of the talks.
The meetings were described as very businesslike. Kim wanted assurances that a Treasury Department action against a Macau bank suspected of money laundering for North Korea would be addressed in the six-party talks. The United States had earlier suggested setting up a working group to address the issue, and Hill reaffirmed that idea. Kim said that was acceptable, according to Hill.
U.S. officials have maintained that the Treasury case was simply an excuse by North Korea to avoid making the strategic choice of giving up its nuclear programs. In earlier talks, Pyongyang had demanded light-water reactors in exchange for abandoning its programs. Though that possible incentive is mentioned in a September 2005 "statement of principles" to guide nuclear negotiations, the United States has insisted that it is only a theoretical possibility that could come at the end of the verified dismantling of North Korea's nuclear facilities.
North Korea set no conditions for returning to the six-party talks on its nuclear program, Hill said. "For us it was very important that no one should create conditions for attending the talks," he said.
Michael J. Green, who oversaw Asian affairs at the White House until last year, said it was significant that North Korea agreed to return without getting relief from the Treasury action or the U.N. sanctions.
"The Chinese exerted real pressure," Green said. He added that he expects China to push North Korea to offer something concrete at the upcoming rounds of talks, such as a moratorium on future tests, a full detailing of its nuclear programs or the return of international inspectors at its Yongbyon facility.
"North Korea is going to cling tenaciously to its nuclear weapons," Green said, but the existence of U.N. sanctions will facilitate coercive diplomacy.
North Korea has blamed the impasse on the U.S. Treasury action against a bank in Macau called Banco Delta Asia, which the department had identified as the main conduit for bringing North Korean-made counterfeit U.S. bills into the international system. The Treasury had determined that senior officials at the Macau bank accepted large deposits of cash and agreed to place the bogus money into circulation.
The bank is also reputed to hold the private accounts of North Korean leader Kim Jong Il and his family.
|
North Korea agreed yesterday to return to the six-nation nuclear disarmament talks, just three weeks after it conducted its first test of a nuclear device.
| 40 | 1 | 29 |
high
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/30/AR2006103001298.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/30/AR2006103001298.html
|
Gee, Oprah. A Thousand Smackeroos. Thanks a Bunch.
|
2006103119
|
Oprah Winfrey, who likes to lavish gifts on her studio audience -- diamond-encrusted watches, Sony camcorders, Burberry coats, BlackBerrys, cashmere sweaters, iPods, wide-screen LCD televisions, washer-dryers, Pontiac G6s -- yesterday gave approximately 300 audience members each $1,000.
"I really do think that it's the best gift I can give this audience, so thanks to our friends at Bank of America -- they thought this was a good idea, too . . . you will each go home with $1,000! . . . One thousand dollars! Okay?" Oprah asked, rhetorically.
Wildly enthusiastic audience response -- though, in truth, nowhere near the level of studio hysteria achieved when she gave audience members those Pontiacs. Still, a pretty happy crowd.
The $1,000, she told them, will be doled out in the form of debit cards, and recipients must spend all of their money on a charity of choice. What she was actually giving them, Oprah said with all the patronization of a woman whose financial worth has been put at $1.5 billion, is "the best feeling in the world."
Definite dimming of enthusiasm in studio to level now far below car giveaway, which has become the gold standard of audience giveaway hysteria.
Or the diamond watches. Even iPods got a bigger response than this.
"I can honestly say that every gift I've ever given has brought at least as much happiness to me as it has to the person I've given it to," Oprah added, with all the complacency of a woman who owns three homes, including a $50 million estate in California.
"That's the feeling I want to pass on to you. I want you to have that feeling this season," she said.
"To document your good deeds, because I want to make sure you document your good deeds," Oprah said, working hard to keep up their spirits, "we are lending everybody in this audience our favorite Sony DVD Handycam.
|
Trick or treat! Oprah Winfrey, who likes to lavish gifts on her studio audience -- diamond-encrusted watches, Sony camcorders, Burberry coats, BlackBerrys, cashmere sweaters, iPods, wide-screen LCD televisions, washer-dryers, Pontiac G6s -- yesterday gave approximately 300 audience members each...
| 7.089286 | 0.946429 | 46.482143 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/31/AR2006103100649.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/31/AR2006103100649.html
|
White House Spokesman Slams Kerry Remark
|
2006103119
|
WASHINGTON -- The White House accused Sen. John Kerry on Tuesday of troop-bashing, seizing on a comment the Democrat made to California students that those unable to navigate the country's education system "get stuck in Iraq."
"Senator Kerry not only owes an apology to those who are serving, but also to the families of those who've given their lives in this," White House press secretary Tony Snow said. "This is an absolute insult."
Kerry, a decorated Vietnam veteran and President Bush's 2004 rival, fired back.
He said he had been criticizing Bush, not the "heroes serving in Iraq," and said the president and his administration are the ones who owe U.S. troops an apology because they "misled America into war and have given us a Katrina foreign policy that has betrayed our ideals, killed and maimed our soldiers, and widened the terrorist threat instead of defeating it."
"This is the classic GOP playbook," Kerry said in a harshly worded statement. "I'm sick and tired of these despicable Republican attacks that always seem to come from those who never can be found to serve in war, but love to attack those who did. I'm not going to be lectured by a stuffed suit White House mouthpiece standing behind a podium."
One week before the midterm elections, the two parties are searching for any edge amid indications Democrats could take back the House and possibly win control of the Senate.
Snow was asked about the comment which Kerry made during a campaign rally Monday for California Democratic gubernatorial candidate Phil Angelides. The White House spokesman was clearly ready, consulting his notes to read a fuller account of Kerry's statement and unleashing a sharp attack.
Separately, the White House issued President Bush's Veterans' Day proclamation praising those who have served in the armed forces _ a week and a half before the holiday.
The Massachusetts senator, who is considering another presidential run in 2008, had opened his speech at Pasadena City College with several one-liners, joking at one point that Bush had lived in Texas but now "lives in a state of denial."
Then he said: "You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."
Snow said the quote "fits a pattern" of negative remarks from Kerry about U.S. soldiers and suggested that whether Democratic candidates _ particularly those running on their military service backgrounds _ agree with their 2004 standard-bearer should be a campaign litmus test.
Unsubstantiated allegations about Kerry's Vietnam War heroism from a group called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth figured prominently in the 2004 Kerry-Bush race. Even Kerry has blamed his slow and uncertain response to the group's claims for helping doom his White House chances.
Snow said a lot of Americans have joined the military since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
"As for the notion that you can say this sort of thing about the troops and say you support them, it's interesting," the press secretary said.
A potential rival to Kerry in 2008 _ Republican Sen. John McCain _ said in a statement that Kerry "owes an apology to the many thousands of Americans serving in Iraq, who answered their country's call because they are patriots and not because of any deficiencies in their education."
Like Kerry, McCain is a decorated Vietnam veteran.
House Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, also called on Kerry to apologize, labeling his comments "disrespectful and insulting to the men and women serving in our military."
Associated Press Writer Michael Blood in Los Angeles contributed to this report.
|
WASHINGTON -- The White House accused Sen. John Kerry on Tuesday of troop-bashing, seizing on a comment the Democrat made to California students that those unable to navigate the country's education system "get stuck in Iraq."
| 17.069767 | 1 | 43 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/30/AR2006103001215.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/30/AR2006103001215.html
|
A Heat Repeat? Probably Not.
|
2006103119
|
I simply didn't have the foresight last year to pick Miami to win the NBA championship.
Pat Riley was telling people he was sick of hearing how great he was when he hadn't won anything in more than 15 years. Not only that, but it seemed Riles had traded for the wrong guys, people like Jason Williams and Antoine Walker who didn't have championship pedigree. Shaq was looking, well, older. Gary Payton was looking, well, ancient. Who knew how much Alonzo Mourning, after a kidney transplant, would be able to contribute? And while Dwyane Wade looked like he might become the best player in the league, which he did, it seemed premature to suggest he was ready to carry a franchise to glory.
But we saw what happened. The Heat, sorta like the St. Louis Cardinals, got hot in the playoffs and couldn't lose. And now, they're all back for a chance at a repeat, Wade and the Golden Oldies. They've all got a champion's pedigree now, and they're favored to win in the Eastern Conference where Detroit might be past its time and the Bulls and Cavaliers probably aren't ready yet.
So, there's every reason to pick Miami this time. But some people never learn.
I'm picking against the Heat again.
Well, not against it necessarily. I can see the Heat getting through the East if Wade can overcome playing virtually nonstop through the FIBA World Championship and stay healthy. But winning the whole thing? Um, no. There are too many younger and physically able teams in the Eastern Conference (Bulls, Cavs, Pistons, maybe the Nets) and too many potential monsters in the West (Mavs, Suns, Spurs).
When the NBA season opens tonight, with the Chicago Bulls visiting the Heat in Miami on championship ring night, the Heat will be the favorite to win it all, which is completely understandable since Shaq and Wade are back.
Problem is, when we left Miami celebrating its championship in Dallas, the team consisted of all the same players, with no obvious upgrades. There's no arguing Miami's players have every right to try to defend their title, but it's also fair to suggest that the Heat needed to get younger . . . and didn't.
The big question in the East is: If not Miami, then who? The Western Conference at least has something of a pecking order. If Dallas falters, the Suns are beyond ready. If the Suns stumble, the Spurs are right behind them, and the Clippers behind them, with the Houston Rockets coming up fast. But in the East? The Bulls, still young even with the addition of Ben Wallace and P.J. Brown, are 11-deep loaded but have yet to win a playoff series with this nucleus. Can LeBron lead his team to the next level when all the Cavaliers added are David Wesley and rookie Shannon Brown? I was all set to write off Detroit, not just because Wallace left for Chicago, but because Big Ben is no longer there to keep Rasheed Wallace from blowing a gasket in a season when there is zero tolerance of 'Sheedish behavior. But then this kid Jason Maxiell comes along and tears up the preseason, and the Pistons look refueled and ready.
Where do the Wizards fit into all of this? It depends on how seriously they take playing better defense and being tough-minded at the end of games. Yes, the NBA now clearly values up-tempo offense and isn't going to allow hyper-physical defense, which favors teams like the Suns, Mavericks, Clippers and Wizards. Even so, if the Wizards don't make a big improvement defensively, especially late in games, they'll finish seventh or eighth and be done early.
While the early story in the east is who can challenge Miami, the story out west is how quickly, if at all, Amare Stoudemire can approach his form of two years ago. If he gets to 80 percent, nobody will beat the Suns. If he doesn't, the Suns will be hard-pressed to equal last year's run to the Western Conference finals. Recovery has been slow. "Getting back to being that guy is the goal," Stoudemire said recently of trying to come back from microfracture surgery. "Penny Hardaway [whose career was dramatically altered by the surgery and his inability to recover fully from it] told me the same thing Jason Kidd told me, which was, 'Don't rush.' They told me to tune out the expectations."
Asked what the other Suns expect of Stoudemire, Steve Nash said: "Our team should have no expectations. Let's put no pressure on him. The sky's the limit, but who knows. Be patient. He's still a young player and didn't play for a year. When you're young, trying to come back from your first injury, you don't have the same confidence in your physical abilities. His health and durability is all we should be concerned about."
With Stoudemire and Kurt Thomas out during last year's playoffs, the Suns became the darlings of the league for the aesthetically appealing way they played and how they persevered. "We had that seven-man rotation in the playoffs and just ran out of juice at the end," all-star Shawn Marion said. "I was dead tired . . . never been that tired before. To think we could this time around have a bench? Subs!"
And the Suns will need everything they had last year and more because Tim Duncan is healthy again in San Antonio. The Mavericks were about 10 minutes from winning the whole thing and come back with pretty much the same team. If you're looking for a sleeper, something of a surprise team that could rearrange the furniture in the West, the Rockets are just that kind of team, what with Yao Ming and Tracy McGrady being surrounded by Bonzi Wells, Luther Head, Shane Battier, Juwan Howard and Dikembe Mutombo playing support roles. The big question: Rafer Alston at point guard.
Look for Utah to replace Denver atop the Northwest Division, for the Lakers to miss the playoffs entirely, for Ray Allen and Kevin Garnett to be coveted by every contender after Christmas, for Darko Milicic to form a potent front-court tandem with Dwight Howard in Orlando, for McGrady to be a serious candidate for MVP, for Yao to be the most productive low-post center in the game, for rookie Brandon Roy to restore hope in Portland, for the Grizzlies to sink like a stone with Pau Gasol out for four months, and for the Bulls to have no 20-point scorers but still reach the conference finals.
Look for the Heat, Bulls and Nets to win their divisions and for the order of finish in the East to be Miami, New Jersey, Chicago, Detroit, Washington, Cleveland, Orlando, Indiana.
In the West, the Mavericks, Suns and Jazz will win their divisions and the order of finish for the playoff teams will be Dallas, Phoenix, Utah, San Antonio, Houston, Los Angeles Clippers, Denver and New Orleans.
Ultimately, the Suns will get Stoudemire back in the lineup for real in February and beat the Heat in the series everybody who loves basketball will want to see, except Miami.
|
The Miami Heat didn't get any younger in the offseason and Dwyane Wade played all summer, leaving the defending NBA champions vulnerable. So the pick here is the Suns to win the NBA title.
| 36.692308 | 0.74359 | 1.25641 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900751.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900751.html
|
Bodies of Evidence
|
2006103119
|
The programs have catchy names like "Food, Mood and Attitude" and "Full of Ourselves" as well as an ambitious goal: to prevent adolescent eating disorders, which tend to be chronic, difficult to treat and sometimes fatal.
In the case of one such program -- "Student Bodies," developed by researchers at Stanford University -- a recently published study suggests that the answer is yes. Stanford researchers, who followed 480 female California college students for up to two years, report that the eight-week Internet-based program reduced the development of eating disorders in women at high risk.
"This study shows that innovative intervention can work," said Thomas Insel, director of the National Insitute of Mental Health, which funded the study; its findings appeared in the August issue of the Archives of General Psychiatry.
Prevention programs for eating disorders have proliferated in the past decade, in part because of the high cost and low success rate of treatment programs. The disorders include a constellation of problems, including anorexia, a pathological fear of gaining weight marked by self-starvation. Anorexia has the highest mortality rate of any psychiatric illness: About 10 percent of patients hospitalized for treatment ultimately die of the disorder.
An estimated 4 percent of teenage girls and young women suffer from anorexia or bulimia, which is marked by recurrent binging and purging, or binge-eating disorder, in which sufferers gorge themselves until they become sick. Another 4 percent are believed to suffer from less severe subclinical forms of these disorders, which can last a lifetime and wreak physical and emotional havoc. The incidence of the disorders has doubled in the past 40 years, according to statistics compiled by the Eating Disorders Coalition, a Washington advocacy group.
"This study is a very significant piece of research because it demonstrates that one can transfer what's known about risk factors into a program that can be applied at very low cost," said Michael Levine, an eating disorders expert who is a professor of psychology at Kenyon College in Ohio. "And it gives every indication of being able to reduce important risk factors" for eating disorders such as excessive concern about body image and weight.
"I can't think of a single computer-based eating disorders program that can hold a candle to these results," said University of Texas psychologist Eric Stice, who two years ago conducted a meta-analysis and found that about 20 percent of eating disorders programs have a statistically significant benefit. Few programs, he said, have involved as many subjects or long-term follow-up as the Stanford approach. Programs achieving the best results, Stice said, are targeted at high-risk subjects rather than the general population of teenagers, involve girls 15 or over, and are interactive rather than didactic.
Clinicians say that effective prevention programs are badly needed. "These are very difficult problems to treat," said Sherry Goldman, a child psychiatrist and pediatrician who practices in Rockville. Many teenage eating disorder patients, she said, "don't recognize the seriousness of their symptoms" and don't think they have a problem.
It's not clear what causes eating disorders, which seem to run in families for reasons that may be biological or environmental -- or both. The vast majority of sufferers are female, which experts say is partly a reflection of cultural norms such as the current popular fascination with skeletal-looking celebrities.
But few experts think culture alone is responsible. Goldman and others who treat teenage girls say that underlying depression is common in eating disorder patients, as are certain personality traits including competitiveness, conformity, rigidity and perfectionism. Many patients have difficulty expressing emotion; some have been sexually or physically abused as children. For them, eating -- or not eating -- becomes something they can control and a way of dissipating feelings that would otherwise be overwhelming.
Psychiatrist C. Barr Taylor, lead author of the Stanford study and a developer of "Student Bodies," said his team focused on young women known to be especially susceptible to eating problems: the 35 to 50 percent of teenage girls with high levels of concern about their weight and body shape, some of whom were overweight. Among the questions used to screen study participants was "How afraid are you of gaining three pounds?" Possible answers included "moderately" and "very."
|
The programs have catchy names like "Food, Mood and Attitude" and "Full of Ourselves" as well as an ambitious goal: to prevent adolescent eating disorders, which tend to be chronic, difficult to treat and sometimes fatal.
| 18.577778 | 1 | 45 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/10/27/DI2006102700945.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/10/27/DI2006102700945.html
|
Book World Live
|
2006103119
|
Robert Kagan , author of "Dangerous Nation, " will be online to field questions and comments about his latest work, a history of American foreign policy.
The author of several other titles on world affairs, Robert Kagan is a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and a monthly columnist for The Washington Post.
Join Book World Live each Tuesday at 3 p.m. ET for a discussion based on a story or review in each Sunday's Book World section.
Robert Kagan: Thank you everyone for joining me in this discussion. I look forward to your questions.
Alexandria, Va.: How does your book add to the material already covered by Walter McDougall's "Promised Land, Crusader State" and Walter Russell Mead's "Special Providence"?
Robert Kagan: A very good question. Those are both fine books on the history of American foreign policy. My interpretation is quite different from both of theirs. For instance, I challenge the idea that the U.S. had a fundamnetally different, primarily isolationist policy at its founding, and only later headed out into global involvement. That is the principal thesis of Prof. McDougall's book. He speaks of an "Old Testament" set of principles for American foreign policy, and a "New Testament." I see much greater continuity in American foreign policy than he does. Walter Mead's work is excellent, and he has been kind enough to write a very flattering review of my book in the current issue of Foreign Affairs. I think he would agree that we have some substantially different perspectives on the history of American foreign policy. Although he and I both agree that the common division of American foreign policy thinking into "realist" and "idealist" schools is simplistic and misleading. All I can suggest is that you take a look at all our books and judge for yourself.
Lyme, Conn.: Do you see a guiding philosophy behind our nation's foreign policy? Do our foreign policy implements tend to see us as the police of the world and we expect the rest of the world to act according to our expectations? Has there been any shift in that the current administration seems to believe we do not need to answer to the international community? Finally, especially since we seem to claim how we are acting in a Judeo-Christian manner which represents the majority (but definitely not all) our nation, shouldn't we follow our beliefs and statements with actual actions by providing greater humanitarian aid around the world? Indeed, if we acted more to help people, regardless of their politics and religion, wouldn't we actually set an example and create greater respect and cooperation throughout the international community?
Robert Kagan: A very thoughtful comment and set of questions. I do see a guiding philosophy behind our foreign policy, rooted more in the principles of the Declaration of Independence, however, than in any religion. (Although one could argue that the principles of universal rights may have a religious underpinning.) We are not always true to this philosophy. Americans are capable of hypocrisy and selfishness, as are all other peoples. Nor has the world always welcomed our efforts to "help" them. Yes, people would like aid. But they often bridle at what they regard as an imposition of American, or Western, economic and political ideas -- the strings that come attached to the aid. Ever since the nation was young, Americans have offered what they reagrded as the "blessings of civilization" to other peoples. This offer has been coupled, often, with certain demands and efforts to enrich Americans, as well. Others, whether the native Americans of the 17th and 18th centuries, or the conservative Islamists today, have seen this offer of assistance as a ruse, an effort at "peaceful conquest." So it hasn't always made Americans beloved -- even when Americans have acted from their own point of view with the best intentions.
Reston, Va.: Would a neutral observer view the United States as a positive or negative force in the World? Has this changed over time?
Robert Kagan: What is a "neutral observer"? All peoples bring to such questions their beliefs and prejudices. If one is a modern, enlightenment liberal, I believe one would regard the United States as a deeply flawed but ultimately beneficial force. But other cultures and people with other ideologies would take a different view -- and always have.
Chengdu, People's Republic of China: Many academics subscribe to the theory that there are two distinct periods in the history of American foreign policy; the period prior to United States involvement in the Cuban-Spanish conflict and the period after 1898. I am interested to hear your views on the topic. Do you feel that this argument is representative of what actually occurred or do you have other, perhaps additional, insights into the matter? Thank you.
Robert Kagan: Another excellent question, and I am delighted to see a question from China, where I visited recently. I do challenge the idea that there are two entirely distinct periods in American foreign policy history, with different styles and approaches, before and after 1989. Again, I see significant continuity. The main difference is power. The accumulation of power by the United States expanded both its ambitions and its sense of interests. I believe the same thing has happened, and will continue to happen, with China. Expanding power produces expanding ambition, an expanding sense of interests, and an expanding sense of entitlement. In this respect, most countries are similar. The key differences between countries have to do with ideology.
Mokena, Ill.: What would Democrat majorities do regarding Iran and North Korea?
Robert Kagan: I doubt they would make much of a difference. The Bush administration has already engaged in intensive multilateral dialogue and, in the case of Iran, has expressed a willingness to engage in direct talks if Iran agreed to suspend uranium enrichment. I don't see what a Democratic Senate would have to add to that policy. There may be pressures for direct talks with North Korea, as well, but given today's announcement from China that North Korea has agreed to return to the six-party talks (why this is a big gain eludes me), I don't think Democrats in the Senate will press the issue very hard, at least for a while. My view, for what it's worth, is that Democratic victories this year won't affect Bush's policies very much. He is not running for anything anymore, and neither is his vice president. I think Bush is thinking about his place in history, so it doesn't matter much who controls Congress, at least on foreign policy questions.
Washington, D.C.: How do you think Iraq fits into the "post-modern paradise" you discuss?
Robert Kagan: The "post-modern paradise" I discussed in my previous book, Of Paradise and Power, is Europe. My argument is that even in the United States does not live in that post-modern world, and is not a post-modern country. It is much more like a traditional great power in its behavior. As for Iraq, there is nothing post-modern about it, and I'm afraid it is, at present, no paradise.
Lagos, Nigeria.: Was America not safer during the Cold War than during this current War on Terror?
Author of the "Scarlet Tears of London".
Robert Kagan: That's an interesting question, and not so easy to answer. Obviously, we did not suffer the kind of attack that we suffered on 9/11. And we certainly seem to be vulnerable to other such attacks in the future, and perhaps on an even more horrific scale. When we look back on the Cold War, it seems to have been safer, but that's partly because we now know that nothing horrendous happened. At the time, however, there were often significant fears of nuclear war. Needless to say, the damage that would have come had there been a nuclear exchange between the US and the Soviet Union would have dwarfed what we have experienced in the 21st century. In the early 1960s, I recall, people were building fall-out shelters in their backyards. It now appears as if, precisely because of the possibility of planet-wide destruction, both sides were deterred from conflict. What is so frightening about our present situation is that those who wish us harm seem to be undeterrable.
New York, N.Y.: Would you discuss how the attitudes of the people and the government changes in regard to civil liberties for our own citizens when we feel threatened? I'm referring to the excesses of the Red Scares, the McCarthy period and some would argue today's climate. How does it fit in with the themes of A Dangerous Nation? Thanks so much for the chat.
Robert Kagan: That's an excellent question, and it is one I attempt to address in "Dangerous Nation," even though the book only covers American history up through the end of the 19th century. If you go back even to the first decade of the nation, you discover that even in the time of Hamilton, Jefferson, and Washington, there were great fears on all sides of attempted domestic sibversion supported by overseas powers. Hamilton and Washington believed the French were supporting some pro-French Americans against Washington's adminsitration. Jefferson and Madison, at the same time, believed Britain was supporting the Washington administration in attempt to install monarchy in the U.S. Both sides were fairly paranoid. One of the consequences of these fears, in the late 1790s, were the Alien and Sedition Acts, which were aimed even at newspapers deemed subversive. So, unfortunately, there is a history of such panics in time of conflict. By and large, however, these impingements on American civil liberties are usually relaxed after the initial panic fades. Our nation does have a remarkable ability to return to the principles we uphold, even after compromising them.
Tysons Corner, Va.: Love your work, but the "Book World" review of your work confused me.
Are you advocating an expansionist American foreign policy, or merely stating that we've always had the same? There's a difference. In other words, are you reporting history, or offering opinion?
washingtonpost.com: Rogue State ( Post Book World, Oct. 29 )
Robert Kagan: Thank you for your question. I don't blame you for wondering, given the nature of that review. The reviewer seems to imply that I advocate what I am in fact only attempting to describe. What I have written in "Dangerous Nation" is history. People may question my interpretation, but my only interest is in trying understand and explain the way Americans behaved in their past. I do think there are continuities between past and present. But I do not have any desire to use history to advocate present policies or strategies. If you get a chance to read the book, I think you will see that the aim is analysis, not prescription.
Bethesda, Md.: Haven't Americans always been reluctant to fund a large peacetime army? During the 19th Century, we relied almost exclusively on state militias. The draft was wildly unpopular during the Civil War.
We didn't have a substantial peacetime military establishment until after WWII, when we finally adopted peacetime conscription (a policy most other industrialized nations accepted decades before). Ending the draft helped defuse the movement against the Vietnam War. Now we have a capital-intensive military performing labor-intensive work in Iraq and Afghanistan. The only way we could get enough troops to perform this operations would be to bring back the draft. That's not going to happen.
Robert Kagan: A large peace-time army, yes. However, the United States has engaged in significant naval buildups, and sometimes during peace time. For instance, in the 1880s the US began to build a new navy, despite not facing any significant threat from abroad. The ultimate reason for that build-up was ambition. Many Americans wanted to be more powerful, especially in the Western Hemisphere. The other major build-up came after the war of 1812.
Finally, I don't believe we need a draft to field the larger force we now need.
Arlington, Va.: Didn't most of our growth during the 19th Century come from beating up on weaker powers (Mexico, the declining Spanish Empire) or from negotiating with more powerful nations (U.K., France, Russia). Certainly after the near-disaster of the War of 1812, we never went to war against the U.K. again. We talked big. We openly coveted Canada. But we were never willing to fight the Brits for it again. Of course, they didn't want war either.
Robert Kagan: You are largely right, except that there was a danger of war with Great Britain as late as 1895-96. President Grover Cleveland all but threatened to go to war over a relatively obscure, but to Americans symbolically important, boundary dispute between the British and Venezuela. Many Americans, like Theodore Roosevelt, were rarin' to go. British war planning did not rule out war with the United States until the early 20th century.
We did pick on some major powers to get territory early in our history, moreover. The US pushed France off the continent in the late 18th and early 19th century, and made it clear that Russia had to give up its holdings, as well. And then there was Spain, a major if declining European empire, which the US bullied into submission.
Buenos Aires, Argentina: Why in your opinion did America go to war in Iraq? Was it national security, democracy promotion, or oil -- or all three? And in what order?
Robert Kagan: I believe the United States went to war primarily for national security reasons, not to promote democracy. Everyone believed Saddam was more advanced in his production of weapons of mass destruction than turned out to be the case. His record as an aggressor in the region -- two wars against neighbors, Iran and Kuwait-- made his possession of such weapons all the more troubling. It was not that he necessarily posed a direct threat to the United States, although he may have. It was that the United States has had, and still has, the principal responsibility for preserving security in that region, hence our first war against Saddam in 1991.
The idea of promoting democracy was more ex post facto, in the sense that once having toppled Saddam, the United States would have to support some kind of government in Iraq. Should it have established a dictatorship? Would that even have been possible given the nature of Iraqi society?
Finally, the United States did not go to war for oil. There is oil in Iraq. But if the United States wanted the oil, all it had to do was buy it. Saddam would have been delighted to sell it.
Concord, Maine: It is a commonly held belief that the United States is the world's sole superpower today. How would you define the nature of "superpower" as it pertains to the U.S., and to what extent do you think the U.S. is imperialistic while cloaking its actions in the rhetoric of spreading democracy?
Robert Kagan: It's hard to define "superpower." Perhaps it means a nation able to wield military, economic, and political power across the globe. Even during the Cold War, the United States was really the only "superpower" in that sense, because the Soviet Union's reach was not nearly as great. Perhaps there were two "superpowers" because of the size of their respective nuclear arsenals.
I don't think the United States "cloaks" its imperial power in any guise. Any great power wields influence over others. The greatest powers wield the greatest influence. Whether this qualifies as imperialism is less clear to me. I tend to take a narrow view of what "imperial" means, and for the most part I don't think the US qualifies.
New York, N.Y.: In your opinion, why do we still have hundreds of thousands of troops in Europe? Is it our commitment to NATO? Or is it an implicit bargain with the E.U. that we will be there to defend them if needed? Thanks for the chat.
Robert Kagan: Thank you, as well. First, I think over time our military presence in Europe will decline somewhat. The presence we currently have serves two purposes primarily: First, yes to provide reassurance in Europe against any return to past conflicts, although I consider that prospect fairly remote at the moment. Remember that the main reason for our presence initially was not just to protect against the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact, but also to ensure the safe reintegration of Germany into Europe after World War II.
The second reason has more to do with current circumstance. Most of our troops in Europe these days are deployed there because it is closer to current and likely scenes of battle, i.e., the Middle East, Persian Gulf, and Central Asia. American forces there are "forward deployed," so to speak.
Warrenton, Va.: The Americans drove the French off the continent? General James Wolfe did that during the French and Indian Wars. And Napoleon sold Louisiana -- and only because his effort to retake Haiti turned into a disaster.
Robert Kagan: I actually take a different view in my book. One of the main reasons Napoleon gave up on his imperial dreams in North America was that he considered the Americans aggressive potential opponents. His advisers warned him against engaging in conflict with what they called this "numerous", "warlike" people.
As for the Seven Years' War, when I write of "Americans" in the book, as well as here, I don't just mean post-Revolution. The Anglo-Americans who sparked the war with France over the Ohio Valley were the future leaders of the nation, Washington, Franklin and others. Were these not Americans?
Beltsville, Md.: Americans sometimes like to beat the heck out of our enemies. But we don't like many of the byproducts of war:
Prolonged engagement with foreign cultures:
-- Philippines (both the insurrection and the subsequent colonial period)
-- you could even include the Reconstruction era
-- a major objection to Reconstruction
-- there was an immediate demand for a tax cut after WWII
-- Bush cuts taxes even as we fight two wars
The draft: Vietnam, Civil War. Nobody dares talk about a draft today.
Long conflicts without hope of a clear victory: Iraq, Vietnam, Korea.
And as Niall Ferguson points out, we never have generated a colonial service like the U.K. did, in part because Americans don't like leaving home, especially for unpleasant places.
Robert Kagan: All quite true. One of the great recurring problems in American foreign policy is the gap between ends and means, between what Americans want and what they are willing to pay to get it. Naturally, they want to pay as little as possible.
But it would be a mistake not to understand that the Americans are, relatively speaking, a martial people. They have not been all that reluctant to go to war, as the past two decades have demonstrated.
New York, N.Y.: I hadn't thought of deployed forward. Now it makes much more sense. Thanks. I look foward to reading your book.
Robert Kagan: Thanks very much.
Memphis, Tenn.: The Russian presence on the Pacific Coast never mattered much -- much too long a line of supply. And they lacked either a sufficient navy or a commercial class worthy of the name. Not hard for the Americans and British to push them out of the way.
Later, the Russians were more than happy to sell Alaska. It was all trapped out, and they needed the money for railroads. Of course, Seward was widely mocked for buying it. Few Americans cared one bit about Alaska until the Klondike gold rush.
Robert Kagan: Quite right. I'm not arguing that the Americans always had to fight World War III to get what they want. I'm just arguing in the book that they certainly were willing to expand and push both native peoples and other empires off land they coveted. Wouldn't you agree?
Re: Army vs. Navy: Navies require money, which the prosperous American economy has usually generated in great quantities. Plus they provide great contracts for shipbuilders, et al. Armies, especially infantries, require soldiers. And young Americans have rarely seen the military as their best option. Except during war (and the atypical period of the Cold War), we rarely have been willing to draft them.
Robert Kagan: All true, but as I suggested in an earlier answer, we shouldn't underestimate the warlike tendencies in the American character. Today we are the only democratic country in the world that routinely considers electing generals to the presidency, whether Eisenhower, Colin Powell, or Wes Clark. Americans generally revere their military tradition more than other democratic nations do. And Americans have gone to war, both large and small, relatively frequently in their history. Land wars, too.
McLean, Va.: Did the United States have a huge advantage in being the only significant power in North America? The great powers of Europe were usually distracted by more pressing matters. The Spanish were already in terminal decline by the time of the Revolution. The British were usually more interested in India. The heartland of Russia was 10,000 miles away. The French cared more about continental Europe or sometimes about Africa. Mexico spent its early years in turmoil. We grabbed a continent on the cheap -- we didn't even have to build a real professional army.
Robert Kagan: Yes. We might ask the question, though, how did the United States get to be the strongest power on the continent? It wasn't fore-ordained (although the Americans at the time believed it was!) Americans populated, prospered, bullied, and in some cases fought their way into prominence. Even the War of 1812, which was no military victory by any measure, did have the effect of soldifying the American position on the continent against both the British and the Spanish. Other powers in the hemisphere were once thought to have promising future, and great ambitions for hemispheric power: Chile, for instance. Nor were the European imperial powers destined necessarily to quit the continent. I argue in the book that the US was not just lucky. Through aggressive expansion, and through a successful economic and political model, it created the circumstances which gave it dominance.
Generals: Ummm ... the French elected De Gaulle. They followed Napoleon for almost two decades.(During WWII, they worshipped Petain, too). The Germans elected Hindenburg. The British had the Duke of Wellington as P.M. Churchill was educated at Sandhurst.
If you want to argue that Americans are more militaristic today -- no argument here. Historically -- no we weren't, we lacked a professional military. Most of our generals-in-politics were amateur soldiers: Jackson, W.H. Harrison, even Washington.
Robert Kagan: I take your point. But I don't see why the fact that they were amateur soldiers makes a difference in assessing the martial tendencies of the nation. After the Civil War, it was almost impossible to run for the presidency unless you had a military background in the Civil War. You have mentioned Jackson and Harrison, two men elected almost entirely because of their war records. The ancient Athenians were amateur generals, as well, but no one would accuse Athens of lacking martial qualities. That is the way in democracies, but it doesn't make democracies less warlike.
Revere military tradition: I would say that other contries -- such as my native Britain -- revere military tradtion, but they see a place for it, and that place does not equate with political leadership. In the end, the U.S. thinks that the political should control the military -- but it's not always obvious, as was the case with MacArthur. I see it more as yearning to be lead by a hero.
Robert Kagan: Coould be. And I don't want to suggest that other countries, especially Britain, don't have a strong martial tradition. But, as you note, when was the last time a British general ran for Prime Minister? Yes, Americans yearn for heroes, but it is interesting how often they are military heroes.
Arlington, Va.: Since our nation was founded, we've been involved in a military conflict an average of once every five years. Are there any other countries in the world that can match our record during the same time? It's not hard to see why the rest of the world thinks of us as warmongers.
Robert Kagan: What is most striking is the frequency with which the United States has gone to war in recent decades. I count nine major dispatches of US force between 1989 and 2003, beginning with George H. W. Bush's invasion of Panama at the end of 1989. Does anyone remember that?
More on generals: Post-Civil War: that's because most American men of that generation had served in the war. And while we elected Grant, all the other presidents of that period were 'not' major military figures. And Cleveland won the popular vote 'three' times without having ever served.
Robert Kagan: Even as late as the 1896, a man like McKinley could display his military credentials to great use. It was harder to run for the Democratic party as a military man, since the Democrats were tarred as the party of the South, drew much of their support from the South, and could hardly promote southern military leaders for the presidency.
Moreover, Jackson was, of course, pre-Civil War. I don't know exactly why we shy away from this heritage and insist on seeing ourselves as simply a people abhor war. Our history simply doesn't support that image.
Robert Kagan: Many thanks for a very interesting and stimulating discussion. An excellent group of questions!
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.
| 125.292683 | 0.682927 | 1.02439 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/10/18/DI2006101801088.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/10/18/DI2006101801088.html
|
Campaign Ads: Checking the Facts
|
2006103119
|
The Annenberg Political Fact Check, part of the University of Pennsylvania's Annenberg Public Policy Center, is funded mostly by the Annenberg Foundation and does not accept contributions from political, lobbying or business organizations.
New York: In the wake of a NRCC ad so offensive and so false that local TV stations refused to air it, many local papers suggested that the intent of the ad was not to sway votes but suppress the vote. Is there any empirical evidence to support the intuitive conclusion that attack ads and negative campaigns lead to low voter turnout?
Brooks Jackson: I'm not an expert on the effects of ads, whether they are positive or negative. The paid professionals must think they work because they spend hundreds of millions of dollars running them.
We focus on whether claims made in ads (and elsewhere) are true or not.
Ashland, Mo.: Who fact checks the fact checker? Two examples:(1) in the last election, Democrats asserted that President Bush was the first president since President Hoover to have a net decrease in jobs created. This was a prediction by Democrats (which proved to be false) that The Washington Post printed as fact until it was pointed out it was a prediction. (2) Sen. Talent alleges that no senator from the Midwest opposed an energy bill, but his opponent did. The fact checker claims this is "wrong" because Sen. Feingold, from Wisconsin, opposed the bill. Perhaps technically incorrect, but many if not most Missourians would not consider a state that is east of the Mississippi and borders Canada and the Great Lakes to be a Midwestern state.
Brooks Jackson: In fact, FactCheck.org pointed out during 2004 that the Hoover comparison might turn out to be wrong, which it did, barely. We didn't weigh in on that particular Talent claim, but see our article on his campaign's use of quotes that his ads falsely attributed to the Kansas City Star. The quotes actually came from critics and politician opponents of his challenger.
New York: Any comment on the RNCC ad using a 1 minute wrong number to accuse Mike Arcuri (D) of calling a sex hotline on the taxpayer's dime? The ad is so slimy that Republican Ray Meier says he wishes the RNCC would "get the he-- out of" the campaign. Local TV stations refused to air the ad. Wouldn't the next logical ad for the Dems point out that if GOP bosses won't listen to Meier now, what makes us think they would pay any attention to him if he got elected? The point must be to suppress the vote--let disgusted voters stay home on election day.
Brooks Jackson: That National Republican Congressional Committee ad is the lead example in an article we posted Friday on the extraordinary number of attacks on personal character that the NRCC is running this year.
The ad actually was aired, though I'm not sure how often or on how many stations.
The evidence shows the call was a mis-dial. One minute later a second call was placed to a number identical except for the prefix, and it was to a New York state agency. The cost of the "adult" call was $1.25, which I am guessing is what the hotel charged for dialing a wrong number.
Hunt Valley, Md.: Is is true that Baltimore's murder rate is 6 times that of NYC? Thanks.
Brooks Jackson: That's one we haven't checked out. So many attack ads, so little time . . .
North Carolina: It seems that pundit conventional wisdom is that as long as dishonest negative ads work, candidates will continue to use them. The latest nasty ad in the Tennessee Senate race comes to mind. Do you think these ads work now, and, what do you see for their future?
Brooks Jackson: Again, I'm no expert on whether they work. As a journalist covering campaigns for a very long time, I certainly have observed instances where they did work. Also instances where the attack was so over the top that it backfired.
My own personal opinion is that as long as 30-second TV ads are the dominant form of political communication, candidates and their paid media consultants will continue to push the envelope of what is factual. The temptation to tweak or distort the facts in order to make a big impact is too great for many of them.
Dallas, Tex.: As in any subject, most political facts have to be put in context to really make sense. Whenever I see a political ad from a party or political organization talking about their opponent, the contextual information is always missing, making the ad misleading.
Wouldn't it be better for the political process if a candidate or political organization to be allowed to talk about their own facts?
Brooks Jackson: Much of what we do at FactCheck.org is to supply the missing context.
Possibly the worst example this year of something taken out of context was an RNC Internet ad that showed a clip of Rep. John Murtha saying that the US is a bigger danger to world peace than Iran or North Korea. When you see what he ACTUALLY said in full context you see that he was saying public opinion polls by the Pew folks show that our allies THINK we are a bigger threat. The RNC editing changed Murtha's meaning 180 degrees.
But, there's no way to force candidates (or anybody else) to confine themselves to self-praise.
Dallas, Tex.: Isn't the problem with misleading ads the fact that many Americans do not read enough to get information they need to make a good decision? If people would take the time to check the claims instead of taken them at face value, the ad situation would get better, imho.
Isn't the political process broken when the voters don't take the time to get informed?
Brooks Jackson: That's one way of looking at it. I certainly can't make the case that all voters are as well informed as they should be to make a good choice.
But I also have felt for a long time that much of what candidates and parties put on the air is really an insult to the intelligence and good sense of ordinary voters. Just speaking for myself here.
It is also my strong opinion that the news media have a big responsibility here that by and large they are failing to meet. It shouldn't be so hard for voters to find this information.
Harrisburg, Pa.: What about distortions of the truth? Just because a legislator or representative votes against a spending item doesn't mean he or she is totally opposed or supportive of the measure, and often it is a matter of degree of funding. How about the attack on a member of Congress for voting against the Toomey Amendment to cut research funding who is getting hit with the ad about how he supports funding for sex research? Isn't that one of the greatest stretches of this campaign season?
Brooks Jackson: I agree that votes are often misrepresented in 30-second TV spots. I can't speak to the specific attack you mention, but you'll find many other examples dissected in some detail on our site.
Harrisburg, Pa.: What do you think of Santorum's nuclear explosion ad? Am I to be scared into believing that opponents of Santorum support nuclear destruction? Is this ad over the top?
Brooks Jackson: The RNC ran an ad, mostly on the Internet but also on cable TV, that brought to mind the old LBJ "Daisy" ad showing a real nuclear explosion. The LBJ ad suggested, without making the point explicitly, that Barry Goldwater would incinerate the world. It ran one time and we've been talking about it ever since.
The RNC ad didn't show a real nuclear blast - just a graphic device that looked like a stylized nuclear fireball. Like the LBJ ad it referred to "the stakes" of the upcoming election, implying that voting Democratic carries a risk of being nuked by al Qaeda. We pointed out that there is little to no evidence that a workable suitcase nuclear weapon still exists, let alone that al Qaeda has one. But it's a possibility, and the RNC ad didn't make any factually incorrect statements in the ad.
West Jefferson, N.C.: You guys are strictly Internet based now -- are there any plans to expand your work to other more traditional media like newspapers, or might you get a permanent television slot somewhere?
Brooks Jackson: No, we are Internet only now and in the future. We do plan to expand by setting up a companion site designed for high-school teachers and their students, with the goal of providing lesson material to help students detect deception on their own and do their own fact-checking. Or should I say, "FactChecking?"
Westport, Mass.: Do you think that if the amounts available for campaigns could somehow be severely limited (and that's a big if), the negative ads would go away?
Do you agree that the strategy behind negative ads by parties (as opposed to candidates) is at least partly to disgust people so much that they do not engage with the political process?
Brooks Jackson: We're nonpartisan and take no position on campaign finance legislation. It is certainly true that if candidates had less money they would run fewer ads, and possibly fewer deceptive ads.
On strategy, I can't read the minds of the practitioners. My own guess is that they don't much care. It would be better from their standpoint if the voter went to the polls and voted - so long as the vote was for their candidate and against the targeted candidate. But the next best thing would be for the voter to just stay home and not vote. Logically speaking.
Kansas City, Mo.: The KC Star ran an article last week on how they were asking the Talent campaign to stop running the add with the misleading references to the Star attacking his opponent. The article referenced your investigation into the ad.
Did you alert the Star or was the Star aware of the distortions? Also do newspapers follow how candidates are using them, especially in major races like this? That ad had been running for a while before the Star got involved, and its still running as the Talent people say they have no control over it.
Brooks Jackson: We attempted to contact the Star for comment before we posted our article pointing out that the quotes were being falsely attributed to them. After the article ran I got a call from a Star reporter who said he had pointed this out in an earlier Star story on the ads. I'm not sure whether that registered on his own editors, however. That's a long way of saying that I don't know what the Star editors knew or when they knew it.
I will say this: the ads are an attempt to misappropriate a newspaper's credibility. If I were the editor I would find that unacceptable, whatever candidate or party is responsible.
A correction of Ashland, Mo is in order : The poster from Ashland, Missouri implies that in 2004 the Kerry campaign, assisted by The Washington Post, knowingly and falsely asserted that employment growth under Bush was weaker than any president since Hoover. Wasn't this statement true until the final month or two before the 2004 election when job growth in what was indisputably a very slow economic recovery finally caught up? To not acknowledge this basic and verifiable fact is to suggest that The Post simply made up this assertion from whole cloth. Also, I grew up in Iowa and Illinois, and Wisconsin is definitely a Midwestern state.
Brooks Jackson: As one who grew up in Indiana, I always thought of Wisconsin as Midwestern, too.
I didn't mean to endorse the questioner's criticism of the Post. I don't recall what the Post said or didn't say about the Hoover comparison. The fact is that by the time Bush began his second term there was a small net job gain for his first term.
Boston, Mass.: If next week the purveyors of negative ads win, what do it bode for 2008?
Brooks Jackson: Win or lose, we haven't seen the end of negative ads.
Let me add here, however, that for us the important thing is not whether an ad is negative or positive, but whether it is factually accurate or not.
Accusing a candidate of having a criminal record is a dirty campaign tactic only if the accusation is false. If the candidate really DOES have a criminal record, I think most voters would find that useful information. We get into a grey area with convictions for petty offenses from long ago, but I think you see my point.
Re: Dallas: To follow up on Dallas' point, the reason these ads work, I think, is because most people can't be bothered to actually follow their elections or the issues within them. Discussing policy would work with people who actually cared about democracy; but since most are happy with Doritos and video games, the only way to get their attention is to point and scream at something.
Brooks Jackson: Well, that does seem to be the attitude of the candidates and their media folks.
Blountville, Tenn.: Would it help matters somewhat to require that negative political ads offer the specific bill or specific reference to allow voters quick reference to fact check the information themselves? It seems to me that so many of the critical ads would be reduced if references to the other candidate required attribution.
Brooks Jackson: No, I don't think that would help. Generally that information is already there anyway. They put it on screen (that fine print you have to squint and pause your Tivo to read) because it makes it seem to the viewer that they really know what they're talking about.
But - as we've found time and again - those video footnotes often fail to back up what the ad is saying. What we do routinely is to look up those votes, or newspaper articles, or whatever is being cited. You can't expect the average viewer to go thought all that. That's our job, and the job of the news media.
As an aside, look at how well the "stand by your ad" provision of the McCain-Feingold law has worked. That's the requirement that candidates appear in their ads and say "I approve this message" or words to that effect. It was supposed to deter false and negative ads. You tell me: How's THAT working out?
Washington, D.C.: Many negative ads provide one-word "quotations" from reputable newspapers purportedly criticizing the opposing candidate. For example, a commercial for Candidate A says, "The Washington Post found Candidate B's ethical violations 'disturbing.'" My question to you is, by only actually quoting one word or a short phrase (as opposed to the entire sentence), how can viewers know whether the context of the word used is represented correctly by the ad? Technically speaking, the word "disturbing" could've been preceded by "not" or "according to candidate A..." Do you ever check these instances to see whether the newspapers' words are being misused?
Brooks Jackson: That's a good observation.
These quotes are like movie blurbs. The movie ad says the reviewer called the movie "terrific," but then you find that the reviewer called it "a terrific waste of time."
Alpharetta, Ga.: I first and foremost want to applaud what you do. It's so confusing, frequently. Are media outlets getting better about this. Some people say that since the age of the Internet and particularly YouTube, these ads get more play across the political spectrum, and consequently scrutiny.
Brooks Jackson: Thank you for the compliment.
I still hope that newspapers and broadcast news organizations will be more aggressive at fact-checking these political claims.
Rochester, N.Y.: Have you fact-checked the ads that incumbent Randy Kuhl and the RNC are running in NY-29? One of them features elderly people in the crosshairs of a sniper -- it's do distracting and disturbing, it's hard for me to even listen to what they're saying. Is that part of the plan with some scare tactic ads -- make the ad so disturbing the audience won't be alert enough to notice that they're filled with lies?
Brooks Jackson: Appeals to fear are often meant that way. We have a rule of thumb: "If it's scary, be wary."
Sterling, Va.: I subscribe to your email distribution but don't seem to see your analyses picked up by the media - at least not very often. Any thoughts as to why?
A little more sunshine might help make the slime go away.
Brooks Jackson: Thanks for subscribing.
We do have a large number of reporters and editors (and talk-show hosts) as subscribers, and we hear from them fairly often.
Forth Worth, Tex.: Wouldn't it be useful to have an ad-meter to display how truthful an ad is?
Brooks Jackson: Useful, but how practical?
Who would do the metering? And how could they do it instantly?
Brooks Jackson: Thank you all for great questions. I wish I could answer them all. But - some more ads just came in and I'd better get busy.
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.
| 84 | 0.682927 | 0.829268 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/10/27/DI2006102701177.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/10/27/DI2006102701177.html
|
Station Break
|
2006103119
|
Heard or seen something on the pop culture landscape that appalled/delighted/enlightened you? Of course you have. That's what Station Break with Paul Farhi is here for. Local stations, cable, radio shows, commercials, pop culture -- they're all fair game.
He was online Tuesday, Oct. 31, at 1 p.m. ET.
Farhi is a reporter in the Post's Style section, writing about media and popular culture. He's been watching TV and listening to the radio since "The Monkees" were in first run and Adam West was a star. Born in Brooklyn and raised in Los Angeles, Farhi had brief stints in the movie business (as an usher at the Picwood Theater), and in the auto industry (rental-car lot guy) before devoting himself full time to word processing. His car has 15 radio pre-sets and his cable system has 75 channels. He vows to use all of them for good instead of evil.
Paul Farhi: Greetings, all, and welcome to our Halloween Spook-tacular chat. Granted, there's nothing particularly Halloween-ish about this chat, but I do like saying "Halloween Spook-tacular" for some reason (kinda has a Marty-and-Bobbie-Mohan-Culp quality to it, no?). All Halloween puns, for some reason, seem to be the cheesiest of holiday-related puns....Anyway, we got into this briefly last time, but let me try again (since I wrote a story about it last week): What we think of those Chevy Silverado ads using Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks, dancing hippies, Richard Nixon, Muhammad Ali, Hurricane Katrina and 9-11? Catchy John Mellencamp song, but c'mon--why are they ripping off 9-11 to sell pickup trucks? Or maybe I just don't get it (would not be the first time)...Let's go to the phones...
Baltimore, Md.: Paul: Just in case other posters did not see it, thought I should share the comments of sports columnist Norman Chad, who is carried in the Monday Post. This was about things that annoyed him.
Rain delays on Fox. Because of bad weather in St. Louis for World Series Game 4, captive viewers had to take in 37 consecutive episodes of the unspeakable sitcom, "The War at Home." This flop-and-a-half makes "Yes, Dear" look like "The Honeymooners."
It was stupid to the point of being stupefying, horrific to the point of being horrifying. It didn't need a laugh track, it needed Last Rites. It was, in a word, unwatchable. Why did I keep watching? I'm a moron.
Paul Farhi: "War at Home" is just like "Married...with Children" but without the sparkling wit and nuanced acting. But, y'know, it's a Fox sitcom. Whadya expect?
washingtonpost.com: The Pickup Ad That's Carrying Lots of Baggage ( Post, Oct. 25 )
Greenbelt, Md.: There is talk that Dan Snyder is trying to increase the reach of his radio stations. Right now, when the sun goes down, his AM station has the wattage of a refrigerator bulb. Isn't 730 AM one of the so-called "protected" frequencies that has to cut power at dusk because of more powerful stations in the U.S. and Canada on that frequency? Or is he going to try to get the FCC to expand the range of his FMers?
Paul Farhi: He's apparently trying to boost his AM AND FM frequencies. This despite public denials that there's any problem with his current power levels. Um, there IS a problem; the stations are almost unhearable (is that a word?) in many parts of the area.... Snyder's a smart guy, and he probably knows a few people at the FCC. I wouldn't bet against him.
What is going over at Fox5? The quality of their production has gone down hill! I don't mean to be rude, but between Bob Sellers' odd personality, the fact that I can barely understand what Lark is saying sometimes with her over infectious voice and then the useless Holly Morris spots, the only reason I watch anymore is for the weather at that hour. Also, why do they feel the need to hawk "go to our Web site, MyFox.com , for a link to THEIR Web site.. " every two minutes?
Paul Farhi: Don't you love the contrast between the ultra-reserved Lark and the hyper-caffeinated Holly? Every time Lark sends it out to Holly in the field I just want to jump. Say this for her: She has "energy."
"War at Home": "is just like "Married ... with Children" but without the sparkling wit and nuanced acting. But, y'know, it's a Fox sitcom. Whadya expect?"
What's your point? So was "Married With Children!"
Paul Farhi: My point is, outside of "The Simpsons," Fox has never had great sitcoms.
Rockville, Md.: Paul: have you caught 'Dexter' on Showtime? It's a great show, but it doesn't seem to be generating much buzz and I'm wondering if you know how it's resonating with television views.
Paul Farhi: It's on Showtime. That means, ipso facto, that it's not "resonating" much at all. I don't quite understand why, but Showtime has never really been able to get close enough to HBO to even eat its dust.
Chevy Ad: I had always held John Mellencamp in high regard, because I liked not only his music but that he had a certain Pete Seger-like identification with the common folk. Ninety-eight percent of that went out the window when I saw that ad -- the very definition of a $hameless $ell out.
Paul Farhi: Understood. But check out the full lyrics to the song (I think Mellencamp has them posted on his web site somewhere on the Internet). It's very Springsteen-ish/Seeger-ish...As for selling out, yeah, well...
McLean, Va.: Fox had Arrested Development. Maybe not high in ratings, but a great sitcom nonetheless.
Paul Farhi: I am on record with this: Hated it.
World Series: Here's why the ratings were down: every half-inning, that terrible Mellencamp spot came on, and as we reached for the Mute button, we realized that there was probably something else available, probably with even less McCarver.
Paul Farhi: Less McCarver. What a great band name!...Me, I always liked McCarver. You know, kids, I saw him play for the Cards way back when...
Washington, D.C.: Have you heard that radio ad for the Government MasterCard, that has the guy getting grilled at a press conference? It's been running for a while (on WTOP and WTWP of course), but I noticed in the last couple days that they've edited the name "Mr. Sweeney" out of it.
Paul Farhi: Dunno it. But doesn't "Government MasterCard" have kind of an ominous ring to it?
Adams Morgan - Mellancamp commercial: So because of Vietnam, Civil Rights, 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina I should want to buy a Chevy? This commercial bothers me on so many levels, but mostly because it is ALWAYS ON.
Paul Farhi: Oh, yeah. That, too!
George Mason University: Hi Paul,
ESPN Radio had the rights to post season baseball, yet in the D.C. area it was 980 a.m. (a FOX Sports Radio affiliate) that was airing the games and not Triple X ESPN. What's the story behind that?
Paul Farhi: I'm stumped. Could it be that Triple X didn't want to interpret football talk with baseball? Or maybe WTEM (980) retained rights to JUST baseball from ESPN? Or all of the above. Or none.
Baltimore, Md.: The big news this week is the move of Kirk and Mark -- Kirk McEwen and Mark Ondayko -- from Heart's 98 Rock's wildly successful morning show over to CBS' WHFS, to start a new morning show there early in 2007. Kirk and Mark, along with the legendary Bob Lopez and, for the past year, Josh Spiegel, formed the KMS Morning Show for 10 years, and, to many people, it was simply the best morning radio show in both the D.C. and Baltimore areas. Some questions on the move: Why leave a secure post at a huge, popular, powerful station and a humongous fan base that stretches from Northern Virginia to Western Maryland to southern Pennsylvania to the D.C. and Baltimore markets to parts of the Eastern Shore for a less popular, less listened-to, less powerful very average station owned by CBS, which hasn't been too supportive of radio in recent years? The move doesn't seem to make sense. The morning show was still as strong today as it was 10 years ago. And here's a fact: The fan base at 98 Rock will NOT switch over to WHFS. And the station does NOT have the reach of 98 Rock. The move appears to be a bad one all around!
Paul Farhi: (Assume you mean Hearst, not Heart). Yes, this is all a bit mystifying. But let's take a wild stab at it: Money? Is WHFS (CBS-owned) shelling out the big dollars to try to build the station from virtual nothing-ness? Will CBS syndicate K&M nationally? Could be....And RIP Bob Lopez, a great broadcaster and a very fine human being.
I love Showtime, but: here's the problem -- they charge the cable operators as much per subscriber (probably around $5/month by now) as HBO, but they don't cross-promote themselves in the mass media. I only heard about "Huff," one of the best shows ever, because I read a TV trade magazine.
Paul Farhi: Yes. HBO seems to get (and pay for) scads of publicity, but Showtime not so much. HBO has a brand "identity" that is totally lacking with Showtime. I mean, I can tell you what HBO is "about" (great dramas like "Sopranos" and "The Wire," movies, comedy specials, etc.), but I couldn't tell you what Showtime "is."
Laurel. Md.: Paul Farhi: My point is, outside of "The Simpsons," Fox has never had great sitcoms.
They've had other good ANIMATED sitcoms: Family Guy, King of the Hill, Futurama
Don't know why their humans are so unfunny.
Paul Farhi: Ah. Yes. As Fred Durst once said, we are in agreeance.
Rockville, Md.: Paul, what did you think of the "24" trailer that FOX aired recently?
Paul Farhi: Looks dumb. The terrorists will stop terrorizing American cities if only CTU (or the government or someone) turns over Jack to them? What kind of terrorists are these? The show is gonna have some 'splainin' to do to make that one work for me.
Fox5 Virginia: I can barely handle the "Cackling Cow" traffic reporter on Fox 5, whom needs to be let go. I don't care what kinda of crush she has on Tony Perkins (Bring Tom Slater Back ASAP!) just tell me about the traffic. Oh and now she has a traffic map like the weather people have a weather map. Yikes!
Paul Farhi: Somewhat apropos this, I saw a promo the other day for a "hosted" show on the Weather Channel (attractive young woman and nice-looking guy with daily program). What the heck is that? Is it "The Today Show" for weather junkies? "Oprah" for the meteorologically inclined? "Jerry Springer" for storm junkies?
Arlington, Va.: You hated Arrested Development -- I hate you now, but still love your chats. FOX5 is a disgrace -- Gurvir whatshername is horrible. Lark is okay, in pieces. Holly Morris is a clown, a buffoon, a female version of George Michael. At least Holly isn't on Rachel Ray's show.
Paul Farhi: Don't be a chatta hata!
College Park, Md.: Actually, Fox has indeed broadcast SEVERAL good sitcoms, several of them much better than the competitions' crappy shows:
1. "That '70s Show." A great show.
2. "Malcolm in the Middle." A great show -- until the last season.
3. "Family Guy." It's okay, but it does take some chances.
4. "Futurama." See No. 3.
5. "Get A Life." Actually, one of the most original sitcoms in the past 20 years. Really.
6. And we can't remember if the Andy Richter sitcom was on Fox, but if it was, that's another good sitcom.
So, yes, actually, Fox has a very good track record with sitcoms.
3. Yes, it does takes some chances, but is mostly sophomoric.
4. Now we're getting somewhere.
5. Was that the Chris Elliott show? Very odd. Occasionally watchable. Ran out of steam quickly.
Conclusion: That doesn't add up to a "great" track record.
Mellencamp and Chevy: Me again. I agree that Mellencamp's lyrics have always evoked the same themes as Springsteen and Seger, but never before has he attached them to an endorsement -- particularly one that is offensive to the memory of 9/11 and Katrina victims. A sad end to a great career.
Paul Farhi: Yeah. I might excuse this by saying he's just trying to sell some records, but that's a cop out. Springsteen or Seeger (or Woody Guthrie) would never allow this kind of crass exploitation.
Re: 730 AM Power Increase: I thought I heard that part of the plan was to move the 730 AM towers to Ashburn, Va. Perhaps Messr. Snyder will set up a higher power directional signal from Ashburn to the east, covering the D.C. metro area while avoiding sending transmission to Canada.
Paul Farhi: I'm no engineer (and I don't play one on TV) but some of what you say seems to make sense. Snyder owns 150-some acres at Redskins Park in Loudon County. If the zoning gods would allow it, he could fit a mighty big antenna on that acreage...
Re: Kirk and Mark: They didn't leave 98 Rock willingly. They got into a contract dispute concerning their scheduled apperance at a Maryland Championship Wrestling event and apparently it was determined that the station didn't want them back, so they're moving to HFS come Feb. 1st. As a result, the Junkies will be booted from HFS. From what I understand, the Junkies were ragging on CBS about it yesterday.
Mickey and Amelia took over the morning run. Bahh, I liked them on the afternoon run a lot more.
Paul Farhi: Again, I know nothing (jeez, I sound like Sgt. Schulz today) but I have to guess that the wrestling thing was more an effect of the bad blood between K&M and management than a cause. Seems like the kind of minor dispute that gets blown into a bigger one because of all the underlying ill will (those of you who have been married or have ever had a relationship with another human being will understand what I mean).
Odenton, Md.: I hear the Junkies are going off the air in Baltimore come February. What are the chances they are done in D.C. in the near future as well? I am hearing Opie and Anthony could take over.
Paul Farhi: Opie & Anthony are carried live (i.e., in morning drive) by something like a dozen CBS-owned stations, so I would not discount this as a possibility. On the other hand, the Junkies have done very well in the morning slot for WJFK, so there's nothing broke there.
Re: Mellencamp: He is one of the reasons I hesitate to say I am from Indiana.
Paul Farhi: What are the other reasons?
Re: Chatta Hata: Oh good lord Paul! I said I hated you, not the chat -- love the chat. But you definitely sunk in my ratings by hating Arrested Development -- sorry.
So, what did you make of the Oprah giveaway -- is she just a publicity wh_ _ _ or what?
Paul Farhi: Hey, hey, we don't use those kinds of dashes on this chat! The Oprah giveaway is so...Oprah. She gets to be Mother Teresa by telling OTHER people to give money to charity. And the money comes not from her very substantial pockets but from a sponsor. That's what I call a win-win...for Oprah.
More on Fox5: I agree with the other posters wholeheartedly -- I watch in the mornings only to get traffic and weather, but I really wish Lark would TALK MORE SLOWLY. I can barely understand her. And I'm just counting the days until Tony Perkins' wife comes to the studio and punches out the traffic chick for shamelessly flirting with her husband on-camera. Sheesh.
Paul Farhi: Hahahaha. Wait. Don't give Fox any sweeps month ideas!
Mac vs. PC commercials: Are we sick of them yet or are they still funny? I kind of like them, but the ironic thing is, they certainly haven't achieved their goal, which is to make me want a Mac. They're just kind of (kind of) fun to watch.
Paul Farhi: Something about those ads puts me off. The Mac guy seems--I dunno--kinda smarmy in his I'm-so-much-cooler-than-the-fat-guy way. I sorta feel bad for the fat guy. The look-ism of the ad bothers me, too. The fat guy (PC) is uncool because why? Because he's a) fat; b) wears a suit and tie; and c) isn't as "cute" as the Mac guy. Maybe it's just me...
