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/2006/07/28/AR2006072800240.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/28/AR2006072800240.html
Hezbollah Joins New Call for Cease-Fire
2006072919
BEIRUT, July 28 -- As fighting raged on in southern Lebanon, Hezbollah joined the Lebanese government in a peace proposal calling for an immediate cease-fire with Israel followed swiftly by a prisoner exchange and reinforcement of U.N. troops along the embattled border, senior Lebanese officials said Friday. The agreement for the first time put Hezbollah and the rest of the Lebanese government in a unified position on how to end the 17-day-old conflict. But its terms varied widely from ideas put forth by Israel and the United States, particularly its insistence on an immediate cease-fire. In Washington, President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair said Friday they wanted a cease-fire, but only after a U.N. framework is devised that would extend Lebanese government authority to the south and disarm Hezbollah forces. They called for the dispatch of an international force to southern Lebanon. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will return to the region for more diplomacy Saturday, Bush said. U.S. officials and European diplomats said the elements for an eventual cease-fire -- on a track separate from the Lebanese proposal -- are taking shape despite the failure of a conference Wednesday in Rome to call for an immediate end to the escalating crisis. More than 100 missiles crashed into northern Israel on Friday, slightly wounding 14 people. Israeli warplanes and heavy artillery, meanwhile, maintained a punishing rhythm of attacks against what officials in Jerusalem called Hezbollah targets. Israeli and Hezbollah forces again traded fire in several Lebanese towns and villages Friday. Twenty-six Hezbollah fighters were killed Friday in the contested town of Bint Jbeil, the military said, and large amounts of weaponry were found there, including rifles, antitank missiles, and materials and instructions for making explosives. The Israeli military reported that six Israeli soldiers were wounded. Lebanese officials told reporters that at least 10 more civilians were killed in fighting in the southern Lebanese hills. Three others died in early-morning Israeli attacks in the Bekaa Valley to the northeast, pushing the confirmed civilian death toll to nearly 450, according to Lebanese officials. Journalists driving along south Lebanon's roads described a relentless drumbeat of bombs, rockets and artillery shells as jets flew overhead and artillery batteries fired from just south of the frontier. One convoy of evacuees and journalists, heading from Rmeish to Tyre, was jarred by an Israeli shell that crashed down nearby, slightly wounding a cameraman and driver for a German television station. In the seaside city of Tyre, the trails of several Katyusha rockets arced overhead in the afternoon, headed for northern Israel. Convoys of scores of cars plied the border road that snakes along the hilly Lebanese-Israeli frontier. Nearly all flew white flags. In Aita al-Shaab, one of the hardest-hit villages, a group of Syrian workers carried their white flags on tree branches. Others stranded along the road pleaded for help -- food, medicine or a ride to Beirut. [On Saturday, an Israeli army spokesman said the army had launched two air strikes overnight into the Gaza Strip, the first on a weapons storage facility and the other on a tunnel along the Gaza-Egypt border, adding that "forces entered an industrial area seaching for tunnels and explosive devices as part of our earlier operations, not an incursion of any sort."] U.N. humanitarian chief Jan Egeland called Friday for a three-day truce to evacuate trapped civilians and replenish supplies in areas of Lebanon cut off by the fighting. Egeland told reporters that thousands of children, elderly and disabled have been stranded by more than two weeks of war, while supplies of food and medicines are dwindling.
BEIRUT, July 28 -- As fighting raged on in southern Lebanon, Hezbollah joined the Lebanese government in a peace proposal calling for an immediate cease-fire with Israel followed swiftly by a prisoner exchange and reinforcement of U.N. troops along the embattled border, senior Lebanese officials...
13.627451
0.980392
49.019608
low
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/27/AR2006072701908.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/27/AR2006072701908.html
Detainee Abuse Charges Feared
2006072919
An obscure law approved by a Republican-controlled Congress a decade ago has made the Bush administration nervous that officials and troops involved in handling detainee matters might be accused of committing war crimes, and prosecuted at some point in U.S. courts. Senior officials have responded by drafting legislation that would grant U.S. personnel involved in the terrorism fight new protections against prosecution for past violations of the War Crimes Act of 1996. That law criminalizes violations of the Geneva Conventions governing conduct in war and threatens the death penalty if U.S.-held detainees die in custody from abusive treatment. In light of a recent Supreme Court ruling that the international Conventions apply to the treatment of detainees in the terrorism fight, Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales has spoken privately with Republican lawmakers about the need for such "protections," according to someone who heard his remarks last week. Gonzales told the lawmakers that a shield is needed for actions taken by U.S. personnel under a 2002 presidential order, which the Supreme Court declared illegal, and under Justice Department legal opinions that have been withdrawn under fire, the source said. A spokeswoman for Gonzales, Tasia Scolinos, declined to comment on Gonzales's remarks. The Justice Department's top legal adviser, Steven G. Bradbury, separately testified two weeks ago that Congress must give new "definition and certainty" to captors' risk of prosecution for coercive interrogations that fall short of outright torture. Language in the administration's draft, which Bradbury helped prepare in concert with civilian officials at the Defense Department, seeks to protect U.S. personnel by ruling out detainee lawsuits to enforce Geneva protections and by incorporating language making U.S. enforcement of the War Crimes Act subject to U.S. -- not foreign -- understandings of what the Conventions require. The aim, Justice Department lawyers say, is also to take advantage of U.S. legal precedents that limit sanctions to conduct that "shocks the conscience." This phrase allows some consideration by courts of the context in which abusive treatment occurs, such as an urgent need for information, the lawyers say -- even though the Geneva prohibitions are absolute. The Supreme Court, in contrast, has repeatedly said that foreign interpretations of international treaties such as the Geneva Conventions should at least be considered by U.S. courts. Some human rights groups and independent experts say they oppose undermining the reach of the War Crimes Act, arguing that it deters government misconduct. They say any step back from the Geneva Conventions could provoke mistreatment of captured U.S. military personnel. They also contend that Bush administration anxieties about prosecutions are overblown and should not be used to gain congressional approval for rough interrogations. "The military has lived with" the Geneva Conventions provisions "for 50 years and applied them to every conflict, even against irregular forces. Why are we suddenly afraid now about the vagueness of its terms?" asked Tom Malinowski, director of the Washington office of Human Rights Watch. Since the U.S. invasions of Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003, hundreds of service members deployed to Iraq have been accused by the Army of mistreating detainees, and at least 35 detainees have died in military or CIA custody, according to a tally kept by Human Rights First. The military has asserted these were all aberrant acts by troops ignoring their orders. Defense attorneys for many of those accused of involvement have alleged that their clients were pursuing policies of rough treatment set by officials in Washington. That claim is amplified in a 53-page Human Rights Watch report this week that quoted interrogators at three bases in Iraq as saying that abuse was part of regular, authorized procedures. But this argument has yet to gain traction in a military court, where U.S. policy requires that active-duty service members be tried for any maltreatment.
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.
18.179487
0.512821
0.564103
medium
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/28/AR2006072800408.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/28/AR2006072800408.html
U.S. Economy Cools As Consumers Pull Back
2006072919
The U.S. economy slowed sharply in the three months ended in June, expanding at less than half its pace earlier this year, as consumers and businesses hunkered down in response to climbing inflation and interest rates. Consumers spent more on gasoline while pulling back on purchases of houses, automobiles and many other items. Businesses slashed their spending on housing construction and on equipment and software, while hiring more cautiously at a time of uncertainty over how much the economy will cool. All totaled, the nation's gross domestic product, which measures the value of all goods and services produced in the United States, rose at a below-average 2.5 percent annual rate in the second quarter, a sharp drop from the rapid 5.6 percent pace of the first quarter, the Commerce Department reported yesterday. The economy is probably not sliding into recession, according to private and government forecasts, but it has started the transition from a heady two years of fast growth stimulated by very low interest rates to a more modest, but more normal, pace of expansion, analysts said yesterday. "It adds up to an economy heading into a fairly significant slowdown . . . with consumers facing a lot of headwinds," said Nariman Behravesh, chief economist for Global Insight Inc., a financial analysis firm. Consumer prices shot up at a heated 4.1 percent annual pace in the second quarter, according to Commerce's inflation measure. That was more than double the rate in the previous quarter, and it matched the rate of the third quarter of last year, when energy prices soared after hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Workers' wages, salaries and benefits -- which economists call "labor compensation" -- are rising, too, but they are not keeping up with inflation. Compensation rose 0.9 percent in the last quarter, up from a 0.6 percent increase in the previous quarter, according to the Labor Department's employment cost index, which was also released yesterday. For the 12 months ended in June, compensation rose 3 percent. Despite higher prices and slower growth, "there are no clear signs that the economy is close to a recession," said Eugenio J. Alemán, senior economist for Wells Fargo Economics, noting low unemployment and evidence that "the real estate market is slowing down but not collapsing." Stocks and bonds rallied yesterday on hopes that slower economic growth will encourage Federal Reserve policymakers to stop raising interest rates soon, after two years of steady hikes aimed at keeping a lid on prices. After the GDP report was released yesterday, traders in futures contracts bet that Fed policymakers will leave their benchmark short-term interest rate unchanged at 5.25 percent at their next meeting, Aug. 8, which would mark the first meeting since June 2004 without a hike. On Thursday, the markets saw the outcome of the next meeting as roughly a tossup. Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke indicated to Congress last week that he and his colleagues are counting on a cooler economy to weaken price pressures over the next 18 months -- a sign that they don't plan to raise interest rates high enough to cause a sharper slowdown this year. Their report to Congress showed that they expect the economy to grow at about a 2.5 percent annual rate for the rest of the year and then rebound to a pace around 3.2 percent next year. But Bernanke also warned earlier this year that even if the central bank pauses in its series of rate increases, that would not necessarily mean it would be done tightening credit. And several analysts said yesterday that they still expect the Fed to lift the benchmark rate to at least 5.5 percent before year-end to combat rising inflation. Much of the inflation in the second quarter was due to rising energy prices, as oil shot above $70 a barrel and gasoline averaged close to $3 a gallon. And oil and gasoline prices have moved higher since June, suggesting that price pressures remain strong. More troubling to many economists were signs that businesses are passing their energy costs on to consumers and are finding it easier to raise prices generally. "Core inflation," which excludes volatile food and energy items, rose at a 2.9 percent annual rate in the second quarter, according to the Commerce Department's measure, which is favored by Fed policymakers. That was up sharply from the 2.1 percent rate of the first quarter and well above Bernanke's preferred range of 1 to 2 percent. The jump in core inflation "is probably the worst news" in the GDP report, because it suggests that the problem is broader than energy costs, Behravesh said. When the rise in labor compensation is added, he said, "the worry is that inflation is beginning to get built into the system." The economy cooled in the April-to-June period primarily because consumer spending rose more slowly, at an annualized 2.5 percent rate, down from a 4.8 percent pace in the first quarter, Commerce said. Commerce also revised its economic figures for 2002 through 2005 to show slightly slower growth and higher inflation than previously reported. The economy, for example, grew 3.2 percent last year, revised down from an earlier estimate of 3.5 percent. Similarly, for 2002 through 2005, GDP grew at an average annual rate of 3.2 percent, after adjusting for inflation -- not the 3.5 percent previously reported, Commerce said.
The U.S. economy slowed sharply in the three months ended in June, expanding at less than half its pace earlier this year, as consumers and businesses hunkered down in response to climbing inflation and interest rates.
26.333333
1
39
medium
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/26/AR2006072600623.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/26/AR2006072600623.html
Has Mercosur Gone Bananas?
2006072919
WASHINGTON -- While the world was focused on the tragic events taking place in Lebanon and northern Israel, something very disturbing happened in South America last week. The trading bloc known as Mercosur (the South American common market), at its summit meeting in the Argentine city of Cordoba, formally supported Venezuela's bid for one of the two Latin American seats on the United Nations Security Council. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez had worked the summit to make sure he could defeat Guatemala, Washington's preferred candidate, and gain the coveted seat when Argentina's two-year term expires in October. Chavez wants to become a world power broker as a member of the Security Council that will deal with highly sensitive issues such as Iran and North Korea. The seat would also make him the voice of Latin America at the U.N. Mercosur comprises Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay and, as of last week, Venezuela -- with Chile, Colombia, Peru, Ecuador and Bolivia as associate members. The formal declaration of support means that most of South America is now behind Chavez's bid. Until the summit, there was a chance that Chile, whose moderate left-wing government follows a very different path than the one chosen by Chavez, would promote a third candidacy, perhaps with the support of Peru's new president, Alan Garcia. But Chilean President Michelle Bachelet is strenuously attempting to bring her country into the South American political fold after many years of what was perceived as Chile's aloofness and even arrogance due to its economic success. It is hard to see how she would stand up to the Mercosur trading bloc, especially after the announcement was made in her presence and she did not express any reservations. Adding insult to the injury, Mercosur invited Fidel Castro to the summit and signed a ``trade'' deal with him that was more political than commercial, while the host nation, Argentina, provided him with a platform for a three-hour speech at the University of Cordoba in which he defended everything that Mercosur is supposedly against: one-party rule, jailing political opponents, ideological confrontation with the U.S., and a socialist economy. So, have the Mercosur countries all gone bananas? Yes. Forget the fact that Chavez is offering to supply natural gas to the Southern Cone countries through a 5,000-mile pipeline. What's really driving these countries are an inferiority complex, ideological adultery and an economic misconception. The inferiority complex is a case of reverse nordomania. The term -- a mania for all things northern -- was coined by Uruguayan writer Jose Enrique Rodo a century ago to signify what he thought was a Latin American tendency to copy U.S. materialism. Today, the moderate left-wing governments of Latin America have shaken off many of their old left vices, but still cling to the superstition that dignity means backing anything that happens to displease the U.S. even at the cost of Latin America's development. Ideological adultery comes from the fact that moderate left-wing governments are married to democracy and private enterprise at home -- the boring wife -- but unleash their carnal instincts on Chavez -- the voluptuous lover -- in matters of foreign policy. They would not dream of destroying their own democratic systems, sending mobs to beat up opponents, expropriating agricultural and industrial businesses, protecting Colombian terrorists and making crude comments about the U.S. secretary of state. But they love to make up for their moderate behavior at home by throwing at their barking constituents the crumbs of (occasional) foreign policy radicalism. Start by drinking holy water and you will end up believing, said French philosopher Blaise Pascal. Mercosur countries would do well to heed these words. And, finally, the economic misconception resides in the belief that economic power comes from regional protectionism. Since its creation in 1991, Mercosur has failed to generate wealth because it reproduced at the regional level the national barriers to the free flow of goods, services, ideas and people. The result has been constant dispute -- from the one between Brazil and Argentina over car exports to the current brawl between Argentina and neighboring Uruguay over the latter country's green light to the construction of two pulp mills near the border. Chile, the best economy in the region, has not joined Mercosur because the rules forbid member countries from pursuing open trade with nations outside the bloc. The protectionism of Mercosur will be reinforced by Venezuela's incorporation. These -- and not Chavez's pipeline -- are the main reasons why Mercosur is backing his bid for a seat at the U.N. Security Council. Alvaro Vargas Llosa, author of "Liberty for Latin America," is the director of the Center on Global Prosperity at the Independent Institute. His e-mail address is AVLlosa@independent.org.
WASHINGTON -- While the world was focused on the tragic events taking place in Lebanon and northern Israel, something very disturbing happened in South America last week. The trading bloc known as Mercosur (the South American common market), at its summit meeting in the Argentine city of Cordoba,...
16.345455
0.981818
53.018182
medium
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/27/AR2006072701744.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/27/AR2006072701744.html
Stuff 101
2006072919
It's about all the stuff kids take to college. D ell Inspiron laptop or MacBook. Bluetooth mouse. Printer/scanner/copier. Thirty-gigabyte iPod and speakers. Xbox for video games and DVDs. Joysticks. Plastic coat hangers . . . Zach Boleyn, an Ellicott City 18-year-old, is heading soon to the University of North Carolina-Wilmington in his Dodge Durango. He says: "I guess I need a couple of swimsuits, I want to learn to surf. I play golf so I'm taking my golf bag, my irons and woods. I can't go without a hat, I've got five or six, my Titleist hat, a couple of Carolina hats, my Redskins hat and my Yankees hat and my sister gave me a Clemson hat so I guess I have to wear that when I visit her campus." "I'm gonna bring PlayStation 2 to have the DVD player. How many DVDs? Oh God. I've got the first season of 'Entourage,' the movie 'Rounders.' 'American Beauty,' 'Fight Club' and 'Lord of the Rings,' all of them. 'The Wedding Crasher,' 'Old School,' 'Blow,' 'The 40-Year-Old Virgin.' " One reason students like Boleyn take a lot of stuff is that they've already got a lot of stuff. According to generational consultants William Strauss and Neil Howe, $170 billion was spent on 12- to 19-year-olds in 2004, up from $153 billion five years earlier. Starting six years ago, retailers like Bed Bath & Beyond, Target and the Container Store woke up to college students as a separate target. Until then, they had pitched back-to-school advertising primarily at the K-12 crowd. Each year, the National Retail Federation asks incoming college students how much they and their families plan to spend on college. Last year, students estimated they would spend $34.4 billion on college merchandise, up one-third from the year before. Freshmen planned on spending the most -- an average of almost $1,200 per student. Virtually every major retailer now offers a special "back to college" page online with checklists of essentials (shower caddy) and decorating ideas (beachcomber theme, anyone?). The Bed Bath & Beyond Web site contains a college gift registry, designed like a wedding registry except that "wedding date" has been replaced by "move-in date." Now Aunt Clara can find out what Caitlin might like for her first year away from home besides the highly unsatisfactory response "just money." Retailers' pitches are not subtle. Exhibit A: a 59-page brochure from Target that presumably was mailed to millions of homes. Titled "U.need.want.love.rock.," it offers, among approximately 600 other items, rubber cubes that fit over a bed's legs and raise the bed so a student can "store more." Digital camera. Palm Pilot. BlackBerry. Metal racks to store DVDs and CDs. Storage bins to store everything else. Padded coat hangers .
This is your source for news on personal technology. Find info and reviews on the newest technology that affects your life. Read our latest features on new tech gadgets.
17.764706
0.352941
0.352941
medium
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/20/AR2006072001005.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/20/AR2006072001005.html
Mysteries
2006072919
Unlike many other genre series, mysteries are often better the second, third or 15th time out. The best authors deepen their detectives, turn caricature sketches into character studies and hone familiar rhythms until a P.I. or an amateur sleuth feels like an old friend. Their cities evolve from generic backgrounds into bas-relief; supporting characters evolve from human props to essential sidekicks with their own inner lives. Five modern masters of mystery are back this month, each with characters whose lives have evolved with every volume but whose core values have remained reassuringly familiar. "Smalltimore" -- the little-town interconnectedness between everyone and everything in big-city Baltimore -- informs Laura Lippman's latest Tess Monaghan mystery, No Good Deeds (Morrow, $24.95). This time out, the reporter-turned-P.I. is picking up some easy money teaching investigative techniques to greenhorn reporters at the daily paper. Meanwhile, her good-hearted but soft-headed musician boyfriend, Crow, is befriending a teenage would-be criminal who tried to run a penny-level scam on him. With its varied neighborhoods, tangled politics and surfeit of quirky characters, Baltimore is a town prime for mystery, and Lippman has knotted a taut, intricate tale that leads from City Hall to church soup kitchens and from the tony cul de sacs of Guilford and Roland Park to the mean streets of East Baltimore. Tess (and Lippman) know the politics of the newsroom as well as the politics of city hall, and her insider eye makes No Good Deeds a pleasure. It doesn't take her long to discover that her consultancy at the Beacon-Light is really an end run around journalistic ethics; since a private eye isn't bound by reportorial principles of conduct, the paper is hoping she can steer them toward some scandalous stories while technically keeping its own hands clean. "Newspapers are so besieged right now," she explains to Crow. "On one hand, they're all playing Caesar's wife, suspending and even firing reporters for even the tiniest slip-ups. But they're also trying to compete with the weekly tabloids on the gossip front." Tess has always been a terrific sleuth, even if her earlier adventures were sometimes uneven. Here, Lippman has pulled off the near-impossible: writing a conventional procedural that still feels fresh. It's impossible not to like the complex, all-too-real Monaghan, a strong, wry detective prone to "derailing my own gravy train." How can you resist a tough cookie who is nonetheless sentimental enough to turn down all work around Valentine's Day, which is to private investigators what April 15 is to accountants? Ruth Rendell's 20th Reginald Wexford mystery, End in Tears (Crown, $25), finds her indomitable inspector faced with two seemingly unrelated crimes: a chunk of concrete thrown over an overpass onto a busy highway and, weeks later, the murder of Amber, a teenage single mother left dead in a lane after a night of clubbing. Thus begins one of Rendell's trademark labyrinthine plots, one that keeps leading back to babies: Amber's orphaned son seems to be oddly neglected by her survivors, while on the homefront Wexford's daughter Sylvia has agreed to be a surrogate mother under particularly unusual circumstances. End in Tears is not Rendell's best -- the international scope of the plot would suit London better than Wexford's Sussex, and the inspector's personal life parallels the main mystery a bit too patly -- but the pleasure here is seeing the long-in-the-tooth sleuth still outwitting his more callow partners. Much is made of the puzzling ways of modern young adults, and readers will be amused at the seventyish Rendell (and Wexford) trying to understand a subculture that includes casual hookups at a place called the Bling-Bling Club. Rendell casts a particularly wry eye at Wexford's attempts to adapt to particulars of today's world, from unwed mothers to global warming and quite a bit more. At the top of that list is Wexford's extraordinarily politically correct subordinate, Hannah Goldsmith, ever on guard for displays of racism or sexism, who finds herself attracted to an Indian inspector whose courtship manners are strictly Old World. Goldsmith provides the mystery with humor, a touch of romance and its inevitable hairsbreadth escape. Marcia Muller's private eye, Sharon McCone, is a Berkeley baby-boom gumshoe. Once a crusading junior P.I. at a Bay Area legal collective, she now owns her own whiz-bang agency on the San Francisco Embarcadero, complete with a large staff (carefully racially and sexually balanced), three houses and a Cessna. In her 22nd outing, Vanishing Point (Mysterious, $24.99), McCone has married her longtime partner, Hy Ripinsky, just as she's hired to reopen a cold case. Years before, San Luis Obispo artist Laurel Greenwood disappeared, leaving a husband and two daughters, one of whom hires McCone to solve the mystery once and for all. Soon a second person connected with the case has disappeared under similar circumstances, and McCone's cold case goes hot as she tracks Greenwood up and down California and into Oregon. Before long, she has discovered a mysterious apartment hideaway on Golden Gate Park, someone has taken a shot at her, and she becomes convinced that Laurel Greenwood is still very much alive but out of sight. Vanishing Point is crammed full of people -- perhaps too full -- from previous McCone mysteries. It's a patchwork quilt of characters, obviously dear to both detective and author; a couple of them could have been eliminated to better effect, but Muller does a good job keeping everyone straight. All these old friends help underscore Muller's point about Laurel Greenwood: To McCone, friendship and love are all, and walking out on family and friends is the ultimate crime. Muller's husband, Bill Pronzini, is even more prolific than his wife. His most famous creation is the Nameless Detective; in some two dozen mysteries, neither the author nor his characters ever mentioned the fellow's name. In The Crimes of Jordan Wise (Walker, $23.95), though, Pronzini's protagonist is named in the title, and his story is laid out on the first page. While sitting in a Caribbean bar, Wise tells a stranger that he has committed three perfect crimes, and the rest is flashback. Despite the tropical setting, the story is pure noir: Wise pines for Annelise, a tough woman who doesn't love him back but who agrees to run away with him if he can figure out how to keep her in style. Annelise is the juicy apple of Eden -- irresistible, destructive -- and Pronzini paints her in classic femme fatale terms: "She stood on the stringpiece astern, bathed in sunlight in a way that made her seem to glow . . . a tentative, nervous smile on her unpainted mouth that came and went like a blinking sign." In her white shorts and halter, she's Lana Turner in "The Postman Always Rings Twice," and in her presence Wise is hopeless. But not hapless. One "perfect crime" later, the two have swindled a California company and are now living in paradise, set for life. But, of course, there are more serpents, more apples, in their sun-drenched Eden, and Wise soon finds himself pulling off two more crimes in hopes of saving his skin. Like an expert fisherman, Pronzini spins out his yarn to its inevitable conclusion; there's only one way to end the old story of a lovesick sap and a dame whose appetites can never be satisfied. The Crimes of Jordan Wise is a neat piece of writing: James M. Cain by way of Jimmy Buffett. Lawrence Block has penned several successful detective series, most notably the hard-boiled novels with P.I. Matt Scudder and the lighter capers of bookseller-turned-burglar Bernie Rhodenbarr. With the publication of Hit Parade (Morrow, $24.95), he cements another star on his walk of fame. It's the third installment of the adventures of John Keller, a professional hit man who just wants to be done with the killing and get home to his stamp collection. (His specialty is Martinique.) Less a novel than a succession of loosely connected short stories, Hit Parade shines when Block uses his wicked funny bone. In "Keller's Designated Hitter," he's after a pro ballplayer whose hitting average hasn't kept up with his expensive contract; in "Proactive Keller," he picks up a bit of work via a chance conversation with a seatmate on a flight -- "Strangers on a Train" meets "Snakes on a Plane." The best of these morbid little bonbons is "Keller the Dog Killer," in which the hit man gets his most unusual target to date: Fluffy, a pit bull that's been terrorizing the other dogs in Central Park. Before long, Fluffy is the least of his worries, as two pet owners each hire him to kill the other. Block writes in the same terse, laconic style that his antihero employs, with rat-a-tat dialogue and a matter-of-fact attitude toward the business of death. Should Hollywood attempt to revive the sly, dark "Alfred Hitchcock Presents" anthology, Keller's adventures would be a fine blueprint. With two other classic series under his belt, Block has accomplished what few other mystery writers have: a detective trifecta. · Kevin Allman is a novelist and reviewer who lives in Portland, Ore.
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.
54.352941
0.411765
0.470588
high
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/27/AR2006072700691.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/27/AR2006072700691.html
Publicist: Hasselhoff Was Sick, Not Drunk
2006072919
LONDON -- A spokesperson for David Hasselhoff denied a report Thursday that the former "Baywatch" and "Knight Rider" star had been turned away from a British Airways flight because he was drunk. Judy Katz, the actor's publicist, called the story by the tabloid Sun "totally untrue." Katz said Hasselhoff had not been drinking, but felt unwell after taking some medication for a recent arm injury and wasn't able to get on a flight Wednesday from Heathrow Airport to Los Angeles. The Sun reported the actor had been told he could not board the flight because he was drunk. Witnesses told the newspaper Hasselhoff appeared to have trouble standing and told staff he was upset about his divorce from Pamela Bach. The divorce was finalized Wednesday in a Los Angeles court. Hasselhoff, 54, was allowed to get on a later flight, the newspaper said. The airline said only that a male passenger had been refused boarding after he was deemed unfit to travel. "They gave him some strong antibiotics and he got sick at the airport," Katz said. "He couldn't get on the plane. It was his choice. He got on the later flight." Last month, the actor sliced four tendons and an artery in a shaving accident at his London hotel. Earlier this month, there were press reports that an intoxicated Hasselhoff had to be removed from the All England Club, which presents the Wimbledon tennis championships. He denied the claim. Hasselhoff filed for divorce from Bach on Jan. 12 after 16 years of marriage, citing irreconcilable differences. Bach, 42, filed her own divorce papers, also citing irreconcilable differences.
LONDON -- A spokesperson for David Hasselhoff denied a report Thursday that the former "Baywatch" and "Knight Rider" star had been turned away from a British Airways flight because he was drunk.
8.702703
1
37
low
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/27/AR2006072701682.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/27/AR2006072701682.html
Three Charged in Phone Stock Scam
2006072919
Federal prosecutors yesterday filed criminal charges against three people who allegedly preyed on unsuspecting investors with voice mail messages disguised as confidential stock tips left on the wrong answering machine. At the same time, the Securities and Exchange Commission lodged civil fraud charges against the trio, who authorities say stood at the center of a plot to drum up interest in six thinly traded stocks by using a previously unknown method known as "vice mail." The phone messages, which reached hundreds of thousands of households from July 25, 2004, to Aug. 18, 2004, apparently had the desired effect, securities officials said. The trading volume of the six stocks at issue rose by 1,500 percent, and their market capitalization grew by $179 million, according to the SEC complaint. In all, more than 1,700 people from 43 states and the District called regulators with concerns about the phone messages when they were broadcast two years ago. Authorities say many of the breezy calls were recorded by Anna A. Boling of Altamonte Springs, Fla., while her former husband, Roderick L. Boling III, prodded a telemarketer to disseminate them. Along with stock promoter Jeffrey S. Mills and his company, Direct Results of Sweetwater LLC, the Bolings face multiple wire fraud, conspiracy and securities fraud charges, according to a statement by U.S. Attorney Kenneth L. Wainstein. The lawsuits, filed in federal court in Washington yesterday, include claims that Mills and Roderick Boling traveled in August 2004 to a casino in Gulfport, Miss. There, Mills allegedly gave a blue duffel bag filled with cash to Boling, who passed along $40,000 of the funds to telemarketer Michael J. O'Grady. O'Grady, of Augusta, Ga., pleaded guilty in May 2005 to obstructing justice and agreed to assist prosecutors with the investigation. Lawyers for Roderick Boling and Mills did not return calls. An attorney for Anna Boling declined to comment. Roderick Boling instructed telemarketers to leave messages only on answering machines or voice mail systems and told them to never call the same number twice, the SEC lawsuit says. The stocks in question are American Multiplexer Corp., Donini Inc., 5G Wireless Communications Inc., Innovative Food Holdings Inc., Maui General Store Inc. and Power3 Medical Products Inc. Other stock promoters not yet named in court filings also took part in the scheme, officials said. The investigation continues. Peter H. Bresnan, deputy director of the SEC's enforcement division, said that watchdogs were able to uncover the "electronic footprints" through "careful, side-by-side analysis of phone and stock trading records." John Reed Stark, who leads the agency's office of Internet enforcement, said the case underscored investors' responsibility to "do their homework" and "never take investment advice from a stranger."
Federal prosecutors yesterday filed criminal charges against three people who allegedly preyed on unsuspecting investors with voice mail messages disguised as confidential stock tips left on the wrong answering machine.
17.032258
1
31
medium
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/27/AR2006072700383.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/27/AR2006072700383.html
Exxon Mobil Posts $10.36 Billion Profit
2006072919
Exxon Mobil Corp. said yesterday that its second-quarter earnings jumped 36 percent, to $10.36 billion, boosted by climbing oil prices and larger profits at its refineries. The quarterly profit -- the second-largest in U.S. history -- brought forth a fresh round of criticism from consumer and environmental groups. Critics accused the Irving, Tex.-based company of getting rich at the expense of motorists -- squeezed by $3-a-gallon gas prices -- while distributing billions to shareholders through dividends and by buying back shares. The largest quarterly profit by an American company, $10.71 billion, was also posted by Exxon, in the fourth quarter of 2005. "Once again we see Exxon competing with itself for record profits," said Shawnee Hoover, campaign director of Exxpose Exxon, a group made up of environmental and public interest advocacy organizations that was formed last year. Mindful of the criticism, Exxon Mobil stressed that it had increased oil production during the quarter to keep supplies strong and head off any shortfalls that might put further pressure on prices. The company said it spent $4.9 billion on capital and exploration projects during the quarter, up 8 percent from a year ago. "We're running our capacity full," Henry Hubble, Exxon Mobil's vice president of investor relations, said in response to a question about gasoline demand during a conference call with analysts. "We're selling everything we can make." The company reported that it increased profits in all parts of its business, which includes exploration, production, refining and marketing of oil and natural gas. The earnings for the quarter exceeded many analysts' expectations and were equal to $1.72 a share, up from $1.20 a share in the comparable period last year. Investors initially bid up Exxon shares but retreated from the stock later in the day. The company's shares closed at $66.47 , down 13 cents. Exxon was one of several oil companies to release earnings reports this week. ConocoPhillips said its earnings rose 65 percent, to $5.18 billion. Royal Dutch Shell PLC said its earnings jumped 40 percent, to $7.32 billion. The big numbers have become a popular target of politicians in an election year and fodder for late-night comedians. On Wednesday, Jon Stewart told his "Daily Show" audience that BP PLC's $7.27 billion profit meant that the British oil giant made $55,000 a minute during the quarter. "How did they do it? It's not just unmitigated greed. BP's secret is they drill into banks," Stewart said, as the image of a drill boring through a ceiling into a vault popped up on the screen. By comparison, Exxon's profit per minute during the quarter amounted to $79,000. Exxpose Exxon complained that the company was "refusing" to invest in alternative energy and was a "giant blocking the way" of smarter energy policy. Some analysts on the teleconference seemed concerned about the outside pressure on Exxon. One asked Hubble what negative attention Exxon's profit might attract from lawmakers. In Washington, various ideas have been floated in recent months to offer relief to consumers and punish suppliers, including windfall-profit taxes. Any such measures, Hubble said, "basically are going to reduce the funds available for increasing the supplies." In response to another question about whether Exxon was looking into renewable energy, Hubble replied that there are "very few [biofuels] that are economic without subsidies." But he said Exxon was investing in "breakthrough technologies." "Right now, the technology that's out there . . . basically requires subsidies for the long haul, and we don't think that makes sense to invest in at this point," he said, quickly adding that Exxon is a major buyer and blender of ethanol, and that it blends biodiesel in Europe.
Exxon Mobil Corp. said yesterday that its second-quarter earnings jumped 36 percent, to $10.36 billion, boosted by climbing oil prices and larger profits at its refineries.
23.4375
1
32
medium
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/27/AR2006072701620.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/27/AR2006072701620.html
Warner Bros. To Cut Link With Adware Firm Zango
2006072919
Warner Bros. Studios, home to Bugs Bunny, Scooby Doo and Harry Potter, said yesterday that it plans to terminate a business relationship with Zango Inc., an adware company that has been offering free games on the Warner Bros. Web site in exchange for permission to install a computer program that could push advertisements and pornography. Zango is offering free downloads of games on a Warner Bros. Web page called "Fun Stuff" that appears to be for children. But when users click on the game, they're directed to a page that asks for permission to install on the computer a program called Zango Search Assistant. Hidden in the terms of agreement is the disclosure that users may receive adult-oriented ads through it. A Warner Bros. spokesperson could not say yesterday how soon the Zango link would be removed from the Warner Brothers site, adding that the companies were in a contractual agreement and that lawyers would have to be involved. It's unknown how long the link was on the site. However, after the link it was noted on blogs yesterday, consumer groups that work to protect children from the dangers of the Web began to speak out. The issue also revived the debate over mainstream corporations that support, through business relationships, the seedier side of the Web. Companies such as Zango are best known for installing intrusive computer programs called adware, which deliver pop-up advertisements while computer users surf the Internet. Adware companies have built their businesses by serving online advertising for some of America's top corporations, but privacy advocates say the adware industry has a long and storied history of looking the other way while partners installed their wares through Web browser security flaws and on sites geared toward children. Last year, New York Attorney General Eliot L. Spitzer sued one of Zango's closest competitors, Direct Revenue, for surreptitiously bundling adware with games and other software advertised as "free." In a statement issued yesterday, Warner Bros. said that its agreement with Zango was contingent upon "Zango's ability to satisfy a rigorous set of adware/trackware integrity requirements" and that Zango agreed that "no one accessing Zango's network from the Warner Bros. site would receive inappropriate material." "We take this issue very seriously at Warner Bros. and we have maintained all along that if Zango does not meet any one of these criteria, we will terminate the deal," the statement read. Consumer groups said yesterday that this sort of controversy highlights the importance of mainstream companies policing their own Web sites. "The Web doesn't get the same level of protection that these big companies dedicate to their offline properties," said Parry Aftab, executive director of WiredSafety, an organization dedicated to protecting kids online. "Too often they trust their sites to techies and marketing people. If you are in the kids space, you have a heightened obligation for doing things right, and you have to think before you engage with these kinds of partners." Zango spokesman Steve Stratz said the promotion of its software on a kid-oriented site was a case of "ad inventory mix-up." While the company does not target its software at children, "it's not our job to police the Warner Bros. site," he said. The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act bars Web site operators from collecting personal information about children under age 14 without parental consent. Zango notes that the person who agrees to install the software must be over 18. But the box that confirms the user's age on the Warner Bros. site is already checked, by default. "If this doesn't violate the letter of the law, it certainly goes against the spirit of it," said Ari Schwartz, an attorney for the Center for Democracy & Technology, a Washington group that advocates for privacy. "We have seen many adware players like Zango purposefully aiming their products at children, and I do think that raises concerns," said Schwartz, whose organization recently asked the Federal Trade Commission to prosecute Zango for violating consumer protection laws. The Center for Democracy & Technology "hears all the time from adults who say they got this kind of software on their computer because their children installed it." Krebs is a staff writer for washingtonpost.com.
This is your source for news on personal technology. Find info and reviews on the newest technology that affects your life. Read our latest features on new tech gadgets.
24.029412
0.529412
0.588235
medium
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/27/AR2006072701452.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/27/AR2006072701452.html
Legal Residents Face Fingerprinting at Ports
2006072919
Millions of legal permanent residents will soon have to be fingerprinted and photographed before reentering the United States by sea or air, in a significant expansion of a long-stalled border security program, officials announced yesterday. Those requirements of the US-VISIT program will be applied around the end of the year to the more than 11 million holders of green cards, as well as all immigrants, refugees, asylum seekers, people paroled to the United States and travelers under the Guam Visa Waiver Program, said Robert A. Mocny, acting director of US-VISIT . Certain Canadians entering for extended business or employment also will be subject to the new rule. The changes will apply to more than 1.4 million travelers a year, he said. The changes will be open to public comment until Aug. 28. Congress required immigration officials to develop biometric identifiers for all noncitizens issued official documents, Mocny said. The program now covers about 32 million visitors annually, exempting only some Canadians and Mexicans. Crystal Williams, deputy director of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, questioned why the United States is extending fingerprinting to more travelers when the program does not work as intended. First proposed by Congress in 1996 and launched in 2004, US-VISIT is designed to automate tracking of visitors when they enter and exit the United States, to help find criminals, potential terrorists and visitors who illegally overstay their visas. It has recorded 61 million people entering the country through 115 airports, 15 seaports and 154 land ports. Customs agents may fingerprint and photograph green-card holders at land ports at their discretion. But because of technical and policy hurdles, pilot projects have recorded only about 4 million people leaving the country. "They've only got one half of the US-VISIT program working at all. You would have thought they would be concentrating on a viable exit solution," Williams said. Green-card holders will face longer lines at airports if they can no longer enter through areas set up for U.S. citizens, she said. Barry Steinhardt, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Technology and Liberty Project, said the Department of Homeland Security, which administers US-VISIT, is "overreaching" by including green-card holders, whom he said Congress exempted from requirements for foreign nationals. Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, warned that fingerprinting could soon expand to U.S. citizens inside the borders. He cited the Real ID Act, which requires states to set more stringent standards of proof for driver's licenses and include two biometric measures by May 2008. He expects that this fall the Homeland Security Department will propose that those be a photograph and, most likely, fingerprints. At a news conference, Mocny said US-VISIT is improving immigration controls and the security of citizens and visitors by adding green-card holders and other groups to the list of people who must be fingerprinted. The use of biometric identifiers has been endorsed by the commission that investigated the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. The panel warned that the nation's immigration and identity document systems are readily evaded. US-VISIT has captured 1,100 criminals using false documents, Mocny said, and detected one Iraqi detainee who had been released by U.S. forces in Iraq and later tried to apply for a visa under a false name. The Homeland Security system now collects two fingerprints from each person, but officials hope to pilot a 10-print system next year and deploy it in 2008 or 2009. The smaller system cannot tap into an FBI fingerprint database or include enough data to accurately identify individuals in the entire population, Mocny said. The European Union, Britain and Japan now are looking at fingerprint requirements for their border systems. "The world is moving to biometrically enabled border control processes," Mocny said. "That is going to become the standard. Ten-finger scans is the standard now for identifying people." Researcher Meg Smith contributed to this report.
News about the U.S. military from The Washington Post and washingtonpost.com. Full coverage of defense budgets,Army,Navy,Air Force,Marines and the Pentagon.
25.5
0.566667
0.633333
medium
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/27/AR2006072700224.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/27/AR2006072700224.html
Democrats Criticize Bolton as Ineffective
2006072919
Senate Democrats unleashed a sharp volley of criticism of President Bush's foreign policy yesterday, arguing that John R. Bolton has done more harm than good as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and does not deserve an extended term. If Bolton's style were less divisive, they said, he might have achieved more reforms at the United Nations and tougher sanctions against Hezbollah and North Korea. But Republicans defended Bolton and the administration and said it would be unwise to change ambassadors when the Middle East is in crisis and Iran and North Korea are threatening nuclear advances. Democrats said it was unclear whether they would try to filibuster Bolton's nomination this fall, as they successfully did last year. Bush angered Democrats last August by giving Bolton a "recess appointment" to the U.N. post after the Senate twice failed to muster the 60 votes needed to end debate on his nomination. The appointment will expire by December, and Bush is asking the Senate to confirm Bolton for the rest of his term, saying the outspoken ambassador has proved his effectiveness. Several Democrats hotly disputed that claim at yesterday's hearing before the Foreign Relations Committee. "My objection isn't that he's a bully, but that he's been an ineffective bully and can't win the day when it comes, when it really counts," said Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.), who led last year's opposition. Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (Del.), the panel's top Democrat, said, "At the moment of the greatest need for diplomacy in recent history, we are not particularly effective at it." Most committee Republicans defended Bolton, including Sen. George V. Voinovich (Ohio), who opposed him last year. "I know that one of the concerns that everyone had was that you might go up there and do your own thing, that you didn't understand how important consensus was," Voinovich told Bolton. "And I think you have been very, very active in working on consensus to get things done at the United Nations." Sen. Norm Coleman (R-Minn.) said: "I've watched you work, I've visited with your colleagues. I want you to know you have my unequivocal, unhesitating support." Committee members differed on Bolton's role in helping shape the U.N. Security Council's demand that North Korea suspend its recent missile tests. "Mr. Bolton publicly assured anyone who would listen that he could get support for a resolution with teeth, with so-called Chapter 7 obligations," Dodd said, referring to sanctions that could include military action. "Turns out, of course, he couldn't." After China threatened a veto, the Security Council adopted a milder resolution. Bolton defended the action, saying the resolution "in our judgment is fully binding on North Korea." He added: "It demands -- that's the word the council used, 'demands' -- that North Korea suspend all activity relating to its ballistic missile program." Biden, turning to the fighting between Israel and the Syrian-backed Hezbollah militia in Lebanon, said Bolton did too little to demand enforcement of U.N. Resolution 1559, which calls for disbanding such militias and expanding the Lebanese army's control.
Senate Democrats unleashed a sharp volley of criticism of President Bush's foreign policy yesterday, arguing that John R. Bolton has done more harm than good as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and does not deserve an extended term. If Bolton's style were less divisive, they said, he might have...
11.070175
0.982456
55.017544
low
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/25/DI2006072501108.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/25/DI2006072501108.html
Bourdain in Beirut
2006072719
Bourdain was online Wednesday, July 26, at 11 a.m. ET to discuss his time in the international city and his thoughts about what was once a burgeoning hotspot for international travelers. Anthony Bourdain: Hello, glad to be back and grateful for the opportunity to talk about what I saw in Beirut. University Place, Wash.: Can you describe what you were doing at the time when the first attacks started? How far away were you from your hotel? Anthony Bourdain: I watched the airport being bombed about a mile from my hotel. I watched the second missile strikes on the airport fuel depot. My crew and I were all assembled in my room emptying my minibar, nervously trying to keep a stiff upper lip, trying to follow the example of our Beirut-y contacts and friends who were still maintaining some false bravado. Arlington, Va.: Read your book...great job, well done ... Are the majority of the Lebanese people you spoke to more anti Israel or Hezbollah? Do they see Hezbollah as a benefit to their country? Anthony Bourdain: I can only tell you what I saw in my limited experience. As it happened, I was standing with a Sunni, Shiite and a Christian when Hezbollah supporters started to fire automatic weapons in the air celebrating the kidnapping of the Israeli soldiers as a few supporters drove by the three people I was with all instantaneously took on a look of shame and embarrassment as if a dangerous and unstable little brother had once again brought the whole family into peril. At no time during my 10 days in Beirut did I ever hear an anti-Semitic or even explicitly anti-Israeli statement. To the contrary, there was a universal sense of grim resignation and inevitability to what Israel's reaction would be. Dating to the first seconds after Hezbollah started firing in the air, we were a largely Jewish crew. The last person to leave us as Lebanese fled in droves, was the Shiite from south Beirut. We had to plead with him to leave us and join his family. His house was later destroyed. Washington, D.C.: Big fan of the show Anthony. I know you like to live on the edge but please stay safe! What was it about Beirut that attracted you to the city? Is there a wide mix of international flavors there (like Indonesia) or is the food generally "Lebanese"? Anthony Bourdain: I can only describe it as being like South Beach or Los Angeles. In addition to some of the best Middle Eastern food the already wonderful Lebanese classics, there was every variety of Asian fusion, European and American, that you would expect of any modern sophisticated major western city. Lebanese contacts were effusive, bursting with pride, "enthusiastically and persistently trying to get us to come. The Lebanese food was already said to be the best in the Middle East and by all accounts Beirut was newly resurgent, shockingly tolerant in the days since the Hariri assassination, relatively peaceful between groups. By all accounts it had returned to its one-time status as the "Paris of the Orient." Washington, D.C.: Do you think anything you filmed in Lebanon will make it onto the show? Anthony Bourdain: We're trying to figure some way to show how beautiful and hopeful Beirut was before the bombing, how terrible a thing it is that happened, what we've lost, the pride and hopefulness and optimism that was smashed. The surprising tenderness and sensitivity of the Marines who evacuated us. We're struggling with a way to tell that story without it being about me or about us. It will not be a regular episode of No Reservations. Washington, D.C.: I know your time there was brief, but can you recount for us your best meal in Lebanon? Anthony Bourdain: A little neighborhood place called Le Chef. Typical Lebanese staples, hummus, kibbe, stewed lamb and arak. Everyday food. Chicago, Ill.: When you say you watched the airport being bombed, was that from your hotel room window or the television? Anthony Bourdain: From my balcony. Anthony Bourdain: For the whole time I was there I was often in the bizarre and somehow shameful position of watching a country dismantled before my eyes from a relatively comfortable distance. Annandale, Va.: So how was the food on the USS Nashville? I've always heard that US Navy food is pretty good. Anthony Bourdain: There are times in one's life when tuna noodle casserole and macaroni and cheese speak directly to the heart. Anthony Bourdain: I can't possibly say enough good things about the U.S. Marine Corps or enough bad things about the embassy and the State Department. Darnestown, Md.: In your writing and program you use food and travel as media to communicate an informed world view and philosophy. How has the experience of the past week or so informed or impacted these? Anthony Bourdain: Great question. I don't know yet. I suspect the answer to be a depressing one. Where once I believed that the meal was a leveling experience, a thing that could make a difference, that over food and drink in some small way people could make a difference ... I'm not so sure anymore. It seems now that whatever we eat, however proud we may be, good and bad alike are crushed under the same wheel. Obviously, I'm feeling a little pessimistic about the world these days. Pittsburgh, Pa.: I hate to change the subject from this serious discussion, but I'd really like to read a bit about what you ate before (or even during) things unraveled over there. Anthony Bourdain: Sushi, an enormous selection of mezze (an assortment of pickles, dips, essentially Lebanese taps). To my eternal regret I saw and experienced so little and had the opportunity to show so little of how good and how delicious things were in Beirut. Anthony Bourdain: I had some great late night shwarma (like a gyro). Alexandria, Va.: So what's to eat in the Middle East besides hummus and tabouleh? I'm not a fan of either. Anthony Bourdain: Incredible lamb and rice dishes, pickles, breads, the desserts in particular are subtle, sophisticated and unlike any other. That's just for starters. Anthony Bourdain: Sushi was very big in Beirut. Also, one should keep in mind that when I arrived the city was filled with Lebanese Americans, Lebanese who'd emigrated to Europe and America during the civil war and who had recently returned and expected the same kind of nightclubs, restaurants and to a great extent lifestyle as they'd enjoyed elsewhere. New York, N.Y.: Which county that you have visited has the best and worst bathrooms? Why? Anthony Bourdain: The best bathrooms, Japan, far and away. Worst bathrooms, if you can call them that? Uzbekistan. Toilets in Uzbekistan make the one in Trainspotting look like an operating room. Washington, D.C.: Is there anything that you will not eat? Of all the things that you have ingested what would you say was the most amazing, and why? Anthony Bourdain: I will never eat rat under any circumstances. No monkey brain. Best single thing I've ever eaten? Tough call between roasted bone marrow and high test o-toro tuna. Frederick, Md.: Tony, thank you for being on Live Online today. With the dominance of mainstream, popular, primetime media, how hard is it for you to stay true to your roots and beliefs about food and avoid selling your soul? P.S. When are you going to be at Les Halles in D.C.? Anthony Bourdain: Travel Channel remarkably have indulged me in every conceivable way. They knew what they were getting into, I guess, and have allowed me near total freedom to go where I want, do what I want, say what I want and make the television shows that me and my partners want to make. I couldn't possibly hope for a better arrangement. As far as selling my soul, fortunately that's not necessary at the moment but it could be Suntory Time anytime now. Never say never. Who knows what next year will bring. I travel about 10 months out of the year making this show. It is a rare occurrence that you would find me a the D.C. Les Halles. I hope they're gettin the frites rights. Seattle, Wash.: Were you aware of all of the U.S. State Department warnings against travel to Lebanon before you went? Anthony Bourdain: Yes. But they say that about Oakland too, don't they? LeDroit Park, Washington, D.C.: I'm a big fan and I am looking forward to seeing you speak next month at the ASAE Conference in Boston. What are your favorite restaurants in Boston that I should be sure to visit? Anthony Bourdain: I'm embarrassed to say I'm clueless as to where to eat in Boston. It's been a long time since I've had the opportunity to eat around there. One place I won't be eating is Fenway Park. Trinidad: When do you plan to come to the Caribbean to do a NR show? Have you ever been to Trinidad and Tobago or know about the food here? Anthony Bourdain: I've eaten food from Trinidad elsewhere in the Caribbean. Haven't been there, might well visit. Generally I escape to the Caribbean, blissfully free of cameras. That's where I go to hide out. Rockville, Md.: Looking back at all the places you've traveled and meals you've had, what would be your dream menu and who would you invite? Anthony Bourdain: I would eat at the St. John restaurant in London. An all offal meal prepared by Fergus Henderson. Attending would be a young Ava Gardner, Louise Brooks, Kim Philby, Orson Welles, Richard Helms, Iggy Pop, Graham Greene and Martin Scorsese. Washington, D.C.: Dear Mr. Bourdain: First off, let me say I am glad that you are safe, and I love your work. My question is not about Beirut, but it has been on my mind for some time. In "Kitchen Confidential", you detailed your disdain for Emeril Lagasse, calling him most memorably "an Ewok" and a hack. Yet I have recently seen pictures of you hanging out with Emeril and appearing on friendly terms. What gives? Is Emeril no longer an Ewok? Anthony Bourdain: I still hate his show and will continue to say so. Emeril the man, however, I have come to know, deserves a lot more respect than I've given him. He's an accomplished chef and businessman in spite of what you see on TV. He has a sense of humor and given the current crop of talentless, cabbage patch kids, bobbleheads and dimwits on the Food Network, Emeril now looks like Escoffier by comparison. Alexandria, Va.: Is there any part of the world you have not seen? Where do you call home? Anthony Bourdain: I call New York City home though I spend very little time there. I've been on every continent except Antarctica. Asia's a big place. I could easily spend the rest of my life just eating around China and barely scratch the surface, for instance. Plenty of place yet to go. Bowie, Md.: I have a Vietnamese co-worker who says there's no way that you could have eaten "raw Balut (Filipino name)" when you toured Vietnam. When I watched the show, I could have sworn you ate the raw embryo. Was it raw or cooked? Anthony Bourdain: Balut (half-term fetal duck egg) known in Vietnam as "hot vinlon" as I ate it can best be described as soft-boiled -- very soft-boiled. I found it disturbingly feathery, though the crunchy notes were not unpleasant. Arlington, Va.: Why the bad impression of the State Department? Anthony Bourdain: The total lack of information or response from the Beirut Embassy for nearly a week, the assembly point where evacuees were to meet and be processed was run in so shamefully disorganized fashion that any nightclub promoter, any concert organizer could easily have put to shame. The Marines of the USS Nashville, in a virtually last-minute operation for which they had been neither trained nor experienced, performed brilliantly with a kindness, a thoughtfulness, a sensitivity, a level of efficiency and humanity, sorely missing from what I saw at State and Embassy operations. At the assembly point the simple addition of a few hand-printed signs, a couple of bull horns, a few smiles and maybe eight more bodies would've made all the difference in the world. It was a cluster_ _ _ _. Pasadena, Calif: Which country has the spiciest food of all time? Anthony Bourdain: Sichuan Province in China would certainly be a contender. Eating sichuan hotpot opens up whole new dimensions in the pleasure/pain spectrum. A delightfully sado-masochistic experience, yet curiously addictive. You're sweating, doubled over with pain and yet you want more. I love watching your show on the Travel Channel. I was really looking forward to seeing you in the Middle East and enjoying some of their dishes. However, my question is regarding your weight. How do you stay so slim after eating all that food? Do you work out? Anthony Bourdain: I do not work out. I have a healthy regimen of cigarettes, alcohol, red meat and runny cheese. Anthony Bourdain: I call that Keith Richard diet. Potomac, Md.: Is there anything comparable to a hamburger? Anthony Bourdain: Under certain circumstances a hamburger is the best thing on earth but get real. The Chinese have been cooking for 6,000 years and cooking well. I think it's pretty fair to say there are better food items in this world. Alexandria, Va.: In all your travels around the globe, please name your favorite beer and spirit? Anthony Bourdain: Guinness. A pint of Guinness in Dublin. Must be consumed in Dublin. Favorite spirit? I'm into Negroni's lately. Three liquors I hate: gin, sweet vermouth and Compari, yet together they're wonderful. I blame the evil Mario Batali for introducing me to this lethal habit-forming concoction. He will surely burn in hell. His red plastic clogs melting over his cloven hooves for what he's done to me. Trinidad : Food here is very spicy you have not tasted a good Scotch Bonnet pepper as yet! Anthony Bourdain: I have had a good Scotch bonnet pepper. They burned my head down to a smoldering stump. You're right, those are damn spicy peppers. World's hottest. Washington, D.C.: Do you think being in a war zone changed you? Anthony Bourdain: Yes. And in ways I don't yet understand. I'm sure it's changed my world view, probably not for the better. Anthony Bourdain: Thanks to everybody for their questions, their kind words. Keep watching and eat without fear. 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.
73.195122
0.560976
0.658537
high
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/25/AR2006072501308.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/25/AR2006072501308.html
Ashcroft Nostalgia
2006072719
Alberto Gonzales is achieving something remarkable, even miraculous, as attorney general: He is making John Ashcroft look good. I was no fan of President Bush's first attorney general, who may be best remembered for holding prayer breakfasts with department brass, hiding the bare-breasted statue in the Great Hall of Justice behind an $8,000 set of drapes, and warning darkly that those who differed with administration policy were giving aid to terrorists. But as I watched Gonzales testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee last week, it struck me: In terms of competence (the skill with which he handles the job) and character (willingness to stand up to the president), Gonzales is enough to make you yearn for the good old Ashcroft days. Gonzales is an amiable man, not nearly so polarizing or ideological as his predecessor. If you were given the old desert-island choice between the two, he would be the better option -- more likely to share the rainwater, less likely to make you listen to him sing. (If you've ever heard Ashcroft's "Let the Eagle Soar," you know what I mean.) Where Ashcroft was hard-edged and combative, Gonzales is pleasant and seemingly imperturbable. He's always reminded me a bit of the Pillsbury doughboy: No matter how hard he's poked, he springs back, smiling. At the start of last week's hearing, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), sounding like an exasperated high school English teacher, chastised Gonzales for failing to turn in his prepared statement on time. The attorney general sat silent, then calmly delivered the tardy testimony. The next three hours and 40 minutes illustrated just about everything that is wrong with Gonzales's Justice. There is no polite way to put this: Gonzales doesn't seem to have an adequate grasp of what's happening in his own department or much influence in setting administration policy. Asked about House-passed legislation that would bar Justice from enforcing a year-old law requiring trigger locks on newly sold handguns, Gonzales said he was "not aware of" the dispute. Asked about his department's prosecutions of corrupt Border Patrol agents (described in a front-page story in this newspaper), Gonzales said he would "have to get back to you." And when Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) inquired whether the administration supported reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act as passed by the House, Gonzales didn't seem empowered to give him a straight answer -- though the Judiciary Committee was set to take up the measure that afternoon. "I don't know if I'm in a position to state that as an administration we're going to support that," Gonzales said. Gonzales as witness is a maddening exercise in jello-nailing. "I'm going to move on and accept your non-answer, because I don't think I'm going to get anything more on that subject, and perhaps nothing more on the next subject," Specter told Gonzales after a fruitless line of questioning about whether Justice was -- as the attorney general had said in May -- considering prosecuting journalists for publishing leaks. Specter's bleak prediction proved accurate. When he asked Gonzales about the attorney general's previous assurance that the National Security Agency's electronic surveillance was the only program not subject to judicial authorization, this illuminating exchange ensued.
Alberto Gonzales is achieving something remarkable, even miraculous, as attorney general: He is making John Ashcroft look good.
30
1
22
medium
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/25/AR2006072501311.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/25/AR2006072501311.html
David Ignatius - A Way Forward
2006072719
To stop the war in Lebanon, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will need to start with some basics: The best strategy for containing a militia such as Hezbollah is to build a strong Lebanese state; any lasting solution for this conflict will be political, not just military; continued Israeli bombardment of Lebanon to destroy terrorists might backfire by creating another failed state from which terrorists can operate more freely. The outlines of a settlement that recognizes these basics were floated Monday in Beirut. The Lebanese urged Rice to consider a compromise package -- of the sort that Beirutis describe in a French phrase meaning "neither victor nor vanquished." That kind of negotiated truce would not please those on either side who would like to see their adversaries eradicated. But it might be the best chance of achieving Rice's goal of replacing the dangerous prewar status quo in Lebanon with something more secure and stable for everyone. Negotiated settlements are always messy, but this package has one great advantage: It would provide a framework for the chronically weak Lebanese state, backed by an international force, to begin to assert control over all its territory. It would stress the basic idea that should be the centerpiece of U.S. policy in the Middle East from Beirut to Baghdad: that political compromise and reconciliation, backed by U.S. and allied military power, provide the only path out of the crisis afflicting the region. The challenge in Lebanon is identical to the one in Iraq: how to help weak Arab democracies control sectarian militias and build sovereignty and security. The correct American strategy is one that might be called "muscular reconciliation." Its starting premise is that if one side seeks unilateral advantage, everyone will suffer. Lebanese sources outlined for me the compromise package they say was discussed Monday when Rice met with Fouad Siniora, the Lebanese prime minister, and Nabih Berri, the parliament speaker and leader of the Shiite militia known as Amal. The cornerstone of this package, according to my sources, is that Hezbollah would agree to withdraw its armed fighters from south Lebanon and accept an international force there that would accompany the Lebanese army. Israel, for its part, would agree to halt its attacks and lift its air and sea blockade. The United States would call for negotiations over the return of a disputed territory known as Shebaa Farms, claimed by Lebanon even though the United Nations ruled in 2000 that it was Syrian. Within 24 hours after a cease-fire, there would be an exchange of prisoners as part of this package: Hezbollah would give up the two Israeli soldiers it captured in the July 12 border raid that started the crisis; Israel would release Lebanese prisoners it holds. The package also includes some minor provisions, including an Israeli agreement to provide maps of land mines placed just north of the Lebanon-Israel border. What's in it for Israel to accept such a deal, which would allow Hezbollah to survive? The answer is that an attempt to go all the way and destroy the Shiite militia would require a full-scale invasion of Lebanon, and might well misfire in the same way as Israel's 1982 invasion. Better to go for a solid half a loaf -- pushing armed Hezbollah fighters north of the Litani River and bringing in an international force to help the Lebanese army police a buffer zone -- than to risk further setbacks. Hezbollah's military power would be severely degraded under such a negotiated settlement, but it would remain intact politically. The Shiite militia is trying to put on a brave face, sending me an e-mail message yesterday through a Lebanese intermediary claiming that it has the upper hand. If a cease-fire isn't reached and Hezbollah fights on, it will "accept a four-to-one casualty ratio," the message warned. "Human losses all go to heaven as martyrs with families and children handsomely compensated." But for all this brave talk, statements by Hezbollah's leader, Hasan Nasrallah, seem to be defining victory as simple survival. Wars end when both sides decide they can gain more from a negotiated settlement than from continued fighting. Nearly two weeks into the Lebanon war, Israel and Hezbollah both seem split between those who think they can gain from more combat and those ready to cut a deal. As of late Tuesday, Rice was continuing to resist mounting international demands for a cease-fire, presumably to allow Israel more time to hammer Hezbollah. But that strategy is becoming dangerous for all sides. Rice should turn now to negotiating a formula that can halt the bombs and rockets -- and enhance the authority of the Lebanese state. Bargaining with the devil (or at least the devil's intermediary) is part of the job description for an American secretary of state.
To stop the war in Lebanon, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will need to start with some basics: The best strategy for containing a militia such as Hezbollah is to build a strong Lebanese state; any lasting solution for this conflict will be political, not just military; continued Israeli...
16.472727
0.981818
53.018182
medium
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/26/AR2006072600289.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/26/AR2006072600289.html
Talks Fail on Mideast Truce
2006072719
ROME, July 26 -- International talks on Lebanon here failed Wednesday to agree on an immediate cease-fire in the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah but called for a new multinational force in south Lebanon and opened the way for Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to return to the Middle East soon for further discussions, U.S. and U.N. officials said. The Rome conference did not bridge the gap between a tough U.S. position, opposing a cease-fire except as part of a broader arrangement that can endure for years, and European and Arab calls for an immediate halt to the fighting. The meeting went 90 minutes longer than expected, largely because of stiff debate over the cease-fire issue, U.S. diplomats said. "We are all agreed that we want most urgently to end the violence on a basis that this time will be sustainable, because unfortunately, this is a region that has had too many broken cease-fires, too many spasms of violence, followed then by other spasms of violence," Rice said at a joint news conference with U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan, Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora and the conference host, Italian Foreign Minister Massimo D'Alema. Despite an impassioned appeal for an immediate end to hostilities by Siniora, who said Israeli airstrikes had brought his country "to its knees," the United States pushed through language urging countries to "work immediately to reach with utmost urgency a cease-fire that will put an end to the current violence and hostilities." Most of the 18 parties called instead for "urgent work on an immediate cease-fire." As an alternative, Annan suggested a temporary "pause" in hostilities to let in humanitarian assistance and allow deployment of an international force to distribute relief and eventually help strengthen the Lebanese government, an idea that other delegates said was blocked by intense U.S. pressure. The U.S.-backed formulation would allow fighting to continue until a wide-ranging agreement can be worked out, diplomats here said. Terge Roed-Larsen, a U.N. special envoy for Lebanon, called the conference a "steppingstone," rather than a failure. "No one can wave a magic wand. We need time. This is the real world," he said. Rice told reporters traveling with her that talks will begin later this week or early next week among countries interested in contributing troops to the proposed multinational force. Plans are also underway for one or two new U.N. Security Council resolutions, which U.S. officials said could be drafted as early as next week. The conference did not define the terms or timing of the proposed force, although Rice said it would not be expected to deploy under hostile fire. The conference declaration said the force should receive "a U.N. mandate to support" Lebanon's army in securing the country's south. Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi said Wednesday that he would commit troops to a military force for Lebanon if it had a U.N. mandate, and Turkey, NATO's only Muslim member, said Tuesday that it might join such a force as well. Spain, Germany and Ukraine have also said they are weighing participation, the Associated Press reported. Philip Zelikow, a senior Rice aide, remained in Europe for follow-on talks with European Union officials about future meetings and the proposed multinational force. A U.N. source said its peacekeeping office was exploring different models for a Lebanon mission after the failure of earlier international forces there, including the current observer mission, known as UNIFIL, four of whose members were killed Tuesday in an Israeli airstrike. Conference participants also announced plans for an international donors' conference to mobilize aid to reconstruct battered Lebanon, with a particular focus on the Shiite-dominated south that has long been a stronghold for Hezbollah.
ROME, July 26 -- International talks on Lebanon here failed Wednesday to agree on an immediate cease-fire in the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah but called for a new multinational force in south Lebanon and opened the way for Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to return to the Middle East...
13.314815
0.981481
52.018519
low
high
extractive
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/2006/07/israel_minimizing_civilian_cas.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072719id_/http://blog.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/2006/07/israel_minimizing_civilian_cas.html
Israel's Approach to Peacekeepers
2006072719
Israel’s attack on a U.N. observation post yesterday, which killed four peacekeepers, seems a turning point in this new war. Secretary-General Kofi Annan expressed shock at the attack, saying he was "deeply distressed by the apparently deliberate targeting." The U.N. incident occurred on a day when Israel resumed bombing of targets in south Beirut after a pause during Condoleezza Rice's visit, bombing that itself is garnering increased international -- and even domestic -- condemnation. In Israel, politicians, military analysts and pundits expressed frustration and concern yesterday over the supposed "slow" progress on the ground, conflating the aggressive Israeli air operations with some reluctance on the part of the government to commit ground forces. Israeli Defense Forces are in an impossible position: Israel pursues a tactical course toward eliminating the immediate Hezbollah threat, and remains reluctant to occupy southern Lebanon. Most should be applauding this focused objective, with its recognition of the costs associated with reoccupying the country. But it is a tactical objective that requires at the same time that the Israeli military cut off longer-range threats outside the ground battle zone, necessitating the kind of air attacks that are the most ruinous and inscrutable. One strategy can't work without the other, and in that I can see the logic behind what Israel is doing, that is, as long as it doesn't want to deploy a sizable ground force in country. This, however, doesn't mean that the way that Israel is fighting its air war is either correct or preordained. In the attacks on Lebanon's civil infrastructure, Israel is not just interdicting re-supply of Hezbollah, it is also following a cookie-cutter approach that may not work. The Israeli government's response is to plead: Hey, NATO attacked electricity in Kosovo and the Iraq wars, television and media are "propaganda," making them acceptable targets. "We don't want to do any damage to the Lebanese infrastructure and clearly, we don't want to kill any civilian life in Lebanon," Shimon Peres told Wolf Blitzer on CNN yesterday. What planet does he live on? Israel might have conducted two weeks of precision air attacks against "legitimate" military targets, but to argue -- and not see -- that in this boilerplate targeting approach, it is civilian infrastructure, and by extension, the people of Lebanon, who are the targets, is either dishonest or blind. Here is today's thumbnail of where the war in Lebanon stands militarily: In two weeks, Israel has reportedly flown more than 4,500 air sorties, about two-thirds of which are attack missions by aircraft and attack helicopters. The Israeli military claims to have hit more than 2,000 Hezbollah "targets," large and small in the attacks in the first two weeks. In the first 48 hours of air and artillery attacks, U.S. intelligence sources watching the war say, Israel focused on Hezbollah’s longer-range missiles -- about 200 Syrian- and Iranian-made missiles with ranges in excess of 60 miles. The air attacks seem to have been successful in destroying or neutralizing about 80 percent of the force, Israeli analysts claim. Israeli military officials say the air campaign has also focused on preventing Hezbollah from receiving new arms. American intelligence reports indicate that the Israelis have been successful in blocking the re-supply of larger missile systems, and in closing the Syrian lines of communication. Yesterday, Israeli ground forces seized Bint Jbeil, 2.5 miles from Israel's border, a Hezbollah strongehold. Brig. Gen. Gal Hirsch, commander of Israel's Galilee Division, said Israeli forces fought "alley to alley and house to house" for Bint Jbeil. Hirsch and others readily admit that Hezbollah is well organized, trained and equipped, fighting competently from its network of underground bunkers, and from civilian cover. Some Israeli military analysts claim the two-week campaign to date has degraded Hezbollah's military capability by almost half, but Henry A. Crumpton, a career CIA officer who is the State Department coordinator for counter-terrorism, told journalists yesterday he believed the Israeli response was "in some ways just beginning." Beginning in the sense that Hezbollah continues to fire rockets into Israel: Yesterday, according to U.S. briefing documents, Hezbollah fired between 90 and 100 rockets into Israel, more than a dozen hitting Haifa. More than 2,500 rockets and artillery and mortar rounds have landed on Israeli towns in two weeks. U.S. intelligence sources urge that while Israel has been successful in attacking truck launchers for Katyusha rockets and other conventional launch platforms for the long-range missiles, most of what is being fired now from southern Lebanon is coming from improvised single-rocket launchers on tripods, highly movable and easily hidden in civilian homes. Israel's public line is that quickening the pace of ground operations will merely result in more civilian casualties, an outcome that the government officially rejects. "You can flood southern Lebanon with ground troops and you can bomb villages without warning anyone, and it will be faster," Israel's minister for public security Avi Dichter said yesterday. "But you’ll kill a lot more innocent people and suffer a lot more casualties, and we don’t intend to do either." I get the impression though the Israeli military like's the situation as it is: Hezbollah, for its credibility, has to continue to shoot rockets, exposing its positions; Israel doesn't burden itself with territorial objectives and occupation. If there are any advantages accruing to the Israelis in this "slow" battle in the south, it is that Hezbollah seems intent on holding onto territory, an objective that they will eventually fail at. One wonders at this point what their Tora Bora will be. Of course, there is another potential stumbling block in the Israeli military strategy ahead: peacekeeping. As Foreign Ministers and other international dignitaries sit down in Rome to discuss a peacekeeping force and a cease-fire, Israel is in a difficult spot. A cease-fire with Hezbollah may be impossible to secure or police, but one thing is clear: No one is going to agree to an international force "fighting" its way into southern Lebanon. That leaves Israel with the task of securing an area for peacekeepers to enter "permissive" style, a military mission that may require taking even more territory. By William M. Arkin | July 26, 2006; 9:36 AM ET Israel-Lebanon Previous: Small Rewards in Afghanistan and Iraq | Next: Reading Lebanese Civilian Casualties Hezbollah seems to be a pervert offspring of hidden handshakes between Israel lebanon Siria and Iran. Posted by: lea | August 14, 2006 6:15 PM Perhaps it is time to withdraw UN observers in light of IDF attacks. Everyone knew the IDF was gearing up, the ideal thing to do is to get out of there. Regarding Hezbollah, They call themselves freedom fighters, We call them a terrorist organization. If the people of Lebanon deem it acceptable to have this militia on their soil, then they need to accept collateral damage for accepting them there. Plain and simple. If you don't want this damage, kick them out!!!Let them fire on Israel from another country. To Israel, It is time to stop treating The majority of the Palestinian populace like gutter rats. Stop the illegal settlements (blatant provocation), give them back their land unconditionally. This will eliminate the pretexts they have been using. This will give you (Israelis) the perfect reason to defend yourselves should they (Militants) continue to attack. Perhaps it is time for the militants to engage Israel in every way except militarily....I would like to see an enduring peace in the middle east. It is a TOTAL double standard for a certain people to think that they can populate another country, using freedoms and protections of those lands to gain their means.....and then turn around and call us "crusaders" when we go in and clean house... If you (militants) think you can impose your will "from Iraq to Spain", think of the consequences of a United States invoking a draft, along with a pissed off Europe that has finally awaken. I don't see a pretty picture for the Arab world if your people allow this to continue. Posted by: Rob in CA | August 8, 2006 12:20 PM Arkin, you seem to be suggesting (by quoting kofi and not questioning him) that the Israeli strike on the UN position was deliberate. If anybody has one scrap of evidence that they hit the UN on purpose by all means share it. Just doing the math on your numbers, they've flown 3,000 strike missions already. I've seen nothing to suggest that it wasn't a mistake from generating target lists for so many missions or at worst was neglegence (both much more probable scenarios). I'm not blindly defending Israel, in fact I'm not sure they've thought their plan all the way through. But if you're going to suggest a country deliberately attacked the UN, you need to have some substance to back that up. Posted by: huh? | August 8, 2006 12:06 PM Go to the Bible and read Daniel, plus all the other prophets after. The ENTIRE history, present and future of Israel is there. See the true monster rising (in the EU). Posted by: Peacemaker | August 8, 2006 11:50 AM Isreal had no choice but to go into Lebanon and destroy Hezbollah. The timing was right. I'm glad this happened now instead of 5 years from now. I can imagine Hezbollah would have rockets that could travel 120 miles instead of only 12 miles. They would have a bigger payload and they would have better training and more more bunkers to fire from. Isreal needs to finish this. Posted by: soak490wit338 | August 8, 2006 11:27 AM Isreal had no choice but to go into Lebanon and destroy Hezbollah. The timing was right. I'm glad this happened now instead of 5 years from now. I can imagine Hezbollah would have rockets that could travel 120 miles instead of only 12 miles. They would have a bigger payload and they would have better training and more more bunkers to fire from. Isreal needs to finish this. Posted by: soak490wit338 | August 8, 2006 11:27 AM The state of Israel was formed by forcefully taking land from the Arabs. Over time, the state of Israel, by force, takes more and more land belonging to Arabs. Then, Israel occupies those lands with their military might, which is funded by the USA. Israel administers their "new territories" with a heavy and unfair hand. The state of Israel disregards rules of international law and disregards UN resolutions, while the USA supports the state of Israel in the UN. Is there any wonder that the Arabs hold Israel and the USA with contempt? Is there any wonder that the Arabs see the USA as a biased party in any negotiations between the state of Israel and the Arab states? Might we not consider the state of Israel to be a rogue nation? Posted by: paul | August 8, 2006 10:19 AM How about the Syrian and Iranian support of Hezbollah in the first place, and the Lebanese and United Nations passivity in the presence of the Hezbollah thugs/terrorists. When the kidnapping and bombing start occurring on U.S. soil it will wake up a lot of Americans as to what the enemy is really all about. It seems 9/11 is all but forgotten. Posted by: Concerned American | August 8, 2006 9:22 AM When a country was attacked by terrorists using another country as a base, it attacked that country and held its government responsible. The country that was attacked was the US, and the nation it invaded was Afghanistan, with the support of most of the rest of the world. Similarly, Lebanon failed to carry out its responsibilities under a UN resolution calling for the disarmament of Hezbollah, which instead spent six years arming and digging in. The, it provoked Israel to draw it into a war and the Israelis, who worry that in a few years the Iranian supplied missiles will carry more deadly payloads than ball bearings, decided it was time to act. All civilian deaths in war are tragic. But I would like some of the people who are criticizing Israel's tactics to spend an equal amount of time criticizing the hundreds of rockets fired deliberately at Israeli population centers -- not negligently, not recklessly, but deliberately. Posted by: Meridian | August 8, 2006 7:21 AM "... but to argue -- and not see -- that in this boilerplate targeting approach, it is civilian infrastructure, and by extension, the people of Lebanon, who are the targets, is either dishonest or blind." Yes, this is a good description. Dishonesty an blindness. So let me try and open your eyes. What is happening in our time has happened a thousand times before. Man rejects God and the Holy Spirit, because it is so much more simple to believe in worldly idols. These idols can be money, the Bible, celebrities, parties, nations, races, religions - all what we can see and touch and eat. God is invisible, and so is the Holy Spirit. God expects us to be like Him, to become better. And narrow is the road to heaven, especially in our worldly time. I am not a preacher. I do not want you to be perfect. But I have to warn you, and it doesn´t matter which religion you follow, or if God has a meaning for you. If you want to love Israel or your nation, God doesn´t mind. But if you place a nation, a book or any of your idols above him, you should better remember these words: 20:1 God spoke all these words: 20:2 "I, the Lord, am your God, who brought you from the land of Egypt, from the house of slavery. 20:3 "You shall have no other gods before me. 20:4 "You shall not make for yourself a carved image or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above or that is on the earth beneath or that is in the water below. 20:5 You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I, the Lord, your God, am a jealous God, responding to the transgression of fathers by dealing with children to the third and fourth generations of those who reject me, ... Yes God is angry. What has happened in America?! What has happened with Israel? Have you forgotten the meaning of the words Holy Spirit? This is the most important, the Holy Spirit is your moral compass, it is the one "thing" that is absolute and eternal and above the law and everything, that you can see and touch and eat! And there is only one sin, that will certainly not be forgiven, as Mathews reports: 12:31 For this reason I tell you, people will be forgiven for every sin and blasphemy, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. 12:32 Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven. But whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come. To find the Holy Spirit you can use the written words of the Bible as a fixed star, but the journey of mankind has moved since thes days. Things like tolerance, everything, that unites us are part of this journey to heaven. They were discovered through tragedies and colossal mistakes. Read the Universial Declaration of Human Rights, written in 1948 after the darkest experience in recorded history. God expects us - ultimately - to love each other. And we are free! Read thes lines - again reported bay Mathews: 7:12 In everything, treat others as you would want them to treat you, for this fulfills the law and the prophets. 5:17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have not come to abolish these things but to fulfill them. 5:18 I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth pass away not the smallest letter or stroke of a letter will pass from the law until everything takes place. 5:19 So anyone who breaks one of the least of these commands and teaches others to do so will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever obeys them and teaches others to do so will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 5:20 For I tell you, unless your righteousness goes beyond that of the experts in the law and the Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Following the path, we are always free to be better. All the written words have been noble, honest attempts, by REAL people at their REAL time. The Holy Spirit is the message. But we, the prophets, can only translate, based on our wisdom, our knowledge in our time. The Spirit has always been there and no bombs, no determined leaders, no illusions, no smart PR-campaigns, no presidents, no false prophets will be able to destroy this eternal and absolute Spirit. It is indestructible. Love, compassion, the truth, faith, hope cannot be destroyed. What has happened with America, once the light in the world?! How cold, how wrong, how blinded ...? How can it be that you send money and bombs to the wolf, so that the wolf can more easily slaughter the lamb?! Would Jesus give a "green light" to this?! Don´t you understand that the revelation of John was a WARNING!!! Yes we are free, we can choose to be dumb, proud and make a "mistake", but it might be the last one, because God is so angry ... But I know, and you don´t have to be a prophet to see this, if our God-like destructive capabilities are not restrained by wisdom and love, then we will fail. But you, like the stupid animals, want everything to be true or come true in a WORLDLY sense!? This is WRONG!, Absolutely wrong. God doesn´t know borders, He wants us to be UNITED! He wants us to be better! Look careful at the hate-preachers, they are always wrong, and if you don´t see this immediately, then look at their bitter fruits! Look careful and in a reasonable way at this world, try to understand all sides but do never forget the most simple and most complex part of the whole thing, which is LOVE! Posted by: A voice in the desert | August 8, 2006 6:47 AM How long before this war - rather invasion-is over will we see the Israeli politicians and businessmen flocking first into New York and then to Washington to see how much more money they can wring out of Bush to help pay for their war? They usually get all they ask for and more because we all know that they are our best ally and friend not only in the mid-east but in the world. Believe that and I have a bridge I'd like to sell you. How much longer after that will we see Mayor Bloomberg and his New York City pals fly into Israel wearing their yarmulkes to let everyone know that it is now safe and clear to visit Israel. The main reason that world Jews do not want war is that it's bad for business, tourist business and otherwise. And to all those Jews who say that they don't control undue amounts of money and political clout look at what's going on now - what American politican has dared to open his mouth in opposition? Posted by: john grella | August 4, 2006 7:54 PM We have seen the israeli planes target a small window in a building and hit the exact same window. We have seen them target a moving car. I do not believe that they could have missed their aim. Any hit was intentional. But of course, Israel is always looked at with the keen eye. We are the children of a lesser God. Posted by: Rana | July 29, 2006 12:24 PM "Accidental" Israeli Attacks on UN, include.... 16 July - TWO UN positions suffer direct hits- serious injury to UN Soldier 16 July - UN medical teams come under fire. 16 July - UN refugee convoy comes under fire. 17 July - Direct hit on UN position near Marwahin. 18 July - UN staff and family killed in air strike on their house. 19 July - THREE UN positions suffer direct hits, many repeatedly. UN position at Ras Naquora was hit directly TEN times. Marun al Ras base was hit directly FOUR times (with 36 refugees, mainly women and children, were sheltering inside). UN Headquarters at Naqoura received ONE direct hit. UN position south of Alma Ash Shab is extensively damaged by shelling. 20 July - THREE UN positions suffer direct hits. Marun al Ras base shelled by Israel AGAIN, with three direct hits inside the base. Marwahin UN position hit directly AGAIN. UN base and Battalion positions struck at Khiyam and At Tiri. 21 July - Direct hit on UN position near Marwahin (now 8 direct hits on this battalion position on three different days) 23 July - TWO UN positions suffer direct hits. UN Headquarters near Tibnin are bombed TWICE from the air. UN position in Adaisseh area is hit directly by THREE Israeli mortar shells. Also ELEVEN tank shells land around the UN position in the Rmaich area, causing significant damage. 24 July - Direct hit on UN position near Rmaich. Four soldiers injured. 25 July - Direct hit on UN position near Khiyam. FOUR unarmed UN observers dead. Position received FOUR direct artillery hits, and despite day long protests to Israel, a precision guided bomb was dropped on the base. 27 July TWO direct hits on UN positions, despite Israeli assurances. UN Battalion position near Hula was hit directly by Israel EIGHT times. UN Headquarters at Naquoura, where hundreds of civilian refugees have been sheltering, was hit directly by Israeli artillery. Posted by: David | July 28, 2006 9:32 PM TO THEE "REV", I ALSO MISSED YOU AT CHURCH ALL THESE MANY MONTHS. SEEMS THAT YOU ARE ONE OF THOSE MONEY-CHANGERS THAT CHRIST CHASED OUT AND YET YOU PERSIST ON INSTIGATING FORMENT ON THE CHURCH STEPS. Posted by: GAYE | July 28, 2006 8:57 PM Thanks for your post. I've never read a more lucid summary of how I feel!! look forward to more from you. Posted by: chandra | July 28, 2006 4:01 PM We are all members of Humanity before a member of a Nation State. When there is death and suffering and we do not feel it like a member of our family is suffering we deny our birthright to be fully human! Posted by: Member of Humanity | July 28, 2006 11:03 AM I'm sorry I cannot look at the response to the taking of Israeli soldiers as measured! It smacks of ethnic cleansing. When a cease fire is brokered I hope war crimes against both sides be pursued. people need to open both eyes to truly see the truth. Posted by: Louis | July 28, 2006 10:10 AM More information comes out about the UN bombing... Six days before his death in IAF bombing, Canadian observer Major Paeta Hess-von Kruedener sends email to his former commander, says Hizbullah operating near UN post in southern Lebanon. His commander reveals he said IDF strike aimed at hitting terrorists, not foreign observers. His wife Cynthia, however, accuses Israel of intentionally bombing post Six days before he was killed in an Israel Air Force bombing of a United Nations post in southern Lebanon, Canadian observer Major Paeta Hess-von Kruendener sent an email to his former commander in the Canadian army, in which he said that Hizbullah fighters were "running around" near the UN post struck by the Israel Defense Forces and that they were using the post as a sort of "shield" against Israel' s strikes. The former commander, Major-General Lewis MacKenzie, who served as a UN commander in Bosnia, spoke about the email in a Canadian radio show. He said that Hess-von Kruendener wrote that the IDF strikes near the post had "not been deliberate targeting, but rather due to tactical necessity." "That would mean Hizbullah was purposely setting up near the UN post," he added. "It's a tactic." Posted by: Baboo | July 28, 2006 9:43 AM War has allways been an ugly thing. But we live in a World which is not perfect and sadly enough war is still a means of solving Problems. I think it is a great tragedy for the peacekeeping UN-Forces to have lost four of its soldiers in Lebanon. And of course Israel is to be blamed for this "delibrate" or not attack on the UN-Troops. But isn't the UN itself responsible for the security of own troops? I think these men shouldn't habe been there! In Iraq have died many American and British soldiers and even civillians from the so called friendly fire. The UN shuold have brouhgt its soldiers safely home before this tragedy happened. Posted by: Helmut | July 28, 2006 4:39 AM Posted by: olani | July 28, 2006 2:03 AM You clearly have no regard for Israel's right to exist. What people on this board fail to recognize is not only Israel's withdrawl from the land Hezbollah was apparently fighting for, but the continued firing of missles from the same land given to them for the past 6 years and the unprovoked attack on Israel with the abduction of their soldiers. Now, unlike Hezbollah, its the Israelis who are taking measures to inform the civilians in their attacks. Hezbollah sends nothing but rockets with ball bearings indiscriminately into Israel. If you're antisemiic to begin with, you don't have to use Israel's fighting for its right to exist as an excuse to preach your hatred. Posted by: | July 28, 2006 1:38 AM Hail Hezbollah! Hail terrorists! Praise to all who believe in using civilians as shileds in the 21st century. Posted by: | July 28, 2006 1:30 AM All the condemnation of Hezbollah for fighting from "civilian cover" makes me wonder... isn't that what the founding fathers of the U.S.A. did? Isn't that what the Hagana did? The Viet Cong? I think you're criticizing a dog for having fur... Posted by: Mookie | July 27, 2006 10:38 PM What with destroying and killing the wounded people in an ambulance, destroying a well marked UN observation post and destroying Lebanese infrastructure can anybody still be so naive as to believe the Israelis? I thought smart bombs and pinpoint accurate missiles stopped all this, however we now have nearly 500 civilians killed by the Israelis. Its enough to make anybody anti semitic. Posted by: Robin | July 27, 2006 1:16 PM I hesitate to post this because, on balance, Israel has far mor positive traits than negative, but...not only has Israel apparently attacked other UN positions (see above), but does anyone remember the USS LIBERTY? Israel killed 34 Americans and injured 173 after repeated attacks. Then CIA Chief Richard Helm and Sec. of State Dean Rusk, among many other high-ranking American officials, concluded it was a deliberate attack. Wonder why the MSN hasn't mentioned this? Posted by: Winston Smith | July 27, 2006 11:56 AM Posted by: neva | July 27, 2006 11:37 AM He must have been the official and representative President, who ultimately understood the feelings of the American people. Why? It would appear that most Americans including Republicans, initially voted for or supported the American terrorist war in Iraq, and now, if you believe the polls, the same Americans would vote against it for Americans no longer support the trumped up war. Here is an old saying, 'information is a basis for making decisions'. One could argue, that just as Kerry did, after he he received more indepth information and changed his vote, the American people drew the same conclusion when they received more information, now many of them no longer want to pay for the war. Kudos to the Republican Party, the President and his staff, for some of the greatest subertfuse and one of the greatest cover-ups of all time; it makes Watergate and Contragate look like child's play. Mr. President, may we, the taxpayers, have a refund for all of the money that you wasted in Iraq? We can never get the lives back. Ah, the American people can mostly be depended upon, they simply need all of the informaiton so that they can make a thoughtful and prudent decision. This Administration did not want that! Now, how many people have actually died in Iraq, because of those dastardly WMDs? Perhaps we should sing, 'God Help America", instead of 'God Bless America'. For we have been blessed already, and look at how badly we have behaved. I am an Independent voter, but I would encourage both Mr. Kerry and Mr. Gore to run again... for your country needs you. Besides, the Bush Presidency, the Bush Doctrine and all of the Bushim's (which provided some comic relief), are dead! Posted by: A Rev | July 27, 2006 10:13 AM You apparently, lack any understanding of how conquered states operated, at the time, under Roman martial Rule. On the other hand I don't get the feeling that you are interested in any other truth, than Sully Truth! Israel like many other nations at that time had been conquered by the Roman Republic. Instead of citizens being removed from their indigenous territories by the Romans, the Roman Republic, as it was frequently known to do, permitted citizens to remain in their indigenous territories. A Roman official would be put in place to rule over the civil and religious affairs of each conquered territory. That Roman official would be sanctioned by Rome as well as a regional king. Pontius Pilate was the sanctioned Proconsul who was vested with consular authority by Rome and the local king to manage the civil affairs of Israel and the surrounding region in their stead. He made laws and enforced laws, with the official backing of Rome and the military force that he commanded. The Jews were permitted to retain, and with some restrictions, manage their own civil affairs. The Sanhedrin was Israel's High Court. The Sanhedrin was in place mostly to enforce rabbinical law, and some other minor civil matters. However, in the case of Capitol Punishment, neither the Sandhedrin nor the Jews were authorized to put people to death under Roman law. Those matters had to be referred to the Roman officials for final disposition. .On many occasions the Jews wanted to and sought to stone Jesus, so trust me they wanted him dead. In some ways what took place with Jesus' capture, trial and crucifixion, is similar to the way that our system of law enforcement and jurisprudence operates in this country. A person is arrested, detained, tried and either released or sentenced. In those instances where Capital Punishment is recommended, the government, not the citizens, imposes the death penalty. And that is mostly what took place with Jesus; he was arrested, detained, tried, and found guilty by the Jewish jury. He was then turned over to the Roman Proconsul by the Jews for final disposition, the death penalty. The Jews, if you will recall, were the arresting officers, jailers, prosecutors, jury and judges. The only thing that they were prevented from doing was to implement the death penalty. Just as the State would do in America, the State in this case acted in accordance with the will of the people. You can argue whether the Jews had Jesus put to death or not, however, the evidence would indicate just the opposite. And to follow up on your argument that The Roman Governor and King's could have pardoned him despite the will of the people, is a separate argument; none of the People appealed the death sentence for him. So, just as you have indicated that Hamas and Hezbollah initiated the fight between Israel and Hamas and Hezbollah, the Jewish people acted independently to initiate, then pursue the death of the PEACEMAKER, Jesus Christ. Israel worked the system in order to have Jesus put to death, just as they are working America, the new Roman-style Republic, in order to inflict the death penalty on their step brothers. And just as they do not accept the religions of Hamas and Hezbollah, they still do not accept the religion of Jesus Christ. And just as they wanted Jesus and his religion to die, they also want Hamas and Hezbollah and their religions, to follow in his footsteps Sadly, because of romantic feelings and what Christians have been taught about Israel and the Jews in biblical eschatology, many Christians have lost all of their objectivity. Most Christians have a special place in their hearts for Israel and the holy lands, and therefore will overlook their misbehaviors while judging misbehavior on the other side. I do not have a dog in this fight. Israel must be held to the same just standard that all people should be held, 'lest we allow Israel to repeat its previous patterns of bad behavior which ends up with people innocent people being unjustly put to death. But on the other hand, who is America to talk? Oops, forget, Israel is America's ally. A whole different standard applies to America and its allies! .[sorry for the length folks] Posted by: The Rev | July 27, 2006 9:50 AM Whew! I have to run fast to find the very latest blog post. According to the Bible, the final heads-up is when PEACE finally comes to the Holy Land. T'aint today, folks. And Lebanon and Israel signed a peace treaty not too long ago, as peacy treaties go. Will this be another dozen years war? BTW if this keeps up, the U.S. WILL have to have a draft. This old-timer recalls the draft and the time he served Uncle Sammy. Posted by: George Kaplan | July 27, 2006 7:21 AM I just read the last paragaph and your comments about Jesus, and your questions about where I stand. 1. You are right, Jesus tried to reform the religious group of his day. Religion and politcis, customarily are inextricably tied together, and usually to the detriment of the people. 2. Jesus was not accepted...He came to his own and they did not receive him, no argument there. 3. Jesus sent his disciples to a remote, upper-room location, in order to begin a new movement. 4. Neither the Roman Governor, his wife or Herod, saw any fault in Jesus. It was religious people who wanted him killed, in this case the Jews. Okay, am I doing as have some have done throughout history, that is to say that the Jews should be slaughtered given their complicity in the murder of Jesus? No I am not. I am on the side of justice. At times Israel and the United States for that matter, behave just like the citizens of the world that both nations accuse of being terrorists or of engaging in terrorist behavior. Someone once told me that, you will tell the truth if it hurts you won't you. Well, I learned that from Jesus. We must tell the truth, rather than have a dog in the fact. Remember Apostle Paul, a Jew, he boldly proclaimed at one time that Israel 'had gone about to establish their own righteousness...ignoring the righteousness of God'. I don't want to turn this into a religious lesson, so lets just say every man's way seems right in his own eyes. Perhaps we should all open our eyes a little wider and try to see the other side, and then work towards peace! I pray that you will be safe in your homeland, however, I pray that you will also be just as concerned about the Lebanese people, who by your own government's admission have done nothing wrong. They are suffering too! When I pray in church, I pray for all sides, not just the Americans or the Jews! Posted by: A Rev | July 27, 2006 7:13 AM Governor Pilate or Govenor Bush and Israel! It is a historical fact that the Jews, like many nations in the past and present have aligned themselves with other nations...nothing new there! Manipulating Pilate of the Roman Republic, in order to accomplish their purpose, is not much different from what they are doing with the current Roman-style Republic, and its Governor/President, the United States of America. In the former scenario the Jews relied on the Roman Governor, Pilate. In our current scenario, the Jews are depending on former Governor and our current President, George Bush! Whose side am I on? I am on the side of justice, regardless of the player/combatants. Dumbounded? What did you mean, i.e., Jesus and Mary...Jews, and the Western Civics lesson... I do not get your meaning?. Posted by: The Rev | July 27, 2006 6:56 AM Using Israel's logic, it would appear that it is time for the Lebanese people to defend themselves and their country. Our President has said over and over again, when a nation is being attacked, that nation is justified in defending itself. Now Israel has attacked a sovereign nation. Israel is destroying that nation's infrastructure (and probably its precious trees). Israel is also killing the innocent Lebanese people. And by Israel's own admission, the Lebanese had not done anything wrong. So following the President's logic, Lebanon has the right to defend itself and should defend itself against terrorism and tyranny by terrorist aggressors, who are doing to the Lebanese, what Israel has said that Hamas and Hezbollah are doing to them. Lebanese, DEFEND YOURSElves, your citizens and your country! Posted by: The Rev | July 27, 2006 6:42 AM You obviously have an agenda, and your mind appears to be made up, regardless of the facts. All I will tell you is to go back and review the stories in the Bible, for you are way off base! Its a good thing that you are not a Rev! Posted by: The Rev | July 27, 2006 6:31 AM I agree with Henry A. Crumpton, " ...State Department coordinator for counter-terrorism, [who] told journalists yesterday he believed the Israeli response was 'in some ways just beginning.'" Hezbollah has been built up by Iran as part of a deterrent to an attack on Iran's nuclear sites. With the weapons Iran has supplied, it could have been a potent part of Iran's response. They have not been using everything they have, deliberately holding something back for what they know is coming. Israel and the US are trying to take Hezbollah out first, soften it up, in preparation for an attack on Iran and Syria. That will begin when Hezbollah has been degraded to some acceptable level, or sooner if Iran decides on a pre-emptive defense. Whenever we are ready, we will find the excuse to "retaliate" against them to take out the real long term threat to stability in the region, Iran's nuclear program. We have supplied the weapons and Israel will deliver them, in a war we both feel is absolutely necessary. Posted by: Bob | July 27, 2006 5:02 AM I think you have to put this Israel response in Lebanon in perspective. This discomfort among the civilian Lebanon population is only temporary. As Dr. Rice so eloquently put "What we're seeing here, in a sense, is the growing -- the birth pangs of a new Middle East." As a woman and mother of many children, Dr. Rice knows the meaning of pain as only a mother can. She brings an insight to the challenge the Lebanese face that few can even begin to understand. Posted by: John Paul | July 27, 2006 1:01 AM The UN "peacekeepers" were allowing Hezbollah artillery spotters to use their post to call in fire on the IDF forces, even after they were warned multiple times to cease and desist. They were perfectly justified in flattening the site. Posted by: Jason | July 26, 2006 11:37 PM Israel, our proxy, is literally getting away with murder. Where is the morality of it? How can the United States justify the slaughter of so many innocents? We have clearly, utterly, lost our compass. Posted by: Billy | July 26, 2006 11:08 PM Israel should accept criticism without threats, boycots and brutal retaliations. especially when boasting endlessly to be the only democracy in the Middle East. Whenever someone dares to question its genocidal propensities to resolve issues that desperately need words instead of phosphorous bombs and other 'state of the arts' killing devices, the person in disagreement becomes a target to be sacrificed, persecuted or simply destroyed and this is unacceptable. Israel has transformed itself into a sadistic state, still using the complex and monstrous engeneering of the Holocaust as a shield not to be held accountable for any of its very present human sins. For all of us who are admirers of the rich and generous jewish culture this past atrocities perpetrated by Israel are painfully disparaging. Especially when we see US jewish Senators defend what has no defense: The massive killings for a reason probably Israel has fabricated to advance its expansionist agenda.To divide the world into terrorists and poor imperial victim states is an aberration beyond comprehension. It seems the real perpetrators are following the script of a second rate hollywood screenwriter; mediocre, simplistic and brutal. Lets help Israel by offering from here, from everywhere creative and constructive ideas they should be open to consider in order to end this feast of blood and unbearable suffering. The power of dialogue is the the real power needed to achieve peace. More powerful than phosphorous bombs in the face of a child. with hope and respect, Marcela Posted by: Marcela | July 26, 2006 10:58 PM Why don't the Gypsy's have a state? Why don't the aboriginal peoples of the world, subjected to the cruelest and most complete genocide in history not have a country of their own? America has always played favorites. Some day we can give our opinion and not be labelled anti-semitic. Just because you read somewhere these are God's "chosen people" does not mean they can do no wrong. To err is human but to kill more than 800 innocent people is monstrous. In this day of cloning, space travel and instant access to any and all information, doesn't war seem outdated. Shouldn't we be able to get along without killing everyone by now? War is not a game, if someone dies nobody wins. Am I the only one who is ashamed to be an American these days? Posted by: NN - FL - US | July 26, 2006 10:36 PM The UN places outposts and other workers very near all fighting. UN workers tend to get killed very easily when, for example, driving an ambulance into heavy fighting in Gaza. Accidents happen. Civilians always get killed in war--it is a bad thing, but we cannot get caught up in counting every civilian killed in a war. I just started reading Washington post editorials. Most of the contributors are seemingly uneducated, obtuse, and have political agendas of their own. What a lame "news" source. Posted by: Tom | July 26, 2006 10:26 PM Am I missing something? Jesus and his mother Mary WERE Jewish. And so were ALL of the apostles. What's going on with our basic western civ. history lessons? Posted by: Dumbfounded | July 26, 2006 10:17 PM Before going on with the arguments. Please check out this website. You get to see how Israel is spreading democracy with the help of Western countries and media!!!!!! http://www.fromisraeltolebanon.org/ Posted by: Blind American | July 26, 2006 10:16 PM "With so many people claiming that Israel has deliberately targeted the UN, I have not yet read a single credibly explanation of what would Israel gain from such action." Doh. Practically the whole world wants a major peacekeeping force in there. Israel is dead against the idea, but running out of good excuses for opposing it publicly. So Israel needs to discourage it some other way. Simplest way? Kill some peacekeepers. Doh. Posted by: OD | July 26, 2006 9:25 PM GITM wrote "What about the other 2,996 +/- UN observers? Do they use seeing eye dogs or do you think Israel will whack the rest of them?" Israel has now hit many different UN posts according to the UK Independent. NINE have received direct hits.... NINE Whoops, that was an accident. Whoops, that was an accident. Whoops, that was an accident. Whoops, that was an accident. Whoops, that was an accident. Whoops, that was an accident. Whoops, that was an accident. Whoops, that was an accident. Whoops, that wan an accident. Posted by: David | July 26, 2006 8:37 PM Had Hamas or Hezbollah killed four UN observers, the US would be expressing outrage. Can someone explain to me why Israel is allowed to investigate what it calls a "mistake" and why this incident, in addition to the bombing of civilian areas, is not enough for the international community to demand Israel to cease fire. Posted by: Annette | July 26, 2006 8:25 PM Hell, I thought that was a damn funny joke Arkin! Posted by: GITM | July 26, 2006 7:14 PM "Israel bomb the UN, UN observers pull out and cannot bear witness to the indiscriminate bombing of a predominantly innocent population. There is your argument. Israel directly gains from this action." What about the other 2,996 +/- UN observers? Do they use seeing eye dogs or do you think Israel will whack the rest of them? Posted by: GITM | July 26, 2006 7:13 PM Was it a UN post or was it a post that sheltered Goyim.We must keep this in context.If these were goyim they have no real standing under God.They are just the unchosen.We must keep in perspective the need for a greater Israel.Im not sure why that is, but the jews say its so.Even Christians say it is,but then jews feel Christians are following a false prophet.In congress their is one contstant, Israel good,neibhors bad.What i would pay to see is a debate about the 10,000 pound elephant in the room.CHRIST.Wolfowitz against Delay,Fienstien against Ried.The topic,who gets salvation.The jews who dont recognise Christ as the messiah or Christ loving Christians.I mean we have tackled the issues of Islam by painting them as terrorists(pagans).Now we should tackle the issue of Christ.Do we label jews who dont except Christ as terrorists.Or do jews have a get out of hell free card.Ah, religion and the love it spreads.I mean Bush the greatest Christian of all.To see him willing to give the shirt off his back for a lesser man.I would bet a dollar to a dime he is poor from giving, but rich in spirit.What is that saying its easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to go to heavon.I would imagine that Jerry falwell drives a late model VW and Pat robertson has given the majority of his wealth to the homeless.Look at Dicky and Donald, do you think that they profit from there stocks in haliburton and the bird flu drug.HELL NO.They as good Christians share there wealth to the hungry.That is why they can stand before the world and say God bless America. Posted by: Goyim | July 26, 2006 7:01 PM Israel didn't think the UN "Peace-keepers" were doing a good job - so they fired them. Posted by: GITM | July 26, 2006 6:57 PM Israel bomb the UN, UN observers pull out and cannot bear witness to the indiscriminate bombing of a predominantly innocent population. There is your argument. Israel directly gains from this action. How can any modern military not take heed of so many warnings? If they can't distinguish between UN and Hizbollah then what chance is there for them not hitting innocent people. The whole thing reaks of hypocrisy. There is never any justification for killing innocent civilians and children, no matter what the gain is (none so far!!). UK Posted by: Stephan | July 26, 2006 6:22 PM P. J. Casey, Thanks for your comments that go beyond sterile and empty rhetoric. You might have added that Hezbollah was created in 1982 after the Israeli invasion of Lebanon to resist the occupation. It is a resistance, not terrorist organization. The same is true of Hamas...this is certainly why they have passed the test of popular elections; in this respect, they are are not comparable to Al Quaeda. While they hold 3 military POWs, Israel hold thousands of civilians... The US medias and politicians' pro-Israeli propaganda ('they started first') lacks honnesty and dignity. Regarding the bombing of UN obervers, and comparing it with what happened in Irak, it just shows that IDF didn't have the same kind of 'finesse' shown by the coalition... Posted by: Rossini | July 26, 2006 6:13 PM Pilate could have released Jesus without anyone's permission. Pilate simply asked the jews who they would rather have released. The release of a prisoner was traditional on holidays, which holiday it was I forget at this moment. Pilate ordered Jesus be crucified, not the jews, the jews made a choice offered by Pilate between two prisoners and they did not choose Jesus. Don't twist what happened 2000 years ago Rev to vilify a whole people. Posted by: Sully | July 26, 2006 04:52 PM Yeah he could have released the simple itinerant deluded holy man. But that would have caused a riot in his prefecture, for to the Jews Jesus was no simple holy man. He claimed to be the Son of God who preached tolerance and non violence to the disappointment of may a Jewish insurgents of the time, Judas included. Some were probably terrorists in the Romans' book. So why should a sophisticated Roman proconsul risk a mass riot for some dirt poor self deluded son of the Hebrew god, a minor tribal god after all? Why not go along to get along? Religiously inspired violence has a long and distinguished tradition in that part of the world, long before the Muslims came along. It must be the dry desert air. Posted by: Ir-Rev | July 26, 2006 6:11 PM Can someone explain to me why Democrats are opposed to Maliki speaking before Congress? Is this another one of those cases where the Democrats are trying to outflank the Republicans from the Right? I'm serious, this is not a snarky or rhetorical question. Is this something the Republicans are blowing out of proportion to make the Democrats look bad? And while you're at it, can you explain to me where Bill Arkin is coming from these days? He seems to be undergoing a bit of cognitive dissonance or strange strategic ambivalence about something. His posts lack their usually clarity. Sean-Paul Kelley July 26, 2006 - 1:58pm 1. Surely you joke? In case you do not - Maliki is seen as a Bush's installed prime minister cum puppet. He now opposes the Israeli war in Lebanon in support of Hezbollah thereby embarassing Bush who thru out his presidency is seen as ultra pro Israel in order to out flank the Dems in their traditional stronghold in the American Jewish community. Denouncing Maliki therefore accomplishes two things - embarassing Bush to the American public and scoring point with the Jewish consituency. Three if you want to point out the fact that Bush's war in Iraq unwittingly strengthens Iran's hand in the region which he is now in turn trying to weaken with his proxy war in Lebanon. 2. One could suspect Arkin and many traditional liberal American Jewish intellectuals are caught in a bind. They want to support Israel but is troubled by its heavy handed tactics in Lebanon. So far after two weeks some 400 Lebanese civilians have been killed, light as some have claimed. That works out to about 110 per million of people. Scale that to US scale and you get about 33,000 deaths in two weeks. If it had been Bush's numbers in Iraq they would probably be out front decrying it. 110 * 25 = 2,750 per two week period; 2750 * 26 = 71,500 per year; 71,500 * 3.5 = 250,250 Iraqi deaths so far. Fortunately the US military has seen fit not to keep track of the number of civilian deaths in Iraq. Posted by: Ir-Rev | July 26, 2006 5:51 PM As military history is one of my interests, I was frustrated when CNN switched from a story on Hizbullah's tactics to Tony Snow spinning the White House press corp. I don't think the IDF has a clear mission in Lebanon. This incursion into Lebanon was driven more by the preconceptions of Politicians in either Israel, Washingtion, or both. Neoconservatives are an influential voice in both countries. Normally captured IDF soldiers or their bodies are traded for any number of Arab prisoners. It has been common practice since 1948. The purpose of Hizbullah's raid was to obtain IDF soldiers for trade. All of a sudden, POW's became hostages, and war was declared. This is the same type of idiocy that got the U.S. into Iraq. A CNN reporter talked to a former tank commander who was a veteran of the previous Israeli incursion into Lebanon. He compared the latest incursion to the U.S. going back into Vietnam. This does not sound good. It must have been pretty bad the first time. We certainly wouldn't want to go back to Vietnam. While the IDF may have thousands of soldiers available, there is the impression that they are only using a few hundred. They have those bulldozers up front like they were going into Gaza or the West Bank. They are not dealing with scattered bands of insurgents. Hizbullah is regarded as the A team. According to Haaretz, the IDF is going in using the same routes they used in the first incursion. I think they are trying to use the Air Force as a substitute for a large ground army in Lebanon. The Air Force cannot stop the rockets, but a force on the ground could ,at least, limit their use. Its the more bang for a buck theory of warfare. It only works against massed enemy formations, and not against an insurgency that doesn't mass. Boots on the ground are needed for insurgencies. It has to be politicians behind this thing. I can't believe IDF Commanders could be that stupid. They should have traded prisoners and called it a day! Posted by: P. J. Casey | July 26, 2006 5:12 PM The Rev wrote: "Pontius Pilate attempted to release Jesus to the people, after he had been taken by the Jews." Pilate could have released Jesus without anyone's permission. Pilate simply asked the jews who they would rather have released. The release of a prisoner was traditional on holidays, which holiday it was I forget at this moment. Pilate ordered Jesus be crucified, not the jews, the jews made a choice offered by Pilate between two prisoners and they did not choose Jesus. Don't twist what happened 2000 years ago Rev to vilify a whole people. Posted by: Sully | July 26, 2006 4:52 PM "If Egypt, Syria, Iran, Jordan or Saudi Arabia don't fight terrorism, they'll still exist". Having spent lots of time in these places that's not true, they are all virtual police states, with Jordan being somewhat of the exception. They arent so much fighting terrorism as their Muslim population, to keep the current governments in power. Saudi at least will more than likely go the way of Iran some day, and the world will not be a better place for it. Posted by: | July 26, 2006 4:35 PM If Israel wanted peace it could change its name to something ethnical neutral, for example "Harmonia", renounce all racial, religious, and ethnic discrimination and give full citizenship to the Palestinians. The thing is, the whole point of Israel's "existence" is discrimination and segregation. As to why they killed the U.N. observers: the U.N. has taken a stand against discrimination and segregation and Israel likes to "punish" them for this. It's like when the KKK used to kill civil rights advocates. Posted by: Wes | July 26, 2006 4:27 PM Pontius Pilate attempted to release Jesus to the people, after he had been taken by the Jews. The Jewish elders, scribes and high priests were against it. They stirred up the people, and insisted that the people ask for the life of Barabassin place of Jesus' life. Have you been to church lately, I don't remember seeing you? Posted by: The Rev | July 26, 2006 3:50 PM Jeremy S. Slavin wrote: "If Egypt, Syria, Iran, Jordan or Saudi Arabia don't fight terrorism, they'll still exist." I wouldn't bet on that. Al Qaida has it in for Jordan's king, all the royals in SA and you can bet that Mubarak would be hung by his short hairs. That may be why these countries are helping out in the WOT and not too keen to help Hez. Syria and Iran on the other hand have converging interests. Syria sees a greater Syria in Lebanon and of course there is the Golan. Iran sees itself as the natural historical regional power that somehow has lost its powers and is trying to regain them through nukes. They also want to spread their influence over the entire ME. What they do not understand is that someday Al Qaida will turn its eyes on them and unless they cooperate they will be targets too. No, no one in the region should feel safe if the terrorists take over. Posted by: Sully | July 26, 2006 3:39 PM The Rev wrote: "The Prince Of Peace... Israel had him killed to." Pontius Pilate was an Israeli! The Romans were Israelis? Are you a real rev? Posted by: Sully | July 26, 2006 3:27 PM What, exactly, has the United Nations ever really done for Israel? Read "The U.N. Gang" by Pedro A. Sanjuan, and you'll see how virulently anti-Semitic, anti-Israel, and anti-American the United Nations really is. What are the U.N.'s priorities? It takes months upon months to take up the issue of Darfur, Sudan, where Arabs are slaughtering people, yet somehow it only takes mere days - or hours - to take up Israel-Arab fighting? And as for UNIFIL - the U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon - if UNIFIL had done what its mandate was to do, and hadn't allowed Hezbollah to kidnap soldiers in 2000 and again in 2006, we all wouldn't be in this spot over here. Some truce force - it failed a long, long time ago. All they do is "observe" anyway...what about U Thant, removing the peacekeepers before the '67 war? Nasser barked, the UN complied...and war followed. Who's the David and who the Goliath...regional power Israel, or the hundreds of millions of Arabs scattered across dozens of states versus six million Jews in the world's only Jewish state? And while we're talking about caring about not inflicting casualties - the IDF has taken the concept of "Purity of Arms" to heart. Israel DOES care whether or not U.N. observers, or Lebanese and Palestinian civilians, die, and tries to avoid such deaths (though when terrorists hide amongst civilians, it isn't all that easy to do). Where is the call upon Hezbollah to show similar restraint toward Israeli civilians? It ain't coming...either because some people don't want Hezbollah to show such restraint, or because they know it would be useless. Where is the recognition that Israel had, with UN Security Council and the Sec-Gen's verification I might add, fully pulled out of Lebanon in the spring of 2000? Did Israel ask for kidnappings from Gaza when it pulled out in 2005? If Egypt, Syria, Iran, Jordan or Saudi Arabia don't fight terrorism, they'll still exist. If Israel doesn't fight terrorism, it will slowly die. For nearly 60 years, Israel's had not a single day of peace...and that isn't because it hasn't sought peace. And hey "Rev"...the Prince of Peace was of Israel. Don't forget that. He sought to reform his religion of the day. And considering that it is Hezbollah firing rockets at Nazareth these days...and Israel that is defending Nazareth, the Galilee, and Jerusalem (where I live these days) from Islamist aggression...who's side are you on...God's or the Devil's? Posted by: Jeremy S. Slavin | July 26, 2006 3:25 PM Israel also had him killed... Hamas and Hezbollah apparently do not have a monopoly on bad behavior! I took note of Tucker Carlsen's interview last night, with the Israeli Ambassador. Tucker, an apologist for Israel, pressed the Ambassador to explain why civilians, who had followed Israel's orders to evacuate to the north, were still attacked and some murdered while they were attempting to follow Israel's instructions. The Israeli Ambassador initially denied it, and then he remembered that Tucker was a friend, and then he began to dissemble. I gave kudos to Tucker for returning to impartial journalism for once, and pressing the Ambassador for the truth. My Fellow Americans, I don't believe, that any of the murder, lies and misrepresentations that we have all been witnesses to will stop, until the American people emerge from their comfort zones (making buck) and stand up to our government and tell them enough is enough! I will repeat what I said on another entry; Hitler kept up his shenanigans because the German and Austrian citizens looked the other way. They could have prevented Mein Kemp, but the majority of them chose to do nothing, and we all know what transpired as a result of their choices. Americans can still stop the 'empire building' and murder that is taking place in the Middle East and around the world. In fact, I suspect that nation building would be a more appropriate description of what is transpiring than nation building. I suspect that our leaders are attempting to expand the American Empire more than they are trying to help to birth independent and democratic nations. In the future, historians will look back to this period, the beginning of the 21st century, and wonder why we, the body politic, failed to stop our Hitler's retardative efforts around the world. Israel is simply following in its big brother's footsteps. Neither Israel nor the American Administration has any regard for the United Nations. They only call on the U.N. when they need something. Posted by: The Rev | July 26, 2006 2:57 PM The Prince Of Peace... Israel had him killed to. Hamas and Hezbollah apparently do not have a monopoly on bad behavior! I took note of Tucker Carlsen's interview last night, with the Israeli Ambassador. Tucker, an apologist for Israel, pressed the Ambassador to explain why civilians, who had followed Israel's orders to evacuate to the north, were still attacked and some murdered while they were attempting to follow Israel's instructions. The Israeli Ambassador initially denied it, and then he remembered that Tucker was a friend, and then he began to dissemble. I gave kudos to Tucker for returning to impartial journalism for once, and pressing the Ambassador for the truth. My Fellow Americans, I don't believe, that any of the murder, lies and misrepresentations that we are all witnessing will stop, until the American people emerge from their comfort zones (making buck) stand up to our government and tell them enough is enough! I will repeat what I said on another entry; Hitler kept up his shenanigans because the German and Austrian citizens looked the other way. They could have stopped Mein Kemp, but the majority of them chose to do nothing, and we all know what transpired after that. Americans can still stop the 'empire building' and murder that is taking place in the Middle East and around the world. In fact I suspect that nation building would be a more appropriate description than nation building. I suspected that our leaders are attempting to expand the American Empire more than they are trying to help to birth independent and democratic nations. In the future, historians will look back to this period, the beginning of the 21st century, and wonder why we, the body politic, failed to stop our Hitler's retardative efforts around the world. Israel is simply following in its big brother's footsteps. Neither Israel nor the American Administration has any regard for the United Nations. They only call on the U.N. when they need something. Posted by: The Rev | July 26, 2006 2:41 PM It was rockets firing near Qana, Sully, but a mortar site. And it definitely was taken into consideration by the UN investigator Major-General Franklin van Kappen, who concluded: "(a) The distribution of impacts at Qana shows two distinct concentrations, whose mean points of impact are about 140 metres apart. If the guns were converged, as stated by the Israeli forces, there should have been only one main point of impact. (b) The pattern of impacts is inconsistent with a normal overshooting of the declared target (the mortar site) by a few rounds, as suggested by the Israeli forces. (c) During the shelling, there was a perceptible shift in the weight of fire from the mortar site to the United Nations compound. (d) The distribution of point impact detonations and air bursts makes it improbable that impact fuses and proximity fuses were employed in random order, as stated by the Israeli forces. (e) There were no impacts in the second target area which the Israeli forces claim to have shelled. (f) Contrary to repeated denials, two Israeli helicopters and a remotely piloted vehicle were present in the Qana area at the time of the shelling. While the possibility cannot be ruled out completely, it is unlikely that the shelling of the United Nations compound was the result of gross technical and/or procedural errors." Israel denied having a drone above to spot their fire, until The Independent produced a video shot by a nearby UNIFIL soldier proving it. Then they remembered the drone, but insisted the rest of their story was still true. I know a former Canadian naval officer who used to fly in and out of Lebanon frequently and often chatted to Canadian UNIFIL peacekeepers en route. These soldiers, he said, were typically very pro-Israel going in, but those on the way home expressed loathing and contempt for the IDF and its practices. Posted by: OD | July 26, 2006 2:25 PM lets talk about the un. These terrorist groups have used u n vehicles to attack israel in the past, have shot rockets from nearby u n positions, even going as far as to take an ambulance to abduct israeli solders,and of course the u n (as always)never knows anthing about it.Terrorists never fight war on a battle field. like the cowards they are,who use hatred and fanaticism for motivation and strength,keep useing civilian homes as cover to fire on israeli cities... targeting only civilians. Shouould we feel bad that they have not killed as many,you know their trying their best.2500 rockets,missiles in two weeks.... they use mosques for protection and use the civilian population as human shields they strap animals with bombs,even their own children they strap .... what would any other country do if their cities were getting bombed daily by terrorists.... Let me say this to the people of Lebanon, the people killing you are these terrorist groups.no one was bothering you,shootimg at you three weeks ago ,you where well on your way to once again become as one paper but it "the Paris of the middle east"..that leaves us with two conclusions either the country is so weak that it can't stand up to this terrorist group and say look what your doing to our country... in which case israel must defend itself... or a lot of you are in on this! For how can they continue to use homes to stash weapons,rockets,missiles....if the people are against them being there.... Posted by: | July 26, 2006 2:06 PM With so many people claiming that Israel has deliberately targeted the UN, I have not yet read a single credibly explanation of what would Israel gain from such action. Yet it is easy to see what Israel would lose: International goodwill and support. It is common in wars that military kills its own troops by mistake. Israelis have killed their own, Americans have done that, too, both in Iraq and Afghanistan. Unless we can point out a clear motive for such killings, it is much more logical to assume that they are mistakes. Posted by: Ray Bright | July 26, 2006 1:52 PM are you saying that army has to learn how to line up in addition to how to use weapons to be considered "trained"? i concur with those that are on israel's side. as depressing as the civilian casualties are, what we're seeing here is a microcosm of the work we're doing in iraq, except nobody is removing a government. does it make much sense for our brain trust to rant that we'll be hunting them down to the last man, but urge israel to back off? personal opinion aside, i only have to look out my office window to see real troops preparing for it to be constantly reminded of the reality of life as we know it today. doesn't mean we have to agree with it, to be sure, but it is what it is. vote left, vote right... but vote! Posted by: shabby-bollah | July 26, 2006 1:33 PM I can't read this. The continuity of the writing is off. A couple of paragraphs show up twice in different places. One of the editors screwed up, here. Posted by: saxyboy | July 26, 2006 12:56 PM David wrote: "The strike on the UN was clearly deliberate." I'll wait and see how close Hezbollah was to the UN post. Historically Hez likes to fire from UN posts to draw fire to them. I guess that's part of the "well organized and trained" Hezbollah fighter's methods. Check out what happened in Qana in April 1996. Israel was blamed for that UN post shelling too. Yet the presense of rocket launchers firing from a few hundred feet away was ignored then and probably now. Posted by: Sully | July 26, 2006 12:13 PM Well, at least Arkin has not jumped on the anti-Jew bandwagon like alot of the MSM, including some columnists for this website (Eugene Robinson). Israel is finally doing something about Hezbollah besides turning the perpetual other cheek, which only seemed to get them hit harder. We should continue to support the Israeli efforts and actually let one of these little spats get finished instead of trying to wade in a call timeout. If Israel is successful it will not only have immediate benefits in the WOT but it will also demonstrate that Iran is not the power it thinks it is regionally, thus giving us more leverage on the nuclear issue. If we bow to international pressure and pull the Israelis off then nothing will be gained other than a momentary lull in physical violence. Too often in the ME things never get solved, only stopped, and the problems continue to grow until the cold war going on there ignites anew. The international community and specifically the UN are entirely to blame for this. Their wrong-headed assumtion that regional conflicts will inevitably become global ones has caused this and many other conflicts to simmer and smolder for decades, making the goal of global peace ever more elusive. The ignorant focus on stopping the armed violence asap while neglecting the underlying issues which cause said violence has allowed this particular conflict to go on and on for decades, destabilizing global energy prices as well as stalling an entire region of the world's economic and social development, the main cause of the rise of Al-Qaeda. The international community, mainly Europe and some US administrations, with their child-like fear of armed conflict, have no one to blame but themselves for this mess. Thankfully now we are leaving the Israelis to their own devices and for once are going to let one of these disputes end the way conflict naturally ends, with a winner and a loser. The naieve approach currently in vogue has done nothing to put an end to this smoldering crisis and it's high time for a new (old) approach. Posted by: Archimedes | July 26, 2006 12:02 PM Aiken wrote: "Hirsch and others readily admit that Hezbollah is well organized, trained and equipped, fighting competently from its network of underground bunkers, and from civilian cover." This is quite an eye opening statement. Hezbollah is "trained" yet they fight from civilian cover. What sort of training is that? Its how terrorists train. Someone in a related blog wrote that Israel had prepared for and thus wanted this war. Yet Hezbollah has a system of bunkers. Bunkers are what one builds to prepare for a war. Hezbollah has prepared well for this war, built its bunkers, is using its terrorist training to put its own civilians in harms way and then takes pictures of the dead civilians to show westerners who become mad at those bloodthirsty Israelis. You don't have a brain if you cannot see what is going on in this war and that Hezbollah, which exists to defend nothing and no one, is doing its best to destroy the peoples of a sovereign nation. Wake up. Posted by: Sully | July 26, 2006 11:57 AM The strike on the UN was clearly deliberate. Nine different UN posts have been bombed by Israel in recent days, some repreatedly, with UN injuries and deaths. Over six hours Israeli bombs fell around and on the UN post. The UN General told Israel to stop ten times. An Irish UN soldier told Israel to stop six times. But Israel kept bombing - all day. Eventually they used a precision guided missile to blow up the UN Post, then kept shelling the rescue. Posted by: David | July 26, 2006 11:43 AM The comments to this entry are closed.