20009: I feel bad for the poster from Indiana -- it must be rough to feel shame of one's home state because of a native son. Me, I'm from West Virginia, birthplace of Don Knotts -- I walk tall and proud!
Paul Farhi: Plus, you can claim Jerry West, Mary Lou Retton and Sam Snead. Oh, you must be very proud...
Anonymous: I wish Oprah would give me $1,000 so I can see what it's like to be philanthropic. I'm guessing it's like giving a hobo 4000 quarters.
Paul Farhi: Well, nothing wrong with giving away a grand to a good cause....And do people still use the term "hobo" anymore? Personal historical aside: I was a hobo for Halloween once.
DC 20002: I read a blog by your colleague Marc Fisher last week about why the World Series on Fox is unwatchable. I gave up after the first game and listened to the rest on XM because I got tired of seeing shots of people in the crowd doing what I wanted to do -- watch the game! Does Fox cater to ADD viewers who can't pay attention to the action on the field? Remember, there are no crowd shots on radio.
washingtonpost.com: Why Baseball Is Losing a Generation: Fox ( Raw Fisher, Oct. 26 )
Paul Farhi: I noticed that during the playoffs and the Series, Fox kept showing people who appeared to be praying. Wonder if this was a subtle political message to fundamentalist voters. I'm just sayin'...
Re: Indiana: Well, there is the Brickyard 400/Indy 500 -- I'm not a hick; Corn and soybeans -- I'm not a farmer; Dan Quayle -- need more?
Paul Farhi: Well, John Wooden and Larry Bird are from Indiana. And David Letterman, too. That's a pretty good start...
Washington, D.C.: How do you think Katie Couric's gonna do on election night?
Paul Farhi: That ought to be very interesting. Very interesting. I personally will miss Dan Rather's Rather-isms ("This race is getting closer than a..." FILL IN EXTENDED METAPHOR HERE). I've never cared for Katie's extended metaphor work.
Cleveland Park, Washington, D.C.: You wrote: "Personal historical aside: I was a hobo for Halloween once."
Everyone's been a hobo for Halloween once, Paul.
Paul Farhi: But I was a really GOOD hobo! I had a plastic cigar and a drawn-on beard and patched clothing and...What's that?...EVERYBODY who was a hobo did that, too?...Um...Well, my mom liked it, so there.
West Virginia Natives: And Soupy Sales, don't forget Soupy Sales, for the love of Pete!
Paul Farhi: If you insist...
46220: I'm proud of my Indiana address ... who else can have so much fun with their state nickname? There's actually a liquor store called "Hoosier Buddy." Tho no DNA testing site called "Hoosier Daddy" ...
Paul Farhi: I guess I'm supposed to know this by now, but what IS a Hoosier? Is it like a Buckeye?
RE: Letterman: On last night's show Letterman interviewed Tiki Barber about his pending retirement from football. Tiki said he wanted to go out while he could still play; Dave said he understood the sentiment, since he (Dave) had been on cruise control for the last 10 years. The audience laughed -- too bad it's a true statement.
Paul Farhi: Saw that. It was a good line, and Letterman has been doing variations of it forever. I hope you stayed up late enough to catch Borat playing some kind of weird percussion instrument with Beck. A great moment...
Atlanta, Ga.: I think hobos, strictly speaking, are the ones who ride the rails. (And they probably wouldn't want to carry $1000 in quarters with them as they hop into box cars, but gift horses and all that.)
Paul Farhi: Yes. But no one calls those guys hobos anymore. They've got more socially sympathetic names now.
Ratherisms: I'll miss them too:
Paul Farhi: Love it! Thanks.
I grew up in Indiana too: Hey, we've also got Michael Jackson and Bobby Knight!
Paul Farhi: Hahaha. You take the good with the bad. Or the bad with the bad. Or just the bad with "Bad."
Fairfax, Va.: RE: How Katie Couric will do on election night.
I don't expect any attempts at "Rather-isms," but I fully expect her report to be all about how the election results affect HER.
Paul Farhi: I think that would be Oprah's job. With lovely parting gifts, of course...
Glen Burnie, Md.: According to Radio and Records, the Baltimore Sun, the Baltimore Business Journal and other trade publications: Kirk McEwen and Mark Ondayko resigned from 98 Rock because the station could not meet their new contract demands, and they wanted to explore the possibilities of hosting a show that has syndication across the country. They want to move it up a few notches. 98 Rock, like many stations, wants to keep their morning and afternoon shows local, which makes sense considering the power that 98 Rock yields. However, the wrestling promotion is NOT the reason that Kirk and Mark left the station, and it had nothing to do in the negotiations. Kirk and Mark couldn't appear at it once they resigned because of legal issues in their 98 Rock contracts!
Paul Farhi: Excellent media triangulation, Glen Burnie! Thanks.
Greenbelt Gal: So, are the broadcast networks actually going to cover Election Night next Tuesday, or are they just going to say, "Ratings, yeah, baby!" and abdicate their civic responsibility to the cable news networks?
Paul Farhi: They will cover it, but I wonder if they will cover it less than they have in preceding cycles and punt the rest to cable. That's what's happened to network coverage of the political conventions--less and less each time. Although, of course, you can justify the latter. The conventions are shameless propaganda fests, and the elections are actual news events.
Beltsville, Md.: I can't believe the Post is making you do these chats ... I hope they pay you "hazard pay" for immersing yourself in such low-brow fare. Anyway, is the Great Pumpkin Charlie Brown on tonight?
Paul Farhi: Ha! And you missed it--it was on on Friday.
Hoosier: Believe it or not, it's from the original French settlers' greeting: "Who's there?"
At least that's what they told us in grade school.
Katie on Election Night: "These numbers are softer than the focus on my lens."
Paul Farhi: The French said that? So, if things had broken another way, and another French phrase had been adopted, Hoosiers might be known as "Bonjours," or possibly "Zut alors!"?
Televisi ON: I love the Gieco commercials. All three are great AD campaigns. But the Nenderthals are the best!
Paul Farhi: Those have picked up momentum in my mind (I've slowly come around). The latest one--with the caveman noticing the billboard as he passes by it in the airport--is genius. His expression of disgust is perfect.
Re: Mac vs. PC: I actually think the PC guy steals the show in those commercials. I know he's the brunt of the jokes, but he's funny in the process. And in the end, since I'm not buying a Mac any time soon, that's enough for me.
Paul Farhi: Yes, a backfire there. I like the PC guy more, simply because I hate the way he's being sold out.
Mellencamp's Sellout: Seems to me that the reason this sellout is more egregious than, say Seger's (Bob, not Pete) "Like a Rock" that we heard in so many, many Chevy spots, is that Mellencamp takes himself so deadly seriously. He actually thinks people listen to his songs for the lyrics, so he's been on an anti-Bush crusade for quite a while, embracing this Seegeresque (Pete, not Bob) persona.
Rule #1 of celebrity endorsements: make sure the endorser isn't polarizing.
Speaking of which, have you seen those Dennis Hopper spots for some investment company? He's so smug, patronizing, and butt-kissing (not easy to do at the same time) that if I could stay with it long enough to know who he's endorsing, I'd tell them that I'll never do business with them.
Paul Farhi: Yeah, those Hopper ads, like Hopper, are strange, simply because Hopper is such an odd bird (says here they're for a company called Ameriprise Financial. Okay). I mean, do I want to take financial advice from the guy who was in "Blue Velvet"? What next, Christopher Walken recommends surgeons?
Sell Out: In fact, Chevy went hard at Springsteen back in the mid 80's to use "Born In The USA" for their ads (UGH!) but he correctly refused them. They then went out and got "Like A Rock" from Bob Seger, which they ran into the ground. Anyone who works in the Springsteen/(Pete) Seeger lyrical realm should not be selling their music for commercials. I am very disappointed in Mellencamp.
Paul Farhi: I've never heard the full version of "Like a Rock" (wasn't even sure there was one). I always thought it was just a jingle with four words ("Ooooooooh....like a rock!").
What Showtime "is": Interesting and offbeat series and morning porn, thanks to the West Coast feed. If you can't stay up late for Skinemax, get up early for Showtime.
Hey, maybe I should be their ad agency!
Paul Farhi: Oy. Great programming strategy!
Paul Farhi: And on that pleasant note, folks, I bid you adieu (or as the French in Indiana say, "Adios"). Let's check in on this whole mess again in two weeks, a week after democracy speaks again. This was major fun, as always. Until then, bon jour and regards to all...
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.
| 139.731707 | 0.682927 | 0.829268 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/30/AR2006103000357.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/30/AR2006103000357.html
|
With Tribune on Block, L.A. Times Circulation Down 8%
|
2006103119
|
The Los Angeles Times lost 8 percent of its daily circulation -- the most of any of the nation's largest newspapers -- over the past six months, potentially lowering its value even as suitors line up to bid on its parent company.
Nationally, newspaper circulation has been sliding since 1987 and the past six months were no exception. Overall circulation was down 2.8 percent from the comparable period last year. But the pain was felt worse in some cities than in others. The smaller-circulation Miami Herald, for example, was down 9 percent for daily and Sunday, while the New York tabloids -- the Post and Daily News -- gained.
The L.A. Times is owned by Chicago-based Tribune Co., which has put itself up for sale as the result of a boardroom war. A minority of board members are unhappy with the company's performance over the past year and think the company would be worth more split up or sold off.
On Friday, two private-equity groups -- Bain Capital of Boston and Thomas H. Lee Partners of Boston combined with Texas Pacific Group of Fort Worth -- met Tribune's deadline for expressing interest in buying the company, said sources with knowledge of the submissions who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the bidding is private. Tribune's market capitalization is $8 billion.
Tribune's sentimental flagship is the Chicago Tribune, but the L.A. Times is its largest newspaper and accounts for about one-quarter of Tribune revenue. The Times has been at the heart of Tribune's cost-cutting efforts in recent months; Chicago executives fired Times publisher Jeffrey M. Johnson this month for refusing to cut more jobs.
The 8 percent drop in circulation was recorded in April through September and left the Times with a daily circulation of 775,766, according to the Audit Bureau of Circulations, which monitors newspaper sales. The Times's Sunday circulation for the period was down 6 percent, to 1.2 million. The Times publisher said the big drop was attributable to low-value circulation -- such as giveaways -- that the paper cut to save money.
Other Tribune papers fared slightly better. Daily circulation at the Chicago Tribune was down 1.7 percent; the Hartford Courant was down 3.9 percent; the Baltimore Sun was down 4.4 percent; and Newsday was down 4.9 percent.
Tribune shares fell 50 cents in morning trading in reaction to the circulation news but mostly recovered during the day, closing down 2 cents at $33.45.
If the Times's circulation slide is the result of readers actively fleeing the paper, the company's value could be reduced as the sale process goes forward, said James C. Goss, an analyst with Barrington Research Associates Inc. of Chicago. That could lead bidders such as Bain and Lee to lowball Tribune, offering less per share to buy the company.
Analysts place Tribune's value at about $35 per share.
But if the 8 percent loss is the result of what Goss called "corporate choice" -- meaning that Tribune allowed low-value circulation to seep away -- that would be seen as smart corporate policy and could raise the value of the company.
However, allowing overall circulation to drop too far can result in lowered ad rates.
In a written statement, Times publisher David D. Hiller said his paper was focusing on "individually paid circulation," or full-price circulation. In that respect, the Times's circulation was up one-third of 1 percent over the past six months, yesterday's data showed.
Newspapers receive credit for other forms of circulation, such as "third-party sales," when a retailer agrees to buy a large number of newspapers at a reduced rate then give them away as a promotional tool. That kind of Times circulation was down 67 percent, the paper said.
The Washington Post lost 3.3 percent of its daily and 2.6 percent of its Sunday circulation in the same period. The New York Times was down 3.5 percent daily and Sunday. USA Today, the nation's largest newspaper, lost 1.3 percent.
In New York, the tabloid wars have been good for the industry: The New York Post's circulation was up 5 percent, while the Daily News's rose 1 percent.
|
The Los Angeles Times lost 8 percent of its daily circulation -- the most of any of the nation's largest newspapers -- over the past six months, potentially lowering its value even as suitors line up to bid on its parent company.
| 18 | 1 | 45 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/30/AR2006103001254.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/30/AR2006103001254.html
|
Federal Agencies' Outward Migration Irks Area Officials
|
2006103119
|
As they battle sprawl, Washington area leaders say they face a stubborn foe, and it's not greedy developers or the tyranny of the automobile or the desire for big houses. It is the United States government.
In scattering employees to the region's outer edges, local officials and planners say, the federal government has undermined efforts to concentrate growth near public transit and the area's urban core -- the strategy local officials see as key to reducing traffic and conserving resources in a booming region.
The U.S. government, they say, has become a kind of master planner, making decisions, with little local input, that will shape Washington's commuting and development patterns for years.
"I continue to be amazed by the shortsightedness of the federal government," said Fairfax County Supervisor T. Dana Kauffman (D-Lee). "Whatever they do is 'here and now.' They seem to have no interest in trying to plan for the rational development of a sustainable community. I suppose if they had the chance to relocate to the moon, they would."
Sparking the most recent round of complaints were reports last week that the FBI is moving its Northern Virginia field office from Tysons Corner to Prince William County. The FBI says it needs more space and that the site near Manassas is less expensive and more secure than locations closer in. But some FBI employees note that it will result in higher commuting costs for many of the office's 300 workers and encourage some of them to move farther out. Agents will have to make long trips on overloaded Interstate 66 for their cases and for meetings with prosecutors in Alexandria, they say.
The move is reminiscent of another, far bigger dispersal: the Pentagon's transfer of 30,000 military and civilian employees from Arlington County, the District and other close-in locations to installations farther out, mostly to Fort Belvoir in southern Fairfax. Rather than being near Metro, the jobs, which will be followed by thousands of related contractors, will be in an area with crowded roads and little transit. Also getting thousands more workers are two other posts on the region's fringe, Fort Meade in Anne Arundel County and Quantico Marine Base in Prince William.
Local officials see a similar lack of federal foresight in the rejection of a proposal to build a Metrorail extension to Dulles International Airport underground through Tysons Corner instead of on an elevated track. Tunnel proponents said it would help achieve a key goal of Fairfax leaders to transform the county's downtown into a walkable urban center, but federal transit officials discouraged Gov. Timothy M. Kaine (D) against the tunnel, saying the delays and higher costs it would bring would imperil federal funding.
Critics also point to the consolidation of the Food and Drug Administration outside the Capital Beltway in White Oak and the transfer in the 1990s of the headquarters of the Naval Air Systems Command from Arlington to Southern Maryland. But not all agencies are moving outside the Beltway. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms recently built new headquarters near the New York Avenue Metro station.
Other regions also must contend with the consequences of military relocations and other federal actions, but the dominance of the federal government in Washington makes the area uniquely dependent on it. Ideally, officials say, this could be a plus, if the government used its sway to drive unified planning across a region divided among three jurisdictions.
That happened to some extent in the 1990s, planners and officials say, when President Bill Clinton issued an executive order that federal agencies try to locate within downtowns. By dispersing agencies outward, critics say, the federal government is effectively undermining its $10 billion investment in Metro.
"Six or eight years ago, [the federal government] was moving in the right direction . . . but now you have a couple major decisions that undo" past successes, Arlington County Board member Jay Fisette (D) said.
At the heart of the federal government's justification for the recent decisions are cost savings and security. The Pentagon says the moves chosen by the Base Realignment and Closure Commission will save $49 billion nationwide, partly by moving employees out of leased space such as in Crystal City. Moving out of such close-in locations as Arlington and Alexandria to such closed posts as Belvoir also complies with new military requirements for 82-foot setbacks to guard against truck bombs.
|
As they battle sprawl, Washington area leaders say they face a stubborn foe, and it's not greedy developers or the tyranny of the automobile or the desire for big houses. It is the United States government.
| 20.414634 | 1 | 41 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/30/AR2006103000962.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/30/AR2006103000962.html
|
Redskins Fighting Aches and Pains
|
2006103119
|
The Washington Redskins were without four of their premier offensive players for much of yesterday's practice because of injuries -- quarterback Mark Brunell, tailback Clinton Portis and wide receivers Santana Moss and Antwaan Randle El -- and starting middle linebacker Lemar Marshall did not practice. With only Brunell certain to practice tomorrow, Coach Joe Gibbs said it is too soon to determine how many will play Sunday against the Dallas Cowboys.
Of the group, only Randle El (heel) participated in team drills, shagging punts on special teams, with Brunell (rib muscle) throwing a bit on the side. Portis (left ankle) and Moss (left hamstring) walked gingerly to the field about 20 minutes into practice and did only light individual work. Marshall (left ankle) was on the field but did not take part in drills.
Merely trying to run the offense in practice this week would be difficult enough with so many key players out, Gibbs said, and facing the Cowboys without their top players would not bode well for the 2-5 club, which is last in the NFC East after three straight defeats.
"With that group, we'll just have to see as the week goes," Gibbs said of his injured players.
The Redskins return to practice tomorrow, and Brunell, who also sat out last week's abbreviated on-field schedule, said he will be able to participate fully. Reserve quarterback Jason Campbell took much of the work last week, a first for the 2005 first-round pick, and Gibbs said that Campbell and veteran backup Todd Collins each worked with the first team yesterday. Gibbs said that the rotation for Sunday's game remains unchanged, with Brunell the starter, Collins No. 2 and Campbell designated the third quarterback.
When the Redskins' offense has moved the ball this season, Portis has been the fulcrum. He missed the first game against Dallas -- a 27-10 defeat in Week 2 -- and overcame shoulder injuries from the preseason to lead the attack in consecutive victories over Houston and Jacksonville, but carried only 26 times the past two games. Should Portis be unable to play, Gibbs said he is confident in the other backs, including T.J. Duckett, who has carried just five times, all in the first game against Dallas.
"It's all right. It's coming around," Portis said. "I'm out of the cast. I did a little work moving around laterally, just seeing how it feels. It feels okay. I'm sure we'll do a little more on Wednesday having an extra day [of practice] this week. Today, I didn't try a lot. We'll come out and see what I can do on Wednesday and go from there."
Moss, who has 493 receiving yards, more than double anyone else on the roster, seemed less certain about his ability to heal through the week. Hamstring injuries can easily be aggravated, and Moss has battled the problem in the past. He is getting regular treatment but said he is often unable to guess how the hamstring will feel from one day to the next.
"I'm concerned because you want to do a lot," Moss said, recalling his previous injuries. "But being a guy who has dealt with [hamstring injuries], these things, they will hurt you later. You go out and try to be Superman on it and, you know what, just because you pushed me when you weren't supposed to push me, it prolonged the healing process. So I don't want to do that. But we'll take it day-to-day. Hopefully, it will get better and I will be able to play Sunday."
Randle El said his injury is impossible to ignore, causing problems when he tries to run routes and return punts. He, too, will have to work daily with the training staff to try to play this weekend.
"I don't want to do too much on it, then I can't go the rest of the week," said Randle El, who has made big plays despite a limited role in the offense. "Hopefully, it'll progress more than what it was today. It's overall, just the way I run, period. It's overall. Hopefully, it'll calm down a little bit and I'll be able to go in the next couple of days."
The Redskins' defense was just starting to get healthy, with tackles Cornelius Griffin and Joe Salave'a practicing fully and both starting cornerbacks -- Carlos Rogers and Shawn Springs -- practicing together for the first time this season. But Marshall is the quarterback of the defense, calling out assignments and keeping everyone aligned, and his absence was significant against the Indianapolis Colts. He wore a walking cast briefly before that game and was expected to play, but could not pass a pregame fitness test.
While the players spent the weekend traveling or at home with their families, the coaches continued to work long hours trying to right the team's many problems. The Redskins have produced just 14 offensive touchdowns through seven games, are ranked 26th in total defense (and last in many key categories), have the most penalty yardage in the NFL and have yet to defeat an NFC opponent.
"What we tried to do is analyze everything up to this point," Gibbs said. "How we won football games and how we lost. It goes from everything to penalty issues to playing poorly in the second half. We try to do a really good job analyzing ourselves and present that to the team and I think we had a good three or four days of work for the coaches. And for the players I think it was important for them to get a break."
|
Info on Washington Redskins including the 2005 NFL Preview. Get the latest game schedule and statistics for the Redskins. Follow the Washington Redskins under the direction of Coach Joe Gibbs.
| 32 | 0.742857 | 1.257143 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/30/AR2006103001198.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/30/AR2006103001198.html
|
To the Media, YouTube Is a Threat and a Tool
|
2006103119
|
Media companies are of two minds about Internet video-sharing site YouTube, which rocketed to fame by letting users share homemade videos along with copyrighted clips from movies, TV shows and music videos.
They are unsure of whether YouTube is a friend or a foe -- a threat that could siphon off their TV audiences and ad dollars or a powerful promotion machine that could generate buzz for the shows. While users have had virtually unfettered freedom to post and watch whatever clips they want, big media companies are starting to reassert control by seeking removal of some shows.
If all or most of the bootlegged content disappears from YouTube, some users wonder whether YouTube can live up to the promise Google Inc. saw when it agreed to buy the site for $1.65 billion in stock this month.
Last week, Comedy Central asked YouTube to remove some copyrighted clips of its "South Park" and "The Daily Show With Jon Stewart." At the same time, NBC Universal Inc. has opted to let copyrighted clips of its "Saturday Night Live" and "The Office" stick around on the site.
"Everybody is learning, in some sense, how to draw the line," said Rick Cotton, executive vice president and general counsel for NBC Universal. Cotton said NBC asks YouTube to take down more than 1,000 clips a month, including some that cross an obvious line by including an entire episode of a show. But NBC thinks exposing other clips on YouTube could help the network.
"This medium is at the cutting edge," Cotton said. "I think our creative executives feel that 'The Office' and 'Saturday Night Live' benefit from the significant attention we've gotten online."
YouTube is the most recent example of how the ease of sharing digital information poses copyright threats to media companies. Internet users can self-publish just about anything, including clips of popular TV shows that they record at home. Over the past year, the site has brought Internet video to the masses, drawing 81 million visitors in September, according to ComScore Networks Inc. Now, as more people spend more time watching video on the Web, companies such as NBC are looking to YouTube to help figure out the future of television.
Not all networks are open-minded about YouTube. Last week, a group representing Japanese authors and copyright holders reportedly asked YouTube to take down 30,000 videos. News Corp. also toes a hard line, asking the site to take down all infringing content.
Comedy Central and its parent company, Viacom Inc., declined to comment on the request it made to YouTube last week. A spokeswoman for YouTube, Julie Supan, also declined to comment on the Comedy Central removals.
But thousands of clips from Comedy Central shows remained on YouTube yesterday, including ones from "South Park" and "The Daily Show."
One of YouTube's challenges is that some media companies haven't developed a unified policy on how to deal with violations of their copyrighted material, according to Supan, YouTube's senior marketing director.
"On one phone call, we're getting asked to remove the content. The next one is from a marketing team from the same company who is uploading it and asking where it is" on the Web site, she said.
|
Media companies are of two minds about Internet video-sharing site YouTube, which rocketed to fame by letting users share homemade videos along with copyrighted clips from movies, TV shows and music videos.
| 17.135135 | 1 | 37 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/31/AR2006103100610.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/31/AR2006103100610.html
|
Philip Morris Asks Court for Relief
|
2006103119
|
The Supreme Court heard a tobacco company's plea for relief from a $79.5 million punitive damages award yesterday, in a case that could illuminate the Roberts court's approach to tort reform.
In recent years, the court has helped the business community on the punitive-damages issue, ruling that excessive awards violate companies' constitutional rights. But yesterday's case may be especially significant because the firm seeking help is tobacco company Philip Morris, and it has been found liable not for bilking a consumer out of money, but for actually killing him.
A ruling in Philip Morris's favor would suggest that the court is so concerned about high punitive damages that it would protect even an unpopular corporate defendant. For their part, consumer and anti-smoking groups hope that the court will rule against Philip Morris -- and show thatpunitive-damage limits do not apply to especially reprehensible conduct.
By the end of oral arguments yesterday, however, it seemed that the court was reluctant to rule broadly in either direction.
Instead, several members of the court, including some who had supported its recent limits on punitive damages, suggested that the best way to handle the case would be to send it back to the Oregon Supreme Court for clarification of technical state law issues.
"What's worrying me about this case is . . . that we're going to be in a kind of bog of mixtures of constitutional law, unclear Oregon state law, not certain exactly what was meant by whom in the context of the trial, et cetera," said Justice Stephen G. Breyer, who voted in favor of the court's previous decisions limiting punitive damages.
Justices Antonin Scalia and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who dissented from those decisions, made similar points, as did Justice David H. Souter.
Compensatory damages are usually awarded to compensate for economic losses or pain and suffering. About six states do not have punitive damages. Elsewhere, punitive damages may be added -- subject to statutory limits in some states -- to deter and punish corporate misconduct.
Businesses say that the patchwork of state laws, coupled with the unpredictable behavior of juries, has left them at the mercy of an expensive and arbitrary system. Consumer organizations and trial lawyers say punitive damages are often the only effective means to combat corporations' wrongdoing.
In 1996, the Supreme Court sided with business. It overturned a $4 million punitive-damage award to an Alabama man who had sued a BMW dealer for selling him a repainted car instead of a new one.
For the first time, the court declared that the constitutional right to due process of law meant that companies may not be subject to disproportionate punitive damages.
In 2003, the court broadly defined what qualifies as an excessive award, suggesting that punitive damages should normally be no more than nine times as large as compensatory damages.
|
Continuing coverage of the Supreme Court nomination and confirmation process from The Washington Post.
| 36.533333 | 0.6 | 0.866667 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/30/AR2006103001062.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/30/AR2006103001062.html
|
E-Mail Voting Comes With Risks
|
2006103119
|
Time was when soldiers, if they wanted to vote, had to request ballots by snail mail, fill them out and return them the same way.
The process typically took weeks.
This year, thousands of soldiers around the world have the opportunity to vote in the Nov. 7 elections by e-mail. It's part of a Pentagon effort to make it easier for overseas military personnel to cast ballots in federal and state elections, and it reflects how the Internet has changed life in the combat zone.
But computer security experts inside and outside the government warned that the Pentagon's Federal Voting Assistance Program ignores the risks associated with unencrypted e-mail: interception, hacking and identity theft.
"E-mail traffic can flow through equipment owned and operated by various governments, companies and individuals in many countries," Joel Rothschild, a Navy Reserve captain, said in an August report prepared for the Pentagon. "It is easily monitored, blocked and subject to tampering."
A separate report by four outside computer security experts released last week raised similar red flags and added that the use of unencrypted e-mail for registering overseas voters invited identity theft.
"No bank would ask their customers to send Social Security numbers over unencrypted e-mail," said the report's co-author, David Wagner, a professor of computer science at the University of California at Berkeley. But that is what the system allows, he said.
Rothschild's report noted that e-mails can be encrypted to reduce tampering risks. Pentagon officials said states would need to arrange for that provision.
States have options for getting ballots to and from voters. They can fax, e-mail or mail the ballots, or use a combination of the methods. The federal government began the use of faxed ballots in 1990, with troops stationed in the Persian Gulf for Operation Desert Shield. E-mail is an option in those states that allow it; at the moment eight do. Mississippi was the first, allowing troops overseas to vote by e-mail in a 2003 gubernatorial election.
Neither the Pentagon nor state officials say they track how many of the 294,000 military personnel overseas are voting by e-mail. That information is held at the county level, state elections officials said.
Anecdotally, the number of military personnel voting by e-mail appears limited.
In Colorado, Jefferson County elections official Shawna Weir said she has received three ballots that soldiers sent by e-mail. The service members -- two in Iraq and one on a ship -- e-mailed their ballots to a federal facility in Virginia, which then faxed them to the county.
They were all "very eager to vote," Weir said, noting that they had called her to make sure they could get their ballots.
The combination of faxing and e-mail "is about as dangerous as you can get," Wagner said. "It's got all of the problems with unencrypted e-mail, plus your ballot is being routed through the Department of Defense. Will soldiers feel free to vote their conscience when they know that the DOD may be able to see how they voted? How do we know that the DOD or their contractors haven't modified soldiers' ballots in transit?"
J. Scott Wiedmann, deputy director of the Federal Voting Assistance Program, said the operators at the federal facility cannot alter e-mail content, which is sent in "read-only" format. Voters are also encouraged to mail in an original copy of their ballot as a backstop, he said.
Soldiers faxing and e-mailing their ballots also must sign waivers saying they understand that somebody might see their ballot, Wiedmann said. "There's no U.S. constitutional guarantee to a secret ballot," he said.
Joni Ernst is a county elections official in Iowa and a major in the Iowa Army National Guard who served in Iraq from 2003 to 2004. She delivered mail to the troops and saw how long it could take, so she is glad that soldiers have the e-mail option. Most every camp has an Internet cafe for soldiers, and if the voting process is simple, she said, the troops are more likely to vote.
"Their time is very limited," Ernst said. "We don't want to detract from the mission. But we want to make sure their vote counts."
|
Time was when soldiers, if they wanted to vote, had to request ballots by snail mail, fill them out and return them the same way.
| 28.6 | 0.966667 | 14.833333 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/31/AR2006103100121.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/31/AR2006103100121.html
|
Pakistanis Protest Attack By Own Army on School
|
2006103119
|
KHAR, Pakistan, Oct. 31 -- More than 15,000 Pakistani tribesmen, many of them carrying rifles and ammunition, protested Tuesday over a Pakistani army helicopter attack on an al-Qaeda-linked religious school near here that killed about 80 suspected radicals.
Chants of "Down with America" and "Down with Musharraf," referring to Pakistan's president, rang out as the tribesmen protested in Khar, main town in the Bajaur tribal region close to the Afghan border.
"Our jihad will continue and, God willing, people will go to Afghanistan to oust American and British forces," Maulana Faqir Mohammad, a pro-Taliban cleric, told the crowd of turbaned tribal members. Some of them shouldered rocket launchers.
The government says the school at Chenagai was being used to train fighters and had been under surveillance since July.
Officials said it had been frequented in the past by Osama bin Laden's deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and other al-Qaeda members including Abu Obaida al-Misri, whom security officials have named as the organizer of a plot that was broken up in August to blow up U.S.-bound airliners flying from London.
The officials said they did not believe any high-ranking radicals were present at the time of the airstrike. Protesters said the dead, mostly young men ages 15 to 25, were merely students.
But Pakistan's president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, speaking at a seminar in the capital, Islamabad, said they were all radicals. "We were working on them for six or seven days; we know who they were. They were doing military training," Musharraf said.
Nowhere is Musharraf's alliance with Washington more unpopular than in the Pashtun tribal belt straddling the Pakistani-Afghan border. A mountainous region that is difficult to reach, Bajaur lies across from the eastern Afghan province of Konar, where U.S. troops are hunting al-Qaeda and Taliban fighters.
Thousands of fighters took refuge in the semiautonomous tribal lands after U.S.-backed forces drove them from Afghanistan after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States.
On Tuesday, the tribesmen in Khar showed their loyalty with shouts of "Long Live Osama" and "Long Live Mullah Omar," referring to the Taliban leader Mohammad Omar. Similar protests took place in other parts of North-West Frontier Province
A planned visit by Britain's Prince Charles and his wife, Camilla, to the province's capital, Peshawar, on Tuesday was canceled because of security concerns.
|
KHAR, Pakistan, Oct. 31 -- More than 15,000 Pakistani tribesmen, many of them carrying rifles and ammunition, protested Tuesday over a Pakistani army helicopter attack on an al-Qaeda-linked religious school near here that killed about 80 suspected radicals.
| 10.319149 | 1 | 47 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/31/AR2006103100263.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/31/AR2006103100263.html
|
Saddam Trial Witness Describes Massacre
|
2006103119
|
The witness, who testified from behind a curtain to conceal his identity, said he was one of dozens of prisoners who were taken in buses to an execution site in western Iraq in April 1988 during the crackdown by Saddam's regime on the Kurdish population.
Saddam and six co-defendants are charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity for their roles in the Operation Anfal crackdown, which the prosecution says killed some 180,000 Kurds. Saddam and one other defendant are also charged with genocide.
The witness said the prisoners knew they were going to be shot when they arrived at the killing site near Ramadi because they heard gunfire. They recited Islamic prayers that are customary before death, asking for one's sins to be forgiven.
"The guards took two prisoners at a time from the bus, shot them dead and dragged their bodies to a huge ditch," he said.
He said when it was his turn, he and his cousin got off the bus and were blindfolded and handcuffed. The guards then asked them to lie on the ground before spraying them with bullets.
"I felt no pain," the witness testified. "I thought that maybe when the bullet pierces the body, one doesn't feel the pain, but then I heard my cousin dying. We were pulled away by our legs. I pretended I was dead."
The witness did not explain how the guards could have missed him when they were shooting at point-blank range and he was one of only two targets.
He said the guards dumped him in a ditch where there were many other bodies. He removed his blindfold and saw a guard walking through the ditch shooting at people who were not yet dead.
When night fell, the witness said, he crept out the ditch and walked for three days without food or water. Finally he found refuge in a Kurdish town in northern Iraq.
The court heard four more Kurdish witnesses and then adjourned to Nov. 7.
Associated Press writers Sameer N. Yacoub reported from Baghdad and Jamal Halaby from Amman, Jordan.
|
BAGHDAD, Iraq -- A witness testified at Saddam Hussein's genocide trial Tuesday that he survived a massacre by feigning death when Iraqi soldiers shot at Kurdish detainees lying at their feet.
| 11.794118 | 0.647059 | 0.705882 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/30/AR2006103001011.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/30/AR2006103001011.html
|
Teen Diet Isn't All Junk Food
|
2006103119
|
A walk through the food court of any mall confirms the worst reports about teens' eating habits: Kids share overflowing cartons of french fries, bite into cheeseburgers and dripping slices of pizza, and quench their thirst with jumbo cups of soda.
Stop and talk to teenagers, though, and many say that they eat junk mainly when they're out of their parents' eyesight, especially when they're hanging out with friends. They have learned what it means to eat healthfully, they say, even though they often don't choose to do so.
Take 17-year-old Porscha Hall, a senior at Ballou Senior High School in the District, who says that she usually skips breakfast and has chips, cookies, candy and soda -- bought from school vending machines -- for lunch. She often goes to a carryout restaurant after school for french fries, fried rice and egg rolls. Dinner at home tends to be much healthier, she says, including baked chicken and rice.
Hall says she knows her mom would prefer that she eat healthier meals. But, she says, "I don't have time to eat healthy," because she attends school during the day and takes classes at night. She predicts that one day, probably when she's done with college, her food choices may matter more to her.
Hall admits that junk food is often the quickest way to satisfy her hunger when she's on the go -- and that's common among busy teenagers, says Felicity Northcott, an anthropologist who does nutrition research at Johns Hopkins University. "I'm not sure that teenagers don't eat healthfully because they don't want to -- particularly teens who are in school, where there is a lot of junk food around," she says. "They just eat whatever is there."
The tension -- between knowing what is bad for you and continuing to do it anyway -- is a key challenge for health professionals. About one-third of American children and adolescents are obese or at risk for obesity, according to a report released in September by the Institute of Medicine; and the obesity rate has more than tripled for those ages 12 to 19 in the past three decades, increasing from 5 percent to 17 percent.
The effects of food choice on weight and, later, chronic disease are also well documented. A 2005 study in the journal Pediatrics found that children ages 9 to 14 who ate more fried foods away from home tended to be heavier. Findings published in 2004 in Obesity Research showed that, among children ages 9 to 14, drinking sugared beverages may contribute to weight gain.
Kids who talk about eating healthfully often say their good habits were established at home. Sajni Patel, a 10th-grader at Thomas S. Wootton High School in Rockville, says she's a big fresh-fruit eater -- which is unusual, she admits, for a 15-year-old.
"I love citrus fruit, apples, nectarines, mango," Patel explains. "I will come home around 3 and have a salad [and] vegetables" -- choices she attributes to her parents' mealtime routines.
Rashida Ross, 16, a junior at Thurgood Marshall Academy Public Charter High School in the District, admits she enjoys chips, cakes, candy and hot sausages -- but her mom's rule of eating a salad with every meal sticks.
"I'm not a big fried-food eater," Ross says. And her mom typically keeps fresh fruits in the house. But there are also not-so-good-for-you foods. So what would Ross pick given a choice between junk food and fresh fruit? "I'll probably go more for the chips and stuff," Ross admits. "I try to do what my mom does with vegetables and stuff. I know it's good for me. Sometimes I have a choice not to eat a salad, but I'll take it anyway."
As teens prepare to leave home, their parents' influence declines, but it does not disappear. Michael Kellogg, an 18-year-old high school senior from Woodstock, Ga., generally makes his own food selections, he says. But his parents' rules and routines still affect his food choices.
"I guess 40 percent is my own choice and 60 percent is I eat what they eat," he says. "When I'm on the go, I will stop and get fast food."
The transition to college life -- which Kellogg will make next year -- is another challenge. Ajanta Raman, 18, a freshman at William Jewell College in Missouri, describes how she now substitutes breakfast bars for her morning meal and eats protein bars at lunchtime, when she has two classes. But, she says, she has succeeded in taking the eating lessons learned at home with her to college.
"Mom always said to stay away from all the Honey Buns and the really sugary stuff," Raman said. "If it weren't for her, I'd probably be eating a lot more of these sweets and calories."
Other teens report sticking to healthy diets because they -- and their peers -- want to stay in shape. That's the case for Samantha Boddy, 13, of Sarasota, Fla., who loves dancing. She starts out with a smoothie in the morning and eats apples and whole-grain snack bars throughout the day.
"I've always eaten really healthy," said Boddy, attributing that both to her mom and to the influence dance has had on her. If fellow students see a dancer eating a potato chip, she explains, "they'll freak out and say, 'Do you know what that's doing to your body right now, as we're speaking?' " ·
|
A walk through the food court of any mall confirms the worst reports about teens' eating habits: Kids share overflowing cartons of french fries, bite into cheeseburgers and dripping slices of pizza, and quench their thirst with jumbo cups of soda.
| 24.391304 | 1 | 46 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/30/AR2006103001098.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/30/AR2006103001098.html
|
Institute Practices Reproductive Medicine -- and Catholicism
|
2006103119
|
OMAHA -- Craig Turczynski traveled from Texas to find ways to help infertile women that do not conflict with his religious beliefs. Cherie LeFevre came from St. Louis to learn how to treat her OB-GYN patients in obedience to her Catholicism. Amie Holmes flew from Ohio so she could practice medicine in conformity with church teachings when she graduates from medical school.
On a journey that would blend the aura of a pilgrimage with the ambience of a medical seminar, the three arrived at an unassuming three-story red-brick building on a quiet side street in this Missouri River city.
Their destination was the Pope Paul VI Institute for the Study of Human Reproduction, which has become perhaps the most prominent women's health center serving Catholics and other doctors, medical students and patients who object for religious reasons to in vitro fertilization, contraceptives and other aspects of modern reproductive medicine.
"We have built a new women's health science," said Thomas W. Hilgers, who runs the institute. "Our system works cooperatively with the natural fertility cycle and enables doctors to treat women and married couples, especially Catholic married couples, in a way that allows them to live out their faith."
Hilgers and his supporters say the approach, called "natural procreative technology" or "NaProTechnology," can address a spectrum of women's health issues, including family planning, premenstrual syndrome, postpartum depression and infertility, without the use of birth control pills, sterilization, abortion or in vitro fertilization (IVF). Instead, Hilgers said, he uses diagnostics, hormones and surgery to identify and treat underlying causes of reproductive ailments that other doctors often miss.
Although the institute is not formally affiliated with the church, Hilgers's work is endorsed by groups such as the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Catholic Medical Association.
But many mainstream authorities question Hilgers's assertions that his techniques are equal or even superior to standard therapies. They worry that women are being misled and given unproven, ineffective treatments, denying them the best available care.
"This is anti-science," said Anita L. Nelson, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of California at Los Angeles. "I respect people's personal values. But I am deeply concerned that they are giving treatments and making claims that are not scientifically proven as safe and effective."
Although some independent experts say that some of the institute's offerings may be acceptable alternatives for religious patients, as long as they are fully informed about their options, others view its work as a disturbing example of religion intruding into secular society.
"Combining medicine and religion is dangerous," said the Rev. Carlton W. Veazey, president of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice. "This tendency is creeping into our health-care system."
The trend will become particularly worrisome, some say, if religiously shaped medicine begins to displace and curtail access to standard medical care.
"If you look at what's happened with abortion services being severely limited in large parts of the country, this is not at all an unrealistic fear," said R. Alta Charo, a bioethicist at the University of Wisconsin at Madison.
|
OMAHA -- Craig Turczynski traveled from Texas to find ways to help infertile women that do not conflict with his religious beliefs. Cherie LeFevre came from St. Louis to learn how to treat her OB-GYN patients in obedience to her Catholicism. Amie Holmes flew from Ohio so she could practice medicine...
| 10.910714 | 0.982143 | 54.017857 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900863.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103119id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900863.html
|
Va. Catholics Pushed to Support Same-Sex Marriage Ban
|
2006103119
|
Virginia's Catholic leaders can take comfort from recent polls showing that a majority of state voters are in sync with them in supporting a constitutional amendment to ban civil unions. What worries them is their own flock.
A Washington Post poll conducted this month showed that a majority of Catholic voters oppose the proposed amendment, which would ban same-sex marriages. As a result, Virginia bishops are flexing their growing political muscle in an attempt to sway more Catholics on the issue and get them to voting booths.
"When Catholics are presented with our church's perspective on the nature of marriage, its relationship to the common good of society and the importance of the proposed amendment for children and families . . . they will be much more likely to support the amendment," said Jeff Caruso, executive director of the Virginia Catholic Conference.
The lobbying group spent about $25,000 this year on 100,000 glossy copies of a letter that Richmond Bishop Francis X. DiLorenzo and Arlington Bishop Paul S. Loverde wrote to explain why Catholics should support the amendment.
The amendment campaign is one of DiLorenzo and Loverde's largest political efforts. They founded the conference just last year, although many states -- including Maryland -- have had Catholic lobbying groups for decades.
There has also been a renewed effort since 2005 to register voters at Catholic parishes in Virginia, said Terry Wear, state coordinator of the marriage amendment effort for the Knights of Columbus. Wear said the marriage amendment is "one of the principal issues" behind the new registration effort, as well as concern about abortion and other social issues.
Of Virginia's more than 7 million residents, 620,000 are Catholic, according to the conference.
A solid majority of the state's Catholic voters -- 60 percent -- said gays should "be allowed to form legally recognized civil unions," compared with 38 percent who said they shouldn't, according to a Washington Post poll conducted this month. Slightly more than half of Catholic poll respondents -- 51 percent -- said they oppose the proposed constitutional amendment, compared with 46 percent who said they support it.
In contrast, the result for all poll respondents was 53 percent in support of the amendment and 43 percent against.
The split among voters who identify themselves as Catholic and church leaders mirrors a national rift on civil unions, as well as some other social issues. Asked whether gay couples should be allowed to form legally recognized unions that would give them the rights of married heterosexual couples, 53 percent of Catholics nationally said yes in a June 2006 ABC poll, compared with 40 percent who said no.
Some Catholics in Virginia said they weren't surprised by the division.
Joseph Strada, president of the Brent Society, a lay Catholic group of the Arlington Diocese, noted that only about one-third of U.S. Catholics go to Mass at least once a week. If they don't go, they won't be properly informed about gay marriages, civil unions and other issues, he said.
"To me, it's not surprising, because they're not going to a church they disagree with," he said. "If they don't attend church, they don't know what the church teaches. So it's obvious they won't have reliable answers."
Michael Burnett, 62, a Catholic from Prince William County who answered the Post poll and opposes the amendment, said: "The church has so much fence-mending to do, with all the problems they've had in the last couple decades, I'm not sure Catholics quite honestly really march to the beat of the drum anymore."
The bishops wrote in their letter: "Those who would give non-marital unions the privileges and status enjoyed by husbands and wives contradict and devalue what is truly good for society. Put another way, marriage as the lifelong union of a man and a woman is not one 'model' among many options of equal public significance. Rather, it is the very building block of the family and of society." Copies of the letter were requested by 190 of the state's 226 parishes.
Response to the pastoral statement "was very, very overwhelming," Caruso said.
Asked why the dioceses were making the new push into policy and politics, Caruso responded only that it was "a good time." But observers of Virginia's Catholic climate say it has more to do with the replacement in 2003 of former Richmond bishop Walter Francis Sullivan, who was more liberal than Loverde and oversaw the diocese there from 1974 until 2003.
Sullivan "was on his own," Strada said.
Several Catholic lawmakers in Virginia said they had not been lobbied about the amendment, and Strada said he'd like to see the bishops do more.
"They could be much more upfront, taking policy positions on legislation and things going on in the state," he said. "It takes courage" to get involved in moral issues, "and we haven't had very courageous bishops. And we still don't."
The amendment includes language that would bar recognition of civil unions or other same-sex arrangements approximating marriage. Opponents say the language is so broad that it would infringe on individuals' ability to enter into wills, purchase property jointly and receive protection from domestic violence laws -- claims the amendment's supporters dispute.
Some Catholic respondents to the Post poll who had seen the bishops' letter said they were not swayed by it.
"What's important to me more than anything is fundamental fairness," said Scott Peters, a personal trainer in Sterling. He said he disagreed with the church's stance on abortion as well.
"If this amendment just banned gay marriage, I'd vote for it. But I do believe in civil unions, and I just don't think I can support something that obviously is trying to go after those arrangements. Honestly, I just believe the church is wrong on this one."
|
Virginia's Catholic leaders can take comfort from recent polls showing that a majority of state voters are in sync with them in supporting a constitutional amendment to ban civil unions. What worries them is their own flock.
| 28.825 | 1 | 40 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/10/20/DI2006102000738.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/10/20/DI2006102000738.html
|
Inside Job: Women and Home-Based Work
|
2006103019
|
Had enough of the rat race? Maybe it's time to start your own business -- and many people have had success opening shop from within their homes. In our Inside Job special feature, we've gathered information you can use to learn the ins and outs of doing a home-based business right.
Karen Steede-Terry , author of "Full-Time Woman, Part-Time Career" (CMS Press, 2005), is an expert on helping women find ways to combine work and motherhood, among other things. She was online to help readers find ways to balance their personal and professional lives.
For more on entrepreneurism, visit last year's Small Business 101 special feature. And there is plenty more information on jobs and careers in our online Jobs section .
Washington, D.C.: I would like to work from home or have a home-based business. I know that working from home is out of the question in my current career. I'm willing to make the transition. Where is a good place to start looking?
Karen Steede-Terry: What is your current career and what kind of skills do you have?
Lusby, Md.: Hi, Karen. Two questions: where is the best place to search for jobs that let you work at home? two, what careers are most likely to allow you to be "virtual?" Thanks.
Karen Steede-Terry: Hello! Thank you for participating in the chat. In my book "Full-Time Woman, Part-Time Career," I have a list of Web sites that have work from home opportunities. You can also search on Google, or on monster.com, which is a good source. What are your skills? There are many careers you can do "virtually," including consulting, freelance writing, coaching, and many marketing services. Depending on your skills, you may be able to do something related to your profession, or something slightly different within your field. For example, I know two lawyers who give seminars and provide consulting to other law firms, rather than actually practice law. Many people can make a transition to something related to their field, depending on their skillset.
Snellville, Ga.: How can you assist me in finding a legitimate home business as I have been trying to find one for the longest time that doesn't have a high start up cost.
Karen Steede-Terry: There are many Web sites that offer home-based businesses. Most are selling products from well-known companies. I don't usually endorse one Web site over another, however I like www.hbwm.com (home-based working moms), which offers legitimate opportunities.
Norcross, Ga.: I am underpaid since 2001, only about $900 a month. My credit is poor, marriage suffering, and children hurting, because I wasted so much money on trying to get ahead. I would love to work at home if there is a legitimate business out there with little or no up front money.
Karen Steede-Terry: Dear Norcross: What do you do? My approach is to help women begin working from home in their existing field, rather than try to set up a home-based business selling products. If you have skills to offer (such as writing, marketing, or public speaking), you can go out on your own, working from home. The start-up costs are minimal, because you don't have to buy products (cosmetics, kitchen accessories). To start out, you need business tools, such as a computer, FAX machine, letterhead, business cards, etc.
College Park, Md.: What are the common mistakes people make when they decide to work from home?
Karen Steede-Terry: One thing about working from home is that you can be very isolated. It is very hard, especially if you are used to working in an office with a lot of people. You do not have the social interaction with co-workers, and for women especially, it is difficult not having anyone to talk to.
One thing that can help with this is to "switch" your social interaction from day to night. If you are alone all day, join some evening social groups -- dinner clubs, tennis leagues, book clubs, whatever appeals to you.
The second thing is the tendency not to separate work from home life. This is a big one, especially when you have family around. Be sure to have dedicated work time AND space. If you have a dedicated work area (a home office), this will help you be in the mental mode to work. One of the things that I have found hard is to get others to respect the fact that you are working. It helps to establish some boundaries and guidelines up-front.
Russellville, Ark.: Is there a general salary range for home-based working opportunities?
Karen Steede-Terry: Hello! Thank you for your question. In my book "Full-Time Woman, Part-Time Career," I talk extensively about pay ranges and setting rates for new consultants. When you go out on your own, you need to decide how much you are worth, and how much you are willing to work for. There are six case studies in the book, and most talk about their pay and what to expect when you are just starting out.
Here is a good review of my book on BlogHer.com: http://blogher.org/node/10241
Scroll down and you will see a text box that quotes one of my case studies (Leita Hart) and what she has to say when setting your rates and deciding what to make when starting out.
Florida: Do you know much about affiliate programs where you make money linking to other sites or products or serving ads on your Web site? And if so, what would be the top three places you recommend to learn the best information about how to find the best affiliate programs?
There is so much HYPE! And it seems the only people making money are the people hyping up their own e-books and membership sites -- those folks really know how to sell their own stuff and toot their own horns. I really don't want to be like that -- I want to join top quality, high-income producing affiliate programs that are going to be around for the long haul.
Can you point me in the right direction(s)? Thanks so much for your advice.
Karen Steede-Terry: I just read an excellent article about affiliate programs and viral marketing by Cory Threlfall. I don't have the link, but you can do a Google search on the author. Affiliate programs are good if you list a product on your web site, but you don't necessarily want to sell it on your site (in other words you don't want to handle the financial transaction yourself by setting up a merchant account). These programs provide you with an opportunity to still make a little bit of money from the fact that you "referred" the business to their web site (kind of like a referral fee). Notice I said "a little bit" of money - you won't get rich from these programs unless you have a whole bunch of Affiliate Links and you have a lot of people who visit your site (what these people you are describing do).
I work for the federal government as a FOIA officer. I like the flexibility of my job but that's about it. I am a wife and a mother of three kids ages 10, 8, and 4, and I have not been able to strike a balance without feeling burnt out. Currently, I do work from home on Mondays but that's not enough. I lack passion for what I do and that also bothers me.
I know I want to work from home but I am not sure what my passion is and how to go about finding it. I forgot to mention that I am the bread winner in the house so I feel like I really can't search for my dream job with out a financial hardship.
Thus far, I know one thing for sure and that is I don't want to wait 30 years to retire from a job. I want to enjoy my family now and later and provide a secure future as possible for the years to come.
How do I start my journey?
Karen Steede-Terry: Hello. Thank you for writing to me. Your situation is similar to a lot of women. They are working for the income, many are the sole breadwinner, as you mention, and they would like to leave the corporate world, (or in your case, the government) but they don't know how. If you have skills (writing, coaching, technical, financial), you can go out on your own. My book is a roadmap for how to do it.
I also highly recommend www.integratedmother.com, founded by Michele Dortch, for the emotional/passion/living side of things. Michele's entire mission reflects what you said in your last paragraph -- to help women find the passion in their lives, and build an integrated life so they can enjoy their families now. I agree with her philosophy, as it is so important to cherish the time you have with your kids, now (not in 30 years, as you say), before they are all grown up! Check out her site. I think she has some resources that will help you.
I'm happy that your column has international reach, perhaps you can shed some light on my situation.
I am a lawyer/anthropologist specializing in development. Since returning to the Caribbean (in 2003) I've been working from home as an independent consultant, and I'm really enjoying the freedom and flexibility.
Recently, I've ventured into creative writing/film making and am traveling more as new opportunities arise. Although I am living my dream, these activities take me away from paid work.
For some time, I've been contemplating starting a firm, fielding responsibilities to partners/associates and reducing my involvement in projects. However, I have major concerns with:
1. How to find the right people to bring in (creative, independent, experienced, but team oriented)? I've thought of a loose structure where people are brought on for specific projects but this leads to high turnover. On the other hand if I take on staff, the issue is how to retain them between projects? And then there are the challenges of managing people and their expectations
2. How to best capitalize on my strengths (research, project formulation, troubleshooting and evaluation) without getting involved in day to day project management.
3. How to make the transition smoothly? In five years I want to dedicate my time entirely to creative endeavors and having a family.
I'd love your perspectives on this.
Karen Steede-Terry: Hello! Thank you for writing (and for reading my column on www.msfinancialsavvy.com) -- do you blog on BlogHer.com? I am half-joking, there was a similar story posted from the Caribbean recently . . .
Your question about staff is never easy: "how to find the right people to work with?" As you know, sometimes you really click with people and sometimes you don't. What has been helpful to me is using subcontractors. In my case, I am a software instructor, and these were other women looking for flexibility in their lives, because most were new moms. I did get references from them first. I called their clients, and looked at their course evaluations to see how they were received. I explained what I expected up-front, and I had a positive experience. You might try using someone as a subcontractor first, and then hiring them if it works out. Do you have any professional groups (as an attorney, I would think there would be many!) where you can look for people?
Combining travel with creative writing sounds like a dream come true to most people! I understand about having two careers and when you are trying to get the second career off of the ground, it does take you away from your paid work. Is there any way for you to balance this out?
Anonymous: What services do you offer to assist women in finding opportunities?
Karen Steede-Terry: Hello and thank you for asking. I do offer coaching on an hourly basis. However, my services are confined to helping women who want to go out on their own, using their existing professional skills, rather than trying to find a suitable home-based business for someone.
Washington, D.C.: I have spent a career developing and implementing financial and regulatory policy. For health reasons I now need to work from home. There are no options with my former employer. Do you have an resources that I might explore in this area?
Karen Steede-Terry: How long have you been in your field? If you have been in a specific field (in your case, financial) for five or more years, chances are that you have some pretty good contacts and/or a pretty good network. What I would do is make calls to your network, to people you know in your field, and I would ask them if they know of any contract or consulting opportunities. You can always go to monster.com, and look for contract work, but you have a much better shot at getting a job with someone you know, because they already know you, and thus you have credibility. Many times, one contract job can lead to another, and then another, etc.
Landover, Md.: What would be a good home-based business for someone who has experience in the administrative assistant field, and how would I get started? Also, what online resources are available?
Karen Steede-Terry: Have you thought about becoming a Virtual Assistant?
This is a relatively new job area, where one person has several clients who want a web presence, but who don't want to maintain it. You update Web sites, maintain client databases, put together and then send out e-mail newsletters (known as e-zines), etc. Does this sound like a good fit for someone with your background?
New York: "...for women especially, it is difficult not having anyone to talk to."
This is as true for SOME women as it is UNTRUE for other women. Please help us avoid perpetuating the women-talk-to-much stereotype.
Loudoun County, Va.: Even in this county just 50-70 miles west of Washington, D.C., home to AOL, and recently declared the "richest" county in the U.S., the level of computer services varies greatly. If you're lucky enough to be in a village in the western part, you may get high-speed or wireless. If you're in a town and VERY lucky, you may get fiber optic. But many still rely on dial-up in the rural areas where the commutes to jobs in Washington, D.C. can be two hours each way. How critical is a high-speed Internet connection to the most recently emerging home-based businesses? And do you know of any communities that have addressed this issue of ensuring high-speed or wireless options to all of their residents?
Karen Steede-Terry: Hello. To answer your question, it depends on what you are doing from home. If the work you are doing is independent of the Internet (such as writing articles or marketing pieces for other companies), then the speed of your Internet connection shouldn't really matter. I work with one graphic artist who lives in a rural area outside of Atlanta. She works on the marketing pieces, and then sends them to her clients over e-mail, so the end client really has no idea what speed her connection is, but they LOVE the end result (the work she does for them).
Karen Steede-Terry: Thank you to everyone who submitted a question to me today. There were so many, that I was unable to get to them all, and if I did not answer yours, I apologize. Feel free to contact me directly at www.fulltimewoman.com.
I wish you all the best and I hope our time today was beneficial for 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.
|
Many women have found home-based businesses to be a source of income and inspiration. Author Karen Steede-Terry discusses work at home and women's issues in this live discussion.
| 92.685714 | 0.885714 | 1.914286 |
high
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/10/26/DI2006102600982.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/10/26/DI2006102600982.html
|
K Street Confidential
|
2006103019
|
Please send some more questions; there's plenty of room.
My column today is about the crackdown on lobbyists Rep. Nancy Pelosi would lead if she became Speaker of the House. This is real stuff--Pelosi would change House rules and that would impose changes immediately.
The big change would be a ban on gifts and travel provided by lobbyists and by organizations that hire lobbyists.
What do you think of that? What else should be done? Don't be shy. Write in and let me know.
Chantilly, Va.: Rumors are rampant at my Dulles defense contractor (not a Halliburton affiliate) that when the Dems take control of Congress, they'll start issuing subpoenas for dozens of people, from CEOs down to the rank and file, investigating supposed waste and fraud in government contracting. People are worried the company will go out of business and they'll be on the hook for huge legal fees.
I've been telling people no way this will happen but I keep hearing that this has a prime spot on the agenda. Have you heard any of these stories?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Yes, I've heard plenty of stories like this and, to some extent, they are likely to be true is Democrats come to power on Capitol Hill.
It's likely that a Democratic House or Senate would hold lots of hearings into the doings of defense contractors. Oil companies, too, and drug companies as well.
But whether that will mean huge legal bills for employees of those places--I doubt it. There would be a lot more scrutiny, but I wouldn't bet on more legal actions or anything so dire as bankruptcy.
So be prepared, but don't worry too much.
Washington, D.C.: Your article in today's Post was very interesting. Is it really true that under the present House rules, the lawmakers don't have to be given an opportunity to read the actual final bills before they have to vote on them? Some of the bills are hundreds of pages long and very convoluted in construction. It's easy to see why the Highways, Rivers & Harbors, and Miscellaneous Trade bills are so loaded with dubious special interests, so say nothing of pushing a host of trade breaks into the Pensions bill at the last moment, though appearently that was done by Frist in the Senate rather than in the House, where Nancy Pelosi hopes to become speaker next session according to your article.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Rep. Pelosi wants to change the way Congress operates. She is serious about that, I believe. But stating an intention is different than making it happen.
I would not be surprised if a few of the items in my column fall away under pressure from lobbyists and others. But I do think that what Pelosi wants, Pelosi gets for most of these druthers. If she becomes Speaker, she will place a high priority on putting some distance between lawmakers and lobbyists.
That would be a popular move (though not so popular on K Street).
Chicago, Ill.: It appears that the Republican party has a much sharper apparatus for pairing money interests with public officials who will do their bidding. With an eye on this important mid-term election, should we fear that the Republican party is less willing to find solutions to the real problems that our country is facing? Is it true that the Republicans are much keener at the money game than the Democrats, or are they equally sophisticated?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Republicans raise more money, but both parties are acutely aware of who their money constituents are and are very good at catering to them.
I wouldn't give one party an edge in pandering to "special interests." If Democrats win control of the House, they will help labor unions, trial lawyers and environmental groups in the same way that Republicans have helped small businesses, and oil and drug companies. You pick who's right and who's wrong. I try to focus on who wins and who loses--that's how Washington works.
Washington D.C.: I recall that earlier in the lobbying reform debate there was a proposal to restrict but not ban privately-funded travel. If memory serves, the idea was that trips would be pre-screened to ensure they are legitimately connected to giving legislators information they need to do their jobs. Do you think there's any chance this will be resurrected, or is it going to be a ban or nothing?
Privately-funded Congressional travel has obviously become a big problem, but still there are legitimate trips, even sometimes funded by groups that lobby. It would be a shame if the good couldn't be saved in order to stamp out the bad.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: If I have read Rep. Pelosi's proposal correctly, privately paid travel from lobbyists and from nongovernmental groups that hire lobbyists would be banned. Lobbyists can't now pay for travel, but their employers have been able to. That would be out the moment that the House rules are changed, which can be done with a simple majority vote in that chamber. If that happens, it will be a big deal.
Arlington, Va.: There is something in the papers this morning about an Arab Institute connected with Grover Norquist paying to ship Chris Shays to the Middle Eat with intimations that it was at least unwise for Shays to accept. Without taking a particular stance on Shays, what sort of lobbying empire has Norquist set up and how close is he to indictment on the Abramoff-Reed money laundering scheme?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: I don't know Norquist's legal status.
But his group, Americans for Tax Reform, is large and influential among Republicans in Washington.
I don't know the details of Shays' trip, but sensitivities are so high about "special interests" these days that any revelation linking a lawmaker to them can be very damaging, especially this late in the campaign.
Stuck in Security Line: As someone who has taken private jets to get to out-of-the-way spots that are either super expensive or difficult arrival/departure times, I see the benefits of private air travel as becoming more and more a necessity. While I understand the role of corporate jets in the Abramoff scandal, is the real issue the private jets, or the lack of disclosure? Personally, I would think it's fine if it's disclosed...
Jeffrey Birnbaum: You are among a small minority of people who take private planes. To most of America the practice is elitist and way too fancy for representatives of "the People." The problem is that this has turned into a year of "corruption" and any lawmaker who has been tainted with being too close to lobbyists or "special interests" is having a tough time according to the polls.
Ben Lomond, Calif.: On a scale of 1-10, what's the panic level on K Street?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: About 9 if you're a Republican.
About 3 if you're a Democrat.
Rockwall, Tex.: Please provide your opinion of the notion that, in the post-cold war world, national security is no longer the exclusive province of government. Businesses, for various reasons, are on the firing line as targets of U.S. adversaries, and must share responsibility for national security in such areas as global information networks, and critical infrastructure. This requires a reconfiguration of traditional business risk models to appropriately value exposure to an attack, the effects of which would extend beyond the specific financial interests of the company.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Corporations have been boosting their security procedures, as well they should.
But only the government can provide the kinds of protections that are needed in a global war against terrorists. Securing the borders and protecting American lives is the provenance of the central government primarily and must always reside there. That's one of the main reasons we have a government at all.
Ben Lomond, Calif.: Why are you only answering questions from the East Coast?
Actually, I didn't even realize that I was ignoring anyone.
Let me find another question from your side of the country and I'll be back in a moment.
Ben Lomond, Calif.: Who on K Street should be worried the most about Post November 7?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Ah, here you are, West Coast.
My column two weeks ago laid out which industries should worry most, and which ones least, if Democrats take control of the House, the Senate or both.
Oil and pharmaceutical companies would surely be targeted. Democrats would try to repeal some drilling subsidies and require competitive bidding on drugs purchased for Medicare.
Other industries that have been big backers of Republicans--and Republicans of them--include chemical companies, insurers, manufacturers and food processors. These industries might also be wise to watch their backs after a Democratic wave.
Funny: Usually the shills hop on to declare they do us all a service by helping Congress on highly technical issues, etc...
Now it seems to me none of these rules will get in the way of that. After all, since all they are doing is explainig the legitimate and honest concerns of their pay masters, these lobbyists should have no trouble doing so in an office setting. Or by inviting Congress folk to a meeting here in DC.
After all, such honest noble concerns don't need free expensive lunches, or private jets to resorts to let the light of their truth shine free!
Funny how these rules expose a lot of these lobbyists for the mercenary cockroaches they are. A littlke sunlight and they go scurrying for dark corners.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Come now, tell us what you really think.
Washington, D.C.: I was watching C-SPAN last night and there was this big panel discussion from a law firm, DLA Piper, led by former Congressman and Ambassador Jim Blanchard with other former Congresspeople like Dick Gephardt. Do firms do this often and why do they? It seemed interesting but how does speculating about who will win or not help the clients? Hope you like the WP better than Fortune.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: I do like the Washington Post better than Fortune. Thank you asking.
Lobbying firms like the one that sponsored the forum you saw do such things all the time, though not on television necessarily. One of the main jobs of a lobbyist is to keep clients up to date about the political environment in which their issues have to move. It makes a very big difference whether Republicans or Democrats are in charge on Capitol Hill--and which Republicans and Democrats have the power to do things.
The forum you saw is repeated hundreds of times in smaller ways all over Washington or in memos sent to clients.
Columbus, Ga.: Why is the Post ignoring the contest between Lynn Westmoreland (currently Republican incumbent of the GA-08 Congressional District) and Democratic newcomer Mike McGraw, businessman from Newnan, for the new GA-03 Congressional seat??
One of McGraw's big issues is the way Congress has been ignoring the real problems facing ordinary, middle class Americans. He wants a government of fiscal responsibility which isn't beholden to special interests. Check out his website at www.mikemcgrawforcongress.com to see where he stands on the issues.
He's giving Westmoreland a real run for this seat.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: The Post can't possibly cover all 435 House races this year. You are about the first person to mention that this race is one worth covering, meaning that it could have a surprise outcome. Thanks for letting us know.
Monroe Township, N.J.: Do you think the business coalition to "reduce" Sarbanes-Oxley will succeed?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: I do not, especially if Democrats take control of the House, the Senate or both.
Sanibel, Fla.: Regarding your column today, and Nancy Pelosi's lobby reforms, the real pros on K Street will emit a silent "Amen." They never needed those kinds of perks anyway. They know that the system is out of control and will be happy to see things like this curtailed. Thugs like Abramoff couldn't have made a living lobbying twenty years ago. The only losers will be air charters, restaurants, hotels and the local sports franchises.
I agree with you that lobbying will continue to thrive no matter what rules changes happen.
But that does not mean that lobbying will be as easy as it once was if new rules are enacted.
In this case, a lot of trade groups would be hampered because they couldn't entertain lawmakers at their regular conventions.
What's more, Pelosi sees these rules changes as merely a first step. Bigger changes might be coming down the pike in the way of changes in law as well, and those could bite more deeply.
Indianapolis, Ind.: The NY Times reported yesterday how large corps. and accounting firms are planning to change the sec rules to get protection from shareholder litigation. It's not going to Congress. Former administration folks (Evans and Hubbard) are directly involved and current folks (Paulson) are cheerleading. How will the Dems. control this type of circumvention?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: They would just say no.
Monterey, Calif.: Jeffrey, with a Dem House in the cards, will the Dems be able to handle all that cash from K St. Who will be the go to person to herd the Dems into some sort of order to get Bills of Concern earmarked.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: I thinks the Democrats are up to that task. There will be plenty of lawmakers who can handle the task you suggest--and they're more than willing to do so. Whether we like it or not.
Falls Church, Va. : Maybe I should have listed a west coast location, in order to catch your eye -wink-
My question is - ok, Pelosi bans gifts and travel. But that still leaves campaign donations (and what else?) for ways that lobbyists can influence politicians/legislation? I mean, this isn't going to put all lobbyists out of business...
Jeffrey Birnbaum: You are correct. Lobbying will not be stopped nor can it be; it's a right guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.
And you are also right to suggest that only clamping down on campaign finances will make a real difference to the lobbying world. That isn't being suggested by anyone, by the way.
Nonetheless, there has been so much talk about corruption this year I would not be surprised to see more than Pelosi's rules changes happen and that lobbyists' wings will be clipped even more than she suggests.
Palm Springs, Calif.: Mr. Birnbaum, Is there hope that Mrs. Pelosi can go farther with her plans for accountability and do something about completely eliminating the "earmark" program, allowing nothing to be included in a funding bill other than the exact matter at hand. To me the earmark system is nothing more than bribery and corruption performed daily by those we elect to represent us. Do you think this can be stopped as well as pulling in the reins on lobbyists? Thank you.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: I don't see how earmarks--narrowly focused appropriations--can be outlawed. Full disclosure of them is a step toward keeping them relatively small, however.
Falls Church: Not that I am a complete fan of Republicans, but how can anyone vote for Democratic Congressmen when it would put Nancy Pelosi as House Majority leader and Rangel as Chair of Ways and Means? Pelosi is arguably the most active, left-leaning liberal with nothing to show that she would represent the country as a whole and Rangel is a special interest left-leaning liberal who would hold hostage any votes he did not like. I can't think of a more dangerous team to put in charge of our country's legislative branch.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Your argument is one that the Republican party will be making with increasing volume in the final days of this campaign. We'll see how many voters buy it.
Washington, D.C.: In your article today, you claim Speaker Pelosi will introduce a rule to ensure members AND staff must tell a congressional committee they are looking for a new job? Am I reading this right, and if so, such a draconian measure placed on staff seems unrealistic.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Members and top staffers, is my understanding of the proposal.
Palm Springs, Calif.: Mr. Birnbaum, Can you explain why neither party is willing to take the inital step of "closing the borders" and then working on the other issues related to the illegal immigration problem? Without taking that intial step of drastically reducing the number of illegals entering this country, by walking, swimming, however they want to do it, it seems that there will never be a solution to any aspect of the problem. Seems we will just continue in the same manner, every 20 years or so, amnesty is given to another 15 to 20 million people and it's business as usual, complain, complain, complain. There has been no party or politician with the guts to stand up and fix the problem for the past 40 or 50 years, if ever. Thank you. David Smith
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Congress tried to take the first step by authorizing a fence--both physical and virtual. I think immigration will be a focus of the end of the current Congress and the beginning of the new one next year--no matter who is in charge.
Scottsdale, Ariz.: Pelosi would not be my choice by a long shot. With that said, I do agree whoever and support her position an cleaning up corruption in the House and Senate. That is long over due.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Yes, I think cracking down on lobbyists would be a popular proposal these days (though lobbyists probably don't agree).
Charleston, W.V.: Thank you for an excellent column. What kind of reaction could come from the lobbyists and congress members? I cannot believe they would easily give up the lucrative arrangement they have now.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: I haven't heard much yet. But I expect there will be lobbying against these proposed lobbying changes. I bet that they get watered down in the process, too.
Reston, Va.: Hi Jeff. It seems that one of OMB's recent initiatives, "strategic sourcing", is a classic intersection of business, politics and government. I know some state and federal agencies have experienced some successes here, but was wondering what your opinion was about the level of lawmaker awareness or interest concerning strategic sourcing. Do you detect a growing interest on the Hill for this or similar cost-cutting/procurement efficiency initiatives? I ask because there is some concern in the small business community that initiatives of this type may reduce their opportunity to compete - is this on Congress' radar?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: I'm afraid I am not an expert in procurement policy.
Phoenix, Ariz.: The one way to get around the Pelosi travel ban mentioned in your article is to turn any trip or speaking engagement into a fundraiser. Then, the new rules would not apply. Wouldn't this worse than the current situation? Those groups with the biggest PACs would be the big winners.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Yes, you are correct. And I bet that happens more often if the rules changes happen.
Washington, D.C.: I'm frankly baffled by the conventional wisdom that says contracting governemnt activities out to the private sector is the answer to government waste and sloth.
I'm a manager in the federal government and my experience over the years with contract companies has been an eye-opening experience. The ONLY thing that matters to a company is the bottom line. If necessary companies will deliver less than promised and even lie and cheat to enhance the bottom line.
Part of my workforce is provided by a contract company. Those employees are miserable. I'm not supposed to know anything about the way their company treats them, but what they tell me makes me in private makes me very upset. These employes are paid much less than my federal employees yet cost the government just as much.
My son has also worked as a contract employee for four different companies providing a service to the government. His experience is about in line with what I'm hearing from my employees.
The goal of private sector companies and the government are at odds. I'm not against contracting out per se. I have one contract that I'm very pleased with. Even so, the majority of the contracts I've been associated with over the years have not worked well for the government. The contractor has almost always delivered less, sometimes far less, than what they were paid for.
Jeffrey Birnbaum: The success of the practice is mixed I believe. But thank you for passing along your experience. I think outsourcing will continue to grow in Washington and your warning is worth listening to.
Thank you for your column in today's Business Section. Reading it, I had a concern with the proposed changes regarding privately sponsored Congressional travel. While I understand why this is an attractive reform, I feel as though it would unintentionally impede legitimate fact-finding and educational trips by members. Golf trips to Scotland are obvious abuses of this privilege but the majority of travel by Congress allows them to interact with citizens outside the beltway and engage in an exchange of ideas about policy. Wouldn't a pre-approval process accomplish the intent of the reform and prevent abuse?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Pre-approval might work and it might not. Banning the practice completely eliminates doubt.
Your argument killed a plan earlier this year to bar privately funded travel. It might do so again.
What do you think of Mike Steele picking up the endorsement of Wayne Curry and 5 members of the Prince George's County Council?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Certainly a fact that will help Steele. That race is closer than expected, so anything that happens could potentially be important.
Washington, D.C.: Should the Dems take over one or both houses, to what extent does this fall on the shoulders of the recently-revved-up business lobby, who in the past decade has been more and more involved in elections? Does this damage their power on the Hill, or is the election more about non-business-related issues?
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Many, but not all, business interests prefer Republicans to Democrats and send their campaign donations accordingly. Business would be a loser overall if the Democrats take over on Capitol Hill. But most industries have been smart enough to hedge their bets and to keep lines of communication open with Democrats. Don't expect a wave of anti-business legislation, just some targeted pieces.
Responding to Falls Church - Pelosi and Rangel..: Falls Church wrote: Not that I am a complete fan of Republicans, but how can anyone vote for Democratic Congressmen when it would put Nancy Pelosi as House Majority leader and Rangel as Chair of Ways and Means?
And compare them with WHICH Repubs that are indicted (Scooter Libby, Ney, Cunningham, Delay), under investigation (Frist, Hastert) among others......
Jeffrey Birnbaum: Thanks for so many questions, and good ones, too.
I'll be back at this in a couple weeks. We can rehash the election and its implications then.
Until then, vote early and often.
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.
| 111.97561 | 0.731707 | 0.97561 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900895.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900895.html
|
Brain on Fire - washingtonpost.com
|
2006103019
|
The Siemens Magnetom Trio at the University of Pennsylvania is a 10-foot-tall, 14-ton "functional magnetic resonance imaging" machine -- fMRI, for short. It promises to be the most formidable lie detector ever built. By peering directly into our brains, its keepers aim to set a new gold standard for the recognition of honesty in everyone from politicians to criminals to lovers.
The check's in the mail.
I'm from Washington and I'm here to help you.
In the pipeline are several cheaper, faster, easier-to-use brain-examining technologies, all intended as major improvements on the unreliable chicken-scratching polygraph we use now. Some seem to identify mental preparations for telling a lie even before the liar opens his mouth -- verging on mind-reading. Another is meant to work from across the room, even if you do not wish to cooperate. Think of it as the "mental detector" at your airport screening, and not without good reason. Much of this research is being funded by the military as part of the anti-terror juggernaut.
You're chambered into this dimly lit tunnel of truth like a shell into a shotgun. First you are instructed to twist plugs far into your ears. Then you lie on a gurney narrower than a stretcher. A woman in a lab coat slides a helmet over your head. It is not really like a Hannibal Lecter mask, although the researchers like to make that joke. Your nose barely clears the equipment, your eyes can only look up, and your head is cradled to discourage movement.
Into your hands the researchers place a box with two buttons. The left one, when punched, signifies a "yes" response to questions. The right one means "no." When they slide you into the bore, it is barely wide enough for your shoulders. To your hip they've taped a bulb that you are supposed to squeeze if you have a panic attack, because there is the possibility that no one will hear you scream -- when the machine goes to work, it pounds like a high-frequency jackhammer, except when it shrieks like the klaxon on a submarine when somebody shouts "Dive! Dive!"
All of this in the service of making every atom in your brain align in the same direction to banish lies forever. A seductive thought. Especially if you believe, as does Ruben C. Gur, director of the Brain Behavior Center at Penn, that "the brain is the soul."
To get this far into a quest for the future of truth, you've had to answer hundreds of medical questions. One of them is whether you suffer from anxiety.
Sixteen hundred years ago, Saint Augustine defined lying as having one thing in one's heart, and uttering another.
Two U.S. companies are for the first time gearing up to offer brain scans meant to explore exactly such conflict for anyone with several hundred dollars and a burning desire to -- like The Shadow -- know what evil lurks in the hearts of men.
This commercialization is derided by many researchers as premature. It is not yet clear, they say, how well this technology identifies different kinds of lies, or how well it works across a great array of people, or how well it stands up to countermeasures.
|
The Siemens Magnetom Trio at the University of Pennsylvania is a 10-foot-tall, 14-ton "functional magnetic resonance imaging" machine -- fMRI, for short. It promises to be the most formidable lie detector ever built. By peering directly into our brains, its keepers aim to set a new gold...... The...
| 10.864407 | 0.966102 | 53.169492 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900545.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900545.html
|
Losing Nicaragua, Again
|
2006103019
|
Oliver North and his associates were leaving Managua last Tuesday on a private plane after a dramatic surprise visit when they heard news they could scarcely comprehend. The State Department had just issued a "public announcement" that, in effect, warned Americans not to travel to Nicaragua because of the prospect for "violent demonstrations" and "sporadic acts of violence" leading up to the Nov. 5 presidential election there.
The North group had seen nothing in Nicaragua to justify a travel advisory, normally issued when life and limb of visiting Americans are at risk. U.S. and Nicaraguan security officials alike are dumbfounded, and the State Department did not explain it to me. That buttresses suspicion that the U.S. government wants to keep away meddling Americans like North, who seek to influence an election that now appears likely to return Daniel Ortega and the Sandinistas to power after an absence of 16 years.
The seemingly unavoidable outcome of next Sunday's election is a Nicaraguan tragedy, losing at the ballot box what was won two decades ago by the blood of contra fighters and the risking of Ronald Reagan's presidency. Because the anti-Sandinista vote is split, Ortega figures to return his Marxist-Leninist party -- now backed by Hugo Chávez's Venezuelan petrodollars -- to the presidential palace. Apart from the misery to be inflicted on the Nicaraguan people, this reflects the deterioration of U.S. influence in the Western Hemisphere under the Bush administration.
Nicaraguan law permits the election of a president with as little as 35 percent of the vote if he is five percentage points ahead of his nearest competitor. That now seems probable with the anti-Sandinista vote divided between two major candidates: former vice president Jose Rizo and banker Eduardo Montealegre. The former contras blame this state of affairs on the Bush administration in general and, specifically, on the U.S. ambassador in Managua, Paul Trivelli.
The looming political fiasco in Nicaragua comes as no surprise. Adolfo Calero, a Washington-based contra leader in the '80s, returned to the U.S. capital in April to issue a warning. He asserted that tacit U.S. support for Montealegre and opposition to Rizo was a horrendous political error and that the only hope to hold off the Sandinistas was to support Rizo. But official doors were closed to Calero. The occasion of Calero's visit was a reunion of contra leaders, their former CIA handlers and Ollie North, who as a Marine lieutenant colonel ran the Nicaraguan account at the Reagan White House. The festivities were marred by fear and frustration over the coming election.
North went public in his syndicated column of Oct. 6. He contended that "official U.S. policy in Nicaragua has been blind to the realities of Nicaraguan politics." He said Ambassador Trivelli "has to stop pressuring private sector leaders with potential reprisals" for backing Rizo and his Liberal Party. North called on Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to visit Managua and meet with all anti-Sandinista candidates -- including Rizo.
In Washington, North was ignored. He and his colleagues paid a hastily arranged visit to Managua Monday, Oct. 23, and publicly pleaded with Nicaraguans to reject the Sandinistas. The apparent U.S. reaction was Tuesday's official U.S. government warning that implies Americans would do well to stay away from now until April 18. By urging "American residents and visitors in Nicaragua " to be "vigilant," the U.S. government was telling the old contras to keep hands off.
Dewey Claridge, the famous CIA contra handler, put it bluntly in an e-mail to associates: "Just when you think the State Department's level of stupidity has reached bedrock and can go no further, it comes up with this nonsense, probably the [work] of Trivelli and his paranoia that Oliver North's visit to Managua to receive a testimonial and lay a wreath at the tomb of the fallen . . . is the Contra War II."
State Department spokesmen would not elaborate on the basis for the travel advisory, but the department's security personnel and Nicaraguan police privately said they saw none for such a warning. The real warning should be about the return of the Sandinistas, in league with Havana and Caracas, thanks to another failure in U.S. policy.
© 2006 Creators Syndicate Inc.
|
Next Sunday's election will likely return Nicaragua to the Sandinistas thanks to another failure in U.S. policy.
| 42.421053 | 0.947368 | 4.736842 |
high
|
high
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/27/AR2006102701482.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/27/AR2006102701482.html
|
Where We Went Wrong
|
2006103019
|
Somewhere along the road to a "permanent majority," the Republican Revolution of 1994 went off track. For several years, we had confidence in our convictions and trusted that the American people would reward our efforts. And they did.
But today, my Republican friends in Congress stand on the precipice of an electoral rout. Even the best-case scenarios suggest wafer-thin majorities and a legislative agenda in disarray. With eight days before the election, House speaker-in-waiting Nancy Pelosi has already begun her transition planning.
Where did the revolution go astray? How did we go from the big ideas and vision of 1994 to the cheap political point-scoring on meaningless wedge issues of today -- from passing welfare reform and limited government to banning horsemeat and same-sex marriage?
The answer is simple: Republican lawmakers forgot the party's principles, became enamored with power and position, and began putting politics over policy. Now, the Democrats are reaping the rewards of our neglect -- and we have no one to blame but ourselves.
In 1989, Newt Gingrich rose to the number two leadership position in the House after a contentious three-way race pitting young backbench conservatives such as myself, Bob Walker, Joe Barton and others against old bulls such as Minority Leader Bob Michel and other ranking members. We thought they suffered from a minority party mindset and were too accommodating of the Democrats. Out of congressional power for nearly two generations, Republicans had become complacent. Senior members of the party were happy to accept the crumbs afforded by Democratic chairmen. Life was comfortable in the minority as long as you did not rock the boat. Members received their perks -- such as travel abroad and special banking privileges -- and enough pork projects for reelection. The entire Congress lived by the rule of parochial politics.
Gingrich and I and a handful of true believers in Ronald Reagan's conservative vision set the goal of retaking the House. The "Contract With America" outlined our platform of limited government. This vision appealed to both the social and economic wings of the conservative movement; equally important, it included institutional reforms for a Congress that had grown increasingly arrogant and corrupt. The contract nationalized the vision of the Republican Party in a way that unified our base and appealed to independents. We championed national issues, not local pork projects or the creature comforts of high office.
In 1994, this vision was validated when Republicans took 54 seats in the House, eight seats in the Senate and control of both houses of Congress.
Welfare reform in 1996 only affirmed the revolution. Bureaucrats, special interests and the White House all claimed that the sky would fall if we touched this failed Great Society program, but we held firm. When you take on a sacred cow, you must kill it completely -- tinkering on the margins is ineffective. In the end, the reform proved so successful and popular that President Bill Clinton (who rejected the original bill twice) considers it one of the best ideas his administration ever had.
At one point during the welfare reform debates, a member approached me and said, "Dick, I know this is the right thing to do, but my constituents just won't understand." I told him, "So you're telling me they are smart enough to vote for you but not smart enough to understand this?" He ended up voting to pass the bill.
Yet despite such successes, we didn't learn the right political lessons. A few months before the victory on welfare, we lost the battle over the federal government shutdown of 1995, when we were outmaneuvered by Clinton, a masterful political operator. After that fight, too many Republicans apparently concluded that America wanted bigger government. This misreading was the first step on the road away from the Reagan legacy.
We emerged as a wounded party; we stopped trusting the public; and we internalized the wrong lesson. Since the party won the majority in 1994, the GOP Conference had been consistent in requiring offsetting spending cuts for any new spending initiatives. (In fact, during the aftermath of a large Mississippi River flood, Rep. Jim Nussle even waited to find and approve offsets before moving the relief legislation for his own state of Iowa.) But by the summer of 1997, the appropriators -- rightly called the "third party" of Congress -- had begun to pass spending bills with Democrats. As soon as politics superseded policy and principle, the avalanche of earmarks that is crushing the party began.
Now spending is out of control. Rather than rolling back government, we have a new $1.2 trillion Medicare prescription drug benefit, and non-defense discretionary spending is growing twice as fast as it had in the Clinton administration. Meanwhile, Social Security is collapsing while rogue nations are going nuclear and the Middle East is more combustible than ever. Yet Republican lawmakers have taken up such issues as flag burning, Terri Schiavo and same-sex marriage.
If Democrats take control of Congress on Nov. 7, they will form an accidental majority. They are not succeeding because of their principles or policy proposals, but simply because they have kept their heads down. Republicans, fearful of taking on big tasks and challenges, may be defeated next month by a party that offers nothing on the key issues of our day.
Pelosi says she would preside over a moderate Democratic majority, and has committed to raising taxes only as a last resort. But Democratic policy goals such as nationalized health care and low-interest student loans are expensive, and dozens of new spending "priorities" will crop up as soon as the election results are tallied. Democrats have promised that all new spending will be offset by tax increases, so will they raise taxes in the run-up to the 2008 race?
In essence, Pelosi will be forced to choose between a vocal base -- expecting immediate satisfaction on issues such as withdrawing from Iraq, legalizing same-sex marriage and the impeachment of President Bush -- or policies that are tolerable to a majority of Americans. That's quite a dilemma: appeasing a base that has been hungry for political revenge since 2000 and 2004, or alienating moderate and swing voters.
Pelosi has stated that House committee chairmen will be chosen by seniority. This could backfire on the Democrats, because members from the most consistently partisan districts are usually the ones who stick around the longest. Chairmen have the power of the subpoena; Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), the would-be judiciary chairman, has already drafted articles of impeachment for Bush, while others are calling for investigations on the war in Iraq and the federal reaction to Hurricane Katrina. A revenge-hungry Democratic majority, substituting political grudge matches for serious policy, will not remain a majority for long.
How can the Republicans respond?
The leadership must remember that the modern conservative movement is a fusion of social and fiscal conservatives united in their belief in limited government. The party must keep both in the fold. Republicans also need to get back to being the party of big ideas. The greatest threat to American prosperity today is a catastrophic fiscal meltdown resulting from long-term entitlements. Democrats have already lined up behind the solution of raising taxes and reducing benefits. But Americans want more freedom and choice in education, health care and retirement security. Republicans -- too busy dreaming up wedge issues to score cheap points against Democrats -- have lost sight of their broad national agenda.
The likely Republican losses in next week's elections will not constitute a repudiation of the conservative legacy that drove the Reagan presidency and created the Contract With America. To the contrary, it would represent a rejection of big government conservatism. When we get back to being the party of limited government, putting a national agenda ahead of parochial short-term politics, we will again be a party that the American voters will trust to deal with the serious challenges facing our nation.
The 2006 midterm elections will be a success for the Democrats. Republicans will have to manage their own disappointment. Fingers will be pointed, and various villains will be fashioned out of recent events. But the plain fact is that Republicans have been setting the stage for this outcome for nearly a decade, running from themselves and their own principles. We will not find ourselves by conforming to the status quo, but by returning to our Reagan roots.
When we act like us we win. When we act like them we lose. Let's win.
Dick Armey, the House majority leader from 1995 to 2003, is currently chairman of the think tank FreedomWorks.
|
Republican lawmakers have forgotten the party's principles, become enamored with power and position, and begun putting politics over policy.
| 72.173913 | 0.956522 | 4.782609 |
high
|
high
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900753.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900753.html
|
Midterm Vote May Define Rove's Legacy
|
2006103019
|
By many calculations, Democrats are ready to make big gains in the midterm elections, enough to take over the House and possibly the Senate. But White House Chief of Staff Joshua B. Bolten says there is one reason he is feeling upbeat amid so much Republican gloom.
"I believe Karl Rove," Bolten said in an interview in his West Wing office Friday. "Karl Rove, somewhere inside that massive brain of his, has figured out the political landscape more clearly than the entire collection of conventional-wisdom pundits and pollsters in the entire city of Washington."
That was true for two elections in a row, in 2002 and 2004, and President Bush's senior adviser has insisted to West Wing colleagues and party faithful alike that it will be again. But Rove is just eight days from having his genius designation revoked -- or upgraded to platinum status.
Even within Rove's own party, expectations are widespread that the Nov. 7 elections will mark a repudiation for the base-rallying, contrast-drawing brand of politics with which he and Bush have been so closely aligned. But it is a mark of the particular place Rove holds in the Washington psyche that even the most exuberant Democrats are wondering why he seems so confident.
There are two questions. Is Rove just acting cocky as a way of lifting GOP morale, or does he really believe it? And, if the latter, is he deluding himself, or does he once again know something that Democrats do not?
The answers have implications well beyond Rove's reputation. Midterm congressional losses for the GOP, some analysts and Republican veterans believe, could effectively end the Bush presidency two years ahead of schedule.
If the Republicans were to lose control of at least one chamber, those in the party who have long seen Rove's approach as polarizing would feel emboldened. At the same time, a new panel co-chaired by the man who exemplifies the GOP establishment, former secretary of state James A. Baker III, is preparing to chart a new course on the Iraq war -- which polls suggest is the single largest reason for the Republicans' current travails.
"The architect may find his engineering plans were faulty," said one former senior official of past GOP administrations, who has watched the current one with increasing dismay. "Turning out the base this year may not be a winning or a governing strategy. America seems to be looking forward to making things work together, rather than dividing people across the board."
Rove is dismissive of the idea that the Republicans will lose the 15 House seats or six Senate seats required to cede control to the Democrats. On Tuesday, when the White House hosted radio talk show hosts from around the country, Rove did at least 13 interviews. He was on the phone with Washington association executives with what one called "happy talk" about voter-turnout metrics, polling data and campaign funding.
"I look at the individual races as clear-eyed as I can every single day, knowing what we are doing and knowing that we have the capacity to move the resources in if we need to do more," Rove said in a brief telephone interview from the road last week. "Incumbents are hard to defeat. Our candidates by and large have significantly more resources than they have. And we have succeeded in making these races choices between two local candidates."
An object of fascination on both the left and right, Rove at age 55 counts as one of the most celebrated and notorious figures in modern presidential history. Inside the White House, he is a revered figure, known as something of a jokester who will show up at senior staff meetings bearing snacks and promising a coup if Bolten is absent. Ed Rogers, a prominent GOP lobbyist, calls him "the glue" that holds the White House together.
Rove has also acquired something close to cult status among movement conservatives: After the president, Laura Bush and Vice President Cheney, Rove is the most powerful draw on the GOP fundraising circuit. He has headlined more than 100 fundraisers this campaign cycle, raising close to $13 million for Republican candidates and causes.
|
By many calculations, Democrats are ready to make big gains in the midterm elections, enough to take over the House and possibly the Senate. But White House Chief of Staff Joshua B. Bolten says there is one reason he is feeling upbeat amid so much Republican gloom.
| 15.764706 | 1 | 51 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900628.html/
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900628.html/
|
Lobbyists Won't Like What Pelosi Has in Mind
|
2006103019
|
Odds are that lobbying in the House of Representatives is about to get harder.
If Democrats gain the 15 seats they need to win control of the House -- and most analysts think they will -- one of the first things the new House will do is restrict or end outright a slew of lobbying practices.
In a little-publicized statement, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), the House Democratic leader, has promised to change the chamber's rules to reflect the provisions of her not-so-modestly-named Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2006. The months-old measure would, among other things, prohibit House members from accepting gifts and travel from lobbyists or from organizations that employ lobbyists.
The Pelosi bill includes changes not only to House rules but also to federal laws. Any changes in law would have to be approved by the Senate and the president before they could take effect. But the House can alter its own rules anytime, and that's precisely what Pelosi proposes to do as the House's first official act next year -- after it selects her as speaker.
Congress has come close to reining in lobbyists before, and it wound up doing nothing of the kind. Several of the proposals in Pelosi's bill (H.R. 4682, for you wonks out there) were wending their way through the system but died after lawmakers concluded -- incorrectly, it turned out -- that voters didn't care much about congressional "corruption." Pelosi's bill, with small modifications, was tested in the House and lost by just three votes.
Now, spokeswoman Jennifer Crider said, Pelosi is committed to passing "the elements within the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act that are within the House rules." Any variations from the original, Crider said, would be "slight."
That would be a major development for K Street. If the House rules were altered in ways that even came close to Pelosi's preferences, lobbying of House members would be changed significantly and immediately. The new rules would apply as soon as they were approved by a simple majority.
The Senate would be trickier. Election analysts say it's a tossup whether Democrats will control the Senate next year. If it does, Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Democratic Leader Harry M. Reid, said, "Ethics reform will be a priority." But he noted that a two-thirds vote of the Senate is needed to modify its rules, which would make a quick assault on lobbying difficult.
Not so in the House. The biggest change proposed by Pelosi would be the ban on gifts and travel. Pelosi would prohibit House members and their staff from using corporate jets for travel taken as part of their official duties. She would also prevent them from taking anything of value from lobbyists, including meals, tickets and entertainment.
The ban would apply not just to lobbyists' gifts but also to gifts from nongovernmental groups that hire lobbyists. House members and their aides would also be barred from accepting transportation or lodging for any trips that are funded, arranged, requested, planned or even attended by lobbyists.
These are all reactions to the Jack Abramoff scandal. Abramoff infamously took Rep. Robert W. Ney (R-Ohio) on a golfing trip to Scotland on a private jet. The result was a series of convictions on fraud and public corruption charges against Ney, Abramoff and others in federal court this year.
In an attempt to slow the revolving door between the public and private sectors, Pelosi would deprive lawmakers-turned-lobbyists of a few of their congressional perks. She would eliminate the House rule that gives access to the House gym, the House floor and its cloak rooms to former members of Congress who are registered to lobby -- access that was temporarily taken away earlier this year.
|
Odds are that lobbying in the House of Representatives is about to get harder.
| 49.066667 | 1 | 15 |
high
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900765.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900765.html
|
In Election Polls, Response Time Speaks Louder Than Voters' Words
|
2006103019
|
The table was set up at a shopping mall well in advance of the November election. Potential voters were asked to listen to recorded statements about the Republican and the Democrat in the race and then press one of five buttons, which represented a range of opinions from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree."
What the volunteers did not know was that psychologists were measuring something besides their opinions: After each statement about the candidates, a microprocessor started a clock that silently counted off the seconds until the volunteers hit one of the buttons.
Every answer from every volunteer, in other words, measured the time delay in coming up with that opinion.
Beginning the day after the election, psychologists telephoned the volunteers to ask how they had voted. People who had answered quickly were nearly twice as likely to have actually voted for the candidate they said they were going to support, compared with those who were slow in coming up with their answers.
The experiment, conducted ahead of the 1984 presidential election by Russ Fazio, a psychologist now at Ohio State University, was a sober reminder that people's statements about their political choices do not always predict how they end up voting.
A wide variety of subsequent experiments show that measuring time delays when people respond to opinion surveys can tell a political campaign something far more important than what people think at that moment -- it can tell them what a voter is likely to do on Election Day.
"For every second longer they take to respond about who they are going to vote for, the probability they are going to turn out and cast a vote for that party drops by 8 percent," said John Bassili, a psychologist who has studied how response time predicts voting behavior.
"If they pause for five seconds, the chance they will vote for whom they say they are going to vote for is reduced by 40 percent," said Bassili, who works at the University of Toronto at Scarborough.
Pollsters, of course, regularly ask people nowadays not only what they believe but how strongly they believe it. But experiments show that time delays are a better predictor of the strength of people's opinions than the explicit statements people make about themselves.
Fazio and Bassili, who are interested in what such results say about human decision making, do not know how widely such techniques are being used ahead of the midterm elections. (The Washington Post does not measure time delays in its polls.) Both telephone surveys and computer polls make it relatively simple to measure time delays.
Here is why your speed in answering is tied to the certainty of your views: Voters with strong political views readily identify themselves as liberals or conservatives. When asked their views on a subject -- say, gun control or abortion, or which candidate they support in an election -- they view the question through their political self-image and produce a ready answer.
While the idea of being a knee-jerk liberal or conservative may be unfashionable, such group affiliations serve as a very efficient shortcut for the brain to manage complex information.
|
The table was set up at a shopping mall well in advance of the November election. Potential voters were asked to listen to recorded statements about the Republican and the Democrat in the race and then press one of five buttons, which represented a range of opinions from "strongly agree" to...
| 10.589286 | 0.982143 | 54.017857 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900897.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900897.html
|
Lady Sov: Rap Pixie With Puck
|
2006103019
|
So, too, does Jay-Z, the iconic rapper and Def Jam Records president, who's banking on Lady Sovereign to become a stateside pop star. Def Jam will release Lady Sov's compelling full-length debut, "Public Warning," tomorrow, and the expectation is that the album will be a hit here.
As interesting as she may be on CD and MP3, Lady Sovereign is even more captivating onstage. That's not necessarily because of her performance skills, which need sharpening (less "blah-blah-blah"-ing through the lyrics, please, and try for better diction, too), but because of her caustic wit and unpredictable persona, which are at extreme odds with her appearance. Petite and ponytailed, Lady Sov looks not unlike a 12-year-old girl.
But Saturday, performing for the first time in the District, she introduced one song ("The Broom") by saying, "It's about some [expletive] I hit over the head because she was being rude," and another ("9 to 5") by noting that she'd written it "a long time ago, but it still makes sense because I'm still a lazy bastard."
The self-described "biggest midget in the game" also spotted a man in a full-body banana suit in the well-below-capacity crowd and ordered him to roll (yes, roll) onto the stage. She drop-kicked the strange fruit, verbally abused him, threw a bottle of water at him, then shoved him off the stage. Acting most unladylike, she also led the crowd in a hideous call-and-response belching exercise, discussed her private parts in moderate detail, and shattered an empty beer bottle against a wall by way of demanding another drink.
No wonder Lady Sov has been dubbed "Feminem" by the pop press. It's a perfect sobriquet, given her verbal dexterity, self-deprecating irreverence, penchant for antagonizing audiences, and undeniable whiteness. (Before performing "Hoodie," a funky slice of social commentary about street fashion, she sneered and said: "I can't dance to my music. It's pathetic, but I'm white.")
Lady Sov's breakthrough U.S. hit, "Love Me or Hate Me," even sounds like something out of Eminem's playbook with its clever, clownish wordplay, singsongy chorus and devil-may-care attitude as she thanks those who love her and more or less extends a middle finger to those who don't.
Of course, she's doing much less bird-flipping these days: The uproarious video for "Love Me or Hate Me" reached No. 1 on MTV's "Total Request Live," an early indicator that Lady Sov (real name: Louise Harman) very well could succeed where her Brit-rap predecessors such as the Streets and Dizzee Rascal have failed -- which is to say, in America. But she might have to do so without getting much love from hard-core Southern hip-hop fans. Performing the song "Random" on Saturday, Lady Sov mocked the dominant American rap idiom and even alluded to the likes of Chingy and J-Kwon.
As it turns out, though, Lady Sov seems to have more in common with Southern rap than she realizes. "Random" was actually the hopped-up highlight of the hour-long show, a club banger with a chant-along refrain that was delivered with the explosive, frenetic energy that's a hallmark of crunk. Then again, crunk doesn't incorporate London street slang a la this "Random" couplet: "J-Lo's got a batty / Well, you can't see mine cuz I wear my trousers baggy." Nor do Lil Jon and his ilk tend to employ the sorts of electro-rock accents favored by Lady Sov and her counterparts from the Brit-rap "grime" scene.
Backed by a three-piece "band" (deejay, drummer, bassist), Lady Sov didn't just stick to straight-ahead rap during the show. She also attempted a somewhat atonal cover of the Sex Pistols' "Pretty Vacant," for which she had to consult a lyric sheet. Her stab at punk ultimately came across as more amusing than menacing, so put away those Bonnie Rotten references for now.
She also took a genre-jumping run during the encore performance of "Public Warning's" title track, a chaotic, thrashy electro-ska sound clash. At the center of the sonic storm was Lady Sov, who opened the song with a breathtaking blast of rapid-fire rapping before slowing down just enough to announce her royal status.
All hail the new queen of pop? Not exactly. "Crown me the pint-size clown of the town," she declared. Consider it done, shorty.
|
Search Washington, DC area music events and venues from the Washington Post. Features DC, Virginia and Maryland entertainment listings for music news, events, reviews, clubs, and concerts. Visit http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/eg/section/music/ today.
| 24.487179 | 0.435897 | 0.538462 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102600693.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102600693.html
|
Dream Seekers
|
2006103019
|
Imagine, for a moment, that the new president begins his inaugural address by saying he has written down and studied his dreams. With a level head, and without detouring into the psychic or prophetic, he says he hopes to understand himself better by doing some dreamwork.
"I mean, how would that go over in the press?" says Gayle Delaney, who for the past 30 years has striven to mainstream dreamwork -- the practice of sidestepping classical dream interpretation for a more nuanced, personalized meditation on one's dreams.
Delaney has done "The Oprah Winfrey Show" (five times) and "Today." She is the founding president of the International Association for the Study of Dreams. She has written books and virtually shorted out the lecture circuit in the United States and Europe. And still, many people think dreamwork is bosh and bunkum.
"Prejudice against dreaming is huge, in part because so much nonsense is written about it," Delaney says.
Ask any professional with dream experience, and their message is clear: Ignore quick-fix dream "doctors" on TV and the Internet. Toss your conventional dream dictionaries to the curb -- they are too strict, too patrician.
It's common sense, really. Many people dream about cats, but not all dream that cats are manifestations of one's mother, as Freud suggested.
"After all, a dream about a house must mean different things to a carpenter and an arsonist," says Karen Shanor, a clinical psychologist who runs a private practice in Northwest Washington.
Dreams should be worked rather than cut and dried into categories, Shanor, Delaney and others say. No book -- and no one -- can tell you what your dreams mean, since one's dreaming life can be understood only in the context of one's waking life.
As Dr. Phil-ish as it sounds, dreamwork is a matter of self-therapy, of being open to the possibility that reflecting on your dreams may yield some holistic or entertaining insights.
"People would just as soon think that dreams are random activity in your cortex," Delaney says. "There are still huge swaths of movers and shakers whom I have as clients who say, 'If I tell anybody I've seen you, I'll have to deny it.' "
Oh, if those Hewlett-Packard knuckleheads had prefaced their morning meetings with a little dream analysis . . .
That scenario is not so crazy. Business schools and management training programs in England and India use dream therapists to help hone problem-solving skills. Working through a conflict in a dream scenario may have a practical application to one's waking life.
Still, there is bias against dreaming, agrees Clara Hill, a professor in the Psychology Department at the University of Maryland. Some of the bias comes from a lack of understanding dreamwork, particularly the aspects that sound a little paranormal.
Take dream incubation, in which people condition themselves to dream about a certain topic, or prodromal dreaming, in which the body sends signals to the dreaming mind about impending illness. The validity of both is supported by a wealth of anecdotal observation and some supplementary research.
But they still have that faint whiff of the psychic, which turns some people off. Extrasensory powers may exist, but there is no way to gather statistical proof about clairvoyance.
"I think the jury's still out on that," says Deirdre Barrett, a Harvard Medical School professor who uses dreamwork in clinical and classroom settings. "It's a matter of faith. Most of us hear really dramatic anecdotes in that direction, and I think it's possible there's something we don't understand happening in communication outside of what we're consciously aware of. But we also underestimate coincidences."
Prepare yourself for a dramatic (or coincidental?) anecdote: In the '50s, Rita Dwyer was a research chemist at Thiokol Chemical Corp. in Denville, N.J. One day in 1959, rocket fuel exploded in Dwyer's lab, trapping her. Her co-worker, Edward M. Butler, rescued her from the fire. Afterward, Butler told her that he'd had a recurring dream about saving her from a fire and that he did exactly what he had "rehearsed" in the dream when it actually happened.
Because of this event, Dwyer's interest swung from aerospace to inner space, and she founded the Metro D.C. Dream Community in 1983. She and Butler still talk weekly.
"We've been encultured not to pay attention to our dreams: 'Oh, it's just a dream. It doesn't matter,' " says Dwyer, who takes a spiritual and holistic approach to dreamwork. "But they do matter. During the day we pick up materials that we're not aware of, process them at night and come up in the morning with some idea."
What about the skeptics, some of whom might still be reading this story (lips pursed, heads shaking)? How does Hill respond to naysayers who invoke psychiatrist J. Allan Hobson's theory that dreams are products of benign psychosis -- a mostly random firing of neurons?
"They might be, but if you can use them therapeutically and it works, that's great," says Hill, who has conducted about 20 studies on dreaming. "So I get out of the argument that way. The research we've done so far is that people really can gain insight."
|
Many people still think dream analysis is bosh and bunkum, but experts say it can be a valuable form of self-therapy.
| 40.846154 | 0.807692 | 1.807692 |
high
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900927.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900927.html
|
A Race to Run (and Drive, and Walk)
|
2006103019
|
Howard "Call Me Howie" Denis has been hitting the trail for almost 40 years. He first ran for office in 1967, for delegate to a mock constitutional convention. He lost.
This time, he's running to keep his seat on the Montgomery County Council, where he is the lone Republican.
In between: Five dog bites. One gun incident. A win-loss record of 6-5. The emergence and fine-tuning of the "Call Me Howie" Campaign Regimen.
There are folks in this world who love a parade. Denis, 66, loves a campaign. And if he can campaign in a parade? Best of all!
Of course all politicians will say they love the stump: Oh how they love the kissing of babies, the pressing of flesh, the mingling with "real" people.
But judging from the color-coded precinct lists Denis carries in slightly tattered manila folders and the custom arch supports he has fitted into his shoes each campaign season, you get the sense that this guy is the rare politician who really means it. Other politicians may look at their cars and think "transportation." Denis sees opportunity, which is why his silver Chevy Cobalt boasts two American flags flying from the roof and a triangular red and white rooftop sign that proclaims: "Re-Elect Denis," complete with a star to dot the "i."
There he goes up 270, behind the wheel of this un-Montgomery County setup, and other motorists stare, the way they do when they see a clown driving to a children's party.
The "Call Me Howie" Campaign Regimen has not always been a winning strategy; there was that unsuccessful bid for lieutenant governor and the failed tries at the state House of Delegates. Now, in his quest to keeping representing District 1 (Bethesda, Chevy Chase, Potomac and points in between), he's facing a tough challenge from Democrat Roger Berliner. But, says Denis, he understands that if you're going to play the game, you can't be afraid to lose.
Sometimes, he gets the one-fingered salute. Or worse. "I guess I just knocked on the wrong door" is how he perceives why a man once opened his door and waved a gun when the candidate stepped onto his property.
The key, he says, is to start slow. Eighteen months before Election Day, he starts walking precincts. A few here, a few there. Too much walking too soon can result in painful -- really, really painful -- late-night leg cramps. Denis has been there.
About six months before Election Day, he abandons potatoes and bread and embraces the South Beach or Atkins diet. More energy. And less poundage means less strain on his back and feet during those increasingly lengthy precinct walks. This season, he's lost eight pounds.
The way Denis sees it, half the battle is getting people to remember your name, particularly in this election, when the County Council candidates are down near the end of the ballot. That's why he's never been shy about trying something different. He scoffs at those who sniff at his unconventional tactics.
|
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.
| 12.254902 | 0.333333 | 0.372549 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900819.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900819.html
|
O'Malley, Party Try To Stir Base Vote
|
2006103019
|
Baltimore Mayor Martin O'Malley looked at the sea of enthusiastic Democratic supporters at a Silver Spring high school yesterday and was quick to lay claim to his roots.
"It's great to be back in Montgomery County, my home county," O'Malley, who grew up in Bethesda and Rockville, said at the outset of his remarks at a rally at Montgomery Blair High School.
Both Democrats and Republicans are pouring time and resources into capturing votes in Maryland's most populous county, and any hometown claim a candidate can make cannot hurt.
With 273,234 registered Democrats in Montgomery -- more than twice the 125,534 Republicans -- it is a battle the Democrats can feel comfortable about winning. But the margin of victory will probably play a large role in determining the outcome of both O'Malley's gubernatorial race against Republican Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. and the U.S. Senate race between Democratic Rep. Benjamin L. Cardin and Republican Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele.
Ehrlich and Steele appeared in the county last week and say they hope to improve on their performance in 2002.
Yesterday's rally -- held before several hundred cheering and sign-waving supporters -- was part of an effort to mobilize the Democratic base and to reach out to Democratic voters who do not normally vote in non-presidential election years. O'Malley was joined by all of the statewide candidates, including Cardin, as well as a large roster of county Democrats.
Montgomery County Executive Douglas M. Duncan, appearing with O'Malley for the first time since he dropped out of the Democratic primary for governor in June citing depression, was given a rousing welcome. In his remarks, Duncan criticized a new television ad for Ehrlich that includes disparaging remarks the county executive made about O'Malley before dropping out of the race.
Duncan called the ad an attempt to "mislead the public" into believing he supported Ehrlich. "If they got quotes from me about Ehrlich, you couldn't print them," Duncan added.
Ehrlich, who was shown to be trailing O'Malley by 10 percentage points in a Washington Post poll published yesterday, said his campaign was making a vigorous play for the Montgomery vote.
"People tend to look at Prince George's County and Montgomery County as places a Republican is just not going to win," Ehrlich said Thursday during a visit to a Wheaton police station, where he announced funding for programs to track sexual predators. "However, you still need to hit your targets in order to win."
Although Republicans acknowledge that it is impractical to expect to win a majority of votes in Montgomery, they want to do better than in the last election, when Ehrlich won 38.3 percent of the vote against former lieutenant governor Kathleen Kennedy Townsend (D).
"We've picked up," Ehrlich said. However, the Post poll of 1,000 likely voters yesterday showed Ehrlich with no greater support in the Washington suburbs than he had in 2002.
But Ehrlich said the endorsement he received last week from the Washington Post might help him win over voters in the Washington suburbs. The governor said his positions on the environment, education and transportation -- including the intercounty connector -- have won him support.
"Last time, it was a very tough thing," Ehrlich said. "I was a Baltimore area congressman, unknown around here, running against Bobby Kennedy's daughter in the Washington suburbs. This time, I've spent a lot of time here."
O'Malley portrayed the governor yesterday as out of touch with the Montgomery electorate, hammering Ehrlich for saying two years ago that multiculturalism is "bunk."
"Anybody who doesn't think multiculturalism is good for America, come to Montgomery County," O'Malley said.
Democrats are hoping the presence of two Montgomery candidates on the statewide ticket -- State's Attorney Douglas F. Gansler, the nominee for attorney general, and Del. Peter Franchot, the nominee for comptroller -- will bring out voters who will also support O'Malley and Cardin.
In an effort to blunt the impact of the Post poll, Ehrlich's campaign sent a memo to supporters via e-mail suggesting the contest was much tighter. It said the most recent survey conducted by Ehrlich's pollster found O'Malley leading Ehrlich 46 percent to 45 percent. One percent favored third-party candidates, the memo said, and 8 percent were undecided.
"We are sending this information to you because we are convinced that recent public polls have been wildly off the mark and run counter to what we have been seeing," the Ehrlich campaign e-mail said.
Meanwhile, O'Malley won the endorsement of the Baltimore Sun yesterday. The Democratic candidate also touted the results of the Post poll. In an appearance in Arbutus, Ehrlich's home town, O'Malley acknowledged that polls are only "snapshots in time."
"The nice thing about this snapshot is it's only nine days out and we're 10 points up," O'Malley said.
His comments came at an event where O'Malley won the endorsements of two former leaders of Democrats for Ehrlich, a group formed in 2002 to support the then-congressman.
"I am ashamed, embarrassed and feel very foolish for what I did," said Wayne Frazier, the group's former chairman.
Staff researcher Rena Kirsch contributed to this report.
|
Baltimore Mayor Martin O'Malley looked at the sea of enthusiastic Democratic supporters at a Silver Spring high school yesterday and was quick to lay claim to his roots.
| 35.068966 | 1 | 29 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/30/AR2006103000002.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/30/AR2006103000002.html
|
Romo's the Star of Cowboys' Upset Victory
|
2006103019
|
CHARLOTTE, Oct. 29 -- The Dallas Cowboys handed out a $25 million contract to Terrell Owens in the offseason for the controversial wide receiver to be the savior of the franchise and, perhaps, of Bill Parcells's tenure as their coach.
They may have found their savior Sunday night, but it wasn't Owens. Quarterback Tony Romo, a former undrafted rookie making his first NFL start, kept their season from unraveling by directing the Cowboys to a 35-14 triumph over the Carolina Panthers at Bank of America Stadium.
"My hat's off to my kids tonight," Parcells said. "They fought back. That was a good win for us. We needed it badly."
Romo completed 24 of 36 passes for 270 yards as the Cowboys (4-3) moved into second place in the NFC East, a game behind the New York Giants. Romo threw a costly interception as the Panthers (4-4) raced to a 14-0 lead in the first quarter on touchdown runs by tailback DeShaun Foster and wide receiver Steve Smith.
But the young quarterback steadied himself and led the Cowboys to 35 straight points, throwing a touchdown pass to tight end Jason Witten and connecting with Owens on a two-point conversion pass. The Cowboys took the lead for good on tailback Julius Jones's fourth-quarter touchdown run following a fumble by the Panthers on a kickoff.
"It's self-explanatory," Owens said. "You saw the game. He managed the game and put the ball where it needed to be, and everybody played together as a group."
Owens was Romo's favorite target, with nine catches for 107 yards. Witten added six catches for 80 yards, and Jones ran for 92 yards on 24 carries. Jones's backup, Marion Barber, had two late touchdown runs after a pair of turnovers by Panthers quarterback Jake Delhomme, first an interception and then a fumble.
"We haven't found a way to finish a game yet, and this was probably as poor of a performance in the fourth quarter that I've been associated with," Panthers Coach John Fox said. "I apologize to all of the people who paid for tickets to be at the game."
Parcells switched to Romo at halftime of last Monday night's loss to the New York Giants at Texas Stadium, after a first half in which veteran quarterback Drew Bledsoe was sacked four times and threw an interception on the doorstep of the Giants' goal line. But Romo threw three second-half interceptions, one on the opening play of the third quarter and another that was returned for a fourth-quarter touchdown. Still, Parcells decided Tuesday to start Romo and announced the decision Wednesday, hoping that the younger quarterback's mobility would be useful playing behind the Cowboys' sometimes-leaky offensive line.
Romo completed a pass to Owens on the Cowboys' first offensive play Sunday, and he scrambled for a first down the second time they had the ball. But the Cowboys' opening drive ended with a punt, and they got nothing on their second possession when kicker Mike Vanderjagt missed a 48-yard field goal attempt. The ball clanked off the right upright.
The Panthers, to that point, had done nothing on offense. They went three plays and out on each of their first two possessions. But Delhomme finally found the strike zone on the Panthers' third drive. He had four completions, plus a throw that resulted in a pass-interference penalty on the Cowboys, to set up Foster's one-yard touchdown plunge.
Romo made his first big mistake, throwing a pass up for grabs in Owens's direction while under pressure. Cornerback Chris Gamble made a juggling interception, just managing to get his feet in bounds after finally grabbing the ball. That put the Panthers back in business at the Cowboys 24-yard line, and they needed only one play to cash in. Smith took the ball from Delhomme on an end-around and dashed untouched into the corner of the end zone.
"You never want to get in that situation, especially in your first start," Romo said. "But it's nice to be able to come back from that."
The Cowboys got a good kickoff return by Tyson Thompson and a personal foul on the Panthers for a hit out of bounds, and Romo directed them 47 yards for a touchdown. The score came on a three-yard pass to Witten. The Cowboys had a chance to scoop up a Panthers' fumble on the ensuing kickoff but botched it. They did force a punt, though, and got Vanderjagt's 38-yard field goal in the final minute of the first half to pull to within 14-10. The Panthers blocked one kick by Vanderjagt, but he got another chance because Fox had called a timeout just before the snap.
The Cowboys got a break in the third quarter when Panthers wide receiver Keyshawn Johnson, a Parcells favorite who was released by Dallas in the offseason to make room for Owens, dropped an on-target throw from Delhomme after he'd beaten cornerback Anthony Henry for what might have been a touchdown. The Cowboys were moving the ball better in the third quarter but weren't converting.
They got a first down at the Carolina 8 early in the fourth quarter after a pair of clutch catches by Witten. But on third down from the 6, Romo's pass was just wide of Witten and the ball bounced off the tight end's fingertips. The Cowboys had to settle for Vanderjagt's 24-yard field goal that narrowed their deficit to 14-13. The Panthers' Brad Hoover lost a fumble on the kickoff, and Jones sprinted 14 yards through the middle of the Carolina defense on the next play to put Dallas in front. Romo's two-point conversion pass to Owens upped the lead to 21-14.
|
Get sports news,schedules,rosters for Washington Redskins,Wizards,Orioles,United,Mystics,Nationals. Features Washington DC,Virginia,Maryland high school/college teams,Wilbon and Kornheiser from The Washington Post.
| 27.02381 | 0.404762 | 0.452381 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900623.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900623.html
|
Forecast for Federal IT Spending: 'Moderate With a Caveat'
|
2006103019
|
The federal government's spending on information technology is likely to increase only moderately over the next five years, according to an IT industry group.
The Government Electronics and Information Technology Association, however, also predicts that government contractors will find growing opportunities in such programs as those involving information sharing, outsourcing and cross-agency initiatives.
GEIA, an Arlington-based association of government contractors including defense companies, information technology services providers and telecommunications companies, presented the forecast at its annual conference on Oct. 18 and 19 in Falls Church. The predictions are based on 150 interviews of agency officials as well as information culled from reports that agencies are required to file with the Office of Management and Budget.
The report also draws on the association's forecast database and data provided by market research firm Eagle Eye Inc. of Fairfax from the government's Federal Procurement Data System. FPDS draws its data from spending reports filed by government agencies.
GEIA expects that federal IT spending will grow to $74.1 billion in current dollars in fiscal 2012 from $64.7 billion in 2007. During that period, the association says, Defense Department information technology spending will have a compound annual growth rate of 2.8 percent, while civilian agency IT spending will have a rate of 2.7 percent.
"The forecast going forward is moderate, but moderate with a caveat," said Payton Smith of Booz Allen Hamilton, who presented information on the overall information technology budget.
GEIA cited several factors likely to have an impact on information technology spending: First, the report noted, there are unlikely to be many new initiatives because President Bush's term will be drawing to a close. For the next two years, the forecast said, his priorities will continue to be the war on terror, homeland security, border patrol, health IT and immigration.
Second, the federal deficit will put pressure on agencies to reduce expenditures, including those on information technology. Government agencies will have to decide whether or not to shut down their older systems. They also will wrestle with recruiting, retaining and training acquisition professionals, particularly as the number of people eligible to retire increases. Outsourcing, an objective of the Bush administration's management agenda since 2002, will become an even bigger issue, the forecast states.
Third, GEIA reported, the Office of Management and Budget is the key to IT investment. Agencies will need to comply with several procurement reform laws such as the Government Performance and Results Act, the 1996 Clinger-Cohen Act and the Federal Information Security Management Act, which require agencies to be more efficient with how they spend their contracting dollars and to build business cases to justify their spending.
Federal agencies continue to focus on consolidating redundant systems, creating cross-agency initiatives, outsourcing IT functions and services, and coordinating their systems with other agencies, the conference participants noted. "IT spending is really becoming program-focused," Smith said, as the government concentrates on buying solutions that apply across an entire agency and less on isolated products and services.
GEIA offered a list of civilian agency highlights it expects will drive IT growth over the five-year forecast period. Among the predictions: Health and Human Services spending will grow from $5.6 billion to $7.3 billion. At the Treasury Department, the IRS has the bulk of the IT budget, some of which will go for homeland security-related projects, such as tracking terrorist funds. At the Commerce Department, spending is being driven by preparations for the 2010 Census.
Finally, natural and manmade disasters also could affect market opportunities, forcing affected agencies to reallocate their budgets. "Many of the markets we serve place industry in an event-driven environment," said John Williams of Northrop Grumman Corp.'s IT sector.
Roseanne Gerin is a staff writer with Washington Technology. For news on this and other government contracting news go tohttp://www.washingtontechnology.com.
|
The federal government's spending on information technology is likely to increase only moderately over the next five years, according to an IT industry group.
| 27.555556 | 1 | 27 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900708.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900708.html
|
Honeybee Genome May Shed Light on Social Evolution
|
2006103019
|
Bees and people have a lot in common.
We both live in groups and snuggle with others when cold. We both know that staying clean helps prevent disease. We both prepare food for others and leave home to get it even when we aren't hungry. We both can communicate through dancing.
Of course, there are differences.
Bees are an inch long. They copulate while flying. Each winter, the females kick the males out of the house to die.
So to what extent do genes explain our two wildly different evolutionary journeys? Biologists now have a better way of exploring that question, and a whole lot of other ones.
Last week, the Honeybee Genome Sequencing Consortium announced that it had finished copying out the genetic message of Apis mellifera , the world's most important pollinator, maker of nature's best-known sweet food, and object of human fascination and delight for eons. The honeybee becomes the third insect to have its genome fully transcribed, preceded by the fruit fly drosophila and the malaria mosquito anopheles. A flour-eating beetle, an aphid and a wasp are next in line.
The work was done by 150 people in about 20 countries over the past three years. The huge mass of data -- along with that from the other species -- will help sketch a picture of what it means to be an insect, as well as what it means to be a honeybee.
Insects are the most diverse group of animals on Earth, with about 925,000 identified species. The genetic exploration may eventually shed light on the biology of togetherness and cooperation, which bees and people both discovered in the 600 million years since they last shared a common ancestor.
"We can use this genome to go looking for any and every gene that might be involved in the evolution of sociality. But that is down the road," said Hugh M. Robertson, an entomologist at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
In a long paper in the journal Nature and several shorter ones in Science, Robertson and his colleagues describe their initial insights on the honeybee genome, which is full of both surprises and confirmed hunches.
The honeybee has 10,000 to 15,000 genes arrayed on 16 chromosomes, compared with humans' estimated 24,000 genes and 24 chromosomes (22 regular ones and two sex chromosomes). Comparisons with the fruit-fly and mosquito genomes suggest that bees evolved more slowly than either of those other insects. Curiously, some bee genes -- notably the ones responsible for internal "clocks" and circadian rhythms -- are more similar to mammals' genes than flies'.
But the most interesting insights so far come from discoveries of what parts of the bee's genome have been enriched, ignored or discarded by the evolutionary force of natural selection.
|
Science news from The Washington Post. Read about the latest breakthroughs in technology,medicine and communications.
| 26.75 | 0.5 | 0.6 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/30/AR2006103000455.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/30/AR2006103000455.html
|
Milan Court Orders Berlusconi Tried
|
2006103019
|
MILAN, Italy -- A court Monday ordered former Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi to stand trial on charges of corruption along with the estranged husband of Britain's culture minister.
Berlusconi is accused of ordering the payment in 1997 of at least $600,000 to his co-defendant British lawyer David Mills, a close friend, in exchange for the lawyer's false testimony in two trials against Berlusconi. Both deny the allegations.
Mills is married to British Culture Secretary Tessa Jowell. They formally separated in March.
Judge Fabio Paparella issued the ruling after refusing a defense motion to remove himself from the case because he is presiding over a separate case charging Berlusconi and Mills with false accounting, embezzlement and tax fraud in the purchase by Berlusconi's Mediaset empire of TV rights for U.S. movies.
The new case is set to go to trial March 13. If convicted, Mills and Berlusconi could be sentenced to between three and eight years in prison, according to prosecutors.
Berlusconi's lawyer, Niccolo Ghedini, said the decision to open another trial against Berlusconi was expected, but he expressed disappointment the judge didn't wait for a higher court to decide on whether he should step aside.
"Everything went as we thought it would. It is like scripted," Ghedini said outside the courtroom.
He noted that two requests were pending to higher courts for Paparella to step aside in the case _ leaving open the possibility if one or the other succeeds that the charges will supersede their statute of limitations, which runs out in February 2008. "This is not what we want. We want an acquittal," Ghedini said.
Mills' Italian lawyer, Federico Cecconi, said there was no evidence to support the charges.
"In the trial we will highlight that there is no evidence that there has been illicit payments on the part of Mediaset group," Cecconi said.
Berlusconi has a long history of legal troubles linked to his business interests based in Milan.
In past cases, he was either acquitted or cleared of the charges because the statute of limitations had expired. He has always maintained his innocence.
Associated Press writer Milena Vercellino in Milan contributed to this report.
|
MILAN, Italy -- A court Monday ordered former Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi to stand trial on charges of corruption along with the estranged husband of Britain's culture minister.
| 13.580645 | 1 | 31 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900767.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900767.html
|
D.C. Paid For Training Schools Say Didn't Occur
|
2006103019
|
In September 2005, Equal Access in Education billed the city $76,250 to train math and reading teachers in techniques to boost student performance at five D.C. public charter schools that failed to meet academic targets.
But principals at four of the schools (the fifth one has closed) say that they never heard of Equal Access and that their teachers never received training from the company.
"It boggles my mind that this could have happened," said Norman Johnson, executive director of Integrated Design & Electronics Academy Public Charter School (IDEA) in Northeast Washington. "We certainly needed those services."
Federal authorities are investigating whether Equal Access was connected to Brenda L. Belton, the former executive director of the Board of Education's charter schools office. The company submitted invoices requesting that payments be sent to 26 Underwood Pl. NW, the address of a duplex formerly owned by Belton and currently owned by her daughter Lindsay Holmes. In May, the FBI raided Belton's office and home as well as the Underwood Place property as part of its investigation into the possible misuse of public funds by the board's charter school oversight office.
Documents obtained by The Washington Post through the Freedom of Information Act show that Equal Access charged the city at least $395,000 between 2002 and 2006 to monitor charter schools to ensure they were meeting financial and academic targets and to provide teacher training. One Equal Access invoice indicated that in addition to the IDEA charter school, four other charter schools -- Booker T. Washington in Northwest, Elsie Whitlow Stokes in Northwest, Options in Northeast and the now-closed Jos-Arz Therapeutic in Northeast -- had received training services. But officials at the three open schools said Equal Access was not one of their vendors.