The latest news on computer and network security issues. Visit www.washingtonpost.com/technology.
1,132.230769
0.846154
1
high
medium
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/26/AR2006072600230.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/26/AR2006072600230.html
Iraqi Prime Minister Presses for More Aid
2006072719
A day after securing a pledge from President Bush to bolster U.S. troop presence in Baghdad, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki asked Congress yesterday for more reconstruction aid, acknowledging that most of the billions already allocated were swallowed by security costs. And he warned the United States not to abandon Iraq, as it did after the Persian Gulf War when the United States stood aside as a Shiite rebellion was crushed by Saddam Hussein. "Let 1991 never be repeated, for history will be most unforgiving," Maliki said during a speech to a joint meeting of Congress. He used the speech to reaffirm his new government's commitment to the war on terrorism, pledging that "Iraq will be the graveyard of terrorism and terrorists for the good of all humanity." Republicans had hoped to use Maliki's visit to showcase progress toward democracy in Iraq, but the prime minister's two-day stay in Washington proved to be politically problematic. Bush's promise to fortify troop presence in Baghdad virtually foreclosed major troop withdrawals before November's midterm election. And Maliki declined to disavow his critical comments on Israel's incursion into Lebanon or denounce Hezbollah's killing and kidnapping of Israeli troops that precipitated the fighting, handing Democrats a wedge that they eagerly used. At a breakfast meeting yesterday with congressional leaders, Democrats repeatedly pressed Maliki to declare Hezbollah a terrorist organization, but Maliki would not reply beyond broad denunciations of terrorism, according to several participants. Democrats such as Sen. Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.) protested the prime minister's oblique stand on Hezbollah and his denunciation of Israeli "aggression" by refusing to attend Maliki's address, forcing congressional leaders to fill empty seats in the House chamber with youthful aides. Other Democrats, such as Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (Fla.), sat in stone-faced silence, then decried the speech for its failure to recognize Middle East terrorism beyond Iraq's borders or to be frank about sectarian strife that is killing an estimated 100 Iraqis a day. "He essentially ignored the fact that he is the president of a war zone," Wasserman Schultz said. Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean called Maliki an "anti-Semite" for failing to denounce Hezbollah for its attacks against Israel. "We don't need to spend $200 and $300 and $500 billion dollars bringing democracy to Iraq to turn it over to people who believe that Israel doesn't have a right to defend itself and who refuse to condemn Hezbollah," the Democratic leader told a gathering of business leaders in Florida. Republicans fired back at what they perceived as a Democratic partisan ploy playing out at the expense of a crucial U.S. ally. "The House Democrat leader and some of her Democrat colleagues may not agree with the liberation of Iraq and they may not agree with criticism by some against Israel's actions, but their continued efforts to undermine the advancement of freedom and democracy in Iraq is shameful," Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.) said. White House spokesman Tony Snow said: "Let me try to explain democracy to people on Capitol Hill. It involves such rights as free speech and freedom of opinion." Veteran San Francisco activist Medea Benjamin, wearing a "Troops Home Now" T-shirt, chimed in, standing in the House gallery to interrupt Maliki's address with repeated shouts of: "Iraqis want the troops to leave. Bring them home now." She was promptly removed and arrested. Amid such discord, Maliki struck lofty tones as he thanked the United States for standing by Iraq. "Many around the world underestimated the resolve of Iraq's people and were sure that we would never reach this stage," he said. "Few believed in us. But you, the American people, did, and we are grateful for this." But he also inserted himself into the election-year controversy over the war, acknowledging, "I know that some of you here question whether Iraq is part of the war on terror. "The fate of our country and yours is tied," he continued. "Should democracy be allowed to fail in Iraq and terror permitted to triumph, then the war on terror will never be won elsewhere." In a visit with Maliki to Fort Belvoir after the speech, Bush seconded the prime minister's position, saying that "success in Iraq is necessary for the security of the United States, and it's necessary for the peace of the world." Maliki also appealed to Congress for more reconstruction aid, which the Bush administration has been reluctant to request after much of the $18 billion in development assistance was consumed by security costs, corruption and inefficiency. "Much of the budget you had allocated for Iraq's reconstruction ended up paying for security firms and foreign companies, whose operating costs were vast," Maliki told Congress. "Instead, there needs to be a greater reliance on Iraqis and Iraqi companies, with foreign aid and assistance to help us rebuild Iraq." Republicans hailed Maliki's speech as historic. But Maliki's appeals for continued military and economic assistance were not likely to sit well with a wide swath of the U.S. electorate, which has grown weary of the war, according to polls. Iraqi officials are "fortunate souls, because they have the strongest military in the world at their beck and call to protect them every single day," Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) said. "There has to be a change. The Iraqis have to accept responsibility for their own fate and future." But the debate before and after the address was not so much about Iraq but about Maliki's position on Hezbollah and the fighting in Lebanon. Before the speech, House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) emerged from breakfast with Maliki to declare, "He disavowed any terrorist organization," adding that "he talked about Hezbollah specifically." Later, after Democrats at the meeting disputed his assertion, Hastert conceded that: "We didn't ask him to come here for general commentary on the Middle East. He denounces terrorism, and I have to take him at his word. Hezbollah is a terrorist organization."
A day after securing a pledge from President Bush to bolster U.S. troop presence in Baghdad, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki asked Congress yesterday for more reconstruction aid, acknowledging that most of the billions already allocated were swallowed by security costs. And he warned the United...
23.096154
0.980769
50.019231
medium
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/25/AR2006072501452.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/25/AR2006072501452.html
Not Wanting to Earn Their Wings
2006072719
OSHKOSH, Wis. -- Jack Gilbert flew up here Sunday from Louisiana, parked his homemade plane with hundreds of others on a grass patch not far from the runway, and set up his tent for the week. Gilbert, 57, a building contractor, was in heaven: sleeping in a tent next to his plane, with thousands of other aviation buffs and their assorted aircraft at one of the world's biggest air shows. Like many others here, Gilbert is worried that he might one day witness the death of such shows. Most of the others around him are his age. Fewer young people are discovering the romance of flying. Whether it's the high cost or the substantial training time, the number of student pilots has fallen by more than half in 25 years. Gilbert was disappointed when his two grown sons passed on the opportunity to become pilots -- even when he offered to teach them. "I think it's the video games," Gilbert said as he adjusted his aviator sunglasses and worked on his tent. "The younger ones want instant gratification. Learning to fly is work. You have to work at it." Thousands of pilots and more than 7,000 planes are descending this week on Wittman Regional Airport for the Experimental Aircraft Association's AirVenture Oshkosh 2006 show. Organizers say that so many planes are taking off and landing here that Wittman becomes the busiest airport in the world during the show. More than 700,000 people are expected to attend -- a sea of pilots, their tents and their biplanes, vintage aircraft, experimental propeller planes and "spam cans," as factory-made aircraft are called. The attendance figures and the enthusiasm of participants shroud a worry that cuts across trade groups and business associations: The number of pilots in the United States has fallen 25 percent in the past 25 years. The number of student pilots has plummeted 56 percent over the same period -- from about 200,000 to 87,200 in 2005. Only about 40 percent of today's student pilots will get their licenses. Industry observers say that overall aviation, including commercial air carriers, could be harmed if more people don't learn to fly. If the aviation sector grows as expected, some predict, there will be a shortage of skilled pilots in the next decade or two. Trade associations and manufacturers are so concerned that they have created programs to recruit new pilots. The Experimental Aircraft Association sponsors a program that encourages its 170,000 members to take youngsters up for free flights, to give them a taste of flying. The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association is pushing its 400,000 members to find potential fliers as part of a program it launched last month. There are many reasons, mostly financial, for the decline in the number of pilots. It costs a lot to learn to fly ($200 to $250 a lesson in the Washington area, including instructor, plane rental and fuel). The practical applications of earning a license can be limited because it is often easier and cheaper to jump on a commercial jet than fly in a Cessna or Piper. A new Cessna 172, a plane that just marked 50 years of production, costs about $250,000. Insurance can cost thousands of dollars a year. Earning a license requires a minimum of 40 hours of flight time, most of it with an instructor. Pilots also must go through ground school to learn the basics of flight. Although there isn't much trade groups can do to reduce the cost of learning to fly -- aviation fuel costs about $4 a gallon and instructors charge about $40 an hour -- manufacturers are looking to build less expensive and more efficient and reliable planes to attract new pilots. The Cessna Aircraft Co. unveiled a small airplane at the show on Monday that executives say could be aimed at beginners and cost less than $100,000. The plane is designated a "light sport" aircraft, the fastest-growing segment in general aviation, according to Cessna. It has a wingspan of 30 feet, seats two and has a cabin width of 48 inches.
Washington,DC,Virginia,Maryland business headlines,stock portfolio,markets,economy,mutual funds,personal finance,Dow Jones,S&P 500,NASDAQ quotes,company research tools. Federal Reserve,Bernanke,Securities and Exchange Commission.
17.727273
0.409091
0.409091
medium
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/26/AR2006072600406.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/26/AR2006072600406.html
Washington State Upholds Ban on Same-Sex Marriage
2006072719
SEATTLE, July 26 -- Deferring to state lawmakers and agreeing with most other U.S. courts, the highest court in Washington state on Wednesday upheld a state law that bans same-sex marriage. The Washington Supreme Court, though, was bitterly divided in its 5 to 4 decision, producing six separate opinions in rejecting the claim of 19 gay couples that they are victims of state-sanctioned discrimination that harms their children and their financial security. In its lead opinion, the Washington court insisted repeatedly that elected lawmakers have wide discretion to define marriage -- while judges do not. "At the risk of sounding monotonous," the lead opinion said, "legislative bodies, not courts, hold the power to make public policy determinations." It added that where "no fundamental right is at stake, that power is nearly limitless." The court ruled that gay couples challenging Washington's 1998 Defense of Marriage Act had failed to show that it denies them either a "fundamental right" or equal protection under the law. "Although marriage has evolved, it has not included a history and tradition of same-sex marriage in this nation or in Washington State," the opinion said. It added that because state law prevents both sexes from entering into a same-sex marriage, it does not discriminate on the basis of sex. The opinion dismissed a lower-court ruling, which had found a fundamental right to same-sex marriage, as "astonishing, given the lack of any authority supporting it." Only one state, Massachusetts, allows same-sex marriage, and then only for its own residents. If the Washington court had overturned the ban, state law here would have allowed nonresident gay couples to come here and get married. Earlier this month, the high courts in New York and Georgia also ruled against same-sex marriage. At least a half-dozen other states have legal challenges about same-sex marriage pending. Wednesday's decision here shows the continued difficulty that proponents of same-sex marriage have in their legal challenges. The Washington court's lead opinion suggested several times that the majority of justices may disagree with the state's ban on same-sex marriage but that they had ruled narrowly on its constitutionality. The decision "is not based on an independent determination of what we believe the law should be," the opinion said. A sharply worded dissent, written by Justice Mary E. Fairhurst and signed by three other justices, said the court was using "the excuse of deference to the legislature to perpetuate the existence of an unconstitutional and unjust law." The majority ruling condoned "blatant discrimination against Washington's gay and lesbian citizens in the name of encouraging procreation" and raising children in homes with opposite-sex parents, Fairhurst wrote. She argued that the court ignored "the fact that denying same-sex couples the right to marry has no prospect of furthering any of those interests." Senior political leaders in Washington state, where Democrats control most top offices, were critical of the much-anticipated ruling on a case that was heard by the state's high court more than 15 months ago. Arguing that marriage "is not the business of the state," Gov. Christine Gregoire said she does not believe government should discriminate against any citizen. But she urged respect for the ruling "whether we agree with it or not." At a news conference in downtown Seattle, King County Executive Ron Sims, who two years ago had encouraged gay couples to sue him to overturn the state ban on same-sex marriage, stood with dozens of disappointed plaintiffs and compared Wednesday's decision to the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Plessy v. Ferguson , which affirmed the principle of separate but equal in race relations. "This is an unwise decision," said Sims, who is black and who said that gays must continue to fight for change, just as blacks did. "Sometimes it takes longer than we might like to bring about needed social change." As for the plaintiffs, they said they were surprised and angry, and determined to press the state legislature to overturn the marriage law. "We are reeling today," said Elizabeth Reis, a Seattle health teacher who has been together with her partner, Barbara Steele, a retired researcher in communicable diseases, for 29 years. They raised four children together and have 14 grandchildren and two great-grandchildren. "Courts have said you can get married if you have been married six times before," Reis said. "Courts have said you can get married if you owe your children entire childhoods of back child support. But this court says I cannot marry a woman I have loved nearly my entire adult life."
Continuing coverage of the Supreme Court nomination and confirmation process from The Washington Post.
61.4
0.6
1
high
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/25/AR2006072501666.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/25/AR2006072501666.html
Cloud In the Silver Lining
2006072719
Woody Allen is saying goodbye with the same wan handshake he used for hello 30 minutes ago. "I hope I haven't depressed you," he says apologetically. The 70-year-old writer and director has been musing about life, sex, work, death and his generally futile search for hope, and frankly, mere depression hardly seems like the right response. Flat-out terror is what is called for here. Yes, the world according to Woody is so bereft of meaning, so godless and absurd, that the only proper response is to curl up on a sofa and howl for your mommy. Alternatively, you could try the Allen approach, which is to make a feature film every year and try, however briefly, to distract yourself from the darkness. "You do the best you can within the concentration camp," he says, cutting straight to the life-as-Auschwitz metaphor. "It's very hard to keep your spirits up. You've got to keep selling yourself a bill of goods, and some people are better at lying to themselves than others. If you face reality too much, it kills you." What'd you expect, a pep talk? You thought a sit-down with Woody Allen would cheer you up? He is not the anxious, gesticulating quipster he's played in so many of his movies, a man who bundles his despair with a batch of winning one-liners, a bit of vaudeville by way of Camus. There is little shtick about the real-life Woody Allen, who says that outside of his work, he is rarely funny. Instead, he is chatty, rueful and, though he seems vaguely uncomfortable with the setting -- an empty reception room at the Mark Hotel, where he is gabbing his way through an afternoon of interviews -- he is almost evangelically passionate about a few subjects. None more so than the chilling emptiness of life. "It's just an awful thing," he says, shrugging a little, "and in that context you've got to find an answer to the question: Why go on?" The answer, at least for today, is the publicity drive for "Scoop," his second movie in a row set in London. Opening Friday, it's a comedy, with Scarlett Johansson as a student journalist who falls in love with a hunky aristocrat (Hugh Jackman) who just might be a serial killer. Johannson is tipped off to the story by a famous reporter (played by "Deadwood" star Ian McShane) who returns from the dead and nudges her investigation along. Her panicky sidekick is an old-school magician, played by Allen, who pretends he's Johannson's father and helps her wheedle her way into the privileged echelons of British society. Despite the murder plot, "Scoop" is Allen's lightest movie in a while, an about-face from the unnervingly grim "Match Point," released last year to raves and nominated for an Academy Award for original screenplay. That movie performed a nifty bit of CPR on Allen's career, which had all but flat-lined with a spate of forgettable films starting in the mid-'90s. Raise your hand if you saw "Melinda and Melinda," his last New York movie. It grossed $3.8 million domestically. Allen's star had fallen low enough that he claims one of his recent films earned more in Paris alone than it did in the States. By the time he wrote "Match Point," he couldn't find American backers willing to cede the total creative control he has always demanded.
NEW YORK Woody Allen is saying goodbye with the same wan handshake he used for hello 30 minutes ago. "I hope I haven't depressed you," he says apologetically.
20.676471
1
30.235294
medium
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/25/DI2006072500934.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/25/DI2006072500934.html
Crisis Unabated in Middle East
2006072719
Martin Indyk , director of the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at The Brookings Institution and former U.S. ambassador to Israel, was online Wednesday, July 26, at 1:30 p.m. ET to discuss the current crisis in Israel and Lebanon. Full coverage from washingtonpost.com : Crisis in the Middle East Fairfax, Va.: Do you think that the "law of unintended consequences" has fully kicked in as the current conflict unfolds or is everything going about as expected by Israel and Hezbollah? What evidence do we have, if any, that this is a "proxy war" as some have suggested in the press and media? Martin Indyk: Funny you should ask. I'm writing a book about U.S. diplomacy in the ME and it's provisional title is "Unintended Consequences." In this case, Hezbollah has admitted that it did not expect the Israelis to react with such ferocity. Nasrallah thought it would just be a repeat of previous kidnappings and prisoner swaps. That's why he called Israeli PM Olmert an "idiot" because he didn't play by the established rules of the game. On the other side, the Israelis were already dealing with one kidnapping in Gaza. To them, this looked like an Iranian attempt to hijack the Palestinian cause on the eve of the G-8 summit. And they had been watching Hezbollah build up its forces and rocket and missile stocks for six years. They were in effect waiting for an opportunity, but certainly didn't expect it to come at this moment. The Israeli Army wasn't prepared for this level of fighting. Given that the war itself was "unintended" both sides are groping for achievable objectives. Nasrallah is trying to show that he can be "the last man standing." The Israelis have gone from declaring their objective to be the destruction of Hezbollah, to the stripping of its rockets, to the clearing out of Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, to the establishment of a buffer zone along Israel's northern border. Nasrallah's inability to get Israel to back off its military campaign is leading him to ever more escalatory actions. He is now declaring that he will attack beyond Haifa. It's not clear whether this means missiles on Tel Aviv or terrorist attacks on Israeli and Jewish targets abroad. But if either of those things happen, we can expect an Israeli escalation in response. The ultimate unintended consequence will be, I fear, an Israeli-Syrian confrontation. Even though both Israel and Syria declare they don't want it, unfortunately I don't think the crisis ends until it rises to that level. Washington, D.C.: Thanks for taking my question. If the tensions in the middle east end up culminating in a Shia versus Sunni conflict, might the world be better off? That is if the Islamist rage is inwardly directed to a fractrical war might that be better than the current "clash of civilizations". I am reminded of Mayor Ed Koch's comment on the Iran-Iraq war if they are killing each other "who cares" Martin Indyk: Yes, there is a growing Sunni/Shia conflict that started in Iraq but definitely has the potential now to spread to Lebanon and thence to Syria. Notwithstanding their anger at Israel's bombing of Lebanese infrastructure, Lebanese Sunnis and Christians are largely unaffected by Israel's targeting of Shia suburbs of Beirut and Shia towns and villages in Southern Lebanon and the Bekaa Valley. They resent Hezbollah taking the country to war and they will want to see Hezbollah disarmed, just as their own militias had to do a long time ago. This demand is now being voiced by the international community -- it was one of the points of agreement at today's Rome meeting of the Lebanon Core Group. But Hezbollah is declaring that it will not be humiliated in this confrontation with Israel, which means it will not disarm. So this crisis is likely to end with increased Sunni(Christian)/Shia tension in Lebanon. In Syria, the Sunni majority has long been suppressed by an Alawite minority sect headed by the Asad family. The Alawites are closely associated with the Shias and the regime is allied with Shia Iran and Hezbollah. There is considerable potential for Sunni/Shia tensions to explode in Syria too. Would it be a good idea to encourage? Definitely not, in my view. It could make the current bloodbath in Iraq look like a picnic. And the outcome would not only be that a lot of innocent people will die. It will set the region back a century as extremists come to power everywhere. Reston, Va.: Is it possible that Hezbollah could develop a political wing similar to the Sinn Fein wing of the IRA with whom Israel would be willing to talk with? Martin Indyk: Hezbollah already has a political wing. It has 30 representatives in the Lebanese Parliament. It has two cabinet ministers in the Lebanese government. The problem is not that it lacks a political wing, it's rather that the political wing is subservient to a militant leadership in Lebanon and Iran. After Hezbollah's victory against the Israeli army in 2000, when Israel evacuated all of southern Lebanon, Hezbollah had to choose between focusing on internal Lebanese politics or continuing the conflict with Israel. It chose the latter, manufacturing the issue of "Shaba Farms" (which the UN has declared as Syrian NOT Lebanese territory) to justify its continued "resistance" operation. And then it jumped on the Palestinian bandwagon, inserting itself in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and supporting Palestinian terrorist attacks on Israel. The sad reality is that when Syrian troops left Lebanon in response to UN Security Council Resolution 1559, there was an opportunity to insist that Hezbollah respect the third paragraph of that resolution which called for the disarming and disbanding of all militias in Lebanon. Believing those French and Lebanese voices that said the best way to disarm Hezbollah is to get it into the political process, the Bush Administration supported elections and gave up on demanding Hezbollah's disarmament. Hezbollah then used the elections to move into the government and establish a veto over any attempt to disarm them. So shifting Hezbollah from a militant terrorist organization with outside sponsors, to a political party without a militia, is going to be a very difficult proposition. Bethesda, Md.: By becoming part of their country's governments, aren't Hezbollah and Hamas going down the slippery slope of "legitimacy"? In order to be effective, it seems to me they're going to eventually have to recognize Israel and disavow terrorism, otherwise, they will become so isolated that they and their governments will implode? Martin Indyk: They'll become isolated or they'll hijack their governments and societies. At the moment, it looks more likely that they will use the political process to further their militant objectives, rather than that the political process will tame them. Bethesda, Md.: I'm struck that the endgame of this conflict looks more and more like a lose/lose proposition for all the parties involved. While states (and militia groups for that matter) aren't perfect rational actors, the decisions here seem wildly poor when looking at the long-term interests of everyone involved. Is this just a case of the fog of war, the dynamics of rapid escalation, and bad internal negotiations producing bad choices, or am I missing some long-term wins that any of the parties seem to be moving toward? Also, beyond diplomatic chest thumping, the costs of the US refusing to engage in direct talks with Syria seem awfully high. Is there some legacy of direct talks with bad regimes being damaging to US foreign interests? (This comes up w/North Korea too.) Martin Indyk: First, Hezbollah's objectives are those of a non-state actor. In a speech Nasrallah gave yesterday on his TV station, he made clear that victory for him is the demonstrable ability to continue to fire rockets into Israel and inflict heavy casualties on the Israeli army. Since Hezbollah is not a state, he explains, it doesn't matter if it loses control over territory (or for that matter if Beirut is destroyed - it will be rebuilt, he declares). Since, in these circumstances, Israel cannot hope to destroy or even deter Hezbollah with conventional force, it has to create conditions where the Lebanese government, backed by the Lebanese people and the international community, demands that Hezbollah's state-within-a-state be dismantled. Airpower is a blunt instrument for achieving that objective. Talking to Syria is not the issue. It's the content of the message that counts. In the 1990s, when Syria had 15,000 troops in Lebanon, and Israel and the U.S. were engaged with Syria in a peace process, we relied on Syria to curb Hezbollah. That's why we would run to Damascus when Hezbollah's attacks on Israel started to get out of hand. But the context has changed dramatically since then. First, notwithstanding the fact that four Israeli Prime Ministers (Rabin, Peres, Netanyahu and Barak) offered the Syrians full withdrawal from the Golan Heights in exchange for peace, the Syrians were never willing to consummate the deal. So anyone who imagines that the way to contain Lebanon's crisis is to make peace between Syria and Israel needs to be able to argue that it will be different this time around. Unlikely. Second, over a million Lebanese, backed by the U.S. and France, came out in Beirut's streets a year ago and demanded that Syrian troops leave Lebanon. Amazingly, they did. If Secretary of State Rice now went to Damascus to ask them to curb Hezbollah, it would be tantamount to inviting them back into Lebanon. It would be a betrayal of everything the Bush presidency supposedly stands for in the Middle East, and a particular betrayal of the Lebanese people. Washington, D.C.: Israel's bombing of Hezbollah targets is comprehensible, but I fail to understand why they are bombing parts of the country not affiliated with Hezbollah. If the idea is to have the Lebanese government act against Hezbollah, how does weakening the Lebanese government further that aim? Thank you for taking my question. Martin Indyk: The Israelis do a lousy job of explaining their targeting. Today, they are bombing Tyre (a city in southern Lebanon) because the rockets that are hitting Haifa are launched from there. They are hitting the southern suburbs of Beirut today, in retaliation for the attacks on Haifa (on the principle that for every attack on Haifa, ten buildings in Hezbollah's southern Beirut enclave will be destroyed, according to an unnamed Israeli security official). In the early days of this campaign they hit roads, bridges and airports to make it more difficult for Iran and Syria to resupply Hezbollah with rockets and missiles. They have not hit the power grid or the water supply. After the surprise missile attack on their battleship, the Israeli Air Force attacked naval radars all the way up the Lebanese coast, including the lighthouse in downtown Beirut. So there is method in what might often appear to be blind rage. But that doesn't take account of the targets that are hit by mistake in such an intensive bombing campaign, which include civilians and now a UN post. The Israeli Government needs a strong Lebanese government to insist on the disarming of Hezbollah and to send its Armed Forces to the south. But it also needs to degrade Hezbollah's capabilities. And the two objectives are often in contradiction. Vienna, Va.: Thank you for taking questions. I actually have 2: (1) Other than suspicion, what proof is there that Hezbollah is is acting on orders of Iran by way of Syria? (2) At what point will the US relaxed its conditions for a cease fire in Lebanon? Martin Indyk: I don't have any proof of instructions from Iran. What can be established without a shadow of doubt is that the arms, funds, and training for Hezbollah come from Teheran. For decades, there were hundreds of Iranian Revolutionary Guards in Lebanon providing training to Hezbollah. Iran provides the rockets and missiles that Hezbollah is firing now. They have over 10,000 rockets! And Iran finances Hezbollah to the tune of $100 million a year. The U.S. is likely to relax its conditions for a cease fire when President Bush feels that Israel has sufficiently degraded Hezbollah's capabilities that it will not be able to claim a victory and when the Israeli army has succeeded in clearing Hezbollah out of its positions in southern Lebanon along Israel's northern border. Detroit, Mich.: Thanks for calling on me. I've done a lot of reading and it seems the pro-Israel bias of the American negotiating team was one of the central reasons that the Arab side was not properly taken into account and, ultimately, a reason why we have this mess today. As one of those negotiators, do you think in the future the US government should only employ mediators who are less biased in the future or must one come from AIPAC to negotiate Arab-Israeli peace ? Martin Indyk: It's a fair question but perhaps you should ask the Arab leaders whether they preferred people who were committed to making peace between Israel and the Arabs because they wholeheartedly believed that it served American interests and Israel's well-being, or they prefer people now who don't believe in peacemaking or diplomacy? For eight years, President Clinton and his peace team dedicated themselves to trying to achieve a just, comprehensive, and lasting peace that would have met the reasonable requirements of the Palestinians and the Syrians. Those deals included formal offers, accepted by Israeli governments, of all of the Golan Heights, all of Gaza, and 95-97 percent of the West Bank (with territorial compensation for the rest). We thought that's what the Arabs wanted. That's certainly what they told us they wanted. So I fail to understand the argument that we didn't take their needs and requirements into account. And that somehow, by pursuing peace with all our hearts and minds, we are responsible for this mess. washingtonpost.com: Thank you for joining us for this discussion. 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.
Martin Indyk, director of the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at The Brookings Institution and former U.S. ambassador to Israel, discusses the current crisis in Israel and Lebanon.
86.40625
0.96875
18.53125
high
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/19/DI2006071901300.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/19/DI2006071901300.html
The Washington Nationals
2006072719
Barry Svrluga: Hello, Nationals fans. Let's see. What could we possibly want to talk about today? Tonight's big game against the Giants? Likely not. Let's get this Soriano-fest under way. Season ticket holder, D.C.: Barry, Thanks for doing these chats. While my logical side knows that Sori will be gone within the next few days, my heart wishes they would keep him around. It's been a tough season for us Nats fans and it's been nice to have an All Star around. I know he's not perfect, but he sure is fun to watch. Not to mention who will be in the outfield with Guillen out for who knows how long. -sigh- I guess I'd better buy my Soriano t-shirt at tonight's game huh? Barry Svrluga: Yes, I'd wear that Soriano jersey tonight. Let's be clear: Soriano has been better -- in attitude, at the plate and, perhaps, even in left field -- than anyone could have imagined when spring training began. He really is an exciting player, and there's little doubt that -- even though the Nationals are in last place -- he has provided more wins than Brad Wilkerson would have. But I've said it before, and I'll say it again: With the team trying to build for the future, and with there no guarantee that Soriano would sign a long-term contract to stay here in the offseason, it seems only logical that he'll be dealt. That's just the starting point. Let's move on. Columbia, Md.: Barry, do you think the Nats are going to try to package Hernandez with Soriano so they can get his contract off the books? They may get less in return that way, but it would free up quite a bit of money. Barry Svrluga: I believe that the Nationals would love to unload Hernandez's contract -- worth $7 million next year -- if they could find a taker. GM Jim Bowden said yesterday that he doesn't HAVE TO make any trade, which is a way of saying they're not going to give people away. Do I think Hernandez would be packaged with Soriano? No. I think he would be traded on his own. He hit 88 and 89 mph on the radar gun in his last start, and I think there will be plenty of scouts here on Thursday to monitor whether he can do that again. It's his last start before the deadline, and it could go a long way toward determining his market value. Bethesda, Md.: Any rumors that Bowden might be trading Screech? Barry Svrluga: We can dream, can't we. We can dream. Mount Vernon, Va.: The world will not be beating down Jose Guillen's door this offseason after Tommy John surgery. And given that the Nationals are obligated to provide medical attention to him until he is completely recovered. Would it make any sense for the Nationals to sign Guillen to a below arbitration one -year deal with a mutual option based upon some sort of incentives? Barry Svrluga: Guillen's situation will be interesting, and coming off an injury-plagued year in which he hit .216, he will not necessarily be in the driver's seat. I think one year is the best he can hope for, and I doubt he'd get guaranteed money. I think he's more likely to sign a minor league deal, prove he's healthy and turn it into playing time. And yes: Depending on the makeup of the roster, I think it's possible Bowden could re-sign him with the Nationals. Somehow, he drove in 40 runs in just 241 at-bats, so there's still something alluring there -- despite all the drama. Rockville, Md.: What is the real imperative to trade Soriano for a "building for the future" player? It's not like a trade this year is critical to get the Nats anywhere (best chance of even hitting .500 is probably his bat rather than a pitcher-to-be). Since he's willing to sign, and the fans love him, can't they do a 2 or 3 year deal to keep our spirits up during this "rebuilding" phase ? Barry Svrluga: It's a good question. Bowden's point yesterday -- in which he talked about having to make painful decisions -- and Stan Kasten's point all along (in which he's said that this is a long process to eventually get to the point where the team can compete for a championship) is that the Nationals need young, talented players that will be around in several years. The risk of letting Soriano walk after the season is simply too great. Soriano's camp isn't willing to negotiate a contract with the club right now, so they have to -- HAVE TO -- explore all opportunities. Eureka: I've got it! the Dead Presidents (the Rushmores?) can replace Screech. Barry Svrluga: The Rushmores are really, really great. Worth a trip to the park just to see them. (FYI: I have Jefferson in the press box pool for the rest of the year. I have one win to this point. Abe has two. He seems to have some spry legs, that Abe.) Savala, Ga.: Is there any chance that Bowden actually pulls the trigger before the 31st? I can't see it happening -- it seems to me that his ego gets way too much of a rush from being in the national spotlight and playing Crazy Trader Jim. I gotta believe he's gonna milk this for all it's worth. Barry Svrluga: He claimed yesterday that the price to get Soriano or other players is the price, and it won't change. By that logic, he said, there's no reason to wait till the deadline if teams meet the price now. Translation: No one has granted the Nationals what they're offering. And yes, if I had to guess, I'd say it'd go down to Sunday or Monday, the last two days. Comcastville: O Heavily Consonanted One... Where o where does the TV stuff stand? What do the Lerners need to do to get THEIR TEAM'S games on Comcast? Barry Svrluga: Oh, dear Comcastville, thanks for chiming in. The FCC is now getting involved, and there is more and more movement. Comcast is a large, powerful company, but MASN is succeeding in stirring things up on Capitol Hill, etc. Will that make a difference in getting the games on by the end of the season? It's really hard to tell. Jim Bowden has all of our hopes up for what we will get in return for Soriano. What kind of package should we be satisfied with? Barry Svrluga: Bowden makes the point that, when you trade for prospects, you have to get numbers in return because you never know which ones are going to pan out. I think it will take at least two guys, and possibly three. Soriano Love Fest: I suppose it is appropriate today but...please...where is the love for Nick Johnson and Ryan Zimmerman? I find their kind of ball even more exciting than Alfonso's. Zimmerman's bunts for instance. Johnson's fielding acumen. I love these guys! Barry Svrluga: Don't get me wrong, I very much enjoy watching Zimmerman and Johnson, and for the sake of Washington's fans, I hope they're around for quite some time. Zimmerman has shown that he's smart enough to bunt for base hits when the infield plays back. I would argue, though, about Johnson's fielding. I would say that for more than half a season last year, Nick was almost Gold Glove caliber (especially if Derek Lee wasn't in the league). But this year, he's struggled a bit. He's dropped several pop-ups -- and in fact is currently working on catching them in drills at RFK, showing his level of commitment -- and last night he didn't dig out a throw from Felipe Lopez in the ninth, an error that could have been costly. He has seven errors this season after having five all of last year. He's better than that, and he knows it. College Park, Md.: ============================= (FYI: I have Jefferson in the press box pool for the rest of the year. I have one win to this point. Abe has two. He seems to have some spry legs, that Abe.) ============================ they should put in an infamous President, say Nixon, in the mix. he could always lose or be disqualified, much as the role of the Really Rottens on that Saturday morning fave, the Laff-a-Lympics. Barry Svrluga: My idea: Have a 10-foot tall John Wilkes Booth in the stands ready to take Lincoln out one evening. Didn't really go over well with team officials. Here's a theory: Barry: is it just possible that the Soriano deal hasn't been consummated yet because the Nats and Soriano's agent are having behind-the-scenes talks about a contract extension? Barry Svrluga: Anything is possible. But the Nationals have made it clear that though they have talked to Soriano and his agent about Soriano's stated desire to remain in Washington, they have been told that Soriano doesn't want another distraction during the season. It makes sense, to a degree: Soriano has waited this long to be a free agent, and his agent's duty is to find out what he can get on the open market. I like your theory. I just don't believe that's happening. Washington, D.C.: If we don't trade Soriano and he walks after the season, we get two(2) first round picks right? If we do trade him, those picks go to whichever team ends up losing him to free agency right? Two first round picks ARE two top prospects right? That said, it seems like Soriano should easily be worth two top prospects that are just a little closer to the big leagues. Barry Svrluga: The picks would be a first-rounder and then one sandwiched between the first and second rounds. But yes, two very high picks. The risk, though: Draft picks are unpredictable in baseball, and while Bowden and Kasten have vowed to hire the best talent evaluators in the game, there are no sure things in the draft. Prospects that are already in pro ball can be evaluated against the same level talent with wooden bats, etc. Even if they're young, they're more proven than guys who are amateurs. But if they can't move Soriano, that'll be the spin: Hey, we got him for at least a couple more months, and look, even if he leaves, we get these draft picks. Foggy Bottom: What's the deal with Alex Escobar? He's been on a tear since he was called up, but keeps getting sidelined with injuries. Will he ever be healthy enough to be an every day outfielder? Barry Svrluga: Escobar is a great mystery. Clearly, the talent at the plate is there, and you have to feel bad that he can't stay in the lineup. But at this point, he has to be considered injury-prone, and it's anybody's guess as to whether that'll ever end. Guy's hitting .429 in 42 at-bats. The land of the free?: Barry- Not sure if you could see it from the press box, but last night security went around taking away any anti-Barry Bonds posters. Not just the obscene ones (or the offensive ones), all anti-Barry posters. Posters supporting Barry were ok, though. I couldn't tell if we were in the capital of the free world, San Francisco, or Cuba. Barry Svrluga: Interesting point. I did not see that (had my head down writing most of the time), but I know that there have been so many incidents involving Bonds in other parks -- people throwing stuff or, in one case in Philly, I believe, people dressed as a syringe -- that security is very, very tight around him. Rushmores: Did Jefferson win last night? And was TR's win on Sunday disqualified in Lincoln's favor? I thought GW, Abe and TR won the first three; I didn't see last night. Barry Svrluga: Yes, Roosevelt was DQ'ed on Sunday for using a golf cart. Come on, Teddy. Everybody knows the rules here. T-Jeff got the win that day, I believe. Abe posted his second win last night. TR is the only one without a victory yet. Washington, D.C.: If Soriano is insistent on a no-trade clause, Nats fans better get ready for his departure. Kasten doesn't give no-trade clauses. Barry Svrluga: This is a good point. Washington, D.C.: Am I the only one who's sick of the Soriano trade talk? It's sad that the Nats are only in the news because of a player who will likely not be on the team in a week's time. But seriously, what do you think would be the best trade at this point? Please don't say A-Rod. Barry Svrluga: No, I can guarantee you you're not the only one sick of this. There's a guy typing this sentence into the computer who is ... Forget about that. It is a really, really important deal for the future of the team, and the next week will give us a better idea of what next year's roster will look like. Anonymous: It appears that you're doing more reporting for the Nats instead of write-up about the games. Will you go back to the daily grind after the trading deadline?? Do you have a wife and kids? Is she a big baseball fan?? Barry Svrluga: Hello, Anonymous. Why hide your identity? I didn't write the game story last night because we felt like I could write a more interesting piece on what Jim Bowden said are his guiding principles this time of year, and we ran a chart that gives an idea of what prospects other teams have that the Nationals might seek. I'm likely to do the same kind of work the next couple of days, but I'm the only one going on the nine-game West Coast road trip that begins on Friday in Los Angeles, so I'll do everything from there. Yes, I have a wife. She is very understanding. No, Mr. Bonds, I expect you to bunt: So the question remains, were the muscle taking away anti-Bonds posters working for the Nats, or for Barry, personally? Barry Svrluga: They would be stadium security, I believe. Rosslyn, Va.: I was happy to hear the Nationals hired Mike Rizzo to oversee all the aspects of the Scouting Department. Any word on who will fill the Pro Scouting or International Scouting positions? That also raises another question, who is overseeing the Player Development (you know actually ensuring the players brought into the system develop)? Barry Svrluga: The Nationals are likely to raid other teams' scouting departments for pro and international scouts. Bob Boone oversees the player development aspect of things, though he admits he hasn't been able to spend as much time with the minor league teams as he would like because Bowden has been using him so much as a scout. Now, Boone is strapped at Bowden's side until the deadline as one of his most trusted talent evaluators and sounding boards. Gaithersburg, Md.: In reading the recent coverage about Jim Bowden's wheeling and dealing, it seems he is very self-congratulatory about his ability to be such a great wheeler and dealer. The biggest problem I have with this is that his track record is spotty at best, and with the Nationals mired in last place, he shouldn't be bragging too much. Don't you think he should tone it down a bit until he can at least show that the team he has put together has a winning record? Barry Svrluga: There are certainly people who believe that, but it's against his nature. He loves making deals, loves thinking about all of this, and loves being at the center of it all. He has some evidence of success -- he won some years in Cincinnati, always working on a tight budget -- but he also admits he has some failings, as when he traded Tomo Ohka for Junior Spivey last year. Arlington, Va.: If rebuilding the team is the key, and the Big Presidents are so amusing (which they are) and so popular with the fans, why not just sign them and use them as the starting infield? That way, Bowden would have even more trade bait to get a batch of unproven prospects. But seriously, I don't understand the apparent unwillingness to re-sign Soriano. He's 30 years old an a bona fide All Star. He's literally done everything the club has asked him to do, and has continued to play brilliantly with the trade hanging over his head. What's not to love? Why isn't HE the guy to build this club around? Barry Svrluga: Jefferson doesn't go to his right well enough to be a starting second baseman. Don't read the "unwillingness" as just on the part of the Nationals. Soriano's people, apparently, are unwilling to negotiate a deal during the season. This is a two-way street. Bethesda, Md.: It would seem Lopez and Kearns are finally accepting the fact they play for the Nats now and not the Reds. What have your observations of the two been since the trade? Barry Svrluga: They both admit to being much more comfortable since they got to RFK, and that's only natural. Lopez, it seems, is not terribly solid defensively, though he's been hitting the ball well in the last four games. Kearns, I think, is what he is: Someone who can hit a homer at any time, who's going to walk a lot, but who strikes out a bit too much, too. He looks to be a very competent right fielder, though. What is the contract status of John Patterson? With his history of injury after injury, do you think the Nats feel that he'll ever be a dependable front of the rotation starter? Barry Svrluga: Patterson is eligible for arbitration for the first time this winter, and given his injury-plagued season, he's not likely to get a big bump in salary. The Nationals believe that, if Patterson's healthy, he can pitch at the front of the rotation. But given all his ups and downs, that is a big if right now. Eastern Market: So let me get this straight: it's a public facility -- the taxpayers paid for it, after all -- and we can't bring in a bottle of water or a sign expressing an opinion. Who died and made Ted Learner monarch of the 21 acres or so that make up RFK? 19th and K St.: I agree with being sick of the trade talk, if only because so much of it is focused on Bowden shamelessly self-promoting. There was a piece on ESPN.com, one in the WashPost by your colleague Tom Boswell, and then of course his own piece in the DC Examiner, which devoted a good amount of column inches to him talking about how great he is. I know that this was really never discussed previously, but I think there is a fan contingent that is really turned off by Bowden, and that just like some fan bases in other cities ended up losing interest in a team because of a GM's style/incompetence/attitude, it could happen here. I know many people who really dislike Bowden and have trouble supporting him, and ergo, it makes it really tough to handle this rebuilding process he's guiding. washingtonpost.com: For Nationals, Greed Is Very Good, (Post, July 26) Barry Svrluga: I understand that there are lots of people who don't support Bowden, and another faction that does. He is a very interesting, sometimes-polarizing character. He makes for great debate. But I think the focus on him at this point is legitimate. He has the player who's the fulcrum of the trade deadline talk, and his moves -- or lack thereof -- will help chart the course for this franchise's future. Like him or not, he's a central character right now. Washington, D.C.: Any chance the Angels will trade one of their kids in Salt Lake City (Kendricks or Willits) for Soriano? We can hope can't we? Barry Svrluga: Reports out of L.A. seem to indicate that Angels GM Bill Stoneman thinks the price is too steep. But others around baseball feel like the Angels are a perfect fit for Soriano. They need some punch in the lineup, the division is there for the taking, and it might be a place he could be convinced to stay beyond this year. Imagine Soriano and Vlad Guerrero in the same lineup. And you're right: The Angels have a deep farm system, and someone like Kendrick would be the kind of player the Nationals are looking for. The Beach: Was Church brought up to make him more visible for a trade? I get the feeling he'll never be part of any long-term plans here. Barry Svrluga: Church, I think, could certainly be included in an offer to sweeten a package (with Soriano or one of the pitchers). But if he ends up staying here, the Nationals wouldn't be crushed. Bowden believes in his ability, but he has been woefully inconsistent this season, and seems to allow things to get into his head fairly easily. Others in the organization feel he acts too much like a veteran when he hasn't earned such status. But when he's hot, as he is now, he has tremendous ability. Lernerville: Actually, you can bring in a bottle of water, just no Gatorade or Pepsi. Tsar Lerner is okay with plain water. Barry Svrluga: Thanks for the update. I am not familiar with what's allowed in and what's not. Vienna, Va.: Had the good fortune of getting to Saturday's game and enjoyed the grand reopening, especially my Hard Times Chili Dog. I do have one complaint though: The new Terrace Food Court shut down during the fifth inning! What the...??? They spend all this time and money plugging their spanking new offerings, only to close them down not even halfway through the game. On a positive note, I got myself two t-shirts, and $3 tickets for the Oct. 1 Mets finale with no service charges, so I've got that going for me. Barry Svrluga: I noticed that the Food Court shut down on Saturday like that, but I haven't noticed it on other days. Those $3 tickets appear to be a fairly good deal, no? Bethesda, Md.: Just curious about your sports background, Barry. Did you play ball in HS or college? Barry Svrluga: Consider yourself the only person curious about this. Played baseball through high school. Somehow, career stalled before college. Something about not being able to hit, throw, catch or run. Whatever. Fairfax, Va.: Barry- This is the real test of Bowden coming up. We should hang tight before judging. In the meantime, I would rather have someone maniacal who works 24/7, who goes through so many trade possibilities that he can eventually arrive at the best possible. Barry Svrluga: Here is, certainly, the other half of the Bowden camp. And you are correct: Even the man's detractors believe he is incredibly hard-working, diligent, creative and intelligent. I think this trade season and the coming offseason will give us an even more complete picture on how Bowden plans to reshape this organization. dreamcometrue: This is not a question, but I am so looking forward to this I had to put it out there....on Oct 1, I will be at RFK till the final out to "say goodbye" for the season, and then hop on the metro and take in redskins game which starts at 4:15. First time this has been possible in 30 years! Barry Svrluga: Something refreshing and positive. Have a heck of a day! Our team as currently constructed with position players is more than a fine club. Really, look at the numbers this team is putting up offensively, they are more than competitive. Also, in my view Anderson is better than Vidro at second. Our only real hole is CF (although Escobar has been a surprise and Church since the call up). Why can't we just hang on to the position players we have (also enter into long-term contract negotiations with Soriano) and just focus on getting pitching during the offseason? Pitching can be gotten during the offseason. We don't need that many pieces (just pitching). Barry, am I that far in left field? Barry Svrluga: I think you are a bit out there, maybe on the grass behind shortstop. Soriano is a key factor. If the Nationals can't/don't re-sign him, then the lineup is far different. Vidro appears to be declining, and the days when he automatically hit 40 doubles are behind him. Schneider is having a poor offensive year, and while he's entitled to a slump, he needs to respond in the next couple months and carry it into next season. Zimmerman is the real cornerstone, the untouchable one, and Johnson is having a career year that makes his contract extension seem well worth it. After that, we'll see. From Svrlugaville, Va.: Why would the trade Armas? Young, perhaps decent 4th or 5th starter... seems to be what they are trying to trade for? Barry Svrluga: History of injuries. Contract is up after this season. Might be able to get a decent prospect in return. And, at 28, not as young as you might guess. Restonia: Any thoughts on whether Vidro stays or goes? Ortiz? Barry Svrluga: Vidro, now on the disabled list with a bad hamstring, will be staying because Bowden said "we don't trade injured players." Ortiz: If I was a contending team, I'd take a shot at him. Barry Svrluga: Folks, I'm out of time, and I think there are 100 unanswered questions. My apologies. Tune in next week, when we'll be able to talk about what happened -- not what might happen. 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.
131.390244
0.609756
0.707317
high
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/25/AR2006072501621.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/25/AR2006072501621.html
Failed Trade Talks Usher in Uncertainty
2006072719
So now it's official: Global talks to lower trade barriers are "suspended," perhaps never to resume. Yesterday, leading negotiators continued to fling accusations at each other for the breakdown. But the more profound issue confronting policymakers around the world is whether globalization has been fundamentally redirected, slowed or possibly thrown into reverse. The talks' failure raises the prospect of weakening the multilateral system that has governed global commerce for the past six decades, possibly even a splintering into regional blocs. Another potential is an erosion of respect for the World Trade Organization's authority to settle disputes, increasing the chances that countries will resort to tit-for-tat trade wars that could disrupt the global economy. Ensuring that economic interconnection would continue to advance was one of the chief reasons for launching the talks after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. With fear of disintegration then haunting the globe, the member nations of the WTO meeting in the Qatari capital of Doha sent a powerful signal that they would deepen their mutual ties by starting a new round of multiyear negotiations aimed at reducing tariffs and other trade obstacles. For all its boldness, the initiative was fraught with risk -- and on Monday, those risks loomed menacingly, when WTO Director-General Pascal Lamy called a halt to the talks because trade ministers from the United States and five other major powers were at such loggerheads over the main issues. The upshot could have "serious systemic implications for multilateral trade," Peter Mandelson, the European trade commissioner, said yesterday. Critics of the 149-nation WTO are jubilant, seeing evidence of a backlash to the fast and furious pace at which globalization has proceeded. "The cause of this collapse is not specific countries' unwillingness to concede on particular themes, but growing public opposition in poor and rich countries alike to the very WTO model," said Lori Wallach, director of Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch, a group founded by Ralph Nader. Even free-trade enthusiasts see some validity in that interpretation. "Countries want to liberalize trade, because they recognize the link between open trade and economic growth, but there just isn't a whole lot of interest right now in the kind of liberalization that binds countries to new rules and new commitments," said Daniel J. Ikenson, a trade specialist at the libertarian Cato Institute. "Countries want to liberalize at their own pace." It would be misleading to view the problems besetting the Doha talks too apocalyptically. Globalization is not about to stop in its tracks; new forms of cross-border commerce are continuing to proliferate, especially because of the Internet and the fast-growing efficiency of container shipping. "A lot of globalization goes on outside the world of negotiations and agreements," said Edward Gresser, a trade analyst at the Progressive Policy Institute. But for the WTO and its multilateral rules, which underpin the system and maintain its stability, the outlook has darkened. That is in part attributable to the success of the WTO and its predecessor, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, in sharply reducing trade barriers since World War II. Eight rounds of negotiations over the past six decades have slashed tariffs and eliminated quotas in many countries and in many industries such as electronics, automobiles and machinery; the sectors that still have high levels of protection in rich countries are the most politically sensitive, notably agriculture, textiles and apparel. Those are the areas where much of the current haggling has proven so fruitless. "We're really into the tough stuff," U.S. trade representative Susan C. Schwab said in an interview. Farm trade was the main source of the dispute that dissolved the meeting at the WTO's Geneva headquarters on Monday. Schwab insisted that other countries open their markets wider to the United States' highly efficient agricultural producers, a demand rejected by the European Union and India, whose governments face enormous pressure from farmers who are anxious to keep foreign competition at bay. Complicating matters further is the emergence of China, which joined the WTO in 2001, as an export powerhouse. "There's a concern on the part of many developing countries about opening their markets to China, and some concern about developed countries opening their markets so that China can walk away with the benefits," Schwab said. If those problems keep the Doha talks from reviving, one likely scenario is an acceleration in many countries' efforts to strike two-way and regional free-trade alliances such as the North American Free Trade Agreement and the more recent Central American Free Trade Agreement. That, many experts fret, could help marginalize the WTO as the central forum for opening trade. At the same time, such countries as Brazil will probably bring new cases before WTO tribunals, straining the system's ability to adjudicate contentious disputes and intensifying the danger that powerful nations will start defying WTO rulings. Complaints appear especially likely against the subsidy payments that governments in the United States, the E.U. and Japan give their farmers. Brazil had won a major case against U.S. cotton subsidies and another against European sugar subsidies, and it was expecting a final Doha agreement would curb other subsidies. If the talks "come to a flat end, I think you would have other countries looking at our programs; it just seems inevitable," U.S. Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns said Monday. Ultimately, the fear that the trading system will revert to the law of the jungle that prevailed in the 1930s will help bring the talks back to life, predicted Jeffrey Schott, a scholar at the Institute for International Economics. "Countries will sit back for a while, stew in their juices, and see the costs of not going back to the table," Schott said. "There are those who say the talks won't be revived, but my perspective is much more optimistic."
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.
25.454545
0.431818
0.431818
medium
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/25/AR2006072501601.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/25/AR2006072501601.html
A Mammoth Wealth Transfer Awaits the Area, Study Predicts
2006072719
Washington area residents are expected to bequeath $2.4 trillion over the next 50 years -- an amount to be divided among heirs, charities and estate taxes -- in what is believed to be the largest transfer of wealth in the region's history, according to a new study. Their beneficiaries will inherit about half of those assets, charities will get close to $460 billion and estate fees and taxes will eat up the rest, according to the study by Boston College's Center on Wealth and Philanthropy, to be released this week. It is the first look at the fate of wealth -- investments, homes, private retirement accounts and other assets -- accumulated by today's retirees and the aging generation of baby boomers expected to die between 2005 and 2055. Ultimately, the wealth will flow to their descendants in generations X and Y, researchers said. Because the average wealth of households in the region is substantially greater than the national average, beneficiaries of local estates can expect to inherit proportionally more than elsewhere in the country, according to the study. "The gross amount of wealth transfer is staggering," said Shep Burr, senior vice president of Chevy Chase Trust, a Bethesda wealth-management company that commissioned the report. The study predicted that the bulk of the bequests will come from households with a net worth of more than $1 million -- including equity in homes -- which account for 10 percent of households in the region. That doesn't mean that beneficiaries in less-affluent households will end up with nothing, according to Paul Schervish, director of the Center on Wealth and Philanthropy. Local households with assets of less than $200,000, for example, are expected to leave behind an average inheritance of $175,131, according to the study. Such a figure "doesn't change lives," Schervish said. "But it can be invested for retirement." Victoria Hutcherson, 56, a store clerk who lives in the District's Anacostia neighborhood, said she has saved all her life and expects to bequeath some of her nest egg to her 32-year-old daughter. "She's like me," Hutcherson said. "She knows how to spend money wisely, and she knows how to save money." The study encompassed a wide swath of the Washington region: five Maryland and 11 Virginia counties, six Virginia cities and the District.
Washington area residents are expected to bequeath $2.4 trillion over the next 50 years -- an amount to be divided among heirs, charities and estate taxes -- in what is believed to be the largest transfer of wealth in the region's history, according to a new study.
8.865385
1
52
low
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/25/AR2006072501451.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/25/AR2006072501451.html
Williams Signs Bill For Housing Plan
2006072719
Mayor Anthony A. Williams signed legislation yesterday for the revitalization of the Sursum Corda neighborhood, where affordable housing and redevelopment have been promoted and organized by residents. The bill advances a plan that calls for 1,600 housing units in Sursum Corda, a cooperative housing complex bounded by K and M streets NW between North Capitol Street and First Street, 520 of which are to be designated as affordable units for low-income families. The rest of the housing will be condominiums, apartments and townhouses intended for moderate-income and more-affluent residents as part of an effort to create a mixed-income community. "It'll have a wonderful effect on the neighborhood," said Alverta Munlyn, a former resident who was a major force behind the redevelopment plan. "After two and a half years of work between the community and the government, we have a plan that will work for everybody." The legislation authorizes spending city funds to start the project, to acquire properties and attract developers. It calls for the eventual creation of a new neighborhood elementary school, a recreation center, a library and a health clinic. Community activists who worked on the project hope the development will revive an area that Williams (D) deemed one of the District's 14 crime hot spots in 2004. In a controversial decision this month, the D.C. Council voted to give the city the power of eminent domain over Sursum Corda to move forward with development despite protests from some residents. Under the new plan, Sursum Corda residents will have the right to stay in their homes, and new housing will be built before the existing units are demolished. Community leaders said high crime rates in Sursum Corda have begun to decline since the 2004 murder of 14-year-old Jahkema "Princess" Hansen in an apartment building there. The neighborhood had long functioned as an open-air drug market where rival gangs fought for control, police officials said. After an increased enforcement effort, they reported that crime declined 40 percent within a year after Jahkema was killed. "This is about building a safe community," Munlyn said yesterday. "It includes our needs for a school, a library and lots of indoor and outdoor space for kids to do safe activities."
Mayor Anthony A. Williams signed legislation yesterday for the revitalization of the Sursum Corda neighborhood, where affordable housing and redevelopment have been promoted and organized by residents.
14.862069
1
29
low
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/25/AR2006072501517.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/25/AR2006072501517.html
Rewriting the Web for Mobile Phones
2006072719
Internet access has become a standard feature on most mobile phones, but navigating a Web page over a tiny screen or a slow connection has kept consumers from flocking to their phones to check e-mail, read news stories or consult a map. Now, the powerhouses of the Internet, including Google Inc. and Yahoo Inc., are introducing programs specifically tailored for the mobile phone, hoping to create an experience that puts the devices on a level playing field with the personal computer. Google yesterday unveiled a mobile version of its personalized home page for subscribers to its service and updated its mobile Google Maps feature to include live traffic updates. Yahoo Inc. last week announced that its Yahoo Go for Mobile, a Web application that combines e-mail, search, address book and local information programs, would be preloaded on millions of Motorola handsets. Mobile Web applications have been around for several years, but only recently have companies started to jump over the hurdles that initially kept them from reaching a larger share of the mobile market. "With mobile Web, we don't try to just plop PC-based services onto the phone," Yahoo spokeswoman Nicole Leverich said. "The network speeds are different, the device capabilities are different and what consumers want from us is different." Still, Mark Donovan, a senior analyst with the research firm M:Metrics Inc., said the demand for advanced mobile Web services would increase as the handset technology improves. In May, 25 million people, or 13 percent of wireless users, accessed news and other information from a mobile phone. "There are a lot more mobile phones in the world than there are computers, and they're the most personal and intimate of these devices," Donovan said. "Google and Yahoo can't view PCs and the wireless world as disconnected silos. We live in this grid of connectivity, and we want to connect wherever we may be." For the past year, the two Internet companies have offered text-messaging services that allowed mobile phone users to search for such information as weather forecasts, restaurant locations and movie times. Other businesses, including retailers and media channels, are looking for ways to make mobile Web applications profitable. Television channels ABC and HBO, for example, have launched services that allow mobile users to watch episodes of TV shows or download images. Unlike other mobile services, the content is not published through a wireless carrier. Instead, it is offered directly to the customer who uses the phone's Web connection to navigate to that site. "A lot of companies are trying to cash in by going directly to the consumer as opposed to publishing through a carrier," Donovan said. And that trend is only going to continue, said Matt Booth, an analyst with the market research firm Kelsey Group Inc. "These are still the early days of the mobile Web," he said. "There's going to be a big, big market, and there are some huge players who are going to put a lot of resources into this area." Simplifying the navigation experience, as Yahoo and Google are doing with their new mobile offerings, is a first step. Lewis Ward, an analyst at the market research firm IDC, said consumers need to be educated about how to access the Web over their phones before the mobile surfing experience reaches the mainstream audience. "There isn't quite enough eyeballs yet," he said. "There are a lot of adjustments to make it as user-friendly as possible. We're still a substantial distance from where we need to get."
This is your source for news on personal technology. Find info and reviews on the newest technology that affects your life. Read our latest features on new tech gadgets.
20.676471
0.529412
0.529412
medium
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/21/AR2006072100503.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072719id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/21/AR2006072100503.html
Marrakech Hammam: What's the Scrub?
2006072719
WHERE: In the Ville Nouvelle of Marrakech, outside the medina. WHY GO: To soak, scrub and socialize -- then repeat. Bathing usually is a simple operation, but in a Moroccan hammam, it's not your typical rub-a-dub-dub. First, there's no tub, just a honeycomb of tiled rooms with streaming faucets and perspiring walls. The multi-step cleansing technique requires a chemist's brew of hot and cold water, olive oil soap and a mud-like paste. You need to know when to douse and when to drench, when to scrub and when to soak. If you do it right, you'll walk out of the sweat chamber relaxed and glowing. Do it wrong and, well, you should've just stayed in your own bathroom. Most Moroccans know the drill, since they've been visiting hammams since they could fit inside a bucket -- a common sight at the facility. On any day, from early morning to late evening, you can see men in traditional jallabas, women trailing children and best girlfriends dragging their toiletry-filled buckets to the ubiquitous hammams. To be sure, the popular outposts are more than just a place to get "a good soak, steam and scrub, and to exfoliate your skin like a snake," explained Latif, my Marrakech guide. Descended from Roman baths and modeled after Turkish baths, the hammams were originally patronized by Moroccans whose homes lacked indoor plumbing. The baths also are rooted in the Islamic ritual of ablution: Muslims wash distinct parts of their body before their daily prayers. With modernization, though, the hammams have morphed into soak-and-socialize centers; indeed, at Majorelle, the chatter flowed like tap water. Each hammam's appeal (read: sanitary factor) varies immensely. Some are undeniably dirty, with dank surroundings and hairballs. Others are hospital-clean and modern, such as Majorelle, which shares the name of the nearby Oriental gardens that were planted during the French protectorate and are now owned by fashion designer Yves Saint-Laurent. High-end hotels also have hammams, but many are often solitary and silent. That sounded like my boring-old bathroom at home; I wanted company in the shower. "Here you are with Moroccans," said Latif, as he led me to the women's entrance at Majorelle. "It is traditional. I go at least once a week." For the uninitiated, hammams can befuddle: Do you soap first or use the mask? Cold water, then hot, or vice versa? And the biggest question: naked or beach attire? And if the latter, European or American? Fortunately, the all-inclusive package (cost: about $9) includes a fairy godmother with a magic bucket. Mine was Rabia, a doughy Mother Earth type in droopy white bikini bottoms. Taking my hand, Rabia led me to the largest room in the back, where half-naked women sat behind a fortress of buckets, scrubbing their bellies, brushing their wet hair, shaving their legs. Rabia filled a scoop with the henna-clay mixture and mimed for me to paint myself cocoa brown. Covered in the sludge, I waited for her return. And waited. I wrote "HELP" on my muddy leg, but the woman next to me spoke only Arabic. Eventually Rabia returned, drowned me under a waterfall, then escorted me to the middle chamber. She then busied herself with filling buckets (my cache had grown from one to three). I was then slowly spun around as she scrubbed all of my angles with a Brillo-like mitt; I could feel my snake skin shedding. More rinsing and lathering followed, this time with a supple olive oil soap that oozed like warm caramel. Then, a massage. After nearly an hour of cleansing, scrubbing and kneading, all that remained was the finale: the ceremonious dumping of the bucket over my head. Rosy red, I was ready to plunge back into the grit of Marrakech. As I gathered my belongings, Rabia handed me a parting gift: my mitt scraper. Now all I needed was a bucket. At Bain Majorelle (Rouidate 3 No. 57, Marrakech), a full hammam includes supplies, gommage, massage and tip, and costs about $9. Shower only costs $1.
Bathing usually is a simple operation, but in a Moroccan hammam, it's not your typical rub-a-dub-dub.
32.884615
1
26
medium
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/24/AR2006072400809.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/24/AR2006072400809.html
Stressing Pork, Not The Party
2006072519
GLEN ALLEN, Va. -- Sen. George Allen, the Virginia Republican up for reelection this year, and Jim Webb, his Democratic opponent, have big differences on Iraq. Allen supports President Bush's policies. Webb opposed the war. But the big news out of their debate Saturday in Hot Springs had nothing to do with the Middle East. The geographic locale that mattered was Craney Island. Most people outside Virginia's Hampton Roads region have never heard of Craney Island -- and neither had Webb, an anti-politician whose career has taken him from the military to the Reagan administration to writing and now back to the Democratic Party. Allen asked: "Jim, what's your position on the proper use of Craney Island?" Webb replied, candidly: "I'm not sure where Craney Island is. Why don't you tell me?" No doubt feeling very pleased, Allen replied: "Craney Island's in Virginia." Just last week -- as Jim Hodges of the Daily Press in Newport News, Va., reported -- the Senate authorized a $671.3 million expansion of Craney Island, adding 580 acres and "offering a boost for a future port there." Allen wanted no one to miss the significance. "This is huge," he told reporters. "It's a big, big deal." I have no idea whether Allen will get a boost from his quiz-show moment of triumph and the implication that he delivered big-time for Virginia. What's interesting is the extent to which Allen and other Republican incumbents around the country are talking up how they brought big government's largess to their constituents. It doesn't matter that they claim to be against that very same big government. Faced this year with a choice between running on their party's record and delivering pork, they'll take pork. That means that some incumbent Republican senators are acting as if they were seeking reelection for governor -- or even mayor. Sen. Mike DeWine (R-Ohio) started running a television spot a couple of weeks ago focusing on "fires, accidents, paramedic calls" and the needs of localities to be prepared for terrorist attacks.
Faced this year with a choice between running on their party's record and delivering pork, Republicans are taking pork.
19.318182
0.909091
13.363636
medium
medium
extractive
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/howitsplayingout/2006/07/heating_up.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072519id_/http://blog.washingtonpost.com/howitsplayingout/2006/07/heating_up.html
How It's Playing Out
2006072519
Outlook this week detailed daily life in both Beirut and Haifa as attacks in the Middle East continued. Apart from the dark humor in the diaries, the section also featured Amal Saad-Ghorayeb, a Hezbollah scholar in Beirut, trying to answer the question, as she put it, “what on earth” Hezbollah was up to when “it abducted two Israeli soldiers and provoked a punishing response that is creating orphans and bringing down buildings all around us?” A blogger reading Saad-Ghorayeb from Jerusalem says that reading her piece is a sobering reminder that compromise isn’t really an option in any realistic way. Jonathan Keiler agrees with most of Saad-Ghorayeb’s argument, especially the notion that Israel “can completely defeat [Hezbollah] only by conducting the kind of vicious campaign…that Israel will never do.” Though where Saad-Ghorayeb says a weakened Hezbollah is more dangerous than a strong militia, Keiler disagrees. “It is hard to imagine that Hezbollah can be much worse than it is... Better it be weakened when it resumes the offensive than to act from a position of strength.” There was plenty of additional disagreement earlier on Monday when Saad-Ghorayeb answered reader questions online. She noted that many non Shiites were initially resentful of Hezbollah for provoking Israel’s attacks, but now that anger has been “replaced by a resentment of Israel’s excessive violence,” which, is “perpetrating collective punishment.” Now, Saad-Ghorayeb said, one poll indicates that over 90 percent of Shiites support Hezbollah’s right to exist. Many people writing in used the word terrorist to describe Hezbollah, a term that Saad-Ghorayeb disputes. The spirited back and forth prompted one commenter to say that the conflict on the washingtonpost.com live online session is one tiny window into why “resolving the conflicts has been such an intractable problem…It may be satisfying to be oppositional, but it doesn’t seem like a good way to move forward.” Saad-Ghorayeb doesn’t find opposition for opposition’s sake satisfying. She says she finds it difficult to find common ground with readers whose basic assumption is that Israel is “a peaceful nation. I have to make a counter-argument. Some critical thinking is in order here.” Elsewhere in Outlook this week, Michael Grunwald wrote about the politics of global warming—making the pun it is perhaps impossible not to make that “global warming is having its moment in the sun.” In response, Glen Barry writes at climateark that Grunwald’s piece indicates that “denial is starting to crumble” even though “Americans continue to resist the dramatic personal and societal actions necessary to lower carbon emissions.” Pat Cleary writes about Grunwald’s piece at Shop Floor, the blog of the National Association of Manufacturers (the “millions of people who make things in America”), which was also linked to on RedState. Further global warming puns prove impossible to resist. “This piece re-heats…lots of canards, assumes consensus and alludes to the hot weather in Washington as just so much more global warming.” Cleary sees no evidence that it is and thinks the discussion remains “one-sided.” From Australia, Blue Beyond notices that Americans “now accept that global warming is a reality, but don’t want to take the responsibility to do something about it. It’s too easy “to blame the Americans” because, as Blue Beyond notes “we Aussies are doing our bit to screw up the planet too.” A solution? “I hope that Americans do the one good thing and put Mr. Gore into the Presidency. Then we have a chance that one man’s voice can make a difference.” But where, really, should one man’s voice be making a difference? Is the presidency really the place for Al Gore? Grunwald also argued in Outlook this week that Mr. Gore should think about a second act as the second in command and re-run for Veep. Andrew Sullivan for one doesn’t think “it’s nuts.” Sullivan says Gore is “the most viable candidate in my view,” mostly because of his pre-9/11 hawkish record and foreign policy experience. He is though, as Grunwald writes as well, a “terrible candidate.” A solution? “An Obama-Gore ticket, with Gore as the veep, is a variation on the Bush-Cheney 2000 strategy—a young, untested pol with a daddy at his side.” Who else could run with Gore? At the Democratic Daily, former unofficial Kerry blogger Ron Chusid asks whether anyone is up for a Kerry-Gore ticket. He notes “it will never happen” but likes thinking about it anyway. By Rachel Dry | July 24, 2006; 4:20 PM ET Previous: Hidden History | Next: Chavismo on the March? TrackBack URL for this entry: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/cgi-bin/mt/mtb.cgi/8959 A Kerry-Gore ticket? That's a counsel of despair if I ever heard one. What, Michael Dukakis doesn't want to leave teaching? A good rule of modern politics is: you lose, you're done. Recent Presidential candidates have not been people like Adlai Stevenson, Bob Dole or even Roanld Reagan, people with records of accomplishment in public life. They are at most people with records of manufactured accomplishments, whose positions of public prominence rest on their name identification and the number of people they can persuade to give them large amounts of money. Kerry has been a showhorse Senator throughout his career in Washington; Gore's reputation as an innovative thinker in the Senate was based on his preference for staking out positions on peripheral issues about which most people had no strong opinions. Neither man was half the public servant Walter Mondale was, and each did a lousy job as a Presidential candidate, especially Gore. The alternatives for Democrats include a freshman Senator whose principle credential is that she married a guy who became President, a former freshman Senator blessed with great hair and teeth who treated his Senate seat as if it were a part-time job, and yet another freshman Senator whose only accomplishment in public life to date is having delivered skillfully a couple of speeches written by someone else. So I suppose in that context a certain amount of interest in Kerry or Gore might be excused. And I can understand why a Democrat might argue that anyone they nominate is bound to be better than President Bush or anyone the Republicans will put forward in 2008. But 2008 isn't here yet. Are these guys really the best the Democrats have? Posted by: Zathras | July 25, 2006 12:45 PM To quote: "A good rule of modern politics is: you lose, you're done." Pretty well sums up my feeling about the Democratic Party. The fact that they could not beat Bush in '04 brought up the legitimate question of what exactly, at this juncture in history, is the Democratic Party good for? What purpose does it serve? The business in Connecticut could be another, slightly more obvious, coffin nail. Our leadership consists of people of keen intellect, people of staggering incompetence, people of conscience and energy and purpose. What they seem to have in common is they are all failures. What WILL it take to turn it around? I can only hope that I'm wrong and that a good, uh, rump-kicking or bottoming-out will serve as some kind of pushing off point in a new direction. Posted by: Sore | July 25, 2006 07:40 PM We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features. User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.
A weekly look at Internet reaction and blogging about the lead story in the Outlook section. Visit www.washingtonpost.com/.
82.368421
0.526316
0.736842
high
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/25/AR2006072500260.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/25/AR2006072500260.html
Israeli Airstrike Hits U.N. Outpost
2006072519
JERUSALEM, July 25 -- An Israeli airstrike hit a United Nations post in southern Lebanon late Tuesday, killing four international observers, hours after Prime Minister Ehud Olmert agreed to lift Israel's 14-day blockade of Lebanon for shipments of humanitarian aid to reach the swelling ranks of displaced Lebanese civilians. U.N. officials said an aerial shell struck an observer post in the hilltop town of Khiyam, and rescue teams reached the site soon after to search for survivors in the rubble. Milos Strugar, a senior adviser for the mission, known by the acronym UNIFIL, said the four observers inside the post had taken cover in bunkers after 14 Israeli airstrikes landed nearby throughout the afternoon. In a statement, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan said he was "shocked and deeply distressed by the apparently deliberate targeting" of the "clearly marked U.N. post at Khiyam." Annan said Olmert had given him "personal assurances" that U.N. posts would not be targeted, adding that the UNIFIL commander had been in "repeated contact with Israeli officers throughout the day on Tuesday, stressing the need to protect that particular U.N. position from attack." "I call on the government of Israel to conduct a full investigation into this very disturbing incident and demand that any further attack on U.N. positions and personnel must stop," Annan said. Israeli government officials, expressing regret over the deaths, said that the U.N. personnel were not targeted and that there would be an investigation. [The official New China News Agency reported Wednesday that one of the dead was Chinese. The others were from Austria, Canada and Finland, the Associated Press reported, citing U.N. and Lebanese military officials.] The airstrike came at the end of a day when Hezbollah gunmen operating from southern Lebanon fired scores of missiles into Israel and battled Israeli forces seeking to uproot the Shiite Muslim militia from a border stronghold. The Israeli government and the Bush administration are drawing up plans for a more robust international peacekeeping force to deploy in Lebanon as part of a diplomatic solution to end the fighting, now entering its third week. After international criticism that Israel was not doing enough to ensure the delivery of food and medicine to Lebanon's increasingly desperate south, Olmert pledged in a meeting here with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice earlier in the day to allow aid flights, sea shipments and safe passage for deliveries on roads that have been targeted for days by Israeli bombers. Israeli officials said they would begin allowing the aid to arrive as soon as possible. But Lebanese officials warned that it would take at least a week to repair runways at Beirut international airport, bombed by Israeli warplanes along with major roads and bridges in the south after Hezbollah captured two Israeli soldiers in a July 12 cross-border raid. Israeli military aircraft hit dozens of targets again Tuesday as Olmert, backed by Rice, promised to continue to fight the militia arrayed along the northern border. "We will reach out for them, we will stop them, and we will not hesitate to take the most severe measures against those who are aiming thousands of missiles against innocent civilians for one purpose -- to kill them," Olmert said. "This is something that we will not be able to tolerate." Rice's two-day visit to the region was more a listening tour than a determined attempt to end a conflict that showed no sign of abating. She declined to call for an immediate cease-fire, saying that "we cannot return to a status quo ante, in which extremists at any time can decide to take innocent life hostage again." "It is time for a new Middle East," Rice said. "It is time to say to those who do not want a different kind of Middle East that we will prevail, they will not."
JERUSALEM, July 25 -- An Israeli airstrike hit a United Nations post in southern Lebanon late Tuesday, killing four international observers, hours after Prime Minister Ehud Olmert agreed to lift Israel's 14-day blockade of Lebanon for shipments of humanitarian aid to reach the swelling ranks of...
14.294118
0.980392
49.019608
low
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/25/AR2006072500618.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/25/AR2006072500618.html
Immigration Proposal Aims to Bridge Republican Divide
2006072519
In an attempt to strike a pre-election Republican compromise on immigration, two conservative lawmakers unveiled a plan today that would allow most of the 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States a chance to work here legally, but only after the government certifies that U.S. borders have been sufficiently secured. The proposal -- sponsored by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (Tex.) and Rep. Mike Pence (Ind.) -- would pressure illegal immigrants to "self-deport" to their home countries within two years of the law's enactment and apply for a new kind of visa that would allow them to return to the United States quickly and work legally if a job awaits them. They would have to work here for 17 years, however, to be eligible for U.S. citizenship. The plan, which has received mixed reviews from those briefed on it, is aimed at unifying Republicans on an issue that has bitterly divided them for months and threatens to damage the party in future elections. The stringent rules for illegal immigrants are certain to draw bipartisan opposition from those who favor a quicker and easier path to citizenship. Additionally, conservatives who favor legislation to secure the border this year and delay action on guest workers and the citizenship question are also expected to oppose it. The Washington Post was provided an advance copy of the proposal. Hutchison and Pence consider it the foundation for a possible compromise between the Senate, which voted for a plan that would provide a new path to citizenship, and the House, which has demanded that Congress focus only on securing borders for now. Former House majority leader Richard K. Armey (R-Tex.), a critic of the Senate bill, said the new proposal could be "a bridge between the two bodies." Armey, former House speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) and former Republican National Committee chairman Ed Gillespie were briefed on the plan in hopes that they would help build pressure on skeptical lawmakers, the aides said. White House officials, including presidential adviser Karl Rove, have been told of the framework but not the details. A Republican close to the White House said President Bush "won't be crazy about it, but I think he would sign it." The impasse will not be easy to break. The push for a pre-election compromise has lost its sense of urgency, as both sides privately calculate that no deal might be the best politics and produce the best policy. Hutchison and Pence think they can bridge the divide. They emphasize that immigration laws will not be changed until the president certifies that the borders are secure. The plan includes the most popular security measures that have passed the House and Senate, including new border fences, additional enforcement personnel and bigger detention facilities. The government would spend about two years instituting the security changes. U.S. companies would open Ellis Island-type centers in many countries to process applications for a new kind of work visa, known as the Good Neighbor SAFE (Secure Authorized Foreign Employee) visa. The government would create tamper-proof identification cards that contain personal information and biometric technology designed to minimize fraud. Illegal immigrants would be required to return to their home countries and apply for the SAFE visa. They would undergo criminal background checks and health screenings and would need to prove that a U.S. job awaits them. The new visa would be offered only to immigrants from countries that are part of trade pacts covering Canada, Mexico and most of Central America. The SAFE visas would be good for two years and could be renewed five times, for a total stay of 12 years. At any point, the holders could return to their home countries and apply for U.S. citizenship without paying a fine or back taxes. But they would have to wait in line. Illegal immigrants could extend their stay beyond 12 years by applying for a five-year X-Change visa, which requires a job and a clean record. After 17 years in the system, X-Change visa-holders could go through the citizenship process without leaving the United States.
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.
20.076923
0.589744
0.74359
medium
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/24/AR2006072401039.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/24/AR2006072401039.html
A Long Flight of No Return
2006072519
The passengers settled uncomfortably into the narrow seats of the Boeing 737 as a woman in a blue uniform launched into the pre-flight safety speech that has become a ritual of modern air travel. But her tone made it clear that she was no flight attendant, and this was no ordinary flight. "Keep your seat belts on at all times. Don't touch any of the buttons above your head, and don't touch the window shades," the woman, a U.S. marshal, commanded in Spanish. "Once we're in the air, we'll give you something to eat, and then you can go to the bathroom-- with permission . Did you hear me?" The passengers -- 105 men shackled at the wrists and the ankles--grumbled their assent. Then they peered out the thick, blurry windows for a last glimpse of Virginia. Once, they had been hopeful newcomers to the United States. Now, they were about to leave for good on a deportation flight for illegal immigrants run by the Department of Homeland Security. As the plane began to hurtle down the runway, many of them let out a cheer. It was their first time on an airplane. In seat 7A, Jose de Jesus Galea, 37, stared morosely out his window, unmoved. The burly Salvadoran pet store owner had called Virginia home for 21 years. It seemed incredible, he said later, that he would never again see the flat, forested landscape that was receding rapidly from view. Just as strange was the thought that he would soon be back in a country he last saw when he was 17. The year was 1985, El Salvador was in the throes of civil war, and Galea had just been discharged from one of the army's most ruthless battalions. Pressed into service when he was 14, Galea said he was taught to torture the unit's captives by pushing needles under their fingernails. He had buried innocent civilians alive, and he was haunted by guilty flashbacks of their screams. Now he was being deported back because of a drunken assault. Deportation is a fate that befalls only a fraction of illegal immigrants, though such flights may become commonplace if some of the more restrictive immigration reforms pending in Congress are adopted. Although U.S. authorities turn away or deport more than 1.6 million people attempting to cross the border illegally every year, once an immigrant manages to sneak into U.S. territory, the chances of getting caught are minimal. In 2004, the most recent year for which statistics are available, authorities deported only 104,000 immigrants who had been in the United States for three days or longer before they were apprehended. That's less than 1 percent of the nation's estimated 12 million illegal immigrants. Those who are deported often come to the attention of immigration officials only because they commit a crime. Authorities in the Washington area often wait until they have a critical mass of deportees, then charter a plane to fly them to a detention facility near the U.S. border for final transport to their home countries. Such was the case with the men aboard the somewhat worn, plain white aircraft rolling onto the runway at Dulles International Airport one recent afternoon, its destination Alexandria, La. Watching over them were 16 marshals, who had reason to be wary. About 45 percent of the deportees had been convicted of violent crimes. Others had committed offenses as minor as public drunkenness. Although most were Salvadorans, there were natives of the Dominican Republic, Mexico, Guatemala, Jamaica and Honduras.
The passengers settled uncomfortably into the narrow seats of the Boeing 737 as a woman in a blue uniform launched into the pre-flight safety speech that has become a ritual of modern air travel.
18.324324
1
37
medium
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/25/AR2006072500538.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/25/AR2006072500538.html
Existing-Home Sales Fall in June
2006072519
Sales of previously owned homes in the United States fell in June for the eighth time in the past 10 months, reflecting a continued slowdown in the housing market, according to a report released today by the National Association of Realtors. The Washington region followed that trend. In Loudoun County, for example, 515 existing single-family homes and condominiums were sold last month, down from 994 in June 2005, a 48.2 percent decline. Home prices dropped last month in Loudoun for the first time in six years. Today's report shows that across the United States home sales dropped 1.3 percent in June to an annual pace of 6.62 million units -- more proof that American homes have become harder to sell as mortgage interest rates have been heading up. Meanwhile, the median selling price of a home rose 0.9 percent -- to $231,000 -- in June from the same period last year. (The median is the point at which half the sales are higher and half are lower.) But home prices in some parts of Maryland bucked the national trend, rising 12.5 percent during the past year in Prince George's County (to $337,500 in June), 11.9 percent in St. Mary's County ($335,000), 6.1 percent in Montgomery County ($467,000) and five percent in Anne Arundel County ($351,750). The picture isn't as pretty for some homeowners in northern Virginia, where selling prices were down 1.2 percent in Loudoun County (to $485,000) and unchanged in Fairfax County, Fairfax City, Arlington County, Alexandria and Falls Church ($500,000). In the District, the median price of a single-family home and condominium rose 3.6 percent to $430,000. "The change in price performance is directly tied to housing inventories," David Lereah, the real estate association's chief economist, said in a statement. "A year ago, we had a lean supply of homes and a sellers' market, with monthly home sales at an all-time record high." In addition, home sales may be affected by mortgage rates, which have risen to the highest levels in more than four years. But Lereah said the decline in home sales may be slowing. "Over the last three months home sales have held in a narrow range, easing to a level that is near our annual projection, which tells us the market is stabilizing," he said. "At the same time, sellers have recognized that they need to be more competitive in their pricing given the rise in housing inventories. " As a result, "home prices are only a little higher than a year ago," Lereah added. In the Washington region, homes are taking a lot longer to sell. For example, in June 2005, the average home in the Fairfax-Arlington-Fairfax-Falls Church area took 15 days to sell. Last month, the typical home in that market sold after 49 days.
Sales of previously owned homes in the United States fell in June for the eighth time in the past 10 months, reflecting a continued slowdown in the housing market, according to a report released today by the National Association of Realtors.
13.136364
1
44
low
high
extractive
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2006/07/2008_the_case_for_barack_obama_1.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072519id_/http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2006/07/2008_the_case_for_barack_obama_1.html
2008: The Case for Barack Obama
2006072519
At this time two years ago Barack Obama was not yet a household name. He had won the Illinois Democratic Senate nomination in a romp but had yet to deliver his keynote address at the 2004 Democratic convention -- a speech that catapulted him to political superstar status. Nor had he crushed perennial candidate Alan Keyes (R) in the general election to become the second African American man to be elected to the Senate since Reconstruction. Two years later the excitement about Obama has only increased. Democrats across the country want a piece of Obama -- his office says he gets 300 requests for appearance a week. Obama and his top aides insist that he is flattered by all of the attention but pays little mind to calls for him to run for president in two years. Denials aside, Obama's travel schedule continues to raise eyebrows. The Illinoisan will headline Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin's annual steak fry in September -- a traditional proving ground for aspiring presidential candidates. Obama is cast as the safe pick for Harkin since so many other high-profile Democrats in the Senate are already openly weighing White House bids. Today, The Fix make the case for an Obama presidential candidacy in 2008. Check back on Thursday for the case against such a race. Neither of these posts should be read as an indicator of whether Obama will run or not. We tend to doubt he will make the race; these posts are meant to spark conversation, so feel free to agree, disagree, condemn or compliment in the comments section below. In politics, timing is everything. If you pass on an opportunity, it might not come around again. Just ask former New York Gov. Mario Cuomo. In the run-up to the 1992 election, Cuomo was widely seen as the frontunner for the Democratic nomination against President George H.W. Bush. After two months of publicly hemming and hawing, Cuomo announced in December 1991 that he would not run, saying he could not simultaneously address economic problems in the Empire State and run for president. (Cuomo had also walked away from a presidential candidacy four years earlier.) The rest, as they say, is history. With Cuomo out of the race, Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton surged to the nomination and the presidency. By the time the office was open again in 2000, Cuomo had been out of the governor's mansion for six years -- ousted from that position in 1994 by an upstart state senator named George Pataki (R). Cuomo's cautionary tales hangs heavy over many Obama supporters. There's little question that Obama is the hottest political Democratic commodity in the country right now, drawing support from across the geographic and ideological spectrum. When 2,000 people show up to a state party dinner just for the chance to see Obama in person, it's clear there is an excitement level about him that no other Democratic politician (not even Hillary Rodham Clinton) can match. Don't underestimate the excitement factor when it comes to presidential politics. Much of 2007 will be spent in the campaign trenches -- door-knocking, sending out mail pieces, urging small dollar donations, the kind of work that is far from glorious and can only be done well if there is a committed group of volunteers willing to do it. For those who say Obama needs more seasoning before making a national bid, take a look at history. No senator has been directly elected president since John F. Kennedy in 1960, although scads have made the attempt. National polling shows the American public has soured considerably on Washington, and many Democratic insiders are coming to believe that the longer someone stays in Washington the less chance he or she has of being elected president. As evidence, look no further than the current chief executive. When George W. Bush made clear he would run for president in 2000, he had only six years of elected office under his belt -- and that in a state where the governor has strict limits on his power. The lesson is that presidential elections are not always decided by the candidate with the longest -- or most impressive -- political resume. A great candidate on paper doesn't always equal a great candidate in practice. Obama has several other factors working for him from a process point of view. As we have noted in this space before, the first hurdle that any serious presidential candidate must clear is a financial one. Given the likely frontloading of the nomination process (four states voting in a 15-day period in January 2008), only those candidates able to fund full campaign operations and expensive television advertising buys in multiple states will be competitive. Let's assume, conservatively, that the price tag for that kind of four state campaign is roughly $25 million. At the moment, the candidates who appear to have the capacity to raise that kind of money are Clinton, John Kerry, John Edwards (maybe), ex-Virginia Gov. Mark Warner and Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh. (Former Vice President Al Gore would also qualify for that list if he decided to run.) Obama would immediately join that group. He raised and spent $14 million in the general election against Keyes in 2004. And if the early returns of his Hopefund leadership PAC are an indication, there's plenty more where that come from. Since its founding last year, Hopefund has raised nearly $4 million -- putting it in the upper echelons of all leadership PACs currently operating. The level of interest in Obama among the donor community and his fundraising base in Chicago (one of the Democratic fundraising hotspots) should erase any doubt that he could compete or eclipse every candidate but Clinton in the fundraising chase. The other major factor recommending an Obama run in 2008 is his positioning on the Iraq war. Obama was not in the Senate in 2002 when the chamber passed the resolution authorizing President Bush to use force to remove Saddam Hussein from power. But Obama has said that he opposed the war all along, and he has been a frequent critic of the Bush administration's handling of the conflict. This stance puts Obama in rarefied air, since Clinton, Edwards, Kerry and Bayh all voted for the resolution (Warner has sought a middle ground, refusing to call for a timetable for withdrawal). The only candidate likely to run (again, we are leaving Gore out of this debate) who has a so-called "clean" record on the war is Wisconsin Sen. Russ Feingold, who has not shown the capacity to raise the tens of millions he would need to be competitive. Take all of that together and what's it spell? O-B-A-M-A 2008! Check back Thursday for the other side of this argument... Read The Fix's past cases FOR and AGAINST: * Rudy Giuliani: For | Against * Al Gore: For | Against * John Kerry: For | Against By Chris Cillizza | July 25, 2006; 7:35 AM ET | Category: Democratic Party , Eye on 2008 Previous: And the Winners Are: Clinton, Edwards and Nevada | Next: The Fix Talks Back: Bellwether Project, Lieberman and More Add The Fix to Your Site "great charisma", "good man", WHO CARES. What does Barak Obama stand for ? He's the African-American male version of Hillary Clinton. I couldn't be less impressed quite franky. Posted by: ducky | September 18, 2006 8:17 AM I also feel, as Adam expressed a few weeks ago, that Barack is the country's brightest hope since RFK. Intensely moral, articulate, able to garner support from both sides of the aisle, because what he says is right-on, I think these are all fine qualities for a president that is currently lacking in the current administration. As far as foriegn policy experience, he's right now in Kenya encouraging people to get tested for HIV. He'll win over our enemies as well as our friends, and we can happily eat French Fries again because we won't be mad at each other any more. I e-mailed Barack about 6 months ago asking him to run. He did not respond to my e-mail, but maybe if someone more articulate and knowledgeable than I could do it too, it may put a bug in his ear. Posted by: Rob in Covington, VA | August 24, 2006 6:07 PM I see Mr. Obama in South Africa, visiting Mandela's cell; in Ukraine, dealing with Uranium; in Kenya, visiting his father's village... I don't think it is speculation for me to say that these are the travels of a man who is dealing with big, philisophical questions in his mind... the kind of questions that the democratic party needs to be dealing with before it puts together a platform for 2008. The kind of questions that lend themselves to elegant elocution, etc., e.g. bill clinton, hell, even Reagan. I fully support this man. In terms of cold wheeling and dealing, how is four years in the senate any less experience than two terms in the texas governorship? Fresh. Posted by: big drew | August 22, 2006 2:43 AM I have stopped looking to old-time politics to run America. I think that's why people are excited about who will be running in 08. Being from Michigan I can say that I am open to all candidates. My opinion is that Bayh/Obama would be a good ticket. Bayh, a senator and former governor is from a red state and could swing other midwest red states and Obama is a strong, youthful, upcoming senator that shows promise and a VP seat in 08 could catapult him to president in 2012 or 2016. Both are relatively young, photogentic, from neighboring states, smart, and could bring a new prespective to our government. Posted by: dclabman | August 11, 2006 1:49 PM Obama could very well be the first black president (after Bill Clinton, of course!)... There is no way the republicans could fork out the first black president, as mentioned above... I mean, their support from the black voters is around 10%! If you visit easily accessable sites such as BET.com, even there you will find that support for republicans, or a possible black republican president nominee (Condi) - the support is VERY minimal. I say, OBAMA 2008! Posted by: Flood | July 29, 2006 3:02 AM I forgot to mention that question I told you to ask yourself after you sit alone and ask GOD for a sign to help you. "What is Michael Steele doing these days in Maryland and are you going to the ball park with your real brother?" Chicago is in town this weekend in Baltimore. Embrace him, his friends and his vision. Posted by: Lightning | July 28, 2006 1:13 PM I forgot to mention that question I told you to ask yourself after you sit alone and ask GOD for a sign to help you. "What is Michael Steele doing these days in Maryland and are you going to the ball park with your real brother?" Chicago is in town this weekend in Baltimore. Embrace him, his friends and his vision. Posted by: lightning | July 28, 2006 1:12 PM I forgot to mention that question I told you to ask yourself after you sit alone and ask GOD for a sign to help you. "What is Michael Steele doing these days in Maryland and are you going to the ball park with your real brother?" Chicago is in town this weekend in Baltimore. Embrace him, his friends and his vision. Posted by: lightning | July 28, 2006 1:12 PM Thanks for pulling my comment. I guess I hit the nail right on the head. Obama should join the GOP and be appreciated, supported, embraced and ultimately placed before the podium. He is a cadillac for sale on a lot full of late model fords. Obama, as I know you are screening this blog, do not be afraid to call E. Dole and ask her for a horse to mount on the GOP platform. From your friend Lightning. Posted by: lightning | July 28, 2006 1:06 PM I believe Senator Obama is our best hope for retaking the White House in the first open election - no sitting president or VP running - we've had in many election cycles. His consistent anti-Iraq war message differentiates Sen. Obama and will energize an underutilized anti-war movement in our party and country. I believe he inspires average Americans like no other living political leader. If you believe in Sen. Obama as I do, I encourage you to email his campaign, and urge him to run in 2008. On his website, I would probably check mark "position on an issue" and then check "other" for the subject. Posted by: RobertinSeattle | July 27, 2006 9:32 PM Sorry Bhoomes, but I am a citizen- born here, if that matters in your small dark little mind. Oh, and yes, I vote. Always. And not for anyone in the Ass-Clown Christian Taliban Republican Party. Posted by: maria | July 27, 2006 3:25 PM And, for the record, I'm a registered Democrat. Posted by: peter | July 27, 2006 9:53 AM Sigh. I wasn't questioning the statistics themselves. I was questioning your reduction of the eligible black electorate. Say blacks are 13% of the population, as you suggested. And say we have a population of 100 people. That's 13 blacks in our population. We'll use the middle of your 3%-5% figure for non-voting age blacks. So 4% of our population is too young to vote. Four percent of 13 people is 0.52 people, so 12.48 blacks are of voting age. We're still at 12.48% of our population, not 8%-10%, as you suggested. Then we'll use your figure of 4% of blacks having been through the criminal justice system. We'll even say that all of them went through as adults as opposed to as juveniles, were convicted of felonies, and have not regained their right to vote through the courts; that's pretty presumptuous. If we lose 4% of our voting age population of 12.48, that brings us to 11.9808 people. Of our original black population of 13 people, 92.16% can still vote. And almost 12% of our total population are blacks that can vote - not the 6%-9% you suggested. That's what I meant by sketchy math. Get some numbers from Florida and then we'll work with those. Posted by: peter | July 27, 2006 9:51 AM Adam T - right on! An Edwards-Obama ticket has great potential for the Dems to take back the White House. Each man has the intelligence and the spiritual strength to act on behalf of all Americans rather than only those with fat wallets and family connections. Edwards-Obama 2008 gets my vote! Posted by: maggieO | July 27, 2006 9:30 AM Please. He is an empty suit. His only claims to fame are: (1) Good-looking, (2) Youngish, (3) Mixed-race, (4) Muslim background/though Christian now (not a plus in many circles). If a person with his resume and resume were a plain-looking 65 year-old white Christian he couldn't get elected dog catcher. Jeez. This isn't the Academy Awards or Vogue magazine. It's the presidency of the United States! Posted by: W Hayes | July 27, 2006 7:53 AM There is racism everywhere. But it's different in the south. Some in the south have never gotten over the LBJ's Voting Rights Act of 1964. It's not just a hostility towards Blacks, but also of any northern Democrat who runs for national office. Yankees will vote for a southernor, i.e. Bill Clinton, Al Gore. But many whites in the south will only vote for the party of LBJ if the nominee has a southern accent. John Edwards is just as liberal as John Kerry, yet he talks with a southern accent and is therefore considered a much stronger candidate in the south than John Kerry. If it was just an issue of voting for people who reminded them of their own heritage, white southern Republicans would also only vote for candidates with a southern accent. But the Republican party has never had that problem in the south, because they are not "blamed" for empowering Black southernors with the Voting Rights Act of 1964. My original point was that Democrats can win the White House without the south; therefore, Democrats shouldn't renounce their core values - or eliminate otherwise qualified yankee candidates - just to appease the irrational decades old hostilities of some red states whites. Posted by: RobertinSeattle | July 26, 2006 7:00 PM Extreme racism in the South? really? Huh. Ever been to Boston, NYC, Philly? Posted by: | July 26, 2006 4:35 PM I never said RFK was killed in the south. He was shot walking through a hotel kitchen in Los Angelos. But nor was he a Black male. There are enlightened whites in the south. But it's still a very racist place, overall, with extreme segregation. Black political leaders in the south rely on turn out by Black voters. It's not like in Seattle, an overwhelmingly white city, that elects a very popular mayor who happens to be Black (Norm Rice). I went to graduate school in the south and watched Black/white relations very closely. xxxxxxxx I don't think some people fully appreciate the significance of Senator Obama. You have to experience him in person to fully appreciate him. This type of born leader comes along only once in a lifetime. I wholeheartedly agree with those who say he is the JFK, RFK and MLK of our lifetime - of the 21st century. I've followed politics closely since I was a child, and I've never encountered anyone like Senator Obama before. And no other political figure in this country inspires the type of following that Senator Obama does from average Americans. Posted by: RobertinSeattle | July 26, 2006 3:22 PM Well Peter, feel free to correct me. Are 4% of black males not incarcerated per the 2000 Census? Or are the 0-17 year population numbers not accurate? What are the Republican numbers? Black men only make up let's say .5% of the prison population? Help me understand what makes these numbers sketchy. I'm sure you know the correct numbers Peter. So please enlighten me. I have no clue what I'm talking about, right? Lay it on me. Just please site your source. You better hope my numbers are right if you want the GOP (KKK) to stay in office man. And those Black's in New orleans should have known better too...But atleast GW finally spoke to the NAACP (with Condi Rice at his side)...She felt more out of place then he did...But there is no need for the NAACP because Jim Crow and slavery didn't really exist and us poor black people are extremely lazy....GET AT ME PLEASE...I will DESTROY anything you have w/ substantiated facts. Posted by: Black Yalie | July 26, 2006 2:27 PM Posted by: peter | July 26, 2006 1:50 PM Let me get this straight. Black people make up roughly 12-13% of the population. 4% of black men are incarcerated and or have been through the criminal justice system (means they can't vote if they have had served time felonies.) So we'll take that to 8-10%. Another 3-5% of that are of non voting age. So let's take that to 6-9%. Then there's Florida. Can't forget Florida. Look, I like many people don't care if the person running for president is pruplr, but there is one problem...there are no purple people! There are no green people! There are no blue people. I don't understand why people don't acknowledge that this country is not politically made for minority people. I believe in Sue's comment she said we are all immigrants and etc. Sure we are, and we even built this country. But who did we build it for. Who paid us to build it? How much were we paid? When the middle class was established, who created it? Who are the Bush's, the Weyerhouses, The Morgan's, The Pillsbury's, the Stanton's, the Chaffee's, and etc? They are the ones who politically and economically have a stronghold on this country. Make no mistake, I wish Barak and any other person of color the best in a political election. Really I do, but to say we are one America and We Shall Overcome, and we can beat them at the polls is immature and unrealistic. The Fix is in in on political power in this country and Billy C (YLS) would have gotten his doors blown off if the Republicans could have ran someone better than Grandpa w/ one arm. Posted by: Black Yalie | July 26, 2006 1:31 PM I think Obama would do better with the "Bubba" vote than people realize. I remember reading an article about Obama's senate campaign which covered a campaign event he held in southern Illinois. Obama was the only black person there and all the folks who attended were middled aged conservative white farmers and the like. The reporter was struck by the site of seeing all these "Bubbas" wearing big "Obama" buttons. The people who wouldn't vote for someone because they are black would probably never vote for a Democrat anyway. And black voters would turn out in historic numbers. Posted by: CBS | July 26, 2006 1:16 PM I believe people are wrong when viewing Obama and his running as inexperienced, look what we have now!!! I believe Obama is well spoken, thoughful and genuine, I am afraid though that if he wants to run it should be in 08 while he is still "green", because let's face it after a few years in the "money pit" we call our capitol if your not skewed and corrupt your well on your way! Maybe what this country needs is someone fresh and NON-Washington. Worked for Lincoln, Washington etc., and look what they achieved! I personally don't care if the guys skin color is purple, if he is smart and gives the American people the attention THEY deserve, then I would be willing to vote for him, I have told many people I believe and Ideal ticket would be an Obama/Clark ticket or the other way around. General Clark is a fine man and his military experience would help this country get back to where our standing needs to be. I haven't read yet about either one of them beholding to the Oil companies or big corporations so that's already a +. We need fresh blood, new ideas and someone who cares about AMERICA. People better get over their fears of a black brown or yellow President, because the last time I looked this country was pretty much a rainbow and if our borders continue to be ungarded pretty soon we will have SPANISH as our national language and Vincente Fox will be running the commerce department. Please that's not a slander of hispanics, it's simply a fact. We were all from immigrants at one time or another,and as long as they are here LEGALLY, I have no problem voting for them either. I am sick to death of the same faces running Washington and this country, were going down the toilet americans and Bush/Cheney/Rove have their hands on the handle! Let us move together as a nation and throw all of the bums out, either side and get some new faces in there, if they screw up then vote them out of office after one term. The only thing these guys understand is REELECTION! I hope come November they get the message loud and clear, unless we have all those "hanging chads" afterwards, then our slanted supreme court will decide again, God help us! Thanks Fed up in Idaho Posted by: Sue Filutze | July 26, 2006 1:05 PM RFK was killed in Los Angeles. (Of course that is in Southern California.) I am mightily weary of the white southern stereotype, i.e. a racist jerk. Just one fact about the south, in Mississippi, there are more elected black officials (mayors, aldermen, legislators and even a former congressman and current US congressman) than any other state in the union. Posted by: Bubba | July 26, 2006 12:22 PM After talking with my YLS (that's Yale Law School) friend and having him examine my intial remarks, there is no place where I had lamented that Black people shouldn't run for "high office." All I have said, is that in U.S. History, there hasn't and will never be a Black president. EVER! If you can dispute that, then let's have a debate. But if you cannot, please don't try and throw Douglas Wilder in my face. Why don't you just throw Jackie Robinson in my face? And can you and your community college degree having self, clarify what exactly deems "high office?" I know I've made a few spelling errors here and there, due to the small keys on my BlackBerry, but gramatical errors aside, what exactly is "high office?" Is the Gov. the bench mark for high office? Or is the Senate? Maybe County Dog Catcher? Seriously, my friend and I are trying to find out what is high office and since he may be president of this country one day (a skull and white guy), he would also like to know what exactly is "high office." You knoe Nor'Easter, you're as bright as they come...Watch out Anderson Cooper....Chris C, Nor'Easter is coming for you. He has an interview with your editor next week and he's breaking out the suit from TJ Maxx... Back to the subject at hand (my man Snoop Dogg--he's a rapper for all you Republicans) Blacks or African Americans should run for high office (there's got to be a better term out there than that), rap, entertain white folks on the athletic field, run American Express, run BET, go to jail and or prison in droves, even become Secretary of State (twice)...but I never said this country was over run w/ racists...just idiots, who misconstrue ones initial remarks and twist them to quantify their idiotic statements. So Run Barak Run....who knows, you might just make it to the Primary! And if not, then there's obviosly some alternative "high office" that Blacks are winning in droves that I am obviously unware of (that's me miscontruing what you said genius) Malik T. Sarcasm Extrodinaire Yale '08 Posted by: El Negro de Yale | July 26, 2006 12:00 PM I know, I did make some excellent points... Thanks for the concession! I love Republicans Posted by: Black Yalie | July 26, 2006 11:35 AM Posted by: Nor'Easter | July 26, 2006 10:56 AM Well, I guess nobody who is black should ever run for high office, given that this country is so populated with racists. Mayor Wilder, will you please return all of those achievements of your's as Governor of Virginia. I feel sorry for Malik T. (Yale '08) above, he's sitting on a gold mine with his Ivy League education, but has already bought into the victimization B.S. This is what Nor'Easter said.... Gov. of Va versus president of United States...Gee let me think....Not even in the same ballpark...Not even in the same Game....I guess Nor'Easter is the guy who has "black friends" or better yet the classic one "my best friends are black"...Yale is a Goldmine and deep down I know you wish you could get some...Victimization? Look here jack, all I'm doing is listing facts....There has been Obama, Moseley-Braun, Gov. Wilder and who else? Who else has seeked and won "high office?" And Congress doesn't count...And there are only like 50 or so Black Representatives of Congress out of 600 or so....You're a joke and I'd dance you around the Quad here in New Haven on political facts...I guess Augusta National doesn't have racist undertones and connotations due to the fact that Ken Chernault is a member and they let Tiger Woods play on their course once a year...But I get it, Black people who recognize ill will and racism and blatant political inequality are playing the Victim Card, adn should all have the predisposition of Frederick Douglas or MLK....I'm sure we would all like to, but some of us have to work three jobs to get by...I feel sorry for Nor'Easter if he ever is in Harlem or around any black people and tries to hang 400 years of political history on the Honorable L. Douglas Wilder....Come get some.... Posted by: Black Yalie | July 26, 2006 9:56 AM Why is a freshman Senator even discussed as a national candidate? Because he has captured the imagination of a significant number of people. The process of electing a President isn't about comparing résumés. If it were, Senator Henry Jackson would have easily beaten back the candidacy of a small-town peanut farmer thirty years ago. If it were, a Governor of Arkansas not have defeated an incumbent President just 14 years ago. Vice Presidents aren't selected for their résumés either, necessarily. When G. W. H. Bush was foisting Dan Quayle on the American people in 1988, he could just as easily have chosen the other Republican Senator from Indiana, Richard Lugar, whose résumé was clearly heavier. Obama's race may not be as big a factor against him as might appear at first blush. Many whites are terribly weary of the racial conversation, skimpy though it has been. Once a black is elected President, those people will use that to shoot down, shut down and shout down all claims of racial injustice. So, the election of a black as our President could conceivably HURT the cause of racial justice and slow progress on all the work that still needs to be done on that front. If whites realize that intuitively, many will vote for a nice, polite, smart, young black fellow--for all the wrong reasons. Of course, as JimD mentions, fewer will vote for a black candidate than will promise they will or did. Finally, a comment on the Cuomo non-run in '88. Just two years earlier, Mario Cuomo had hand-picked Stan Lundeen as his Lt. Governor, in effect pronouncing Lundeen capable of taking over the Governorship if something icky happened to the Governor. Only two years thereafter, he announced he couldn't run for President because he had to lead the New York State budget negotiations, in effect pronouncing Lundeen incapable of performing that bit of governance. Every generation produces several politicians in both parties who would rather let people think about how terrific they might have been than go through the process of convincing voters of it. Colin Powell is another example of the same phenomenon. Like Cuomo, he just didn't have the belly for it. Posted by: LonestarJR | July 26, 2006 9:36 AM It seems to me that anyone with any kind of moral fiber feels the power of this man's words, including a great many conservatives and the msm. He has a very clear way of speaking and thinking and a rationale that is very morally principled to everyday folks. You cant fake that kind of thing. It is also exceedingly hard to knock someone that is clearly THAT capable. 2008 may be too soon for a Presidential run, but he is definitely ready for the national stage. The people who are saying, he cant this... they never will that... etc etc, I dont think any of that stuff holds water. I think if he runs, he will win. Posted by: FairAndBalanced? | July 25, 2006 9:09 PM "There is no fool like an old fool...you just can't beat experience!" 5 yrs or 50 yrs experience doing the wrong things for America do not qualify anyone for anything. I would gladly trade all that experience for a brilliant, ethical leader who has shown himself confident enough to surround himself with the brightest and best that America has to offer. I have often made the statement that regaining the USA's standing in the world can never happen in my lifetime. If we had the wisdom to elect Obama, I would take that statement back. Imagine the reaction of a world that has come to see us a arogant, ignorant rich old white men who seek to dominate the world for our own edification. Overnight, the image would change. Here in America, when have we had a leader who can look the ghetto raised teenager in the eye and say "look where I came from, and look where I am at. What is your excuse going to be?" My dream ticket....Obama/Richardson. Richardson has the national experience, is a good man doing a good job in NM. Beyond that, we are looking at a swing-stater who would invigorate and capture the Hispanic vote. I do not see this ticket losing in any state that Kerry carried....and I do see them runnning much stronger in a few that Kerry did not carry. I do not think that Obama wants to run in 08. I think it might not be his safest route to the presidency. BUT, this is a man who loves his country and it's people...and it is our obligation to let him know that we need him....NOW. Posted by: waynep | July 25, 2006 9:07 PM There is no one in American politics at the same level as Barak Obama. No one has his combination of intellect and charisma. If he runs, I'm absolutely certain he'll win. My only fear for him is what happened to RFK and MLK, especially if he travels in the south. xxxxxx No matter who Democrats nominate - Obama, Warner, Rush Limbaugh - the Republican party will attack them as being more liberal than Senator Edward Kennedy. If you haven't noticed, they have a script they recycle every four years. Why be so reactionary and worry about how Republicans will portray our nominee? Obama talks a great deal about Americans needing to be self reliant. Just b/c Republicans label all Democrats as too liberal doesn't make it so. xxxxxx Despite all his rhetoric about being a straight talker and an outsider, John McCain is a very conservative beltway insider from a deeply red state. Someone as articulate as Obama will be able to contrast their positions nicely. xxxxx More governors have recently been elected president than senators, b/c senators are handicapped by long voting records that can be used against them, often out of context. Obama doesn't yet have a long voting record that can be used against him. XXXXXX Why do some people worry so much about picking up southern states? Kerry and Gore, despite running pretty very sad campaigns, came very close to winning without picking up red states. And both were Senators. Some in the south will never forgive the party of LBJ for enacting the Voting Rights Act of (1964?). That doesn't mean Democrats should be held hostage to the losing side of the Civil War. If the party runs too far to the center, to appeal to suburban and red state voters, we'll lose urban voters in swing states who will just stay home rather than vote for another Joe Lieberman. Posted by: RobertinSeattle | July 25, 2006 8:34 PM Obama is the most likely person from either party to defend the constitution. Constitutional Law is his forte. He is frank, clean spoken, and his demeanor engenders a sense of trust. He comes across as a competent, capable, genuinely altruistic servant of the people. For my money, he is exactly what this country most needs. The downside is that neither party is all that interested in empowering such a lose canon. He has been involved in leadership and political positions as long as GW was prior to his running for president. He hasn't been around long enough to be tainted by a horde hidden agendas or manipulated into being someone else's voice. This would set corruption back a hundred years! Senator Obama... if you run, We WILL VOTE! If you choose not to run for president, look for Edwards or whoever seems to be the best complement. Election after election has been won with mudslinging. I think we're ready for someone who is charismatic enough to hold a political revival. He can do it. Conservative vs Liberal? Most of us are centrists. Go line for line on his "style" and you'll see that he chooses his decisions on a "per topic" basis, looking for what is best for the country--not the party or for a small group of investors at the expense of the people. He offers a unique opportunity to unify our citizens. Could he reach older, wiser Americans who are educated? I'm college educated and in my fifties. My group is tired of empty promises and being overridden by powerful people behind closed doors. Most folks in the baby boomer generation would be inclined to think that he pulled back from the election because the DNC is more willing to back a "Predictable (controllable) Candidate"--Hillary. If he'd push it and we'd back him, the small group of decision makers in the DNC would have to bend. Black vs White? I'm white and wouldn't vote for anyone because they are black. I'd vote for the person I believe is the best suited for the position. I'd vote for him based on the content of his character. I'd go door to door campaigning for Senator Obama. Posted by: Clay from Colorado | July 25, 2006 7:35 PM Obama is promising because of of his charisma and obviously sharp mind. He is scary because of his youth. Clinton is promising because she has more wisdom, brains, and connections in politics than anyone one. She is scary because because of her lack of charisma and her obviously scheming mind. The obvious thought is to combine her wisdom at President, and his charm at VP, all the while grooming him for the future.. . He's such a boy scout, he could make the battle against corruption his campaign theme. Not only will he make this an open government once again - telling you what the country has been doing since 2000. But he will he will ensure that his President maintains the highest level of integrity. Posted by: mcrose | July 25, 2006 7:18 PM McCain is now toeing the line of the radical fundamentalists who want to start WWIII to bring on the Rapture. Is that what people in this country really want-- to die? Posted by: Drindl | July 25, 2006 6:41 PM Will: I agree that conservative Republicans are very afraid of Obama because they know he appeals to many moderate Republicans. I watched Obama's speech to the Democratic Convention on PBS and afterwards Jim Lehrer turned to Shields and Brooks for commentary and David Brooks was extremely impressed and won over by Barak. The next day I read conservative Andrew Sullivan's blog and he said of Obama -- and this is an exact quote -- "He's our only hope." But even if Obama won the Democratic nomination, if he had to run against McCain I think he would lose. McCain appeals to a number of centrist and conservative Democrats the way Obama does with moderate Republicans. McCain has enough personal charisma to go toe-to-toe with Obama and he has a lifetime of experience that Barak couldn't compete with. Posted by: CBS | July 25, 2006 6:34 PM I'd vote for him in a heartbeat. Posted by: Nancy | July 25, 2006 6:33 PM the WH is not happening for Ford, ever. Posted by: txyankee | July 25, 2006 6:25 PM I think the unbeatable ticket would have to be an Edwards/Obama ticket and Clinton and Kerry need to endorse this. If all of this occurs I think you can have a very stong group to contend with if not a Clinton anything or Kerry anything will flop in the 08'. Posted by: | July 25, 2006 6:24 PM Experience and insight go beyond a professional resume. What we need is a great leader to pull us out of the domestic and international divisions that have now threatened our place in the world. Obama's a great leader who could bridge the divide. Posted by: scott | July 25, 2006 6:22 PM Posted by: | July 25, 2006 5:58 PM Well, I guess nobody who is black should ever run for high office, given that this country is so populated with racists. Mayor Wilder, will you please return all of those achievements of your's as Governor of Virginia. I feel sorry for Malik T. (Yale '08) above, he's sitting on a gold mine with his Ivy League education, but has already bought into the victimization B.S. Posted by: Nor'Easter | July 25, 2006 5:51 PM Somehing about Obama scares right-wing elitists. Conservatives who are not parrots seem to like him. He's certainly charismatic and very centrist. He's done a good job of uniting people. The wingers, however are already starting with the 'out-of-touch' lines and the 'liberal Obama' tag, which he clearly is not. Next it'll be how he 'hates Americas troops' and wants to 'tax you into poverty'. They must be pretty scared. Posted by: Will | July 25, 2006 5:49 PM Obama is phony as the day is long. Typically Clintonesque in that he espouses a "moderate" line; yet when he finally does speak he's somewhere to the left of Chuck Shumer. Phony. Phony. Phony. Of course with the Democratic Party looking something akin to picnic day at Haight Ashbury, I suppose anyone who even sounds "moderate" is attractive to the media. One caveat: look what the Dems did to Lieberman when he had the audacity to leave the far left plantation - they turned on him. Posted by: bill | July 25, 2006 5:46 PM Obama will be this country's next FDR. He has the vision, he has the charisma, and he has the ideas. I truly believe that, in my heart of hearts, and I hope and pray that he decides to run, not just for the country's sake, but also for the Democratic Party's sake as well. If Hillary Clinton gets the nomination I just don't know what I would do (I may either vote McCain or not vote at all - as painful as that is to admit!). Let it be known that I'm a life-long, hard core Yellow Dog Democrat, however, as every new day passes I just become more and more distrustful of and disgusted at everything that is Hillary. Everything about her, every move she makes, every vote she casts, every word she utters is so focus group-market tested, bland - often aggravating, always uninspiring - robotic, disingenuous, talking-point bullsh*t. Even if she were to somehow win and become president, she is so polarizing, and so unlikable that she would not be able to get anything through congress, therefore getting nothing done for the country except exacerbating the already extreme polarization! She will be booted out within four years, and her legacy will be much the same as Jimmy Carters; Got nothing done, damaged the already tainted image of our Party as a Party that can lead, and usher in another age of right-wing administrations. I could go on forever on this topic, but this is an Obama article, and my basic point is Obama is the antithesis of everything that Hillary is, and he is the only candidate with enough charisma, inspiration, and bi-partisan support to heal and lead the broken and demoralized post-Bush era to come. Posted by: Alex | July 25, 2006 5:36 PM Tell me in detail how Dems will lose. You mean all the polls are wrong again? I am glad that you admit you are a liberal though. FDR JFK Truman and Johnson would be proud of you. All that borrowing and spending big government tax cuts in time of war government in our private lives must sure piss you off. Glad to have you on our side Posted by: Larry | July 25, 2006 5:30 PM One thing we're all gingerly stepping around. Obama is not white. Whether we want to admit it or not, when people step into that poll booth, far from the 'truth' of polls and public comment, many just won't vote for a black man. Same with Condi. And don't forget, she's a woman (actually, an oddly hot one when she's wearing the dominatrix boots, but I digress). So, like it or not, she loses votes on two counts (but perhaps she picks up the dominatrix fetish voters). Another very real strike against Condi - she was not only an architect of the Iraq policy, she was it's very public face. Her appearances on various talk shows talking hype about Saddam's mushroom cloud and such will surely come back to haunt her, even amongst those in her own party. Posted by: Hillman | July 25, 2006 5:28 PM Interesting point. I guess that's why the GOP was once the party of Lincoln, who freed the slaves. And now the Republcans hate black people. Posted by: the real GOP | July 25, 2006 5:09 PM The left hijacked the word Liberal. A classical liberal (our founding fathers) is essentially what amounts to a conservative today. And Al Gore, like Kerry, LOST. Just take your meds and wait until 2008. I'm mean, you'll lose again but... Posted by: | July 25, 2006 5:06 PM All of you don't know sh*t, including Cillizza. The press got W. elected in 2000 because they gave him a pass on everything, never pressing him on all the pablum Herr ROve and Frau Hughes were dishing out. Could Obama make a run? Absolutely. He's got the charisma, no doubt. He's got that Clinton-like ability to connect with voters. He also knows what he belives, unlike Hillary. His opposition to the war is based on firmly held principle. This alone is a novel concept in American politics right now: a candidate who believes in something and is willing to say it. There is no doubt in my mind that voters will see this, and even when they diagree with him on a few things, they will respect his point of view. And if they agree with him on enough things, they'll vote for him. His thin resume is a major liability -- this is where Cillizza is a bonehead. He will get eaten alive for a lack of experience. And citing the Kennedy example is stupid. No one has been able to get elected from the Seante since Kennedy, so why should Obama be any different? The proof in the pudding is if he is willing to fight back or not. When the GOP starts attacking him, will he hunker down the way Kerry did with the Swiftees, or will he fire back and hsow that same passion and emotion that she howed on stage in Boston during the '04 convention? That's what this will all be about. Posted by: Groan | July 25, 2006 5:04 PM Of course a neocon gets it wrong. The founding fathers were the liberals of their time. America was founded on liberal principles or we would have stayed the colonies. Lincoln was a liberal pres freeing the slaves Wilson was a liberal winning WW1 and FDR was a liberal for 4 terms winning WW2. What part of neocon fantasy land do you live in? Al Gore a LIBERAL was chosen by American people by 600000 votes over Bush. The congress was run by LIBERALS for most of the 20th century. Republicans have not won the pres election honestly since 1988. Just because you want your nonsense to be true does not make it true. Posted by: Larry | July 25, 2006 4:28 PM Oh, and Clinton picked up Southern states not only because he was a Southerner, but probably more importantly because Perot split the vote. Kerry and Gore were to the ideological left of Clinton and it's no surprise they didn't do terribly well in the South. Though your point about Kerry not sounding like a Southerner withstands, I doubt the South would turn on Romney if he were to run, and he hasn't a drop of Southern blood in him. Edwards' greenness hurt the Kerry/Edwards ticket. His inexperienced showed in the VP debate, and it didn't look good. Posted by: peter | July 25, 2006 4:28 PM Fred, actually that's cheney. Rove is merely evil, much like goebbels. Steals a lot of material from him, too. But what i speak of goes back much further, to the creation of the rightwing communications apparatus begun during the Goldwater era. It took a long time to build, but with vast infusions of cash from Gilded Age heirs like the Olins and Bradley and Mellon-Scaife family, it grew into the sophisticated global media empire it now represents. Some of the largest PR agencies in the world are part of it. Fox and [and Rove] are just the tip of the iceberg. If you understand that just 6 men, all of whom attest to voting repubican, own every major news outlet in this country, it kind of gives you a clue as to why so many people in this country have their own brand of reality. Posted by: Drindl | July 25, 2006 4:24 PM Obama is NOT that liberal. He has stated in the past that we should keep military options wide open for Iran, he has not (to my knowledge) insisted on a date for Iraq withdrawal, he is openly Christian as stated in his magnificent and eloquent speech at the Sojouner's convention, he doesn't demonize large corporations (like it or not, large corporations drive America's economy -- and they are not going to go away just because you don't like them...) and he smokes. Seems like the right guy to me... Posted by: | July 25, 2006 4:23 PM Some good points, Navy Yard. Colin Powell had a lot more political baggage than GWB, though. See Vietnam. Additionally, he is generally less conservative. Black candidates have run for president, of course, but I'm not aware of any that have made serious bids lately. Sharpton ran less to become president and more to pull civil rights into the campaign. Keyes has run numerous times in order to pull conservative religious values into the fray. Whether the party establishments want to risk it or not, they can't stop candidates from entering the primaries. At this point I think either party would be justifiably proud in nominating the country's first major-party black candidate. America has racist elements that you are right to address. But don't think they can't be eroded further. I think a successful Obama presidency would do worlds toward that end and would additionally inspire disadvantaged racial minorities to participate more fully in the political process. It doesn't have to be in 2008; personally I am of the opinion that Obama probably shouldn't run yet. But my reasoning for that has nothing to do with his race. Posted by: peter | July 25, 2006 4:21 PM I resent Mike B's comment, "Bubba's" - the same sort of brainless, tobacco chewing, gun V8 pickup driving..." Posted by: Bubba | July 25, 2006 4:21 PM For all those saying Obama's too green, how is his record all that different from John Edwards? Sure, Edwards didn't win the nomination, but he came in second, and by the time the general election rolled around a lot of primary voters wished they had a do-over. It will be interesting to see how Iowa and New Hampshire react if given a similar choice: the tried and true "safe" pick (Clinton), or the young upstart (Obama). The voters might just take into consideration past mistakes. Posted by: jamestkirk | July 25, 2006 4:17 PM With all that I've said, I do believe Obama could be an excellent president. However, realistically, although most educated Americans would not vote based on race, Let's not discount the hordes of UNEDUCATED Americans vote based on people that "look" like presidents. People, EVERY southern state voted for Bush! Clinton won several southern states during his run. Clinton presided over the greatest econominc expansion period in American History. 4 years later, they all suddenly switch to Bush because he was that much better than the democratic candidate? No, Kerry didn't "reach" the southern states. He didn't look nor sound like them. This is the American voter. Posted by: Navy Yard | July 25, 2006 4:17 PM Posted by: Drindl | July 25, 2006 4:15 PM Y'all Demos sure fear Rove. Is he the anti-Christ or something? Posted by: Fred | July 25, 2006 4:13 PM You forget mike, that a lot of people of the republican persuasion really don't like civil rights, or the new deal. I presume they'd rather that old people eat cat food. 'they will always play second fiddle to the more attractive and practical conservative candidates] I mean, look at that comment. After 6 years of being ruled by the most demented crazies who ever escaped a violent asylum ward, there's still people out there who think 'conservatives' are 'practical'. The forces of propaganda are legion--and effective. Posted by: Drindl | July 25, 2006 4:13 PM Opposing an Obama candidacy on the grounds that there are racists in this country ultimately has the same end as opposing an Obama candidacy on the grounds that one feels blacks should not be elected. Ultimately, both parties decline to support the candidacy solely on the grounds of Obama's race. Admittedly a glib interpretation, but something to think about. Posted by: peter | July 25, 2006 4:11 PM Peter, I actually don't define myself by race. I have one parent who is considered "white", and one parent who is considered "black". I have lighter skin than most "black" people, but since I do have color to my skin, most Americans probably look at me as "black". Anyway you say this : "Who was the last president to campaign successfully on the merits of his race?" You're right, no one has ever successfully campaigned on the merits of his race. The reason why? It was never needed to be done. Why hasn't it ever been done? Because, no other "race" has gotten that far to be a serious candidate. Out of all the highly qualified, intelligent people of a "non-white" background, not one has ever been considered a serious presidential candidate. That should tell you something, Peter. "White" americans DO see race as important. I do agree with you that Class is becoming more important than race by middle and upper class people. Midde/Upper class Americans, in general, are comfortable with other Middle/Upper class people, regardless of race. However, we aren't talking about being comfortable with a Middle/Upper class "black" man. We are talking about making this "black" man the leader of the free world. Sorry, most Americans ("white"), will not be comfortable doing that. You also say: "The steady stream of white presidents is ceraintly rooted in history, but how many black candidates have seriously run for president recently?" The reason there haven't been any recently is because their respective parties don't want to risk it. Colin Powell had was 10 times more qualified than George Bush to be president, yet, he didn't run. Think about this: If Colin Powell was "white" and George Bush was "black", do you really think George Bush would be president now? Posted by: Navy Yard | July 25, 2006 4:10 PM I think Obama could be the next Kennedy. Here's why I believe this: We live in California, but our daughter goes to college in Illinois. While home on break I heard her and her friends talk about Obama with the same excited, almost reverential terms that my generation talked about Kennedy. I think there is a very good chance that Obama could ignite a "movement" that would go way beyond a "candidacy." Posted by: Nordo | July 25, 2006 4:08 PM Navy Yard - I read your previous posts. I choose to ignore the fact that race would factor into an election because it is an useless reason to vote for or against a candidate. I don't care if he is "electable," based upon race, credentials, or whatever John Kerry was supposed to have. He is a great candidate and I would hope America would be able to see that. To push aside his candidacy due to an expectation of a racist turnout is irresponsible. John - Obama is not Hugo Chavez. He is neither extreme, nor even out of the range of the majority of Americans (To be honest, I think its ridiculous to box a person into such a label). And just for the record, some of the greatest and longlasting progressive movements in America were the result of liberal government. The New Deal. Civil Rights. Conservative, progressive movements have mostly tended to fail. Supply side economics. Eisenhower Doctrine. Posted by: mike w | July 25, 2006 4:01 PM For too long people blindly vote based on party lines, not who has the best attributes to be our President. Those attributes are a person with a clear vision of America's current and future role in the world and an understanding of our current and future problems. He/she must be able to lead America to a secure future by appointing Cabinet Secretaries who are willing and able to help him implement his/her vision for a better America. Barrack Obama has articulated the most clear vision of any politician. He is honest. He admits he doesn't have all the answers. He is willing to listen. His bi-racial background, his life experiences, his work as a community organizer have given him an understanding of the world and the human condition as it affects everyone. He is able to brings both sides together to discuss issues and reach consensus. This is what a great leader is about. Having a vision that benefits everyone - not just the haves and have nots and getting people to work together to implement that vision. He has my vote in 2008!!!!! Posted by: andrea kato | July 25, 2006 3:56 PM But Navy Yard - who was the last president to campaign successfully on the merits of his race? Or for that matter, the last candidate for any significant office? Most white people are more comfortable around other white people. That's a no-brainer. But currently I think that has less to do with race than it has to do with social and cultural realities. The average middle-income, suburban family man is most likely to associate with other middle-income, suburban family men. But what is the race of most middle-income family men? These men (and women) may be uncomfortable on an urban street because they are surrounded more commonly by lower-income urban people, who commonly happen to be black. But I doubt most of these middle-income white people would be uncomfortable around their black suburban neighbors merely on account of their race. "Peter, isn't it amazing how NO ONE ever calls Obama "white"?... The only reason they don't see him as white is because he has dark skin." It would seem to me that that question would answer itself. People call Obama black as opposed to white because he LOOKS black. Genetically speaking, you're absolutely right; he's just as white as he is black. But I'd wager most people don't know his mother is white, and judging solely by his appearance, it's no wonder people call him black. Regarding the issue of identity, I still contend that race is not an important factor for whites, at least in identifying themselves. Do you feel a comrauderie with strangers just because they are white? (I am assuming you are white, and I hope I am not a racist for it). Black men, especially, report a strong feeling of identity with other black men, according to that special feature the Post ran a few weeks ago. Regardless of how most people feel about the company they keep, I think Americans in general wouldn't be unwilling to vote for a black presidential candidate solely on account of his race. The steady stream of white presidents is ceraintly rooted in history, but how many black candidates have seriously run for president recently? Posted by: peter | July 25, 2006 3:50 PM Obama might be a brilliant and charismatic person, but he would make a terrible candidate. Just think about it, if John Kerry cannot get elected after suppressing his leftist credentials and promoting his purported "war hero" persona, how can an unapologetic liberal like Obama ever stand a chance? As history has so elequently taughts, liberalism is a minority view in the United States. Until the Democratic party fully thinks about (and acts upon) what this means, they will always play second fiddle to the more attractive and practical conservative candidates. Posted by: John | July 25, 2006 3:47 PM CC -- you forgot another factor in his favor. Have you people seen his smile? He has the best set of teeth I've ever seen? W looks like a monkey when he smiles. Kerry's botox shows off when he grins. Cheney isn't sure how to smile (or his heart attack left him unable to smile straight...). Hillary looks disingenuous when she smiles. Obama literally lights up the room, or as I've only seen him, the TV. I think America would fall in love with that. Hey -- we're a superficial country... Posted by: yo | July 25, 2006 3:45 PM Mike W, Please listen.... There is no way Obama will ever be elected President of the United States. Look at my previous posts for the reasons why. Posted by: Navy Yard | July 25, 2006 3:39 PM Senator Obama is a brilliant and charismatic person. Why do we need to temper this with such subjective things as a political resume? The democratic party put up the two most "electable" candidates the last two times around. How did that work out? It's time we stop trying to mold our politicians into the "perfect" candidate and actually try and find a great one. Senator Obama is a great candidate. I hope he runs. Posted by: mike w | July 25, 2006 3:37 PM For any posters who think Obama is being inconsistent on civil rights issues by only supporting civil unions, I would suggest that you take a look at the splits within the Congressional Black Caucus more generally on this issue. There are an awful lot of generally progressive voters and politicians, especially within the black community, who simply don't think that gay marriage is right. I disagree with that view, but that's simply a fact. Posted by: Colin | July 25, 2006 3:35 PM Edwards has raised $6.5 million for Democrats in the 2006 cycle (Hillary is at $7.5, so not much of a difference really). According to NJ article due out soon. Edwards has his donor base in tact from 2004 (plus, more lawyers will come on board since he isn't a longshot this time around) and he's got solid netroots support to get money from there as well. Posted by: philgoblue | July 25, 2006 3:33 PM Gays and lesbians should be allowed to marry, just like heterosexuals. I don't know Obama's position on this, but I'm certain he's not to the political right of the Democratic field on this. But I understand why almost every major political figure in the Democratic party supports civil unions but not gay marriage. It's yet another wedge issue used by Republicans to divide the left. And every poll shows there is very little support for gay marriage, even among rank and file Democrats. That's unfortunate and wrong, but we have to pick our battles. The Republicans' political platform coincides with the self interest of only multinational corporations and the top 1-5% wealthiest Americans. So they create these social wedge issues to divide the country. Unfortunately, it's been very effective. Posted by: RobertinSeattle | July 25, 2006 3:27 PM Peter, You dove too far into it. My point was for people to realize that most humans judge perople based on how they look. Peter, isn't it amazing how NO ONE ever calls Obama "white"? Even though he has a white mother, most americans won't vote for him, because they don't seem him as "white". The only reason they don't see him as white is because he has dark skin. Also, you say that, in general, "white" americans don't think about race in their identity. This couldn't be further from the truth. That is the only reason why every US president has been a "white" male. There hasn't been one Asian, Latino, East Indian, Black president. There hasn't been a President that even has had a somewhat "ethnic" look to him. This is not a coincidence. "White" America has only been comfortable with a Commander in Chief who looks truly "white". Posted by: Navy Yard | July 25, 2006 3:27 PM Hey John. What part of Bill Clinton surplus do you not understand? Posted by: FairAndBalanced? | July 25, 2006 3:26 PM Thirty years of massive financing of 'conservative' thinktanks, propaganda, talk radio and TV and media aquisition have really done their job. There is so much hysterical and baseless hatred of Democrats. Sometimes the ferocity of it [not to mention the calls for assinations, murders, and executions] really makes me wonder what american values are -- I mean, if we have any. Posted by: Drindl | July 25, 2006 3:22 PM It's my understanding that biracial individuals, at least in the case of those with a black parent and a white parent, more often consider themselves black than they do white or biracial. Given the history of the United States, a white person is pretty unlikely to consider race an important part of his or her identity. A black person, however, is much more likely to do so. Ethnicity is another matter. Whites in the U.S. may not tout their race, but they will proudly identify themselves as Irish, Italian, Dutch, etc. Americans of Anglo-Saxon decent are probably less likely to identify themselves according to their ethnicity, however, because one might call them the "whitest" of the white race in the United States because of their past position as the country's dominant ethnic group. Blacks in the U.S., however, often have little means of tracing their ethnicity due to the way many of their families came to this country and the conditions they lived in thereafter. Consequently they are content to call themselves blacks or African-Americans. It is similarly true that Americans of Asian descent are likely to identify themselves simply as Asian, perhaps because most Americans are not typically perceptive of the differences among Chinese groups, Japenese, Koreans, Vietnemese, Laotians, etc. In Africa or Asia, respectively, these people would identify themselves ethnically as opposed to racially for the same reason whites identify themselves ethnically in a majority white part of the world. But that's a huge digression. People call Obama black because there is a strong sense of identity to the black race in this country. I think it reflects history more than it does some current undertone of racism. Posted by: peter | July 25, 2006 3:17 PM Yes, money is not substance. And evaluating candidates by the quality of speeches written by somebody else hardly demonstrates substance. I too must also ask: Has anyone done their homework? Far too many gutless Democrats talk about "equality" and "civil rights" but just can't walk their talk. Empty words and vapid bumper-sticker slogans are the most courage they can muster. On THE most important civil rights issue of the new millennium the Democrats have cowered like whipped dogs licking their self-inflicted wounds. In a recent speech Obama urged us to not shy away from debate but when he was debating Alan Keyes, during the Illinois senatorial race, Keyes was getting the better of Obama in pointing out Obama's hypocrisies. Obama's solution? He stopped the debates even though Keyes wanted to continue. Oh yes, by all means, let us not shy away from the debate senator! John is also right on the marriage issue. Obama's statements on civil rights and marriage are simply so off-the-wall that any second year law student would deservedly flunk Obama's own course on equal protection if they gave his answers to such questions. The Republicans continue to hold office in part because the Democrats are viewed as gutless cowards who pander to majority tyranny and herd mentality. Yes indeed, "the best argument against democracy..." And, yes, Obama's position on marriage equality is at odds with virtually every old guard black civil rights leader. Instead of marriage equality he -- as a special and Liberal favor to gays of course - wants to give gays the 'separate but [not] equal' seat in the back of the bus --- civil unions. Gee wiz senator, a special place just for gays, it's just like having our very own water fountain. Gee thanks. How very white of you! If we claimed a pure "democracy" in which the majority decides we all know where that would leave Senator Obama and his parents! To use the senator's own words from his autobiography ("Dreams From My Father") the laws he would propose for gays are designed for one purpose and one purpose only, "to keep us on the outside looking in." Merely being sick of the demented religiosity of the Republican right will hardly suffice to induce many of us to vote for gutless Democrats who run from adversity on the field of battle. But who needs substance when money will suffice? Americans' consent can be engineered easy enough .... "the best argument against democracy"? Posted by: Terrence | July 25, 2006 3:15 PM It's amazing how "thick" liberals are continuing to think that far-left candidates have a chance at getting elected nationally. What part of "only two Democratic president's getting elected in almost 40 years" do they not understand? A liberal Democrat -- like Obama is turning out to be -- has no chance in hell of getting elected in the good old USA--this has not, is not, and will not ever be a liberal nation! The only chance the Democratic party has of winning an election in the modern era is to present a moderate candidate and hope for special circumstances in the national mood or climate. (e.g., 1976-first post-Watergate election and 1992-very strong third party candidate. For all the problems the Republicans are alleged to be having, this alone will not be enough to get a Democrat elected. Posted by: John | July 25, 2006 3:11 PM Well, RMill, considering some of the comments I've read here [although, granted, they are a minority] I'm not so sure about that. There are a lot of people out there who are perhaps not stupid, but who nonetheless are so monumentally simple and credulous that they will believe even the most absurd and nonesensical crap that FOX and rove and limbaugh dish out. Posted by: Drindl | July 25, 2006 3:10 PM It is not the intelligence of the American electorate but the engagement, faith in the system and attention span that is lacking. Posted by: RMill | July 25, 2006 3:04 PM Everyone, let's be realistic here. As someone said earlier, the presidential election is a "beauty contest". It's a "beauty contest" in the sense that people vote for people that they can relate to. People who they could see themselves comfortable with in a social setting. That is the ONLY reason why EVERY southern state voted for Bush. Bush looks and sounds like those people, so they think "hey, he's a great guy"! This is not the case for all voters, but the majority of American voters vote in this way. With this being true, there is no way American would EVER vote for a man with dark skin. It doesn't matter how intelligent and how well qualified he may be. If George Bush was the SAME EXACT person, but looked like Jesse Jackson, he would NOT be president now. Point Blank! Posted by: Navy Yard | July 25, 2006 3:03 PM Obama didn't have an easy primary in Illinois. He beat out a crowded field of locally well known Democrats by a wide margin. xxxxx Obama is known for more than one good speech. He was an extremely accomplished state legislator. He was a law professor at one of the top 5 law schools in the country. He's hugely popular throughout the country. Here in Seattle, his recent speech at Garfield High School sold out in 1 1/2 hours. After his Seattle speech, all we could talk about was how amazed we were that he could maintain such an extremely high caliber of speaking even at our low stakes event in a small corner of the country. Afterwards, all we could talk about was how presidential he seemed. You have to hear him speak in person to understand he is in a completely different league than the rest of the field. xxxxxx I just find it interesting how many people consider him qualified to be VP for a long list of presidential candidates, including some truly mediocre ones - Joseph Biden??? Or they would have Obama run as VP for candidates who are just as "inexperieced", yet immediately rule him out for the top position. Even in a racist country, truly gifted people are seen as transcending race. Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods come to mind. xxxxxx Obama is half white. But it's interesting how his other half is what defines his racial identity to everyone else. Posted by: RobertinSeattle | July 25, 2006 2:56 PM Why do people continue to evoke the founding fathers, like they were some great people? The founding fathers along with more than half of the US Presidents were men who allowed their own citizens to be mistreated for about 200 years (1776 - 1966). People talk about Saddam Hussen gassing his own people, ok, let's talking about the majority of US presidents who enslaved and disenfranchised its own people for almost 200 years. Posted by: Navy Yard | July 25, 2006 2:56 PM Watch out Maria--criticize republicans and the resident dittohead/ foxparrot Boobs will viciously and personally attack you. Posted by: | July 25, 2006 2:55 PM I would rather Harold Ford. Like Bush, Obama hears the voice of god talking to him. This is not a quality I want in my elected leaders. I strongly believe that state should be definitively separated from church, just like the founding fathers did. Posted by: blogger | July 25, 2006 2:50 PM "When do we start taking the presidency a little more seriously than a beauty pageant?" Sorry, but you're overestimating the intelligence of the American electorate. It's a beauty contest and has been since at least 1960. Bush is the candidate people want to "have a beer with" and he wins, first gov. of Texas (which fools people outside Texas into thinking he must have some executive experience), then POTUS. Obama is the Dems beauty contest winner and therefore should be their candidate. Personally, I would like to see him serve first as governor of Illinois, but that's probably not going to happen. In a country this big, where next to nobody actually sees the candidate in person any more, mediagenics is what it's all about. Jim from Rockford's comment "I live in Illinois and did not vote for Obama. He is tooo liberal and socialistic for me." is a hoot. Sounds like any Democrat is too socialistic for Jim. Forget about people like him. He's part of the 30% who still think Bush is doing a good job. Posted by: Cal Gal | July 25, 2006 2:49 PM Why does everyone on here refer to Obama as "black". If I'm not mistaken, his mother is "white". If his mother is "white" and his father is "black", then that means he is as much "black" as he is "white". However, no one ever refers to him as "white" Why is that you ask? Because this country still goes by the "one drop of blood" theory. Everyone who understands that theory needs to recognize how racist this country can be. Posted by: Navy Yard | July 25, 2006 2:48 PM Governor Bill Richardson (NM) former Energy Secretary and UN Ambassador fits that bill as well. Posted by: RMill | July 25, 2006 2:35 PM Obama looks good because he IS good. If you study his own words, he's a healer and a uniter with generally moderate instincts -- and an eloquent communicator. All this matters more than his skin color (Black), his party (Democrat), his home base (Illinois -- Upper Midwest), his tall height, or even his present job (U.S. Senator). I've heard two superb A+ major-party keynote speeches in my lifetime -- Obama's for the Democrats in 2004, and Dan Evans for the Republicans several decades ago before the Republican Party was hijacked by the American Christian-Right Taliban. Obama is not merely a breath of fresh air -- he's a fresh wind of change. Posted by: oldhonky | July 25, 2006 2:32 PM Taking a big picture view, politics in America has degenerated into a Hatfields and McCoys situation with no real problem solving, just name calling and recriminations. The main argument you get for voting one way or another is that things will go to hell if you vote for the other guy. Political orientation is probably a bell shaped continuum with the majority of voters being a mix of liberal and conservative values i.e. "socially liberal fiscally conservative republicans". Obama strikes me as the guy who can mobilize that huge number of people in the center who are completely turned off by the product served up by both parties. Posted by: JL | July 25, 2006 2:27 PM The next president would need to pay the national debt, too. Posted by: Bobby the independant | July 25, 2006 2:13 PM A large part of the reason Obama looks so good right now is that he hasn't really been tested. His election to the Senate ended up being a walkover--and as such, he didn't have to do anything which might make him look bad--to anyone. All we've gotten from him has been 100% positive. Posted by: Staley | July 25, 2006 2:10 PM I think the best president would be a popular governor with an executive experience or a former vp. He would need to be willing to fight the real war on terror ( not Iraq), global warming, the dependance on oil, poverty, lobbyist, outsourcing and corruption. God Knows hom many legislations are influenced by coorporate lobbyst. It's disgusting. Forget about all those senators who want to be president. In my mind, nominating Hillary means losing in landslide (remember 1972, 1984), the best candidates are either Mark Warner or Al Gore for the dems. Don't misunderestimate republican extremism, they can nominate another right wing wacko. I know, it looks promising for John McCain but he can be defeated and he's another senator with no executive experience. A senator is ok for the vp nomination, think Walter Mondale, Hubert Humphrey not the presidential nomination. Nominating a politician with executive experience (not from the North East)is the simple formula to win. Posted by: Bobby Bob the independant | July 25, 2006 2:09 PM If the last two elections have proven anything, it's that experience and substance stand for squat. I have never been moved by a political speech as I was by Obama's address at the convention. He can speak to all Americans like none of the current professionals on either side. We can't afford another four years under another party hack from either side. What the president needs is a spine, a brain, and the ability to distinguish fact and reasoned argument from smoke being blown up tour a**. Bush is 1 for 3 in that department. I bet Obama bats 1.000. Posted by: JL | July 25, 2006 2:05 PM One of my mentors once told me: "It takes two fools to put a preacher on a pedestal-- one who will put him up there, and one who is willling to be put." dbucks, Obama is not Swahili for "messiah." There's only been One, and look what we did to him. And for those of you who think religion and politics should never meet, it is Separation OF church and state, not separation FROM church and state. Jefferson's Wall of Separation correctly understood is this: A free church living in a free state. 1. A free church means no state sponsored church. 2. A free state means no church-dictated belief system. Ideally, the church provides a moral climate that moves people toward, as Lincoln said, "their better angels." The State provides the security for liberty of conscience--to believe or not believe whatever you want. This is why The Baptist Joint Committee On Public Affairs years ago filed an amicus curiae with the United States Supreme Court on behalf of a group practicing Santeria in a city in Florida. The city tried to shut this religious group down because it objected to their ritualistic sacrifice of chickens in their "worship" service. (The court correctly ruled in favor of the Santeria group.) You won't find any dead chickens in any Baptist church I know of, but any Baptist who knows his own church's history will affirm absolute religious liberty and "soul-competency" of the individual believer (or non-believer). What we have witnessed in Washington for the last six years is not biblical religion. It is fear-animated fundamentalism of right wing people who are devoid of biblical ethics. It has been a terroristic religious hostage-taking of "Christian" faith that is neither Christ like nor faith based. Biblical faith(BF) cares for the widows and orphans. BF feeds the poor, houses the homeless, clothes the naked, visits the sick and the imprisoned. BF understands simple phrases like: Thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not bear false witness (lie), thou shalt not kill, Honor your father and mother (and don't rob their Social Security), Have no other gods (Wall Street, "bottom line," instantaneous gratification, the greedy before the needy, etc.) before Me. For six years we have witnessed all talk and no walk. Biblical faith is all about walk and talk that holds people accountable for what they DO. As my father used to say: TALK IS CHEAP. And as my Brother said: "Not everyone who says, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter my kingdom, but he who DOES my Father's will." Posted by: skypilotreeves@yahoo.com | July 25, 2006 2:04 PM One of the reasons I like Obama so much is more than just the force of his personality, but I feel like he has political savvy and a unique understanding of message politics. I think he's well-suited to beat McCain in 2008, but I agree with CC that I doubt he will run. Posted by: BlueBlogger | July 25, 2006 2:02 PM Yes, money can buy anything! It can even manufacture consent. Come on folks! Get real. Has anyone done their homework here? Barack Obama is a mixed race Harvard educated civil rights lawyer (so called) who's mother and father were deemed felons in 17 states the day they were married. They remained criminals as a matter of law in those states until the Supreme Court's ruling in Loving v. Virginia which pronounced marriage a fundamental right. In spite of this Obama has said that he does not believe marriage is even a civil right let alone a "fundamental" right! (Just Google it!) This from a Harvard educated lawyer! Affirmative action! Oh well, win some loose some I guess. To make matters worse the said that (with all due respect for the doctrine of separation of church and state) that the term 'marriage' has "religious connotations" and because of those "religious connotations" gays should not be allowed to marry but instead be granted separate but not equal civil unions. This was in spite of the fact that his own minister (the Rev. Wright of the UCC Trinity Church in Chicago) is listed at the National Black Justice Coalition's web site as favoring full marriage equality and in spite of the fact that his own religious denomination (the UCC) did then and does now perform same-sex unions in their churches while making absolutely no distinction between same-sex and marriage and opposite sex marriage -- so much for the so called "religious connotations" of marriage. Gimmie a break! On the issue of marriage equality it is clear that most old guard African American leaders are not aligned with Obama. (See http://www.nbjcoalition.org/about/supporters.html) Indeed, Nobel Peace Prize winner bishop Desmond Tutu has called this civil union exclusion from marriage nothing less than "apartheid" -- what an interesting choice of words! But Obama just holds his finger to the wind to see which way it blows. When he ways he's not in favor of marriage equality he's about as believable as Lincoln who consistently maintained that he was not in favor of abolition of slavery! Such politicking with civil rights may be politics but is it leadership? When Winston Churchill said, "the best argument against Democracy is a ten minute conversation with the average voter" this is the sort of thing he meant. Posted by: John | July 25, 2006 2:02 PM Has the rare gifts of Lincoln, Kennedy and Martin Luther King. I bet even Obama didn't know he was so gifted. You sound like you may be in love CBS. Hate to break your fantasy, but he is human like the rest of us, which means he has plenty of foibles. Posted by: bhoomes | July 25, 2006 1:58 PM It's a little telling that criticisms of Obama's policy preferences only surfaced after a long discussion of his experience. That's good for liberal voters, I think, because it means that Obama's politics aren't yet the subject of much scrutiny. He is a liberal, to be sure, but he has an undeniably articulate, rational air about him. An earlier poster pointed out that Americans by and large were not as conservative as Reagan (or Bush, for that matter), but elected him anyway because he was a very effective communicator. Voters, it would seem, are far more receptive to candidates who know how to talk to them. Bush is obviously far less articulate than Obama is or Reagan was, but in his element he knows how to speak to a crowd. Ultimately, an Obama campaign could potentially produce a race in which the Democrat's liberal politics are largely not a liability. While undoubtedly there are those in this country who would vote against a candidate because of his race, there exists also a large pool of non-voters that consists of very significant numbers of racial minorities. This population would probably be much more motivated to vote for a black candidate. The existing black vote would probably be even more Democratic because it would appear that the party is finally trying to earn the black vote again. Analyzing the situation unscientifically, I would think an Obama candidacy would motivate more people to vote FOR the black candidate than against him - all other factors held constant at least. Posted by: peter | July 25, 2006 1:55 PM Obama would make a great Veep on a Gore/Obama ticket. Posted by: Will in Seattle | July 25, 2006 1:54 PM Larry with all due respect, probably you should let it go and move on. We republicans had a strong case we were cheated out of the governship in Washington, but that is now in the past, we will make sure we get it next time. Posted by: bhoomes | July 25, 2006 1:52 PM Don't get me wrong, I like Mr. Obama and I would certainly vote for him, but this country is overpopulated by racist "Bubba's" - the same sort of brainless, tobacco chewing, gun V8 pickup driving, Neanderthal's that voted for Bush. I just don't think Mr. Obama could win with these racists composing about 1/3 of the voters and I don't want him nominated just to prove a point. I am concerned about winning and rolling back everything Bush has done. We need a national health insurance program. We need to unwind Bush's insane tax breaks for wealthy families and investors. We need a sane foreign policy. We either end outsourcing and guest worker programs or this country wont exist in 10 years. We need rational, sane people with the interests of this country at heart in charge of science, economic, and pother policies. I do not think, heck I am certsain, we cannot survive even four more years of even allowing the damage Bush has done to stand, let alone electing another scumbag like him. So, the Democrats need to nominate a centrist candidate that can actually win. Posted by: MikeB | July 25, 2006 1:49 PM I read some of Obama's recent speeches that are posted on his senate website and was completely blown away. I urge others to read these speeches. Obama is just operating on a completely different plane than any other politician today. His soaring intellect is grounded in the wisdom of the heart, and taps into the highest aspirations of the human spirit. He has the rare gifts of Lincoln, Kennedy and Martin Luther King (whose images he has in his Senate office, along with Gandhi). And his speeches so effectively eviscerate the Republican's record that it's hard to understand why every Democrat in the country isn't using them to come up with their campaign strategy. For example, he says the problem with the Republican approach to governing isn't that it hasn't been working the way it's supposed to, it's that it has been working EXACLTY the way it's supposed to. He then proceeds to completely rip to shreds the idea that the country is better off when every man and woman is left to fend for themselves. The fact that Obama conveys these messages in a distinctly nonpartisan, common sense way makes them even more effective. Before reading these speeches, I strongly believed Obama shouldn't run yet because of his lack of experience. I was also concerned about him running against Hillary because I didn't want the Clinton's to go after him. But reading his speeches stirs something deep within the soul and you realize that he represents our hope for the future and that he has the capacity to heal this country. He talks about 'the politics of hope' replacing 'the politics of fear.' Not coincidentally, he has a new book coming out in October entitled "The Audacity of Hope." I'm very curious to see what happens when this book comes out. When the time is ripe for a new movement there is nothing that can stop it. I don't know if it's his time yet and he probably doesn't either, but movements tend to happen spontaneously and sometimes quite suddenly, although they are usually years in the making. I believe the politics of hope is a powerful notion and that eventually Americans are going to get tired of the politics of fear. Whether that will be in 2008 remains to be seen. Posted by: CBS | July 25, 2006 1:45 PM How is letting felons and ilegal aliens vote the only way we can win? Again Gore received almost 600000 more votes than Bush and in 2004 Dem congressional candidates got 54% of the vote. It seems like it is Reps who need more voters. The leaders of the Republican party realized after the 2 Clinton landslides that they no longer had enough voters to win nationally. Plan B was to cheat and commit voter fraud. Even with the voter fraud Gore won pop vote. Bush would not be pres ecept for cheating in Ohio. Cant you be a real american and read the facts about voter fraud in this country? Posted by: Larry | July 25, 2006 1:40 PM Remember, The Fix is making the case for why Obama should run, not whether or not he should be president. Hence, the factors mentioned were superficial and related only to the "horse race" aspect of presidential politics. He has celebrity, charisma, and can raise money, and these three things are self-reinforcing. No question GWB had his political career handed to him -- though defeating Ann Richards in 1994 was no shoe-in. But Obama is currently having a lot handed to him as well. Few politicians have received as much hype as he for just showing up. I think that he is introspective enough to realize that he is not ready to be president, and that the country would sense that he is not ready (as with 2004's other freshman senator wonderboy, John Edwards). Let's take a little bit more measure of the man and resist the cult of personality that has enveloped him. Posted by: B Daren | July 25, 2006 1:32 PM Not sure two "blue state" Democrats, Clinton and Obama, are the answer. And Obama, on the very left side of the liberals, has an unexamined state senate voting record in Springfield, Illinois, that might work against him. Plus, he's never had a tough election (except for getting stomped by U.S. Rep. Bobby
Chris Cillizza joins washingtonpost.com as the author of a new politics blog called The Fix. Cillizza will provide daily posts on a range of political topics, from the race for control of Congress in 2006 to scrutinizing the 2008 presidential contenders.
424.840909
0.795455
1.204545
high
medium
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/24/DI2006072400687.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/24/DI2006072400687.html
From Alaska to Fame
2006072519
washingtonpost.com: Jewel will be with us momentarily. Please stand by. Groningen, Netherlands: I've seen people label you as 'pop queen,' 'country chick' and some people would class your music as 'jazz.' Which musical genre do you think suits you best? Or do you think it has changed over time? Jewel: Hmmm. I grew up to a lot of different artists, from Nina Simone to Joni Mitchell to Loretta Lynn so I guess it makes sense that you can hear a lot of influences in my music. I guess the one thing that ties it all together for me is the storytelling aspect, that would be it. Annapolis, Md.: On Your official Web site you had a version of Good By Alice that is a more acoustic version. Are you going to release that version? Download? Jewel: I'm pretty sure you can find a bootleg already online but at some point, yeah, I'll probably an acoustic version of it on something. Jacksonville, Tex.: I, too, live on a ranch and I enjoy it very much. I was wondering what types of work you engage in at the ranch. Also, do you garden flowers or vegetables? Jewel: No gardening. We have about 300 acres in Coastal and Kleim grass. We run about 200 mother cows, so the ranch work includes everything from fixing fences to doctoring cows to picking rocks out of fields. Boston, Mass.: Do you plan on doing anymore shows by yourself on the east coast anytime soon? Jewel: I'll be touring the east coast in November through December. Fairfax, Va.: What do you think of American Idol, the TV show? What did you think of Katharine McPhee's version of Over the Rainbow? Jewel: Didn't hear Katharine McPhee's version but I love that song. As for American Idol, I think the show at least encourages a higher standard of singers in an industry that has certainly strayed from singing being a prerequisite for the job. That said, I don't think it necessarily encourages artistic freedom or songwriting. Washington, D.C.: How can someone learn to yodel? Jewel: Lots of practice and a soundproof room. Washington, D.C.: What's your take on Hollywood -- like it, hate it, want to be part of it? Does the culture appeal to you? Jewel: I guess it's never really appealed to me although as a voyeur who can come and go it can be quite an entertaining culture but nothing that should be taken too seriously. Leesburg, Va.: Can you speak to (1) "artistic freedom" versus the Indie Label format, and how this industry measure impacts what you release either written word or voice? Thanks! Jewel: I think that artistic freedom begins and ends with the artist's resolve. I believe any artist in any format should be able to maintain artistic integrity in whatever field they choose, indie or major label. It's a hard fight no matter where you are. Gaithersburg, Md.: Do you miss Alaska, if so what aspect do you miss the most and which do you miss the least? Jewel: I still get homesick for Alaska quite often. It's mainly the landscape, the mountains and the ocean that I miss. I I don't necessarily miss the long, dark winters. Dayton, Ohio: First I would like to say that I am so pleased you returned to your musical roots. Question: Have you ever thought one day you might do collaborations with any other artist? Jewel: I've never seen any of my music as a separation from my roots. It's all been storytelling from my life but I'm glad you like this most recent record. It's one of my favorites too. As for a duet, I got to sing with Bob Dylan, also B.B. King, so my wish list is pretty much taken care of with the exception of my regret for not having sung with Nina Simone. Tucson, Ariz.: What was it like touring with Rob Thomas? Jewel: Touring with Rob Thomas was great fun. It was a blast to have another band on the road and to get up on stage and sing with him. Grover Beach,Santa Barbara, Calif.: What happened to the Clear Water Foundation (I think that is what it was called)? Is it still around? If so, how can we get involved? Jewel: Yes, I still run the Clearwater Foundation. If you want to get involved you can find a link on Jewel Web Site It has been run by me and my brother since I was 21 and we solve water problems on the village level. So far we have put in 15 filtration systems in 12 different countries. New York, N.Y.: Hi Jewel, During this era in which the industry is so driven by artificial, oversexed and undeniably talentless fluff, how would you encourage up-and-coming songwriters/performers to be heard and recognized in an environment that seems so set on ignoring true talent? How did you remain focused and driven in the beginning? Jewel: I never got into music to become liked or famous. I started writing music because I needed it and it moved me and it helped me. I don't think real artists need to be encouraged to create real art. They just need a forum to perform their real art in, which means fans and consumers need to let radio stations and record labels and promoters know that they are still interested in real artists so that they will continue to give real artists a forum. Gaithersburg, Md.: I'm 50 years old and, I admit, I bought your latest CD. Your voice is just too strong and interesting to ignore. So, my question: Is it OK for an old guy like me to buy your music? (Honest question!) Jewel: LAUGHS. I'll take any fan I can get. I find that "older" fans that grew up listening to a lot of the great acts tend to be more loyal fans. Wixom, Mich.: How long does it take you from start to finish to write a song? Jewel: Um, well, every song is different but in general they come to me quite fast -- in a couple hours. Writing is an odd experience. It's sort of like reading a book out of my head. You can't see the words; you can only feel them. It feels like it's already written. You just need to discover it properly. Brownsville, Tex.: As an actress, you have only made one feature film and been in several TV shows. As far as you future is concerned, what kind of film project(s) are you looking for in doing? Do you want to go any further and chose parts than are different than who you are? By the way, I love your entire body of work! I wish you all the best! Jewel: I made a decision several years ago to kind of let acting go because I was beginning to spend all my free time working on acting and as I look around at many in my profession I see that often they grow old to be famous and affluent but not necessarily happy. Because so much time is spent on maintaining the career -- not developing a life outside of the career. I enjoy acting immensely and take parts when they come but no longer actively pursue movies. This is really just a fancy was of saying I'm lazy ... and I enjoy the ranch and being with my boyfriend. Clarksburg, W.Va.: I loved you on the "Iron Chef" program, that must have been a lot of fun? Do you get time enough to enjoy the food? Jewel: I'm a big fan of Iron Chef and the Food Network. Though we shot at 8 a.m. and I was eating raw lamb by 8:30 a.m. which was a first to say the least, I did thoroughly enjoy Bobby Flay's cooking and a lot of it. Jefferson, Wisc.: How do you feel the general public has responded to the evolving of your styles? Jewel: Everything considered, I think my fans have been resilient and open-minded, which is heartening because music really should be a liberal and accepting community. I really enjoy diverse styles of music and it has given me great joy to continue to experiment and push myself musically. Jewel: Thanks so much for bringing in your questions and I hope to do this again soon. It's nice to talk directly with the fans. washingtonpost.com: This concludes our discussion with Jewel. She had another interview to do. Hopefully, as she indicated, we may have her back with us. Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
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.
43.195122
0.512195
0.560976
high
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/19/AR2006071901380.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/19/AR2006071901380.html
The Cuban Solution
2006072519
A single candle casts a faint but warm light on the dark wood of a dining room table in Havana. The neighborhood has been hit with one of the rolling blackouts that occasionally plague the city, but Melissa Mitchell and Revery Barnes are determined to cram all night for their final exam in hematology and endocrinology anyway. Revery straps a miner-style flashlight onto her head as Melissa sets up a battery-operated laptop filled with notes. They pile heavy medical textbooks on the floor, pull their chairs close together and prop open one textbook between them. Back when Melissa was a premed student at Howard University, studying in the dark was never an issue. But this isn't Washington. This is Cuba, where Melissa, Revery and 95 other Americans are studying medicine in a country that's been an anathema to the United States for almost five decades. Thanks to Fidel Castro, their education is free. But that doesn't mean they aren't paying a price for turning to Cuba in their quest to become doctors. They've given up creature comforts most Americans take for granted, struggled to master hematology and other complicated subjects in a foreign language, and have no guarantees they will get a chance to practice medicine in the United States. Right now, though, Melissa, 25, and Revery, 26, aren't thinking about any of that. Melissa, a third-year student, says she has to do well on this test because the professor is on her case. Cuban doctors place a premium on basic skills -- interpreting breath sounds from a stethoscope, for instance -- that have been deemphasized in the high-tech world of U.S. medicine. Not long ago during rounds, Melissa's professor exploded at her when he asked for a diagnosis of a patient, and she replied that the lab results weren't back yet. "Are you planning to become a doctor or a lab analyst?" he growled. "Tell me what you heard and felt and saw." To study for the exam, Melissa and Revery have already walked a couple of miles from the blackout-darkened dorms at Salvador Allende Hospital in central Havana to a Cuban friend's house. They were hoping that this neighborhood near the famous Malecon would still have electricity. No such luck. "I reviewed anemia already," Melissa tells Revery. "I'll teach you anemia if you do diabetes" with me. Revery tilts her head low to illuminate a page, and they get to work. Within a few hours, their last candle sputters out. The laptop is already dead. Soon the flashlight batteries lose strength, dimming the light from bright white to dingy yellow. Before being plunged into pitch blackness, the two begin packing up, filling backpacks with notes and books. The plan: walk back to the dorm because maybe lights have returned to that part of town. If not, Melissa's Cuban boyfriend has a flashlight. They'll walk to his house to borrow it. "We can't complain," says Melissa, whose almond-shaped eyes make her look a little like a stylized portrait of Nefertiti. "We knew what it was going to be like when we signed up." HOW BADLY DOES MELISSA MITCHELL WANT TO BE A DOCTOR? Badly enough to learn Spanish and commit to living in Havana for more than six years -- double the time it would take her to complete medical school in the United States. Badly enough to live as Cuban students do, in cramped dorms without air conditioning, eating rice and beans and little else. (The simplest things -- a phone call home, a soda or candy bar, checking e-mail -- are usually out of reach for students living on a monthly stipend of about $4.) Badly enough to defy a U.S. ban on travel to Cuba to be here. Melissa knew when she accepted Castro's offer of room, board and tuition that relations between her own government and her benefactor were antagonistic at best. Last year she and her American classmates were ordered home by the Bush administration as part of a series of moves to tighten the 44-year-old embargo against Cuba. A few students abandoned their medical studies and returned to the United States, but most, including Melissa, stayed. Eventually, the administration relented and agreed to give the students temporary travel permits, which will be up for renewal next year. The Americans are operating on faith that their Cuban education will prepare them to pass tough U.S. licensing exams. Even though their medical studies are in Spanish, they must pass the exams in English. Melissa has no idea how she will pay for the exams, which collectively cost more than $2,000, let alone the review courses that most students, U.S. and foreign, routinely take to prepare for them. Most of her classmates are in the same boat.
Melissa Mitchell wants to be a doctor to tend to the poor. But the Howard Unversity undergrad was too poor herself to attend med school. That's when Cuba's maximum leader offered a helping hand.
24.051282
0.615385
1.128205
medium
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/24/AR2006072401021.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/24/AR2006072401021.html
Citing Crime Bill, Cropp Rebuffs Poll
2006072519
Linda W. Cropp dismissed yesterday a Washington Post poll that found she trails Adrian M. Fenty in the race for D.C. mayor and said the results would have been different had the survey been conducted after the D.C. Council approved a crime bill last week. Cropp (D), the council chairman, said Fenty (D-Ward 4) was out of touch with residents because he was the only council member to oppose the crime legislation. The bill, which came after a city crime emergency declaration, imposes a 10 p.m. youth curfew, gives police immediate access to some confidential juvenile records and installs surveillance cameras in neighborhoods. "Mr. Fenty does not even recognize that there is a neighborhood crime problem," Cropp said. "Obviously, he's not talking to the community. "When the real poll is taken September 12" -- the date of the Democratic primary -- Cropp said, "we will be victorious. If you took [the poll] last week . . . it would have had a different read." The poll was conducted between July 13 and 18, a day before the council's crime bill vote. It showed Fenty leading Cropp 39 to 31 percent among Democratic voters, and his lead is 10 percentage points among those considered most likely to vote. The telephone poll of 1,350 randomly sampled D.C. adults included 1,030 registered voters. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points for questions asked of all voters, and of 4.5 percentage points for those who are considered most likely to vote in the Democratic primary. Cropp, 58, made her first public comment about the poll during a morning news conference in Northwest Washington to highlight her plan to revamp the city's job training and employment programs. Fenty, 35, said yesterday that he voted against the crime bill because he thought it would not have a significant impact. He characterized the council as having a "knee-jerk" reaction and said he would have preferred his colleagues, who reconvened from summer recess for the vote, to have worked harder to craft a better bill. "People know that with the pressure to act, the council moved quickly to adopt feel-good measures," Fenty said, "instead of acknowledging that the government has not done the work it should have done and committed to do so in the future." But Cropp said Fenty did not offer a countermeasure. "Instead of just saying, 'No,' you have to come up with a solution to solve the problem," she said. Meanwhile, council member Vincent C. Gray (D-Ward 7) said he expected poll, which showed him slightly ahead of Kathy Patterson (D-Ward 3) in the race to replace Cropp as chairman, would give him a boost among undecided voters. Among likely voters, Gray is leading Patterson 43 to 38 percent, with 19 percent undecided, according to the poll. Several former city officials endorsed Gray yesterday, including Sterling Tucker, the city's first elected council chairman; one-time chairman Arrington Dixon; and former council members Frank Smith, H.R. Crawford and Sandy Allen. Patterson would not comment, said campaign manager Eric Marshall. He said Patterson has endorsements from council member Sharon Ambrose (D-Ward 6) and former council members Bill Lightfoot, Betty Ann Kane and John Ray.
Linda W. Cropp dismissed yesterday a Washington Post poll that found she trails Adrian M. Fenty in the race for D.C. mayor and said the results would have been different had the survey been conducted after the D.C. Council approved a crime bill last week.
14.152174
1
46
low
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/24/AR2006072401058.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/24/AR2006072401058.html
Krzyzewski Is Tasked With Reviving the Gold Standard
2006072519
LAS VEGAS -- Something about Mike Krzyzewski in Las Vegas is so incongruent: The high priest of the college game in the middle of Sin City, where NBA egocentricity, AAU street runners and sneaker-company vermin are all competing for attention and hotel rooms this week. Amid this carnival of hoop culture, something about Krzyzewski running practice on Jerry Tarkanian's former campus -- the Duke do-gooder in the back yard of the NCAA's ultimate bad dog -- feels out of kilter. "I had a thought kind of like that when the bus came in the first day of practice," Krzyzewski said. "The battles that we had for those two years with UNLV. And now we're actually practicing here. I didn't share that thought with anybody, but I thought it was interesting." It's actually necessary. Krzyzewski was brought in to prepare and coach the U.S. national team. But on a deeper level, Coach K is supposed to perform an exorcism of endorsement-driven selfishness, to rid the game of its AND1-gotta-get-mine mentality in hopes that the United States might one day share the basketball again and perhaps not get beat by Olympic powerhouses like Puerto Rico. When you lose to a U.S. territory at the Athens Games, something has gone awry. Krzyzewski is supposed to make LeBron James, Carmelo Anthony and Dwyane Wade care about winning gold in Beijing, stage of the next Olympics in 2008, but he is also charged with altering how we perceive our elite ballplayers. "I do feel that all of us have a responsibility to make the game better through this experience," Krzyzewski said. "It's not just about winning." He kept going on with his basketball idealism, how this brainchild of keeping players in the national-team system for three years could help fix what ails the game on many levels. "It'll be a process," he said. "We develop this at this level of play, then the stature of U.S. basketball will grow within our country. Potentially, there won't be so many shoe-company and AAU camps in July. Maybe there's USA basketball camps." "I don't know if we're lost, I just don't think we've kept up internationally with the game," Krzyzewski added. "The NBA game is a good game. But with kids skipping the process of going to college, or shortening it, we haven't filled the gap of skill development and the nuances of the game. I'm not saying the guys are bad, but how to play with one another, the different footwork things that you would learn along the way, somehow these kids get started with AAU in the summers and . . . " Krzyzewski cuts himself off, saying he has nothing against the Amateur Athletic Union. Why? Because he knows the cattle-call summer tournaments put on by the AAU are ultimately where his next recruiting class will come from. He can't kill the sneaker-company vermin too much, either, because he and Duke have made multimillion-dollar deals with that devil. Yes, Coach K in Vegas, fixing the game and the players who play it, is a nice angle. Many of the game's greatest players appreciate the way he walks patiently up court to talk with them rather than at them; he has managed to combine old-college-try authority with a deference to NBA lifestyles and personalities that has caught on in less than a week of practice. But it's not altogether reality -- and Krzyzewski knows it. Krzyzewski's hands are tied in ways unimaginable in Durham. Players' friends, family, former coaches and the occasional hangers-on ring the periphery of the practice court. One of LeBron's friends here is a likable guy known for organizing high-stakes card games among players. NBA-sponsored cameras follow the team around like a reality show, waiting for that next utterance from players who come and go as they please. "It's not anything I would -- or should -- change, because they're comfortable with it," Krzyzewski said. "Whether it's being miked, having NBA Entertainment around or anything. I wouldn't allow that for Duke because my kids would be distracted. They would absolutely not pay attention to anything, whereas these guys do that all of the time. They're men. I'm the one who should be making those adjustments." Krzyzewski has no illusions that he can work his Duke magic and single-handedly change the culture of basketball in the United States. For him, this job is a tremendous arrangement, almost like fantasy camp for college coaches who might want to coach at the next level but don't want to give up their small-town fiefdoms and university control. To keep this NBA job, Krzyzewski is not beholden to any one superstar; he can replace that malcontent with another superstar. And because he does not coach in the league, he doesn't have any agenda beyond building a team. Plus, unlike Larry Brown, Krzyzewski will not disassociate himself from his players when they fall apart against Lithuania in a qualifier. Part of who he is involves going down with the ship. And if he brings home gold in 2008, the great Coach K -- not Pat Riley or Phil Jackson or any other big-name NBA coach -- is the man who reestablished international dominance, who fixed all that ails America's game. Wish him luck. Between these AAU, Nike and Reebok characters loitering in the lobbies this week, you just hope Mike Krzyzewski remembered to bring his rosary beads to the desert.
Mike Krzyzewski is charged with restoring American dominance in basketball and the challenge is daunting for the college coaching legend.
52.285714
0.714286
1.095238
high
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/24/AR2006072400948.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/24/AR2006072400948.html
Baptist Group's Leaders Convicted
2006072519
PHOENIX, July 24 -- Two former executives of a failed Southern Baptist foundation were convicted here Monday in what prosecutors said was the nation's largest fraud ever targeting members of a religious group. William Pierre Crotts, who was president of the Baptist Foundation of Arizona, and Thomas Dale Grabinski, the group's former chief legal counsel, were each convicted of three counts of fraud and one count of conducting an illegal enterprise in a scheme that lasted decades and cheated 11,000 investors across the country of about $585 million. In a trial that lasted 10 months, prosecutors claimed that the executives were driven by shame to hide the foundation's mounting investment losses, bilking investors who were recruited in Southern Baptist churches and by Bible-quoting salesmen who visited their homes. Investors were told their money would help Southern Baptist causes, such as building new churches, and were promised above-market returns. Instead, prosecutors said Crotts and Grabinski had designed a Ponzi scheme in which new investors were needed to pay off the secret mounting debt. Donald Conrad, an Arizona assistant attorney general, characterized Crotts and Grabinski during closing arguments as business failures who defrauded investors in part to "feed their financial fantasies" that they were savvy businessmen. The pair were handcuffed and led from Maricopa County Superior Court after the verdict. Prosecutors failed to show that Crotts and Grabinski profited personally from the fraud, which involved hiding millions of dollars of losses in shell companies they created to conceal the losses. The two men were acquitted of 23 theft counts. Defense attorneys had argued that the foundation could have been able to pay off investors if state regulators had not forced it to stop selling securities in 1999. Grabinski's attorney, Daryl Williams, said Arizona officials simply did not understand the foundation's complicated finances. The two former executives will be sentenced Sept. 29. Each faces a maximum sentence of more than 46 years, according to the attorney general's office. James D. Porter, a foundation investor and Crotts family friend, said he believes that Crotts is innocent despite the verdict. "The truth is not determined by what this court said," Porter said. "Righteous people have spent time in jail before." Since the foundation's 1999 bankruptcy, five other employees or associates have pleaded guilty in connection with the fraud. The foundation was an official agency of the Arizona Southern Baptist Convention, which is affiliated with the national Southern Baptist Convention. The foundation's accounting firm was Arthur Andersen LLP, which collapsed after allegations that it had helped Enron Corp. conceal its mounting business problems. In 2002, Arthur Andersen agreed to pay the state of Arizona $217 million to settle a lawsuit over its work for the Baptist foundation. Foundation investor Bob Shaw, 59, a car salesman, said he recovered about 68 percent of the $250,000 he invested with the foundation. But he said Monday's verdicts were more satisfying than getting his money back. "When they walked out of there in handcuffs," Shaw said, "that was justice for me." Special correspondent Steve Elliot contributed to this report.
Get Washington DC,Virginia,Maryland and national news. Get the latest/breaking news,featuring national security,science and courts. Read news headlines from the nation and from The Washington Post. Visit www.washingtonpost.com/nation today.
14.285714
0.452381
0.547619
low
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/24/AR2006072400951.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/24/AR2006072400951.html
Growing Coalition Opposes Drilling
2006072519
VALLE VIDAL, N.M. -- Calving season has just ended in lush Carson National Forest, a fact that becomes obvious as three baby elk emerge from the woods with their mother in the midday sun. They are the newest members of a herd that has lived here for thousands of years, interrupted only at the beginning of the past century when humans killed them off -- and then promptly reintroduced them. The natural beauty of this area of the forest, known as Valle Vidal, remained largely unblemished as the 101,000-acre mix of scenic conifer forests and open meadows became a sporting playground for Hollywood stars and moguls, and later for oil company executives, before the land was donated to the government in 1982 by Pennzoil Corp. and opened to the public. Now, Valle Vidal has become a battleground in the drive to expand energy exploration on public land, attracting the attention of a growing coalition of hunters, anglers, environmentalists, ranchers, homeowners and politicians across the ideological spectrum. Here and elsewhere in the Western United States, this coalition is starting to resist the push for energy exploration in some of the nation's most prized wilderness areas. Although it remains unclear how successful they will be, these new activists -- including many who treasure Valle Vidal as a place to fish for cutthroat trout, hunt for elk and ride horses across its wide expanses -- have brought a new dynamic to the public debate over energy development in the West. "There's clearly a headlong rush into opening up these areas, but there's a recognition there's precious areas, beautiful landscapes that people appreciate and love," said Rep. Tom Udall (D-N.M.). "In those cases, the equation swings over to protection." Udall sponsored legislation to make Valle Vidal off-limits to oil and gas drilling and to protect hundreds of thousands of acres of wilderness in California, Idaho and Oregon. The House unanimously approved Udall's bill on Monday, and the issue is now before the Senate. In two other states, prominent GOP senators -- Conrad Burns (Mont.) and Craig Thomas (Wyo.) -- have also pushed in the past month to restrict energy exploration on public land. The debate over Valle Vidal began in 2002 when El Paso Corp. announced it wanted to explore drilling for coal-bed methane, which involves tapping into beds of coal and extracting water to release the trapped natural gas. The Forest Service must decide whether to allow it. The U.S. government has already opened to drilling 85 percent of the federal oil and gas reserves in the Rocky Mountains' five major energy basins. Responding in part to increased demand and rising energy costs, in 2005 the administration issued almost twice as many drilling permits -- 7,018 -- as President Bill Clinton did in 2000. But now resistance to drilling is growing, especially because environmentalists have enlisted sportsmen and other new allies in their fight, and because energy companies already have access to most of the public land in the Rocky Mountain West. In the case of Valle Vidal, two of the groups fighting hardest to preserve it are hunters, who vie for a once-in-a-lifetime state permit to shoot elk here, and devotees of the Philmont Scout Ranch, which is next to Valle Vidal and brings 3,000 Boy Scouts there to hike each year. "Something is happening here," said Chris Wood, vice president for conservation at the advocacy group Trout Unlimited. "What we're seeing is the emergence of a powerful new voice in conservation. It's not your garden-variety environmental groups. It's hunters and anglers and outfitters and guides that are helping convince Democrats and Republicans alike of the need to protect these last places." Steven Belinda, energy policy initiative manager at the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, a sporting group, shot an elk with his bow in Valle Vidal two years ago and is now mobilizing hunters to oppose drilling here. Numbering between 1,500 and 2,700, the forest's elk herd is one of the largest in the state, and a ban on off-road vehicles allows hunters to pursue the animals without the disruptive background noise.
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.
20.333333
0.487179
0.538462
medium
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/24/AR2006072400172.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/24/AR2006072400172.html
Democrats' Plan Focuses on Middle Class
2006072519
DENVER, July 24 -- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) accused Republicans under President Bush of economic mismanagement and favoring the rich here on Monday as she outlined a Democratic campaign agenda of tax breaks and incentives designed to make the costs of health care, college and retirement more affordable for millions of Americans. The former first lady delivered the keynote address at the centrist Democratic Leadership Council's summer meeting, unveiling the results of the "American Dream Initiative," a year-long effort she led on behalf of the DLC to produce a domestic platform that Democrats can take to voters this fall in their bid to win control of the House and Senate. The agenda represents a renewed effort by Democrats to attract middle-class voters, some of whom shifted to the Republicans in 2002 and 2004 over concerns about national security and terrorism. But the ideas also could form the backbone of Clinton's campaign message in 2008 if she decides to run for president, as many Democrats expect. "The Republicans say the economy is great for everyone," Clinton said. "They've done nothing about these costs that are eating away at the paychecks of hard-working Americans. Democrats will work to get health-care costs down, to get college tuitions under control, to address the rising costs of gas prices, to cut middle-class taxes and reward companies that create jobs here at home." Clinton argued that Democrats proved to be good economic stewards and protectors of the middle class during the administration of her husband, Bill Clinton, but said that, over the past six years, the Republican leadership has eroded the economic and income gains that many workers experienced during the 1990s. "A policy of fiscal discipline and budget surpluses was abandoned for one that racked up debt and claimed that deficits don't matter," Clinton said. "And a policy that focused on helping the middle class get bigger and healthier and stronger was replaced by one that helped the strong get stronger and the rich get richer." Reworking a line from her husband's 1992 campaign, she said the rallying cry for Democrats this fall should be: "It's the American Dream, stupid." Republican National Committee spokeswoman Tracey Schmitt contested Clinton's appraisal of the GOP's economic record. "Political theatrics aside, the reality is 5.4 million jobs have been created in the last three years alone," she said in an e-mail message. "Even a master politician can't manipulate those numbers." Clinton was one of a handful of possible Democratic presidential candidates who spoke during the day. Others included Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack, the DLC chairman, who said the group should seek to unify the party for the campaign ahead; Sen. Evan Bayh (Ind.), who said Democrats must be credible on national security before voters will listen to them on other issues; and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson. The American Dream Initiative includes proposals that DLC President Bruce Reed said would cost $450 billion to $500 billion over 10 years. He said the cost could be offset by eliminating corporate subsidies in the tax code, cutting out 100,000 unnecessary federal contractors and making a more aggressive effort to identify and collect taxes now going uncollected by the Internal Revenue Service. The initiative also calls for a return to pay-as-you-go budget rules in Washington, which means that all spending on new programs must be offset by cuts elsewhere. The centerpiece proposal would provide additional support for college costs, with the goal of increasing the number of college graduates by 1 million a year by 2015. The proposal includes $150 billion in block grants for states to ease rising tuition costs and a consolidated tax credit for students. To qualify, states and universities would have to limit tuition increases to the rate of inflation. Other ideas include requirements for employers to establish retirement accounts for all workers and a refundable tax credit for savers; "baby bonds" that would create a government-funded savings account of $500 for every child born in the United States; a refundable tax credit to help provide the down payment on housing; universal health care for children; and benefits for small businesses to lower the cost of providing health insurance to workers. The DLC often has put itself at odds with the party's liberal wing, but the new agenda was designed to create a unified message for the Democrats, although congressional leaders also have put forth a party agenda. The DLC document bears the imprint of several other progressive organizations, and DLC founder Al From said he believed that it represented "a set of ideas around which Democrats of all stripes can rally as we head into the fall election." Initial reviews from other Democrats suggested that Clinton had succeeded. Robert L. Borosage of the liberal Campaign for America's Future, which has often sparred with the DLC, praised the proposals as "pretty interesting, and bolder than normal," adding, "I take it as a pretty good indication of how President Bush unifies the Democrats." Clinton said Monday that Democrats would hold Bush and Republicans accountable for their national security policies as well as their domestic policies, but Borosage noted that national security remains a fault line between the DLC and liberals, with the DLC out of step with a majority of activists. Clinton was booed and heckled last month at the annual conference of Campaign for America's Future for opposing a timetable for withdrawing U.S. forces from Iraq. While Clinton was in Denver, her husband was at an event that underscored Democrats' divisions over national security, campaigning in Connecticut for Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, who faces a stiff primary challenge from antiwar Democrat Ned Lamont.
DENVER, July 24 -- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) accused Republicans under President Bush of economic mismanagement and favoring the rich here on Monday as she outlined a Democratic campaign agenda of tax breaks and incentives designed to make the costs of health care, college and retirement...
20.259259
0.981481
52.018519
medium
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/24/AR2006072400992.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/24/AR2006072400992.html
Operating Quietly, Tattoo Artists Make Their Mark in Iraq
2006072519
BAGHDAD -- If you found the artist, someone must have told you about him, and this was precisely what scared him, because it could have gotten him killed. He neither advertised his services nor hung a sign on his door. But he could be found: through a small art gallery on the first floor of an anonymous two-story building in downtown Baghdad, up a narrow, twisting flight of stairs, and into the cramped, dank studio with only one low window obscured by a purple curtain. "You shouldn't have come here," he said the other day, after pulling back the curtain to reveal a machine gun propped on the sill. "If they find me, they will cut off my head." In Iraq's current climate of intimidation by religious extremists -- accused of murdering those who immodestly wear shorts, or drink alcohol, or happen to be born with a particular name -- body art cannot be practiced openly. Some Islamic scholars consider tattoos haram , or prohibited by the religion: a desecration of God's creation and the chosen emblem of thugs and convicts. Worse, some consider the practice an imitation of the "occupiers" from America. But in market stalls and private homes and small rooms tucked out of sight, tattoo artists are plying an increasingly popular trade, and their young Iraqi customers say they take inspiration from foreign soldiers, American athletes and the traditional Islamic body decorations common among elder generations before Saddam Hussein cracked down on the practice. "Saddam did not allow it, and people who had tattoos would be imprisoned because it is an imitation of the West," said Ibrahim Samat, 19, sitting with his shirt off inside the Baghdad tattoo shop as the artist inscribed the head of a tiger onto his left shoulder. "I want one because it is a beautiful thing and because lots of young people are doing it." When U.S.-led troops knocked down Hussein's government, they also took out the Baath Party's influence over television stations and the Internet, opening the door to a burst of Western culture. Many Iraqis despise the United States and its military, but it does not prevent them from spending hours on the couch watching Oprah or Dr. Phil. Such cultural exchanges are common in wartime. The British left behind cricket when they departed the Greek Island of Corfu in the 19th century. After World War II, Italian singer Renato Carosone famously crooned to his countrymen: "You want to play the American." What invading militaries unwittingly bring with them "really has a kind of secondary impact that is in some ways more lasting," said Benjamin Barber, the author of "Jihad vs. McWorld: How Globalism and Tribalism are Reshaping the World." "We're much better at selling [our culture] unintentionally than we are at selling democracy," he said. Khaman Aziz Qasab Oghlo, 18, a Turkmen student living in the northern Iraqi city of Kirkuk, paid $75 to have an eagle tattooed on his back after admiring the body art of U.S. troops patrolling the city.
Washington Post coverage of the American occupation of Iraq, the country's path to democracy and tensions between Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds.
23.92
0.56
0.72
medium
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/21/AR2006072100498.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072519id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/21/AR2006072100498.html
What's the Deal?
2006072519
· Vue Pointe Hotel on the Caribbean island of Montserrat has half-price rooms during the renovation of its bar and restaurant. Rates Aug. 1-Oct. 15 are $60 per night (including 20 percent taxes and service charges) for a cottage with a kitchenette. Info: 664-491-5210, http://www.vuepointe.com/ . · Lease a car in Europe for at least 17 days through Renault Eurodrive and get an automatic for the price of a manual transmission. For example, a 17-day car rental in Paris of an automatic Renault Clio during early September is $849 (plus $10 handling fee); usual price is $125 more. Deal is good through 2006 on new bookings. Info: 800-221-1052, http://www.renaultusa.com/ . · Save 40 percent on Silversea's 10-day "Accent on Brazil" cruise round trip from Buenos Aires. The cruise, which departs Dec. 13, now starts at $3,777 per person double (plus $325 port charges and fees); brochure rate starts at $6,295. Info: 877-215-9986, http://www.silversea.com/ . · Windstar has several seven-night European cruises this fall starting at $1,999 per person double. Discounts apply to the Oct. 15, 22 and 29 and Nov. 5 sailings of the Wind Surf on its Nice-Rome, Rome-Barcelona and Barcelona-Lisbon itineraries. Savings vary: The Nice-Rome sailing, for example, was priced at $3,699 (plus $37 taxes). Info: 800-258-SAIL, http://www.windstarcruises.com/ . · Coast of Maine cruises have been discounted by 20 percent by American Canadian Caribbean Line. The seven-night cruises, which depart Aug. 10 and 29 and Sept. 7, start at $1,056 per person double (plus $75 taxes), a savings of $264. Info: 800-556-7450, http://www.acclsmallships.com/ . · Southwest has low fares on its new service between Dulles and Las Vegas . The $99-each-way fare ($219 with taxes round trip) is valid for nonstop and connecting travel Oct. 5-Dec. 10. Fourteen-day advance purchase is required. Nonstop fare on legacy airlines starts at $278; JetBlue is matching. Info: 800-I-FLY-SWA, http://www.southwest.com/ . · Fly last minute from New York's JFK to Vancouver for $328 round trip (plus $65 taxes). Cathay Pacific deal is good for travel departing by July 31. No advance purchase necessary. Fare on other airlines starts at $578 from Washington and $562 from New York. Purchase at http://www.cathay-usa.com/ . · Expedia and Travelocity are offering instant rebates of $200 per booking on flight and hotel packages to Hawaii, Mexico, Europe or the Caribbean . For example, a six-night trip in early October to Jamaica including round-trip flights from Dulles on American and all-inclusive lodging at Sunset Beach Resort and Spa is $1,711 per couple with the discount at Expedia ($1,665 per couple on Travelocity with flights on Northwest from BWI). Priced separately, the package would cost $2,340 per couple. Book at http://www.expedia.com/ by July 27 for travel completed by Dec. 31; use coupon code EXPEDIA200. Book at http://www.travelocity.com/ by July 27 for travel through Jan. 7: use coupon code GREAT200. · Wildlife Safari USA has savings of $800 per person on two Kenya safaris , departing Oct. 14 and 21. The seven-night itineraries, priced at $2,995 per person double (plus $250 taxes), include round-trip airfare from Washington to Nairobi, a night at the Hilton Hotel in Nairobi, six nights' accommodations at four safari lodges, meals, national park fees, transportation in safari vehicles, game-viewing and guides. Info: 800-221-8118, http://www.wildlife-safari.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.
Hurry to capture half-price rooms for a hotel in Montserrat, $200 instant rebates from two Internet booking sites and Southwest air fare deals.
27.5
0.821429
1.535714
medium
medium
mixed
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/21/DI2006072100904.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/21/DI2006072100904.html
Post Politics Hour
2006072419
Don't want to miss out on the latest in politics? Start each day with The Post Politics Hour. Join in each weekday morning at 11 a.m. as a member of The Washington Post's team of White House and Congressional reporters answers questions about the latest in buzz in Washington and The Post's coverage of political news. washingtonpost.com political columnist/blogger Chris Cillizza and Washington Post national political editor John F. Harris were online Monday, July 24, at 11 a.m. ET . Bellwethers: Key Issues in the Battle for Congress Read Chris Cillizza 's blog, The Fix Fairfax, Va.: Why did your bellwether topics exclude National Security? Many people, liberals and conservatives both, are worried that North Korea's nuclear arsenal has increased to eight WMD under Bush and that our military capability is much less due to Iraq (witness our inability to play a role in the current Middle East crisis)? How could this topic not be an issue in the coming election? John F. Harris: Good morning. I hope people will read and take a moment to click around on the Bellwether project, a joint effort between the newspaper and washingtonpost.com that began this morning and will continue through the Nov. 7 mid-term elections. The idea was to focus on eight questions that we think can help frame readers thinking about the elections, and whether a turnover in control of Congress will happen. Like any such exercise, there was a degree of subjectivity on the questions we chose. As for your point, however, national security is indeed one of the important questions. We looked at it especially in the context of Iraq, and whether this will hurt Republicans. In particular, there are several suburban districts that seem to be in play this year that ordinarily Democrats would have a hard time making competitive. I'll be joined for this chat by Chris Cillizza, of post.com, who along with my colleague Dan Balz played a key role in deciding which races we would focus on. Alpharetta, Ga.: How will the Bellwether be covering primaries such as those in R.I. and Tenn? Chris Cillizza: The goal of the Bellwether Project -- as John pointed out -is not to cover every single race in the country but rather to focus on those that can serve as, well, bellwethers -- showing readers and political insiders where the electorate may be leaning. As for the Senate races in Tennessee and Rhode Island, both of them fall within the bellwether project's purview. Tennessee is covered under the Red State question -- Can Democrats win again in the rim or upper south? Rhode Island Sen. Lincoln Chafee's re-election race is addressed in the question about President Bush and how much negative effect he will have on Republicans trying to win re-election in areas viewed as not particularly friendly to the GOP. Washington, D.C.: How were the bellwether topics selected and why is there nothing specific about the growing disparity during the Bush years between increased income for the wealthy and stagnant wages relative to cost of living for middle and lower income folks? Also what about the topic of presidential dishonesty: lying about WMD, Katrina etc.? Also what about price-gouging at the gas pump? Chris Cillizza: About six weeks ago, a group of reporters from The Post and post.com sat down to begin developing these questions. The goal of the bellwether project, and what we hope makes it stand out from other election coverage, is that its goal is not simply to provide a catalogue of the most competitive races in the country. Instead, it seeks to find the issues foremost in voters' minds as they mull their choice this November and the races around the country that best illustrate those questions. This is an organic process. Races will almost assuredly change between now and November. That's why it's important to remember that this is a JOINT project between The Post and the post.com. We will be continually monitoring these questions in the paper, on the web and through The Fix. Rochester, Minn.: Hi and thanks for taking my question. I call myself a "former Republican" as I find it hard to call myself a Democrat but I have voted mostly Dem since the mid-1990s. I see myself and a number of my family members as social liberals and fiscal conservatives. Bush et all have lost nearly my entire family because they appear to be the opposite of us: social conservatives and fiscal liberals (irresponsibly so in most of our minds). Does the GOP care about winning back people like us and if so what, if anything, are they planning to do about it? John F. Harris: As the Republican Party has moved in a more conservative direction over the past 25 years, there probably a lot of people who feel as you do. But Republicans have successfully brought in large numbers of new and conservative voters, particularly in the Sunbelt states. But this strategy carries risk. You'll note that in our Bellwethers project this morning one of the key questions is whether Republicans in the northeast--who tend to be socially moderate--can survive at a time when the reputation of the GOP nationally is more conservative than their constituents. Boston, Mass.: I'm excited by your congressional race project. Of course you have to make choices about what races to pick, but I would have loved to have seen Tom DeLay and Richard Pombo on the list as corruption bellwethers. Do you see the earmarking, money laundering and Abramoff-related corruption having any effect on the races of Jerry Lewis (CA-41), Dana Rohrabacher (CA-46), John Sweeney (NY-20), Dennis Hastert (IL-14) and Tom Feeney (FL-24)? Even if they're (extremely) likely to win their races, will they have to spend money locally (as in the Busby-Bilbray race) that they would have otherwise sent to vulnerable incumbents and challengers? My guess is that may end up being the greatest effect of the corruption scandals. Chris Cillizza: This is a question and a set of races that we went back and forth on multiple times. DeLay's race was not included simply because we did not view it as a bellwether contest in terms of corruption. Of course if DeLay does wind up on the ballot the entire race will be a referendum on him and the ethics questions that surround him but in order to judge whether corruption will play a major role in determining control of the House, it will be in seats like Ohio's Senate race where Mike DeWine himself has not been implicated in any scandal but is struggling with an unfriendly environment due to the problems of Ohio Gov. Bob Taft (R) and Rep. Bob Ney (R). Baltimore, Md.: Your bellwether issues didn't include the distraction topics that the Congress and Senate has been so focused on - flag burning, gay hatred, stem cells. Is it your belief that this tactic is not working? John F. Harris: We don't regard flag-burning as likely to play out a decisive factor in many races, but controversies over stem cell research and gay marriage may indeed have an important impact. We looked at this possibility on the bellwether question about turnout. Specifically, how will both parties' efforts to use issues important to their base voters affect close congressional races. On the Democratic side the minimum wage and stem cells are on the ballot as referendums in several states. One place to look at this factor is Missouri, where a measure to expand stem cell research is before voters. Polls indicate it will pass overwhelmingly. The Democratic candidate for Senate, Claire McCaskill, supports the measure, and hopes that it will encourage a lot of additional Democratic voters to come to the polls. Republican incumbent Sen. Jim Talent opposes the measure. San Francisco, Calif.: Hello, gentlemen, and thanks for taking my question this morning. I've reviewed your bellwethers article, and I wonder why two of the six issues you've selected are so-called "process" or "horserace" topics? "Tough Terrain" (with regard to GOP success in the Northeast) and "Red State Revival" (about Democratic possibilities in the upper tier South) seem more inside baseball than voter-driven issues. Are you considering what moves voters, or what DeeCee is talking about? Chris Cillizza: Well, we sought to make the bellwether questions an amalgam of issue-based questions (Iraq, immigration, corruption) and process-centered ones (Northeast consolidation by Democrats, the competitiveness in the Upper South). The goal was to provide a blueprint for our readers of not just what voters are talking about on the issue side but also the prevailing geographic dynamics in the country as well. Remember the bellwether is an attempt to show the how, why and where of the 2006 election. We don't pretend it is comprehensive. Boston, Mass.: Maybe I overlooked it in the plethora of interesting information, but do you intend to do any particular regular polling related to this project? Are you going to be polling these races or these issues, or both? Or do you plan to analyze the general population of polls with your questions in mind? John F. Harris: This is a work in progress, and we may well combine some polling between now and election day. The initial goal was to lay out the larger factors that we think will drive this election, and the races that best illuminate the trends. There will be numerous additional stories and web features on these eight bellwether questions we identified. If we can figure out a smart way (within the budget!) of using polling to shed light on races and the general direction of the year between now and election day I'd love to do it. Of course we will by all means be doing our regular Washington Post/ABC News polls, that come out every six weeks or so. Stroudsburg, Pa.: It seems like Casey is a shoo-in for PA voters disenchanted with Rick Santorum's extreme positions on many issues --- and by Rick's place on the political spectrum -- to the right of Bush! Any ideas on this? John F. Harris: I would not say shoo-in, but you are right that Santorum is in real trouble. Polls show him trailing by double digits and have for months. That is why he is regarded by operatives in both parties as the most vulnerable Senate Republican incumbent. We did include him in a bellwether question--can Republicans hold on to vulnerable in the Northeast--but to be honest he has so many problems that are specific to him and Pennsylvania politics that in some ways this is not a model bellwether race. Roseland, N.J.: Specifically, what candidate has surprised you the most this cycle? Chris Cillizza: Rep. Harold Ford Jr. When Ford got into this race, I was extremely skeptical about his chances of winning. He had flirted with Senate races in 2000 and again in 2002 before backing away and I had real questions about whether he would go all out when it came to this race. He has proven me wrong. Ford has raised money at a furious pace and taken the kind of risks (early television advertising for example) that show he realizes what a difficult race this will be. This is not to say that Ford is a favorite to win retiring Sen. Bill Frist's seat in November. A poll came out this morning that showed him trailing former Chattanooga Mayor Bob Corker, who is leading the three-way Republican field. Since most of the attention has been focused on the GOP primary it's not too surprising that Ford is behind and after a Republican nominee is selected I would be the numbers level off somewhat. The reality of Tennessee politics is that Ford can do everything right and still lose. But, he deserves credit for putting himself into position to have a chance at winning with less than four months before the election. San Francisco, Calif.: Good morning, gentlemen, and thanks for picking my question today. Did you give any consideration to the Medicare Part D "donut hole" appearing in the wallet of many seniors just before they vote this fall? A huge bloc of regular voters will see a big gap in their Part D coverage sometime after Labor Day. Won't that issue drive them away from their customary home in the GOP? Candidates like Bruce Braley, with a district higher-than-average in seniors, are hammering on that issue already. John F. Harris: If you had been in our discussions as we selected the bellwether questions, this would have been a reasonable one to consider. To my mind, the Medicare prescription drug issue is probably a turnout question. Are there a lot of seniors who are upset enough by the new program and its complexities that they will go to the polls in higher numbers in ways that could help Democrats. As a practical matter, however, seniors are already among the most reliable voters in mid-term elections. And Republicans argue that after a lot of bumps in the beginning the new drug program is working more smoothly and won't hurt them this fall. It is a question that's worth looking at in the context of individual races, and I expect we'll do it between now and the fall. Republican Rep. Clay Shaw, for instance, in Florida's 22nd district, represents lots of seniors. He's a top target of Democrats this year and the prescription drug issue will surely be pressed by challenger Ron Klein, a state senator. As you can appreciate, the eight bellwether questions we focused on were not meant to be a comprehensive list of every factor that will determine races--just ones that seemed especially interesting and relevant to us on the political staff at The Post. It seems as though members of Congress have vastly different opinions of the impact that various contentious national issues will have on the races in their individual districts. For instance, a Democratic Senate candidate who supports expanded stem-cell research might think that it is a huge winner for him in his district, while a Republican House member might be equally convinced that public opinion at the local level was on his/her side in opposing that measure. Are these candidates, in voicing such confidence, simply engaging in pre-election spin? Or is it that the political makeup of their districts are truly so different than there is no single consensus for how these issues will play out, from district to district? John F. Harris: Your question suggests an important cautionary note. We follow national trends, but these trends do not always play out in local races in consistent or predictable ways. That's why we'll be traveling to lots of competitive races and doing a lot of on-the-ground reporting this fall. Thanks for joining us this morning, and please do continue to check into post.com's bellwether page regularly between now and election day. 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.
washingtonpost.com political columnist/blogger Chris Cillizza discussed the latest buzz in Washington and The Post's coverage of political news.