In some of the documents requesting payments, Equal Access did not specify which schools were supposed to have received the services.
"I think everybody associated with this mess should pass 'Go' and go straight to jail," school board President Peggy Cooper Cafritz said when told about the five schools that did not receive services detailed in invoices from Equal Access.
Next month, Cafritz said, the school board will consider hiring a university or a nonprofit group to manage the 18 charter schools it currently oversees.
According to school and city officials who are seeking answers about the charter funds, Belton, who was fired this month, had worked without many of the checks and balances imposed on other agency executives.
The school board gave Belton, who at times supervised five employees, broad authority to issue hundreds of thousands of dollars in contracts to consultants to monitor the schools under the school board's charge and to help those failing to meet academic targets. For many of those contracts, Belton used a special school system fund that allowed her to bypass city regulations that require agencies seeking contract work to put potential vendors through an extensive vetting and bidding process.
For a vendor to be paid, agencies must submit an invoice and a form verifying that the service or merchandise was satisfactorily provided.
"There are no excuses for apparently misappropriating funds or giving funds to consultants without a work product," said D.C. Council member Kathy Patterson (D-Ward 3), who chairs the education committee and first alerted the school board to a potential problem with Belton. "The board had a responsibility to supervise that office, and the board failed to do so."
|
In September 2005, Equal Access in Education billed the city $76,250 to train math and reading teachers in techniques to boost student performance at five D.C. public charter schools that failed to meet academic targets.
| 17.184211 | 1 | 38 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/28/AR2006102800808.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/28/AR2006102800808.html
|
Gay Couples' Adopted Kids May Be Baptized, Catholic Draft Says
|
2006103019
|
Children adopted by gay couples may be baptized in the Roman Catholic Church, even though the church does not support such adoptions, calling them "a pastoral concern," according to new guidelines for ministering to gay men and lesbians that will be presented to U.S. bishops next month in Baltimore.
The 23-page draft document affirms traditional church teachings on same-sex issues, such as forbidding the blessing of same-sex unions or marriages, and addresses some relatively new issues, such as discrimination against and harassment of gay men and lesbians.
The document, "Ministry to Persons with a Homosexual Inclination: Guidelines for Pastoral Care," marks the first time in nearly 10 years that U.S. bishops have addressed such ministry in detail. Bishops will debate and vote on the guidelines at their annual fall meeting, Nov. 13 to 16, in Baltimore.
An early draft of the guidelines welcomes celibate gay men and lesbians to take part in parish life while asserting the church's "right to deny roles of service to those whose behavior violates her teaching." Public announcements of one's sexual orientation "are not helpful and should not be encouraged," the draft cautions, and it says church ministers must not bless same-sex unions or marriages or promote them in any way.
The bishops' Secretariat for Doctrine and Pastoral Practices took four years to draft the document.
|
Children adopted by gay couples may be baptized in the Roman Catholic Church, even though the church does not support such adoptions, calling them "a pastoral concern," according to new guidelines for ministering to gay men and lesbians that will be presented to U.S. bishops next month in Baltimore.
| 4.763636 | 1 | 55 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/27/AR2006102700490.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006103019id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/27/AR2006102700490.html
|
What's the Deal?
|
2006103019
|
· Book a ski vacation at Quebec's Mont Tremblant by Nov. 15 and receive discounts ranging from 15 to 30 percent . For example, early-season stays through Dec. 21 net a 30 percent discount; a three-day package with lodging at La Tour des Voyageurs and ski lift tickets starts at $401 per couple (plus $83 taxes). Three-night minimum required; cheapest prices based on Sunday-Tuesday arrival. Info: 888-738-1777; http://www.tremblant.ca/bigdeal .
· A luxury rail trip between San Antonio and Mexico City has been discounted by $400 per couple when booked by Dec. 15. The seven-night "GrandLuxe Mexico" itinerary, offered by GrandLuxe Rail Journeys (formerly American Orient Express), starts at $2,945 per person double on January-March departures. Package includes four nights' hotel, three nights' train accommodations, sightseeing and meals. Info: 800-320-4206, http://www.grandluxerail.com/ .
· Adventures by Disney, Disney's guided tour company, has discounts of up to $900 per person on select tours booked by Dec. 2. For example, a six-night "Taste of Tuscany" tour between Rome and Tuscany with departures June-September is $1,799 per person double after discount. Tour includes lodging, most meals, motor coach transportation, guide and sightseeing; airfare is extra. Info: 877-728-7282, http://www.adventuresbydisney.com/ .
· Peter Deilmann Cruises (800-348-8287, http://www.deilmann-cruises.com/ ) is offering free airfare, free shore excursions and free hotel nights for its Canary Islands sailings in March aboard the MS Deutschland. The six-night itinerary, for example, includes free air from Washington (about $684 if booked separately); two nights at the four-star Reina Isabel in Las Palmas (value about $266); and shore excursions worth about $500. Cruise price starts at $3,140 per person double (plus $125 port charges and $265 air taxes and fuel surcharge).
· Cruise West sailings in Alaska have been discounted by $100 to $1,000 per person. For example, an eight-night "Wilderness Inside Passage" cruise sailing before June 15 nets a $400 savings if deposit is received by Dec. 8 ($500 if paid in full by Dec. 8); early-booking price starts at $3,799 per person double including taxes. Info: 888-851-8133, http://www.cruisewest.com/ .
· McCabe Bremer Travel in McLean has discounts on a 12-night "Adriatic Passage" cruise from Istanbul to Venice aboard the Crystal Serenity departing May 25. Fare starts at $4,514 per person double including taxes; passengers also receive $100 per stateroom shipboard credit, a cocktail reception and day of sightseeing on Corfu. Cruise fare alone is listed at $4,654. Info: 703-762-5043, http://www.mccabebremer.com/ .
· Take an extra $50 off World Traveller Plus fares to London on British Airways. The round-trip fare for the premium seat is $960 including taxes after discount. Purchase by Nov. 13 and complete travel by March 25. Fourteen-day advance purchase required; cheapest fares for Monday-Wednesday travel. Fare not offered Dec. 19-24. Must be booked online at http://www.britishairways.com/ ; registration required.
· Cathay Pacific's "Deal of the Month" is a round-trip fare of $789 from New York to Hong Kong; taxes are an extra $72. You must depart Nov. 1-30 with a maximum stay of 30 days. Fare on other airlines starts at about $1,090. Purchase by Oct. 31 at http://www.cathayusa.com/dotm .
· A 10-night "Four Corners of China" tour that visits Beijing, Xi'an, Guilin and Shanghai is priced at $2,395 per person double (plus $239 taxes). Experience Asia is offering the deal, which includes round-trip air from New York, three domestic flights in China, 10 nights' lodging, most meals, seven days of sightseeing, a day cruise on the Li River and transfers. Six departures at discounted price are offered March-October . Priced separately, air and hotel alone would be $2,455 per person. Info: 877-481-2446, http://www.experienceasia.net/ .
· Club ABC Tours has a three-night package to Stockholm that includes round-trip air from Newark, three nights at the Clarion Hotel, transfers and a city sightseeing tour for $499 per person double (plus $190 taxes and fees). The deal is good for departures Nov. 23 and Dec. 7. Priced separately, the trip would cost $557 for air and $225 a night hotel. Membership in Club ABC is $30 per year. Info: 888-868-7722, http://www.clubabc.com/ .
Prices were verified and available on Thursday afternoon when the Travel section went to press. However, deals sell out quickly and are not guaranteed to be available. Restrictions such as day of travel, blackout dates and advance-purchase requirements sometimes apply.
|
Big savings for cruises to the Canary Islands, flights to Hong Kong and packages to Stockholm.
| 53.555556 | 0.888889 | 1.444444 |
high
|
medium
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900926.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900926.html
|
Golan Heights Land, Lifestyle Lure Settlers
|
2006102919
|
KATZRIN On the edge of this growing Jewish settlement, which bills itself as "the city of water and wine," Moti Bar is building a stylish microbrewery and restaurant in a glass and stone shopping mall that opened a few months ago. His venture, all the way down to the imported copper brew tanks, is a bet that Israel will remain in the Golan Heights for years to come.
The high-end beer and view of the Sea of Galilee are designed to appeal to Israeli yuppies, who are being encouraged more aggressively than ever to move to this rugged plateau seized from Syria in the 1967 Middle East war. Dozens of newly graded home sites stretch westward, and a large industrial park called Golantech is emerging a few miles from Bar's pub.
"We're living our life as if we'll be here forever," said Bar, 42, who commutes from the nearby community of Kanaf. "And I don't think there is any reason why we should leave."
Israel's summer war with Hezbollah, the Lebanese Shiite militia that acts as Syria's military proxy, has revived the decades-old contest over the Golan Heights. This latest phase is also being shaped by demographic changes epitomized by this expanding settlement.
Israel annexed the Golan Heights in 1981 and offered its Arab residents citizenship in the Jewish state, something it has not extended to Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The annexation was not recognized internationally, however, and most of the Arabs here refused the offer as a protest against what they consider an illegal occupation. But they do have residency rights that allow them to travel throughout Israel and vote in local elections.
Most of the Arabs in Golan are Druze, members of a sect that split from Islam centuries ago and has large followings in Lebanon, Syria and Israel. Unlike most of the Druze in Israel, those here identify themselves as Arabs and do not serve in the Israeli military. The vast majority consider themselves citizens of Syria, although a small percentage support Israel's presence here.
For years, the Israeli military discouraged civilian settlement in Golan, particularly along the frontier with Syria, for fear the area would emerge again as a battlefield. Some small Israeli settlements were established there anyway, but in the past 15 years all new growth has occurred within existing settlement boundaries rather than in new areas.
The pace has picked up in recent years. Now, for the first time, the number of Jewish settlers in Golan may soon exceed the nearly 20,000 Arab residents whose families remained here after the war. The milestone may have already been passed, Arab leaders concede, with 400 Jewish families moving into Golan each year.
Since the Lebanon war ended on Aug. 14, settler leaders have launched a $250,000 advertising campaign to attract young Israelis with the lure of free land and a lifestyle ethic that blends Marlboro Country, Napa Valley and the X Games. Their goal is to double the Jewish population in Golan to 40,000 within a decade through an appeal that emphasizes cowboy hats over skullcaps.
At the same time, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has called for new negotiations on Golan, emboldened by Israel's inconclusive fight against Hezbollah. For years, the Syrian government has helped arm and fund Hezbollah to strengthen its own hand in talks on the region. The Syrian army, meanwhile, has maintained quiet along the heavily mined frontier.
In a recent interview with the German magazine Der Spiegel, Assad added an ominous note to his previous calls for talks, warning that "when the hope disappears, then maybe war really is the only solution." In response, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert called Golan "an inseparable part of the state of Israel."
"No doubt the steadfastness of the resistance in Lebanon, ending the legend of the undefeatable Israeli army, has strengthened our belief that the end of the occupation is closer than ever," said Hail Abu Jabal, 62, a Druze political leader in the town of Majdal Shams who spent seven years in Israeli prisons for campaigning against Israel's hold on Golan. "But expanding these settlements is a mistake, making peace more distant and violent confrontation closer."
|
KATZRIN On the edge of this growing Jewish settlement, which bills itself as "the city of water and wine," Moti Bar is building a stylish microbrewery and restaurant in a glass and stone shopping mall that opened a few months ago. His venture, all the way down to the imported copper brew tanks, is...
| 13.032258 | 0.983871 | 60.016129 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/28/AR2006102800803.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/28/AR2006102800803.html
|
In Teens' Web World, MySpace Is So Last Year
|
2006102919
|
Teen Web sensation MySpace became so big so fast, News Corp. spent $580 million last year to buy it. Then Google Inc. struck a $900 million deal, primarily to advertise with it. But now Jackie Birnbaum and her fellow English classmates at Falls Church High School say they're over MySpace.
"I think it's definitely going down -- a lot of my friends have deleted their MySpaces and are more into Facebook now," said Birnbaum, a junior who spends more time on her Facebook profile, where she messages and shares photos with other students in her network.
From the other side of the classroom, E.J. Kim chimes in that in the past three months, she's gone from slaving over her MySpace profile up to four hours a day -- decorating it, posting notes and pictures to her friends' pages -- to deleting the whole thing.
"I've grown out of it," Kim said. "I thought it was kind of pointless."
Such is the social life of teens on the Internet: Powerful but fickle. Within several months' time, a site can garner tens of millions of users who, just as quickly, might flock to the next place, making it hard for corporate America to make lasting investments in whatever's hot now.
MySpace is one of the most wildly successful sites in recent years, amassing 124 million profiles and transforming teen life online during its 2 1/2 years of existence. The site functions like a cross between a diary, e-mail program and photo album where content can be shared with friends, whose pictures appear on a member's profile.
One key measure of a site's popularity is the amount of time a user stays on the site. Tracked over time, such usage data for older networking sites frequented by young people show how popularity gradually rises then falls, like an inchworm's back.
Take Xanga, the hot social networking site before MySpace: In October 2002, the typical Xanga user spent an average of 1 hour and 39 minutes a month on the site, a figure that declined steadily, reaching only 11 minutes last month, according to Nielsen-NetRatings. Friendster, another older site, hit its first usage peak of 1 hour and 51 minutes in October 2003, and then hit another peak of 3 hours and 3 minutes in February 2006. But last month, the average user was on Friendster for a mere 7 minutes.
MySpace usage ramped up heavily during its first year and a half, hitting 2 hours and 25 minutes in October last year. Then it dropped to about 2 hours and held relatively steady there for the past year. Facebook, a younger networking site, is still on a gradual incline, reaching 1 hour and 9 minutes last month .
It's hard to make an online audience stick. Most Internet services are free and compete for a viewer's time, which most sites then try to parlay into advertising dollars. The more time someone spends on a site, the more ads they see. The successful sites engender habits among their users, but users can -- and historically have -- defected to other services for any number of reasons.
The high school English class cites several reasons for backing off of MySpace: Creepy people proposition them. Teachers and parents monitor them. New, more alluring free services comes along, so they collectively jump ship.
The relatively short lifecycle of a popular site is a terrifying prospect for companies like Google Inc., which this month spent $1.65 billion in stock to acquire the Internet's latest grass-roots favorite, year-old YouTube, whose popularity Google hopes to harness as a loyal video audience.
|
Teen Web sensation MySpace became so big so fast, News Corp. spent $580 million last year to buy it. Then Google Inc. struck a $900 million deal, primarily to advertise with it. But now Jackie Birnbaum and her fellow English classmates at Falls Church High School say they're over MySpace.
| 12.241379 | 1 | 58 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/28/AR2006102800009.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/28/AR2006102800009.html
|
Don't Give Up the Flagship
|
2006102919
|
Amid all the bad news about the future of newspapers -- and there is plenty -- a good news story quietly has been building: Online newspaper revenue is growing.
For those of you who are faithful readers of the ink-on-paper versions of the news (and those of us employed by the companies who produce them), this is a good thing.
Yes, it's true that consumers are moving from newspapers to newspaper Web sites (and beyond) for their daily fix of current events and information for living -- movie listings, commuter help, classifieds. And there's no sign that that trend will change anytime soon. After all, high-speed Internet connections in our homes, at the corner coffee shop and even on our cellphones are only getting better -- making the online consumption of news and information that much easier.
Here's why this is important for those of us who don't want to stop reading (or, in my case, writing) in-depth, analytical news pieces: A significant number of the stories you read on the Web are created by the staff members at the dead-tree versions of newspapers.
That makes for an urgent race in the newspaper business as the "print" side of the business tries to maintain its revenue to support its staff while the "Web" side of the business tries to bring in enough money to support and build its own staff.
For instance, the good news: In its recent quarterly earnings, the New York Times Co. said that overall company revenue was down but that revenue from the company's online divisions, such as the Times' Web site, was up. The problem: Online revenue was only about 9 percent of the company's total revenue pie. If the Times' Web site -- or any newspaper Web site -- were forced to hire a staff and fill its pages with only the revenue it made, it would look a lot like the Web site your daughter made for a class project. Except not as impressive.
For you guys, the news consumers, the news actually is very good: Everyone is pouring money into Web news and information. You have more choices now than ever before, and that will only increase in coming years.
Those guys at Popular Science will do anything to get you to read about science. (And, clearly, I'll do anything to get you to read to the end of this column.)
They're taking what they know best and applying it to what you seem to love most: amateur videos on the Web that feature things that shouldn't amuse us but do -- people falling, stuff blowing up, things crashing into each other.
In a new blog called the Breakdown, the physics experts over at PopSci will analyze a mishap in an online video.
They'll tell us all about how angular momentums, pivot points, gravitational pulls and external forces play into the slips and falls and crashes.
What better way to spark some interest in the blog than showcasing a (fully-clothed) young woman attempting a clumsy pole dance in a nightclub. She grabs the pole in her right hand and tries to spin -- flinging herself from the stage.
The PopSci folks apply Newtonian physics to the dancer (legal in some states) and compare her to a figure skater who pulls her arms in, speeding her rotation out of control.
"A hand rotating away from the pole cannot continue to hold onto the pole, and without that grip, our dancer loses her balance in a most sudden and undignified fashion. Lesson learned: Newton can still represent," the blogger wrote.
But the people who viewed the clip and offered their comments challenged the experts, asking whether her high heels or the likelihood that she was toasted factored into the fall.
Suddenly, science class is a discussion again.
As for Popular Science, the Breakdown blog may be on to something if the goal is to generate some interest in the laws of physics -- even if it means turning a science lecture into "America's Funniest Home Videos."
Check out the blog at http://popsci.typepad.com .
|
Amid all the bad news about the future of newspapers -- and there is plenty -- a good news story quietly has been building: Online newspaper revenue is growing. Those guys at Popular Science will do anything to get you to read about science. (And, clearly, I'll do anything to get you to read to the...
| 12.59375 | 0.984375 | 31.015625 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900180.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900180.html
|
Police Storm Oaxaca to Suppress Protest
|
2006102919
|
OAXACA, Mexico, Oct. 29 -- On the order of President Vicente Fox, federal police backed by armored vehicles and water cannons tore down barricades and stormed embattled Oaxaca on Sunday, seizing control of the city center from protesters who had held it for five months.
A 15-year-old boy guarding one barricade was killed by a tear gas canister, said Jesica Sanchez, a human rights worker.
The conflict has pitted the governor of the state of Oaxaca against a coalition of citizen groups and striking teachers demanding his ouster.
With helicopters roaring overhead, police earlier entered the city, normally a picturesque tourist destination, from several sides. They marched up to a final metal barrier blocking the center, but pulled back as protesters armed with sticks attacked them from behind, hurling burning tires. The air filled with black smoke and tear gas.
Some demonstrators used syringes to pierce their arms and legs, then painted signs in their own blood decrying the police.
As night fell, however, protesters abandoned the center and regrouped at a local university. They pledged to continue their battle to persuade Gov. Ulises Ruiz Ortiz to resign, even as police tore down the banners and tents in the center that had served as demonstration headquarters.
At least eight people have died in the unrest since August, including Brad Will, an American and volunteer correspondent for the Web site Indymedia.org who was shot dead Friday along with two Mexican protesters. Fox, who leaves office Dec. 1, had for months resisted repeated calls to send federal forces to quell the protests.
In Oaxaca, the teachers protest is an annual rite that began 26 years ago. The protests are usually peaceful and generally last a week or two, but this year the teachers became infuriated when Ruiz sent police to forcefully remove demonstrators from the city's idyllic squares.
Last week, teachers tentatively ratified an agreement that would allow them to return to classes at an unspecified date and receive 30 percent raises spread over six years. Their unmet central demand, Ruiz's resignation, threatened to undermine the fragile pact.
|
OAXACA, Mexico, Oct. 29 -- On the order of President Vicente Fox, federal police backed by armored vehicles and water cannons tore down barricades and stormed embattled Oaxaca on Sunday, seizing control of the city center from protesters who had held it for five months.
| 7.94 | 1 | 50 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900190.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900190.html
|
Nigerian Airliner Carrying 104 Crashes in Abuja
|
2006102919
|
ABUJA, Nigeria, Oct. 29 -- A Nigerian airliner with 104 people aboard slammed into the ground moments after takeoff Sunday, the third deadly crash of a passenger plane in less than a year in this West African country. Six people survived.
Among those killed was the man regarded as the spiritual leader of Nigeria's Muslims, and thousands of people gathered at a regional airport to receive his body.
The Boeing 737 crashed one minute after taking off from the Abuja airport, said Sam Adurogboye, an Aviation Ministry spokesman. President Olusegun Obasanjo ordered an immediate investigation into the cause of the crash, said his spokeswoman, Remi Oyo.
Rescue workers found debris from the plane, body parts and luggage strewn over an area the size of a football field. The plane went down inside the sprawling airport compound about two miles from the runway. Smoke rose from the aircraft's mangled and smoldering fuselage. Its tail hung from a tree.
Emergency workers pulled blackened corpses from the wreckage, then covered the bodies with white sheets and hauled them away in stretchers.
Through the day, airport security officials kept back anxious people seeking information about friends or loved ones.
Adurogboye said 104 passengers and crew members had been aboard the flight, and he knew of six survivors who had been taken to a hospital. "Obviously the rest are feared dead," he said.
The plane was bound for the northwest city of Sokoto, about 500 miles northwest of Abuja, the capital, state radio said, adding that it had gone down during a storm. Witnesses said there was a rainstorm around the time the aircraft took off, but rains later subsided, giving way to overcast skies.
In an announcement broadcast on state radio, the Sokoto state government announced that the sultan of Sokoto, Muhammadu Maccido, died in the crash. Maccido headed the National Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs in Nigeria. The panel determines when Muslim fasts should begin and end, and decides policy for Nigeria's 70 million Muslims.
Maccido's body was immediately flown to Sokoto, where thousands of people awaited its arrival at the airport. He was buried Sunday in accordance with Islamic custom, and the Sokoto state government declared six days of mourning.
Mustapha Shehu, spokesman for the Sokoto state government, had said earlier that the sultan's son, Muhammed Maccido, a senator, also was aboard the flight, along with Abdulrahman Shehu Shagari, son of former Nigerian president Shehu Shagari, who was in office from 1979 to 1983. Their fates were not immediately known.
Oyo said Obasanjo was "deeply and profoundly shocked and saddened. . . . He offers condolences to all Nigerians, especially family, friends and associates of those who may have been on board."
The Boeing 737-2B7 owned by ADC Airlines, a private Nigerian company, was manufactured in 1983, Adurogboye said.
|
ABUJA, Nigeria, Oct. 29 -- A Nigerian airliner with 104 people aboard slammed into the ground moments after takeoff Sunday, the third deadly crash of a passenger plane in less than a year in this West African country. Six people survived.
| 12.021739 | 1 | 46 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601254.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601254.html
|
Deterring Kim Jong Il
|
2006102819
|
In an interview aired last week, George Stephanopoulos put the question to President Bush: What would he do if "North Korea sold nukes to Iran or al-Qaeda?" Bush replied, "They'd be held to account."
Seeking specifics, Stephanopoulos asked: "What does that mean?" The president answered, "I want the leader of North Korea to understand that he'll be held to account. Just like he's being held to account now for having run a test ."
Say what? If North Korea sells a nuclear weapon to Osama bin Laden or Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, he should expect the United States to go to the United Nations and negotiate further sanctions? And if al-Qaeda sneaks that bomb into the United States and we awake to the president's nightmare in which a mushroom cloud engulfs Washington or Los Angeles, then what? If this formulation stands -- without further specification -- America risks becoming the victim of a catastrophic "deterrence failure."
Deterrence emerged as a central concept in Cold War strategy. It meant convincing the adversary that the costs of taking an unacceptable action would greatly exceed any benefits it could hope to achieve. How did the United States prevent the Soviets from seizing Berlin? By convincing Soviet leaders that such an attack would trigger a response that would destroy their country.
Effective deterrence required three components: clarity, capability and credibility. Clarity meant bright lines and unacceptable consequences. Credibility was understood to be in the eye of the beholder. How credible was the threat to trade Boston for Berlin? Never 100 percent. But U.S. forces, exercises and communication were crafted to convince Soviet leaders they dare not test it.
To date the Bush administration has demonstrably failed to deter Kim Jong Il. Successive U.S. demands that Kim not develop nuclear weapons, not test a missile and not test a nuclear bomb have been defied. In each case, the president has asserted that this would be "intolerable." Pressed to be precise about what this threat meant, however, Bush refused, responding instead, "I don't think you give timelines to dictators and tyrants." National security adviser Stephen Hadley has gone further, arguing that red lines make no sense in dealing with North Korea because "the North Koreans just walk right up to them and step over them."
Having stiffed Bush -- and the world -- in building a nuclear arsenal, testing a long-range missile and testing a nuclear weapon, might Kim now imagine that he could also sell nuclear weapons?
America's challenge is to prevent this act by convincing Kim that he will be held accountable for every nuclear weapon that originates in North Korea. This requires clarity, credibility about our capacity to identify the source of a bomb that explodes in one of our cities (however it is delivered by whomever) and a believable threat to respond.
Kim must be convinced that American nuclear forensics will be able to identify the molecular fingerprint of nuclear material from his Yongbyon reactor. He must feel in his gut the threat that if a nuclear weapon of North Korean origin explodes on American soil or that of a U.S. ally, the United States will retaliate precisely as if North Korea had attacked the United States with a nuclear-armed missile: with an overwhelming response that guarantees this will never happen again.
Here, the president can take a page from President John F. Kennedy in the Cuban missile crisis. In 1962, as the Soviet Union was emplacing nuclear-tipped missiles in Cuba, some worried that these weapons could be transferred to a young revolutionary named Fidel Castro. Kennedy issued an unambiguous warning to Nikita Khrushchev. "It shall be the policy of this nation," he announced, "to regard any nuclear missile launched from Cuba against any nation in the Western Hemisphere as an attack by the Soviet Union on the United States requiring a full retaliatory response upon the Soviet Union." Khrushchev knew that meant a nuclear war.
The writer, an assistant secretary of defense under President Bill Clinton, is director of the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government and the author of "Nuclear Terrorism: The Ultimate Preventable Catastrophe."
|
America must credibly convince Kim that he will be held accountable for every nuclear weapon that originates in North Korea.
| 38.47619 | 0.952381 | 13.904762 |
high
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601257.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601257.html
|
In Michigan, a Sale the GOP Can't Close
|
2006102819
|
HOUGHTON, Mich. -- While Republicans scratch their heads over why a seemingly good economy is not helping them nationally in this year's elections, Michigan is where the party once hoped a bad economy would help it seize a governorship.
The heavy hits sustained by the auto industry's Big Three have left the state with a 7.1 percent unemployment rate, just below the 7.2 percent rate for Mississippi, which endured Hurricane Katrina. The job hemorrhage seemed the ideal issue for billionaire businessman Dick DeVos, the Republican nominee, against Gov. Jennifer Granholm. She is a nationally respected Democrat who many think would have made a fine presidential candidate if only she had not been born in Canada.
DeVos, a conservative whose wealth comes from his family company, Amway, is auditioning for her job by insisting, Kennedy-style, that Michigan can do better. "We have gone backward while the country has gone forward," he said during a debate on Monday. "It's just unacceptable."
Tying himself to this season's most popular institution in the state, he said earlier this month: "If we need inspiration, look at the Detroit Tigers. They've succeeded against all odds because they changed leadership and changed their attitude."
Spending heavily from his own fortune, DeVos was on the verge of making the sale. A Detroit News Poll in mid-June found him leading Granholm 48 percent to 40 percent.
But Granholm has come back. The News poll in mid-October had her ahead, 51 to 42 percent. More recent polls give her a comparable lead. Her recovery helps explain why the economy is not helping the Republicans elsewhere.
The problem for the GOP is that while voters in better-off states seem to be voting on Iraq and other issues, those thinking most about the economy live in lagging industrial states such as Michigan and Ohio, and they are blaming President Bush and national policies for their troubles. In the Ohio Senate race, for example, Rep. Sherrod Brown, a Democrat, has built a lead over incumbent Republican Mike DeWine using hard-hitting advertisements on trade and the loss of manufacturing jobs.
For her part, Granholm is doing everything she can to turn the argument on Bush and Washington. "My opponent began advertising way back in February trying to put the blame for Michigan's economic contraction on me," she said in a telephone interview, "when most people who work in the plants know that the shift of jobs to India or China is much more the result of federal policy and these trade agreements."
While Granholm has been helped by ads sharply attacking DeVos, the exchange between the two is at its heart a substantive choice between the challenger's tax-cutting approach and the incumbent's argument that recovery can come only from changes in federal policy.
"They feel this president has not stood up for them," Granholm says, arguing that voters are skeptical of "old-time solutions of just tax-cutting your way to prosperity." She calls for changes in federal trade, training, education and health-care policies. In the meantime, she has offered loans and tax breaks to the auto industry to preserve jobs. She says she is embarking on "as robust an industrial policy as we can to keep those jobs here," but adds: "My tools can do only so much."
In Michigan's Senate race, anti-administration feeling has also helped incumbent Democrat Debbie Stabenow, once considered vulnerable, to a double-digit lead in most polls over Republican Mike Bouchard. In an unusual display of solidarity between senatorial and gubernatorial candidates, Stabenow and
Granholm regularly reinforce each other's arguments.
"We have a national policy that says if you work for less, lose your health care and lose your pension, then we can compete," Stabenow says of the status quo. "The No. 1 way we could help employers in this country is to change the way we fund health care."
Granholm says she understands that economic change has been a rule in this state. The population here in Houghton County on Michigan's Upper Peninsula reached 88,000 in 1910 because of the copper industry boom. It declined, with the industry itself, to 35,000 people a half-century later, where it has held steady, buoyed by the presence of Michigan Tech.
The problem with the current manufacturing decline, says Granholm, is that it has been "so quick, so frightening . . . so cataclysmic and there has been so little transition time and people are left reeling." And the people who are reeling seem to be targeting Bush.
The president came into the state yesterday on behalf of Stabenow's opponent, and that's just fine with her. "I would welcome him back three or four times before the election," she says.
|
Industrial states with lagging economies are blaming President Bush and national policies for their troubles.
| 58.75 | 0.9375 | 7.9375 |
high
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/27/AR2006102700486.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/27/AR2006102700486.html
|
Official in Abramoff Case Sentenced to 18 Months
|
2006102819
|
A federal judge yesterday sentenced David H. Safavian, a former top Bush administration official, to 18 months in prison for lying and concealing unethical dealings with lobbyist Jack Abramoff.
During an unusual hearing that lasted much of the day, U.S. District Judge Paul L. Friedman wrestled with how to mete out justice to Safavian. He said Safavian was a man who had "pulled himself up by his bootstraps" and had been "a very good person to a lot of people." But, the judge said, Safavian also committed "an abuse of the public trust" in his relationship with the lobbyist.
"Did he believe in public service? I guess he did," Friedman said. "But he also wanted someday to join Mr. Abramoff in that lucrative lobbying business."
Friedman lamented that Washington has become "more and more corrupt," increasingly a home to greedy lobbyists and politicians on the take.
Safavian, 39, a former chief of staff for the General Services Administration, wept as he told Friedman that he knows now he never should have given Abramoff inside information about government-owned real estate that the lobbyist wanted to acquire. At the time, Safavian said, he thought what he was doing was innocuous. "I didn't see anything wrong in helping Jack," he said.
The 18-month jail sentence was about halfway between the 30 to 36 months sought by government prosecutors and the defense's proposal for alternative sentencing that would avoid any prison time at all.
Barbara Van Gelder, Safavian's attorney, urged leniency, telling Friedman that Safavian exhibited an ethical "blind spot" in his dealings with the brazen and flashy Abramoff. "He may have been blinded, dazzled," she said, but his wrongdoing with Abramoff was "isolated, not a man beginning a life of crime."
But prosecutor Peter Zeidenberg asked the judge to add a perjury conviction to Safavian's crimes for his testimony at trial. "For the two days he spent on the witness stand, Mr. Safavian lied about virtually everything," Zeidenberg said. "He testified under oath that he never lied, never concealed. . . . He even went on to say, 'I never gave Jack Abramoff favorable treatment,' " statements the jury rejected in its verdict.
Friedman said he did find some of Safavian's statements from the witness stand "incredible," including the defendant's claim that he believed his payment of $3,100 would cover the cost of a week-long luxury golfing excursion to Scotland with Abramoff. But in the end, the judge decided against the prosecutor's request for a perjury conviction.
Safavian was a lobbyist and congressional aide until 2002, when he joined the GSA, the agency that oversees the purchase and leasing of billions of dollars in federal property around the country. He later became the government's top procurement officer at the Office of Management and Budget.
He was convicted in June of concealing facts about the 2002 golf trip as well as the help he gave to Abramoff, a longtime friend, in trying to acquire two GSA-controlled properties -- one of them the Old Post Office building on Pennsylvania Avenue.
The jury found him guilty of lying to the GSA inspector general and obstructing an inquiry by that office, as well as lying to the Senate Indian Affairs Committee and to a GSA ethics officer.
Trial evidence included stacks of e-mails showing that Safavian secretly maneuvered within the GSA to obtain information for Abramoff about properties he wanted to buy or lease. The two schemed to get members of Congress to pressure the agency for the information.
Friedman said he had received 50 to 60 letters from people attesting to Safavian's good qualities, including one from his former boss Clay Johnson, the OMB's deputy director for management, from friends on Capitol Hill and from his pastor. A letter also came from his sister, who testified tearfully on his behalf yesterday. Her brother, she said, "didn't tell anyone" he was in trouble until his arrest. "He called me at work, sobbing and sobbing. He said, 'I'm so sorry for embarrassing you,' " Mehnaz Safavian said.
Safavian's lawyers said their client will appeal the conviction. Safavian is one of eight people convicted so far in the wide-ranging influence-peddling investigation into Abramoff's lobbying activities on Capitol Hill and in executive branch agencies. Earlier this month, Rep. Robert W. Ney (R-Ohio) became the first lawmaker to plead guilty in the probe. Abramoff and several former congressional aides have pleaded guilty and are cooperating.
One of them, Neil G. Volz, a former Ney aide, went to work with Abramoff, went on the Scotland golf trip and was a central witness in the Safavian trial. Friedman said he was revolted by Volz's testimony that government officials prepared sworn declarations about lobbyist-paid trips based on what "would pass the smell test" -- not what was true. "I wanted to go home and take a shower," the judge said.
|
A federal judge yesterday sentenced David H. Safavian, a former top Bush administration official, to 18 months in prison for lying and concealing unethical dealings with lobbyist Jack Abramoff.
| 30.5 | 1 | 32 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/27/AR2006102700560.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/27/AR2006102700560.html
|
Cheney Defends 'Dunk in the Water' Remark
|
2006102819
|
Vice President Cheney said yesterday that he was not referring to an interrogation technique known as "waterboarding" when he told an interviewer this week that dunking terrorism suspects in water was a "no-brainer."
Cheney told reporters aboard Air Force Two last night that he did not talk about any specific interrogation technique during his interview Tuesday with a conservative radio host.
VIDEO | White House Spokesperson Tony Snow said Friday the United States does not torture prisoners. Vice President Dick Cheney recently said that dunking terrorists in water is a "no brainer."
"I didn't say anything about waterboarding. . . . He didn't even use that phrase," Cheney said on a flight to Washington from South Carolina.
Earlier in the day, White House press secretary Tony Snow told reporters that the vice president was talking literally about "a dunk in the water," though neither Snow nor Cheney explained what that meant or whether such a tactic had been used against U.S. detainees.
"A dunk in the water is a dunk in the water," Snow said.
The comments were aimed at calming a growing furor over Cheney's comments, which were taken by many human rights advocates and legal experts as an endorsement of waterboarding as a method of questioning.
Coming shortly before the midterm elections, the remarks prompted a wide range of political figures -- from Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) to Cheney's wife, Lynne -- to weigh in on the issue, providing another unexpected controversy for Republicans as they fight to keep control of Congress. Reporters peppered Snow with questions about the interview during Snow's two daily news briefings.
Waterboarding, in which a prisoner is secured with his feet above his head and has water poured on a cloth over his face, is one of several methods of simulating drowning that date at least to the Spanish Inquisition. It has been specifically prohibited by the U.S. Army and widely condemned as torture by human rights groups and international courts.
"Would you agree a dunk in water is a no-brainer if it can save lives?" Scott Hennen of WDAY in Fargo, N.D., asked Cheney on Tuesday. "Well, it's a no-brainer for me," Cheney responded.
Cheney also said he agreed with Hennen that the debate over interrogation techniques was "a little silly," and he praised the information obtained from U.S. terrorism suspects during questioning.
Hennen said in an interview yesterday that he did not know precisely which technique Cheney was referring to and was only passing along a question he had heard from a listener.
"It's impossible for me to say 'Did the listener mean waterboarding?' and 'Is waterboarding torture?' and that sort of thing," Hennen said. "I can't get in the vice president's head, and I can't get in the listener's head."
|
Vice President Cheney said yesterday that he was not referring to an interrogation technique known as "waterboarding" when he told an interviewer this week that dunking terrorism suspects in water was a "no-brainer."
| 14 | 1 | 40 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/27/AR2006102701000.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/27/AR2006102701000.html
|
Allen Blasts Webb Novels For Sex Scenes
|
2006102819
|
RICHMOND, Oct. 27 -- Virginia Sen. George Allen (R) has accused his Democratic opponent, James Webb, of writing inappropriate sex scenes and demeaning descriptions of women in his fictional books, the latest character attack in a close and nasty campaign.
With 10 days remaining before Election Day, the allegations about sex-laced passages in Webb's writings inject a new question into a campaign that has centered almost exclusively on character issues: Should the author of a fictional work who runs for office be personally held to account for the scenes in his books?
Webb, a former U.S. Navy secretary, responded angrily Friday on Washington Post Radio, defending his novels as "serious" works and calling Allen's attack part of the senator's negative campaign that is devoid of ideas. "To take these things out and pull excerpts out and force them on people . . . is just a classic example of the way this campaign is run," Webb said. "Literature is literature. I've made my career as a novelist. George Allen doesn't have a record to run on."
Webb's books, including "Lost Soldiers," "Something to Die For" and "Fields of Fire," are historical novels that describe wartime horrors in Vietnam and people dealing with the aftermath of combat. Webb is a decorated Marine who served in Vietnam.
Allen campaign officials provided excerpts from the books -- some of them depicting acts of incest and graphic sexuality -- to the Drudge Report Web site Thursday night. Matt Drudge's Internet blog often breaks or promotes stories with sensational angles, most recently the scandal involving former Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.). Allen's aides, who have been trying to get other news organizations to write about the excerpts for weeks, issued statements saying the fictional scenes in Webb's novels reflect poorly on Webb's character and fitness for office.
Allen told reporters after a campaign stop in Harrisonburg that Webb's books are demeaning to women. "My opponent hasn't been in public office," he said. "But he talks about the books he's written and his creative writing, his novels. Those are some of his writings. . . . People can make that judgment."
Allen's aides would not say whether the senator had read Webb's books. They said he did not know about the books' contents six years ago, when he accepted Webb's endorsement for his first Senate campaign.
Webb said the graphic scenes in his novels, many of which are set in wartime, are taken out of context and do not accurately reflect the books or their content: combat. He said he has written about disturbing scenes that he witnessed on the battlefield or as a journalist in Southeast Asia.
"It is an observation about how the human species lives," Webb said after Mark Plotkin, the radio show's host, read one of the more lurid passages, prompting objections from the candidate.
Webb told Plotkin that listeners should read a book by Allen's sister, Jennifer, who described her brother's harsh physical treatment toward her. He also shot back that Vice President Cheney's wife, Lynne, wrote a novel, "Sisters," which contains scenes of rape and a lesbian love affair. "You can read Lynne Cheney's lesbian love scenes if you want to get graphic on stuff," he said.
In an interview later on CNN, Cheney declared Webb to be "full of baloney" and denied that she wrote anything in "Sisters" that is sexually explicit.
"His novels are full of sexually explicit references to incest -- sexually explicit references," she said.
|
RICHMOND, Oct. 27 -- Virginia Sen. George Allen (R) has accused his Democratic opponent, James Webb, of writing inappropriate sex scenes and demeaning descriptions of women in his fictional books, the latest character attack in a close and nasty campaign.
| 15.106383 | 1 | 47 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601811.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601811.html
|
The Year Of Playing Dirtier
|
2006102819
|
Rep. Ron Kind pays for sex!
Well, that's what the Republican challenger for his Wisconsin congressional seat, Paul R. Nelson, claims in new ads, the ones with "XXX" stamped across Kind's face.
It turns out that Kind -- along with more than 200 of his fellow hedonists in the House -- opposed an unsuccessful effort to stop the National Institutes of Health from pursuing peer-reviewed sex studies. According to Nelson's ads, the Democrat also wants to "let illegal aliens burn the American flag" and "allow convicted child molesters to enter this country."
To Nelson, that doesn't even qualify as negative campaigning.
"Negative campaigning is vicious personal attacks," he said in an interview. "This isn't personal at all."
By 2006 standards, maybe it isn't.
On the brink of what could be a power-shifting election, it is kitchen-sink time: Desperate candidates are throwing everything. While negative campaigning is a tradition in American politics, this year's version in many races has an eccentric shade, filled with allegations of moral bankruptcy and sexual perversion.
At the same time, the growth of "independent expenditures" by national parties and other groups has allowed candidates to distance themselves from distasteful attacks on their opponents, while blogs and YouTube have provided free distribution networks for eye-catching hatchet jobs.
"When the news is bad, the ads tend to be negative," said Shanto Iyengar, a Stanford professor who studies political advertising. "And the more negative the ad, the more likely it is to get free media coverage. So there's a big incentive to go to the extremes."
The result has been a carnival of ugly, especially on the GOP side, where operatives are trying to counter what polls show is a hostile political environment by casting opponents as fatally flawed characters. The National Republican Campaign Committee is spending more than 90 percent of its advertising budget on negative ads, according to GOP operatives, and the rest of the party seems to be following suit. A few examples of the "character issues" taking center stage two weeks before Election Day:
· In New York, the NRCC ran an ad accusing Democratic House candidate Michael A. Arcuri, a district attorney, of using taxpayer dollars for phone sex. "Hi, sexy," a dancing woman purrs. "You've reached the live, one-on-one fantasy line." It turns out that one of Arcuri's aides had tried to call the state Division of Criminal Justice, which had a number that was almost identical to that of a porn line. The misdial cost taxpayers $1.25.
|
Rep. Ron Kind pays for sex! Well, that's what the Republican challenger for his Wisconsin congressional seat, Paul R. Nelson, claims in new ads, the ones with "XXX" stamped across Kind's face.
| 12.428571 | 1 | 30.333333 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/27/AR2006102700261.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/27/AR2006102700261.html
|
Calif. Blaze Spreads After Firefighters' Deaths
|
2006102819
|
BANNING, Calif., Oct. 27 -- A wildfire that has consumed thousands of acres west of Palm Springs and has killed four U.S. Forest Service firefighters continued to roar Friday, fed by hot, fast and dry winds, while state and local officials boosted the reward to $500,000 to find the suspected arsonist who ignited the blaze.
The Forest Service and the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection are investigating the deaths, and on Friday a half-dozen investigators wearing yellow protective suits studied the steep dirt driveway of 15400 Gorgonio View Rd. As a fierce wind whipped past the gutted house on a blackened hill above them, an investigator knelt down, then gestured at the canyon wall, from where the flames had come.
Five Forest Service firefighters were trying to protect the house from the wildfire Thursday when the inferno suddenly overwhelmed them. Three died at the scene, and a fourth died soon afterward at a hospital. On Friday the fifth remained in grave condition, with more than 95 percent of his body burned.
The deaths constituted the worst disaster involving a wildfire since 2001, when four firefighters were trapped by flames and killed in a remote part of Washington state.
On Friday, investigators, as well as the men's families and colleagues, struggled to understand how an experienced fire captain and his crew could have been killed.
"They had a real good, experienced crew," said Jerry Garcia, 29, a firefighter who worked with Capt. Mark Loutzenhiser, 43, and Jess McLean, 27, a fire engine operator. "I've been with them on fires, and I felt real safe with them."
McLean, Garcia said, "was someone I really looked up to. Last season was my first season, and I really trusted him."
The doomed firemen were outside their fire engine, apparently running, when flames caught up with them, said Pat Boss, a Forest Service spokesman. Firefighters carry protective shelters, similar to pup tents, that can shield them from flames, but they did not use them, Boss said.
"They had no time to deploy anything, much less even pull it out of their bag," he said. "They had no idea what hit them."
Also killed were Jason McKay, 27, and Daniel Hoover-Najera, 20.
Michael Wakowski, a fire division chief in the San Bernardino National Forest, told the Associated Press it did not appear the crew did anything wrong.
"Sometimes things go bad, I hate to say," he said.
|
BANNING, Calif., Oct. 27 -- A wildfire that has consumed thousands of acres west of Palm Springs and has killed four U.S. Forest Service firefighters continued to roar Friday, fed by hot, fast and dry winds, while state and local officials boosted the reward to $500,000 to find the suspected...
| 8.719298 | 0.982456 | 55.017544 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/19/AR2006101901383.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/19/AR2006101901383.html
|
Nip/Tuck
|
2006102819
|
Sometimes, out and about, I catch a stranger fixing me with a gimlet eye. Does she recognize me? Perhaps. I wrote a first-person story for Washingtonian magazine back in 1989 about getting a facelift -- with before-and-after mug shots on the cover. Maybe that stranger stashed it in a bedside drawer. I imagine her fishing it out after one of those blood-freezing flashes when she spots her own reflection in a shop window and thinks her mother's come to town.
Over the intervening 17 years, my own visage has slid back into its pre-lift contours. But millions more have surrendered to the knife, and a charming new vocabulary has been born: Carb Face, for example (puffy-cheeked); Bowling Ball Breasts; the Trout Pout; the Wind Tunnel (severely backswept facial skin); the Kabuki Mask (all-Botox, all the time). Mind-boggling new technologies have blossomed: lasers, microsurgeries, wrinkle fillers, wrinkle paralytics, power-assistant liposuction, endoscopic tricks and "thread lifts," in which barbed threads are stretched beneath the cheeks and anchored to the skull. Cheekbones are glorified with Gore-Tex, just like your L.L. Bean jacket. Gallons of collagen, cultivated in a vast petri dish from the stem cells of a single infant's foreskin, have been pumped into lips or nasolabial folds, an alternative to the locally fashionable "cadaver tissue," i.e., corpse flesh. (How do you know where it's been? Maybe you're sporting a snippet of dear old Alistair Cooke, whose own dead tissue went missing, in your kissable new Trout Pout.)
In New York, women have their toes trimmed to squeeze into pointy Jimmy Choo shoes. In Los Angeles, gals who've had everything else done now get genital beautification. Says one, "I've spent so much money for the rest of me to look like Dolly Parton. So why should that look like Willie Nelson?" Many under-40 men today think it perfectly normal for the breasts on a reclining woman to stand up like rockets at take-off.
The New York Times's racy feature writer Alex Kuczynski has written Beauty Junkies , an exposé of the cosmetic surgery industry. And she really knows her stuff. The 30-something beauty confesses that she hopped aboard the fix-me train at age 28. At first, it was just a couple of Botox shots to the brow. (Scowling over a computer all day, every writer knows, encourages piles, dowager's hump and eye trouble -- but exacts its most visible toll between the eyebrows.) Later, she was persuaded by her doctor to have her almond-shaped, slightly slanted blue eyes "fixed" to reduce the volume above the upper lid -- excising that enchanting, extended epicanthic fold that gives Charlotte Rampling, Kathleen Turner and, in an earlier generation, Simone Signoret their bedroom eyes. She's had lard lipo'd from her thighs. She's spent many thousands on "maintenance."
And finally, in 2004, in quest of that Angelina Jolie suck-the-chrome-off-a-trailer-hitch moue, she had her upper lip stuffed with Restylane, a mucus-like synthetic form of hyaluronic acid. It gave her a yam-sized Donald Duck disaster zone below her nose that kept her housebound for several days. That -- and the recognition that a friend had, in the course of various improvements, become a frightening "meat puppet" -- cured her of her addiction. Or so she says.
A few choice statistics, now, from her sumptuously fact-packed Beauty Junkies : In 2004, nearly 12 million surgical and nonsurgical beauty procedures were performed in the United States -- including 290,343 eyelid jobs, 166,187 nose jobs, 478,251 liposuctions and 334,052 breast augmentations. Despite the fact that those dense, high-cohesive silicone-gel European breast implants known as "gummi bears" are generally illegal here, it's estimated that a third of all artificial breasts in this country are "in trouble." Still, since 1997, breast implants are up 147 percent. Liposuction's up 111 percent; tummy tucks, 144 percent; and Botox use, 2,446 percent.
Kuczynski emphasizes the two harsh realities that steer these soaring numbers. First, boomers are graying more reluctantly than any previous generation. Second, with the current state of the health care game, many surgeons and dermatologists actually prefer big-bucks, high-satisfaction cosmetic work to, say, cancer surgery. Which would you rather do? Take 15 minutes to squirt a face full of Botox, and get $1,000 in cash and a stiffish smile in return? Or painstakingly remove a freckle, slice by panicky slice, over a full hour or more, and then, a couple of months later, get 12 bucks from a grudging insurance company?
At its core, of course, the rage for "age management" is a ghastly business. Beneath those glamorous Chiclet-tooth veneers may lurk stinking stubs that revolt even the dentists who created them from perfectly healthy teeth. Very fat people who have gastric bypasses (140,600 Americans in 2004) find their new slender bodies swimming in gigantic sacks of skin -- dangling aprons, flaps, curtains, folds and hammocks that actually shock the plastic surgeons who must tailor them to fit the new frame.
To avoid even approaching that fate, Hollywood gals turn to Clen -- clenbuterol, a steroid used to treat asthma in horses and to help the human body remain a size two. Clen also increases the risk of stroke and heart attack, destroys endurance and stiffens the heart muscles.
But as long ago as the 17th century, the wise François, duc de la Rochefoucauld, observed that, "One must suffer to be beautiful." Today, 73-year-old Joan Rivers wistfully adds, "I wish I had a twin, so I could know what I'd look like without plastic surgery." As for Kuczynski -- well, she's gone off the Botox. ·
Diana McLellan is the author of "The Girls: Sappho Goes to Hollywood."
|
Search Washington, DC area books events, reviews and bookstores from the Washington Post. Features DC, Virginia and Maryland entertainment listings for bookstores and books events. Visit http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/print/bookworld today.
| 34.882353 | 0.382353 | 0.441176 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601820.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601820.html
|
'Death of a President': Realism With a False Face
|
2006102819
|
Those words, chanted by demonstrators at the disastrous 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago, are never uttered in "Death of a President," but they echo nonetheless. An unsettling and exceptionally skillful exercise in blurring the lines between appearance and reality, this fictional, documentary-style film uses the incendiary premise of the assassination of President George W. Bush in the not-too-distant future as a springboard for thinking about the practical and psychic toll of how America deals with terrorist threats.
Produced by Britain's Channel 4 television network and co-written and directed by Gabriel Range, "Death of a President," or "DOAP" as it has come to be called by its publicists, has garnered understandable notoriety after making its debut at the Toronto Film Festival and being picked up by the same studio that distributed "The Passion of the Christ." Two theater chains have refused to show the movie, which uses real-life news footage and flawless computerized special effects to create a chilling approximation of an assassination, and a few television and radio networks have decided not to air advertisements.
The hubbub must please the filmmakers, who surely chose their putative subject for its potential, in marketing argot, to garner invaluable unearned media. The question is whether "DOAP" has earned its own inflammatory conceit. Is it politically provocative agitprop or merely a cynical, exploitative stunt?
Probably the latter, but one that has been performed with unusual dexterity. Structured like an installment of "Frontline," "DOAP" often has the taut urgency of that PBS series, with witnesses providing a detailed tick-tock of events as they unfolded. Indeed, "DOAP" is so convincing that, like most he-said, he-said documentaries, it eventually suffers from a fatal, talking-head inertness.
Still, "DOAP" gets off to a riveting start, with presidential aides and FBI agents (portrayed with terrific verisimilitude by the actors who play them) "recalling" the day in 2007 when Bush, in Chicago for a speech to a business group, encounters the biggest and most unruly demonstration of his administration. Range intercuts archival footage of past demonstrations -- picture the fury of Bush's first inauguration combined with that of the 1999 anti-globalization march in Seattle -- with staged interviews to create an atmosphere that crackles with dread; when Bush finally enters the scrum of the fatal rope line (his face is digitally superimposed on an actor's), the mood turns sickening. (As is the occupational hazard of anyone working with of-the-moment material, events have in some ways outstripped the film's attempts at realism, from recent doings in North Korea to the drama co-starring Dennis Hastert.)
Those who would condemn "DOAP" without seeing it should be made aware of one crucial fact: Range does not depict that event with glee or even a smirk. The shooting of Bush is indeed portrayed with solemnity and grief (although some red-meat Dems will no doubt mentally insert screeching "Psycho" violins when someone first refers to "President Cheney"). The ballast of "DOAP," after the horrific event itself unfolds, becomes a true-crime procedural dedicated to the search for the assassin. It's at this point that Range reveals his true agenda: Although a few suspects come under scrutiny, only one is finally railroaded into a kangaroo conviction, the result of a beefed-up Patriot Act, political expedience and a populace agog with paranoia and fear.
With its seamless use of actual and staged footage, "DOAP" at its best will remind some viewers of "Medium Cool," Haskell Wexler's brilliant neo-realist thriller that was filmed during the 1968 convention and released the next year. "DOAP" possesses the same sense of immediacy and political moment, and when Range focuses on the anti-Bush demonstrators, their faces contorted into masks of fury and contempt, he taps a vein of present-day rage that in some quarters seems to be on the verge of bursting again.
And in playing into the historical fascination with assassination, it resembles a kind of 21st-century "JFK," tweaked to hit the hot-button issues of the day. (The most obvious comparison is with the politically charged pseudo-docs of avant-garde filmmaker Mike Z, whose work has been shown at the DC Underground Film Festival. His Internet hoaxes are so good that he's been investigated by real FBI agents.)
But it's not as if those issues -- the tensions between civil liberties and security in a post-9/11 world -- aren't being addressed in pop culture, whether in such television series as "24" and "Sleeper Cell" or even the recent film "The Departed." How American democracy will engage those issues in months and years to come will in a very real sense define this country. And a rigorous, sober, intellectually honest discussion, not a partisan food fight or piece of cinematic showmanship, is what is called for.
Range doesn't advance that discussion as much as use it as a fig leaf for his own self-serving interests. He's artistically akin to the man who shouts "Fire!" in a crowded theater, and then wonders why no one sticks around to hear his argument for brighter exit signs.
At such a pivotal juncture, we deserve better. We need better. Nearly 40 years on, the world is still watching.
Death of a President (93 minutes, at Landmark's E Street Cinema) is rated R for brief violent images.
|
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.
| 43.2 | 0.52 | 0.52 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601826.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601826.html
|
The Walls Tumbled By Time
|
2006102819
|
"Something there is that doesn't love a wall," wrote Robert Frost in "Mending Wall." The poem is in part about being driven nuts by a neighbor who ceaselessly repeats "Good fences make good neighbors."
As part of his own version of a good neighbor policy, President Bush signed into law yesterday the "Secure Fence Act of 2006." It authorizes construction of 700 miles of new walls along parts of the 1,951-mile-long border from San Ysidro, Calif., to Brownsville, Tex. The Secure Fence Act does not include funding for the project, the cost of which is estimated to be at least $6 billion.
Yet humans quite clearly do love walls.
Starting 2,200 years ago, Chinese dynasties built walls to keep the Mongols at bay. The most famous of these is the Great Wall, which is twice as long as the U.S.-Mexico border. It did not prevent the Manchu from conquering China in 1644.
The Romans built Hadrian's Wall across 74 miles of what is now northern England to keep the tribes from Scotland in their place. This did not prevent the Romans from eventually abandoning this outpost of empire.
The Berlin Wall was a shock because it was intended to keep people in . To this day, hefting chunks of it can feel spooky. Maybe it's all in the imagination, but those shards of pebble and concrete still seem to give off a palpable chill of evil.
However, history tells us that walls usually work the other way.
After World War I, the French built the Maginot Line to slow down the Germans. The Germans invested in high mobility. When they moved, they drove and flew around and over this wall. They were well into France in five days.
During World War II, to defeat an Allied invasion, the Nazis built the Atlantic Wall along the west coast of Europe from the French-Spanish border to Norway. It included 6 million mines in northern France, concrete pillboxes, machine guns, antitank guns, light artillery and underwater obstacles. Devotees of "Saving Private Ryan" know how that movie ends.
One of the founding premises of cities -- from the beginning of fixed settlements 8,000 years ago -- was that you were safer inside their walls than out.
"The archetypal chieftain in Sumerian legend is Gilgamesh: the heroic hunter, the strong protector, not least significantly, the builder of the wall around Uruk," writes Lewis Mumford in "The City in History."
That wall evolved into the medieval walls of Vienna, raised against the Turks, along with walls around cities from Avignon to Fez. The expression "beyond the pale," now meaning beyond acceptable behavior, once referred to things outside walls made of palings, forming a palisade of poles.
Walled cities with gates that closed at night existed in China in the 20th century. In America, the walled city was represented by frontier stockades like Fort Laramie in Wyoming. Artillery and airplanes decreased the strategic effectiveness of city walls. Many of them were torn down. The small Tuscan city of Lucca, however, neglected to modernize, and now is the richer for it, with tourists coming to see its walls.
The conceptual artist Christo even loved a Roman wall enough to wrap it in cloth in 1974.
As this recitation suggests, not only can walls be beautiful and quaint, they are reassuring. They unquestionably show that the leaders are doing something.
It will be interesting to see what effect our latest wall has. With some 350 million legal crossings per year, the U.S.-Mexico boundary is the most frequently crossed international border in the world, according to the American embassy in Mexico City.
Once walls existed to keep one culture from taking over another culture, but in this case, that battle has long since been lost by both sides. There is a broad swath of North America from the Pacific to the Gulf, and from Denver to very deep into Northern Mexico -- as far as Cabo San Lucas and San Luis Potosi -- where it is increasingly difficult to know where abstractions like the United States and Mexico begin and end.
According to the book of Joshua in the Bible, Jericho was a city of walls. When determined enough people challenged them, they came tumbling down.
|
"Something there is that doesn't love a wall," wrote Robert Frost in "Mending Wall." The poem is in part about being driven nuts by a neighbor who ceaselessly repeats "Good fences make good neighbors."
| 18.931818 | 1 | 44 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102600974.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102600974.html
|
Sun Joins a Growing List of Papers That Investors Aim to Take Private
|
2006102819
|
A group of Baltimore business leaders headed by longtime politico Ted Venetoulis is angling to buy the Baltimore Sun, becoming the latest speculators aiming to rescue newspapers from the earnings grind of Wall Street and deliver them into private ownership.
Venetoulis, a Democrat and former Baltimore County executive, said it would be the group's goal to return the Sun and its smaller community newspapers to local control and restore the paper's reputation to a time when it had "oomph and quality and broadness."
Venetoulis joins a growing list of boldface names bidding for publicly owned newspapers. Hollywood producer David Geffen has made noises about buying the Los Angeles Times. Retired General Electric Co. chief executive Jack Welch is reportedly forming a group that aims to bid for the Boston Globe, owned by the New York Times Co. A wealthy Hartford, Conn., family has expressed interest in Tribune Co.'s Hartford Courant, should it be put on the block.
Though private ownership extracts newspapers from the constant growth demands placed on a publicly traded company, the private equity world is populated by corporate breakup artists who zero in on ailing businesses and ride them to the ground. Such ownership gives journalists nightmarish visions of empty newsrooms and shopper-thin dailies filled with wire-service copy.
"Newspapers are frisky ventures these days," Venetoulis said in an interview yesterday, referring to the industry-wide drop in circulation and advertising revenue as more readers move to the Internet, cable television and other forms of information delivery. "Everyone [in the investment group] needs to understand this may not be the best business venture around and the return may not be what they expect. This is part civic responsibility."
Other members of his consortium, called the Baltimore Media Group, include longtime Baltimore civic leader Walter Sondheim Jr. and Robert C. Embry Jr., president of Baltimore's Abell Foundation, which has expressed interest in the Sun and was founded by the families that once owned the Sun.
While Venetoulis and his partners voice interest in the public mission of news, not all potential newspaper investors do. Others are more interested in squeezing papers for profit.
Tribune, with headquarters in Chicago, is being roiled by a boardroom war that threatens to split the company. A group of board members unhappy with the company's performance has forced Tribune to essentially hang out a "for sale" sign for the company as a whole or its individual properties. Tribune set today as the deadline for bids.
Carlyle Group, based in the District, is among the private-equity firms interested in Tribune, said a private-equity executive who has examined media deals and requested anonymity because he is involved in ongoing transactions.
Most large newspaper companies, such as Gannett Co., McClatchy Co., The Washington Post Co. and the New York Times Co., are publicly held, and Wall Street demands strong quarterly earnings growth. But as newspapers have struggled with declining circulation and advertising revenue for more than a decade, along with volatile newsprint costs, the industry has fallen into disfavor on Wall Street. Shareholders have grown increasingly unhappy after becoming accustomed to profit margins of 20 to 30 percent that newspapers returned for much of the past century, when they had a virtual monopoly on local news and advertising.
But as news and information choices grew, newspapers have been forced to cut expenses and payrolls to keep profit margins high.
Now, a growing number of investors say the cuts have not gone far enough, and they seek to break up newspaper companies or sell them to private ownership to cash in their investment before the industry worsens.
|
Washington,DC,Virginia,Maryland business headlines,stock portfolio,markets,economy,mutual funds,personal finance,Dow Jones,S&P 500,NASDAQ quotes,company research tools. Federal Reserve,Bernanke,Securities and Exchange Commission.
| 15.636364 | 0.431818 | 0.431818 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601635.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601635.html
|
Early Opposition to Iraq War Bolsters Moran in House Race
|
2006102819
|
One recent Saturday, Republican congressional candidate and Army veteran Tom M. O'Donoghue ran smack into his campaign's biggest problem, and it came in the form of Joan O'Keefe, a 52-year-old NASA contractor putting up Halloween decorations in her yard.
When O'Donoghue stopped to introduce himself as the Republican opponent of incumbent U.S. Rep. James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.), O'Keefe's response was rapid-fire: "Jim's got my vote. He was the only guy to stand up against that war," O'Keefe said.
"I was actually there," O'Donoghue, 41, responded quickly. "I spent 12 months in Iraq . . . "
Cutting him off, she said, "Sorry you had to go." Moran, she said, "has had his ups and downs with me, but he sealed the deal when he went after the war in the beginning. . . . He locked in my vote solidly on that issue alone."
Two years after Moran grappled with his first primary challenge and national furor over his comments about Jews and the war in Iraq, the eight-term congressman finds himself in an enviable position.
He is a well-funded incumbent whose early opposition to the war plays well in the heavily Democratic 8th Congressional District, which includes Alexandria, Arlington County, Falls Church and parts of Fairfax County. And his last two years in office have been free of the headline-grabbing behavior of years past, as he married for the third time and settled into a $6 million home overlooking the Potomac River in Arlington
"Over time, people have gotten to know who I am," said Moran, 62, as he greeted voters recently at a festival in Clarendon. "They can always find some issue to disagree with me on, but what I hear consistently is that I say what I believe, and I'm outspoken. A lot of people tell me they think I get too emotional, but I think passion is a good thing. . . . They accept who I am."
On the campaign trail, Moran's two opponents -- O'Donoghue and independent James T. "Jim" Hurysz of Arlington -- have largely shied away from raising alarms about Moran's character, whereas past opponents have found a buffet of incidents from which to choose. Those include questions about his finances, a dust-up with former U.S. Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-Calif.) and a 2003 remark about the Jewish community's support for the war that some interpreted as anti-Semitic, which cost Moran a House leadership post.
"Despite all his problems and mini-scandals, Jim Moran does have a certain rapport with voters," said Mark J. Rozell, a professor of public policy at George Mason University. "That's been the most striking thing about this election: It's been a quiet time for Jim Moran. He's had none of the kind publicity that's surrounded him several years ago with his personal conduct and difficulties in office. When it's quiet for Jim Moran, it's good."
In such a climate, both challengers have struggled to raise money. O'Donoghue has raised about $40,000, and Hurysz, who eschews contributions from political action committees and other special interests, has raised about $13,000.
Meanwhile, Moran -- who has raised more than $1.2 million and probably will spend about $200,000 on his race -- has devoted much of his time and energy in recent weeks to helping tip the balance in the hotly contested Virginia Senate race. About half of his campaign tab will consist of "co-branded" signs and literature with Senate candidate James Webb. He also has added an extra staff person and more phone banks than in years past to aid Webb, said Bryan Spoon, Moran's campaign manager.
Hurysz, 59, a self-employed quality assurance consultant, is making a second attempt to unseat Moran after garnering 3 percent of the vote as an independent in the 2004 race. Hurysz has kept his focus on local issues such as the environment and transportation, favoring transit upgrades such as extending Metrorail to Dulles International Airport, installing bus rapid transit on Route 1 and expanding ride-sharing programs.
Republican supporters say O'Donoghue has impeccable credentials. He is a graduate of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point and has an MBA from Yale and a law degree from Georgetown University. He took a leave from his civilian job after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to volunteer for Army active duty in Afghanistan, and later, in Iraq, where he was awarded the Bronze Star. And he was tapped for a high-profile appearance this week on CNN's "Larry King Live" speaking opposite Illinois House candidate Tammy Duckworth (D), a helicopter pilot who lost her legs in Iraq.
But locally, O'Donoghue said he has struggled to get his message out in a largely Democratic district in a year in which antiwar sentiment runs high. When Moran invited fellow Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.), an outspoken critic of the war, to a town hall meeting this year, an emotional crowd of more than 600 packed the auditorium and flowed out into the street.
Arlington County Democratic Committee Chairman Peter Rousselot, who has watched the candidates in several debates, said O'Donoghue is "soldiering on. . . . He's doing the best he can with a terrible poker hand."
Moran said he thinks that, with the exception a few special operations troops and advisers, the bulk of the troops should be brought home by next summer. O'Donoghue favors a more measured withdrawal from Iraq, fearing that a faster move could destabilize the entire region.
"In this district and in this year, being Republican is a big burden," O'Donoghue said. "I give them my literature, and they act like it's contaminated . . . just because it's from a Republican. But in terms of Iraq, they are very sophisticated on the issue and raise criticism that's legitimate. Who's got a plan? We all recognize the need for something to be done, and they're grasping for it."
|
One recent Saturday, Republican congressional candidate and Army veteran Tom M. O'Donoghue ran smack into his campaign's biggest problem, and it came in the form of Joan O'Keefe, a 52-year-old NASA contractor putting up Halloween decorations in her yard.
| 26 | 1 | 46 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601540.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601540.html
|
Running Together, a World Apart
|
2006102819
|
Marine Sgt. Chuck Trainer is not a marathoner.
He is a football player, or was, anyway, years before duty called him in February to Camp Fallujah in Iraq for his second tour there. Sure, he regularly runs a few miles as part of his conditioning routine, but a marathon?
"Twenty-six point two miles -- that's something you drive," Trainer half-joked in a phone conversation from Iraq this week. "I'd rather punch myself in the face than go run 26.2 miles."
Yet on Sunday, several hours before 30,000 runners stand in the shadow of the Marine Corps War Memorial in Arlington ready to begin the Marine Corps Marathon, Trainer will set out on his first marathon in, of all places, the Iraqi desert.
And he's actually thrilled to be running, only because training for the race has helped him stay close to his older sister, Christine Haas, back home in Pennsylvania.
Trainer is one of 208 members of the armed services stationed in the Middle East who are registered for Sunday's inaugural Marine Corps Marathon Forward at al-Asad air base, which is about 100 miles west of Baghdad. For Trainer and others, the satellite race is serving as a medium through which they can connect with loved ones in the United States, especially those who are running the Marine Corps Marathon here.
"I don't know anything about long-distance running," Trainer, 28, said. "As far as I'm concerned, it's just putting one foot in front of the other for longer than usual. But there's diets and a training regimen, so it was Chrissie that I kind of relied on to make sure I knew what I was doing."
Marine Maj. Megan McClung, an avid runner who will participate in Iraq on Sunday, came up with the idea in May for a satellite race for deployed servicemen and women. With the help of Marine Corps Marathon organizers and the Army's Office of Morale, Welfare and Recreation, the MCM Forward will officially be considered part of the marathon here. Each finisher in Iraq will be added to the list of those who cross the finish line in Rosslyn.
Runners in the MCM Forward will twice run out and back on a 6.5-mile course. The final 0.2 of a mile will be completed in a parking lot in the downtown area of the base. While the race course here is lined with various forms of entertainment and other diversions, participants in Iraq won't have the luxury of being distracted from each grueling stride.
"Maybe we'll have some aircraft to look at," Marine 1st Lt. Carla Jurczynski said via phone from Camp Fallujah. "Honestly, it's really, really brown and gray and sandy out here. I'm sure it will be the same up there."
Despite conditions that are less than ideal, including expected temperatures in the mid-80s, Trainer and Jurczynski are eager to run Sunday because both have sisters running the Marine Corps Marathon here. During the last several weeks of training, the race has helped Trainer forge a connection with Haas, and Jurczynski has done the same with her older sister, Maresa. For all four of them, the experience has been therapeutic during a time apart that is sometimes filled with painful uncertainty.
"This will be, by far, the most meaningful marathon I could ever run, and to be running it with Chuck is such an honor," said Haas, 39, of Newtown, Pa. "It's a way of showing him support, and it gives me an opportunity to be his older sister, whether that's with words of encouragement via e-mail or by sending him a care package."
|
More than 200 members of the armed services stationed in the Middle East will race by satellite in Sunday's inaugural Marine Corps Marathon at al-Asad air base near Baghdad.
| 21.939394 | 0.909091 | 5.515152 |
medium
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601565.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601565.html
|
Religious Conservatives Cheer Ruling on Gays as Wake-Up Call
|
2006102819
|
The New Jersey court decision that gay couples are entitled to the same rights as heterosexual couples was bad news for social conservatives -- the bad news they were hoping for.
"Pro-traditional-marriage organizations ought to give a distinguished service award to the New Jersey Supreme Court," said the Rev. Richard Land, head of the public policy arm of the Southern Baptist Convention.
Land and other conservative religious leaders predicted that the court's 4 to 3 ruling, which was handed down Wednesday, would boost turnout of social conservatives in the midterm elections, particularly in the eight states that have constitutional amendments against same-sex marriage on the Nov. 7 ballot.
"I have to think there are Democratic strategists out there thinking the words of the old Japanese admiral: 'I fear all we've done is wake a sleeping giant,' " said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, a Washington-based advocacy group. "They were coasting into an election with a Republican base with dampened enthusiasm. This brings it all back home to the base, what this election is about."
President Bush, at fundraising events in Iowa and Michigan, denounced the New Jersey ruling and called heterosexual marriage "a sacred institution."
Before the New Jersey decision, conservative religious groups tried to rally their supporters around the issue of same-sex marriage, but with far less success than they had in the 2004 elections.
Focus on the Family founder James C. Dobson, for example, held "Stand for the Family" rallies in three cities in September and October, drawing considerably smaller crowds than anticipated. The first rally, in Pittsburgh on Sept. 20, attracted 3,000 people to a 17,000-seat arena that Focus on the Family had predicted would be full.
The next two rallies, in St. Paul, Minn., on Oct. 3 and Nashville on Oct. 16, were moved from stadium-size venues to smaller auditoriums, and the tickets, which had been on sale for $7, were given away. Each event also drew about 3,000 people, according to Focus on the Family spokesman Paul Hetrick.
"We don't gauge the success by the number of people," Hetrick said, adding: "I don't think it's the rallies [that flopped]. I just think it's more of a challenge to enthuse people about midterm elections."
Evan Wolfson, executive director of Freedom to Marry, a group that supports same-sex marriage, said religious conservatives "have gone to this well too many times, and people are not buying it."
"They attack gay people when the sun rises, and they attack gay people when the sun sets, so no matter what the court had done in New Jersey, they would have said Americans need to shift their attention from the real threats to our country to the alleged threat from gay couples seeking to settle down," Wolfson said.
New Jersey's Supreme Court stopped short of requiring the state to allow same-sex marriage. It said that under the state's constitution, same-sex couples can no longer be denied the rights and benefits that opposite-sex couples receive. It gave the state legislature 180 days to craft a solution, which apparently could include allowing civil unions.
Land said conservative voters were more energized about same-sex marriage in the 2004 elections because Massachusetts had just become the first -- and so far only -- state to legalize it as a result of a state court ruling in 2003.
Since then, opponents of same-sex marriage have been on a roll. Twenty states have passed constitutional amendments banning it. Several courts, most recently in the states of Washington and New York, have ruled against it. Those victories, Land said, may have made some conservatives complacent.
"But whatever wind was pumped out of their sails has now been pumped back in," he said. "I frankly was amazed that the New Jersey judges issued their decision before the election."
Perkins agreed, saying that he "had long anticipated a bad ruling from New Jersey" and was glad that it occurred in time for voters to see the "very real and present danger" that same-sex marriage could spread. He spoke by telephone shortly before holding a news conference to denounce the New Jersey decision in South Dakota, one of the eight states with marriage amendments on the ballot. The others are Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia and Wisconsin.
|
The New Jersey court decision that gay couples are entitled to the same rights as heterosexual couples was bad news for social conservatives -- the bad news they were hoping for.
| 27.25 | 1 | 32 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601625.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601625.html
|
District 3 Offers Candidates Myriad Challenges
|
2006102819
|
Terri Anomnachi is the mother of four and president of the PTA at Lucy Diggs Slowe Elementary School in Northeast Washington, where her two youngest children are enrolled. Her two oldest children also went there, but when they approached middle school age, Anomnachi decided to send them to a charter school, rather than Bertie Backus Middle School.
Although she hasn't given up on the traditional schools -- "I want them to go to McKinley," said Anomnachi, referring to the state-of-the-art career and technology high school in Eckington -- she's frustrated with a school system that has few high-performing middle schools in Ward 5. She's also upset that Slowe, once a highly rated school, has suffered from budget cuts and declining enrollment and is slated to close in 2008.
"I really feel like the school board, they just cut the school off and weren't involved," Anomnachi said.
The candidate who emerges from a pack of five looking to become the next school board member from District 3, which represents Wards 5 and 6, will face these parental frustrations and more. The victor must look for ways to address those concerns and other pressing issues of student achievement, the condition of school buildings and the future of charter schools in the District.
There are almost 50 schools in economically and racially diverse District 3, in neighborhoods that include Capitol Hill, Rosedale, Riggs Park and Old City. Buildings such as Paul L. Dunbar High School and Eastern Senior High School have fallen into disrepair, and such schools as Brookland Elementary have been targeted for closure because of declining enrollment and the condition of the facilities.
There are bright spots. Parents recently celebrated the opening of new libraries at Stuart Hobson Middle School and Robert Brent and Ludlow-Taylor Elementary schools, part of an eight-school library renovation project in which the school system partnered with a private foundation to fix eight Capitol Hill school libraries.
Tommy Wells, who has represented the District for six years, won the Democratic primary last month for the Ward 6 D.C. Council seat. He said whoever replaces him on the school board must move quickly to be responsive to community concerns.
"They have so many schools, each with their own challenges," Wells said.
Three advisory neighborhood commissioners, an education consultant and a former charter school administrator are crisscrossing Wards 5 and 6 searching for votes. At community forums and in interviews, they outlined different prescriptions for fixing city schools.
Robert Brannum, an ANC commissioner in Ward 5's Bloomingdale neighborhood and substitute teacher, said he has a passion for "those without a voice," and his classroom teaching experience has given him an insight into the issues facing students and teachers.
"I have shown an ability to work for all people of all colors and sexes," Brannum said. "I have been out there working on behalf of children for a lifetime."
A native Washingtonian, Brannum, 53, said curtailing special education costs would be his top priority. He did not offer a specific proposal, saying he supported the plans outlined by D.C. School Superintendent Clifford B. Janey. Under Janey's master facilities plan, special education students in private placements would return to city classrooms after space is made available through the renovation of aging buildings and the addition of education centers.
|
Terri Anomnachi is the mother of four and president of the PTA at Lucy Diggs Slowe Elementary School in Northeast Washington, where her two youngest children are enrolled. Her two oldest children also went there, but when they approached middle school age, Anomnachi decided to send them to a charter...
| 11.690909 | 0.981818 | 53.018182 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/10/23/DI2006102300367.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/10/23/DI2006102300367.html
|
Maryland Senate Race
|
2006102619
|
Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael Steele will be online Friday, Oct. 27 at 11 a.m. ET to discuss his campaign to represent the state in the U.S. Senate.
Michael Steele is a former chair of the Maryland Republican Party and was the first African American elected to state-wide office in Maryland. He grew up in Washington and attended Archbishop Carroll High School, Johns Hopkins University and Georgetown Law.
Steele lives in Prince George's County with his wife, Andrea, and their sons Michael and Drew.
Read The Post's profile of Steele: A Political Natural, Railing Against Politics
Visit his campaign Web site
Programming note: An invitation has been extended to the Democratic candidate, Rep. Ben Cardin, to participate in a separate live online discussion.
Michael Steele: Thank you for joining me this morning. I look forward to answering your questions. This is an exciting race and a unique opportunity to communicate directly with Marylanders. I love this tech stuff!!
New York, N.Y.: What is your position on increasing the minimum wage? Do you support Maryland increasing its minimum wage above the Federal minimum wage?
Michael Steele: Thank you for the question. I do support increasing the federal minimum wage coupled with tax and other incentives for small business owners to help them absorb the increased cost in labor. I have always viewed the minimum wage as a "training wage" -- designed to put you on the pathway to greater earning power. My mother worked at a minimum wage job for 45 years and I learned from her experience that this should not be the most money a person makes in their life. I want to see individuals empowered through education and training to earn as much as possible.
Edgewood, Md.: Mr. Steele, thanks for the chat. Can you share your views on providing affordable health care to all Americans? (or at least all Marylanders!) Thanks.
Michael Steele: I'd like to see the country actually HAVE A CONVERSATION on health care. We started in 1992 and then stopped. We have 46 million Americans without health care so I propose that we get serious and design a health care system that reflects what individuals want -- not the government. I favor health savings accounts designed to empower individuals to have greater ownership over their health care choices, associated health plans for small business owners to pool with other small business owners, a focus on prevention, as well as addressing the obvious disparities in health care. That's a start.
Virginia: What makes you think you would make a good senator?
Michael Steele: Virginia, I believe in public service. I believe that one person can make a difference, even in the United States Senate. I am tired of the worn out labels, the name calling and finger pointing. I just want to take the people of Maryland with me to Washington and get something done on health care, education and poverty. The only "promise" I've made during this campaign is to commit myself every day to doing my very best to represent the people of my state, to take responsibility for the decisions I make and to be accessible.
Silver Spring, Md.: Why is it that none of your ads clearly denote the fact that you're a Republican? As an African-American voter, I personally feel like you were "trying to get over" on black voters by seemingly hiding which party you affiliate with.
Michael Steele: I'm not defined by any label. I ran for Lt. Governor as a Republican and I am honored to have served ALL of the citizens of Maryland. My party affiliation is no secret -- you knew I was a Republican. My point is, the labels and colors (red/blue) have begun to define who we are and what we believe. I don't accept that. As a U.S. Senator, I must always be open to people who come to the table with a different perspective. I can't close them off or shut them down because they are a Democrat or white or have a full head of hair (which I don't).
Hazlet, N.J.: Good Morning, Mr. Steele :
Are you proud of your African-American heritage ? Who are some of your heroes ? Thank you for taking my questions.
Michael Steele: I am extremely proud of my heritage and appreciative of the struggle of so many African Americans on whose shoulders I stand today. From Frederick Douglass to Dr. King to my Mom (Maebell) I have been blessed to be in this moment as the Lt. Governor of my state and (hopefully) the next U.S. Senator from Maryland. I bring to this job the legacy of those who have come before me in order to continue to build upon their dream of equality, opportunity and ownership.
Silver Spring, Md.: How has being lieutenant governor prepared you for the Senate?
Michael Steele: I have been fortunate to be able give definition to the office of Lt. Governor. During my tenure, I have visited 110 of the 157 municipalities of Maryland -- taking state government directly to the people and learning first-hand the concerns of Marylanders. I have reformed our small business enterprise for the state, laid out a blueprint for strengthening our educational system (stop teaching to the test!), fought for the creation of the Office of Community Initiatives to empower and aid our faith institutions and non-profits to provide the services they do to those most in need. I believe now is a unique opportunity for me to take these same principles and ideas to the Senate. To engage the Senate to focus on the needs of people, not government and special interests. From my experiences across the state, I will bring the voice of all Marylanders to Washington.
Rockville, Md.: So you say that like puppies, but no mention of cats? Are you a cat-hater?
Michael Steele: I love cats too! I owned one for 12 years.
Arlington, Va.: Is there any one person in the Senate today that you see as a model for how you would like to be viewed in six years?
Michael Steele: I admire Sen. McCain. I love his independence. Agree or disagree with him, you always know where he stands.
Beltsville, Md.: Can you name we one thing you would do to help clean up the Chesapeake Bay? Do you view the Bay as a local issue or one of national importance?
Michael Steele: The bay is both a local and national issue. but I also want to focus on the Anacostia (70 percent of which is located in Maryland and flows into the Bay). I've worked with the governor on Bay restoration, and look forward as senator to making certain the resources are there for continued efforts to maintain not just the Bay but the overall ecology of Maryland.
Largo, Md.: With the rising prices of housing, how do you plan to address the issue of affordable houses/housing with the still low salaries being paid to Maryland residents?
Michael Steele: Great Question. As Lt. Gov., I launched a program in Maryland called "More House 4 Less," which has helped more than 4000 Marylanders purchase their first home. If elected, I will work to institute a mortgage insurance tax deduction for families with incomes below $100K. I will also work to promote policies to make it easier for all Americans to own their own homes, because home ownership is the foundation for legacy wealth creation and the pathway to the middle class.
Frederick, Md.: The Cardin campaign ads portray you as "loves George Bush." Are there any issues to which you disagree with the Bush Administration or its handling of different issues?
Michael Steele: First. Don't listen to the Cardin campaign.
Second, yes, I disagree with the administration on minimum wage (which I support), affirmative action (which I support), and No Child Left Behind (good idea, poor execution because our teachers have begun to teach to a test).
I also think the administration should recognize it's time to make a course correction on Iraq because the situation there has become a mess. We must begin immediately to put in place benchmarks and strategies to make sure that our soldiers have a safe and effective strategy to come home sooner rather than later.
Chevy Chase, Md.: Please tell us how you agree/disagree with the current policy in Iraq.
Michael Steele: What we have right now in Iraq is a mess. We have a mess that we need to focus full time and attention on, and we need to put in place the benchmarks and the strategies to make sure that those young men and women who are currently serving have a safe, effective strategy to come home. The question that we have to ask ourselves is how do we do that, when do we do that, and how do we begin to put in place those benchmarks. That requires the Iraqi government and the Iraqi people to stand up and defend - and to fight for the very freedom they went to the polls and voted for. Our job there should be nearly done; as they stand up, we stand down. Now is the time, not six months from now, not 18 months from now -- to put that strategy in place so we can begin to see progress and our young men and women can begin to come home.
Landover, Md.: If you have moral objections to the death penalty stemming from your religious beliefs, why do you only support a moratorium on executions for further study of the issue and not outright repeal of the death penalty?
Michael Steele: I do not support the death penalty. I am very concerned about the studies that show that there exists racial and economic disparities that, in my view, should not be ignored. My opponent, Congressman Cardin, and I are very different on this issue. Congressman Cardin favors the death penalty and he has even voted to limit death row appeals. Congressman Cardin has also voted against a second habeas corpus appeal when potentially exculpatory new evidence is discovered. I believe that the possibility of a person being put to death for a crime they did not commit is enough for us to pause and reflect on the nature and effect of any death penalty policy.
Michael Steele: When most of us look at the U.S. Senate today, we see an institution and a power structure that cares more about itself than about our problems. We see lobbyists looking to peddle influence and too many elected officials ready to be influenced unduly. We see multi-national corporations get their way while small businesses struggle to navigate a punishing tax and health care structure. The whole system's broken, and it's time for change. That is why I am running for the United States Senate. I want to shake this system up. I want to see the faith in public service restored. I want our kids to know that there is a tomorrow for them and it will be better than today. I want to make a difference in any small or big way I can. So I ask for your vote and support. I think you're ready for change too.
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.
|
Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael Steele will be online Friday, Oct. 27 at 11 a.m. ET to to take your questions and comments.
| 88.88 | 0.96 | 13.36 |
high
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/10/20/DI2006102001314.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/10/20/DI2006102001314.html
|
Weekend Now - washingtonpost.com
|
2006102619
|
Join the Weekend staff online this Friday, Oct. 20, at 11 a.m. ET to take your questions and comments.
This week we write about how more and more grown-ups are getting into the spirit of Halloween ; visit Vit Goel , a.k.a. Lighthouse Tofu House, a standout among Korean barbecue kitchens in Annandale; check out two exhibits for modern-art lovers at the Phillips Collection ; explore the National Zoo's new six-acre Asia Trail and panda habitat; chat with legendary pianist McCoy Tyner and noted director Terry Gilliam ; and of course review the latest movies .
Read about the staff of the Weekend section.
Curt Fields: Hello and welcome to our weekly chat. Looks like a lot of questions have already been submitted so let's get to it...
Arlington, Va.: Is there any place you know of that won't be having any Halloween festivities this weekend, where some long-lost friends and I can grab and drink or two and enjoy some conversation? I'd like to stay in Arlington, specifically Clarendon/Courthouse. Thanks!
Jenny Abella: Hmm. Let's see. How about Tallula (2761 Washington Blvd.; 703-778-5051)? You could call to see if they're providing an oasis for those looking for a little more conversation and a little less "people in crazy/scary/silly costumes". They have 70 wines by the glass and a lounge. Anyone else have a suggestion?
Wilmington, Del.: Do you know of any events where dogs can participate such as a dog costume contest? Thanks!
Michael O'Sullivan: The American Visionary Art Museum in Baltimore sponsors an annual costumed-pet parade on or around July 4, but you were probably looking for something, um, sooner, right? (Mark your calendar.) Anybody else know of something happening now?
Accokeek, Md.: I've got a 14- and 16-year-old. What would be an evening Halloween outing for them to enjoy in our area? Thanks for taking my question.
Jenny Abella: Why not try a spooky ghost tour? There are tons of 'em across the region, such as in Annapolis and the Riversdale House Museum in Riverdale. Those are bound to give 'em goose bumps! A link to more coming in a bit. Other ideas? Anyone? Anyone?
Montpelier, Vt.: If you had the choice of taking a class in "music video dance" versus a single's cooking class, which would you choose. On the one hand, I do want to learn to dance like Justin Timberlake, but on the other hand, maybe cooking will help me get my sexy back ... It's so difficult to make these choices. Oh, and I'm moving to D.C. after one of these classes, so which skill will suit me better there?
Joyce Jones: What a tough decision. I'd say take the single's cooking class, gives you more of a chance to talk to the other singles and in the long run meeting someone who can really cook is a bigger plus than being able to dance like Justin (Also, can't you figure that out by watching him on video? my theory is either you can dance or you can't. a class isn't going to change it. where as cooking, yeah, a class could make a difference)
this is such a burning question, that I'm sure others might want to chime in...
Eve Zibart: I'm with Joyce (my turn to lead?)...Cooking is much sexier in the long run because once you've got the date in the kitchen, it's a captive audience...besides, Justin will be back out of fashion in another six months; good food never goes out of style!
Curt Fields: Oh Eve, you have so little faith in JT's long term cultural relevance. I'm shocked.
But yeah, cooking seems to be a more handy and beneficial skill in the long run.
Arlington, Va.: Where can a couple in their mid-20s go to be a part of the Halloween festivities that is not a bar crawl for college kids or a community center day for families?
Eve Zibart: A number of restaurants--as opposed to nightclubs, in this sense--are hosting Halloween parties, Chef Geoff's and Helix among them. Or you could probably find a fun crowd at one of the Halloween-ish movies (I'm crazy for "Nightmare Before Christmas" in 3D) or concerts...at Millennium Stage, a pianist is doing the old "Phantom of the Opera" music, then you could skirt the edges of Georgetown and pick your spot.
Fairfax, Va.: Hello, all: Can you tell me, please, whether any places in the No. Va. area (theater or otherwise) will be showing more "light" Halloween-appropriate movies on the evening of the 31st (something even campy, like "Creature from the Black Lagoon")? Not looking for true horror or anything too scary, but more fun while still being in the spirit of the holiday. There is usually someone playing something like that each year, but I've been unable to find a place so far. Of course I could always rent, but there's something about being in a theater ...
Thanks in advance for your help! And if there are any of your readers who know, please feel free to add your comments. Much appreciated.
Christina Talcott: For my money, I'd cross the river for "Young Frankenstein" at the AFI Silver Theatre, part of their "Frankenfest" series. Close to home, you've got lots of options, too: the Psychotronic Film Society is showing "Die You Zombie Bastards!" at 8 at Dr. Dremo's in Arlington (202-707-2540). Maybe Capt. Jack Sparrow's your ticket - "Pirates of the Caribbean 2" is showing at University Mall Theatres. And Arlington Cinema 'N' Drafthouse is hosting a party and an advance screening of the new movie, "Turistas," directed by John Stockwell ("Crazy/Beautiful," "Blue Crush"). In DC, the Library of Congress is showing the classic "Somewhere in Time"; Films on the Hill is showing Laurel & Hardy's "The Live Ghost" and Boris Karloff as a creepy doctor in "The Man With Nine Lives"; and if you want fries with your movie, American City Diner's screening "Rear Window." All these and more are in the Repertory listing in Weekend, starting on page 47.
RE: Delaware Dog Halloween: Hey Wilmington, I'm from that area, and you might like to know that there will be a doggie Halloween party at the Talley Day Bark Park (on Foulk Road). It's scheduled for Saturday at 3:00. Have fun!
Eve Zibart: and naturally, Old Town Alexandria, doggy happy hour heaven, has one, too
Poolesville, Md.: I want to give my husband a flying lesson for his birthday. Could you recommend a good place to go? Thanks!
Eve Zibart: I took one some years ago at the airpark off Route 134 on the way to Laytonsville, that would be pretty close....
Washington, D.C.: I'm thinking of taking a drive to see the fall foliage. Do you have any recommendations on where to go? Do you think the leaves will still be around by next weekend? Thanks!
Joyce Jones: The leaves are still pretty stunning in the area east of the mountains. On the Virginia leave hotline (did you know there was one?) Forester Tim says that the leaves in the Shenandoah Valley are at their peak. And they are peaking in the piedmont. The peak will come in early November on the Eastern Shore. If you want to wait til next weekend, you may want to give either the Va hotline (800-424-5683) or Md hotline a call (800-532-8371) before you plan your trip.
Rockville, Md.: Is Love's dress code still going to be applied this Saturday for the Cypress Hill show? I mean they do know who Cypress Hill's fan-base is right? (i.e., wacky-tobacky crowd.)
Curt Fields: Most likely. They don't tend to make a policy of relaxing it. You could always give a call ahead of time if you just can't bring yourself to meet the dress code guidelines. Love's number is 202-636-9030.
Silver Spring, Md.: Hey guys ...
Movie question. Anybody know if "Flags of Our Fathers" is worth it? I'm in a movie mood tonight, but I am worried that "Flags" won't fly with my girlfriend. Also, anyone hear anything about that movie "Little Children"? I'm open to any new movies though. Thanks!
Michael O'Sullivan: I loved "Little Children," by the writer/director of the Oscar-nominated "In the Bedroom," Todd Field. Desson liked it too. Not sure if it's exactly a date movie though. It's about marital infidelity and a sexual offender. Haven't see "FooF."
Jenny Abella: I saw "Flags of Our Fathers" last weekend and loved it, but I guess I'm just a girl who's into war flicks. It's not a romance, no, but it has more than carnage and bombs exploding -- half of it takes place stateside and there's a lot of character development. You see how war has affected the men internally. In terms of new movies, I recommend "Catch a Fire." It's great.
Michael O'Sullivan: I agree with Jenny. "Catch a Fire" is really top-notch. Dramatic political thriller set in pre-Apartheid South Africa.
Newport, R.I.: Has anyone seen that movie Borat yet? I am stunned that people actually fell for Ali G's hoax and "didn't read the fine print," as all the stories are saying. It seems like it might be a fun movie, but it could probably go either way.
Michael O'Sullivan: I haven't seen the movie, but I've seen Baron Cohen's "Borat" shtick on "Da Ali G Show." I find that the funniest encounters are the ones in which he makes fun of Borat as much as he does his "victims." He's usually so over the top that it's hard to imagine anyone falling for it, but they do.
Christina Talcott: Having watched hours of back-to-back "Ali G" episodes (gotta love Netflix!), I'm looking forward to the movie. BTW I was at SBC's press conference (in front of the Kazakh embassy, with the march to the White House), and he was in fine form. My only disappointment: I've heard that when he's Borat, he wears the suit for days (weeks?) so it's really stinky, but I am sad to tell you that I leaned in for a sniff as he walked by me that day, and he smelled nice and clean. I was crestfallen.
Washington, D.C.: I'm hosting a birthday and Halloween party this Saturday (my birthday is on Halloween). I want a birthday cake, but that doesn't really go with the spooky Halloween theme of the rest of the party. Do you have any ideas?
Eve Zibart: YEAHHHHHHHH HALLOWEEEN BIRTHDAY!!!!! (okay, so I'm prejudiced--it's mine too). Here's some ideas (and what's wrong with devil's food cake? my favorite)How about a prison tower of Halloween-frosted doughnuts...ice cream cones turned upside down on cookies (i.e., witches' hats)and frosted chocolate...hot spiked chocolate in pumpkin mugs...caramel and chocolate apples (black and orange)...pumpkin-shaped carrot cake...ice cream molded into Caspar (vanilla) and a black cat (chocolate)...you could even do a red velvet cake and give it a more gruesome title. One more: root beer floats in frosted mugs, like a witch's brew
Curt Fields: red velvet cake ... mmmm ... (sorry, the southern roots for both Eve and me are showing)
Washington, D.C.: A while back, the Post did a weekend getaway review to a B and B and B -- that's Bed and Breakfast and Beer. Sounds fun! It said the owner serves his own brew and guests can drink as much as they want -- included in the rate. I can't remember the name of the place or where it's located. Please help me find it!
Joyce Jones: I don't recall this showing up in Weekend, but our friends in the Travel section think you may be referring to the Smokehouse Winery and B&B near Sperryville, Va., where owner John Hallberg is part of a renewed trend toward making mead, a wine made from honey instead of grapes.
Does anyone out there know of another BB&B?
Cathedral : Hello everyone! I am attending the Buzzlife event at Wooly Mammouth tonight. I love Scott Henry but was unable to go tommorow night. Can you let me know what kind of music to expect tonight from the DJ's. I haven't had time to check out the Web site but I was curious your opinion?
Richard Harrington: headliner is Hybrid, a progressive breaks/trance trio from Wales' who've also done remixes for Moby, Alanis Morriestte and Radiohead. Costume party there tonight....
Eve Zibart: PS to campy Halloween movies: the Spooky Movie Festival at the CinemaArts in Fairfax is doing 30 new animated, sci-fi, docu-drama, you-name-it flicks this weekend, and the always wonderful Count Gore du Vol is back to host...could be hilarious
Washington, D.C.: Okay. I'm not big on Halloween (I don't hate it, I'm just not into dressing up). So what can I do this weekend that has nothing to do with the holiday?
Jenny Abella: Hey, we accept everyone here in this chat. You could check out the new museum and education center at Mount Vernon -- it just opened today and looks mighty cool. Or there's the Arabian Sights Film Festival sponsored by FilmFest DC at Loews Wisconsin Avenue Theaters, 4000 Wisconsin Ave. NW. For live music, check out the fifth-anniversary party that Jammin' Java is throwing itself Saturday with music for kids during the day and for adults at night. Happy non-Halloween!
washingtonpost.com: Mead in the U.S.A. ( Post, April 19, 2003 )
Alexandria, Va.: Is Terry Gilliam crazy? He thinks teens are going to want to see his movie?
Michael O'Sullivan: Okay, that's two questions, but I'm not going to touch the first one with a ten-foot pole. As for that second one, I don't think he really believes that teens are going to WANT to see it, but that whatever teens do see it will "get it" (and not be irreparably damaged by it). That's assuming that a parent or guardian drags them to it. He told me he knows a 12-year-old boy who saw "Tideland" and thought it was "wild." Look, the man has been living in Europe for the past four decades. He was surprised when I told him that no one under 17 could get into an R-rated movie in this country without a parent or guardian.
Upper Marlboro, Md.: Is Peyroux all she's cracked up to be? How does she compare to McKay, Norah, Krall? Where would you put her in the RIYL spectrum?
Richard Harrington: More focused than McKay, less adventurous than Jones, less showy than Krall. A bit too melancholy for my taste, but a lot of folks are drawn in by that....
Desperate in Chicago: I am a 27-year-old female with no Halloween costume -- I just can't think of anything I want to be. Any suggestions? I am getting desperate!
Eve Zibart: the "Devil Wears Prada" is hot; beg, borrow or steal a Prada handbag (or just this once, it's okay to buy a fake) and a pair of horns...how about wearing a blue tarp, stick some branches on it and a sign that says, "FEMA housing"? (due credit: my husband thought of that)
Fredericksburg, Va.: I'm babysitting my niece (8) and nephew (3) Sunday afternoon. I want to take them somewhere fun, I'm kind of clueless on kids stuff and Fredericksburg (I live in Fairfax). They have already done the big pumpkin patch there, any other ideas? Or can kids do a pumpkin patch twice in one year without being cranky? Oh, and it can't involve eating food due to some wacky allergy issues.
Joyce Jones: From personal experience, YES, kids can go to a pumpkin patch more than once a year. My almost 5 year old twins are set for their second pumpkin patch adventure (And they only went a week ago for their first this year). Pack some approved snacks and take 'em to the patch.
Falls Church, Va.: Do you know of any good farms/pumpkin patches in Northern Virginia that we could visit with a five-month-old? There are ones in Poolesville and Howard County but the little one does not like long car rides ...
Jenny Abella: There are a couple in Fairfax County you could visit. The Burke Nursery in Burke (9401 Burke Rd.) has a pumpkin playground, and Cox Farms (15621 Braddock Rd., at Pleasant Valley and Braddock roads, midway between Routes 29 and 50, about five miles west of Centreville) has a lots of events on the weekends during its Fall Festival. Bring a camera -- you never know when a photo op will strike! A list of other pumpkin patches, mazes and more coming right up shortly.
washingtonpost.com: Farm Trips ( Post, Oct. 6 )
Washington, D.C.: I've never been to a Cirque du Soleil show ... What's this new one about?
Michael O'Sullivan: Having seen a few Cirque shows, I'd say that asking what one is about is like asking what an acid trip is about. That said, the description of "Corteo" on the Cirque Web site calls it "a festive parade imagined by a clown. The show brings together the passion of the actor with the grace and power of the acrobat to plunge the audience into a theatrical world of fun, comedy and spontaneity situated in a mysterious space between heaven and earth.
The clown pictures his own funeral taking place in a carnival atmosphere, watched over by quietly caring angels. Juxtaposing the large with the small, the ridiculous with the tragic and the magic of perfection with the charm of imperfection, the show highlights the strength and fragility of the clown, as well as his wisdom and kindness, to illustrate the portion of humanity that is within each of us."
Harper's Ferry, W.Va.: We're taking a drive to Harper's Ferry on Sunday and I'm hoping for some suggestions on what to do, see, and eat while we're there. Thanks!
Eve Zibart: Most of the museums and Park stuff are sort of at the bottom along the river(s); the whole street that rises up from the river is lined with little shops and restaurants; a lot of them have patios and gardens (if it warms up again). You can usually see a menu posted out front. Hilltop House has the most amazing view, but the food's not much to speak of.
Joyce Jones: Anybody out there got a really cool costume idea they want to share? What are our intrepid chatters going to dress up as this year?
Washington, D.C.: Rain tomorrow. What to do indoors somewhere that's not my house?
Twila Waddy: You can always catch up on a few movies. Alot have come out in the past two weeks. There are a few film festival for Halloween, if you are looking for a good scare.
Leesburg, Va.: For Delaware looking for a dog costume contest, there appears to be one in Woodbridge, Va., on Saturday. Check out The Washington Post Event listings for more details.
Also, for the person looking for a Halloween Birthday cake, Costco does great cakes, complete with a spooky theme, they're very big, very yummy and very affordable.
Curt Fields: Here's some help from a chatter for a couple of earlier questions. Thanks.
Silver Spring, Md.: Petsmart hosts a Halloween Party for pets. Prizes and everything!
Curt Fields: And here's another suggestion.
Our chatters/readers are an informed bunch. We like that!
Avoiding M street: Where can adults get a few costume friendly bars in without paying $10 at each door and avoiding the college crowd on terror at M street.
Eve Zibart: I'd have to guess that the area around Verizon Center, which has a lot of bars and lounges but isn't quite as collegy, would be a fair bet.
Rockville, Md.: Lupe Fiasco ... real deal or lame?
Richard Harrington: Actually, much closer to real deal. For one thing, he's thoughtful and willing to see the grey instead of just the black and white in many scenarios. And as the spouse of a skater, I have to respect him for "Kick Push" alone.
Chicago, Ill.: Hello Weekend Staff!
I'm visiting from Chicago and am wondering if there are any Fall Festivals to check out next month? Thanks, D.C. is great!
Joyce Jones: If you want to share the dates you'll be here, we can give more details, but here's a general view of the next few weeks. Most of the "fall festivals" that involve turning leaves and pumpkins are winding down, but the leaves themselves (and perhaps some festivities) may be peaking on the Eastern Shore, so you should consider a drive out that way if you're looking for fall color while here. But if you just looking for festivals, here are some: Multicultural Children's Book Fest is at the Kennedy Center, Nov. 4; the 2006 National Ski and Snowboard Exp is at Dulles Expo Center, Nov. 10-12; and the Washington Craft Show is at the Washington Convention Center, Nov. 17-19. Enjoy your time here...
Washington, D.C.: Any suggestions on area wineries that would be fun to go to during the day on a weekend in the fall? Also, how do winery visits work exactly?
Eve Zibart: Almost every winery will be open on a weekend afternoon. What generally happens is that there will be a rep (or two) at the bar with a long row of glasses; he/she pours a small sip from all or as many as you're interested in, working from lighter whites to big white, then lighter reds to big and perhaps dessert wines, if they make it. You can buy by the bottle or case. Most have wine-oriented gift stores or nibblies as well: some, including Barboursville and Prince Michel, have serious sit-down restaurants.
Hungryville USA: Your earlier answer got me wondering? Where can I find good red velvet cake around here? Pecan pie? Chicken and dressing? Help, my stomach's flashing back to my childhood.
Christina Talcott: A few years back, I did a round-up of places to buy red velvet cake. Harris Teeter and Giant said they make 'em in their bakeries; here are a few others from that list: Buck's Fishing & Camping (occasionally on the menu, 5031 Connecticut Ave. NW. 202-364-0777), Georgia Brown's (also great Southern-style food, 950 15th St. NW. 202-393-4499),
Red Byrd Restaurant & Motel (19409 Shepherds Town Pk, Keedysville, Md. 301-432-6872), Reeves (1306 G St. NW. 202-628-6350).
Eve Zibart: just make sure it's a flashback, not a reflux!
Mt. Pleasant, Washington, D.C.: Hi Weekenders,
Do you know if the annual trick or treating fest will be happening on Lamont St. in Mt. Pleasant this year?
Michael O'Sullivan: That's my 'hood. I understand that it will be. Thousands of angry 7-year-olds would take to the street with Molotov cocktails--hey, there's a costume idea!--if it was cancelled.
Washington, D.C.: Looking at the lineup, is this DAM! Festival going to be a one-hit wonder? Or do you think it'll be the next SXSW?
Curt Fields: Probably fall somewhere in the middle. You can help it avoid the one-hit wonder fate by turning out to support it (and urging friends to go too). The odds of it becoming another SXSW seem highly unlikely. That's a venerable and (some would say over)hyped event that draws industry types of all kinds.
Washington, D.C.: I'm a Halloween-obsessed 22-year-old with a killer costume (Wonderwoman ... fav superhero of all time) However I'm on some meds and can't booze until Tuesday a.k.a. I'm missing the "Nightmare on M street Bar Crawl." I know Tuesday isn't technically the weekend BUT ... Can you help with any ideas of places to go to make up for being on the Injured list this weekend
Jenny Abella: To us, every day can be the weekend if you put your mind to it... Asylum (2471 18th St. NW) is getting its Halloween on with a "fractured fairy tales" theme on Tuesday with drink specials and a costume contest. Hope you're better!
Lupe: He isn't actually a skater .. so it makes him less the real deal. Plus he's GIANT on self-promotion. I saw him in Chicago at Lolla. He came out as a special guest for Kanye and pretty much showed everyone he was closer to sell out than we had originally thought
Richard Harrington: Sounds somewhat personal. BTW, David Bowie wasn't actually an astronaut, David Byrne wasn't actually a psycho killer, etc, so not sure what Lupe Fiasco's not being actually a skater has to do with it....
Curt Fields: If self-promotion was a negative the airwaves would be dead.
I'm not quite as sold on him as Richard.
washingtonpost.com: Capital Hauntings ( Post, Oct. 6 )
Washington, D.C.: Have bar-goers noticed an uptick in violence on U Street? Around midnight last Friday, my husband and I walked past Bar Nun and were harassed by a group of young thugs. These men blocked our path on the sidewalk and one of them punched our friend in the back of the head as we tried to walk away. I have heard similar stories from others, and I fear that a vibrant neighborhood is being ruined by an unsavory element. My husband and I are debating whether to go back to U Street for nightlife.
Eve Zibart: Well, most of it is anecdotal, but you have to remember that U Street has only fairly recently upscaled, and is still a little uneven. The sort of street harassment you're talking about seems to come and go, perhaps depending on police presence, but I certainly wouldn't give up on it. I would certainly make sure I reported it to the police, though, which itself makes for more beat coverage.
Joyce Jones: The Post has published a couple of stories recently on crime in some of the more popular nightlife areas. One ran on Oct. 13 and was an overview of the types of things that happen and when and where. In yesterday's paper there was a story on a new system where people can map an area and see what kinds of crime occur there. Sorry to hear of your experience. But don't give up on going downtown. (we'll give a link to yesterday's story)
washingtonpost.com: Plotting Crime, Street by Street ( Post, Oct. 26 )
Curt Fields: That concludes our chat for today. Thanks for stopping by and a special thanks to those of you who offered suggestions to your fellow chatters.
Check us out on the radio next Thursday and come back for the next chat on Friday the 3rd. You can tell us if you got mostly treats or not!
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.
| 137.731707 | 0.682927 | 0.829268 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/10/20/DI2006102000895.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/10/20/DI2006102000895.html
|
Tell Me About It
|
2006102619
|
Appearing every Wednesday and Friday in The Washington Post Style section and in Sunday Source, Tell Me About It offers readers advice based on the experiences of someone who's been there -- really recently. Carolyn Hax is a 30-something ex-repatriated New Englander with a liberal arts degree and a lot of opinions and that's about it, really, when you get right down to it. Oh, and the shoes. A lot of shoes.
Been There: I had to respond to the letter in the Post last Friday from the husband who is concerned about his wife's difficulty with being excited about her pregnancy after a string of first trimester losses.
I had three miscarriages before luckily having a happy, healthy daughter. My husband also shared in the writer's frustration with how to reconcile his excitement with my state of panic.
What concerned us both about the letter was the similarity of their experience to ours, and the fact that we had no idea that things would get far worse before they got better.
What no one saw coming was the horrible case of postpartum depression that hit me like a ton of bricks. Fortunately my OB put me in touch with a fantastic psychiatrist who specializes in reproductive mental health. Multiple miscarriage is a huge contributing factor to PPD and I strongly urge this couple to seek medical attention as soon as possible to prevent it or head it off at the pass.
Carolyn Hax: Thanks. They do appear to be connected, so anticipating that might be a big help.
Richmond, Va.: OK, my wife of five years hates my dog. I had him prior to getting married and when we fused as a couple, Spotty came along. I see him as sweet, fun, energetic and cute. She sees him as dirty, irritating, hyper and ever-present (but cute!) We have no kids so this pup is my pride and joy. My wife and I don't argue much, save over the dog, so what is the best way to work through this? Giving him up would greatly pain me, but I'd do it, grudgingly, if it came to it.
Carolyn Hax: I should probably ask first instead of just assuming he's had no real obedience training, but I like my assumption so much I'm going with it. Get him some obedience training. It's neither cute nor necessary for a dog to be hyper, and it's also cruel--because hyper=nervous=unsure of the house rules, and because it's so often the reason dogs lose their homes.
I moved in with my boyfriend about two years ago because we were getting married. A female neighbor still doesn't like the new arrangement because she doesn't acknowledge me or our relationship. She only talks to my husband when I'm not around.
Do you think I should be concerned -- or is it harmless? Should I say something or does my husband need to?
Carolyn Hax: Tough for me to make that call from here, but people on the ridiculous end of the spectrum tend to be harmless. Besides, if there were "harm" here, it would stem from your boyfriend, not from neighbors bent on homewrecking. If you're okay with the way he handles the neighbor, then you're probably okay, and if you're not, then it's time to say something to him.
Backhanded Complimenter: So...I've been looking good lately... new clothes, new haircut, great multivitamin, etc. Proud of myself for taking care of me, even in light of a very demanding job, and even after coming out of a some very low, hard times. Saw my evil mother in law, and the first thing out of her mouth was, "Are you pregnant? People like you don't look this good unless they're knocked up?"
I am still smarting, because I was feeling so confident and so good about myself. Should I have taken it as a compliment? Is there some humor in this that I am just not seeing?
FWIW... not pregnant. At all. Not even a little bit.
Carolyn Hax: There's always humor in how far people will go to retain the upper hand. She knows she gets to you. Be happy in knowing you got to her, too, finally--and congratulations on the transformation.
For Richmond, Va.: He should also take some time to take the dog for a long walk each day. Tires the dog (making him more pleasant to be around) and gives the wife a bit of a break from the dog's presence. Worked for us...
Carolyn Hax: Right on the wet nose. Tired dogs are good dogs, bored ones misbehave. Day one of owner obedience training.
Jobs: Do you think we'll all look back on our lives when we're old and gray and wish we had worked less and spent more time with loved ones more? I have a full-time job I really like and a part-time job which I took just for fun. But I can't help but miss the free time I used to have with my wife. Have considered quitting the PT job, but the excuse "I miss my free time with my wife" sounds so silly in reality, though I suspect it's a perfectly good reason. What do you think?
Carolyn Hax: It's a great reason. If I had to generalize, I'd say we'll live to regret living according to generalizations instead of doing what's right for ourselves and those close to us.
And if liking your wife sounds silly, then marriage definitely needs a new publicist.
Richmond, Va.: RE Wife hates dog scenario:
As much as the writer says it would pain him to give up his dog, it would pain the poor dog even more. I work in dog rescue, and I see the suffering dogs experience when their humans abandon them. Please, please get the obedience training, and if that for some unlikely reason should not work, call one of the many reputable rescue groups in Richmond to get information on rehoming your dog responsibly. He will still suffer, but at least he will survive.
Carolyn Hax: Great, now I'm going to cry. But thank you.
I'm also going to change the subject, if any of you are getting worried.
Washington, D.C.: My best friend and her husband had themselves their first baby about eight weeks ago. What's an average timeframe before I can reasonably expect her to express an interest in my life again? I understand our friendship has changed forever on some levels and that things are going to be stressful for her for a while, and I'm willing to shoulder the balance of that for however long I'm supposed to. At some point, though, I'm going to need my friend back, even if it's only for five minutes on the phone once a week. (It probably goes without saying that I am single and childless.) How long will it be all baby, all the time, before I am justified in getting a little annoyed about it? Online only, please, thank you!
Carolyn Hax: If your friend, conceptually, can't hear or talk about anything non-baby, it's about your friend and it's not changing anytime soon, most likely.
If your friend, literally, can't hear or talk about anything--over the baby's screaming or through her own sleep deprivation--then it's about you and you need to be more patient.
Either way, eight weeks is a little early to be expecting anything about your friend "back." Some babies are easier than others and some parents are more laid-back than others, but almost all newborns find a way to suck every last free thought and minute out of their parents, at least until parents and babies get to know each other well enough to strike some kind of deal.
So if you're going to speak up about feeling neglected--which is a perfectly fair thing to do--please at least wait till the baby's about four months old.
Washington, D.C.: Hi Carolyn, love the chats!
How do you stop yourself from being insecure about a new relationship that has moved on from the initial two-month stage of intensity, butterflies, lots of togetherness, into what is presumably a more settled, comfortable stage.
I have myself convinced he's going to break up with me any second, and I hate being so insecure. (I was dumped suddenly and out of the blue last spring, and I hate that this is still affecting my thought process).
I am reading into everything he says and does, and everything he doesn't say and do, looking for signs.
Carolyn Hax: please remind yourself that you have some power here, too. While we certainly can't make people like us or stop them from dumping us, it's incredibly self-defeating to slam yourself reflexively into the role of Waiting to See What S/He does. It's essentially the same as declaring that you want him no matter what he says or does, and your only focus now is to keep him. Well, he may be great, but nobody's that great, to get a free pass from any further thought or scrutiny.
So, think, and scrutinize. What do YOU want from this person, what are YOU doing to get that, what are YOU feeling after you and he see each other, what do YOU think of HIS jokes/manners/ideas/behavior/ways of showing affection? Do you even like him? Is he really someone you want, or do you just -not- want to get dumped? And is that enough of a foundation for being with somebody?
Think of it as letting your brain take a few slow deep breaths, so it doesn't hyperventilate.
BAR: The bar results come out at 4:30 for Georgia and I can't sit still and the dread is INTENSE. What can I do to relax? I'm supposed to be doing legal work.
Carolyn Hax: Do legal work. Whatever is going to happen has already happened.
Speaking of upper hand and one upping: So co-worker always does things smarter, faster, better than anyone else. Some talks about how they saved $10 on a book, he interrupts to tell how he saved $50. If someone had to work two jobs to get through school, he worked three. I honestly think if someone came in and said, "wow my weekend was rough. i was gang-banged by biker gnomes," he would say "oh that reminds me of the time i was gangbanged by goth biker gnomes."
Not trying to sound bitter, jealous or anything beyond annoyed since others are trying to tell their stories. Besides just walking away, any ideas?
Carolyn Hax: You know, goth biker gnomes have a hard enough time assimilating without these random, baseless attacks.
Just say, "Wow, you don;t say," or whatever non-response comes to you. Even though you're probably right that it's one-upsmanship, it doesn't sound malicious (like the mother-in-law) so much as scared--like he's socially awkward and wants to participate/show empathy but hasn't a clue how to do it without accomplishing the virtual opposite. Just a theory.
Atlanta, Ga.: Why is everyone so focused on having children? I see a world that is already over-populated and unsustainable and would not want to bring a child into this mess. Am I the only one that feels this way? Is popular culture driving it (graduate, get married, buy house, have children, divorce...)? So is it nature, nuture, a combination or just shortsightedness? What am I missing?
Carolyn Hax: Not "everyone" is so focused on having children. Take the chip off your shoulder and just let us respect your choice not to have kids. People combine their circumstances and values and ideals and beliefs and either choose to have kids or they don't. Thinking people can come to different conclusions, and neither conclusion has sole claim to the moral high ground.
Unless you voluntarily decline to collect Social Security, or health care, legal work, or grocery-bagging performed people younger than you are. Then it's allll yours.
Charming...: I'm absolutely charming when I'm not attracted to a woman and incredibly shy when I am. I have a bevy of married and older women friends that just think I am the bomb. Attractive, intelligent, equalitarian, sensitive, caring, etc. You know, everything women claim they like in a man. Anyway, I haven't dated for almost four years. Any suggestions?
Carolyn Hax: Dating is a rough way to get to know people--so loaded with expectations, and therefore nerves, miscues, and excessive spending. Proximity is a much more forgiving way to go; just being around the same people on a regular basis allows for second, third, ninth impressions, which eases pressure and lets people see each other in a more natural light. As in, the way you know your married/older female friends. How you get proximity is up to you, and isn't always easy, but most people get it in ways they don't even realize, through work, school, church, neighbors, where you buy coffee and do your errands. If those aren't expanding your social circle the way you'd liek, then you move into signing up for things that align well with your interests. Then you either meet people who share your interests, or you just spend your time on something that interests you, which can't be all bad.
One up with Kids: So my kids aren't perfect, but apparantly my co-worker's only child is. How do I listen to the constant "Joey is reading at a 8th grade level at age 4" and "Joey was awarded the most amazing pre-schooler trophy?" I try to be happy for the kid and say what a great kid (s)he is ((s)he is really just a regular child, with some gifts, like every child). I find myself resenting both the parent and child.
Carolyn Hax: No! Feel for the poor kid. No little shoulders can carry expectations like that. Sorry you have to listen to the momster, though, and whomp up endless daily variations on, "You don't say ..."
Virginia: Do you believe we do not choose who we fall in love with? It just happens?
Carolyn Hax: I think a good deal of attraction is subconscious, but unless you're forced into proximity with someone, it's conscious choice to keep that person's company, long enough and often enough for love to develop.
BTW, I also think the subconscious can be adjusted, by choice, by paying attention to habits and patterns and etc.
Childless in Atlanta: Wow; talk about chips on shoulders (the response); why not answer the question? Why DO people today have children? Both parents work and have hardly any free time and everyone seems stressed out with the soccer games, etc. It's no longer to help out with the farm work. Is it for ego (to make "mini-me's"), to seem "normal" in society's eyes or please the family, to have a built-in caretaker in old age? My theory is that it's in response to a basic existential crisis; introducing another life gives your own life meaning, which actually seems to me to be a viscious cycle. We childless-by-choice want to know.
Carolyn Hax: How is your answer not an in-your-face judgment of people who choose to have children?
And how was mine angry or defensive? My point was that both choices are fine. In fact, both are necessary. Older people need a younger generation to sustain them. And, a younger generation needs not to be so recklessly produced that there aren't resources enough to sustain them. So, some people have kids and some don't, and they all rush their urges to be smug and judgmental into the nearest soundproof room.
Washington, D.C.: My friend went through a super needy period. She has recently admitted to it and is sort of getting better. I can't seem to get over the image of the crazy-need-focus-on-me girl and just see my friend. I know things were tough, but why am I still so worked up about it?
Carolyn Hax: I don't know. Have any theories?
When do fleeting and indulgent thoughts of suicide become cause for concern? If I'm tired or bored and it's led me to a depressive mood, I'll often find myself thinking that I should just step off the curb and into traffic. Once I catch the thoughts, I snap myself out of it and return to reality, where I am in no way a suicidal person. I'm wondering, though, if I should consider what are probably merely broken-record-melodramatic daydreams as something more sinister, something that I should keep my eye on. Your thoughts?
Carolyn Hax: My thoughts are that we all have dire thoughts, sometimes. Who can be near the curb on a busy street and not ever wonder ...?
But of you're having these thoughts as part of something you know to be a "depressive" mood--i.e., if you have a known illness, a history of illness or even a recurring suspicion of illness, then I can't see any reason not to make an appointment. Better to be out an hour and 150 bucks than ... ?
Childless in Alexandria: Hey Atlanta, speak for yourself! I don't have or want kids but I would never try to boil down the desire to have them as an "existential crisis". Geez, I don't have kids because I don't want to. Others have kids because they do. Why read any more into it than that?
Carolyn Hax: It's a good question. Driving a $130,000 gas hog is pop culture meets existential crisis; having kids is a little more complicated.
One-upping co-worker: (Not the one with the perfect child; that one will just become the butt of jokes during off-hours conversations, if my office is any example)
For the "my weekend is better than your weekend" guy, I recommend a tag team approach: one of you gets to have the Best Weekend Ever, the other the Worst Weekend Ever. Cow-orker is so conflicted about whether his weekend was better than the best or worse than the worst, he will disappear in a puff of quantum logic. It will be great, and you might even get a Novel Prize.
Carolyn Hax: Sounds good, but I want the Navel Prize.
I feel stuck. I am stuck. Stuck in a marriage I'm not sure I should be in, stuck in a company I'm not sure I want to be an employee of, stuck in a mid-30s panic about whether to have children. I feel unfulfilled, unmotivated, unsure. I've been to therapists. Two. They were nice and helpful in getting me to think about patterns and past behavior and being true to whoever I am, but they never un-stuck me. Not sure what to do now.
Carolyn Hax: Pick one small thing that you think will make your life better (better-better, not 20-minutes better followed by hangover followed by making life worse), and start doing it. Exercise, a new skill, a hobby, a tough conversation, something that makes -you- better. Hint: It's probably something you already know but are making excuses to avoid because you're afraid of it for some reason--maybe because it runs counter to how you normally see yourself.
Try that, in earnest; give it time to show results; write back if it doesn't help.
Washington, D.C.: What?! I've never ever been near a curb on a busy street and thought I should step out in front of traffic. Doesn't seem normal to me and something more than "just should be watched". Possible indicator of bipolar disorder?
Carolyn Hax: Well, there are distinctions within this that are really important, I believe. Thinking "I should step out in traffic" is a thought that belongs in a doctor's office; thinking, "Wow, there's nothing to keep a person from stepping out in traffic" is just, I dunno, appreciating that life is a pretty thin thread.
Which brings me back to, anyone who is worried should heed that and consult with a reputable therapist.
Help!: How does one distinguish between a mere crush and feelings for another person that are more substantial?
Carolyn Hax: Preferably, by the potential consequences of acting on the feelings.
On Having Children: Having a child needs to be more than a choice. It is a moral delimna that I don't think you are considering carefully enough. The caring capacity of the earth is finite, and at some point people have to decide whether their desire for children (which is legitimate, I feel it myself) is outweighed by the need to make the earth a better place. Don't you think that should at least be a consideration?
Carolyn Hax: That -I'm- not considering carefully enough?
I have potential parents weighing their "circumstances and values and ideals and beliefs." I make the disctintion that "Thinking" people can come to different conclusions. That's hardly an endorsement of breeding at will. Concern for the capacity of the earth falls under values, ideals, beliefs AND circumstances.
Re: Help!: How does one distinguish between a mere crush and feelings for another person that are more substantial?
Carolyn Hax: Preferably, by the potential consequences of acting on the feelings.
I don't get it, what does your answer mean??
Carolyn Hax: Meaning, if there are dire consequences, treat it as a crush, and if there aren't dire consequences, test it out for signs of real substance.
Oh, C'mon: Bipolar disorder? I'm all for diagnosing mental illness, but we're just talking about the feeling one gets at the edge of a roof - what if?
Between thinking that everyone who has kids, or doesn't have kids, is suffering from a diagnosable mental illness of some sort, and thinking that the occasional random thought warrants hospitalization, this is turning into one heck of a Friday afternoon.
Carolyn Hax: You forgot the Goth Biker Gnomes.
I feel the urge to slam my head into my keyboard. Clearly I am hgcljhgdpolar.
For Stuck in Chicago: And DON'T have kids until you are unstuck and SURE you want them!!
Carolyn Hax: Right, right. Missed that. Sorry.
Idiot wind: How do you fight character assasination, people generating rumors that are misleading or untrue? People are such social cows that this can be a huge problem, no one ever thinks to ask me my side of any of this crap.
Carolyn Hax: I'm not sure I have an answer, i just like "Idiot wind."
Ignore it, I guess; behave as the person who clearly would not do these rumored horrible things; let the rumormongers keep behaving as people who would do horrible things, such as spread rumors; correct the record as opportunity presents.
Anonymous: Seriously, Carolyn, Vikings or Pats? I have to finish up the office pool and I can decide.
Carolyn Hax: Pats. If you lose, that's your punishment for asking me.
--Person Who Walked Up Ramp to Upper Deck of Gillette Stadium While 7 Months Pregnant With Twins
Arlington, Va.: Do you think differences in religious belief is an impossible relationship hurdle, say Evangelical vs. Darwinist? Sometimes I look at Matalin and Carville and think anything is possible.
Carolyn Hax: In so many ways.
Sometimes differences in beliefs are just differences in how you arrange the spiritual furniture. Sometimes, it's about living life on different planets. Up to you to figure out which is the case.
Re: Traffic stepper: So is it or isn't it normal to think about these things? I never thought it was abnormal and I never thought about actually doing it but the thought that you can change the course of your life (if you succeed or not when steping out) and somebody else's life (that who ran you over) is very powerful, and scary. And makes you consider how sacred you view your life and others. Society functions and lives on this very thin line of what's acceptable or not and we're relying on the people around us (in the next car in traffic, or walking down the street past us, etc.) to behave as society dictates and not do something crazy and hope they value life the way that you do, and vice versa (like if you step out in traffic, consider how it can possibly ruin the person's life who just ran you over).
Carolyn Hax: What you said. I think it's totally normal, and at the root of what it is to be philosophical.
Needy friend: Having trouble getting over your needy friend? Try this jacket on and see how it fits: You resent her ability to request/demand what she needs because you can't do it yourself.
If she had broken her foot and been on crutches and needed rides from you, help with doors, carrying things, etc. would you still be cheezed off?
Can you accept your own weaknesses or do you despise it so much in yourself that you despise it when others show it?
I'm still working on that last one, myself.
Carolyn Hax: Interesting take, thank you.
Parent to nursing home?: Any advice on how one goes about having their parent put into some kind of care facility? She simply can't care for herself, and Dad can't keep doing it. She's lucid sometimes, other times she makes up terrible stories about family members and tells it to strangers in the drug store. Where do I start?
Carolyn Hax: Talk to her doctor; talk to the head of a local senior center; talk to someone in the geriatrics dept of the nearest hospital; if your mom is religious, talk to someone in that community about good care providers. That's just a start, but generally you start to hear the same names over and over once you start asking.