133.818182
0.954545
8.954545
high
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/20/DI2006072000827.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/20/DI2006072000827.html
Series: Being a Black Man
2006072419
Manassas, Va.: Hello Mr. WcWhorter, I am a 40 year old black man who grew up in, predominately white, Fairfax, Virginia. My family was solidly ensconced as upper middle class. My mother, being a teacher, was HEAVILY involved in every aspect of my education and expected me, and my siblings, to perform at our very best. Now, as you mention in your excellent books, we were often the target of other blacks for actually caring about school (I was more afriad of my mother than them!) I think I have heard the terms 'Oreo' and 'Uncle Tom' from other blacks than I have heard the N-word from other races. This sorry fact has caused me much confusion and internal strife over the years. I would often consider myself as a man without a 'home color', so to speak; not black, because I was not a 'trusted member' who denounced intellectualism and victimology, and not white, because of the copious amounts of melatonin in my skin. Why are you not in the media more often than you are? You mention in 'Loosing The Race' that you want to maintain your credibility as a scholar in linguistics. I have read several of your works and feel that what you have to say should be touted more in mainstream media. For me, reading your books has helped me understand myself more and move beyond the confusion and guilt of not being considered 'black' - by both other blacks and whites! I feel that all blacks would gain so much from your perspective of what is truly a great strain on all of us. John McWhorter: I'm glad my work makes some sense to you. I know that the hardest thing about being someone like you is that so many very smart black people insist that what you were up against was not real, that there are "many ways of being black," and so on. But I do think that the black community is more aware of the "acting white" problem than ten years ago -- awareness spreads slowly. As for me and the media, I actually am pretty satisfied with where I am. If I had to be on some radio or TV show every week (or Lord Forbid, day), I wouldn't have time to write, which is what I really prefer. Justin Storch, Arlington, Va.: Hi John, I just logged on to the Washington Post and saw your face at the top of the page... and I received your wedding invitation a few days ago! I'm looking forward to it, and I wanted to be the first person to RSVP to a wedding via Washington Post online chat. John McWhorter: Hi Justin -- So pleasant to find someone I know during one of these on-liners and to dwell on something equally pleasant, my upcoming wedding. (You know, of course, that there will now be two or three people reading this who will launch into speculation as to who evil John McWhorter is marrying and whether or not she's white! Well -- it'll keep life interesting in the inbox for the next few days! Washington, D.C.: The series to date, seems to show lots of images of black men that we don't often see in the media. Productive middle class men, taking care of their part of the world. However, after reading the feedback blog I see some people saying these aren't the real faces of the "black man." Why aren't they? Who decided that black men are limited to these two images -- rich and successful or thug and criminal? John McWhorter: I would venture that these days, the media no longer ignores that middle class black man. He is now a commonplace of television shows and movies -- so much so that I suspect we tend to barely notice anymore. The idea that "real" black men are either poor unforunates or rich rappers and magnates is based, I think, on the mere sensationalism of those two images. At 40 I am just old enough to remember when it would have been downright bizarre for black men doing ordinary corporate work and living in the suburbs to be normal aspects of mainstream TV, film, and advertising. I'm also GLAD that today's it's so ordinary. Birmingham, Ala.: A common approach in philosophy today is to reevaluate the history of ideas. A better understanding of the time that produced the ideas gives us a better understanding of what the ideas are. Your book seems to adopt this approach by reevaluating the historical context of many social or political problems faced by blacks collectively. But some of your solutions seem unrealistic -- e.g., shedding "counteproductive cultural baggage" -- without succumbing to Panglossian belief in personal responsibility and a naively Nietzschean belief in free will to change one's life without cost. Doesn't this suggest that you are viewing black history through the distoring lenses of your own ideology? I would note that the Manhattan Institute, your patron, is known to be a right-of-center think tank, and your book was praised in National Review by Roger Clegg, who is about as far-right on racial issues as one can respectably get before donning a white hood. Given that blacks in the underclass are unlikely to read your book and have an epiphany because of it, don't you have a personal responsibility for the reasonably foreseaable uses of your ideas by whites antagonistic to "the black community"? In my book, that is much worse than Cornel West producing a bad rap CD and calling it scholarship. Don't you agree? John McWhorter: The idea that right-of-center ideas on race may harm the black community comes up often, but I am unclear what the evidence is that it would happen. There's been Steele, Connerly, Loury in the old days, Williams, Sowell -- where, precisely, is the "backlash" against black America as the result? I just don't see it -- and given that it seems as if you have read some of my work, you will understand that I do not regard the questioning of racial preference polices as "anti-black," for reasons which one may disagree with but which are, I hope, relatively reasoned and coherent in themselves. Nowhere do I espouse "Panglossian" views -- I stress that black America needs the assistance of the powers that be; the bootstraps argument is common among many true black "conservatives" but is not mine. I do believe that black America has been taught to overstress the power of "racism" -- but that is not the same as saying that everyone needs to just "get real" -- and again, I see no approaching "backlash" as the result of my saying what I do say. Roger Clegg, who I know, is not a racist and is in no reminiscent of a Klansman. I am happy to be reviewed in the NATIONAL REVIEW, especially since I am also reviewed in liberal publications. On the underclass, my aim is to help affect public policy that addresses the underclass. The Manhattan Institute is, indeed, a conservative think tank -- your message, if I read it correctly, implies that this is something clandestine or that I would rather not see mentioned. In this light, they are not my "patron" -- they are my employer. Washington, D.C. : I just took some time out to read your piece on the Boondocks as I think that it is an interesting comic strip that deserves the attention that it gets even though I don't agree with all of Mr. McGruder's sentiments. I believe that you are (perhaps intentionally) missing the point. In your commentary you talk a bit about Riley as a character who shows the wrong way for African American boys, which I think is exactly what Mr. McGruder is trying to get across. Riley imagines himself as a thug and is a caricature of so many boys, of every race who watch rap videos and hope to one day obtain some "bling." Also you talk about Mr. McGruder's resistance to realizing that we have moved beyond "Guess who's Coming to Dinner." But the entire premise of the cartoon is that we are in Modern Day America. Huey, Riley and Grandpa live in one of those mansions, because Grandpa saved up and moved out there. They are never subject to outright hatred. The interracial married couple has a daughter that deals with lots of the concerns of bi racial children. The mother and father are depicted as caring and loving. But just as President Bush pointed out there is lingering racism. It is another kind of racism, that says that children who look like Huey and Riley must be dangerous hoodlums and not well educated kids who live in the 'burbs. Do you not believe that this exixts? Certainly this is an issue as there are many young people who live out their life under the influence of hip hop culture yet black children are still the ones who have to answer for it? The Boondocks is a cartoon, everything is stylized and Mr. McGruder certainly has a point to make just as the makers of South Park do in every episode. John McWhorter: I understand that the BOONDOCKS is a cartoon and that humor has layers. However, I do not take McGruder as painting Riley purely as a "joke." There is a lot of Riley's professional alienation at all costs in McGruder himself and the whole world view of the strip and show. I cannot deny that there are stereotypes out there, such as seeing kids who look like Huey and Riley as "thugs." However, neither can I see a plausible world of human beings where such stereotypes will not exist at all. I'm more interested in making sure young black men can do okay regardless, and that's about forging relationships between police forces and inner city neighborhoods (which is happening nationwide) than teaching people not to generalize, which they always will. In any case, I just cannot see how McGruder's world view tells us how we could move forward -- in the opening credits you see Huey nodding in rhythm to the beat of the theme song. What does the nod mean? Yes to what other than the catchiness of the beat? Indianapolis, Ind.: Do you feel as an African American man, that the family ties that most whites have (mother, father support from mentors), are gone from the African American household? John McWhorter: There are an unfortunate number of black households without fathers. This exploded after the late sixties when changes in welfare legislation made it possible to get government checks to raise out-of-wedlock kids whether the father was present and/or employed. Of course there are white households like this as well. But it is a national tragedy that in black ghettoes the two-parent family became rare. Welfare reform in 1996 and hopefully new efforts to address the make half of the equation are helping reverse the damage of what happened in the late 60s. Washington, D.C.: I have read of the shrinking of the social networks of black men. What do you think are the repercussions of this phenomenon? John McWhorter: There was a time when the black community was closer-knit because segregation made this necessary. One of the most ironic things about the Civil Rights revolution is that it diluted those ties. However, community still exists. For example, the internet brings groups together in a way that would have seemed like science fiction just 15 years ago. Washington, D.C.: Why do (a lot) of Black men view the Black woman as their enemy instead of their partners and helpmates? John McWhorter: You know, to tell the truth I think this is a sad human universal. It's more that this kind of treatment of women is taught OUT OF people by educated Western / middle class culture, but that's only a small layer of people. Thus black men and women outside of that demographic are dealing with age-old human problems. Mequon, Wisc.: Will you please comment on the Cosby-Dyson debate? John McWhorter: Cosby sees that culture can matter more than economics and racism, even for black people (i.e. descendants of African slaves). Dyson, typically of black academics, sees it as an urgent wisdom that black problems are all due to racism and the economy -- i.e. that they are "structural" as academics put it. Academics see Cosby's message as precisely what they have devoted their careers to teaching the public out of. However, the truth is that black America's problems are partly structural and partly cultural -- and furthermore, the cultural part is not something marginal that does not bear extended discussion. Academics will continue to be appalled at the public airing of that message -- but that's the way it has to be because, in my opinion, the academics on this question are wrong (my latest book explains why, for the record). Arlington, Va.: I just read over one of your previous editorials on Hip Hop music. Has your position on Hip Hop music and its effect on black youth changed any? John McWhorter: My position on hiphop is best explained in my latest book WINNING THE RACE. The City Journal piece I wrote three years ago is much shorter than the version I submitted, and I had no idea it was going to get around the way it has and so I did not attempt to address all perspectives the way I usually try to when I write something longer than an editorial. For example, in WINNING THE RACE I discuss what seems to be the most common response to the article, that I do not discuss "conscious rap." Washington, D.C.: John, what do you have to say about the Bill Cosby, Dyson feud? I agree with Cosby mostly. John McWhorter: So do I -- I just answered a post asking the same question. I think you can read it on the site? Washington, D.C.: John, greetings from a fellow Rutgers alum (and survivor of Brower Commons). Hope all's been great. Your TV appearances have been thought-provoking and insightful. Take care and keep up the great work- Drew Bittner, RC Class of 86 John McWhorter: Thanks, Drew. I still remember those chicken patties at the commons (although one night for some reason they had artichokes). Clinton, Md.: First, thanks for lending your voice to this all-too-important issue of what it is to be a black man today! What do you think, as a member of the mass media, is an appropriate mechanism to reach the black kids that need to hear, see, and feel that there is value in being a solid, productive member of society? John McWhorter: Making it so that the notion of the black man -- and role model for the kids -- who doesn't work is no longer "normal." That will mean a combination of policies addressing prisoner re-entry, child support, and job training and retention to get black men off the corners. The ideal will be what it was like back in the day -- a few corner men, but most men working for a living in legal jobs. Detroit, Mich.: John, Thanks for taking questions here today. Could you please address statistical discrimination? If the discrimination is based on accurate data, how can those who are above average for the whole escape being wrongly stereotyped? On the other hand, if the discrimination is based on inaccurate data, how can blacks as a race overcome the stereotyping? Lastly, have you read Sniderman et. al., "The New Racism"? Comments? Do whites go out of their way to help blacks who are perceived as cooperators? John McWhorter: Frankly, my favored way of overcoming stereotyping is to work to eliminate the reason the stereotype began. I think we have taken the public about as far as humans could reasonably be expected to go in being wary of the excesses of stereotyping. I don't like that -- but I also cannot see that we can alter it. I haven't gotten to the Sniderman source. Burtonsville, Md.: On the topic of Arron McGruder's "The Boondocks" what is your take on the cartoon's use (in my opinion overuse) of the N-word. John McWhorter: The N word today is, among blacks, a sign of affection. The person called an N is being told that they are considered "one of us." A lot of people don't like this. But the truth is that it is so entrenched that we cannot fix it. Listen to a group of black men using it every two seconds -- there is simply no way anything could alter it in the slightest. Alexandria, Va.: I disagree with your dissection of The Boondocks. It is, as McGruder has stated, a satire. He has no lofty goals to outline a treatise on advancing race relations in the 21st century through a comic strip, but does point out the foibles of said relationships with 3 or 4 panels a day. It's a living. John McWhorter: Of course we don't expect lofty policy prescriptives. But even humor has meaning and his does not taste good to me. If a race joke can be analyzed as significant in its "meaning" and "implications," then I'm just applying that same perspective to McGruder. I do not, of course, think that he's a "force for evil." It's just a cartoon. About which I said something, that's all. Blacks from other countries making it in the U.S.: I am a 23-year old black woman from the Caribbean whose faimly immigrated to the U.S. when I was 10. No English, no free housing/food stamps, no extended family...graduated from a top private university with honors, studied abroad, completed excellent internships and now pursuing my career. Basically, I took advantage of all the opportunities in America. I am genuinely flabbergasted by the fact that so many BLACK immigrants from the Caribbean, Latin America and Africa are so successful in the U.S. but, most African-Americans just complain about the white man...drop out of school...go to jail..speak improper English...get pregnant at 15...it just goes on! Why can other BLACK immigrants make it in the U.S. while African-Americans born here are lagging behind everyone else? If we are black just like you then it can't JUST be a race issue!! Take responsibility. John McWhorter: The standard response here is that Caribbeans and Africans have a special immigrant "pluck" from having had the initiative to move here. I suppose there's truth in that. But I agree with you that it remains significant that the immigrants show that racism cannot be as decisive a block as we are told. Washington, D.C.: I think as we are now in the 21st Century, we need to realize that race in America is becoming less and less importants. I believe what people need to be concerned about more is Class. Back in the 60's, wealthy blacks and black celebrities were not treated that much better than "normal" black people. The way the country treated Muhammed Ali proves that. However, now, Wealthy blacks, Black athletes, Black actors, Black musicians, etc, are adored and pretty much worshiped by mainstream America. People like P. Diddy, Shaq, etc, DO NOT deal with racism for the most part. Class in this country determines how well you are treated. Lower class blacks need to realize this, and they need to realize that the best way to change their situation is to get an education. Get some marketable skill that will pull you from the lower class in America. John McWhorter: Well, many would tell you that even affluent black men and middle class ones get pulled over disproportionately by the police, do not get car or insurance loans as cushy as whites with the same income, etc. My take on that is that even if those things are true, they do not justify a sense that being black is a daily "battle." Nevertheless an awful lot of people disagree with me on that. It's a tough issue; one day I want to do an article on it. (But God, no more books!) Arlington, Va.: Was there one thing in particular that disturbed you regarding the results of the polls in the "Black Man in America" Series? John McWhorter: How commonly black men mention that racism affects them on a regular basis depresses me. For one, it does affect them to an extent. But then on the other hand I think a certain element in the culture teaches black men to focus on that issue beyond how much they would otherwise. It's a very tough issue. I find your comments on "therapeutic alienation", quite interesting. I wonder if you could give more details on your theory in relation to how Black Men have been alienated through a systematic culture of racism. Or do you believe Black Men have faced alienation through racism in American society? John McWhorter: My point on alienation is that alienation can thrive as a way of feeling like you matter, as a kind of standing sense of enlightenment. Alienation is not always a direct response to a situation or problem. Starting in the 60s, an ideology permeated black America teaching us that being alienated from whites was a kind of higher awareness. It took such a hold because it felt validating to a race beaten down for so long. That alienation helped create a new sense of what was normal -- such as not being employed. I think society's role in this since the 60s has been minor (although not nonexistent). Atlanta, Ga.: When I look around my neighborhood, I see more than a grain of truth to what he says. I live in a middle class neighborhood in the supposed Black Mecca of the South. I see young men, not boys, unemployed, living at home with no job smoking not cigarettes killng time. No desire for college, but feel they deserve the type of salary a college degree would garner them. Their parents appear to be hard working folks. I see it over and over again. As much as I don't want to generalize, what is it about this generation of men who seem to be so non-motivated but feel entitled? John McWhorter: Those guys are products of the idea that it is authentic for black people to "check out" as a gesture of alienation from white society. History makes this understandable but we do need to get past it. Of course, there are white suburban slackers too -- we have to make sure that the suburban kids you refer to are not just ordinary teenagers. But in inner cities, obviously there is a race-skewed problem. Washington, D.C.: as someone first exposed to you through this brief introduction, can you define your background and perspective on Black political issues? (conservative, moderate, liberal) and, possibly the basis for that perspective? The very brief reading I have done on your connected site appears that your focus is on self help, and the pitfalls from prior social gains or methodologies which garnered those gains. As one who views the need for the Black community to look at itself simutaneously to standing up to the majority, I am quite interested in your response. John McWhorter: I am a liberal whose views on race are now called conservative by many. I do not espouse "self help" alone, but I deplore the view that we can accomplish nothing significant until there is no "racism." I am a white male who is puzzled in many ways by the continued emphasis on slavery's legacy among blacks. I mean no disrespect nor do I downplay its horror. I simply point out that many whites like myself have no connection to slavery because our ancestors did not arrive in this country until slavery was ended and we consider it a closed book. How do we refocus the debate on the more current issues facing black and other minorities without the emphasis on slavery? John McWhorter: Many think that slavery's impact is why black inner cities are so awful today, and thus they feel that it is reasonable to continue stressing it. They're not crazy -- but in my opinion, their linkage of the plantation to South Central is empirically inaccurate. I discuss why in various places such as my last book. But the fact that so many whites had no participation in slavery is irrelevant to reparations fans -- and in a coherent way. After all, no one complains that people who had nothing to do with the internment of Japanese people in WW2 lent their taxes to paying those reparations. I find the reparations movement a distraction myself. But the people who lead it are not just hustlers as many claim -- they have their own coherent way of thinking; in y view, coherent and mistaken. Arlington, Va.: In your opinion, how can the African-American community get the next generation of African-American males to understand that a man that respects, takes care of his family and his obligations is stronger than any thug, drug dealer or pimp? How can we get them to understand that academic achievement is the key to true respect and success? John McWhorter: I answered a similar one before -- thanks. Rocky Mount, N.C.: I was born in Washington and my father was born in Arlington, Va. My family has been displaced 4 time (Arlington, Georgetown, Southwest, Capitol Hill). My question is do you beleive that the government sponsured racisum and generation hatred and lead in our drinking water is the reason why Black men 'Don't want to do nothing'. Back in the day when we had Leaded or Unleaded gasoline, where did the lead go. If Lead in the air we breath can affect a childs devlopment, can this be one of the reasons Black men don't do well in school, on the job, and in family situations. John McWhorter: The idea that environmental racism poisons black people (dumps deliberately placed close to ghettos and so on) has been conclusively shown to be a fiction, including by a very well-intentioned black writer. If it were true I'd be the first person to say so and condemn it (I have written often on profiling, for example). But that one isn't -- and we have to remember that Correlations are not always Causes. Bethesda, Md.: Last night I watched Tom Brokaw's report on problems facing young African American in the deep south. I am not surpised that the racism still exists but I am surpised to hear somebody who was lifted up from poverty to believe that they did that themselves. What do you contribute your success to? John McWhorter: My work is not about telling people to just shape up by themselves -- that's a standard "conservative" script that does not happen to be mine. My success, such as it is, is based on being a nerd who grew up middle class. Washington, D.C.: Crime, violence has been committed by every ethnic group that populates this country. Poverty touches every ethnic group in this country.Why is it that being "Black" good or bad, carries a stain that won't go away? Whether we lift ourselves up by our boot straps or not, we remain painted by the same brush. John McWhorter: We all know that there are plenty of white criminals, that white boys shoot up high schools, and so on. But we also cannot walk through a black inner city and say "well, there are white people who do these things too." The proportion is the issue -- whole neighborhoods where certain factors are norms: 'the underclass'. The white underclass is a much smaller PROPORTION of white America. So -- people will differ as to why that is and what we do about it. But I question whether we can just say that we are "stereotyping" black people by describing an underclass. Chicago, Ill.: I would be curious to hear your comments on 'What is blackness?' That is to say, what is the binding force in the African Diaspora (African, Afro-Caribbean, Afro-American and so on) that makes it meaningful to think of ourselves as a whole, a community, a unit. Is it the melanin in our skins or the discrimination and legacy of discrimination that comes with it or some other option. Either way, I've often wondered at whether this basis is deep enough to sustain and to nourish. In this context, I would like to bring up issues such as 'talking white' and 'acting white' which is to say as some in the African diaspora strive to access certain aspects of our common western cultural heritage, higher mathematics for instance, they are often accused of losing some sort of 'authentic' blackness. Does this have an element of truth? Education does have an effect on an individual and to the extent that one absorbs and internalizes the thoughts of 'great white men', is there then something that is lost? John McWhorter: Many's sense of what unites the black community is oppression (leftist black writers are often quite explicit in this). Personally I find that a massively depressing thing to base my sense of self on, and I will never be able to. It probably has a lot to do with why I write the things I do. Indeed, education can dilute a subcultural identity -- which leads us to work by people interested in hybridicity, multiple identities and other things that are a little too profound for me. Anonymous: I've only read the description of your book on the manhatan website,so I'm going off of that impression alone. Does your book address the economic reasons for this "victimhood ?" I find it interesting that no one every does the math when it comes to race/class issues. We (black folks) have had approx 30 years of "fairness (and I use that word very loosely)" after over 300 years of economic slavery, but everythings is supposed to be "even steven" now. Also I wonder how much of your research was done in the South, having grown up on the east coast but finishing high school in the deep south (well pass ATL) and living in places like Biloxi, MS, I've experienced first hand the difference in what is on paper and what is the reality. John McWhorter: WINNING THE RACE is full of reference to history, economics, and so on. "Conservative" is not synonymous with "unaware of facts." I am unclear as to how growing up on the East Coast weakens any of the arguments, but I am hardly omniscient. Baton Rouge, La.: John, you make some very good points. Nevertheless, don't you believe it's unfair to isolate your criticism to African-American men between 14 and 30 when out-of-wedlock births require the participation of women? Further, aren't you a tad concerned that those who would despise black men anyway might use your rhetoric as justification for their refusal to hire any qualified black men -- no matter how bright they are? I'm a black man in law school here. John McWhorter: Try to think of an example of an instance when a black pundit wrote something and, as a result of that, policy affecting black people was turned back and poverty rates went up. Arlington, Va.: Hello, Dr. McWhorter. I don't understand why putting more emphasis on the ability of the black community to solve some of black people's problems has to come at the expense of continued tough-minded vigilance towards racism and its effects. Isn't the thrust of your work, in other words, being misrepresented as advocating a false choice? I am a middle-aged white woman, and I can tell you that the number of white people motivated by racism is dwindling, but not nearly as fast as one might hope: racism is still a potent force in much white thinking. As proof, look at any anonymous public forum in which people (of any race) identify racism as a problem: you will see a flood of comments attacking black people and their concerns about racism, often in very blunt and racist terms. (Example: the Washington Post TV blog last week: see the comments section at http://blog.washingtonpost.com/tvblog/2006/07/colorblind_casting.html#comments). Or listen to white conservative talk radio whenever an issue related to race comes up. Such fora indicate that there is indeed still a small army of white people who resent and dislike black people and are happy to say so behind a cloak of anonymity. Surely you are not saying, then, that this malevolent force is not real, and does not continue to play a grim role in American and private life? So aren't you being misunderstood? Isn't battling the effects of racism and the effects of what black people can change in and about themselves a matter of "both/and," not "either/or"? Or do you really believe racism has been defused as a serious danger to America's well-being? Thanks for clarifying this very important point. John McWhorter: There will always be racism. I truly cannot see how we could completely eliminate it. However, today, cultural factors independent of racism matter just as much. I disagree, for empirical and carefully presented reasons, with the common idea that the cultural factors are the product of racism. I am more interested in addressing something that can change. I assume that as strong people, we black Americans can handle the fact that all white people do not love us. Bowie, Md.: Obviously, the disappearance of unionized manufacturing jobs has had some effect on black economics and hence culture and family life. What is there, besides prison, for the child of a single mother who doesn't have time or resources to get her kids out of a dangerous, unproductive school system? John McWhorter: Data show that the impact of the disappearance of factory jobs has been overstated. Study after study shows that this was, at most, a third of why black inner cities fell apart (Wilson's work on this is by no means the last word on it; lots has been done since.) The plight of the working poor ghetto mother is a serious problem, but welfare reform's results will help give her children wider opportunities than the street or jail. Folks -- I have to stop posting for today, but thank you very much for the questions. I wish I could have gotten to all of them. 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.
167.487805
0.609756
0.756098
high
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/17/DI2006071700621.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/17/DI2006071700621.html
Critiquing the Press
2006072419
Howard Kurtz has been The Washington Post's media reporter since 1990. He is also the host of CNN's "Reliable Sources" and the author of "Media Circus," "Hot Air," "Spin Cycle" and "The Fortune Tellers: Inside Wall Street's Game of Money, Media and Manipulation." Kurtz talks about the press and the stories of the day in "Media Backtalk." Howard Kurtz was online Monday, July 24, at 12 noon ET to discuss the press and his latest columns. Read today's Media Notes: The War of Images (Post, July 24) Washington, D.C.: One thing that drives me crazy about the media's coverage of conflicts (and The Post is doing the same right now in its home page) is the "Casualties Continue to Mount" headline. That's like saying "Crimes Continue to Occur." Yes they do, but at least in the case of domestic crime the media is savvy enough to focus on the rate not the fact that they keep happening. Obviously they continue to mount. The total is never going to go down. This is especially acute on Iraq, where the stock headline pops up frequently in the media. Focus on the rate please! Howard Kurtz: Well, but "Casualties Continue to Mount" doesn't mean there were one or two more, bringing the grand total up slightly from the day before. It means there was a significant increase in the death toll that shows that the war is continuing at a certain level of intensity. Remember, headlines have to be short. Lake Ridge, Va.: Hi Howard -- I heard a rumor that the U.S. is still fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Can that be true? The media is only talking about Israel and Lebanon. The fact is that more people have died in the past week in Iraq than in Lebanon. Bring the media focus back to what really matters to Americans. Howard Kurtz: I happen to believe that Iraq has gotten short shrift over the last two weeks. For television, in particular, most of the reporters who were in Iraq are now in Israel and Lebanon. I understand the impulse -- the Mideast war is new and novel, while the carnage in Iraq is a three-year-old story that has a certain repetitive quality -- but it's still a place where 130,000 American troops are fighting, and where the outcome is anything but certain. Columbia, Md.: I don't want to get into an argument over whether the coverage of the Middle East is fair or not, but one question or line I keep hearing over and over again that just irritates me from pundits and journalists is whether Israel's response is "disproportionate." More than the question itself, most of the time the question is phrased in a way that is basically accusing Israel of being "disproportionate such as "Isn't Israel being disproportionate?" or "Some people claim Israel's response is disproportionate, how do you respond?" and on and on. I've yet to hear the question phrase without the accusatory tone towards Israel. In addition, I have yet to hear any of these same journalists tell anyone what they believe a "proportionate" response would be that would even prompt the question that Israel is being "disproportionate." Even yesterday I heard you, on your show, ask that question of the Israeli guest. I thought his retort to you was great when he asked you what a disproportionate response would be - kidnapping two Hezbollah terrorists? Why do anchors, reporters and pundits continue to ask this question? Howard Kurtz: Because, with Israel having killed about 300 people in Lebanon, it's a question being asked around the world. It may well be that Israel is completely justified in its massive retaliation, both because Hezbollah attacked first and continues to fire rockets at Haifa and other Israeli cities and to have no interest in a cease-fire with a country it would like to wipe out. But journalists ask questions for a living, and that is a legitimate question. New Hampshire: Thanks for taking my question, Howard. Regarding the media coverage of Lebanon and Israel, I find it unnerving to have our ex- military talking heads on teevee talking about Israeli military goals while drawing on maps and telling us what surgical operations they are engaged in. We don't hear much about Hizbollah's military plans. For me, anyway, it sure appears like we are in cahoots with Israel. Howard Kurtz: Hezbollah doesn't seem to have any military plans other than continuing to indiscriminately fire rockets at northern Israeli cities. Washington, D.C.: Today's Post ran a large front page photo of weeping Lebanese women following an Israeli airstrike that injured relatives. Where is the accompanying photo of weeping Israelis whose relatives are suffering at the hands of indiscriminate Hezbollah rocketeers? I am sure I heard on the radio or TV that some Israelis have been injured or killed every single day since Hezbollah began its rocket attacks on Israeli population centers. Howard Kurtz: The Post has run many photos of grieving Israelis or those seeking shelter from Hezbollah rockets. In fact, on the front of today's World News section is a picture of Israeli soldiers grieving at the funeral of one of their fallen comrades. To try to claim bias based on a single image on one day's front page, without considering all the other front pages, seems to me to be misguided. Oklahoma City, Okla.: I was astonished at all the lefty posters last week whose reaction to your previous comments on the anger and rage so evident on the left was "Anger?? What anger???" Perhaps they missed Air America host Randi Rhodes suggesting that the president be taken out in a boat, like Fredo in the second Godfather film, and shot in the back of the head. Or maybe they missed the recent post on one lefty blog re Bush-Cheney-Rumsefeld that said, "Hang the treasonous B------s!" When will the extremists on both ends of the political spectrum learn that raw hate is neither a policy nor very appealing to people with sense? Howard Kurtz: By the same token, it's not fair to tar a whole movement by citing the words of a couple of hotheads. Washington, D.C.: Is Iraq no longer of front page interest to The Post or does The Post just not want to highlight the dimension of the disaster the Bush policy has created in Iraq? Today The Post ran on Page A15! an article saying at least 66 people were killed by bombs in Iraq, continuing the killings last week which The Post called one of the deadliest weeks of the year. Instead of putting the Iraq story on the front page above the fold there was a story about Pakistan's developing nuclear weapons program. What is The Post's trying to do- get our minds off of our troops in Iraq and what is happening there and start thinking about Pakistan which Bush is not accountable for? Howard Kurtz: It's interesting to me that you attribute motive to these decisions, as if The Post is "trying" to accomplish this or that end through story placement. I, too, have winced as The Post and other papers have put inside the paper stories about 50 or 60 people being killed in Iraq on a single day (and television has been even worse). But there are maybe six pieces on A1 on any given day, and if two are about the Mideast war, that reduces the chances of an Iraq story making it out front. At the same time, The Post did make room yesterday and today for front-page excerpts of Pentagon reporter Tom Ricks's new book, which argued that U.S. mistakes allowed the Iraqi insurgency to grow out of control. That sort of contradicts your thesis about the paper not wanting to "highlight the dimension of the disaster the Bush policy has created," wouldn't you say? Winthrop, Mass.: Why so little coverage in the National Media of the recent proof that America's Electrical Grid is collapsing at a rapid rate. For 80,000 people in NYC to be out of power for nearly a week for anything other than a truly major event like a cat 4 hurricane is nearly unbelievable. Every remotely independent expert on the subject says these problems in NYC and St Louis are just the tip of the Iceberg and yet the coverage is minimal. The decaying intrastructure in the USA is far, far greater threat to Americans than terrorism, or the war in Lebanon, yet the coverage is nearly non-existent. Where is the outrage, where is the investigative reporting. Hire some Electrical Power Engineering professors and write a story that matters about a problem that has clear solutions. Howard Kurtz: I don't know if I'd say it's a far greater threat than terrorism (although I might feel differently if I was living in Queens!) But the general media attitude toward the issue seems to be it's a huge story when the power goes off and not much of one the rest of the time. Herndon, Va.: Hi Howard: It always amazes me in these chats when someone takes one image or one phrase published in the paper and blows it way out of proportion. Folks - when you read the paper or listen to the news, you are expected to use your critical thinking skills. Don't be so literal when you see a couple words put together. Look at the entire context of a photo or phrase before you make a judgment. Just because the paper is written at a ninth grade level, doesn't mean you have to interpret it as a ninth grader would! New York, N.Y.: The Israel/Lebanon conflict has taken priority with the media over a war that the United States is actually involved with. Isn't it the American media's job to focus on a conflict that actually involves American lives rather than a conflict between foreign countries? Clearly the media is not doing its job or it is just doing the job that the Bush Administration wants it to do. Anything but Iraq seems to be the mantra of the administration and the media it controls. Howard Kurtz: Major newspapers are continuing to report from Baghdad, but those stories are running inside the paper. Cable news has given a little coverage to Iraq in the last two weeks, and network news hardly at all. But in fairness, the Iraq story will make a comeback once the violence in the Middle East subsides. There is another justification for killing of Lebanese civilians that is troubling to me. That is, it's what has to happen because Hezbollah has integrated with the general population and uses them as human shields. However, the killing of innocent people (knowingly) is being justified. This disturbs me as much as the logic of "we'll fight them over there so that we don't fight them here." Doesn't this continue to devalue the life on non-American, non-Israeli citizens? Howard Kurtz: I'll leave that up to the readers. But as the U.S. has found in Iraq, it is difficult to attack an enemy that deliberately blends in with the population without some civilian casualties, as sad as each case is. Media (Non) Bias: You might point the readers who are complaining about media bias and the lack of attention to Shankar Vedantam's very good article in today's paper on how partisanship affects interpretations of the news. It's not about the news, folks, it's about the readers/viewers/listeners. washingtonpost.com: Two Views of the Same News Find Opposite Biases (Post, July, 24) Howard Kurtz: That piece did capture in rather dramatic fashion a scientific study concluding that strong partisans can look at the exact same news reports (in this case, about Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon) and reach opposite conclusions about whether the report is unfair to their side. Atlanta, Ga.: When was the last time a major network/cable anchor or correspondent has gone to Iraq since the Bob Woodruff tragedy? Based on this, what is the rationale for sending essentially CNN entire staff to the Middle East and reporting as if it were World War III. Do you think the saturation coverage is having a positive or negative effect on the overall view of the American people? Howard Kurtz: On your second point, since correspondents for CNN and the other networks are reporting from both Israel and Lebanon, I'm not sure that the deployment in and of itself is changing perceptions of the war (though it is very much a war of images, as I write in this morning's column). As for Iraq, no broadcast network anchor has gone there since the Bob Woodruff injury, but plenty of brave correspondents have, including CBS's Kimberly Dozier, who, as you may recall, was badly wounded there on Memorial Day. Anonymous: You just wrote: "But in fairness, the Iraq story will make a comeback once the violence in the Middle East subsides." Which kind of leaves out the fact that Iraq is in the Middle East. I know you know that, but I think it points up a wider problem with American media coverage. To this point, I have seen or heard precious little analysis of how our presence in Iraq effects our ability to be an actor in the Israeli/Lebanese hostilities. Howard Kurtz: I'm using Middle East as a shorthand for the Israel/Hezbollah/Palestinian conflict. Has the press always been criticized so vehemently from both sides? It seems no matter what you report people on both sides are up in arms. They seem to want the papers/media to be champions for their causes rather than news sources. That is not to say the media is above criticism. But it seems they cannot win at all. Is this phenomenon recent and what has led to it's arrival? Howard Kurtz: There has always been an element of that, but the trend has certainly intensified in recent years, perhaps along with the general polarization of American politics. Pittsburgh, Pa.: Your column today about the different ways the conflict is being reported was very interesting. However, if you ever wondered by Fox's "fair and balanced" attitude, there was a perfect example last week. When someone mentioned the civilian casualties in Lebanon, Brit Hume corrected her by calling them "supposed civilians." Can you imagine the uproar there would have been from Hannity, O'Reilly, Fred Barnes and Mr. Hume had, say, someone on another channel referred to the Israeli civilians in the same manner? Howard Kurtz: I didn't see the segment, and clearly many innocent civilians are being killed in Lebanon. But it's not an entirely unfair point to raise about whether some of those being targeted by Israel are either Hezbollah or working with Hezbollah, since members of the group don't exactly wear uniforms with a big "H" but rather try to hide in residential neighborhoods. Those 10,000 rockets are being hidden somewhere, right? Do you think that major news outlets CONTINUALLY re-evaluate their news "budget" (i.e., what stories to cover and where to place them) during these days of important news events throughout the world. Or is it more like "Let's cover the Israel-Lebanon story as much as we can until something really big happens?" Howard Kurtz: When there is a war, whether it's in Iraq or Israel/Lebanon, budgets are often thrown out the window as pour resources into covering something that couldn't have been anticipated. Same would go for an event such as Hurricane Katrina. Then, at the end of the year, when everyone realizes they've busted their budget, we get all these urgent appeals not to take anyone to lunch and that sort of thing. Arnold, Md.: Am I wrong or is the MSM even mentioning a war in Iraq? Come on folks the White House must be thrilled with this non-attention to the war in Iraq. You stated that after the Israel problem is settled we will hear more. Forgive me but last week how many people died in Iraq? Did the elected officials speak spiteful words about Israel? Who is held accountable for the mess in Iraq? Evidently, the MSM including the television and cable networks is giving a pass to the White House. I am sure the families who have men and women in Iraq are thrilled that no one seems to even care to watch and report about the Iraq war. Talk about falling down on the job. Howard Kurtz: I said at the outset that Iraq has been overshadowed by this other war. The newspapers are doing the best job of continuing to cover it, even if the stories aren't running on the front page. But keep in mind that even newspapers have limited resources, and if they have moved some of their Baghdad reporters to Israel and Lebanon, that leaves a smaller contingent behind in what is already a fairly limited press corps. Did you think it was at all strange that Nic Robertson of CNN (during several episodes of Wolf Blitzers show) was running around Beirut with Hezbollah's "Press officer" treating him as if he was THE authority on this current conflict? I found it kind of disturbing to be honest. Howard Kurtz: I asked him about the Hezbollah tour on my show yesterday and he said that viewers should know that all such episodes come with a "health warning" that the correspondents can't independently verify what Hezbollah is saying because they aren't given much time or the ability to go into buildings and interview anyone they want. But Robertson is hardly the only journalist in that position. I saw reporters for each of the major networks getting the Hezbollah tour last week, which I touch on in today's column. Bethesda, Md.: Do reporters at The Washington Post or other major papers make more money or get bonuses based upon column readership, web hits, participation in chats, or any other reader/consumer oriented incentives? Would that be good or bad for reporting? Howard Kurtz: No. And that would probably be a bad idea. Uniforms?: So just because the bad guys don't wear uniforms, it's OK to kill everyone knowing you'd get the bad guys, too? Civilians on both sides - innocent civilians - are being killed, but the western media clearly cares more about the Israelis and simply excuses the Lebanese civilian casualties with the rationale you just did - bad guys are hiding with the civilians, so it's OK to wipe 'em all out. I guess that's what we call compassionate conservatism. Howard Kurtz: I don't see anyone saying "it's OK to wipe 'em all out," just reporting the facts that warfare is difficult against an enemy that blends in with the population. It was the same thing in Vietnam. Lansing, Mich: "But it's not an entirely unfair point to raise about whether some of those being targeted by Israel are either Hezbollah or working with Hezbollah, since members of the group don't exactly wear uniforms with a big "H" but rather try to hide in residential neighborhoods." Howard, I would like to correct you. It seems your views from Iraq and Afghanistan are carrying over to your coverage of this situation. I refer you to this report in your paper today. "One soldier said the guerrillas wore olive green army uniforms "to confuse us" because Israelis wear the same." Not all wars are the same. I think the media is falling into a mindset that Hezbollah is not a well-trained army and it is skewing the coverage. This is a true military engagement and should be covered as such. Simply demonizing Hezbollah will not win the war, but it will call into question Israeli competence as things move proceed. I think it is important to maintain perspective. Howard Kurtz: I stand by my observation that Hezbollah, like al Qaeda, doesn't wear uniforms. If some are wearing garb that resembles Israeli uniforms to confuse the Israelis, that's a military tactic, but doesn't undermine my basic point. New York, N.Y.: What affect do you think youtube.com will have on media coverage? It seems to be another tool that will eventually put a coffin in the mainstream media. Howard Kurtz: You might want to check out the column I wrote on YouTube two weeks ago. One reason it's stealing the media's thunder is that the networks are being slow and not terribly smart in not making more of their video available for free on their Web sites. On the other hand, YouTube does provide plenty of free advertising for network shows and newscasts, since so many excerpts are posted on the site by ordinary folks. 19th & L NW, Washington, D.C.: Hezbollah are guerrillas. Of course they "hide out" among civilians. That's how guerrilla warfare has operated since the dawn of military action. That's what the French Resistance did. That's what the Yugoslav Partisans did. And, of course, that's what the Viet Cong did most effectively. You don't engage a technically superior force such as the Israelis in open warfare, for heaven's sake. Bethesda, Md.: Is it just me or is everyone sick of reporters doing TV shots from war zones? Perhaps its the serious injuries of Woodruff and associates, or just my general disgust of war as an answer to political problems, but it sure seems like U.S. health care, social security, poverty, etc, etc. could use some media attention and reporters too. Is the only way for a reporter to get a raise in TV news to go to a war zone? Is that the incentive? Let's try something else. (I'm not saying don't give me the news, I just don't need it with a constant array of faces in front of it.) Howard Kurtz: I don't see the two as mutually exclusive. But how exactly do you expect television to cover the war without anchors and correspondents going there and doing live shots? That is the architecture of how television news works, but it also gives the anchors and correspondents first-hand exposure to what is going on in a war zone, as opposed to sitting in a climate-controlled studio in New York. Avon Park, Fla.: I don't mean to minimize the importance of the Middle East situation, but do you think that it warrants the weeknight cable shows spending pretty much all of their time on it? I know that the fighting over there could eventually affect the United States which does warrant news coverage. But I don't think that shows like Chris Matthews or Hannity and Colmes have to give wall-to-wall coverage. It's not like nothing of national significance is happening here. Howard Kurtz: I do think that Bush's stem-cell veto and NAACP speech got relatively short shrift because of the war. But cable talk shows in particular go with what's hot, and right now the Middle East war is deemed the hottest story around. Washington D.C.: There would be more room for important news on the front page of The Wash Post if it didn't waste space on a golf tournament. I don't care if Tiger Woods walked on the water trap; put it in the sports section!! Why does such fluff get put on the front page? Howard Kurtz: Sorry to disagree, but that was a great story (and I'm not a big golf fan). The world's most famous golfer breaks into uncontrollable crying when he wins a major tournament a few months after losing his father? Nothing but readers. A front page has to provide a bit of a smorgasbord, but I don't think that one was a particularly close call. Bob Woodruff: Since his name came up, I thought I'd ask how he's doing? I haven't heard hide nor hair of him in months.... Howard Kurtz: His recovery is going well and he has recently paid several visits to the ABC newsroom. Anonymous: Local news in the DC area spends its early evening hour broadcasts telling us about what they are going to tell us about later. In other words, they use the news time as a commercial for later broadcasts. What are your thoughts about this practice and the general commercialization of broadcast news? Howard Kurtz: They've got a lot of time to fill. Ellicott City, Va.: I hate to put evil intents on the administration, but it is odd that they did nothing publicly for so long on the Lebanon issue. Maybe they wanted to keep it hot and heavy and have Iraq/Afghanistan fall off the radar a while? Otherwise I can not fathom why they didn't get more proactive in the whole affair. Howard Kurtz: I think it's pretty clear, based on the reporting that's been done, that the administration wanted to give Israel more time to damage Hezbollah's military capability. Roseland, N.J.: Just a brief thank you for the Reliable Sources segment featuring Israeli and Lebanese journalists' views of the conflict. It really helped underscore the problems and lack of easy solutions. Howard Kurtz: Thanks. Sometimes there's no substitute for putting on people with different viewpoints and seeing how they each regard the world. Anonymous: "I don't see anyone saying "it's OK to wipe 'em all out," What about Ann - see E&P Ann Coulter, in her latest syndicated column, laments that all of South Lebanon hasn't been obliterated. "Some have argued that Israel's response is disproportionate, which is actually correct: It wasn't nearly strong enough. I know this because there are parts of South Lebanon still standing Howard Kurtz: Ann has always been known, of course, for her understated rhetoric. Thanks for the chat, folks. Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
Post media columnist Howard Kurtz discussed the press.
566.444444
0.777778
1.222222
high
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/21/DI2006072100844.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/21/DI2006072100844.html
Senate Candidates Debate at Homestead
2006072419
Virginia Democrats chose Vietnam War hero James Webb to challenge Sen. George Allen (R), siding with their party's national leadership, which had declared the former Republican to be the only candidate with a chance to beat Allen in November. ( Read More .) When asked how Saturday's debate went, the Post reported ,What was Hezbollah thinking of when it abducted two Israeli soldiers and provoked a punishing response that has been creating orphans and bringing down buildings in Lebanon? Hezbollah scholar Amal Saad-Ghorayeb believes the movement had envisaged a response of this kind. It is forcing Israel to realize that Hezbollah is not just a guerrilla group but a popular social movement that cannot be eradicated without destroying the entire Shiite community. Saad Ghorayeb, an assistant professor at the Lebanese American University and the author of "Hizbu'llah: Politics and Religion" was online Monday, July 24, at 1 p.m. ET to discuss her Sunday Outlook article, Hezbollah's Apocalypse Now, (Post, July 23, 2006) Webb said: "Well, I was a boxer for eight years, and when you first walk out of the ring, you don't know which ones hit him and which ones hit you." Allen, said he would "leave it for others" to judge whether Webb had a sufficient handle on the issues. Washington Post Metro Political Editor Robert Barnes was online Monday, July 24, at noon ET to discuss the first debate between U.S. Sen. George Allen (R) and his Democratic challenger, James Webb. He also took questions on the upcoming fall elections. Analysis: Webb Isn't Fitting the Challenger Mold 'Virginia Values' vs. 'Fresh Eyes' Robert Barnes: Good day and welcome. We're going to be chatting about Virginia politics and the commonwealth's hot Senate race between George Allen and James Webb. But we can also talk about the Senate race across the river in Maryland, if you'd like, or anything else about the region's politics. If you'll excuse the typos, we'll move along as quickly as we can. Washington, D.C.: What will Webb have to do to take the title from the champion? Staying even won't be enough will it? Robert Barnes: No, it won't. Webb is clearly the underdog and he needs to give Virginians a reason to drop a man they've elected both as governor and senator. Webb thinks there are plenty of reasons: Allen's support of the Iraq war, his loyalty to President Bush and a number of social issues on which they differ. Webb is attempting to portray himself as an independent-minded leader and Allen as a follower. But what he has to do first is raise a lot of money to get those messages out there, and he is at a huge disadvantage there. Bremo Bluff, Va.: Was this recent debate more of an opportunity for Allen to measure Webb's ability? Can the fact that Allen is gunning for the GOP nomination for President prove to be a liability? Any point in Webb attempting to box in Allen by getting him to vow not to diss Va. voters and run for President? Robert Barnes: It is an interesting question about whether Allen's presidential ambitions hurt him with voters. Many Democrats hope so, although Webb has told me he's not sure it is a liability for Allen. Perhaps people like that one of their senators is mentioned as being capable of running the country. By the way, Webb said at the debate that he has no interesting in running for president. I wonder how far Allen had to dig for that silly question to Webb about "Craney Island." I've been followed Virginia politics closely since Howell "Keep the Big Boys Honest" Howell and I've never heard of the place. If that's the best Allen can do for Virginia, we're in deep trouble. Robert Barnes: There's another question about this. I'll publish it and answer below. I was surprised that Jim Webb fell into Allen's trap question about the Hampton Roads Port project. Even a novice should have anticipated a question like that. That was pure Dick Wadhams, and Webb better watch out. What did you think of Allen's question and Webb's response? Robert Barnes: One of Allen's strategies in the debate was to make Webb look like an outsider, and ill-prepared to represent Virginia. It always seems effective when the challenger has to ask the incumbent what he's talking about. And I'm sure that it played big in the Hampton Roads area. That said, I also think voters recognize a trap question when they hear one. And all politicians have had a moment when they didn't look as prepared as they should have. I remember Allen not knowing who Ben Bernanke was, months after his confirmation hearings to replace Alan Greenspan as chairman of the Federal Reserve. And I believe I recall a current president flunking a heads of state test during his first campaign. Thanks for responding to this comment: Senator Allen is a potential Republican candidate for President in 2008, which explains why bumping him off with a Democratic veteran is crucial, symbolically and as a test of strategy. But Senator Allen, a.k.a "Dubya Redux," is also one of the weaker candidates. Taking Allen out of the running makes the race easier for McCain, Guiliani, Romney, and Brownback, which, in the long-run harms Democrats because those are the men who can surmount the Hillary. At the very least, a defense of Allen's seat in 2006 that depletes his war chest shoves Allen to the back of the pack. It seems Democrats have yet to hear of the term "Pyrrhic victory". Robert Barnes: I'm not sure that all Democrats would agree with your assessment of Allen's national appeal. But even if they did, I think they would opt for returning the Senate to Democratic control and winning a high-profile red state that they are hoping is becoming more welcoming to a Democrat running for federal office. Arlington, Va.: OK. What are "Virginia Values" exactly and how do they differ from "Texas Values" or "Idaho Values" or "New Jersey Values"? More importantly, why didn't Webb call Allen on this during the debate? Robert Barnes: There's another question on this, so please keep reading Arlington, Va.: I was intrigued by Senator Allen's reference to himself as supporting Virginia values (whatever these are) as opposed to James Webb's "Hollywood values." Although I am sure that he means I am conservative and Webb is liberal, it is interesting that Allen grew up in a suburb of Los Angeles and somehow acquired a Southern accent after the age of 20 when he transferred to UVA. I do note that virtually all Virginia politicians were not born in Virginia. Eric Cantor and Doug Wilder are the only ones I could find. Robert Barnes: Webb is a newcomer to Virginia politics, although he isn't really a newcomer to Virginia. But Allen wants to portray his opponent as the outsider. He made several references to Webb, who among many careers has been a novelist, screenwriter and movie producer, as living in a world of "fiction" and being a "Hollywood producer." He even told Webb that if they two ever had a beer, it would have to be a Coors or Bud, because they are produced in Virginia. As for why Webb didn't call him on it, this was the first major debate for Webb and there were a couple of times I thought he missed a chance to put Allen on defense. Clifton, Va.: I am surprised that Webb's spouse wasn't an issue for the far left and NOW supporters in the Democratic party. I have met MR Webb and he strikes me as the typical military man who wants [a] wife who is not heard and agrees with everything he says. He couldn't find one in [the]U.S. so he married one from overseas. Quite typical especially for Marines. Robert Barnes: Wow. Hard to count all the stereotypes in just one post, Clifton. I believe that Mr. Webb's wife was raised in the Midwest. I do know that she is a corporate lawyer with a degree from Cornell law school. Good day, Mr. Barnes. Thanks for choosing my question and for chatting with us this morning. First of all, a note to washingtonpost.com: the links posted in the chat announcement don't go to coverage of the debate. Is there any Post coverage of the debate? Here's my question for you, Mr. Barnes: with George Felix Allen Jr. tied down in Virginia defending his Senate seat from Jim Webb's unexpectedly strong challenge, what GOP Presidential hopeful will benefit? washingtonpost.com: 'Virginia Values' vs. 'Fresh Eyes' Analysis: Webb, the Restrained Challenger Robert Barnes: That's an awfully good question for which I don't have an equally good response. Some believe that Mitt Romney is moving quickly to establish himself in those early states in the nominating process. But I'd add that while Allen is not as free to travel as he once was, he has a very aggressive cadre of consultants and party insiders who will make sure that he remains in the mix, even as he campaigns in Virginia. Fairfax, Va.: Did Webb disappoint all those who voted for him on the basis that he would be a feisty appearing candidate, a real fighter? Robert Barnes: Even though I love this stuff, I have to caution against drawing too much from a midsummer debate that very few people saw. Certainly there are folks who think that Webb needed to be more aggressive against Allen, but as I wrote on Saturday, going on the attack may not be in Webb's make-up. He spoke several times during the debate about his aversion to what he called "slash-and-burn" style politics. But I think you are right that only a very aggressive campaign is going to challenge George Allen. Blue Collar, Mich.: I am not all that familiar with Va. politics, but wouldn't the national Democratic Party swamp Mr. Webb with money? I would think he could really make a run for it if the money were on par with Senator Allen's. Is the state's demographics deep red or is there any issues that could bring the color blue to a bit greater prominence? Robert Barnes: Virginia is a fascinating state politically. The general assembly is controlled by Republicans, both senators and eight of 11 members of Congress are GOP. But Mark Warner was elected governor in 2001, and Tim Kaine in 2005, and both of the other statewide races were very competitive. Democrats have hopes for Virginia. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee leadership abandoned tradition in supporting Webb during the primary, and have pledged help. But remember that the committee's job is to return the Senate to Democratic control, and it will spend its money on the races it thinks provides the best chances of making that happen. Vienna, Va.: Thanks for taking these questions. On Saturday, did the candidates and the media at the UVA event already know about the new WSJ/Zogby poll and Rasmussen poll? If yes, did those numbers play into the event, and did it help/hurt the candidates at the event? If not, then do you think these polls and the Saturday event make it very difficult for Webb to gain traction? Robert Barnes: I personally haven't seen the polls, but I take it from your question that they show Allen with a larger lead than he had before? Don't think they matter much. And Allen's campaign manager Dick Wadhams and Zogby have been in a big, um, spitting match about the accuracy of his poll. Newport News, Va.: Recently the Newport News, VA Daily Press reported that Allen has about 15-16 times the cash in his war chest as Webb. Is that Allen's money for his senate re-election or can it be used for his main ambition, which is that of seeking the GOP presidential nomination? Robert Barnes: I believe that Allen may use what is left over to pursue another office, which is one reason Democrats would like for him to have to spend it all. Alexandria, Va.: What is Webb's position on embryonic stem cell research? In 2001, I e-mailed Allen about this and he sent me a letter supporting it. Then I see that he'd changed his mind and now is opposed. I suppose that the religious right's influence on him is overwhelming. Robert Barnes: There are a couple of questions on this, some written by folks I suspect already know the candidates' positions. But it does appear that Allen has changed his position on this, and in 2001 indicated he would support federal funding of embryonic stem cell research on embryos that would otherwise be destroyed. He voted against lifting those restrictions last week, though, and said federal taxpayers should not have to pay for such research. Webb supports federal funding of the research, and has cited it as one of the ways he believes Allen is out of the mainstream. John Warner split with Allen on this vote. Henderson, Nev.: Why isn't Webb hammering away at the ultra-hawkish Allen's lack of military service? And why didn't Allen serve? Did he have "other priorities," like Cheney? Robert Barnes: Webb's campaign has certainly tried to make an issue of it, with mocking references to Allen working at a "dude ranch" while Webb was being wounded in Vietnam. The Allen campaign says Allen received a college deferment, like many at the time, and then had a high number in the draft lottery. I think you will see the Allen campaign being quite respectful of Webb's military service. George Allen has made statements in the past that he is bored in the Senate. How much do you think that will get played as an attack ad for Webb? Robert Barnes: I've got a feeling Allen regrets making those remarks, even though he couldn't help himself in the debate, and pulled out a favorite one about things moving in the Senate with the speed of a wounded sea slug, or something like that. But if Allen isn't crazy about the Senate, he does like campaigning, and I think he believes his aggressive campaign will remove any doubts in voters' minds. Robert Barnes: I'm afraid that's all the time we have. Thanks so much for your questions. Let's do this again. 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.
70.756098
0.707317
0.95122
high
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/07/DI2006070701061.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/07/DI2006070701061.html
FIASCO: The American Military Adventure in Iraq
2006072419
Thomas Ricks has covered the U.S. military for the Washington Post since 2000, reporting on activities in Somalia, Haiti, Korea, Bosnia, Kosovo, Macedonia, Kuwait, Turkey, Afghanistan and Iraq. He was part of a Wall Street Journal team that won the Pulitzer Prize for national reporting in 2000 for a series of articles on how the U.S. military might change to meet the new demands of the 21st century. Ricks also was part of a Washington Post team that won the 2002 Pulitzer prize for reporting about the beginning of the U.S. counteroffensive against terrorism. His book, FIASCO: The American Military Adventure in Iraq, will be published by Penguin Press in July 2006. Washington Post staff writer Thomas Ricks was online to discuss his new book and to answer your questions. Scottsdale, Ariz.: I have not yet read your book. However, just from the titles of your articles, the tone is negative, negative, negative. What has the US and its military done RIGHT..not just tactical activities but strategic decisions and events? In the profession of journalism today, can a journalist be positive and not be viewed by their peers as a cheerleader, or must all critical reviews be critical? Tom Ricks: Hi. I apologize for the tardy start--we had a kind of technological glitch. To turn to the first question, from Scottsdale. I think this is a good way to start. Why write a book called "FIASCO" about Iraq. The short answer is: because I want to win in Iraq. I don't know a lot of officers who think the current posture is sustainable, especially as the chaos continues in Baghdad. But I still think it is possible to win in Iraq, if we get better at recognizing mistakes and adjust better and faster. Fairfax, Va.: Is Iraq in the midst of a civil war at this time; and if not, what more will have to happen before the conflict there can legitimately be called a civil war? Tom Ricks: I'd say it is kind of a low-level civil war. In fact, I think that the U.S. military mission may be to keep a lid on that war and keep it from intensifying or spilling over the borders and making it a regional war. Orleans, Mass.: Do you think that a favorable outcome of the Iraq invasion was ever possible? By 'favorable', I mean a stable government, a peaceful society and one not unfriendly to the Uuited States (but not necessarily a democratic copy of us). Tom Ricks: Yes, I think it was possible. Annandale, Va.: The war is not over--yet you label it a fiasco. I didn't read your story and I didn't read your book. But I congratulate you on being the typical cynical, pessimistic, liberal Washington Post reporter that the rest of this country looks down on as somethign wholely un-American and frankly I just can't say enough about morale-destroying you probably are to our troops. I'm glad my WWII-era military father is gone so he wouldn't have to pick up the Post in the morning and see your trash on the front page of the paper. You can report all you want on the nasty stuff of the war but putting "Fiasco in Iraq" only serves denigrate our country and fighting people. You have no response to this. There is no good in that title for your book. I served in the military and we always laughed at the Washington Post and how they were completely out of tune with the rest of the country. Maybe you feel comfortable at 15th and K at the Post headquarters or in some other liberal bastions of this country--but in the rest of the country -- the solid majority of hard-working Americans who believe in freedom. You don't see squat. Tom Ricks: This is an interesting question because it brings home to me how polarized the country is by this war. It especially bothers me that there seems to be little room for "loyal dissent." People who try to make honest criticisms are attacked instantly. I am seeing this on the left as well as the right, by the way. I sometimes think that the left would only be happy if we started labelling all their enemies liars. I noticed that one leftish blogger criticized me for quoting generals who said in 2003 that we were winning the war. I don't think he understands that part of my job is to quote people accurately--even if I don't agree with what they are saying. Denver, Colo.: Your book is a strong criticism of decisions made leading up to and into our invasion of Iraq. Do you think that the American Press could have done a better job in reporting the dissent that existed even among the elder Bush's advisors for our plan to invade Iraq? Tom Ricks: Yes, I think the media's coverage was part of the problem. But I don't like the broad brush of "main stream media." Why? Because Judith Miller of the NY Times messed up, but Tim Russert did a great job on "Meet the Press" of asking the right questions. Arlington, Va.: Mr Ricks, I caught your segment on Meet the Press yesterday. As a recently retired Army Officer, I can vouch for the fact that MANY in the Army and Marine Corps realize the planning process for Iraq was corrupted. Maybe your publisher can send you out into the American 'red states' so the other 35% of the folks that still believe Administration can finally get a dose of reality. I look forward to reading your book. Thanks for getting out the truth. Tom Ricks: Thanks very much. I've been struck at how warm and supportive the reaction has been from military officers to my book. Over the last couple of days I've gotten many from officers, including some now in Iraq, thanking me for my articles. I think that one way to support the troops is to criticize the generals--and I think that the officers writing to me understand that, and appreciate the spirit in which I wrote. Cambridge, Mass.: Many people believe reporters have a liberal bias. Even if that perception is without merit, do you think titling your book "Fiasco," and calling the war an "epic disaster" will make Washington Post readers more or less skeptical about the objectivity of your reporting? Tom Ricks: Well, what should I have called it? Denver, Colo.: Mr. Ricks -- Judging from the excerpts, your book looks to be compelling and important. I recall at least two times when the newspapers said Gen. Casey was planning for a significant reduction in U.S. troops in Iraq. (Most recently in June '06). These leaks seemed to come from the Army. But the reductions didn't happen. I think Pres. Bush complained at one press conf. that the Gen. was "engaging in speculation" about the troops. Does this indicate that the Army brass would like to send some troops home, but can't get approval from the administration? Are these leaks are an effort to prod the White House on troop reductions? The military long has wanted to cut the troop presence in Iraq. Don't forget that the original plan called for swift reductions for the invasion force that would have us down to about 30,000 by the later summer of 2003. Instead, here we are three years later at 127,000. That said, my impression is that the Bush Administration also would like to see troop cuts, and that it is commanders in Iraq who are saying no, it is too soon. We have seen rushes to failure before in Iraq--for example, a battalion of the new Iraqi army was ordered to Fallujah in the spring of 2004, and refused. So I think now commanders are trying to show patience and move cautiously. Washington, D.C.: Your first answer (..because I want to win in Iraq) illustrates the problem that has plaqued this war from the outset, i.e. what constitutes "winning", and how has whatever was originally intended as constituting winning, changed over time? Tom Ricks: Thanks. You put your finger on an important question. I think we could win in the sense of prevailing. But it would not look like victories in some other wars. In this war, for example, it would be a victory if, say, a leading insurgent agreed to put down his weapon and become, say, minister of agriculture. Chicago, Ill.: I just want to express skepticism about "theses" regarding why things have "gone wrong" in Iraq. Maybe it is true that different tactics, a better policy toward the Iraqi Army, more troops, or some other maneuver would have pacified Iraq. But to me we are just talking about too complex a system to easily analyze; Iraq was a very high risk undertaking. The biggest risk and unknown was the nature of the enemy. The fact is that the Arabs have evolved an extemely pathological politics which has given rise to a mujahideen movement which is brutal, determined and resilient. They are willing to accept far worse outcomes on the battlefield than they could get at the bargaining table. Many in the Arab world want armed victory at any cost to assuage the humiliation they feel with respect to the West/Israel. This determination is the main thing that "went wrong" in Iraq. Tom Ricks: Well, that's an opinion. As a retired O-6 (colonel) who recently retired with over three decades of service, including time as an NCO in Viet-Nam with Rangers and SF, I found myself nodding and grimacing while reading the two articles. I am currently back in SWA and deal with OIF each day so it was a little diheartening to realize that it just wasn't me seeing most of wht you described. The question is: Can the Army turn this around and actually salvage something from the mess it currently is in? Or is this simply another war that will end up like Algeria or Viet-Nam? A long war which will drag on and on and eventually see the US depart with the "mission" not quite accomplished? Tom Ricks: Thanks, Kuwait! I love the reach of these talks. Yes, I think it is salvagable. I know that not everyone in the military agrees. And some guys actually think we are winning. But I think that in order to win, the American system would need to work better. The military establishment would have to mobilize to win, like sending the best it has to the advisory effort, and giving it all the resources needed by the advisory teams. We'd also need to stop saying that "we haven't suffered a tactical defeat" and recognize that every time a friendly mayor or police chief gets killed or intimidated, that's a setback for us. Maybe we could look more seriously at leadership issues--after four years, not a single general has been relieved for failure. Compare that to Gen. Marshall's relief of more than 200 officers at the outset of World War II. It also would help to have Congress hold substantial hearings on the conduct of the war. And finally, thanks for your service to the country. Arlington, Va.: Within the past year and a half, numerous books have been written with the same premise as yours, that the war in Iraq was strategic and tactical blunder. How is your book different from those such as Cobra II or the Assassins Gate? I have read and liked both those books. I think the difference is that my book really takes off in the summer of 2003, which is when my book takes off. The bulk of the book is about 2003-04, but I also get into 2005 and end it in 2006. I've teased Michael Gordon that I was going to call my book "Cobra Three." Bethesda, Md.: Have you worked in Iraq? I have to admit I am skeptical about all these Iraq books coming out. Many journalist work a couple months there and then write a book. Do we really have the perspective yet to write about success, failure, etc.? Tom Ricks: You're right to be skeptical. I should emphasize that my book isn't about my opinions--in fact, after the beginning, the first person hardly appears in the book. What I tried to do in the book is summarize the views of hundreds of soldiers I interviewed, as well as facts I found in 37,000 pages of documents I read. There is a ton of information out there. Is it the final word? No. But it does tell you a lot that isn't broadly understood yet about this war. Salina, Kan.: You did a great job on "Meet the Press." In your opinion, how much longer will our troops be in Iraq? Tom Ricks: I would bet a loooong time. Maybe 10 to 15 years. Boston, Mass.: Hi Thomas, thank you for fielding questions and your time. In view of the current crisis' gripping the global environment, do you still feel this administration can legitimiately claim Iraq as an "A-list" foreign policy priority? Do you feel the adminstration has begun to acknowledge nuclear proliferation among beligerent nations as a direct threat to the United States posture as the preponderant nation in the world? Tom Ricks: Thanks. Yes, I absolutely think that Iraq is the top foreign policy issue facing the nation. If we prevail there, it will help us with virtually every other problem we face. If we lose, watch out. Corpus Christi, Tex. : Mr. Ricks: You allege: "I've been struck at how warm and supportive the reaction has been from military officers to my book." When can we expect you to provide actual evidence of the "warm and supportive ... reaction"? Was Paul Hackett, the self-described "Marine" and darling of the useful idiots of the Washington press corps, the one providing you with all of the "warmth" and "support"? I got a kick out of seeing Tim Russert just suck down every one of your allegations without asking for any evidence. Of course, if Russert reads some allegation made by the New York Times or Washington Post, he thinks that allegation is "evidence" of what is alleged. Tom Ricks: Well, that's not what I heard from Baqubah or Camp Victory this morning. Their e-mails weren't for sharing. But go back and look at the question about from the retired Special Forces colonel. Do you think he also is a liberal dupe? Washington, D.C.: I know some are labeling you a cynic, but I just want to say thank you to putting into eloquent words what the soldiers like my brother are going through over there. I don't think anybody--whether from a blue or red state--want us fail over there. But if we're going to be over there, then let's at least do it right. If you could change one fundamental aspect of the way our leaders are waging this war, what would it be? I would like to see this war waged on a bipartisan basis. And best of luck to your brother. It is tough duty over there, especially during these late summer months. Quantico, Va.: First, I'd like to complement you on the large body of balanced material you've produced over the years. I vividly remember a conversation I had with my Battalion Commander in Camp Lejeune about three years before the war started. I was a Marine Platoon Commander and we were conducting a formal professional discussion with all of the battalion officers on Dien Bien Phu. The subject turned to training for low intensity conflict (which includes counter-insurgency) and our ability to prepare for it adequately. The consensus was that we didn't have the time to prepare for the range of missions we might encounter and that we should focus on traditional high intensity combat. The theory was that we could always scale back but not up. I think that, collectively, the entire U.S. military probably made the same decision. Thus, when the war evolved into an insurgency we started at a huge deficit. The result was that you ended up with a situation where every commander may have a completeley different idea of how to fight the war in Iraq. Your story of Major General Odierno is just one example of a failure to understand the nature of the conflict. Stories of very senior commanders being upbraided by LtGen Petaues (then the commander of the Multi-National Security Transition Command), for instance, have made the rounds among junior officers. My question is this - do you really think that the services are making their best effort to adapt to the nature of the war considering the significant mental challenges that need to be overcome? For instance, we don't reward officers for serving as embedded trainers with Iraqi units. Many senior officers haven't even internalized the tenets of Manuever Warfare, the central warfighting theory of the Marine Corps, do you really think we can get all services to internalize the principles of counter-insurgency? Tom Ricks: Thanks. Would you take our friend in Corpus Christi aside for a quiet chat? Seriously, I think you raise good points. Counterinsurgency is tough--especially because it runs so contrary to much the US military has taught over the last two decades. For example, classic counterinsurgency doctrine says to use the minimal amount of force necessary to doing the job, rather than use overwhelming force. And it also says to treat the people well, even prisoners. One senior officer in Iraq told me earlier this year that about one-third of his subordinate officers "get it," one- third are trying but not reallly getting it, and one-third just want to kick a little butt. That means your force is probably less than half effective, and part of it is counterproductive. Gaithersburg, Md.: Tom: Two questions ... 1. You may have explained this on Meet the Press yesterday (nice job, BTW), but ... where did the title "Fiasco" come from? 2. Have you heard from Gen. Odierno since this morning's article? Do you expect to? Tom Ricks: I'm glad you liked the "Meet the Press" segment. I was nervous. The title struck me one day in Najaf, Iraq, the day after I was in a convoy that was bombed and machine-gunned. Kabul, Afghanistan: Any plans to examine Afghanistan in the same amount of depth? Tom Ricks: Hey Kabul! Wow! I used to live there--from 1969 to 1971. I actually wrote an article about that for the paper--maybe the washingtonpost.com folks can link to it. No, I have no plans at this time to write a book about Afghanistan. I'd like to, because I love the country--I used to go skiing in the Salang Pass and also at a little hill west of Kabul, near Paghman, where we had a rope tow. In the meantime, I'd recommend Sean Naylor's very good book, "Not a Good Day to Die." Central Virginia: Why do you suppose that so many people are so dead-set against recognizing (1) the mistakes that we made in Iraq, or (2) the rolling disaster over there? Tom Ricks: Man, I wish I knew. I wish we could all calm down and stop questioning the patriotism or integrity of anyone who disagrees with us. Atlanta Ga.: Two questions - first, did you find anything to support the view that the admin knew before the war that Saddam didn't have WMDs? Two, is there a consensus view among officers you've spoken with regarding how to quell the violence in Iraq, and if so what's the consensus? Tom Ricks: 1. No, I suspect the administration talked themselves into it--even though there was no new evidence to support their shift to the view that Iraq was growing increasingly dangerous. 2. No, I don't think there is a consensus among all officers. But I think there is a pretty good consensus among those who have read and understood classic counterinsurgency doctrine. That sounds abstract but it really isn't--if you haven't, go read David Galula's little book, "Counterinsurgency Warfare: Theory and Practice." It is about 125 pages, you can read it in an evening, and you'll never look at the Iraq war the same way again. Gloucester, Mass.: You are getting it from both sides, and nobody has even read the book. I have always failed to see what there is to win there, and now what there is to lose? Reagan was correct to cut his losses and pull out and we had better do the same before it takes all of our money and will. Tom Ricks: This is weird--first Kabul, then Gloucester, Mass. Both places I have lived in or near--I lived in Essex, Mass., as a child, and went back frequently because my grandparents lived there for another 15 years. I think if we lost there, or left now, we would be abandoning many Iraqis who have sided with us, and would embolden enemies there and around the world. Stafford, Va.: Where does the crux of the blame for the FIASCO lie? There were a lot of efforts to incorporate lessons learned and new "ways of thinking" into military concepts, doctrine, education and training prior to OIF. Why did these efforts fail to take? Tom Ricks: I'd say the book argues that you don't get a mess as big as Iraq from the failings of one or two men, such as President Bush and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld. Rather, I think there was a systemic failure. Sure, the Bush Administration made mistakes, and failed especially to recognized the nature of the conflict in which it was engaged (which as Clausewitz says, is the key task of the supreme leader). But I would would say the military establishment bears much of the blame, especially for the flawed occupation. In addition, the media and the intelligence community made mistakes. Finally, I think that Congress was asleep at the wheel. That's crucial. Congressional hearings provide oversight and accountability and (when done well) pump information into the American system. In other wars, you had hawks and doves. In this war you had the silence of the lambs. Thank you for all your questions. I am sorry I didn't get to all of them, but I have to run. 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.
Pulitzer Prize-winning Washington Post staff writer Thomas E. Ricks has covered the U.S. military for the Washington Post since 2000. His book FIASCO: The American Military Adventure in Iraq will be published by Penguin Press in July 2006.
104.837209
0.976744
8
high
high
mixed
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/23/AR2006072300573.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/23/AR2006072300573.html
It's Not California Dreaming
2006072419
Reasonable people say they'd like to tax or regulate carbon, but alas it's politically impossible. They invoke President Bill Clinton's humiliating failure to secure an energy tax in 1993. They declare that carbon taxes or regulations would cripple the economy. These reasonable defeatists should meet Vinod Khosla, the Silicon Valley venture capitalist who bet big and early on Google and Amazon. Khosla's current bet is on next-generation ethanol. He believes, with all the passion of a techno-evangelist, that we can get most of our vehicle fuel from the Midwest rather than the Middle East, and we can do so simply by growing it. He shows doubters a photograph of a bamboo-like crop that sprouts 11 feet in just one year. If South Dakota were planted with this stuff, our dependence on Saudi fundamentalists would fall -- and so would our output of climate-warming carbon. Khosla has made a fortune betting on technology, and he's invested tens of millions of his own dollars in the futuristic ethanol that will replace today's corn-based version. Yet he's the first to say that we can't address climate change with technology alone. Government must deliver the right tax and regulatory fixes to persuade people to adopt ethanol. So the first lesson that Khosla teaches is that politicians have to act. But the second lesson is more pleasant: The government fixes that Khosla seeks are not actually so burdensome. Khosla wants government to require auto companies to make more flex-fuel cars that run on gasoline or ethanol. Well, thousands of flex-fuel cars are sold in Brazil, and they're barely more expensive than ordinary ones. Khosla wants government to require big gasoline distributors to install ethanol pumps at a tenth of their gas stations. Well, it costs less than $50,000 to convert a pump. Assuming 20,000 conversions, this is a $1 billion problem -- a flyspeck on a $12 trillion economy. The other government policy that Khosla wants is a reform of the ethanol subsidy. At the moment, the subsidy is worth 51 cents per gallon, but Khosla proposes that it be lower when oil prices are high and vice versa. By switching to a variable subsidy, the government would insure ethanol investors against the danger that OPEC might cut prices to drive them out of business. Subsidies would rise and fall, but the long-run cost of this reform would be about zero. Khosla's enthusiasm for next-generation ethanol may turn out to be overblown, though his track record would suggest otherwise. His variable ethanol subsidy is less sensible than a variable carbon tax, which would spur hybrid cars, hydrogen cars and other carbon-cutting progress, rather than just ethanol. But Khosla's pitch illuminates a little-known fact. Relatively cheap tax and regulatory fixes can trigger substantial cuts in carbon emissions. When scientists and economists estimate the cost of stabilizing carbon emissions, their conclusions tend to support Khosla's claim that it's not actually expensive. In 2004, for example, the U.S. government's Energy Information Administration analyzed a carbon-cutting plan advanced by Sens. John McCain and Joe Lieberman, which aimed to stabilize greenhouse emissions. The energy administration estimated that reaching this target would cause U.S. GDP to be 0.4 percent less than it would otherwise have been in 2028. Since GDP was projected to grow by 90 percent between the time of the study and that year, this meant that the nation could address climate change and still experience growth of 89.6 percent over the period. In 2001 the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the most prestigious authority in the field, carried out a similar exercise . It calculated that stabilizing carbon emissions at an acceptable level -- defined as slightly higher than today's -- would cause world GDP to be 4 percent lower than it would otherwise have been in 2050. Again, that is a modest cost -- roughly one year of decent growth for the world economy. So the reasonable defeatists on climate change turn out to be unreasonably pessimistic. The cost of cutting carbon emissions is not actually crippling. And if that's not enough to convince doubters that a responsible policy is politically viable, consider the fact of Khosla's trip last week to Washington. Like most Silicon Valley digerati, Khosla spent years ignoring politics. But last week he was bouncing between Senate offices; he's pitched the White House on his ideas; he's backing a California ballot initiative that would raise royalties for oil companies. In short, Khosla is part of an emerging lobby for emerging fuels -- a lobby that includes companies such as General Electric, which has green technologies to sell, as well as Archer Daniels Midland, an agribusiness giant that knows how to work Washington. In the past month, I've spoken with congressional staffers, White House veterans and the boss of General Motors, and all of them agree that serious carbon policy is not on the horizon. But sooner or later logic will prevail. The folks who said it was impossible are in danger of losing face -- that, and maybe money.
Reasonable people say they'd like to tax or regulate carbon, but alas it's politically impossible. They invoke President Bill Clinton's humiliating failure to secure an energy tax in 1993. They declare that carbon taxes or regulations would cripple the economy.
20.765957
1
47
medium
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/23/AR2006072300531.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/23/AR2006072300531.html
A Place Where Displaced Kids Can Play
2006072419
Children who face months or even years living in temporary trailer parks after losing their homes to Hurricane Katrina are set to be given something they desperately need -- the chance to play safely -- thanks to a partnership between the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the charity Save the Children that is expected to be announced today. Secure, well-lighted playgrounds, game rooms, Ping-Pong tables, board games, drama workshops, art groups and the chance to be a Boy Scout or Girl Scout could soon be offered when FEMA opens 20 of its trailer communities and collaborates with experts to convert them into child-friendly spaces. The agency's managers will work with public and private organizations to ensure that problems are addressed. Alongside clean and safe play spaces outside, double-wide trailers will be brought in as community centers where adults can socialize and learn about job opportunities. Save the Children will run sessions to help families cope with the fact that their lives have been turned upside down. The trailers will also serve as places for kids to have fun. "FEMA is acknowledging the need," said Mark Shriver, vice president of Save the Children's U.S. programs. "These families are under incredible stress -- many have lost homes, jobs and family members and are now living in cramped quarters. We found there were few spaces for families to get together and no facilities for kids to play." A Save the Children investigation into life inside the trailer communities -- to be released today -- has revealed a disturbing picture. An assessment of 20 sites in Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama has uncovered an array of "physical and social hazards" for children. Many were not attending school -- finding it difficult to fit into the new environment and get along with local children. Residents reported changes in young people's behavior such as boredom, fighting, crying and depression. Many were vulnerable to crime and physical and sexual abuse. Respondents on nine sites said drug abuse and dealing were prevalent. The charity hopes to use the venture with FEMA and the Department of Homeland Security to put in place some of the report's recommendations, which include improving links to schools and creating community spaces inside the communities. Save the Children will spend $2 million on the "Safe and Protective Communities Project," which will start at one of FEMA's largest trailer parks: the Diamond Group Site in Lousiana's Plaquemines Parish, with 450 trailers. FEMA officials said DHS will not provide any funds. Allowing the charity into the communities "makes sense," said Gil Jamieson, deputy director for Gulf Coast recovery at FEMA. "It is a terrific way to have some normality return to some of the family and kids," he said from his office in Baton Rouge. The joint venture is not an acknowledgement of difficulties inside the trailer parks, he said. "I don't view them as difficulties. I am in the business of providing housing -- I see trailer parks as giving folks a roof over their head that they did not have before." But Jamieson added that anything that can help children play and socialize is welcome. Save the Children will not only focus on getting children to play but also helping raise their self-esteem. Trained professionals will run "emotional-support sessions to for the children at Plaquemines Parish, which was badly hit by the hurricane. "What they need is a lot of one-to-one attention, self-esteem building and the chance to regain a sense of normality," said Barbara Ammirati, deputy team leader for Save the Children's Katrina response. She said many are under strain because they moved to unfamiliar surroundings: "This is about trying to ground them. Kids are resilient, but they need support."
Get the latest US government news on recent federal affairs. Up-to-date information and analysis of federal legislation and contracts. Search for government job openings and career information.
20.25
0.472222
0.638889
medium
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/23/AR2006072300512.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/23/AR2006072300512.html
Two Views of the Same News Find Opposite Biases
2006072419
You could be forgiven for thinking the television images in the experiment were from 2006. They were really from 1982: Israeli forces were clashing with Arab militants in Lebanon. The world was watching, charges were flying, and the air was thick with grievance, hurt and outrage. There was only one thing on which pro-Israeli and pro-Arab audiences agreed. Both were certain that media coverage in the United States was hopelessly biased in favor of the other side. The endlessly recursive conflict in the Middle East provides any number of instructive morals about human nature, but it also offers a psychological window into the world of partisan behavior. Israel's 1982 war in Lebanon sparked some of the earliest experiments into why people reach dramatically different conclusions about the same events. The results say a lot about partisan behavior in general -- why Republicans and Democrats love to hate each other, for example, or why Coke and Pepsi fans clash. Sadly, the results also say a lot about the newest conflicts between Israel and its enemies in Lebanon and the Palestinian territories, and why news organizations are being besieged with angry complaints from both sides. Partisans, it turns out, don't just arrive at different conclusions; they see entirely different worlds . In one especially telling experiment, researchers showed 144 observers six television news segments about Israel's 1982 war with Lebanon. Pro-Arab viewers heard 42 references that painted Israel in a positive light and 26 references that painted Israel unfavorably. Pro-Israeli viewers, who watched the very same clips, spotted 16 references that painted Israel positively and 57 references that painted Israel negatively. Both groups were certain they were right and that the other side didn't know what it was talking about. The tendency to see bias in the news -- now the raison d'etre of much of the blogosphere -- is such a reliable indicator of partisan thinking that researchers coined a term, "hostile media effect," to describe the sincere belief among partisans that news reports are painting them in the worst possible light. Were pro-Israeli and pro-Arab viewers who were especially knowledgeable about the conflict immune from such distortions? Amazingly, it turned out to be exactly the opposite, Stanford psychologist Lee D. Ross said. The best-informed partisans were the most likely to see bias against their side. Ross thinks this is because partisans often feel the news lacks context. Instead of just showing a missile killing civilians, in other words, partisans on both sides want the news to explain the history of events that prompted -- and could have justified -- the missile. The more knowledgeable people are, the more context they find missing. Even more curious, the hostile media effect seems to apply only to news sources that strive for balance. News reports from obviously biased sources usually draw fewer charges of bias. Partisans, it turns out, find it easier to countenance obvious propaganda than news accounts that explore both sides.
You could be forgiven for thinking the television images in the experiment were from 2006. They were really from 1982: Israeli forces were clashing with Arab militants in Lebanon. The world was watching, charges were flying, and the air was thick with grievance, hurt and outrage.
10.735849
1
53
low
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/19/DI2006071901239.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/19/DI2006071901239.html
K Street Confidential
2006072419
Read today's column about the Burden of Fixing the Tax Code . K Street Confidential appears every other Monday in the Washington Post business section. My column today is about Sen. Ron Wyden's lonely crusade to overhaul the federal income tax. That ought to spark a lot of controversy! Please send me some questions about that, or about any other juicy issue that interests you. Okay, then, let's get started. Sanibel, Fla.: As the author of "Gucci Gulch," and one who tracked superstar lobbyists like Charlie Walker, Tommy Boggs, J.D. Williams and other tax lobbyists in their heyday, would you agree that today the big lobby names are the telecom guys and gals, with many buzzing around the FCC who aren't even required to be registered? That's where the biggest money is in the Internet era, isn't it? Jeffrey Birnbaum: Well, Sanibel, as usual, you put your finger on it. Telecom is one of the hottest topics on K Street, if not THE hottest topic. And the FCC lobbying is an area worth exploring, that's for sure. I have come to learn more about appropriations lobbying (read:earmarks) lately, and I wonder if that isn't as sizzling a branch of lobbying as telecom. Surely it would be a close contest. Anyone out there have any interesting tips about lobbying at the FCC? Send them now or to my e-mail, kstreetconfidential@washpost.com Washington, D.C.: Doesn't Wyden have a big problem with is own party on this topic. At least in theory, Republicans should favor fewer loopholes (although in practice many plug for them). The Democrats, on the other hand, are quite up front, they want the government to encourage and discourage certain activities and the tax code is one vehicle. Tax reform the limits loopholes would take away this option. Jeffrey Birnbaum: Tax reform of the kind Wyden wants (and which passed in 1986) would combine both GOP and Democratic ideas. For the Democrats, loopholes would be closed (meaning primarily corporate tax breaks). For Republicans, tax rates would be reduced. That's the combination that former senator Bill Bradley (D-NJ) devised as the perfect political synthesis and which, with Ronald Reagan's backing, became law 20 years ago. Wyden wants to persuade Congress to adopt an updated version of that compromise. His main problem, I think: business interests are so much more powerful now, the increases in corporate taxes his version of "reform" would require might never get through Congress these days. Irvine, Calif.: How would you revise the death tax, so that families can pass down their homes to their children without paying a tax bite for homes that are valued from $3 to $10 million. Would raise the exemption floor or revise it some other way? Or would tax the entire value? Jeffrey Birnbaum: I don't think I want to step into that debate. I would say, however, that there is an active effort in Congress now to reduce the bite of the estate tax. It's possible that some version of repeal (or something close to it) will be added to a pension-revision bill moving through Capitol Hill in the next few weeks. Such an addition could sink the overall legislation, so I'm not betting at the moment that the estate tax provision will be added. But keep your eye on Congress; something could happen to make it cheaper to pass on your house (and other assets) to your heirs--permanently. San Ramon, Calif.: Does it matter that the White House seems interested in advocating for tax code reform? With Bush acting erratically (to be polite), his poll numbers in the toilet, and GOP lawmakers doing their best to distance themselves from him, how valuable is White House support these days? Second, what does reform mean to Bush? You stated that "Wyden's Fair Flat Tax Act would lower taxes for millions of middle-income families, in part by raising taxes on some corporations and also on wealthy people with significant investment income -- which the president would likely oppose." Are there any documents intended for regular people that summarize Bush's plan? Jeffrey Birnbaum: Bush doesn't have a tax reform plan yet. The notion that businesses and rich folks would have to pay a lot more in taxes, however, runs counter to everything that he has stood for so far. And it does matter what the president wants or doesn't want. With an issue as controversial as tax reform, there would be no chance of passage without presidential backing. It's as simple as that. Holualoa, Hawaii: Any chance of getting Federal Tax breaks for those who use solar energy as with cars? Jeffrey Birnbaum: Yes, I think there is. The higher the price of oil (and gasoline) the more interest there is in Washington to assist the use of alternative fuels. If I'm not mistaken (and I know someone out there will correct me if I'm wrong) there already are some tax incentives for solar power. Given President Bush's recent assertion that the U.S. is addicted to foreign oil, I would not be surprised to see even more such incentives added to the tax code. Interesting column -- Sen. Wyden is a pretty creative guy but tilts at a lot of windmills. An observation -- the current tax code tries to be all things to all people but can't afford it. As a result, you get a little bit of scholarship aid, a little bit of disaster relief, etc., all coupled with limitations and complex eligibilities. If we are going to start over, then we need to decide what activity is important enough to incentivize through the code and then do it. Jeffrey Birnbaum: Ah, but that's the question. What is worth keeping and what isn't? There are as many answers to that one as there are lobbyists on K Street. Which is a lot! Portland, Ore.: When I think of Ron Wyden and taxes, I think of him opposing efforts of states to collect sales tax on Internet transactions. That has local appeal due to the technology industry here as well as Oregon not having a sales tax. Maybe my cynicism shows, but I believe taxes are always being "reformed" to reduce the burden on the contributors to congressmen. The only tax reform I remember in my lifetime was under Reagan when Democrat Dan Rostenkowski joined with him to help pass "tax simplification". You refer to that reform in your article. I just don't see this happening without a president who has some popular support and I don't see that as possible until after 2008. The 2008 agenda will be set by the next president who will be stuck with bills to pay for the Iraq war and the start of baby boomer retirement, so is this just the first salvo of a reform that means tax increase? Jeffrey Birnbaum: It could be the first shot of a battle that doesn't really create much fire at all. I covered the Tax Reform Act of 1986 and co-wrote a book about it called Showdown at Gucci Gulch. After my co-author and I sent an early copy of the manuscript to a prominent Republican member of the House Ways and Means Committee, he read it and said he liked the story, but that we should remember that passage of the sweeping measure was a "fluke" that would not happen again and probably should not have happened at all. He might be right. It is amazing that so many interests were vanquished when their loopholes were closed. It's hard to see how that could happen again given the growing strength of K Street. Then again, that strength might well eventually turn into a weakness if there is a populist uprising at some point. That's why Wyden is worth watching. New York City: Hi Jeff -- This question is probably better suited for Kurtz, but since I've seen everyone from Lou Dobbs to President Bush to Jack Welch flub this question, I'll ask you your opinion of my analysis. The reason why consumer confidence, and opinions on the economy are so low compared to the actual healthy and expanding economy is roughly 25 percent high gas prises, and 75 percent because the avg. American when looking at the front page, or watching TV see virtually no headlines trumpeting the positive growth in the economy. Meaning, the avg. American does not really think that the economy is bad, rather they have no clue that the economy is good! Jeffrey Birnbaum: I don't know about your percentages, but your analysis sounds right to me. The lack of "good news" out there about the economy is one reason the White House has been working overtime to trumpet economic advances. The more of that slant that gets into the press, the better off Bush will be politically. I think that some of it is getting out, by the way, and that's one small reason Bush's job approval rating has been making a comeback lately. Stamford, Conn.: Will there be anything like the Reagan tax reform during Bush's term or his successor when the current code is the result of years of lobbying? Jeffrey Birnbaum: I'm not betting on a full-scale rewrite of the tax code of the kind that happened in '86. But a big swing at revising the code is likely and sooner than most people think. The main reason: the alternative minimum tax. That backup tax system, supposedly designed to force the super rich to pay at least some taxes, has become a menace to the upper middle and even the middle income taxpayer. It has had to be "patched" every year to prevent millions of people from getting whacked by it. Eventually, a bigger solution will have to be undertaken and at that point there will be a substantive reason to look at the entire code. Other, political considerations could well push lawmakers in a similar direction. And then, who knows, maybe a big time rewrite could happen? Stranger things have. Baltimore, Md.: How do you respond to the view that unless and until we adopt a National Sales Tax, there will never be true Federal Tax Reform in this country? Jeffrey Birnbaum: I would say that isn't true. Tax "reform" could easily happen without a national sales tax being imposed. Montevideo, Uruguay: Do you think any changes in the tax code might impact ex-pats? The U.S. seems to be unusual in taxing world-wide income. Jeffrey Birnbaum: I don't see any changes happening soon, but ex-pats are always vulnerable as an afterthought to a big tax bill. So are lots and lots of other, usually-out-of-mind interests. When large revisions are made in taxes, some things have to give and the groups with the least clout often get hurt in the exchange. Why do you let posters get away with questionable semantics such as substituting "death tax" for "estate tax"? The tax question is to what extent a person can donate their assets to the entitites of their choice without having to pay tax. Whether the taxpayer is alive or dead is not the issue. Jeffrey Birnbaum: Opponents of the estate tax like to use the term death tax. I can't stop them, nor should I try. As for your formulation of the question, that's even more tilted than the term death tax, in my view. The government can tax whatever it wants, and does. Including assets at death. Whether that's the right way to go about it . . . well, that's the question at hand. Jefferson, N.C.: When discussing changes in taxes, I submit that the first change should be some form of carbon tax. Most of the oil we consume is used for transportation, so this tax could be applied as a hefty levy on transportation fuels, including diesel and jet fuel. I would use the income to pay a major portion of the military budget and reduce the taxes on individuals by a like quantity, such that the result is revenue neutral. I would call this an Energy Security Tax, to keep it apart from the gasoline tax which presently is used to fund more highway construction. I submit that it's becoming quite clear that the U.S. must join with the rest of the world and do something about global warming from burning fossil fuels. A large tax on transportation fuels would get people's attention and provide incentives to purchase vehicles which are more efficient that we now find. Not only would this approach reduce CO2 emissions, but imports of oil from nations with dubious loyalties would also be reduced. Jeffrey Birnbaum: With gasoline prices so high lately, not many people are talking about making them higher through carbon tax increases. It seems to many that the marketplace is giving us plenty of reason to search for alternative energy sources. Washington doesn't need to add more. Sun Prairie, Wisc.: Jeff, leaving aside whether Ron Wyden brings quite as much to the tax reform table as Bill Bradley did 20 plus years ago, why on earth would Sen. Grassley or anyone else believe President Bush would NOT order up a report on tax reform and then let it gather dust? George Bush is not Ronald Reagan. Reagan let his Treasury Department work for more than a year not on just a blueprint, but actual draft tax reform legislation. He threw his personal weight behind reform when his own party tried to bury it in the House; he supported Packwood's Senate bill even though large parts of it had not originated in his administration. And though sympathetic to big business Reagan did not object to the major tax increases on business that made it possible to lower rates in the '86 TRA. It would have occurred to no one that some interest group could get Reagan to block some of these by offering large amounts of campaign contributions to the Republican Party. We can't say that about George Bush, now can we? Jeffrey Birnbaum: I don't know if we can or we can't. Your analysis otherwise is spot on, however. When Reagan, a Republican, and Rep. Dan Rostenkowski, a Democrat and the House's chief tax writer, agreed that tax reform must pass, it created a momentum that proved to be unstoppable--almost despite the contents of the legislation. If Bush were to defy your prediction, he could well get a lot done in taxes--maybe even a major overhaul. Re: Lack of "good news": To New York City: you forgot to mention one important reason for the disconnect between the "good" economy and consumer perceptions of a "bad" economy. The benefits of recent economic "growth" are going disproportionately to the wealthy. Several recent studies and articles have supported this assertion. For many working people, the "good" economy is not benefiting them very much, thanks to the economic policies of the Bush administration. Back to the tax reform debate: what would it take for a "populist uprising" to blunt K Street's ability to block tax reform for the vast majority of Americans who would benefit from a simpler, fairer tax code? Jeffrey Birnbaum: That would be more than I could surmise off hand. But a surrogate for that question might be answered in the mid-term elections. Might the corruption issue, for instance, create a stampede against incumbents? Might the same happen as a backlash against Bush's policies in Iraq? These are uprisings of the same sort that might create the climate for a major tax reform effort. But will they happen? We will have to wait until November to know. Alexandria, Va.: For Irvine, Calif., who wrote, "How would you revise the death tax, so that families can pass down their homes to their children without paying a tax bite for homes that are valued from $3 to $10 million." So, why shouldn't your fortune of $10 million be taxed? The government needs the revenue, the dead are dead and won't notice it, and the heirs are just getting gravy. In fact, I urge the estate tax be increased to make this a more just and equitable society. Jeffrey Birnbaum: So take that! Passions do run high in the estate tax debate--which is one reason the effort might falter this year. As Congress gets closer and closer to adjourning, does lobbying reform get squeezed out? Does it even make a difference, given the remaining content of prospective legislation? Jeffrey Birnbaum: Two excellent questions. I do think it is possible that the lobbying/ethics bill could go nowhere this year. Lawmakers are not hearing from constituents that they demand action on the topic, and therefore might simply let the legislation fade away. If it does pass, even the minimal reforms it will probably contain are better than getting nothing at all. I think that more disclosure, which is the heart of the measure, is much needed. If Congress passes that, all citizens will benefit. McLean, Va.: Senator Frist is expected to allow the Senate to act on repeal of the federal estate tax before he retires in four months. With Congress leaving town for the August District Work Period this week and the midterm elections looming, wouldn't this be a good time to do away with this tax forever? What do you think about timing/latest political rumblings from your discussions? Jeffrey Birnbaum: It's not clear that Frist has enough votes to pass any version of estate tax relief. Therefore, its fate is up in the air. Madison, Wisc.: Do you have any ideas, outside of so-called campaign finance "reform," or the ballot box, on how to balance citizen lack of power with lobbying power? Jeffrey Birnbaum: You gloss over the ballot box as if it were insignificant. It is not. Voters can create change if they want to. Elections are miraculous things. Occasionally, big transformations happen as a result of them. In the meantime, there are other things that can be done (and I'm working on a few suggestions. Back to you later about those.) Herndon, Va.: Don't you think a better method would be to look at all taxes combined, federal, state, and local-income, estate, sales, personal property etc? This would allow everyone (our elected representatives and the public) to get a complete picture of what we are providing to the government and what we are getting in return. Jeffrey Birnbaum: Sounds far too rational to have any chance of passage. At the same time, lawmakers and policy makers do look at overall tax burdens. As for the return on that investment, that's a calculation you rarely see. How would you measure it anyway? Government doesn't function like a business, nor should it. It provides a very different kind of service, the measure of which can't be counted as easily as a bottom line. How do you define that extremely fine, thin line where government control, business extortion, and political lobbying all meet? Is there too much "order", not enough, or what? Jeffrey Birnbaum: That's a line that's moving all the time. Lately, federal prosecutors have been changing its color from gray to a darker shade of black (or is red more appropriate?). In any case, the line between those in government and those out of government isn't clearly drawn and that has created all sorts of problems this year. Just ask Jack Abramoff (and Ralph Reed)! Manheim, Pa.: Have you ever heard of the book by Jules Archer written in 1973 called "The Plot To Seize The White House". It's about a U.S. Marine corps General Smedley Darlington Butler, who foiled a plot by wealthy American industrailists in the early 1930's to topple FDR and install a fascist dictatorship right here in the USA. I hadn't either until last week when a great friend sent our group the link. It goes along with what we are talking about today: corporations basically taking over and running the country. The book only ever had one printing and has long ago been forgotten about. If you were lucky enough to come accross a copy you probably couldn't afford to buy it. I was taught nothing about this in school. You forget about history [and] it comes back to bite you in the rear. If anyone is interested in reading this book it is available online for all to read for free at The Plot to Seize the White House Be ready for a shock when you see the people and well known rich families involved. For any disbelievers this is all backed up with the congressional investagation. It's not fiction, it's fact, Mr. Butler is a true American hero. Now we need another true American hero to stop the corporation take over happening today. Jeffrey Birnbaum: Haven't heard of the book. Don't know if it's worth reading. Washington, D.C.: Considering the current tax system is so complex, highly influenced by powerful lobbying groups and therefore difficult to reform, would it not be more practical to wipe the slate clean and impose a sales tax ("The FairTax")? Also, what is your position on HR25? Jeffrey Birnbaum: Luckily, I don't take positions on legislation. I leave that to you. Jeffrey Birnbaum: Thanks everyone. That was fun. Let's do it again after my next K Street Confidential column in two weeks. Cheers! 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.
104.585366
0.756098
0.95122
high
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/21/DI2006072100933.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/21/DI2006072100933.html
Outlook: Stark Moment for Hezbollah
2006072419
What was Hezbollah thinking of when it abducted two Israeli soldiers and provoked a punishing response that has been creating orphans and bringing down buildings in Lebanon? Hezbollah scholar Amal Saad-Ghorayeb believes the movement had envisaged a response of this kind. It is forcing Israel to realize that Hezbollah is not just a guerrilla group but a popular social movement that cannot be eradicated without destroying the entire Shiite community. Saad Ghorayeb , an assistant professor at the Lebanese American University and the author of "Hizbu'llah: Politics and Religion" was online Monday, July 24, at 1 p.m. ET to discuss her Sunday Outlook article, Hezbollah's Apocalypse Now , ( Post, July 23, 2006 ) Prague, CR: Does Hezbollah still expect other Arabs to help them? If other Arabs planned to help them, why are they waiting? Amal Saad-Ghorayeb: I don't think Hizbullah expected pro-U.S. Arab regimes like Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan, to side with it, but they did not expect them to side with Israel as they effectively did. Hizbullah's Secretary-General said he was very "surprised" by this. In effect, these Arab regimes 'condemnation of Hizbullah amounted to a "political cover" for Israel which prolonged the crisis Silver Spring, Md.: Thanks for taking my question. Your article and assessment is very scary. One question though -- am I reading correctly that you equate Hezbollah and the Shi'ites? Are they truly one and the same? Amal Saad-Ghorayeb: Well, obviously there are some in the Shi'ite community who don't support Hizbullah. But after Syria was forced to withdraw from Lebanon last year, and pressures to implement UN Resolution 1559, the Shi'ites strongly rallied behind Hizbullah. In fact, numerous opinion polls show that over 90% of Shi'ites support Hizb.'s right to resist Israel. New Hampshire: Thank you for taking my question. First, let me extend my condolences on the loss of life and devastation of your country. I am heartsick that my country has done nothing to alleviate the suffering. I know that Secretary Rice is currently in Lebanon, but I wonder what, if anything, she can do at this point. What are your thoughts on the actions so far of the U.S. government? I do not understand the complete lack of diplomatic efforts between the warring factions-- how can you have peace if you won't talk to your enemies? Amal Saad-Ghorayeb: Thanks for your sympathy. I think the U.S. has played a very destructive role in this current conflict. It is the only Western nation to completely side with Israel and to refuse an immediate cease-fire. The Lebanese government. which is closely allied to the U.S. has beseeched the U.S. to end Israel's aggression but the administration refuses to do so, thereby undermining and weakening that government. In her visit to Lebanon today, Rice again refused to press Israel for a cease-fire. And then you have John Bolton's famous line about there being "no moral equivalence between civilians killed by Israel and the victims of terrorism." In other words, an Israeli life is more valuable than a Lebanese life. How can the U.S. be considered an honest peace-broker in this conflict? Lyon, France: Does anyone really believe that Hezbollah is anything but a terrorist group? Amal Saad-Ghorayeb: Actually, the overwhelming majority of Arabs and Muslims regard it as a Resistance group. They regard Israel as a terrorist state. Washington, D.C.: While no Lebanese civilian can be reasonably expected to side with Israel or can be asked to "understand" their plight, does your average Lebanese individual harbor resentment towards Hezbollah for setting off this recent round of hostilities? Amal Saad-Ghorayeb: Good question. Actually many non-Shi'ites were initially resentful of Hizbullah for provoking Israel's wrath. But that anger has now been replaced by a resentment of Israel's excessive violence which has only targeted Lebanese civilians and infrastructure, it is perpetrating collective punishment, without weakening Hizbullah. The UN considers Israel's actions as "war crimes". So now most Lebanese, even Christians and Sunnis, are counting on Hizbullah's resistance to ward off Israeli aggression. Their country is being destroyed after all. "In fact, numerous opinion polls show that over 90 percent of Shi'ites support Hizb.'s right to resist Israel." Are you referring to resisting Israel's right to exist? Amal Saad-Ghorayeb: No of course not. Hizb. is not intent on destroying Israel. They just want it to end its aggression on Lebanon, release Lebanese prisoners and stop violating Lebanese airspace and waters. Washington, D.C.: Thank you for your excellent article. Would you agree that, given the pressure upon Hezbollah to disarm (prior to this war), their attitude was basically "use them or lose them"? Amal Saad-Ghorayeb: There was pressure yes. But Hizb. was engaged in a National dialogue over many issues, including the status of its arms. There was no real fear Hizb. would lose their arms because the government. was unable to come up with a more effective deterrent strategy for Lebanon. Now of course, Hizb has proven that its Resistance is the most effective deterrent. Alexandria, Va.: In 1979 a Lebanese Druse named Samir Qantar and others kidnapped an Israeli family, resulting in the death of a baby and perhaps others. In addition to Qantar and the two Hezbollah fighters captured this week are there any other Lebanese incarcerated in Israel? When people speak of thousands of Palestinians and Lebanese incarcerated by Israel is this assertion accurate as it pertains to Lebanese? Amal Saad-Ghorayeb: There are 10 000 Arab prisoners in Israel, but only 3 or 4 remaining Lebanese. New York City, N.Y.: It seems clear that Israel and the United States are ideologically disinterested in engaging Hezbollah in diplomatic discourse. Is Hezbollah similarly disinterested? Amal Saad-Ghorayeb: Yes, Hizb sees no interest in engaging the U.S., on political grounds, and definitely not in the case of Israel, on ideological grounds. The U.S. is not perceived as a neutral party that they can dialogue with. Quebec, Canada: Is Syria's offer to help negotiate an end to the situation a sign of fear? After all, Israel did give Syria a crushing defeat in 1982, when Syria tried to help the PLO in Lebanon. Amal Saad-Ghorayeb: Actually, the Syrians feel empowered by this, so I think it's a sign of strength given that Israel's call for a cease-fire comes as part of a broader peace initiative it has proposed, which would include the liberation of the Golan Heights. Syria has also threatened to sit "idly by" if Israel invades Lebanon. SO it doesn't seem as though Syria is weak at all. Washington, D.C.: Good Article. My question is about the tactics (killing of innocent civilians through terrorism) used by Hezbollah and if they are considered justified in the Islamic world? And if there is any analysis done by the terrorists are their supporters and sympathizers as to what they have achieved in the last 40-50 years? Amal Saad-Ghorayeb: I find it interesting that so many of you are using the word "terrorism" so freely in describing Hizbullah. Let us first define what is meant by terrorism. According to most definitions, it refers to the deliberate targeting of innocent civilians to pursue political ends. Isn't that what most armies in the world have done at some point or another? Isn't that what Israel is currently doing in Lebanon, by attacking ambulances and homes, killing scores of women and children. 65% of the casualties have been children. Are they terrorists? Washington, D.C.: If an international force is to enter southern Lebanon to restore peace and provide stability, what would be some of your key recommendations on how to conduct a successful mission? What could the international community do to ensure that fighting did not flare up again? Amal Saad-Ghorayeb: I think such a mission would be doomed for disaster from the outset. When a similar force was sent in 1982, it was perceived as an occupation force. In fact, the U.S. marines contingent was bombed because it took sides in the war. it attacked Muslim areas in support of Israel. A multinational force which is tasked with the responsibility of preventing Hizb from resisting Israel, will be met with force. Iahaina, Hawaii: Do you believe that the high jacked 2 Israeli soldiers by Hezbollah was ordered by Iran with the collaboration with SYRIA ,just as a tactic to divert the G-8 summit from Iran nuclear crisis. Amal Saad-Ghorayeb: I don't think it's that simple. Hizb is an autonomous organization, much like Israel is independent from the U.S.. But both sides receive help and coordinate with their respective sponsors, be it Iran or the U.S.. Deflecting attention away from the Iranian nuclear issue wouldn't last for long any way. Washington, D.C.: If Israel was only targeting civilian, as you said, then why are the death tolls relatively small, and why did Israel drop fliers to tell the residents to flee? It seems to me that they would prefer not to kill civilians. Amal Saad-Ghorayeb: They do this to terrorize civilians, not to protect them. If they wanted to protect them, they wouldn't strike cars and ambulances that were fleeing on highways. And besides, given the vast destruction they have inflicted upon all the road networks, it is impossible for civilians to flee with so many blocked roads and huge craters. PA.: Based on your answers, you have little credibility since your view is only anti-Israel. I am not a fan of Israel, but the Middle East cannot use Israel to blame all of their ills. How about corruption, poor leadership, no spread of wealth and radical Islam to start. Change comes from within - too bad the Middle East does not have enough fortitude and appreciation of human life to make the necessary changes. Amal Saad-Ghorayeb: I fully agree with you. Israel is part of the problem. Unfortunately, the corruption, authoritarianism you speak of are regimes supported fully by the U.S.. And as for the spread of radical Islam, what do you think is the major grievance which radicalizes Muslims? It is Israeli aggression and the U.S. support for Israel, which Arab regimes seem refuse to tackle. hence, disaffected youths turn to Islam. Fairfax, Va.: You do not have your facts right. Hiding rockets in housing areas, schools, etc. are war crimes. Blowing up people with explosives around your body is called terrorism. Pinpoint bombing with civilian deaths is call collateral damage. Amal Saad-Ghorayeb: Unlike you, I get to see different media, both American/Western and Arab. Plus, I have the advantage of living here. You only see one side of the story. I see both. If Hizb. were dumb enough to hide amongst civilians, don't you think that it would run the risk of being snitched on by potential collaborators? Do you think that Israel would hesitate to attack those target if Hizb. was using them. Washington D.C.: This is a difficult situation for most of us here in the U.S. to watch and to understand. Why should the U.S. and Israel be in favor of a cease-fire while Hezbollah is still a threat to Israel? And why did Hezbollah attack Israel when Israel had completely left Lebanon in 2000? Finally, what prospect is there for middle east peace in the next decade? Amal Saad-Ghorayeb: Well first of all, Hizb did not start the shelling. Sure, it violated the rules of the game by abducting soldiers from Israel but Israel initiated the violence. Secondly, Israel continues to occupy Lebanese territory, the Shebaa Farms, which Israel clung onto after its withdrawal in 2000. There can only be peace if Israel withdraws from all remaining Arab lands, including the Occupied Territories. that would deprive groups like Hizb. and Hamas with an excuse for retaining their arms Washington, D.C.: The U.N. has in the past called for the disarming of Hezbollah. If the Lebanese government wasn't up to the task, how do you think this goal can be accomplished? Amal Saad-Ghorayeb: I think he best way to disarm Hizbullah is to deprive it of an excuse to maintain its armed status. In other words, Israel should withdraw from the Shebaa Farms, release the Lebanese prisoners, end its violations of Lebanese airspace etc. And most importantly for the long run, agree to a comprehensive regional peace agreement with other Arab countries. Fairfax, Va.: Complaints about Israel's "disproportionate" attack on Lebanon ignore the possibility that Lebanon is a silent partner with Hezbollah and its vocal goal of eliminating the State of Israel. Apparently the Israelis don't see the distinction between the "good" Lebanese who aren't out to destroy Israel and the "bad" Hezbollah who the Lebanese have appear to have done next to nothing to stop Hezbollah's rocket attacks across Israel's border. What has Lebanon actually done to disarm Hezbollah as UN Resolution 1559 required? Amal Saad-Ghorayeb: First of all, Hizbullah has no plans to destroy Israel. They believe it is up to the Palestinians to liberate Jerusalem. Let me toss the argument around: if the Lebanese are guilty by association, or tacit support or inaction or whatever, then the Lebanese can make the same argument for the Israelis. But that is an unsound argument to begin with, because civilians should not pay the price of their governments. Washington, D.C.: Why is someone who has a view-point that is anti-Israel considered to have no credibility? Pa.: "Unfortunately, the corruption, authoritarianism you speak of are regimes supported fully by the U.S." Since when is Syria, Iran, pre-war Iraq supported by the U.S.? Amal Saad-Ghorayeb: You must have a short memory because Saddam was once the U.S. biggest ally in the region. The U.S. funded Iraq and armed it to the teeth when it fought Iran. The U.S. previously backed the Assad regime and permitted it to occupy Lebanon. And as for Iran, let us not forget the U.S. previous unwavering support for the authoritarian rule of the Shah. And BTW, Bin laden and the Taliban were funded by the CIA in the good old days of Soviet occupation. Alexandria,Va.: I believe your responses here demonstrate why resolving the conflicts has been such an intractable problem. You dismiss every question or make a countercharge. There's no attempt to listen, to explain, to find common ground. It may be satisfying to be oppositional, but it doesn't seem like a good way to move forward. I say this as someone who is horrified by what Israel has done to Lebanon and its people in the past couple of weeks. Amal Saad-Ghorayeb: How can I find common ground when most readers' basic premise is that Israel is a peaceful nation, the U.S. is an honest broker and Hizbullah is a terrorist organization? I have to make a counter-argument. Some critical thinking is in order here. New Hampshire: Just a follow up. You mentioned John Bolton's revolting comments about the moral difference between dead people. It strikes me that Israel is following America's lead with their own version of shock and awe and labeling of nations and resistance groups and axes of evil. This is troubling in the extreme to me. Why is it when Hezbollah captures 2 soldiers, they are called terrorists but when Israel or America does it, it is deemed ok and perfectly legitimate? In our case, we commit rendition and torture, too. So sad. Amal Saad-Ghorayeb: exactly .And let us not forget how Israel gets away with "targeted assassinations", which would be called "terrorism" if they were practiced by a Muslim or Arab organization. or when Arab regimes repress and brutally torture their citizens, the U.S. does not brand that a terrorism either, because they are its allies. Washington, D.C.: Are you asserting that Hezbollah doesn't hide among Lebanon's civilian population in an attempt to deter Israeli bombings? Amal Saad-Ghorayeb: What civilian pollution in the South? Do you know that over 600 000 people have field that area? there are very few people left. Besides, Hizb. hides in underground bunkers not in exposed buildings. even the Israeli army admitted as much. Oakton, Va: Actually your no credibility is reinforced when you say Hezbollah didn't start the shelling but is guilty of only violating the game. Any organization that goes into a country, kills and captures its soldiers does deserve what Hezbollah is getting right now. Too bad they don't care enough about the Lebanese people they say they are protecting. Amal Saad-Ghorayeb: But do Lebanese civilians deserve that? To date, only 8 or so Hizbullah fighter have been killed amongst the 400 civilians. Gravois Mills, Mo.: Hezbollah Shiite leaders as well as Iranian head of state Mahmoud Ahmadinejad have stated their goal is to "wipe Israel from the face of the world". Do you really think their violent animus toward the Israelites really will be contained by nothing more than a prisoner exchange at this point after so much violence and bloodshed? Considering the fact that Israel and probably Iran have nuclear capability, instead of saying "apocalypse now" maybe we should be worrying about "Armageddon now." Amal Saad-Ghorayeb: I realize that Ahmadinejad's threats are not exactly reassuring, well they are downright provocative, but it is pure jingoism on his part. Hizb. officials do not make such claims. Perhaps you should read some of their interviews and speeches to get an idea of their discourse. Chantilly, Va.: Sir: Since Hezbollah is not fighting in what are commonly called the occupied territories, what are they fighting for? You haven't made a case that they are fighting for anything other than the destruction of Israel. Amal Saad-Ghorayeb: First of all I am not a sir, I am a woman. Second, as I have stated before, Hizb. is not fighting to liberate Palestine, they want to liberate Lebanese land and release Lebanese prisoners. washingtonpost.com: thank you all for joining us. Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
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.
88.219512
0.682927
0.780488
high
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/17/DI2006071700782.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/17/DI2006071700782.html
Talk About Travel
2006072419
The Post's Travel Section Flight Crew will take your comments, questions, suspicions, warnings, gripes, sad tales and happy endings springing from the world of... the world. Of course, the Flight Crew will be happy to answer your travel questions -- but the best thing about this forum, we insist, is that it lets travelers exchange information with other travelers who've been there, done that or otherwise have insights, ideas and information to share. Different members of the Crew will rotate through the captain's chair every week, but the one constant is you, our valued passengers. We know you have a choice in online travel forums, and speaking for the entire Flight Crew, we want to thank you for flying with us. You may also browse an archive of previous live travel discussions. John Deiner: And we're back . . . Welcome to this week's jaunt with the Travel section Flight Crew. We have a pretty full team here to take your questions, including Cindy Loose, who can fill you in on anything you want to know about Quebec City and environs. If you saw our section this weekend (and you did see it, didn't you?), you noticed the piece on last-minute trips to the beach. We're wondering: What's the best/worst last-minute trip you ever took? You know, you see a great airfare and jump on a plane, or you need some fudge so you head to Amish country. We're looking for short and sweet, folks, but mostly short! Best/funniest/most heartwarming/whatever anecdote gets a book on the Paris Jazz scene and an inflatable head rest pillow for airplanes that came in the mail. (Anyone ever actually find those things comfortable? Let me know.) And awayyyyy we go . . . Santa Cruz, Calif.: Ms. Sachs suggested staying at Yosemite lodgings in car-less travel to that national park. Yosemite lodging is either unavailable without previous reservation or very expensive, often both. An alternative is the HI-Yosemite Bug Hostel, located about 25 miles outside the Valley floor. Price for a bed is less than $20, rooms start about $40, the restaurant has a great local reputation. It's along the bus route, you can get on and off. Hostelling International Hostels in the States can be found on www.hiusa.org. This listing will give additional information of how to get to Yosemite NP without a car. There's also a nice small friendly hostel in Merced. John Deiner: Hey, Santa Cruz. Ms. Sachs isn't with us today, but that's a great suggestion. Thanks so much for letting folks know. Silver Spring, Md.: Good afternoon flight crew! I have four days (Monday-Thursday) to soak in a taste of Asia after a business trip in Singapore this September, before heading home from Singapore on Friday morning. I'd love to go to Japan but am wary of spending seven hours each way from Singapore just to get there (return to the states must be out of Singapore). Would a quick first-time jaunt to Bangkok -- two and a half hours away -- be justified however? Any recommended sections to stay in in order to make the most of such a visit? Anne McDonough: I say your instinct to stick with a short flight is a great idea, especially since you'll have that long Singapore-US flight on your way back. Go to Bangkok and have a wild time. Or, spend two days there, take an overnight bus up north for two days, heading to Chiang Mai perhaps, then head back to Bangkok and fly back to Singapore. If you didn't want to fly at all, try exploring Malaysia. You can get there by bus from Singapore; to and from KL it's super cheap and about five hours if I remember correctly. Southern Malaysia, even closer, would be fun to explore as well. Burlington, Vt.: Where's a place to go at the Jersey shore with a boardwalk, but no major thrill rides that attract teenagers? John Deiner: Hey, Burlington. As far as I know, both the boardwalks in Ocean City, N.J., and Point Pleasant are nice and don't have major head-banging thrill rides, like the ones at Wildwood and Seaside and Atlantic City. It's been a while since I've been in Ocean City, though. Both of the two I mention are pretty family friendly . . . anyone out there with a recommendation for or against these? Fairfax, Va.: Hello Flight Crew! My mom and I are considering traveling to Santiago, Chile in early January and taking Spanish classes for about two weeks. We're trying to figure out about how much spending money we would need. What's the average cost for a meal out? Any idea about tipping customs in Chile? Also, I've done some searches for flights and with fees the lowest seems to come out to around $1000. Does that sound right? Do you think they might come down as we get closer to January? Gary Lee: Getting to Santiago is expensive. It may go down a bit in January but unlikely to go down much. The good news is that meals, hotels, etc are all pretty cheap when you get there. You can get a pretty decent dinner for $10-$12 and lunch for half that. You should be able to get a hotel room for $40-$50. Don't forget that you have to get a visa for $100 (they are available at the airport if you don't get one at the consulate beforehand.) Croatia: Hi FC, I'm planning a trip to Croatia in September and was wondering how you got around when you were there. I heard the train system isn't up to that of the rest of Europe and Dubrovnik doesn't even have a station. What's the best way to get from say, Zagreb to Split to Dubrovnik? Is renting a car a good idea? Thanks! KC Summers: Forget about the train. You can rent a car -- the drive down the Dalmatian coast from Split to Dubrovnik is supposed to be gorgeous and a lot of people do it -- but also consider taking ferries. I did that and thought it was a great way to get around, with wonderful views of the forested coast. You can stop off at little islands along the way -- Hvar or Korcula are both good choices. From Zagreb, if you don't rent a car I'd recommend flying. I flew from Z. to Dubrovnik on Croatia Air (relatively cheap), then ferried up the coast to Split (very cheap), then flew back to Zagreb. There are also long-distance buses, but I wouldn't recommend that -- takes too long. There are also long-distance buses but I wouldn't recommend that. Leesburg, Va.: Is there anyone who is/was actually on a real flight crew? As a flight attendant, I'd be interested to know? John Deiner: Hey, Leesburg. None of us has actually been on a real flight crew before, though Hendrix does walk through the section every day about 3 p.m. with a cart serving drinks. washingtonpost.com: Ye Don't Say: This Summer, Philly Talks Up Its Storied Past, July 20, 2005 Washington, D.C.: Big broad question: Which Hawaiian island should I go to for my honeymoon? Why? John Deiner: Gosh, D.C. That is broad! You can't go wrong with any of the islands, seriously. It just depends on what you're most interested in. Volcanoes and hiking? The Big Island. A more cosmopolitan scene and Don Ho? Oahu. Something totally out of the way and untouristed? Molokai. Several coworkers here just returned from honeymoons in Hawaii, and both visited the same place: the North Shore of Kaui, which is a natural wonderland, fairly secluded from everyone else and rarely crowded. Plus there are enough high-end resorts up there to satisfy the big spenders. Bethesda, Md.: Hi, We plan to take a trip to China in either this Fall or next Spring. Do you know any good company that offer escorted tours, English speaking. There are so many companies that I found in the Internet, but I don't know which one I can trust. And when is a good time to go to China, in term of airfare. We would like to see the Yang-ze River, Xian, and Huangshan mountain. Thank you so much. Anne McDonough: I've not used them, but a reputable company that often does China tours is New York-based Ritz Tours. As to timing...unless the company has some last minute cancellations to fill, a fall trip is going to be pricey; from what I've heard, most China tour folks book their trips pretty far in advance. Also, the China National Tourist office lists vetted companies on their site (www.cnto.org); call their NY office for brochures at 888-760-8218. The itinerary you mention is great--each is incredible its own way. For Huangshan, it really is worth hiking all the way up instead of taking the cable car. It kicks your tuchus but the scenery is just that much more amazing. It's, along with Guilin in the south, is the China of ink paintings. Great Falls, Va.: Does anyone have any tips for travel in Santiago, Chile? We will be traveling there from Lima in October and would like to what we should see and experience and what to expect. Gary Lee: I like the Pablo Neruda museums (one in the city and one a two hour bus ride out on the coast in Isla Negra) both are in former homes of the poet and are worth visiting. Cleveland Park, D.C.: Hey Crew! I'm headed to Philly for two days in August. We have been there a few times before, so I need to know: what's new and noteworthy in Philadelphia? Thanks! Steve Hendrix: The new big thing in Philly, CP, is a much improved look at the old thing, i.e., Constitution Hall and all that. They've completely renewed and enhanced the visitor's experience in the historic quarter, with the new Constitution Center, the Independence Visitor's Center, Libery Bell Center and Independence Hall. They've also got accustomed story tellers scattered around the district (we'll post a link to an Escapes about that). Laurel, Md.: I know I'm asking for what might be someone's most closely-guarded travel secret here, but... We'd like to visit Chicago without pay $200/night downtown. Can someone recommend a more reasonable hotel within easy walking distance (200 yds max) of the El or Metra? Gary Lee: There a decent place called City Suites, on Belmont, next to an El and in a neat neighborhood around North Halsted. Otherwise, suggest that you check out the Web site hotrooms.com, a discount site for Chicago Hotels. (I noticed a Holiday Inn downtown there for $129, etc.) Anybody else have cheap hotels in Chicago? Bethesda, Md.: I believe the road between Yosemite Valley and the hostel has been closed by a landslide and will not open for some time. Camp Curry, however, in the Valley has tent cabins that are inexpensive (compared to the Valley hotels) and often available at the last minute. John Deiner: Good to know, Beth. Thanks! Adelphi, Md.: Another Santiago, Chile question. We are also planning a trip to Chile in early 2007 to visit my husband's extended family. My father-in-law gathered us some information about charter flights which will appear to save us a lot of money, but he's never used them himself as his job always pays for his flights. Does anyone have any experience with these? It's still so much money that booking with a company I don't know makes me a little nervous. Gary Lee: We have no experience with the charters here... can anyone offer advice here? Pasadena, Calif.: Best short-sweet vacation: $300 tickets to Oslo for a five-day stay, departing mere days after the fare was announced. My husband and I pounced, spent two days in Oslo seeing the sites and eating reindeer, then headed up to Lillehammer to see the family who hosted me as an exchange student when I was in high school. When I got back and regaled my office with stories, my boss was perplexed - when I'd asked for the time off he somehow thought I was going to San Francisco for the weekend! John Deiner: Holy cow! $300 to get to Oslo? Great story, Pasadena . . . but even San Fran would have been pretty fun. K Street: Hi Crew! My then-husband and I will be heading to Point Grace at Providenciales, Turks Caicos for our five-day September honeymoon. Any recommendations things to do in Provo, Utah? (Where to snorkel, dine, gamble, sightsee, etc.) Thank you!! Cindy Loose: You mean Provo, as in Providenciales, not as in Utah, right? So, you'll find beautiful beaches there and maybe that's all you need on a five-day honeymoon. If not, there are really cool islands you can fly to take a boat to--some uninhabited, with amazing beaches. Cindy Loose: Hey, I assume you don't mean the Utah part, right? Provo, the city on the island, has great beaches, good snorkeling, diving, boating of all kinds. That might be all you want to do with a five-day honeymoon. If you do get restless, considering flying to taking a boat to one of the many islands around Provo, including deserted ones. On Provo, if you're not doing all inclusive, try a romantic dinner at the Sibonne Hotel's Bay Bistro Restaurant on Grace Bay Beach. There's also a local beach hangout called Bugaloo where curried conch and other local dishes cost about $7. Open for lunch only, unless there happens to be a special occasion, like lobster night. There's also a Cuban restaurant there called Cuba Bella (Grace Bay Plaza), although I can't vouch for the food cause it was closed while I was there. If you rent a vehicle, be careful if you're renting from a local joint. I rented a jeep that was barely functional and quite scary. (Consider going with a known car rental co, or at least ask how old the vehicle is before wasting your time going to the lot for pick up.) Best of luck for a hurricane-free and wonderful trip. Dallas, Texas: I am shopping for airfare to visit the family for Christmas. Last year we paid around $250/ticket to fly round-trip from DFW to PBI on American. This year, they are over $400! Pricing flights into nearby Fort Lauderdale returned a fare over $450. Do you think I should jump on them or do you anticipate any holiday season sales? I expected to pay more this year, but this is going to cut into the gift budget! Thanks for your insight... Cindy Loose: We know a lot more about fair fares from D.C. area than we do about Texas. However, it doesn't surprise me that you're finding fares way way up. I'm a little surprised you found a fare anywhere over Christmas for $250 roundtrip,but then again, we don't know your market well. You can always take a chance on fares going down, but over the Christmas holidays, I don't think the airlines will have any trouble filling planes, so I'd be surprised to find a sale for that time. The only advise I have may not work, but is worth a try: Have you tested for fares going a day or two later or earlier than you'd planned? That can sometimes make a difference if you're flexible. Then again, you're talking Christmas, so I'd shop around a bit on different airlines and different Web sites with flexible dates, and if that doesn't help, I'd buy now. Raleigh, N.C.: I love spur of the moment trips. My best was a few years ago. I'd been working at a job where office drama doesn't even begin to cover the working conditions. I'd completed a HUGE project, having taken three weeks to complete while completely ignoring any and all other work, turned it in, and was told by my boss "Oh, we decided two weeks ago we didn't need this after all. I hope you didn't spend too much time on it." So, at 5 p.m., I went home, threw my tent, sleeping bag, five-gallon water jug, empty cooler and about 15 books I'd been wanting to read into my car, drove a few hours to Sheridan Lake in the Black Hills, stopping at a grocery store on the way, getting a couple of steak, some potatoes, coffee, eggs, red wine, firewood and ice. I pitched my tent, and spent three heavenly days (yes, I was "sick" that Monday), with nothing but me, books, hiking trails, and nature. It was amazing. When I got back on Tuesday, I found out my boss had been fired. Not only was that the BEST no-planning vacation EVER, my wish-on-the-first-star wish that I'd made the first night at camp came true! John Deiner: LOL. Great, Raleigh (man, you guys are checking in from all over today). You had me at "red wine" -- I wouldn't sleep on the ground without it. Thanks for chiming in! Silver Spring, Md: Best last minute trip: When [Hurricane] Isabel struck D.C. and work was shut down, we hopped the train to Philadelphia and spent the best 24 hours: toured the best museum ever seen, saw Tiffany stained glass lobby at a private building, ate cheese steaks, poked around a flea market and went to a Phillies baseball game. We stayed in a small BB right next to the river. John Deiner: Good stuff, Silver Spring. I bet you didn't have power at home right? Might as well use another city's electricity when you can. Thanks much. Herndon, Va.: Just got back from Europe and read the Sunday letters about the Q/A column on arrival times for check-in and then the luggage weight on this week's Travel Talk. Our experience: We arrived over two and a half hours before our flight to Munich. The line was unbelievably long as all of us snaked our way to the front. Peridodically, a representative would call for a flight. We were about ten people from the front when a United Rep asked for people traveling to Munich. We raised our hands. When she saw where we and another family were in line, she said, "You will be all right." We got to the desk 40 minutes before the flight and were told we could not be processed. No amount of "it is your fault because United doesn't have the personnel to handle the crowds" or "your rep said we were okay" would work. We had to be booked on another flight. Since we were meeting a ship for a cruise, and knowing we wouldn't make it in time with the new flight we opted to go to the next port of call. It cost us for a hotel, the cab from the airport to the town, and a loss of night on the ship. Oh, and our luggage was lost. Several other families were in the same predicament. One was sending two young children and were told the best United could do was another city in Germany. By then the people who were waiting behind all of us heard what was going on and became feisty because they were also close to the 45 minute window. When we finally caught a flight to Frankfort five hours later, people all around us on the flight were complaining of similar problems. It is clear that much of what happened was not because people didn't arrive at the airport on time but because of United's inefficiency. A word to the wise: monitor your flight time and speak up way before it gets close. As for luggage... United was very strict on the weight. People were paying $25 for suitcases weighing only 52 pounds. We had weighed ours at home but our scales were off by 1-2 pounds but within the accepted weight. I would suggest that anyone not 100 percent sure that his suitcase is under 50 to have one of those zippered pouches handy to take out some heavier items rather than pay the fee. One woman was going to pay $75 because each of her three suitcases was slightly over. I suggested that she take a few things out of two, put them in the one and then pay the $25. She did. I think it is ridiculous that a person can take two suitcases at 50 pounds each but will be charged for one that is 53. Or can have one that is 35 and another that is 55 and has to pay. KC Summers: You've just about summed up the current climate in air travel today. My sympathies. If it's any consolation, you're not alone -- we've heard many, many nightmarish stories in recent weeks about people missing flights due to understaffed airline desks. And don't even ask about missed connections. That's good advice to be proactive about speaking up when your flight time draws near. Also, if you're flying domestically, it's a no-brainer to check in online the night before. And consider taking only a carryon (repeat after me: learn to pack light) so you can avoid the airline counter altogether. Of course, that's not an option for international flights. And yes, the airlines are cracking down on luggage weight restrictions too, so make sure you don't go over the limit(that's also good advice to redistribute the weight and to take zippered pouches). Washington, D.C.: My husband and I will be traveling to Trinidad, West Indies, in September this year. Can you give us any tips in getting the best price for a good hotel (clean w/ A.C., private bathroom, etc.) and round trip airfare. We are young and want to visit relatives and have saved some money but we are not wealthy, you know? Any help would be appreciated. Also, if you have anyone been to a good cheap hotel they could recommend, let us know. Thanks. Gary Lee: For airfare, you should check out bwia airways. They fly out of Dulles once a week and sometimes have good fares. Otherwise, American also has deals if you book early. Getting a good rate on a hotel in Port of Spain can be tougher. There is a pretty cheap place I know called the Pelican, with a/c, private baths, etc that goes for around $50 US a night. (It can be loud sometimes, though, due to the pub downstairs.) Otherwise, there are decent B&Bs, including Alicia's House and the Normandie Inn. Anybody else have POS hotel or flight tips? Arlington, Va.: I am going up to New York City this weekend. I am staying at the Kimpton on Park but can get pretty much anywhere in Manhattan fairly easily. Where should I go for good pizza? Anne McDonough: Hey Arl...you trying to make me homesick? There are several locations--the Upper East Side and Midtown each have one--but John's on Bleecker (between Sixth and Seventh) is my absolute standby. And you can't order by the slice, only by the pie, so third slices which may be guilt-inducing elsewhere at John's are really a way to decrease the per-slice cost. San Francisco, Calif.: The best last-minute trip I took was a week in Waikiki last December to cheer on an acquaintance in the Honolulu marathon. There were four of us (all singles) altogether and although we barely knew each other, we got along swimmingly. The worst last-minute trip was a roadtrip to Montreal in a heat wave. Although I was with a good friend, we didn't have enough in common to last the whole trip. Tempers were short. Both of us were glad when it was over. I'm going on a non-last-minute trip to Paris this fall and that jazz book would come in handy! John Deiner: I'll keep that in mind, San Fran. (Hey, is it still real hot out there?) New York, N.Y.: My friends and I are planning a trip to Bryce and Zion National Parks. We are undecided between finding lodging halfway between the two parks to stay at the entire time or are we better off staying one or two days at lodging located at each park? Steve Hendrix: I've done that drive; it took about two hours to get to Zion Lodge from Bryce (eighty something miles, I think). That's too much time on the road if you base at one or the other, and I don't remember too much in the way of motels between them. I'd relocate (neat places in Springdale, the gateway town for Zion). Fairfax, Va.: All things being equal, which location should I choose for an March-April 2007 vacation? I'm a solo 30-something male who enjoys "wandering around" and the travel would be for 10 days. I won't have to pay for the air travel but would like to get as much bang for my buck as I can. I'd want to rely on public transportation and wouldn't mind the opportunity for side trips. I know this is a tough question to answer but would appreciate your the travel crew weighing in. Cindy Loose: This is a bit arbitrary, but my choice given your stated desires would be, in this order, Prague, Dublin, Istanbul. I would spend just a couple days in Prague then get out and about, to different cities or countries. Check out Slovenia--river adventures, castles, caves, hot springs, cool capital. I'd make my money go further by sticking to Eastern Europe--the euro will kill a budget right quick. Prague, by the way, is more expensive that other parts of Eastern Europe, but it's a lovely place to start. That's my two cents. Anyone who disagrees is welcome to chime in and confuse him further. Alexandria, Va.: Anyone ever been on a Windjammer Barefoot Cruise? Just booked one for my 40th birthday and I hear mixed reviews... John Deiner: Hey, Al. None of us has been on one, but I'm sure someone out there has. Anyone have the 411 on Windjammer? Buses in Croatia: I second your opinion that long-distance buses in Croatia can take a loooonnnggg time, but they're pretty interesting, particularly if you speak the language. Many years ago I was riding a bus from somewhere to Zagreb, stopping at every wide place in the road. Suddenly, as we approached a small town, the bus driver looked over his shoulder and said "Ptooey!" I was pretty shocked, particularly since the apparent expectoration was directed pretty much straight at me. Then we came to the city-limits sign, and I about fell out of my seat laughing. The town we were entering was Ptuj. Three guesses how it's pronounced. KC Summers: Ah, the challenges of Croatian -- takes you a while to pick it up, but eventually you get the hang of it! Germantown, Md.: How does one get to Turks Caicos direct from this area?! I assume honeymooners are going direct if they only have four-five days Cindy Loose: Last time I checked, there were no direct flights to TC. I've gotten so used to doing 20 hour days on travel excursions that their four-five day thing didn't even hit me until you wisely pointed it out. So, honeymooners---do at least five, and try to fit in a bit more. If four is all you have, do you still have time to rethink destination. If so, check out destinations with direct flights. I'm assuming you know about the risk of hurricanes, right? You might want to either buy insurance or pick a hotel that allows you to cancel in case of hurricane. Los Angeles, Calif.: Crew and clicksters: Help, help, PLEASE help! Are there any good luaus on Oahu - less tacky, better food, that sort of thing? Sis-in-law desperately wants to go and I like her, but want to ease our pain ... John Deiner: Less tacky? What fun is that? Hey, let's send this one out to the clicksters, since it's been a while since we've tested them out for ourselves. Anyone out there with a luau tip for LA? Thanks for the great article on Quebec! You mentioned several construction projects in the city. Do they detract from the experience? Would you suggest postponing a visit until after the construction is done? Cindy Loose: No, I wouldn't worry about it. There is a small area of the boardwalk that has fencing around it, but it's a small area and you can still enjoy walking other parts of the boardwalk overlooking the St. Lawrence. As to the bike path and park construction--that's all out of sight. Croatia Buses: Why do you recommend against buses in Croatia? I agree that the ferries are best, but they are slower than buses and often don't run as frequently. We alternated buses and ferries in a trip along the coast, and found the buses perfectly decent, in fact, much nicer than your average Greyhound. KC Summers: I was advised against using them because of the long drive times (see above posting). You're right that the ferries don't run all that frequently, but I found it pretty easy to coordinate my island/city visits along the coast with the ferry schedule. Washington, D.C.: Dear Travel Crew, I'm thinking of booking a trip with Overseas Adventure Travel, one of the tour operators mentioned in Steve's piece last week. They offer by far the most appealing itinerary of Greece that I have found, plus friends of mine have had good experiences with them. However, I found that their BBB membership has been revoked (along with their parent company Grand Circle Travel). Is this a really serious problem, in your opinion? Would you automatically nix any travel company that had its BBB membership revoked? Steve Hendrix: Wow! We hadn't heard that, WDC. That's a big deal, I'd say. Grand Circle is a major player in that world. We'll look at that more closely. I can say that my Mother-in-law has had many positive trips with OAT, but that I would take a BBB banishment very seriously. Northern Va.: Through JetBlue's great intro deal, my husband are flying to JFK for super cheap in September. But now I'm trying to get a decent hotel that doesn't cost $200 bucks a night. I really don't want to stay near JFK, I rather be in the city. Any suggestions about finding good NYC hotel deals? Anne McDonough: Is this question just an excuse for us to show off the roundup of $200-under-under NYC-area hotels that we ran on May 7? Consider it done. washingtonpost.com: We'll Take Manhattan - for Less Than $200 a Night , May 7, 2006 Washington, D.C.: Any advice on touring the bourbon distilleries between Lexington and Louisville, Kentucky? We're thinking of making a romantic weekend of it. When's the best time to go? Which places are can't-miss? And is there some kind of tour bus that takes people around to multiple places so we can both indulging in tastings, or will one of us need to be a designated driver? I read that there's a big festival in mid-September, but we'll probably avoid then because of the crowds... unless someone's been to the festival and it offers things we couldn't get on another weekend. Gary Lee: I toured Maker's Mark a couple of weeks back; it was small and intimate. The setting is bucolic and they do a great tour; I highly recommend it. I also think that Jim Beam, the grand daddy, is worth it. There are a couple of companies out of Louisville (where I stayed) that offer tours; inquire either at Louisville tourism or your hotel. I would skip the festival; it's more fun to go on your own. Also, you may want to do a tasting in town. If you're staying in Louisville, try the Maker's Mark Lounge on Fourth or the bar at the Seelbach. Both have good tasting deals. Chicago hotels: We were at the overpriced Hyatt Regency next to the Chicago River near Michigan Avenue for a conference, but after the first two nights had to move since the rooms were all booked. We moved to the Club Quarters, which is mainly for corporate members but which can be reserved through some services such as Travelocity. Room and bed were smaller than at the Hyatt, but cost was less than $180, and instead of an overpriced mini-bar (e.g., $4 for a can of soda), we had a small kitchen with microwave, and glasses, silverware and plates for our use. Instead of the Hyatt's $7 for 10 minutes of Internet use in their business center, the Club Quarters had a lounge with three computers we could use for free (printing included). The CQ did not have sufficient safety boxes for its guests, but the price and location were good. Santiago Tips: One of my favorite things to do when I studied in Santiago was wander around the artisan markets. There are a couple of large ones-one around the corner from the Apumanque shopping center, and one across from the Santa Luc¿a fortress, which is also interesting to check out. Also, check out the Cementerio General, which holds the tomb of Salvador Allende and tombs of generations of wealthy santiaguinos. Gary Lee: Great tips. Gracias. Washington, D.C.: Hiya Crew! Hoping you can help a girl out with a quick question: My boyfriend and I need to fly from D.C. to Minneapolis for a wedding over Labor Day weekend. We've been looking online for flights and the cheapest we can find is in the $300/per person range (slightly more for nonstop, slightly less with layovers/change of planes). Is this a good deal? Or should we wait for better prices? I'm concerned about waiting since it is Labor Day weekend. Any advice? Thank you thank you! Cindy Loose: Given it's a three-day weekend, I'd probably go for the $300 flights. About $50 of that is taxes, so the airline isn't making a huge killing at that price, and while I'd be shopping hard to get something under that price for a normal weekend, I'd be guessing--mind guessing--the prices weren't all that likely to drop for Labor Day weekend. washingtonpost.com: Readers' Choice: 8 More NYC Hotels Under $200 a Night , May 28, 2006 Anne McDonough: And as a counterpoint to our suggestions, here are some NYC hotels recommended by readers (we didn't visit these ourselves, though, so keep that in mind). Thanks, Christian! Alexandria, Va.: Would you recommend renting a car in Curacao? Gary Lee: Yes. Many sites, especially the best beaches, are tough to reach without one. You can take taxis to various places but it will be far less costly to drive. Washington, D.C.: Hi Flight Crew! I have vacation time in September and am considering visiting Chicago or going to the desert SW. I'd like to see other parts of the country, and after reading guide books, both seem intriguing. I like art, am moderately active and like the outdoors. John Deiner: Hey, DC. One idea that popped into my head was Santa Fe, NM. Beautiful hike-friendly countryside and about one zillion art galleries. Georgia O'Keeffe's place is up the road as well. You can fly into Albuquerque, home to its own little warren of galleries and such. Silver Spring, Md.: Hey there. Everything I've read says that Iceland is the most expensive European country to visit, but I'd still really, really, really like to go. If I went in April, rented a car, ate bread and fruit, drank no alcohol and camped everywhere I went, would it be possible to do this trip for under $1500 for two people? Thanks. Cindy Loose: Are you including airfare? If so, how much are you figuring on the airfare part? Sounds like your biggest expense is going to be the car and gas, and it should be pretty easy to figure out how much that's going to cost. As to food, if you buy food in a supermarket, figure it to cost maybe 30% more than in the U.S. Affordable hotel Chicago: If you're really looking for a deal, the IH hostel is in the loop. We've booked a room at the Club Quarters at Wacker and Michigan for an avg of $150/night over Labor Day weekend. Gary Lee: Thanks, good tip. Re: Non-Tacky Luau: Went to a good one at Paradise Cove for FREE because we spent 45 minutes at a timeshare presentation. Of course it was tacky, but the food was good and there was a also good bit of culture. And good mai-tais. If you have military IDs, the Hale Koa does a good one, too. John Deiner: Hey, nothing beats free. And good mai-tais? Perfecto. Thanks for the assistance. for Cindy: Just wanted to let you know how much I enjoyed your article about the med student in Cuba. Interesting and beautifully written. Cindy Loose: My boss will hit me if we get a lot of magazine story comments on the travel chat, but thanks a lot for checking in and sharing such nice sentiments. re: Bryce Canyon: If there is still room, you really should stay in the lodge at Bryce. There's not much worth doing outside the park and the sunsets are gorgeous at the canyon rim. Steve Hendrix: This is my memory, too. I'd give Bryce a night and go a bit heavier on Zion. Anonymous: Bryce and Zion are great parks. Rooms in the lodges in the two parks must be reserved months in advance. Springfield is a good option for Zion. Nearest town to Byrce is Hatch, I believe. North Rim of the Grand Canyon (cooler, higher, greener and less crowded than the South Rim) is nearby, as is Capitol Reef National Monument. Hilton Head visit: I'm spending four days at Hilton Head with my family. Any special/wacky things you'd recommend to do? We know about the boating/outdoors-y things to do. We're trying to think of a few lesser-known but fun things to check out. (I'm trying to sell my parents on the area, too.) John Deiner: Hilton Head help out there anyone? Bethesda, Md.: I usually travel alone and use various low-cost web sites to try to get the best deal. Recently, I booked a hotel for myself and a non-romantic friend over www.hotwire.com. I got a great rate but I didn't read the fine print, so the two of us wound up with just one bed. There was no couch or other sleeping alternative, so we made do for two nights until a rollaway bed became available, at an additional $24 a night. We even tried to rent a second room, but the hotel was full up. We still had a good time on the trip, but this was something of a downer. It also cost an additional $24 per day (they seem to like $24) to park the car. My question is, is this typical? Another friend and I are planning a weekend in St. Paul and also want separate beds. From what I can tell, Orbitz, Travelocity, Expedia and a couple others are all silent on this point while, as noted, Hotwire specifically calls for one bed per two people; I just didn't read the conditions carefully enough. We won't have a car, so parking costs don't matter, but we do want separate beds. Thanks. Cindy Loose: So many hotels promise to have their best prices available on their own Web sites, I think in this case, where two beds are deemed critical, that you check hotel Web sites directly. Falls Church, Va.: Do you know of any tour groups or services, providing trips to Europe, which cater to wheel chair or other limited mobility individuals or small groups? Thanks for the great chats!! Anne McDonough: Hey FC-coming up should be a link to our annual Way to Go issue from 2005; included in the Specialty Travel article is a list of several organizations with information on tours, etc. for folks with limited mobility. Off the top of my head I can think of access-able.com and emerginghorizons.com as two such organizations. Baltimore, Md.: I'm planning a trip to Rio de Janeiro in March 2007. I've been to Rio a few times, but recently I've been told that I should also visit Salvador Bahia. If I split my time between the two cities, what would be the minimum amount of days I could spend in Salvador to get a good overview of the city? Gary Lee: I adore Salvador. I think to do the sights justice you should spend three to four days there, if you can. If you can swing it, try to arrange attending a camdoble service there. washingtonpost.com: Specialty Travel Resources , from "WAY TO GO: The Guide," September 25, 2005 Anne McDonough: Thanks, Christian! This is for the limited mobility poster... Steve Hendrix: I meant: Bueno, gracias. (not only is he prentious, he's a pretenious idiot!) Washington, D.C.: I think this question/anecdote is more appropriate to your title, but less to the topics at hand... I was on a flight from St. Louis to D.C. on Sunday, and I had an enormous man sit next to me in the middle seat, effectively taking away three inches of my own seat space. He also kept his cell phone on during the entire flight while pretending to punch something in mid-way through, which was disconcerting to say the least. Here's the question: Is it rude to ask for another seat, after having this massive individual sit down? Also, how do I go abut having this person turn his phone off without causing an argument. I forgot to mention that the man was gripping the phone while sweating profusely, so asking him to turn it off was not something I was comfortable with. KC Summers: I wouldn't have hesitated to rat the guy out, Wash. Definitely inform the flight attendant if rules are being broken or if a seatmate is making you nervous. This is stuff they need to know. As for the weight issue, you can always ask to be reseated -- you can make up a lame excuse when you leave, and in any case, you're never going to see the guy again -- and if seats are available, the flight attendants won't mind your changing. If the flight is sold out, you're pretty much out of luck. Or you could fly Southwest, which famously began making severely obese people buy two seats to accommodate their girth. Washington, D.C.: In Port of Spain, there is no other but the Trinidad Hilton with a commanding view of one of the largest public spaces on earth. Gary Lee: The Hilton does have a fantastic view but the rooms are less than spectacular. Also, the travelers asked for budget options, which would rule out the Hilton. As for views, I like the one at the top of the Kapok.... Silver Spring, Md.: A friend won a three-night stay at a hotel in the Bahamas (forget which one) and offered to take me for my birthday in February. When should we start looking for airfares? John Deiner: Hey, Silver. That's a tricky one....start too early and you could miss a good sale, start too late and you could miss a good sale. (Well, duh, we already knew that, didn't we?) I'd actually start looking now to see what's available and what airlines are charging to come up with a comfort level and then see where they go from here. Often, the airlines will advertise some good deals in early January, but I wouldn't count on it. I'd think if you can get anything close to $250 to $300 you should pounce on it. Reston, Va.: Enjoyed the article on Quebec in the Sunday paper. I didn't notice any discussion about getting by with only English in Quebec. Waddya think...doable or difficult? Two'fer here. With a week's time to travel by rental car from Burlington to Quebec and back, what would be your suggested itinerary for those liking both hiking/paddling and good food and historical sights? Thanks. P.S. Thanks for your previous help on my son's trip to South Africa. We found him a discounted ticket and he's been having a great summer volunteering there. Cindy Loose: I got by with English quite well. People involved in dealing with tourists all spoke at least rudimentary English. Government workers, and there are a fair number of them in Quebec City, are required to be bilingual, and that helps too. In four days I didn't encounter a single incident where language was a problem. If I were doing the trip again I think I'd drive straight through Burlington to Quebec one way, and the other way plan to stop overnight, either in the Eastern Townships or somewhere along Lake Champlain. I'd also spend one of my nights on Ile Orleans. Arlington, Va.: I know you have mentioned before (usually around Christmas) not to pack wrapped gifts in your luggage, in case airport security screens your bag and has to unwrap it. but what are the realistic chances of that happening? If they are less than 25 percent then I will just accept that risk. Anne McDonough: First of all, I think there's a good chance they'll poke around in them. Secondly, I think (and maybe this is the Pollyanna in me, but whatever) that we all should do our parts to make security lines go smoothly. Sure, we can have our pockets emptied and jackets off and laptops out of their cases and things can STILL take forever, but at least we've done what's possible to not make those around us moan and potentially miss their flights. So, think of it this way: It's not just a risk that your wrapping efforts will go to waste, but also that your wrapping is actually adding to the problem. End of lecture (please don't bite my head off!). We're traveling through St. Petersburg for three days and Moscow for one during a trip to Europe next month. What are the must sees in these cities? Gary Lee: I have lived in both cities. In St. Petersburg, I recommend the Hermitage and the Russian Museum. But above all, take a day trip by bus of the palaces around the city. If you have some rubles to blow have lunch or dinner at the Astoria and see a ballet. In Moscow, go to the Tretyakov and try to get inside the chapels in the Kremlin. A day may not allow time for it, but I always liked the so-called Novy Devochki cemetery. Anonymous: "Anybody else have cheap hotels in Chicago?" Are you a fed? You can get federal rates, even off-duty, at both Kimpton properties in Chicago. Not CHEAP, but well under $200. And when they have a sale, they have great rates. Gary Lee: Thanks. You feds live well. Boston, Mass.: I use priceline for hotels in NYC. Sat. night my room at a Hilton in midtown cost $120+ tax. The cheapest room on the hotel's Web site for the same night was $199+ tax. It worked for me because I'm flexible on location and knew I wouldn't cancel. Anne McDonough: Thanks, Boston! We like people who take the comparison-shopping approach; that's in fact how we found all of those hotels listed in the article. Shop around, do some homework, and your wallet will see the benefit. New York, N.Y.: Do you guys know anything about go-today.com? We just booked a trip with them based on the rec of a friend as well as reviews on the site. But I wanted to get your opinion. Thanks! KC Summers: I really like go-today -- used them for a trip to London last summer and found them to be not only incredibly cheap but very reliable. I especially liked being able to choose from among five levels of hotels -- so you don't have to travel the dirt-cheap route if you don't want to. I went the middle route and my hotel was perfectly acceptable, if not exactly charming. They also responded promptly my e-mails, no small thing these days. Link to my story coming up... washingtonpost.com: London Calling, But at What Price? , August 15, 2004 KC Summers: Here's that link to the story about go-today.com -- thanks Christian! Chicago, Ill.: For the person with time after Singapore...skip Kuala Lumpur/Malaysia. Once you've seen the Petronas Tower, there's not much left. Cheap flights are easy and plentiful -- JetStarAsia and TigerAirways are based there. You can fly throughout SE Asia very cheap. Definitely consider Bangkok and be sure to take a water taxi ride. Anne McDonough: I'm with you on KL (I just included the timing to show how easy it is to travel across Malaysia). Checking out the cheapo flights is a great idea-thanks, Chicago! Charlotte, N.C.: How do I...? Considering trip to Iceland via Icelandic Air from BWI. So I catch a flight from Charlotte, checking luggage on USAirways, AirTran, whatever. Pretend luggage is too much, too big, whatever to carry on. Do I have to go to baggage claim in BWI pick up bags and then check in with Icelandic Air with bags, go through security, etc. Since I am already within the BWI airport when I land, is there any way I can stay within security without adding all the extra steps of going outside and then back in again? I appreciate you comments. Cindy Loose: Please, anyone out there who knows a trick I don't know should chime in, but I don't believe there is any way you can fly from Charlotte to BWI one one airline and then avoid having to claim your bags and checking back in on Icelandic. Last Minute: My husband and I decided last minute to go to Paris for my 50th birthday. I did not want a party and thought about going to the Inn at Little Washington. When we had recovered after doing the math my husband said "how about we spend that same amount in Paris for a long weekend." (We had enough miles for two tickets. Those were the days... ). He started calling hotels and in no time he was swooning because of the delicious French accents of the women on the phone at the hotels. Never mind that all of them told him they were "fooly booked". This happened six or seven times. By the 8th I took over and found us a room.....We had a memorable four days and still joke about something being "fooly booked". John Deiner: Fooly wonderful tale, LM. That's some fairly amazing math you did . . . you can go to Paris for four days for the same price as the Inn at Little Washington? Wow. Washington, D.C.: I took a last-minute trip to Paris about five years ago when the (e-saver) getting was good. I think it was like $300. After a day or two, my friend and I decided a week in Paris might be too much -- she'd been there before and I had spent a semester there, so we took the Metro to the Montparnasse train station and had only one rule: get on the next train going somewhere neither of us have been before. So we spent a few days eating crepes in Saint-Malo! I love the idea of just walking into a train station and hopping on a train. (After paying, of course :) John Deiner: Nice, DC. That's what trains are for, aren't they? Thanks for the story. Re: Quebec City: People visiting Quebec in the summer should know that Quebec City hosts an international fireworks competition every summer. The fireworks are launched above Montmorency Falls. I saw one of the displays in 2001, and it was spectacular. http://www.lesgrandsfeux.com/ Cindy Loose: Thanks. And there are going to be a lot of extra fireworks once the anniversary celebrations start. Wish I had seen them over the falls, that must be great. Last minute trip: My friend and I decided to get out of Santiago, Chile, for a weekend and we wanted to see the flowering desert. We booked bus tickets for a bus leaving the next day, took the 10-hour ride into the middle of nowhere, wandered into a hostel where the owners treated us like royalty, and spent two amazing days poking around the flowering desert and relaxing on the beach. Considering all that could have gone wrong, it was a fantastic trip. John Deiner: It sounds fantastic. A lot of talk of Santiago today, and here's another reason why we should all go there! Iceland in April?: Hey- Have you checked into average weather conditions to see if you'll be willing to camp there in April? If you do winter camping (in cold areas) you may have appropriate gear and be fine, but if not you may wish to go at a warmer time of year. I camped out one August (yes, August) night in England (an hour or so north of London) and froze. Learned why my brother in law wasn't worried about ice for the cooler overnight! Sending comfortable camping thoughts your way... Cindy Loose: Thanks for the comments and good wishes. If the Iceland dreamer is going in April cause fares will be lower then, have you thought about September instead? Honolulu, Hawaii: A lot of people end up at the Polynesian Cultural Center for the luau, but it may not be exactly what the poster from LA is looking for. There are luau at Paradise Cove and Germaine's as well as at many hotels (someone mentioned the Hale Koa for military). A new-ish venue is the luau at Sea Life Park in East Oahu, with a beautiful view of Makapu'u Lighthouse, but not sure that would fit your request for non-tacky. Now that I think of it, I don't thank any of them would! Now that the Historical Hall of the Bishop Museum is closed for renovations, maybe consider the PCC luau and spend the day up there touring? John Deiner: Great suggestion, and from someone in the know. I forgot about the PCC -- we've heard great things. Ballston, Va.: To the traveler with four days in Asia - spend three at the Temples in Angkor, Cambodia. Or do two and then two in Bangkok. I traveled for three months in SE Asia and Angkor was the highlight, bar none! Anne McDonough: More ideas for the Singapore conference attender...Thanks, Ballston! Washington, D.C.: A friend of mine is going on vacation to Pittsburgh and Cleveland (baseball-related reasons.) What can I tell her to look forward to besides the baseball? She already knows about the brewery in the church in Pittsburgh. Anything else to recommend? They've only got a couple of days in each place. Gary Lee: In Cleveland, if you only have a day, spend it in the University Park area. The Cleveland Museum is fantastic, as is the Botantical Garden there. There are a number of small theaters nearby and a couple of big ones downtown; check on the Web site of the Plain Dealer, the local paper, to see what's playing. Definitely peek into the symphony and see a performance there of you can. In Shaker Heights, located nearby, there's a decent restaurant called Fire. I have fewer tips for Pittsburgh but think you'd be remiss if you did not tour the Andy Warhol museum. Washington, D.C.: Thinking of traveling to Lima, Peru, in August. I was told that the high season for travel ends mid-August, but I see no appreciable drop in airfares to or from the D.C. area (still over $900, pretty much where they've been over the summer) all the way through dates in November. Is it still best to wait up to two weeks before the flight to get the best deal or is that out the window as flight prices keep going up? Steve Hendrix: Man, I sympathize. I was (am) trying to get down in the next couple of weeks to research a super-secret blockbuster travel story (I mean, we're talking a great armchair read AND excellent consumer information), but the ruinous airfares may trump journalistic excellence. I don't know when they're going to drop, but Gary Lee warns me that they probably won't go below $650. Boston, Mass.: My friends and I want to take a road trip to Montreal this August. Are there any good places to stay for under $150 per night? We would prefer somewhere with active nightlife. Thanks. Anne McDonough: It's been a few years since I've stayed there, but I LOVED the Pierre Dominique Bed and Breakfast--it's in the Latin Quarter, right on Square St-Louis, and looking at their site now the price is right... http://www.bbcanada.com/928.html Alexandria to Cologne: Just found a great deal on a hotel on eBay, and off I go! Three days in Cologne, a cruise on the Rhine, and ... what else shall we do, Crew? We've got ten days total and have extensively explored the Munich area before. Aachen is definitely on the list. Is Freiburg too far to go? Thanks! Gary Lee: If you like music and museums, check out Bonn, which has good options for both. The shopping is great in Dusseldorf, especially for ready to wear fashion. Freiburg is a it far but why not go for it? washingtonpost.com: Pittsburgh Rocks: The city that made steel is now forging some serious local music , May 12, 2004 Gary Lee: For the traveler to Pittsburgh, check out these music venues. Pittsburgh, Pa.: For the baseball fan in Pgh: Yes, the Warhol's great (and right next door to PNC Park). Also consider The Mattress Factory -- a funky museum of world-class installation art a half-mile from the stadium. Gary Lee: Thanks. Go for it! First-time cruiser: Hi Crew! I love these chats. I've gotten so many ideas from you and the chatters for destinations and travel tips. I'm hoping you can help me out here. I'm taking my first cruise ever in a couple of weeks. It's a 10-day cruise, going to the Caribbean. I'm having some packing issues. People have been telling me that people change clothes two or three times a day (!) on cruises. Can this possibly be true? That's a LOT of clothes to pack. Any tips or suggestions on how to make it more manageable? Thanks so much for any ideas you have, they're very much appreciated! KC Summers: I guess there are still people who take lots of matched luggage, steamer trunks and hatboxes on vacation, but for the rest of us, it's much more sensible to pack light -- even on a cruise. Actually, you probably *will* change clothes three times a day, e.g. from shorts to bathing suit to dinnerware -- but there's no reason you can't recycle components of the same few outfits. Follow basic common-sense packing procedures -- take a few basic items in a go-with-everything color like black and coordinate with a few matching pieces -- and dress your outfits up or down with shoes, scarves and jewelry. A little black dress for women can go far. I felt fine in that and didn't dress up for fancy dinners -- many people don't. One thing you should definitely take a few of, though, is swimwear: Nothing worse than having to put on a wet bathing suit. re: last minute travel: A few years ago, a girlfriend and I got ticket to London for $300. We spent only three days there but had a blast. The best part was just after we picked up the rental car and had driven off the lot, we realized that we couldn't figure out how to get the car into reverse! After some amazing use of gravity and pull-through parking spaces, we were able to find a phone, make a call to the rental agency, make complete fools of ourselves, but get back on the road. Good times! John Deiner: Yow. Dicey situation there -- glad you lived to tell the tale! Greenville, S.C.: In March 2001, my wife was attending a week-long seminar in Houston and wanted me to go with her. Having grown up there I didn't really feel the need. I got on the 'net, found a $390 airfare from Atlanta to Rome, and stayed in a convent on via Sistina for $27 a night. Stayed five nights and loved it. Got kick out of walking past the Hassler three blocks away and seeing the tourists who paid $300 a night. Anne McDonough: Gotta love it when the perfect location location location...location can be both $300 and $27. Thanks, Greenville! Lancaster, Pa.: We are going to San Diego in a couple of weeks for my wife's conference. She is all excited about going to Tijuana. Is it worth the trip? I'm sure the main tourist area is safe as San Diego but what about other places? I have never been and am looking for help. Also, she does not have a passport, she does have a certified copy of her birth certificate. Will that work to get her back into USA? Cindy Loose: Assuming your wife is a native of the U.S., she won't have to have a passport to leave or return to the U.S.--that's coming soon, but not yet. Just make sure it's a real, government-issued birth certificate, not some hospital-issued thing. Also, take a photo id, preferably a driver's license. Tijuana has experienced violent crimes. Read about it as www.travel.state.gov, all the while aware that the state department site is conservative and cautious. Washington, D.C.: Another best spur-of-the-moment trip. Flew to Las Vegas on a Sunday morning in March last year when the desert flowers were so incredible, rented a car, drove to Death Valley, spent about 24 hours driving through the park reveling in the flowers, photographing them, and sleeping; back to LAS by lunchtime Monday, home by 10 p.m. Monday. Anne McDonough: Last minute, yet very productive; I like. Last Minute trip: Was in Taiwan for the summer pretending to be an expat. Hopped on a moped with a housemate I'd befriended who conveniently was actually studying the language. We were supposed to be going to the ocean, but on the way I found out she was actually more interested in stalking after some guy, who luckily wasn't home - so we ended up sleeping untented and unblanketed on the beach in Danshuei. Woke up the next morning covered in life guard jackets and invited by said guards to share in the rice and dried fish breakfast they were boiling up in their hut. Ah, to be 23 again. John Deiner: Ewwww. Man, that's a pretty creepy tale! To be 23 again? Heck, I'd like to just remember what it was like. Miami, Fla.: Going to Madrid for work in August for about a week. Besides the famed Prado, what else do you recommend? Gary Lee: In the city, suggest a run of the tapas bars. Outside, Toledo makes for a great day trip. Tell me we're not crazy: My finance and I are just about to book our honeymoon to Bora Bora. We are in a bit of sticker shock for the price, but it looks amazing and will be a once in a lifetime kind of trip. The thought of stepping out of our over the water bungalow and down our personal ladder to swim with the fish sounds too amazing to pass up. If anyone out there has been, please let me know that we're not crazy for spending so much for our honeymoon and that it is worth it! KC Summers: None of us has been -- we're so deprived -- but we'll post a link to the fab story by foreign correspondent Tony Faiola. It's a few years old but it'll give you a good idea of the charms of that place. It also has one of our all-time favorite headlines. Pittsburgh, Pa.: For the folks visiting the 'burgh: Try walking around the Strip District - great for people watching, terrific food. Take one the paddleboat tours up the Allegheny river, if they have a car and don't mind an 45-minute drive, visit Fallingwater, a Frank Lloyd Wright home built over a waterfall. Also visit the Carnegie Museums (art, history, and science). washingtonpost.com: Bora Bora, I Adore Ya: How I Surrendered to Paradise , May 6, 2001 KC Summers: For the Bora Bora bound. Fairfax, Va.: Could you post a link to the article you did on visiting the former Yugoslav republics a little while back. I can't seem to find it on the Web site. Many thanks. Anne McDonough: You ask, .com delivers. Coming right up. washingtonpost.com: Peace Signs in Sarajevo: After the War, the Capital Rises From the Ruins , March 26, 2006 College Park, Md.: For the Jersey Shore poster, Point Pleasant and Ocean City are both good choices for family-friendly boardwalks. Point Pleasant Beach (as opposed to Point Pleasant Twp.) is probably best for families with small kids and Ocean City is still good for families whose kids are a bit older. Both are still head-and-shoulders above the sketchiness of Seaside Heights, though. John Deiner: Excellent . . . those are both lovely places. And Seaside Heights? Well, you pretty much said it. Boston, Mass.: Best Last Minute Trip EVER: February 1997. Sick as a dog from the flu. Had dinner with a friend Friday night. We both spoke about needing to go somewhere warm with a beach. The following Wednesday, he sends me an email about a great fare to Puerto Rico. I say to my boss, "What if I went to Puerto Rico on Saturday and didn't come back 'til next Thursday?" He says, "Do it." I do. The most spontaneous thing I had ever done in my almost-27 years. Great food. Great scene. And great visit to El Yunque Rainforest with magnificent views of the island. Anne McDonough: That's a great boss you have! Hope your flu flew by the time you hit PR. Washington, D.C.: For the traveler going to Iceland from Charlotte: Just drive to BWI! It's probably easier and less stressful! And Iceland is worth it. I believe SAS flies to Iceland as well. Those Vikings have to stick together! John Deiner: Thanks, DC. Good stuff. Washington, D.C.: Next month, I'm spending one day in L.A. It is just a stop-over, so I will be staying at the Westin near the airport. What should I do during my one day in L.A.? Anywhere I should eat? I thought about doing the whole fancy dining thing, but I think I would rather lean toward fun activities and restaurants. Thanks. Gary Lee: The Getty museum is a must. Quebec hikes/paddles: I highly recommend taking a day out to Tadoussac for whale watching and some fun spots to be outdoors. From there, take a swing toward Saguenay for gorgeous hikes. Note: your French skills in the rural parts are a huge plus, but the tourist info offices are very good - their economy depends on Anglophones. Ah, what a great place in summer! Steve Hendrix: Thanks for the tip. Washington, D.C. : There was some discussion last week of car-less travel to Yosemite National Park. People should be aware that the road between Merced and Yosemite which the local bus system uses (Rt. 140) has been closed indefinitely by a landslide. I don't know what arrangements have been made for the buses to get around it; at the least, bus travel will be less convenient. I don't believe bus service is available through the other two western entrances to the Park (Rt. 120 to the north and the road from Fresno to the south). Once you get into the park, there is a shuttle that makes getting around easy. John Deiner: Already posted something to this effect, DC, but you've added some valuable info here. Thanks! Washington, D.C.: I'd have to second the earlier post about airline travel difficulties. While we didn't experience any problems, we saw many who did flying out of Dulles on a recent trip. It was a Monday early morning, and it was taking most people almost 1.5 hours to get through security and to their gate. All of the ticket agents were being very careful about weighing baggage and just about every person near us was getting tagged with an overweight charge (don't the airlines and luggage manufacturers know these new larger suitcases easily can hold well over 50 lbs. of just clothes). The planes were so crowded that at just about every gate passengers were being bribed to step off the planes for standby/late passengers. Air travel has become quite a battle recently! KC Summers: We're hearing this sort of thing so often these days. Alternatives to flying just look better and better... Washington, D.C..: For Fairfax deciding between Dublin, Prague and Istanbul. I can't speak for the first two but have a very definite opinion of the third, Istanbul. As a single male in his 30s who spent a week there less than a month ago, I can give advice specific to another solo male traveler: With sadness, I must advise: don't go! Whether in the tourist area of Sultanhamet or the commercial/night-life area around Taksim Square, the relentless come-ons of the locals trying to get me into their sleazy bars for purposes of prostitution, a bill shakedown, or worse (I've heard numerous, independent, non-contradictory stories about druggings) made simply strolling about the admittedly gorgeous city unnerving and, sadly, unappealing. Day or night, the refrain was the same: A young man would approach you as you are walking along and ask the time in Turkish. When you say you don't speak Turkish, he suddenly light up at the "realization" you speak English. "Oh sir, you are not from here. Where are you from? Oh, United States? I love the United States. I am not from here, either. I am here from Ankara/Cyprus/Cappadocia, etc. on business. Hey, why don't we go and get a drink. I know a bar. ..." This could happen several times an hour! As wonderful as the history is in Istanbul, and as clean and manicured as the place is, I truly cannot recommend it for this rogue element factor. Talking to the tourist officer at my hotel, I found out that another bad ending from these "random" conversations involves pocket-pickings by thieves working in cahoots with the "talker." It honestly got to the point where I did not want to leave my hotel because of the peskiness. If you do end up going to Istanbul, please, don't ever go into a bar with anyone! Anne McDonough: One travelers perspective...definitely heed that last sentence... New York, N.Y.: Hi all, thanks a lot for taking my question and for doing this every week. I'm going to Amsterdam for about a week in December and am looking for a side trip. I'm big into cities: love the architecture, love restaurants ... Plan A was just a couple of half-day trips to Haarlem and maybe Rotterdam, which I still might do. Plan B was a day trip to Brussels, but in reading up, it didn't seem obvious what there was to do, even for six or seven hours. Plan C is Paris; I might take a morning train in, hit the Louvre, d'Orsay, and Orangerie so I don't waste my wife's time when I bring her there someday, and then take a train out the following night. Looks like the trip takes four hours each way, and costs $185 in all. Does anyone have alternate suggestions, especially for something that gets me from city to city (including any airport-related waiting) in as little time for as little money? Gary Lee: I vote for Plan C. If Paris is an option it will never disappoint... John Deiner: Wow. You guys kept us scrambling today. Thanks much for the great questions (you know, the ones we could answer) and your helpful suggestions. I'm going to throw the book and the headrest out to Raleigh, N.C., who went camping in the Black Hills after an ugly experience with the boss. If you could send your name and address to travel@washpost.com, we'll get your junque out to you. Thanks for playing along, folks, and watch for this weekend's Travel section, which features stories on Iceland, eating blowfish in Tokyo and two hot shows in Las Vegas. Cheers! 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.
363.292683
0.707317
0.902439
high
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/12/DI2006071201289.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/12/DI2006071201289.html
Spoiling for a Fight: The Rise of Eliot Spitzer
2006072419
Washington Post Staff Writer Brooke A. Masters was online Monday, July 24 at 2 p.m. ET to discuss her upcoming book, Spoiling for a Fight: The Rise of Eliot Spitzer , to be published by Times Books in July 2006. Since 2002, she has had a close-up view of corporate malfeasance - her assignments included the trials of Martha Stewart, Frank Quattrone, the Rigas family and Bernard Ebbers. She also reported extensively for the Post on Eliot Spitzer's various investigations. In her seventeen years at the Post, she has also covered criminal justice, education, and politics. She has written extensively about espionage, capital punishment and terrorism. Her 2000 articles on the flaws in Virginia's death penalty helped prod the state legislature into passing a law that made it easier for inmates who claim to be innocent to reopen their cases. She also served as an assistant metro editor in charge of criminal justice coverage. Born and raised in Manhattan, Brooke attended the Brearley School and Phillips Exeter Academy. She graduated summa cum laude from Harvard University in 1989 and earned a master's in economic history from the London School of Economics. Brooke A. Masters: Welcome to our discussion. I'm Brooke Masters and I'm the Washington Post's Wall Street correspondent. I've covered Eliot Spitzer since 2002. While I was researching my book, I had extensive access to him, his staff and his adversaries. I'm excited to talk about what I learned about his investigations and about his political prospects. So let's get started. Boston: Why didn't Spitzer pursue the billions of dollars of restitution that mutual fund shareholders lost due to the trading costs incurred by the late trading scam? Brooke A. Masters: Actually Spitzer and the SEC have negotiated the return of $3.4 billion in restitution and reduced fees for mutual fund shareholders who were harmed by market timing. Just today, Waddell and Reed agreed to pay $50 million in restitution and cut fees by $25 million for its mutual fund customers. It was the 19th such settlement Spitzer has negotiated since 2003. Here's the link to the press release: Arlington, Va.: The impression I have is that Spitzer was at odds with federal regulators and prosecutors on what he was doing. Is that correct? Or did the AG actually work closely with the feds in trying to clean up Wall Street? Brooke A. Masters: Both things are true. Spitzer has routinely irked and annoyed the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the U.S. Department of Justice by charging into areas where they generally have jurisdiction, such as mutual funds and stock research. In some cases he has even rushed to file complaints while his federal counterparts were still working on their investigations. At the same time, once Spitzer has gotten the ball rolling by bringing the first case or holding the first press conference, he has been more than happy to work with the feds because 1) they have more resources than he does and 2) the SEC has the administrative authority to rewrite the rules for entire industries. Spitzer sees his role partly as a catalytic one--he charges in and reveals the problem but he works with the feds in coming up with a long term solution. New York: Spitzer's first settlement made a mockery of the First Admendment by regulating how and when securities analysts conduct their business. If the US AG forced regulation upon journalists you would be screaming your heads off. Secondly, Spitzer has yet to put any corprate criminals in jail, but he has forced settlements which have resulted in the elimination of over ten thousand high paying jobs in the United States of America. These people that lost their jobs did not commit any crimes. There crime was going to work every morning and supporting thier families. My,question is how has Spitzer improved the lives of anyone in New York and is the his crusade against corporate corruption worth the price paid by middle class Americans both in lost civil rights and lost jobs? Brooke A. Masters: The limits on stock research have been expensive for the investment banks (lots of lawyers and chaperones to make sure bankers don't overly influence research) But I'm not sure it really had that much impact on the analysts' free speech rights. They can still say what they believe about companies. It just has to be backed up by research and they have to disclose any conflicts of interest. The 10,000 jobs lost is hard to calculate. Certainly insurance broker Marsh & McLennan laid off thousands after its bid-rigging scheme was revealed, but bid-rigging has been illegal since the 1890s so it's hard to argue that Spitzer was out of line in investigating that one. Other job losses are more complicated--the investment banks and mutual fund companies that did layoffs often had problems far greater than Spitzer's probe (Fund companies Putnam and Janus were losing assets well before Spitzer and their woes continued well after.) Alabama: Did Spitzer draw any inspiration from Connecticut's Richard Blumenthal, another crusading Attorney General? Blumenthal was often discussed as a gubernatorial candidate but never pulled the trigger on a campaign (maybe Spitzer learned from that). Brooke A. Masters: Spitzer and Blumenthal (also a Democrat) are old friends, and right after Spitzer was first elected in 1998 he met Blumenthal for breakfast and asked for advice. They've also worked together on environmental, insurance and gun cases. Washington, D.C.: In your book excerpt that the Post has online, you detail how Spitzer allowed Eddie Stern to settle financially in the late trading case. Yet didn't the bank staffer who was instructed to execute those trades face something like 30 years in prison at Spitzer's urging? Of course, a jury rejected Spitzer's case across the board but what do you make of the disparity in how he approached the case? Also, isn't there some question about the legal/ethical merit of the Martin Act? Brooke A. Masters: Spitzer's decision to let Eddie Stern off with a civil settlement while pressing charges against the broker who put through Stern's trades, a guy named Ted Sihpol, has stirred more controversy than almost anything else Spitzer has done. In my book, Spitzer argues that cutting the deal with Stern was necessary to jump start his efforts to go after the mutual funds and Brooke A. Masters: get them to return money to their customers. While he defends the decision to press charges against Sihpol he is somewhat regretful that he didn't cut a deal that would have convicted Sihpol but spared him jail time. Harrisburg, Pa.: Eliot Spitzer is the model of an Attorney General who takes his infrequently enforced state laws and aggressively prosecutes white collar crime (hint, hint, other states' Attorney Generals). Why do fewer Attorney Generals aggressively fight white collar crime: is it because the functions of these offices involve much civil and legislative work, and is the fact that in many states these are elective offices and it may be hard to fund raise from white collar contributors if one campaigns on a aggressive white collar prosecution campaign? What is your analysis? Brooke A. Masters: Spitzer has two crucial advantages over many other AGs: he's in New York where every financial services companies have to do business. (If he were in North Dakota they could just pull out rather than deal with him.) He also has the Martin Act which is an extremely broad anti-fraud law than gives the New York AG powers that other AGs don't have Washington, D.C.: Has Spitzer been asked upfront about his presidential ambitions during his current campaign for governor? Will he take an "I won't run" pledge? Brooke A. Masters: When I asked him, he demurred and said he is interested right now in NY governor. He is certainly not running in 2008. Beyond that, who knows? Washington, D.C.: I have heard anecdotally of a few Wall Street hedge fund managers who are very supportive of Spitzer. This seems to conflict with the anti-Wall Street image that some have cultivated of him. Can you explain this discrepency? Brooke A. Masters: Spitzer is no flaming populist. He always talks about how he wants to reform capitalism, not kill it. His father made a fortune in real estate and Spitzer spent part of his adulthood helping to invest it. Some of his closest friends run hedge funds and he and his family have given them money to invest. Vienna, Va.: Given all his talk about protecting the retail investor, how much money has actually gone back to the retail investor? He is shaking down these financial giants, but where is the money going. Brooke A. Masters: The $1.4 billion global research settlement was complicated. Twelve 12 banks paid in to a pot to settle with the SEC, Spitzer and other state regulators over allegations of biased stock reports, The money that went to the SEC went back to investors, there was a pot for investor education that has gotten tied up in bureaucratic wrangling and some of the money went to state coffers including New York.(This was controversial and led to criticism of Spitizer. That may be why Spitzer has emphasized restitution ever since.) For the 2003 mutual fund scandal, all of the $3.4 billion in payments went to investors. And the 2004 insurance scandal led mostly to restitution for the companies hurt by the bid-rigging. Washington, D.C.: What's the Hillary-Eliot dynamic like? Two N.Y. politicos with national star power... Brooke A. Masters: They get on surprisingly well. She likes smart men, he likes smart women and they both see the advantage of having a homestate politico to watch their backs. (Both have much pricklier relationships with Chuck Schumer and Pataki of course is a Republican) One of her prominent advisers recently came out and criticized Spitzer's primary opponent Tom Suozzi for getting too personal with his attacks on Spitzer Alexandria, Va.: What are Spitzer's chances for winning November's NY gubernatorial election and the Democratic primary? Tom Souzzi seems to be a formidable opponent and a better politician. Brooke A. Masters: The Sienna Institute monthly poll of New York voters just came out today and things are looking grim for Suozzi: "Loudonville, NY - Attorney General Eliot Spitzer will walk into the first Democratic gubernatorial debate tomorrow with a stunning 78-9 percent lead" That's three points worse than last month.... There's a televised debate tomorrow and I suppose that could change the dynamic a bit. Follow up to Alabama's question: Another crusading AG the fits the Blumenthal-Spitzer mold is Michael Moore in Mississippi (took on the tobacco firms). Brooke A. Masters: Moore is certainly one of the recent crusaders. Previous NY AG Robert Abrams also did a bunch of work in the 1980s on consumer protection and environmental issues McLean, Va.: His family has strong ties to the real estate industry in NY, yet he has not looked at that industry as one that needs to be "cleaned up." Any comments? Brooke A. Masters: I asked him that and he said that he would take a case if someone brought him one. That of course is a bit disingenuous because he could also go looking for cases. His family could be a factor. Another is timing--the New York real estate market was going gangbusters for most of his time in office while the stock market had a major crash. Big losses tend to bring out the enforcers and the tipsters. Washington, D.C.: Will Wall Street "vote" for Spitzer this year? Brooke A. Masters: So far hedge funds are giving money to Spitzer, allies of Invemed investment banker Ken Langone (who is angry that Spitzer sued him and the New York stock exchange over ex-chairman Dick Grasso's $140 million retirement package) are giving to Suozzi But most of the street is staying out of this fight at least on the money side Sanibel, Fla.: Twenty years ago, Colonel Oliver North nearly pulled down the Reagan White House with reckless emails on the Iran-Contra issue. More recently, the two biggest lobby scandals in US history (Abramoff Indian casinos and USAF/Boeing KC-767 aerial tankers) were traced by incriminating emails. Throughout Eliot Spitzer's investigations, emails were the fingerprints that tracked down the crimes. Will these people never learn? Are emails a manifestation of an ego trip these zillionaires simply can't kick? Brooke A. Masters: I think people just don't focus that their emails can be retrieved. New York responder: Ms. Masters, Being from New York and a longtime Democrat, I'm looking forward to reading your book about Eliot Spitzer. Given the long tradition of populist Democratic Governors in New York(e.g. Mario Cuomo, Franklin D. Roosevelt, etc.) it will be interesting to see if Spitzer will be elected and if he is, how the office may change him. Assuming he is elected, how do think his transition from attorney general with a "prosecutorial zeal" to governor who has to compromise in order to get deals done will work? Brooke A. Masters: You are definitely the target market for my book. The entire last chapter is focused on assessing whether Spitzer can make the transition from the black and white mindset of a prosecutor to the more nuanced worldview of a governor who must build alliances and compromise. I think the jury is definitely still out on that question. Spitzer does work well with his senior staff (unlike, say, Rudy Giuliani who ran through police commissioners and school superintendents as New York mayor). But he's also famous for yelling and insulting his adversaries and I doubt that will play well with the legislature. New York: How big is Spitzer's office? How does he get all the case work completed on this highly complex prosecutions? Brooke A. Masters: The office is one of the largest AGs offices in the country with 1700 plus staff members and 500 plus attorneys. Over half of them are focused on defensive issues (they defend the state when it is sued). The investment protection bureau which does most of the Wall Street cases was only a dozen lawyers when Spitzer brought the Merrill case. It's now got about 40 lawyers. One reason Spitzer is so successful is that the SEC ends up following his lead and doing much of the work---he brings the first case, they bring the follow ups Silver Spring, Md.: Why is Suozzi challenging Spitzer in the Dem. primary? Brooke A. Masters: I think Suozzi is an ambitious guy who doesn't see anyplace else to go. He's been Nassau County exec for a while, he's not a lawyer so AG is out, Lieutenant governor is a meaningless job and Alan Hevesi is entrenched at Comptroller. Hillary and Schumer have the Senate spots so unless Hillary wins the presidency, Suozzi is stuck. Anonymous: Why is it that so often an article about Spitzer's work starts off, "...in his bid for the governorship...," as if there is something suspicious about why he is trying to clean up the securities industry? I find this to be an unnecessary and virtually insulting addition to the reportage. Brooke A. Masters: Many of Spitzer's opponents say he grabs the headlines because of his political ambitions. My personal impression is that he is ambitious and wants badly to be governor but for policy reasons rather than simply for personal aggrandizement. He really thinks he can improve New York and American government. So to him, the high-profile cases have two merits---they achieve the changes he believes are necessary and they increase his stature so that he can go on and make more changes. New York, N.Y.: Eliot Spitzer is oft accused of opportunistically encroaching on the federal government's exclusive powers (i.e., prosecuting Person X when the SEC won't). I wonder if that means Spitzer's critics are robber-barons who hate that he jails robber-barons. On the other hand, it could mean that Spitzer prosecutes entrepreneurs to populist cheers even though from an economic perspective all they've done is what entrepreneurs historically do in capitalist democracies. Given your scholarly background in economic history, do you, in your book, analyze from an economic perspective the financial transactions that tend to lead to Spitzer's criminal prosecutions? Also, was the timing of your book coordinated to have impact on Spitzer's run for governor, and has it any nasty dish that Faso or Suozzi could use? Did you take into account such an impact when writing or editing the book? I ask these questions because I'm considering purchasing your book. Thanks for answering my questions. Brooke A. Masters: I do try to address these issues in the book. (There's a whole chapter on the issue) Some people argue that Spitzer's methods are not that different from any agressive regulator or prosecutor. His targets simply have the money to fight back with their own pr firms and high priced lawyers. I think some of the scholars who criticize him for encroaching on federal powers genuinely believe that there should be a division of responsibilities. The businesses that complain tend to be more self-interested in that they would rather not be tightly supervised and regulated. I do try to explain the economic implications of some of the activities that Spitzer went after as well as some of the fallout. Asburn, Va.: Thanks for covering a public official of the type one wishes we would have more of...Spitzer has have pulled me back from becoming completely cynical in believing that our system in unable to protect the interests of common consumers like me (against corporate interests). How do you rate his prospects in quest for the NY governorship? Thanks, Brooke A. Masters: Spitzer is the prohibitive favorite. My colleague Chris Cilliza who rates the governor's races says it is the governors mansion most likely to change parties this fall (from Pataki who is a Republican to Spitzer who is a Democrat). Spitzer could still mess up, of course, but the race is very much his to lose. Brooke A. Masters: I hate to do this folks, because there are still a bunch of interesting questions in the queue, but I have to write a daily story. (The healthcare firm HCA is being bought out by a bunch of private equity firms.) My editors will clobber me if I don't get going... You all are a smart and informed audience. I hope you'll join in when the website hosts my occasional chats about Wall Street and investing. If you're interested in learning more about the book, check out my website www.brookeamasters.com washingtonpost.com: Thanks Brooke and thanks to all our readers for participating in today's discussion. 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.
89.780488
0.707317
0.902439
high
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/22/AR2006072200825.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/22/AR2006072200825.html
A Tough Call: Invisible Phone Or Invisible Friend
2006072419
It's the latest sidewalk game in the urban canyon: On K Street, a guy in a tie screams at the air: "Who do you think you are?" In Dupont Circle, a woman downing dainty bites of a muffin ponders, seemingly to no one, "Ummm, no." Then, more confidently, "No." Outside the Capitol, a dapper suited young man circles a patch of sidewalk, stabs his pen at a notebook and jabbers whispered words to the ground. Used to be that we knew immediately: The phones were, at first, way too big to miss. Then we learned to spot the subtler signs -- the hand cradled to the ear, the chiropractically problematic crook-necked shrug, the dark wire dangling down the chatterer's neck. "Who are you talking to?" an older woman asks Vernal Hardy one day at Neiman Marcus. Inside the store's luxurious hush the noise of "crazy" is not only unacceptable but flat-out gauche. So the 26-year-old wearer of a wireless headset shows the woman the tiny apostrophe in his ear. It connects to his cellphone, and it's so itsy-bitsy it makes his watch face look like the moon on his wrist. Of course, it employs Bluetooth, a short-range wireless technology that creates "personal area networks among your devices, and with other nearby devices," which sounds vaguely kinky, like a new little friend with benefits. With measurements in the millimeters, this is the latest cellphone gadget to change the ways we denigrate each other.
This is your source for news on personal technology. Find info and reviews on the newest technology that affects your life. Read our latest features on new tech gadgets.
9.117647
0.529412
0.647059
low
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/23/AR2006072300508.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/23/AR2006072300508.html
Huge Backlogs, Delays Feared Under Senate Immigration Plan
2006072419
Arturo Zavala entered the United States illegally from Mexico in 1976 and picked mushrooms in Pennsylvania for a decade before he became a legal resident. But that menial labor was not the toughest part of life here. More difficult was gaining permission for his wife, daughter and two younger sons to join him and his eldest son here. The family finally reunited in 2001, 14 years after Zavala received his green card as part of a 1986 amnesty program for illegal immigrants. "I missed my family," he said. "I would live here nine months and go visit them three months. When I went, they were little, and by the time I saw them again, they were all grown up. My wife was like a mother and father." The long delays for Zavala's family were among the many unintended consequences of the 1986 law, which allowed nearly 3 million immigrants to gain legal status. But illegal workers and the government may face far greater problems if pending immigration legislation passes and three times as many people -- as many as 10 million by some estimates -- are permitted to apply for legalization. "It would be an utter meltdown," said Peggy Gleason, a senior attorney at the Catholic Legal Immigration Network. "Despite the problems, [the 1986 amnesty] was actually an enormous success. Government made this huge effort to make all these offices that were very consumer friendly. I have no idea what the government is doing right now to prepare, but back then, they thought about it hard." Now, there are two versions of the legislation. In the House, the focus is on border security. The Senate would permit illegal immigrants who have lived in the United States for at least two years to apply for legal status; smaller legalization programs would apply to illegal farm workers and some children of illegal immigrants; and a guest-worker program would be established for as many as 200,000 people a year. Of the nearly 12 million illegal immigrants living in the United States, about 10 million may register to apply for legalization if the Senate plan passes, said Demetrios G. Papademetriou, president of the Migration Policy Institute, a research center. That could overwhelm the U.S. Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services, which last year granted permanent residency to 1.1 million people and awarded temporary worker visas to 200,000. Back in 1986, the numbers of illegal immigrants were far fewer than they are today, but federal agencies still had difficulty keeping up. Their backlogs grew even deeper when immigrants granted legal status exercised their rights to bring immediate relatives. Processing those applications took years, as in Zavala's case. Zavala recalled long lines and a chaotic scene at the Lima, Pa., district office when he went to apply for amnesty in 1986. He said he felt lucky that his proof of residency and employment were accepted quickly. Many of his friends were not as lucky. Others were terrified to come forward, fearing they would be deported. "Many of my friends were afraid to apply," he said. "By the time I told them the rumors weren't true, the deadline was up." Of this year's debate, he said, "I hope they make it like '86. But I hope they do it quicker for their families." Supporters of the Senate proposal note that Congress has learned some lessons from 1986. The bill would set a six-year processing window and would require participating immigrants to register within 90 days.
The latest news and analysis from the Washington Post on the national debate over immigration.
42.3125
0.5625
0.5625
high
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/23/AR2006072300168.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/23/AR2006072300168.html
Saudi Arabia Asks U.S. to Intervene in Lebanon
2006072419
The Saudi foreign minister personally urged President Bush yesterday to intervene to stop the violence in Lebanon, the most direct sign of mounting frustration among key Arab states with what they see as a hands-off U.S. posture toward Israeli strikes against Hezbollah. In an Oval Office meeting yesterday afternoon, Prince Saud al-Faisal said, he delivered a letter to Bush from Saudi King Abdullah asking for U.S. help in arranging an immediate cease-fire, a stance U.S. officials have repeatedly rejected on the grounds that it is premature. U.S. officials would not comment directly on the request, saying only that the two sides discussed the humanitarian situation, reconstruction and how to end the violence. "I found the president very conscious of the destruction and the bloodshed that the Lebanese are suffering," Saud told reporters after the meeting. "His commitment [is] to see the cessation of hostilities. I have heard that from him personally, and that is why he is sending [Condoleezza] Rice to work out the details." Secretary of State Rice said the need for a cease-fire is "urgent" but cautioned that it had to be on terms that ensure it will last. The Saudi request for a cease-fire promised to further complicate an already difficult diplomatic mission for Rice, who departed for meetings in Israel and Italy last night after joining Bush in conferring with the Saudi delegation. The United States had been hoping to enlist moderate Arab allies in an effort to pressure Syria and Iran to rein in Hezbollah, but the Saudi move yesterday seemed to cloud that initiative. Although the Saudis had initially criticized Hezbollah's actions in triggering the new violence, diplomats say the kingdom's leaders have become increasingly distressed about the growing humanitarian crisis in Lebanon. Israeli airstrikes have produced numerous civilian casualties and vast devastation. One senior European diplomat said the Saudis were also concerned that the package they expect the United States to present to European and Arab allies in Rome this week will be too heavily anti-Iran and anti-Syria. U.S.-Saudi relations have been strained over terrorism issues and the Bush administration's democracy initiative in the Middle East, but the kingdom remains perhaps the most important American ally in the Arab world, and King Abdullah's views carry influence with Bush. Mindful of the growing anger among Arab countries, U.S. officials said they expect Rice to convey the administration's concern over the humanitarian problem caused by Israel's choices of targets when she meets with Israeli officials today. But they made no secret of their continuing skepticism of the value of an immediate cease-fire or of their desire to see Israel further weaken Hezbollah, which before the outbreak of hostilities had thousands of fighters and a large cache of missiles and other weapons. Speaking before the Saudi meeting, White House chief of staff Joshua B. Bolten said the United States is open to the establishment of a international military force to help the Lebanese government maintain security. But he suggested that the time is not yet ripe. "The purpose of an international force has to be to maintain a sustainable cease-fire," Bolten said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "A cease-fire is sustainable only if we get at the root problem, which is Hezbollah, a terrorist organization that has kidnapped Israeli soldiers and sent rockets into civilian areas in the sovereign territory of Israel." The events yesterday underscored the complex task awaiting Rice on her first diplomatic foray since the hostilities began in Lebanon July 12, after Hezbollah's cross-border raid triggered a fierce Israeli response. The Bush administration has strongly backed Israel's actions while cautioning Israel to minimize civilian casualties. But that posture has angered the Arab countries, such as Saudi Arabia, on whom the administration must depend to be interlocutors with Syria and Iran.
The Saudi foreign minister personally urged President Bush yesterday to intervene to stop the violence in Lebanon, the most direct sign of mounting frustration among key Arab states with what they see as a hands-off U.S. posture toward Israeli strikes against Hezbollah.
15.891304
1
46
medium
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/21/AR2006072100496.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072419id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/21/AR2006072100496.html
Tuning In to Birmingham
2006072419
In Birmingham, apparently so. Over the past four years, three of the city's talents have barreled to the finals of Fox's hit reality show. The streak started with Ruben Studdard in 2003, followed by 2005 runner-up Bo Bice and this year's crowned crooner, AARP-haired Taylor Hicks. So, America wants to know: How did Birmingham get its groove? Alabama's largest city cannot be pigeonholed -- musically or culturally. The three Idols are a good example: Hicks sings pop-wrapped soul, Studdard belts out gospel, and Brice channels Southern rockers. Indeed, there's no pure Birmingham sound; it's more like a compilation disc. "We have gospel, punk rock, Dixie, jazz musicians who claim to be gospel and Christian instrumental," says Hunter Bell, 34, who produces and hosts a weekly public radio show featuring local bands. "I think there's a ton of talent. . . . A lot of people think the Birmingham music scene is going to explode like Athens [Ga.] or Austin. It hasn't happened yet, but it's on the brink." A big push has, of course, come from "American Idol," which just announced that it will hold auditions in Birmingham for the first time. But the city is also working hard to improve its image, breathe life into deserted buildings and create a environment that sparks innovation and makes its own stars. "We suffered inertia for a long time. Civil rights was the overriding theme for the past decade," says Birmingham native Alan Hunter, one of MTV's original VJs, who returned home in 1994 and opened WorkPlay, a multimedia center. "But the potential is here for greatness, if we can just get beyond the low self-esteem. We're looking forward, not backward." To be sure, after a long period of dormancy, Birmingham seems to be waking up. Throughout the rambling downtown, encouraging scenes are unfolding in neighborhoods on both sides of the railroad tracks. Lakeview, a drab district of low-lying buildings and parched grass, is filling up with color: During a Saturday market at the Pepper Place, stalls selling outsider art, homemade soaps and shelled peas cluster near the 1930s Dr Pepper plant. Across the way, in the former digs of Martin Biscuit Co., a Mexican restaurant called Cantina shares space with an antiques store. Around back, the Amani Raha bar co-opts the L.A. style -- and martini menu. The established district of Five Points South is also expanding, with a wine bar and a seafood cafe. Even the Piggly Wiggly supermarket chain is getting into the act, with Friday-night in-store wine tastings. You can't get more random than sipping Pinot Grigio at the Pig. Nor can you ignore Birmingham's turbulent past. In the late-19th to mid-20th centuries, the Magic City earned its nickname from iron and steel production, raw materials extracted from Red Mountain and the rapid expansion that followed. When the Depression hit, Birmingham's growth sputtered, and the city never fully recovered. It is perhaps best known for the violent civil rights demonstrations of the 1960s; for many, the city's name still conjures images of fire hoses, bombings and frightened faces of all colors. But slowly, things are perking up: In 2004, the U.S. Conference of Mayors designated Birmingham as "America's Most Livable City." "The scene is really happening now," says Bell. " 'American Idol' has brought attention to Birmingham. There's such a buzz going around; very few bands are moving out of town these days." Since "American Idol 2007" is not too far off, it seemed like a good time to check out the city's music scene -- before Simon & Co. get there first.
Find Washington DC, Virginia and Maryland travel information, including web fares, Washington DC tours, beach/ski guide, international and United States destinations. Featuring Mid-Atlantic travel, airport information, traffic/weather updates
17.395349
0.27907
0.27907
medium
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/19/DI2006071901580.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/19/DI2006071901580.html
Post Politics Hour
2006072219
Don't want to miss out on the latest in politics? Start each day with The Post Politics Hour. Join in each weekday morning at 11 a.m. as a member of The Washington Post's team of White House and Congressional reporters answers questions about the latest in buzz in Washington and The Post's coverage of political news. Washington Post national political reporter Jim VandeHei was online Friday, July 21, at 11 a.m. ET to discuss the latest in political news. Political analysis from Post reporters and interviews with top newsmakers. Listen live on Washington Post Radio or subscribe to a podcast of the show. Jim VandeHei: Good morning. another day of big news in Washington -- with reports Sec. Rice will outline this afternoon a diplomatic framework for ending the latest Middle East crisis. Dems raising a lot of money and reserving a lot of airspace for ads. And another Bush official has some questions to answer... Richmond, Va.: With the defeat of Ralph Reed in Georgia, is the Republican "culture of corruption" beginning to take its toll? Jim VandeHei: it took a heck of toll on Reed. You are talking about the one real stars of GOP politics over the past decade and he was beaten badly BY REPUBLICANS. It shows that individual candidates with ethical problems are in trouble, which is true in any election but more pronounced now. I would not want to be Bob Ney or William Jefferson or even Conrad Burns in Montana. Corruption makes such an easy target, people get it and hate it. My favorite corruption-related tale of the week: Ney, who republicans describe as delusional right now, has been telling party leaders that DOJ has a rule against indicting members with 90 days of an election. That would be great for him -- if it were true. A DOJ source assured us no such rule exists. Washington, D.C.: What do you make of the poll that shows Lamont leading in the primary against Lieberman but Lieberman winning in a relative landslide as an independent over LaMont and the Republican opponent? It seems like no one really has any cause to celebrate over it. Jim VandeHei: Lamont and liberal bloggers have reason to celebrate. Here is why. There is no doubt Lamont has momentum -- he went from 15 down to about 4 up. No matter how you crunch the numbers, that is a bummer for Lieberman. The same poll show liberals split on whether Lieberman deserves another term while Republicans overwhelming say, yes, he does. This could help Lieberman win as an independent candidate if he loses dem primary. But remember: if Lieberman loses, the dynamics change dramatically. He will be a defeated Democrat seeking the money and base to beat not only a well-funded liberal backed by the dem establishment, but also a Republican. Lieberman's easiest path is to win the primary. Charlotte, N.C.: Is there still a war going on in Iraq? Just wondering. I haven't seen much coverage of the situation there lately. Jim VandeHei: Yes. There is no doubt has been an inside-the-paper story with the war in the Middle East dominating coverage. Death tolls are higher than ever in Iraq, so it is important for the public and the media to stay focused. Post.com has plenty of coverage of developments in Iraq so please tune in. Hamilton, N.Y.: Hey Jim, speaking of corruption...do you think they'll be any fallout from this whole "black-market powdered milk" scandal? Isn't it just too wierd not to be explored in depth? Jim VandeHei: I doubt it. Might be too complex to be used as an effective political weapon. But I will have the web goddess post the entire series on misuse and outright abuse of ag programs. This is a fascinating series that is well worth your time to read and think through. washingtonpost.com: Post Investigative Series: Harvesting Cash Boca Raton, Fla.: Michael Abramowitz's analysis in today's WP seems to imply that President Bush's strategy to bring the peace to the ME is to let the Israelis pound on any and all and then for us to continue to provide full support to Israel. Is this the strategy that Dr. Rice will be talking about this afternoon? Jim VandeHei: I do not know what Dr. rice will propose. but mike's piece was a dead-on view of the Bush's take on the Middle East and how it differs from that of previous presidents and current world leaders in Europe. I will post that story, too. washingtonpost.com: In Mideast Strife, Bush Sees a Step To Peace , ( Post, July 21, 2006 ) A worker in the HHS anthill: So, you think we're going to be losing our departmental secretary? Jim VandeHei: There are a few questions about story on the front-page of the post. It is an interesting look into a tax scheme that has worked wonders financially for the HSS Sec. Leavitt. We will post, you digest and I would love to hear from you all about the political implications and level of outrage. I have not heard any calls for resignation. washingtonpost.com: HHS Secretary's Fund Gave Little to Charity , ( Post, July 21, 2006 ) Washington, D.C.: Do you think the media will focus much on the fact that Republicans are sharply divided over Iraq? Jim VandeHei: It was on the front page of the post yesterday. So yes. What amazes me as that more Republicans are not voicing the complaints I hear from them in private. You would think most Republicans are nervous but generally supportive of the Bush war. I think their true feelings are much more complex and negative. But they have made a calculated gamble that it is better to appear consistent and "strong" that wobbly and divided. The voters will decide if that is the best approach. Washington, D.C.: What grade do you give Tony Snow, and is that higher or lower than Scott McClellan? Jim VandeHei: He seems well liked by the WH and reporters. Obviously, he is smoother and sassier than McClellan. He likes to argue with reporters, which the WH likes, and I think reporters like to mix it up and have the freer exchange of thoughts and ideas that Snow encourages. New York, N.Y.: Who is "another Bush official"? "And another Bush official has some questions to answer... " San Francisco, Calif.: Hello, Mr. VandeHei, and thank you for chatting with us this morning. Has the White House press corps been given the President's August Crawford vacation schedule for 2006 yet? Jim VandeHei: just rough dates. They don't preview the travel with any precision. I don't think you will see Bush camping out in Crawford like he did last August. That was bad PR, and one of the precursors to the problems that followed. I would expect several campaign stops and some big money events. He needs a GOP Congress or the last two years of his presidency could make the past two seem like a honeymoon. Columbia, Md.: The problem with Leavitt's charity is that it is legal by the letter of the law even if it is not by the intent of the law. I can not see how people will raise enough fuss to make him resign especially if Mr. Bush stands by him. It would be interesting to check all of the Bush family foundations to see if they are operated on the same logistics. Jim VandeHei: one reader's take on Leavitt Washington, D.C.: President Bush's lack of regard for the innocent Lebanese being killed daily is appalling. If the President's father were still President, James Baker would have been jumping between Middle Eastern capitals brokering a cease fire. I've always thought that the current President's foreign policy views are colored by the fact that, prior to becoming President, he traveled very little overseas, and that, consequently, he has very little ability to see things from the perspective of people living in non-western nations. Accordingly, he thinks little of the effect of Israeli attacks on the Lebanese people, and can only think of the war in terms of geopolitical strategy. Your thoughts? Jim VandeHei: This is a common gripe of other world leaders and some Democrats and Republicans in Washington. When the House put together its pro-Israel resolution this week, Republicans insisted that it not include even a gentle recommendation to Israel to minimize civilian casualties. Nancy Pelosi was going to cosponsor it, but a dispute over this language prompted her to keep her name off the resolution. She still voted for it on the floor. This tale is a long way of saying that the prevailing view in official Washington is that the Lebanese are victims not of Israel's offensive but of Hezbollah's kidnapping and refusal to disarm. I am sure Bush is concerned about the casualties but his focus is on state sponsored terrorism and there is a belief inside the WH that Hezbollah must be destroyed or defeated. Skaneateles, N.Y.: Karl Rove's strategy to run on the war seems like lose, lose proposition right now, three months out. How are Republicans feeling about it? Jim VandeHei: They still think it is the best plan in a bad environment. Many Republicans buy into the Roveian theory that in a time of terrorism voters want strength and conviction, even if they are uncomfortable with the war and death that follow. If you did not see his comments, please search out those of Rep. Gil Gutknecht of Minnesota. He visited Iraq and returned with a pessimistic view of progress, calling for a troop withdrawal. I wonder if this will open the door for other GOPers who share this concern to voice them? Princeton, N.J.: WRT Columbia's comment, we have reached a sorry state when the ethical requirement for high public office is that the person not be indicted. Jim VandeHei: more reader reaction Leavitt: The problem is, it's one thing for a private citizen or a corporation to take full advantage of a loophole in the tax code to keep some money in their coffers. It's another thing when a government official does it. I think Leavitt's got a real problem and will go into hiding and hold on for a few months (gee, like maybe until after the elections?) and then step down. Tony Snow...: "What grade do you give Tony Snow, and is that higher or lower than Scott McClellan?" "Jim VandeHei: He seems well liked by the WH and reporters. Obviously, he is smoother and sassier than McClellan. He likes to argue with reporters, which the WH likes, and I think reporters like to mix it up and have the freer exchange of thoughts and ideas that Snow encourages." Even when he "thanked" Helen Thomas for providing Hezbollah's point of view? Jim VandeHei: I was not in the room when Snow made such comments. My guess is reporters had mixed views. Some reporters like Helen's in-your-face commentary, while others think she is sometimes more interested in making statements than getting answers. Louisville, Ky.: Do you think the President's behavior at the G8 summit is causing him embarrassment, particularly his surprise shoulder rub of the Chancellor of Germany. This behavior seems totally inappropriate and newsworthy. Most men know that you don't offer uninvited massages to any female, much less the chancellor of Germany. Jim VandeHei: The shoulder rub was a bit creepy, especially when you see the blown up images of it. It was revealing of his corny, jokester side. For those of us who have covered him, it was not that striking. For those who have not, I think it was, especially in a G8 setting Pittsburgh, Pa.: Hello, Jim, thanks for taking questions. I am a middle-aged woman who had a career in brokerage and banking. When I retired in 1990 I was president of a very small subsidiary of a very large bank. My responsibilities included a lot of meetings with high level executives throughout our company. The shoulder massage Mr. Bush inflicted on the Chancellor of Germany left me dropped-jaw shocked. How is this playing amongst your colleagues at The Post? Jim VandeHei: The Fix said it was "wierd," too. Thus end my informal post poll: two votes for wierd. It's not Lamont and bloggers that should celebrate. It's the people of Connecticut who should be happy to get rid of a terrible Senator. Jim VandeHei: more reader feedback Fairfax, Va.: Is George Allen's close ties to the White House and strong support of administration on the eaves dropping and other domestic spying issues going to hurt him enough for him to lose the election? Jim VandeHei: Allen remains a popular figure in Virginia and has a strong base of conservative support, which makes him a pretty strong favorite to win. There is no doubt Democrats got the candidate they wanted in the primary -- Webb, a former Republican -- and that keeps the seat in play. Boston, Mass.: RE: Leavitt. Based on the Post's article, I think he epitomizes the complete fiction that is the Republican "compassionate conservativism." How many other dodgy Republicans have set up "charities" that exist mainly for their personal and political benefit? (I'm thinking of those fake foundations De Lay, Abramoff, etc. used to basically launder funds for political causes...) Kensington, Md.: Hey Jim, I notice you only post anti-Bush, ant-Rove, anti-Republican comments on this chat. What a surprise coming from The Post. Jim VandeHei: busted. you have exposed my elaborate plot to plant my liberal views on the web in hopes of undermining the Bush presidency. In truth, I am posting each comment as they come in. If you have one, test me. Leavitt Defendant- Arlington, Va.: Since when was it unethical for anyone (whether or not in a government post) to use family funds to finance family interests? Isn't that the entire purpose of a family trust? Washington, D.C.: Quick question about Gil Gutknecht, the Republican Congressman from who called for a withdrawal from Iraq -- is he in a tight reelection race? Jim VandeHei: potentially. His district, according to The Fix, is on the "outskirts of competitiveness." Bush won it 51-47. That tells me it could flip in a bad environment. Jim VandeHei: Thank you for your questions and comments. 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 national political reporter Jim VandeHei discusses the latest buzz in Washington and The Post's coverage of political news.