Keep an ear out for family support resources, too--it's a tough thing to do, a lot of guilt to go around.
RE: Idiot Wind: BTW, Idiot Wind is a Dylan song.
Carolyn Hax: Did he offer any advice?
I had a great first date! I'm hopeful! How do I not screw this up?
Carolyn Hax: Don't be hopeful!
Pregnant with twins: We need a new word to express "pregnant with twins". Can you or your readers suggest some? The word pregnant does not lend itself to retooling, so I'm having a very hard time.
Re: Stuck: I hate to say this but sometimes therapy requires alot of time and a not so nice therapist. It took me 7 years and 3 therapists to work out some issues of mine. There were times when I was frustrated, felt like I was spinning my wheels, "wasting money" on therapy, etc. But, in the end, it was all worth it. I'm not perfect by any stretch. I still have some residual issues. But, I don't feel depressed or hopeless the way I did. The difference internally is still very apparent to me and friends from that period say they almost don't recognize me.
I'm not saying that YOU have to use therapy, just that you might consider trying again with a therapist who may push you a little harder to challenge some of your patterns and the underlying beliefs/ideas.
Carolyn Hax: Thanks. One more therapy ad:
Brentwood, Md.: I think that Washington, D.C., should definitely get screened for depression. He/she said they "often" have these thoughts of stepping into traffic. Also, I wouldn't just go to any therapist, but I would go to one who works in cooperation with a psychiatrist who can prescribe medications. If you have to go to a primary care dr first to get a referral, so be it. But if it's a serious thing, you'll want to see a psych. For the past year, I've been working with a therapist and a psychiatrist to deal with what I now see to be lifelong depression and anxiety. I think it's important to work with someone who is a specialist and knows about all the different possible drug combinations.
Carolyn Hax: The point about cooperation is a good one, for people who do go the screening route. Thanks.
Charming to whom?: FWIW - "charming" consistently described himself in terms of other people's perceptions: e.g. "married and older women friends think I am...attractive, intelligent, equalitarian, sensitive, caring everything women claim they like in a man." He might encounter more success with women/greater happiness in life by making sure that HE likes who he is (most of the time, at least). If you require a glowing report card from your prospects, anyone would have reason to be stressed, which might translate into a lack of interpersonal connections.
Carolyn Hax: Possible he set it up that way to make the comparison between types of women he knows--but, that said, you make a lot of sense. Thanks.
Washington, D.C.: How do I deal with probably well meaning co workers who assume that because I am quiet at work there must not be anything to me? I have sometimes a too active social life, obligations to activities and groups, and I do some freelance work, so when I'm at work, I just want to get my work done. I am more friendly and relaxed around the people my age, but I try to have a more respectful and professional demeanor around older people. It's frustrating to get comments like "wow, you do X, I always thought you were so uninteresting" or a surprised expression when I have a fun answer to "what did you do last night?" Why do people assume that just because I'm not making a big effort to be best friends with coworkers I don't have anything in common with, that I must be quiet and boring in my personal life? And how do I stop caring about that anyway?
Carolyn Hax: That's the real question, why do you care.
Well, after the other real question, why you're judging people based on age.
Do your work, treat all people fairly and let time sort it all out.
Washington, D.C: It's me, the "traffic stepper" (I'm adopting the moniker for the purposes of this chat only; never fear). I was diagnosed with low-level chronic depression years ago, but I'd never experienced suicidal tendencies. Basically what I'm asking is how to understand the difference between an indulgent depressive thought ("Oh my life is worthless yada") and an actual suicidal impulse. I hadn't actually articulated my concerns before this, though, because up until recently, my life had been going very smoothly. Lately, I've been more down than I would like, however, and now that I've written in here and gotten some feedback, I think it's pretty clear that some investigative therapy couldn't hurt my case at all. But to put all the chatters at ease, I don't have any plans to off myself or to ruin the life of a motorist, or possibly kill him or her. I think I really just needed to put my concerns on paper, so to speak. Thanks for the forum.
Carolyn Hax: Thank you, and thanks for putting your thoughts into words and getting us all thinking.
Traffic-stepper here: It's been a bad several weeks and I'm getting close to traffic-stepping today. Great timing for the chat, eh?
Any words of wisdom to someone who has worked so hard at so much only to find it all failing her, a week before her birthday?
Feeling sad, sick, and desperate. Tried submitting a more-rounded-out question but guess it got lost in the mix.
Carolyn Hax: First, the stuff I can't skip: If you fear for yourself, get help. Thank yew.
Now: wisdom. Heh. The experience you're having now is the source of wisdom here, not me. It's telling you that hard work is a guarantee of nothing--except, I suppose, for the knowledge that you have in fact worked hard.
Which is no small comfort, actually. Watching everything go to crap when you know you could have done more is actually worse, since then you can find no end of ways to blame yourself.
In your case, you gave whatever-it-is a hell of a shot and it didn't work out. It happens, it happens, it happens. Sometimes there's nothing in it for anybody, but I think that's extremely rare. Instead, almost always, there's a prize in there that's bigger than the thing you were originally after--the knowledge that you can fall as hard as you're falling now, and then get back up. It takes a while for it all to play out, but when it does, you'll have an inner resource you didn't have before. Till then, just wait for the WALK signal, please. Thanks.
Maryland: I'm flying out to meet my boyfriend's folks for the first time tonight. We're staying with them for the WHOLE weekend... Any advice?
Carolyn Hax: Offer to help and mean it; don't try to be someone you're not; make eye contact; skip the baked beans; send a thank-you note.
Monster blunder for a friday afternoon: HELP! I've been casually dating several guys I met through an online dating service. The inevitable happened - I called John Doe thinking it was John Buck and left a message. Is there any way to recover from this? I'm pretty sure it was a harmless message, and we've only had one date.
Carolyn Hax: If John Doe laughs, it's a great sign. If he doesn't, it was one date.
Luxembourg, Luxembourg: Do you think it's ridiculous for a 40-year-old guy to get hair plugs for a receding hairline?
Carolyn Hax: The hairline keeps receding; the plugs do not. The math is doable.
Boston, Mass.: Help! I've been doing almost nothing but studying for a Ph.D for the last six years and I think I've lost all my social skills. Now that I have a little more time to go out, I feel like the world's most boring person-I can barely remember how to engage in interesting conversation anymore. Any tips on how to reconnect with people?
Carolyn Hax: T-shirt with: Humor me, I've just spent six years in my head.
Or: Start enjoying all the things you had to give up for your PhD--newspapers, magazines, movies, music, restaurants. Consuming culture is to be in the culture, which is to be in a position to converse. Like riding a bike, right?
Burlington, Canada: My boss is very mean. But I don't really need advice in terms of getting out of here. I am trying and looking actively for a new job. But for a bit I am still here. Any good jokes or funny stories that will get me through the day? Nuts?
Carolyn Hax: Mean Boss walks into a bar ...
Syracuse, N.Y.: Carolyn, what is your opinion on obtaining a professional background check on a potential marriage partner?
Carolyn Hax: How would you feel if that partner did it to you?
Carolyn Hax: Will put Liz out of her misery. Bye, all, thank you, and type to you next week.
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.
| 177.219512 | 0.536585 | 0.682927 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601575.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601575.html
|
After Many Battles, Still on the Front Lines
|
2006102619
|
Karin Johanson loves studying the tiny print in the dozens of political polls that land on her desk every morning. She can tell you what's happening in Indiana's 8th Congressional District at any given moment, and why 20 volunteers must be dispatched pronto to an obscure precinct in Michigan.
She can also probably predict with scary accuracy how many seats Democrats will pick up in the Nov. 7 midterm elections -- but she's too superstitious to say.
Johanson, 51, is one of those people whose names you never hear, a political junkie who has been toiling in the backwaters of Democratic politics for more than 30 years -- and one who is playing a huge role in the party's efforts to regain the House.
She is the executive director of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the minority party's campaign organ colloquially known as the "D Triple C," and she knows more about the individual races in the 435 congressional districts than most of the candidates do.
If her boss, the outspokenly partisan Rep. Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), is the aggressive face of the Democratic push, Johanson is his anchor, the person who can sit at her office near the Capitol and see the whole country at a glance -- or in critical little parts that might add up to a win.
"She's Rahm's other side," says friend Mary Beth Cahill, who ran Sen. John F. Kerry's presidential bid in 2004. "Someone has to be there every day to make sure everything works."
This Johanson does with a staff of 60 (all quite young), a volunteer pool of 700 and a budget of $40 million, $10 million of which goes straight into the districts for grass-roots efforts. Yesterday, she had 100 active broadcast political commercials in her e-mail queue waiting to be viewed.
"Karin put together 40 customized plans in 40 districts with 40 ground operations," Emanuel said. "She has intimate knowledge of every district. She knows what works and what doesn't because she's been there before. I'm a very obsessive person, and I give her six things to do and she does seven."
Johanson has indeed been down this road many times before, as the DCCC's West Coast political director in the 1994 (Democratic nightmare) cycle and political director in 2000. Before that, she was political director of Emily's List -- the political action committee that supports female candidates -- during the 1992 "year of the woman." Twenty-one new Democratic women were elected to the House, and Emily's List founder Ellen Malcolm credits Johanson with recruiting most of them.
"She knows every player in every district," Malcolm said. Even after 1995, when the GOP took control of the House, Johanson was not deterred from recruiting candidates. "We'd say, 'What about so-and-so?' and Karin would say, 'Oh, I asked her twice, and she said no,' " Malcolm said. "Everyone was saying no, but she was persistent, and the environment started to shift."
Johanson grew up in Princeton, N.J., and recalls being a partisan very early. She was for Eugene McCarthy when she was 12 because she opposed the Vietnam War, and she named her pet goldfish Hubert, Horatio and Humphrey. She attended American University but took some time off before graduating to work for then-Rep. Gladys N. Spellman (D-Md.). Later, she spent 10 years working for Rep. Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.), as his press secretary and later as his chief of staff.
Johanson said that after Democrats lost the House in 1994, she couldn't bring herself to go up to the Hill for a year. "It was too depressing. I didn't want to see Republicans," she said. "I didn't even go up to the credit union."
Although she said she won't let herself get too enthusiastic this year about what seems to be a Democratic wave, Johanson admits that it feels very different. "There is a huge energy among Democrats out there. We know what we running against." Unlike in 2004, when Democrats struggled to find issues, she said, this year "we're not making it up."
The war in Iraq, she said, is the dominant issue "because there is something there for everyone to be concerned about -- whether it's expenditures, or body armor, or questions about why our government hasn't done better to prepare the Iraqis.
"Even people who support the war think something needs to be done," she said. "And all these scandals -- it's been overwhelming."
Johanson said the DCCC is treating 54 districts as competitive -- an unusually high number.
At a time in life when most political operatives have already jettisoned the high-adrenaline life of retail politics and a constant diet of fast food, Johanson isn't going anywhere soon.
"I love electoral politics," she said. "I like being in the fight. I think everything else is boring by comparison. I think everybody who has done it loves it, but most people feel like they have to do something else."
|
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.
| 26.333333 | 0.564103 | 0.615385 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601891.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601891.html
|
Defiant Iraq War Foe Defined by Vietnam
|
2006102619
|
James Webb will tell you that he is first a writer, with several best-selling novels to his name. He is also the descendant of brave-hearted Scots-Irish who stood up to English kings. He is a husband and father of four.
But above all, Webb is still in his heart a combat Marine. His defining moment came in Vietnam, and he remains loyal to the men he led and the memories he formed there. Once a year or so he reunites with former comrades. At Arlington National Cemetery, he visits the graves of others, often leaving Marlboro cigarettes for his buddy, Snake.
Now, Webb, a Naval Academy graduate who once dreamed of wearing a Marine Corps general's stars, has become a face of the movement against the Iraq war. The man who admired President Ronald Reagan and served his Republican administration as a cocky secretary of the Navy is one of the Democrats' best hopes to wrest control of the Senate from the GOP as he challenges incumbent George Allen.
That this warrior rails against the war is only one of the contradictions in Webb's life, just a hint of the complexities and ironies that make him an uneasy candidate. He has switched from Democrat to Republican and back to Democrat -- first in anger because of President Jimmy Carter's pardon of people who avoided the draft, and now because of the Iraq war.
At 60, Webb, who says he loves writing because of the independence -- "You can sit on a park bench, and no one knows who the hell you are" -- is running for a chamber where there is no anonymity, and people can't switch parties when things don't go their way. Even his good friends question whether he has the temperament to serve in Congress.
"It's no secret that I'm not a person who wears a bridle well," he once said after clashes with his bosses at the Defense Department.
His friends also wonder whether it was Webb's temperament that led at least partially to his writing a Washingtonian magazine article in 1979 about women in combat called "Women Can't Fight" that some female midshipmen say encouraged hostility and sexual harassment.
The inflammatory article has become one of the turning points of the Senate campaign and a key reason why Webb is not enjoying the success among female voters that other Virginia Democrats have, according to a recent Washington Post poll.
The article still resonates. "Now you've got a bona fide war hero -- and I'll never take that away from Jim Webb, because he was a war hero -- and he just lined up every woman there and publicly executed us," said retired Navy Cmdr. Kathleen Murray, a 1984 Annapolis graduate who lives in Norfolk.
Paul E. Roush, a retired Marine colonel, wrote in a 1997 naval journal that Webb's article was "the single greatest purveyor of degradation and humiliation on the basis of one's gender that academy women have had to endure." And several Navy women said Webb's views later resurfaced in his writings, speeches and actions as Navy secretary.
Dogged by the issue during the campaign, Webb has dismissed the article as old news and apologized for its excesses, especially a crack in which he called a dormitory at the school a "horny woman's dream."
Webb isn't comfortable talking about the Washingtonian article. He acknowledges that he's not at ease at fundraisers or pressing the flesh in a large crowd, either. That, perhaps, is the most curious contradiction of all.
|
James Webb will tell you that he is first a writer, with several best-selling novels to his name. He is also the descendant of brave-hearted Scots-Irish who stood up to English kings. He is a husband and father of four. Webb isn't comfortable talking about the Washingtonian article. He... Battle......
| 10.71875 | 0.953125 | 40.953125 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601874.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601874.html
|
In South Africa, a Dramatic Shift on AIDS
|
2006102619
|
JOHANNESBURG -- The South African government is seeking to shake off years of international denunciation for its handling of the AIDS epidemic -- including a fixation on the supposed protective powers of beets and lemons -- while expanding treatment, testing and prevention programs, officials and activists say.
In public comments and private meetings over the past six weeks, Deputy President Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka has emphasized that the government now believes unequivocally that HIV causes AIDS, a connection that President Thabo Mbeki once publicly questioned. She has also said that antiretroviral drugs must be the centerpiece of the government's response while playing down the dietary recommendations long cited by Health Minister Manto Tshabalala-Msimang as key to fighting AIDS.
"The beetroot and all that lemon stuff is out the window," an adviser involved in recasting the government's policy said on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly about it. "These guys are now serious about getting it right."
Driving the recent change is a growing realization of the severity of AIDS in South Africa -- an estimated 5.4 million of 47 million citizens have HIV, among the highest totals in the world -- and concern that the controversy surrounding the disease was damaging the country's international reputation.
The Treatment Action Campaign, the country's leading AIDS activist group, said that after years of hostility and legal battles, government officials were working cooperatively with members to realize some of their long-standing demands, such as setting targets for dramatically expanding the availability of antiretroviral drugs through the public health system. Mlambo-Ngcuka, who has taken control of the national AIDS commission, has met privately with the group.
"There's clearly a shift taking place," said Zackie Achmat, the head of the Treatment Action Campaign.
Officials say that Tshabalala-Msimang, often ridiculed as "Dr. Beetroot," will maintain some role in AIDS policy, but activists say they are confident she has been effectively marginalized by the appointment of Mlambo-Ngcuka to oversee the government's response to the disease. Government officials privately acknowledge that Tshabalala-Msimang had become an embarrassment, and activists say the tenor of conversations with the government has changed dramatically since the deputy president took over.
"I'm still skeptical, and I'm still waiting for the proof," said Francois Venter, head of the Southern African HIV Clinicians Society. "But there's been a switch, the most hopeful switch in years, over the past four or five weeks."
Mbeki's comments questioning the relationship between HIV and AIDS stirred international outrage in 2000, and the government lagged even some less developed African nations in introducing subsidized antiretroviral drugs, which can prolong the lives of those with the disease by many years, perhaps decades. The first government program distributing the drugs began here in April 2004. South Africa's far smaller northern neighbor, Botswana, began two years earlier.
The South African program has grown steadily in the past 2 1/2 years and now reaches about 200,000 people with AIDS -- roughly one-quarter of those estimated to need the medicine immediately. But the demand for the drugs has grown faster than the program could handle despite major new government spending, including $400 million for AIDS programs this year alone.
"There were weaknesses on the implementation side of things," a government spokesman, Themba Maseko, said from Pretoria.
A turning point came in August, at the International AIDS Conference in Toronto, where Tshabalala-Msimang sponsored a display featuring lemons, beets and garlic but no antiretroviral drugs. An interview that Tshabalala-Msimang had with ABC's "Nightline" that same week renewed fears that she and Mbeki did not accept the two-decade-old scientific consensus that HIV causes AIDS.
"President Mbeki said, 'It cannot be the virus alone, we must look at other, other issues that predispose people to the immune system being depressed,' and I am of the same view also," Tshabalala-Msimang said on "Nightline."
The following day, Stephen Lewis, the U.N. special envoy for HIV/AIDS in Africa, denounced the South African government's view as "wrong, immoral and indefensible." Two weeks after that, 81 AIDS scientists from South Africa and around the world signed a letter calling on Mbeki to fire Tshabalala-Msimang.
The president refused. But those events, combined with a government report blaming AIDS for a massive surge of deaths among South Africans in their 20s, 30s and 40s, prompted Mbeki to appoint Mlambo-Ngcuka to lead an urgent review of AIDS programs, pushing Tshabalala-Msimang out of the spotlight, officials say.
In a speech to labor leaders on Sept. 19, Mlambo-Ngcuka said, without qualification, that HIV causes AIDS. She acknowledged "shortcomings" in the government's response to the disease so far. She mentioned the value of a sensible diet but made clear its limits.
"It should be stressed that a healthy lifestyle and good nutrition are not alternatives to treatment," she said, according to a transcript.
Mlambo-Ngcuka also called for peace between the government and its many critics on AIDS. "Our collective response has for too long been undermined by finger-pointing and despair. I appeal to you that we change that," she said.
AIDS activists said they initially reacted warily, but after meeting privately with Mlambo-Ngcuka, including a session Tuesday in Cape Town that lasted nearly two hours, they have grown more confident of the government's desire to improve its handling of the disease.
The activists say they are pushing for several concessions, including a target of treating 1 million South Africans with antiretroviral drugs. They also want targets for expanding HIV testing and for cutting the rate of new infections. Prevention efforts have largely failed in South Africa, experts say, even as Zimbabwe and several East African countries are showing success in curbing new infections.
Maseko, the government spokesman, said that after years of resisting calls from activists, officials have decided to set firm targets for expanding prevention programs and the availability of antiretroviral drugs in the five-year government plan due for release Dec. 1, celebrated around the globe as World AIDS Day.
"We will be accelerating implementation to make sure those who need treatment are getting it," he said.
As discussions continue, activists say the shift in the government's intentions is tangible and hope officials are capable of carrying through on their new promises.
"They have lost at least five years," said Mark Heywood, head of the AIDS Law Project at Witwatersrand University in Johannesburg. "They're behind on prevention. They're behind on treatment. They're behind on planning for the social impact of HIV. But it's not too late to prevent a whole other generation of people from getting HIV."
|
JOHANNESBURG -- The South African government is seeking to shake off years of international denunciation for its handling of the AIDS epidemic -- including a fixation on the supposed protective powers of beets and lemons -- while expanding treatment, testing and prevention programs, officials and activists say....
| 26.38 | 0.98 | 48.02 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102600264.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102600264.html
|
U.S. Deaths In Iraq Near Peak Months
|
2006102619
|
BAGHDAD, Oct. 26 -- Unrelenting daily attacks in Baghdad and the western province of Anbar have made October the deadliest month of the Iraq war for U.S. troops in combat since the all-out American offensives on Fallujah in April and November of 2004, according to U.S. military figures. The military on Thursday reported five more American troops killed, raising the toll for U.S. deaths in hostile action so far this month to 92.
The latest reported deaths -- those of four Marines and a sailor -- occurred Wednesday in Anbar province, an insurgent stronghold. The increasing death toll in Anbar comes after months in which U.S. and Iraqi commanders had said that sectarian warfare between Sunnis and Shiites was their prime concern and that Baghdad was the focus of their efforts.
Maj. Gen. William B. Caldwell, the U.S. military spokesman in Baghdad, attributed the resurgence in American deaths in the western province to "very conscious and deliberate operations" in Ramadi, Anbar's capital.
"It's an aggressive, offensive approach to taking back the city of Ramadi, to return it back to Iraqi security forces," Caldwell said on Thursday.
U.S. and Iraqi forces have been battling Sunni Arab insurgent groups in the heart of Ramadi on a daily basis since early this year, and Caldwell's words -- "taking back" -- reflected the degree to which guerrillas have asserted control over the city.
The insurgent groups include both foreign-led organizations such as al-Qaeda in Iraq and Iraqi resistance groups. U.S. officers said this past summer that they could claim sure control only over a few blocks immediately around Ramadi's town hall, as well as forward operating bases and other American outposts in the lawless city. U.S. troops, especially since summer, have moved more aggressively out into the city, pushing back against insurgents but also putting themselves at greater risk.
It was not clear whether Wednesday's killings were all in Ramadi, and the military gave no details about how they occurred. Local leaders in Ramadi reported that a series of planted bombs and suicide car bombs had targeted American forces around Anbar on Wednesday.
In 2004, thousands of American troops were involved in two concentrated offensives against Sunni Arab insurgents in Fallujah, and the toll in April of that year also included deaths in heavy fighting against forces of Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr in southern Iraq. The number of Americans killed in action that month was 126; in November 2004, 125.
In contrast, American deaths this month have come singly or in twos, threes or fours, mostly from roadside bombs and small-arms fire targeting patrols, checkpoints and other day-to-day operations.
Sources within the two militaries, as well as Iraqi militiamen and foreign fighters, cite many of the same reasons for the current increase in violence in Anbar.
After American warplanes killed al-Qaeda in Iraq leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in June, his successor, Abu Ayyub al-Masri, called on followers to concentrate attacks on U.S. troops and Shiite militiamen, soldiers and police. In September, Masri urged every insurgent in Iraq to kill at least one American within 15 days.
The Egyptian-born Masri wanted redoubled attacks "to have a great effect on the American elections," said Abu Islam al-Arabi, a local al-Qaeda leader reached by telephone Thursday in Anbar province.
|
Washington Post coverage of the American occupation of Iraq, the country's path to democracy and tensions between Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds.
| 25.8 | 0.64 | 0.88 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102600948.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102600948.html
|
D.C. Jury Acquits Jemal of Bribery
|
2006102619
|
Douglas Jemal, one of Washington's most prominent developers, was acquitted yesterday of charges that he bribed a city official to get sweetheart contracts and inflated profits at taxpayers' expense.
The jury in U.S. District Court convicted Jemal of one lesser count of wire fraud. But the panel resoundingly rejected the crux of the government's case, acquitting Jemal and two top lieutenants of his company, Douglas Development Corp., of the more serious charges of conspiracy and bribery.
"God bless you all," a tearful Jemal told jurors when he saw them leaving the courthouse. Giving them hugs, he declared: "Thank you, sweetheart. Thank you, dear."
From the start, Jemal, 63, denied wrongdoing in his dealings with the city. When he was indicted along with son Norman Jemal and leasing agent Blake Esherick in September 2005, Jemal said he was looking forward to the chance to clear his name and theirs after nearly two years of overlapping city and federal investigations.
Just before 3 p.m. yesterday, Jemal stood ramrod-straight in the courtroom as the jury foreman began to read the group's decision. When the foreman said, "Not guilty," on the chief counts, Jemal bent forward, his eyes beginning to water and rimmed with red. All told, he was acquitted of six of seven charges.
Prosecutors said Jemal could face up to 20 years in prison on the wire fraud charge. But under federal sentencing guidelines, his sentence could be much lighter, and he could wind up with just probation.
Known as a maverick developer who helped turn the city's East End near the Verizon Center from run-down storefronts into a vibrant area of housing, restaurants and shops, Jemal has an array of ambitious projects ahead, stretching from downtown to the banks of the Anacostia River in Southeast to Richmond. Now he will return to his daily routine -- and his trademark cowboy boots and jeans, which he had ditched for business attire for court.
He, his son and Esherick had recruited a veritable who's who of preeminent Washington defense lawyers to represent them in the trial that began Sept. 11. The jury acquitted Norman Jemal, the company's vice president, of all charges but found Esherick guilty on the wire fraud count as well as two counts of tax evasion relating to underreporting his income from Jemal. The bribery charges were always considered the most toxic in the case, but Esherick's conviction on the three felony counts is a serious blow, carrying the possibility of significant jail time.
Defense attorneys said they hoped to get the convictions overturned.
"We're relieved, of course," said Reid H. Weingarten, the lead defense attorney for Douglas Jemal. "He was charged with horrible crimes, of ripping off the District -- charges that never should have been brought."
U.S. Attorney Jeffrey A. Taylor said the guilty verdicts against Douglas Jemal and Esherick were a "vindication of a majority of our case." He defended the prosecution, saying, "This was a tough case, but given the serious allegations, we had to bring it."
The wire fraud charge stemmed from a document that Jemal and Esherick falsified and then used as a justification to get a mortgage company to release $430,000 in loan proceeds. The money went to a different business deal than the one specified in the mortgage. The defense contended that Jemal had a right to the money and that no one was hurt.
|
Douglas Jemal, one of Washington's most prominent developers, was acquitted yesterday of charges that he bribed a city official to get sweetheart contracts and inflated profits at taxpayers' expense.
| 19.617647 | 1 | 34 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601853.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601853.html
|
A Trend Without A Leg To Stand On
|
2006102619
|
Leggings have been touted on must-have lists as one of the surest ways for a woman to announce that she is acutely aware of this season's fashion trends. They identify her as someone who keeps track of hemlines and silhouettes, probably has at least one subscription to a fashion magazine and may have, upon occasion, even put her name on a waiting list for a particularly desirable handbag.
The fashion industry desperately needs this trend-conscious shopper -- even as it mocks her.
Leggings -- or their lighter-weight cousin, footless tights -- were revived about six months ago when designers debuted their fall collections. Right away, eager early adopters headed to the hosiery department and stocked up on footless tights to wear with their sundresses and flouncy skirts throughout the summer. A fall runway fad had been embraced. And for a brief time -- perhaps it was on June 21, the summer solstice -- leggings were cool.
By August, stores were well stocked with leggings for fall. They were prominently featured on Saks Fifth Avenue's "Want It!" list of items that the fashionable woman should have in her fall wardrobe. Hue brand leggings were $18. Wolford offered "velvet de luxe" opaque leggings for $38. At Barneys New York, one could buy cashmere leggings priced at $195. Prada had leggings for an unspeakable sum.
And yet, one would have been hard-pressed to find a single high-ranking fashion editor or retailer at the runway shows earlier this month wearing a pair. A fashion director in leggings? Are you mad?
By the time the fall collections had actually arrived in stores and customers began to earnestly consider grandpa cardigans, romantic blouses, wide-leg trousers and the delicate task of layering one on top of the other, industry insiders had not only ceased being charmed by leggings, they had started to gently malign them in conversation.
Why? Beyond the fact that they can be profoundly unflattering on the wrong figure, in the wrong proportions and with the wrong skirt, dress or tunic, they are also too obvious. From 50 paces they shout: TRENDY.
The problem wasn't that the streets were clogged with women wearing footless tights, miniskirts and ballet flats. The problem was that insiders expected leggings to be omnipresent. They had been hyped as the dominant accessory of the season. They weren't that expensive. There were no waiting lists for just the right pair. Anyone and everyone could wear them.
Leggings aren't a status item, not like a designer handbag, which can be prohibitively expensive, difficult to come by and especially adept in telegraphing wealth and prestige. Instead, the lure of a pair of leggings is that they allow the wearer to project an iconoclastic, bohemian style. They are a little artsy. Quirky. But if everyone is wearing them, they're just part of a uniform.
After a brief summer dalliance, most fashion insiders, whose livelihood depends on their ability to express personal style, elan or inventiveness, steered clear of leggings. Instead, for fall, they focused on mini-dresses, skinny jeans and platform shoes. All of which only whisper trendy.
The few who have worn leggings have done so judiciously. It looked more like duty rather than desire. One editor at the runway shows apologized for them: "I packed the wrong pair of tights!" A retailer excused herself from wearing them by saying, "Oh, I wore them the first time they were in style."
It is always instructive to inspect the audience at runway shows. They are filled with some of the most stylish men and women anywhere (although there are also no small number of fashion victims, as well). It is intriguing to see how quickly they embrace a trend, but more telling is how fast they leave it behind. (Which designers do they tout in the pages of magazines? Balenciaga. But which do they always seem to have on? Marni.) Trendiness can be measured by what one chooses to wear. Style is determined by what one chooses to ignore.
|
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.
| 15.568627 | 0.333333 | 0.333333 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/10/25/DI2006102501473.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/10/25/DI2006102501473.html
|
Watergate, Woodward and Bernstein
|
2006102619
|
Read some of Bob Woodward's recent book excerpts .
washingtonpost.com: Our discussion with Alicia Shepard about her new book on Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein will begin in a moment. For more information on her book, go to woodwardandbernstein.net .
washingtonpost.com: Thanks for joining us today. How long did you work on this book, and did you receive cooperation from Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein?
Alicia C. Shepard: I started working on a piece about what happened to Woodward and Bernstein for Washingtonian magazine in 2002. That piece appeared on Sept. 2003 (that link should be good on Oct. 30. Washingtonian is redoing its website) I did long interviews with both Carl and Bob for that piece. I interviewed about 75 people for that story, so as you can imagine I had a ton of material left over. And that went toward the book, which I began in earnest in summer 2004. Once I got the contract, I told both men about the book. Woodward was working on his new book, and frankly, Bernstein is really hard to pin down.
But the truth is, I had already gotten a lot from them and I felt that the primary sources I used were more valuable. I relied on their archives at Univ. of Texas. But also very valuable were the interviews of Woodward and Bernstein and all the principals done in the 1970s.
I found those to be fascinating and really reliable. One of those archives belonged to Alan Pakula. the director of All the President's Men. He felt to do the movie well he had to do in-depth interviews with everyone connected to the Post's Watergate story. Ben Bradlee said Pakula was like Freud in interviewing him.
One of the things I learned from trying to research something that happened 30 years ago is that memory plays many tricks. People have a set way of remembering an event, and it's not always accurate. I found the interviews at the time to be more accurate.
Harrisburg, Pa.: What led the Washington Post to stick with Woodward and Bernstein through the entire Watergate saga? Was there ever pressure from more senior writers to take over the story? What led to the story staying with Woodward and Bernstein?
Alicia C. Shepard: Initially the more senior reporters at the Post, especially those familiar with Washington politics didn't think much of the story. I found a quote from William Grieder who was a reporter at the Post at the time, who said if he'd gotten the same information he would have shrugged his shoulders and said,"politics as usual."
Woodward had only been at the Post for nine months when the break-in occured on June 17, 1972, and he was hungry and extremely hardworking, and a natural to put on initially. He worked so hard at the time that the Post practically had to beg him to take time off. so it was natural to keep him on the story.
Bernstein was another story. He wasn't happy at the Post, was looking for other jobs, and they weren't happy with him. But there was one editor there who saw past Bernstein's foibles, and that was Barry Sussman. Carl was a reporter with a lot of raw talent and a terrific investigator and a terrific writer. But he wasn't considered reliable. Carl and Bob were paired together by Sussman, who instinctively knew that together they could do something neither one of them could do individuallly. Today, Sussman doesn't speak to either man, which seems sad.
Washington, D.C.: Broadly speaking, how did Woodstein's Watergate work change journalism in the years after?
Alicia C. Shepard: Their reporting had a dramatic impact on journalism and my book deals with this as well as their fascinating story. For starters, they popularized the use of anonymous sources. Who, after all is the most famous anonymous source in history? One Watergate era journalist told me that he once came back to his station with a story that had a guy on the record. the producer looked downtrodden. can't we make him an anonymous source?
And after Watergate there was a rise in investigative journalism. it had been done before, but it became a staple in newsrooms.
Also, the tenor between the White House and the press was forever altered, and became much more aggressive. Another change was the advent of celebrity journalism. Woodward and Bernstein were the the first average joe reporters to become celebrities. it's hard to remember just how much attention they got after they wrote All the President's Men.
Baltimore: Anything really surprising in the archives you had access to at the Univ. of Texas?
Alicia C. Shepard: One of the things that really surprised me was the fan mail. it's hard to imagine any reporters today getting so many love letters really for one story. there are about two feet of fan letters in there. and they were just metro reporters. in the thick of Wgate, they received so much mail the Post had to assign them an assistant.
The letters are so laudatory. People thought that Woodward and Bernstein could save the world after Watergate and sent them scores of requests: investigate the kennedy assassination, look into fluoride in water, find someone's missing husband in Cuba, look into military medical malpractice.
My fave was a letter from a woman who said that "one day she would tell her two daughters about what giants once strode upon the earth." They were only 28 and 29.
Another woman wrote in saying she was interested in Bernstein and that Woodward seemed like a cold fish. Many letters like that.
Also in the archives are there financial records. Woodward was earning about $156 a week and suddenly they were getting royalty checks of $50,000 -- a quarter.
It all makes for fascinating reading.
Chicago: Did you talk with Mark Felt or his family for the book?
Alicia C. Shepard: It is not possible to talk to Mark Felt. Woodward makes that clear in the Secret Man. I thought it was awful that Larry King had Felt on TV. Anyway, I talked with Felt's attorney John O'Connor, but more for the last chapter on the revelation of who DT was.
As an author, I was very fortunate that Felt's ID was revealed on May 31, 2005. It made for a great final chapter of my book. I had a clear starting date of June 17, 1972 and a clear ending date of May 31, 2005. My book is not a definitive bio of both men, but the story of what happend to them during Watergate and after. We all may have read All the P's Men, but that was just their story. There is so much more that happened to them.
Alexandria, VA: I'm enjoying your book now. It's seems like a valuable trait for an investigative reporter is the ability to smell fear, which encourages you to plow onward when no one is talking to you.
Alicia C. Shepard: Thank you. Good observation. There is something in a reporter's DNA that makes them want to work much harder when someone tells them 'No." I LOVE that challenge of being told you can't get some information. If someone stonewalls you, you know that, and it makes me want to dig further.
Arlington, Va.: Woodward continues to take a lot of criticism for some of the things written in "Veil" and the Belushi bio. Do you touch on those in the book?
Alicia C. Shepard: Yes I do. The Belushi book was the only book that Bob has done where he used footnotes. He applied his usual techniques of interviewing scores, going deep, going back, but he was in unfamiliar territory and he was surprised by the vitriol that came from Belushi's friends. He talks about that in the chapter that deals with Belushi. Someone said he got the story right but he couldn't hear the music, like he was tone deaf to the nuances of Belush's life.
There is also a chapter that deals with Veil and Woodward's close relationship with CIA director William Casey. There are many who think BW made up that scene of visiting Casey in the hospital room--and before the revelatoin of DT, that he made up DT.
But they don't know Bob Woodward. After spending four years researching him and Carl, I would have stood on a stack of Bibles to say that there was a Deep Throat. If there hadn't been, and he was a composite, that would have meant that Woodward had built his whole career on a lie.
Say what you will about Woodward, and I know that there is a vocal group out there that are quite critical, but I came to believe he's an honest journalist who operates without an agenda.
Philadelphia, PA: Tell us more about Sussman not speaking with Woodstein. Didn't that have something to do with the creation of a composite editor character in the movie? It seems so sad, though.
Alicia C. Shepard: Yes, it is sad. It had to do with writing the book All the PResident's Men. Initially, the three of them were going to write it. But then Carl felt it wasn't necessary to have Sussman too. I found a lot about this in the archives of author David Halberstam, who wrote The Powers that Be. Halberstam let me look at his interviews done in the 1970s with the POST mainstays involved in Watergate. So the rift occured by 1973. Sussman told me he never read the book.
Another fallout in relationships occured because of the movie and Pakula's making editors into composites and not accurately representing what happend. Ben Bradlee/Jason Robards became the hero of APM. Robards even won an Oscar for his performance. In reality, it was managing editor Howard Simons who was the hero in the Post newsroom. He was more involved with the story initially and backed it from the start. Bradlee didn't get involved until later in the came. Now that's a simplistic answer. Bradlee AND Katharine Graham played a key role in allowing and encouraging Woodward and Bernstein to stay on the story.
But after the movie, SImons and Bradlee's relationship changed. They had been so close that Simons and he had talked abou taking care of each other's kids if anything happened to one of them. But Simons did not like that Bradlee got all the credit. Bradlee told me they eventually reconnected before Simons died.
these are small things but they show the greater impact of the Watergate story.
Bethesda, MD: Have you had any reaction from either Woodward or Bernstein to the book?
And what did you find the most surprising about the two men?
Alicia C. Shepard: No, haven't heard a peep from either man. I think they might be surprised at how much research I did, and what I dug up. the book isn't a love letter, but it is rich in detail about all that has happened to them. I was fascinated with the idea of hitting the top at age 30, and what do you do with the rest of your life. They clearly picked different paths.
But what surprised me about them is how they are very close friends. They had an awful rift when the Watergate story came to a close for them in 1976-- after the movie appeared in april 1976 and after The Final Days was published that same month. Carl left the Post in December 1976.
But they did go through an incredible, life-altering experience together and a year or so later, Carl reached out to Bob when Bob was getting divorced from his second wife. Interestingly, both men got married during the height of Watergate (Carl famously to Nora Ephron) and neither man's marriage could weather the intensity of those times.
Today, Carl is exceedingly loyal to Bob, always defending him in public any chance he gets. and Bob let Carl write an afterword to his book The Secret Man.
They are SO different, and never would have been friends, but then life intervened, and they are very close today. But they would never work together again on a story or a book.
New York, NY: We hear so little of Carl Bernstein anymore. How close are he and Woodward?
Alicia C. Shepard: I actually have a piece running this Sunday, Oct. 29 in the Newark Star Ledger perspecitve section on what happened to Carl Bernstein. He's in the news of late actually -- but it's because his name is mentioned in conjunction with Woodward's new book and Nora Ephron's new book.
Silver Spring, Md.: Do either men have children working in journalism?
Alicia C. Shepard: Yes they both do.
Jacob Bernstein is a reporter for Women's Wear Daily, and he covers the media and does quite well in NYC. I'd say he was succesful on his own.
Woodward's daughter, Tali, has been a reporter for a while at the SF Bay Area Guardian. I remember years ago doing a story for American Journalism Review on the SF Chronicle and interviewing the editor, and he brought in Tali Woodward -- wanting me to know that Woodward's daughter worked at the paper. But I've followed Tali's reporting and she is very good. No doubt, she checks in with her dad on a story-- but so would I if my dad were the most famous reporter in America.
Alabama: I really enjoyed the oral history article this book grew from, and look forward to reading the expanded edition.
Some historians have criticized the heroic role given to Woodward and Bernstein, noting (among other things) that the harsh sentences imposed by Judge Sirica on the Watergate burglars forced McCord to acknowledge that he had been paid hush money for the break-in. In your view, how much credit should they receive for the progress of Watergate?
Alicia C. Shepard: Ah, someone after my own heart. I try hard in the book to demythologize the legend that Woodward and Bernstein brought down a president. It's just NOT true. They would say it wasn't true.
There's a wonderful letter in the Texas archives from Kay Graham to Woodward and Bernstein, and she says, "We didn't bring him down.." But the American public loves the Davd and Goliath story. We like the little guy bringing down the president.
(BTW, the reason for this myth that Woodward and Bernstein brought down the prez is the influence of the book and movie, All the P's Men. One can't underestimate its impact. At the time the book was published in June 1974, 200,000 copies were printed. that's huge. and bookstores couldn't keep copies in the store. Having Dustin Hoffman and Robert Redford portray you in a major Hollywood movie sinched their fame.)
But the fact is the courts, the congress even the FBI played key roles in Nixon's resignation.
The one unsung hero, as far as I'm concerned, is Alexander Butterfield. He was the former Nixon aide who was compelled to testify before the Senate Watergate Hearing and revealed to investigators on (i love this) Friday July 13, 1973, that Nixon had a secret taping system. If there had been no taping system, I maintain Nixon would not have resigned.
Philadelphia, PA: Is it true that Woodward still insists that he be the lowest paid person in the newsroom?
Alicia C. Shepard: Yes. He may be. but that is really irrelevant. He rarely goes into the newsroom, and if you check, he hasn't written many stories of late for the Post. His arrangement is quite unusual in American journalism. But it seems to work for both parties.
Petworth, D.C.: Alicia--Congratulations on the publication; your book is definitely on my Must Read list. I'm a big fan of Woodward and Bernstein's work. "The Final Days" is one of the best-written political books ever.
Do you think Woddward and Bernstein's reluctance to be interviewed for your book stems from all journalists' natural disinclination to subject themselves to the other side of the pen?
Alicia C. Shepard: I've spent the bulk of my career writing about the media. Yes, it's true, journalists do not like to be the subject of interviews. They are wary of other journalist; they know what can happen with a story.
I like to say that Woodward likes the attention and fame and money, but he doesn't like the spotlight. He actually doesn't think he's that interesting. it sounds so disingenuous, but that's how he sees himself. Woodward does interviews with all other journalists very reluctantly. in each case, he tries to talk the reporter out of doing the story.
Bernstein on the other hand, is much more outgoing and likes to go around the country giving speeches and seems to enjoy press attention. Once I finally got a commitment, he was delightful to talk to. He can be self-effacing and is able to look at himself with some critical distance now.
I did talk to both men and I include a lot from those interviews done in 2003 with each of them in my book. But as I said earlier, the first seven chapters deal with Watergate and what happened after, and I found the primary source material very valuable. Plus, I interviewed almost 200 people associated with both men.
Walnut Creek, Calif.: Alicia: I read the excerpt of chapter one online yesterday and ordered the book this morning. It reads like a fast paced mystery novel and I can't wait to get my copy. Thanks for a nostalgic look back at my younger days and the enthusiasm we all had.
Alicia C. Shepard: Are you my sister, Judy? Thanks so much. Yes, there is an excerpt on my Web site: http://www.woodwardandbernstein.net/
I might also add, that on my Web site homepage is a request for stories. Where were you when Nixon resigned? I'd love people to tell me those. It's not quite like when Kennedy was killed, but for those of us 50 and above, it was an amazingly traumatic time.
Alexandria, Va.: Hello. Can't wait to read the book. How many people from the Watergate-era staff of the Post newsroom were you able to talk to for this project?
Alicia C. Shepard: About 20 from the Post or who had worked there.
Woodward and Bernstein: Most of us have the sense that the two essentially worked in obscurity for several months, ignored by other media outlets as they plugged away at Watergate. When did they first become publicly recognized for their work -- when they won the Pulitzer, when they published All the President's Men, or some other point? And what role did they play in creating their own mythology?
Alicia C. Shepard: Good question. They did work in obscurity for the first seven months or so. Other reporters from other outlets also worked on this story. Especially at the Los Angeles Times: Jack Nelson, Ron Ostrow, Bob Jackson. Interestingly, those three men were about a decade older than Bob and Carl and because of family commitments and wives could not work 24-7 the way Woodward and Bernstein did. It really did make a difference that bob and carl were newly single (one divorced, one separated) and didn't want much to do with women at the time. they loved this story.they inhaled it. They worked so much on this story that the Post had to send a news clerk out to buy Woodward soap.
But they didn't really get much credit until May 1973 when the Post --not Woodward and Bernstein (a common mistake i saw repeatedly in the press) -- won the Pulitzer Prize. But they truly became rock stars after the book All the P's Men came out in 1974.
Ironically, Playboy did an excerpt in May 1973 and that is where Deep Throat made his first debut.
One other thought: It was CBS that really galvanized the nation and got it paying attentoin to the Watergate story. and that was exactly 34 years ago TODAY.
On Oct. 27, 1972, at anchor Walter Cronkite's insistence CBS ran a piece on Watergate that was 14 minutes long -- the equivalent of two-thirds of a front page. The Post may have been writing stories, but they weren't getting a lot of attention outside of DC. THis was afterall, pre-Internet.
In my book, in chapter 3, I deal with how the rest of the press behaved during Watergate. Why the New York Times failed to engage in the story is a fascinating tale of serendipity.
Washington, DC: Three years ago I took one of your classes at AU and I really enjoyed it. I am looking forward to reading you new book.
Alicia C. Shepard: Thank you. send me an email and let me know how you like it. No quizzes, though.
Northern Virginia: Bob Woodward became famous through one of the most famous unnamed sources ever -- Deep Throat, and is still known for using unnamed sources in his books. I know this is much debated. What is your take?
Alicia C. Shepard: That's a great question. My take is that the use of anonymous sources is complicated. I think it is always best to get people on the record and make them accountable. When you use anonymous sources, those people are not accountable. We don't know who said it, or why they said it or whether they have an agenda.
But it's not always possible to get people on the record. Sources are critical for reporters to tell the stories that the government and others do not want the public to know. Those stories are important for informing the public and maintianing a viable democracy. So, no, i would never ban the use of anonymous sources. They should just be used judiciously.
As far as Woodward goes, he believes that people lie on the record and there's no value to getting someone on the record. In fact, he thinks, people will be more honest when there name isn't used. He may be right.
Woodward can do this. He's proved himself as a journalist. People trust what he writes. To me, he fits the definition of sui generis (look it up). But as a journalism professor, I would not hold him up as an example. I would not want young journalists to work the way he does.
Washington, D.C.: You're saying so many nice things about Woodward. I can't believe he wouldn't cooperate with you for the book.
Alicia C. Shepard: You interpret what I have written in this Q-and-A as "nice," about Woodward, I look at my book as my best attempt to get an accurate take on someone who has become like a fifth branch of government. My goal in doing this book was to write a fair, accurate and complex portrayal of what happened to Woodward and Bernstein because of their role in Watergate.
Life in the Shadow of Watergate is by no means a hagiography. Like any of us, Bob and Carl have strengths and weaknesses. If I just wrote about the strengths, I guess they would have approved an authorized biography. But I didn't. I wrote about their divorces, their personalities, and Woodward's role in the Janet Cooke scandal at the Washington Post and how he got too close to CIA director William Casey, who was able to steer Woodward away from the big scandal, Iran-Contra. Those stories are accurate, but may not be "nice," to quote you. Read the book then get back to me, pls. my e-mail is on my Web site
New York: Is investigative journalism threatened by the consolidation in the news media? Does it take a Sulzberger or Graham family to support aggressive reporting like this?
Alicia C. Shepard: Investigative journalism is expensive. One reporter can spend months on a story, and it may not pan out. Then the paper or TV station would have spent months and thousands of dollars (salary alone) and gotten nothing.
So, yes, in these times of media consolidation and endless budget cutbacks, investigative journalism is in great peril. It would be the easiest thing to cutback on in a newspaper and not have readers miss any expected coverage of say, sports, education, city hall, politics. So it's really to the credit of any news organization that keeps spending money on investigative journalism.
You may be right that family-owned papers like the Post and the NY Times are the only ones that can comfortably keep practicing investigative journalism.
Carl Bernstein finds the terms "investigative journalism" to be offensive. He said that "investigative reporting" is just plain old, good, solid, gumshoe reporting that you should do on any story.
Alicia C. Shepard: Thank you all for the many great questions. Sorry I couldn't get to all of them.
I hope you'll take a look at Woodward and Bernstein: Life in the Shadow of Watergate and check out my website
Love to get your "Where were you when Nixon resigned" stories for my Web site.
Woodward and Bernstein are journalistic icons. They sold the contents of their desk at the Post from 1972 to 1976 to the University of Texas for $5 million. That tells you everything about their place in history. What other journalists could possibly do that? That's why I find their tale so worth telling.
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.
| 123 | 0.658537 | 0.853659 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601775.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102601775.html
|
Fla. Lawmaker Faces Racial-Slur Inquiry
|
2006102619
|
MIAMI -- For months, state Rep. Rafael Arza has ducked accusations that he repeatedly used a racial slur. But last Saturday night, according to authorities, he was caught using the derogatory term for a black person on another legislator's voice mail, and what has been a long-running sideshow here has come to a political climax.
In a rare move, House Democrats vowed this week to walk out unless the prominent Republican legislator resigns or is expelled.
House Republicans, meanwhile, have put an inquiry into Arza's phone messages on the fast track, but it is not known whether there will be enough votes in the GOP-controlled legislature to expel him. Police and state law enforcement officers are also investigating the calls because the recipient of the messages, a fellow House Republican, was allegedly threatened with physical harm.
"We want Mr. Arza to know that there is no road to redemption that leads through the Florida House," said Dan Gelber, the designated House Democratic leader. "He can't simply apologize. Once you tolerate this behavior, you have endorsed it."
In a statement, Arza apologized for the phone message, blaming it in part on drinking. He is expected to be reelected on Nov. 7.
But the scandal represents a dramatic turn for a legislator who was a key ally in Gov. Jeb Bush's education reform drive. Described as a bully by critics, Arza was first reported to have used the term this spring in reference to Miami-Dade schools chief Rudy Crew, an African American, in a discussion on the House floor.
Several top Republicans distanced themselves from Arza this week.
"Opening up wounds like that just doesn't make sense -- it's tragic and it's sad," Bush said.
While praising Arza as a "great partner in education reform," Bush said "he's got problems. He's got to work on his problems. . . . Now I think it's time for him to focus on his own personal issues."
The tortuous intrigue began in April when Crew and others accused Arza of using racial slurs in English and Spanish to refer to him.
The lawmaker denied the allegation.
"I'm shocked by it," Arza told the Miami Herald.
|
MIAMI -- For months, state Rep. Rafael Arza has ducked accusations that he repeatedly used a racial slur. But last Saturday night, according to authorities, he was caught using the derogatory term for a black person on another legislator's voice mail, and what has been a long-running sideshow here...
| 7.603448 | 0.982759 | 56.017241 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102600165.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/26/AR2006102600165.html
|
France Assigns Police to Guard Buses
|
2006102619
|
PARIS -- France's interior minister pledged Thursday to deploy police in buses serving some Paris suburbs, after rampaging youths seized three buses in immigrant neighborhoods and burned them after forcing passengers to leave.
The overnight attacks _ which caused no injuries _ came just before Friday's one-year anniversary of three weeks of rioting that hit suburbs where people of Arab and black African descent live outside France's big cities.
Last year's riots raged through housing projects on the outskirts of cities nationwide, springing in part from anger over entrenched discrimination against immigrants and their French-born children, many of them Muslims from former French colonies in Africa. Despite an influx of funds and promises since then, disenchantment still thrives in those communities.
About 10 attackers _ five armed with handguns _ stormed a bus in Montreuil, east of Paris, early Thursday and forced the passengers off, the RATP transport authority said. They then drove off and set the bus on fire. The bus driver was treated for shock, the RATP said.
The handguns were unusual _ last year's rioters were armed primarily with crowbars, stones, sticks or gasoline bombs.
Late Wednesday, three attackers forced passengers off another bus in Athis-Mons, south of Paris, and tossed a Molotov cocktail inside, police officials said. The driver managed to put out the fire.
In yet another attack Wednesday night, between six and 10 youths herded passengers off a bus in the western community of Nanterre and set it alight.
The attacks, and recent ambushes on police, have raised concern about the changing character of the violence, which appears more premeditated than last year's spontaneous outcry and no longer restricted to the housing projects.
Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy, a leading contender for next year's presidential elections, pledged to assign police officer to protect public buses. He said he hoped to avoid suspending public transport to sectors judged to be high-risk.
A police union said more than 500 extra riot police have been assigned to Paris' suburbs to beef up security there ahead of the anniversary of the riots.
"It's better to be over-prepared than to come up short," said Marc Gautron, national secretary of the UNSA police union. "We want to be able to make the maximum number of arrests if a bus or a person are attacked."
Regional authorities said the Nanterre bus line, which passes near Paris' financial district, La Defense, was not considered a high-risk area. Francois Saglier, director of bus service at the RATP, said the attacks happened "without prior warning and not necessarily in neighborhoods considered difficult."
|
PARIS -- France's interior minister pledged Thursday to deploy police in buses serving some Paris suburbs, after rampaging youths seized three buses in immigrant neighborhoods and burned them after forcing passengers to leave.
| 14.222222 | 1 | 36 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/25/AR2006102501810.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/25/AR2006102501810.html
|
Allen, Webb Stake Out Positions on 'No Child'
|
2006102619
|
In a state skeptical of federal intrusion in local school affairs, Virginia Sen. George Allen and challenger James Webb each say they support the goals of No Child Left Behind but quarrel with how the federal law has played out.
The Democratic challenger says schools need more federal funding to fulfill mandates to test students and narrow achievement gaps. The Republican incumbent, who voted for the landmark legislation five years ago, now argues that states need more flexibility in how they grade schools. But neither candidate supports an outright repeal of the law.
Whoever wins Nov. 7 will have a vote when Congress debates whether to renew the controversial law, which aims to push students in a range of grades to attain near-universal proficiency in reading and math by 2014. The law requires testing for all students from grades 3 through 8 and once during high school, and it requires schools to show that students in racial, ethnic and other groups are making adequate progress. Schools that fall short can face sanctions up to the threat of state intervention.
As Virginia governor in the mid-1990s, Allen was chief architect of the school accountability program that measures progress using the Standards of Learning tests. Since voting for No Child Left Behind, he has become critical of the federal initiative. State officials in that time have also complained about aspects of the law.
In a speech at Patrick Henry College in Purcellville this month, Allen told students that the federal law is "forcing Virginia schools to dumb down our curriculum." He later said that whereas the federal law focuses on reading and math, Virginia's testing system is "more comprehensive" and includes science and social studies.
Allen has proposed to amend the law by allowing states that have accountability programs to be granted waivers from certain federal requirements. His bill also would require states to expand testing to include U.S. history and civics.
In an interview this month with Washington Post reporters and editors, Webb said that the "intentions" of the No Child law are good but that Washington has not provided enough money. Congressional Democrats charge that the Bush administration and Republican-led Congress have delivered tens of billions of dollars less than the law authorized in education aid.
"You have federal requirements that are being put into place without the full amount of funding so that local jurisdictions are having to make up the difference, which is taking money away from other things they could be doing," Webb said. He also said the law places too much focus on teaching "toward standards" instead of teaching students to "think and adapt."
Kristian Denny Todd, a spokeswoman for Webb, said he hasn't decided whether he would vote to renew the law. "In terms of a vote for reauthorization," she said, "he's going to have to take a look at it and make sure the funds are dedicated."
The law has popped up as a campaign issue in various states. In Maryland, Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele, the Republican candidate for Senate, alluded to No Child Left Behind in a television advertisement that said his party "built a system that teaches to a test." Rep. Benjamin L. Cardin, Steele's Democratic opponent, voted for the law in the House in 2001 but now -- like Webb -- says it has been underfunded.
Analysts said education does not appear to be a driving issue in a Virginia Senate race dominated by debate over taxes, the war in Iraq and questions of character.
"The differences between the candidates appear quite subtle to most voters and not substantial enough to make any real difference except perhaps with a small number of committed educational professionals," said Mark J. Rozell, a professor of public policy at George Mason University.
|
In a state skeptical of federal intrusion in local school affairs, Virginia Sen. George Allen and challenger James Webb each say they support the goals of No Child Left Behind but quarrel with how the federal law has played out.
| 17.095238 | 1 | 42 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/25/AR2006102501998.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/25/AR2006102501998.html
|
Atheist Evangelist
|
2006102619
|
NEW YORK There are really just two possibilities for Sam Harris. Either he is right and millions of Christians, Muslims and Jews are wrong. Or Sam Harris is wrong and he is so going to hell.
This seems obvious whenever Harris opens what he calls "my big mouth," and it is glaringly clear one recent evening at the New York Public Library, where he is debating a former priest before a packed auditorium. In less than an hour, Harris condemns the God of the Old Testament for a host of sins, including support for slavery. He drop-kicks the New Testament, likening the story of Jesus to a fairy tale. He savages the Koran, calling it "a manifesto for religious divisiveness."
Nobody has ever accused the man of being subtle. Harris is straight out of the stun grenade school of public rhetoric, and his arguments are far more likely to offend the faithful than they are to coax them out of their faith. And he doesn't target just the devout. Religious moderates, Harris says in his patient and imperturbable style, have immunized religion from rational discussion by nurturing the idea that faith is so personal and private that it is beyond criticism, even when horrific crimes are committed in its name.
"There is this multicultural, apologetic machinery that keeps telling us that we can't attack people's religious sensibility," Harris says in an interview. "That is so wrong and so suicidal."
This is Harris at full throttle, the Evel Knievel of ideas, a daredevil of the mind. You listen to him and think, "Well, that is going to land him in the hospital."
Instead, it has landed him on the bestseller list. His first book, "The End of Faith," won the 2005 PEN/Martha Albrand Award for First Nonfiction and sold more than 270,000 copies, making Harris a very high-profile voice of the godless. Now there is a follow-up, "Letter to a Christian Nation," a 96-page shiv inspired by the reaction to his first book, which apparently included a heap of hate mail.
"Letter," which is No. 11 on the New York Times bestseller list, doesn't drill many new theological wells. Harris is the first, though, to retrofit the case against "Old Book" religions in readable form for the post-Sept. 11 world. He is also among the first to indict religious liberals, and he might be the first man to be anointed "Hot Atheist" in Rolling Stone magazine.
The un-gospel according to Sam has found a huge audience, but every bit as striking is the counter-reaction to Harris among religious scholars. Mention his name to academics of just about every religious persuasion and you can almost see their eyes roll. Oh, that guy.
Harris has grossly oversimplified scripture, they say. He has drawn far-reaching conclusions based on the beliefs of radicals. As bad, his stand against organized religion is so unconditional that it's akin to the intolerance he claims he is fighting. If there is such a thing as a secular fundamentalist, they contend, Harris is it. Even some who agree with his conclusions about the dangers of fanaticism find his argument ham-handed.
"I think this country needs a sophisticated attack on religion," says Van Harvey, a retired professor of religious studies at Stanford University. "But pushing moderates into the same camp as fanatics, that seems like a very crude mistake."
According to Harvey, not only has Harris picked a fight with those who could be on his side, but his solution -- let's all ditch God -- is laughable given the role that religion plays in so many lives. Others say that he has taken these "Old Books" at their literal word, instead of studying the way that the faithful actually engage the scriptures. Put more simply, he doesn't know what he's talking about.
"Religion doesn't make people bigots," says Reza Aslan, author of "No God but God," a history of Islam. "People are bigots and they use religion to justify their ideology."
|
NEW YORK There are really just two possibilities for Sam Harris. Either he is right and millions of Christians, Muslims and Jews are wrong. Or Sam Harris is wrong and he is so going to hell. Over lunch the day before the debate, Harris seems utterly placid, which is a surprise. Reading his...
| 13.344262 | 0.852459 | 26.52459 |
low
|
medium
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102401358.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102401358.html
|
Scared Out of Your . . . Town
|
2006102619
|
Suspending reality at Halloween comes easily when you're walking through a decrepit, 177-year-old prison at night and your flashlight suddenly dies. Was it intentional, a planned part of the frightening experience of exploring Eastern State Penitentiary in Philadelphia in October? Or just really, really bad timing?
Didn't matter. Walking through the crumbling, dark halls of the prison, tension built inside me as I waited for some humpbacked, deformed creature to stick his bloodied, oozing face in mine and scare whatever bejesus there was left in me.
Sure, the ooze was actually latex and the creatures local university students. But the prison walls and the darkness were all too real -- something hard to forget as you take the "Terror Behind the Walls" haunted house tour at the penitentiary in the city's Fairmount neighborhood.
Visiting haunted houses and frightful forests at Halloween requires some amount of reality-shelving. That's a hefty task when a guy in a Wal-Mart mask jumps out at you in a suburban corn maze. The production values make some shockfests scarier than most; at others, the venue itself is naturally horrifying. Eastern State has both going for it, even without 130 costumed actors, mazes and dummies made to look like corpses.
The Gothic, castlelike prison opened in 1829 as a cutting-edge correctional facility where prisoners were kept in solitary confinement. The theory at the time was that the solitude would make them feel repentant; just as often it drove them mad. The penitentiary closed in 1971. It's a National Historic Landmark.
The Halloween event started 16 years ago and evolves every year. The newest attraction has visitors navigate a dim, mazelike section in small groups, armed only with keychain flashlights. That's one of five different areas to explore after going through an intake process and boarding a prison bus. Other features include a re-created prison kitchen, complete with dead bodies hanging on meat hooks, and a morgue. Fright fans, this one kills.
"Terror Behind the Walls" at Eastern State Penitentiary (22nd Street and Fairmount Avenue, Philadelphia) runs through Tuesday. Tickets are $20 to $30, depending on the night. Not recommended for children under 12 (or under 7 on Sunday and Halloween, which are Family Nights). Info: 888-763-6483, http://www.easternstate.org/ .
Looking for other places to freak out before Halloween? Here are some haunted offerings known to be among the scariest in the region. Most say they are not appropriate for children under 12 or 14 years old, and some accept only cash at the door.
The site of Shocktoberfest also was once a prison, and a psychiatric hospital. It's now an industrial park, boasting a haunted hayride with a biohazard theme.
Details: On Route 422 west of Reading; through Tuesday starting at 7 p.m.; $10 to $30, depending on the attractions visited.
|
Looking for other places to freak out before Halloween? Here are eight haunted offerings known to be among the scariest in the region.
| 21.730769 | 0.884615 | 10.192308 |
medium
|
medium
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/20/AR2006102000378.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102619id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/20/AR2006102000378.html
|
L.A.'s Chic and Savory Third Street
|
2006102619
|
Los Angeles is a difficult town to get to know. If you think it's all movie stars, pro boarders and platinum-blond Beverly Hills women of indeterminate age with diamonds dripping down their enhanced chests . . . you're only partially right. To get a better look at how L.A. natives really live, you need to head to more bohemian 'hoods, where pedestrians sport lighter makeup, fewer bedazzled tank tops and occasionally even brunet hairdos.
One of these spots is along Third Street between La Cienega Boulevard and Fairfax Avenue, arguably the city's newest "it" area. It's one of Tinseltown's true walking neighborhoods, located in the center of the city just east of Beverly Hills and west of Hollywood. When (or if) they find it, visitors can enjoy its quaint brunch spots and shops -- and stargaze to boot.
A long line snakes through Joan's on Third (8350 W. Third St., 323-655-2285), especially during prime lunch hours. But the gourmet food store turned sidewalk cafe -- thanks to haphazardly placed tables and chairs -- is in the midst of an expansion, to the relief of regular customers who murmur, "about time." A cheese selection includes daily specials and is perched next to baskets of crunchy baguettes and jars of sweets such as homemade caramel marshmallow squares ($1). On blackboards above the friendly counter staff, a sophisticated menu of sandwiches, salads and sides includes such standouts as a Venetian Coppa Salame sandwich with provolone and olive paste ($8.50).