130.954545
0.954545
8.954545
high
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/14/DI2006071400816.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/14/DI2006071400816.html
Weekend Now
2006072219
The staff of Weekend , The Washington Post's weekly entertainment guide, covers what's happening in the Washington area. We'll field your questions on everything in the section from performances and new DVDs to weekend getaways and kids' activities. We write about all kinds of tun things to do and we're happy to talk to you about it. The Weekend staff was online Friday, July 7, at 11 a.m. ET to take your questions and comments. This week's Weekend heads to DC's inaugural Fringe Festival, which is jam-packed with shows of all kinds. Way too many for just one writer, so we used a tag-team approach to preview some Festival offerings. Also, Ellen McCarthy writes about outdoor opportunities to socialize and catch some free (or almost-free) entertainment in our Nightwatch feature, Richard Harrington talks to the chart-topping India.Arie, Eve Zibart reviews Indique Heights in Friendship Heights, Michael O'Sullivan writes about new exhibits at the National Museum of Women in the Arts and the Embassy of Australia, and we talk with actor Jason Lee. And if that's not enough to chat about, we've got dogs playing Frisbee. Read about the staff of the Weekend section. Curt Fields: Hello! Welcome to the weekly electronic gathering we like to call Weekend Now. We're glad you stopped by. You're welcome to just lurk and read but it'll be even more fun if you talk to us. Want to talk about the Fringe Festival? Tell us what shows you're looking forward to seeing. Have you been to other cities' fringe fests and have experiences to share? We can also chat about India.Arie, Jason Lee, entertaining new DVDs, movies, restaurants or any other topic we cover. Curt Fields: Some questions and answers coming momentarily. Everything you've heard about writers and deadlines is true... Dupont Circle: Loved the Fringe festival guide! Thanks. I see several I want to go see. Is there one you think is a can't miss show? Scott Vogel: First off, thanks for your kind words on our package, which includes a really neat Web component. If you haven't seen it yet, here's a link . Your question is not an easy one to answer, but as I've always been amazed at the dearth of political theater in this town, I'm very excited about the set of plays about Vice President Cheney known as "You Don't Know Dick." Washington, D.C.: Is Fraser Gallery closing? Michael O'Sullivan: No, it will continue under the direction of Catriona Fraser. Her former business partner (and ex-husband) Lenny Campello is moving on. Undisclosed Secret Location: KC and the Sunshine Band, Gloria Gaynor and Sister Sledge at NISSAN? Do I need to dig out my old bell bottoms. Shouldn't they be playing somewhere smaller? Richard Harrington: For some Nissan shows, they only sell Pavilion seats, no lawn. But this one includes lawn seats, and there will apparently be lots of room. As for the bell bottoms, it's likely that they, too, might need to find something smaller.... Washington: Hey guys, hopefully you can come through for me as you always have. Looking for something outside (if the rain holds), free/low cost, Metro accessible, not an every day thing (i.e., not the Mall). If it's something where I won't feel weird by myself, that's even better. Thanks so much! Ellen McCarthy: Hey there, you know we don't want to disappoint a loyalist. But you don't say when you're looking for said outside-low cost-metro accessible event. Tonight? The Brian Settles Quartet is playing at the National Gallery of Art's Sculpture Garden. Tomorrow? Fringe, Fringe, Fringe. Alain Nu's Circus of the Mind show is free... he'll go on at 6 and 7:30 p.m. at the National Theatre. Check out Curt's profile in today's section. Fairfax, Va.: I'm looking for a good Pakistani restuaruant. Are there any in the D.C. area? Thanks! Christina Talcott: Do you have anything in particular you're craving? For Pakistani food in general, here are some suggestions: I like Mayur Kabab House at 1108 K St. NW (202-637-9770) for their cheap buffet. There are a couple of places near Eastern Market that serve Pakistani food: Aatish on the Hill (202-544-0931) and Capitol Hill Grill & Tandoor (202-547-3233), but I haven't tried them. Years ago I used to go to Food Factory on Rockville Pike, which serves Afghani and Pakistani dishes. It looks like the Rockville one is closed, but there are Food Factories in Arlington (703-527-2279) and College Park (301-345-8888). Anyone have another suggestion? Springfield, Va.: Hi everyone, I hope you get to my question! I need a suggestion for dinner, it will be two friends and myself, we're college students so we want a young crowd, and not to expensive, probably in D.C. around U St. or a place nearby. - another note, my friends are not adventerous, but I am, is there anything that can accommodate all of this? Eve Zibart: The U Street area ought to offer almost anything you'd like, including some places where some can be braver than others. Among good bets: Coppi's Organic, 1414 U, fresh veg/pasta/wood grilled pizzas; Tabaq,1336 U, mid-East/Mediterranean tapas; U-topia, 1418 U, jazz and good American pub-plus; Polly's Cafe, 1342, similarly broad but good eclectic....for more adventure, Dukem Ethiopian, 12th and U....enough to start you? McLean, Va.: I'd like to explore some galleries specializing in local artists and it would be great if there was a wonderful restaurant nearby. Any suggestions? Michael O'Sullivan: Viridian, in the same building as a bunch of galleries (Hemphill, G Fine Art, Curator's Office, Adamson) at 1515 14th Street, is not bad. The exhibitions there aren't always devoted to area artists, but often are. The building is also very near Irvine Contemporary and Transformer. Alexandria, Va.: Anything good going on in D.C. galleries this weekend? Any good group shows? Michael O'Sullivan: I like a number of works in "Conversions," a new group show co-sponsored by the Washington Project for the Arts/Corcoran at the Ellipse Arts Center (4350 N. Fairfax Dr., near the Ballston Metro). It's an assortment of site-specific installations on the loosey-goosey theme of "spatial interpretation," and it'll be up through Sep. 29. Of special note: works by Renee Butler, Ami Martin Wilber, Kathryn Cornelius and Michele Kong. Kensington, Md.: Hi -- What do this this weekend (now that the pool is out because of rain) with an almost two-year-old? I am not interested in heading into town though the Fringe Festival sounds cool. Scott Vogel: Don't rule out the Fringe Festival, as there are several kid-friendly shows (again, see the Fringe Festival Web page for details). As well, there will be all sorts of "Pop-Up Dances," spontaneous terpsichorean acts, all over town but mainly around the Warehouse Theater, which might be considered Fringe central. Here's another idea. There will be "Green Kids at Market Day" events at 5 area farmers markets this weekend. They're a great way for kids to learn about the importance of eating healthy foods, but if that makes it sound boring, it's not! Expect things like treasure hunts throughout the markets, ice cream, the chance to build veggie "bugs," and more. For further information, visit the Les Dames d'Escoffier Curt Fields: Also, the 17th annual Montgomery County Farm Tour is this weekend. It runs from 10 am to 4 pm on Saturday and Sunday. 13 farms are open Saturday and 9 on Sunday. Hayrides, pony rides, live music and farm-related demonstrations. You can also pick your own peaches, blackberries, flowers, plants, and other goodies. Talcottville, Conn.: Since we're on the topic of food, can anybody out there recommend both the best funnel cake in the area and the best Ethiopian food? I guess you could say I have eclectic tastes ... Christina Talcott: Wow, who knew there was a Talcottville, Conn.? Is it near Talcott Mountain? I bet it's a cool town, wherever it is... I have yet to find a regular provider of funnel cake outside a theme park, but a good stand-in is the fry bread at the American Indian Museum. As for Ethiopian, I love Meskerem on 18th Street for the front-window people-watching, Lalibela on 14th for its patio. Anyone else have a favorite? Silver Spring, Md.: I'm really getting into playing online Scrabble against strangers, much to the chagrin of my sweetie. Sometimes I stay up all night battling with my vocabulary. Just curious, but can anyone help settle an argument I'm having -- is it really antisocial to play games online? (Sweetie obviously says yes, I say no.) Curt Fields: Just remember, moderation in all things. If you look at your sweetie and think only of the point value their name would bring if it hit a triple-word square, then you're probably playing too much. Downtown, office: I know you usually do dinner spots, but is there a place in the Farragut North area where I can get a good Cuban sandwich on a lunch hour? Eve Zibart: Well, you missed Havana Breeze, which would have been ideal....You might be able to put something fairly similar together at High Noon on the square, Could you go a little farther? Ceiba's at 14th and G, and the Cubano's a staple. Great Falls, Va.: I hear that there's a major gallery art fair coming to D.C. soon ... but can't find anything online or in the newspaper. Have you guys heard anything about this art fair? Michael O'Sullivan: You're right. It's coming April 27-30 of next year to the Washington Convention Center. More info here. Silver Spring, Md.: My friend is in town and I'm looking for some things to do with her this summer. We were planning to get together at Duport Circle. Any recommendations that don't include overeating. I'm trying to cut some calories. Ellen McCarthy: Hmmmmm, how about waiting until the sun goes down and then touring the monuments at night, via Segway. Could be a great way to play host and see the city from a different angle yourself. And did we mention there's a little something called the Fringe Festival going on this week? I'm just saying.... Eve Zibart: The five corners of M Street, Connecticut and Jefferson just south of the Circle is a hub of clubs--how about dancing those pounds away? washingtonpost.com: Washington, D.C. Segway Night Tour Hiking: Do you know of any good parks in Southern Maryland for a picnic and hike? I want to soak up the sun before summer ends for good! Twila Waddy: Hi. You are right about getting out before the summer is over. We are alreay almost done with July. Some parks to try out in Southern Maryland are Cedarville State Park, 301-888-1410. There are 19.5 miles of marked trails for hiking and biking. Picnic tables and grills are available. There is also the Greenwell State Park, 301-373-9775. The 596-acre park is located on the Patuxent River in St. Mary's county. Hiking, fishing and picnicking is allowed. Washington, D.C.: Are there any waterparks in the area that you would recommend for a family with a 4-year-old? Thanks. Scott Vogel: Glad you asked! My six-year-old and I have made it our special project this summer to hit each and every water park in our area. (Hey, it's something to do.) The best ones -- according to him -- are Cameron Run Regional Park (enormous pool that's less than 2 feet deep throughout), Splashdown Waterpark in Manassas (lots of water fun for wee ones), and of course Hurricane Harbor at Six Flags. Would love to hear about more, though, as we're running out of places to go! Arlington, Va.: I hope ya can help! My daughter's friend's mother has been helping me out a lot by picking up my daughter after the camp, etc., and I'd like to get her a gift certificate from a Turkish restaurant. You know of any good ones? Eve Zibart: Cafe Divan at the top of Georgetown is nice; if you're farther out, Kazan in McLean or Nizam's in Vienna are longtime reliables. There's also Anatolia on Capital Hill, but I'd put that lower down. washingtonpost.com: Southern Maryland Publc Lands Washington, D.C. : I applaud your story today and only wonder why you don't do more about our incredible theater scene. But I'll take what I can get! Scott Vogel: Trust me, deciding what to put on our On Stage page each week is an eternal dilemma, what with all the worthy offerings out there. And all of the arts scenes in town seem to be exploding! But theater has always been a core commitment of Weekend, and it always will be. Eve Zibart: More on Ethiopean fare: The area around Ninth Street and U has pretty much replaced 18th Street as DC's "Little Ethiopia." Next Friday's Fare Minded review, in fact, is of one of the most comfy, Etete; and there will be a list of others nearby as well. I mentioned Dukem above. Zed's in Georgetown isn't perhaps all it used to be, but very comfortable for first-timers. And if you're a suburbanite, Langano in Silver Spring is very near the Metro. Washington, D.C.: I was kinda confused by the description of the deaf guy who is going to be putting on a musical in the Fringe Festival. Did he go deaf because of 9/11? Did the explosions in N.Y. make him go deaf?? Eve Zibart: Hi--sorry, we had to keep to such a small space it might not have been clear. No, Jay began to lose his hearing in his 20s, much like Beethoven, in fact; and it began to progress more rapidly in his 30s. He was pretty much profoundly deaf by 9/11. Cuban Sandwitch: Doesn't Bread Line have them? Eve Zibart: Not much farther away, either, good point--about 18th and Penn. Not sure whether Clyde's on the Walk has one (Gallery Place) but that might be a possibility. Washignton, D.C.: I went to the party for the Fringe Festival last night at the Avenue and got frisked at the door. I don't drink anymore and don't go out to clubs. Is this frisking standard practice in all D.C. clubs now because of the crime emergency? >Or has this just been going on since I stopped drinking? Ellen McCarthy: Wait, there was frisking? I knew I should've gone to that!! kidding, kidding. No, this is not standard practice for ALL DC clubs. But maybe it's becoming that way. Any one else out there seen tighter security at local night spots lately? Curt Fields: Ah yes, you never forget your first frisking (mine was in the early '90s at an Ice-T show. For the Pakistani food seeker: The Kabob Palace in Crystal City was recommended to me by a cab driver. It's where all the cabbies go. Eve Zibart: As for chicken tikka, most Indian restaurants can help you (see today's Fare Minded, for instance.) Same place as before: As a beginning art collector, I'm interested in buying original art by art students. Do the art schools ever have any exhibitions where they actually sell the work of art students? How would I find this out and where? Michael O'Sullivan: Both MICA (Maryland Institute College of Art) in Baltimore and our own Corcoran College of Art + Design have spring thesis exhibitions, along with pretty much every other college that has an art department (GW, GMU, Catholic, AU, etc.). Several area commercial galleries have recently started jumping on the bandwagon started by Conner Contemporary a few summers ago of showing (and selling) works by students fresh from area art schools. Conner's "Academy 2006" opens Aug. 4. The Arlington Arts Center's "New Art Examined: Works by 2006 MFA Graduates in the Md-Atlantic Region" runs through Aug. 5. I beleve the new gallery Project 4 is also planning an exhibition of work by recent art school grads. Washington, D.C.: I have never seen Van Morrison live and he is coming here to the Patriot Center. I'm very tempted to go, but he can be, um, somewhat erratic as a performer. Do you have any feel for what his shows are like these days? Richard Harrington: The Mercurial Morrison! It's always been a risk/reward situation with Van: some night's, he into the zone, locked tight with his band, into the mystic as it were. And sometimes he's got something on his mind that won't let him connect to the music, the audience or, it seesm, the world at large. Only recent review I found was from a London show in February in which he served up a good amount of material from his new country standards album and some classics, including "Moondance." When he's on, he's amazing so it worth the risk. Maryland: I'm about to go on a week-long beach vacation. Do you have any tips of things to do during the long car ride (especially for kids). Christina Talcott: Kudos for steering clear of the DVD trap for car trips. Long rides can be a drag sometimes, but they're also a great way for kids to see something new. And there's so much to see on the way to the beach, with the farms and the bridges and, well, all the other cars heading east. "I Spy" and "20 Questions" are classics. Mad-Libs are a great way to pass the time and work on grammar and vocab. This site has a bunch of suggestions, too: http://familyfun.go.com. If you're heading to the Delaware beaches, stop at Holly's on Kent Island. They have amazing fried chicken, but they also have placemats with a states-and-capitals game. It's more fun than it sounds. Eve Zibart: Yikes! missing brains this morning....I have a Turkish godmother and for her birthday I took her to Zaytinya and she had a great time. Sorry (pass the coffee pot!) Washington, D.C.: Ever thought about doing a cover story on Open mic nights? Ellen McCarthy: Interesting suggestion. Where can we catch your act?? Curt Fields: We did one a year or two ago on comedy club open mics. Talcottville, Conn.: Yes, Talcottville is the coolest place ever, even though most people just think it's some exit from the N.Y. to Boston cheapie Chinatown bus. There's a donut shop in town that sells Funnel Cake (they call it fried dough too, but it's the same thing), but I haven't found funnel cake beyond Six Flags since moving to the area. I was hoping to put some Ethopian-style chick peas on funnel cake. Don't ask. I just know it will be good. Eve Zibart: You could also try a Middle Eastern place for hummus (and no, it doesn't sound weird to me at all--you should see what ethnic foods I mix!) Or even an Italian and get the white bean/tomato salad? Fairfax County: I liked the big article about the re-opened Portrait Gallery and American Art museums. Was there anything special you saw in the "not on exhibit" collection that you thought merited more public display? Do you know if any special shows or traveling exhibitions are on the schedule? Michael O'Sullivan: I assume by the "not on exhibit" collecton, you're referring to the "open storage" of the Luce Foundation Center for American Art. Considering that there are 3,300 objects on view there--several times more than in the museum proper--there's tons to see, and too many special things to list them all. But I'll give you one: "Honore Sharrer's "Tribute to the American Working People." Odd, a little bit obscure and wonderful. The Luce Center is my favorite thing about the new Reynolds Center. It's hard not to find something you'll absolutely love. Newport, R.I.: I just want to say that MY sweetie won't stop playing Dance Dance Revolution because she's revolting against the fact that I refuse to take her dancing. I'd much rather she take up online scrabble at this point. Curt Fields: Hmmm ... seems to me watching her do DDR has got to be more entertaining than watching her puzzle out a Q word that doesn't use a U (there are some, btw, for the non-Scrabble playing folks among us). But maybe that's just me. Fairfax, Va.: Hi All! Im really excited about going to Artscape tomorrow to see Goapele and Common, but need help. What would be the best way to get to Baltimore from Northern Virginia for the night show? Thanks for your help! Christina Talcott: If you're car-less, or you just don't want to drive, you can take Amtrak and either walk (it's about 15 minutes) or take the light rail to the show. The train's about $15 each way, and you can probably catch the 11:42. If you're driving, take 495 and either the Baltimore-Washington Parkway or I-95. Here are the directions from www.artscape.org: From the South of Baltimore: Take I-95 North towards Baltimore, then I-395 North towards the Baltimore City, bear onto Martin Luther King Blvd. traveling north, crossing over Howard street continuing towards Mount Royal Avenue, ARTSCAPE will be on your left. Dupont Circle, Washington, D.C.: : Where can we find duck pin bowling around here? Scott Vogel: Thanks for your question. Believe it or not, duckpin bowling is not entirely dead. In fact, it seems to be conspicuously undead in the Baltimore-Washington area for reasons that remain unclear. Two places to check out are Silver Spring's White Oak Duckpin Lanes and Baltimore's Patterson Bowling Center. washingtonpost.com: White Oak Duckpin Lanes Re Beach Trip: Go to the a dollar store and buy some of the cheap trinkets and what not especially the multipacks used for parties. Wrap them up. When the kids start to get antsy give them one to play with. Another game I played with my kids was a variation of Chain reaction. One person starts and it goes around the car. ex Curt Fields: Some more ideas for keeping the kids sane in the car. Eve Zibart: Also new at the Portrait Gallery, in the Luce area/cafe: music by longtime sax favorite and hometowner Buck Hill (best known, if unfairly, for his work with Shirley Horn) and his quintet, the third Thursdays of the month from 5-7, with some wines by the glass and new acquisitions to view in one of the nicest rooms around. The program is still shaking down, for info check with the museum. Michael O'Sullivan: Oh, and I forgot to add this to my answer to the question about upcoming special exhibitions at the Reynolds Center for American Art and Portraiture. There's a Joseph Cornell exhibition coming this fall to the Smithsonian American Art Museum, and a show on Saul Steinberg (one of my favorites) in April of next year. Don't miss either one of those. Laurel, Md.: As I was looking for places to take my kids (5 and 7) for a nearby weekend getaway, I came across Rocky Gap Resort in Cumberland, Md. Do you know of it? Have you been there? Any thoughts about the place is appreciated. Thank you. Twila Waddy: Hi. I have not been there. But, from what I have read it sounds like a wonderful place to go. Is there anyone out there that has been? Eve Zibart: Nemacolin Woodlands Resort is a little farther, just over the line in Pennsylvania, and they have a ton of stuff to do for all ages (get them settled in the kids' area and head to the spa!) For Pakistani food, I'm searching for chicken karahi as well as chicken tikka. Thanks for the suggestions! I'll have to try them out! Christina Talcott: I've never had chicken karahi - it sounds delicious. A random web search turned up a place called Mehran, at 2138 Pennsylvania, with chicken karahi on the menu. If you go, please come back and give us a report! Fairfax, Va.: I hear there is an art show (it may be part of Fringe Festival, but you all don't have it listed). It's some sort of hang your own art and you don't really have to be an artist. Do you know where that is? Michael O'Sullivan: Maybe you mean "1460 Wall Mountables" at the DC Arts Center, 2438 18th Street? You get a two-foot square space to hang something for ten bucks. It opens July 28. Installation dates are July 26-28. Check it out here here Washington, D.C.: I was wondering if you guys know the name of the Pottery shop in SE where you can paint your on pottery? Is in good to take kids there? Doe you know of any other places? Eve Zibart: Perhaps you're thinking of the Capitol Hill Arts Workshop in the old French school on Seventh Street? It might also be that the Eastern Market potters have some kids' activities There are Color Me Mine franchises in Bethesda and Gaithersburg, etc. . . . Curt Fields: Well folks it's been an especially fun chat with you this week. Hope you enjoyed it as much as we did. Check back with us again next Friday. Now, after all the food talk, if you'll excuse us, we're going to make a mad dash for some nearby restaurants. Until next week, have fun. 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 The Post's Weekend section staff for "Weekend Now," a weekly discussion about its feature stories and weekly entertainment information.
214.04
0.88
1.44
high
medium
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/20/DI2006072001171.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/20/DI2006072001171.html
Violence Impacts Lebanon, Israel
2006072219
Nick Pelham , senior analyst for the International Crisis Group who is currently in Jerusalem, was online Friday, July 21, at noon ET to discuss the latest developments as fighting continues in Israel and Lebanon. Read full coverage of the conflict in the Middle East. For more on the humanitarian issues affecting the region, see our discussion with Dorothea Krimitsas of the International Red Cross. Nick Pelham is Senior Analyst with the Middle East Program of the International Crisis Group. Pelham has spent 20 years traveling, writing and broadcasting in the Middle East for The Economist , BBC Middle East Times and other organizations. He is currently conducting research in Israel. Richmond, Va.: Bush has made it very clear that the U.S. is NOT an "honest broker" in the Middle East. Is there anyone at all who could take on that role? Nick Pelham: The problem is less that the U.S. is not an honest broker, than that it's not a broker at all. In previous crises, U.S. envoys shuttled across the region seeking diplomatic solutions, but Washington and Brussels have both have self-imposed restrictions on interacting with many of the warring parties, and have not only disengaged but have pressed others to follow suit. There is no umpire, no referee... not even a linesman. Bethesda, Md.: Can you give us your best-case scenario and your worst case scenario for the outcome of all of this? What would you say the odds are for each? Nick Pelham: The best case: an immediate cease fire and an exchange of prisoners, leading to diplomatic engagement between the warring parties on ratifying recognized borders between Lebanon and Israel and open border crossings between Israel and Gaza, underwritten by the return of Syria to the negotiating table with Israel. The worst case: an entry of a western-backed international stabilization force which becomes bogged down in a battle to disarm Hezbollah, leading to the spillover of conflict into Syria to curtain supply lines. Tehran enters the conflict directly providing backing to Syria, and Israel sides with coalition forces, sparking a regional war. International inertia is likely to prevent either from being realized. Nick Pelham: The best case: an immediate ceasefire and an exchange of prisoners, leading to a political process between the warring parties focused on ratifying recognised borders between the Lebanon government, of which Hezbollah is a member, and Israel; and open border crossings between Israel and Gaza, underwritten by the return of Syria to the negotiating table with Israel. The worst case: an entry of a western-backed international stabilization force which becomes bogged down in a battle to disarm Hezbollah, leading to the spillover of conflict into Syria to curtain supply lines. Tehran enters the conflict directly providing backing to Syria, and Israel sides with coalition forces, sparking a regional war. International inertia and general disengagement from the region is likely to prevent either from being realised. Below is part of an email I got from a friend in Beirut several days ago. Have you heard similar reports about these types of weapons being used? "Israel is using chemical and phosphoric weapons (illegal weapons), and some new other weapons (strange ones) which create dark clouds and consequently cover houses in the south as if they are painted with a black color (several citizens in many villages reported this type of weapons)." Nick Pelham: Similar allegations were recently made by doctors in Gaza operating on those wounded by Israeli shelling. To the best of my knowledge, no UN agency of international NGO - of which there are many in Gaza - has corroborated the claims. America has not only torpedoed calls for an immediate cease-fire through its repeated endorsements of Israel's actions: it has also done everything it could to make the task of reaching a future cease-fire more difficult. (Cue John Bolton's various statements.) At the same time, the IDF begins to warn of heavy losses against a very well armed and trained guerilla force whose capabilities have been severely underestimated. What is your assessment of the likelihood of a cease-fire over the coming days or weeks, with America opposed or abstaining? Nick Pelham: In terms of US support for a ceasefire, much will depend on Israel's assessment of its progress in fulfilling its objectives by force of disarming Hezbollah of its missiles and forcing its retreat from the border - which are also objectives shared by the U.S. and UN resolution 1559. So far the air strikes have not prevented Hezbollah's continued firing of missiles. Its commanders have reportedly exhausted their prepared list of targets and must now assess whether to deploy a major ground offensive, which could prove costly and could lead to Israel again becoming bogged down in Lebanon. The dilemma facing its leaders is whether to act like Bush senior - and stop short of attempts at regime change with a march on Baghdad, or to act like the current U.S. president and seek regime - or in this case Hezbollah - change by force. If they decide on the latter or decide the war is not meeting its declared objectives, the U.S. could lend its backing to an early ceasefire. Gaithersburg, Md.: So, your best case scenario does not include Hezbollah disarmament? And what are the "recognized borders" after the U.N. accepted the blue line as the border between Israel and Lebanon? This sounds more as the "best case" for Hezbollah... Nick Pelham: It assumes that attempts at forceful disarmament are liable to backfire generating greater conflict, and that the transformation of Hezbollah from a military force to a political force will require an internal Lebanese as well regional diplomatic solution. Lebanon is littered with botched attempts - at great cost - of outside players who thought they could change the political map by force. Rockville, Md.: How can Israel be criticized for not wanting to have a surrogate terrorist army on its border controlled by its arch-enemies Iran and Syria? No other country in the world would be expected to tolerate such a situation. Doesn't eliminating this army increase the chances of peace in the Middle East? Nick Pelham: Your question assumes that Hezbollah can be eliminated without sparking far greater unrest in the region. Israel has not been criticized for the principle of seeking to defend an internationally recognised border, but the means with which it has chosen to do it. There is a great risk that escalation will such in more players, leading to more instability not less. The political track has been allowed to subside for years, prompting a regional return to seek military solutions instead. Bethesda, Md.: I would like to know your opinion on the long term effects of the Israeli bombing in Lebanon. Do you think that in long term this will really weaken the influence and support of Hezbollah in Lebanon or create greater support and therefore more insecurity for Israel? (especially if Israel moves troops in). Also why has there been no mention of the Sheba Farms in the press as one of the areas of dispute between Hezbollah and Israel? Most stories say Israel pulled out of all of Lebanon in 2000, but Sheba Farms are still occupied (and have been since 1967). Nick Pelham: Short of mission fully accomplished, Hezbollah will emerge from this round of fighting with Israel with some, perhaps most, of its stockpiles and command structure in tact. Without the engagement of Syria by western powers, its supply lines are also likely to remain open enabling it to rearm. Moreover, Hezbollah's support base may not be as susceptible to military pressure as say Hamas's. It relies heavily on a single confession, and may not feel too pressured by other Lebanese sects who had a greater stake in Lebanon's reconstructed economy. With Shia, Lebanon's largest sect, feeling victimized by Israeli bombardment, its own grassroots may also rally behind its political leaders much as Israelis rallied to their leaders when they came under bombardment. Washington, D.C.: The EU seems to be currently focusing on a ceasefire which guarantees civilian safety via an international force. Given that Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon was contingent on a similar arrangement, which failed to provide the requisite security, what changes to this strategy could be made that strategy that would give Israel (and the Lebanese civilians Hezbollah hides behind) a sense that this time things will be different? Nick Pelham: Israel wants any force to be mandated to implement UN Resolution 1559 disarming Hezbollah and have a UN Chapter VII mandate allowing it do so. It remains deeply skeptical however of the political will to pay for a force of some 15,000 troops it estimates would be required, and the resolve of its component members to risk their lives when faced with local opposition. Some politicians fear it would go the way of coalition forces in Iraq, as one by one its members withdraw. Reston, Va.: This doesn't seem like a war between Israel and Hezbollah rather, a continuation of the civil war in Lebanon. Rather then have Israel do the attacking, why did the U.S. and Israel just not provide money, weapons, and advisers to the Lebanese military that could be trusted and have them disarm Hezbollah, It seems like more people in Lebanon want peace and the elimination of the terrorists, Iranian/Syrian influence then those that want to see Israel wiped off the map. A civil war isn't finished if one side still holds military control over a region of the country. Nick Pelham: The Lebanese army is drawn from the country's constituent sects, of which the Shias are the largest. In the event of a Lebanese Army order to disarm Hezbollah, it is unclear whether its ranks would obey. In a country where power is distributed according to sect, many people have divided loyalties between their confession and their state. In addition, Hezbollah is not alone in maintaining a confessional-based force. Richmond, Va.: Egypt and Jordan both have strong militaries (thanks to U.S. military aid) and neither is engaged in any kind of conflict nor has Israel pointed a finger or laid blame to them for the current crisis (big surprise). Has anyone approached them about contributing troops to an international peace keeping force in Lebanon? Nick Pelham: Given current tensions in the region, it is highly unlikely that Jordan and Egypt would be seen Lebanon's constituent parts as neutral players. Jordan's king has promoted the notion of the rise of a threatening Shia crescent extending from Tehran via Iraq to South Lebanon, and his intervention together with one of the traditional bastions of the Sunni world could be seen by Lebanon's Shia as highly partisan and thus destabilising - not to mention that they would be open to accusations - no doubt fanned from pulpits - that as recipients of US aid they were merely doing Israel's and America's dirty work. Just as Arab states have been reluctant to send forces to Iraq, so too in Lebanon. Germantown, Md.: Did the Palestinians cut off their nose to spite their face by electing Hamas? Can any reasonable person believe that the Palestinians are capable of governing themselves without a Mafia-style power struggle within its factions? Nick Pelham: Hamas elected by Palestinians to a large extent as a protest vote against Fatah which had led the PA since its inception in the 1990s. During this period living standards declined markedly, as did Palestinian freedom of movement, as a result of settlement expansion and the construction of the separation barrier. Fatah was widely perceived by its people as failing to deliver. Hamas fought an election campaign on domestic issues of anti-corruption, clean government. They also signaled their intent to continue the ceasefire which they had largely maintained since Spring 2005. Had they been allowed to govern - which they considered the right of an democratically elected government, they would have likely done so. Washington, D.C.: Do you agree with the suggestion that Hezbollah undertook its initial operation against Israel, anticipating harsh reprisals, as a ploy to weaken (if not destroy) the new, largely anti-Syrian Lebanese government? Or, do you think it had more to do with the organizations ideological commitments, ie. Palestinian solidarity, commitment to fight Israel? Nick Pelham: Hezbollah saw an opportunity to increase its leverage in the region: mediation over a prisoner exchange and a possible ceasefire between Israel and the Palestinian factions in Gaza had stymied primarily on timing, and Nasrallah believed that he could project his influence by capturing Israelis and using them as bargaining chips for a broader prisoner release. Previous Israeli administrations - including Olmert's predecessors Barak and Sharon - and he probably anticipated that the current Israeli government would act likewise, thus bolstering his image - and those of his allies - as players with clout, domestically, vis-a-vis Israel, and regionally. 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.
Nick Pelham, senior analyst for the International Crisis Group who is currently in Jerusalem, discusses the latest developments as fighting continues in the Middle East.
89.5
0.964286
11.464286
high
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/20/AR2006072001633.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/20/AR2006072001633.html
To Save a Revolution
2006072219
You could sense the hurt and anger as Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Siniora pleaded this week to the U.S. ambassador and other diplomats in Beirut for a halt to Israeli attacks on Lebanese targets. "The country has been torn to shreds," he said. "I hope you will not let us down." The challenge for the Bush administration as the Lebanon war explodes into its second week is just that -- to keep faith with Siniora and his Cedar Revolution, even as it stands by its close ally Israel. This isn't simply a question of appearances and public diplomacy. Unless Siniora's government can be strengthened, there is little hope for achieving the U.S. and Israeli goal of bringing Hezbollah's guerrillas under lasting control. "America's role is to energize a political outcome that helps to satisfy Israeli military objectives by other means," says one administration official. The problem is that the American diplomatic timetable is so slow that by the time a cease-fire is reached -- more than a week off, by U.S. estimates -- Lebanon may be too broken to be put back together anytime soon. Administration officials rightly insist that returning to the status quo in Lebanon would be a mistake. After last year's triumph of forcing a withdrawal of Syrian troops, Siniora's government was struggling (and largely failing) to establish a viable nation. This nation-building effort was hamstrung by Hezbollah's insistence that it maintain what amounted to a state within a state. The administration's strategy is to let Israel do the dirty work of breaking Hezbollah and then move in a foreign "stabilization force" to bolster the Lebanese army. Once Israel has pushed the guerrillas north, this international force would help the Lebanese army deploy to the southern border with Israel and the eastern border with Syria. The plan is for a beefed-up successor to the existing United Nations force in southern Lebanon, known as UNIFIL. The administration's informal deadline for getting a U.N. mandate for this new international force is July 31, when UNIFIL's current mandate expires. The French now command that force, and the United States hopes they can remain in that role, with new troops coming from such robust military powers as Italy, Turkey and Canada. Siniora has privately warned the Bush administration that by bombing so many targets in Lebanon, Israel is undermining its own strategic goals. Lebanese are angry with Hezbollah for starting the war by kidnapping Israeli soldiers, and most want to see the militia under government control. But Siniora has asked why the Israelis are hitting Lebanese airports, ports, roads, villages and other targets that primarily affect civilians. And he has criticized attacks on the Lebanese army, which even the Israelis say is the key to long-run stability and security. Some Bush administration officials share Siniora's concern about the scope of Israeli attacks. These officials are said not to understand Israeli targeting decisions. The administration is understood to have communicated this concern to Jerusalem. The Lebanon crisis has put the administration in a double bind. U.S. officials know they need to move soon toward a cease-fire to preserve any chance for the Siniora government to regain control of the country. But they don't want to move so quickly that they prevent Israel from completing its primary military mission of destroying Hezbollah's arsenal of missiles and pushing the Shiite guerrillas back from the border. The administration's two-track approach is perhaps summed up in Augustus Caesar's famous admonition: "Make haste slowly." Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will head for the Middle East this weekend to try to animate this diplomacy. She has no plans to stop in Syria, and that's a sensible decision. It's up to the Syrians to demonstrate that they can play a positive role -- not least to their Sunni Arab neighbors, who are angry about President Bashar al-Assad's alliance with Shiite Iran and its proxies. A recent claim by Syrian intelligence officials that they have no control over Hamas leader Khaled Meshal is said to have infuriated Egypt's intelligence chief, Omar Suleiman, who responded indignantly: "Don't give us that! We are not Mauritania! We are Egypt!" Supporting Israel and Lebanon at the same time is a tricky task -- especially at a moment when the bombs are flying between one nation and the other. Unless the administration moves quickly to demonstrate that it supports the Siniora government, and not just Israel, its larger strategy for defusing the conflict may begin to unravel. Administration officials recognize that a stable Lebanon cannot be achieved by military action alone. But for now, all the world sees is Hezbollah rockets and Israeli bombs.
You could sense the hurt and anger as Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Siniora pleaded this week to the U.S. ambassador and other diplomats in Beirut for a halt to Israeli attacks on Lebanese targets. "The country has been torn to shreds," he said. "I hope you will not let us down."
14.866667
0.983333
33.416667
low
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/20/AR2006072001856.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/20/AR2006072001856.html
Farm Harm
2006072219
AQUESTION raised by The Post's recent reports on farm subsidies is this: Why does the nation tolerate this waste? As reporters Gilbert M. Gaul, Dan Morgan and Sarah Cohen explain, the federal government paid out $1.6 million in earthquake compensation to Washington state farmers who hadn't suffered earthquake damage. It foisted $39 million in storm compensation on bewildered Wisconsin farmers who were unaware that they'd suffered any loss. And it gave $400 million worth of powdered milk, which it had bought to support milk prices, to supposedly drought-stricken ranchers -- only to find that ranchers and middlemen sold the milk back onto the world market, driving milk prices down again while clearing a fast profit. This theater of the absurd reflects more than government incompetence. The Livestock Compensation Program, the subject of the Post article on Tuesday, was the result of careful political judgment. It was created by the Bush administration in 2002 to boost John Thune, the Republican Senate candidate in South Dakota. The White House calculation was that Mr. Thune would pick up crucial votes from his state's ranchers if he was seen to have delivered federal pork. The flip side of the calculation was that the president would not pay an electoral price for throwing millions of dollars out the window. Campaigners against farm subsidies have spent years grappling with this logic. It's long been clear that the lion's share of the $20 billion-plus in annual farm payments has gone to rich farmers who don't need the cash; that the payments promote environmental damage; and that they harm farmers in poor countries. But even with the most cynical view of politics, in which you assume that these substantive problems with farm programs don't count, there's still something of a mystery. Sure, the farmers who pocket the cash will vote for whoever provides it. But farmers are a tiny minority of the electorate. Why doesn't the majority, which pays for all this waste, rise up in revolt against the sheer gluttony of it? The answer is that the taxpaying majority doesn't care, not least because it is oblivious. But maybe there is hope. In the era of online political organization and Internet search, information on pork-peddling scandals ought to spread faster and more widely. On Tuesday Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) held hearings on a bill to create a database of government spending and contracts that would make it easy to look up how much federal money flows to particular companies or nonprofits. The bill's bipartisan backers are hoping for quick passage, and they rightly point out that the only ground for opposing their idea is a desire to keep corrupt payments secret. It will be interesting to see whether any senator has the nerve to block the bill -- and whether leaders in the House, who want to exclude information on government contracts, are shameless enough to argue that taxpayers should be kept in the dark.
AQUESTION raised by The Post's recent reports on farm subsidies is this: Why does the nation tolerate this waste? As reporters Gilbert M. Gaul, Dan Morgan and Sarah Cohen explain, the federal government paid out $1.6 million in earthquake compensation to Washington state farmers who hadn't suffered...
10.181818
0.981818
53.018182
low
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/20/AR2006072000333.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/20/AR2006072000333.html
For Evacuees From Lebanon, a Bittersweet Arrival at BWI
2006072219
An hour after he landed in Maryland yesterday with the first wave of American evacuees from war-torn Lebanon, Adib Mansour couldn't escape thoughts of his motherland. The memories, some from only a day ago, took hold of the Lebanese American designer: the helicopter attack his young son witnessed, the heartbreaking pleas of his brothers to evacuate one of their sons with him, the sight of his beloved Beirut as he and his family were whisked away in a U.S. military helicopter. "All I could think was, 'We're leaving everyone behind,' " Mansour said as he broke into tears and then fell silent. In another corner of Baltimore-Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport, a smiling Fady Lamaa picked up and hugged his daughter, Christina, 3, moments after she walked out of customs with her brother, Johnny, 7, and mother, Janine. After a frantic week of long-distance worrying, Lamaa had been waiting since 5 a.m. to reunite with them. But his wife, who heard the bombs and the explosions, couldn't forget her parents, two brothers and sister still in Lebanon. "All the time I've been thinking about them in the airplane. 'What's happening now?' " said Janine Lamaa of Ashburn. "I feel very happy and sad at the same time." The first of thousands of American evacuees from Lebanon started flowing back to the United States yesterday, returning to their homes after a chaotic week of danger and uncertainty. Seven additional flights of evacuees are expected at BWI -- their primary entry point into the United States -- by tomorrow, including three that are tentatively scheduled to arrive by this morning. And at least one flight is expected in Philadelphia as early as today. U.S. officials say that as many as a third of the estimated 25,000 Americans in Lebanon want to be evacuated. Many of yesterday's 150 evacuees were of Lebanese descent -- toddlers, senior citizens, students and film directors -- and their homecoming was bittersweet. Inside Lebanon, many said, they thought only of the immediate concern: how to escape. Now, they are starting to come to grips with the long-term consequences for their shattered homeland. Their nostalgia and pride for a nation that resurrected itself after a 15-year civil war has given way to sadness and dread. Some said they feel guilt and helplessness for having the means, and the correct passports, to escape, while their relatives in Lebanon have no such options. Yet the United States is also their home, they said, and they're looking forward to its normalcy. "You're happy you're coming home to see your family and kids. At the same time, I feel guilty that I'm saving my life but I cannot save anybody else's," said Amal Kazzaz of Richmond, who emigrated from Lebanon in 1972 and has four adult children and 12 grandchildren in Virginia. "You cannot be happy when you know somebody else is dying behind you. But this is my home.
Get Washington DC,Maryland,Virginia news. Includes news headlines from The Washington Post. Get info/values for Washington DC,Maryland,Virginia homes. Features schools,crime,government,traffic,lottery,religion,obituaries.
12.804348
0.543478
0.543478
low
low
abstractive
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/worldopinionroundup/2006/07/a_conflict_viewed_through_very_1.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072219id_/http://blog.washingtonpost.com/worldopinionroundup/2006/07/a_conflict_viewed_through_very_1.html
A Conflict Viewed Through Very Different Lenses
2006072219
Are Americans being given a very different view of the Israel-Hezbollah conflict than their counterparts in Europe and elsewhere? Yes, according to commentators in Muslim and European media. The editors of the Jordan Times are especially critical of the U.S. television coverage. "Not only the Lebanese and Arabs but any educated, broad-minded person equipped with the necessary tools that do not allow him to succumb to the mighty propaganda machine have, over the past few days, all the reasons to be furious at the coverage by major US networks of the tragedy unfolding in Lebanon." "The Western media has dropped the ball," according to the managing editor of the Daily Star in Lebanon. "The vast majority of Western media reports do not accurately portray the fact that the vast majority of the dead are civilians, most of them women and children," wrote Marc J. Sirois on Thursday. "For the most part Western television viewers, newspaper readers, and Web surfers are reading highly sanitized versions of the news, spun in such a way as to dilute the brutality of the Israeli onslaught and especially to ensure that blame is placed squarely on Lebanon in general and Hizbullah in particular." In the English-language Arab media, the civilian toll, not Hezbollah's attacks on Israel, is the central issue. "Kingdom seeks to end Brutal Israel war," says the Saudi Gazette in Saudi Arabia. "Israeli revenge is horrendous," wrote Hazem Saghieh, columnist for Dar Al-Hayat, a popular Arab daily, "It may only be described as severe and radical collective punishment. In the crushing confrontation that is taking place, the Jewish State shows an instinctive inclination to regard its people as ... super human." Duraid Al Baik, foreign editor of the Gulf News in Dubai, wrote that the U.N. and the Arab League "sent a clear signal to the Arabs that the international community is not interested in protecting their lives against a state-sponsored terrorism." Hezbollah should have known better, said a former Kuwaiti oil minister, precisely because Israeli retaliation against non-combatants should have been predicted. "Everybody is criticising Hassan Nasrallah for taking the decision to lead the country to war without consulting the leadership of the concerned country," Ali Al-Baghli wrote in the Arab Times. "Maybe Nasrallah did not think about the repercussions of his actions. When he captured two Israeli soldiers, maybe Nasrallah didn't expect such a bloody response from Israel. This should be counted as a blunder committed by Nasrallah. He should have known Israel is an enemy which doesn't show any mercy and deals with Arabs in the bloodiest possible manner." In other words, the West long ago stopped caring about Muslim civilians. As'ad AbuKhalil, visiting professor at the University of California at Berkeley and author of the Angry Arab blog, told Aljazeera.net that "the same racist impulse that considers Israeli lives worth more than Arab lives is at play here. I have no doubt that the lives of Arabs never meant much for the descendants of colonial powers in the region. In European media, the civilian toll in Lebanon is often seen as trumping all other considerations. With hundreds of civilian casualties, hundreds of thousands of refugees and billions in damage to the Lebanese infrastructure, one commentator for the German broadcast network Deutsche Welle said "it is absurd and inhuman to constitute a new order in Lebanon based on this suffering and misery of innocent people." "It's mainly civilians who are suffering from the continuing conflict in Lebanon between Israel and the Islamic Hizbollah movement," says Radio Netherlands. Foreign online outlets seem more likely to run stories about specific incidents in which Lebanese non-combatants died. American news organizations are more likely to emphasize, as the print edition of Wednesday's Washington Post reported, the "High Civilian Price for Both Sides." The differences can be seen in what editors and reporters think is most important. Compare, for example, the first paragraph of The Post's report on the fighting on Wednesday with the opening of an Agence France-Presse dispatch that was carried by the Naharnet News in Beirut, the Middle East Times in Egypt and other news sites. The Post: "Israeli airstrikes hit targets in Beirut's main Christian enclave on Wednesday as hundreds of U.S. citizens boarded a cruise ship chartered to evacuate them to the Mediterranean island of Cyprus. In southern Lebanon, Israeli troops carrying out a cross-border raid clashed with fighters of the radical Shiite Muslim group Hezbollah, which fired more rockets into northern Israel." AFP/Naharnet News: "At least 55 civilians were killed on Wednesday as Israeli jets and gunboats pummeled towns and villages across Lebanon and tens of thousands of people fled a conflict that both sides defiantly warned would have no limit. In the bloodiest day since the fighting erupted eight days ago, two Israeli children and one adult were also killed in a Hizbullah rocket attack on the holy city of Nazareth while two soldiers were killed in clashes with the group's fighters." When an Israeli bomb on Monday hit a group of children swimming in a canal outside a Palestinian refugee camp, injuring seven children and leaving three missing, the New York Times briefly mentioned the incident in a larger story about the ordeal of civilians in the Lebanese city of Tyre. By contrast, The Guardian of London reported on the incident in detail: "The scene was littered with small plastic sandals, several caked in blood. Ismael, the father of one of the children, sat on the edge of the crater, his head in his hands weeping. 'Children! Children!' he roared through his tears, 'Children here! My son here.' He stood and looked down into the crater: 'Is Hizbullah here? Only children here,' he said, referring to the militant Islamist group that kidnapped two Israeli soldiers and which Israel says it is targeting in the wave of attacks. The Mirror, a liberal British tabloid, also ran a story on this incident, while the Times of London interviewed one of the children as part of a longer story. Another incident that drew attention was the Israeli bombing of two vehicles in which at least 18 people died. The Post's Anthony Shadid reported on it Tuesday in a longer piece about displaced families, while two foreign reporters made the attack the lead of their stories. "Jets 'incinerate' fleeing family," was the headline on an AFP article reprinted Monday on the Australian new site news.com.au. "ELEVEN children and seven adults were killed overnight in southern Lebanon, their bodies consumed by flames when an Israeli warplane opened fire on the convoy they were in, UN peacekeepers and hospital sources said," according to the article on news.com.au. "They had been among residents fleeing villages close to the Israeli border and were killed when missiles struck a car and a minibus near Shamaa, hospital sources said. The children were aged between 7 and 12." The incident was also reported by Robert Fisk, the veteran Middle East correspondent of The Independent of London, whose work is widely reprinted overseas.. Giving Americans What They Want? Is the U.S. media just providing reports that conform to its consumers' world view? After all, Americans are the most sympathetic towards Israel of 15 nations surveyed by the Pew Global Attitude survey conducted earlier this year. That survey found that 48 percent of Americans sympathized with Israel as compared with 13 percent who sympathized with Palestinians. Americans are also more likely than the people of any other country to regard U.S. policy in the Middle East as "fair," according to Pew pollsters. In one 2003 survey, 47 percent thought U.S. policy in the Middle East favored neither the Israelis or the Palestinians. Only five percent of Lebanese shared that view. The disparate reaction to Lebanon's civilian casualties may simply reflect the larger beliefs of the societies in which journalists work. "Western media guilty of not telling the real story in Lebanon" --Roy Greenslade, Guardian blogger, United Kingdom: "for the most part western TV viewers, newspaper readers and web surfers are reading highly sanitised versions of the news, spun in such a way as to dilute the brutality of the Israeli onslaught and especially to ensure that blame is placed squarely on Lebanon in general and Hizbullah in particular." "U.S. Media Favors Israel in War in Lebanon" -- Kazinform, Kazakstan news agency: "An American reporter once reminded me that we cannot blame the American people for their limited, one-sided understanding of what is happening in the Middle East. It is the American media that must be chastised for its disproportionateness." "Does the Washington Post Favor Hezbollah and Hamas?"-- Arutz Sheva, Israel: "In a piece appearing in yesterday's Washington Post, veteran op-ed columnist Richard Cohen published a screed so offensive, and so outrageous, that it should prompt every clear-headed individual to shun the American capital's paper of record and cancel their subscriptions forthwith." By washingtonpost.com Editors | July 21, 2006; 6:18 AM ET | Category: Mideast Previous: Can Israel Defeat Hezbollah? | Next: Iran -- Instigator or Bystander? "The disparate reaction to Lebanon's civilian casualties may simply reflect the larger beliefs of the societies in which journalists work." - What nonsense! American's bigoted view of the Mideast is formed by the deeply biased reporting. When it comes to the Middle East we have no free press - we are the most self-censored press in the world. Posted by: David | July 21, 2006 02:49 AM I really hope we can blame the American media for the callous disregard that has been shown by the US leadership to the bloodshed and destruction in Lebanon. Otherwise we would have to wonder how Americans, always depicted by the Hollywood fairytale as caring, compassionate and highly moral people, can bear to watch children being massacred in large numbers while they tut tut about the horrible terrorists. And how's George W's form? He was almost in tears over his concern with the 'murderous' and 'immoral' nature of stem cell research at the same time that he gives the go ahead to another week of slaughter of innocent civilians - most of them real, living children. Where's the logic? Where's the morality? Posted by: PW | July 21, 2006 03:26 AM Thank you for this review. America has been propagandized for decades about the Middle East and Israel. Israel long ago chose violence as its way of dealing with its neighbors and the United States became its willing enabler, with hundreds of millions of dollars per year (OUR dollars) going to Israel for the purchase of weapons of war to use against poverty-stricken Palestinians and, later, Lebanese. Hamas and Hezbollah were the result of Israel's previous actions. Who knows what their current actions will bring. The legislation passed by the Congress yesterday trumpets to the world the nonsense that Israel is in danger of annihilation and is therefore justified in its war against the citizens of both Palestine and Lebanon. Will these resolutions aid peace? I think not. Will Israel's continued campaign of death and destruction lead to peace? Absolutely not. Posted by: Bernice Vetsch | July 21, 2006 03:35 AM Well the people of America may not see what is going on but be certain the Muslim world does. They know where the F16's, helicopters, 'smart missles' (which kill civilians) all come from. This war makes it very clear where the US with all its so called support of democracy stands. George Bush may pretend to feel for each death in Lebanon - but then he sends another replacement missle to Israel. Posted by: Peter Sheppard | July 21, 2006 03:55 AM Take an American and put him on French soil: after one year he will think like other Frenchmen. The same is true for a Frenchman transferred to US. It's propaganda, and only propaganda, that makes the difference. What you see on TV in US is that two Israeli civilians were killed by a Hizbollah rocket. In France you see that a hundred civilians were killed by an Israeli rocket. That makes some difference in perception. I may be wrong, but it seems to me that the MSM American brainwashing machine is more biased, more shameless, and more inclined to the "God bless us!" ideology, than its counterparts in Europe. Posted by: alice | July 21, 2006 04:27 AM For once, Mr. Morley has provided the reader with a comprehensive and factual review of world opinion regarding Israel's actions! One, however, has to ask how this column escaped the "truth police" at the Washington Post? Posted by: David G. Ward | July 21, 2006 05:22 AM I like Richard Cohens article. A dream of the 19th century, that brought the colapse of Austrian-Hungarian empire, that many in that region wish back........people fleeing to Israel without thinking much. Posted by: Fischi | July 21, 2006 06:28 AM On the other hand Israel is a reality. Does it matter much? The basic problem seems to be Israels unwillingness to talk with its neighbors. Lets call it "arrogance". Israels unwillingness to seek a solution along the borders of 67. There is no other way and when they they will realise it it may be to late. A solution along the borders of 67, that is open for future peacefull change. A one state solution looks more beautifull on the map anyway. Posted by: Fischi | July 21, 2006 06:37 AM If you read only the Post or the New York Times you would have no clue that the rest of the world regards the US and Israel as bullies and pariahs. The US has in Israel a client state it can't control. GWB sees this bloodshed, like that in Iraq, as an "opportunity." Not an opportunity he'd like to share, though. I've often wondered what Bush would do if he faced the grim situations he's happy to put other people in. The rule regarding criticism of Israeli government actions is this: If you do it, you're anti-Semitic. If you're Jewish and you criticize this bloodbath, you're a self-hating Jew. See Noam Chomsky. Posted by: renee | July 21, 2006 07:26 AM I must agree with Prof. As'ad AbuKhalil, when he says that "the same racist impulse that considers Israeli lives worth more than Arab lives is at play here. I have no doubt that the lives of Arabs never meant much for the descendants of colonial powers in the region." Having spent the last five years in the U.S. I was shocked to discover the extent of Americans' racist attitudes towards Arabs -- or anyone with an obviously Muslim name, for that matter. This racism is being encouraged every day by reporting that treats Muslim lives as somehow sub-human and expendable. If the supporters of the current Israeli war think that killing civilians will bring peace in the Middle-East, they are either disingenous or self-deluded. Posted by: Karen Margrethe | July 21, 2006 07:48 AM I think Americans are far less concerned with Israel "fighting fair" than they are about who started this, and how the people who started it will pay for starting it. Posted by: Wolcott | July 21, 2006 08:03 AM Many Europeans in countries occupied during WWII still remember what it is like having some foreigner shout at you in a language that you don't understand and your relatives shot or arrested when they don't give the "right" answer. This memory makes Europeans (perhaps minus the English?) understand the psychology of foreign invasion and occupation much better than Americans, and perhaps it makes them better equipped to understand the political reactions that invasions (even supposedly "well-intended" ones)are likely to spur. Posted by: Karen Margrethe | July 21, 2006 08:06 AM The present administration's mideast policy is something that only a congenital drunken imbecile and his overpaid lackies (many in the media) could forge and implement, as they are greatly lacking in any vision for a lasting peace. What the American people see courtesy of its monolithic propaganda machine is only what this cabal of war criminal wants us to see. The Lebanon/Gaza bloodbath is an "Opportunity" for them-not a reason to immediately intercede in order to prevent further loss of civilian lives, and to restore any hope of America being seen as an "honest broker". After the countless deaths of Arabs and Muslims, Israel will have won a short term victory over the Lebanese and Gazans, but it will have squandered another chance to secure a long term peace with its neighbors. Hizbullah will probably emerge more politically and dare I say, more militarily powerful for the next bout of American-supported carnage by our Israeli "allies." After this latest episode of US taxpayer-sponsered "opportunity"-the survivors of Lebanon and Gaza will have even greater reason to hate Americans. I guess the return address on Israeli-launched U.S. made missiles will give them a location to forward their varied responses worldwide. Now that's one very rosy scenario! Posted by: Syed | July 21, 2006 08:12 AM I am continuously amazed by Anti-Israeli writers who completely ignore in their logic who started this, and that Israel has no choice but to do what they are doing. Let's put the blame where it belongs. Posted by: Wolcott | July 21, 2006 08:27 AM What an excellent summary of how America's reporting on this conflict is so different from that in much of the rest of the world. Have any of the Post's editors read this yet? Or have they been too busy either pushing atrocities against Lebanese civilians lower into each story, or just rewriting them to make them less offensive? My personal favorite the Post worked up was a recent description of the killing of several Lebanese "with Canadian citizenship." Um ... doesn't that make them Canadians? Guess not -- apparently it wouldn't be wise to let readers start imagining Israelis accidentally killing our (presumably white) neighbors ... Posted by: P. Sean Bramble | July 21, 2006 08:33 AM That last citation is a nice touch. The best way to secure one's place in any location is to make friends. One requirement of that is not to kill people's family members. Israel claims to be very concerned about these neighboring countries appreciating their right to exist. Well, I think they need to appreciate everyone else's right to exist as well. The big issue here goes back to making friends. Israel probably killed that for the next 100 years along with these people. At least. I hear that 18% of the Lebanese government is Hizbullah, and that their army is bigger than the Lebanese army. I would think that would leave the average Lebanese citizen in a tough spot. While unfortunately no one will thank them for it, they have a duty to appreciate that, especially if they don't want the entire Lebanese government to be Hizbullah, or better yet Syria. Posted by: Deanna | July 21, 2006 08:54 AM Wolcott: Suppose that someone living in an appartment block has injured or even killed one of your family (God forbid). Would you start bombing this and the neighboring buildings to take your revenge upon "them"? Would your fellow Americans be less concerned with your actions than "about who started this, and how the people who started it will pay for starting it" ? Posted by: Alice | July 21, 2006 08:59 AM Thank you for the press survey. Even though it looked into the possible motivations of the American press coverage, there seemed to be little attention paid to what political, historical and cultural influences there are in other parts of the world press. Considering the 60 year run-up that the European, Arab and British audiences have had in coverage of Israel and those wishing its death, I'm not surprised at their reporting at all. Posted by: Steve G | July 21, 2006 09:00 AM The situation is tragic, but it seems that many only care about about Arab civilians being killed when it is done by Israelis or Americans. Otherwise the silence is deafening. Posted by: Dismayed | July 21, 2006 09:09 AM We have a new Hitler in town - he lives in Isarel. A previous writer just said: "On the other hand Israel is a reality. Does it matter much?" Yes, it matters much because innocent people are suffering (Hitler did the same with Poland before starting WW2. But what Israel should understand, it has suddenly started its decline and obviously will disappear as is. The Arab World has had enough. Hesbolla is just a name of Arab countries and Arab fighters taking on Israel - somewhat like the "Underground" in Europe taking on Hitler Germany. Israel will eitehr 1)disappear completely or 2)redefine itself as a fully integrated society in the Middle East were Palestinians will be in charge and were Jews will be tolerated. I think it will be #1. Hatred and new sophistication of weapons will be too much for Israel to block - see USA in Iraq, basically they have given up. No need to take sides but just look at realities. Posted by: Anagadir | July 21, 2006 09:22 AM Sorry, Alice, but your example is clearly not a good analogy of the situation. The circumstances are completely different. Hezbollah could have avoided the situation by not bombing Israel, and by not kidnapping 2 Israeli soldiers. They could have ended it before Israel started the devastation if they stopped bombing, and if they released the soldiers. Israel has no choice. Hezbollah is responsible for everything happening there. Israel is simply responding decisively and refusing to give into blackmail. While I'm sure that there is a huge difference in the way the American media is reporting the devastation, I think they are giving the American public just what it wants ... to see punishment for the ones who started it, even if it means attacking their families and the neighbors who support them. Posted by: Wolcott | July 21, 2006 09:33 AM I am continuously amazed by Anti-Israeli writers who completely ignore in their logic who started this, and that Israel has no choice but to do what they are doing. Let's put the blame where it belongs. Posted by: Wolcott | July 21, 2006 08:27 AM Please stop this "chicken-or-egg" thing that has been going on for some 60 years. The Israelis started it all by stealing land from Palestinians/Arabs. Israel is nothing but a "Colony" with Righteous Nonsense (God likes us the Best because we Always Suffer so this is OUR LAND - also called "ZIONISTS"). The original owners (Arabs) are angry and have decided to trow them out. No big deal. Reality is raising its ugly head (at least for the colonists). Posted by: MissColony | July 21, 2006 09:34 AM IS THERE ANYONE, ANYWHERE....who does not see extreme danger that a jewish owned and operated, dominated press has posed in America? Not to mention the department of defense, the NSA and the white house. Has worked out very well, hasn't it. With brutal hell to come. But of course we don't care what the rest of the world thinks. Posted by: | July 21, 2006 09:38 AM Steve G's assessment of the press coverage of Israel in Europe in the last 60 years doesn't seem accurate. The mainstream Norwegian press (and the political establishment) used to be solidly Pro-Israeli in the 70's and 80's, even to the point of supporting immoral and illegal acts of war. Mossad got away with murdering an innocent waiter, Ahmed Bouchiki, in Lillehammer in 1972, while he was walking down the street with his pregnant Norwegian wife (apparently, they thought he might be Ali Hassan Salameh, a man on their hit-list after the Munich attacks). This is the only lethal terrorist attack on Norwegian soil in the last sixty years that I can think of. Reality began to catch up with ideology in the 90's, however, and some in the Pro-Israeli camp began to ponder what being a "friend of Israel" really demands. Typical is the reaction of former PM Bondevik, who in an interview with Aftenposten yesterday wondered how someone can call himself a friend of Israel while supporting the current attacks on Lebanese civilians. True friends don't stand by and cheerlead while you're committing atrocities, true friends speak up. It's time for the true friends of Israel (and America) to speak up. Posted by: Karen Margrethe | July 21, 2006 09:42 AM "Please stop this "chicken-or-egg" thing that has been going on for some 60 years. The Israelis started it all by stealing land from Palestinians/Arabs. " Let me set the record straight on one thing. The Jews did not start by stealing land from the Arabs. They started by buying land from the Arabs. It wasn't untill war had broken out that they started stealing (or confiscating take your pick) land from the arabs. Posted by: Duck | July 21, 2006 09:44 AM The thing is Wolcott probably most people would not have too much of an objection if the idf were fighting hezbollah but so far they have only done a good job on taking out the K-7 brigades of Lebanon. I've asked this on many of the other blogs but most of the Israeli "HB started it" crowd don't have the guts to answer...at what point will you criticise the idf for going to far....will we have to see another Sabra & Chatilla? Will it be when they accidently kill a large number of non-Lebanese civilians? Drop a bomb on the US Embassy? What are the limits? I am interested to see if you have limits or if you feel they should have carte.. blanche.. And btw I absolutely condemn HB for firing missiles at civilians in Israel...targeting civilians - especially children - is terrorism regardless of who sanctions it.. Posted by: Angus | July 21, 2006 09:47 AM MissColony: First you want the "chicken/egg" or "who started it" to stop, and then you point out that Israel started it, by taking the land from the "original owners (Arabs). The ownership of that land has been debated for thousands of years. The Arabs have no more right to it than Israel. The land has always belonged to whoever won the last war. Posted by: Wolcott | July 21, 2006 09:49 AM This article as well as the resultant comments are a disappointing reminder that those who identify themselves with one group or the other can easily disregard the suffering experienced by the other side. Both sides want to be the victim, and both sides want to cast responsibility on the other to justify their own actions. Some of the comments on this site have noted that Americans do not place value on the loss of Arab lives. At the same time however, Arabs also do not place value on the loss of Israeli lives. Often times, there are reports of Arabs celebrating in the streets after Israelis have been killed. If there is ever going to be a real solution to this conflict, people have got to stop the, "everything is the other side's fault" game. One group is rarely ever responsible for all the problems. At this point, it doesn't even matter who started it. There needs to be honest discussion about how to end this, pride aside, if there's ever going to be any peace. Posted by: MK | July 21, 2006 09:53 AM Finally, a discussion in which the thoughtful, intelligent people who understand world politics and think about it way outnumber the shrill, obnoxious, if "a" therefore "x" zionists. I will enjoy reading (most of) your thoughts. As opposed to the gentleman the comPost had yesterday to comment on the middle East, he was from The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, The policy wing of AIPAC (fair and balanced) Posted by: Thom | July 21, 2006 09:57 AM In 1945, the United States Air Force dropped nuclear bombs on two cities in Japan, Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The death toll from both has been estimated around 214,000 people, most of them civilians. Suppose now for an instant that we, the Jews, would have had the possibility of bombing Germany and killing 214,000 German civilians during the 2nd World War and that this would have allowed us to save a part of the six million Jews assassinated, wouldn't we have done it? And if we had done it, wouldn't we have been accused of brutality and sadism by all the newspapers of the world? Wouldn't the newspapers be full of pictures of poor little innocent victims of the Jews? There is something that became quite clear to Jews during and after the 2nd World War: not that the Christian Europeans have always been implacable enemies (this they suspected), not that the world is cynical (this they knew), but that all information provided by the press is strongly biased and unreliable, even if it is published in a "serious" newspaper, even if it appears in all the papers of a country with so-called "freedom of information", even if it appears in all the newspapers of the world. "Strongly biased and unreliable" does not mean "always false". It means that what you read in the papers, what you hear on the radio, what you see on television is a series of rumors, not a description of reality. Posted by: Ephraim Rauch | July 21, 2006 09:58 AM Also Friday, a U.N.-run observation post just inside Israel was struck during fighting between Israel and Hezbollah militants. The Israeli army blamed Hezbollah rockets but a U.N. officer said it was an artillery shell fired by the Israeli Defense Force. A U.N. officer, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the situation, said an artillery shell fired by Israel made "a direct hit on the U.N. position overlooking Zarit." The post is part of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon. Posted by: IsraeLIES | July 21, 2006 09:58 AM The washington post should also analyze the arab media's silence when it come to the daily massacres of arabs in iraq by their fellow arabs. It seems that arabs only care if jews do the killing, and the washington post is falling for their very selective and convenient outrage. Posted by: FreeThinke | July 21, 2006 10:01 AM Let's face it: U.S. media have never reported fairly on Israeli agression in the Middle East -- in large part because a disproportionate number of U.S. journalists, editors and producers are committed Zionists who view Israeli lives as sacred and Arab lives as expendable. As someone with friends on both sides of this conflict, I'm astonished at the bias evident in U.S. media reports. How can anyone be surprised that U.S. sympathies lean toward Israel when practically all U.S. media reports portray Israel as a victim and Arabs as aggressors -- when, in fact, death tolls since the establishment of the state of Israel reveal precisely the opposite. Moral of the story: if you want the straight goods on what is going on in the Middle East, forget about relying on U.S. media reports. They're hopelessly biased. Posted by: Galen | July 21, 2006 10:01 AM "Strongly biased and unreliable" does not mean "always false". No, but it does mean that you shouldn't a) waste time reading it or b) believe any of it. Posted by: Thom | July 21, 2006 10:03 AM The press in this country is extremely biased. They always repeat the story line that Israel's invasion of Gaza started when one of their soldiers was "captured", but never mention that just 12 hours before that incident, Israel entered Gaza and "captured" two Palestinians, nor the months long embargo and blockade of Gaza that has turned it into a prison for its residents. And when covering of the brutal attacks on Lebanon, they ignore to mention the invasion and killings in Gaza that preceded Hezballah's capture of the Israeli soldiers. Nor do they mention the Lebanese prisoners held by Israel that Lebanon has repeatedly requested be returned. Nor do they mention the routine violations of Lebanese airspace and sovereignty when Israel bombs or assasinates Lebanese and Palestinians in Lebanese territory. As always our press always covers the story with the assumption is that Israel has the right to arrest Palestinian "criminals" while Palestinians or Lebanese have no right to react or defend themselves. Posted by: Peter | July 21, 2006 10:07 AM If i'm not miustaken the reason Hezbollah captured the 2 Israeli soldiers was to attempt a prisoner exchange., israel holds over 900 Lebanese and Arabs, Hezbollah and hasn't charged them with criems or offered them any leagl recourse. (Kind of like Gitmo...) Because Israel cannot see their way to offering justice to Arabs, they find they must crush them. Which means that innocents die. And the MSM American media, buying into the short term memory, fails to tells its audience the whole picture. Posted by: rpaul | July 21, 2006 10:08 AM Many good points are made here about the innocent civilians, and I think it's tragic and unfair. But war is tragic and unfair. After N.Korea drops it's first nuclear bomb on a US city, are we going to hesitate to retaliate because of the innocent civilians we will kill? Or wait for the second bomb? Posted by: Wolcott | July 21, 2006 10:12 AM I wish these conversations could be conducted without people descending into streams of invective about zionists and nazis and jewish owned-and-operated media and political machines. (Jews own the White House? And the Defense Department? What?) It obscures the larger point, which is that there are many of us who do support Israel, but not blindly -- who don't support military actions like these that kill civilians. It raises distrust when the reasonable anti-Israel/pro-Palestinian advocates won't disavow the crazies -- and it's what make people start thinking about anti-semitism instead of the issues. Posted by: ester | July 21, 2006 10:14 AM "After N.Korea drops it's first nuclear bomb on a US city, are we going to hesitate to retaliate because of the innocent civilians we will kill? Or wait for the second bomb?" Posted by: | July 21, 2006 10:17 AM A)Hypothetical B)Wrong Chat ******** Agreed. My only point is that in war, civilians die when retaliation is necessary ... as tragic and unfair as it is. Posted by: Wolcott | July 21, 2006 10:21 AM All right Wolcott, let's see see who started it, in order to put the blame where it belongs. Let's see, did it start with the expulsion of the Palestinians from their land and homes in 1948? Did it begin with the massacres of Khan Younis and Deir Yassin? Did it begin with the 1982 invasion and destruction of Lebanon, the division of the West Bank into cantons by encouraging settlements, the erection of the illegal, land-grabbing wall, the demolishment of Palestinian homes with bulldozers (courtesy of the good folks at Caterpillar), the uprooting of olive trees, the humiliation at checkpoints, the illegal arrest and detainment (without charge, without trial) of countless prisoners both Lebanese and Palestinian, the torture in Israeli jails, the "targeted assassinations" that have taken out civilians as "collateral damage", the stripping away of Palestinian dignity and human rights, the blocking of medical care and aid, the punishing of democracy, the blockading of Gaza, the comments of Begin, when he said that "1,000 Arabs are not worth a single Jewish fingernail", the kidnapping of the two Palestinian brothers that preceded the kidnapping of Gilad Shalit, the violation of airspace over Lebanon (after the "withdrawal"), the Qana massacre, the Sabra and Shatila massacres....? When did it begin? Anti-Israeli? Not so much. Let's call it Pro-Human. Posted by: zene | July 21, 2006 10:25 AM By that logic, the civilians killed in Hezb'allah's retaliations for attacks on Beiruit which are killing civilians are not OK, but necessary. But that is the justification for more strikes on Beiruit. See the problem? Can't just argue for one side, gotta tar everyone with the same brush Posted by: | July 21, 2006 10:28 AM Why doesn't Jefferson Morley look at Arab coverage of suicide bombings on Israelis buses and in Israeli pizza shops, when Jewish and Arab Israeli civilians are TARGETED by bombs packed with ball bearings and rat poisin intended to inflect the most horrific damage possible? Is it because the Arab media (and some of the European media) present these deaths as acceptable? Posted by: | July 21, 2006 10:33 AM Israel and jews are always guilty it is not signigicant tht hamos and hezbolla are terrorist and killers the world always will hace to face the real situation hamas and hizbola are terroist and tomorrow they will try to destroy USA please don´t be so nahib Posted by: daniel | July 21, 2006 10:36 AM You could have just posted in hebrew, your spelling might have been better. Posted by: | July 21, 2006 10:40 AM It is really peculiar to see how many arabs and filo-arabs blame the american pro-israel feelings on biased media, and none of them recognizes propaganda as a possible cause of their own hatred of Israel. This is even more amazing if one considers that plurality of opinions and freedom of the press are practically non-existing in Arab/Muslim states, where all the media are state-controlled or mullah-controlled and primary school textbooks teach the children to hate Israel. And the Americans are the ones being brainwashed. It's simply ridiculous (and tragical at the same time). Posted by: Paolo from Milan | July 21, 2006 10:41 AM zene: you sound anti-Israeli to me. Certainly there have been many conflicts going back thousands of years, but, even though there was hatred three weeks ago, there was peace, and there was no conflict until Hezbollah started it ... this time. They could have ended it, but chose not to. *** I read a lot of the Arab statements through their media, and they are much more biased than the American media, in my opinion. Posted by: Wolcott | July 21, 2006 10:54 AM It's interesting that when discussing who is to blame for the latest violence (and even Arab states today blame the Hizballah for having crossed an internationally recognized border- not for the first time, by the way ) one hears that "Israel started it because Israel stole the land from the Arabs." Even ignoring the fact that Israel was built and established in accordance with decisions made by international organizations (like the U.N.) - what does such a statement mean? It means like Israelis like me, who have favored a return to the 67 borders more or less - in return for peace - have to admit to being totally naive and blind to the reality - that we will never be accepted in ANY borders. If any aggression against Israel is seen as justified in light of the "original sin" of Israel's having been established - what hope can we ever have that our neighbors will let us live in peace - no matter what our borders are. When Israel withdrew from Lebanon to the international border, it was with the understanding that this would be a border between two countries at peace. Instead, Hizballah was allowed to take over the area and to repeatedly commit acts of aggresion against Israel. The international community must come to the aid of the legitimate Lebanese government and work to end the rule of the Hizballah militia in the South of the country, which works against the interest of Lebanon when it attacks Israel over the international border dividing what should be two peaceful neighbors. Posted by: a disallusioned leftist | July 21, 2006 11:07 AM Thank you for your article about one sided press coverage. The situation is obscene and was accelerated by the invasion of Iraq. Maybe this is all part of the plan (not that there was any planning) of starting more wars in the area to sell US weapons to. Would someone please do a story on how much US intelllegence and weaponry is being supplied to enact the massacre of innocent civilians right now. What about the bombs Israel is using, designed to amputate body parts as they spray metal everywhere. The most absurd headline was "Bush sees this as a path to peace". When? When every civilian is obliterated. At least he spoke the other day surrounded by children, so you know how deeply trouble he is by the slaughter of innocents. Posted by: Bonnie | July 21, 2006 11:07 AM "I read a lot of the Arab statements through their media, and they are much more biased than the American media, in my opinion." Yes, but in this chat you have shown us where you stand on the issue. Of course you find the Arab media to be biased. I bet you find some of the papers in Israel to be biased too. Posted by: Thom | July 21, 2006 11:09 AM There are always new rules of the game, and the unintended consequence of the current IDF military campaign is an emerging split between Bush and his allies over the Middle East. For Olmert to be accused of war crimes and to open such a rift in world opinion in such a short time is a veritable 'own goal'. Posted by: Bill Church | July 21, 2006 11:13 AM The big mistakes made throughout history are 1) To think that "we" are better than "them". Jews are not better, nor worse, than arabs. Americans are not better, nor worse, than Japanese. Christians are neither better, nor worse than muslims. Every people on the face of Earth can be easily brainwashed and led to commit attrocities. Once you start to believe, that you, or your people are chosen by God, etc, you make your first step on the road to Hell. 2)To think that you are stronger, and THEREFORE, you must defend yourself and crush "them". While this illusion can work temporarily, in the long run, if you kill "their" children, then one day YOUR children will be killed. If you torture "them", YOUR children will be tortured (with the same justification). Somebody WILL have to pay one day for Hiroshima and Dresden. (Though not intended as such, Dresden was already a reprisal for killing Jews). All the existing people, without exception, have a bloody history, in which killings, as always, only led to more killings. So, who is to be blamed? It is absolutely futile to seek who has done what and when. The simple rule is: always put the blame on the one that is stronger, whoever he is. Our simpathy should be always with the weak, like in everyday life. And the only condition, when you are allowed to kill, is when you see a foreign tank in your backyard. Posted by: Alice | July 21, 2006 11:14 AM Will terrorism dissappear because we Americans go along with the excessive force against innocent civilians by Israel in Gaza and Lebanon. GW Bush was understandibly upset about Saddam Hussein trying to kill his father. It looks like he will never realize that people are going to have nothing but hatred for those who kill and maim their own loved ones. Or maybe he thinks that some loved ones are worth more than others? More expendable maybe? Americans would wake up and realize that these policies are morally wrong and not in our interest if they were given balanced reporting. Do we feel safer now from terrorists? Does the economic outlook look brighter? Or did the price of gas go down? And likewise the jewish people who did suffer so much, would probably stop going along with the same collective punishment tactics used by the Nazis if they were shown the suffering and hardships caused on other people by the racist policies of the Israeli government. Is israel a democracy. Do israeli arabs have the same rights as israelis of european origin? Shame on the american news medias for the lopsided reporting of the root problems in the arab israeli conflict and on the savage israeli adventurism and excessive use of force in Gaza and Lebanon. Show the american people the grief and suffering on all sides.Not just the israeli suffering. Come on let's be fair. Show the real picture and let decent people on all sides decide what is right. We can then see if they continue to go along with the bloodshed or if they begin to question these policies . Posted by: james in pittsburgh | July 21, 2006 11:16 AM Thom: The original article spoke of Muslum media which is why I mentioned it. True, Israeli media is biased too, but it seems to address more of the facts than the Muslum media does, in my opinion. As to where I stand, if Israel had started the current situation, then I would stand against them. Posted by: Thom | July 21, 2006 11:18 AM Why begin your history in 1948? What about the slaughter of 67 Jews in Hebron in 1929? What about the rejection of the partition plan in 1947 and the attempt to wipe Israel off the map from the very outset. The miserable history of violence in Israel/Palestine would have been avoided if the Arabs and Palestinians had accepted the UN Partition plan in 1947. Other countries were partitioned (India - Pakistan). Some 56 years after Israel has been established, isn't it about time to accept it's existence as a fact and to look for a solution based on mutual recognition? If you continue encourage those who see Israel's very existence as illigitimate and to justify the continued war to destroy her, you condemn the region to perpetual war. Posted by: to zene | July 21, 2006 11:19 AM Thom: The original article spoke of Muslum media which is why I mentioned it. True, Israeli media is biased too, but it seems to address more of the facts than the Muslum media does, in my opinion. As to where I stand, if Israel had started the current situation, then I would stand against them. (don't know why my last post came out as posted by Thom. My error apparently) Posted by: Wolcott | July 21, 2006 11:24 AM I accept Israel's right to exist (1967) as I am sure many others do. Why is your(Israeli) government killing Lebanese children? Posted by: Angus | July 21, 2006 11:26 AM GW Bush has been quoted as saying that he wanted to bring democracy to Iraq because "democracies do not make war on one another." Well, here we have a (kind of) Democracy (true democracies do not have second class citizens) Israel, invading not one but TWO democracies. Yet he sits by and does nothing and says nothing except that he hopes this war will lead to a lasting peace. The only way that will happen is if they, the I's, kill everyone in Lebanon, because anyone who is left alive will have many reasons and justifications to hate Israel. It's another Iraq, except that when the Israeli's go home, they will be right next door, not half a world away. Posted by: Get them out now | July 21, 2006 11:26 AM US Media biased? Of Course. Even todays Washington Post Editorial has major factual errors. It talks of an "unprovoked" cross border atack on Israel by Hizbullah. Of course the first "unprovoked" cross border attack, after a long peaceful period, was a terrorist car bomb in the Lebanese city if Sidon, on May 26. This was followed by a cross border artillery bombardment on Lebanon by Israel. In addition Lebanon was also bombed from the air by Israel. THEN two soldiers were kidnapped. To say this was unprovoked is demonstrably factually WRONG. Posted by: David | July 21, 2006 11:33 AM American media and america is hijacked by right wing jews. What do you expect?. Jews are evil? No. But they are certainly act like muslim extremists. But there is a signal sent to all muslim nations. There is no saviour for them when they fight against israel. Either you come up with nuke and nuke israel or use some WMD weapon. All this suicide bomb is useless. it is look like mosquito bomb. Every muslim country looking at this barbaric attack on lebabnon probably begging pakistan to give few nukes to protect themself against bully america and israel. I would n't be surprised they all got few from pakistan. I also seriously doubt america is superpower because of jews. They are smartest people in the world. Rest of america is living off hardwork done by jews. No one dare to challenge jews in america because they will be wiped out. Even bush , if he goes against jews , he will be shot by mozzad masked as muslim terrorist. WHat it really says is american people are stupid and jews media treat them as fickle and immature in not able to make decision on their own. They are afraid that america will wake up and find out the truth. It is like arrival movie. The problem though everyone in the world know america is a big jewsish state. All other people living in america are freeloaders!. it is true. Brain comes from jews. My goal is not piss off people but the people in very powerful jobs are jews. They control and shape how american people think. They use the americans anger against muslim to do create bigger jews country in middle east. Then it wil be jews on their own will be super power. i seriously think they will wipe out all palestenians. Then the world will know why hitler hated Jews. i always wondered why hitler hated them so much to kill them gruesom?. Now the same kind of act done by israel. They do it by noit giving food or life or land to palestenians. Smae result , different methods. I think karma will come back bite them. The more israel do stupid things , more people in the world will hate jews. I believe Israel is not playing its cards well. They ghave to be a victim , not aggressor of muslim. All these buffer zone will not guraanty their security. Israels enemy is muslim states not this mosquito terrorists. Posted by: Alex | July 21, 2006 11:35 AM "As to where I stand, if Israel had started the current situation, then I would stand against them." I guess that depends on what one determines as the current situation. History shows that the Jews in the British Protectorate, (Ashkenazi, which I will use as the beginning of the history of Modern Israel) were not fuzzy puppies, willing to sit quietly and wait for their chance to buy property and nicely ask the British to leave. What did they do? Nothing Political, they turned to terrorism. Not just killing, but mutilating their victims, Arab and Brit alike. The Irgun, the Stern Gang, among others began the cycle of violence that has never ended. Who blew up the King David Hotel? Since then, Israel's racist practices, (land ownership for one, voting rights for another) have consistently and completely destroyed any chance the Palestinians (and Israeli arabs) have had to live even a remotely normal life (read the WP article about the Bomb Shelters for Israelis, but 2 miles away none in an Is. Arab Village, Wednesday, I think). So who started it? Who has made it much worse than it has to be? Who has had a better opportunity to end it? Posted by: Thom | July 21, 2006 11:35 AM Seems like so many countries are calling for a cease-fire, and no one has any real solution for peace. No one (well, almost no one) wants war. But finding the real answers to peace is the real problem. Looks like this conflict will be going on for weeks, so there will be plenty of time for debate. Meanwhile, there are numerous news agencies from other countries to get all of the different perspectives. I'm wondering if this conflict is going to tumble into Syria and/or Iran. Only time will tell. Posted by: Wolcott | July 21, 2006 11:36 AM The Gaza kidnapping was also labelled by some American media as unprovoked. However after a 16 month truce with Hamas, Israel blew up a family of seven having a picnic on the beach. Henve the start of the current Gaza hostilities. Israel have since killed over a hundred Palestinians, a large number of which were civilians. Posted by: David | July 21, 2006 11:37 AM Thom wrote: Who has had a better opportunity to end it? I think that's the right question to ask, but I don't think the answer is Israel. Hamas and Hezbollah have clearly stated that their goal is to eliminate Israel from the map. No Israeli concessions will change this. Israel cannot end the conflict. Only Hamas and Hezbollah (i.e. Iran) can do so. Posted by: San | July 21, 2006 11:49 AM "I think that's the right question to ask, but I don't think the answer is Israel. Hamas and Hezbollah have clearly stated that their goal is to eliminate Israel from the map. No Israeli concessions will change this. Israel cannot end the conflict. Only Hamas and Hezbollah (i.e. Iran) can do so" Actually, according to America's fearless leader, and most Israelis, the Israeli's have the best opportunity to end it, doing what they are doing. Of course that will only make things worse, as it always has. Kill one man, and his whole family will want to kill you. Multiply that by one hundred. . . well you get the idea Perhaps my question should have been who has had the better opportunity to end it throughout history. . . a militarily powerful state (the proverbial 600 lb gorilla) or a fledgling democracy that has just gotten rid of one foreign power, apparently to make room for another, far more malign one. Posted by: Thom | July 21, 2006 11:57 AM Educated Americans do not hold racist views in regard to people of the Middle East. They know history and realize that Islam is not a religion of tolerance, despite vehement Islamic protestations. Centuries of warfare reinforce this opinion. That is not to deny that Christians have tried, since the emergence of Muhammed, to establish doctrines in the Middle East which are anathema to many---not all---citizens of the US. Up to this point, since the demise of the Puritan founders, we do not have a theocracy. Posted by: J. O'Brien | July 21, 2006 11:58 AM World need another superpower to balance the power. I believe the only way palestenians can live safe is Iran getting nuke and blackmail israel to give what palestenian wants. Israel knows it. That is why it wants to wipe out iran and syria. Then israel will concentrate on pakistan nuclear weapons. Israel become aggressor infront of world's eyes. its time is limited as israel wake up every muslim in every country. But no indiviudual can organize on their own and attack israel. Only muslim state /secret organization can do it. The target is clear. Iran. You will be watching in coming days about more propaganda against Iran in american media. Even iran says it is not interested in nukes and agree to proposal. You will watch America will try to humiliate iran and make them angry and revert to confrontational position. The idea is attack and remove nukes. Kill them and weaken them. I know how rightwing jews in Israel think. Aug 22 is the date iran will respond. I say it will be negative. if Iran exposes itself that it is nuke free , Israel planes will pummel iran to submission for helping palestenians and hizbollah. Iran weapons can't match american weapons. Even israelw ill start to occupy some parts of iran. Iran knew this. WIthout umbrella of nuke , his enemies will not fear iran. So Iran will not give up their right. They will fight. They will try to bring more party into this fight. WIll they succeed ? we don't know. I am just speculating how Israel and Iran behaves in future and how they act and react to each other. Blair is bus's poodle. America is Israel's poodle. Posted by: Alex | July 21, 2006 12:00 PM "The simple rule is: always put the blame on the one that is stronger, whoever he is." (Alice) Wow, THAT's a really clear-cutting criterium. How come I didn't think to it before? So, let's see... This is Arabs vs. Israeli, right ? Well, there are about 50 arabs for each israeli; the cumulated territory of arab states is about 600 times the one of Israel (including the "occupied territories"). Arabs states have a total GDP 10 times higher than Israel's one, and spend for militaries 4 times more than Israel (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab-Israeli_conflict_facts%2C_figures%2C_and_statistics). Of course, if we take into account non-arab muslim states (like Iran, for example), comparisons are even more appalling. So the conclusion is pretty obvious, isn't it ? Posted by: Paolo from Milan | July 21, 2006 12:00 PM Thom "As to where I stand, if Israel had started the current situation, then I would stand against them." Israel DID start the current situation with a Mossad car bomb in Sidon on May 26, followed by an artillery barage on Lebanon, then air strikes. The Olmert threatened more strikes on Lebanon, Likud suggested wiping Beiruit out, toxic chemicals were removed from Haifa Port in preparation for war. Then there was the so called "unprovoked attack" by Hizbullah. This escallation coincided with Israel blowing up a family of seven having a picnic on a Gaza Beach which ended a 16 month truce with Hamas. The whole thing has been planned. Posted by: David | July 21, 2006 12:04 PM "Educated Americans do not hold racist views in regard to people of the Middle East." Putting this first in your post does not take attention away from the racist statement that follows it. Are you saying you are not an educated american? I'm confused. Posted by: | July 21, 2006 12:06 PM The US media has hijacked the basic issues. That is nothing new. And Please do not ask why the US government is not like, accepted and even hated. When the US latest war equipment is used to assault innocent people and to impose lawless regimes. What anyone expects? There are thousand of kidnapped, imprisoned peoples in Israel that have not been accused, judge nor defended and have been forgotten for 3 Israelites soldiers, that were armed and represented de oppressor? Posted by: Roberto J | July 21, 2006 12:07 PM I for one am really tired of the "blah, blah, blah" about how Israel violates the rights of others. Israel is a sovereign state and has the right to defend itself. Do you think if someone rained hundreds of missiles on the U.S. that the U.S. would retaliate, even if it caused civilian casualties? You betcha. When this is all over, if the Islamic Fascists win, journalists will be the first to die. Fascism is rather intolerant of a free press, ya know. There's food for thought. Posted by: Umhangträger | July 21, 2006 12:07 PM "As to where I stand, if Israel had started the current situation, then I would stand against them" I didn't say that. I was quoting Wolcott. Posted by: Thom | July 21, 2006 12:07 PM America has green lighted this war. It has supplied the weapons for israel to commit atrocities against civilains. It has paid for them. Effectivelty, America is at war. Which makes it inceredibly stupid (and dangerous for Americans) for Bush to say that wiping out civilians can be considered legitimate self defence. This is especially so when American is so out of touch with the reast of the world. Just look at the stunning front page of todays Independent UK http://www.independent.co.uk/ Posted by: David | July 21, 2006 12:10 PM The US media has hijacked the basic issues. That is nothing new. And Please do not ask why the US government is not like, accepted and even hated. When the US latest war equipment is used to assault innocent people and to impose lawless regimes. What anyone expects? There are thousand of kidnapped, imprisoned peoples in Israel that have not been accused, judge nor defended and have been forgotten for 3 Israelites soldiers, that were armed and represented the oppressor? There are Uniformed terrorist and those are the worst kind. They feel they have all the rights to brake all the laws because they use flags and gods too. Posted by: Roberto J | July 21, 2006 12:10 PM Umhangträger: "Israel is a sovereign state and has the right to defend itself." I agree completely. However, defending oneself implies on one's own territory. As soon as one goes into someone else's territory, that is, by definition, an attack. Posted by: Thom | July 21, 2006 12:10 PM There are types of people in Israel. Normal jews wants peace with palestenians once for all. But also there is extreme right wing jews. Who thinks that the only way Israel is safe by creating big buffer zone around them. To do that they have to get rid of palestenians. how do you get rid of them? Constant humiliation. Terror action. Even palestenians wants peace , the right wing jews do not want it. Their goal is eliminate all palestenians completely. It may look like Hamas did suicide bomb but you may never know it is mozzad is the one helping hamas to keep the fight going. Israel is doing to palestenians the samething hitler did to them. In a different way. Both had same goal. ELiminate opposition completely. Posted by: Alex | July 21, 2006 12:13 PM I find this column and virtually every supportive comment to be a complete joke. The underlying cause for all violence in the region is Muslim intolerance of Jewish "occupation" of "their" land. Hezbollah operates virtually as a state-within-a-state in Southern Lebanon, and bases operations from civilian areas such that any defensive action by Israel is guaranteed to cause civilian casualties. This is then reported around the region and among socialist morons in Europe and elsewhere as if Israelis enjoy killing civilians. It is Hezbollah that does not care about Arab civilian deaths, because those deaths ultimately help their cause by fomenting more hatred of Israel. This puts Israel in a Catch-22. The Lebanese government is powerless to rein in Hezbollah because of popular support (i.e. the average citizen's hatred of Israel) throughout the region, and material and financial support from Syria and Iran. Civilian deaths are always a tragedy, but Israel has the right to do what it can to wipe out a terrorist organization dedicated to its destruction. Posted by: Pete R | July 21, 2006 12:21 PM People are innocent. Only religious beliefs make them do evil things on behalf of beliefs. If you want me to take side. I will take side of Jews. why? Simple. Islam has serious problem with its thought process. Islam do not allow people to have freedom of thought. Its goal is confine your thought to under the umbralla of allah and limit your thought to Muhammeds brain.He wrote koran. That is plain stupid. They have to modernize Koran. They have to remove all offensive words from koran completely. Will it happen? No until some tragic things happen in the middle east to make these people think religion is for stupid people. Posted by: Alex | July 21, 2006 12:22 PM "It is Hezbollah that does not care about Arab civilian deaths, because those deaths ultimately help their cause by fomenting more hatred of Israel. This puts Israel in a Catch-22." Doesn't seem like much of a catch to me. If retaliation causes hatred, don't retaliate, don't escalate. Posted by: | July 21, 2006 12:23 PM Perhaps one of the most disturbing images coming out of this conflict is photos of well-dressed, smile-faced Israeli girls (age 6-8?) writing on artilleries (to be fired into Lebanon by IDF) with "with love" and their names. We have seen pictures of Arab kids posted as suicide bombers. Now this. It is hard to be optimistic when all these maddenings from both sides continue. Posted by: mike | July 21, 2006 12:28 PM Are they really just hitting civilians? How is it that anyone knows weather the dead are civilians or Hizbollah? Do Hizbollah terrorists wear uniforms like the military? No they do not. So what you might call a civilian may just be the right target. Everyone just makes speculations on this and no real facts are ever presented to anyone. I do not discount that civilians have been injured and killed as well, but how can you blame a military for retaliating on a position where the enemy hides out? All terrorists hide among civilians because they think the military will not fire on civilians. It is their chicken hearted way of fighting. If caught in the open they would grab an innocent civilian and put them in between the soldier and the terrorist. They are all cowards who cannot do more than blow things up and hide behind civilians, disguised as civilians. They will never be able to stand up like a man and fight. Instead they will endanger civilians and use spin-doctors in the media to make it look as if it were the militaries fault that the terrorist hide among the civilians. Posted by: Stanley | July 21, 2006 12:29 PM The argument that instigation provides a sufficient justification to inhumane and possibly illegal acts is greatly flawed. The argument is likened to what immature 4 year old children make when they are confronted about an argument or altercation; for instance when they claim validation by claiming - "Well he started it". Furthermore, by the same argument, just brushing up against a person - a small possible instigation, the other party is somehow justified in murdering the instigator? Posted by: Rashesh | July 21, 2006 12:29 PM Posted by: | July 21, 2006 12:32 PM Since the beginning of the 20th century, Wars of Attrition are always "won" by the beleagured for what should be obvious reasons: all they have to do is survive; they are already at their home; it is the foreigner who must give up and leave; to win means to kill them all - every single man, woman and child. I challenge you "historians" to provide a contradictory example. Posted by: Maura | July 21, 2006 12:33 PM Israel has no right to exist. It is palestenian land forcibly occupied by jews. They are just trying to copy the american way of getting rid of all indians. Israel does evil things to exist. That being said if you ask me do you like world to be jewish world or muslim world? I say jews world. You will still have sreedom thought and expression. Muslims do not. They are barbaric. lawless. if you check the history , they kill their own wife, son to capture power. No wonder every majority muslim state has barbaric dictator. That being said Israel provokes palestenians and hizbollah by hunting terrorists. Hibollah and palestenians just react. There are normal jews who really , genuinelyw ants peace with palestenians. But there are mozzad and rightw ing jews keep provoking palestenians and hizbollah in the name of hunting terrorists and jail people. Muslims are stupid people , they can't organize or galvanize their own people. They fight individually for non existant allah. These stupid arabs watching their own muslims die in lebanon because they are shias. Muslims are like remote controlled robots. Where is the remote? Koran. Posted by: Alex | July 21, 2006 12:33 PM Why are Americans supporting a theocratic state in Israel anyway? Invade the region, set up an interim government of both Arabs and Jews to formulate a non ideological constitution, and hold elections in a single unified country called.... mideastistan or something. Posted by: Zain | July 21, 2006 12:36 PM As a human being I am aghast at the way Israel has sought to punish the people of Lebanon and Gaza. But I am even more troubled by the US admin response of let's give Israel enough time to finish the job and then we'll call for a stop. This merely reinforces the Muslim view of the US as a dis-honest broker and an enemy of their religion. It strengthens the likes of Osama Bin Laden and fans the flames of hatred. This is another war that is not good for anybody. Posted by: akash | July 21, 2006 12:38 PM It is funny these Stupid jordan's abdullah and Egypt mubarak did n't have guts to call off their ambassadors from israel. What a pity!. Afraid of free 2 billion / year loan from america to refurnish your palace?. I don't like innocent civilians gets killed in the name of religious beliefs. It is pure human stupidity!. Posted by: Alex | July 21, 2006 12:40 PM I AGREE WITH ZAIN. WE SHOULD INVADE ISRAEL AND SET UP A DEMOCRACY THERE. HOW ABOUT IT UNCLE GEORGIE AND DONNIE. WHAT DO YOU SAY? Posted by: | July 21, 2006 12:40 PM "Muslims are stupid people ," Oh my. I can see oodles of intellect pouring out of your ears after a statement like that. Psst, in case you didn't get it, I was being sarcastic. Posted by: Zain | July 21, 2006 12:41 PM Posted by: Thom | July 21, 2006 12:41 PM I encourage Mr. Morley, just as an exercise, to go back to all the media outlets he quotes from today repeating the eternal refrain of Arab victimhood and report on their coverage of civilian deaths in Darfur over the last there and one half years. It would be the shortest column he's ever written. Stories about the genocide in Darfur, sponsored by an Arab government that has the full support of all other Arab governments, do sometimes appear in the Western press. Even The Post prints them sometimes -- though the paper's editorial page has done a better job covering Darfur than its reporters have. The Arab press prints stories quoting government spokesmen, and reprints stories from Xinhua and Reuters that quote government spokesmen. And that's it. A couple of months ago a news director from al-Arabiya did a chat here on The Post's site in which he said that Arab media silence about Darfur was a product of deference to the Khartoum government. And there is probably a strong racial element involved as well. Sudan's genocidal war against civilians, which has produced deaths numbering in the hundreds of thousands, has after all been going on for over three years. That's a long time to sit on a story, and it stands to reason that the reasons for it are probably not pretty. But whatever the reasons, we ought to bear in mind the context of Arab media complaints about how Westerners value Arab lives less. Who knows, even The Post may report on this someday! Posted by: Zathras | July 21, 2006 12:44 PM This string is fascinating and terribly disturbing at time.In my estimation, Paolo and Pete R make the two most valid arguments. Clear, concise and relevant. Bravo to both of you! One thing is clear... this situation is tragic no matter what side you align with. Posted by: David | July 21, 2006 12:44 PM The reason world is chaotic because America is hijacked by religious fanatics. I always laugh when people say Israel is a democratic state. It is a 100% religious state just like any muslim state except that israel is rich because of america is dumping money and weapons. For me i don't like to establish any RELIGIOUS STATE!. I am not against jews. Because people can have different views and opinions and customs. As long they don't enforce it on another , it is ok. I don't want Israel to exist because the only reason as i see is that it will create wars and hate among everyone. I equally don't like all muslim states as well. No country should be based on religion. Religion should n't be part of governance. Lets take these extreme case...Lets say all muslims states are defeated andonly Israel remains. Then israel take over all the land and become jews super power? And they kill all non Jews? De Ja VU all over again?. Think about it. Never support religious state even if it is jews. Humans are gone beyond religion. The only religion if any it has to be democracy and freedom of thought. Posted by: Alex | July 21, 2006 12:48 PM "If retaliation causes hatred, don't retaliate, don't escalate." Yes: if somebody blows up your buses, and restaurants, and pizzerias, don't do anything. This way the "international community" will rush at your side, and the bad guys will be stopped. Just wait and see. Or maybe you have already seen ? Some 60-70 years ago ? Posted by: Paolo from Milan | July 21, 2006 12:48 PM I do agree with you that Egypt and Saudi Arabia's remarks are just opportunism and a reflection of their deep rooted prejudice towards the Shia. Mubarak said something to the effect of the Shia in Iraq being the lap dogs of Iran (something very derogatory ill have to google the exact quote later). The wahabis in Saudi Arabia are probably torn between who to hate more, America, the Jews or the Shia. Posted by: Zain | July 21, 2006 12:48 PM seventy years ago, there were no busses, no pizza parlors, and I have no idea what you are talking about Posted by: What happened in 1936? | July 21, 2006 12:51 PM Look, the US and Israel are both indoctrinated societies and here in the US, we are not even taught 20th century world history through high school. While Leon Uris', 'Exodus' was required reading for me in high school, I didn't learn anything about the Arab point of view until my third year of college, and I was a history major! Look at the recent blackballing of Professor Juan Cole of the University of Wisconsin, when he was up for a position at Princeton. His pro-Palestinian views were considered so extreme, that there was a large, well-connected effort to quash his appointment. In the rest of the world, his views are well within the norm. We aren't even allowed to consider that perhaps there is another point of view in the Arab-Israeli conflict. Also, look at the 2004 approval that our pedmorphic president gave Ariel Sharon to unilaterally build a security wall encompassing vast swaths of the West Bank. Internationally, there was a huge outcry. Here in the US, noone even noticed. Another example is the recent Harvard study by Mearscheimer and Walt examining the impact of the Israeli lobby on US policy. Alan Dershowitz was attacking the authors before the ink was even dry and anyone had even had an opportunity to read the study. Finally, Alex from the above post, I would encourage you to study a little more about religions before you cast such a broad judgment. Aside from some eastern religions and philosophies like Hinduism, Buddhism and Taoism, all religions are in the mind/behavior control business and Christianity is probably the worst offender. Posted by: Steve Shaw | July 21, 2006 12:52 PM Where is OSAMA and His regular Tapes? Where is his regualr appearance?. Let me tell you the truth!. OSAMA was dead long long time ago. Musharraf bliped it in media by mistake. Bush Muzzled his voice. As long as OSAMA is alive , Right wingers can use his name to instill fear and pass any legislation. What about regular OSAMA tapes? Well. Do you relaly think CIA can't forge Osama's voice? CIA is in pakistan ...manufacting OSAMA's tapes in regular intervals and sent to ALjazeera. It is very easy to dupe america if you can control the media outlet. Posted by: Alex | July 21, 2006 12:54 PM The LOW GRADE SIMMERING hatred that most of the world has felt for Israel as it killed and grabbed land in the name of "defense" HAS TURNED WHITE HOT. How smart are the arrogant Israelis? And do they think Americans, except the stupid duped Bush admiinstration will stand with them after this? (see Pew research above) WRITTEN as the savage Israelis mass at the Lebanaese border WRITTEN as Osama ben Lauden prepares to launch another message, that is, please God, hopefully only words. Posted by: white hot | July 21, 2006 12:57 PM Alex. Please stop posting. You're making an ass of yourself. Posted by: David | July 21, 2006 12:59 PM really discusses is that Jews _by definition_ are elitists and seperatists... not that that makes them evil, but they are rather predjudiced in their own behaviour as "the chosen," that being said _Jewishness_ is ethnicity, ethnicity, implies behaviors that come from an enculturement rather than an external abstraction like everyone in France _becomes_ french, or puerto ricans Jewish ethnicity involves needing paranoia, being persecuted-as-a-way-of-life(aka the Woody Allen syndrome) and taking offense when rude primitive people act like _that_ to address the current situation and solve it would require a psychiatrist and world leaders from different philosophys and religions to discuss the morality of gawd and war....and convince the Jews, that perhaps they are part of the effing problem...not the solution if the WTC was caused from an external source, which I don't see that it was...it seems to have been an inside job, most of the animosity would have been from the unequal treatment that Israel recieves in the Palestinian situation... also invading Iraq for OIL may have angerfied a few fence sitters.... Posted by: what no one | July 21, 2006 12:59 PM "If retaliation causes hatred, don't retaliate, don't escalate." Yes: if somebody blows up your buses, and restaurants, and pizzerias, don't do anything. This way the "international community" will rush at your side, and the bad guys will be stopped. Just wait and see. The problem is that the Palestinians look at Israeli actions historically as just that sort of justification for continuing their attacks against the Israelis. Then you get into that vicious cycle of who dunit first and before you know it people are quoting scripture to justify their claims. Posted by: Zain | July 21, 2006 01:00 PM To Steve Shaw,David: Are you all afraid of truth? Posted by: Alex | July 21, 2006 01:02 PM One has to understand that Hezbollah has been hiding rockets in houses, paying civilians for their storage services. Hence the high number of civilian casualties. The difference is that Israel is trying to minimize civilian casualties, while Hezbollah aims at civilians as its main target. Israel began this operation because its high moral standards dictate a rescue mission for those who where taken across an internationally recongnized border by Hezbollah, and because it has to protect its civilians from the ongoing attacks of Hezbollah and Hamas. Israel accepted the UN Partition Plan, while the Arabs rejected it and started a war to wipe it off the map. The Arabs have done so several times over the past decades, and now Syria and Iran, under international pressure, are trying to use a proxy to do it again. Israel will win because it fights a just war. Posted by: Israeli | July 21, 2006 01:02 PM WHERE ARE THE QUOTES FROM ISRAELI NEWSPAPERS? WHY ARE THERE MORE ARAB AND EUROPEAN QUOTES THAN US QUOTES? IS THE WRITER BIASED? Posted by: NAIVE | July 21, 2006 01:06 PM What is frightening is the extent to which Israel -- like the Bush Administration -- lives by the credo that a display of reckless, indiscriminate force is the best way to cow your enemies into submission. It's amazing that Israel and GWB continue to think this is the way to victory since it has been shown so clearly not to be the case over and over, whether in Iraq or Lebanon or Vietnam. But what is more frightening is to think about how they might decide to display that power next. If invading Iraq and trashing Lebanon are fair game, who's to say they won't decide to just take on the whole region, just deal with this Middle East problem once and for all? As long as we're thinking big picture and not too concerned about minor short-term issues like, say, civilian casualties, destruction of infrastructure, etc., why not go for the touchdown? I wish I was kidding, but if GWB himself was reading this, he'd probably be saying "here! here!" Posted by: Frank S | July 21, 2006 01:08 PM Poor little muslims, they scream for holy war and then cry and soil their pants when it is served to them boiling hot. They want war but then hide behing their women and children and say "you can't attack us now", or "humanitarian crisis" or "let us now talk", or "give peace a chance". Your Iraninan and Syrian masters have dragged you into war and now you will suffer, and yes, muslim lives mean absolutely nothing to me as you are the enemy. The problem is not terrorism but the religion of Islam which we must excise like a cancerous tumor. Posted by: Santiago Matamoros | July 21, 2006 01:09 PM WHERE ARE THE QUOTES FROM ISRAELI NEWSPAPERS? WHY ARE THERE MORE ARAB AND EUROPEAN QUOTES THAN US QUOTES? IS THE WRITER BIASED? It's called World Opinion Roundup, that's why. Posted by: | July 21, 2006 01:09 PM Angus: "I accept Israel's right to exist (1967) as I am sure many others do. Why is your(Israeli) government killing Lebanese children?" Because the Lebanese government hosts the Hizbullah, who does NOT accept Israel's right to exist, and demonstrates his intentions with facts, while yours are only words. Posted by: Matt | July 21, 2006 01:12 PM It's wonderful to see Mr. Morley quote papers from all the Arab countries that typically allow their citizens no freedom of speech. Also, the wonderful European countries that where anti-semitism is alive and thriving. Once again, the Post proves its bias. Posted by: | July 21, 2006 01:12 PM Alex - Aren't you even a little embarrassed? Posted by: | July 21, 2006 01:13 PM Mr. Morley - Do you even read these posts? Posted by: | July 21, 2006 01:18 PM please by quiet, you're too controlling...and a nall Posted by: David, | July 21, 2006 01:21 PM Since this blog is about conflict viewed through different lenses, let me refer all of you to this: Posted by: | July 21, 2006 01:22 PM the Israeli's need psychiatric help and the muslims need some social skills, let's werk together to help them get what they need? come on meshugannehs, oy veh! Posted by: let's face it | July 21, 2006 01:24 PM Israel is a tiny sliver of land on the Mediterranean. Muslim lands extend from the Atlantic Ocean to continental India. Yet Muslims extremists want to wipe Israel off the face of the map. Israel has Muslim members in their Knesset but no Jews are allowed to even live in Muslim lands or the handful are a persecuted minority living in daily fear. Enough of this Zionist entity rhetoric now mouthed by so-called Christians who can never forgive the Christ killers. Like the Crusaders of old they would gladly see every Jew die to avenge the stories repeated ad nauseum by their priests and ministers. But if they can't be wiped out they can be made to suffer for eternity. This isn't anti-Semetism it is a Christian Jihad against the Jews that lurks in their unconscious. Posted by: Jew | July 21, 2006 01:25 PM a good analyst from Long Island, perhaps he could counsel the Israeli people, or Dr. Phil, and Miz Manners could work with the Arabic people, to teach them that killing should not be the first response in a difficult social situation! Posted by: I know | July 21, 2006 01:26 PM and everyone is against me! the fact that I have emotional issues and make everyone near me hate me, is not my fault, it's part of my ethnicity! Posted by: oh I am a Jew | July 21, 2006 01:27 PM Oh, but Islam is a religion of peace, remember??? Posted by: | July 21, 2006 01:28 PM to slap the womens lib movement person that said that every male was chauvinist, or the black guy hustling a woman with no respect for her accusing her of being predjudiced....this is the same schtick thatyou're using...knock it off you're rude, and paranoid, you need to see a shrink... Posted by: did you ever just want | July 21, 2006 01:29 PM I can't believe that someone really does not know what happened in Europe from 1933 to 1945. I just wanted to point out that Jews have learnt at their expenses that when somebody says "I will kill you all" he really means it, and that if they don't defend themselves, nobody else will. That's why they can be sometimes over-reactive (which I don't think they have been in this case). Posted by: Paolo from Milan | July 21, 2006 01:30 PM Maybe the fundamentalists could actually evolve and enter this century where people can use language to communicate with each other. Instead, they remain in whatever century they're locked into where they can act like barbarians. Posted by: | July 21, 2006 01:30 PM And now for some ethnic cleansing.. TYRE, Lebanon, July 20 - The warning came in the morning Thursday, a recorded message dialed to phone numbers in southern Lebanon. In flawless Arabic, it instructed: Leave now, beyond the Litani River that bisects the rock-studded wadis of the south. Don't flee on motorcycles or in vans or trucks. Otherwise, you will be a target. The message signed off simply: the state of Israel. But leaving this southern Lebanese city Thursday was more complicated than a choice. Aid officials say that tens of thousands have already fled Tyre and its environs along the Mediterranean Sea but that perhaps 12,000 Lebanese remain stranded. The wartime circumstances of a besieged city keep them here: no gasoline for their cars, no money for taxi fares that have surged 75-fold, no faith in assurances from Israeli forces that have repeatedly attacked civilian vehic
The latest opinion and commentary on news around the world: A comprehensive blog about what international newspapers, blogs and Web sites are saying about America, Europe, the Middle East, Africa, South America, including Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, England, Germany, Canada and other countries.
314.181818
0.909091
1.454545
high
medium
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/20/AR2006072000826.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/20/AR2006072000826.html
Navy Quarterback Cleared of Raping Midshipman
2006072219
A former U.S. Naval Academy quarterback was acquitted last night of raping a female midshipman but was found guilty of conduct unbecoming an officer for having sex with the woman in her dorm room and disobeying an order to stay clear of her. The verdict by a jury of five naval officers means that Midshipman Lamar S. Owens Jr., 22, could face up to two years in a military prison as well as dismissal from the Navy. He avoids the life sentence that could have come with a rape conviction. The high-profile court-martial, involving a star football player who led Navy to victory in the Poinsettia Bowl, comes as the Annapolis academy and other military schools face increased pressure to crack down on sexual assaults. Owens's acquittal on the rape charge comes less than a month after a similar verdict for a Coast Guard Academy cadet accused of rape. Owens's attorneys immediately objected to the jury's decision, saying that there was no credible evidence to support conviction on any of the charges and that they would ask the judge, Cmdr. John A. Maksym, to overturn the verdict today. Owens's attorney, Reid H. Weingarten, said in a news conference that he was relieved the rape charge did not stand and was "very confident the conduct unbecoming will go." If the judge affirms the verdict, the jury will begin considering the sentence immediately. In court testimony, the woman said Owens had entered her room while she was barely conscious after a night of heavy drinking and began forcing her to have sex, stopping only after she resisted. Owens contended that he had been invited to the room during an instant message conversation and began having consensual sex with her; he found that she had suddenly become unresponsive, after which he stopped and left. Owens's defense team argued that the prosecution's case was "riddled with reasonable doubt," given that the woman acknowledged having several gaps in her memory of the incident and that several witnesses had testified that they had seen her drinking heavily. Prosecutors responded that she had no reason to lie in her testimony and that Owens had apologized repeatedly during a telephone conversation with the woman that was secretly taped by investigators. The nine-day trial made public other problems the academy usually keeps private. The testimony of several witnesses, some of them granted immunity, touched on sex, binge drinking, cheating and lying -- taboos at a school that tries to instill in its students the ideals of honor, courage and commitment. Owens's case is one of the few at Annapolis that has reached court-martial. Most sexual assault allegations are quietly resolved by the school's internal disciplinary system. Of 56 midshipmen accused of the crime since 1998, only two have been convicted. The jury of four men and a woman delivered the decision after nearly 10 hours of deliberation in a small chamber next to the wood-paneled courtroom in the Washington Navy Yard. Under military procedure, a two-thirds majority is required to convict on each charge. The jury's votes were not revealed, and the judge ordered the jurors not to discuss the case. Owens stood at attention as the jury's president, a lieutenant commander, read the verdict. Owens's family members, seated behind him, grimaced and then stared stonily ahead. Weingarten's 20-year-old son, who has watched much of the trial, put his head in his hands.
A former U.S. Naval Academy quarterback was acquitted last night of raping a female midshipman but was found guilty of conduct unbecoming an officer for having sex with the woman in her dorm room and disobeying an order to stay clear of her.
14.954545
1
44
low
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/20/AR2006072001816.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/20/AR2006072001816.html
Top-Secret World Loses Blogger
2006072219
Christine Axsmith, a software contractor for the CIA, considered her blog a success within the select circle of people who could actually access it. Only people with top-secret security clearances could read her musings, which were posted on Intelink, the intelligence community's classified intranet. Writing as Covert Communications, CC for short, she opined in her online journal on such national security conundrums as stagflation, the war of ideas in the Middle East and -- in her most popular post -- bad food in the CIA cafeteria. But the hundreds of blog readers who responded to her irreverent entries with titles such as "Morale Equals Food" won't be joining her ever again. On July 13, after she posted her views on torture and the Geneva Conventions, her blog was taken down and her security badge was revoked. On Monday, Axsmith was terminated by her employer, BAE Systems, which was helping the CIA test software. As a traveler in the classified blogosphere, Axsmith was not alone. Hundreds of blog posts appear on Intelink. The CIA says blogs and other electronic tools are used by people working on the same issue to exchange information and ideas. CIA spokesman Paul Gimigliano declined to comment on Axsmith's case but said the policy on blogs is that "postings should relate directly to the official business of the author and readers of the site, and that managers should be informed of online projects that use government resources. CIA expects contractors to do the work they are paid to do." A BAE Systems spokesman declined to comment. Axsmith, 42, said in an interview this week that she thinks of herself as the Erma Bombeck of the intel world, a "generalist" writing about lunch meat one day, the war on terrorism the next. She said she first posted her classified blog in May and no one said a thing. When she asked, managers even agreed to give her the statistics on how many people were entering the site. Her column on food pulled in 890 readers, and people sent her reviews from other intelligence agency canteens. The day of the last post, Axsmith said, after reading a newspaper report that the CIA would join the rest of the U.S. government in according Geneva Conventions rights to prisoners, she posted her views on the subject. It started, she said, something like this: "Waterboarding is Torture and Torture is Wrong." And it continued, she added, with something like this: "CC had the sad occasion to read interrogation transcripts in an assignment that should not be made public. And, let's just say, European lives were not saved." (That was a jab at Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's trip to Europe late last year when she defended U.S. policy on secret detentions and interrogations.) A self-described "opinionated loudmouth with a knack for writing a catchy headline," Axsmith also wrote how it was important to "empower grunts and paper pushers" because, she explained in the interview, "I'm a big believer in educating people at the bottom, and that's how you strengthen an infrastructure." In her job as a contractor at the CIA's software-development shop, Axsmith said, she conducted "performance and stress testing" on computer programs, and that as a computer engineer she had nothing to do with interrogations. She said she did read some interrogation-related reports while performing her job as a trainer in one counterterrorism office.
Christine Axsmith, a software contractor for the CIA, considered her blog a success within the select circle of people who could actually access it.
24.888889
1
27
medium
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/20/AR2006072001917.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/20/AR2006072001917.html
Janet Bares Belly, Not Soul
2006072219
Janet Jackson was in Washington yesterday to do . . . something. Exactly what is unclear. What we do know is that the R&B diva took a short break from doing whatever else she does and deigned to spend about 15 mid-afternoon minutes in a chi-chi hotel ballroom, offering not very revelatory answers to questions about her personal life, her career, her fans and a forthcoming album, "20 Years Old" -- an album that none of the reporters in the room had been given a chance to hear. (Q: So, how is that CD? A: Might be the best thing we've never heard!) The event, such as it was, was billed as "The D.C. Press Junket for the International Icon," and throughout the exercise in celebrity-journalism torture, said international icon -- multiplatinum recording star, sister of Michael, flasher of nipple -- offered very little beyond a look at her newly trim bod. Jackson, 40, generously shared that much of herself with the cameras, courtesy of a midriff-baring cropped vest that was held together, at the bosom, by a single button that was holding on for dear life. Otherwise, Jackson threw very few bones to the hungry journalists and instead served a big, steaming bowl of nothing. (Not that you go to a Janet Jackson news conference expecting to hear a soliloquy on the stem-cell debate or anything. But still.) Jackson has more or less been in hiding since her infamous Super Bowl halftime show in 2004, and it was roughly 45 minutes past the appointed hour when she finally emerged in the Mandarin Oriental hotel's Grand Ballroom. What was she doing behind that black velvet curtain all that time? Sit-ups? Makeup? Eating a cup of mixed veggies -- which, we learned from reading Us Weekly, is a critical component of her new diet? Before her arrival, Jackson sent an advance team out. It was led by her beau, the superproducer Jermaine Dupri, who was dripping in jewelry, a Louis Vuitton BlackBerry holster hanging from his hip. "Sorry we're late," he said. "Dealing with traffic and other things in D.C." (Never mind that hotel employees said Dupri, Jackson, et al. had arrived at the hotel plenty early.) After Dupri's introduction, Jackson came onto the stage, appearing shy and demure, wardrobe notwithstanding. She smiled uneasily for the cameras. "Everyone's so quiet," she said. Nobody responded. "I wasn't raised in a quiet home." She sat. The questions began. There was one from a Washington Blade editor. Why do you think you're so popular with gay people? she was asked -- though not by the editor himself. The assembled journalists had been given 3 1/2 -by-4 1/4 -inch notecards, along with instructions to write their questions and then pass them to the left, to a publicist-cum-moderator. In a mousy voice that kept fading out on the PA, Jackson said something about sometimes writing about gay topics, even though she didn't have to, and mumble mumble mumble.
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.
12.078431
0.411765
0.411765
low
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/20/AR2006072001922.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/20/AR2006072001922.html
'Lady in the Water': Ingenious Strokes of Fantasy
2006072219
"Lady in the Water" doesn't have a cute kid who sees dead people, but it has something intriguingly better: a pallid, otherworldly, watery being called Story (Bryce Dallas Howard), who sets the stage for a mesmerizing bedside yarn with all-but-apocalyptic dimension. Filmmaker M. Night Shyamalan may never match the commercial success of "The Sixth Sense," which held audiences in its thrall to the tune of almost $300 million. But "Lady in the Water," a captivating amalgam of mystery, thriller and mythic fantasy, eclipses his 1999 debut for sheer inventiveness, audacity and narrative derring-do. When Story emerges from a swimming pool behind a dingy Philadelphia apartment building and into the arms of its bewildered superintendent, Cleveland Heep (Paul Giamatti), he learns she needs protection. But from what? Slowly the houseguest reveals that she's a "narf," a nymph who has been sent by her people to find a man of deep significance. She knows only that he is a writer whose words will affect the course of humanity. But she dares not leave Cleveland's apartment because of marauding creatures in the wooded area just beyond the run-down high-rise. Cleveland seeks help from his Korean neighbor Young-Soon Choi (Cindy Cheung) and her mother, Mrs. Choi (June Kyoto Lu), a cantankerous old lady who knows -- from stories she heard as a child -- all about narfs, marauding "scrunts" and terrifying monkeylike beings known as "tartutics" that lurk in trees. The plot follows the filmmaker's familiar strategy, in which seemingly insignificant episodes and characters accumulate like bricks to become a grand structure. As Shyamalan aficionados have come to appreciate, that building is inlaid everywhere with narrative twists. And Cleveland, a guy who has resigned himself to a life plunging toilets, soon understands that he's at the beginning of something significant. A mission. He accepts the challenge. It's easy to see why Disney, Shyamalan's backer for his previous four movies, withdrew from the project after reading the script. "Lady in the Water," now a Warner Bros. film, is more complex -- and just plain weird -- than anything he has attempted before. It is peopled with disconcerting characters, including the stammering antihero, a room full of potheads and the almost funereal Mr. Farber (Bob Balaban), a humorless book and film critic, who despises most movies (you can imagine his reviews of Disney flicks) and serves as the movie's postmodern comic relief. And Shyamalan, who has made a tradition of brief cameos in his films, gives himself a surprisingly hefty role as another resident of Cleveland's building. But Disney's withdrawal is a gain for viewers who value fanciful storytelling that's not afraid to follow its most eccentric impulses. Shyamalan has never shied from high-wire risk, and the very unevenness of his work, ranging from the sublime "Sixth Sense" to the disastrous "The Village," is testament to that courageous sensibility. Should commercial consideration always be the sine qua non, the lodestar of American filmmaking? Hopefully not. If the ultimate goal is entertainment, then "Lady in the Water" enthusiastically rises to the task. In a movie laden with enough symbolism, shamanism and mythic lore to make Joseph Campbell dance a tribal jig, Shyamalan never forgets to have fun. Interspersed throughout the film is a deft humor that not only offers further insight into its characters, but also allows the audience to take a breath before negotiating the next story corridor. At one point, Cleveland is waiting patiently for translation as Mrs. Choi is unleashing a flurry of strident banter upon her daughter. After giving Cleveland the information he's so desperate for, a flustered Young-Soon adds that her mother "also told me I should be married to a dentist." At the center of all this is Giamatti, whose performance demands short-list consideration come award time. He seems to grow with every role and, here, you particularly notice the very expressiveness of his eyes, variously furtive, shy, mysterious, observant, even brooding -- and always haunted. Until now, Shyamalan's work has been one of masterful trickery, designed to keep audiences spellbound until the end credits. But for the first time, the filmmaker illuminates a world beyond scheme, beyond the shell games of his earlier films. In "Lady in the Water," we no longer think of his characters as mere slaves of the narrative but mazes unto themselves. The eventual outcome of their lives is something we contemplate long after the movie has ended. That's the mark of an artist who makes it his business to push the boundaries of storytelling in Hollywood. And that's exciting. Lady in the Water (110 minutes, at area theaters) is rated PG-13 for some frightening sequences.
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.
37.76
0.52
0.6
high
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/07/DI2006070700991.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/07/DI2006070700991.html
Real Estate Live
2006072219
Welcome to Real Estate Live, an online discussion of the Washington area housing market with Post Real Estate editor Maryann Haggerty. Maryann has been with The Post for 18 years and has served as real estate editor for the last five years. She's been a business and real estate editor and reporter for about 25 years. In all that time, she still hasn't figured out where you can find a lovely but inexpensive house in a charming neighborhood. She's online twice a month to answer your questions about the local housing market -- from condos and investment properties to contracts and mortgages. For more on local real estate, visit washingtonpost.com's Real Estate section . Maryann Haggerty: Hello, folks. It seems summer has come to Washington for real this week. I consider myself personally lucky because I have a very short commute--30 minutes door to desk via foot and Metro. That's a big part of what makes living in Washington work for me. But in tomorrow's Real Estate section, we have a story that features people who left Washington to live in Baltimore, mostly for cost reasons, and now consider THEMSELVES very lucky, long commutes and all. I'll dive into answering your questions. Feel free to chime in with advice to others, or with your thoughts about what makes it worth your while to continue to live in this area. Ashburn, Va.: There are 4,500+ units for sale in Loudoun County, Va. With only 400 or so sold per month, odds are that we in Loudoun have a 10 percent chance of getting a buyer. How long do you think this high inventory trend will continue? Will we be waiting until 2007 before this inventory is cut in half? Maryann Haggerty: Can't tell you how long it will continue--greater economic changes can have effects, for instance. But 2007 isn't that far away anymore, so I think it's safe to say the wait is at least that long. Your worst nightmare: Well, it's time for the weekly running of the bulls. I thought I'd start the show early with a little insight into your buyer market. I'm a very well paid professional, who just crossed into a six figure income last year. I have basically no debt beyond my student loans. I rent. I'd be interested in buying. But you see, I spent the past five years listening to all of you blather on about RE. The smug attitude. The snotty "oh you rent" comments. We warned you that this was a bubble. We told you that ARMs, or worse yet interest-only ARMs were amazingly stupid on historical low interest rates (which can only go up). We told you energy prices were skyrocketing, driving up inflation (and eventually interest rates). But still you bought the condo for a half mil on $80,000 income. And were condescending about it. So now I'm sitting back, putting a grand or two a month away. I have no pressure. I'm ahead of the game. I just have more downpayment. Rates going up? Who cares? NOW is when you use ARM loans, when rates are higher and going up ... by the time it resets rates are going back DOWN. You on the other hand have an albatross. Those low, low payments die when your ARM (or god help your interest-only ARM, or worse yet your teaser) resets. Maybe you can afford it. Maybe you can't. A lot of you can't. Or you get a job elsewhere. Or whatever. The point being you are competing with desperate builders of new construction, and have a timeline. Or didn't you notice the backlog of properties? I can wait you out. I'm not buying your overpriced place on some silly discount. I'm buying at 2002 or earlier prices. If not from you, then from your bank when you foreclose. So keep dreaming about "soft landings." All the greater fools already bought ... the rest of us are those who could afford it, but weren't willing to mortgage our futures on crazy loans and overpricing. Maryann Haggerty: Who is sounding a little, well, smug and condescending now? Sterling, Va.: How successful are realtor open houses? Do you recommend them? Maryann Haggerty: The conventional wisdom is that open houses don't directly sell houses. Let me see if we can find a link to a recent story we did about that... washingtonpost.com: Cooling Market Lifts Lid on Old Debate , (Post, May 13) Maryann Haggerty: This is the link to the open house story What's do you think about Maryland's Baltimore's market? We can still find houses for under $150,000 in Baltimore, one hour drive to D.C. Thank you for your response. Maryann Haggerty: A Baltimore question: Having done a lot of Baltimore home real estate ad searches this week, I can tell you, yes, there is still stuff under $150,000, but I can't tell its condition or, more importantly, whether you would like the neighborhood. For that legendary big Victorian walking distance to a MARC station, you are going to pay more. Woodbridge Va.: As the BRAC process moves forward and more defense jobs move from Crystal City to Dale City, do you see an opportunity for me to sell high in Woodbridge and buy low in Alexandria? Maryann Haggerty: Not really. The most recent round of BRAC studies predict people won;t be making wholesales moves within Northern Virginia; rather, they will be adapting their commutes. Washington, D.C.: I have a rental in D.C. where my tenant is on a month-to-month as his lease expired last August. Someone told me that tenants in D.C. are basically "tenants for life," and you just can't ask them to move unless they are not paying rent. You have to have a good reason. Is that true? Maryann Haggerty: That can be pretty much true in practice. The following is from the Georgetown University housing office's Web site: "You cannot be evicted or asked to leave because your lease expires. The terms of your expired lease continue to be in effect, except for the amount of rent paid. The amount of rent can increase as allowed by the rent control law. Your landlord must give you a written letter asking you to move. This letter is called a "Notice to Correct or Vacate." Any part of your lease that says you can be evicted without notice is invalid, unless it is for nonpayment of rent. You are not required to vacate, however, until a court orders your eviction. As soon as you receive a court notice about an eviction (called a "summons and complaint"), you should act immediately. The number of days notice is different depending upon the reason for eviction. The most common reasons (each requiring 30 days notice) are for nonpayment of rent, violation of the lease after receiving a 30-day written notice to comply with the terms of the lease, and a court decree that you have committed an illegal act in your apartment." Kensington, Md.: I submitted an offer on a house I wanted in Kensington yesterday. The listing agent told my agent about an hour before she was to talk to the seller about the offers what it would take to get to the top of the other two offers -- full listing price and the seller would contribute closing costs. I told my agent to go ahead with that offer. After that, we heard nothing for three hours. It turns out that another offer MIRACULOUSLY showed up a few minutes before her (the listing agent's) talk with the seller, complete with escalator clause to assure the other buyer the house! My suspicion and that of my agent is that the listing agent simply used our offer to call the other buyer and see if they'd up their offer. I was told this is illegal and unethical. Of course I can't prove this but do I have any rights? Is it wrong for an agent to talk about other offers to the potential buyers? Do I have a case for a lawsuit? As a first time homebuyer, I thought I could stay in that house for 20 years and now I feel like I'll never see another house like that again. Maryann Haggerty: It may feel unethical, but it's not illegal, as far as I know. But calm down. Why even think about bothering with the hassle and expense of a lawsuit? Keep looking; there are plenty of other houses out there. Really, there are. Washington, D.C.: Hi, Maryann. We are planning to put our 100 year old capitol hill row house for sale in early fall. It has been completely rehabbed. What would you say is the market outlook for capitol hill homes? Thanks for your response. Maryann Haggerty: As with many other areas, there are a lot of houses on the market and prices are more rational than a year ago. (Which is not to necessarily to say they are much lower. Just not as laughable for wrecks that are barely standing.) Washington, D.C. : Maryann -- My wife and I are about to make an offer on a house. In your opinion, is it stronger to offer the asking price and request seller's help with closing, or to offer less than asking and pay the full closing amount? I'm also interested in what my fellow Real Estate Live readers think about this. Thank you! Maryann Haggerty: I guess it's the psychology of the thing. A cold, dispassionate analysis would tell you the lower price is better for both buyer and seller--slightly less taxes, slightly lower commission. Some buyers can't scrape together all the cash; those are the folks closing costs help. And some sellers may have pride issues and feel better about the higher price, no matter the real bottom line. Baltimore, Md.: Happy Friday, Ms. Haggerty. I hope you will take on this question, as I've not been able to get any advice or suggestions elsewhere. Here's the deal. I have this house in the Baltimore area. The reason for buying in Baltimore is because I didn't believe I could afford to buy in the area where I had been renting, which is P.G. County. It will be a year next month, and I want out. I can't afford to live there anymore. What with property taxes breathing down my back (I didn't include it in my mortgage because my realtor was not the best). Then there is the long commute to DC every morning. If you've been reading the papers lately, you'd know that the MARC trains have been delayed, put out of service and it is driving me crazy. What made me believe I could do that? I want to get out without getting burnt too badly. Could I sell it and walk away with some money in my pocket? Should I rent it out to someone that lives and works in the area? I've even thought about a roommate, but I don't really want to go that route, because that spells more trouble. An ideal situation would be for me to sell it (on my own, if possible). Move in with my boyfriend for a while until I can get something on my own. Tell me what the consequences of selling would have on me. Maryann Haggerty: Here is someone who isn't happy with the Baltimore decision. If you can sell at even a small profit, then sell. If the house is pulling you further under each month, there is no plus to keeping it, and you risk real problems if you start missing payments, etc. Yes, if you make a profit, you will have to pay tax on the capital gain because you have been there less than 24 months (unless you can gin up some legal reason for a partial exemption, which I don't really see here.) I that in order to make any money at all, you would have to go for-sale-by-owner; it is unlikely your property has appreciated sufficiently in a year to cover anything else. Remember, that is a lot of work. Being a landlord isn't worry-free either; you have to do those numbers, too. Whatever you do, think through what will be best for you. If that house is making your life miserable, you may even want to take a small loss to sell it. Washington, D.C.: Last year I bought a condo in a recently converted apartment building (24 units). Our management company is awful and our condo board, of which I am a member, is really inexperienced. We're starting to run into building maintenance issues and aren't dealing with them effectively. Any idea where a small building, with a lackluster management company, can go for help? We want to fire this company when the contract is up. Maryann Haggerty: Immediately call the Community Associations Institute in Alexandria. (www.caionline.org) They have a lot of information available and offer regular training for inexperienced board members. You can learn pretty quickly how to go about hiring a decent management company and overseeing them properly. Long time TWP reader: Hi, Maryann. Interesting display piece on the Plaza Hotel selling timeshare condos in NYC in today's paper. It made me wonder if there might be any places in the D.C. area that are doing something comparable? Can you think of any? Thanks. washingtonpost.com: Here's that story: Rawther Part-Time Plaza , (Post, July 21) Maryann Haggerty: There don't seem to be any in the immediate DC area, according to one expert in the story & what I have seen over the last months. They're mostly in resort areas. Washington, D.C.: My wife and I own a condo in McLean Gardens in N.W., D.C. We moved to Florida and have rented the place out. What rights do our renters have if we want to sell the place? Do they have first choice to buy the place? Maryann Haggerty: If you own just the one property, I don't think you are covered by the law. You may want to double check with lawyer, though (or the landlord's association, the Apartment and Office Building Association of Metro Washington, www.aoba-metro.org). There have been a slew of recent changes in these laws. RE: Worst nightmare: Keep waiting for those pre-'02 prices. If you're looking in the better areas (Georgetown, Upper Northwest), chances are you'll NEVER own anything. Maryann Haggerty: This is a valid point. Even if prices in some areas fall below year-ago levels, as they have, will they take a five-year fall? That would be very very steep by historical standards. Washington, D.C.: Are there any neighborhoods left in the greater D.C. area that are affordable for first time buyers? I make $80,000/year, but short of finding a marriage partner with a similar income, I don't know how I would afford even the smallest of houses, which all seem to be more than $300,000, and thus unaffordable unless I do something unwise like an interest-only or ARM. Are there any "gem" neighborhoods out there that first timers should know about? Maryann Haggerty: Well, many of the gems have been picked over, but if you're going to find them, you're going to find them in Prince George's County, southern Maryland, West Virginia or Baltimore. Now I'm going to repeat something that I know upsets a lot of people: It is nearly impossible to buy a home on one income, especially in a high-cost area such as Washington. Not many people can do it. You don't have to get married, but you may need to buy with a friend or relative. Washington, D.C.: Well after more than four months of searching both Northern Virginia and Montgomery County, I have finally landed a single family home at a reasonable price. And I will tell you, that notwithstanding after having lived in San Diego and Hawaii before, this was by far the most challenging real estate chase I have ever had -- and given this was my sixth housing purchase in high-cost areas in the last 19 years, that is saying something! I write to tell you that besides the overall boom-factor and seller greed, I must attribute it also to the quality of the realtors and the overall intelligence in the marketplace out there. On the former, I have engaged realtors (on both sides) who were lacking experience, uninformed, incompetent, unprofessional, and downright lazy when it came to setting valuations and representing their client. Moreover, I am quite certain that in some cases, agents are just taking listings at whatever exorbitant asking price just to get the business. This of course does nothing other than drag out market time, and in most cases, ultimately results in even lower return for the seller. I have also personally witnessed agents acting with incomprehensible indifference to the transaction (by going on vacation in crunch time, or recklessly encouraging offers to just get something going, or acting merely as a paper-pusher and not diligently nor professionally stewarding an offer). On the buyer/seller side, I am amazed at how many people do not even know how sales comps, Zillow-type analytics, tax assessments, physical characteristics and location, or condition inspections should influence the price determination of real estate. Just my two cents ... and I really enjoy your column. For those of you out there still searching to buy or trying to sell a home, I offer the following suggestions: (1) Do your homework before setting a price ... if you over-value the house from either buyer or seller side, it just hurts everyone in the long run. (2) Pick the right agent ... if you are a buyer and they do not adequately represent you, get another agent. If you are a seller, and they do not adequately counsel you before setting a price nor exude diligence during the listing period, get another agent. (3) Buyers -- NEVER get emotional about real estate. Be passionate about the pursuit, but be willing to walk away at some point. It took four offers (and six realtors) before I landed this home, and it was clearly worth the wait. Maryann Haggerty: Thanks for all the good advice. Can I ask a favor of you, and of all the rest of you smart people who have recently bought or sold? Can you e-mail me directly at haggertym@washpost.com sometime soon? I am trying to recruit a handful of local people to offer advice to others as part of a package of stories I'm planning for this fall. Thanks!!! RE: Mr. Nightmare: I bought a condo a couple of years ago because I was renting one in a neighborhood that I loved, but I wanted to live in a place that I could make my own. My landlord was great but she wasn't going to take down the kitchen wallpaper, tear up the old carpet, or repaint in colors that I preferred. So I bought a place in the same neighborhood and I'm slowly making upgrades and I love it. The mortgage is a little higher than the rent was, but not much, and I've already got some decent equity. I'm actually very happy, thanks for asking. Maryann Haggerty: Happy is good. D.C.: In your opinion, does NoVa. (i.e., Fairfax) have a different feel or vibe compared to Maryland (i.e., Montgomery County)? To me, it seems like a different dynamic, but I can't pinpoint what it is. Maryann Haggerty: Well, this is a totally unanswerable question! To me, every neighborhood seems to have a different vibe; places in Montgomery County can be as different from each other as they are from places in Fairfax. (And I say this as someone who has edited more than 350 Where We Live profiles over the years!) That said, there are verifiable political differences between the two areas, and of course big differences in "urban" planning over the years. one thing that has always struck me: All major roads in Fairfax are congested. Montgomery County just doesn't have major roads. D.C.: Given the choice, would you rather live in Western Montgomery County or NoVa, with schools, quality of life, jobs, and congestion vs. price being the main factors? Maryann Haggerty: A similar question, of course. What I would prefer has little bearing--as I've said many times, for now I've made my choice, and that is Capitol Hill. I'm not at a point in life where the suburbs attract me. But others are at a different point. What works for you is what is important, not what works for me, or for the guy at the other cubicle. Chevy Chase, Md.: We are seeing more FSBOs on the market in our desired neighborhood. Is there a different set of negotiating techniques for these types of houses? Also, it seems that one of the FSBOs we are interested in does not want to work with our realtor or any realtor for that matter. What is your opinion on dealing directly with the seller? Maryann Haggerty: One of the two of you had better know what you are doing. Often, negotiating directly with the owner is going to be a more emotional situation. If you are a good, calm negotiator, you may be able to navigate that. But please--if you do this, hire a lawyer to review the contract, etc... RE: Your Worst Nightmare: Ok, the guy (or gal) is a bit smug and condescending but I have to give him an AMEN. My husband and I have lived in the area for three and a half years and decided when we first married to work on car and student load debt. Now, we're debt free and saving a good portion of our wages, with a nice money market account interest rate. Of all the times we've been told we should buy and we're wasting our money on rent - I can't tell you how many times we've heard that. Actually, everyone should just mind their own business and let us decided what's best for our future. Thanks for your chat! Maryann Haggerty: Good for you: You set your priorities and stuck to them. It's a great feeling to be out from under debt and have some cash in the bank, isn't it? Now, you need to decide FOR YOURSELF whether you want to buy or not. It may work for your life, it may not. Generally, for most people over the years, homeownership has been a very effective hedge against inflation and an important part of a balanced life financial plan. (However, if you hang out on real estate chats, funny thing, people are going to talk about real estate.) Washington, D.C.: My fiancee and I will soon be moving in together, so I've been thinking about what to do with my condo, a modest one-bedroom in the Hill East area of Capitol Hill. Should I rent? Sell? Or put it on the market for rent or buy? There are some other condos for sale near me and two new buildings in progress. We don't need the capital just yet, but a recent conversation with a lawyer with experience in the landlord-renter court, had a strong caution about making sure I find a good tenant. Maryann Haggerty: If you can carry it off financially, and you're ready to deal with the challenges of being a landlord, maybe you want to consider renting. But, especially in DC, you want to make sure you get a good tenant. I have a copy on my desk of a new book that looks like it might be a lot of help: Nolo Press's "Every landlord's Guide to Finding Great Tenants." It's more than 400 pages long (!!) with lots of forms, checklists, etc.... Falls Church, Va.: Finding a home in the D.C. area to meet the needs of a growing family is so difficult. Is it worth buying a smaller/less expensive home and putting on an addition? Maryann Haggerty: If you like the neighborhood, and it's legal to build on, that can be a good choice. Especially if the family is still small and still growing! Washington, D.C.: What is the best way to determine how much house you can afford? My partner and I are considering buying, and we don't know whose estimate to trust: the realtor's, the lender's, an online calculator's, or another source altogether. We have no outstanding debt, a combined income of nearly $200,000 per year, but we keep hearing wildly different numbers as to what range we should look in. Help! Maryann Haggerty: Ask a mortgage lender/broker. You can afford different amounts depending on what kind of loan you're talking about. The rest are just guesses, but they can help you narrow things down. (For the most conservative estimate, use one of the on-line calculators that takes taxes & insurance into account, and does the calculations based on a fixed-rate loan and a reasonable down payment.) Hyattsville, Md.: What is the best way to determine how a remodel will effect the value of our home? Real estate agents have not been helpful. We recently purchased a house that requires quite a bit of work. We'd like to completely renovate the kitchen, but aren't sure what kind of impact that will have on the home value. The home is on the low end of recent sales in the neighborhood, but I'm not sure if that's because of the shabby state of the interior or because of the square footage. Any suggestions? Maryann Haggerty: Improve enough to get you roughly in line with the neighborhood. A kitchen improvement, dollar for dollar, is likely to give you the best return. It will also make you life much more pleasant. Bowie, Md.: Hi. We are having a home built in a new subdivision in Bowie and are supposed to go to closing next week. Just a couple of weeks ago it has come to our attention that the developer plans to install a Tree Protection Fence on our property that will not allow us access to approximately two thirds of our property. This was never disclosed to us by the builder (they claim they just found out themselves even though the plan was dated in 2003) and we never signed anything to accept this condition. Of course they're scrambling now to assure us that they're going to request a waiver from the county and or developer and that everything will be fine. Do you think we should continue with the purchase or should we try to terminate this contract? Or are we forced to continue with transaction? We have considerable concerns also about the possible resale of this property in the future as to whether this will decrease the value of the property. Your thoughts please. Maryann Haggerty: Wow, that has the potential to become messy. I'd try to find a lawyer now. Bethesda, Md.: RE: Condo management companies -- There are a few management companies in the area that specialize in 'small' (under 100 units) condos. I suggest visiting condos in your neighborhood that are similar to yours and finding out who they've hired. And don't be afraid to fire the company you have now if they aren't doing the job. Maryann Haggerty: Thanks for the advice. Falls Church, Va.: I am a first-time buyer and have been looking to buy since Jan. I have noticed the only way to work in this market where list price is inflated is to give sellers lowball offers. The sellers who are realistic will work with you, the greedy ones will continue to sit and lose out. I got one seller to accept a contract from me for 40,000 below list price, knowing full well the seller would still make double the profit what they paid four years ago. If sellers would be a bit more realistic than buyers would be back in the market. My advice to sellers is lower your price now, so you get buyers interested and sell before the market gets worse in 2007. Maryann Haggerty: Price negotiation used to be very common, you know. Maybe we'll soon get back to seeing this process for what it is: A business negotiation that, with luck, makes both parties feel as if they got the best deal they could. If the amount you offer is realistic and in line with the market, then I wouldn't call it a lowball. It's what it is, an offer. But if it is way out of line with the market, I wouldn't jump to call the sellers greedy, either. Just not willing to negotiate at this point. Shirlington, Va.: I'm under contract for a new condo being built in Shirlington. Some of the buyers in my building organized a listserv to chat about the status of the building, etc. Based on current prices of other condos on the market, some people in the group say we should try to collectively renegotiate our prices with the builder (and threaten to walk from our deposits if they won't). Could that possibly work? Won't they laugh at us? These same listserv-ers say that even if renegotiating doesn't work and we had to lose our deposits, we might still get better prices after construction is complete (there are still unsold units). They think the prices could be lower I guess. Help! Maryann Haggerty: Well, they might laugh. Or might just accept your deposits. Or might negotiate. It all depends on the developer's financial situation and outlook on the market. But just let me point something out--don't fall into listserv group thought. Think for yourself whether you want this condo, how it compares with others, etc. Vienna, Va.: For all the people who are gloating over not bowing to the pressure to get into the market in light of the bursting bubble, be reminded that there are tons others who did get into the market and didn't get ARMs and made plenty of cash from flipping and/or are sitting on nice equity increases even if they have to sell. Others who can survive this bubble are enjoying their homes and don't care about the market conditions because they're firmly planted into their communities while their kids are growing up with their neighborhood kids, with freedom and room to run and play, and plenty of space to have cookouts/BBQs and are enjoying their living conditions. Enjoy your stay at your apartment complex while we're enjoying our stay in our McMansions. Maryann Haggerty: Let's be nice to each other, folks! For the most conservative estimate: Hah! The fact that an RE reporter states that rational, sound planning for the majority of people is "the most conservative" says a ton about why we have a bubble. Maryann Haggerty: Well, it's actually a true characterization of how you determine how much you can afford. Unless you wanted me to advise a first-time home buyer to count the money under the mattress. Hanover, N.H.: I grew up in D.C. and am moving back but it seems like all the new developments for townhomes are 3,000+ sq. ft. monsters. What ever happened to the 1,200+ sq. ft. townhome? Maryann Haggerty: Sorry, they're just not building them anymore. Lots of reasons--we don't have much time left, but there was a Page one story a couple weeks ago about this phenomenon. can we find it real quick??? Vienna, Va.: There seems to be daily news report about the slow down in the real estate market from sources like the WSJ. However, I'm not seeing prices for single family homes dropping widely. Even with reduced prices, homes are still significantly more expensive than they were one to four years ago. Is there any sign of an accelerated slow down? Benanke said there is an orderly slow down in the real estate market. What do real estate professionals think about that comment? Maryann Haggerty: Overall, the market is slowing down. There are pockets in this area and nationally where it is slowing more than in others. As you can tell from this chat, some people perceive a crash in progress, others don't. Bernanke said yesterday that he sees an orderly slow down. Those actually in the real estate business tend to be optimists, in my opinion, and economists are split between slow and not-so-slow. We'll see. Very, very steep by historical standards: Actually, not at all. Five-year value fall about exactly the mark from the last bubble, back in the 80s. It took approximately three to five years to happen, but that was the final bottom to the bubble pop. Maryann Haggerty: Not on most studies I've seen for the Washington region. (That folder is here on my desk somewhere, but time is running out.) Maryann Haggerty: Ladies and gentlemen, I have to leave. It has been fun, as always. And to repeat: If you're interested in sharing more of your hard-earned buying or selling wisdom with other readers, drop me a line at haggertym@washpost.com. I'm trying to pull somethings together for the fall. In the meantime, enjoy the summer, and stay cool! 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.
162.780488
0.634146
0.926829
high
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071800722.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071800722.html
Timeline of Stem Cell Debate
2006072219
Nov. 5, 1998: The first stem cells are isolated by scientists at the University of Wisconsin and Johns Hopkins University. Stem cells can develop into any tissue, but the process is controversial because it requires destroying human embryos. Post Story Aug. 9, 2001: President Bush declares federal funding will go to research only select stem cell lines derived from destroyed embryos left over at fertility clinics. States retain the ability to appropriate money for research or to restrict it. Post Story However, scientists say some of the 64 designated cell lines are fragile. Post Story Nov. 25, 2001: Scientists in Massachusetts perform the first cloning of human embryos. In a process called therapeutic cloning or somatic cell nuclear transfer, cloned embryonic stem cells could generate replacement tissues that patients' bodies would not reject. Post Story Nov. 2, 2004: In Proposition 71, Californians vote to spend $3 billion over 10 years on stem cell research, making the state the first to fund such research; 59 percent of the state's voters support the move. Jan. 11, 2005: New Jersey's governor announces the state will fund a $150 million stem cell research center and promises to champion a ballot initiative to allocate another $230 million. May 20, 2005: Bush vows to veto any legislation that would ease the restrictions he imposed on stem cell research in 2001. He has not yet used a presidential veto. Post Story May 24, 2005: The House approves a bill to loosen Bush's restrictions on federal funding for stem cell research by a vote of 238 to 194. In voting in favor of the bill, 50 Republicans break with Bush. Post Story May 26, 2005: The bill that matches the one passed by the House is introduced in the Senate with the crucial support of Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) and Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah). May 31, 2005: Connecticut lawmakers earmark $100 million for stem cell research over 10 years in an effort to help its biotech industry compete with California and New Jersey. July 13, 2005: Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich circumvents the legislature using an executive order to dedicate $10 million for stem cell studies after bills allocating funds for the research were voted down or shelved without a vote. July 29, 2005: Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) announces his support of an effort to loosen Bush's restrictions on stem cell research, putting him at odds with the Bush administration. Post Story August 21, 2005: Scientists convert ordinary skin cells into what appear to be embryonic stem cells -- without having to use human eggs or make new human embryos in the process. Post Story April 6, 2006: Maryland. Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. (R) signs stem cell legislation which will authorize $15 million for stem cell research in the upcoming year. In the wake of a 2001 executive order by President Bush that limited federal support for embryonic stem cell research, five states have agreed to provide money - Connecticut, Illinois, California, Maryland and New Jersey. Post Story June 7, 2006: Harvard announces multimillion-dollar program to create cloned human embryos as sources of medically promising stem cells. Post Story July 17, 2006: The Senate opens debate on bill that matches H.R. 810, which would ease Bush's restrictions. Matching bill passed the House May 24, 2005. Senate also opens debate on two other stem cell bills. One would encourage research into creating stem cell lines without destroying human embryos and the other would ban the creation of a fetus solely for the purpose of destroying it and harvesting its body parts. President Bush says despite divided GOP, he will not ease policy and if passed will likely veto. Post Story July 18, 2006: Senators vote 63-37 to approve the House-passed bill that would allow federal funding for medical research on stem cells to be discarded by fertility clinics. President Bush is expected to veto the bill, and there is not enough support in both houses to override it. Post Story July 19, 2006: In the first veto of his presidency, Bush vetoes the stem cell bill at a White House ceremony where he was joined by children produced by what he called "adopted" embryos. Post Story
Nov. 5, 1998: The first stem cells are isolated by scientists at the University of Wisconsin and Johns Hopkins University. Stem cells can develop into any tissue, but the process is controversial because it requires destroying human embryos. Post Story
17.3125
0.916667
15.5
medium
medium
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071800496.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006072219id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071800496.html
FDA Approves Implantable Contraceptive
2006072219
WASHINGTON -- Implantable contraceptives soon will be available again to U.S. women seeking a long-term solution to birth control, with the approval of a matchstick-size rod that can prevent pregnancies for up to three years. Organon USA Inc. said Tuesday it would begin training doctors in August to implant the contraceptive rod, called Implanon. The Food and Drug Administration approved the 1.5-inch-long rod late Monday. It is designed to be inserted underneath the skin of the upper arm. Implanon provides 99 percent contraceptive protection. It will be the first contraceptive implant to be sold in the United States since 2000, when Wyeth Pharmaceuticals stopped U.S. sales of Norplant. Norplant worked for up to seven years, or four years more than Implanon, but spawned lawsuits by women injured while having its six rods removed or disturbed by side effects. Another implant, a two-rod product called Jadelle, received FDA approval in 1996 but has never been sold in the U.S. Implanon has been sold in more than 30 countries since 1998. More than 2.5 million women have used it, according to Organon. That track record, along with the implant's single-rod design and the training doctors must receive before they can prescribe it to women, shouldn't lead to a repeat of the Norplant experience, said Dr. Scott Monroe, acting director of FDA's Division of Reproductive and Urologic Products. In case there are problems that lead to a recall, a card containing the implant's lot number will be included in the medical files of women fitted with Implanon to help track them down, Monroe said. Implanon releases a low, steady dose of progestin to prevent pregnancy. Its use can cause irregular bleeding and spotting. For some women, it can eliminate monthly periods altogether. The rod is inserted by a doctor under the skin of the upper arm in a quick surgical procedure that requires only a local anesthetic. It must be removed after three years, although it can be taken out at any time before then, according to the company, a unit of Netherlands-based Akzo Nobel NV. Progestin is a synthetic hormone similar to the progesterone made in the ovaries. The hormone typically acts on the body by thickening the mucus in a women's cervix, preventing the union of sperm and egg. It also can prevent ovulation, or the release of an egg from the ovaries. The implant won't work the same in all women: It may be less effective in women more than 30 percent heavier than their ideal weight, Monroe said. Implanon, along with other hormonal contraceptives, is associated with an increased risk of several serious side effects like blood clots. Smoking can further increase those risks. Other hormonal birth control methods include the pill, patch and a shot, called Depo-Provera, which provides three months of protection. Organon also makes a vaginal contraceptive ring, the NuvaRing, that must be replaced monthly. Organon did not release the price of Implanon. Spokeswoman Frances DeSena said it would be comparable on a per-month basis to the cost of other hormonal methods. Its availability will be a benefit to women who want a method of birth control that doesn't require a daily, weekly or monthly "ritual," said Dr. Vanessa Cullins, vice president for medical affairs at Planned Parenthood Federation of America. "The history of its use in other countries has indicated this is really a fantastic addition to the array of contraceptives available to women in this country," Cullins said. Food and Drug Administration: http://www.fda.gov
WASHINGTON -- Implantable contraceptives soon will be available again to U.S. women seeking a long-term solution to birth control, with the approval of a matchstick-size rod that can prevent pregnancies for up to three years.
16.707317
1
41
medium
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/14/DI2006071400418.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006071919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/14/DI2006071400418.html
Ambient Findability
2006071919
Peter Morville , author of "Ambient Findability," was online Wednesday, July 19 at 11 a.m. ET to discuss his book about the future of information and connectivity. Peter Morville is widely recognized as a founding father of information architecture. He co-authored the best-selling book, "Information Architecture for the World Wide Web," and has consulted with such organizations as Harvard, IBM, Microsoft, and Yahoo. He is president of Semantic Studios , co-founder of the Information Architecture Institute , and a faculty member at the University of Michigan. His work has been featured in publications such as Business Week, The Economist, Fortune, and The Wall Street Journal. He blogs at findability.org . Weekly Schedule Recent Discussion Transcripts Peter Morville: Hello and Welcome! Our chat today will be focused around Information Architecture and Ambient Findability, so let me provide a couple of basic definitions: * Information architecture involves organizing web sites (and other information systems) so people can find what they need. * Ambient findability describes a fast-emerging world in which we can find anyone or anything from anywhere at anytime. And, for anyone in the DC area, I'll be talking about both topics at the Library of Congress tomorrow morning. See my blog at findability.org for details. So, I'm happy to answer practical questions about web design today, and futuristic questions about information and findability tomorrow, and perhaps a few questions about strangely connected topics. Boston, Mass.: Are there any realistic numbers for how much time companies waste on searching for stuff they can't find (but is there... somewhere) and is then re-created for the Nth time? Peter Morville: Here are a few statistics: Employees spend 35% of productive time searching for information online. - Working Council for Chief Information Officers, Basic Principles of Information Architecture Managers spend 17% of their time (6 weeks a year) searching for information. - Information Ecology, Thomas Davenport and Lawrence Prusak The Fortune 1000 stands to waste at least $2.5 billion per year due to an inability to locate and retrieve information - The High Cost of Not Finding Information, IDC White Paper The average mid-sized company could gain $5 million per year in employee productivity by improving its intranet design to the top quartile level of a cross-company intranet usability study. - Intranet Usability: The Trillion-Dollar Question, Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox Of course, you need to take these with a grain of salt. For instance, the process of searching is very much a process of learning. In fact, I'd argue searching is one of the most important ways that knowledge workers learn. So, we don't necessarily want to reduce (valuable) time spent searching...we just want to avoid the waste and frustration that comes with a badly designed system. St. Mary's City, Md.: Out-of-left-field question... Have you read about the BrainGate trial, where an implant gives tetraplegics the ability to control prosthetic devices using their brains? What would this research mean for information technology? Would people be able to share information without computers or audiovisual equipment? Actually, this sounds like something from cyperpunk science fiction. I can imagine people turning into passive drones if their brains were connected directly to television signals. "Dad is staring into space...the playoffs must be on." Peter Morville: I haven't read about that particular trial, but I am aware of numerous similar experiments...monkeys with networked brain implants that enable them to control machines via the Internet...technologies that enable people to play video games using only their brains. Weird stuff! I'm convinced that many people will choose to become cyborgs. It's already happening with cochlear implants, and some "hackers" have implanted RFID chips in themselves, so they can do cool things like open their garage door with a wave of their hands. I expect tomorrow's teenagers will embed FriendChips that allow them to stay in constant contact with their buddies. Portland, Ore.: Good morning! How do you talk to clients or organizations about the value of IA or user-centered design, given that thelingo and best practices tend to be somewhat arcane or technical? How do you talk about, say, heuristics without having the marketing people glaze over? Peter Morville: First, whenever possible, I try to learn about my audience before I start talking. What "language" do they speak? What's important to them? Second, I try to keep it simple. That's why I like the term "findability." Everyone can appreciate the difficulty and importance of finding what we need in a large web site. But, I also help clients to understand that IA isn't just about findability. For instance, the way we organize and label our information on the home page has a huge impact on our credibility and perceived authority. And, there are other qualities of the user experience, which I explore in this article: Los Angeles, Calif.: What is your opinion of Google? Do they really have the market on search or do you think there's a smaller outfit out there trying to perfect better methods? And if there is a smaller company out there doing this, do they even have a chance against the corporate giant? Peter Morville: Short answer: I use Google every day. Long answer: Google is amazing in a couple of respects. First, they deliver the best search results, fast, via a clean interface. The multi-algorithmic solution behind the scenes is complex, but the user experience is simple. Second, Google is expanding search well beyond the Web...Google Desktop, Google Book Search, Google Maps, Google Earth...they are pioneers at the crossroads of digital and physical where wayfinding and retrieval converge. However, there are other interesting things going on: Endeca's Guided Navigation based on faceted classification is great for site search; Yahoo!'s experiments with Social Search are worth keeping an eye on; and Podzinger is bringing search to audio and video content. Ashland, Ore.: Schools, k-12, are ever the slow innovators... how do you see young children's education changing in light of so much information? How will schools be responding? Peter Morville: I think schools are responding slowly to the challenge of information/media literacy. In a world where we can increasingly select our sources and choose our news, it's not going to be easy for teachers to strike the right balance with respect to authority. Who should we trust? What should we believe? What happens when textbooks and the Wikipedia tell us different "truths". For better or worse, I think children will figure out a lot of this stuff for themselves...hopefully with some guidance from their parents and teachers! Lake Havasu City, Ariz.: Pete, you rule my world. How do we get good design when an unfriendly eyecore like myspace is numma 1? Peter Morville: At the bleeding edge of IA, we see emerging success stories that seem to invert the laws of good design and structure, from Flickr to the Wikipedia to MySpace. Now, first, I must admit (reluctantly) that IA isn't everything :-) Without valuable content and services, IA doesn't matter. But, if you look deeper at most of these successful sites, you'll see some interesting IA design decisions. There is an information architecture framework to all of these sites, but users also play a major role in populating and shaping that structure. Washington, D.C.: I'm reading your book and enjoying it greatly as I work in a particularly challenging search and access area. At the same time, on another level, I am feeling increasingly annoyed and harassed and wearied by information and information technology, such that I just want to turn it ALL off! Thus far in your book, you don't seem to have reached that semi-Luddite endpoint. What's your secret? Peter Morville: I actually have mixed feelings about all this information and technology that increasingly permeates our lives. But I don't see it going away, so I try to make it work for me. For instance, I rarely answer my cell phone (Treo). I use it almost soley to collect voice mail (for when I'm ready to be interrupted) and for outgoing calls...oh, and to check email while driving (don't worry, I've got it under control!). Bel Air, Md.: With regard to Information Architecture, why do you think that usability studies and tests are so routinely dropped from the SDLC? Doesn't "know your audience" apply to applications, too? Peter Morville: Sometimes, usability tests get dropped because people think they already know how users think or behave. Other times, they're viewed as too expensive or time consuming. I often have to make the case for usability testing and other forms of user research as part of the IA process. And yes, user research is perhaps even more important for application design (e.g., Rich Internet Applications) because they're more complex and we don't have well-defined design patterns yet. Wyoming, Ontario: Findability is great, but often the data you find are outdated or just plain wrong. How do you persuade the keepers of the data to keep them current and accurate, especially when the key beneficiaries of those data may be other than the keepers? Peter Morville: Ideally, you find a way to make the keepers beneficiaries, so they can do the right thing while acting in their own self-interest. Also, you can provide a feedback loop to let them see the impact of their data quality on other people. But, the responsibility also rests with the mediators (e.g., Google, librarians) to help people find quality content...and ultimately with the end user to select which sources to trust. College Station, Texas: Hi, I've just started reading the transcript and wanted to ask for elaboration on "searching is one of the most important ways that knowledge workers learn." Peter Morville: Search is not as simple as enter a keyword, view the results, find what you need. Often, we enter a keyword, view the results, look at a document, realize we're using the wrong word, try a new search, find a person to contact, ask a question, and so forth. As Marcia Bates showed us back in the 1980s [*], the information seeking process is iterative and interactive...or in my words, what we find changes what we want. what are your thoughts about the Semantic Web (qv. the recent debate between Sir Tim Berners-Lee and Peter Norvig of Google). Do you think an emergent approach is better? or the more top-down approach (Ontological) is workable? or if they are actually complementary and not mutually exclusive? Peter Morville: In Ambient Findability, I have a whole chapter called "The Sociosemantic Web" in which I argue for a balance between The Semantic Web and Social Software...so I see them as complementary. Johnstown, Pa.: Do you think that IA can have a bigger impact in the government arena than in the commercial marketplace? And if so do you think it will have a similar type of impact? Peter Morville: I think IA has had a huge (positive) impact in both, but right now there's more room for improvement in the government arena. Washington, D.C.: I am a new Web master - and I have a Web site that sorely needs redesign and much thoughtful consideration. Where do I start? Can you direct me to some resources? Peter Morville: The IA Institute (http://iainstitute.org/) is a great place to learn more about information architecture. And, for keeping up with the latest in IA, I pay attention to Boxes and Arrows (http://www.boxesandarrows.com/)and InfoDesign (http://www.informationdesign.org/). Also, you should read Steve Krug's Don't Make Me Think! Upstate N.Y.: What's your take on how findability changes people? While I simply cannot go back to the dark ages, I can certainly do without the bombardment of useless information. As soon as you find an 'oasis' of 'pure' information, someone comes along and adulterates it. Peter Morville: In Ambient Findability, I make the distinction between Push and Pull. As users, we love to pull the information we need to us when we need it. But, we're often not crazy about the increasing amount of information that's pushed towards us...what you might call ambient advertising. We can't really have one without the other, but sometimes it's hard to find a balance. Peter Morville: It's time to wrap up. I'm really impressed by the number and quality of questions. After all, information architecture and findability aren't exactly hot-button, mainstream topics. So, thanks for making this such an interesting hour for me. I hope you enjoyed it 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.
Peter Morville, noted as the founding father of information architecture, was online to discuss the future of information and connectivity.
109.166667
0.875
3.791667
high
medium
mixed
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/19/AR2006071900337.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006071919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/19/AR2006071900337.html
Consumer Price Index Up 0.2 Pct. in June
2006071919
WASHINGTON -- Consumer inflation slowed in June, helped by a temporary drop in energy prices. But the improvement was expected to be short-lived with a new crisis in the Middle East pushing crude oil prices to record highs last week. The Labor Department reported that its closely watched Consumer Price Index rose by just 0.2 percent in June, the smallest increase in four months and just half of the 0.4 percent May rise. The overall increase was in line with expectations although core inflation, which excludes energy and food, rose by 0.3 percent in June, higher than the 0.2 percent Wall Street had been expecting. That increase left core inflation rising for the past three months at an annual rate of 3.6 percent, far above the Federal Reserve comfort zone of 2 percent or less. In a second report, the Commerce Department said that construction of new homes fell by 5.3 percent in June, another signal that the once-booming housing market is beginning to slow. Builders started construction on new homes at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1.85 million units last month. Applications for building permits, considered a good sign for future activity, fell for a fifth straight month. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, delivering the board's semiannual report on monetary policy Wednesday, talked about the slowing housing market as a signal that the economy is moving to a slower growth, which should help keep inflation under control. "The anticipated moderation in economic growth now seems to be under way," he said in testimony to the Senate Banking Committee. His comments sent stock prices soaring as investors believed they signaled that the central bank's two-year campaign to raise interest rates to slow growth and keep inflation contained may be drawing to a close. The Dow Jones industrial average soared by 212.19 points to end the day at 11,011.42. "I think the evidence is clear that the Fed is coming to the end of the tightening string," said David Wyss, chief economist at Standard & Poor's in New York. "Bernanke talked about the fact that monetary policy operates with long and variable lags and you have to be forward looking, not backward looking." The 0.2 percent increase in inflation in May reflected a 0.9 percent drop in energy prices, the first decline for energy costs in four months. Gasoline prices fell by 1 percent last month, the best showing since February. But prices in recent weeks have been rising again as global crude oil prices surge to new record highs, threatening to hit the $80 per barrel mark with the fighting in the Middle East. Food costs were up 0.3 percent in June with declines in beef, pork and fresh vegetables offset by increases in poultry and fresh fruits. Outside of food and energy, the 0.3 percent increase in core inflation marked the fourth straight month that core inflation has risen by 0.3 percent. One of the biggest increases in the core inflation categories was a 3.1 percent jump in airline ticket prices, reflecting rising jet fuel costs.
WASHINGTON -- Consumer inflation slowed in June, helped by a temporary drop in energy prices. But the improvement was expected to be short-lived with a new crisis in the Middle East pushing crude oil prices to record highs last week.
12.911111
1
45
low
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071801598.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006071919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071801598.html
Misreading His Lips
2006071919
When Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke reports to Congress this week on the U.S. economic outlook, he will seek to explain his thinking more clearly to another important audience that has misunderstood him at times this year: the financial markets. Stock and bond prices have swung widely in response to several of Bernanke's comments in recent months, as investors, traders and analysts have tried to figure out whether the new chairman was saying the Fed was nearly done raising interest rates or was going to keep hiking them to combat rising prices. Bernanke's testimony to the Senate Banking Committee today and the House Financial Services Committee tomorrow offers an opportunity for him to explain to the markets how Fed policymakers view the economic slowdown, the recent rise in inflation and the uncertainty they face in adjusting interest rates, analysts and traders said this week. "In terms of how Bernanke and the markets are communicating, I think they're sort of missing each other," said Sharon Lee Stark, a chief strategist at Stifel Nicolaus & Co., a brokerage in St. Louis. "This testimony will be important in reestablishing Fed communication with the markets." Doing so is a top goal for Bernanke, a former professor and White House adviser who had stressed the importance of clear Fed communication long before he became chairman in February. "He's a teacher. He learns what his students need to know," said Diane Swonk, chief economist at Mesirow Financial Holdings Inc., a private investment firm. "His weakness, coming in, is he wasn't a markets guy. . . . That's the disconnect." One task for Bernanke today is to convince the markets that he will be tough on inflation while explaining that the Fed also needs to be flexible in responding to an economy in transition. The economy grew rapidly from 2003 to 2005 but is slowing now in response to rising interest rates, higher energy costs and a softening housing market. Meanwhile, consumer inflation has moved higher in recent months as more companies have raised prices to cover their increased energy and raw materials costs. The Fed seeks to promote economic expansion while keeping inflation low, and it does this by adjusting interest rates. When inflation is a concern, it raises borrowing costs to cool economic growth, which weakens businesses' power to raise prices. Central bank policymakers have raised their benchmark short-term interest rate steadily for two years to keep inflation contained, moving it up in quarter-percentage-point steps at each of 17 consecutive meetings. It reached 5.25 percent last month. Bernanke and his Fed colleagues believe the slowing economy will dampen price pressures, but they are not sure whether more interest-rate increases will be needed to keep inflation under control. So they are no longer raising their benchmark interest rate automatically at every meeting. Instead, they are deciding what to do based on their ongoing analysis of the latest data on prices, growth and the labor market.
When Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke reports to Congress this week on the U.S. economic outlook, he will seek to explain his thinking more clearly to another important audience that has misunderstood him at times this year: the financial markets.
12.931818
1
44
low
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071801379.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006071919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071801379.html
Lebanon: The Only Exit Strategy
2006071919
There is crisis and there is opportunity. Amid the general wringing of hands over the seemingly endless and escalating Israel-Hezbollah fighting, everyone asks: Where will it end? The answer, blindingly clear, begins with understanding that this crisis represents a rare, perhaps irreproducible, opportunity. Every important party in the region and in the world, except the radical Islamists in Tehran and their clients in Damascus, wants Hezbollah disarmed and removed from south Lebanon so that it is no longer able to destabilize the peace of both Lebanon and the broader Middle East. Which parties? Start with the great powers. In September 2004 they passed U.N. Security Council Resolution 1559, demanding that Hezbollah disarm and allow the Lebanese army to take back control of south Lebanon. The resolution enjoyed the sponsorship of the United States and, yes, France. As the former mandatory power in Lebanon, France was important in helping the Lebanese expel Syria during last year's Cedar Revolution, but it understands that Lebanon's independence and security are forfeit so long as Hezbollah -- a lawless, terrorist, private militia answering to Syria and Iran -- occupies south Lebanon as a rogue mini-state. Then there are the Arabs, beginning with the Lebanese who want Hezbollah out. The majority of Lebanese -- Christian, Druze, Sunni Muslim and secular -- bitterly resent their country's being hijacked by Hezbollah and turned into a war zone. And in the name of what Lebanese interest? Israel evacuated every square inch of Lebanon six years ago. The other Arabs have spoken, too. In a stunning development, the 22-member Arab League criticized Hezbollah for provoking the current crisis. It is unprecedented for the Arab League to criticize any Arab party while it is actively engaged in hostilities with Israel. But the Arab states know that Hezbollah, a Shiite militia in the service of Persian Iran, is a threat not just to Lebanon but to them as well. Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan have openly criticized Hezbollah for starting a war on what is essentially Iran's timetable (to distract attention from Iran's pending referral to the Security Council for sanctions over its nuclear program). They are far more worried about Iran and its proxies than about Israel. They are therefore eager to see Hezbollah disarmed and defanged. Fine. Everyone agrees it must be done. But who to do it? No one. The Lebanese are too weak. The Europeans don't invade anyone. After its bitter experience of 20 years ago, the United States has a Lebanon allergy. And Israel could not act out of the blue because it would immediately have been branded the aggressor and forced to retreat. Hence the golden, unprecedented opportunity. Hezbollah makes a fatal mistake. It crosses the U.N.-delineated international frontier to attack Israel, kill soldiers and take hostages. This aggression is so naked that even Russia joins in the Group of Eight summit communique blaming Hezbollah for the violence and calling for the restoration of Lebanese sovereignty in the south. But only one country has the capacity to do the job. That is Israel, now recognized by the world as forced into this fight by Hezbollah's aggression. The road to a solution is therefore clear: Israel liberates south Lebanon and gives it back to the Lebanese. It starts by preparing the ground with air power, just as the Persian Gulf War began with a 40-day air campaign. But if all that happens is the air campaign, the result will be failure. Hezbollah will remain in place, Israel will remain under the gun, Lebanon will remain divided and unfree. And this war will start again at a time of Hezbollah and Iran's choosing. Just as in Kuwait in 1991, what must follow the air campaign is a land invasion to clear the ground and expel the occupier. Israel must retake south Lebanon and expel Hezbollah. It would then declare the obvious: that it has no claim to Lebanese territory and is prepared to withdraw and hand south Lebanon over to the Lebanese army (augmented perhaps by an international force), thus finally bringing about what the world has demanded -- implementation of Resolution 1559 and restoration of south Lebanon to Lebanese sovereignty. Only two questions remain: Israel's will and America's wisdom. Does Prime Minister Ehud Olmert have the courage to do what is so obviously necessary? And will Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's upcoming peace trip to the Middle East force a premature cease-fire that spares her the humiliation of coming home empty-handed but prevents precisely the kind of decisive military outcome that would secure the interests of Israel, Lebanon, the moderate Arabs and the West?
There is crisis and there is opportunity. Amid the general wringing of hands over the seemingly endless and escalating Israel-Hezbollah fighting, everyone asks: Where will it end?
26.909091
1
33
medium
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/19/AR2006071900524.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006071919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/19/AR2006071900524.html
Stem Cell Bill Gets Bush's First Veto
2006071919
President Bush issued the first veto of his five-year-old administration yesterday, rejecting Congress's bid to lift funding restrictions on human embryonic stem cell research and underscoring his party's split on an emotional issue in this fall's elections. At a White House ceremony where he was joined by children produced from what he called "adopted" frozen embryos, Bush said taxpayers should not support research on surplus embryos at fertility clinics, even if they offer possible medical breakthroughs and are slated for disposal. The vetoed bill "would support the taking of innocent human life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others," the president said, as babies cooed and cried behind him. "It crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect." Each child on the stage, he said, "began his or her life as a frozen embryo that was created for in vitro fertilization but remained unused after the fertility treatments were complete. . . . These boys and girls are not spare parts." Within hours of Bush's announcement, the House, as expected, fell short in a bid to override the veto, extinguishing the issue as a legislative matter this year but not as a political matter. Democrats said voters will penalize GOP candidates for the demise of a popular measure, and predicted the issue could trigger the defeat of Bush allies such as Sen. James M. Talent, who faces a tough reelection battle in Missouri. "Those families who wake up every morning to face another day with a deadly disease or a disability will not forget this decision by the president to stand in the way of sound science and medical research," said Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.). Some conservatives also criticized the veto. "I am pro-life, but I disagree with the president's decision," said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (Tenn.), a heart surgeon who is weighing a 2008 presidential run. "Given the potential of this research and the limitations of the existing [human embryonic stem cell] lines eligible for federally funded research, I think additional lines should be made available." The House and Senate passed the bill by comfortable margins but not with the two-thirds majorities required to override a veto. The House voted 235 to 193 yesterday to override Bush, falling short of the threshold and negating the need for a Senate override attempt. Bush did sign a bill, unanimously passed this week by the House and Senate, to ban the creation of human fetuses for the sole purpose of harvesting organs. But the House thwarted prompt passage of another bill he had hoped to sign yesterday. It would have promoted efforts to conduct stem cell research without destroying human embryos. Bush called it "an important piece of legislation," but several Democrats called it a political fig leaf intended to distract attention from his veto of the long-debated funding measure for embryonic stem cells. Bush has threatened vetoes on numerous issues over the years, but he and the Republican-controlled Congress had always worked out their differences. On stem cells, however, the president drew a sharp line during his first nationally televised address, on Aug. 9, 2001, banning government funding for research using human embryonic stem cell colonies created after that date. Over the next five years, public sentiment increasingly moved away from him as celebrities such as Nancy Reagan and Christopher Reeve touted the potential that embryonic stem cells offer in treating Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, diabetes, spinal cord injuries and other conditions. Unlike "adult" stem cells, embryonic cells can replicate themselves and turn into almost any human tissue. Officials say that about 400,000 frozen embryos are stored at U.S. fertility clinics. The vast majority await disposal because the couples that produced them have completed their pursuit of children and do not want another person to raise their biological child. Bush praised those who "adopt" such embryos, implant them in a woman's womb and bring them to term. But others said there will be few such adoptions because most couples seeking a child through in vitro fertilization want a genetic connection to that child. "Even with federal funding available to encourage adoption, the number is 128, which makes it conclusive that these 400,000 embryos will either be used for scientific research or thrown away," Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), a proponent of the bill, said this week. Bush and his allies say that frozen embryos are tantamount to humans, and therefore are no more appropriate for medical research than are death row inmates. "If this bill were to become law," Bush said yesterday, "American taxpayers would for the first time in our history be compelled to fund the deliberate destruction of human embryos." Others reject that analysis, saying it would make killers of every couple that produces an unused embryo, and every employee and official who allows fertility clinics to produce and store such embryos. "If that's murder, how come the president allows that to continue?" asked Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa). "Where is his outrage?" Harkin called the veto "a shameful display of cruelty, hypocrisy and ignorance."
President Bush issued the first veto of his five-year-old administration yesterday, rejecting Congress's bid to lift funding restrictions on human embryonic stem cell research and underscoring his party's split on an emotional issue in this fall's elections.
21.869565
1
46
medium
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071800309.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006071919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071800309.html
Is There Anything Left That We Can Eat?
2006071919
I can't decide what to eat. I don't mean which recipe to make, or what restaurant to go to. I mean when I go grocery shopping, I'm paralyzed with indecision. Everything, it seems, is either ethically, nutritionally or environmentally incorrect. Guilt is ruining my appetite. Take the other day when I went to buy eggs. Sounds easy, but this is the dialogue that played in my head as I stared at six shelves of egg cartons: "Should I buy the omega-3 eggs that are supposedly good for my heart? But wait, they're not organic. Maybe I should spring for the $3.50 organic eggs from Horizon, even though I read that the company has gotten so huge, it's driving out the smaller organic farmers. Perhaps I should get the cage-free eggs from a small farm in Pennsylvania? Or the brown eggs from vegetarian-fed, free-roaming hens? "Oh, never mind. I need to save money. So what if the hens are living a miserable existence in the poultry version of the state pen. The eggs are only 79 cents. I have bills to pay." (Note to PETA: Don't worry. I couldn't live with the guilt. I ended up buying the brown eggs from free-roaming happy hens, so don't write to me.) The point is, choosing what to eat and drink has become hard work. It's not simply a case of taste or price. Now we have to ask ourselves: Is this good for my health? Have animals suffered? Is it local? Organic? Bad for the planet? Harvested by child workers? What's worse, the answers are often contradictory. Should I buy the locally grown lettuce at the farmers market, even if the farmer uses some pesticides? It's good to support local farmers, but what about pesticides' link to cancer? Then again, that California-grown organic lettuce at the supermarket has been trucked in thousands of miles, burning up thousands of gallons of fuel. Does that make environmental sense? Even when you think you know the answers, it turns out you don't. Consider salmon. To prevent the over-fishing of wild salmon, which was also wildly expensive, farm-raised salmon was developed. It seemed the perfect solution to controlling cost, protecting the species and meeting the exploding consumer demand for the kind of fish that health experts insisted we needed to eat. Except that now farm-raised salmon is said to have high levels of chemical contaminants and other carcinogens because of the way the salmon are raised. Should we limit our intake? Switch to something else? (But not Chilean sea bass, which is over-fished, or shrimp, which is farm-raised in equally contaminated water in foreign countries, or canned tuna, which is full of mercury.) Or should we just take the risk because we're told -- this week -- that fish oil is good for us? The tough decisions aren't limited to the fish counter. Books such as Eric Schlosser's "Fast Food Nation" (Houghton Mifflin, 2001) have raised questions about the humane treatment of cattle and of the immigrants working in packing plants. Critics wonder how closely the federal government really inspects the meat we eat. The feds say our meat supply is safe, but companies aren't required to announce recalls of contaminated beef. And what about that Texas cow discovered last year to be infected with mad cow, the brain-wasting disease? Government officials played it down; should we trust them? Switch to chicken? Oh, wait. Avian flu. Salmonella. Chickens raised in factory farms. Manure runoff polluting the Chesapeake Bay. Chicken-of-the-sea becoming literally true. I think I need to lie down. My anxiety over what to eat is what Michael Pollan addresses in "The Omnivore's Dilemma" (Penguin Press, 2006). The question of what to have for dinner has become complicated, he acknowledges. Fast food and processed food are making us fat. Dietary advice is confusing. Even organic is becoming big business, including organic junk food and organic factory farms. But refusing to consider these developments is not the answer. Ignorance, he argues, is not bliss. It's just ignorance. "To eat with a full consciousness of all that is at stake" can afford great satisfaction, Pollan writes, because it lets you choose what is best for you. Bottom line for him in the dinner dilemma: Choose local. Still, I wondered if there might be some moral and ethical template I could apply to my food decisions. Arthur Caplan is the director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania. He's usually asked about tough subjects such as stem-cell research and human cloning. I asked if he found moral predicaments at the grocery store. "Oh, absolutely. And it doesn't even end with the food," he says. "One of my great moral quandaries comes when the cashier asks, 'Paper or plastic?' " (For the record, he chooses paper.) Caplan believes there's no need to have "a moral aneurysm" every time we go to the supermarket. Every person, he says, needs to establish a scale of ethical priorities. Is taste most important to you? Cost? The environment? Your health? Animal suffering? Pick one thing that matters most and let that drive your decisions. For Caplan, No. 1 on his list is whether suffering was involved. "So I want happy chickens, no veal, no foie gras. After that comes environmental impact, and then labor. I have an ethical guide in my head that helps me through the store." He also points out that, in a way, we should be grateful we are even considering all these ethical questions. "These are the dilemmas of abundance," he says. "If we were living in Darfur, the only answer to 'what to eat?' would be 'anything I can find.' "
I can't decide what to eat. I don't mean which recipe to make, or what restaurant to go to. I mean when I go grocery shopping, I'm paralyzed with indecision. Everything, it seems, is either ethically, nutritionally or environmentally incorrect. Guilt is ruining my appetite.
20.637931
1
58
medium
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/14/DI2006071400783.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006071919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/14/DI2006071400783.html
Dirda on Books
2006071919
Each week Dirda's name appears -- in unmistakably big letters -- on page 15 of The Post's Book World section. If he's not reviewing a hefty literary biography or an ambitious new novel, he's likely to be turning out one of his idiosyncratic essays or rediscovering some minor Victorian classic. Although he earned a Ph.D. in comparative literature from Cornell, Dirda has somehow managed to retain a myopic 12-year-old's passion for reading. He particularly enjoys comic novels, intellectual history, locked-room mysteries, innovative fiction of all sorts. These days, Dirda says he still spends inordinate amounts of time mourning his lost youth, listening to music (Glenn Gould, Ella Fitzgerald, Diana Krall, The Tallis Scholars), and daydreaming ("my only real hobby"). He claims that the happiest hours of his week are spent sitting in front of a computer, working. His most recent books include "Readings: Essays and Literary Entertainments" (Indiana hardcover, 2000; Norton paperback, 2003) and his self-portrait of the reader as a young man, "An Open Book: Coming of Age in the Heartland" (Norton, 2003). In the fall of 2004 Norton will bring out a new collection of his essays and reviews. He is currently working on several other book projects, all shrouded in the most complete secrecy. Dirda joined The Post in 1978, having grown up in the working-class steel town of Lorain, Ohio and graduated with highest honors in English from Oberlin College. His favorite writers are Stendhal, Chekhov, Jane Austen, Montaigne, Evelyn Waugh, T.S. Eliot, Nabokov, John Dickson Carr, Joseph Mitchell, P.G. Wodehouse and Jack Vance. He thinks the greatest novel of all time is either Murasaki Shikubu's "The Tale of Genji" or Proust's "A la recherche du temps perdu." In a just world he would own Watteau's painting "The Embarkation for Cythera." He is a member of the Baker Street Irregulars, The Ghost Story Society, and The Wodehouse Society. He enjoys teaching and was once a visiting professor in the Honors College at the University of Central Florida, which he misses to this day. Michael Dirda: Welcome to Dirda on Books! I'm still up here at Bread Loaf, teaching away. The day before yesterday it was, I'm told, hotter in Vermont than in Washington. Sigh. My classes are half over now, and we do have a three-day weekend, so I'll be flying home to visit family tomorrow afternoon. As it happens, though, wife and children (and two of children's friends) came up for the weekend, so I had to show five somewhat restless young men--ages 15 to 22--parts of Vermont. The first thing they wanted to see was the Otter Creek Brewing company, followed by the Ben and Jerry's Ice Cream tour. So it goes. I continue to feel under the weather, though I am soldiering on. I do recall, more and more, words I read as a boy in Ben Franklin's autobiography (or one of his essays): "Ninety percent of the world's work is done by people who don't feel well." And with that, let's get on to the questions for this week. Dupont Circle, Washington, DC: Mr. Dirda: I am reading through Ronald Firbank this summer and am wondering why you choose to teach from among his works Concerning the Eccentricities of Cardinal Pirelli? Also what can you say re: Firbank's characterizations of black people in his fiction? I understand the time and milieu in which Firbank wrote. Like with, say, Twain, one tries not to be offended, but ... Michael Dirda: Firbank is the master of camp humor, and I wanted to teach books that were foundation works in various genres. I also find him very funny, and feel he did a lot to give air and light to English prose. Before Firbank, there's always, more or less, a slight air of stuffiness, of fustian in novels. Afterwards, they seem to move and breathe more freely. Part of this derives from his ability to leave things out, and to capture accurately the way people talk. Sorrow in Sunlight was renamed Prancing Nigger in America. It's important to remember that Carl Van Vechten, who was very interested in and supportive of Negro culture, was Firbank's great champion. Yes, the book is full of caricatures of black people, but ALL of Firbank's characters are caricatures. Are saints really like the heroine of The Flower Beneath the Foot? And Sorrow/Prancing is, in fact, very sympathetic to its black characters and their dreams. It is, I think, the most touching of all his books. I chose Pirelli because it's often regarded as Firbank's masterpiece, but I didn't like it all that much when I first read it. I wanted to give it another chance, another look, and any Firbank novel would have served my purposes. I just finished a biography of Charles Flandrau titled, In Gatsby's Shadow by Larry Haeg. Three local authors each a decade apart made to the Ivy League and became writers (Flandrau, Sinclair Lewis and F. Scott Fitzgerald). Lewis and Fitzgerald were successful (sold out) but all became alcoholic. An interesting sidelight was that Alexander Wollcott was so influential as a critic (especially on radio) that his word could drive sales for books and make or break theater shows. So my question, have you ever heard of Flandrau and does alcohol always destroy the best writers? Michael Dirda: I've never heard of Flandrau, but this does sound an interesting subject for a book. Alcoholism among writers is a vexed issue. Faulkner and the writer/artist Stephen Longstreet once sat in a Paris cafe and listed all the American writers who drank to excess, and they decided that all great American writers were alcholics. I don't know. Certainly, for those with the tolerance, some alcohol can relax one's mind or inhibitions, allow one to tap into aspects of the self otherwise closely monitored by reason. But I don't think anyone has ever written really well, while seriously drunk. More likely, even writers like Chandler waited for sober moments to clean up and polish the sentences they'd churned out when soused. Artists, though, are such extremists and maybe they do need this disordering of all the senses. As the title of a book on Fitzgerald says, "The Price Was High." Mickey Spillane : Mickey Spillane, the creator of Mike Hammer, passed away a couple of days ago. His death is a huge loss to fans of pulp fiction. I've always been a big fan of pulp fiction. I couldn't get enough of it as a kid. What are some of you favorite pulp novels? Michael Dirda: Yes, I was sorry to hear about Spillane's death. All the great ones are leaving us. "How could you? Mike" I think I had just enough time to get in before it was too late. "It was easy." Or something like that. They don't write 'em that way any more. Favorite pulp novels--I'm fairly traditional: early Hammett and Chandler, the main James M. Cain books, lots of short stories from collections based on Black Mask, featuring early Erle Stanley Gardner, Norbert Davis, et al. To my regret, I've yet to read David Goodis. Trumansburg, NY: Do you have any recommendations for a book that gives detailed examples of a close reading of a major novel? Something that discusses all the uses of figurative language, allusions, etc., essentially all the stuff I'm missing because I'm too dense to see it? There are lots of books that annotate major novels, from Ulysses to The Recognitions, but these usually point out the sources for allusions, quotations or unusual language. They generally don't go into interpretation very deeply. Major critics have offered extended readings of books, which might suit your needs--Edmund Wilson on The Turn of the Screw, Philip Rahv on Dostoevsky, etc etc. I suspect that an extended explication de texte might grow tedious for any but the most determined critic, let alone his reader. Stevens Point, Wis: At this year's ReaderCon John Crowley announced that the fourth and concluding volume of his Aegypt quartet will be issued not by a major publishing company, but Small Beer Press, the imprint owned by Kelly Link and Gavin Grant. As a reader I'm elated and would welcome its publication in any form, from samizdat to e-scan; but at the same time I'm wondering how a development like this might affect the writing of Other Great Works. Gene Wolfe, for example, did not write the third volume in his Soldier series because he was told by his publisher that TOR was not likely to pick it up. Will small press therefore be the savior of such works or only increase the possibility that these underappreciated masterworks are never written in the first place? Michael Dirda: Insofar as writers expect to make money on their work, they must rely on major trade publishers. In that sense, the publishers influence what books are produced, just as the publishers are now influenced by Barnes and Noble sales as to what books they commission. It's a vicious circle. For whatever reason, I presume that Crowley's book was not deemed commercial--probably, to a large extent, because it only makes sense if you've read the three previous novels and these are likely to be out of print just now. So a trade publisher would need to reissue the first three in paperback at the same time as the new book. But then Bantam or Morrow or whoever published the first three might not want to release paperback rights or might be asking an exorbitant amount for them. And so the prospective publisher has no choice but to reject the fourth volume. Small Beer can publish it because its audience already knows the earlier works, and it will probably do fairly well, by small press standards, but a few thousand copies aren't enough for a trade house to bother over. That's my guess on what happened with Crowley. I recently moved out to Denver from the DC area. Any good books come to mind on Denver and/or Colorado? Non-fiction, history, fiction all welcome. On a somewhat related note, what is the general opinion of the old WPA-sponsored books on each of the states? Michael Dirda: The WPA guides to the states, and those to the rivers of America, are much collected, and were frequently written and edited by distinguished scholars and authors. Much is now dated in them--they are 75 years old and the world has changed. But there are descriptions and cultural essays that are still important. alcohol & writing: My husband is a painter and will almost always have a glass of wine in one hand and his brushes in the other. He doesn't get drunk, but he claims that it relaxes him to get the creative juices flowing. On the other hand, I'm a writer and won't touch alcohol before working. And on a similar vein, the connection between mental illness and artistic ability is also tenuous: I couldn't work while I suffered from depression, but the pain remembered does inspire my work now that I'm better. Colorado Springs, Colo: I'm the poster from a few weeks ago who asked for recommended reading of short novels. I just finished Chronicles of A Death Foretold. I'm wondering though how to read How It Is, which I bought? As a writer and critiquer of other writers, I put it down after the first page because I couldn't determine where to pause or where the thought ended. Help. Michael Dirda: Well, HOw it is is late Beckett, and so it's not going to be an ordinary book. You need to essentially go with the flow of the prose and before you know it you'll understand were the pauses are. The text is in short bursts really, and there is considerable poetry in it. Still, it is a work that sets one of the boundaries of fiction, both in treatment and in action. Washington, DC: My rising 10th grade son has to read a non-fiction book this summer. Do you have any recommendations for good biographies or perhaps something dealing with ancient cultures? (He will be taking AP World History next year which is heavily focused on ancient civilizations.) Michael Dirda: Hmmm. Nonfiction, eh. You might look for one of the many books by Michael Grant, a prolific translator and scholar of the ancients, who has produced histories of the Caesars and the Greeks that are readable and reliable. He stresses anecdote and story, too. M.I. Finley's book The World of Odysseus discusses the background of the Odyssey with entertaining detail and speculation. There are several books on archeology that might fit in here, e.g those of C.W. Ceram and titles like Gods, Graves and Scholars. Silver Spring, Md: For Trumansburg who wanted examples of close readings, here are two suggestions: First, an anthology called Close Readings, edited by Frank Lentricchia and some other guy. Lots of good examples of close readings. Second, How to Read Literature Like a Professor, by Thomas Foster. Broader scope, very entertaining, includes several sample close readings but has more on general things like symbolism. Michael Dirda: Yes, thanks. But I thought he wanted a single sustained reading of one major book. There are many examples of brief close readings of parts of novels. close reading: Au contraire! I think most serious readers would love to find the type of books that contain close (or semi-close) readings of novels. I bought about three different books on Jane Austen recently, looking for just such a thing, and they were all washes. Two were terribly shallow and one was way too off-topic and narrowly focused. Chatters occasionally ask about this, usually in the form of "Do you know of any journals . . . ?" The problem is that reviews don't provide it, scholarly journal articles are usually too narrow in focus, and the reader is stuck when he/she wants to go deeper. Here's an example from the movies: I somewhere (NYT?) read a kind of "close reading" of the movie "The Hours." In it, the author pointed out that the robe that one character wears through much of the movie is made from the bedspread he had when he was a little boy---something that is glimpsed very briefly in the movie and I certainly did not notice. This is exactly the kind of thing avid but general readers (not specialists) would love to find for novels. Michael Dirda: Perhaps this is a felt need. But I now do remember a series that comes close to this. It's British, the books were about 200 pages long in paperback, and they covered major works of world literature in a somewhat sustained way. I read the volume on The Tale of Genji some years back and it was excellent. It might be called Landmarks of World Literature. Riverdale, Md: Who are you introducing at the Sept. 30 '06 National Book Festival - or do you know yet? Michael Dirda: So far as I know, I may not be introducing anyone this year. No one has yet asked me, but then Book World wouldn't even think about this until September. Books on plane crashes: For the poster last week who asked about plane crashes. the Pilot's Wife by Anita Shreve Lord of the Flies, by William Golding Michael Dirda: Many thanks. This one called Lord of the Flies sounds kind of good. (Okay, just kidding.) Omaha, Neb: Re: Alcoholic writers. I read an interesting psychology book that offered semi-close readings of the works of a wide span of literary figures: "Touched with Fire" by Kay Redfield Jamison. The book suggests that manic-depressive disorder is the most common cause of the eccentric behavior of writers and artists, including the alcoholic ones. I had thought that psychological analysis, Freudian or otherwise, had really lost credibility as a critical school of thought, but this book was quite interesting. To your knowledge, have there been any other recent works on "madness and the artistic temperament"? Thanks for doing this chat!! Michael Dirda: Hmmmm. Jamison is something of an authority. I feel sure there must be such a book,but I can't think of anything except old titles like Frederick Hoffman's Freudianism and the Literary Mind, or whatever it was called. Most Freudian and Jungian analysis these days tends to be directed at the books rather than their authors. Munich, Germany: As an aficionado of Glenn Gould, you've probably never taken any notice of the poetic lyrics of modern music, but today, I've been thinking of a certain verse; You've got to kick the night, It was written by the Canadian singer/songwriter Bruce Cockburn, and borrowed by the Irish rock icon, Bono, for a song by his band, U2. It inspires me to believe that the truth is something that isn't often easily come by. Have you ever been moved by lyrics in music and been tempted to analyze them? Michael Dirda: Bono--Is this Cher's late husband, Sonny? Okay, that was juvenile. I find it hard to take seriously anyone named Bono. It's like Fabian in my mind. Pop lyrics always touch me a great deal--especially in country and western heartbreakers and in classics of the American Songbook. But on most contemporary rock or rap I have a lot of trouble just making out the words. But the lyrics to songs like "Let's Face the Music and Dance" or "They can't take that away from me" are very powerful aural pheromones. As I say, I also weep over my lost youth when I hear certain oldies. Back in the 60s Richard Goldstein brought a collection called The Poetry of Rock, in which he reproduced and commented on rock lyrics. And, of course, Christopher Ricks, as eminent a critic as they come, recently produced a long serious study of Bob Dylan. But in general most pop lyrics are relatively inane or trie when divorced from the music. But with the music, they can break your heart. As Noel Coward famously remarked, "Strange how potent cheap music can be." Virginia: What's best to read in the blistering heat? Do you turn to, say, Russian lit as an antidote? I'm tempted to give in and tackle The Inferno. Michael Dirda: I've written a couple of columns over the years about hot weather books. You can either go for accounts of the cold--polar exploration is always good--or you can just swelter along with Philp Marlowe in Southern California or Meursault in North Africa. Perhaps this might be a good time ro read Kenneth Clark's The Nude. How to Read Literature Like a Professor: I wouldn't recommend this book. I found it very, very basic and disappointing. I'll try the other book the chatter recommends, though (Close Readings). For Denver: The Beany Malone series of teen fiction is set there. New York, NY: Goodis' "Shoot The Piano Player" is incredible. Almost an hour by hour account of a couple days with this one burst of the main character's entire history condensed to 10 pages or so, and then back to the original pace. I really loved it. To the person looking for close readings of major novels I'd suggest any of the Norton or Oxford versions of books. They all have excellent notes and introductions, and often include essays and reviews both when the work was originally released and more contemporary. Michael Dirda: Yes, those are both good series, but they aren't really close readings--they offer useful annotation, good apparatus (ie maps), and sometimes very academic essays. Still, I like them a lot. I'm new to the discussion but always read the transcripts after the facts. I have two questions: Why does it seem (feel like) that fewer and fewer people are interested in reading? Second, where is the best place start when diving into Hemingway for the first time? Michael Dirda: Hard to know for sure if fewer and fewer people are reading, though it does seem that the focus of energy is now directed to screens rather than pages. For Hemingway: read The Sun Also Rises or the collection In Our Time. These, and a few later stories, are what seems likely to last of Hemingway. Lenexa, Kan.: Re Spillane: He attended my college (for a semester)--Ft. Hays State University. Even though I'd heard he received a "C" or "D" in his English class, the college was always proud of him--bestowing on him a distinguished alumnus award. He returned on occasion and the current president used him to help in some fundraisers. A friend of mine asked him once when he was at Hays, "Are you still writing?" He said "Only when I need the $/%#-- money." Michael Dirda: As I said, they don't make 'em like that any more. Colorado Springs, Colo: I am curious, do you know why most major bookstores separate African-American literature (and sometimes Asian literature) from literature in general. This has always makes me uncomfortable (not being African-American) when I want to read a book that happens to have been written by such an author (most recently, I picked up Toni Morrison's Beloved). It seems like separating certain literatures by race makes them less accesible--it is as though these shelve signs indicate that "these books are for this race only" or "only deal with issues that concern this race." Does this bother you or anyone else posting? Or am I alone here? Michael Dirda: It's all about marketing. Bookstores aren't being racist or insensitive. Many authors hate being categorized like this--or as mystery writers of science fiction novelists or fantasy authors--when what they produce is, in their judgment at least, Fiction or even Literature. But the world is the world. London, UK: I enjoy reading the work of young literary writers of color: Zadie Smith, Chimamanda Adichie, Helen Oyeyemi, Uzodinma Iweala, and Colson Whitehead. The latter two are from the US. Could you recommend other emerging writers of color from the US?¿¿ Michael Dirda: Hmmm. This actually is a good segue from the previous posting. I myself don't tend to think of people as writers of color--unless they make a big deal of it themselves. One reads Edwidge Danticat because she's a good writer, just as one reads Edward P. Johnson or Sherman Alexie. I'm sure you can find some good ideas by going to--wait for it--the African-American section of your local bookstore. You now see why bookstores have such sections. New York, NY: The mention of Beckett's "How It Is" reminds me of Timothy Dexter. At the age of 50 he decided to write a book about himself - "A Pickle for the Knowing Ones or Plain Truth in a Homespun Dress." He wrote about himself and complained about politicians, clergy and his wife. Since he had never learned to spell properly, the book had no commas or full stops, and capital letters were sprinkled all over the place. At first he handed his book out for free, but it rapidly became popular and ran into eight editions in total. When people complained that it was hard to read, for the second edition he added an extra page - of punctuation marks - asking readers them to "sprinckel them like salt and pepper". Michael Dirda: Cute. Beckett had an extraordinary ear and if you give his prose a chance its lilt and rhythm and punch will carry you along. Same is true of the daunting looking Riddley Walker by Russell Hoban. Lenexa, Kan.: Mr. Dirda: I just finished Maria Arana's terrific novel, "Cellophane." I found it a totally gripping tale from the little boy studying through the store window the engineer's trick of "perpetual motion" to the river-floating detritus and demise--the little boy's "Rosebud" gone, his Floralinda (Beautiful Flower) flaming on the swollen banks of the Ucayali. It seems a perfect fictional complement to "American Chica." Every sentence was polished, much of it brimming with native biota. Echoes I heard were Marquez, Allende, Kingston, Conrad, K.A. Porter, Kingsolver, Millhausen, W.H. Hudson... QUESTIONS: Have you read it? Did you see parts in draft? There are young Latin writers trying to escape the magic realism shadow of Marquez (reminiscent of Welty's comments on Faulkner). Do you have any thoughts on the matter? Thanks much. Michael Dirda: I'm sure Marie will be thrilled by your comments. I haven't read the book, but we did chat--very generally about its progress--over the past year. I neither offered nor gave any guidance. Venus: Hello, Michael. What is the best English translation of "War and Peace"? Michael Dirda: I still would turn to Aylmer and Louise Maude. You can find a hefty well made Inner Sanctum edition with useful maps and commentary. New York, NY: Just read on Donald Westlake's website that he had a rough 2005 - endured 10 eye operations and suffered permanent damage in one eye. But I am happy to report that he is back working. He has a Parker novel out in November, and just completed a Dortmunder one. The man is amazing, and truly underrated. I've only read about 5 of his books, and enjoyed them all. His prose style is so smooth and readable, yet manages to avoid the cliches of genre writing. Currenly reading Kahawa, which many consider to be his best. Are there any other authors as prolific and able to maintain such high quality? Michael Dirda: Not many. Westlake's friend Lawrence Block is comparably prolific and of high quality. Peter Straub is underrated for his versatility and consistency. But I do tend to think of Westlake as being in a class of his own. Washington, DC: Michael Normally I've enjoyed books you've recommended, but I have to say that Little, Big wasn't one of them. I gave it a good shot but just couldn't get past Crowley's precious, self-conscious style and relentless quirkiness. It just grated after a while, so I put the book down. Sorry! Michael Dirda: No offense taken. There's no reason people should like the same things I do. And vice versa. Silver Spring, Md: Toni Morrison and the other Most Recognizable to Everybody black writers are not harmed by the separate sections, or at least not much. The people harmed are midrange marvelous black writers like Percival Everett and Colson Whitehead. Michael Dirda: Yes, Everitt is a particularly good example, since he mocks just such marketing labels. Washington, DC: Hi Mr Dirda, I was browsing my local "big-chain" bookstore and came upon a well-illustrated, presentation copy of a book called The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho. I was intrigued by the book's packaging, so I googled him and found him to be a sort of mystic. Have you read this book or any by him? do you have any opinions? Thanks, and I hope you are cooler in NE than we are in DC! Michael Dirda: Somewhat cooler today. I've not read Coelho and he's just a name to me, though with those mystical associations. Lexington: Michael, Donald Hall, our new poet laureate, wrote lyrically of Summer in New Hampshire ( but it will do for Vermont also ): "the Summer place becomes a mental state, a name for sweet freedom, innocent irresponsibility, imagination's respite, time for loafing and inviting the soul." It was a great resource for the Transcendalists, Thoreau, Emerson, Melville, Hawthorne all summered there and wrote about Monadnock. Hawthorne died in Plymouth on his way to a summer vacation with Franklin Pierce in the New England Alps, and wrote "The Canterbury Pilgrims" about a Shaker settlement in NH. Harry K. Thaw summered there after he was released from the insane asylum, climbing Mt Kearsage. Kipling lived for a while in Brattleboro and I think wrote 'Captains Courageous" there. The James boys summered there also. On the other hand, I had some VErmont friends who lived near Grafton for over twenty years and were told by the natives they would never be Vermonters. As it was explained to them, you could cook rocks in an oven for a long time and when they were 'done' they would never be buns but just rocks. Michael Dirda: Well,yes: Certain regions, certain towns are just that way. You need to be born there to really belong there--at least in the eyes of natives. I've discovered that the magic of Vermont and New England isn't really there for me. I think I'm a Southerner at heart--I loved New Orleans and even Oxford and Jackson,Mississippi, and Florida. In Europe I love the South too--Provence, the Mediterranean, Italy. Chapel Hill, NC (Audio Book Girl): Hi, Michael. What do you have up your sleeve in the 'lovable rogue' category? Where the heroine suffers, but emerges triumphant. Also, platonic friendship---lasting and intense. Michael Dirda: ANy help here? I'm afraid my sleeves are pretty empty on this. When I think of lovable rogue, I think of Simon Templar, the Saint. Suffering but triumphant heroines--that could fit a lot of gothic novels. Maybe I need a more detailed question. Sorry. I'm curious if you caught Louis Auchincloss's "top 5" list of novellas in Th Wall Street Journal a couple of weeks ago (especially since that topic has come up here of late). They were: 1. Madame de Treymes, Edith Wharton 2. The Author of Beltraffio, Henry James 3. Olivia, Dorothy Bussy 4. The Portrait of Mr. W.H., Oscar Wilde 5. Le Procurateur de Judee, Anatole France Any comments on or additions to this list? (Absolutely loved "Book by Book" by the way!) Michael Dirda: This is a very elegant list. Though, to be fair, the Wilde is more a tract than a novella (about the identity of the begetter of the sonnets--but it is witty in its homosexual thesis) and the Procurator of Judea is really a short story. It ends famously, almost notoriously: Pontius Pilate has retired and some old friends come to visit. Over wine they talk about the old days, and one brings up the wonder worker Jesus of Nazareth and asks whatever happened to him. Pilate answers, in the last sentence of the story, "Jesus? Jesus of Nazareth? I cannot call him to mind." Jakarta Indonesia: Mr. Dirda, Can you recommend a book about The Divine Comedy which focuses on the text, but uses the text as a springboard to discuss the intellectual and political history of 13/14th century Italy? Thank you. Michael Dirda: Hmmm. Most general books on Dante would have a chapter or more on the political historical background of the poet and his poem. I'd start there. Cincinnati, Ohio: Last week, several people mentioned reading Mark Twain's book on Joan of Arc. So on a related note, what do you and today's participants think about Steinbeck's version of King Arthur? Michael Dirda: I've never read it, but have been told it's quite good, though Steinbeck was never quite done with it and it came out posthumously. And that, friends, brings us to the end of another session of Dirda on Books! Until next Wednesday at 2--keep reading! 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.
156.170732
0.634146
0.780488
high
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071801808.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006071919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071801808.html
It Takes 'Talent' To Kill This Trend
2006071919
Go ye therefore and be famous for 15 minutes -- or so, approximately, goes the gospel according to Andy Warhol. His prediction that everybody would get his or her quarter-hour in the spotlight -- or, more likely, on television or in a pop-up on the computer screen, may have erred on the side of generosity: Five minutes, not 15, seems a more plausible estimate now. With the number of available channels exploding exponentially, America's celebrity shortage grows increasingly severe. Stars can't be stamped out on a conveyor belt like creatures concocted at Willy Wonka's chocolate factory -- but almost. And, to mix metaphors further, it turns out there's an audience that will patiently and even avidly watch the sausage being made -- first on Fox's phenomenally popular "American Idol" and now on NBC's shameless and slavish imitation (with some of the same producers involved), "America's Got Talent," airing again tonight at 8 on TV's most pathetically desperate network. "Talent," hosted by affable Regis Philbin, doesn't draw nearly as many suckers into the tent as "Idol" does, but then "Idol" had three years to grow into a sensation. This year it averaged 30.2 million viewers for its Tuesday night edition and 31.2 million for its Wednesday night installment, when winners from previous nights were announced. The July 5 episode of "America's Got Talent" on NBC pulled in only 12 million viewers, and the following week's show, on July 12, only 11.2 million. Will the downward trend continue with tonight's show, or will some mysterious factor (the other channels go dead) result in a rebound? Such shows are cheap to produce, what with amateurs providing the "entertainment" and has-beens dominating the panels of "judges" who rule on who stays and who is jettisoned into the horrific void of anonymity. The acts on NBC's show are generally of a much lower quality than Fox's (an embarrassing flip-flop considering that NBC's Johnny Carson and David Letterman used to make jokes about what a lowly fiasco Fox was) and suggest a change of title is in order: "America's Got Talent -- But You Won't Find It Here." For all the mediocrity religiously poured into it, however, even as resolute a shambles as "America's Got Talent" has managed to produce a moment or two of affecting spontaneity, something to knock a viewer right off his couch. Last week it happened near the end of the two-hour telecast. The Millers, as they call themselves, are a pair of adolescent brothers, one of whom -- the older and more handsome of the two -- strummed guitar and sang, unmemorably, while the other -- younger, dumpier and more childlike -- played the blazes out of a harmonica, which seems at some point in the past to have become an inseparable part of his physiognomy. Piers Morgan, the requisite snippy British judge ("Talent's" version of "Idol's" Simon Cowell), issued his verdict on the Millers, telling the harmonica player, "I think you ought to sack your brother" and go solo. The ugly remark elicited an unexpectedly touching response: The little brother, tears in his eyes, hugged his partner and vowed not to break up the act, with the crowd applauding its emotional approval. It was a tender and seemingly genuine moment, one that almost made sitting through the previous two hours of inanity worth it -- the puppeteer with two unfunny bird marionettes, the scantily clad hula-hoop babe who billed herself as Hoopalicious (wisely keeping her real name concealed), a cute but hokey yodeler (is there still a market for yodelers?) who after an introductory yodel or two turned to the band and barked, "Hit it, guys," as if we'd all been teleported back to, say, 1954 and a Mackless "Ted Mack and the Original Amateur Hour." "Talent's" early ratings may have been higher, but many of the acts were worse. The early editions of the show supplied that crazy fix of schadenfreude that "American Idol" delivers in its audition phases, when the tone-deaf singers and oblivious klutzes take the stage and perform hilarious exercises in stupefied mortification. Some of the worst of the "Idol" acts have remained in the spotlight longer than a few of the "winners," perhaps partly because their self-delusion takes on a sweet aura of innocence. On Chuck Barris's masterpiece of kitsch, "The Gong Show," many of the contestants were so showbiz-savvy that they made their performances as bad as possible, playing a kind of mano a mano game with the audience that was funny but slick and packaged. At their ghastly best and worst, though, "Idol" and even "Talent" offer performers who appear truly unaware of how dreadful they are, and while many in the studio audience jeer and boo (they are performers, too), some of us watch at home and can't help being touched as well as tickled by the truly terrible. Our hearts go out to them. From the look and sound of the opening installments, "America's Got Talent" is that one show too many that has killed many a television trend. It has no charm, it's edited into anarchy, and its so-called judges (also including the vacuous Brandy and frighteningly primitive David Hasselhoff) could hardly be less articulate. Brandy: "Taylor, you were awesome." Hasselhoff: "You guys did a great, great, great, great, great, great job . . . It was just really great." Morgan: "You are what this show is all about" (sounding exactly like Cowell). There was also a lot of blowing away. "You so blew me away with Godzilla," Hasselhoff told a puppeteer who'd done his version of the monster movie. "I was expecting you to blow us away," Morgan told a juggler. "The first time I saw you, I was completely blown away," Brandy said of a man who dressed dogs in drag. If only the winds of Burbank would grow strong enough to blow the whole lot of them away, NBC programming executives occasionally crashing into walls.
Go ye therefore and be famous for 15 minutes -- or so, approximately, goes the gospel according to Andy Warhol. His prediction that everybody would get his or her quarter-hour in the spotlight -- or, more likely, on television or in a pop-up on the computer screen, may have erred on the side of...
18.984615
0.984615
63.015385
medium
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071801371.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006071919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071801371.html
Verizon Overbills 11,000 Customers
2006071919
The nation's second-largest phone company said it discovered the mistake on June 26, fixed the computer program on June 29, and would correct the errors in most customers' next bills. The incorrect bills were sent to customers in the District, Maryland, Virginia and West Virginia. Verizon said fixing the problem involved going through the 5.3 million monthly bills it sends to the region to figure out which ones were wrong. Harry J. Mitchell, a Verizon spokesman, said the company called some affected customers to tell them of the errors and planned to communicate with the rest, probably by letter. It was not clear whether Verizon would tell customers what they owed before next month's bills. Mitchell said customers unsure of what to pay could call Verizon or pay what they owed the previous month. He also said Verizon would "turn off any late-payment charge flags" so affected customers are not dunned if they do not pay what their bills say is due. Jack Mitton, an accountant who lives in the District, said he recently signed up for a Verizon plan promising unlimited local and long-distance calling for $39.95 a month, but his next bill was for $2,255.26. Mitton said a Verizon agent told him on Monday that he owed about $59 (counting fees, taxes and a prorated amount from a previous service plan) and promised to fix the problem. When he called yesterday, the bill had not been corrected and a second agent estimated that he owed $55. "After that, then the guy wanted to sell me on DSL," Mitton said. "I said I wasn't interested in DSL until I after I had gotten everything straightened out on the bill."
Verizon Communications Inc. said yesterday that it overbilled about 11,000 customers in the Washington region and West Virginia by $200 to several thousand dollars each because of a software error.
10.4375
0.59375
0.96875
low
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071801727.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006071919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071801727.html
Nats Begin Preparing for Soriano Trade
2006071919
MIAMI, July 18 -- The Washington Nationals, fresh with the possibility that the Seattle Mariners will become a serious contender to acquire left fielder Alfonso Soriano, have started scouting the Mariners' system for prospects. Scouting director Dana Brown and another scout watched the Mariners' game on Monday in New York against the Yankees. In addition, director of player personnel Bob Boone has recently seen the Mariners' top farm club, Class AAA Tacoma, as the Nationals try to learn as much as possible about Seattle's talent pool. The Detroit Tigers, Los Angeles Angels, Los Angeles Dodgers and New York Yankees are among the other possible suitors for Soriano. That the trade talks are becoming more serious will be evident later this week, when Brown and Boone are both scheduled to be in Washington to discuss their evaluations with General Manager Jim Bowden. In addition, assistant general manager Tony Siegle, who rarely misses a road trip, remained in Washington with Bowden during the six-game trek that opened the second half. In New York, Nationals scouts were specifically keeping an eye on rookie outfielder Adam Jones, just recalled from Tacoma. Jones hit .277 with 14 homers and 55 RBI in the minors and is considered the Mariners' center fielder of the future. Part of the reason the Nationals don't have complete reports on each opposing minor league system is because the franchise has been understaffed with scouts over the past 4 1/2 seasons. Incoming team president Stan Kasten and Bowden have pledged to beef up the scouting department, and the club appears to be attempting to make a first step in that direction by interviewing Mike Rizzo, the scouting director of the Arizona Diamondbacks. Neither Kasten nor Bowden would comment about Rizzo on Tuesday. "I never discuss things we might do or might not do," Kasten said by phone. Right fielder Jose Guillen left Tuesday's game against the Marlins with right elbow soreness. Guillen made a throw in the first inning that skied toward third base. "It burned like it was on fire," he said. He will have an MRI exam on Wednesday.
This is your source for info on Washington Nationals baseball. Learn about DC baseball at the RFK stadium. Get the latest schedule and stats for the Washington Nationals. Stay updated on the latest Washington Nationals news!
9.395349
0.511628
0.744186
low
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071801483.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006071919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071801483.html
Firms Aim at Business Networks
2006071919
Microsoft yesterday announced a partnership with Canadian telecommunications company Nortel Networks to help companies make the transition from traditional phone systems to software-based networks. Today, AOL is rolling out a new business-oriented instant-messaging program that ties in WebEx video-conferencing services and Microsoft's Outlook e-mail program. The new alliances hope to reduce costs, increase productivity and simplify communications tools for businesses, the companies said. Nortel, which has long been an industry leader in providing hardware for corporate phone systems, expects to bring in more than $1 billion in revenue from its partnership with Microsoft, the world's largest software maker. The companies plan to work together over the next four years to develop software for Internet calling, instant messaging, and voice and video conferencing. They plan to share the investment in development, marketing and integrating the new technology into existing systems. "Our partnership fundamentally changes the telephone landscape with the software approach," said Mike S. Zafirovski, Nortel's president and chief executive. "This will drive down the cost of business communications. . . . The bottom line is that we take the risk out of the transition." Some businesses have been slow to adopt Internet-based communications tools because of the complex technology that surrounds them, said Robert Whiteley, senior analyst with Forrester Research Inc. The partnership bodes well for smaller businesses that do not have the resources to put Internet-based systems in place, he said. "Nortel is good at providing the underpinning technology, and Microsoft is good at creating the applications," Whiteley said. "In the past, users had to bring those together themselves." Businesses are interested in the cost-saving possibilities of Internet-based communications, while telecom and software firms are hoping to capitalize on that transition, said Samir Sakpal, an industry analyst at the research firm Frost & Sullivan. The Internet-based communications market will experience healthy growth this year, according to Forrester Research. A recent survey showed that 64 percent of U.S. companies are shifting their voice traffic to an Internet network. Cisco Systems Inc. and International Business Machines Corp. are also collaborating to converge data, voice and video on Internet networks, and analysts expect similar partnerships to emerge as telecom companies try to compete. AOL is also looking to revamp business communication with its new instant-messaging program, AIM Pro, which combines instant messaging, e-mail, desktop sharing, and voice and video conferencing into one application. The AIM franchise, which this year is celebrating the 10th anniversary of the Buddy List, is used by 14 million U.S. workers, according to Osterman Research Inc. AOL is trying to reach a larger share of the at-work instant-messenger users, said John McKinley, president of AOL's digital services division. "We should have a version of AIM to reflect the role it's playing at any part of the day," he said. Radicati Group Inc., an industry research firm, estimates that 135 million people use IM programs at work, and that number is expected to grow to 477 million by 2009. "For the longest time, key players have been wanting to move into the enterprise IM space," said Sarah Radicati, the group's president and chief executive. But persuading business owners to adopt the programs has been difficult. Two years ago, AOL, Microsoft and Yahoo Inc. linked their instant-messaging services for use at the workplace, but corporations did not jump on board. This time, Radicati said, companies will probably be more open to AOL's program. "IM used to be viewed as just a toy; now it's viewed as an important communications tool," she said.
Microsoft Corp. and AOL are making separate bids this week to rewire the way businesses communicate, tapping into new technologies for e-mail, instant messages, Internet calls and video conferences.
20.628571
0.657143
1.057143
medium
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071801420.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006071919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071801420.html
President to Address NAACP Tomorrow
2006071919
After six years in office, President Bush has agreed to address the NAACP at its annual national convention in Washington, the White House announced yesterday. White House spokesman Tony Snow said the president will appear before the nation's oldest and largest civil rights group tomorrow after years of trading rhetorical jabs with its leadership. "I think the president wants to make the argument that he has had a career that reflects a strong commitment to civil rights," Snow said at a news conference. With the appearance, Bush will avoid becoming the first president since Warren G. Harding to snub the predominantly black organization throughout his term. The president's change of heart followed a change in the NAACP's leadership. Bruce Gordon, the new president, is a former telecommunications executive who is more moderate than his predecessors. "Yes, they have political disagreements," Snow said, but "Bruce Gordon . . . and the president have good relations." The NAACP was among the organizations that strongly challenged the results of the Florida balloting in the 2000 election that was ultimately decided in Bush's favor. A few years later, NAACP Chairman Julian Bond referred to far-right members of the Republican Party as "the Taliban wing." Former NAACP president and chief executive Kweisi Mfume routinely criticized the administration's policies. When Bush declined the group's invitation to speak at its 2004 convention, he explained the snub, saying, "You've heard the rhetoric and the names they've called me." That same year, during the buildup to Bush's reelection in November, the Internal Revenue Service threatened to revoke the NAACP's nonpartisan, tax-exempt status because Bond "condemned the administration policies of George W. Bush" in a speech, according to documents provided by the NAACP's lawyers. The NAACP, founded in 1909, has had sufficient influence in black America to draw every president after Harding to its conventions, even as the group has been critical of some, including Republicans Richard M. Nixon and Ronald Reagan and Democrats Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.
After six years in office, President Bush has agreed to address the NAACP at its annual national convention in Washington, the White House announced yesterday.
14.285714
1
28
low
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071801436.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006071919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071801436.html
Bush Supports Israel's Move Against Hezbollah
2006071919
In blunt language, President Bush yesterday endorsed Israel's campaign to cripple or eliminate Hezbollah, charged that Syria is trying to reassert control of Lebanon, and called for the isolation of Iran. Bush, in remarks at the White House after he briefed members of Congress about the recent Group of Eight summit of industrialized nations, said the "root cause" of the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah guerrillas in southern Lebanon "is terrorism and terrorist attacks on a democratic country." "And part of those terrorist attacks are inspired by nation states, like Syria and Iran. And in order to be able to deal with this crisis, the world must deal with Hezbollah, with Syria and to continue to work to isolate Iran," Bush said. The president spoke amid increasing pessimism about the potential for diplomacy to defuse the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah in the near future. Many U.S., European and Arab officials are resigned to a prolonged battle with limited prospects for diplomacy because of limited alternatives and what one European diplomat called the "unstoppable dynamic" of Israel's military campaign. At the same time, the administration is scrambling to develop a strategy to deal with the crisis. Despite unity at the G-8, U.S. officials said that a lot of ideas have been offered without details or feasibility assessments. "What we have to do before we launch anyone at a target is understand the mission," a senior U.S. official said. For now, the administration is letting Israel's military strategy to weaken Hezbollah and its Syrian and Iranian backers play out. "The real objective here has to be to deny the Mediterranean branch of Tehran a strategic victory and to find a way that, coming out of the crisis, we have a situation recomposed, so Hezbollah's influence is more limited -- ideally you could say destroyed," the senior U.S. official said. Iran gave birth to Hezbollah and has provided some $100 million annually in funds and most of its arms. Syria, which ended a 29-year occupation of Lebanon when it withdrew 14,000 troops last year, is trying to get back into Lebanon in violation of U.N. Resolution 1559, Bush said. The president said there are growing "suspicions" that the instability that followed Hezbollah's cross-border raid last week will lead some Lebanese to invite Syria to return. Any such move is "against the United Nations policy and it's against U.S. policy," Bush vowed. Pressed on whether he is trying to buy time for Israel to eliminate Hezbollah, Bush said Israel should be allowed to defend itself. But he also cautioned that Israel should be "mindful" to allow Lebanon's government to "succeed and survive" after the conflict. "Sometimes it requires tragic situations to help bring clarity in the international community," Bush said. "And it is now clear for all to see that there are terrorist elements who want to destroy our democratic friends and allies, and the world must work to prevent them from doing so."