Judging by the vast legging-and-ballet-flat crowd outside even on overcast days, Toast Bakery Cafe (8221 W. Third, 323-655-5018) helms the hipster breakfast and lunch scenes. Many regulars take the long Toast wait with Milk (a chic new boutique perfect for wasting time just steps away). The traditional but extensive menu employs fresh California produce -- as with the juicy berries topping golden French toast ($8.95) and a long salad list with such offerings as Tony's salad with candied pecans, bleu cheese crumbles, chicken breast and avocado ($10.95).
Although some dissenters claim that Toast does it better, many foodies agree that Doughboys Bakery (8136 W. Third, 323-651-4202) makes the city's best red velvet cake with cream cheese frosting ($5). Whether sitting inside amid exposed brick walls or spilling outside onto the street, boho-chic diners enjoy what can be described as health-meets-comfort food, including flaxseed or apple raisin griddle cakes ($7.95), hot, creamy polenta with figs, dates, pine nuts and honey ($6.50) and pan bagnat sandwiches on fresh-baked bread ($7.95).
As day turns to night, meal reservations are generally necessary. Sushi Roku (8445 W. Third, 323-655-6767) has long attracted a swanky pre-dinner drink crowd, thanks to its sake cocktails, endless eye candy and audacious decor -- bamboo, oversize Buddhas and an enormous rock centerpiece a la Stonehenge. Angelenos love their sushi, and this spot passes muster with such signatures as rock shrimp and jalapeno rolls ($9.50). Still, you won't go wrong with such cooked dishes as miso cod ($16) and sizzling mushroom Toban-Yaki in ponzu citrus ($12).
Craving a little old-fashioned silver-screen romance? Walk through the oversize wooden doors and onto the patio of the Little Door (8164 W. Third, 323-951-1210), and you'll think you've discovered a secret world of flowers and fountains. Diners enjoy a selection of 85 wines, plus Mediterranean French bites such as Moroccan steamed black mussels with cumin, cilantro and preserved lemons ($16) and rack of lamb ($34).
For equally delectable and rich French fusion with a more contemporary bent, head to A.O.C. (8022 W. Third, 323-653-6359), featuring a sleek, minimal interior and tapas-style menu. Cheese experts navigate diners through exotic triple creams, bleus, sheeps and goats, served alone or with such accents as dried figs and saba ($8). Menu items include sea bass in grape leaves with labna and dukkah , and lamb ragout with ricotta gnocchi, olives and feta ($14 each).
No self-respecting Angeleno would be seen at these hipster spots without the proper attire, though you'll never have to wear a jacket or tie. No need to venture far to find the right duds: While the main Third Street drag is sandwiched between the Beverly Center and the Grove -- L.A.'s most popular shopping centers -- the blocks stretching in between are a boutique lover's dream.
A good start is Aero & Co. (8403 W. Third), owned by designer Cynthia Vincent and publicist Alisa Loftin. Although the store stocks clothing and accessories from all over, Aero & Co.'s support for local designers is obvious. This season's pieces include Figmint black wool jersey-cropped sweaters with embroidered wings ($175), Violently Attractive harem pants ($110) and Margarita Saplala embroidered bird cardigans ($165).
Home and gift store Zipper Art Form + Function (8316 W. Third) represents L.A.'s dedication to innovative design. Regulars trust this staple for everything from notebooks to jewelry. The cluttered shelves hold Black Zipper candles ($20), mosaic glass bar sets ($195) and a Zero Blaster smoke ring blower ($21) that serves no obvious purpose.
On the same side of the street, Hillary Rush (8222 W. Third) has fashion world lineage. The New York transplant's grandmother owned a Canadian department store (and watches over her granddaughter from a hanging portrait), and her father created Le Tigre, the hot '80s sportswear line that's resurging. Lesser-known independent designers line the racks along with such favorites as J Brand jeans in charcoal and navy corduroy ($160), London Sole Annie flats ($225) and LA Made leggings ($36). Most important, Rush carries a large range of sizes, a rarity in this town of size 0s.
Starlets make their way across the street to luxe boutique Satine (8117 W. Third). Its owners (ex-lawyer Jeannie Lee and designer and fashion editor Sophia Banks) find exquisite vintage and contemporary pieces in Tokyo, London and Los Angeles -- often from established fashion houses such as Balenciaga, Chloe and Roland Mouret. Heels, flats, clutches and hobos perch atop antique furniture, including a '50s-style TV playing old movies. Bring your checkbook: Items include coveted pieces such as Lanvin's Kennedy brown leather shopping bag ($2,225), Alexander McQueen's ornate lace-up red heels ($815) and Stella McCartney's camel jersey dress with gold sequins ($1,499).
The clothing at South Willard (8038 W. Third), which specializes in menswear and women's fashions from international designers, is particularly innovative. Unusual items found at this shop one day are often fashion's biggest trends a couple of months later. Ahead-of-the-curve pieces available now include Band of Outsiders' slim fit oxfords ($195).
End or begin your day at the famous Los Angeles Farmers Market (6333 W. Third, 866-933-9211, http://www.farmersmarketla.com/ ), which has been around since 1934 but hasn't lost its freshness. The cross section of cuisine from Mongolian to Brazilian is almost as impressive as the array of people lounging outside at cafe tables, drinking beer, listening to music or belting out songs at weekend karaoke nights.
For general information on travel to L.A., contact the Los Angeles Convention and Visitors Bureau, 800-228-2452, http://www.lacvb.com.
|
Get a better look at how L.A. natives really live, with a glimpse of bohemian 'hoods, where pedestrians sport lighter makeup, fewer bedazzled tank tops and occasionally even brunet hairdos.
| 43.142857 | 0.971429 | 15.028571 |
high
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102400909.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102400909.html
|
Insult to Injury in Iraq
|
2006102519
|
It's been coming for a long time: the idea that fixing Iraq is the Iraqis' problem, not ours -- that we've done all we can and now it's up to them.
Such arguments have been latent in the Bush administration's Iraq strategy and explicit in Democratic critiques of that strategy for some time. Now Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has declared: "It's their country. . . . They're going to have to govern it, they're going to have to provide security for it, and they're going to have to do it sooner rather than later."
The implication of these arguments is clear: The United States should prepare to leave Iraq, after which the Iraqis will work out their own troubles -- or they won't. In any event, we can no longer help them. This notion is wrong and morally contemptible, and it endangers American security around the world.
The current crisis in Iraq is no more just an Iraqi problem than it has ever been. The U.S. military destroyed Iraq's government and all institutions able to keep civil order. It designated itself an "occupying force," thereby accepting the responsibility to restore and maintain such order. And yet U.S. Central Command never actually made establishing order and security a priority. Its commander throughout the insurgency, Gen. John Abizaid, has instead repeatedly declared that America's role is primarily to train Iraqi forces to put down their own rebellion and maintain order.
By allowing violence and disorder to spread throughout the country, the Bush administration has broken faith with the Iraqi people and ignored its responsibilities. It has placed U.S. security in jeopardy by creating the preconditions for the sort of terrorist safe haven the president repeatedly warns about and by demonstrating that no ally can rely on America to be there when it counts.
A rapid U.S. withdrawal would lead to catastrophe in Iraq. The presence of American troops is vital to restraining Iraqi soldiers -- the Iraqis know not to participate in death squad activities when Americans are around. The fact that large numbers of U.S. troops are not embedded with the Iraqi police is a main reason for the participation of those forces in the killings. When the U.S. troops go, the Iraqi army will probably go the same way.
Nor is there any likelihood that Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki will be able to simultaneously accomplish all the tasks now demanded of him, especially without American help. These include reforming the Interior Ministry and the police, disarming Shiite militias, fighting Sunni Arab insurgents, establishing functioning local and regional governments connected to the central government, and rooting out corruption. What are his chances if U.S. forces leave, sectarian violence rises and Iraqis grow ever more pessimistic about the success of their democratic experiment?
Americans believe that all problems are soluble and therefore that people who aren't solving their problems must not be trying. They need to be "incentivized," either through promises or threats. Many on the left have long been advocating a withdrawal of U.S. forces, or the threat of it, as just such an incentive for the Iraqis. But what if even then Iraqis cannot accomplish the goals we have set for them? Can we then declare that, by establishing the Iraqi army and helping Iraq elect and establish its government, we have done all that honor requires?
No, we can't. Both honor and our vital national interest require establishing conditions in Iraq that will allow the government to consolidate and maintain civil peace and good governance. It doesn't matter how many "trained and ready" Iraqi soldiers there are, nor how many provinces are nominally under Iraqi control. If America withdraws its forces before setting the conditions for the success of the Iraqi government, we will have failed in our mission and been defeated in the eyes of our enemies. We will have dishonored ourselves.
Our enemies watched the debacle in Somalia and drew conclusions: America is weak, unable to stomach even the smallest level of casualties and willing to lose rather than fight. The invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq changed the equation. Al-Qaeda leaders did not expect us to attack, and they regarded their unanticipated defeat as a catastrophe. Iran's leaders and North Korea's Kim Jong Il saw the invasion of Iraq as the first phase of an attack on the "axis of evil" and were fearful. But the protracted insurgency and the apparent weakening of U.S. will are emboldening them once again.
In 1991 the United States encouraged rebellions against Saddam Hussein and then abandoned to his inhuman vengeance the Kurds and Shiites who answered the call. That abandonment, still fresh in the minds of many Iraqis, is one reason for the suspicion with which the United States was greeted in 2003. What will happen if we abandon the progressive forces of Iraq once again with the hypocritical declaration that the resultant failure is their own fault? What reasonable moderate in the Muslim world -- or anywhere -- will ever again rely on America?
The comparison is often made between Iraq and Vietnam. One implication is that just as it was possible to lose Vietnam and still win the Cold War, so it is acceptable to lose Iraq. But in the Cold War, Vietnam was a sideshow. Iraq is in the heart of the Muslim world and at the center of the struggle against radical Islamism.
It is also worth keeping in mind that as indirect consequences of America's defeat in Vietnam, the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, the Sandinistas seized power in Nicaragua and Ayatollah Khomeini seized Tehran and American hostages. The "decent interval" between our withdrawal and the collapse of South Vietnam didn't help. Neither will the implausible deniability the Pentagon is now trying to establish in Iraq.
Those who have criticized the administration for failing to send enough troops to fight the war, failing to plan adequately for the postwar crisis and failing to react properly when it came are right. But Democrats should not be so quick to embrace these attacks unless they are willing to accept the corollary: Just because Bush did the wrong thing in 2003 doesn't mean that we can do the wrong thing now.
The writer is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.
|
It would be neither practical nor honorable for the U.S. to abandon Iraq to figure out things for itself.
| 59.15 | 0.8 | 0.9 |
high
|
medium
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102400911.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102400911.html
|
Tax Breaks for Football
|
2006102519
|
Before Miami police quelled the recent riot involving more than 100 University of Miami and Florida International University football players in the Orange Bowl, fighting erupted among fans in the stands. In two masterpieces of misdirected anxiety, the commissioner of the Atlantic Coast Conference, to which Miami belongs, said the rioting "has no place in college football" and the commissioner of FIU's Sun Belt Conference said "there is no place in higher education for the type of conduct exhibited."
But the question really raised by the barbaric behavior, and by nonviolent but nonetheless lurid behavior by some universities, is: What is the place of high-stakes football in higher education?
Twelve days before the Orange Bowl brawl, Republican Rep. Bill Thomas wrote, as chairman of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, an eight-page letter to the president of the National Collegiate Athletic Association, asking awkward questions. Thomas wonders how, or whether, big-time college sports programs, which generate billions of tax-exempt dollars -- CBS pays the NCAA an annual average of $545 million, mainly for the rights to televise the March Madness basketball tournament -- further the purposes for which educational institutions are granted tax-exempt status. Other questions include:
How does the NCAA fulfill its proclaimed purpose of maintaining "the athlete as an integral part of the student body"? Only 55 percent of football players and 38 percent of basketball players at Division I-A schools graduate. The New York Times has reported that at Auburn, a perennial football power, many athletes have received "high grades from the same professor for sociology and criminology courses that required no attendance and little work." Eighteen members of the undefeated 2004 team took a combined 97 hours of those courses while at Auburn. Who believes such behavior is confined to Auburn?
In recent decades the NCAA has increased the number of games that football and men's basketball teams are allowed to play. Thomas wonders how these changes help athletes improve their academic performances. Perhaps these changes have pecuniary purposes?
The NCAA says it aims to "retain a clear line of demarcation between intercollegiate athletics and professional sports." But aside from not compensating the athletes in a way commensurate with the money they generate for the universities, how is that line clear?
Some say the tax-exempt status of college sports is justified by the fact -- and it is a fact -- that successful sports teams often trigger increased applications for admission, and largess from alumni and legislatures. But, Thomas notes, "federal taxpayers have no interest in increasing applicant pools at one school opposed to another." Furthermore, athletic success that causes a surge of giving to universities might decrease giving to worthy charities.
Also, tax exemption is financing an escalation of coaches' salaries. More than 35 college football coaches are paid more than $1 million annually. The University of Colorado athletic department has borrowed $8 million, much of which will be used to buy out the contract of a fired football coach. Noting that several universities pay their men's basketball coaches four to five times what they pay their women's basketball coaches, Thomas wonders: "What additional educational benefit do men's basketball coaches provide beyond that which is provided by women's basketball coaches?" If the disparity has a commercial rather than an educational rationale, why should the commerce be tax-free?
Tax exemption also is a federal subsidy for ever more lavish facilities: Oklahoma State University, which is receiving $165 million from T. Boone Pickens to improve its athletic facilities, was already planning a $102 million upgrade of its football stadium. OSU charges fans a $2,500 "annual donation" just to become eligible to buy tickets for the best seats. The University of Michigan, which has had 198 consecutive sellouts at its stadium -- it now seats 107,501 -- is spending $226 million to add 3,200 luxury seats and 83 suites. The University of Texas at Austin is spending $150 million to add 10,000 seats to its current 85,123 capacity. These may be sound commercial decisions, but why should this commerce be tax-exempt?
Thomas wants to know: How many NCAA members "generate a net profit on the operations of their athletic departments (excluding university subsidies such as student fees or general school funds and services)? Of the institutions that generate a net profit, how many use the profit for purposes unrelated to the athletic department?"
Thomas is retiring, but if Democrats capture control of the House, the new chairman of Ways and Means, Charles Rangel, may hold hearings into the NCAA's tax-free lifestyle. Such hearings will be embarrassing, if people who operate football and basketball factories are capable of embarrassment.
|
The nation's collegiate sports factories do not need tax-exempt status.
| 65 | 0.857143 | 2.285714 |
high
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/25/AR2006102500342.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/25/AR2006102500342.html
|
Bush Is Reassuring on Iraq But Says He's 'Not Satisfied'
|
2006102519
|
President Bush declared yesterday that the United States is winning the war in Iraq despite the deadliest month for U.S. troops in a year, but he added that he is not satisfied with the situation and vowed to press Iraqi leaders to do more to stabilize their country on their own.
Trying to walk a careful line between optimism and pessimism less than two weeks before midterm elections, Bush lamented the "unspeakable violence" raging in Iraq while trying to reassure American voters that he is adapting his approach to address it. He vowed to "carefully consider any proposal that will help us achieve victory" as long as it does not involve withdrawing troops prematurely.
"Absolutely, we're winning," Bush said when pressed at an East Room news conference. At the same time, he said, "I know many Americans are not satisfied with the situation in Iraq. I'm not satisfied either. And that is why we're taking new steps to help secure Baghdad and constantly adjusting our tactics across the country to meet the changing threat." He said that he is pushing Iraqi leaders "to take bold measures to save their country" and emphasized that his patience "is not unlimited."
Bush's appearance, made hours after a news conference by Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, exposed rising tensions between Washington and Baghdad as the fighting worsens. Maliki upbraided U.S. officials a day after they announced benchmarks for the Iraqi government to meet over the next 12 to 18 months, dismissing the plan as "the result of elections taking place right now that do not involve us."
The dueling messages come as U.S. casualties mount in Iraq and the Bush administration faces the prospect of Democrats taking over one or both houses of Congress in the Nov. 7 elections on the back of public disillusionment with the war. At least 93 U.S. troops have been killed in October, and commanders in Iraq have conceded that their latest effort to stem the violence in Baghdad has not succeeded.
Democrats quickly seized on Bush's comments and called them an act of political desperation. "This is a struggle on the part of the administration to look as though they're really trying to change course without saying they're changing course," Sen. Carl M. Levin (Mich.), the ranking Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, said in a conference call with reporters. The congressional elections, he added, "will be a referendum on Iraq policy to a significant degree in many of our states and districts."
Rep. Ike Skelton (Mo.), Levin's counterpart in the House, said Bush needs to define his benchmarks for progress. He said he proposed goals to Bush a year ago. "I recommended that for every three Iraqi brigades that were fully capable, that we'd redeploy one American brigade." In response, Skelton said, the president wrote back that his recommendation "was too rigid."
Bush made the unusual move of calling a second news conference in as many weeks to address the public concern, and then opened the event with a 16-minute speech, knowing television networks would carry it live. He said that he had hoped this spring to bring many U.S. troops home this year but that events made doing so impossible. Although he maintained that there has been "very important progress," he acknowledged that Iraq is "in the midst of an incredibly violent period."
The president tried to balance a variety of competing ideas. He insisted on keeping U.S. troops in Iraq "until the job is done" but also talked about changing course to meet an adapting enemy. He promoted benchmarks for Iraqi leaders to meet in terms of taking over security of their country while distinguishing that from Democratic-proposed timetables for withdrawal of U.S. troops. He said he is pushing Maliki to do more but expressed confidence in the Iraqi leader as "the right man to achieve the goal."
Most important, he tried to reassure the public that he knows what to do to win because, as he said, "if the people think we don't have a plan for victory, they're not going to support the effort." At the same time, he tried to identify with public frustration over the direction of the war by expressing his own "dissatisfaction."
Asked by a reporter whether the United States is winning the war, Bush offered a discussion of the nation's role in the broader struggle against Islamic extremists.
The reporter pressed for a direct answer. "Are we winning?"
"Absolutely, we're winning," Bush said. "Al-Qaeda is on the run. As a matter of fact, the mastermind, or the people who they think is the mastermind of the September the 11th attacks, is in our custody." He then circled back and seemed to make clear that he meant the United States is winning in Iraq specifically. "We're winning, and we will win unless we leave before the job is done. And the crucial battle right now is Iraq."
Asked afterward whether Bush meant that the United States is winning in Iraq specifically or in the fight against terrorism, White House press secretary Tony Snow said: "In Iraq."
Bush repeatedly said this summer that the United States was winning in Iraq. "You're winning this war," he told troops at Fort Bragg, N.C., on July 4. Three days later, at a fundraiser in Chicago, he said: "Americans are wondering whether or not we can win. And to those Americans, I say: Not only can we win, we are winning."
But in nearly four months since then, he has avoided repeating that assertion as violence has escalated to new heights, saying instead that the United States is winning the battle against terrorism or that he is confident that the nation will eventually win in Iraq. Asked at an Oct. 16 briefing whether the United States is winning in Iraq, Snow said: "I don't know. How do you define winning? . . . Let me put it this way: The president's made it obvious we're going to win."
Bush, who has adamantly resisted calls for timetables in Iraq, said that the benchmarks his team announced in Baghdad on Tuesday are not the same thing. "That is substantially different . . . from people saying, 'We want a time certain to get out of Iraq,' " he said. "As a matter of fact, the benchmarks will make it more likely we win. Withdrawing on an artificial timetable means we lose."
Bush declined to rule out seeking permanent bases in Iraq, an especially sensitive point among Iraqis and Arabs who accuse the United States of waging the war to establish a military foothold in the region. "Any decisions about permanency in Iraq will be made by the Iraqi government," he said.
Although Bush agreed that the war has not gone as he had hoped and that he was "not satisfied," he defended his decision not to fire Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld or any other member of his national security team.
"I've asked him to do some difficult tasks as the secretary of defense -- one, wage war in two different theaters of this war on terror, Afghanistan and Iraq, and at the same time, asked him to transform our military posture around the world and our military readiness here at home," Bush said. "I'm satisfied of how he's done all his jobs. He is a smart, tough, capable administrator."
As for whether anyone else should be held responsible for the missteps in Iraq, Bush said, "The ultimate accountability . . . rests with me. It's what the 2004 campaign was about. If people want to -- if people are unhappy about it, look right to the president."
He acknowledged that voters may do so in 12 days, agreeing that the congressional elections are shaping up as a referendum on his national security and economic policies. But he said Democrats were declaring victory prematurely.
"We've got some people dancing in the end zone here in Washington, D.C.," he said. "They've got them measuring their drapes. They're going over to the Capitol and saying, 'My new office looks beautiful, I think I'm going to have this size drape there, or this color.' But the American people are going to decide, and they're going to decide this race based upon who best to protect the American people and who best to keep the taxes low."
Staff writer Walter Pincus and research director Lucy Shackelford contributed to this report.
|
President Bush declared yesterday that the United States is winning the war in Iraq despite the deadliest month for U.S. troops in a year, but he added that he is not satisfied with the situation and vowed to press Iraqi leaders to do more to stabilize their country on their own.
| 31.566038 | 1 | 53 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102401154.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102401154.html
|
Grass-Roots Group of Troops Petitions Congress for Pullout From Iraq
|
2006102519
|
More than 100 U.S. service members have signed a rare appeal urging Congress to support the "prompt withdrawal" of all American troops and bases from Iraq, organizers said yesterday.
"Staying in Iraq will not work and is not worth the price. It is time for U.S. troops to come home," reads the statement of a small grass-roots group of active-duty military personnel and reservists that says it aims to give U.S. military members a voice in Iraq war policy.
"As a patriotic American proud to serve the nation in uniform, I respectfully urge my political leaders in Congress to support the prompt withdrawal of American military forces and bases from Iraq," it reads. The group, which aims to collect 2,000 signatures and deliver the "Appeal for Redress" to Congress in January, is sponsored by antiwar activists including Iraq Veterans Against the War, Veterans for Peace and Military Families Speak Out.
The unusual appeal -- the first of its kind in the Iraq war, organizers say -- makes use of a legal protection afforded by the Military Whistle-Blower Protection Act, which provides that members of the military, acting in their capacity as citizens, can send a protected communication to Congress without reprisal.
"Just because you put on the uniform of our country doesn't mean you've given up your rights as a citizen," said J.E. McNeil, a lawyer for the group and executive director for the Center on Conscience & War, a Washington organization that protects the rights of conscientious objectors.
But the service members can exercise this right only while off duty and out of uniform, and they must otherwise make clear they are not speaking for the military. In addition, they cannot say anything disrespectful about their commanders, including the president, McNeil said.
Navy Seaman Jonathan Hutto of Atlanta was the first service member to sign the appeal.
"I hear discussions every day among my shipmates about the war in Iraq and how it doesn't make any sense at this point," said Hutto, who is based in Norfolk and served from September 2005 until March on a ship off Iraq's coast. "There is no victory in sight, and war is still inevitable." He said he opposes the war because of its human and economic tolls, adding that the billions of dollars should be spent on jobs and education at home.
Marine Corps Sgt. Liam Madden, 22, served in Iraq's restive Anbar province from September 2004 until February 2005 and found his opposition to the war intensified after he returned to the United States. "I don't think any more Iraqis or Americans should die because of the U.S. occupation," he said, expressing disappointment that Iraqi elections in January 2005 did not lead to a decline in violence.
"I think some things are worth fighting for, I just don't feel Iraq is one of them," said Madden, of Bellows Falls, Vt. The Quantico-based Marine plans to leave the service to attend college in January.
Madden said he and Hutton met and learned of the vehicle for expressing their views to Congress when they attended a lecture at the YMCA in Norfolk by David Cortright, the author of "Soldiers in Revolt: GI Resistance During the Vietnam War."
Staff researcher Julie Tate contributed to this report.
|
More than 100 U.S. service members have signed a rare appeal urging Congress to support the "prompt withdrawal" of all American troops and bases from Iraq, organizers said yesterday.
| 19.424242 | 1 | 33 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/25/AR2006102500235.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/25/AR2006102500235.html
|
Defiant Iraqi PM Disavows Timetable
|
2006102519
|
BAGHDAD, Iraq -- An angry Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki disavowed a joint U.S.-Iraqi raid in the capital's Sadr City slum Wednesday, and criticized the top U.S. military and diplomatic representatives in Iraq for saying his government needs to set a timetable to curb violence in the country.
Al-Maliki spoke at a news conference a day after U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad said Iraqi leaders had agreed to set deadlines by year's end for achieving specific political and security goals laid out by the United States, including reining in militia groups.
"I affirm that this government represents the will of the people and no one has the right to impose a timetable on it," the prime minister said.
The prime minister dismissed U.S. talk of timelines as driven by the coming midterm elections in the United States. "I am positive that this is not the official policy of the American government but rather a result of the ongoing election campaign. And that does not concern us much," he said.
Al-Maliki complained that he was not consulted beforehand about the Sadr City offensive. The raid was conducted by Iraqi special forces backed by U.S. advisers and was aimed at capturing a top militia commander wanted for running a Shiite death squad.
"We will ask for clarification to what has happened," al-Maliki said. "We will review this issue with the Multinational Forces so that it will not be repeated."
Mouwafak al-Rubaie, his national security adviser, later told The Associated Press that al-Maliki's anger grew out of a misunderstanding that had since been cleared up with Gen. George Casey, the top U.S. commander in Iraq.
While the U.S. military said the raid had been cleared in advance with al-Maliki's government, President Bush acknowledged that al-Maliki himself may not have been consulted.
"We need coordinate with him. That makes sense to me. And there's a lot of operations taking place which means sometimes communications are not as good as they should be. And we'll continue to work very closely with the government to make sure communications are solid," Bush said at his own news conference.
Military action in Sadr City is especially sensitive for the prime minister.
Until Wednesday, U.S. and Iraqi forces had largely avoided the densely populated slum, a grid of rutted streets and tumble-down housing that is home to 2.5 million Shiites and under the control of anti-American cleric Muqtada's al-Sadr's Mahdi Army.
Reining in the Mahdi Army and the other major militia, the Badr Brigades, remains one of the thorniest problems facing al-Maliki. His fragile Shiite-dominated government derives much of its power from the al-Sadr's faction and from the Supreme Council for the Revolution in Iraq, or SCIRI, which operates the Badr Brigades.
|
BAGHDAD, Iraq -- An angry Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki disavowed a joint U.S.-Iraqi raid in the capital's Sadr City slum Wednesday, and criticized the top U.S. military and diplomatic representatives in Iraq for saying his government needs to set a timetable to curb violence in the country.
| 9.963636 | 1 | 55 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/10/11/DI2006101101242.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/10/11/DI2006101101242.html
|
White House Talk
|
2006102519
|
Dan is also deputy editor of Niemanwatchdog.org .
Dan Froomkin: Hi everyone, and welcome to another White House Talk.
What a day! There was already so much to talk about and then -- at 8:33 a.m. -- the White House press office sent out word that President Bush would hold a press conference at 10:30! Reporters had 27 minutes to sign up, and less than an hour to show up on the White House driveway, to be escorted to the East Room. As for me, I had to scramble to get the rest of my column done.
The column today leads with my initial response to the press conference. My sense was that other than saying he owed the American people an explanation for this whole Iraq mess, he didn't really have much new to say. In other words: There's a lot that remains unexplained.
Did you watch? What did you think? And what else (White-House-related) is on your mind? Let me know.
Des Moines, Iowa: In your column today you start out with: "At a surprise press conference this morning...." Have not all of Bush's press conferences been a last minute surprise? So the surprise is really now the expected in a way? And did past administrations commonly give last minute heads-up?
Dan Froomkin: Good point. Lately, all of Bush's press conferences have been announced essentially at the last minute, which I have to believe is in part a way of keeping the corps from thinking too hard about what questions to ask -- and, not that this would ever happen, planning a coordinated attack on the question of the day.
The exception to this rule is the prime-time press conferences, which have to be announced way ahead of time. That's why Bush only holds about one of those a year.
I'm not sure about past administrations. Fine question. My gut is this is something new, but I could be wrong.
I'm also interested in the timing: Holding them in the morning, rather than the afternoon. On the one hand, it gives the daily newspaper folks time to mull and fact check before filing for the morning paper -- but on the other hand, it means a full day of mostly stenographic, rather than analytical or truth-squadding coverage, both on TV and in the online-news world.
Pacifica, Calif.: This morning the President refused to answer a question about what the U.S. would do if efforts to quell a "civil war" failed. He claimed the question was a "hypothetical" and therefore would not answer.
I always thought that people in government, as well as people in business, had a responsibility to consider "hypothetical" situations in order to be prepared for all options.
Since I'm sure the President has thought about options other than complete victory, should his response be seen as an attempt to avoid even more negativism than already swirls around the Iraq War?
Dan Froomkin: That's a very good point. Bush and his spokespeople have swatted away innumerable good questions by labeling them hypothetical.
And, in this particular case, there are a lot of people who don't think there's anything remotely hypothetical about a civil war in Iraq. That includes 82 percent of the American public, according to a CBS News poll in June, and experts like Harvard's Monica Toft.
Arlington, Va.: It seems likely to me that the next president will inherit a mess in Iraq. Has anyone in the press asked Snow if this administration will 'get the job done' before he leaves office? It would be very un-Texan of him to have started something he couldn't finish.
Dan Froomkin: Mike Allen of Time asked that very question of Bush himself this morning -- and guess what? He ducked it.
White Plains, N.Y.: I believe Mr. Bush was quoted earlier this weeks as having said "I never said 'stay the course'" Why is the press not addressing this aggressively as a glaring example of the President's knowing and willful distortion of reality?
Dan Froomkin: Oh but they are! With truly surprising vigor! See my columns today, and yesterday , and Monday .
In fact, a keen observer called me just yesterday to see if I could explain the vigor, given the many other similar opportunities that the corps has passed up. I don't have a firm answer, but in my October 11 column, I wrote about how Bob Woodward's book, "State of Denial," had finally convinced establishment Washington that Bush has a serious credibility problem.
Superior, Wis.: Good afternoon...Do you think President Bush's impromptu press conference had anything to do with another story that is reported in The Post this morning: an appeal from active-duty soldiers urging Congress for a phased withdrawal? The President could not very well criticize soldiers who have put their life on the line so was this a way of addressing them? What do you think? Thank you.
Dan Froomkin: You're talking about this story by Ann Scott Tyson .
My first reaction to your question was no, this story hasn't risen to anywhere near the level that Bush would feel compelled to respond in any significant way.
But the White House and the RNC do lots and lots of very sensitive polling and who knows? Maybe they saw this as touching a nerve. Bush certainly did spend a lot of time saying things like this today: "And the parents of our troops must understand that if I didn't believe we could succeed and didn't believe it was necessary for the security of this country to succeed, I wouldn't have your loved ones there. That's what I want these parents to hear."
Dan Froomkin: The transcript of the press conference is available here .
Thanks for restoring truthfulness to journalism.
My question is as follows: Didn't General Casey say six months ago that Iraq could assume primary responsibility for its security? I'm pretty sure if he did. If I am right, why should the American public find him more credible now if his previous prognostication totally lacks credibility?
Dan Froomkin: Thanks. I'm just a truthy kind of guy.
Michael R. Gordon touched on some of these past announcements that came to naught in today's New York Times. There were indeed many of them.
Alexandria, Va.: Again I am dismayed at the softball questions and lack of follow-up. When is someone going to ask the President to name the Democrats who "don't want his listening to terrorists' conversations"? Why don't they point out the distinction between voting for a law that has many bad points and supporting legitimate surveillance? Why do the press continue to give him a platform to repeat his false allegations against those who vote against him?
Dan Froomkin: I hear you, but please don't underestimate how hard it is to ask a question that the guy at the podium can't spin to his favor -- when he controls the microphone.
That's why I reserve my greatest ire not for reporters at press conferences (called with 27 minutes notice), but for those bigshots who get one-on-one interviews with Bush and squander the opportunity to do rigorous follow-ups to his nonanswers. Now mind you I realize you could take up most of an hour-long interview just trying to pin him down on one or two things, but I think that would be worth it.
New York, N.Y.: Dan - If the Democrats win at least the House, how in general will GW Bush and his team respond?
They said they have no plans for a loss in the elections!
Dan Froomkin: Well, that's really the question of the moment: What will the White House do (if it happens)?
I'm sure they do have some (secret) plans, but I have no clue what they are. Would they try to reach across the aisle and find common ground? Or would they continue their politics of division -- guaranteeing gridlock? I just don't know.
Palo Alto, Calif.: News journalists have written and discussed in detail congressional and Senate races, but they never mention the vulnerability of the electoral process -- hackable machines and purged voter roles. How much of an impact do you think this factor will have if exit polls suggest a Democratic tsunami but results keep Republicans in power?
Dan Froomkin: This isn't a White House question, per se, and my expertise in this issue is not great. But I feel obliged to address it on account of the literally hundreds of e-mails I have gotten from readers who wonder if Bush and Rove's confidence in a Republican victory has something to do with a GOP plan to hack the vote.
I simply can't believe that's the case. But some aggressive reporting on this issue sure wouldn't hurt.
I certainly expect quite a bit of chaos at the polling places. See for instance,Amy Goldstein's piece in today's Post about a new report fromElectionline.org. And chaos, combined with the widespread lack of a paper trail, certainly could appear inviting to miscreants.
As for exit polls, my understanding is that the traditional media consortium exit pollsters are no longer releasing any data until they can "correct" their numbers to conform to the official count. As campaign consultant and data expertStephanie Singer writes: "In other words, what they report is no longer exit poll data at all, but rather a meaningless affirmation of official numbers." Singer also describes an independent attempt to do exit polling.
There is a clear majority of voters that are anti-Bush, that want to send the administration a clear message and vote against the President. 2 thoughts: First, where were all of these people 2 short years ago? How did things crumble so quickly for the president and how did so many American citizens get duped? and Second, Does it really matter? After all, the president (and most of his cabinet) aren't going anywhere. The real message should have been sent in 2004, not today?
Dan Froomkin: I thought Bush's comment about accountability today was absolutely fascinating.
In essence, he said: You missed me. You had your chance in 2004, and you missed me. And to some extent, he's right.
What happened in 2004, in my opinion, is that Karl Rove used a complicit press to to turn the election into a referendum on John Kerry, rather than on Bush.
Since then, of course, things in Iraq have gotten a heck of a lot worse, and the evidence of credibility problems has continued to mount, etc.
Now, ironically, Bush is not on the ballot. But he's having a heck of a time demonizing his opponent. So the focus is more on him than it was last time.
Just for kicks, here's my January 18, 2005 column about Bush's assertion, in a Washington Post interview, that the 2004 election was "an accountability moment".
Pittsburgh, Pa.: I notice Tony Snow making lots of campaign appearances - unusual for a White House press secretary, I believe. And he's using the big TV screens as a means of becoming a superstar to the Bush base. Do they have some plan to run him for office in the near future? I know he has no public office experience, but It certainly hasn't been a hindrance for their candidates to date.
Dan Froomkin: Now there's a thought. I don't think any White House press secretary has ever run for office. (Can anyone prove me wrong?)
But then again, Snow's certainly the first to make campaign appearances.
And why is no one shocked at his behavior? I think Washington has come to realize that there is simply no difference between politics and policy in this White House. So what's one more example?
Delmar, N.Y.: In your "White House Briefing" column today you note a conversation between Vice President Cheney and a radio host in which the VP admitted that we used the technique of waterboarding against some detainees. He also said that this technique does not constitute torture. It is interesting that Mr. Cheney's alleged boss, President Bush, has refused to answer the question as to whether we have ever used waterboarding on the grounds that if we revealed our interrogation techniques "the enemy" could adapt. (How? By practicing holding their heads under water?) I wonder why this item has not gotten more attention?
Dan Froomkin: Yeah, I probably buried that. But maybe it will get some pickup now.
First, Cheney tacitly agreed to describing waterboarding a suspect as "dunking a terrorist in water," -- and then he called it a "no-brainer."
That was in this radio interview yesterday.
And yes, given Bush's refusal to acknowledge that waterboarding continues, this should be taken as an official administration position until or unless it's clarified or denied.
Wasn't there an exchange this morning at the press conference to which the President sarcastically responded "I truly enjoy this process," or something to that effect (I may have read it in your column, in fact). Why didn't someone ask the follow-up: If he hates the process, and has nothing new to say, why is he up there?
Love your columns and chats. Keep up the good work.
"I can't tell you how joyful it is" is the exact quote.
Bush actually did explain, in response to an earlier question, why he was going before the microphones: "I think I owe an explanation to the American people," he said.
Someone toward the end of the press conference should have followed up on that: Is THAT your explanation? There's nothing new in it, and the American people remain unconvinced!
Or they could have asked some of the questions I mentioned in my column.
Arlington, Va.: Pierre Salinger, JFK's Press Secretary, was appointed as Senator from California but lost the election to continue in that office.
Dan Froomkin: I love my readers. Thanks.
Houston, Tex.: The presidential press secretary is supposed to speak for the president. Bush has found the perfect press secretary in Tony Snow, who seems to be as big a liar as his boss.
Apart from Snow's "entertainment" edge over his predecessor, do you ever wish Scott McClellan were back?
Dan Froomkin: I can't think of anything that would make me wish Scott McClellan were back.
Burke, Va.: I read that Bush was planning to try and change Social Security once again. Has anyone asked what he wants to try this time?
Dan Froomkin: Yes he does -- and the exact same thing as last time.
Amazing, huh? Lori Montgomery had a story about this in The Washington Post this morning.
Arlington, Va.: The transcript of today's press conference again shows the President kidding around with reporters and trying to be funny. While I am all for not taking things too seriously, there are Americans and Iraqis dying daily in a war that the President started. Aren't jokes just inappropriate right now?
Dan Froomkin: Considering that he once again lashed out at the mythological "some people" who "say we're not at war," I think that's a reasonable point to bring up.
Forest, Va.: Looking forward, I believe that when the Democrats take control of one or both houses of Congress, that they will need to come out of the blocks at speed.
And that's my concern, that the Democrats, (of whom I'm a staunch supporter), won't project a strong image of power, focus, competence, and accomplishment.
I'm concerned that they will, in public, spend an inordinate amount of time discussing goals, strategies, appointments, etc., etc.
Dan Froomkin: The only thing I can say about the White House strategy for dealing with a Democratic Congress is that they will very likely look to exploit any weakness on the Democrats' part -- and judging from past experience, that will keep them plenty busy.
Salem, Va.: Sorry to tell you Dan, you are less truthy than you are spinny. You focus on the news items that most interests you (everything negative about this administration) then you harp on it to the delight of the moveon.org groupies that read your blog.
Dan Froomkin: Well, I don't entirely agree. But you're entitled to your opinion. Thanks for posting.
Washington, D.C.: This may sound petty - but if you're going after the security/soccer mom vote - these last minute press conferences keep pre-empting shows like Martha and The View. That could really turn some people off!
Burke, Va.: I read Broder to see what establishment Washington is thinking. He thinks Clinton lying about sex is worse than Bush lying about Iraq because he doesn't really believe Bush was really lying. Do you know how common that opinion is. Also - do you know why the effects of the military commissions and torture bill seems to be so poorly covered? The Post has done a decent to good job, but most news media have not.
Dan Froomkin: David Broder is often a very good reflection of the conventional wisdom in establishment Washington.
What you are seeing in him, and in it, is a lack of outrage over things that are arguably outrageous. I can't explain it. But there you go.
And.. just my guess... but it may change as Bush weakens.
Costa Mesa, Calif.: Thanks for taking my question Dan.
Since most of the reporters at the press conferences know that Bush will either give a fuzzy or meaningless answer, or not answer at all, why don't they ask basic questions that are less easy to fudge. Such as: "Mr. President, since you have repeatedly indicated that many events, such as the Katrina response, or the increase in violence in Iraq, are "unacceptable", how many people have been held accountable for such poor job performance and let go?
Dan Froomkin: Oh, he'd take that one and run with it, as well.
I do like the idea of very short, very specific questions. Like, for instance: "How precisely do you define torture?"
Anonymous: Given that today's press conference refocuses the media attention, and consequently the public attention, on the war in Iraq, why would the President hold this press conference? Doesn't it seem like a bad political move, especially since nothing substantially new was offered, nothing that would change people's minds?
Dan Froomkin: Yeah, I'm not really clear on that either.
Edmond, Okla.: Mr. Froomkin, thank you for being a voice of reason on these matters. My son is in the Army, stationed in Ramadi, Iraq. I talked to him last week and he is very tired. He said that they had heard that 60% of the American people did not support the war. I said that that was true. He asked me, "Then why are we here?" As someone who never supported the war, I had no answer. How can we answer that question, asked by a soldier in the field?
Dan Froomkin: Tell him you're proud of him. Tell him we're all proud of him. Then tell him you'll try to do something about it.
Rockville, Md.: "Mike Allen of Time asked that very question of Bush himself this morning -- and guess what? He ducked it. "
Possibly because he has already stated that the next administration would have Iraq to work with.
Is it too crude to ask some to "pay attention?"
Dan Froomkin: He has indeed said that he does not expect every single American soldier to be entirely out of Iraq before he leaves office -- but he has not addressed how likely it is that most will be out by then.
Dan Froomkin: Thanks very much for all your wonderful questions and comments, as always. Sorry I couldn't get to more of them. See you again here in two weeks, and every aftrernoon at washingtonpost.com/whbriefing .
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.
| 98.682927 | 0.682927 | 0.878049 |
high
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102401563.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102401563.html
|
The GOP Leans on A Proven Strategy
|
2006102519
|
Beset by discouraging polls and division within ideological ranks, the White House is accelerating efforts to woo back disaffected conservatives and energize the Republican base in a reprise of a strategy that succeeded in the last two campaign cycles.
President Bush and Vice President Cheney have given multiple interviews to conservative journalists, senior adviser Karl Rove has telephoned religious and social activists, and the White House has staged signing ceremonies for legislation cracking down on terrorism and illegal immigration. Two weeks before Election Day, Bush aides invited dozens of radio talk show hosts for a marathon broadcast from the White House yesterday to reach conservative listeners.
The message that Bush and others are sending to alienated supporters is that, no matter how upset they have been about various policies or political missteps over the past couple of years, life would be far worse under the Democrats. They name liberal lawmakers who would take charge of key committees and warn conservatives that taxes would go up and protection against terrorists would go down. And they cite, in particular, the confirmation of two conservative Supreme Court justices who might have been blocked by a Democratic Senate.
"The White House strategy is to remind us who would be in leadership in the House and Senate" if Democrats win, said Gary L. Bauer, president of a group called American Values and a Christian conservative who sends a daily e-mail to 100,000 supporters. "The idea is that that's going to be enough to get out most of this vote."
Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform and a close Rove associate, said the White House team is blanketing the conservative circuit. "They're out there, they're talking to people, they're at our meetings," he said. "This is a full-court press." Norquist dismissed conservatives who are threatening to stay home on Election Day: "They're not doing anything other than whining."
Some conservatives said it is too late. "They honestly need a baseball bat against the head," said Republican pollster Frank Luntz, who helped Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) take over Congress in the 1990s. "Because if they don't change the lexicon immediately, as bad as this election is going to be, they're going to lose the presidency in 2008. I've given up on 2006. They've already made so many mistakes, there's no way they can fix it in two weeks. But I'm worried now they're going to lose all the marbles."
The White House courtship of the right paid enormous dividends in the past, but this year it is complicated by a far more skeptical audience than in 2002 and 2004. Conservatives who were key to those victories have grown frustrated with the Bush policies on federal spending, immigration, Iraq and foreign affairs, and uncertain of his commitment to issues such as preventing legalized same-sex marriage. The Mark Foley page scandal did not help reassure "values voters," as strategists call them, nor did the publication of a book by former White House official David Kuo saying that Bush aides dismissed Christian conservatives as "nuts."
Republicans in Washington Post-ABC News polls are unified behind GOP House candidates, but somewhat less so than Democrats are behind theirs. Ten percent of Republicans in the latest survey said they plan to vote Democratic this year, compared with 4 percent of Democrats who intend to cross over. One reason is that Democrats have made some headway among traditionally conservative groups.
In the most recent poll, 29 percent of self-identified conservatives said they plan to vote for Democrats for the House, compared with 17 percent in 2004. Among white evangelical Protestants, 30 percent favor Democrats, compared with 25 percent two years ago. At the same time, Republicans report being as enthusiastic as Democrats about voting this year, belying the assumption that they might stay home.
"This is going to be a very important part of the election," said White House political director Sara Taylor. "In a traditional midterm headwind, Republicans are going to have to make sure they turn out their base. In places where they do that, Republicans are going to win races they're supposed to win. In places where they don't do that, they're going to have a much harder time."
The White House has tried to rev up its base in various ways. Bush has given interviews to Fox News host Bill O'Reilly, the Wall Street Journal's Paul Gigot, and groups of conservative columnists and talk show hosts. Cheney appeared last week on Rush Limbaugh's radio show and yesterday gave an interview to conservative television and radio commentator Sean Hannity.
"Nancy is not in sync with the vast majority of the American people," Cheney said, referring to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.), who would become speaker if Democrats took over the House. "Nancy represents what I think is that side of the Democratic Party that has not been aggressive of and does not believe in a really robust, aggressive prosecution of the global war on terror."
|
Beset by discouraging polls and division within ideological ranks, the White House is accelerating efforts to woo back disaffected conservatives and energize the Republican base in a reprise of a strategy that succeeded in the last two campaign cycles.
| 23.853659 | 1 | 41 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102401476.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102401476.html
|
A Contentious Campaign in a Battleground State
|
2006102519
|
COALMONT, Tenn. -- John Layne is a 57-year-old white Republican with a long gray beard, no job and advancing emphysema. He arrived an hour early to hear Harold Ford Jr. speak in this struggling mountain town.
"Oh, sure, there's some prejudice," Layne said as he contemplated casting a ballot for a black man. "I wouldn't want my daughter marrying one." But he's more concerned about rising medical costs: When it comes to voting, "you gotta look at the person, not the color."
Ford announced his Senate campaign 18 months ago with three strikes against him: He was a Democrat, he was black, and he carried family baggage. The five-term congressman was wildly popular in his Memphis House district and was viewed as a rising star in the Democratic Party. But statewide office seemed beyond reach in Tennessee, a state with a history of racially divided voting where Republicans had won recent Senate races.
Now this political curiosity has become one of the most intense and bitter contests of the season. With the Nov. 7 elections two weeks away, Ford is locked in a surprisingly close battle with Republican Bob Corker. The latest poll -- released yesterday by Mason-Dixon -- showed the charismatic Ford trailing 45 percent to 43 percent.
Tennessee is one of the four remaining Senate battlegrounds, along with Virginia, Missouri and Rhode Island, that operatives in both parties believe are most likely to determine whether Republicans maintain control of the Senate in January. But this race is in a different category because of Ford's profile.
Corker and Ford tangle over all the usual issues, including the war in Iraq, education and energy independence, with both candidates holding mainstream views on most topics. Yet every speech, slogan and campaign ad seems to echo with double meaning.
"I'm a believer that this moment is a big one," Ford, 36, told the Coalmont crowd, as Layne nodded approvingly from his seat in front of the podium. "I'll make you a good senator. I just want to go up there and do right."
Corker depicts himself as more "senatorial" than Ford but is running an almost entirely negative campaign at this point. He depicts Ford as a smooth-talking city slicker who has deeper roots in Washington, D.C. -- where Ford lived for part of his childhood -- compared with Corker, the self-described "real Tennessean" in the race.
The hardest blows have come from the national GOP. The National Republican Senatorial Committee ridicules Ford's expensive tastes on a "Fancy Ford" Web site, and the Republican National Committee is airing a controversial new ad that features a scantily clad blonde who says she met Ford at a Playboy party. "Harold, call me!" the woman chirps.
The former Chattanooga mayor often appears to be tiptoeing through a rhetorical minefield, eager to discredit his Democratic opponent with the sharpest weapons he can find but wary about accusations of playing racial politics. "Our life experiences could not be more different," Corker said in an interview. "For him, politics is a way of life."
Does the race factor influence his campaign decisions? "I understand the point of your question," Corker responded carefully in a recent interview. Then he shook his head and looked away.
If Ford pulls it off, he will become the first black senator to represent the South since Reconstruction. Victory in Tennessee also would be particularly symbolic for the Democratic Party, a bookend of sorts to the 1994 "Republican Revolution." That historic election, which gave the GOP control of both chambers of Congress, was tilted by races in the same Upper South states where Democrats are seeking to wrest power from Republicans this year.
|
COALMONT, Tenn. -- John Layne is a 57-year-old white Republican with a long gray beard, no job and advancing emphysema. He arrived an hour early to hear Harold Ford Jr. speak in this struggling mountain town.
| 17.452381 | 1 | 42 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102401447.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102401447.html
|
A Long Way From Home
|
2006102519
|
BOSTON It wasn't Mississippi and it wasn't Alabama. But in the 1970s, many blacks were frightened just to climb the steps of Charlestown High. Police officers had to escort students to their classrooms while this tightknit white neighborhood howled and demonstrated against integration.
And now, here is Deval Patrick, 50, a black man and the Democratic candidate for governor, gliding through his main campaign headquarters.
Only one other black man -- L. Douglas Wilder of Virginia -- has been elected governor of a state in America. The race is a roiling political drama, drawing the kind of interest here that is usually reserved for the Red Sox or the Patriots. Patrick, who faces the Republican nominee, Lt. Gov. Kerry Healey, on Election Day, has a double-digit lead in the polls.
If he's successful, Patrick would not be the first black elected statewide in Massachusetts. That distinction belongs to Edward Brooke, who in 1966 became the first black elected to the U.S. Senate since Reconstruction. Nevertheless, the state's racial history has been bloody and complex, both brutal and glorious.
Two miles from Charlestown and directly across the street from the gold-domed state capitol stands a lustrous bronze statue honoring the Massachusetts 54th Regiment, the first all-black regiment recruited in the North to fight for the Union Army in the Civil War. The regiment's casualties were huge. Inscribed on the base is "For the Union Dead," a haunting poem written by Robert Lowell as a tribute to the soldiers:
. . . Two months after marching through Boston,
Half the regiment was dead;
William James could almost hear the bronze Negroes breathe.
But harsher winds also swirled across the commonwealth.
The nation was introduced to a black man named Willie Horton during the 1988 presidential contest between Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis and Vice President George H.W. Bush. Horton was an imprisoned murderer who received a weekend furlough while Dukakis was governor. Horton escaped and made his way to Maryland, where he raped and robbed a woman. Horton became a seminal figure in the anti-crime ads of candidate Bush, and there were those who thought Bush was pandering to racial fears.
|
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.
| 8.27451 | 0.333333 | 0.372549 |
low
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102400571.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102400571.html
|
Hastert, Reynolds Testify About GOP's Handling of Foley Case
|
2006102519
|
House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) spent nearly three hours behind closed doors with the House ethics committee yesterday, describing what he knew about then-Rep. Mark Foley's relationships with young male pages and when he knew it.
The extraordinary appearance came just a few hours after the House Republican campaign chief, Rep. Thomas M. Reynolds (N.Y.), went before the committee to reiterate his contention that he personally told Hastert in the spring about suspicious e-mails that Foley had sent to a Louisiana teenager. Hastert has said he has no recollection of that conversation and did not learn of the Foley matter until it surfaced in late September.
"Since I had requested prompt action by the committee, I took the opportunity to thank them for moving expeditiously to look into this matter," Hastert said as he emerged from the committee's Capitol basement hearing room. "I answered every question they asked fully and to the best of my ability."
The twinning of Hastert's appearance with that of Reynolds surprised House Republican and Democratic leadership aides, and it only heightened the drama of the committee's deliberations.
Hastert is the first House speaker to testify before the committee since Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) discussed a much-criticized book deal in 1997. But in that case, committee members scheduled Gingrich's testimony at night, sparing him a daylight walk through the throng of reporters and camera crews camped outside the hearing room.
Also unlike Gingrich, Hastert had to appear immediately after the chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, Reynolds, who had already challenged Hastert's version of events.
"I was happy to voluntarily do my part to assist in their inquiry and answer any questions they had," Reynolds said yesterday. "Earlier this month I had several opportunities to answer your questions and tell you what I know, but the committee has asked us not to share the substance of our discussion.
"I would only add that a full and fair investigation of the facts is vital to ensuring the continued integrity of this institution, which is why I strongly encourage any of my colleagues who have information that may be of relevance to bring it to the committee's attention at once."
House Majority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) testified last week that he also told Hastert in the spring about concerns stemming from what House leaders have termed "over-friendly" e-mails from Foley to the former page from Louisiana.
Yesterday's drama was the strongest indication yet that the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, as the ethics committee is formally known, may be nearing the end of its investigative work. The committee interviewed Hastert's chief of staff, Scott Palmer, on Monday and could call up his deputy chief of staff, Mike Stokke, and his counsel, Ted Van Der Meid, this week.
But neither Democratic nor Republican leadership aides believe that a final report will be released ahead of the Nov. 7 elections, which have been roiled by the Foley matter.
The inquiry has been focused on the handling of Foley by House leaders. As far back as 2000, Foley's advances on former pages over the Internet had come to the attention of one congressman, Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-Ariz.). Kolbe had brought the matter to then-House Clerk Jeff Trandahl, who reported to the speaker's office.
According to sources close to Trandahl, the former clerk repeatedly brought concerns about Foley to the congressman's chief of staff, Kirk Fordham. Fordham told the committee that when he was unable to stop Foley's advances, he asked Palmer to intervene in 2002 or 2003. Palmer has said Fordham's version of events did not happen.
Aides in the speaker's office have said that the matter did not come to their attention until the fall of 2005 and that it was handled without Hastert's involvement.
Hastert tried to deflect attention from GOP leaders yesterday, suggesting, as other Republicans have, that Democrats may have known about Foley's explicit instant messages but did not report them to authorities. Instead, Republicans have said, Democrats shopped them to the news media before the elections.
Hastert said he encouraged the committee "to continue to move forward to get to the bottom of this, including finding out who was aware and when they were aware of the sexually explicit instant messages that were created three years ago."
Two former pages who were the sources of the instant messages have told The Washington Post that they did not come forward until after ABC News published the suspicious but not the sexual e-mails. A Republican former page said he wanted to expose Foley's more outrageous actions and had no intention of sparking a wider scandal. A Democratic former page, who supplied the messages to The Post, did so several days after ABC News obtained its messages.
|
House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) spent nearly three hours behind closed doors with the House ethics committee yesterday, describing what he knew about then-Rep. Mark Foley's relationships with young male pages and when he knew it.
| 19.604167 | 1 | 48 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102401513.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102401513.html
|
'Rent' Creator Gets His Due
|
2006102519
|
It isn't often that the Library of Congress books a rock band. The emphatic pulse of drum and electric guitar filled the august institution Monday night, though, as it celebrated the induction into its archives of "Rent" composer Jonathan Larson's papers.
Larson, who died of an aortic aneurysm in 1996 at age 35-- days before the premiere of his landmark rock opera -- is the first of a younger cadre of Broadway songwriters to have his manuscripts, letters and other materials preserved at the library alongside those of Irving Berlin, George and Ira Gershwin, Cole Porter and Leonard Bernstein. Library officials say that scholars already are inquiring about access to Larson's collection.
"It's a surprisingly rich collection for someone who died so young," said Mark Eden Horowitz, the senior music specialist who spearheaded the library's efforts to acquire Larson's papers, which consist of about 3,800 items. "I've never seen anyone who wrote down his thoughts as much as he did. There's just so much of the person there, what he was thinking and feeling about things."
The library's musical commemoration was an exuberant retrospective that featured a half-dozen Broadway singers -- including "Rent" original cast members Anthony Rapp and Gwen Stewart -- performing Larson's pop-inflected compositions from both his well-known and unproduced shows.
A large, particularly fascinating portion of the evening was devoted to songs that were either cut from "Rent" or completely overhauled before the show's off-Broadway opening in January 1996 at the New York Theatre Workshop. (It moved later that year to Broadway, where it won a Tony Award and Pulitzer Prize.)
The members of "Rent's" original onstage band -- Daniel Weiss, Kenny Brescia, Jeff Potter and Steven Mack -- reunited for the concert under the guidance of Tim Weil, the rock opera's music director, who put together the evening. Seated near the front of the library's Coolidge Auditorium were Larson's parents, Al and Nan, as well as his sister Julie, who -- using some of the long-running musical's proceeds -- formed the Jonathan Larson Performing Arts Foundation, which supports budding musical-theater writers.
Horowitz said he approached the Larsons a decade ago about securing the composer's papers, which the family found in his Lower Manhattan apartment. (The flat, with a bathtub in the kitchen and a toilet in the closet, is alluded to in his songs.) The collection, which includes 651 sound recordings, arrived at the library in 2004, but the cataloguing of of such acquisitions routinely takes years.
An unusual aspect of the collection is that all of it was produced by a composer in virtual anonymity. (A long-ago letter to Public Theater producer Joseph Papp, pleading with him to see one of Larson's early shows, was among the items on display outside the auditorium.)
"I saw 'Rent' fairly shortly after its Broadway opening in '96," said Horowitz, himself a student of musical theater and composers such as Stephen Sondheim. "And I felt it was important enough and valuable enough that I wanted to make sure his papers were preserved in some way."
For the Larsons, "Rent" has always been a source of joy wrapped up in anguish, and sitting with them before the concert, one could sense that the occasion drew on emotional extremes. "It's a mind-blowing thing for me," Al Larson said. "I'd trade this, though, in a minute. Time does dull, but it doesn't change the facts."
"Rent"-heads, of course, were in their glory. Rapp, who befriended Larson during the musical's workshop productions, told the audience a story about inviting the unknown Larson to a party. Another friend walked up to Rapp and said: "What's up with that guy? I was talking to him and he said with a perfectly straight face, 'I'm the future of musical theater.' "
As Rapp recalled it, the friend added: "Like, dude, who would ever want to admit that?"
The poignant truth was that Larson did not have much future left. The talent, however, would endure, and Monday's concert gave Rapp, Stewart and four other big voices (those of Michael McElroy, Randy Graff, Natascia Diaz and Jeremy Kushnier) the opportunity to show that -- in the breadth of Larson's work from such early efforts as "Superbia" and "tick, tick . . . Boom!" to "Rent."
Rapp said that Larson wrote 386 songs in 20 years at the keyboard. On the basis of the library's concert, his songbook might make for a tantalizing revue even without "Rent." Larson's comic gifts were underlined in Graff's jazzy rendition of the song "Break Out the Booze," and in Diaz's impression of a neat-freak mom in "Hosing the Furniture." Larson's fluid way with a pop ballad was affirmed in Stewart and McElroy's "You Called My Name," and Diaz's "Come to Your Senses" showed off the power in Larson's ballads, too.
The concert's second half surveyed songs that Larson excised from "Rent" or rewrote extensively. As delivered by Kushnier, for instance, the driving music in the plaintive "One Song Glory" -- performed by the character Roger, the AIDS-stricken musician -- had been sung to the words of a song titled "Right Brain."
There was also "Over It," a song cut from "Rent" that is a duet for the characters Mark and Maureen, who break up after Maureen runs off with a woman. (The two were played by Rapp and Idina Menzel in the stage and movie versions.) The number was eventually replaced in the show by "Tango: Maureen," a song for Mark and Maureen's lover, Joanne. In a rendition by Rapp and Diaz, "Over It" provided a new layer of tension in one of the musical's key relationships.
At the end of the evening, the Washington-based gospel group the Ministers of Music joined the actors onstage for the signature Larson anthem, "Seasons of Love." Not only were the papers of a singular American talent there, but the spirit was, too.
|
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.
| 24.352941 | 0.45098 | 0.490196 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/25/AR2006102500038.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/25/AR2006102500038.html
|
Infection Hospitalizes Esther Williams
|
2006102519
|
LOS ANGELES -- Esther Williams is in the hospital for treatment of a minor infection and will stay there for the rest of the week, the actress' publicist said Tuesday.
The nature of the infection was not disclosed. The actress, in her mid-80s, is expected to recover fully, spokesman Harlan Boll said.
"She was just up in bed listening to her favorite music," Boll said. "She's doing fine."
Associated Press archives list Williams' birthday as Aug. 8, 1921. Boll said Tuesday that the actress was born Aug. 8, 1922.
Williams was a swimming champion who turned to acting where she was able to use her aquatic skills in such films as "Easy to Wed," "Neptune's Daughter" and "Dangerous When Wet."
She had been scheduled to appear Nov. 2 at a tribute to actress June Allyson but backed out at the request of family members. Elizabeth Taylor will take her place, Boll said.
|
LOS ANGELES -- Esther Williams is in the hospital for treatment of a minor infection and will stay there for the rest of the week, the actress' publicist said Tuesday.
| 5.787879 | 1 | 33 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102401500.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102401500.html
|
Hip-Hop Editor Wins Suit Over Her Firing
|
2006102519
|
After a tumultuous two-week trial, Kimberly Osorio, a former editor in chief of the Source magazine, won a workplace lawsuit against the popular hip-hop monthly, and a Manhattan jury awarded her $15.5 million.
"This is a victory for women in hip-hop," Osorio told the hip-hop Web site SOHH.com after the verdict Monday night. "I stood up and I won."
Osorio, who was fired by the Source last year, sued the magazine and its founders, David Mays and Raymond Scott, alleging sexual harassment, gender discrimination, defamation, retaliatory discharge and maintaining a hostile work environment. The defendants responded that Osorio was fired in March 2005 for "poor performance," including her decision to publish a cover photo of rapper Nelly without his posse and running a negative review of a CD by rapper Fat Joe.
Osorio, now an editor at BET.com, testified that Scott repeatedly begged her for sex, and that another editor threatened to "knock me upside my [expletive] head."
The jury of six men and two women threw out the discrimination and sexual harassment complaints but found that Osorio was fired in retaliation for complaining to her bosses about discrimination and sexual harassment. In addition, the jury ruled that Scott had defamed Osorio in an interview after her firing.
The defendants quickly announced that they would appeal the verdict.
"This will be knocked out on appeal," Mays said in a telephone interview yesterday. "She won't collect on any of this."
The eight-day trial was enlivened by testimony about life in the Source's offices in New York, which was said to include watching porn videos, graphic threats of violence, and the spreading of rumors that Osorio, Mays and Scott had sexual relations with various rappers.
During the trial in U.S. District Court, Osorio's attorney, Kenneth Thompson, told Judge Jed S. Rakoff that Scott -- who is also a professional rapper known as Benzino -- shouted "Coward! Chump! Uncle Tom!" at him as he walked to the men's room during a recess. Scott denied the charge. The judge gave Scott the choice of staying in the courtroom or being escorted out of the building by a marshal.
"I'll leave," Scott said, and a marshal took him out.
Scott has long been a controversial figure in the rap world. In 2003, he released a Benzino album that included a song attacking rapper Eminem, and the Source promoted it by publishing a cartoon that depicted Benzino holding the bloody severed head of Eminem. "That's all part of hip-hop," Mays explained yesterday. "That's part of the game of being a hip-hop artist."