In blunt language, President Bush yesterday endorsed Israel's campaign to cripple or eliminate Hezbollah, charged that Syria is trying to reassert control of Lebanon, and called for the isolation of Iran.
16.111111
1
36
medium
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071800792.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006071919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071800792.html
Republican Candidate Linked to Abramoff Loses in Ga. Primary
2006071919
Former Georgia Republican Party chairman Ralph Reed lost his bid for the party's nomination for lieutenant governor last night, the first electoral defeat this year that can be traced directly to the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal. Meanwhile, Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-Ga.), facing her first election since a scuffle with a Capitol Police officer this spring, will face a runoff with her main challenger, Hank Johnson, a former county commissioner with roots in the heart of her core constituency. Reed conceded defeat to Casey Cagle, a little-known state senator, less than three hours after the polls closed. With 94 percent of precincts reporting, Cagle led by 56 percent to 44 percent. An upbeat Reed told a few dozen cheering supporters in Atlanta that his conservative message will live on. "Stay in the fight. Don't retreat. And our values will win in November," he said. The defeat represents an astounding fall for Reed, 45, who presided over the Christian Coalition for most of the 1990s and was regarded as one of the GOP's rising stars. In 2001, Georgia Republicans elected him state party chairman. But his first run for elective office was damaged by revelations that Reed had mobilized Christian voters against Indian casinos -- for fees totaling more than $4 million -- to benefit gambling interests that had employed Abramoff as a lobbyist. Once that was reported, Reed's fundraising dried up. Polls began showing Cagle climbing from obscurity to competitiveness. Cagle capitalized on Reed's struggles, running television commercials that accused him of "selling out our values." In November, Cagle will face Jim Martin or Greg K. Hecht; the two Democrats are headed to an Aug. 8 runoff. So is McKinney. With 98 percent of precincts reporting, she was leading Johnson in the 4th Congressional District primary by 47 percent to 44.5 percent of votes counted. Georgia law requires a candidate to reach 50 percent to avoid a runoff. McKinney lost her seat in 2002 after implying the Bush administration knew about the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks before they happened. She was returned to Washington in 2004. Gov. Sonny Perdue (R) and Lt. Gov. Mark Taylor (D) won their parties' gubernatorial nominations. Perdue has been seen as a top target of Democrats. But his campaign war chest -- more than $9 million, at last count -- and a polling bump he received after Hurricane Katrina have strengthened his chances. In Alabama, George Wallace Jr. lost to lawyer Luther Strange in the Republican runoff for lieutenant governor. Wallace, son of the former Alabama governor and presidential candidate, previously lost bids for Congress and lieutenant governor.
Former Georgia Republican Party chairman Ralph Reed lost his bid for the party's nomination for lieutenant governor last night, the first electoral defeat this year that can be traced directly to the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal.
13.282051
1
39
low
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071800613.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006071919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071800613.html
Lebanese Cardinal Leads Peace Service
2006071919
In English and in Arabic, shedding tears and sweat, Washington's Lebanese Catholics prayed yesterday for peace in their homeland, filling a new white church at noon on a sweltering workday. Catholics are the largest Christian community in Lebanon, and the special Mass at Our Lady of Lebanon Maronite Church was celebrated by Cardinal Nasrallah P. Sfeir, considered one of the most influential leaders of the country's Christians. Nasrallah was in the United States this month when the violence began and spent his last day -- yesterday -- speaking about the holy nature of peacemaking. "Are there no more peacemakers? I ask: Is war inevitable? The course of history seems to confirm this fearful thought," he told more than 200 people at Our Lady, which was dedicated in May. "As Christians, we believe that war is not inevitable; people choose war, and people can choose peace. . . . Blessed are the peacemakers." Among those at the quickly planned Mass were Washington Archbishop Donald W. Wuerl and his predecessor, Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick, who retired this summer. Hours before a scheduled meeting with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Sfeir said in a telephone interview that he planned to tell her that the United States should press Israel to stop attacking his country. The United States has the ability to "restrain Israel," he said. The cardinal has over the past several years advocated for Hezbollah to disarm and be integrated into Lebanese society. He said he was surprised that the conflict had developed the way it has -- so rapidly and with so much violence. Asked where he believed the situation was headed, he said the first priority was to stop the fighting. In the long term, he predicted that the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah won't end until the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is solved, with both peoples established in their own states. Sfeir is the spiritual leader for Lebanese Catholics, including the 71,000 who live in the United States, according to the 2006 Official Catholic Directory. Our Lady of Lebanon, with its white, curved walls and skylights, is on Alaska Avenue NW in the District and serves more than 400 families. Also yesterday, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops urged in a statement for the United States to "exert greater leadership" to work toward a cease-fire, to restrain Israel and to move quickly into negotiations between all the parties. The statement, written by Bishop Thomas G. Wenski, chairman of the conference's Committee on International Policy, said that although current fighting may have been provoked by "extreme armed factions" of Hamas and Hezbollah, Israel's military response has been disproportionate and sometimes indiscriminate. "Our Conference appeals to all leaders in the region and to the leaders of our nation to make it clear that violence, from whatever side, for whatever purpose, cannot bring a lasting or just peace in the Land we call Holy," the statement said. Last night, the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee rallied in front of the White House, calling for an immediate cease-fire. Among the 23 groups co-sponsoring the event were the women's antiwar group Code Pink, the Arab American Institute and the Catholic nonviolence group Pax Christi USA. At least 400 people attended, according to the committee's spokeswoman, Laila Al-Qatami.
In English and in Arabic, shedding tears and sweat, Washington's Lebanese Catholics prayed yesterday for peace in their homeland, filling a new white church at noon on a sweltering workday.
18.4
1
35
medium
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/19/AR2006071900422.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006071919id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/19/AR2006071900422.html
Buddhism revives in Mongolia's grasslands
2006071919
KHARKHORIN, Mongolia (Reuters) - When Gendenjav Choijamts thinks of praying, he thinks of vodka. The 62-year-old monk at Mongolia's oldest Buddhist monastery remembers when his father and his friends had to pretend they were gathering for a drinking session to hide the fact they were gathering in prayer. "My father was a monk but because people were persecuted for that; it wasn't widely known," he said in the lush green grounds of Erdene Zuu, which dates from the 16th century. "He was a herder. He hid his shrine and would chant in secret in the evening," he said. Monastic life, which took hold in Mongolia in the 1500s, was nearly wiped out within 15 years of communist rule, mostly during Stalinist purges in the 1930s when an estimated 17,000 lamas were executed. But since the country emerged from decades of Soviet dominance, the Yellow Hat sect of Buddhism -- also practiced in Tibet -- is making a comeback. In 1990, three monasteries were allowed to reopen. The number quickly mushroomed to 170 across the country. Tibet's spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, has visited Mongolia five times since the early 1990s, most recently in 2002, when he delivered religious discourses to thousands of followers. The word 'dalai' itself means 'ocean' in Mongolian, and the title of Dalai Lama, or "Ocean of Wisdom" was bestowed in the 1500s by Genghis Khan descendant Altan Khan, who ordered Mongols to practice Buddhism. Traditionally many Mongolians have practiced Shamanism, which still has a strong following in the north of the country. Erdene Zuu monastery, in the grasslands on the edge of the ancient capital of Kharkhorin, some 230 miles southwest of Ulan Bator, housed 1,500 lamas before it was destroyed in 1936.
KHARKHORIN, Mongolia (Reuters) - When Gendenjav Choijamts thinks of praying, he thinks of vodka.
18.368421
1
19
medium
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/17/DI2006071700773.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006071819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/17/DI2006071700773.html
Mideast Conflict Grows
2006071819
VIDEO: The Post's Shadid from Beirut, (July 17, 2006 ). Washington, D.C.: I haven't seen anything about this aspect of Hezbollah's rocket attacks. Does Hezbollah have targeting info and/or capabilities with these rockets? Are they just aimed and fired more or less blindly depending upon their range or does Hezbollah have a tactical plan for their use apart from simply inflicting terror in Israel? The rockets they have been firing at Israel so far are not very sophisticated or accurate. They seem to have used a guided missile to attack an Israeli warship in the Mediterranean, but mostly they're just throwing up a lot of missiles and hoping to hit something. Washington, D.C.: Why isn't Israel sending in ground troops to disarm Hezbollah instead of bombing civilians in Lebanon? What military advantage is there in bombing Beirut? Is Israel strong enough to take on Iran, Syria and Lebanon without resorting to nuclear strikes? Jon Alterman: Israel got out of southern Lebanon in 2000, and they were delighted to do so. Hezbollah was wearing them down with a war of attrition. There's not much eagerness to reinstitute an occupation of southern Lebanon. Israeli targeting seems guided by 1) a desire to destroy Hezbollah assets, such as they are, and 2) to goad the Lebanese government to taking forceful action against Hezbollah. I think we've largely seen the end of symmetrical warfare in the Middle East, where armies line up across a battlefield. Israel would handily win any such encounter. That's why countries such as Iran prefer to work through proxies, and to make all of Israel the battlefield. Washington, D.C.: Is there a realistic possibility of lasting peace in the middle East? It seems to me there isn't so long as Israel exists. Palestinians and their allies will never forgive or forget the loss of their ancestral land, and Israel, for its part, seems to believe that security involves viewing its Muslim neighbors and citizens as targets. It makes me wonder whether the president of Iran was correct, and peace will only come if the Jewish homeland is moved to Europe. Jon Alterman: I'm not so sure. I think there's been a remarkable acceptance of Israel in the Arab world that started perhaps 15 years ago. Al-Jazeera's graphic, for example, shows Israel labeled as Israel, and the West Bank and Gaza labeled as such. We've largely gotten away from Arabs referring to "the Zionist entity." In quieter times, polling suggests broad willingness to live side by side with Israel. Equally importantly, the polling changes depends on what's happening on the ground. Polling in Israel changes, too. I think there is something to build on, but clearly this week isn't the week to try. Also, note that a large percentage of Israeli Jews are from the Middle East themselves. "Sending them back to Europe" not only isn't a practical option, it also doesn't put us back to the status quo ante. Tijeras, N.M.: How is it that three separate attacks were allowed INSIDE Israel? What has happened to Israel's internal security and its military? Have the terrorists become better at internal warfare? Jon Alterman: I'm told there is a lot of criticism within Israel that operational security had broken down badly, and that these kidnappings of Israeli soldiers were, in part, due to sloppiness by troops in the field. Chicago, Ill.: Why is U.N. reluctant to exert real pressure on Syria and Iran, who control Hezbollah, to return the Israeli soldiers and stop launching missiles? That would immediately de-escalate the crisis. Jon Alterman: The UN's approach is to treat all sides as equally culpable. That's clearly not the US view, and the President has made clear that he agrees with you. Springfield, Va.: Given how many rockets Hezbollah has been launching at Israel, is it possible (is there any intelligence) that they have a very finite number of rockets they can use before running out or getting so low as to limit their use in a real way? Also, if this is the case, would it be increasingly difficult for additional rockets to be shipped for immediate or future use via Syria (originating from Iran) given recent developments? Jon Alterman: Interesting question. My guess is that the cupboards aren't bare yet, but they are certainly working through a finite resource. Some Israeli targeting seems to be directed at cutting off supply routes (including Beirut Airport). I would bet Israel will bargain hard for a bar on resupply as part of a ceasefire agreement. The thing I'm just not sure about is how much of their arsenal can be supplied based on domestic manufacturing. Richmond, Va.: What do you think is the probability that Israel would use tactical nuclear weapons, should the conflict widen even further and involve most of the Arab nations opposed to Israel? Jon Alterman: 1) I don't think the conflict will widen. Not a single surrounding state wants it to. 2) I cannot imagine Israel would use nuclear weapons, except as a final salvo to avoid the destruction of the state. In some ways, their nuclear arsenal is intended as much to show us they're serious as it is to deter their neighbors. For example, during the 1973 war, they rolled out their nuclear-capable Jericho missiles not because they wanted to use them, but because they wanted US overhead surveillance to see them and understand this whole thing could get out of hand. Surrounding Arab armies were clueless about this development. This war has been going on since 1948, almost going on 60 years. Is there any end in sight? Jon Alterman: I can imagine an end to this conflict, but I can't see it from here. Much will depend on how the dust will settle from this (in terms of Israeli politics, in terms of Lebanese politics, etc.). Much will shift. After all, the current Israeli government was elected on the platform that unilateral withdrawal will produce peace, and now they find themselves fighting a two-front war in the very places from which they withdrew. They obviously are going to need a different strategic vision. Akron, Ohio: It is reported that the Arab League, though acknowledging that Hezbollah is the instigator of the present situation, is asking the U.S. to push Israel to a cease-fire. Two questions based on this news: Is the Arab League, and its member states, also pushing to get Hezbollah and Hamas to commit to cease-fire? Also, aren't many of the member states of the Arab League tacitly part of the problem since they refuse to acknowledge Israel's right to exist and right to defend its borders? Jon Alterman: I think the Arab League is indeed pushing Hamas and Hezbollah, neither of which they feel much warmth toward. At the state level, these countries have basically reconciled themselves to living side-by-side with Israel, and they see these groups as dangerously challenging the status quo. The Saudi comments about Hezbollah's adventurism were unprecedented. I also note that the Hamas fundraisers have gotten more hectoring lectures than cash when they toured the Gulf a few months ago. It seems to me that they really are committed to the Arab League initiative, put forward in Beirut in February 2002. They understand there's no other way forward. Thanks for doing this chat today. There has been some speculation that this conflict could widen and include attacks on Syria and potentially Iran and its capabilities (nuclear and otherwise.) It seems that Israel's stated goal of disarming Hezbollah and making it impossible for them to attack Northern Israel could be followed to the logical conclusion that they would attack Syria and/or Iran. In your opinion, what are the chances that this will occur? And, if it were to take place, what are the chances that this would pull the United States into the conflict? Thank you... Jon Alterman: I wouldn't be surprised at all to see Syria attacked, but I don't think they'd respond. They certainly haven't before, given the overwhelming strength of the Israeli army. There may in fact be some backchannel negotiations between Israel and Syria right now to make sure it doesn't happen. I think Iran is just too far, and the target sets too remote, to invite an attack. More likely this will remain a limited proxy war, to continue for a week or more, and then succumb to international mediation. Of course, a lot could go wrong between now and then, and there will certainly be continued loss of life on both sides. GB. Wis.: How is Iran involved in the current conflict in Isreal? Jon Alterman: Iran waves its anti-Israel credentials in part to elide the fact that they feel connected to the Middle East but are not Arab. The Shah dealt extensively with Israel, and the Islamic revolutionaries who tossed him out defined anti-Israeli policy as a core value of the Iranian revolution. The interesting thing in the last year is the way that President Ahmedinejad has used anti-Israeli rhetoric to gain credibility in Muslim communities throughout the world. It seems to me that this is becoming a more popular issue (due in part to people watching the Arab-Israeli conflict more on television), and Iran is at the forefront of pushing it. Reston, Va: What do you think Iran wants out of this? Return to the status quo? Another occupation of southern Lebanon? A wider conflict involving Syria and Iran? Jon Alterman: Iran's foreign policy, it seems to me, is both entrepreneurial and hedging. The current conflict diverts attention from their nuclear program, it builds up animosity to Israel in Muslim communities, and it builds solidarity among the Lebanese Shia. None of that is especially bad from their perspective. My guess is they haven't thought this out strategically, and they'll take what they can get. Fairfax, Va.: If we can assume that Israel's goal is as stated in today's Jerusalem Post to "alleviate Hezbollah's capacity to threaten Israel" and they are largely successful in accomplishing this, how long will this problem be "alleviated" before they are expected to rearm? In view of the "Law of Unintended Consequences" what can be expected after the current crisis plays out? Jon Alterman: I don't doubt that Israel wants to constrain Hezbollah, as do many Lebanese. Whether they will be successful will depend on how subsequent negotiations play out. They key issue, though, is this: what Israel really needs is a political outcome, not a military one. Hezbollah needs to make a decision to lay down its arms and submit to the authority of the Lebanese state, and that is a fundamentally political decision. Everyone has ample military means at their disposal, but military means can't force political outcomes. Parkville, Md.: Israel has not withdrawn from the West Bank. Gaza is only a tiny territory. It seems that as long as Israel occupies the West Bank its actions will suffer from some moral taint. Personally, I could accept a temporary military occupation of certain strategic regions outside Israel if such were deemed militarily necessary, but by building civilian settlements in these places the Israelis have really undermined the cause of their own legitimacy and security. Jon Alterman: PM Olmert was elected on a platform of withdrawal from the West Bank, and Hamas and Hezbollah have helped make that far less likely. Some might argue this was their intention, because they need armed conflict for their survival. From my talks with folks sympathetic to them, I don't think they're that strategic, and their hatred for Israel is genuine. Israel certain needs a long-term strategy both to deal with Arab populations in the West Bank and Gaza, and to deal with surrounding states. My guess is that they're in a relatively strong position on the latter, but back to the drawing board on the former. Washington, D.C.: Presumably the biggest losers from the escalation between Israel and Lebanon have been Lebanon's citizens. How would you describe sentiments in Lebanon toward Hezbollah before the escalation, and what would the Lebanese government need to do in the future to prevent another such conflict from creating so much collateral damage? Jon Alterman: Lebanon's citizens are deeply split, depending on the normal kinds of things -- geography, class, sectarian origin. In general, people are awfully tired of proxy wars being fought on their territory. Lebanon needs a strong government to negotiate with Hezbollah and make them play by the rules. I'm not confident that the current actions make that more likely. Washington, D.C.: Do you think the proposed UN or international force that Tony Blair seems intent to create would help the Lebanese government and actually stop Hezbollah from regrouping on the border? Jon Alterman: I wish I were more confident about outside military forces making a difference. In general, peacekeepers are effective when there is a peace to keep. Peacemakers need to fight their way in, and in so doing, would constitute an invading army. I don't think we're ready for outside military forces to come in. Washington, D.C.: Good morning, Dr. Alterman. Some have suggested that Israel had been planning its recent offensive in Gaza for several months, and used the capture of Cpl. Shalit as a pretext for justifying this course of action. Can you assess the legitimacy of such speculation? Thank you for your time and consideration. Jon Alterman: Militaries plan for all sorts of things, and I would think the Israeli army would be derelict in its duties had it not had a Gaza plan on the shelf. They also had a new government, headed by a Prime Minister and Defense Minister with little military experience. It seemed to me--and I said at the time--that PM Olmert would need to show toughness before he could show compromise on Arab-Israeli issues. The political question, then, is whether this was the appropriate thing to do in response to the provocation of a soldier's kidnapping. I don't think they were merely seizing a pretext to do what they had decided to do already, but I'm not sure that the military reaction they had was the best possible response to the provocation. Hanover, N.H.: What do you think of William Cristol's enthusiasm for the "opportunity to crush Hizbollah?" Jon Alterman: I'm skeptical that Hezbollah can be crushed. It's a lot more than merely a militia, but its strength as a militia contributes to its overall power. Washington, D.C.: What is the solution to extremism...I mean, they have the necessities of life, unlike Sudan violence or N. Korea...How can they learn to get along? Jon Alterman: Strangely, really poor people don't fight -- they're too busy trying to find food. It turns out revolutions are much more common among middle-income populations than among the poorest of the poor. Washington, D.C.: Is Hezbollah a Lebanese organization, or is it a transplant group? Also isn't the hat for Israel due to the rigidity of the religion? Jon Alterman: It's Lebanese, with some Iranian cash and Syrian encouragement. I don't see Shia Islam as especially rigid. New York City, N.Y.: Doesn't the rising price of oil strengthen Iran's hand? It would seem that it would easily pay for all those rockets to be replaced. Jon Alterman: You're absolutely right. A friend in the oil business told me that based purely on supply and demand, oil should be at about $45/barrel. That means there's currently a $30 risk premium that all producers (including Iran) enjoy, and it goes right into their pockets. Reston, Va.: How significant is it that other Arab countries in the region have remained relatively silent rather than condemning Israel? Jon Alterman: I think it's an important sign that governments in the region have largely reconciled themselves to living side by side with Israel. Populations are a different story, and many of them are in the streets protesting government inaction. In general, Arab governments have weathered public protest in the past (over the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, the Israeli redeployment into the West Bank and its sacking of Jenin in 2002, and so on). It's unclear whether their past luck will hold, but at this point I don't see good reason to bet against them. Washington, D.C.: When you say Hezbollah is a Lebanese organization, do you mean its members are Lebanese nationals or Palestinians who live as refugees in Lebanon or both? Jon Alterman: Hezbollah isn't Palestinian at all. It's Lebanese Shia. Washington, D.C.: With the Lebanese president vowing to stand by Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah and the Israeli Prime Minister refusing to consider a cease fire without certain conditions being met, what are the chances that this conflict will be resolved without further escalation? Jon Alterman: My guess is a week or two of more fighting and escalation, followed by successful international mediation (ultimately with a strong US role, but not initially). Jon Alterman: I'm afraid I'm going to have to knock off. I apologize to the 50 or so folks I haven't gotten to. I appreciate your questions, and I look forward to doing a chat with you all in the future. 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.
84.292683
0.658537
0.853659
high
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/14/DI2006071401050.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006071819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/14/DI2006071401050.html
Post Politics Hour
2006071819
Don't want to miss out on the latest in politics? Start each day with The Post Politics Hour. Join in each weekday morning at 11 a.m. as a member of The Washington Post's team of White House and Congressional reporters answers questions about the latest in buzz in Washington and The Post's coverage of political news. Washington Post White House reporter Peter Baker was online Tuesday, July 18, at 11 a.m. ET . Baker has been in Russia, covering President Bush's trip to the G-8 Summit: Microphone Captures Bush's Unscripted Comments at G-8, (Post, July 17, 2006) Leaders Work Out Plan For End to Mideast Crisis, (Post, July 17, 2006) Peter Baker: Good morning, everyone. Sorry to be late. Checking in here from Russia, where President Bush and the rest of the G-8 just wrapped up the first summit ever in this country. Lots to chat about, so let's get started. Laramie, Wyo.: Have you seen that video of Bush grabbing Chancellor Angela Merkel on the shoulders like he was going to give her a massage and totally freaking her out? Can you believe the LA Times description: "Entering the meeting room, as relayed by a Russian television camera, Bush headed directly behind the chancellor, reached out and, placing both hands on the collar of her gold jacket, gave her a short massage just below the neck. Peter Baker: The summit gave us a few unscripted moments between world leaders, but I confess I didn't see that one. Fairfax, Va.: Now that you have had a little bit of time to analyze what was accomplished or not at the recent G8 meeting, are you able to draw any conclusions? In the scheme of things, is the meeting a "relationship" meeting which the parties use to to develop and/or change positively or negatively the relationships between them or is it a meeting of real substance where something positive or negative will grow out of it at some future date? Peter Baker: Most of these sorts of meetings involve lots of prearranged statements and "agreements" that sometimes don't seem to add up to much. There's lots of discussion going on in the NGO world about whether the G-8 has lived up to commitments made last year on world poverty and disease. This year, the official topics of energy, infectious disease and education were relegated to the sideline by the Middle East crisis, and in this case the leaders actually negotiated a plan to end it themselves rather than just leaving it to aides. Now whether it leads anywhere is another question. One of the most interesting and controversial ideas they put forward was an international security force in Lebanon to separate the two sides once fighting stops. But there's an unhappy history of foreign forces in Lebanon as well. Washington, D.C.: You wrote, "President Bush and other world leaders put aside their differences Sunday and crafted a plan to stop the fighting in the Middle East, calling on Islamic militias to halt their rocket attacks on Israel and on Israeli forces to end their military response." I understand it is customary to toast each other with massive amounts of vodka in Russia. Were you 'toasting' too, or did you drink the Kool-Aid that Nick Burns brought to the press availability? I don't understand how making nice at the end of a G-8 summit and issuing a joint communique counts as "crafted a plan to stop the fighting in the Middle East". It is undeniable that if the two sides stop shooting at each other this would 'stop the fighting,' I don't see any 'plan' here. Bush's unscripted, comments, caught live on the open mike; his description of the 'root-causes' for the violence in Lebanon and Israel were clearly at odds with the rest of the world. Did I miss a real plan of joint action that they agreed to? Peter Baker: Well, the plan specifically calls for Hezbollah and Hamas to release the Israeli soldiers they seized and cease rocket attacks, and for Israel to end its military operation and release Palestinian officials they arrested. It also calls for the U.N. to consider an international security force. This may or may not go anywhere, it may or may not be a good plan or a comprehensive plan, but it adds up to a little more than the more predictable statement of regret about the violence. Los Angeles, Calif.: One question for the Bush Administration: "Are you just as certain about Iran and Syria 'calling the shots' regarding Hezbollah's current conflict with Israel as you were in determining Iraq processed WMDs?" While Administration officials including Bush make statements like "There is no doubt of Iran's and Syria's hand is this" or "Everybody knows Hezbollah would not make this move without Iran's and/or Syria's approval" it would help build confidence that the Bushies' intelligence capability has rebounded since the Iraq WMD debacle if concrete evidence was shown (ala President Kennedy's Administration showing photos of Russian missiles on the ground in Cuba during that crisis). This is not to imply Iran and/or Syria are innocent or blameless. But rather, showing concrete evidence would elevate the discussion above speculation and build confidence in the Administration's capabilities since it appears Joe Wilson is otherwise too busy with his lawsuit to take another trip at the behest of Administration officials. Peter Baker: You raise interesting questions. The administration certainly made no concrete evidence available in St. Petersburg to back up the assertions about Syrian and Iranian involvement. That's one reason why other leaders, including Russian President Vladimir Putin, said they refused to name those countries in the joint statement on the Middle East. New York, N.Y.: After reading your article Leaders Work Out Plan For End to Mideast Crisis (Post, July 17), I am left with the impression that the G8 leaders have no plan at all. Do you think there is any likelihood this "plan" will have any effect on the conflict? Peter Baker: There's lots of reasons to be skeptical. So far neither Hezbollah nor Israel shows any sign of backing down. The United States, obviously, has no influence with the former and doesn't want to use its influence with the latter. Is there a U.S. foreign policy? Are we ginning up for an attack on Iran and/or Syria? Peter Baker: I see no signs of that, certainly not at the moment. We've written not long ago that the Pentagon has been drafting contingency plans for military strikes on Iran if the dispute over the nuclear issue leads to such a decision, but that doesn't mean it's really happening, at least not at this point. The military is obviously pretty well occupied next door in Iraq and not all that eager to take on new missions. Bethesda, Md.: So what's with bumping you to the Style section with your insightful analysis of the President today? Joining the fun crowd? On welfare to cattle farmers whether they need it or not, is it fair to say that the Bush administration through tax and program policies have systematically shifted government resources to the white, rich, and red Stated? It seems that the needy are derided for receiving "welfare" while the privileged are just entitled. I'm genuinely shocked at the Administration's approach. washingtonpost.com: Bush's Bull Session: Loud And Clear, Chief, (Post, July 18) Peter Baker: Bumped? No way, we love to write for Style. It makes us story-a-day hacks think we can play with the clever set. Just an illusion, of course, but pleasant while it lasts. On the other question, I assume you're referring to the provocative series examining federal agriculture subsidies that grew to more than $25 billion last year, despite near-record farm revenue. Eye opening reporting, including today's piece by Gilbert Gaul, Dan Morgan and Sarah Cohen. For those who haven't seen it yet, we'll see if we can post it in a minute. washingtonpost.com: No Drought Required For Federal Drought Aid, (Post, July 18) Washington, D.C.: What are other leaders saying/thinking about the events in Israel and Lebanon and how long this will drag on? Peter Baker: There's a growing alarm among other leaders, a rising fear that we're seeing the beginning of another protracted and deadly crisis not just a momentary surge of fighting. A lot of these leaders have been through this before in the region and don't want to go down that road again. Charlottesville, Va.: Do you think that the President's self-satisfied vulgarity and confidence in his own opinions is as unsettling to the leaders of the European Community as it is to many of us here at home? Peter Baker: Interesting question. None of them said so yesterday, in any case. And some of them have foul mouths of their own. President Putin has been known to brag that he would "wipe out" Chechen rebels in the, well, outhouse is a nice word for it. He also once suggested a reporter who questioned him on human rights abuses in Chechnya should be circumcised. Arlington, Va.: Has the President taken any interest in the glories of St. Petersburg or is it pretty much like when he went to India and ignored the "obligatory" trip to the Taj Mahal? Peter Baker: He's been to St. Petersburg at least a couple times before and Laura dragged him to the Hermitage museum but he only lasted 30 minutes there before leaving. On this trip, he didn't do any sightseeing other than to pay homage at a memorial to the residents of Leningrad who endured the 900-day Nazi siege during World War II. Of course, the official events were at some pretty interesting glories -- Peterhof, which was Peter the Great's summer palace and can fairly be said to rival Versailles, and Konstantinovsky Palace, a modest 1,000-room crib that Peter started but was never finished until Putin decided to rebuild and regild it a few years back. Do you think that President Bush is actually pleased that Israel is attacking the Hezbollah, but can't really admit it to the world--so instead he says,"I think Israel has the right to defend themselves." Thanks--keep up the good work. Peter Baker: Good question. Hard to read his mind, maybe he'll say something around an open mike and tell us. I've certainly heard that speculation, though, that perhaps he's not so unhappy about an opportunity for Israel to cripple Hezbollah. Kansas City, Mo.: Not sure if you can do this, but if you saw the Post's story on agricultural subsidies, any chance of asking Bush if he supports this seemingly wasteful program? Peter Baker: It's a great question and one we should pose to him when we have the next opportunity. Philadelphia, Pa.: The war in Iraq has emboldened leaders of North Korea, Iran, and Hezbollah, among others. Europe denies the threat of military action in favor of diplomacy. What will it take for European leaders to use or employ the threat of military action? $100 per barrel gas prices? All out war in the Middle East? New U.S. leadership? Peter Baker: It certainly does seem to be a crisis-filled summer, doesn't it? Bush tried to rein in some of the swaggering style of his first term to rebuild relations with European allies and try more diplomacy in the second. But it would be an interesting debate to look at whether one approach has worked any better than the other. What the administration would say, I'm sure, is that there is progress simply in the fact that the Europeans, Russia and China are working together with the United States on Iran, even if not in total harmony, and that China, Japan, South Korea and Russia are working with the U.S. on North Korea, with the same caveat. But we haven't seen the bottom line results yet. Time may help us answer the question. Washington, D.C.: The footage I've seen of the conversation going on between Bush and Blair shows all the other leaders, sitting around rather blaze. I guess I wonder if any of them are at all surprised by this language from Bush-both the actually wording, and general tone. Their facial expressions read like "oh there he goes again". And just a comment. A lot has been printed about Bush's relationship with Merkel. I am amazed that Bush would walk up behind her and massage her shoulders. That is such an American way of males displaying dominance. Peter Baker: A lot of reaction to Bush's unplugged moment. I'll post a few. Washington, D.C.: Despite the bruhaha surrounding Bush's use of profanity at the G-8 summit, doesn't the discussion speak volumes about his analytical thinking. The idea that Syria (Assad) can call off Hezbollah is simplifying the situation to a great degree. Further, the lack of urgency that the USG is putting on resolving this issue is striking. Also, Bolton's comments indicating that Lebanese civilian deaths are not equitable with Israeli civilian deaths is grotesque. Their both innocent, so what's the difference. This type of moral ambiguity regarding innocent life is troubling coming from a senior U.S. official. Besides this, the flow of conversation was amusing. "Russia's big, China's big". Sounded like a discussion a 4th grader might have, not a man with an MBA. (or the leader of the free world) I couldn't imagine Bush I or Clinton having the same conversations. New Mexico: Regarding Bush's little mic-slip, everyone is focusing on him dropping the S-bomb but isn't the more serious issue the fact that he betrayed little diplomatic (or even just basic human behavior) knowledge by saying "what they need to do is get Syria to get Hezbollah to stop doing this -poop] and it's over." I mean, how simpleminded is that? It's like saying "All we've got to do to end the war is to get everyone who's fighting it to stop fighting it." Peter Baker: And here's another. One thing I'd note, just for the sake of the discussion, is that we should remember that the open-mike caught only four minutes of informal lunchtime chit chat, as opposed to the hours and hours of serious talks that took place behind closed doors over the weekend. So we only have a very limited window into the thinking. Burke, Va.: Did the intensity of the Israeli reaction to the cross-border raid surprise you as much as it did me? I didn't expect as much bombing as what happened. Peter Baker: I think it caught a lot of people off guard. Just from external appearances, at least, it seemed to have surprised the Bush people as they were traveling to Europe. Externally, at least, they appeared slow to really react with the gravity the situation would seem to invite. Now, to be fair, they deny that's the case and say they were privately all over this, making phone calls and so on that we didn't see. But the president in his first public remarks on the crisis while in Germany did not dwell much on it and his repeated jokes about the pig he was to be served for dinner may have unintentionally muddied the message. Boston, Mass.: In Bush's defense, Russia and China -are- big. New York, N.Y.: Until recently I looked forward to the discussion every day. Lately however it seems to have become one predictable Bush-bashing "question" after another. I'd really prefer questions seeking informative answers. I doubt that anyone reading the discussion is going to be swayed by comments concerning Bush's "vulgarity", etc. Grow up people! Peter Baker: I hear you and agree that these chats are more fun when they're about trading information rather than making political points. So what we need are more probing questions. There's your homework assignment. Washington, D.C.: I can't stand President Bush, but those who are obsessing about him using the S-word need to grow up. Who cares? The guy isn't Jimmy Carter, I think we all have that figured out by now. Peter Baker: It doesn't seem to me that it's all that shocking that presidents use the same kind of language off stage (or when they think they're off stage) that many of us do. All you have to do is go back and read Michael Beschloss's terrific compilations of the LBJ tapes to get a sense of genuinely raw presidential patter. San Francisco, Calif.: Wait, wait, wait, Peter, you'd have us believe that this President participated in hours and hours of behind-closed-doors debate and discussion? Isn't the "s--t" talking Bush the one you in the press corps see all the time but don't write about? Peter Baker: He did in fact participate in hours and hours of closed-door discussions. Now, as he himself said, he grew weary of it. Too many of them talk too long, he said. But no, we're not covering up any Bush profanity, if that's what you mean. Crystal City, Va.: Chirac and other European leaders complained about Israel's "disproportionate" response - did any journalist bother to ask them what type of response they thought would be proportionate to cross border attacks and a rain of missiles targeting civilians? Peter Baker: A good question and I don't know if they were asked. (My French isn't as good as it was in high school -- sorry, Mrs. Thomason.) What does qualify as a proportionate response? One bombing? Ten? A hundred? I think part of what was behind their concerns was the choice of some of the targets -- airports, power stations, roads, bridges, civilian locations, not just areas where they think rockets were launched from. Margate, N.J.: On balance, if Bush vetoes the stem cell research bill, do you think it will hurt or help him politically? Of course, the veto will play to the religious right, so presumably it will bolster his credentials there. But is that really enough at this point? I'm also sure that there are those in the religious right who are squirming right now over Bush's "on-mike" language at the G8 summit. For many evangelicals, those words are no-no's. Peter Baker: Lot of questions today on the stem cell debate. If it's okay, I'm going to pass just because I've been out of the country the last week and haven't really been able to tune into the latest dialogue on it in Washington. Looking forward to catching up when I get back. Duncanville, Tex.: Over the weekend "Condi" Rice stated on ABC's This Week, that "The president is talking to who 'we' think he should." "WE"? Bush was overheard garbling "I think she (Rice) is going in (Mideast) soon..." "THINK"? Who decides for the decider anyway? And why hasn't the media picked up on this fractured chain of deciding? Peter Baker: Hmm, that may be reading more into it. Every president has advisers who together with him decide who he should talk with in a crisis. A presidential call is a very specific tool in the diplomatic arsenal and not pulled out at random or by whim. At least in general. Now some presidents are more active than others in bypassing this sort of process. What do you make of the body language between Bush and Blair. I just know that I would have stood up if I were Bush. Do you think he could have done this if it were another foreign leader that he had a more formal relationship with? To me, it comes off quite rude, without even getting into the S-bomb. Safe travels. Peter Baker: Maybe, but remember they'd been together for three days by that point. Anybody been to an office retreat or a family reunion that goes on for days? At a certain point you don't really stand on ceremony. But there was something interesting in the sense that Blair is approaching Bush seeking to press his points on a few issues and the president feels free to interrupt and change the subject if he wants. Again, I think moments like this are wonderfully revealing but don't want to go too far in drawing overarching conclusions based on four minutes of open mike. That open mike!: What did President Bush's attitude to Tony Blair show about who's top dog in that relation? (I'm a UK ex-pat) Blair suggested twice, I think, that he should go to the Mid East, and got the brush-off, imo. What's yours? Peter Baker: I'm sure this will be viewed with a certain perspective in Britain where Blair has been widely lampooned as a "lapdog" for Bush for many years. No doubt the tabloids are already eating this up. Still, let's face it, like it or not, there are very few relationships in which the president of the United States, no matter who he is, isn't the top dog. New York, N.Y.: About the tone of the chat: I've been surfing between this chat (and thank you for it) and the chat on the Middle East. The chat on the Middle East has more substance than style. It seems to me that politics has become overwhelmingly about style, provoking the questions the politics reporter is asked. If you tune into a chat on an issue, you probably want more information. Not the reporter's fault, he's answering the questions that come in. Peter Baker: Fair point. Glad someone's doing substance today! Politics is a lot about style, that's true, but a good mix would be healthy. Peter Baker: Okay, on that note I'm going to sign off here. Thanks for playing today. 'Til next time. And watch out for those microphones. 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.
107.439024
0.682927
0.878049
high
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/14/DI2006071400781.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006071819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/14/DI2006071400781.html
The Garden Plot - washingtonpost.com
2006071819
Catch up on previous transcripts of The Garden Plot. Higgins is the author of two books, "The Secret Gardens of Georgetown: Behind the Walls of Washington's Most Historic Neighborhood" and "The Washington Post Garden Book: The Ultimate Guide to Gardening in Greater Washington and the Mid-Atlantic Region." Is there any natural fertilizer I can use on my grass ? I don't mean the commercial mixes, but something that helps without all of the extra chemicals. Adrian Higgins: Depends how organic you want to go. One thing you might consider is buying or making compost tea, a process too involved to discuss here but easily attainble by Googling, I would imagine. Some independent garden centers sell the stuff (I think American Plant Food. You can spray this on the lawn and this will build the microbial life quickly. My lawn is entirely zoysia grass. Is there anything that I should use on it, besides the commercial mixes ? I've heard that zoysia likes to be fertilized every 4 weeks or so. The yard is nice and green and I'd like to keep it that way. Adrian Higgins: Zoysia likes to be fertilized in the summer, when it is growing (unlike cool season grasses, which should not be fed now). You need a pound of slow release nitrogen fertilizer per 1,000 square feet. Chevy Chase, Md: Hi - thanks for all your great help in the past. I have a very un-glamorous question today! Due to an apparent language barrier with a crew we hired to do some weeding, we now have a 6x20 foot slope with no vegetation of any kind. It is probably an 80 degree slope and we are very worried about erosion and mudslides next time it rains. Can you recommend anything we could plant that will take quickly with enough of a root system to avoid erosion? Are there any stop-gap measures in the meantime? We've been told covering it with stones, a mesh or landscaping fabric, or even sandbags might help. We're really in a bind here... Thanks so much for any thoughts! Adrian Higgins: I would cover the hill with burlap, pegged with landscape staples, and cover that with shredded hardwood mulch. Then decide how you want to plant it. Some dry loving ground cover would be in order. I cut my asters back once in May, and now they're getting tall and bushy again. Should I cut them back again ? Adrian Higgins: I wouldn't, I think they might bloom too late. I recommend just one cutting of asters in late May or early June. Adams-Morgan, Washington, DC: Any idea why my sweet basil is tasting bitter? I am growing it in a large pot on my apartment roof top. Adrian Higgins: I think it is going to seed or about to go to seed. I would try and plant some fresh or cut it back hard. Make sure it receives even moisture. Plants that Like Bugs in VA: Adrian, I've got five bug-eating plants - oh, I love 'em! But I've read mixed information on the amount of water, humidity and type of soil they need. Right now, three are in a basin of distilled water, two are in individual pots of moss, water with distilled water. They're all outside. Do they need to be in a bell jar or need different soil? Thanks. Adrian Higgins: As a rule, carnivorous plants such as sarracenias need poor, acidic soil, a blend of sand and peat moss is good, and constant moisture. They should be watered with rainwater, not tap water. Silver Spring, Md- Does it really work: Adrian, I have lots of kids and pets and lots of weeds have refrained from weed killer.I have hand pulled many of the larger weeds especially after the rain. The kids help but the clover is spreading. I am planning on reseeding in the fall but does a high acidic vinegar really work? Adrian Higgins: I think it would but it is far more acidic than table vinegar. Don't splash it in your eyes. Clarksville, Md: My wife and I have a small debate going. We have a vegetable garden (10 x 10) and 3 acres of yard. How close to the garden should the Japanese Beetle trap be ? Adrian Higgins: 50 miles. Not close anyway. Ashland, Va: Mr Higgins. After years of Apartment living I've purchased my first home, and am now overcome with lawnophobia. The yard is overall in good shape with a few thin spots here and there, and a few bare spots (mostly were the sun bakes all day). All in all though not to bad. What would you suggest (re-seeding, lawn fert., etc) I do to have the best yard on the block, and at what time of the year should this be done. Adrian Higgins: Your interest is peaking at the right time. Late summer is ideal for lawn renovation, and I find that by seeding a little earlier than recommended, you get a great stand of cool season turf before the leaves fall. I would get a soil test now to see what nutrients are lacking, and to get the pH right. Then in late August or early September, fill in low spots, top dress the entire lawn with screened compost and get it core aerated, and then seed. When is corn ready to pick?: Hello from Oklahoma City where the high today is predicted to be 104... Adrian: How do you know when it's time to pick an ear of corn? My husband and I have a crop growing in an Earth Box, and as of today we have 7 or 8 white silky tops visable -- looking good so far. But what is the peak of ripeness indicator? This is our first effort. Thank you for taking my question. Take care.... Adrian Higgins: You want to wait until the silks are about half to two thirds brown. Then the kernels should be ripe. Pick one at half brown stage and see if it's OK, then try one with the silk a little browner, and compare. My tomatoes are not doing very well this year, and I was wondering if you had any advice. I got my plants in about the beginning of May - I bought 7 plants from HD, and they started out looking pretty good. However, after all of the rains, the stalks are yellowish, and they haven't gotten very big. I'd say the tallest plant is about 2 feet at this point. We have harvested several tomatoes already, and they have been tasty. However the plants don't look very healthy. The plants are in full afternoon sun, and are in the same location where I have been growing tomatoes for several years. So I know the location is a good one. Any advice on how to salvage the rest of the summer for these plants? Adrian Higgins: First of all, tomatoes that went in a little late still have a lot of growing to do, which they will do in the next month. Second, blight on the leaves will set them back, and you need to remove the yellowed leaves and discard them and take care not to spread the blight to healthy foliage. It is conceivable that your tomatoes may be suffering from waterlogging. If you are convinced that isn't the problem, however, I would give them a feeding. I use a little superphosphate fertilizer once and then a weekly feed of diluted seaweed fertilizer. When and where is your weekly talk show ? Adrian Higgins: I'm on Washington Post radio from 7 to 8 a.m. on Saturdays, on the David Burd show. I sometimes appear on Hillary Howard's show on Wednesdays at 11:30 a.m. I know David loves people to call in with gardening questions, as do I. 202 465-3081. Springfield Va: Are there any holly plants / evergreens / laurels that can tolerate full shade? I'd like a screening device (around 6' high) but am having a hard time finding one that will work under the canopy of american beech and tulip poplars. Adrian Higgins: Cherry laurels will take shade, as will aucubas, yews, camellias and various hollies. Do check though to see if you have dry shade, in which case you will need to make sure that the understory plantings get enough moisture. Batimore Md: Someone gave me a small hydranga bush last year. I planted it in a place that gets a lot of shade, I almost killed it be forgetting to water it. However, it has come back this year, but all I have is leaves, no blooms. Should the plant be moved or perhaps it may bloom next year? Adrian Higgins: It will bloom better in light shade than in full shade. Don't prune it. Rockville, Md: Thank you so much for these chats, they are really valuable. I'll be going away for three weeks. I've purchased a timer and soaker hoses for my recently installed gardens (everything from roses to rosemary, tomatoes to a peach tree). Can you recommend for how long and how often I should set the timer? For example, once per week for 30 minutes? Something more frequent? Also, can deciduous azaleas get blackspot because mine have something that looks like that? Any advice? Thank you so very much. Adrian Higgins: Three weeks is a long time to be away at this time of year. Bah humbug. It's tough to get each plant's differing needs met automatically. Shrubs need less than lawn, herbs less than shrubs. Containers need watering every day or two. For a plant border, I would say 30 minutes twice a week, perhaps. Washington DC: What could be the cause of the leaves of my Azalea bushes turning brown? Is there anything I can do to help them. Could they be getting too much sun? What is the ideal amount of sun they should get? Adrian Higgins: Possibly leaf spot diseases promoted by all the rain we have had. I wouldn't worry about it. Bowie, Md: I've got a few tomato plants where the tomatoes are both green and red. When's a good time to pick a red tomato? Adrian Higgins: The beauty of tomatoes is that they will continue to ripen after picking (not in the fridge, please) I think you should pick when the entire fruit is red and has that ripe sheen to it. Don't wait too long, or it may split, overripen or become food for animals. Green fruit should be left to ripen. Annapolis, Md: Good Morning, Adrian. I have about 2 dozen tomato vines in raised beds, all of them are volunteers from last year's bumper crop of heirlooms. All I really had time for this year was to thin them out and add compost- I didn't even stake them. Now I'm starting to get ripe tomatoes from these vines that have sprawled all over the place. I don't see any more blight than usual (I pick off the yellow leaves), so should I try to go in and stake the vines to get them off the ground, or can I leave them where they are, and accept whatever crop I get? The cherry varieties are fruiting prolifically already... Adrian Higgins: These volunteers are usually cherry tomatoes, they seem to seed most prolifically. SO if you want cherry tomatoes, fine. I prefer to pick my varieties myself, so I pull seedlings and plant varieties of my choosing. SOme seedlings may not be as good as the parent plants, if they are F1 hybrids -- another reason to buy fresh seeds. That said, yours may be delicious. I would as a matter of principle get them off the ground and away from pests and diseases. Clarksville, Md: Hi Adrian. Do you like those newish concrete pavers for a patio or entrance, or is natural stone such as slate or flagstone a better alternative? Thanks! Adrian Higgins: I dislike them, they represent the homogenization and uniformity of the built garden. They are done simply for the benefit of the contractor, they are uniform so you can use masons of lesser skill to install them. Bricks and flagstone, on the other hand, need a lot more hand working to fit, but it is that craftmanship that gives a garden its character. Arlington, Va: Not knowing it was more of a bush than a typical sage plant, I planted a pineapple sage in a long planter on a balcony with several other herbs. The rest of the herbs (mint, parcel, oregano) are doing very well, but the pineapple sage seems to be having issues - it has grown rather large, but recently has a great deal of yellowing leaves with brown edges that eventually drop. Other than some of the new greener leaves at the bottom of the plant - the leaves don't smell very much of pineapple anymore. Any thoughts on what I can do to better manage the situation? Adrian Higgins: I suspect it is in soil that is too wet. I would dig it up and place it in a nice clay pot with rich, free draining soil, and then cut it back. It should regrow nicely and the fresh leaves will be pungent once more. Reston, Va: We just got a garden plot throught Reston Association. Wondering what we can plant at this late date and when we should start the fall crop of beans and such. Adrian Higgins: The season is about half over, so take advantage of the weeks ahead by planting carrots, spinach, chard and beets. Try some broccoli and cabbage. In a month, sow lettuce. Frederick Md: My tomato bushes are very bushy but also tall and have had tomatoes on them for weeks now that aren't turning red. What is going on? Adrian Higgins: It takes sunlight and patience, some varieties take their time in ripening. You may want to trim some of the leaves so that the fruit is not shaded. Laurel Del: Gardens have been overwhelmed by japanese beetles, I am out there plucking away, when this question came to my mind, ready?? What is the average number of offspring to each pair of beetles? Adrian Higgins: My reference book to hand doesn't actually say how many eggs the female lays, but I'm sure it is several dozen. Noticed your comment in this chat that herbs need less water than shrubs/grass, and your later comment that sage may be suffering from overwatering. What ARE the water requirements for herbs? I water mine (potted) about every other day, except rosemary and thyme, which I have been told need less water and prefer drier soil. They seem to be doing OK, although teh cilantro I cut back hasn't regrown well. Adrian Higgins: More important than the frequence of watering in the herb garden is the soil composition. It must be free draining. Raw, unimproved clay is completely incompatible with growing herbs. Even a nice loamy soil can be too wet for herbs. In preparing a bed for hebrs, I mix in lots of lots of sand and perlite and peat moss and minimize the amount of humus. Richmond, Va: Adrian thank you for doing this chat, I have two questions for you. What would your advice be on removing Bamboo? We've cut it back, but the roots are proving to be quite difficult, and we are looking for any options short of a bull dozer. Secondly, once the bamboo is gone we would like to lay sod over the area, and I was wondering what preparations we should make to the existing dirt to ensure the sod thrives. Thanks!! Adrian Higgins: Keep cutting it back and you might win the battle, but it will take a few years. I would stop cutting in early September, let some culms develop and then treat them with glyphosate or some other systemic herbicide formulated for bamboos or grasses. I planted a fairly mature honeysuckle in April, and it bloomed in May and June. However, since the hot weather has started the honeysuckle hasn't bloomed. Does it need more water, or will it just start blooming when the weather cools down? Adrian Higgins: You may get a little repeat flowering in the summer but I suspect our climate is too hot for a good continuous show. You may wish to remove fruits and trim back stems to see if this will induce a reflowering in late summer. It may. Gardens have been overwhelmed by japanese beetles,: Adrian, I know you don't like chemicals, but for these persistent beetles Bayer tree and plant systemic is the answer. Protects for 12 months. Adrian Higgins: Thanks, sometimes desperate situations require desperate measures. Boyce, Va: hi, Adrian! what is the deal with mulch? i've heard not to use wood mulch near buildings because it causes or brings termites. true? what about using pebbles? thanks, wondering in boyce Adrian Higgins: Termites live everywhere, and excessive mulching may indeed draw them. But mulch should not be excessive, it should be light. No more than a couple of inches, max, especially around the house. Trimming pansies: Hi, Adrian- The Midwest (where I am) is being hit by the same heat that is all over the country. The potted pansies on my front steps are looking scraggly and tired, despite watering. I recall hearing that they can be cut back to rebloom. How does one do this without overdoing it or hurting them? Adrian Higgins: Please release your pansies, let them go to that distant spring in the sky. They are not summer plants in the US, even the Midwest. Plant some fresh ones in late August. West Virginia: We want to put an ornamental plant or plants in an east-facing area against the front of the house. We love crepe myrtles but don't want anything taller than 7 or 8 feet. Also like azaleas and rhododendrons but they don't seem to flower long. Any suggestions? Thank you! Adrian Higgins: Yes, look carefully at the crapemyrtles around you. The popular tree forms like Natchez grow to 30 feet. I can't tell you how many people ask me how to cut back crapemyrtles that they think have grown too large. They haven't grown too large, they have just been placed in an area that is too cramped for them. You will need dwarf crapemyrtles, which, in time, will grow to your desired height. Abelia might be a good choice for you if you want something that flowers for a long time. Baltimore, Md: I have a cucumber question. The vines seem to be growing pretty well and, other then some slight yellowing, the leaves and stems appear healthy. However, when the plant flowers the baby cuc's get to about an inch long before they shrivel up and turn brown. The few fruit that have matured have been good with no sign of pests or disease. Any thoughts on how to get more fruit to mature? Thanks. Adrian Higgins: I wonder if they have been pollinated. Another reason to keep honeybees. Try and encourage bees in your garden by planting herbs like borage and lavender. Harvest the cukes young to keep them coming. Richmond, Va: What plants work best for container gardening for a small scale apartment patio and something that I don't want to have to overwinter inside? Thanks... Adrian Higgins: I would pick plants you can use, sweet basil, chile peppers and cilantro and parsley. oleander: Researching this bush on the web, I read both that it is poisonous but that you would have to eat a lot of it to do any harm, and that it is so poisonous one leaf can kill an adult. Do you know which it is? I will admit to leaning toward the first, considering the popularity of the plant in the south, and the latter sounds so alarmist, but on the web it is impossible to sort fact from fiction. Adrian Higgins: Yes, it is poisonous but so are quite a few plants in the landscape. It's probably not the plant for a garden where small children play or puppies play, but otherwise, enjoy it. We have run out of time. Hope to hear from you on the radio, or here again next week, and don't forget to check out Thursday's Home section. 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.
99.585366
0.536585
0.731707
high
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/11/DI2006071100730.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006071819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/07/11/DI2006071100730.html
Life at Work Live
2006071819
An archive of Amy's Life at Work columns is available online. Find more career-related news and advice in our Jobs section. Amy Joyce: Good morning, all. It's Tuesday, which means it is time for us to chat about your life at work. As always, hop in with your own advice and lessons learned to help your fellow chatters. Question of the week for you: Are you a workplace worrier? How do you keep your worries in check, if you do? Have you learned how to let things roll off your back? Please let me know for my upcoming column on workplace worriers vs. non-worriers at lifeatwork@washpost.com. Okay, the questions are all waiting for us, so let's get going... Washington, D.C.: My company just hired some new employees in my department -- they are 18 and 19, just out of high school. These are entry-level positions, and they have the chops to do the job. I am not their supervisor. However, I am dismayed at their attitude when they make mistakes. Rather than owning up to the error and professionally dealing with it, their first response is nearly always, "I didn't know. It's not my fault." Is it my place to offer advice? This is their first job in the business realm, and I think it would serve them well to change "it's not my fault" to "I was not aware, but now I know, and will make every effort that this not happen in the future." I guess it's all semantics, but it grates on me, and on others, to hear such a defensive, immature reaction. Mistakes happen. We all make them everyday. But their attitude is really a hindrance to their being taken seriously. Amy Joyce: Well, they *are* immature. And I don't mean that in a negative way. They are young and not trained in the ways of the office. They say: "I didn't know. It's not my fault." You say: "We don't care about fault here. We just want to show you so you know for next time." They are young and learning. You don't have to preach, just guide. Even if you are not their supervisor, you can send them in the right direction. Don't take their comments so personally. They're learning -- and probably in a high school mindframe where fault really did matter. I'm looking for some validation here. I recently e-mailed one of my supervisors and attached something I had been working on for him to review. He e-mailed me back and asked me to bring him a hard copy. What do you think about this? For the record, he sits about 10 feet from a printer, while I am on a completely different floor from him. Also, he has his own administrative assistant. Now, I did it, mind you -- but only grudgingly. I'd like to know your thoughts on this. Thanks! Amy Joyce: I'm so totally thinking that you're overthinking. It may have been your supervisor's way of getting into a conversation about it. Or simply seeing you in person. Or he is lazy. Or just wanted a hard copy. Or thinks that you should have handed him a hard copy in the first place. It could be anything. But it's really just one little thing. If you let all your daily little things get to you, you'll be dizzy with angst by noon. Washington, D.C.: Can you give some basic guidelines in asking for a raise for the first time? My strategy: I've documented the "above and beyond" and I'm staying away from the negative. Do I go well above what I want, as I've been counseled by friends? Do I write a formal letter, or just ask for a meeting and pose the question there? Anything I'm missing? Amy Joyce: A lot depends on the culture of your workplace. But in general, it's probably best to ask for a meeting, explain that you really think you have earned a raise because X, X and X. Then add that you've written up a little memo highlighting what you've accomplished. Don't ask for well above what what you want. Your boss will just think you're not so educated about your position and the business world. Ask for what you think you have earned. Do your homework as much as you can by researching what people in a similar situation receive. The Bureau of Labor Statistic's web site is a good resource for salary info., and there are good salary calculators online. The raise issue is one that I'm hitting for an upcoming column. If anyone wants to share with me how they successfully asked for and received a raise--or not so successfully -- please e-mail me at lifeatwork@washpost.com. I'm also hoping to hear from some managers who can give us the insight from the other side: What do you look for in requests for raises from employees? I'm planning to attend the job fair at the Convention center this evening. Any advice on what to do at these events since hundreds of people will be there looking for a job as well? Amy Joyce: Dress professionally. Take a TON of resumes with you. Know what employers you might want to focus on, if there's a list in advance. That way you won't waste your time wandering around. Go straight to the employers that interest you. Then with the time left over, wander around and see if anything else suits you. And I'm sure you've heard this one, but have your quick pitch ready: Who you are, what you want to do, what your expertise is in, what experience you have. Anyone else with job fair experience they'd like to share? Washington, D.C.: Oh, man. Is it acceptable to leave a summer position off of a resume, or does it make me look lazy? I am volunteering for an organization in town this summer. So far, I am happy with the work I'm doing. However, I just found an article online that includes so not-so-appealing information about my boss. This is only from one source, but if the information is true I'm not sure I would want people to know I worked here. If it comes up after graduation, could I talk about the work I completed, and not the place? Amy Joyce: You should keep the job on your resume. It was an experience. You worked during your summer. You gained insight and skills. If you talked about the work completed, your potential new employer would definitely want to know what organization you worked with. And will probably do some reference checking with them. Just be prepared to answer a question about your organization's questionable practices, though. If, in fact, it was the org and not just your boss. Breathe. You'll be okay. Washington, D.C.: Hi Amy, thanks for taking my question. I really appreciate these chats and I loved your book! I've been at my first post-graduation job for about two months now, and I am curious about protocol for listening to headphones in the office. I've had several internships in the past and listening to music on the job hasn't been a problem, but I mentioned it offhand to a friend and she seemed very certain that it is unprofessional. I disagree: I listen on a low volume, and I always get my work done. If someone comes up to talk to me, I take the headphones off immediately and talk to them. Any thoughts on this? Amy Joyce: Thanks back at you. This is an issue of the modern workplace: Most of us work in very open spaces, so things are loud and can be distracting. Some people drown that out by wearing headphones (or earplugs. Or iPods. Or...? ) We are learning to cope. I don't think it's unprofessional if you focus on your work but also can tell when someone needs to speak with you. There are companies, however, that have been banning headphones in the office. Just make sure yours isn't one of them. Burbank, Calif.: Re: Worrying at work and beyond I work in HR at a huge entertainment company and despite our best efforts, every day is filled with some sort of crisis or perceived emergency. Not aiding the situation is a supervisor who acts like Chicken Little. It has been hard, but I have learned to triage my day and to "overreact and worry" only about the things that deserve my frantic response. I spent far too many years going home every night like a wreck from the anxieties of the day. No more. My fav new phrase is "not the hill I want to die on today." These are just my thoughts. Amy Joyce: E-mail me, Burbank! Lifeatwork@washpost.com. Bethesda, Md.: Hate to tell you this, but work ethic is not the same as when 'we' started in the workforce (I'm in my 40s). A lot of interns -- and the like take their first jobs for granted, and don't make much of an effort. They reason there are plenty of other jobs out there if this one doesn't pan out. There are exceptions to this, of course, but few and far between. Amy Joyce: Hate to tell you this, but I think you're making gross generalizations. Things have changed, sure. And there are plenty of other jobs, yes. And it *is* a different generation of workers: They don't expect to find their lifetime job at 20. But you can't just blanket an entire generation and say they are all taking their jobs for granted. They are learning and experiencing new things. Sure, some will perhaps be a bit lazy or not so into their job. But I know people of every generation who are like that. Fairfax, Va.: re: Northwest D.C. I can understand where Northwest is coming from. One morning I walked into my bosses office to say good morning, before I was even finished with "morning" he asked me to make several copies of several documents and proceeded to explain to me exactly how he wanted them done. Same situation the printer is not very far from him and I am not his secretary. What really got me is he didn't even say "good morning" to me, he just went into his request. I also understand where you are coming from Amy, however if it keeps happening, then what? Amy Joyce: Lower your expectations. Know that you're not going to be best buds with that boss, and that boss really just wants the job done. If it's not your job, tell your direct supervisor that you don't have time to do these things, but will if it's necessary. But also say if you have to do them, then priorities need to be set by your direct supervisor so you can get everything done. At which time it might just have been easier to make the copies for the guy anyway. (Or just walk in another entrance.) Some people -- bosses, co-workers, clients -- just aren't all in to that organization chart and nice office chatter. if you know that's not going to change, you need to learn to live with it or update your resume, I'm afraid. washingtonpost.com: 97th Annual 2006 NAACP National Convention Diversity Job Fair Amy Joyce: Aha! Free public service announcement here. Good luck, job seekers. headphones: I use them because my co-worker loves to talk loudly on the phone which is very distracting. Re: young employees advice: Amy: I just wrote, "We don't care about fault here. We just want to show you so you know for next time." onto a post-it and put it by my keyboard...I'll try to be less preachy and more guide-like in my responses to them. When you mentioned that fault did matter in a high school mindset, I had all these horrible flashbacks of high school...yikes. Amy Joyce: Wow, that was quick. I hope it helps. Let us know... Work ethic generalizations...: Wow, it is just the reverse in my office. The young people put in the long, stressful hours and do whatever it takes, while the older people log in 9 to 5. Their jobs are secure and they aren't looking to move anywhere -- they'll be content in these positions for the rest of their lives (sounds miserable) and are just passing the time for the paycheck while the young ones are trying to get things done for the organization. Amy Joyce: Okay, but now you're just reversing the generalizations. I don't mean to be Ms. Fair Ness today, but just remember that generations in the workplace are all coming from different places, so they may have different ways of working. But each person -- no matter the age-- is different from the next. Avoid generalizing based on age. Not just to be PC, but because generalizations often don't work. Job Fairs: I agree Amy, with knowing which employers are going to be there and talking to them first. Read up on the companies that interest you most and when you visit their booth ask specific questions about that company (mission, community activities, etc.) The more you know about that company and are able to tell them, the more you will stand out over others. Amy Joyce: Good advice. Thanks. Washington, D.C.: Can you please explain what the dress code "business attire" entails? I'm starting a new position and I have been told suits aren't necessary, but that "business attire" is not as casual as "business casual." What's in-between suits and casual? (I'm a female, by the way.) washingtonpost.com: Chat Transcript: What to Wear Amy Joyce: We aim to please... Liked the column about the dueling bosses. Here's my comment: When I interviewed for the position I have now, that question was actually asked (How do you deal with dueling priorities). Anyway, I told them that if I come to such a situation I would put them in a ring and pull a "Celebrity Deathmatch" on them. Luckily they are young enough to get the joke and laughed. Amy Joyce: And anyone who gets a joke an interview is the right employer to choose, in my book. Love it. two different worlds: I find it funny that we have posts complaining about young people and how they work; as well as posts by young people about whether iPods are acceptable. Two thoughts -- take the young people under your wing, you'll have a chance to impart your wisdom and may learn something too! And for the iPod wearer, if you've only been there for two months, and you are the only person with headphones, I'd ease up a little bit. Amy Joyce: Good point about learning from each other. Thanks. iPod wearer could just mention to a supervisor why she wants to wear headphones, and ask if that's okay. Used To Worry in Va.: Hey Amy! I used to worry at work. I worried about everything. I worried I wasn't a good manager, my direct reports didn't like me, my boss thought badly of me etc. Then one day my worry came true -- I was fired. The thing I worried about most happen. But guess what? I SURVIVED! I lived on unemployment through the summer so I kinda had a vacation and actually found a better position in the fall. So now I don't let things bother me. I figure as far as the business world goes, I've lived through the worst so whatever happens happens. I also kinda wear the getting fired thing as a badge of honor. It made me a better person and now that I don't worry so much. Amy Joyce: You've been through it all. Congrats. And thanks for the insight. Arlington, Va.: As a long-time manager, I am often asked to give raises. What convinces me to write that memo to my own boss advocating for an employee's raise is: a short memo listing accomplishments, especially those that led to improved income for the company or a demonstrably happy client (one who wrote to thank or who followed up with additional work); convincing evidence (from salary surveys, DOL websites) showing that the employee's request is reasonable A "going above and beyond" memo is offputting, not only because it seems a somewhat adversarial approach, but also because the definition of "above and beyond" is so subjective as to be meaningless. Amy Joyce: Thanks, Arl. Can you e-mail me at lifeatwork@washpost.com? I would love to chat a little further about your insight from "the other side"... Capitol Hill, Washington, D.C.: Thanks for these ever-enlightening chats. I have a question for you and the other chatters: I teach a professional writing course at a local university. Many of my students don't want to believe how important communication skills are on the job. Any advice -- or stories -- that I can share with my students? (Or perhaps the chatters will disagree with me. If so, I'd like to hear their arguments too.) Thanks in advance to all. Amy Joyce: Okay, folks, have at it. Why are writing skills important on the job? Or are they not? From my perspective: Writing as communication is who we are these days. With our BlackBerrys, e-mail and other online communication, it is important to know how to be clear in a short amount of time and space. How many of us judged someone who sent an e-mail that was poorly worded or full of spelling errors? A boss or colleague may easily believe an e-mailer is not so bright if they send an error-ridden email. It's also important, I think, just as a matter of, well, communication. We need to understand what our co-workers, bosses and clients want from us and vice versa, right? Making that clear in writing is incredibly important. (Paranoia alert: Is this chat full of typos by me today, or what?) Copies and Prints: Sheesh! Unless you own the company, if anyone asks me for a copy instead of an e-mail, I will gladly do it. It's called team work. Amy Joyce: One nice way to look at it. And I would guess you're a lot happier at work thinking of it all that way. iPod: For the iPod-wearer: I wear mine too because I can't concentrate with all the phones ringing and people talking around me. BUT I only put in one earbud so if my boss comes in, the phone rings, etc., I can hear them and not make anyone feel like I'm ignoring my work. Amy Joyce: Good half-pod idea. Job Fair Advice from a Recruiter: Most job fairs publish a list of vendors in advance online. PLEASE try to know something about each company that may suit you -- walking up and saying "What do you do?" doesn't create a great first impression. Also, please don't be a giveaway hog. That free pen may cost you a real chance at a job! Amy Joyce: Good advice. Thanks. (Gotta love those convention freebie seekers. I love to just watch them when I'm at one.) Alexandria, Va.: I spent 10 years in a toxic environment and now I find that I'm a terrible worrier. I'm afraid that anybody I work for or with will go off on me at any time. I find that I am willing to job hop to avoid any uncomfortable situations. How do you recommend overcoming this? Amy Joyce: Read my column on Sunday in the Business section, and hopefully you're learn. Believe it or not, there are a lot of folks out there who do some serious research on how to overcome the workplace worries. I hope they can help you... And all the worriers out there. (I'd love to hear more from you. Can you e-mail me at lifeatwork@washpost.com to discuss your situation for the column?) McLean, Va.: I read your article with interest. After a reorganization, a supervisor I liked ended up reporting to somebody who believed that we all actually were direct reports to him and that the supervisor was there to do the "grunt" work for the manager (HR, reviews, etc.) This lead to me being assigned tasks directly by the manager without my supervisor being in the loop. I always made a point of circling back to the supervisor to ensure that he know my workload, but it was at times awkward. washingtonpost.com: Heads Butting: When Bosses Fight,You Might Get Hurt (Post, July 16) Amy Joyce: I'm sure that was awkward, but it sounds like you handled it well. I've been at my current job over a year. I'm extremely dissatisfied (long commute, no advancement potential, the biggest insult being NO benefits to speak of) and looking for a new job. Several offers have been made and the one I'm considering wants me to start immediately. Things here are just awful. I dread coming to work. If I take the new job I won't be able to give two weeks notice (not that I'd want to anyway). Any tips on how to make a graceful albeit QUICK exit? I prefer to get it over and done with as soon as possible. Amy Joyce: No matter how gracefully you try to exit, if you don't give two weeks' notice, you're probably going to burn some bridges. If you're willing to do that, then go. But know that you may need these people in the future. You can go to your boss, explain that you have received a new offer and they want you to start immediately. But say that you'd try to put them off for the two weeks if your boss would like to have that time. You may or may not be asked to stay. Of course, you can leave sooner. But know that it might not sit well with your company. Re: Importance of Writing: I agree with Amy. In this age of electronic communication -- phone, e-mail, etc. -- our written communication is sometimes the first opportunity to make an impression and often one of the most frequently used way to cement a reputation. The same reason you might want to wear appropriate business attire to be taken seriously is the same reason you would want to be sure your written words are articulate (and spell/grammar checked). Building others confidence in you helps you to get your ideas heard and respected. Amy Joyce: Thanks. Good points. Crystal City, Va.: I'm one of the employees that got flooded out of the main IRS building recently. Some of us are working from home right now but I am constantly hearing co-workers bragging about how they are "working from the back nine" and getting full pay for it. I believe they are falsifying their timesheets. Management seems not to care. As a taxpayer, I am annoyed but I also feel like I have to pick up their slack. Any suggestions? thanks. Amy Joyce: Are you sure they're not just saying that? They really aren't working? If you're picking up their slack, I'd go to your boss or the IRS ombudsman, who I think takes these sorts of concerns, no? I hope... Why learn to write?: The only reason I have the (very well-paid) job that I do is because no one in this vast government agency can write his or her way out of a paper bag! It's quite shocking, really, but my writing ability has allowed me to shoot up the pay scale swiftly and quickly, despite my lack of a graduate degree. Amy Joyce: That's all it takes? Wow. (Thanks...) Alexandria, Va.: I became a stay-at-home-mom after my daughter had several illnesses in daycare. I plan to be home with her until she's in kindergarten. How would I best handle the employment gap on my resume? Also, how do you recommend that somebody transition into a different type of position that the one she left? Amy Joyce: First of all, remember that this is a very common issue. Lots of women -- and men -- took time off to take care of children. Or elderly parents. Leave that gap on your resume, and feel free to explain in the cover letter that you are looking forward to getting back into the X industry because [fill in reasons here that show your expertise and enthusiasm]. No employer will be shocked to see this. Really. Amy Joyce: Well, wouldya look at the time. I've got to run. Don't forget to e-mail me at lifeatwork@washpost.com if you are a worrier, or a recovering worrier. I'm also wondering what you supervisors think when someone asks for a raise: What works? What doesn't? On that note, have a great TWO weeks, folks. I won't be here to chat next Tuesday. Don't forget to check out my Sunday Life at Work column in the Business section. Writing Skills: I think writing skills are very important. A lot of times a client or business contact's first impression of you is through writing. My current boss always emphasizes being mindful of your writing, even in an e-mail. You never know if that e-mail you send to someone will be forwarded on to others and you never know who may end up reading it. Amy Joyce: Another good point, thanks. 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.
127.365854
0.634146
0.731707
high
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/06/22/DI2006062200571.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006071819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/06/22/DI2006062200571.html
Fitness - Moving Crew
2006071819
Health section contributor John Briley was online Tuesday, July 18, at 11:30 a.m. ET to talk with you throughout the hour. Health section editor Craig Stoltz and assistant editor Susan Morse were unable to join the discussion. As the Moving Crew, we specialize in helping beginners get started, regular exercisers reach the next level and everybody avoid injuries, stick with their programs and have fun. And because the fitness world can be so intimidating to folks who are overweight and sedentary -- and since they can benefit so much from a fitness program -- we take special pride in helping them along the path to fitness. The Moving Crew was online to take questions every other Tuesday at 11:30 a.m. ET. Nice to be back online after a three-week hiatus from these fitness chats. We have a skeletal crew today (i.e., just me for now, though others may join mid stream), but don't let that alarm you: I have a niiice stack of fitness reference books right here beside me! As always, we're here to address your questions, comments and ministrations on exercise and all things fitness, so let's get right into it... Ellicott City, Md.: I have been running outdoors 2-3 miles most days of the week. I am not seeing much difference in terms of weight loss or toning as a result of the running. Any thoughts on what better ways I should be exercising if my main goal was to stay healthy and get my muscles toned as well? Thanks! Have you noticed that you've upped your caloric intake along with launching (and maintaining) the running program? That happens often, simply because our bodies ask for more fuel when we start using more. If yes, try to feed the need with fresh produce and other healthy stuff. Also, not that this should matter too much, but are you pushing yourself during these runs or just going through the motions? If the latter, your body might have adjusted to the new routine and is not feeling challenged enough. Mix up your route, your speed (throw some intervals in there) and even your mileage. Last: Start strength training - 2 days a week - to tone muscle (but keep up the cardio routine - you do need that for heart health). Arlington, Va.: Hi crew: I strained my ham string earlier in the year, and am finally getting it taken care of through physical therapy (lesson learned: exercising through pain does not make something heal, just makes it worse). I've been given the all clear for cardio, just no running and I have to keep the elliptical on a low, low incline. I'm having a VERY difficult time getting a real workout at the gym. I like exercise that makes me really sweat, and can't seem to reach that point on other machines. Any tips? Walking plans or spinning maybe? John Briley: Oh do I feel you pain, Arlington! Going through the exact same thing right now, and my advice is twofold: 1. BE PATIENT and do what you PT says. I tore mine in early May and am dying to get back into action but these are very slow-healing muscles. I have heard sooo many stories of people who rushed back from a hammy pull/tear and continue to suffer YEARS later. 2. Swimming, BUT don't kick if that hurts. There are not too many exercises that don't involve at least some hamstring engagement. Stick with the PT and get what sweat you can from prescribed elliptical settings. It may not seem like it now, but you'll be back to full strength (or nearly) if you exercise restraint now. Bellingham, Wash.: Howdy. First a quick comment: A while back someone asked the difference between a Snickers bar and a Clif bar for post-exercise refueling. Aside from the sugar crash, questionable ingredient source and crappy fat in the Snickers bar, there is the issue of balance. I'm not a nutritionist ('tho I do pretend to be one on the Internet) but everything I've read about pre and post exercise nutrition talks about a target balance of plus/minus 250 calories split 60 percent carbs/25 percent protein/15 percent good fat. That is about exactly what the Clif bar provides. Regarding flavor, once I weaned myself off sweets and lost my sweet tooth those Clif bars became mighty tasty, not so much like cardboard anymore. No affiliation, True story! Followed by a quick question about exercise duration: I am training for a marathon and one of the cross-training days in my program is 40-50 minutes of brisk walking (its on the day after the long run). I have a 30-minute brisk walk to work. So do I count the round trip as 60 minutes of cross training or is 2 X 30 minutes eight hours apart not equal to one 60 minute session? I do get the heart rate up and do some sweatin' during both walks. Thanks in advance and apologies for the length. That's what you get for taking the 4th off then not being around on the 11th! John Briley: Thanks Bham! Good comment on the bars and, yes, the "performance" and "nutritional" bars are much healthier - by and large - than traditional candy bars (but we encourage everyone to read the ingredients before scarfing them down). Your RT walk counts. I know you from these chats and I know you don;t try to cheat your way out of these requirements, so I trust you're "brisking" along on those strolls. Good luck and have fun! Washington, D.C.: I really want to work out in the morning, but every time I wake up, I just make more and more excuses and the thought of actually going to the gym exhausts me. Any suggestions on how I can motivate myself? John Briley: Forget the gym for now. Find something around your house or neighborhood to ease you into a habit. Example: If you drink coffee, instead of making it in-house, force yourself to walk a block to the coffee shop for a cup. The economics aren't bad (IF you avoid the $4 frufru drinks) and you'll start to enjoy your little stroll. Live in the burbs? Try starting each day with a 10-minute walk around the block. Things like this don't require a great alarm clock adjustment - just 10 or 15 minutes versus, say, an hour for a gym visit - and you probably will discover that you enjoy your little moments of personal time. Over time, look for longer outlets - maybe a 25-minute bike ride to run a weekly errand, or join a friend on his/her dog walk (everyone knows someone with a dog, right? See today's Moving crew column). Just as in successful dieting, don't look for a huge solution, and be patient with yourself. It's all incremental and, in many ways, simply mental: Create opportunities that will look forward to, not dread. Washington, D.C.: I would like to lose my stomach. How do I do that without doing sit- ups? John Briley: Holy cow, man, do you how hard it would be to digest food without a stomach? Using my well-honed spidey senses, I will presume you mean the flab around your middle, not your actual stomach. And (getting serious here, I promise) you cannot spot-reduce fat - i.e., your overall body fat will melt away as you increase your calorie burning and reduce your calorie consumption. Doing ab exercises will not target tummy fat, but it will help build ab muscles (which help with "tone"). You - and everyone - should not do traditional "sit-ups" anyway (where you bring your whole back off the floor). These have been shown to increase risk of back pain. Start with crunches, where you lie on your back, knees bent and together, feet flat on floor, and contract ab muscles to raise shoulders off the floor. Also, planks and bridges are good (look 'em up on the Web), but sounds like you might not want any ab exercises. We advise against that strategy - core exercise is a key part of overall fitness - but if you choose it, focus on burning more calories than you eat, and eat healthy. The fat should recede. Bored at work: Will wearing warm clothes during a workout (i.e., sweatshirt and sweats) help you burn more calories or is it just water weight? ... And is it better to do 30 min of cardio 7 days a week, or more intense workouts (40-60 min) 5 days a week? John Briley: Inneresting questions, B.a.W. 1. First, I advise against forcing your body to sweat more than necessary as a routine practice, especially in this heat, but also in more breezy times because it puts undue stress on your internal temperature regulation system. Yes, you could argue that exercise does the exact same thing, but the benefits of working out are almost as numerous as the detriments of staying sedentary. By piling on clothes you will burn more calories for the reason cited above: Your body will summon more energy in an effort to cool itself, and energy comes from calories (overly simplistic explanation, but you get the point). 2. Mix up the workouts. Intense some days, a little more "recovery" minded other days, a mix on others. This will keep it interesting and keep your body guessing a little bit, which is good for fitness AND function. Like if you do a slow jog every day of the week then have to sprint hard one day, for example, to chase down the ice cream truck, that sprint might cause you to strain something if you never make yourself sprint during workouts. Chantilly, Va.: Ok, I got married a year ago to a wonderful man, the one I was looking for all my life, and what happened? I gained 20 pounds and I feel like I gained 80. I need to get back to the work out routine I was in before we married and joined our lives and families and life got hectic. I belong to a gym and right now its a waste every month. How do I remotivate myself back into the every other day routine I was in before we joined up. John Briley: See my answer above on incremental steps. You might be able to start a little bit ahead of that person, but do try to view this a step-at-a-time return to fitness. Start by reclaiming at least two nights a week (or lunch hours, or pre-work time slots) to get exercise. If the weather is nice, go outside: You'll feel a lot better getting the exercise than in a gym. But if you must head indoors, view it as something you owe yourself, not a chore. This will build on itself. Envision you and your mate at the beach, on the hiking trail, posing for a cover shot for "Chantilly Happy Couple Today". You do - and will continue to - have ample time for together time. Carve out some you time and get that old habit back. Leesburg, Va.: My husband and I are avid gym goers. I'd like to incorporate some outdoor activities in the Leesburg area into our routine. We've hiked Sugarloaf mountain once; I'm having trouble finding other activities to do ... as well as convincing my husband that hiking, walking, etc., can take place of a gym session. John Briley: I'm not super familiar with Leesburg area, but I know there's some nice road biking around Purcellville, plus that trail (D&O? Old Dominion? y'know the one...) and if you two operate at different speeds, perhaps you could cycle while he jogs alongside? THAT should feel like a workout. Also, you have the river nearby - any scenic trails or parks along there that might offer a nice visual diversion, just as an excuse to get out there? You could also consider challenging him to some sporting contest - or join a local soccer, frisbee, flag football, etc. team - to steer things out of doors. Last suggestion: If he won't bite, find a friend and go do it yourself. No reason you and spouse need to be attached at the hip for every workout, and if he sees you coming home all cheerful and upbeat from the great outdoors maybe he'll be more inclined to join in the future. Any Leesburgians out there have suggestions? Gaithersburg, Md.: After several years of not bicycling (and I'll admit, the last year or so I've been a slug), I signed up for the Seagull Century. Last weekend I did 20 miles on Saturday and 25 Sunday, and I figured I'd keep increasing the weekend miles with whatever cardio I can fit in during the week. The catch is, I crashed at the end on Sunday's ride, and I'm not sure I'll be doing much besides nursing the swelling and bruising this week. Is it too late to have a prayer of getting to 100 miles by Oct. 7? John Briley: Not at all too late, especially since your goal (I hope) is not to win but to enjoy the ride and finish the 100 miles. Heal up and get back on the training when your body allows. And when you do, remember the magic training word: Intervals! Those will help you build strength and stamina more quickly than will steady-pace rides (but you should mix these up throughout the week/month; don't do an interval workout every time out). Oxon Hill, Md.: Is it true that the easiest and best way for men to lose weight get in shape is through running? John Briley: That's a major over-simplification (and misleading). Running is incredibly efficient as an exercise modality - no gear needed (besides shoes), quick elevation of heart rate, ability to crush through calories in relatively short distances and, for most people, right outside their doors. But if all you do is run, at some point you are risking over-use injuries (knees are notorious victims of running addictions) and you are neglecting body parts that might want to have at least mildly conditioned for later: Core, arms, chest... We recommend five days of cardio a week (more if like it and can handle it) and two days strength training, and we suggest mixing up all the training. Sure, you could using running most days, if that's your thing, but occasionally jump on a bike or a rowing machine, pogo stick, elliptical, in-line skates to work some different muscles. The strength work will help boost muscle capacity and make you a better runner. Alexandria, Va.: Could you give me a dummy's guide to intervals? I've been focusing too much on strength training and am trying to ratchet the cardio up a notch. I usually do 20-30 min. on the elliptical at the gym, but I've started using the treadmill more. I walk briskly, but I've been adding a few 1-1.5 minute intervals of light jogging. If I'm walking at a pace between 3.5 and 4 mph, what speed should my jogging intervals be? And how many would you do, spaced how far apart over a 30-min. workout? Many thanks! John Briley: Good Q Arlington. I won't go into MPH specifics but this should help: 1. Get warmed up (5 minutes at least) then establish a pace you can hold for a while, hopefully at around 65% of your max heart rate, or breathing hard but not panting wildly. 2. Take it up to a near sprint, something that is REALLY hard, and try to hold for 30 seconds. If you have a heart rate monitor, this would be around 85% of HR max (maybe even 90%). 3. Return to - but not below - your prior steady state and recover for 60 seconds. 4. Repeat 10 times, if you can. 5. Cool down for five minutes before stopping. If you can hold an interval for 90 seconds you either in sick shape or not pushing it quite hard enough. Over time, increase the number of intervals, then the length of each one. If you get to a point where you're doing 15 intervals of 45 to 60 seconds each, you will be rocking. Washington, D.C.: I run about 3 miles, 3 mornings a week, do interval sprints one morning, and lift weights at the Y two afternoons. So I'm pretty active, and have been for years. The problem is that I'm hungry ALL.THE.TIME. This has been a problem for years too, but has gotten worse lately. I eat breakfast (grape nuts w/banana) upon getting to work at 9, and by 11:30 I'm ravenous again. I eat a snack (fruit), then lunch at 1, and am starving by 3. So I have another snack. Then I'm ravenous again by 7 for dinner. I'm so tired of this! I'd like to lose about 5 pounds, but I know I'll never be able to eat less since I'm so hungry as it is. What's the problem? Has my routine exercise thrown off my metabolism or something? John Briley: This one might be outta my league, but I suggest trying more-frequent snacking with vegetables (carrots and broccoli are good for filling up). Other healthy somewhat filling foods include brown rice and grapefruit. Every meal should include carbs, fat and protein. Drop in on Sally Squires' Lean Plate Club chat at 1 p.m. and see if you can get more detail. One important thought: Do you really need to lose those 5 pounds? Media images often cause us to obsess over fairly healthy bodies. I know there's an obesity epidemic on right now, but it doesn't sound like you're in that high-risk category. Very last thing: Try consulting with a sports nutritionist. there are a lot around and not all are reserved for serious athletes. Washington, D.C.: Hey guys -- A question about over training. I've recently started hitting the gym regularly again, doing 6 cardio (1 interval) and 6 strength training routines a week broken down into three groups: Chest and Triceps, Biceps and back, and legs (2 exercises for each muscle, 3 sets of each to exhaustion) Am I overdoing the strength training? Would I see better results actually doing less? John Briley: Sounds like a lot but your body will tell you if it's too much. See my May 23 column for details on what constitutes over training: washingtonpost.com: Lean Plate Club Discussion Help!: Right after the new physical fitness guidelines came out (maybe 9 months to a year ago?) you did a great column that clarified the new guidelines and put it into language that was easy to understand and follow. I thought that I had saved the article, but I can't seem to find it. Could you put up a link to that article? (I've been waiting for the right opportunity to share it with my husband...and this is it!) John Briley: Link coming in a second... washingtonpost.com: 60 Minutes, 90 Minutes: We're Losing It ( Post, Feb. 8, 2005 ) Culpeper, Va.: I walk my Golden Retrievers every evening. How do I know if it's too hot for them in the weather we are having now? John Briley: If they lie down during the walk, if they act strange after returning home (or get sick, from either end) - things like that. If they're used to walks and you're going out after the heat of the day, they should be fine, as long as you're not running them. Also, carry a squirt bottle and/or walk them near water if possible: Dogs will stand in water because cooling their foot pads helps regulate heat. No matter what, do keep it mellow on days like this - this heat is a severe shock to almost any animal's system, especially one covered in fur. McLean, Va.: I just recently started working out -- about two weeks ago. I do 45-90 minutes of cardio per day, and strength training 3-4 times a week. I only have about 15 lbs to lose. My question is, I know that I'm building muscle -- which weighs more than fat, so I'm seeing changes. I'm just not seeing a change on the scale. Any idea how long it might take? John Briley: Not really, but you kind of addressed your own question: Don't focus on the scale, focus on how you look and feel. Sounds like you're doing great, so just keep doing that! Omaha, Neb.: I have some generic knee problems. I've recently become active again, primarily through walks (3-5 mile) in a hilly neighborhood and am getting random "discomforts" in my knees. Any suggestion for preventing more serious pain/damage? When should I consider help from a physical therapist vs. treating myself? I'd like to eventually take up running again, but unless I have healthy knees, its out of the question. Thanks for doing this chat, it's a great idea! John Briley: Two things with knees: 1. Strengthen the surrounding musculature (quads, hamstrings, calf, even groin, as well as the core, to help take pressure off your knees. 2. Try to lose weight (if you are overweight) for the same reason. If you're just returning to exercise, some creakiness is normal, BUT if you have anything resembling acute or chronic pain, please see a doc. I am unqualified to offer sound medical advice over the Web! For the Hungry Person: I noticed that you did not mention a lot of protein in your food examples. Lean sources of protein such as egg whites, chicken, fish, nuts, soy, low-fat cheese, etc., might fill you up without filling you out. Also, protein takes longer to digest and fills you up a bit more than fruit and carbs. Also choose foods full of fiber. I am not a nutritionist but found eating small frequent meals with some form of protein has really helped me control my ravenous appetite. John Briley: Excellent points. I was hustling through that question and did not go into great detail at all. Thanks for the elaboration. Washington, D.C.: Do you burn more calories if you run or walk? John Briley: Depends. If you walk 20 miles you will burn more calories than if you run a city block. You burn calories faster by running. Basically: It takes the same amount of energy to move a mass a certain distance, so if all you care about is calories burning, focus on distance, not speed. Washington, D.C.: Submitting early. I've gained about 25 lbs. in the last year due to an injury. My doctor has given me the green light to exercise, and I want to get back into the swing of things. Any recommendations as to how to start loosing the weight? John Briley: Since you're now overweight, start slow, probably with some brisk walks. Elevate intensity and distance as your body allows, then, when that gets less challenging, intersperse some short jogging spurts into the walks. Soon after starting add in a day a week of light strength training (can do at home or gym) and build that up to two 45-minute strength sessions a week. This also may take time to achieve. Washington, D.C.: When I went hiking recently I got embarrassingly tired on some of the steep parts. (The hike was 4 miles, 1400 vertical feet). What can I do in the gym to improve my conditioning for future hikes? All That Sweat Is No Elliptical Illusion Intervals, my friend, intervals. And strength training for core, quads and glutes. John Briley: Hey folks, much as I'd love to stay and do this all day, I gotta run. Due to limited Crew chiefs today, we didn't get to a whole slew of questions but we are back in two weeks for more action. Also, I will surf the leftovers and look for column ideas, so you're unanswered question may appear in a newspaper near you soon! Thanks for participating today. Stay cooooool. 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.
120.365854
0.634146
0.731707
high
low
abstractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/17/AR2006071701202.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006071819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/17/AR2006071701202.html
Stem Cell Debate Wedges Bush Between a Rock and a Hard Place
2006071819
George W. Bush has signed 1,116 consecutive bills into law since becoming president. He probably wishes he had vetoed just one of them. Instead, Bush faces the prospect of casting his first veto this week against embryonic stem cell research, defying the wishes not just of a majority of Americans and their representatives but also of Nancy Reagan and those representing millions of people with Parkinson's disease, diabetes, spinal injuries and the like. Thus did Bush find Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), chairman of the Judiciary Committee, on the Senate floor yesterday comparing the president's position to those who opposed Columbus, locked up Galileo, and rejected anesthesia, electricity, vaccines and rail travel. Such attitudes "in retrospect look foolish, look absolutely ridiculous," said Specter, daring Bush to join them. Even Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), a former transplant surgeon who got his job as Senate majority leader thanks to Bush's influence, inserted a scalpel in the president. "Stem cells offer hope for treatment that other lines of research cannot offer," said Frist, who has rescinded his earlier support for the Bush policy. "The current policy unduly restricts the number of cell lines." Bush's congressional allies, meanwhile, were mailing it in yesterday. GOP Reps. Joseph Pitts (Pa.), Mike Pence (Ind.) and Dave Weldon (Fla.) called a "background briefing" on stem cells for 11 a.m. in the Cannon House Office Building -- but none of the three showed up. "He's a host and sponsor," explained Pence spokesman Matt Lloyd. "I don't think we ever said he was coming." In the Senate, Bush's defense was taken up almost exclusively by the chamber's two most ardent religious conservatives, Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) and Tom Coburn (R-Okla.). And they were having a tough time of it. Brownback, beneath an oil portrait of George Washington, beckoned to a photograph of a bald eagle and complained of a disparity between treatment of human and bird embryos. "You can face . . . two years in prison for destroying a bald eagle egg," he said, but "taxpayer dollars are used to destroy a human at the same phase of life." Brownback brought a group of parents of children grown from "adopted" embryos to make his point. "My daughter was flown out FedEx from the East Coast to the West Coast, where I live," reported Maria Lancaster. "She had been in the freezer four years." Marlene Strege, with her 7-year-old daughter, who was adopted as an embryo, displayed a drawing by the girl of an embryo asking, "Are you going to kill me?" Said Mom: "Mommy and Daddy and her are all adopted into God's family because of what Christ did on the cross." This election year has been full of "wedge" issues in which Republicans sought to split Democrats on cultural issues such as flag burning and same-sex marriage; this week alone, while war threatens the Middle East, the House is taking up legislation protecting the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance and a gay-marriage amendment to the Constitution that has already been rejected by the Senate. Frist, by decreeing that the stem cell bill would get a vote on the floor, gave the Democrats a rare wedge with which to split Republicans, and Democrats were effusive. "I privately congratulated and complimented Senator Frist," Sen. Tom Harkin (Iowa) said publicly.
George W. Bush has signed 1,116 consecutive bills into law since becoming president. He probably wishes he had vetoed just one of them.
28.08
1
25
medium
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/17/AR2006071701154.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006071819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/17/AR2006071701154.html
Hunker Down With History
2006071819
The greatest mistake Israel could make at the moment is to forget that Israel itself is a mistake. It is an honest mistake, a well-intentioned mistake, a mistake for which no one is culpable, but the idea of creating a nation of European Jews in an area of Arab Muslims (and some Christians) has produced a century of warfare and terrorism of the sort we are seeing now. Israel fights Hezbollah in the north and Hamas in the south, but its most formidable enemy is history itself. This is why the Israeli-Arab war, now transformed into the Israeli-Muslim war (Iran is not an Arab state), persists and widens. It is why the conflict mutates and festers. It is why Israel is now fighting an organization, Hezbollah, that did not exist 30 years ago and why Hezbollah is being supported by a nation, Iran, that was once a tacit ally of Israel's. The underlying, subterranean hatred of the Jewish state in the Islamic world just keeps bubbling to the surface. The leaders of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and some other Arab countries may condemn Hezbollah, but I doubt the proverbial man in their street shares that view. There is no point in condemning Hezbollah. Zealots are not amenable to reason. And there's not much point, either, in condemning Hamas. It is a fetid, anti-Semitic outfit whose organizing principle is hatred of Israel. There is, though, a point in cautioning Israel to exercise restraint -- not for the sake of its enemies but for itself. Whatever happens, Israel must not use its military might to win back what it has already chosen to lose: the buffer zone in southern Lebanon and the Gaza Strip itself. Hard-line critics of Ariel Sharon, the now-comatose Israeli leader who initiated the pullout from Gaza, always said this would happen: Gaza would become a terrorist haven. They said that the moderate Palestinian Authority would not be able to control the militants and that Gaza would be used to fire rockets into Israel and to launch terrorist raids. This is precisely what has happened. It is also true, as some critics warned, that Israel's withdrawal from southern Lebanon was seen by its enemies -- and claimed by Hezbollah -- as a defeat for the mighty Jewish state. Hezbollah took credit for this, as well it should. Its persistent attacks bled Israel. In the end, Israel got out and the United Nations promised it a secure border. The Lebanese army would see to that. (And the check is in the mail.) All that the critics warned has come true. But worse than what is happening now would be a retaking of those territories. That would put Israel smack back to where it was, subjugating a restless, angry population and having the world look on as it committed the inevitable sins of an occupying power. The smart choice is to pull back to defensible -- but hardly impervious -- borders. That includes getting out of most of the West Bank -- and waiting (and hoping) that history will get distracted and move on to something else. This will take some time, and in the meantime terrorism and rocket attacks will continue. In his forthcoming book, "The War of the World," the admirably readable British historian Niall Ferguson devotes considerable space to the horrific history of the Jews in 19th- and 20th-century Europe. Never mind the Holocaust. In 1905 there were pogroms in 660 different places in Russia, and more than 800 Jews were killed -- all this in a period of less than two weeks. This was the reality of life for many of Europe's Jews. Little wonder so many of them emigrated to the United States, Canada, Argentina or South Africa. Little wonder others embraced the dream of Zionism and went to Palestine, first a colony of Turkey and later of Britain. They were in effect running for their lives. Most of those who remained -- 97.5 percent of Poland's Jews, for instance -- were murdered in the Holocaust. Another gifted British historian, Tony Judt, wraps up his recent book "Postwar" with an epilogue on how the sine qua non of the modern civilized state is recognition of the Holocaust. Much of the Islamic world, notably Iran under its Holocaust-denying president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, stands outside that circle, refusing to make even a little space for the Jews of Europe and, later, those from the Islamic world. They see Israel not as a mistake but as a crime. Until they change their view, the longest war of the 20th century will persist deep into the 21st. It is best for Israel to hunker down.
The greatest mistake Israel could make at the moment is to forget that Israel itself is a mistake. It is an honest mistake, a well-intentioned mistake, a mistake for which no one is culpable, but the idea of creating a nation of European Jews in an area of Arab Muslims (and some Christians) has...
14.349206
0.984127
61.015873
low
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/17/AR2006071701153.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006071819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/17/AR2006071701153.html
Meeting Stem Cells' Promise -- Ethically
2006071819
I am pro-life. I recognize that human life begins at conception; before coming to the Senate, I spent my life practicing medicine in order to save lives. Today, as the Senate discusses legislation about cutting-edge biological research, we will shape our debate around three separate proposals. All three are consistent with my deep-seated belief that human life has value at all stages of development. While a law that would expand the range of stem cells eligible for federal funding has received the most attention, I think it is equally important that the Senate pass measures that will place "moral guardrails" around future research and accelerate efforts to find alternative means of securing cells for research. These legislative proposals are important because embryonic stem cell research presents so many ethical quandaries and holds so much scientific promise. Each human embryo represents a nascent, genetically distinct human life and thus has tremendous moral significance. Because they have a property called pluripotence -- the ability to become almost any other type of body cell -- embryonic stem cells could eventually help treat spinal cord injuries, mitigate diabetes, repair damaged organs, relieve pain and preserve lives. Even though cures may take years to develop, I believe that we cannot ignore the promise these cells hold. But I also believe that whatever research the federal government funds should follow clear ethical guidelines and use only embryos that would otherwise be destroyed. Under President Bush's current policy, however, scientists can use federal funds only for research on embryonic stem cell lines -- groups of specific cell types maintained in the laboratory for research -- that existed before the summer of 2001. While researchers initially believed that experiments using 80 lines could receive federal funding, in fact, only about a quarter of that number can. Even though the president has made it clear that he will veto any bill that changes his policy, I believe that the progress of science and a pro-life position demand that Congress send a message. Thus I'm supporting legislation that's gotten enormous attention: a bill that will let scientists use federal funds for research with embryonic stem cells derived from embryos that families created for in vitro fertilization but that are now ready to be discarded and destroyed. I hope that we can redeem this loss of life in part by using these embryos to seed research that will save lives in the future. Under this policy, so long as they follow ethical guidelines, researchers will have as many stem cell lines as they can produce. At the same time, I recognize that research involving nascent human lives needs clear, strict safeguards. That's why I will also support a bill that would ban scientists from implanting human embryos in order to abort them for experimentation, thus placing important moral boundaries around biomedical innovation. Quite simply, we need to draw a bright line against this barbaric practice before it becomes a reality. Just as importantly, the Senate will also vote on increasing funding for research methods that would create pluripotent stem cells without harming or destroying human embryos. As Robert P. George and Eric Cohen noted recently on this page [July 6], new scientific techniques could create pluripotent stem cells without the need to destroy a single human embryo. If these techniques proved effective, they would assuage many Americans' legitimate reservations about stem cell research while simultaneously moving science forward. The debate over embryonic stem cell research will never prove simple. Congress isn't always the best forum to hash out complicated bioethical issues. But it appears inevitable that we will confront these questions time and again as science advances. The three-bill package the Senate will vote on both recognizes stem cell research's potential to cure and confronts the ethical dilemmas it implies. Because it does both of these things, I believe it will protect human dignity, treat disease and save lives. The writer, a Republican from Tennessee, is the Senate majority leader.
I am pro-life. I recognize that human life begins at conception; before coming to the Senate, I spent my life practicing medicine in order to save lives. Today, as the Senate discusses legislation about cutting-edge biological research, we will shape our debate around three separate proposals. All...
12.694915
0.983051
57.016949
low
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071800413.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006071819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/18/AR2006071800413.html
Evacuations Underway in Beirut
2006071819
BEIRUT, July 18 -- By helicopter and ship, hundreds of Americans and Europeans fled on Tuesday from Beirut, ending its first week of siege, as casualties mounted in deadly Israeli raids that struck a Lebanese military base, a truck carrying food from Syria and a village near the border. The militant group Hezbollah fired at least 100 rockets into Israel, killing one civilian. On a sweltering day, Norwegian, Swedish, Greek and British ships pulled into Beirut's harbor, most of them trying to load their passengers before nightfall. From a helipad at the U.S. Embassy overlooking Beirut, the dull thud of rotors announced the arrival of helicopters, which ferried passengers to the island of Cyprus, taking 30 people on each trip. Other U.S. citizens waited, growing more frustrated over having to endure another day of a conflict that has begun to impose a wartime logic in the city. "I had to come and cry at the door of the U.S. Embassy, kissing hand and foot, telling them they must let me leave," said Raba Letteri, a child-care provider from Reston, Va., who was on vacation in Lebanon with her husband and two children. They were living near Beirut's international airport, a swath of the capital barraged in Israeli airstrikes. Her 2-year-old son, Aaron, had a stomach infection. As they waited to board, he burst into tears. "This is the worst thing in my life," she said. Through the day, Beirut itself was relatively quiet. Life returned to some streets so far unscathed by the attacks. Even traffic in the battered Shiite Muslim suburbs, Hezbollah's stronghold, trickled past the rubble of destroyed bridges and the shattered glass from apartment buildings that littered the streets. To some, the day was a brief respite as evacuations got underway. What might follow the foreigners' departure was a question many asked. "I feel in my heart that after the foreigners leave, big problems are on the way," said Jamil Abu Hassan, a burly 56-year-old, loitering near the port. "Today, the embassies are taking their people. Tomorrow, the next day? God knows what will happen." Hezbollah fired at least 100 rockets at Israel on Tuesday, including a large barrage an hour before sunset, striking about 10 towns and cities across northern Israel, from Haifa on the Mediterranean coast to tourist communities in the southern Galilee region. [Two big explosions reverberated over Beirut early Wednesday, and missiles hit towns to the east and south of the capital, the Associated Press reported.] One Israeli was killed Tuesday in a rocket strike in Nahariya about four miles south of Lebanon on the coast, the Israeli military reported. Twenty-one people were injured. So far in the fighting, 25 Israelis have been killed, including 12 soldiers. [Israeli armored forces entered the central Gaza Strip overnight and clashed with Palestinian militants, killing two members of Hamas and wounding five, the Associated Press reported, citing residents. Witnesses reported heavy gunfire around the Maghazi Refugee Camp, not far from the Gaza Strip's border with Israel. Fourteen other people, including children, were reported wounded. Five Israeli soldiers were wounded, two of them seriously, the military said, describing the raid as part of its effort to halt rocket fire and recover a soldier captured by gunmen June 25.] Several rockets struck Haifa, Israel's third-largest city, about 22 miles south of Lebanon, where eight civilians were killed in a rocket barrage Sunday, the Israeli military said. The city's port remained closed for a second day because of the danger. More than 720 Hezbollah rockets -- a small portion of the militant Islamic group's arsenal -- have struck Israel since hostilities began a week ago, when Hezbollah crossed the border and seized two Israeli soldiers. In the wake of the attack, Israel has unleashed a destructive military offensive that has killed more than 230 Lebanese, most of them civilians. The country's airport is closed, and the south is largely cut off from the rest of the country by wrecked roads and collapsed bridges. The Israeli military said its jets flew about 110 raids over Lebanon on Tuesday, part of a campaign that has created competing narratives of the war. An Israeli military spokeswoman said the raids were targeting trucks carrying Hezbollah weapons, Katyusha rocket launchers in southern Lebanon, Hezbollah weapons storage facilities, bridges and roads used to transport weapons and fighters -- "all of this to damage the Hezbollah infrastructure," she said.
BEIRUT, July 18 -- By helicopter and ship, hundreds of Americans and Europeans fled on Tuesday from Beirut, ending its first week of siege, as casualties mounted in deadly Israeli raids that struck a Lebanese military base, a truck carrying food from Syria and a village near the border. The...
15.385965
0.982456
55.017544
low
high
extractive
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/17/AR2006071701420.html
https://web.archive.org/web/2006071819id_/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/17/AR2006071701420.html
In Nazareth, Arab Israelis Now at Risk
2006071819
NAZARETH, Israel, July 17 -- The rockets landed in darkness on either side of this sacred city, long considered out of range and off-limits for the radical armed groups that have bombarded Israel's Galilee region from south Lebanon. Out of range because Nazareth lies across a hilltop more than 20 miles south of the Lebanese border, where Hezbollah gunmen set off a new war last week by capturing two Israeli soldiers and killing eight others. Off-limits because, like the people firing the rockets, most of the residents here are Arabs. Amin Abu Taha, a dentist with two teenage children, worried as he took a midday break outside a coffeehouse along Paulus VI Avenue. "Israel is the most powerful state in the Middle East," he said, sweating in the summer heat. "But rockets do not discriminate. This is an old story that must be resolved." The barrage around midnight Sunday caused no casualties and it remained unclear whether Hezbollah intended to hit Nazareth or the nearby Jewish town of Nazaret Ilit. But the explosions prompted feelings of fear, despair and a touch of pride here in Israel's largest Arab city. Conversations along Paulus VI Avenue, empty of the Christian tourists who come to the place known as the home town of Jesus, also highlighted the peculiar place that Arab citizens hold within the Jewish state, especially in times of war. "From a political perspective, we have no impact," Abu Taha said. "And we know it." The roughly 1.2 million Arab citizens of Israel -- one-fifth of the population -- do not serve in the army, now engaged on the northern and southern borders. They have slim representation in parliament, and receive scant government support for the kind of bunkers and warning systems that have been well used in other northern Israeli cities since the fighting began. The people here also have far fewer places to flee than the Jewish residents of northern Israel, thousands of whom are heading south to family and friends to wait out the war. For many of the 75,000 Arabs of this city, their only family is in Lebanon -- where, since the 1948 Arab-Israeli war, they have lived in refugee camps and cities that now may be under Israeli attack. Along streets and in market stalls abuzz with radio news broadcasts, opinions ranged Monday from fear that Hezbollah would target the city center to rage at other Arab nations for not joining the fight against Israel. Despite the rocket attacks, Nazareth remains a restive exception in a country that has largely rallied around the attacks inside Lebanon. "We heard explosions in the night, but we had nowhere to go," said Yihiya Sotari, 44, who for three decades has sold taped Islamic sermons, tracts and prayer beads from a market stall. "In Jewish towns you have shelters and sirens, but here you have nothing," he said. "When it comes to security matters, it is an issue where the Arabs have no say. It is a Jewish-only issue." Sotari is a native of Nazareth, now raising six children. But his extended family has lived in Lebanon since they fled the village of al-Mujaydil during the fighting in 1948. The town has since been given a Hebrew name, Migdal HaEmek. Sotari's relatives settled in Baalbek near Lebanon's eastern border, where Israel carried out recent airstrikes targeting transmitters of al-Manar, Hezbollah's satellite television channel. He has not spoken to his family there since Israel's 1982 invasion of southern Lebanon, an operation that was also launched in response to rocket fire into the Galilee area. With Koranic verses ringing out from the tape player behind his display, Sotari said he expected an Israeli attack on southern Lebanon following last Wednesday's cross-border capture of the two soldiers, whom Hezbollah leaders want to trade for Lebanese prisoners in Israeli jails. But he said he thought international mediation would follow.
NAZARETH, Israel, July 17 -- The rockets landed in darkness on either side of this sacred city, long considered out of range and off-limits for the radical armed groups that have bombarded Israel's Galilee region from south Lebanon.
16.933333
1
45
medium
high
extractive