Both Mays and Scott left the Source in January and recently started a new publication, HipHop Weekly, which published its first issue this week. According to its press release, the magazine includes "exclusive photos of DMX going after the sound man at a recent Long Island concert" and "an exclusive report on Jay Z stating, 'I'm out for dead president Bush' while performing."
Yesterday, Mays praised Scott as "a great man" who was unfairly maligned by Osorio's lawyers during the trial.
"They tried to assassinate his character because he didn't go to Harvard like me," Mays said.
|
Search Washington, DC area music events and venues from the Washington Post. Features DC, Virginia and Maryland entertainment listings for music news, events, reviews, clubs, and concerts. Visit http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/eg/section/music/ today.
| 16.820513 | 0.358974 | 0.410256 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102401345.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102401345.html
|
Affording Gaithersburg
|
2006102519
|
For Edgardo Garcia, an immigrant from El Salvador, an affordable housing proposal under consideration by Gaithersburg officials could give him the opportunity to buy a home after six years of renting an apartment.
For Bob Drzyzgula, a homeowner and 17-year city resident, the proposal could mean more "slums" for a downtown that many say sorely needs upscale businesses and homes.
These opposing views underscore the culture clash dividing Gaithersburg, a city of about 60,000 residents whose suburban comforts have given way to the urban challenges of an economically and racially diverse community. As the City Council considers a proposal to require developers to set aside affordable housing for moderate-income and middle-class families, it is also struggling to find a location for an employment center for day laborers, many of them immigrants.
"It's not this little city anymore," said Grace Rivera-Oven, who has a local cable show and has been a vocal supporter of the day-laborer center. "I think [there's] a socioeconomic division, and you add . . . different people from different places, and I guess it's kind of a little bit of a 'not in my back yard' kind of thing. People are threatened by it."
Many residents think that the city has gone too far to accommodate recently arrived immigrants, legal or illegal, who are attracted to Gaithersburg's abundance of rental apartments. The city's population is at least 20 percent Latino. At a council meeting this month, some of the people who spoke in opposition to the center also voiced objections to the proposed affordable housing policy.
If approved, the policy would require developers to set aside 7.5 percent of owner-occupied units for moderate-income households -- those earning 60 to 80 percent of the area median income of $90,300. Another 7.5 percent would be so-called "workforce housing" -- for those making 80 to 120 percent of the median income. For rental units, developers would have to make 15 percent of the units moderately priced.
The council is expected to vote on the measure early next month.
Gaithersburg, an incorporated city about 13 miles north of Washington, is exempt from Montgomery County's requirement that developers reserve 12.5 percent of new homes for moderate-income households and that 10 percent of residences around Metro stops be reserved for workforce housing.
"My wife and I walk through Olde Towne Gaithersburg very often, and, to be frank, it's a little bit above a slum," resident Clark Day said at the hearing. "I don't see why it is that people who can't afford to live in Montgomery County have to get a handout so that they can be close to where they work. I just don't get that."
That kind of rhetoric draws a sharp rebuke from housing advocates.
"These are working-class people," activist Patty Kaczmarski said at the hearing. "They're working, a lot of them, for below minimum wage. They are holding down two jobs. They are not lazy, they are not stupid and they are not trying to get a handout from anybody."
The debate in Gaithersburg reflects what is happening across the region, City Council member Michael A. Sesma said. As more people are priced out of the inner suburbs, they are moving farther out in search of affordable housing. At the same time, the region is attracting more immigrants.
|
For Edgardo Garcia, an immigrant from El Salvador, an affordable housing proposal under consideration by Gaithersburg officials could give him the opportunity to buy a home after six years of renting an apartment.
| 18.472222 | 1 | 36 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102401449.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102401449.html
|
Redskins' Run in '05 Is Both Boost, Burden
|
2006102519
|
As one of the Washington Redskins players who takes losses the hardest, defensive end Phillip Daniels is also one of the most optimistic, even though the odds that he and his teammates will be able to reverse the course of the season grow longer.
Daniels does not dispute the facts of the first seven games of the year: the defensive breakdowns, the lack of the big plays, the recurrent use of the word "inconsistent" when players and coaches discuss the team's performance, and most damning of all, the number of times he has looked across the line of scrimmage and seen teams celebrating at the Redskins' expense.
But then, there was last season. On Nov. 27, 2005, the Redskins were 5-6 and yet would win five games in a row and make the playoffs.
"Do I think we can do it? Yes, with the talent we have here. No one is discouraged," Daniels said before the Redskins lost, 36-22, in Indianapolis Sunday. "We've got 10 more games. Anytime, you can run off 10 straight and get it started. That's our goal, and it starts this week."
After the loss, Daniels did not waver from his belief that what the Redskins accomplished last year could be reproduced.
"In a way, we're in kind of a better position than last year because we have more time and we don't have to win all of them, where last year it was late and we had to win every single game," he said. "Here, we have to do it fast, but we just need to get back on track."
Since the end of last season, the optimism surrounding the Redskins has been largely built on those final five games of 2005. In effect, the entire 2005 season -- and the championship expectations it would produce heading into this year -- has been viewed through the lens of those last five games. The 11 games before the streak, which were similarly inconsistent offensively and uneven defensively as this season, have been forgotten.
The Redskins haven't lived up to the streak. Instead of it serving as a catapult for this year, it is haunting them as if it were an aberration. As the Redskins enter into their bye week with a 2-5 record, the team is flailing for answers.
The real difference between this season and last after seven games is that last year's 4-3 team appeared positioned for an upswing whereas this year's 2-5 club has been consistently beaten. Last year's team was flawed, but lost close games. This year, the Redskins have been beaten by big plays, by failing to win the trench fights at the line of scrimmage that prevent long, withering drives by their opponents, and in the mental game by defeating themselves with crushing penalties.
"We need to correct the things that we haven't done on the field," defensive tackle Joe Salave'a said. "We're pretty much reevaluating everyone on an individual basis. No matter how much we preach about winning ballgames, if guys aren't critical of themselves, nothing is going to change."
Buttressed by high-priced free agents, the offense was supposed to be better this year. No one anticipated the defense being worse. On Oct. 30, 2005, the Redskins were 4-3. They were ranked 10th in the NFL in total offense, at 349.7 yards per game, 10th in rushing at 125.3 yards per game and 12th in passing at 224.4 yards per game. Quarterback Mark Brunell was 12th in the league with an 89.8 quarterback rating, had thrown 12 touchdowns against three interceptions, had a 56.2 completion percentage and 1,557 yards passing.
This season, the Redskins are 13th in total offense at 325.9 yards per game, seventh in rushing at 128.4 yards per game and 20th in passing at 197.4 yards per game. Brunell is 11th in passer rating at 90.4, fifth among currently starting quarterbacks with a 64.1 completion percentage, but with nearly 100 fewer passing yards than a year ago.
Defensively, the Redskins have fallen. After seven games last year, the Redskins were sixth overall in total defense, giving up 283.1 yards per game. This year, they are 26th, at 350.1 yards per contest. In two of the last three games, the Redskins have given up more than 400 yards, to the New York Giants and Indianapolis Colts. After seven games in 2005, the Redskins were first in pass defense at 152.7 yards per game. This year, the defense gives up an average of 239.4 passing yards per game, good for 29th of 32 teams. The defense was 25th against the rush at 130.4 yards per game a year ago, and this year is 16th at 110.7 yards per game.
The Redskins are a statistically better rushing team this year than last year, but few players would agree that they are nearly as successful. Most members of the offensive line believe the team has sacrificed its power running-game personality for potential explosiveness to mixed results.
"We just don't know who we are right now," right guard Randy Thomas said. "If I knew how to get there, I'd tell everybody."
|
The Redskins' five-game run a year ago that catapulted the team into the playoffs has been a boost and a burden for a team in the midst of a free-fall.
| 28.25 | 0.861111 | 1.527778 |
medium
|
medium
|
mixed
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102400691.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102400691.html
|
Rush Limbaugh On the Offensive Against Ad With Michael J. Fox
|
2006102519
|
Possibly worse than making fun of someone's disability is saying that it's imaginary. That is not to mock someone's body, but to challenge a person's guts, integrity, sanity.
To Rush Limbaugh on Monday, Michael J. Fox looked like a faker. The actor, who suffers from Parkinson's disease, has done a series of political ads supporting candidates who favor stem cell research, including Maryland Democrat Ben Cardin, who is running against Republican Michael Steele for the Senate seat being vacated by Paul Sarbanes.
"He is exaggerating the effects of the disease," Limbaugh told listeners. "He's moving all around and shaking and it's purely an act. . . . This is really shameless of Michael J. Fox. Either he didn't take his medication or he's acting."
Limbaugh, whose syndicated radio program has a weekly audience of about 10 million, was reacting to Fox's appearance in another one of the spots, for Missouri Democrat Claire McCaskill, running against Republican Sen. James M. Talent.
But the Cardin ad is similar. It is hard to watch, unless, for some reason, you don't believe it. As he speaks, Fox's restless torso weaves and writhes in a private dance. His head bobs from side to side, almost leaving the video frame.
"This is the only time I've ever seen Michael J. Fox portray any of the symptoms of the disease he has," Limbaugh said. "He can barely control himself."
Later Monday, still on the air, Limbaugh would apologize, but reaction to his statements from Parkinson's experts and Fox's supporters was swift and angry.
"It's a shameless statement," John Rogers said yesterday. Rogers, Fox's political adviser, who also serves on the board of the Parkinson's Action Network, added: "It's insulting. It's appallingly sad, at best."
"Anyone who knows the disease well would regard his movement as classic severe Parkinson's disease," said Elaine Richman, a neuroscientist in Baltimore who co-wrote "Parkinson's Disease and the Family." "Any other interpretation is misinformed."
Fox was campaigning yesterday for Tammy Duckworth, a congressional candidate, outside Chicago, when he alluded to Limbaugh's remarks. "It's ironic, given some of the things that have been said in the last couple of days, that my pills are working really well right now," he said, according to a report on the CBS2 Web site.
After his apology, Limbaugh shifted his ground and renewed his attack on Fox.
"Now people are telling me they have seen Michael J. Fox in interviews and he does appear the same way in the interviews as he does in this commercial," Limbaugh said, according to a transcript on his Web site. "All right then, I stand corrected. . . . So I will bigly, hugely admit that I was wrong, and I will apologize to Michael J. Fox, if I am wrong in characterizing his behavior on this commercial as an act."
Then Limbaugh pivoted to a different critique: "Michael J. Fox is allowing his illness to be exploited and in the process is shilling for a Democratic politician."
Limbaugh's shock at Fox's appearance is a measure of the disease's devastation, advocates say. Contrary to the charge that Fox might not take his medicine to enhance his symptoms, the medicine produces some of the uncontrolled body movements.
"Stem cell research offers hope to millions of Americans with diseases like diabetes, Alzheimer's and Parkinson's," Fox says in the Cardin ad. "But George Bush and Michael Steele would put limits on the most promising stem cell research."
Fox has appeared in ABC's "Boston Legal" this season. In his scenes, taped over the summer, Fox does not shake or loll his head as he does in the Cardin commercial, but does appear to be restraining himself, appearing almost rigid at times.
A source with direct knowledge of Fox's illness who viewed the Cardin ad said Fox is not acting to exaggerate the effects of the disease. The source said Fox's scenes in "Boston Legal" had to be taped around his illness, as he worked to control the tremors associated with Parkinson's for limited periods of time.
Staff writer Frank Ahrens contributed to this report.
|
Possibly worse than making fun of someone's disability is saying that it's imaginary. That is not to mock someone's body, but to challenge a person's guts, integrity, sanity.
| 23.108108 | 1 | 37 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102401150.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102401150.html
|
Calling Again for Troop Withdrawal
|
2006102519
|
During the years that he led opposition to the Vietnam War, former senator George S. McGovern (D-S.D.) says, he consoled his family with the proposition that the United States would never again commit such a "tragic mistake," as he put it. But McGovern said in an interview last week that America is headed down "the same road" in Iraq.
McGovern, the 1972 Democratic nominee for president, is out with a new book prescribing what the country ought to do to turn things around. The title neatly summarizes his advice: "Out of Iraq: A Practical Plan for Withdrawal Now."
Co-written with William R. Polk, a former professor and State Department Middle East expert, the 142-page volume calls for a phased withdrawal of 140,000 U.S. troops beginning by year's end and finishing by June 30. The authors say the Iraqi government should request the presence of an international force, including Arab and Muslim troops, to help keep order after the departure of the Americans.
McGovern and Polk call for an aggressive program of U.S. reconstruction aid to rebuild the Iraqi infrastructure destroyed in the war. Among other steps, the two say the United States should "express its condolences" to the Iraqi people for the large number of Iraqis killed, incapacitated, incarcerated or tortured. "A simple gesture of conciliation would go far to shift our relationship from occupation to friendship," they write.
In a telephone interview from his Mitchell, S.D., home, McGovern cast doubt on the assertion by President Bush that withdrawal would embolden U.S. enemies and create a haven for terrorists in the heart of the Middle East. It is the American presence in Iraq, he and Polk believe, that is fueling much of the violence. Their proposal is based on the conviction that the United States will eventually be forced out. Better to leave "in an orderly way" and "in a manner that will prevent further damage to American interests," they write.
At 84, McGovern remains active in civic affairs, speaking on college campuses and addressing the cause that remains his life's passion: world hunger and malnutrition. Along with former senator Robert J. Dole (R-Kan.), McGovern has been promoting an effort to create school lunch programs in developing countries.
Last week, McGovern spent about 50 minutes talking about his ideas for Iraq. Here are excerpts from the telephone interview:
Tell me a little about how this book came about.
I found that lots of thoughtful people had come to the conclusion that the war was a mistake, but they would say now that we are there, we can't pull out. It's the same argument I combated for 15 years during the Vietnam War. . . . We concluded that instead of reducing terrorism, the [Iraq] war was aggravating it -- that we were in a more dangerous position with regard to Iraq and other countries as a consequence of the invasion.
Yes, [Polk] did. These are people who are on the job, so they are not eager to have their names attached to a withdrawal plan right now. What he found is that top people in the military don't think this war can be won. . . . How do you end this? You begin to plan a systematic withdrawal. We're not talking about a stampede for the border -- none of this silly business of cut and run.
Reports from Iraq are that the nature of the violence has changed, from a Sunni insurgency to more sectarian violence. Do you think that the book is a little out of date in the sense that any U.S. withdrawal would not affect this kind of violence?
It's possible. We say in the book that we are not promising stability, but . . . we think you are never going to have stability in Iraq as long as a foreign army is in that country.
What are the kinds of similarities that you see between Vietnam and the situation in Iraq?
I think one obvious similarity is that neither Vietnam nor Iraq constituted a threat to America's security in the world. . . . Secondly, we didn't know much about either one. We didn't even have people ready to go into Iraq that spoke Arabic. . . .
All those years we were in the jungle of Vietnam, losing 58,000 young Americans and probably being responsible for a couple of million Vietnamese deaths, my four daughters and my son used to get discouraged about ever ending that war. They would say, "What good does that do? You keep sounding off. You run for president, you got smashed in the election, what good does it do?"
I would say: "Look, I am an old history teacher. . . . Even bad things in history usually have some good factor. And in Vietnam, the good thing about it is that it is such a tragic mistake we will never again do that again." . . . But I didn't count on terrorism. . . . I really think we are following the same road in Iraq. This time the fear is not communism -- it is terrorism.
Why do you not see the threat the same way [as Bush]?
I see terrorism as a threat to the United States, but I think it's growing worse in the way we are trying to handle it. That's a problem that is not essentially a military problem. . . . I do fear the terrorists. I feel more threatened by six years of the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld plan for fighting it than I did before.
Would you have been okay with an effort to just get rid of Saddam Hussein and leave?
I think it's good that he is gone. Now, having said that, I also wonder if, on balance, we improved our own security. We got rid of an SOB -- we all know that. . . . But what has happened as a consequence of that, Iraq is now in a civil war. People say if we pull out, we'll have a civil war. Well, they have got one going now. Saddam Hussein, for all of his viciousness, would not have permitted that to happen.
Is it your point that we should never try to overthrow a bad guy?
I don't like what is happening in the Sudan now. I don't like what happened in Rwanda. . . . It is a very tough, agonizing issue. But frustrating as it is, I still think we're better off trying to work through the United Nations. It's a frustrating organization. It's bureaucratic. But I still think that's the forum where we ought to press these issues.
What would be your advice to the Democratic Party?
They have got to be more assertive. They can't lay down and go along with policies that many of them know are mistaken. . . . I am disappointed in my old colleagues in the Senate, not all of them. . . . But by and large, the Democrats seem to have been intimidated into silence or kind of a mushy policy on foreign questions.
Is there any figure out there you see as someone who is promising for the Democrats in '08?
I haven't settled on anyone yet. . . . I don't think we have really brought our alternative positions into clear focus yet for the American public.
|
During the years that he led opposition to the Vietnam War, former senator George S. McGovern (D-S.D.) says, he consoled his family with the proposition that the United States would never again commit such a "tragic mistake," as he put it. But McGovern said in an interview last week that America is...
| 22.920635 | 0.984127 | 61.015873 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/20/AR2006102001823.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/20/AR2006102001823.html
|
Do It Yourself - washingtonpost.com
|
2006102519
|
Chances are you've already bought clothes over the Internet and gone comparison shopping online when investing in a new computer, and you'd probably check out Web sites to guide your choice of new car. But what about online shopping for knee replacement surgery? Or for the treatment of your child's chronic ear infections? Believe it or not, those are questions you should be asking yourself as you head into your company's open-enrollment bazaar this fall.
Here's why: These days, more of the cost for everything from surgery to prescription drugs and doctor's appointments is likely to come out of your own pocket. That's not just because health insurance premiums are continuing their steady rise, but because deductibles and other out-of-pocket costs are increasing rapidly, giving consumers a new incentive to shop smartly for health care.
It's all part of a cost-conscious trend known as consumer-driven health care, in which workers pay a higher proportion of the costs in the kinds of high-deductible plans that are steadily replacing managed-care offerings. And don't expect to find much relief in PPOs and other traditional insurance plans; they too require enrollees to shell out more for services.
When it comes to your health, it pays as never before to be informed.
The good news is that the health-care industry is gradually making the information you'll need to reach decisions available to you -- online. It's an imperfect process at this point. But this fall, millions of workers choosing their 2007 health insurance options will have new Web-based tools that can help them pick the plan tailored to their specific needs and find pricing and quality ratings on specific doctors, hospitals, medications and medical services.
Some of these Internet services even allow consumers to sniff out good deals on medical care: If you need a CT scan, for example, you can key in a Zip code and then receive expected costs at nearby facilities (prices ranged from $280 to more than $1,000 in one D.C. search); some services also highlight, based on your health plan, what proportion of that total you can expect to pay out-of-pocket.
A brief survey of what's available this fall reveals that the online options vary significantly in their ease of use, their accessibility and on what they deliver. What's more, unlike buying a car, a computer or a new piece of clothing, health-care choices are rarely driven by cost alone -- or even primarily by cost. "What it costs doesn't have a whole lot of meaning until you know something about the quality of that care," says Carolyn Clancy, director of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and a key player in the federal government's drive to make health-care pricing and quality more transparent. "You need them both."
What is clear is that consumer-driven care -- or at least higher consumer costs -- is the way of the future, giving you and me a new incentive to learn how to use it.
Many people have grown accustomed to turning to the Internet for information on medical conditions, preventive care and nutrition through sites such as WebMD and PubMed. More recently, individuals have used online tools to search provider directories, check claims status or change doctors. Now they can turn to sites offered by Medicare, which provide information on both pricing and quality of care, as well as Aetna, Cigna, UnitedHealthcare and WellPoint. Entering the fray later this year is District-based Revolution Health, backed by America Online co-founder Steve Case and others, aiming to provide a "completely intuitive" consumer-friendly health portal.
These sites are evolving -- and improving -- quickly, but a number of challenges remain that were identified last year in a report card on several consumer-driven health plans that appeared in the peer-reviewed journal Health Affairs. The article gave largely poor grades -- D's and F's -- to the online information that plans made available. "Frankly, the information the consumer would want to determine value wasn't there," says Arnold Milstein, chief physician at Mercer Health & Benefits LLC and co-author of the article. A big problem with most tools, Milstein says, is that pricing information, for example, gives consumers no insight into a particular doctor's practice style -- whether the doctor tends to order several tests, for example -- or whether the treatment might ultimately involve other providers and procedures.
Another knock is that many of the sites are not user-friendly. "Consumers want this information, but they want it in a form where they can make decisions without doing a math equation," says Roger Feldman, a professor of health insurance and professor of economics at the University of Minnesota.
A third unmet need is to tailor costs to the patient. In most Web-based tools, "the cost displayed is not necessarily the cost to me; it's the average cost," noted Jay Silverstein, president of Revolution Health. Silverstein says existing tools rank a "one out of 10."
Some of the stronger online tools are addressing problems of this kind. Before going to the doctor, a member in one of WellPoint's high-deductible health plans can, for example, log on to the insurer's Web site and check physician's prices on a handful of services, comparing them with prices that other area doctors charge, see if any disciplinary actions have been taken against the doctor, read patient reviews on the provider, and later even contribute one.
That's just for starters. A WellPoint enrollee needing her gallbladder removed can compare the rates area hospitals charge for the procedure, while checking each hospital's performance for such complications as infection rates. The typical charge at Holy Cross Hospital in Silver Spring, for instance, runs between $4,600 and $8,900 for laparoscopic gallbladder surgery. The member also can find out how much of that cost she'll pay, based on her particular WellPoint plan.
Anyone who has banked or shopped online would have little trouble tracking out-of-pocket costs, comparing drug prices at pharmacies or finding the typical treatment and associated costs for, say, asthma or allergies.
"We think the real answer [to controlling health-care costs] is the informed consumer asking questions," says Doug Kronenberg, chief strategy officer of Lumenos, an Alexandria-based unit of WellPoint that provides information about consumer-directed plans.
A driving force behind this change is the federal government. Each year, federal programs such as Medicare and the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program spend 40 percent of all U.S. health-care dollars. President Bush in August issued an executive order directing all federal health-care programs to provide more and more-accessible information to their members. That, in turn, is quickening the pace of getting such information to all consumers and other health-care payers.
While he's aware of their shortcomings, Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt says the Internet tools currently available are "groundbreaking first attempts."
"The biggest strength is we're beginning to think about value," Leavitt says.
"It's taken a long time for people to understand your health is your greatest asset," says Joseph Donlan, a vice president for Chicago technology firm Subimo. It also has taken a long time for insurers and the health-care industry to make these tools available.
"Keep in mind, this is information that used to be stamped 'private' on internal documents," says Mark Lindsay, a UnitedHealthcare spokesman. "It's a complete transformation, and it's just the beginning."
The tools arrive in the nick of time. Health-care inflation continues to outpace pay raises. On average, American families this year are paying nearly $3,000 in health insurance premiums, 84 percent more than they did in 2000, according to a recent Kaiser Family Foundation and Health Research & Educational Trust report. Wages have risen just 20 percent in that time. Moreover, single coverage under a PPO plan carries a general deductible of $500 on average -- that's after premiums and before separate hospital or drug deductibles, co-insurance or co-payment obligations. And the typical enrollee in a high-deductible plan must pay a $1,715 deductible this year before insurance kicks in.
If the new tools are to work, though, they need to help consumers not only stretch health-care dollars but remain on top of quality. "If the hip replacement is really cheap but [the hospital's] complication rate is high, a lot of people wouldn't consider that to be a terribly good deal," Clancy says. "The goal is to give consumers user-friendly information on their cost and quality of care so they can make the best decisions for themselves." ·
|
Chances are you've already bought clothes over the Internet and gone comparison shopping online when investing in a new computer, and you'd probably check out Web sites to guide your choice of new car. But what about online shopping for knee replacement surgery? Or for the treatment of your child's...
| 30.245614 | 0.982456 | 55.017544 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/10/20/DI2006102000645.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/10/20/DI2006102000645.html
|
Enron Update: Skilling's Last Stand
|
2006102419
|
Washington Post staff writer Carrie Johnson was online from Houston to discuss the sentencing of former Enron chief Jeffrey K. Skilling at Noon ET on Tuesday, Oct. 24 .
Read more in Carrie Johsnon's recent stories:
Skilling Gets 24 Years for Fraud at Enron (Oct. 24)
Skilling's Last Stand (Oct. 20)
Coverage on Enron's collapse and the legal proceedings against its former executives is available in a special report online here .
Carrie Johnson: Good morning from Houston, where the Enron troops are in retreat after a long, chaotic day Monday. Jeff Skilling, one of the most complex and unusual executives to surface in this era of accounting scandals, received more than 24 years in prison yesterday, but he's free (with a new ankle bracelet) while the Bureau of Prisons decides where to send him. Let's go.
Arlington, Va.: So if I understand the math from the article, Skilling spent $70 million on his defense! How is that even possible?
Carrie Johnson: I think that it is not only possible, it is quite probable, that his defense on criminal and civil charges topped the $70 million mark.
Skilling paid his lawyers in cash, before he was indicted, more than $23 million. Separately, directors and officers insurance policies taken out by Enron years ago paid Skilling's defense team $17 million more. In court papers filed after the conviction in May, the law firm O'Melveny & Myers LLP said it was still out $30 million in fees.
Yesterday, as part of a joint settlement with the Justice Department and lawyers for employees, Skilling agreed to hand over $45 million, what his lawyers called the "overwhelming majority" of his remaining assets. That's on top of $15.5 million more that went to his defense lawyers, so they could recover some fees and pay outside suppliers they used to do courtroom graphics and perform other services.
Legal analysts told me this summer it's the most expensive defense by an individual that they've ever seen. Take a look at our Wash Post archives for the story.
Houston, Texas: Carrie: Hope you like the weather in Houston better this time around.
Regarding the sentence for Skilling; does the length of time imposed by the judge mean he can't go to a Club Fed?
Thanks for the question. Skilling has asked to be sent to the Federal Corrections Institute at Butner, N.C., near the Research Triangle. The place has facilities for inmates under medium security and minimum security as well as a special medical program. Because of the length of his sentence, Skilling will be placed in medium security, which often has cell-type housing and strengthened borders, including double fences. Skilling's defense lawyers asked the judge yesterday to slash 10 months from his sentence, which would have made him eligible for lower security, including dorm type housing. But the judge refused. However, by letting Skilling self surrender, a factor that the Bureau of Prisons takes into account when it decides where and how an inmate will be housed, the judge cut Skilling at least a small break that could allow him to transition into a lower security environment sooner, legal analysts told me yesterday.
Denver, Colo.: What recovery measures, if any, have been tried to recover some of the retirement funds of former employees of Enron? What help can they get now?
Carrie Johnson: Good question Denver.
As I mentioned in the previous response, Skilling yesterday agreed to hand over as much as $50 million that will ultimately go to former employees ($45 million in assets plus $5 million in his bond that the court is holding). Here's the catch: Skilling has vowed to appeal his conviction on 19 fraud, conspiracy and insider trading charges, so while that process stretches on, the money will be held in abeyance (essentially a special fund that no one can touch for a while). If he wins on appeal, he gets the money back. If he loses, it goes to employees, not the US Treasury or anyplace else.
Houston, Tex.: Hi Carrie - Do you have any sense of what Skilling's day-to-day life will be like in a medium security prison? Thanks...
Carrie Johnson: The folks at the facility in Butner, N.C., where Skilling might go have not got back to me yet with details. But I can tell you that in the 2 medium security facilities there, there are a total of more than 1100 male inmates.
Inmates are instructed when to awaken, when to eat, when to sleep, and they must have some type of job inside the prison (cleaning, cooking, facilities management, etc.) where they earn far less than the minimum wage per hour. There are clear limits on visitors and spending in the prison commissary, among other things.
Richmond, Va.: While the people who suffered because of Skilling might feel some satisfaction that he got a 24+ year sentence, I cannot imagine how they feel that Kenneth Lay's family will now benefit luxuriously because of his death. Is there absolutely no way that some measure of justice can be wrought from Lay's involvement in these people's destitution?
Carrie Johnson: Good morning Richmond.
You refer to the judge's erasure of Ken Lay's conviction last week because of Lay's death from heart disease in July. This is a pretty clear matter of legal precedent. But it doesn't mean the Justice Department won't go down fighting. Late yesterday they filed a civil lawsuit against Lay's estate, seeking $2.5 million he used to pay down the mortgage on his 33rd floor condo in a prominent Houston neighborhood; $10 million in a family investment partnership; and more than $22,000 in a Bank of America checking account. We'll see whether the government actually gets that money in the end.
Fort Lauderdale, Fla.: It bothers me no end that Ken Lay's conviction was vacated only because he died while awaiting sentencing, leaving is widow to keep unjust gains. Now it appears Jeff Skilling has the luxury of being home for the holidays before being locked up. Authorities have known about his conviction for months. So what's the hold-up on selecting an appropriate slammer? I certainly hope he doesn't orchestrate an alternative exit. Thanks for great coverage.
Carrie Johnson: Thanks, Florida. Where Skilling will be sent depends on the Bureau of Prisons, which takes into account recommendations from the judge, the prosecution, and the defense. But prison officials also need time to determine the threat that an inmate poses, the threat that others inside the prison could pose to him, and the relative under-or over-crowding in different facilities around the country. This process can take from weeks to a couple of months, according to lawyers familiar with the process. Skilling had asked to remain free pending appeals, but the judge refused.
Houston, Texas: Did Lay's death factor into Skilling's sentence? It seems that Fastow got off relatively easy as compared to Skilling. Your thoughts?
Carrie Johnson: One of Skilling's friends who testified on his behalf yesterday called the likely disparity in sentencing between Skilling (24 yrs plus) and Fastow (6 yrs for cutting a deal) "a travesty." Skilling's defense lawyers urged the judge not to make him a "sacrificial lamb" and said the message of deterrence already has been sent, all over the planet. But Judge Lake, who had for years dealt with sentencing policy issues on an influential panel, flatly rejected that plea. The judge said that Congress had decided, repeatedly, to treat corporate crimes as a serious matter worthy of long sentences.
Worth noting that in the appeal of WorldCom
Carrie Johnson: whoops--meant to say, It's worth noting that the federal appeals court in New York also considered the disparity in sentences between WorldCom chief Bernie Ebbers (25 yrs) and finance executive Scott Sullivan (5 yrs for flipping and testifying against his boss). The appeals court recognized in its strongly worded decision that convictions in big white collar fraud cases could amount to a life sentence for business executives. But the court said that's what Congress intended. You might also want to check out a story we ran last month on this issue, as Ebbers entered prison and Enron's Andy Fastow received his sentence.
West Chester, PA: Hi, Carrie- Thanks for your continuing good coverage of this Corporate morality play. What does the "smart money" have to say about the likelyhood of Mr Skilling's conviction being overturned or his sentence being reduced? Don K
Thanks for the kind words.
In court papers filed earlier this month, Skilling's defense team set out several likely grounds for appeal. They include: the judge's decision to hold the trial in Houston, which suffered tremendously in lost jobs and revenues amid Enron's collapse; his decision to select a jury in a single day; the judge's instructions to the jury that they could convict Skilling and Lay of deliberate indifference, or turning a blind eye to fraud they knew was going on in their ranks; and a few other issues.
Legal analysts said Skilling could gain some ground on the deliberate indifference (aka ostrich) instruction. But such language is not unusual in fraud cases and in fact the appeals court in NY upheld such provisions in the appeal by WorldCom's Bernie Ebbers.
Also a likely focus of Skilling's appeal is a recent ruling by a federal appeals court in Texas that overturned convictions of Merrill Lynch & Co. bankers who did a sham deal with Enron because they had allegedly deprived employers of their "honest services." This is part of Skilling's conviction, but it applies only to a limited number of the 19 charges on which the jury convicted him. It's also more difficult for Skilling to make that argument because of his position at the top of Enron, lawyers have told me.
Philadelphia, Pa.: How long should the appeal process for Skilling's case take?
Carrie Johnson: My best guess is at least a year, but I am less familiar with the caseload of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Rest assured that if he loses at that level, Skilling will try to interest the U.S. Supreme Court in his case as well.
Herndon, Va.: Simple question: what will his appeal be based upon? Thanks.
Carrie Johnson: Got at this in a previous response, but to add one more thing:
Defense lawyer Daniel Petrocelli told reporters outside the courthouse yesterday that he soon would appeal the judge's ruling yesterday that forces Skilling to go to prison soon, rather than remain free pending appeal. So there are some intermediate issues hanging out there as well.
Fairfax, Va.: 24 Years- ouch. The level of malfeasance at Enron was extraordinarily high, and Skilling certainly deserved his share of the blame. However, in the numerous books I have read on the collapse, the one person universally painted in the harshest light was Andrew Fastow.
Now that it is all said and done, who do you think was the "worst of the worst"? To me, it's Andy Fastow, hands down.
Carrie Johnson: Interesting response. Surely both Skilling and Ken Lay would agree with you, as attacking Fastow was a key plank of their defense.
That said, the 6 yr sentence for Fastow outraged many people in Houston, and prosecutors are contemplating an appeal of the decision. Under his plea deal, Fastow was set to receive 10 yrs in prison, with his cooperation.
Washington, D.C.: Did Skilling seem to show any sincere remorse for all of the pain and financial ruin he's caused for thousands of folks? I don't get that impression from his video response to the sentencing as he seemed to come across as quite self absorbed and out of touch, like most of the upper echelons of corporate America.
Carrie Johnson: Prosecutors didn't think so, yesterday criticizing Skilling for talking about the company's credit rating and showing insufficient remorse to a tableau of former employees who choked up over their investment losses.
But Judge Lake aptly noted that Skilling was walking a very fine line yesterday: with an appeal in the works, Skilling was not about to take responsibility for Enron's collapse, nor for any book cooking that occurred there.
Watching Skilling outside the courthouse was fascinating for many reasons: he was red eyed, he cracked a few jokes, he bashed the media for demonizing him, he talked about what coulda been at Enron, and he likened himself to someone facing the Inquisition. Enough said.
Bethesda, Md: A recent article in the Washington Post detailed the various short prison sentences and releases on parole of the defendants who are now accused of murdering the British citizen in Georgetown. Mr. Skilling gets 24 years--essentially a life sentence under federal parole standards. There is no basis in proportionality here and a sentence of this length goes well beyond what is necessary to deter and punish. The entire Enron prosecution smacked of a political show trial and the sentence confirms this. The prosecutors can now go on to lucrative careers in the private sector after placing this notch on their belts. Our legal system, which is based on principles of proportionality, is losing its balance. Politics and ambition trump reasonableness.
Carrie Johnson: Thank you for your comments. Potentially disproportionate sentencing has troubled people for a long, long time, maybe since the ratcheting up of sentences amid the drug wars of the 1980s. The best solution: interest Congress in the problem, since they have legislated ever higher penalties for nearly 30 years.
Huntsville, Ala.: Do you think it is fundamentally unfair to mete out a life sentence to someone convicted of financial crimes? That is, in the cases of Ebbers and Skilling, hasn't the retribution element of punishment been grossly over-emphasized?
Carrie Johnson: Good question Huntsville. Perhaps you have more insight on this given your location?
Check out the lede of a story we wrote last month, noting that WorldCom's Ebbers is serving more time than the acting boss of the Gambino crime family and some Bronx drug lords. It's true: I swear! I researched the clips myself.
As for the view from the business world, many executives tell me that they are tired of all the costly new rules that Enron and WorldCom ushered in. They say that the sight of one or two executives in handcuffs is enough to scare the bejeezus out of folks in the business world. Maybe, but why do these scandal cycles seem to emerge like clockwork every 10 or 12 years?
Washington, D.C.: I have not seen any reporter note that the millions 'lost' by Enron workers were largely illusory. The real value lost was probably much less. Has this issue ever been addressed - is this how the judge came up with the small, $80 million figure?
Carrie Johnson: This is a smart question. The $80 million loss amount pegged to Skilling's conduct at Enron was a negotiated figure that prosecutors and defense lawyers argued about for a long time. The amount of loss is often the single biggest factor in determining a long prison sentence for a white collar official convicted of fraud or financial wrongdoing. Sherri Sera, Skilling's loyal assistant of two decades, yesterday told the judge that she blamed only herself and her risky investment decisions for her stock losses at Enron. She could have, she said, diversified, as experts repeatedly advised.
But five former employees who testified yesterday did not seem moved by her words, or by what they perceived as a mystifying lack of contrition from Skilling.
Washington, D.C.: I have read several differing accounts as to how much money Jeff Skilling is worth, and how much he is forfeiting to plaintiffs in civil suits. I read that he left Enron with $67 million, he will pay plaintiffs about $45 million, and that he paid Daniel Petrocielli's firm somewhere in the neighborhood of $30 million. What is the truth? Will all of his money be extinquished? Will his fortune also be responsible for Ken Lay's crimes, even though his conviction was vacated?
Carrie Johnson: I think we addressed this a bit earlier in our chat. But one point you raise merits more attention.
After Lay's death, prosecutors raised the prospect of trying to hold Skilling accountable for losses caused by Lay. It now appears they will not do so, under a forfeiture agreement that leaves Skilling with few remaining assets to cover living expenses. Instead, the government sued Ken Lay's estate yesterday for more than $12.5 million. Stay tuned.
Arlington, Va.: I must say that I am quite pleased with the sentence that was handed to Skilling. Kudos to the judge for taking a hard-line stance with him and handing down a sentence that fits the crime.
Carrie Johnson: Thanks for your comment Arlington.
Bethesda: What will the lesson of Enron be in 50 years? Don't game the system through accounting tricks or cooperate with the government and show remorse and contrition and watch your sentence be significantly reduced? Or take your heart medicine when at high altitudes?
Carrie Johnson: Another word comes to mind, but thanks for your wiseacre response. Does anybody even say that anymore? (:
Truth be told, we are way too early in this process to know what the Enron lesson will be in 50 years. Clearly there is a rigorous ongoing debate about sentencing policy that we all need to have in this country. And as well, there's an ongoing pushback by business groups already straining under the 2002 Sarbanes Oxley law passed in Enron's wake.
Anonymous: How much in inheritance taxes would have been paid by the estate of Ken Lay? Too bad his buddy managed to get rid of that tax, Huh?
Carrie Johnson: Lay's personal finances remain something of a mystery to me. At trial, he testified that his net worth was negative $250,000. But yesterday prosecutors sued his estate to try to yank back $12.5 million. In his will, a copy of which became public, Lay left his remaining assets to his second wife of nearly 25 years, Linda Phillips Lay.
Houston, Texas: Just wondering if you agree that it would plot well in a mystery thriller to stage the death of an indicted criminal on a holiday weekend away from home where the usual doctor's etc are not available and then have a hasty cremation?
Carrie Johnson: I think one more conspiracy theory about the death of Ken Lay is going to give me a heart attack. (It's a joke, mom.)But a more objective person should probably consult the works of John Grisham and Michael Connelly.
Philadelphia, Pa.: I am fearful that the practices of CEO's of our country's corporate culture have become so common place as to be irreversible. Have there been any serious corrections to the arrogance of the leaders in business? Or do they continue to think they are above the law and deserving of luxurious life styles?
Carrie Johnson: I don't think we know whether executives have really changed their behavior. It's become more difficult to get away, undetected, with large scale accounting frauds and smaller embezzlement type schemes because auditors and board members pay more attention to management and ledgers now. But the executive compensation problem, and almost everybody agrees there is a problem, including President Bush who apparently remarked on it yesterday in a television interview, is far from being resolved.
Washington, D.C.: Thanks, Carrie for answering my earlier question re: Skilling's remorse. I just have to add that I'm pleased with his sentence and I agree with Houston that Lay is alive and well, on some obscure beach in the West Indies living off of his negative $250,000.
Carrie Johnson: Thanks for your comment DC. I think a coroner, a sheriff, and various federal officials would disagree with you though.
Carrie Johnson: Thanks for joining the chat today! Taking off a few minutes early to check out of my hotel. Farewell, Houston.
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 staff writer Carrie Johnson will be online from Houston to discuss the sentencing of former Enron chief Jeffrey K. Skilling.
| 172.565217 | 1 | 10.304348 |
high
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/23/AR2006102301036.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/23/AR2006102301036.html
|
Three Choices, Mr. President
|
2006102419
|
As soon as the midterm elections are over -- and regardless of their outcome -- you will have to make the most consequential decision of your presidency, probably the most complicated any president has had to make since Lyndon Johnson decided to escalate in Vietnam in 1965, and far more difficult than your decisions after Sept. 11, 2001. Then, you rallied a nation in shock, overthrew the Taliban in Afghanistan and Saddam Hussein in Iraq, and confronted Iran and North Korea over their nuclear programs -- acting in all cases with self-confidence and overwhelming national approval.
Now all four projects are in peril. With far less public support, and time running out on your presidency, you must reverse the recent decline in Afghanistan, get North Korea back to the six-party talks, isolate a cocky, dangerous Iran that thinks events are going its way and, above all, figure out what to do with Iraq. So allow me to offer some very unsolicited suggestions on that war.
Broadly speaking, you have three choices: "Stay the course," escalate or start to disengage from Iraq while pressing hard for a political settlement. I will argue for the third course, not because it is perfect but because it is the least bad option.
In your radio address last week, you said that "our goal in Iraq is clear and unchanging: . . . victory." You added that the only thing changing "are the tactics. . . . Commanders on the ground are constantly adjusting their approach to stay ahead of the enemy, particularly in Baghdad." One can only hope that you do not mean those words literally -- or believe them. "Stay the course" is not a strategy; it is a slogan, useful in domestic politics but meaningless in the field.
Your real choice comes down to escalation or disengagement. If victory -- however defined -- is truly your goal, you should have sent more troops long ago. You and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld say that the commanders in Iraq keep telling you they don't need more troops, but, frankly, even if technically accurate, this is baffling. Plain and simple, there are not, and never have been, enough troops in Iraq to accomplish the mission.
But where would more troops come from? The Pentagon says the all-volunteer Army is stretched to the breaking point; it is now recruiting 42-year-olds and lowering entry standards. Afghanistan also needs more troops. And suppose additional troops do not turn the tide? Does the United States then send still more? Even advocates aren't sure escalation will produce a turnaround.
The last option is the most difficult for an embattled wartime president: Change your goals, disengage from the civil war already underway, focus maximum effort on seeking a political power-sharing agreement, and try to limit further damage in the region and the world.
Even your strongest critics understand that disengagement is fraught with risk. You have warned of the bloody consequences that might follow a U.S. withdrawal. Preventing such a tragedy must be your first priority. For this and other reasons, I do not favor a fixed timetable for withdrawal, since it would give away any remaining American flexibility and leverage. But the kind of killing that you predict would follow an American departure is in fact already underway, and nothing we have done has prevented it from increasing rapidly. At the current pace, there will be well over 40,000 murders a year in Iraq. A recent University of Maryland poll found that 78 percent of Iraqis surveyed believe the American presence is now "provoking more conflict than it is preventing," and 71 percent support a U.S. withdrawal within one year.
I urge you to lay out realistic goals, redeploy our troops and focus on the search for a political solution. We owe that to the Iraqis who welcomed the overthrow of Saddam Hussein and put their trust in us, only to find their lives in danger as a result. By a political solution, I mean something far more ambitious than current U.S. efforts aimed at improving the position of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki by changing ministers or setting timelines for progress. Sen. Joe Biden and Les Gelb have advocated what they call, in a reference to the negotiations that ended the war in Bosnia in 1995, a "Dayton-like" solution to the political situation -- by which they mean a looser federal structure with plenty of autonomy for each of the three main groups, and an agreement on sharing oil revenue. Your administration has dismissed these proposals out of hand, and the time lost since Gelb first presented them more than two years ago has made them far more difficult to achieve.
Yet only two weeks ago, the Iraqi parliament took a big step toward creating more powerful regions, with an interesting proviso to delay implementation for 18 months. You could use this legislation as leverage to negotiate a peaceful arrangement for sharing power and oil revenue, while redeploying and reducing our forces in Iraq. If such an effort fails, nothing has been lost by trying.
Those who say this is a proposal to partition Iraq into three countries (which it is not) and would trigger all-out civil war are misrepresenting the idea, while offering nothing in its place. Whatever else you do, Mr. President, you should send American troops to northern Iraq (Kurdistan), which is still safe but increasingly tense, to reduce the very real risk of a Turkish-Kurdish war. Both the Turks and the Kurds would welcome this U.S. presence, but it would have to be accompanied by a cessation of Kurdish terrorist raids into Turkey. This would allow Special Forces troops to move rapidly into other parts of Iraq if a terrorist target appeared, and it would show the world that you were not withdrawing from America's commitment to Iraq.
In recent years, almost any advocate of a change in policy has been accused of wanting to "cut and run." Such rhetoric works against the bipartisanship that this crisis requires. But if you were to decide to draw down American troops -- without a fixed timetable -- and seek a political compromise, the responsible leadership of the Democratic Party would surely work with you, especially if the Iraq Study Group, co-chaired by James Baker and Lee Hamilton, recommends significant changes in policy, which you could use as a starting point for rebuilding a bipartisan national consensus.
This crisis is far too acute for recrimination. If we are still at war during the 2008 campaign, as seems likely if you do not change course, it will benefit neither party but will leave your successor with the same choices you now face, but under far worse circumstances.
Richard Holbrooke, a former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, writes a monthly column for The Post.
|
Dear Mr. President: As soon as the midterm elections are over -- and regardless of their outcome -- you will have to make the most consequential decision of your presidency, probably the most complicated any president has had to make since Lyndon Johnson decided to escalate in Vietnam in 1965, and...
| 23.727273 | 0.963636 | 45.545455 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/23/AR2006102301053.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/23/AR2006102301053.html
|
Bush's New Tack Steers Clear of 'Stay the Course'
|
2006102419
|
President Bush and his aides are annoyed that people keep misinterpreting his Iraq policy as "stay the course." A complete distortion, they say. "That is not a stay-the-course policy," White House press secretary Tony Snow declared yesterday.
Where would anyone have gotten that idea? Well, maybe from Bush.
"We will stay the course. We will help this young Iraqi democracy succeed," he said in Salt Lake City in August.
"We will win in Iraq so long as we stay the course," he said in Milwaukee in July.
"I saw people wondering whether the United States would have the nerve to stay the course and help them succeed," he said after returning from Baghdad in June.
But the White House is cutting and running from "stay the course." A phrase meant to connote steely resolve instead has become a symbol for being out of touch and rigid in the face of a war that seems to grow worse by the week, Republican strategists say. Democrats have now turned "stay the course" into an attack line in campaign commercials, and the Bush team is busy explaining that "stay the course" does not actually mean stay the course.
Instead, they have been emphasizing in recent weeks how adaptable the president's Iraq policy actually is. Bush remains steadfast about remaining in Iraq, they say, but constantly shifts tactics and methods in response to an adjusting enemy. "What you have is not 'stay the course' but in fact a study in constant motion by the administration," Snow said yesterday.
Political rhetoric, of course, is often in constant motion as well. But with midterm elections two weeks away, the Bush team is searching for a formula to address public opposition to the war, struggling to appear consistent and flexible at the same time. That was underscored by the reaction to a New York Times report that the administration is drafting a timetable for the Iraqi government to disarm militias and assume a larger security role. The White House initially called the story "inaccurate." But then White House counselor Dan Bartlett went on CNN yesterday morning to call it "a little bit overwritten" because in fact it was something the administration had been doing for months.
The president has shifted language on Iraq before. At a news conference in August, he returned to his prewar argument that Saddam Hussein harbored terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Hussein "had relations with Zarqawi," Bush said. Weeks later, the Senate intelligence committee concluded that Hussein "did not have a relationship, harbor or turn a blind eye to Zarqawi" and that the U.S. government knew that before the invasion. At his next news conference, Bush was asked about that. "I never said there was an operational relationship," he said.
Bush used "stay the course" until recent weeks when it became clear that it was becoming a political problem. "The characterization of, you know, 'it's stay the course' is about a quarter right," Bush complained at an Oct. 11 news conference. " 'Stay the course' means keep doing what you're doing. My attitude is: Don't do what you're doing if it's not working -- change. 'Stay the course' also means don't leave before the job is done."
By last week, it was no longer a quarter right. "Listen, we've never been stay the course, George," he told George Stephanopoulos of ABC News. "We have been -- we will complete the mission, we will do our job and help achieve the goal, but we're constantly adjusting the tactics. Constantly."
Snow said Bush dropped the phrase "because it left the wrong impression about what was going on. And it allowed critics to say, 'Well, here's an administration that's just embarked upon a policy and not looking at what the situation is,' when, in fact, it's just the opposite."
Republican strategists were glad to see him reject the language, if not the policy. "They're acknowledging that it's not sending the message they want to send," said Steve Hinkson, political director at Luntz Research Cos., a GOP public opinion firm. The phrase suggested "burying your head in the sand," Hinkson said, adding that it was no longer useful signaling determination. "The problem is that as the number of people who agree with remaining resolute dwindles, that sort of language doesn't strike a chord as much as it once did."
If anything, it is striking a Democratic chord, party strategists say. A commercial by Democratic Senate candidate James Webb in Virginia shows a clip of Bush saying "We'll stay the course in Iraq," followed by a clip of Republican Sen. George Allen, saying "I very much agree with the president. . . . And we need to stay the course." A caption on the screen says "Civil War; No End in Sight; We Need a New Course."
An ad for Democratic Rep. Harold E. Ford Jr. in Tennessee shows Republican Bob Corker saying "I think we should stay the course," then rewinds and repeats "we should stay the course." Ford then comes onto the screen. "I support our troops, and I voted for the war," he says. "But we shouldn't stay the course as Mr. Corker wants. . . . America should always be strong. But we should be smart and honest, too. We need a new direction."
Juxtaposed against "stay the course," "new direction" has become the Democrats' poll-tested mantra, even if they don't define precisely what that new direction would be. "There's a reason why every Democratic candidate in the country is talking now about change in direction," said Democratic National Committee pollster Cornell Belcher. "When you ask 'change in direction' versus Bush's direction, you get solid majorities of 60 percent or so for change."
So now even some Republican candidates are changing direction, at least in terms of their language. "We can't continue to keep doing the same things and expect different results," Allen said last week. "We must adapt. We must adjust our tactics." Corker now says on his campaign Web site: "We need to fix our strategy in Iraq so we can get the job done and bring our troops home."
|
President Bush and his aides are annoyed that people keep misinterpreting his Iraq policy as "stay the course." A complete distortion, they say. "That is not a stay-the-course policy," White House press secretary Tony Snow declared yesterday.
| 25.4 | 1 | 50 |
medium
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102400204.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102400204.html
|
Iraqi Prime Minister Acts to Rein In Militias
|
2006102419
|
Although the statement was bolder than usual for Maliki, it fell short of directing that the illegal militias be disbanded, a move that American officials are increasingly urging as sectarian bloodletting and other violence soar.
Shiite militias have been accused of targeting Iraq's Sunni minority in a growing number of brazen killings. The largest of the militias belong to the two Shiite religious parties leading Maliki's government.
Meanwhile, a U.S. soldier in Baghdad was reported missing late Monday, and residents said American forces had sealed the central Karrada district and were conducting door-to-door searches, according to the Associated Press.
A military official in Washington told the AP that the missing service member was a translator and that the initial report was that he may have been abducted. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the information had not been cleared for release.
In his statement Monday, the prime minister acknowledged that unspecified "illegal groups with weapons" were carrying out operations that are undermining security in the country. Iraq's security forces had been directed "to confront the attempts to break the law, regardless of their source," he said.
Maliki singled out turmoil in Maysan province, where the Mahdi Army militia of Moqtada al-Sadr, the powerful Shiite cleric, was accused Monday of renewing attacks on police officers in the provincial capital, Amarah. The police belong to a rival militia, the Badr Organization, formerly known as the Badr Brigade.
The accusation came after Mahdi Army fighters shot four policemen to death, leading Badr militiamen to behead the teenage brother of a Mahdi Army commander, the Associated Press reported.
Iraqi army troops allegedly failed to intervene. About 500 additional troops have been deployed to Amarah since a burst of fighting last week between the two militias killed at least 25 people. In his statement, Maliki appealed to local residents to resist being pulled into the fighting.
Since midsummer, there have been record numbers of attacks on Iraqi forces and record numbers of deaths among Iraqi civilians, with more than 2,600 civilians killed last month in Baghdad alone.
Dozens of slaying victims are collected each day from the capital's streets. On Monday, 52 bodies were found across Baghdad; three of the dead had been beheaded, police said.
Other violence included a bombing in the capital that killed three Iraqis.
Attacks on American troops are also at one of their highest points of the war, with 89 killed already this month. The figure is the highest monthly toll for American forces here since October 2005, when 96 troops were killed.
The U.S. military on Monday and early Tuesday announced five of the most recent fatalities. Three Marines died of injuries sustained from unspecified "enemy action" in Anbar province, according to emailed military statements. One of the Marines died Saturday; no time frame was given for the other two deaths. Officials also reported the death of a soldier killed in a bombing in Baghdad, and said a member of the international force training Iraqi policemen was killed Sunday in a roadside bombing in eastern Baghdad. None of the dead were identified, pending notification of their families.
In London, Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Barham Salih called for U.S.-led forces to stay in Iraq until their Iraqi counterparts are capable of securing the country.
"I do believe there is no option for the international community to cut and run," Salih told reporters after meeting British Prime Minister Tony Blair. About 7,000 British troops are assigned to southern Iraq.
Salih said Iraqi forces would be in control of at least seven of Iraqi's 18 provinces by the end of the year, adding, "We understand that this cannot be an open-ended commitment by the international community."
Other Washington Post staff in Iraq contributed to this report.
|
Washington Post coverage of the American occupation of Iraq, the country's path to democracy and tensions between Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds.
| 29.2 | 0.68 | 0.92 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102400143.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102400143.html
|
Military Mounts Search For Missing U.S. Soldier
|
2006102419
|
BAGHDAD, Oct. 24 -- U.S. forces scoured central Baghdad on Tuesday looking for a missing U.S. soldier who was presumed kidnapped by insurgents while visiting his Iraqi relatives. The troops went door-to-door, manned checkpoints, stopped and searched cars and showed pedestrians a picture of their missing comrade, hoping to generate leads on his whereabouts.
The U.S. military said in a statement that the soldier, who was not identified, was an Iraqi American who was assigned to a provisional reconstruction team as a translator.
The soldier apparently has family in Baghdad and left the Green Zone -- the heavily fortified area in the city that is headquarters for the U.S. military, several embassies and the Iraqi government -- to visit relatives Monday to celebrate Eid al-Fitr, one of the biggest holidays of the Muslim year.
While he was at a relative's house, the statement said, three cars pulled up and men with rags over their faces "handcuffed the soldier and forced him into one of the vehicles."
A relative "who claimed to be at the residence when the abduction occurred was reportedly contacted by the kidnappers using the soldier's cell phone," the statement said. It did not say whether a ransom had been demanded or other demands had been made.
"We will leverage all available coalition resources to find this soldier," said Maj. Gen. James D. Thurman, commander of coalition forces in the capital. "Our thoughts and prayers go out to his loved ones."
"The search is ongoing," said Lt. Col. Jonathan Withington, a spokesman for the U.S. military command in the city. "We are committing all available coalition resources to find him."
The military said it searched the offices of al-Furat TV in Baghdad on Monday night. The station is owned by the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, the country's top Shiite political party and the dominant party in the government.
An employee at the station told the Associated Press afterward that the soldier's wife, also an Iraqi American, reportedly was in the capital visiting family.
A U.S. military spokesman said the soldier was not authorized to be outside the Green Zone for the visit. His duty status has been listed by the military as "whereabouts unknown," the statement said.
The last time a U.S. soldier was abducted was in June, when two soldiers were seized during an insurgent ambush of a U.S. checkpoint south of Baghdad. The mutilated bodies of the two were found three days later. Al-Qaeda in Iraq asserted responsibility for the attack, in which a third U.S. soldier also was killed.
In an unrelated matter, U.S. forces in Fallujah shot and killed four Iraqi firefighters Tuesday, mistakenly believing that they were insurgents who had commandeered a firetruck, the U.S. military said in a statement.
The statement said that after reports had aired that insurgents had hijacked a truck and crew, soldiers spotted a firetruck responding to a call and pulled it over for an inspection. As the firefighters were quickly exiting their truck, "coalition forces thought they were armed" and opened fire, killing them all, the statement said.
A few minutes later, the statement said, the hijacked firetruck was spotted and pulled over, and the occupants fled.
At least five people were killed and more than 30 were wounded in violence in Baghdad on Tuesday.
|
BAGHDAD, Oct. 24 -- U.S. forces scoured central Baghdad on Tuesday looking for a missing U.S. soldier who was presumed kidnapped by insurgents while visiting his Iraqi relatives. The troops went door-to-door, manned checkpoints, stopped and searched cars and showed pedestrians a picture of their...
| 12.111111 | 0.981481 | 52.018519 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/23/AR2006102301148.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/23/AR2006102301148.html
|
U.S. Rank on Press Freedom Slides Lower
|
2006102419
|
Some poor countries, such as Mauritania and Haiti, improved their record in a global press freedom index this year, while France, the United States and Japan slipped further down the scale of 168 countries rated, the group Reporters Without Borders said yesterday.
The news media advocacy organization said the most repressive countries in terms of journalistic freedom -- such as North Korea, Cuba, Burma and China -- made no advances at all.
The organization's fifth annual Worldwide Press Freedom Index tracks actions against news media through the end of September. The group noted its concern over the declining rankings of some Western democracies as well as the persistence of other countries in imposing harsh punishments on media that criticize political leaders.
"Unfortunately nothing has changed in the countries that are the worst predators of press freedom, and journalists in North Korea, Eritrea, Turkmenistan, Cuba, Burma and China are still risking their life or imprisonment for trying to keep us informed," the organization said in a news release. North Korea holds the worst ranking at 168.
Iran ranks 162nd, between Saudi Arabia and China. The report said conditions in Russia and Belarus have not improved. It said that Russia continued to steadily dismantle the independent media and that the recent slaying of investigative journalist Anna Politkovskaya "is a poor omen for the coming year."
Northern European countries top the index, with no reported censorship, threats, intimidation or physical reprisals, either by officials or the public, in Finland, Ireland, Iceland and the Netherlands. All of those countries were ranked in first place.
Serious threats against the artists and publishers of the Muhammad cartoons, which caricatured the prophet of Islam, caused Denmark, which was also in first place last year, to drop to 19th place. Yemen, at 149th place, slipped four places, mostly because of the arrests of journalists and the closure of newspapers that reprinted the cartoons. Journalists in Algeria, Jordan, Indonesia and India were harassed because of the cartoons as well.
Although it ranked 17th on the first list, published in 2002, the United States now stands at 53, having fallen nine places since last year.
"Relations between the media and the Bush administration sharply deteriorated after the president used the pretext of 'national security' to regard as suspicious any journalist who questioned his 'war on terrorism,' " the group said.
"The zeal of federal courts which, unlike those in 33 U.S. states, refuse to recognize the media's right not to reveal its sources, even threatens journalists whose investigations have no connection at all with terrorism," the group said.
Lucie Morillon, the organization's Washington representative, said the index is based on responses to 50 questions about press freedom asked of journalists, free press organizations, researchers, human rights activists and others.
France, 35th, dropped five places since last year because of searches of media offices and journalists' homes, as well as physical attacks on journalists during a trade union dispute, the group said.
In Lebanon, a series of bomb attacks targeting journalists and publishers in 2005, and Israeli military attacks last summer, contributed to a drop in the country's ranking from 56th to 107th in the past four years.
|
Some poor countries, such as Mauritania and Haiti, improved their record in a global press freedom index this year, while France, the United States and Japan slipped further down the scale of 168 countries rated, the group Reporters Without Borders said yesterday.
| 13.020833 | 1 | 48 |
low
|
high
|
extractive
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/23/AR2006102301054.html
|
https://web.archive.org/web/2006102419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/23/AR2006102301054.html
|
IAEA Head: Iran Close To Enriching Uranium
|
2006102419
|
Mohamed ElBaradei, the director of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said that Iranian technicians had pieced together a second line, or cascade, of 164 centrifuges and are days away from using the cascade to enrich uranium.
"It's in place and ready to go," ElBaradei said in a brief interview yesterday.
European officials suggested that the new cascade is a political move by Iranian officials who are hoping to send a defiant message to the U.N. Security Council as it weighs possible sanctions.
It would take many years for the Iranians to produce bomb-grade uranium using the other 164-centrifuge cascade it is currently operating, and U.S. intelligence officials think that Tehran is at least four years away from gaining the technical capability to produce enough nuclear material for a single weapon. Since February, Iran has produced minuscule amounts of low-enriched uranium suitable for the energy program that the government says it wants, and not for bombs. The same cascades, if run longer and more efficiently, can produce bomb-grade uranium.
The Bush administration has dismissed the energy claims and thinks Iran intends to use the program to secretly build nuclear weapons. ElBaradei's inspectors, on their fourth year investigating in Iran, reported earlier this year that they were unable to determine whether the Iranian program is peaceful.
The United States backed a package of European incentives designed to coax Iran into negotiations if it suspended the nuclear program during talks. When Tehran did not respond to the offer, the Security Council stepped in and passed a resolution in August obligating Iran to halt the program and negotiate. The council threatened to impose sanctions if Iran balked.
Iran has since said it wants talks with China, Europe, Russia and the United States but will not suspend its nuclear work in advance, arguing instead that it is exercising its right to peaceful nuclear technology. Iran signed on to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in the 1960s, forswearing nuclear weapons for sensitive technology that could be used for an energy program.
Yesterday, U.S. diplomats met with British and French negotiators to try to complete a draft resolution on sanctions that the rest of the council members, including China and Russia, would approve. The Bush administration had hoped to reach an agreement last Friday, but European officials said they were not comfortable with some of the tougher measures that the United States sought to impose.
State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said there was "widespread agreement, although not total agreement," among Britain, France and the United States on sanctions. European officials said privately that the resolution is likely to be limited to a ban on any nuclear or missile trade with Iran, while carving out an exception for a preexisting Iranian-Russian nuclear deal.
Some U.S. officials have been pushing for broader action, including travel bans and financial restrictions on people connected to the nuclear program.
Iran began its program in secret in 1987, with equipment and know-how from Pakistan's top nuclear scientist. The existence of the program, which includes a large facility in the town of Natanz built to house thousands of centrifuges, was made public in 2002 by Iranian exiles who hope to overthrow the country's clerical regime. The Pakistani scientist, Abdul Qadeer Khan, remains under house arrest in Pakistan, but the Pakistani government has refused to let U.S. officials directly question him about Iran's program or other programs he supplied in North Korea and Libya.
A senior Pakistani military official said yesterday that Khan responds to written U.S. requests for information as best he can. The Pakistani official, in Washington to lobby against a U.S. nuclear deal with rival India, said his country had put Khan and his black market network in the past and suggested it is time for the United States to also move beyond the episode.
Staff writer Colum Lynch at the United Nations contributed to this report.
|
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.
| 15.978261 | 0.456522 | 0.543478 |
medium
|
low
|
abstractive
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.